I'm not a big bleacher report fan but they actually have some pretty good trade ideas in this piece. Which would you guys do?? I'd consider a couple of them but i especially like the one with the Bucks.
http://www.chatsports.com/new-york-knick...
newyorker4ever wrote:I'm not a big bleacher report fan but they actually have some pretty good trade ideas in this piece. Which would you guys do?? I'd consider a couple of them but i especially like the one with the Bucks.
http://www.chatsports.com/new-york-knicks/a/Best-Potential-Trade-Scenarios-for-New-York-Knicks-No-4-Pick-in-2015-NBA-Draft-1-11454257http://
What the heck man i paste links on this message board the same darn way i do on other boards but this is the only board that it doesn't work on??
Thanks you both Cryz and Crush i can't seem to figure out what the difference in posting links on here is to the other boards i post on. There's some interesting trade ideas in that piece right?? Do you guys prefer any of them??
At this point, I'd really prefer to just keep the pick and take the guy we want to take.
I'm sort of thinking the Knicks will lean towards Winslow because of his fit in the system. If they like Winslow, I'd just take him at 4.
I could see the Knicks trading down and thinking Winslow or WCS would be available at 7 or 8 and then having a team just ahead of them take their guy. That to me would be the biggest disaster.
We got screwed with the 4th pick. Just take the best guy available there. Trading down will only compound the misfortune of getting the fourth pick.
crzymdups wrote:At this point, I'd really prefer to just keep the pick and take the guy we want to take. I'm sort of thinking the Knicks will lean towards Winslow because of his fit in the system. If they like Winslow, I'd just take him at 4.
I could see the Knicks trading down and thinking Winslow or WCS would be available at 7 or 8 and then having a team just ahead of them take their guy. That to me would be the biggest disaster.
We got screwed with the 4th pick. Just take the best guy available there. Trading down will only compound the misfortune of getting the fourth pick.
Just by looking at Mill's disappointment when hearing the results is quite telling. This team needs talent and the front office know it. the 4th pick doesnt have that franchise potential associated with it, but merely a good piece, but it's only one piece. If the team can make that one piece into multiple good pieces, then that would be good. Thats likely what they will do.
Either unrealistic or not appealing on all of them. the Knicks have failed in trades for 15 years running . They are impulsive and either buy high or sell low. tHey try to circumvent rebuilding every time and it never works. the best thing for the Knicks is to stay in the draft and be aggressive. I don't mind trading the pick in a multi asset trade but for me it would be a case of acquiring additional picks or players on rookie scale deals and the compensation must be very high no settling for half arse trades that we orgasm at
trading down is the worst idea ever... things start to get dicey right at #5 so moving past that point you have to be prepared to pick a guy who's a LOT more iffy than the top guys...
Stein is not a reasonable target... he's about as bad a fit as mudiay with half the impact....
getting a veteran is also pretty bad unless it's superstar talent... it's pretty much making very little use of the cap space we have...
FistOfOakley wrote:trading down is the worst idea ever... things start to get dicey right at #5 so moving past that point you have to be prepared to pick a guy who's a LOT more iffy than the top guys...Stein is not a reasonable target... he's about as bad a fit as mudiay with half the impact....
getting a veteran is also pretty bad unless it's superstar talent... it's pretty much making very little use of the cap space we have...
I'm ok with trading down if I can get a 2016 number 1 pick with low restriction . Problem is I think teams are lumping Mudiay in with the 5-6 guys after pick 3 and won't return the value we need to make a move.
well here's the thing... sitting at #4 you have the opportunity to pick someone who is probably going to be better than anyone else you're going to be trading for... this is not a normal #4 pick... it's a better top 4 than last year's by a country mile and next year's looks to be even worse....
this #4 pick... whoever it is.. would be #1 in next year's draft... so dealing to get back into the 2016 draft is not too enticing to me...
