[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Noel and Burks Traded!
Author Thread
EwingsGlass
Posts: 26035
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
6/29/2022  8:06 AM
smackeddog wrote:
BigDaddyG wrote:Man, feel bad for Ayton. Lost leverage big time. But who can deny that Detroit ended up getting the better player with their space.

Wish we could turn Randle into Ayton, I'd feel much better- can't get excited about the Brunson signing while we have him on the roster, just because as things stand, a starting lineup of Mitch, Randle, RJ and Brunson just doesn't work either side of the court

This is my feeling. I don’t like the combination of Brunson with Barrett and Randle.

This is the Randle.
AUTOADVERT
EwingsGlass
Posts: 26035
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
6/29/2022  8:07 AM
Philc1 wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
Philc1 wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:Could Miles Bridges be in the Knicks future? Deandre Ayton? Might be possible to get both if they can move Fournier for Murray and use Robinson’s 1.8m cap hold and bird rights to leverage their salary.

Murray
Barrett
Bridges
Randle
Ayton

1) Fournier and picks to SAS for Murray
2) Bridges is RFA. Offer max contract using Cap Space.
3) Ayton is RFA. Use Robinson and Reddish in sign and trade.

Would love to get both Ayton and Brunson but getting $30 mil under most likely is because they know Cuban is going to offer Brunson a big number to stay


Signing Brunson and then going over the cap to lock up Mitch long term is more than fine

I think Bridges is the big dog this summer. His max is like 30mm and we are discussing film giving Brunson 27. Pony up the extra 3m and trade for Murray.

Once you resign Mitch, this negotiation leverage is gone. And if they do it right, they may be able to preserve the MLE

I’m loving how this offseason is playing out so far. We even have extra first round picks in the double draft next yr

It’s no longer a double draft. Despite all the talk, there has been no move to reduce the one and done rule. Double draft is likely 2025 now.

This is the Randle.
Philc1
Posts: 26597
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 9/2/2020
Member: #8897

6/29/2022  8:14 AM
EwingsGlass wrote:
Philc1 wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
Philc1 wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:Could Miles Bridges be in the Knicks future? Deandre Ayton? Might be possible to get both if they can move Fournier for Murray and use Robinson’s 1.8m cap hold and bird rights to leverage their salary.

Murray
Barrett
Bridges
Randle
Ayton

1) Fournier and picks to SAS for Murray
2) Bridges is RFA. Offer max contract using Cap Space.
3) Ayton is RFA. Use Robinson and Reddish in sign and trade.

Would love to get both Ayton and Brunson but getting $30 mil under most likely is because they know Cuban is going to offer Brunson a big number to stay


Signing Brunson and then going over the cap to lock up Mitch long term is more than fine

I think Bridges is the big dog this summer. His max is like 30mm and we are discussing film giving Brunson 27. Pony up the extra 3m and trade for Murray.

Once you resign Mitch, this negotiation leverage is gone. And if they do it right, they may be able to preserve the MLE

I’m loving how this offseason is playing out so far. We even have extra first round picks in the double draft next yr

It’s no longer a double draft. Despite all the talk, there has been no move to reduce the one and done rule. Double draft is likely 2025 now.

Current CBA has a mutual opt out after next season. Let’s see what happens

Knixkik
Posts: 34857
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
6/29/2022  8:46 AM
EwingsGlass wrote:
smackeddog wrote:
BigDaddyG wrote:Man, feel bad for Ayton. Lost leverage big time. But who can deny that Detroit ended up getting the better player with their space.

Wish we could turn Randle into Ayton, I'd feel much better- can't get excited about the Brunson signing while we have him on the roster, just because as things stand, a starting lineup of Mitch, Randle, RJ and Brunson just doesn't work either side of the court

This is my feeling. I don’t like the combination of Brunson with Barrett and Randle.

I’d love to move Randle for Gordon Hayward. It would put more shooting at the PF position and Hayward can move to SF a lot to give Toppin more PF minutes. This deal would save Charlotte about 7 mil in salary this season, although would give them more long term money so not sure if it makes sense for them. I just know they are trying to offload Hayward and always seemed to be linked to Randle in the past.

