Knicks · Offer Draymond Green MAX? (page 1)

WHat do you mean run an offense through him? GSW doesn't even run their offense through him. He moves the ball well and is borderline efficient right now although his efficiency is dropping. However he more than makes up for it in other areas.

I would be scared to increase his role as an offensive player though because of his lack of efficiency though when he is only carrying a 54.7 TS% on a usg of 17%. That is not that high. What you have to hope is that he can become a better 3pt shooter or/and get to the line more.

All that being said. Chandler Parsons got the max so it is more than likely that Green will too. Green max is actually more than Parsons since it is 25% of a higher Cap. When you get paid more you are expected to have an impact relative to your price. Can Draymond up his game more on offense? The ability to get to the line will be the key and not only get to the line but shoot a good percentage there.

P.S. now that you made this thread is every other thread Green safe?

They have not been doing it as recently but when Bogut was out with David Lee too
They ran it through him at times and usually in the post

Usually in the deep post and mid/high post

It is usually hitting the open man but it could really be any of these players that they can run an offense through

1- Curry/Klay

2- Bogut/Green

3- Speights/ Iggy/Lee

4- Livingston

Also any of these guys will also play off the ball as well

Triple threat is dead on.We have to find our own role players even high end role players. The guys who deserve the cash on the WS is curry and Thompson. If you take away curry and Thompson and left green as a main guy gs would win25 games.

TripleThreat as usual is spot on. green is a very nice player but him playing with Klay and Curry makes his life on offense ridiculously easier than if he were on a team that didn't have essentially the most ridiculously talented backcourt by a country mile. Put him on the Knicks and you have a defensive stopper but what would happen to his embryonic offense? He really only this season has become a passably good offensive player. To the Knicks, he is worth 8-9 mil but he will not leave the best team in the west to come to a 15 win knicks squad. We'd have to overpay and that would be a disaster, straight up.

BRIGGS wrote:Triple threat is dead on.We have to find our own role players even high end role players. The guys who deserve the cash on the WS is curry and Thompson. If you take away curry and Thompson and left green as a main guy gs would win25 games.

Briggs,

First of, you do not even watch them play, so please, I do not know how you can even comment on a team that you do not watch and does EVERYING we want to do able to do on both ends
You have it SET IN YOUR HEAD ALREADY, that he is a role player....

DO you watch any basketball games period, on a NBA or PRO leven?
Watching highlights and channel surfing while the game is on is not watching a team either

You are right, we do not have Klay Thompson or Curry, but when will we ever get those type of players?
We do have CA and our 2015 1st round pick, I do not think it is going to get closer than that

And finally, I do not want Draymond Green for ONLY what he brings on the court, I want want he can teach to our team, what he has learned from Marc Jackson and then from Kerr, the differenced that changed their philosophy
I want how he can make other players better, I want his defensive ablities and his abilities to teach this, I want his worth ethic/leadership/work habits that he can pass out to our young guys, I want his leadershp
These are things that you cannot draft, his knowledge of the game and the chemistry that GS plays with the selflessness
You do not factor that that this guy was fliriting with a triple double while Bogut and Lee was out EVERY NIGHT, when the OFFENSE was SOMETIMES run through him
Well, now that everyone is back, the use EVERYONE one the floor and the abiltiies to shoot to spread the floor with the versatility that everyone has, we can actually build a team with that concept, CA does have the abilitiy to catch and shoot
If we want to win as a team and play with the chemistry/selflessness that GS and Atlanta plays with, how about targetting players that understand this and play within this concept

Who is the #3 players and 2 most important players on GS on DEFENSE?
Again, you keep using STATS to measure the importance of each player in the NBA while NOT watching the games, remember these players all sacrifice and utilize EVERYONE to run their schemes/philosophy
They use EVERYONEs ability to spread the floor on OFFENSE and they utilize EVERYONEs ability to to defend/apply preassure, cheat and recover, as part of their defensive schemes
Who are the lock down defenders in GS, it certainly isn't Curry who by himself is not the defensive players that Westbrook in terms of talent...

No matter what I say, it will not matter, as you clearly do not understand it as you do not even watch them play...

Finally, you were willing to trade CA and rebuild around Kelly Olinicks and Nate Walters, you do not see something wrong with the way you evaluate talent?
You call them the next Marc Gasol and Steve Nash and you were very confident that was going to be the case in a couple of years....\

Make a vote, state your side of the arguement and we will have something to look back on in 2-3years
And this goes for everyone, especially those that love to say, WHY DIDN'T we do this and that years later....

