Knicks · Knicks may revisit Shumpert deal with OKC (page 4)

mreinman wrote:Shumpert was always overrated by knick fans, he was inefficient in college and he is inefficient as a pro. Nothing has changed.

Exactly. There's no historical basis for any of the favorable comments you see here about him.

Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

You keep saying youth movement like that is some special thing. How about a quality player movement youth or other wise?

So when Shump goes on to average 15 & 5+ elite defense with OKC while sefolosa goes the Ronnie brewer route and the 29th pick gets cut from he dleague. You will see Knicks fans complaining that another one of our young players are flourishing with their teams in the playoffs. Shandon Anderson all over again

Okc, clippers & celtics are desperate for a player like Shumpert. Especially okc where he can become the 3rd wheel to Durant and westbrook

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

Yeah, but that ship has sailed. We don't have our first and second round picks this year. What we have to do is maximize the assets we have. I'm not against trading Shump. I'm just lukewarm to the idea of trading him for the 29th pick, which I consider to be an over glorified second rounder. Even if we make that trade, there's no guarantee the player we want will be there. I'd rather keep Shump and look for a better offer and buy a second round pick. If OKC was talking aboutvtrading pick 21, I'd be more amenable to a trade. If it were Shump for 29 and another second rounder or multiple second rounders, i'd consider it. But I don't want to trade Shump just for the sake of saying we have first rounder in this year's draft.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

Yeah, but that ship has sailed. We don't have our first and second round picks this year. What we have to do is maximize the assets we have. I'm not against trading Shump. I'm just lukewarm to the idea of trading him for the 29th pick, which I consider to be an over glorified second rounder. Even if we make that trade, there's no guarantee the player we want will be there. I'd rather keep Shump and look for a better offer and buy a second round pick. If OKC was talking aboutvtrading pick 21, I'd be more amenable to a trade. If it were Shump for 29 and another second rounder or multiple second rounders, i'd consider it. But I don't want to trade Shump just for the sake of saying we have first rounder in this year's draft.

nor am I up for getting younger for getting younger's sake. That happened last eyar and the results were catastrophic

Forget about saving a $1-2mil. This is like when the Knicks suddenly got cheap with Lin Eventhough he had no effect on the cap

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:Shumpert was always overrated by knick fans, he was inefficient in college and he is inefficient as a pro. Nothing has changed.

Exactly. There's no historical basis for any of the favorable comments you see here about him.

has he had a chance to develop? was he not dicked around?

BigDaddyG wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

Yeah, but that ship has sailed. We don't have our first and second round picks this year. What we have to do is maximize the assets we have. I'm not against trading Shump. I'm just lukewarm to the idea of trading him for the 29th pick, which I consider to be an over glorified second rounder. Even if we make that trade, there's no guarantee the player we want will be there. I'd rather keep Shump and look for a better offer and buy a second round pick. If OKC was talking aboutvtrading pick 21, I'd be more amenable to a trade. If it were Shump for 29 and another second rounder or multiple second rounders, i'd consider it. But I don't want to trade Shump just for the sake of saying we have first rounder in this year's draft.

Yep.

1996 the New York Knicks select:
18-John Wallace
19-Walter McCarty
20-Donte Jones

In this case we are trading Shumpert for the 29th. Or 41 & 44. I can possibly see trading Shumpert for a pg like Collison or Mills Eventhough I still think Phil prefers Shumpert but sefolosa and the 29th? To save a million?

Smh

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

How much is a 29th pick? Seems like SAS had built a powerhouse. Last Lottery pick was Tim Duncan.

One can get a Euro and incubate him. This is not about NOW when you do this, its about player developement.

If shump can go 15 and 5 here and now, thats great, but if he can't or is not seen as a "Triangle kind of guy" then best to move him.

We all would prefer lots of things but fact is we have no clue what OKC is offering do we?

SupremeCommander wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

Yeah, but that ship has sailed. We don't have our first and second round picks this year. What we have to do is maximize the assets we have. I'm not against trading Shump. I'm just lukewarm to the idea of trading him for the 29th pick, which I consider to be an over glorified second rounder. Even if we make that trade, there's no guarantee the player we want will be there. I'd rather keep Shump and look for a better offer and buy a second round pick. If OKC was talking aboutvtrading pick 21, I'd be more amenable to a trade. If it were Shump for 29 and another second rounder or multiple second rounders, i'd consider it. But I don't want to trade Shump just for the sake of saying we have first rounder in this year's draft.

nor am I up for getting younger for getting younger's sake. That happened last eyar and the results were catastrophic

Yea you are looking at guys like CJ Leslie with Picks 29+ dleague fodder. And even the ones that carve out a role on NBA team need a few years on the bench. We know these guys won't get any burn here Josh Harrelson, Mardy Collins?