HofstraBBall
Posts: 27152
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 11/21/2015
Member: #6192

6/29/2022  8:50 AM    LAST EDITED: 6/29/2022  8:52 AM
smackeddog wrote:
BigDaddyG wrote:Man, feel bad for Ayton. Lost leverage big time. But who can deny that Detroit ended up getting the better player with their space.

Wish we could turn Randle into Ayton, I'd feel much better- can't get excited about the Brunson signing while we have him on the roster, just because as things stand, a starting lineup of Mitch, Randle, RJ and Brunson just doesn't work either side of the court

Hate to see Burks go. Think we will be talking about him as we did Bullock.
Do see the sense as it opens up time for IQ and Grimes and opens CAP.
Keep saying Brunson is not worth the money being discussed. Watched Dallas all year and I agree
with what you mentioned. Brunson likes the ball in his hands and operates in the 7 to 15 foot range. Don't see that as a good match with RJ or Randle. He also plays mediocre defense and not exactly a three point sharp shooter. Guess I would be okay as I have been saying for years we need a PG. Will hope he is the one if we get him. Tbh, hoping this is all being done to get a family friend a max contract with Dallas and we sign Murray, Bridges or another bigger name.

'Knicks focus should be on players that have grown up playing soccer or cricket' - Triplethreat 8/28/2020
Uptown
Posts: 30878
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 4/1/2008
Member: #1883

6/29/2022  9:01 AM
HofstraBBall wrote:
smackeddog wrote:
BigDaddyG wrote:Man, feel bad for Ayton. Lost leverage big time. But who can deny that Detroit ended up getting the better player with their space.

Wish we could turn Randle into Ayton, I'd feel much better- can't get excited about the Brunson signing while we have him on the roster, just because as things stand, a starting lineup of Mitch, Randle, RJ and Brunson just doesn't work either side of the court

Hate to see Burks go. Think we will be talking about him as we did Bullock.
Do see the sense as it opens up time for IQ and Grimes and opens CAP.
Keep saying Brunson is not worth the money being discussed. Watched Dallas all year and I agree
with what you mentioned. Brunson likes the ball in his hands and operates in the 7 to 15 foot range. Don't see that as a good match with RJ or Randle. He also plays mediocre defense and not exactly a three point sharp shooter. Guess I would be okay as I have been saying for years we need a PG. Will hope he is the one if we get him. Tbh, hoping this is all being done to get a family friend a max contract with Dallas and we sign Murray, Bridges or another bigger name.

Brunson is lethal 15 feet and in. His footwork in the paint is masterful, and he is super efficient at the rim. One of the reasons he was able to thrive in the paint is because Dallas played a 5 out (sometimes 4 out 1 in) offense and he had a lot of space to operate. RJ, Randle and Mitch on the floor at the same time won't give Brunson the same room on the floor to do what he does best. In my opinion, Randle should be next on the trading block.

Swishfm3
Posts: 23209
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/28/2003
Member: #392
6/29/2022  9:06 AM
I hate that we traded Burks. What he brought to the table is going to be hard to replace.

I'm seeing mention of Bridges on this board. To that I say, HELL NO. Good player but that dudes SECOND priority seems to be Basketball. The first is a Rap career and drinking lean. Stay away from ANY ATHLETE that has aspirations of also being a recording artist.

HofstraBBall
Posts: 27152
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 11/21/2015
Member: #6192

6/29/2022  9:16 AM    LAST EDITED: 6/29/2022  9:21 AM
Uptown wrote:
HofstraBBall wrote:
smackeddog wrote:
BigDaddyG wrote:Man, feel bad for Ayton. Lost leverage big time. But who can deny that Detroit ended up getting the better player with their space.

Wish we could turn Randle into Ayton, I'd feel much better- can't get excited about the Brunson signing while we have him on the roster, just because as things stand, a starting lineup of Mitch, Randle, RJ and Brunson just doesn't work either side of the court

Hate to see Burks go. Think we will be talking about him as we did Bullock.
Do see the sense as it opens up time for IQ and Grimes and opens CAP.
Keep saying Brunson is not worth the money being discussed. Watched Dallas all year and I agree
with what you mentioned. Brunson likes the ball in his hands and operates in the 7 to 15 foot range. Don't see that as a good match with RJ or Randle. He also plays mediocre defense and not exactly a three point sharp shooter. Guess I would be okay as I have been saying for years we need a PG. Will hope he is the one if we get him. Tbh, hoping this is all being done to get a family friend a max contract with Dallas and we sign Murray, Bridges or another bigger name.

