Defensively?
Shooting?
Driving?
Passing/playmaking?
Intangibles?

GustavBahler wrote:Hardaway will move to the 2 eventually. Would like to see Dotson get some more minutes at the 3 and compare McD to Dotson.

Maybe Dotson can give us similar production for less. Doug is playing lights out right now. Will make it hard for Perry not to consider bringing him back.

Would love to see more Dotson too but am pretty sure he won't get minutes as long as McD, Beas, THJr, Lance, Lee are available, and I'm OK with it. Knicks have him on a very good contract and the other guys are on ending contracts or may be traded and Knicks need to make sure team playing well and all those guys playing well.

Do see him getting minutes next year

I'm happy with both Tim and McDermott...Doug is a much better athlete than I had anticipated based on the little I had seen of him, and he seems to have found a good offense for his game.

Have not seen Tim overpowered at the 3(and posting up at his position is somewhat rare today), and I think he benefits a little on the perimeter because he is as quick as most 3 he's guarding...he might not be as effective at the 2.

WaltLongmire wrote:A nice problem to have...we seem to have a good deal of talent and a great deal of flexibility at the 2/3 slots.

I'm happy with both Tim and McDermott...Doug is a much better athlete than I had anticipated based on the little I had seen of him, and he seems to have found a good offense for his game.

Have not seen Tim overpowered at the 3(and posting up at his position is somewhat rare today), and I think he benefits a little on the perimeter because he is as quick as most 3 he's guarding...he might not be as effective at the 2.

I agree. I thought he was just a long ball shooter, but he's very athletic around the basket, and great hands handling bad passes, and even passes fairly well. I'm pleasantly surprised.

Knixkik wrote:Hardaway is our long-term SG, that much is set in stone. McDermott fits the team well with his shooting, movement without the ball, and personality. My only concern is i don't see McDermott as a future starter or anything like that. He is a great piece in the role he has now. So will we pay that type of player big money? I am always concerned giving a bench rotation player a large long-term contract unless we are a contender and need that piece. Part of me feels like player development and draft picks can get us that role player for 25% of the cost. I see Dotson as filling that role to an extent. I also see us drafted a rotation wing with our first round pick, and a couple of developmental prospects in the second round. I feel we will commit big money contracts to Porzingis, Hardaway, and Kanter, all of which are long-term starters, and not commit big money to anyone until we feel we have a star who can take us to the next level.

Not disagreeing with you. Curious to know what about McDermott's game you believe keeps him from being starter quality? Wouldnt mind Doug starting for the stretch, see how he plays with the Hardaway at the 2. Might work well.

Pretty sure McDermott will get offers as well, having a good season.

GustavBahler wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Hardaway is our long-term SG, that much is set in stone. McDermott fits the team well with his shooting, movement without the ball, and personality. My only concern is i don't see McDermott as a future starter or anything like that. He is a great piece in the role he has now. So will we pay that type of player big money? I am always concerned giving a bench rotation player a large long-term contract unless we are a contender and need that piece. Part of me feels like player development and draft picks can get us that role player for 25% of the cost. I see Dotson as filling that role to an extent. I also see us drafted a rotation wing with our first round pick, and a couple of developmental prospects in the second round. I feel we will commit big money contracts to Porzingis, Hardaway, and Kanter, all of which are long-term starters, and not commit big money to anyone until we feel we have a star who can take us to the next level.

Not disagreeing with you. Curious to know what about McDermott's game you believe keeps him from being starter quality? Wouldnt mind Doug starting for the stretch, see how he plays with the Hardaway at the 2. Might work well.

Pretty sure McDermott will get offers as well, having a good season.

I'm with you. Here is a couple of my concerns;
1. His defense still leaves a lot to be desired and next to Hardaway that can be a problem.
2. He can shoot and can score, but is still a low-volume contributor on a per minute basis.
3. His advanced metrics still don't really check out even with him having a very good year.

