I think for the Knicks it adds the firepower they need, moves Randle to 2nd/3rd scorer and puts him into more a Draymond role.

Zach/Brunson are 27/26
Randle is 28
Mitch is 24

That's my "core 4" (for now) and what I like is it leaves me with Grimes a starter and IQ/McBride/Cam/IHart/Sims off the bench and still good draft assets to add role players or development projects.

God forbid Rokus is an impact player

FYI this cant happen until Jan 15 because of Zach's contract

fishmike wrote:Zach isnt perfect and costs a phuck ton. Any draft comp should be minimal... like the Det and Milw picks so they can say they also got 1 FRPS.

I think for the Knicks it adds the firepower they need, moves Randle to 2nd/3rd scorer and puts him into more a Draymond role.

Zach/Brunson are 27/26
Randle is 28
Mitch is 24

That's my "core 4" (for now) and what I like is it leaves me with Grimes a starter and IQ/McBride/Cam/IHart/Sims off the bench and still good draft assets to add role players or development projects.

God forbid Rokus is an impact player

FYI this cant happen until Jan 15 because of Zach's contract

I would to this but you'll end up wanting to move Randle down the road since Lavine dominates the ball a lot. Brunson, Lavine and Randle would offer better outside shooting but would still struggle with ball movement IMO. Regardless of RJ departing - think Obi or any non-ball dominating PF would fit better. Lavine played well with Lauri M that one season...

franco12 wrote:Randle is the problem. Trade him. RJ is disappointing, but he is a good kid. I just think Randle is a bit stand offish? Combative.

Oh, my, I've just described myself.

Gosh, a novel notion!

UK fan tendency to want players after they peak.

Let's look at the years of service comparisons.....

https://basketball.realgm.com/player/Zach-LaVine/Comparison/41396/RJ-Barrett/103893

Obvious Lavine has 5 MORE years of stats given his age so look not at totals but the first three years RJ looks very good.
I'm not here to tell you the future, but lets stop thinking we can recreate the past by bringing in players AFTER they are established.
RJ is not having a good season but is it wise to indict his career?

Nalod wrote:Word in Bull land is Lavines knee is not good. His numbers are down. Not terrible, but.....That contract!!!!! MY goodness.

UK fan tendency to want players after they peak.

Let's look at the years of service comparisons.....

https://basketball.realgm.com/player/Zach-LaVine/Comparison/41396/RJ-Barrett/103893

Obvious Lavine has 5 MORE years of stats given his age so look not at totals but the first three years RJ looks very good.
I'm not here to tell you the future, but lets stop thinking we can recreate the past by bringing in players AFTER they are established.
RJ is not having a good season but is it wise to indict his career?

Hard comparisons to make, given Lavine's injury history in his first four years. But zim gonna go out on a limb and say RJ's shown 1/3rd the potential Zach did in his first four years. They both make dumb decisions on offense and defense, but Zach has the top tier athleticism to make up for his mistakes. Id still pass on Lavine because his bball makes Randle look Detroit Pistons Isaiah Thomas.

fishmike wrote:Zach isnt perfect and costs a phuck ton. Any draft comp should be minimal... like the Det and Milw picks so they can say they also got 1 FRPS.

I think for the Knicks it adds the firepower they need, moves Randle to 2nd/3rd scorer and puts him into more a Draymond role.

Zach/Brunson are 27/26
Randle is 28
Mitch is 24

That's my "core 4" (for now) and what I like is it leaves me with Grimes a starter and IQ/McBride/Cam/IHart/Sims off the bench and still good draft assets to add role players or development projects.

God forbid Rokus is an impact player

FYI this cant happen until Jan 15 because of Zach's contract

For me, Zach is just more of what we have and don't need. (Albeit a much higher class)
Which is a high volume scorer that has limited basketball IQ.
Would rather ship out guys and get back some efficient scorers that can shoot the three and defend.
I think JB and either Randle or RJ is enough high volume offensive players for a unit.
Think IQ and a better shooter would be enough in the second unit.
We need the guy that hustles and is a glue guy but also a pro shooter. We need a guy that can rim protect but is also a pro shooter. We need a guy that can set guys up and is a pro shooter.
Right now we have, RJ who probably needs 20 shots to be effective, rarely sets anyone up and is not a pro shooter. JB who loves the ball in his hands, multiple head fakes and short jumpers. But does not like to pass in tight games or against good teams. However, he IS a pro shooter. We have Randle who needs 20 shots to be effective and can pass but is turnover prone and takes too many three's. He is a pro scorer going strong to basket. We just added Grimes who is not exactly shy to shoot. Yes he is the new shiny toy but essentially made from the same cloth.