Brunson is lethal 15 feet and in. His footwork in the paint is masterful, and he is super efficient at the rim. One of the reasons he was able to thrive in the paint is because Dallas played a 5 out (sometimes 4 out 1 in) offense and he had a lot of space to operate. RJ, Randle and Mitch on the floor at the same time won't give Brunson the same room on the floor to do what he does best. In my opinion, Randle should be next on the trading block.

Agree about where Brunson to play. Wrote on another thread that we may be forgetting that this is a three point shooters league. Having MR, Randle, RJ, Brunson and Murray is not that. We just gave up one of our better 3pt shooters to Detroit. If we do a S&T with Mavs that will need either IQ or Grimes. To get Murray that would need IQ and Grimes. Plus we will look to dump EF. Which brings us back full circle.
We shall see but hoping we end up having solid outside shooters.
Don't see trading Randle to pay Brunson close to Max and give him room to operate as a smart decision though.

'Knicks focus should be on players that have grown up playing soccer or cricket' - Triplethreat 8/28/2020
newyorknewyork
Posts: 29852
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #541
6/29/2022  9:33 AM
So correct me if I’m wrong but currently we have 38mil in cap and 29mil in TPE flexibility. We also can use Rose, Fournier or Randle in an S&T to offset salary coming back.

Leon has the flexibility to land 3 quality players with this flexibility.

Rose for Brunson(S&T)
Randle for Ayton(S&T)
Mitch, Reddish, draft pick for OG.

Ayton,Obi,OG,RJ,Brunson. 6th man Fournier

https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
fishmike
Posts: 53037
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
6/29/2022  10:14 AM
Knixkik wrote:Moving off 19M in space without having to give up a first round pick. 28M if you include Kemba.

holy **** dude I owe you a pint... I didnt think it was possible but they got Det to play, you said it could happen and this is really solid work from the FO imo.

I view Brunson as a high floor low ceiling player but there's a ton to like about him and I think he and Randle will be able to play the 2 man game as well as anyone.

Some here will go UG, but a big part of adding Brunson will taking the ball from Julis at the start of possessions and making sure he gets it at the end of possessions and that will be really good for the Knicks next year.

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
EwingsGlass
Posts: 26035
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
6/29/2022  10:16 AM
newyorknewyork wrote:So correct me if I’m wrong but currently we have 38mil in cap and 29mil in TPE flexibility. We also can use Rose, Fournier or Randle in an S&T to offset salary coming back.

Leon has the flexibility to land 3 quality players with this flexibility.

Rose for Brunson(S&T)
Randle for Ayton(S&T)
Mitch, Reddish, draft pick for OG.

Ayton,Obi,OG,RJ,Brunson. 6th man Fournier

The $29m and the $38mm are essentially the same. You would need to waive the TPEs and Taj Gibson, release Ryan Arianciata's cap hold and complete the Jalen Duren trade to get to $38mm-ish in actual cap space. You are pretty close to a max offer on Zach Lavine there.

But, while the Detroit TPE(s) remain, you can use the other contracts to complete trades without waiving the TPE under the mere threat of being able to do it. So, its possible that the Knicks achieve some results in free agency without actually dipping below the cap.

The offseason got pretty exciting for me. Sounds like a lot more is brewing than Brunson alone. Maybe its Brunson and Bamba. But I hope we are doing our diligence on Miles Bridges.


This is the Randle.
martin
Posts: 67903
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/29/2022  10:22 AM
smackeddog wrote:

Was the Miami second the 'fake second' we got when we traded for Fournier to give the Celtics a TPE?

Also that legion hoops is the only one that's claiming we got 2 future seconds- any other source confirming that? Seems unlikely.

I wonder if this trade was really meant to be part of the draft day trade that just got finalized separately- so essentially from Detroits side, the intention was:

Detroit take on the Salary dump of Burke, Kemba, Noel for Duran and 2 seconds? But we lessened the loss for us by picking up those 3 firsts from OKC who were desperate to get Dieng.

