TLover wrote:How about we DO NOT trade for Donovan Mitchell.. I would be concerned with his future availability. Believe he had some concussion issues in the past. A player at his size playing as hard as he does can be concerning. RJ at least has the body type to withstand the pounding. Also Mitchell seems to be redundant to Brunson (especially in size) Mitchell is almost like a a rich man’s Colin Sexton which is unnecessary or just trade for Colin Sexton himself who will be much cheaper. My 2 cents…

What's Sexton's situation? Did he sign? That situation is too murky to commit to right now (contract, injury return etc) Also, Mitchell is more like Scrooge McDuck version of Sexton. We still have no idea how Colin's chucking style of play meshes with a winning situation. I'd just assume run it with the squad as it stands now and see if the trade market opens up more.

TLover wrote:How about we DO NOT trade for Donovan Mitchell.. I would be concerned with his future availability. Believe he had some concussion issues in the past. A player at his size playing as hard as he does can be concerning. RJ at least has the body type to withstand the pounding. Also Mitchell seems to be redundant to Brunson (especially in size) Mitchell is almost like a a rich man’s Colin Sexton which is unnecessary or just trade for Colin Sexton himself who will be much cheaper. My 2 cents…

Mitchell would instantly be the best player on our roster. No argument there. But I'm with you on fit next to Brunson.

Ainge's firesale came out of the blue, so I understand Mitchell not being part of the original plan...but committing 4 years and such a major role to Brunson, only to follow it up with Donovan feels very incohesive. I very much echo others' posts on staying the course, see what we've got in place currently unless you can get him for a bargain (obviously that's NOT happening).

Trading the farm for Donovan would be like buying a new car when we really need to focus on home repairs.

HofstraBBall wrote:

foosballnick wrote:So the media now has the DM price at RJ, Obi (or Grimes /IQ) and 5 first rounders (3 unprotected)? Ainge must really be working his media back-channels.

Can't wait for the season the start.

This. Time to play some poker.

Knicks need to stick to Obi, EF, 3 first (2 unprotected) 3 seconds. Have McBride and Roka as fillers if need be. If not. Fuck em.

I've folded and am waiting for the next hand. I don't think Mitchell makes us as much better as this requires. The time to move for him was before signing Brunson. I don't believe they co-exist based on a deeper dive into their stats. You end up with a fraction of the total ability of both. I actually am happy to take another year of the existing contracts, see if the 2022 regression was real or contrived and re-evaluate Barrett, Fournier, Randle and the 2023 draft.

Reasons for my change of mind

1) A look at Brunson and Mitchell's shot charts makes them appear to be very similar shot usage and efficiency. Given the size constraints on both, Mitchell's wingspan would have been preferable to Brunson, but Brunson only cost cap space to obtain. I don't think a lineup will be effective, I think Brunson needs a strong, sizable SG next to him to cover matchups. Barrett would work here, but he appears to be moving to SF sized bulk.

2) I think the Knicks need to consolidate some players into talent. I think the easiest way to do that is to wait until the 2023 draft and use their excess draft capital to ensure they get the players they want. The depth of the 2023 draft is such that I think they can add the SG of their dreams on a rookie scale. I don't think there is a single player they can bring in to close the gap between the Knicks and the top 10 teams in the league.

3) I want to see Brunson and Toppin on the same court. My emotional response is that Brunson can make Toppin look like a slightly smaller Amare.

4) The guard situation needs to be resolved. Brunson, Rose, McBride, Fournier, IQ, Grimes, (Barrett) is leaving talent on the Bench. Rose is borderline untouchable. I only let him move if he asks for it. Other than that I am more hopeful of upside than sure. If there was a three for 1 that made sense, like Fournier, IQ and McBride for Mikal Bridges, that is the kind of deal I would be looking for. Suns get a bit of depth, where we consolidate. Suns don't make that deal straight up, but its the kind of trade I would be looking for.

martin wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:I can see Cleveland being a solid competitor for Donovan, they've got all their picks but no extra picks like NY.

I'm assuming their lineup could be: Garland, DM, ?, Mobley, Jarrett. Bench: Rubio, Sexton, LaVert, Lauri.

Trade fodder: Okoro, Ochai Agbaji, Love (for salary)

Good point. However, they may have the same fear Knicks do. Meaning is DM enough and ,if not, how do you get more if you give up so many of your assets.

Feel like maybe Graland, Donovan, Mobley would be enough with Jarrett as your defensive backbone but maybe I'm wrong.

I think a team like Cleveland still would have to worry about DM at the end of his contract and if he'd still jet for NY; I would worry less if I was a team like Miami.

I think it depends how much they value Lavert and Okoro. Cleveland's wing depth is worse than the Knicks. You make that Mitchell move if you think you have enough wings to get by. Is Okoro's offensive liabilities easier to cover up if you insert D Mitch into the lineup. Personally, I think that lineup could get by... But it's not a foregone conclusion. Also, I think Okoro would have to go in that deal anyway. The Love contract gives them a lot room in terms of salary matching, but Ainge is going to want prospects. That said, Cleveland has shown the willingness to go with zany lineup combinations. I'm probably overthinking it.

Nalod wrote:

martin wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

martin wrote:I can see Cleveland being a solid competitor for Donovan, they've got all their picks but no extra picks like NY.

I'm assuming their lineup could be: Garland, DM, ?, Mobley, Jarrett. Bench: Rubio, Sexton, LaVert, Lauri.

Trade fodder: Okoro, Ochai Agbaji, Love (for salary)

Good point. However, they may have the same fear Knicks do. Meaning is DM enough and ,if not, how do you get more if you give up so many of your assets.

Feel like maybe Graland, Donovan, Mobley would be enough with Jarrett as your defensive backbone but maybe I'm wrong.