The second unit has the same problem. IQ likes his threes and floaters. Rose is instant shot taker. Obi loves them threes and getting out too early for transition dunk. Despite Knicks being one of the worst teams in completing their defensive stops by getting the defensive rebound. Cam is not exactly John Stockton. Just too many of the same type of players. Zach would be one more.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Word in Bull land is Lavines knee is not good. His numbers are down. Not terrible, but.....That contract!!!!! MY goodness.

UK fan tendency to want players after they peak.

Let's look at the years of service comparisons.....

https://basketball.realgm.com/player/Zach-LaVine/Comparison/41396/RJ-Barrett/103893

Obvious Lavine has 5 MORE years of stats given his age so look not at totals but the first three years RJ looks very good.
I'm not here to tell you the future, but lets stop thinking we can recreate the past by bringing in players AFTER they are established.
RJ is not having a good season but is it wise to indict his career?

Hard comparisons to make, given Lavine's injury history in his first four years. But zim gonna go out on a limb and say RJ's shown 1/3rd the potential Zach did in his first four years. They both make dumb decisions on offense and defense, but Zach has the top tier athleticism to make up for his mistakes. Id still pass on Lavine because his bball makes Randle look Detroit Pistons Isaiah Thomas.

you did not look at the 1st three year comparisons did you?
Add in Lavines balky knee with that massive contract and you have a recipe beyond our current real or emotionally fueled conundrum.
Nalod does not see RJ as a finished piece. its why I bark over and over his age. Its 22!!!!

Nalod wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Word in Bull land is Lavines knee is not good. His numbers are down. Not terrible, but.....That contract!!!!! MY goodness.

UK fan tendency to want players after they peak.

Let's look at the years of service comparisons.....

https://basketball.realgm.com/player/Zach-LaVine/Comparison/41396/RJ-Barrett/103893

Obvious Lavine has 5 MORE years of stats given his age so look not at totals but the first three years RJ looks very good.
I'm not here to tell you the future, but lets stop thinking we can recreate the past by bringing in players AFTER they are established.
RJ is not having a good season but is it wise to indict his career?

Hard comparisons to make, given Lavine's injury history in his first four years. But zim gonna go out on a limb and say RJ's shown 1/3rd the potential Zach did in his first four years. They both make dumb decisions on offense and defense, but Zach has the top tier athleticism to make up for his mistakes. Id still pass on Lavine because his bball makes Randle look Detroit Pistons Isaiah Thomas.

you did not look at the 1st three year comparisons did you?
Add in Lavines balky knee with that massive contract and you have a recipe beyond our current real or emotionally fueled conundrum.
Nalod does not see RJ as a finished piece. its why I bark over and over his age. Its 22!!!!

Yeah, I looked them up. But it's hard to make an apples to apples comparison given how much time Zach missed. We both agree Zach is a bad idea. I'm just not buying that RJ has the potential to match Zach's production. I hope RJ proves me wrong.

if he became available that would be a huge flag in and of itself in my book

Alpha1971 wrote:OG is way better. Two way players. OG as the back up to Grimes and RJ getting 30 minutes. Trade IQ and picks for him with Rose. Then trade for Kuzma to play 3-4 off the bench or a back up two way who can play center /PF to back up Mitch and Randle. IQ OBi Rose Cam Hartenstein Fournier and picks to get two solid rotation two way players with size. Then we still have picks in both rounds and player exceptions to round out the bench going forward. I would like also to trade for Tari Eason or Chris Duarte if OG and Kuzma not available. We have plenty of other options. RJ also could be the bench 2-3-4 if we trade for a superior player to him for the starting lineup.

OG is front runner for DPOY. Doubt he is gonna be happy as backup. Some injury concerns by OG, but I think you may be undervaluing him.