That's just cause you have no faith in Brock Aller

Using these notes: https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/future_drafts/detailed

2024 second round draft pick from Miami
Miami's 2024 2nd round pick to Atlanta protected for selections 31-50 and 56-60 or to New York (via Cleveland to Detroit to Philadelphia) protected for selections 31-55 (Miami's obligation(s) to Atlanta and/or New York will thereafter be extinguished) [Cleveland-Miami, 2/8/2018; Atlanta-Miami, 6/19/2019; Cleveland-Detroit, 6/26/2019; Detroit-Philadelphia, 7/7/2019; New York-Oklahoma City-Philadelphia, 3/25/2021]

Points to this trade:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/31134463/george-hill-heads-philadelphia-76ers-part-3-team-deal-involving-new-york-knicks-oklahoma-city-thunder-sources-say

George Hill is headed to the Philadelphia 76ers as part of a three-way deal involving the Oklahoma City Thunder and the New York Knicks, it was announced.

Hill, who is averaging is 11.8 points this season, was sent by the Thunder to the Sixers in exchange for Tony Bradley and second-round picks in 2025 and 2026. The 76ers also get Iggy Brazdeikis from the Knicks.

Terrance Ferguson, meanwhile, ultimately heads from the Thunder to the Knicks, while Austin Rivers goes from the Knicks to Oklahoma City. The Knicks also picked up Vincent Poirier and a 2021 second-round pick from the Sixers, with sources telling ESPN that New York is planning to waive the 7-footer.

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Caseloads
Posts: 27725
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/29/2001
Member: #41
6/29/2022  10:51 AM
Uptown wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
TheGame wrote:
wargames wrote:

In typical Knicks fashion they got second rounders back

This is great trade for Detroit. They get two solid veterans for cheap on expiring deals. The vets can help their youth and the Pistons will have the option of trading Burks at the deadline for a pick.

As for us, we have all the cap space we need to sign Brunson and we did not have to give up much to do it.

It’s too much cap space for just Brunson. Might be a bit more to this.

Word is. they are going to offer Brunson 110 mil now...


way too much of an overpay
fishmike
Posts: 53037
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
6/29/2022  11:34 AM
Caseloads wrote:
Uptown wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
TheGame wrote:
wargames wrote:

In typical Knicks fashion they got second rounders back

This is great trade for Detroit. They get two solid veterans for cheap on expiring deals. The vets can help their youth and the Pistons will have the option of trading Burks at the deadline for a pick.

As for us, we have all the cap space we need to sign Brunson and we did not have to give up much to do it.

It’s too much cap space for just Brunson. Might be a bit more to this.

Word is. they are going to offer Brunson 110 mil now...


way too much of an overpay
its just not. I dont even love Brunson but its not an overpay

Just to put it into perspective, a 4/110 contract for Jalen Brunson would make him the 39th highest paid player in the NBA next season
http://www.espn.com/nba/salaries

At 27.5m, he would be 39th, right ahead of Al Horford and right behind Jayson Tatum

If you think Brunson is a top 40 player in the NBA it's a fair contract. I don't have a list of my top 40 players but I can't imagine Brunson isn't on it or at least close to it. Don't really get the "what an overpay" comments

The above is not from me.. its from Reddit but its spot on IMO for perspective. Brunson is also 26 when he starts playing for us. Literally the best years. He will make Randle better, is a sniper from the corner and is a hard playing tough kid. Very Lowry like. Knick fans will love him. Its a year late but this is a good use of cap space... Brunson is a high EFF% floor general. He's small. I would love to add a big defnesive SF and move RJ to SG but thats for another thread

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
EwingsGlass
Posts: 26035
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
6/29/2022  12:19 PM
fishmike wrote:
Caseloads wrote:
Uptown wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
TheGame wrote:
wargames wrote:

In typical Knicks fashion they got second rounders back

This is great trade for Detroit. They get two solid veterans for cheap on expiring deals. The vets can help their youth and the Pistons will have the option of trading Burks at the deadline for a pick.

As for us, we have all the cap space we need to sign Brunson and we did not have to give up much to do it.

It’s too much cap space for just Brunson. Might be a bit more to this.

