EwingsGlass wrote:While I would prefer to get Murray, a simpler question is whether DLO is better than Fournier? Could DLo (CAA client) be the bench scoring threat for the Knicks. Fournier's contract has a team option where Russell is guaranteed. But, is it possible the Knicks could facilitate the trade to make it work for all?

Now, not looking to get greedy or anything, but if we could get involved and manage to swipe Jarred Vanderbilt, that would be a coup!

Hawks get
Lakers 2029
Knicks 2024
Fournier
Whatever else LAL can give them.

LAL gets
Murray
Grimes

Knicks get
DLO
Vanderbilt
Rich Paul's allegiance again once Lebron retires.

I don't "Love" Dlo. Don't really want him in the starting lineup. But as a super 6th, I'd swallow that pill. I think of it as exercising Fournier's option next year to preserve salary cap.

McBride
DLO
Hart
Vanderbilt
Precious/Robinson

I think D'Lo has a player option, some that would have to be worked out before any trade goes through.

EwingsGlass wrote:While I would prefer to get Murray, a simpler question is whether DLO is better than Fournier? Could DLo (CAA client) be the bench scoring threat for the Knicks. Fournier's contract has a team option where Russell is guaranteed. But, is it possible the Knicks could facilitate the trade to make it work for all?

Now, not looking to get greedy or anything, but if we could get involved and manage to swipe Jarred Vanderbilt, that would be a coup!

Hawks get
Lakers 2029
Knicks 2024
Fournier
Whatever else LAL can give them.

LAL gets
Murray
Grimes

Knicks get
DLO
Vanderbilt
Rich Paul's allegiance again once Lebron retires.

I don't "Love" Dlo. Don't really want him in the starting lineup. But as a super 6th, I'd swallow that pill. I think of it as exercising Fournier's option next year to preserve salary cap.

McBride
DLO
Hart
Vanderbilt
Precious/Robinson

Dlo - “defense is not what I do”. Yup, sounds like a Thibs guy to me

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we're not getting much for Grimes and a 1st, so if we want a real difference maker we gotta pay up.

But is Murray a real difference maker. I think the Knicks are still looking at 3 or 4 in the East if they get Murray. I mean, that's still possible if they stay pat. The idea of Murray was palatable at a relatively neutral cost. Three picks plus Grimes and Fournier is an overpay for a guy who isn't even an All-Star.

IDC about tags or popularity contests, Brunson and OG have never been all stars either.

DJM can help us in alot of areas, we should get him.

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we're not getting much for Grimes and a 1st, so if we want a real difference maker we gotta pay up.

But is Murray a real difference maker. I think the Knicks are still looking at 3 or 4 in the East if they get Murray. I mean, that's still possible if they stay pat. The idea of Murray was palatable at a relatively neutral cost. Three picks plus Grimes and Fournier is an overpay for a guy who isn't even an All-Star.

IDC about tags or popularity contests, Brunson and OG have never been all stars either.

DJM can help us in alot of areas, we should get him.

But Brunson is way better offensively than Murray. Why would I want Brunson to go off ball when he's significantly better than Murray. We keep making excuses, but it's clear Murray is a point guard who doesn't fit with another dominant ball handler. There is a lot of risk both ways and three first rounders is too rich for my blood.

Brunson is a better PLAYER, DJM is a better PG. Brunson is an elite shooter and is carrying a huge load. why is him playing some off ball and spacing the floor and getting some of the load taken off a bad thing?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/IanBegley/status/1749083137030648141

Rookie wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:While I would prefer to get Murray, a simpler question is whether DLO is better than Fournier? Could DLo (CAA client) be the bench scoring threat for the Knicks. Fournier's contract has a team option where Russell is guaranteed. But, is it possible the Knicks could facilitate the trade to make it work for all?

Now, not looking to get greedy or anything, but if we could get involved and manage to swipe Jarred Vanderbilt, that would be a coup!

Hawks get
Lakers 2029
Knicks 2024
Fournier
Whatever else LAL can give them.