If green came here with max expectations you guys would eat him alive. No way he would survive as a core player the way Melo and others over the years have been treated. He just couldn't put up the numbers and have the impact people would ask of him.

Another thing, you keep saying finding our own players and you want to keep CA at the same time

Well CA does not have a lot of years left in him before he declines
Developing players and keeping CA to contend, go against each other, a reason why Holiday was traded to allow the young players to develop on Philly

I do not know on what world you live in that you would have traded CA for Kelly Olynicks and Nate Walters but not willing to even consider giving a young player like Green a MAX when he is a triple double threat when the OFFENSE runs through him and he would be able to defend the players that CA do not have the abilities to and could play side by side with him
Well with Green and CA playing the SF/PF together, SOMEONE must be able to defend both players, while not cheating, resulting in an open shot

So while we would need to grab high IQ, 2 way players, we would be able to play with a similar Philosophy that GS plays in on both ends

Galloway
FA, litterally could put in many different of players in different price ranges or Thanasis, especially if he contintues to work on the 3pt shot and handle

CA/Draymond Green at the Forwards

Center 2015 1st rounder

Knixkik wrote:If green came here with max expectations you guys would eat him alive. No way he would survive as a core player the way Melo and others over the years have been treated. He just couldn't put up the numbers and have the impact people would ask of him.

That is your opinion, I have no problem with it, as I do not know if you watch the games or not

But

Make your pick, state your opinions, and I will bring this back up in a couple of years

For those, even if I am wrong or right, please do not ever make a comment if you do not state your opinion here and make a pick, years down the road

I do not believe CA is a franchise player to build around however, if their is a possiblity to acquire a player that can hide his weakness and bring the qualities that he lacks, Draymond Green is it...

Name me another SF/PF that could fill in to play with CA and FIT plaing both SF and PF, and be able to play quality defense on both positions?
Name me another "role player" that has triple double threats with a pair of blocks and steals each....

Kawhi leonard and tobias harris...

TripleThreat wrote:

RonRon wrote:And finally, I do not want Draymond Green for ONLY what he brings on the court, I want want he can teach to our team, what he has learned from Marc Jackson and then from Kerr, the differenced that changed their philosophy
I want how he can make other players better, I want his defensive ablities and his abilities to teach this, I want his worth ethic/leadership/work habits that he can pass out to our young guys, I want his leadershp

RonRon,

I think you make a strong point about finding another forward whose defense actually fits into a scheme where Melo will age into a full time power forward who will likely stay as a minus defender.

In that regard, Green, currently, offers a lot of defensive upside.

But I think another way to look at this is from the resource management side. The VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) question still looms over any FA acquisition the Knicks get or want to get.

For example, one of the core arguments I make why the Bull would no longer be interested in trading for Melo ( one of many reasons) is that Mirotic is on a very reasonable contract, he's a young player and if he can give you 75-80 percent of the production that Melo would give you but at 1/50th of the cost, that's a major value. That allows you to shift those resources in terms of cap savings elsewhere on your roster. It's not even just the NBA. Russell Wilson on that NFL rookie deal and his advanced production allows the Seahawks to arm up elsewhere on that contender roster, esp allowing them to keep core personnel on their defense.

Can you get 60-70-80 percent of Draymond Green's production at some fraction of a max out of 15 million a year? Can you get 2 guys combined who can give you 65 percent or 70 percent of what Green will give you at a fraction of the cost of 15 million a year.

No one is denying that Green can help the current Knicks and that he has a combination of youth and upside and pedigree from a winning team. The issue is VALUE from the resource management side of the game means you want young players OUTPERFORMING THEIR ROOKIE DEALS for you.

Russell Wilson is a value, a massive value at his current rookie deal.
Once he signs his 2nd contract, he's now being paid to market value or at least perceived market value. While he can still help that team win, the teams option tree narrows.
Are we going to dispute those points above?

The "Moneyball" phenomenon was fascinating because it laid out a simple core truth about professional sports. Every dollar spent has to equate to certain number of points, runs, touchdowns, goals, etc, and if you can't compete to extract the most for your dollar, against the top teams who might be handling their resources better, you've already lost before the season even started. Before the first jump ball, before the first kick off, before the first face off, before the first opening pitch.