Word is. they are going to offer Brunson 110 mil now...


way too much of an overpay
its just not. I dont even love Brunson but its not an overpay

Just to put it into perspective, a 4/110 contract for Jalen Brunson would make him the 39th highest paid player in the NBA next season
http://www.espn.com/nba/salaries

At 27.5m, he would be 39th, right ahead of Al Horford and right behind Jayson Tatum

If you think Brunson is a top 40 player in the NBA it's a fair contract. I don't have a list of my top 40 players but I can't imagine Brunson isn't on it or at least close to it. Don't really get the "what an overpay" comments

The above is not from me.. its from Reddit but its spot on IMO for perspective. Brunson is also 26 when he starts playing for us. Literally the best years. He will make Randle better, is a sniper from the corner and is a hard playing tough kid. Very Lowry like. Knick fans will love him. Its a year late but this is a good use of cap space... Brunson is a high EFF% floor general. He's small. I would love to add a big defnesive SF and move RJ to SG but thats for another thread

I think you are over-generalizing to make the number sound good. But I don't agree. I don't want to trash Brunson, I just don't think 27mm is supported by his numbers. Your analysis is too generalized to be accurate. He is not a top 40 player today by any standards. What percentage of those other 39 contracts are overpays? What percentage are HOF? What percentage are 5th year players coming off of 4 year contracts and not an RFA? You can't just presume he is top 40 and then pay him like that. That's an overpay. It may earn out over time, but today its an overpay. He doesn't have the resume.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/valuation/2021/guard/gmpct-25/active/

I don't love this contract value model from Spotrac - it only uses flat productivity numbers to create value, but it equates productivity to games played and productivity in the games played. It doesn't penalize for missed games as much as I might in determining salary. It won't speak to starter vs bench player, only productivity and then that relates back to contract - obviously rookie scale and vet minimum contracts create exceptional production value despite not being a "better" player.

I think you need to look at contracts for players in similar situations with similar production to get comparative valuation. FVV's extension may make Brunson's price seem right, but FVV is better and more productive. I think the first step for Brunson is a 20mm contract - like FVV, not a 27mm contract. FVV has a ring and got his raise after performing at 20mm. Lonzo Ball got 20mm. Rozier got 18mm. Rozier got 18mm. I would use this chart to find guards with similar productivity at the price you want to pay them and then compare that to the contract value. By doing that, a Lonzo Ball at 20mm is a better value than Brunson at 20mm. At 27mm, he is not good value by this metric.

By current production alone, he's not even a top 40 guard. So anything over 17-18mm is paying for potential. With the right players surrounding him, I would go above 17mm, but not until someone takes Murray off the table at 16mm. For potential, maybe you predict the increased production based on increased minutes. But I don't think you can get from 17mm of face value to 27mm without significantly overpaying.

I don't know where these numbers are coming from and maybe the reporters are more tuned in, but the math doesn't really support the storyline, at least in my head. Those articles seem to be sensationalizing how much the Knicks can offer not how much they should. The fact that Charlotte doesn't want to give Miles Bridges 30mm with his much better size, age and positional scarcity should give anyone pause on their valuation.

This is the Randle.
fishmike
Posts: 53037
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
6/29/2022  12:32 PM
EwingsGlass wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Caseloads wrote:
Uptown wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
TheGame wrote:
wargames wrote:

In typical Knicks fashion they got second rounders back

This is great trade for Detroit. They get two solid veterans for cheap on expiring deals. The vets can help their youth and the Pistons will have the option of trading Burks at the deadline for a pick.

As for us, we have all the cap space we need to sign Brunson and we did not have to give up much to do it.

It’s too much cap space for just Brunson. Might be a bit more to this.

Word is. they are going to offer Brunson 110 mil now...


way too much of an overpay
its just not. I dont even love Brunson but its not an overpay

Just to put it into perspective, a 4/110 contract for Jalen Brunson would make him the 39th highest paid player in the NBA next season
http://www.espn.com/nba/salaries

At 27.5m, he would be 39th, right ahead of Al Horford and right behind Jayson Tatum

If you think Brunson is a top 40 player in the NBA it's a fair contract. I don't have a list of my top 40 players but I can't imagine Brunson isn't on it or at least close to it. Don't really get the "what an overpay" comments

The above is not from me.. its from Reddit but its spot on IMO for perspective. Brunson is also 26 when he starts playing for us. Literally the best years. He will make Randle better, is a sniper from the corner and is a hard playing tough kid. Very Lowry like. Knick fans will love him. Its a year late but this is a good use of cap space... Brunson is a high EFF% floor general. He's small. I would love to add a big defnesive SF and move RJ to SG but thats for another thread

