https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5645318/2024/07/18/knicks-roster-analysis-precious-achiuwa-cameron-payne/

Achiuwa update

Weeks into free agency, Achiuwa is lingering in the market. At this point, remaining unsigned could be to both his and the Knicks’ advantage.

The Knicks remain open to bringing back Achiuwa, who they acquired as part of the December trade that brought OG Anunoby to New York. And yet, for now, they are best leaving Achiuwa unsigned — and Achiuwa can maximize his market by waiting.

The NBA’s economy has changed under this new collective bargaining agreement. The middle class is getting hit. Zero free agents this summer have received the non-taxpayer midlevel exception for multiple seasons. De’Anthony Melton is the only person to receive it in full, but he got only one year with the Golden State Warriors. Others have had to take less. Many organizations haven’t used their midlevel, whether the non-taxpayer or the taxpayer, at all.

The non-taxpayer midlevel exception, which allows over-the-cap teams to sign players to contracts with a starting salary of up to $12.9 million, also can be used as a trade exception now, which gives front offices an excuse to hold onto it if they don’t love what they see. Solid role players are getting squeezed.

Tyus Jones, who is sneakily coming off his best-ever season with the Washington Wizards, remains unsigned. Caleb Martin reportedly turned down a five-year, $65 million extension to test free agency and received only half of that guaranteed money over four years. Gary Trent Jr., a consistent scorer and shooter, settled for a minimum contract with the Milwaukee Bucks earlier this week.

That brings us back to Achiuwa, and why he may still be around.

If the offers are not attractive, maybe at the minimum or barely above, Achiuwa could be best off waiting to see what the Knicks do. And the Knicks could benefit from patience, too.

Here’s why:

Beginning this season, trades are far more difficult to make, especially for a team like the Knicks, who are above the first apron, a payroll threshold that limits an organization’s resources if it crests over it. One of the most punitive first-apron restrictions? The Knicks are not allowed to take back more salary than they send out in a trade.

This is where hypothetical trades become even more confusing: No team above the first apron can realistically make a trade with another that also is above the first apron. Unless they are dealing one player for another who makes the same salary, all the way down to the cent, one team will be absorbing more dollars than the other.

The Knicks could still use a backup center. A trade could entice them, but they need the tools to make it happen. Achiuwa would come in handy if they’re negotiating with a team also above the first apron.

Let’s say the Knicks agree to a trade with Team A that would send (I’m making up numbers to keep the math simple) $10 million in salaries to Team A and $14 million in salary to the Knicks. That means New York is adding $4 million to the deal. Achiuwa could remedy that. All the Knicks and Team A have to do is find a third team, someone either with cap room or an exception to absorb the big man, then agree to a sign-and-trade with Achiuwa that pays him more than $4 million.

The final version of the trade would look like this:

The Knicks send out $10 million of salaries on the roster and, say, a $5 million salary for Achiuwa in a sign-and-trade deal. They bring back $14 million and thus are in the clear.

Team A sends out $14 million and takes back $10 million, which puts it in the clear, as well.

Team B, which must be below the first apron, receives Achiuwa in a sign-and-trade and possibly lands a draft pick as a thank-you for facilitating the deal.

It’s why both sides might as well wait. In the end, the Knicks can execute a trade they otherwise couldn’t and Achiuwa receives more than a minimum salary. If the Knicks can’t find a worthwhile deal, then bringing back Achiuwa, who performed well after joining the group this winter, remains on the table.

martin wrote:From Fred:

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5645318/2024/07/18/knicks-roster-analysis-precious-achiuwa-cameron-payne/

Achiuwa update

Weeks into free agency, Achiuwa is lingering in the market. At this point, remaining unsigned could be to both his and the Knicks’ advantage.

The Knicks remain open to bringing back Achiuwa, who they acquired as part of the December trade that brought OG Anunoby to New York. And yet, for now, they are best leaving Achiuwa unsigned — and Achiuwa can maximize his market by waiting.

The NBA’s economy has changed under this new collective bargaining agreement. The middle class is getting hit. Zero free agents this summer have received the non-taxpayer midlevel exception for multiple seasons. De’Anthony Melton is the only person to receive it in full, but he got only one year with the Golden State Warriors. Others have had to take less. Many organizations haven’t used their midlevel, whether the non-taxpayer or the taxpayer, at all.

The non-taxpayer midlevel exception, which allows over-the-cap teams to sign players to contracts with a starting salary of up to $12.9 million, also can be used as a trade exception now, which gives front offices an excuse to hold onto it if they don’t love what they see. Solid role players are getting squeezed.

Tyus Jones, who is sneakily coming off his best-ever season with the Washington Wizards, remains unsigned. Caleb Martin reportedly turned down a five-year, $65 million extension to test free agency and received only half of that guaranteed money over four years. Gary Trent Jr., a consistent scorer and shooter, settled for a minimum contract with the Milwaukee Bucks earlier this week.

That brings us back to Achiuwa, and why he may still be around.

If the offers are not attractive, maybe at the minimum or barely above, Achiuwa could be best off waiting to see what the Knicks do. And the Knicks could benefit from patience, too.

Here’s why:

Beginning this season, trades are far more difficult to make, especially for a team like the Knicks, who are above the first apron, a payroll threshold that limits an organization’s resources if it crests over it. One of the most punitive first-apron restrictions? The Knicks are not allowed to take back more salary than they send out in a trade.