I'd do the Milwaukee trade in a minute if Rus, Towns, and OK4 are gone. I wouldn't use the 17th pick on Tyus Jones though.. I'd probably go Upshaw, Lyles, Dekker, or Grant.
yellowboy90 wrote:I'd do the Milwaukee trade in a minute if Rus, Towns, and OK4 are gone. I wouldn't use the 17th pick on Tyus Jones though.. I'd probably go Upshaw, Lyles, Dekker, or Grant.
Yeah i'm with you in agreeing that the Bucks trade looks to be a good one and we can choose who we want at pick #17 which there will still be plenty of talent left on the board at that pick. With that trade we'd have a pretty nice looking lineup before we even bring in another starter in free agency.
Gallo/Shved/Calderon/free agent/draft pick
K.Middleton/Timmy
Melo
Free agent/draft pick
J.Henson
Pick BPA at #4 and don't look back. At this point, we can't hamstring our future by "triangle fit". If Mudiay has franchise-player level talent, snag him or whomever the BPA is at our pick.
We can always change the system if the players can't adapt.
Lakers will be making our selection. Mark it
Moonangie wrote:Pick BPA at #4 and don't look back. At this point, we can't hamstring our future by "triangle fit". If Mudiay has franchise-player level talent, snag him or whomever the BPA is at our pick.We can always change the system if the players can't adapt.
BINGO!
I don't see anything exciting in any of those trades. Largely journeymen who can't win elsewhere. Once you decide to keep the pick, it becomes a numbers game not a triangle fit game.
Assuming we sign a backcourt prospect at four, we no longer need to be in the market for PG/SGs AND Hardaway becomes expendable for a second, first-rounder.
Charlotte, Miami, and OKC are strapped for cash, have a need to compete more than rebuild, and might listen if their situation was compelling enough.
In Charlotte, Calderon and Early for Stephenson and #9 might start a conversation.
In Miami, a dual transaction, McRoberts and #10 for the JR Smith trade exception and Hardaway might garner interest.
For OKC, the Jr Smith Trade Exception, Hardaway and Early for Novak, Lamb, and #14 could be a door-opener.
The contending teams need FA money and the ability to lose what they experience as bad contracts. The Knicks can absorb a roster spot or to if the payoff is Lyles, Kaminsky, Stein, Looney, Dekker, Turner, BPA within reach at these positions.
That might be a nice early summer haul.
fwk00 wrote:Moonangie wrote:Pick BPA at #4 and don't look back. At this point, we can't hamstring our future by "triangle fit". If Mudiay has franchise-player level talent, snag him or whomever the BPA is at our pick.We can always change the system if the players can't adapt.
BINGO!
I don't see anything exciting in any of those trades. Largely journeymen who can't win elsewhere. Once you decide to keep the pick, it becomes a numbers game not a triangle fit game.
Assuming we sign a backcourt prospect at four, we no longer need to be in the market for PG/SGs AND Hardaway becomes expendable for a second, first-rounder.
Charlotte, Miami, and OKC are strapped for cash, have a need to compete more than rebuild, and might listen if their situation was compelling enough.
In Charlotte, Calderon and Early for Stephenson and #9 might start a conversation.
In Miami, a dual transaction, McRoberts and #10 for the JR Smith trade exception and Hardaway might garner interest.
For OKC, the Jr Smith Trade Exception, Hardaway and Early for Novak, Lamb, and #14 could be a door-opener.
The contending teams need FA money and the ability to lose what they experience as bad contracts. The Knicks can absorb a roster spot or to if the payoff is Lyles, Kaminsky, Stein, Looney, Dekker, Turner, BPA within reach at these positions.
That might be a nice early summer haul.
Ummmmmm what are you talking about saying the player in those trade options are journeymen?? I'm pretty sure not one single player in any of those trades is a journeymen and then you come out with worse trades then any of the ones in the bleacher report article. LOL
fwk00 wrote:Moonangie wrote:Pick BPA at #4 and don't look back. At this point, we can't hamstring our future by "triangle fit". If Mudiay has franchise-player level talent, snag him or whomever the BPA is at our pick.We can always change the system if the players can't adapt.
BINGO!
I don't see anything exciting in any of those trades. Largely journeymen who can't win elsewhere. Once you decide to keep the pick, it becomes a numbers game not a triangle fit game.
