Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

You keep saying youth movement like that is some special thing. How about a quality player movement youth or other wise?

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

Yeah, but that ship has sailed. We don't have our first and second round picks this year. What we have to do is maximize the assets we have. I'm not against trading Shump. I'm just lukewarm to the idea of trading him for the 29th pick, which I consider to be an over glorified second rounder. Even if we make that trade, there's no guarantee the player we want will be there. I'd rather keep Shump and look for a better offer and buy a second round pick. If OKC was talking aboutvtrading pick 21, I'd be more amenable to a trade. If it were Shump for 29 and another second rounder or multiple second rounders, i'd consider it. But I don't want to trade Shump just for the sake of saying we have first rounder in this year's draft.

Yep.

1996 the New York Knicks select:
18-John Wallace
19-Walter McCarty
20-Donte Jones

In this case we are trading Shumpert for the 29th. Or 41 & 44. I can possibly see trading Shumpert for a pg like Collison or Mills Eventhough I still think Phil prefers Shumpert but sefolosa and the 29th? To save a million?

Smh

SupremeCommander wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

Yeah, but that ship has sailed. We don't have our first and second round picks this year. What we have to do is maximize the assets we have. I'm not against trading Shump. I'm just lukewarm to the idea of trading him for the 29th pick, which I consider to be an over glorified second rounder. Even if we make that trade, there's no guarantee the player we want will be there. I'd rather keep Shump and look for a better offer and buy a second round pick. If OKC was talking aboutvtrading pick 21, I'd be more amenable to a trade. If it were Shump for 29 and another second rounder or multiple second rounders, i'd consider it. But I don't want to trade Shump just for the sake of saying we have first rounder in this year's draft.

nor am I up for getting younger for getting younger's sake. That happened last eyar and the results were catastrophic

Yea you are looking at guys like CJ Leslie with Picks 29+ dleague fodder. And even the ones that carve out a role on NBA team need a few years on the bench. We know these guys won't get any burn here Josh Harrelson, Mardy Collins?

Sure you get the occasional Stephenson/Arena but you can't bank on that. If we had a pick it's be different. You take chances on guys even if there is a 90% chance he is out of the league in 2yrs.

If we bought a second rounder fine

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:Shumpert was always overrated by knick fans, he was inefficient in college and he is inefficient as a pro. Nothing has changed.

Exactly. There's no historical basis for any of the favorable comments you see here about him.

has he had a chance to develop? was he not dicked around?

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:Shumpert was always overrated by knick fans, he was inefficient in college and he is inefficient as a pro. Nothing has changed.

Exactly. There's no historical basis for any of the favorable comments you see here about him.

has he had a chance to develop? was he not dicked around?

He's had about 5000 NBA minutes

and those 5000 minutes were under terrific circumstances where he had a chance to develop? while i am guilty of overrating him a bit i still believe the circumstances have not been good enough for him to be given up on.

Exactly. 5000 empty minutes development wise

He would've been better off in okc, spurs, heat or clippers