Knicks · Isola knick Waiters rumor (page 3)

TPercy wrote:two jr smiths on 1 team? No thanks, I'd rather trade for reggie as someone on here said (if its even possible)or dump Jr smith elsewhere before getting Dion.

CrushAlot wrote:

TPercy wrote:two jr smiths on 1 team? No thanks, I'd rather trade for reggie as someone on here said (if its even possible)or dump Jr smith elsewhere before getting Dion.

If Reggie is available that is the better move. I don't think he s available. Waiters is a risk but that is why he is available. The kid is only 23.

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

VCoug wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:sure ... lets go get one of the worst players in the league because we think we see talent.

He is very talented. He played on the usa select team this past summer. He is a bit of a head case but he is also young and comes at a very low cost. I think you have to hope he figures things out and benefits from a new situation/environment.

he makes 3.5 million, no?

he is worth the minimum.

I think he makes 4 mil. But he is a very young, talented player. The Knicks are not going to have Shump or dalembert back. If they can get a talented but flawed player on a rookie deal I think they have to consider it. Waiters is a very dynamic offensive player already.

When you say dynamic what do you mean by that?

He can hit the three or the midrange shot, he can penetrate and score or pass, he can take guys off the dribble, has a great crossover, he heats up and has runs where he scores in bunches, he posts up, etc.

He's never shot better than 36% from 3 and is shooting 24% this season. He's shooting well from 10-16 ft, 50% this season, but he's only shot 33% and 44% from that distance in previous seasons. From 16ft to the 3-point line he's currently shooting 30%; in previous seasons he's shot 40% and 43% from that distance. Between 3-10ft he's shooting 20% and he's never shot better than 30%. He might be able to take his guy off the dribble but he's not particularly good at finishing at the rim; he's shooting 57% at the rim this year, a decent number but not a great one. He's shot 53% and 52% in previous seasons.

He's never averaged more than 3 assists/game.

I don't like his game but 36% from 3 is okay for a second year player. However, if you can't excel surrounded by the talent around him this year something is wrong with you as a player. He does not have a catch and shoot game which makes him a liability in most systems since like you said he does not do a good job as a finisher. Plus he struggles getting to the FT line and making it when he does get there.

gunsnewing wrote:We didn't have to pay Phil $60mil to make this trade. Grunwald or Mills coul've gotten it done for $144K

So many of you cop to Melo being "What He Is" and conceding we need to surround him with higher IQ players and here you are hoping we'd get a head case gunner to go alongside Melo and JR.

No logic or consistency to much of the ideas espoused here.

If you think it is so easy to take on head cases, because they are 1) talented, 2) better than losing Shump for nothing and 3) can be easily flipped later (keep believing that), then it appears many of you are classic cases of learning nothing from history and being doomed to repeat your mistakes.

The last 15 years is FULL OF THESE STORIES of taking on low IQ rejects from other clubs and rationalizing how we'll polish a turd and turn it into gold. Tell me one instance in this century when we've done that? That's right, you can't. Instead they end up as another deadwood contract we're stuck with.

This is not an asset-building move unless you have a culture that can turn players around. We don't have that culture, so it would be a failure just like the fantasies about getting Lance here.

And Phil is not a culture. He's a guy with rings. Right now that supposed new culture is in flames, not exactly the time you bring in nut jobs for rehab.

When will some of you guys ever learn?

Vmart wrote:I would only consider it if Thompson is included in the deal. Otherwise Dalembert for Waiters straight up.

Cavs laugh while hanging up the phone.

knickscity wrote:

Vmart wrote:I would only consider it if Thompson is included in the deal. Otherwise Dalembert for Waiters straight up.

Cavs laugh while hanging up the phone.

Cavs are a team with championship aspirations. We are giving them the ingredients to take the next step up. The way I see it Dalembert=> head case Waiters. Shump<= Thompson. Basically Knicks are taking over former lottery Cav's players that are nothing without LeBron.

Splat wrote:This thread is full of denialist thinking.

So many of you cop to Melo being "What He Is" and conceding we need to surround him with higher IQ players and here you are hoping we'd get a head case gunner to go alongside Melo and JR.

No logic or consistency to much of the ideas espoused here.

If you think it is so easy to take on head cases, because they are 1) talented, 2) better than losing Shump for nothing and 3) can be easily flipped later (keep believing that), then it appears many of you are classic cases of learning nothing from history and being doomed to repeat your mistakes.

The last 15 years is FULL OF THESE STORIES of taking on low IQ rejects from other clubs and rationalizing how we'll polish a turd and turn it into gold. Tell me one instance in this century when we've done that? That's right, you can't. Instead they end up as another deadwood contract we're stuck with.

This is not an asset-building move unless you have a culture that can turn players around. We don't have that culture, so it would be a failure just like the fantasies about getting Lance here.

And Phil is not a culture. He's a guy with rings. Right now that supposed new culture is in flames, not exactly the time you bring in nut jobs for rehab.

When will some of you guys ever learn?

^^^ This!

Best case: Rodney Stuckey
Worst case: Smush Parker

Yikes!

smackeddog wrote:Ha, Just read on draft express for Dion Waiters:

Best case: Rodney Stuckey
Worst case: Smush Parker

Yikes!

Shumpert's same site

Javaris Crittenton/Terrence Williams

TripleThreat wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:Isola reports the current rumor is Shumpert and Dalembert for waiters. Sam works straight up for Waiters. If Shumpert is in the deal I think the Knicks have to take Hayward back. I think I would do it for Waiters. Sam for Waiters is a no brainer in my opinion.

The entire Cleveland offense is a mess this year, also their defense, not saying Waiter is blameless, but he's running as a fourth option to a poor fit of LBJ/Love/Irving.

The best chance to get Waiters ( and probably Zeller and Karasev) was to try to entice the Cavs on the idea of Tyson Chandler and Shumpert in the offseason, with the Knicks taking back some bad contracts. Even struggling, Waiters is a legit young NBA wing with a high talent ceiling. He has limitations, no doubt, but even wings with flaws are still getting paid in the open market ( Alec Burks has some decent sized flaws and still got a nice extension, Hayward and Bradley got nice raises on potential more than production. )

This is just phantom Phil Jackson shenanigans ( i.e. I can't find a trade market for my players, so I'll get a sports reporter/writer to push one into the press to try to create a phantom trade market by pretending I could make this deal but don't want to when the reality is the other team would never make this deal. And even if they wanted to move Player X, the Knicks would be way down the list of their best trade options overall)

Dalembert doesn't help the Cavs. He's another part time pivot that offers limitations that need to be worked around and would only add to the roster of incomplete pivots they have ( Thompson can't defend the rim, Sideshow Varejao can't stay healthy, Haywood is just six hard fouls)

Is Waiters a low IQ headcase? It's a little unclear IMHO, he definitely has not developed as hoped, but Irving is a no defense non pass first scoring PG who doesn't mesh well with LBJ, but before that had massive marketing backing because of his draft pedigree. Sometimes a guy like Waiters gets trashed because he's trash, sometimes he just runs up into a more marketable player ( i.e. Rodney McCray got completely railroaded by Michael Jordan and the press in his day simply by marketing/star power weight)

A lot of teams would like the chance to see if they can rub the dirt off of a potential high talent ceiling guy like Waiters. He's not perfect, but the raw talent is there. The Cavs can simply get a better package than Dalembert and Shumpert for Waiters.

The only thing I can see as a takeaway from all of this is that the Knicks mismanaged the Tyson Chandler trade. The Cavs would have paid rock solid gold for Chandler in a trade if only the Knicks had waited/the Cavs showed more foresight.

+1