LAL gets
Murray
Grimes

Knicks get
DLO
Vanderbilt
Rich Paul's allegiance again once Lebron retires.

I don't "Love" Dlo. Don't really want him in the starting lineup. But as a super 6th, I'd swallow that pill. I think of it as exercising Fournier's option next year to preserve salary cap.

McBride
DLO
Hart
Vanderbilt
Precious/Robinson

Dlo - “defense is not what I do”. Yup, sounds like a Thibs guy to me

I mean. What do you think you are able to get for Fournier?

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we're not getting much for Grimes and a 1st, so if we want a real difference maker we gotta pay up.

But is Murray a real difference maker. I think the Knicks are still looking at 3 or 4 in the East if they get Murray. I mean, that's still possible if they stay pat. The idea of Murray was palatable at a relatively neutral cost. Three picks plus Grimes and Fournier is an overpay for a guy who isn't even an All-Star.

IDC about tags or popularity contests, Brunson and OG have never been all stars either.

DJM can help us in alot of areas, we should get him.

But Brunson is way better offensively than Murray. Why would I want Brunson to go off ball when he's significantly better than Murray. We keep making excuses, but it's clear Murray is a point guard who doesn't fit with another dominant ball handler. There is a lot of risk both ways and three first rounders is too rich for my blood.

Brunson is a better PLAYER, DJM is a better PG. Brunson is an elite shooter and is carrying a huge load. why is him playing some off ball and spacing the floor and getting some of the load taken off a bad thing?

Is he tho? Brunson average like 8 assists a game since the trade. Brunson is clearly a better offensive engine. Why would we want him to move off ball?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/IanBegley/status/1749083137030648141

yes because his usage is too high since the trade. He needs help, if Randle doesn't show up for playoffs again he'll have even less help on offense this season. RJ was a big time player for us in the playoffs.

DJM had an assist rate over 40% when he was full time PG in SA and over 9apg in less minutes.

DLeethal wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we're not getting much for Grimes and a 1st, so if we want a real difference maker we gotta pay up.

But is Murray a real difference maker. I think the Knicks are still looking at 3 or 4 in the East if they get Murray. I mean, that's still possible if they stay pat. The idea of Murray was palatable at a relatively neutral cost. Three picks plus Grimes and Fournier is an overpay for a guy who isn't even an All-Star.

IDC about tags or popularity contests, Brunson and OG have never been all stars either.

DJM can help us in alot of areas, we should get him.

But Brunson is way better offensively than Murray. Why would I want Brunson to go off ball when he's significantly better than Murray. We keep making excuses, but it's clear Murray is a point guard who doesn't fit with another dominant ball handler. There is a lot of risk both ways and three first rounders is too rich for my blood.

Brunson is a better PLAYER, DJM is a better PG. Brunson is an elite shooter and is carrying a huge load. why is him playing some off ball and spacing the floor and getting some of the load taken off a bad thing?

Brunson is a point guard man. He controls the game, the pace, runs the offense, and yes he's an elite scorer. He's a point guard in every sense of the word and you would never take the ball out of his hands in favor of Murray.

I think there's a fallacy that being a great PG means a ton of assists. Assists are an important metric, but a PG is about being the brains of the operation and the nerve center of the team as well, and you cannot overstate how terrific Brunson is at that aspect of the game. He is capable of making mistakes, we all are, but it has been a long time since we've had a player who you can trust so completely in every situation. I would agree Murray doesn't hold a candle to him as a PG despite averaging more assists. You'd still want Brunson as your primary ballhandler.

EwingsGlass wrote:

Rookie wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:While I would prefer to get Murray, a simpler question is whether DLO is better than Fournier? Could DLo (CAA client) be the bench scoring threat for the Knicks. Fournier's contract has a team option where Russell is guaranteed. But, is it possible the Knicks could facilitate the trade to make it work for all?

Now, not looking to get greedy or anything, but if we could get involved and manage to swipe Jarred Vanderbilt, that would be a coup!