I think you are over-generalizing to make the number sound good. But I don't agree. I don't want to trash Brunson, I just don't think 27mm is supported by his numbers. Your analysis is too generalized to be accurate. He is not a top 40 player today by any standards. What percentage of those other 39 contracts are overpays? What percentage are HOF? What percentage are 5th year players coming off of 4 year contracts and not an RFA? You can't just presume he is top 40 and then pay him like that. That's an overpay. It may earn out over time, but today its an overpay. He doesn't have the resume.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/valuation/2021/guard/gmpct-25/active/

I don't love this contract value model from Spotrac - it only uses flat productivity numbers to create value, but it equates productivity to games played and productivity in the games played. It doesn't penalize for missed games as much as I might in determining salary. It won't speak to starter vs bench player, only productivity and then that relates back to contract - obviously rookie scale and vet minimum contracts create exceptional production value despite not being a "better" player.

I think you need to look at contracts for players in similar situations with similar production to get comparative valuation. FVV's extension may make Brunson's price seem right, but FVV is better and more productive. I think the first step for Brunson is a 20mm contract - like FVV, not a 27mm contract. FVV has a ring and got his raise after performing at 20mm. Lonzo Ball got 20mm. Rozier got 18mm. Rozier got 18mm. I would use this chart to find guards with similar productivity at the price you want to pay them and then compare that to the contract value. By doing that, a Lonzo Ball at 20mm is a better value than Brunson at 20mm. At 27mm, he is not good value by this metric.

By current production alone, he's not even a top 40 guard. So anything over 17-18mm is paying for potential. With the right players surrounding him, I would go above 17mm, but not until someone takes Murray off the table at 16mm. For potential, maybe you predict the increased production based on increased minutes. But I don't think you can get from 17mm of face value to 27mm without significantly overpaying.

I don't know where these numbers are coming from and maybe the reporters are more tuned in, but the math doesn't really support the storyline, at least in my head. Those articles seem to be sensationalizing how much the Knicks can offer not how much they should. The fact that Charlotte doesn't want to give Miles Bridges 30mm with his much better size, age and positional scarcity should give anyone pause on their valuation.

who cares what Cha "wants" to pay Bridges and lets see what they do pay him.

Trash Brunson all you want... I have. He was not a guy I wanted to clear the roster for, but they really didnt do that. They flipped their role players from last year into a 26 year old sharp shooting floor general. He might not even be a top 10 PG in the conference.

BUT

He's really good and the Knicks get better, get younger and fill a position of need.

I understand there are less than ideal aspects of Brunson but when you look at cost/need/value this is a really easy signing for the Knicks. Really easy.

He's also a "culture" player. He will work incredible hard, play hard and he's also a big part of fixing Randle assuming Julius bounces back next (much to some fan's dismay).

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
fishmike
Posts: 53037
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
6/29/2022  12:34 PM
what is the long term implications of Brunson at $27mm for 4 years vs. Brunson at $20mm for 4 years? Like what's happening in 2-3 years that has us now phucked because we overpaid this guy by whatever?
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
EwingsGlass
Posts: 26035
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
6/29/2022  12:40 PM
fishmike wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Caseloads wrote:
Uptown wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
TheGame wrote:
wargames wrote:

In typical Knicks fashion they got second rounders back

This is great trade for Detroit. They get two solid veterans for cheap on expiring deals. The vets can help their youth and the Pistons will have the option of trading Burks at the deadline for a pick.

As for us, we have all the cap space we need to sign Brunson and we did not have to give up much to do it.

It’s too much cap space for just Brunson. Might be a bit more to this.

Word is. they are going to offer Brunson 110 mil now...


way too much of an overpay
its just not. I dont even love Brunson but its not an overpay

Just to put it into perspective, a 4/110 contract for Jalen Brunson would make him the 39th highest paid player in the NBA next season
http://www.espn.com/nba/salaries

At 27.5m, he would be 39th, right ahead of Al Horford and right behind Jayson Tatum

If you think Brunson is a top 40 player in the NBA it's a fair contract. I don't have a list of my top 40 players but I can't imagine Brunson isn't on it or at least close to it. Don't really get the "what an overpay" comments

