TripleThreat wrote:
The three players who can max out and push the Knicks towards a BETTER ( not a guarantee) direction towards actual contention are Durant, Thompson and Leonard. Nothing in the current marketplace suggests that the Knicks would be their best option.
Already you're proving you have no legitimate knowledge of basketball.
Klay Thompson isn't pushing any team to "actual contention" as a significant piece. He's an All-Star. Nothing more, nothing less.
Durant can sign a Super Max with the Warriors and stay in contention during that run. Or he can take a paycut, another one, and go to the Knicks, which has unproven young guys we all hope will pan out and bad contracts.
Durant's not signing a Super Max; more specifically, the Warriors won't offer him that, presuming he wants to stay. He'll take a pay cut. This is beside the point, because AGAIN, you have ZERO ability to see into the future when so many things are in flux and prone to change in the next 11 months. What happens if Steph Curry blows out his knee and Thompson opts out and signs with who the hell ever? Right - exactly.
Thompson and Leonard have better pathways to winning while equalizing out any money/contract length the Knicks can offer.
K.
Irving's Bird Rights belong to the Celtics. What's more likely? Irving comes to the Knicks with Jimmy Butler, both take massive paycuts or the trades to get their Bird Rights would get any kind of depth around them. Or Irving convinces Butler or someone else to come to the Celtics and they go over the cap to resign Irving? And find a better pathway to the Finals from the gutted East?
I think it's likely that Kyrie Irving does Kyrie-esque things like march to the beat of his own drum, just as he did when he said goodbye to Lebron James, waived his 15% trade kicker, and forewent any prospect of receiving a Super-Max. He's from Jersey, has family near here, and loves the big stage. Yes, I 10000% predict Irving will heavily consider the Knicks (not that I particularly care one way or the other)
None of the trades you suggest have any basis in market reality.
Sure they do, kiddo. Wolves would snatch that offer up in a heartbeat near the All-Star break if the Knicks are sliding towards the top of the draft and intend on double dipping on Max FA's. Apples for apples - Butler was dealt for an injured Lavine nearing a new contract, an unproven Dunn, and a pick swap.
I do not know what trades will or will not happen in the next year. I do know if they pass The Mirror Test or not. I do know if the move would get that non Knicks front office fired or not.
Should've stopped there. We agree - you have no idea what you're talking about. You're not the smartest guy in the room; you sure try to pass yourself off as such, though.
The other UFAs on your list, many of them are older, and giving them the max would be an overpay into their deep decline phase.
When did I suggest anyone give the max to the "older" players?? Huh?
Assuming the UFA leaves his current team, it means the Knicks have to offer a better situation than 28 other teams. Any trade has to be a better offer than one's submitted by 28 other teams.
K, Debbie Downer.
If it's fun for you to throw the idea around, fine. It's a discussion board. If you want to say your views on trades and FAs in this thread have a basis in actual and current marketplace reality, then you are wrong.
No, I'm right. YOU'RE wrong. Next! (See how easy that is?)
Unless something catastrophic happens to certain players like scandal or deep injury, the Knicks will not whiff a scent of Durant, Thompson and Leonard.
So you're in deep with their agents, huh? Should've said so!
Hey, can we get this guy a ****in podcast already?
*gets on the floor leaning on elbows with feet in the air like an attentive son
"What's Kevin's agent like, pop pop? Is he nice? Is his hair real? Oh, oh! I know - they're hair plugs aren't they?"
Irving's positional value is an "Attack Guard" who tend to age poorly in their decline phase. Also he has an injury history. He'll be a Knick if the market says they offer him the most money and most years, meaning something is wrong with him for other teams not to do the same.
K. You're in love with Kyrie; we get it, pal.
If you want to hide behind "You can't see into the future" then fine. I can't see into the future.
I don't hide from anything or anyone. And you would do well to remind yourself of that fact.
I don't know what kind of pseudo-psychological head games you're attempting to play here, but this is sophistry at its finest. We agree - YOU CANNOT SEE INTO THE FUTURE.
I can see into the current marketplace though.
No...you can't.
The Knicks max options are only going to be guys who will hurt them long term to sign.
Yea, you mean like that Kyrie fella who buried the Warriors, eh?
Because if they had better options, they wouldn't sign with the Knicks. The lack of better options means something bad (injury, off the court scandal, steep decline already, lack of positional value, lack of modern skill sets valued by the league as a whole)
Or maybe it means they wanna sign with the Knicks? New York's a great option, even if the owner is a moronic scumbag. Knicks are the most networked front office right now. There's a reason they hired the brother in law of the friggin President...the 1st black president. Players and their agents notice these things.
Anyway, this was a waste of my finite energy. I feel like your long-ass response was mostly satire? But I can't tell. Either way, it was full of moronic logical fallacies and false equivalencies. You did not disprove a single thing I wrote. You're welcome to your opinion, but not to your own reality. And I could REALLY do without your smug, unfriendly, miserly, defeatist cynicism, though. I'm not even a fan right now and you make me sound like Spike Lee.
Jesus Christ.