Probably cant afford him. If Jordan moves on, I hope they make a pitch to Rolo. Bring him off the bench. Mitch is fast enough to cover PFs. They could be quite a good defensive tandem at times. Kind of player you want in the playoffs, when the game slows down. Probably cant afford him though.

Vmart wrote:I would add Westbrook to that list. I think he will be available.

Westbrook and Durant back together. Really? Might want to think that one thru.
Also, if we sign two max players, how does one go about paying the salary of this Rainmanian wet dream?

If we strike out on Durant, Kawhi, etc this summer = then keep compiling assets and save the money as you never know when another quality player becomes available. Basically, keep the team in a position of power and flexibility so we're not always saving short-term to go "all in" due to impatience. We're so bad at it anyways - look at our history for evidence

knicks1248 wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:Totally against trading our assets for another star player - especially if we land a Durant and/or Kyrie! To me, it only makes sense to go "all in" when you're a seasoned/stable team needing that one player to get you from the conference semifinals to the finals... We're clearly not that team so maybe it's okay with build incrementally and improve each year. If we land Durant and a Kyrie - we should make the playoffs. If Mitch and/or Knox and/or DSJr develops - we take another step. If we land Zion then our capacity is greater but still good to leave some talent and not drain the cupboard.

If we strike out on Durant, Kawhi, etc this summer = then keep compiling assets and save the money as you never know when another quality player becomes available. Basically, keep the team in a position of power and flexibility so we're not always saving short-term to go "all in" due to impatience. We're so bad at it anyways - look at our history for evidence

TWO stars will not cut it..when LBJ came back to cleveland to join Kyrie, they were slightly above avg until they got Love in a trade for (no other than) the #1 pick Wiggins. They won a title coming off one of the worst records in the NBA the previous season.

When the Knicks traded KP they swung for the fences on a 0-2 pitch

You sort of right. Two stars with a balanced squad with a few very good players can get it done. Today that's called the Houston Rockets. In the past it was the Spurs. GSW pre Durant won 73 games with Klay/Steph and a very good team around them. Draymond Green is not a star. He is a very very good glue guy. Knicks third spoke has to be in grown. The Heatles were valid because they had Wade already. If you bring in two "stars" (my fingers hurt typing that) the dynamic changes. There is a lot more air and sun for Knox, Frank, DSjr and whom ever we draft. I would expect a trade if we land Durant and another but that's for another day.

In Boston the trio of Horford/Kyrie/Haywood is not conducive to growing Tatum/Brown/Rozier. What happens in the past on Cle and BOS is not automatic going forward.

If Durant does not want to grow the youth then FO has to either accommodate him or take a pass. Durant will pick his "robin" and the vision of what he wants. Knicks either accommodate or not. So yeah, two won't get it done but how you get to the third and when is wide open. It need not be year one.

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:Totally against trading our assets for another star player - especially if we land a Durant and/or Kyrie! To me, it only makes sense to go "all in" when you're a seasoned/stable team needing that one player to get you from the conference semifinals to the finals... We're clearly not that team so maybe it's okay with build incrementally and improve each year. If we land Durant and a Kyrie - we should make the playoffs. If Mitch and/or Knox and/or DSJr develops - we take another step. If we land Zion then our capacity is greater but still good to leave some talent and not drain the cupboard.

If we strike out on Durant, Kawhi, etc this summer = then keep compiling assets and save the money as you never know when another quality player becomes available. Basically, keep the team in a position of power and flexibility so we're not always saving short-term to go "all in" due to impatience. We're so bad at it anyways - look at our history for evidence

TWO stars will not cut it..when LBJ came back to cleveland to join Kyrie, they were slightly above avg until they got Love in a trade for (no other than) the #1 pick Wiggins. They won a title coming off one of the worst records in the NBA the previous season.

When the Knicks traded KP they swung for the fences on a 0-2 pitch

You sort of right. Two stars with a balanced squad with a few very good players can get it done. Today that's called the Houston Rockets. In the past it was the Spurs. GSW pre Durant won 73 games with Klay/Steph and a very good team around them. Draymond Green is not a star. He is a very very good glue guy. Knicks third spoke has to be in grown. The Heatles were valid because they had Wade already. If you bring in two "stars" (my fingers hurt typing that) the dynamic changes. There is a lot more air and sun for Knox, Frank, DSjr and whom ever we draft. I would expect a trade if we land Durant and another but that's for another day.