The above is not from me.. its from Reddit but its spot on IMO for perspective. Brunson is also 26 when he starts playing for us. Literally the best years. He will make Randle better, is a sniper from the corner and is a hard playing tough kid. Very Lowry like. Knick fans will love him. Its a year late but this is a good use of cap space... Brunson is a high EFF% floor general. He's small. I would love to add a big defnesive SF and move RJ to SG but thats for another thread

I think you are over-generalizing to make the number sound good. But I don't agree. I don't want to trash Brunson, I just don't think 27mm is supported by his numbers. Your analysis is too generalized to be accurate. He is not a top 40 player today by any standards. What percentage of those other 39 contracts are overpays? What percentage are HOF? What percentage are 5th year players coming off of 4 year contracts and not an RFA? You can't just presume he is top 40 and then pay him like that. That's an overpay. It may earn out over time, but today its an overpay. He doesn't have the resume.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/valuation/2021/guard/gmpct-25/active/

I don't love this contract value model from Spotrac - it only uses flat productivity numbers to create value, but it equates productivity to games played and productivity in the games played. It doesn't penalize for missed games as much as I might in determining salary. It won't speak to starter vs bench player, only productivity and then that relates back to contract - obviously rookie scale and vet minimum contracts create exceptional production value despite not being a "better" player.

I think you need to look at contracts for players in similar situations with similar production to get comparative valuation. FVV's extension may make Brunson's price seem right, but FVV is better and more productive. I think the first step for Brunson is a 20mm contract - like FVV, not a 27mm contract. FVV has a ring and got his raise after performing at 20mm. Lonzo Ball got 20mm. Rozier got 18mm. Rozier got 18mm. I would use this chart to find guards with similar productivity at the price you want to pay them and then compare that to the contract value. By doing that, a Lonzo Ball at 20mm is a better value than Brunson at 20mm. At 27mm, he is not good value by this metric.

By current production alone, he's not even a top 40 guard. So anything over 17-18mm is paying for potential. With the right players surrounding him, I would go above 17mm, but not until someone takes Murray off the table at 16mm. For potential, maybe you predict the increased production based on increased minutes. But I don't think you can get from 17mm of face value to 27mm without significantly overpaying.

I don't know where these numbers are coming from and maybe the reporters are more tuned in, but the math doesn't really support the storyline, at least in my head. Those articles seem to be sensationalizing how much the Knicks can offer not how much they should. The fact that Charlotte doesn't want to give Miles Bridges 30mm with his much better size, age and positional scarcity should give anyone pause on their valuation.

who cares what Cha "wants" to pay Bridges and lets see what they do pay him.

Trash Brunson all you want... I have. He was not a guy I wanted to clear the roster for, but they really didnt do that. They flipped their role players from last year into a 26 year old sharp shooting floor general. He might not even be a top 10 PG in the conference.

BUT

He's really good and the Knicks get better, get younger and fill a position of need.

I understand there are less than ideal aspects of Brunson but when you look at cost/need/value this is a really easy signing for the Knicks. Really easy.

He's also a "culture" player. He will work incredible hard, play hard and he's also a big part of fixing Randle assuming Julius bounces back next (much to some fan's dismay).

All we are talking about is price. For me, Murray is the better opportunity. After that door closes, Brunson isn't perfect, I just don't want an AAV of 27.5mm per. I think we can spend our money better. Dallas' 4 for 85 is spot on. 5 for 110m might work if its a sign & trade.

This is the Randle.
TPercy
Posts: 28010
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/5/2014
Member: #5748

6/29/2022  12:51 PM
Looks like it will be
Brunson
Grimes(eventually)
Barrett
Randle
Robinson

Rose
Quickley
Fournier
Toppin
Sims

The Future is Bright!
fishmike
Posts: 53037
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
6/29/2022  1:02 PM
EwingsGlass wrote:
fishmike wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
fishmike wrote:
Caseloads wrote:
Uptown wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:
TheGame wrote:
wargames wrote:

In typical Knicks fashion they got second rounders back

This is great trade for Detroit. They get two solid veterans for cheap on expiring deals. The vets can help their youth and the Pistons will have the option of trading Burks at the deadline for a pick.

As for us, we have all the cap space we need to sign Brunson and we did not have to give up much to do it.

It’s too much cap space for just Brunson. Might be a bit more to this.

