TripleThreat wrote:

smackeddog wrote:That Hawks guy says that CP3 wants to go to the Bucks, that's his preferred destination, apparently doesn't want to come here (and understandably so, we offer him no hope at contention)

Well sucks for CP3. If he wanted freedom, he shouldn't have signed a max deal. If he tries to leverage out of a trade he doesn't want publicly , the owners will destroy the NBPA in the next labor war over it. If he goes to a team he doesn't want and dogs it, same thing. If he goes and tries to force a buyout, same thing. He is the face of the players side of the executive committee. The owners will have a fair point. If your leader won't honor his deal, why should be give max deals at all? Max deals were not designed to allow players to keep choosing where they wanted to play mid contract. And the owners would have a point.

If CP3 tried this, you'd see the league unhook the entire kennel. Usually the league doesn't engage in media hit pieces on their own players, but on this, even the NBPA would stay silent. When his HOF induction came up, you'd see a flood of every dirty thing Paul did to the press right before. The league can still exert enough power where post career, he'd never get a media job nor a coaching job in the league.

Durant and LBJ signed 1+1s because they wanted freedom. If Paul wanted choice, he could have done the same.

The Bucks are really in a poor asset position to trade for Paul. Again, something he should have accounted for when he signed that contract. OKC doesn't want those contracts and it's unreasonable for the Bucks to be expected to pay out the nose in draft choices to absorb Paul's deal. If a third team is involved, to absorb some contracts, someone is going to have pay a third team to do it. Why would either OKC or the Bucks do that?

To get Paul in any fashion, the Bucks would need to trade Middleton, and how does that actually help them?

That’s an excellent point. The max is supposed to protect small market teams. If Paul somehow prevents OKC from trading him and saving $80 million what is the point. Also, the cap is about to go down bigtime

Philc1 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Ha, this truly would be the stuff of absolute nightmares:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/ScoopB/status/1304095287183540224

Send one of the mavs picks. That’s literally all it may take because OKC saves $80 million trading Paul to the knicks

Saving a small market team $80MM in a shrinking cap environment = that small market team _paying_ for the favor. I would expect a couple of first round picks _coming our way_ with a Paul in return for some token asset like Randle.

TPercy wrote:I can see a 3 team that includes us where Paul goes to 76ers OKC gets expirings( including Randle?) and we get Horford + considerations.

Eh, at least Al is a good passer. Leaves with a big hole at 4 though. And what draft assets do the Sixers have left?

BigDaddyG wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Ha, this truly would be the stuff of absolute nightmares:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/ScoopB/status/1304095287183540224

Send one of the mavs picks. That’s literally all it may take because OKC saves $80 million trading Paul to the knicks

No picks. OKC is trying to save money and we're one of the few teams who can help them? Why would we give up picks for an aging, oft-injured $80 million contract. Chris Paul alone is not enough to get us to the playoffs. Even if he miraculously plays more than 60 games. We only do this deal if we get assets back.

You are getting an asset back. Chris Paul. Plus the Knicks make the playoffs next 2 seasons and stop looking dysfunctional

Philc1 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Ha, this truly would be the stuff of absolute nightmares:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/ScoopB/status/1304095287183540224

Send one of the mavs picks. That’s literally all it may take because OKC saves $80 million trading Paul to the knicks

No picks. OKC is trying to save money and we're one of the few teams who can help them? Why would we give up picks for an aging, oft-injured $80 million contract. Chris Paul alone is not enough to get us to the playoffs. Even if he miraculously plays more than 60 games. We only do this deal if we get assets back.

You are getting an asset back. Chris Paul. Plus the Knicks make the playoffs next 2 seasons and stop looking dysfunctional

You see an asset, I see an albatross. What else are we getting out of this besides a guy who will probably miss, at the very least, a quarter of the season. I'm glad you're optimistic, but this core is worst than OKCs. If Paul leaves, they have two guys who could conceivably play starters minutes. Paul won't make us a playoff team. Let's say we bring him in and get rid of Randle in the process. Could we overpay enough to tempt Bertans or Gallinari? Probably not. What's Paul and his gimpy knee got to work with here? This year was probably a fluke. LeBron and his magic pharmaceutical potions aside, you typically don't get better physically as you get older. This is almost inline with the Amar'e signing.

TripleThreat wrote:

TPercy wrote:I can see a 3 team that includes us where Paul goes to 76ers OKC gets expirings( including Randle?) and we get Horford + considerations.

Paul - $41M

Middleton - $33M

Giannis - $27M

That's going to be a hard sell. OKC would want Donte DiVincenzo and they would be asked to absorb Eric Bledsoe's deal. The Bucks would have to surround those three with basically nothing. They'd go into the tax zone and Chris Paul is no guarantee to stay healthy. Consider he had a long layoff and a shortened season with no travel.

Philly is a slightly better match if they can convince OKC to take Horford.

Well, while it's not conventional, if the Knicks took in Horford and Eric Bledsoe to offer these teams cap relief, they could get something back. Horford/Bledsoe wouldn't you a ring, but they'd offer a far more respectable lineup than the Knicks have seen in a long long time.

We could do far worse than that tbh. All depends on what we’d get in return in terms of draft considerations but it’s not the worst thing. We’d take ourselves out of contention of 2021 and possible 2022 FA but what were the chances we
We’re getting someone anyway?