This is where hypothetical trades become even more confusing: No team above the first apron can realistically make a trade with another that also is above the first apron. Unless they are dealing one player for another who makes the same salary, all the way down to the cent, one team will be absorbing more dollars than the other.

The Knicks could still use a backup center. A trade could entice them, but they need the tools to make it happen. Achiuwa would come in handy if they’re negotiating with a team also above the first apron.

Let’s say the Knicks agree to a trade with Team A that would send (I’m making up numbers to keep the math simple) $10 million in salaries to Team A and $14 million in salary to the Knicks. That means New York is adding $4 million to the deal. Achiuwa could remedy that. All the Knicks and Team A have to do is find a third team, someone either with cap room or an exception to absorb the big man, then agree to a sign-and-trade with Achiuwa that pays him more than $4 million.

The final version of the trade would look like this:

The Knicks send out $10 million of salaries on the roster and, say, a $5 million salary for Achiuwa in a sign-and-trade deal. They bring back $14 million and thus are in the clear.

Team A sends out $14 million and takes back $10 million, which puts it in the clear, as well.

Team B, which must be below the first apron, receives Achiuwa in a sign-and-trade and possibly lands a draft pick as a thank-you for facilitating the deal.

It’s why both sides might as well wait. In the end, the Knicks can execute a trade they otherwise couldn’t and Achiuwa receives more than a minimum salary. If the Knicks can’t find a worthwhile deal, then bringing back Achiuwa, who performed well after joining the group this winter, remains on the table.

Fred was a guest on the KFS podcast. Said something interesting. They might be waiting on a sign and trade but also that the Knicks might be in no big rush to make an immediate move to address an alternative at Center. Since they don't have a lot of draft capital except for the heavily protected Detroit/Washington Picks - they might end up re-signing Precious (i.e. $6M - $7M range) and see how things work - then make a move near the trade deadline if they feel a center will help them in the playoffs. Interestingly he pointed to Larry Nance Jr. as an example of a potential deadline move. Not sure how I feel about that as I really am not familiar with his game.

fishmike wrote:the guy we really need is Steve Adams (assuming he's healthy)

Going in w/ Mitch and Adams at center would be a contender move. I dont think we can add guys AND use Precious in a S%T deal (Im guessing it would cost McBride etc also)

He on Rockets. One year left on his deal. Mitch makes same money but has two years.
So why is he on the rockets? Hmmmmm
Raphael Stone vs. Garson Rosas.........Hmmmm, why is that?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/NBA_NewYork/status/1809416647821680669

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/nba_newyork/status/1814078005892788383

No reason we can’t go with Julius at the back up 5. We have two unbelievable defenders and spacing everywhere, that is probably the lack of urgency here. We need hart on the floor as much as possible and Simms can give you a couple of minutes.

foosballnick wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:Has Randle ever been effectively used at the 5? I don’t recall it but someone please correct me if you remember a time.

If so, not for any long stretches. He can probably be pretty effective on offense but IMO might be a defensive liability at the 5. Perhaps switching - for instance he can take some of the IHart role on offense (with better 3pt shooting) and maybe OG can cover defending the 5.

Yeah, it just doesn’t appear to me to be a viable solution.

EwingsGlass wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:Has Randle ever been effectively used at the 5? I don’t recall it but someone please correct me if you remember a time.

Good question, though I am not certain it is the correct one.

In this concept, defense is fluid. You have two elite defenders in OG Anunoby and Mikal Bridges who will inevitably pick up the first and second best offensive players on the opposing team, regardless of position. Their versatility makes this possible.

On offense, you are likely to see a 4-1 motion offense where the Center (Randle) would be tasked with moving to different portion of the box, bodying the other side to create space for a drive and being the fulcrum of the passing offense - use his gravity to collapse the defense and find any of the other 4 37%+ 3 point shooters on the court.

You'd give up the huge positional size advantage the Knicks have on defense with a lineup of Brunson/Bridges/Anunoby/Randle/Robinson, but you would have perhaps one of the more elite offenses in Brunson/DDV/Bridges/Anunoby/Randle.

Ideally, it would compare with the Death Lineup of Curry/Thompson/Iggy/Durant/Green that won 73 games. That team still had better positional size at each slot and more HoF credentials, so I am not trying to overstate its effectiveness. But the modeling would be similar, with Anunoby and Bridge's defensive versatility allowing the Knicks to match Iggy and Green's versatility on that squad.

The highlight of that squad has Curry, Durant and Thompson all shooting well over 40% from three, a feat the Knicks probably can't match. But I think Randle is a more prominent offensive player than Green and would do better in the post than Green. Assuming he can have the mental fortitude to pass when needed and not force plays, it would be a monster lineup that would force a lot of mismatches across the league. It would spread the floor to allow Brunson and Bridges more room to work, both having pretty efficient mid-range games. The combined offensive output potentially making up for the Curry and Durant's HOF credentials, this squad doesn't really have any 'duds' on offense - Dray and Iggy were pretty inefficient, but minimized in their offensive roles.

Without a better passing big, it feels like the best we can do with the personnel we have. Not to belittle Robinson, but his inclusion bolsters the defense, but is a bit of a drag on the offense.

I suppose my apprehension is simply we haven’t employed Randle effectively at the 5 before, for whatever reasons. But it’s a different team and vibe now. I’d be all for giving it an honest shot.