In Boston the trio of Horford/Kyrie/Haywood is not conducive to growing Tatum/Brown/Rozier. What happens in the past on Cle and BOS is not automatic going forward.

If Durant does not want to grow the youth then FO has to either accommodate him or take a pass. Durant will pick his "robin" and the vision of what he wants. Knicks either accommodate or not. So yeah, two won't get it done but how you get to the third and when is wide open. It need not be year one.

If this was any other FA, i would agree about KD growing with the youth, but he is 32 yrs, kyrie (is having a hard time already with bostons youth) is not coming to NY to do the same.

I'm almost certain that Mils and Perry's pitch will have nothing to do with youth and growing, it will be about Branding and and bringing a title in the greatest sports city on earth within 1 to 3 yrs...

Those are the only 2 things that KD cares about, and I'm sure Dolan is going to be in that meeting offering him everything except lead singer in his band

knicks1248 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:Totally against trading our assets for another star player - especially if we land a Durant and/or Kyrie! To me, it only makes sense to go "all in" when you're a seasoned/stable team needing that one player to get you from the conference semifinals to the finals... We're clearly not that team so maybe it's okay with build incrementally and improve each year. If we land Durant and a Kyrie - we should make the playoffs. If Mitch and/or Knox and/or DSJr develops - we take another step. If we land Zion then our capacity is greater but still good to leave some talent and not drain the cupboard.

If we strike out on Durant, Kawhi, etc this summer = then keep compiling assets and save the money as you never know when another quality player becomes available. Basically, keep the team in a position of power and flexibility so we're not always saving short-term to go "all in" due to impatience. We're so bad at it anyways - look at our history for evidence

TWO stars will not cut it..when LBJ came back to cleveland to join Kyrie, they were slightly above avg until they got Love in a trade for (no other than) the #1 pick Wiggins. They won a title coming off one of the worst records in the NBA the previous season.

When the Knicks traded KP they swung for the fences on a 0-2 pitch

You sort of right. Two stars with a balanced squad with a few very good players can get it done. Today that's called the Houston Rockets. In the past it was the Spurs. GSW pre Durant won 73 games with Klay/Steph and a very good team around them. Draymond Green is not a star. He is a very very good glue guy. Knicks third spoke has to be in grown. The Heatles were valid because they had Wade already. If you bring in two "stars" (my fingers hurt typing that) the dynamic changes. There is a lot more air and sun for Knox, Frank, DSjr and whom ever we draft. I would expect a trade if we land Durant and another but that's for another day.

In Boston the trio of Horford/Kyrie/Haywood is not conducive to growing Tatum/Brown/Rozier. What happens in the past on Cle and BOS is not automatic going forward.

If Durant does not want to grow the youth then FO has to either accommodate him or take a pass. Durant will pick his "robin" and the vision of what he wants. Knicks either accommodate or not. So yeah, two won't get it done but how you get to the third and when is wide open. It need not be year one.

If this was any other FA, i would agree about KD growing with the youth, but he is 32 yrs, kyrie (is having a hard time already with bostons youth) is not coming to NY to do the same.

I'm almost certain that Mils and Perry's pitch will have nothing to do with youth and growing, it will be about Branding and and bringing a title in the greatest sports city on earth within 1 to 3 yrs...

Those are the only 2 things that KD cares about, and I'm sure Dolan is going to be in that meeting offering him everything except lead singer in his band

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2019/05/05/new-yorks-pitch-to-free-agents-were-not-the-same-old-knicks/amp/

Your making shyt up again. Durant will be 31 in September.
You transpose the past into the future. The dynamic would be very different here. I don't want Kyrie as the alpha here. He might not want to be the alpha here. He is on record to appreciation what Lebron did. While you don't love Fiz he is different than Brad Stevens. Might be good way, might not. I can say its not the same.
Your really sure dolan will be there? Even if so, why is that a bad thing? Besides Oak, what player has said bad things about him? Spree? his beef was 18 years ago.