gradyandrew wrote:

Nalod wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:Ayton or not - I don't believe he would fit well next to Randle as we need to open up the floor more and gain toughness. Unless Randle agrees to stay outside the 3pt line the entire season.

I disagree. Ayton has midrange game.
He is somone to pass to and can score. You open the floor up with movement. Mitch moves away his man does not follow. It not just about shooting.
Now if Ayton does not want to work with Thibs, then you pass. That I agree.

Why are we pushing chips on the.table for a guy that will possibly be an improvement? Just go for KAT if you want to make a move.

The idea for some is to pair with Randle. Granted, anything is possible but Minny has a better version of Mitch in Gorbert on that crazy contract and I'd assume that they want and need randle plus either picks or players as they are looking to win now. They Have Rudy, Kat, Ant Edwards, and Conley. Do I want KAT for Randle and Kat next to Mitch? Not sure what we are doing there and the premium to do that.

PHX, also in win now mode can use Mitch but needs a PG behind CP3 if they keep him. Nobody is touching that contract. This is where IQ can be understudy for a year and be better than Cam Payne. CP3 will need time off. This is good for IQ. Add EF for depth off the bench in rotation. Thats basically two starters and functional role player for Ayton. EF was not right for us, but still has a good game. If there is no organizational belief in Ayton being better going forward then it don't happen. Knicks seemed well dialed in to taking some players and elevating them. Randle and Brunson are stars in the league now. It don't work all the time.

The issue of Ayton and Thibs, his maturity, his role on the team, is not set in stone. I perceive Ayton enhances Randle and can make his life easier. Same for the iso heavy ball Knicks play.

BTW, we fans treat iso ball like a disease but they made the final 8, and apparently Knicks are very good at it!

NardDogNation wrote:Anybody else think we should be looking into flipping Mitchell Robinson and Jericho Sims for DeAndre Ayton?

https://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=2gv9rbe6

It’s going to cost more than that. Probably Randle, Mitch and a couple picks

Nalod wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

Nalod wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:Ayton or not - I don't believe he would fit well next to Randle as we need to open up the floor more and gain toughness. Unless Randle agrees to stay outside the 3pt line the entire season.

I disagree. Ayton has midrange game.
He is somone to pass to and can score. You open the floor up with movement. Mitch moves away his man does not follow. It not just about shooting.
Now if Ayton does not want to work with Thibs, then you pass. That I agree.

Why are we pushing chips on the.table for a guy that will possibly be an improvement? Just go for KAT if you want to make a move.

The idea for some is to pair with Randle. Granted, anything is possible but Minny has a better version of Mitch in Gorbert on that crazy contract and I'd assume that they want and need randle plus either picks or players as they are looking to win now. They Have Rudy, Kat, Ant Edwards, and Conley. Do I want KAT for Randle and Kat next to Mitch? Not sure what we are doing there and the premium to do that.

PHX, also in win now mode can use Mitch but needs a PG behind CP3 if they keep him. Nobody is touching that contract. This is where IQ can be understudy for a year and be better than Cam Payne. CP3 will need time off. This is good for IQ. Add EF for depth off the bench in rotation. Thats basically two starters and functional role player for Ayton. EF was not right for us, but still has a good game. If there is no organizational belief in Ayton being better going forward then it don't happen. Knicks seemed well dialed in to taking some players and elevating them. Randle and Brunson are stars in the league now. It don't work all the time.

The issue of Ayton and Thibs, his maturity, his role on the team, is not set in stone. I perceive Ayton enhances Randle and can make his life easier. Same for the iso heavy ball Knicks play.

BTW, we fans treat iso ball like a disease but they made the final 8, and apparently Knicks are very good at it!

For their careers Ayton and Robinson have a 95% similarity score on basketball-reference. Ayton has a salary of 100 million over the next 3 seasons vs. Mitchell at 42 million. So Ayton costs 150% more for 5% more production. And you are talking about tossing in IQ whose win shares in his first 3 seasons match Ayton's.

We also just witnessed Robinson single handedly wrecking the alleged top young front court of the league vs. Cleveland. Robinson averaged 5 offensive rebounds per game during the playoffs. And you also admit that Mitchell's culture fit and work ethic are known qualities vs. Ayton's possibly questionable fit.

I think there could be success in an ultra big line up of Randle KAT and Robinson. It worked well enough for Philly and Milwaukee.

franco12 wrote:Anyone mention Brook Lopez? FA, if I understand correctly. Still producing at a great level. Could be fantastic off the bench- and I think his brother is available too! I would sign them both.

Is Giannis coming with Lopez? That move won’t put the Knicks over the top. The Knicks have to improve substantially and look for a player that can make them better. A player who is young athletic and can shoot. Against the heat the Knicks got man handled in the rebounding department. Last I checked Lopez is a rebounding liability.

Randle is tough to trade because replacing his regular season production will be tough. I don't see any team trading us a better or even an equal player for him. You're looking at Doug McDermott/Enes Kanter/1st type of packages and I'm not doing that. As much as I want Randle gone, it might be best to just hold onto him until better options become available. I also hope management continues to make Randle seek professional help cause a lot of his issues are mental. It's probably easier to trade RJ. We have to trade one of them imo.

Fournier and Rose need to go. We need better and more dependable vets at the end of the bench.

I'd look to trade Rob and upgrade the Center position too. I know he's an elite offensive rebounder but his lack of offense, poor FT shooting, durability and play against the top Centers in the league make him expendable. I know Randle get's a lot of crap for his decline in the playoffs but Rob was awful against Miami and got his ass handed to him by Bam. Even that bbw Lowry went at him with ease.

It was a successful season but second round is the ceiling for this roster. We need upgrades.

gradyandrew wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Brunson is the only untouchable. Everyone else should be available in the right deal. Ideally I'd like to keep most of the young guys like RJ, IQ, Grimes and Obi but we'll lose some of them in a big trade. Definitely keeping Hartenstein and Deuce. I'd like to bring back Hart but only if it's a reasonable and fair trade considering he's a bench player and his lack of shooting hurts. You can't play RJ with Hart in any lineup.

Randle is tough to trade because replacing his regular season production will be tough. I don't see any team trading us a better or even an equal player for him. You're looking at Doug McDermott/Enes Kanter/1st type of packages and I'm not doing that. As much as I want Randle gone, it might be best to just hold onto him until better options become available. I also hope management continues to make Randle seek professional help cause a lot of his issues are mental. It's probably easier to trade RJ. We have to trade one of them imo.

Fournier and Rose need to go. We need better and more dependable vets at the end of the bench.

I'd look to trade Rob and upgrade the Center position too. I know he's an elite offensive rebounder but his lack of offense, poor FT shooting, durability and play against the top Centers in the league make him expendable. I know Randle get's a lot of crap for his decline in the playoffs but Rob was awful against Miami and got his ass handed to him by Bam. Even that bbw Lowry went at him with ease.

It was a successful season but second round is the ceiling for this roster. We need upgrades.

You think trading 3 of 5 starters is a better strategy than scoring 8 more points in Game 1 (shooting 28% on 3s vs 20%) and 5 more points in Game 6 (Randle going 5-14 vs 3-14). Seems dicey to me.

I don't see it this way. We're not just competing against the cHeat. Our talent level is not ECF level and we need to upgrade. I wouldn't necessarily look to upgrade 3 of the 5 starting positions as it's unrealistic but we need to do something. Specifically upgrading the outside shooting. Rob, Randle and RJ are not ideal together imo. You have to swap one (or two) out and get a player in there that can shoot better.

foosballnick wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

blkexec wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

blkexec wrote:

Nalod wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:A lot of athleticism declines with age, obviously. One of the factors that tends to improve- shooting! More reps, more confidence on the court, more experience equals better shooting. I get chills thinking about thisexact same team 3 years down the line when Obi IQ RJ and Grimes are just hitting their prime, Brunson and Josh are in the middle, and Randle is younger than Jimmy Butler is now. Look at the Celtics and Nuggets. Same core for years and they are just hitting their primes. Thibs has built a squad that can contend for the next 5 years- and there's enough young talent coming in that we can build a sustainable bench. Keep it rolling.

good points. The fan typically wants instant change and we all looking at how we did vs Miami losing 4 of 6 and thats how we should react.
We still have Randle vs ATL on our minds and think “he can never perform in the playoffs.
He has not played 20 post seasons games.
Running it back and developing a core in this culture is appealing also. Requires patience and vision of what can be vs. what has.
Does not mean its complacent.
Also does not mean if there is a deal to be done they pass. Just seems this FO is not going to over pay.