You are right, stats alone don't tell the whole story. But at some litmus point, the cost ratio of how much it costs the Knicks to get those critical stats does matter, it becomes absolutely essential to winning.

There is NOTHING WRONG with paying a player to his market value if he can help you. But that tends to show more true upside when you've developed him and gained those rookie cost controlled years, and his built in rapport with your system, your coach, your other players and the philosophy of how you want to play.

The role you want Green to serve, in terms of leadership, is more suited to David West or a Paul Pierce type.

Could Green be everything you hope? Yes, it's possible.

But is it likely? Is it worth the trade offs you have to make elsewhere on the roster even if he can help you? Can you get 70 percent of the production at 15 percent of the cost?

At a certain price point, Green is a solid get for the Knicks, even with some variable risk.
But again, at a certain price point, Green becomes yet another sad overpay that hurts them from helping themselves across the roster. At the price point where Green can be a value for the Knicks, he has no incentive to come to this team and leave a much more successful situation ( from which our talking about him in the first place has it's roots)

Stats don't always matter. That's true.

But their ratio of cost to production is critical in a closed system like the NBA has in place.

Bravo again there is no retort to this post. 100% spot on.

TripleThreat wrote:IMHO, Green would be a decent get at about 8-9 million a year. But at that rate, he might as well just go back to Golden State.

I think what he'll end up getting is about 10-11 million a year in practical terms. Unless a team like the Knicks want to make a gross overpay. IMHO a 13-15 million a year clip is a gross overpay for Draymond Green.

I do like his game, as a fan. I think he's got a lot of the intangibles and the heady plus defense the Knicks need, but IMHO he carries a lot of "system guy" risk for that kind of coin.

I think the issue with Draymond Green for the current Knicks is not to sign him, but to look at his situation and status and ask themselves

1) How can we improve our player evalutions/front office to mine a rotational player value like Green ourselves consistently. Giving the Knicks young cost controlled depth with upside.

2) How can we create a positive and sustainable system of player development to help young players hit their ceiling in terms of their potential.

Getting Green would help only marginally, esp at the max cost. To me, the bigger factor is how the Knicks set themselves up to find Greens all over the place/all the time because they are so ahead of the evaluation/development game over all the other franchises.

For 15 million a year, the expectation should be a matchup proof firebomber who will give you consistency every night as well as the other core intangibles.

If you're going to project opportunity cost on picks

In much of what you post, then you might want to do this when it comes

To this and salary cap opportunity costs down the road[NBA economic BOOM]

Draymond Green is real CULTURE CHANGING player

Matter of fact he has the ability to change the culture of a team

Even moreso than someone like Phil Jackson

Bringing someone like him shows the rest of the league

We truly appreciate and value the proper kind of talent and not the name sake blahzay talents only

You're probably right on where his true value lies but

In most cases every player is overpaid in this league

You have to overpay for the right ones

culture changes only happen when you win.... and you win with good players... GMs have been plucking role players off of championship teams for years hopefully to change their own losing culture and it's almost never worked...

FistOfOakley wrote:culture changes only happen when you win.... and you win with good players... GMs have been plucking role players off of championship teams for years hopefully to change their own losing culture and it's almost never worked...

Actually it worked for San Antonio[The Purest Model of Building All-Time]

They were on a drought of chips until they picked up

Danny Green, Tiago Splitter, Patty Mills, Corey Josephs

That's when they got back to the Chip Pedigree level of play

Won back in the day with Kerr's, Claxton's, Jacksons

They turned someone like Kawhai Leonard low first round pick

Into a LOTTERY TALENT level star as their Hall of Famers aged out

We don't have a sure 'first ballot' hall of famer on our team

And the only chance we have at getting one isn't via Free Agency but it's through the draft

In the meantime the next best thing is picking up talent

like Draymond Green because quite honestly there hasn't been a player

Of his caliber in the NBA for a long time, he's about as rare as a Franchise Lottery Talent Player

if you are saying that danny green and tiago splitter and patty mills and corey joseph and kawhi leonard came from a championship pedigree... that is pretty incorrect unless we are talking about an alternate universe i'm not aware of....

and if you are not saying that... i have no idea what you are trying to say...