Sure you get the occasional Stephenson/Arena but you can't bank on that. If we had a pick it's be different. You take chances on guys even if there is a 90% chance he is out of the league in 2yrs.

If we bought a second rounder fine

gunsnewing wrote:Yep.

1996 the New York Knicks select:
18-John Wallace
19-Walter McCarty
20-Donte Jones

In this case we are trading Shumpert for the 29th. Or 41 & 44. I can possibly see trading Shumpert for a pg like Collison or Mills Eventhough I still think Phil prefers Shumpert but sefolosa and the 29th? To save a million?

Smh

Not even Thabo and the 29th. Thabo is a free agent. Not that I want the Knicks to sign him, but I don't think there is going to be a lot of demand for Sefalosha.

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:Shumpert was always overrated by knick fans, he was inefficient in college and he is inefficient as a pro. Nothing has changed.

Exactly. There's no historical basis for any of the favorable comments you see here about him.

has he had a chance to develop? was he not dicked around?

He's had about 5000 NBA minutes

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Nalod wrote:Don't matter if he was a 17th pick. This is a contract year for him and the question is do we want to pay him or move him for some other assets of which can perhaps exceed his production at some point in the future?

If OKC sees him as a viable asset to help in their quest NOW and sees that he can produce with their system and their players its a win-win.

ITs not about what he does after traded, but what our assets would do.

I agree. But how much of an asset is the 29th pick, especially when there's a decent chance the player the Knicks want to pick will be available in the second round? That seems to be the only thing that OKC is offering. If that's the case, I wouldn't even consider that deal until the pick is being made. I'd rather buy a second rounder or trade Shump for multiple second-rounders.

The two are unrelated.
The average team has a first and a second round pick. We would need to trade Shump for a pick and buy another pick just to not fall further behind in terms of youth movement.

You keep saying youth movement like that is some special thing. How about a quality player movement youth or other wise?

Sure, but you're not going to get good players on cheap contracts who are old.
It is special to have a good player on a very cheap contract for 4 years.

Like a CJ Leslie Bonn?

Bonn1997 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:Shumpert was always overrated by knick fans, he was inefficient in college and he is inefficient as a pro. Nothing has changed.

Exactly. There's no historical basis for any of the favorable comments you see here about him.

has he had a chance to develop? was he not dicked around?

He's had about 5000 NBA minutes

and those 5000 minutes were under terrific circumstances where he had a chance to develop? while i am guilty of overrating him a bit i still believe the circumstances have not been good enough for him to be given up on.

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:Shumpert was always overrated by knick fans, he was inefficient in college and he is inefficient as a pro. Nothing has changed.

Exactly. There's no historical basis for any of the favorable comments you see here about him.

has he had a chance to develop? was he not dicked around?

He's had about 5000 NBA minutes

and those 5000 minutes were under terrific circumstances where he had a chance to develop? while i am guilty of overrating him a bit i still believe the circumstances have not been good enough for him to be given up on.

Exactly. 5000 empty minutes development wise

He would've been better off in okc, spurs, heat or clippers

He played much better once Phil mandated that Woodson stop wasting him at the SF and he went back to SG

Knicks desperately needed perimeter defense not having Shumpert try to muscle up bigger SFs

gunsnewing wrote:

dk7th wrote:he has not a had a chance to develop. he was injured and then he was dicked around. he is the kind of guy who clearly needs a healthy work environment in order to thrive. it's a real shame that he was out most of last season but then again without kidd and prigioni the wheels would have fallen off the knicks rickety bus and badly. it's great for the delusional that shumpert was injured or they could not have enjoyed the 54 wins before getting exposed. not good for those who would have preferred to allow the kid to develop in the normal course of time in a functional organization.

with sheriff jackson in town maybe things will work out.

Exactly. Why people are eager to give him up for the 29th motherfuckin pick is beyond me

I guarantee you if Shump played for okc this entire time he would be looked at a lot differently

If sefolosa was here he would've got ran out of town like Landry fields

I'm convinced Knicks fans are the worst basketball fans in the country. Worst than Miami fans

there is a really good reason to move Shump for a late pick like that. Next year is Shump's contract year and the last of his rookie deal. So play it out... if he has the breakout year we all want he's going to get paid. So do you pay Shump and pass on possibly getting max players in FA? If Shump has his 15-5-5 season while playing great defense whats he worth? $7mm? $10mm?

Its money.

If the plan is get Melo at a discount, then add another max guy summer of 2015 and another almost max guy the same summer to build your new big 3 then Shumpert and his new contract dont fit into the big picture.

If the play is use Amare/Chandler/Bargs expiring deals to add salary and just pack in the talent then you ride with Shump and if he blows up great... pay him.

Two very different roads. One Shump has to go. One it really just depends on how he plays