Hawks get
Lakers 2029
Knicks 2024
Fournier
Whatever else LAL can give them.

LAL gets
Murray
Grimes

Knicks get
DLO
Vanderbilt
Rich Paul's allegiance again once Lebron retires.

I don't "Love" Dlo. Don't really want him in the starting lineup. But as a super 6th, I'd swallow that pill. I think of it as exercising Fournier's option next year to preserve salary cap.

McBride
DLO
Hart
Vanderbilt
Precious/Robinson

Dlo - “defense is not what I do”. Yup, sounds like a Thibs guy to me

I mean. What do you think you are able to get for Fournier?

A baguette? cap space my man....cap space. Seriously though I think the noise is probably true, Thibs and the FO love Brown. I bet if Toronto liked Grimes or valued our picks it would be done already

fishmike wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:we're not getting much for Grimes and a 1st, so if we want a real difference maker we gotta pay up.

But is Murray a real difference maker. I think the Knicks are still looking at 3 or 4 in the East if they get Murray. I mean, that's still possible if they stay pat. The idea of Murray was palatable at a relatively neutral cost. Three picks plus Grimes and Fournier is an overpay for a guy who isn't even an All-Star.

IDC about tags or popularity contests, Brunson and OG have never been all stars either.

DJM can help us in alot of areas, we should get him.

But Brunson is way better offensively than Murray. Why would I want Brunson to go off ball when he's significantly better than Murray. We keep making excuses, but it's clear Murray is a point guard who doesn't fit with another dominant ball handler. There is a lot of risk both ways and three first rounders is too rich for my blood.

Brunson is a better PLAYER, DJM is a better PG. Brunson is an elite shooter and is carrying a huge load. why is him playing some off ball and spacing the floor and getting some of the load taken off a bad thing?

Is he tho? Brunson average like 8 assists a game since the trade. Brunson is clearly a better offensive engine. Why would we want him to move off ball?

not only that but Randle is also looking like a better #2 facilitator. He's been a legit point forward and looks like a 2nd floor general. He's always looking to move the ball it feels. Look, I WANTED to like RJ more than I actually liked RJ and the reason is it was another year of a guy taking 15 shots a game and having worst EF% #s on the team. Now we are not only seeing other guys taking those shot, but we are seeing Brunson and Randle FINDING guys to take those shots. Its DD/OG jumpers and cutters and man they are just looking great.

It's real ripple effect. OG is making Brunson/Randle better and Brunson/Randle are making EVERYONE better.

To me it simple... Brogdon or bust. I trust the FO make the right deal if Murray is an option. I have no interest in Brown, Clarkson, Rozier or Smart.

Murray is a talent upgrade at the 2 but might not be a better fit. DD is just phucking perfect. Dude really reminds me of Starks

Barrett had sticky fingers too. You could tell he wasn't going to pass it most times he touched the ball.

nycericanguy wrote:this is like arguing you wouldn't want IQ back b/c he'd take the ball out of Brunson's hands...lol.

Brunson is great but you cant ask him to beat teams in the playoffs by himself.

DJM is more about taking the ball out of Deuce's hands for 13mpg, and letting Brunson play off ball for a few more where he can focus on attacking.

The only (major) difference is IQ is who we had, so there was no choice in the role we had to give him. Now that its a choice and we have to give up assets to make an acquisition, a lot more goes into whether its the right fit from a chemistry situation and cost of give up.

VDesai wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:this is like arguing you wouldn't want IQ back b/c he'd take the ball out of Brunson's hands...lol.

Brunson is great but you cant ask him to beat teams in the playoffs by himself.

DJM is more about taking the ball out of Deuce's hands for 13mpg, and letting Brunson play off ball for a few more where he can focus on attacking.

The only (major) difference is IQ is who we had, so there was no choice in the role we had to give him. Now that its a choice and we have to give up assets to make an acquisition, a lot more goes into whether its the right fit from a chemistry situation and cost of give up.