FistOfOakley wrote:if you are saying that danny green and tiago splitter and patty mills and corey joseph and kawhi leonard came from a championship pedigree... that is pretty incorrect unless we are talking about an alternate universe i'm not aware of....

and if you are not saying that... i have no idea what you are trying to say...

I'm saying the Spurs did not look for[combining picks, cap space]

Starphuchs to get them back to their championship pedigree-ways

They found role players to get them back there

Really simple what I was getting at

you know if you give draymond green the max you are 'starphucing' except you're now giving role players the max instead of stars...

there aren't any shortcuts to this....

Everyone will have their own opinions on evulation of talents and what we could to in FA for the better of the team
In FA in order to acquire talents, players generally get overpaid, that is especially true for stealing FA's and paying for players that are young and being paid on potential
If you disagree that he is a a max player then what do you think teams would pay for his services

Keep in mind

Gordon Hayword MAX
Chandler Parsons MAX

Roy Hibbert MAX

CA's MAX is 150% greater than these younger players MAX

$22,458,401
$22,875,000
$24,559,380
$26,243,760
$27,928,140

Rudy Gay MAX and then resigned 3year 12m per year

Alec Burks 10m +
Larry Sanders 11m

If you think he is a role player then
How many role players do you know that can defend both SF/PF postions, play inside out, hit the 3pter, have a combined 5 steals/blocks, and flirt with triple doubles when SOME of the OFFENSE was run through him while Bogut was out

I am saying if the offense was run through him on a nightly basis it would grealty improve our OFFENSE and his DEFENSIVE abilities will be there and his a big part of why GS has improved this year vs last year
He also provides leadership and the aability to mentor our young guys on both ends on how to play as team

Are Kawaii and Butler MAX players?
Were they once looked as ROLE PLAYERS?

I could be wrong, I am asking everyone to put their vote in and state your opinion, rather than judge upon it 2-3years later if I am wrong....
So please, submit and state your reasoning, there is no WRONG answer, it is our opinion...

Knixkik wrote:If green came here with max expectations you guys would eat him alive. No way he would survive as a core player the way Melo and others over the years have been treated. He just couldn't put up the numbers and have the impact people would ask of him.

if he played the right way i would not eat him alive. it's when you have to endure watching lazy, overpaid knuckleheads that they earn their scorn. fundamentally-sound two-way players are worth rooting for.

RonRon wrote:

Knixkik wrote:If green came here with max expectations you guys would eat him alive. No way he would survive as a core player the way Melo and others over the years have been treated. He just couldn't put up the numbers and have the impact people would ask of him.

That is your opinion, I have no problem with it, as I do not know if you watch the games or not

But

Make your pick, state your opinions, and I will bring this back up in a couple of years

For those, even if I am wrong or right, please do not ever make a comment if you do not state your opinion here and make a pick, years down the road

I do not believe CA is a franchise player to build around however, if their is a possiblity to acquire a player that can hide his weakness and bring the qualities that he lacks, Draymond Green is it...

Name me another SF/PF that could fill in to play with CA and FIT plaing both SF and PF, and be able to play quality defense on both positions?
Name me another "role player" that has triple double threats with a pair of blocks and steals each....

so the crux of the matter, the driving force behind wanting to acquire green even overpay for him, is the presumption that the knicks are stuck with carmelo anthinay?

TripleThreat wrote:

RonRon wrote:And finally, I do not want Draymond Green for ONLY what he brings on the court, I want want he can teach to our team, what he has learned from Marc Jackson and then from Kerr, the differenced that changed their philosophy
I want how he can make other players better, I want his defensive ablities and his abilities to teach this, I want his worth ethic/leadership/work habits that he can pass out to our young guys, I want his leadershp

RonRon,

I think you make a strong point about finding another forward whose defense actually fits into a scheme where Melo will age into a full time power forward who will likely stay as a minus defender.

In that regard, Green, currently, offers a lot of defensive upside.

But I think another way to look at this is from the resource management side. The VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) question still looms over any FA acquisition the Knicks get or want to get.

For example, one of the core arguments I make why the Bull would no longer be interested in trading for Melo ( one of many reasons) is that Mirotic is on a very reasonable contract, he's a young player and if he can give you 75-80 percent of the production that Melo would give you but at 1/50th of the cost, that's a major value. That allows you to shift those resources in terms of cap savings elsewhere on your roster. It's not even just the NBA. Russell Wilson on that NFL rookie deal and his advanced production allows the Seahawks to arm up elsewhere on that contender roster, esp allowing them to keep core personnel on their defense.