But i will say, i value his shooting and it's needed in today's game, so he is a valuable piece no matter what the numbers say. My concern is less with his ability to be a starting SF, and more with my concern that if he is our starter, we are not ever going to be a deep playoff contender. We need a big time player at that position when we eventually replace Lee. Until then, Lee provides the same shooting McDermott does, but offers more on the offensive end and creating shots as well. In today's game, Lee, or a player like him can handle SF duties just fine. Again, this isn't a knock on McDermott, but i am eager to save cap space outside of committing to obvious long-term starting players. I believe guys like Dotson and other future draft selections can develop into good rotation players.

Knixkik wrote:Hardaway is our long-term SG, that much is set in stone. McDermott fits the team well with his shooting, movement without the ball, and personality. My only concern is i don't see McDermott as a future starter or anything like that. He is a great piece in the role he has now. So will we pay that type of player big money? I am always concerned giving a bench rotation player a large long-term contract unless we are a contender and need that piece. Part of me feels like player development and draft picks can get us that role player for 25% of the cost. I see Dotson as filling that role to an extent. I also see us drafted a rotation wing with our first round pick, and a couple of developmental prospects in the second round. I feel we will commit big money contracts to Porzingis, Hardaway, and Kanter, all of which are long-term starters, and not commit big money to anyone until we feel we have a star who can take us to the next level.

fishmike wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Hardaway is our long-term SG, that much is set in stone. McDermott fits the team well with his shooting, movement without the ball, and personality. My only concern is i don't see McDermott as a future starter or anything like that. He is a great piece in the role he has now. So will we pay that type of player big money? I am always concerned giving a bench rotation player a large long-term contract unless we are a contender and need that piece. Part of me feels like player development and draft picks can get us that role player for 25% of the cost. I see Dotson as filling that role to an extent. I also see us drafted a rotation wing with our first round pick, and a couple of developmental prospects in the second round. I feel we will commit big money contracts to Porzingis, Hardaway, and Kanter, all of which are long-term starters, and not commit big money to anyone until we feel we have a star who can take us to the next level.

Not disagreeing with you. Curious to know what about McDermott's game you believe keeps him from being starter quality? Wouldnt mind Doug starting for the stretch, see how he plays with the Hardaway at the 2. Might work well.

Pretty sure McDermott will get offers as well, having a good season.

I'm with you. Here is a couple of my concerns;
1. His defense still leaves a lot to be desired and next to Hardaway that can be a problem.
2. He can shoot and can score, but is still a low-volume contributor on a per minute basis.
3. His advanced metrics still don't really check out even with him having a very good year.

But i will say, i value his shooting and it's needed in today's game, so he is a valuable piece no matter what the numbers say. My concern is less with his ability to be a starting SF, and more with my concern that if he is our starter, we are not ever going to be a deep playoff contender. We need a big time player at that position when we eventually replace Lee. Until then, Lee provides the same shooting McDermott does, but offers more on the offensive end and creating shots as well. In today's game, Lee, or a player like him can handle SF duties just fine. Again, this isn't a knock on McDermott, but i am eager to save cap space outside of committing to obvious long-term starting players. I believe guys like Dotson and other future draft selections can develop into good rotation players.

McD is a classic MLE player and I think thats his market. He's not going to get big starter money as everyone knows he cant create his own shot and he's an average (but very willing) defender.

MLE is about $8mm right? I would give him that for sure. 4/$35mm gives you a good bench player who can give you some spot starts and be an important part of what you are doing. I think thats his market and I would bring him back for that. Age 26-29 is prime years and if healthy he's a nice flexible piece for trades etc, although the point is to keep him, not flip him. A MLE deal is a nice spot for him IMO

Korver once he had some security defined his role and got even better at what he was good at. Sometimes guaranteed money can propel a career. Sometimes is makes you lazy.

Which is better? About same money and roles they play.