I think a team like Cleveland still would have to worry about DM at the end of his contract and if he'd still jet for NY; I would worry less if I was a team like Miami.

Miami would have to trade Bam?
He is their future backbone. They start with Herro and then add from their. They have to pay Herro.

Lets be real, you accumulate those picks for a reason. If not, they could have been employed earlier and thus mitigated last season losing if so. They could have leveraged prior. They are being patient? I'd hope they can continue to do so.
I like DM and want him. But been rooting for RJ for 3 years and can't say I'd be happy to see him go. Same for our other yoots as well. RJ a 3 year starter here. A bit different than Iq, Obi and Grimes who have promise, but have yet to fulfill it. We love potential!!!!

smackeddog wrote:Jonathan Macri from Knicks Film School said in his newsletter email thing that there was a reason the previous two were on the concept of trading RJ, which he can say now Bagely's comments are on the record. Definitely seems to be discussions/ possibility of trading RJ (where as for weeks it seemed like there was zero- Knicks had zero interest and considered him untouchable and Ainge had no interest. Now articles are saying we're open to moving him and Ainge is interested in him). Like I said if it's RJ and Fournier ONLY (plus maybe McBride), and that get's you out of sending Obi, IQ, Cam and Grimes, and lessens the pick load, I think you have to give it serious thought. If it's RJ AND one of the other young guns AND the same number of 1sts, it's a no deal for me.

If the choice is RJ or Obi and IQ, I'd go Obi and RJ. Forget about whether or not RJ is a star or not. RJ is the only competent wing on the roster (and Fournier too, I guess). Obi, probably isn't going to see time and IQ would become redundant in a Mitchell trade. Trading RJ would leave the roster with Grimes, who is too small to be a full time forward, and Cam, who I have absolutely no feel for. That's a scarier prospect for me.

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

foosballnick wrote:So the media now has the DM price at RJ, Obi (or Grimes /IQ) and 5 first rounders (3 unprotected)? Ainge must really be working his media back-channels.

Can't wait for the season the start.

This. Time to play some poker.

Knicks need to stick to Obi, EF, 3 first (2 unprotected) 3 seconds. Have McBride and Roka as fillers if need be. If not. Fuck em.

I've folded and am waiting for the next hand. I don't think Mitchell makes us as much better as this requires. The time to move for him was before signing Brunson. I don't believe they co-exist based on a deeper dive into their stats. You end up with a fraction of the total ability of both. I actually am happy to take another year of the existing contracts, see if the 2022 regression was real or contrived and re-evaluate Barrett, Fournier, Randle and the 2023 draft.

Reasons for my change of mind

1) A look at Brunson and Mitchell's shot charts makes them appear to be very similar shot usage and efficiency. Given the size constraints on both, Mitchell's wingspan would have been preferable to Brunson, but Brunson only cost cap space to obtain. I don't think a lineup will be effective, I think Brunson needs a strong, sizable SG next to him to cover matchups. Barrett would work here, but he appears to be moving to SF sized bulk.

2) I think the Knicks need to consolidate some players into talent. I think the easiest way to do that is to wait until the 2023 draft and use their excess draft capital to ensure they get the players they want. The depth of the 2023 draft is such that I think they can add the SG of their dreams on a rookie scale. I don't think there is a single player they can bring in to close the gap between the Knicks and the top 10 teams in the league.

3) I want to see Brunson and Toppin on the same court. My emotional response is that Brunson can make Toppin look like a slightly smaller Amare.

4) The guard situation needs to be resolved. Brunson, Rose, McBride, Fournier, IQ, Grimes, (Barrett) is leaving talent on the Bench. Rose is borderline untouchable. I only let him move if he asks for it. Other than that I am more hopeful of upside than sure. If there was a three for 1 that made sense, like Fournier, IQ and McBride for Mikal Bridges, that is the kind of deal I would be looking for. Suns get a bit of depth, where we consolidate. Suns don't make that deal straight up, but its the kind of trade I would be looking for.

Would agree. Also makes me wonder if an Ivey deal should have been pursued more. JB does seem redundant. Although he did have success with yet another high usage player in Luka.

I know you are big on Obi but Amare was nothing like Obi. I see Obi more like a Kenny Sky Walker.
Amare was automatic from 15 and was so much more advanced in things like post moves and PnR.
I see Obi as a perfect second unit player. Instant energy. Especially on a running unit.
But agree we should wait and see how some of these questions develop.

In terms of guards. I have less faith that Rose can come back as strong as he finished the
previous season. Think EF is always going to be shopped and eventually will get a taker but closer to trade deadline. Grimes, MR and IQ seem to be long term staples. RJ is good but hard to argue he deserves a rookie max without being an All Star. Especially since his shooting and FT % are so low.

Once again, all these questions seem to make sense that we wait until trade deadline. If RJ, EF, Randle, Rose, Obi and Cam do not progress or have made little impact on winning, the natural course would be to trade them for assets and retool towards something that can. The draft may be the best along with some upcoming FAs

blkexec wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:5 picks and Toppin is a haul for Mitchell. I can't go further. I don't even like the unprotected nature of those picks. I'd love to have Mitchell, but not more than I like downside risk protection.

Thats way to high as is. I dont even want Mitchell right now--were not considering having two smaller guards that both need the ball.

Unfortunately for you and me, we are not on the hot seat like Thibs and Rose will be if we don't make the playoffs. They are not the best backcourt parring, I agree. But this might be the move that saves Thibs and Rose job. (for now). And this is why we gathered all those picks. So I'm happy for no trade or a trade. Eitherway we will find some good in either scenario.

If there was a year to tank, this is a decent one. Better to be really good or really bad. Anything in between is just meh.