Can you get 60-70-80 percent of Draymond Green's production at some fraction of a max out of 15 million a year? Can you get 2 guys combined who can give you 65 percent or 70 percent of what Green will give you at a fraction of the cost of 15 million a year.

No one is denying that Green can help the current Knicks and that he has a combination of youth and upside and pedigree from a winning team. The issue is VALUE from the resource management side of the game means you want young players OUTPERFORMING THEIR ROOKIE DEALS for you.

Russell Wilson is a value, a massive value at his current rookie deal.
Once he signs his 2nd contract, he's now being paid to market value or at least perceived market value. While he can still help that team win, the teams option tree narrows.
Are we going to dispute those points above?

The "Moneyball" phenomenon was fascinating because it laid out a simple core truth about professional sports. Every dollar spent has to equate to certain number of points, runs, touchdowns, goals, etc, and if you can't compete to extract the most for your dollar, against the top teams who might be handling their resources better, you've already lost before the season even started. Before the first jump ball, before the first kick off, before the first face off, before the first opening pitch.

You are right, stats alone don't tell the whole story. But at some litmus point, the cost ratio of how much it costs the Knicks to get those critical stats does matter, it becomes absolutely essential to winning.

There is NOTHING WRONG with paying a player to his market value if he can help you. But that tends to show more true upside when you've developed him and gained those rookie cost controlled years, and his built in rapport with your system, your coach, your other players and the philosophy of how you want to play.

The role you want Green to serve, in terms of leadership, is more suited to David West or a Paul Pierce type.

Could Green be everything you hope? Yes, it's possible.

But is it likely? Is it worth the trade offs you have to make elsewhere on the roster even if he can help you? Can you get 70 percent of the production at 15 percent of the cost?

At a certain price point, Green is a solid get for the Knicks, even with some variable risk.
But again, at a certain price point, Green becomes yet another sad overpay that hurts them from helping themselves across the roster. At the price point where Green can be a value for the Knicks, he has no incentive to come to this team and leave a much more successful situation ( from which our talking about him in the first place has it's roots)

Stats don't always matter. That's true.

But their ratio of cost to production is critical in a closed system like the NBA has in place.

i think ronron's perspective is that once you vastly, grossly overpay for melo's services, moneyball becomes well-nigh impossible to initiate. i mean was there ever a more anti-moneyball contract than the one awarded the ultimate non-moneyball player?

hence the "continue to overpay other players" approach while melo is here-- you may catch lightning in a bottle and squeeze a conference finals appearance out of it....

F500ONE wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:IMHO, Green would be a decent get at about 8-9 million a year. But at that rate, he might as well just go back to Golden State.

I think what he'll end up getting is about 10-11 million a year in practical terms. Unless a team like the Knicks want to make a gross overpay. IMHO a 13-15 million a year clip is a gross overpay for Draymond Green.

I do like his game, as a fan. I think he's got a lot of the intangibles and the heady plus defense the Knicks need, but IMHO he carries a lot of "system guy" risk for that kind of coin.

I think the issue with Draymond Green for the current Knicks is not to sign him, but to look at his situation and status and ask themselves

1) How can we improve our player evalutions/front office to mine a rotational player value like Green ourselves consistently. Giving the Knicks young cost controlled depth with upside.

2) How can we create a positive and sustainable system of player development to help young players hit their ceiling in terms of their potential.

Getting Green would help only marginally, esp at the max cost. To me, the bigger factor is how the Knicks set themselves up to find Greens all over the place/all the time because they are so ahead of the evaluation/development game over all the other franchises.

For 15 million a year, the expectation should be a matchup proof firebomber who will give you consistency every night as well as the other core intangibles.

If you're going to project opportunity cost on picks

In much of what you post, then you might want to do this when it comes

To this and salary cap opportunity costs down the road[NBA economic BOOM]

Draymond Green is real CULTURE CHANGING player

Matter of fact he has the ability to change the culture of a team

Even moreso than someone like Phil Jackson

Bringing someone like him shows the rest of the league

We truly appreciate and value the proper kind of talent and not the name sake blahzay talents only

You're probably right on where his true value lies but

In most cases every player is overpaid in this league

You have to overpay for the right ones

would carmelo anthinay still be a knickerbocker?