Also no doubt Randle is a max salary player

The Lakers look really good. I don't think I would dump what they have for Lebron and Paul George. Lebron can't quite carry a team like he used to.

IT looked pretty good. As a 6th man, he has a great role. He might be the top FA available this summer.

And if I could add him cheap, I would, happily gamble.

newyorknewyork wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:and he is avg 17.5 points and 6 assists. Before I Thomas came to th Lakers they were not very good.

Also no doubt Randle is a max salary player

He's being used as a 6th man and making 6mil per at the moment.

That's a big difference vs franchise player making 30 mil per.

newyorknewyork wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:and he is avg 17.5 points and 6 assists. Before I Thomas came to th Lakers they were not very good.

Also no doubt Randle is a max salary player

He's being used as a 6th man and making 6mil per at the moment.

That's a big difference vs franchise player making 30 mil per.

That's probably about what he is worth. 6-7 mil per year. Lou Williams is getting 7 mil a year in his new contract as comparison.

Nah he is worth more than that. He has lead teams to winning records which Lou hasn't accomplished. He just is a huge risk to invest 30 mil in if your trying to win a chip.

He is worth more than that from a basketball perspective, yes. The problem is, age, injury, and attitude limits his value. and obviously he is known as one of the worst defensive players in the league at this point.

nykshaknbake wrote:He will get st least 15 next year. He isn't a max player but he's a pretty unique talent. It would probably take 20 to get him here and unless it was for 2 years or less, I would pass, given his injury and defense.

What team with cap space will pay him 15 or more? Maybe LA resigns him if they miss out on others and get desperate, but i'm not sure if i see a good market for him out there. Lou Williams just sort of set the market for the elite scoring 6th man, and he's having a much better year than IT. The market is going to be bad for free agents, other than the max guys.

Gudris wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:There is zero benefit in going after Thomas Briggs. With Porzingis done for the first 40 games why sign anybody, especially over 30. The only guy im interested in is Julius Randle if Kanter goes and he will get more than I'm willing to spend

This means we need Nr1 scoring option until KP comes back, why not IT ?

So ruin draft position in a year we have zero chance of making the playoffs? Not to mention we will likely have to give a 5-7 30 year old PG 45-60 million over 3 years. How is this a good idea in the short or long term

Jmpasq wrote:

Gudris wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:There is zero benefit in going after Thomas Briggs. With Porzingis done for the first 40 games why sign anybody, especially over 30. The only guy im interested in is Julius Randle if Kanter goes and he will get more than I'm willing to spend

This means we need Nr1 scoring option until KP comes back, why not IT ?

So ruin draft position in a year we have zero chance of making the playoffs? Not to mention we will likely have to give a 5-7 30 year old PG 45-60 million over 3 years. How is this a good idea in the short or long term

I was going to say the draft changes next year so tanking isn't so beneficial - but looking at the revised percentages, I'm not seeing that- it still looks like it pays to tank, maybe less guaranteed at the top, but still.

http://www.nba.com/article/2017/09/28/nba-board-governors-approves-changes-draft-lottery-system#/

Knixkik wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:He will get st least 15 next year. He isn't a max player but he's a pretty unique talent. It would probably take 20 to get him here and unless it was for 2 years or less, I would pass, given his injury and defense.

What team with cap space will pay him 15 or more? Maybe LA resigns him if they miss out on others and get desperate, but i'm not sure if i see a good market for him out there. Lou Williams just sort of set the market for the elite scoring 6th man, and he's having a much better year than IT. The market is going to be bad for free agents, other than the max guys.

Redick and Hill both got 20mil per last offseason. Thomas will get 20mil minimum. Only thing a team will try and short him on is years. Philly if they miss out on Lebron will surely target Thomas. They want to take the next step. And will do what it takes to do so.

BRIGGS wrote:

Gudris wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:There is zero benefit in going after Thomas Briggs. With Porzingis done for the first 40 games why sign anybody, especially over 30. The only guy im interested in is Julius Randle if Kanter goes and he will get more than I'm willing to spend

This means we need Nr1 scoring option until KP comes back, why not IT ?

I would like to win. We pay money for vets--we gave Noah and Lee and combined 30mm--give Thomas 45mm for 3 years. If were in it to win games--atleast when KP comes back we have another vet winner. Hes worth the money--teams he plays for wins.

Win a few useless games or build a team for playoffs? Seems like you want to win a few useless games.

Luckily the Knicks won't even have the chance to offer the likes of IT a contract. But I like your reasoning: Knicks made errors with Noah and Lee, so let's do it again because that's a good thing.

BRIGGS, over the past 2 years, you have proposed 3 year contracts for Seth Curry, IT, Tony Allen, Beasley and others. Your cap management and team building is just atrocious, worse than Phil and Dolan combined man.