Assuming we sign a backcourt prospect at four, we no longer need to be in the market for PG/SGs AND Hardaway becomes expendable for a second, first-rounder.
Charlotte, Miami, and OKC are strapped for cash, have a need to compete more than rebuild, and might listen if their situation was compelling enough.
In Charlotte, Calderon and Early for Stephenson and #9 might start a conversation.
In Miami, a dual transaction, McRoberts and #10 for the JR Smith trade exception and Hardaway might garner interest.
For OKC, the Jr Smith Trade Exception, Hardaway and Early for Novak, Lamb, and #14 could be a door-opener.
The contending teams need FA money and the ability to lose what they experience as bad contracts. The Knicks can absorb a roster spot or to if the payoff is Lyles, Kaminsky, Stein, Looney, Dekker, Turner, BPA within reach at these positions.
That might be a nice early summer haul.
No one's trading lottery picks for our crap. You're super overestimating the value of our TPEs.
newyorker4ever wrote:fwk00 wrote:Moonangie wrote:Pick BPA at #4 and don't look back. At this point, we can't hamstring our future by "triangle fit". If Mudiay has franchise-player level talent, snag him or whomever the BPA is at our pick.We can always change the system if the players can't adapt.
BINGO!
I don't see anything exciting in any of those trades. Largely journeymen who can't win elsewhere. Once you decide to keep the pick, it becomes a numbers game not a triangle fit game.
Assuming we sign a backcourt prospect at four, we no longer need to be in the market for PG/SGs AND Hardaway becomes expendable for a second, first-rounder.
Charlotte, Miami, and OKC are strapped for cash, have a need to compete more than rebuild, and might listen if their situation was compelling enough.
In Charlotte, Calderon and Early for Stephenson and #9 might start a conversation.
In Miami, a dual transaction, McRoberts and #10 for the JR Smith trade exception and Hardaway might garner interest.
For OKC, the Jr Smith Trade Exception, Hardaway and Early for Novak, Lamb, and #14 could be a door-opener.
The contending teams need FA money and the ability to lose what they experience as bad contracts. The Knicks can absorb a roster spot or to if the payoff is Lyles, Kaminsky, Stein, Looney, Dekker, Turner, BPA within reach at these positions.
That might be a nice early summer haul.
Ummmmmm what are you talking about saying the player in those trade options are journeymen?? I'm pretty sure not one single player in any of those trades is a journeymen and then you come out with worse trades then any of the ones in the bleacher report article. LOL
The bleacher report trades are a stretch. milwaukee isn't trading Henson AND Middleton to us. The rest I'm sure are popular with fans who think we just restock the roster and get back to being mediocre.
The trades I propose are edgier, involve risk, and are closer to how business is conducted. Certain teams have otherwise untradeable contracts AND fiscal constraints that put them in very uncomfortable positions. They can choke on that discomfort or talk to one of the few teams who can help. That's a very easy proposition.
So, you pointed out the trades are terrible because of *our* offerings. This is a head-scratcher. Our offerings are cap friendly, save the team acquiring the players and trade exceptions *millions of dollars* and room to sign free agents and players they might not otherwise have the ability to sign.
This mentality that our players stink is part of the problem with these boards. Prig, JR, Shump, Amare, and dozens more were all treated like garbage by a segment of the fans and they're doing just peachy.
the players we acquire, picks aside, are the risky parts of the deals. They are expensive, longer term contracts who can continue to self-destruct OR reinvent their game in NY. That's the tricky part.
MIami, OKC and Charlotte can choke on the players they have or they can have a conversation. WE are in that driver's seat.
out of all the scenarios i like the demarcus cousins the most. he would be a good fit for the triangle and is mobile as well.
Cartman718 wrote:out of all the scenarios i like the demarcus cousins the most. he would be a good fit for the triangle and is mobile as well.
Yeah getting Cousins would be great but i just don't see it happening. I really like the Bucks trade a lot. Getting Middleton and Henson would be unbelievably helpful.