Word is. they are going to offer Brunson 110 mil now...


way too much of an overpay
its just not. I dont even love Brunson but its not an overpay

Just to put it into perspective, a 4/110 contract for Jalen Brunson would make him the 39th highest paid player in the NBA next season
http://www.espn.com/nba/salaries

At 27.5m, he would be 39th, right ahead of Al Horford and right behind Jayson Tatum

If you think Brunson is a top 40 player in the NBA it's a fair contract. I don't have a list of my top 40 players but I can't imagine Brunson isn't on it or at least close to it. Don't really get the "what an overpay" comments

The above is not from me.. its from Reddit but its spot on IMO for perspective. Brunson is also 26 when he starts playing for us. Literally the best years. He will make Randle better, is a sniper from the corner and is a hard playing tough kid. Very Lowry like. Knick fans will love him. Its a year late but this is a good use of cap space... Brunson is a high EFF% floor general. He's small. I would love to add a big defnesive SF and move RJ to SG but thats for another thread

I think you are over-generalizing to make the number sound good. But I don't agree. I don't want to trash Brunson, I just don't think 27mm is supported by his numbers. Your analysis is too generalized to be accurate. He is not a top 40 player today by any standards. What percentage of those other 39 contracts are overpays? What percentage are HOF? What percentage are 5th year players coming off of 4 year contracts and not an RFA? You can't just presume he is top 40 and then pay him like that. That's an overpay. It may earn out over time, but today its an overpay. He doesn't have the resume.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/valuation/2021/guard/gmpct-25/active/

I don't love this contract value model from Spotrac - it only uses flat productivity numbers to create value, but it equates productivity to games played and productivity in the games played. It doesn't penalize for missed games as much as I might in determining salary. It won't speak to starter vs bench player, only productivity and then that relates back to contract - obviously rookie scale and vet minimum contracts create exceptional production value despite not being a "better" player.

I think you need to look at contracts for players in similar situations with similar production to get comparative valuation. FVV's extension may make Brunson's price seem right, but FVV is better and more productive. I think the first step for Brunson is a 20mm contract - like FVV, not a 27mm contract. FVV has a ring and got his raise after performing at 20mm. Lonzo Ball got 20mm. Rozier got 18mm. Rozier got 18mm. I would use this chart to find guards with similar productivity at the price you want to pay them and then compare that to the contract value. By doing that, a Lonzo Ball at 20mm is a better value than Brunson at 20mm. At 27mm, he is not good value by this metric.

By current production alone, he's not even a top 40 guard. So anything over 17-18mm is paying for potential. With the right players surrounding him, I would go above 17mm, but not until someone takes Murray off the table at 16mm. For potential, maybe you predict the increased production based on increased minutes. But I don't think you can get from 17mm of face value to 27mm without significantly overpaying.

I don't know where these numbers are coming from and maybe the reporters are more tuned in, but the math doesn't really support the storyline, at least in my head. Those articles seem to be sensationalizing how much the Knicks can offer not how much they should. The fact that Charlotte doesn't want to give Miles Bridges 30mm with his much better size, age and positional scarcity should give anyone pause on their valuation.

who cares what Cha "wants" to pay Bridges and lets see what they do pay him.

Trash Brunson all you want... I have. He was not a guy I wanted to clear the roster for, but they really didnt do that. They flipped their role players from last year into a 26 year old sharp shooting floor general. He might not even be a top 10 PG in the conference.

BUT

He's really good and the Knicks get better, get younger and fill a position of need.

I understand there are less than ideal aspects of Brunson but when you look at cost/need/value this is a really easy signing for the Knicks. Really easy.

He's also a "culture" player. He will work incredible hard, play hard and he's also a big part of fixing Randle assuming Julius bounces back next (much to some fan's dismay).

All we are talking about is price. For me, Murray is the better opportunity. After that door closes, Brunson isn't perfect, I just don't want an AAV of 27.5mm per. I think we can spend our money better. Dallas' 4 for 85 is spot on. 5 for 110m might work if its a sign & trade.

Murray is better but they are way different costs. Brunson allows us to continue to be players in the draft. Maybe we are out of the lottery but this FO has done a great job filling in gaps and getting us players there. Murray is 3 FRPs and 3 swaps plus some players. Brunson is a do-over from the role players we signed last year that didnt work.

You trade for DM and that's your team. Part of what makes Brunson so attractive is we can continue to work our draft assets. DM takes us out of that entirely

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Noel and Burks Traded!

©2001-2012 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy