If Carroll was a 2 that would actually be good but he is as much a 2 guard as Stein is a 4.. Like I said before, the best idea is to pair Danny Green and Demarre Carroll up especially at lest than $10m a yr.. Let Danny be Carroll's Korver and Carroll can be Green's Leonard.

smackeddog wrote:

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:this is a stupid argument.

I will agree with anyone who says we should pay up for D Carroll in fact if the Knicks give him 4 years 50 mm or even slightly higher it's a good deal he earned his way into it--unlike green car rolls game is diverse he can play 2-3-4 he's a solid rebounder defender and realistically his arsenal on offense is a higher tier than greens imho Carroll can avg 17-18 points and green can't.

To those who think you can't find another Danny green in the 2 nd round or ufda hell we just did his name is Langston Galloway and while he is not fully proven from what I have seen his value at 600 k compared to what a team will have to shell out to Green I can live with his bumps and bruises. The one big mistake the Knicks made with Galloway is not signing him to the rookie 3 year 4 mm contract and it will comeback to hurt us next year. No comparison Carroll equals great value and is a smart pick up green equals a value that won't be half as good. I don't like sg who don't take it to the basket and green does not. We don't have the offensive arsenal to support whether green is hot or cold from 3 we need diverse players with multi skill set. And for those who think defense is an overwhelming prognosticator of success to a point it over rides offensive skills you are not following basketball these teams need to get to 110 to win

I'm sorry, but if you think players like Danny Green are easily available everywhere, you are deluded. It's not just about skill set.

You're right, it isnt skillset, it's the system. He looks good because of who he plays with. He's totally replaceable, and if he asks for too much the Spurs likely will.

Its not just the system- a player still has to execute

nixluva wrote:People are really selling Danny Green short. This guy stepped up 2 finals runs in a row. He was great defensively and offensively. Demarre Carroll is a good role player too. He's not breaking defenses down on his own either. Carroll is a SF. Danny Green is a top tier 3nD SG. PERIOD. Every advanced stat I've posted backs that up. The only SG FA who performed better is Jimmy Butler! We should hope and pray we add a player as good as Danny Green. No he's not a star but he doesn't have to be in order to help this team win.

i agree nixluva...ill give the edge to carroll though only cuz hes tougher, can rebound, and i like his defense better. id be happy with either one

yellowboy90 wrote:I find it interesting one player is a product of a system but the other player isn't even though he has exploded playing in the same/similar system. Also, this notion that Carroll is a 2 is ridiculous. Can He guard a 2 occasionally yes but you do not want him chasing smaller wings off screens. You also wouldn't be able to have him switch and guard pgs if you have a point guard that is a below avg defender.

If Carroll was a 2 that would actually be good but he is as much a 2 guard as Stein is a 4.. Like I said before, the best idea is to pair Danny Green and Demarre Carroll up especially at lest than $10m a yr.. Let Danny be Carroll's Korver and Carroll can be Green's Leonard.

smackeddog wrote:

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:this is a stupid argument.

I will agree with anyone who says we should pay up for D Carroll in fact if the Knicks give him 4 years 50 mm or even slightly higher it's a good deal he earned his way into it--unlike green car rolls game is diverse he can play 2-3-4 he's a solid rebounder defender and realistically his arsenal on offense is a higher tier than greens imho Carroll can avg 17-18 points and green can't.

To those who think you can't find another Danny green in the 2 nd round or ufda hell we just did his name is Langston Galloway and while he is not fully proven from what I have seen his value at 600 k compared to what a team will have to shell out to Green I can live with his bumps and bruises. The one big mistake the Knicks made with Galloway is not signing him to the rookie 3 year 4 mm contract and it will comeback to hurt us next year. No comparison Carroll equals great value and is a smart pick up green equals a value that won't be half as good. I don't like sg who don't take it to the basket and green does not. We don't have the offensive arsenal to support whether green is hot or cold from 3 we need diverse players with multi skill set. And for those who think defense is an overwhelming prognosticator of success to a point it over rides offensive skills you are not following basketball these teams need to get to 110 to win

I'm sorry, but if you think players like Danny Green are easily available everywhere, you are deluded. It's not just about skill set.

You're right, it isnt skillset, it's the system. He looks good because of who he plays with. He's totally replaceable, and if he asks for too much the Spurs likely will.

Its not just the system- a player still has to execute

That system has produced quite a few good players. he's executing "the system".

Then so is Carroll

No dispute honestly, they are both products of their system.

So we're not to sign any big names, and now we're not to sign any players from teams with good systems.

knickscity wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I find it interesting one player is a product of a system but the other player isn't even though he has exploded playing in the same/similar system. Also, this notion that Carroll is a 2 is ridiculous. Can He guard a 2 occasionally yes but you do not want him chasing smaller wings off screens. You also wouldn't be able to have him switch and guard pgs if you have a point guard that is a below avg defender.

If Carroll was a 2 that would actually be good but he is as much a 2 guard as Stein is a 4.. Like I said before, the best idea is to pair Danny Green and Demarre Carroll up especially at lest than $10m a yr.. Let Danny be Carroll's Korver and Carroll can be Green's Leonard.

Exactly. This thread goes on about the horrors of overpaying role players only to go on and suggest we overpay a role player. Danny Green's above average rate of rebounds, steals and blocks are also a product of the Spur's system? That's funny, because they're similar to what he did during his lone season in Cleveland. The numbers don't back up Demarre being better than Danny. At best, the most you can say is that their similar. I'd be happy with either one, because the Knicks roster is need of proven NBA talent, especially guys used to playing within a system. Lastly,this conversation is a bit early. Who cares if Carroll can play small ball four if we grab Okafor or Towns? What sense would it make to grab Green if we grab Russell? Sure, both guys should be on our radar. But it's too early for the team to develop tunnel vision in terms of what role players to sign.

Danny Green barely played for the Cavs....please stop.

knickscity wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

knickscity wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I find it interesting one player is a product of a system but the other player isn't even though he has exploded playing in the same/similar system. Also, this notion that Carroll is a 2 is ridiculous. Can He guard a 2 occasionally yes but you do not want him chasing smaller wings off screens. You also wouldn't be able to have him switch and guard pgs if you have a point guard that is a below avg defender.

If Carroll was a 2 that would actually be good but he is as much a 2 guard as Stein is a 4.. Like I said before, the best idea is to pair Danny Green and Demarre Carroll up especially at lest than $10m a yr.. Let Danny be Carroll's Korver and Carroll can be Green's Leonard.

Exactly. This thread goes on about the horrors of overpaying role players only to go on and suggest we overpay a role player. Danny Green's above average rate of rebounds, steals and blocks are also a product of the Spur's system? That's funny, because they're similar to what he did during his lone season in Cleveland. The numbers don't back up Demarre being better than Danny. At best, the most you can say is that their similar. I'd be happy with either one, because the Knicks roster is need of proven NBA talent, especially guys used to playing within a system. Lastly,this conversation is a bit early. Who cares if Carroll can play small ball four if we grab Okafor or Towns? What sense would it make to grab Green if we grab Russell? Sure, both guys should be on our radar. But it's too early for the team to develop tunnel vision in terms of what role players to sign.

Danny Green barely played for the Cavs....please stop.

Yeah, but his rebounds, blocks and steals per minute were good back then. That's all I meant. Look 'em up yourself. They're consistent in the D-League as well.

He played 5 minutes a game, come on now. He was a good shooter in college though.

True, but they are consistent. He's shown glimpses. Pops didn't magically transform Danny into a solid rebounder and defender with his "system." Even the shooting has always been a part of his game. Those are skills Danny has shown every stop he's made in his pro career.

knickscity wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

knickscity wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

knickscity wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:I find it interesting one player is a product of a system but the other player isn't even though he has exploded playing in the same/similar system. Also, this notion that Carroll is a 2 is ridiculous. Can He guard a 2 occasionally yes but you do not want him chasing smaller wings off screens. You also wouldn't be able to have him switch and guard pgs if you have a point guard that is a below avg defender.

If Carroll was a 2 that would actually be good but he is as much a 2 guard as Stein is a 4.. Like I said before, the best idea is to pair Danny Green and Demarre Carroll up especially at lest than $10m a yr.. Let Danny be Carroll's Korver and Carroll can be Green's Leonard.

Exactly. This thread goes on about the horrors of overpaying role players only to go on and suggest we overpay a role player. Danny Green's above average rate of rebounds, steals and blocks are also a product of the Spur's system? That's funny, because they're similar to what he did during his lone season in Cleveland. The numbers don't back up Demarre being better than Danny. At best, the most you can say is that their similar. I'd be happy with either one, because the Knicks roster is need of proven NBA talent, especially guys used to playing within a system. Lastly,this conversation is a bit early. Who cares if Carroll can play small ball four if we grab Okafor or Towns? What sense would it make to grab Green if we grab Russell? Sure, both guys should be on our radar. But it's too early for the team to develop tunnel vision in terms of what role players to sign.

Danny Green barely played for the Cavs....please stop.

Yeah, but his rebounds, blocks and steals per minute were good back then. That's all I meant. Look 'em up yourself. They're consistent in the D-League as well.

He played 5 minutes a game, come on now. He was a good shooter in college though.

True, but they are consistent. He's shown glimpses. Pops didn't magically transform Danny into a solid rebounder and defender with his "system." Even the shooting has always been a part of his game. Those are skills Danny has shown every stop he's made in his pro career.

It's called translation and that happened primarily due to the system. i wont discredit a player working on their games to thrive in each level, but Green isnt that kind of player. He's not transcending to the point that his production would have happened anywhere he's been.

Good defense, the ability to move without the ball and three point shooting are skill that will translate in any system. Is he a star? Naw. But he's legit.

Also, if Green is undervalued and is just another player is the Spurs machine then he should be an easy get at a cheap price. Green is a ufa so no one has to offer an outrageous offer sheet like one does with an rad. They can offer him market value, whatever that is.

callmened wrote:maybe green isnt mentioned much because i doubt the warriors will let him go anywhere

The above is talking about Danny Green, not Draymond Green
Briggs has said Danny Green and Draymond Green are role players that are products of the systems and talents of the team
However, it is the same for Carroll, who I do like, but Briggs is suggesting a near max for him at over 12m a year
With that said, a max for Draymond Green is just about 2m more, he never thought Draymond Green was worth such a contract, but believes Carroll is a steal, even at that price, while I disagree and I like Carroll but he is not a SG as Briggs suggests