Nope, we know that about rose. He will either bring everyone back with minor tweeks like trading EF. But there’s a time limit on patience. Brunson and Randle are in their prime now. To me the best time to swing for the fense is now. Build around Brunson with nba players that compliments him and his style.

Doesn't Brunson have a lot of similarities to Kyle Lowry? Brunson is 26 and Kyle is 37, so I don't really see the immediate rush.

Did you just compare JB to Lowery with a str8 face?

We should learn from the Ewing era and not repeat it.

Give JB a team he can win a chip with while in his prime vs waiting until he’s Kyle lowery age since they are similar (lol). I couldn’t even type that with a str8 face. We just gonna disagree on that comparison and leave it there. Because lowery at 36 is not leading an nba team to a chip as the top player on his team. He’s not even a starter anymore. But he’s doing for Miami what drose can and should do for the Knicks.

My interpretation of the post was that regarding the need to make a move immediately we still have some time with Brunson. Note that Lowery appears to be much more effective on D than DRose which is why he maintains value even as a reserve at least IMO.

By more time do you mean as an NBA player in general? It's not realistic to expect Brunson to keep up his current production into his 30s. We need to strike while the iron is hot.

By more time I mean that Brunson is 26 and not "into his 30's".

Ok. But realistically, and I'm being optimistic, we will only have 4-6 years of prime Brunson years. The clock is ticking if they want to capitalize. It's cool that Brunson exploded, but it also makes the teams need to improve a bit more urgent.

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:IQ RJ QG and Randle have all been above average 3 point shooters at some point. Shooting is about practice and confidence, two factors that should improve with experience.

I'm not worried about IQ and Grimes. There's been enough of a sample size to show that they are average to above average three point shooters. RJ and Randle's percentages have been all over the place throughout their careers and I'm not sure any amount of practice will change that. Some guys are pure, but a lot of guys can't get there no matter how hard they try. Not the end of the world, but you have to wonder if RJ or Randle would be better if they were opposite another knockdown shooter at the forward spot.

RJ is not really guarded at the 3point line so I don’t know how a spacer would help him.

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:IQ RJ QG and Randle have all been above average 3 point shooters at some point. Shooting is about practice and confidence, two factors that should improve with experience.

I'm not worried about IQ and Grimes. There's been enough of a sample size to show that they are average to above average three point shooters. RJ and Randle's percentages have been all over the place throughout their careers and I'm not sure any amount of practice will change that. Some guys are pure, but a lot of guys can't get there no matter how hard they try. Not the end of the world, but you have to wonder if RJ or Randle would be better if they were opposite another knockdown shooter at the forward spot.

RJ is not really guarded at the 3point line so I don’t know how a spacer would help him.

More space for his downhill strikes. He got better at kicking out during these playoffs. Maybe that becomes a trend? I dunno, but something needs to change I'm that dynamic.

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:IQ RJ QG and Randle have all been above average 3 point shooters at some point. Shooting is about practice and confidence, two factors that should improve with experience.

I'm not worried about IQ and Grimes. There's been enough of a sample size to show that they are average to above average three point shooters. RJ and Randle's percentages have been all over the place throughout their careers and I'm not sure any amount of practice will change that. Some guys are pure, but a lot of guys can't get there no matter how hard they try. Not the end of the world, but you have to wonder if RJ or Randle would be better if they were opposite another knockdown shooter at the forward spot.

RJ is not really guarded at the 3point line so I don’t know how a spacer would help him.

More space for his downhill strikes. He got better at kicking out during these playoffs. Maybe that becomes a trend? I dunno, but something needs to change I'm that dynamic.

Shooting better from 3, that’s what needs to change for RJ. Or just shooting better in general will open things up for himself.

BigDaddyG wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:IQ RJ QG and Randle have all been above average 3 point shooters at some point. Shooting is about practice and confidence, two factors that should improve with experience.

I'm not worried about IQ and Grimes. There's been enough of a sample size to show that they are average to above average three point shooters. RJ and Randle's percentages have been all over the place throughout their careers and I'm not sure any amount of practice will change that. Some guys are pure, but a lot of guys can't get there no matter how hard they try. Not the end of the world, but you have to wonder if RJ or Randle would be better if they were opposite another knockdown shooter at the forward spot.