BigDaddyG wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Ha, this truly would be the stuff of absolute nightmares:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/ScoopB/status/1304095287183540224

Send one of the mavs picks. That’s literally all it may take because OKC saves $80 million trading Paul to the knicks

No picks. OKC is trying to save money and we're one of the few teams who can help them? Why would we give up picks for an aging, oft-injured $80 million contract. Chris Paul alone is not enough to get us to the playoffs. Even if he miraculously plays more than 60 games. We only do this deal if we get assets back.

You are getting an asset back. Chris Paul. Plus the Knicks make the playoffs next 2 seasons and stop looking dysfunctional

You see an asset, I see an albatross. What else are we getting out of this besides a guy who will probably miss, at the very least, a quarter of the season. I'm glad you're optimistic, but this core is worst than OKCs. If Paul leaves, they have two guys who could conceivably play starters minutes. Paul won't make us a playoff team. Let's say we bring him in and get rid of Randle in the process. Could we overpay enough to tempt Bertans or Gallinari? Probably not. What's Paul and his gimpy knee got to work with here? This year was probably a fluke. LeBron and his magic pharmaceutical potions aside, you typically don't get better physically as you get older. This is almost inline with the Amar'e signing.

Next season will be 50 games tops. Paul should be able to handle that fine even at 35. His deal only has 2 year’s remaining and the Knicks would make the playoffs both seasons. Bertans would be ideal but I think the Knicks bring back either Gallo or Melo on a one year deal to be the stretch 4 we need

Philc1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

TPercy wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

TPercy wrote:I can see a 3 team that includes us where Paul goes to 76ers OKC gets expirings( including Randle?) and we get Horford + considerations.

Paul - $41M

Middleton - $33M

Giannis - $27M

That's going to be a hard sell. OKC would want Donte DiVincenzo and they would be asked to absorb Eric Bledsoe's deal. The Bucks would have to surround those three with basically nothing. They'd go into the tax zone and Chris Paul is no guarantee to stay healthy. Consider he had a long layoff and a shortened season with no travel.

Philly is a slightly better match if they can convince OKC to take Horford.

Well, while it's not conventional, if the Knicks took in Horford and Eric Bledsoe to offer these teams cap relief, they could get something back. Horford/Bledsoe wouldn't you a ring, but they'd offer a far more respectable lineup than the Knicks have seen in a long long time.

We could do far worse than that tbh. All depends on what we’d get in return in terms of draft considerations but it’s not the worst thing. We’d take ourselves out of contention of 2021 and possible 2022 FA but what were the chances we
We’re getting someone anyway?

Well it seems to me that the fans that want to stand clear of CP, are still thinking that we need the cap space to sign Rondo at 20 mill for 1 yr

What’s the point of getting all this cap space if no one ever wants to sign here? If the Knicks start making the playoffs even if it’s just an 8th seed maybe we actually can get one of these superstar free agents to come here for once

Crazy thing is, I mean I know we are just hypothesizing here but we could still have a lot a decent amount of cap space left over...not enough for a max I don’t think but still enough to be active.

Philc1 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

TPercy wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

TPercy wrote:I can see a 3 team that includes us where Paul goes to 76ers OKC gets expirings( including Randle?) and we get Horford + considerations.

Paul - $41M

Middleton - $33M

Giannis - $27M

That's going to be a hard sell. OKC would want Donte DiVincenzo and they would be asked to absorb Eric Bledsoe's deal. The Bucks would have to surround those three with basically nothing. They'd go into the tax zone and Chris Paul is no guarantee to stay healthy. Consider he had a long layoff and a shortened season with no travel.

Philly is a slightly better match if they can convince OKC to take Horford.

Well, while it's not conventional, if the Knicks took in Horford and Eric Bledsoe to offer these teams cap relief, they could get something back. Horford/Bledsoe wouldn't you a ring, but they'd offer a far more respectable lineup than the Knicks have seen in a long long time.

We could do far worse than that tbh. All depends on what we’d get in return in terms of draft considerations but it’s not the worst thing. We’d take ourselves out of contention of 2021 and possible 2022 FA but what were the chances we
We’re getting someone anyway?

Well it seems to me that the fans that want to stand clear of CP, are still thinking that we need the cap space to sign Rondo at 20 mill for 1 yr

What’s the point of getting all this cap space if no one ever wants to sign here? If the Knicks start making the playoffs even if it’s just an 8th seed maybe we actually can get one of these superstar free agents to come here for once

Reason why you have to continue to build with young assets until you become competitive enough to draw an elite player or until you get lucky and one of your draft/young players turn into a superstar in their own right. Ie. Boston. Until then, you can stay the path by using cap space to take on expiring deals that add draft pick assets. Or use it when an opportunity comes up to trade or sign a young elite player. Ie. Booker, AD. Just don't think its a good idea to use that cap space (which cost a lot of assets and took a considerable amount of time to obtain) on a 30 plus superstar on a downward trajectory. Specially when you won't have enough money or don't have enough talent to complete building a solid roster that will get you past the first round of the playoffs.

Philc1 wrote:
Next season will be 50 games tops. Paul should be able to handle that fine even at 35. His deal only has 2 year’s remaining and the Knicks would make the playoffs both seasons. Bertans would be ideal but I think the Knicks bring back either Gallo or Melo on a one year deal to be the stretch 4 we need

Rose tried to get Houston to trade Paul to the Knicks last offseason, but former team president Steve Mills wanted no part of reversing his youth movement. The Knicks have stockpiled draft picks for an occasion like this.