The next #1 pick that the Knicks have is apparently in 2017 -- right (?)
Why wait around for that, for heaven's sake (!)
It shouldn't be much better than a 15 overall.
What does that get you -- another Jerian Grant (sheeesh) (?)
If (for example) Atlanta wants that #1 pick as part of a deal for Teague . . . whyever not (?)
We can't trade the 2017 pick because we traded the 2016 pick. Thank god, because we probably would've traded it five times over by now.
Earliest pick we can trade is 2018.
Malcolm wrote:The next #1 pick that the Knicks have is apparently in 2017 -- right (?)Why wait around for that, for heaven's sake (!)
It shouldn't be much better than a 15 overall.
What does that get you -- another Jerian Grant (sheeesh) (?)
If (for example) Atlanta wants that #1 pick as part of a deal for Teague . . . whyever not (?)
Ah, the old "trade the pick, because we'll be good when its used and won't need it" number. A Knicks classic.
crzymdups wrote:We can't trade the 2017 pick because we traded the 2016 pick. Thank god, because we probably would've traded it five times over by now.Earliest pick we can trade is 2018.
Right -- thanks.
So have the same conversation, except: What is the 2018 pick really worth (?)
Considering what the franchise has done in the past and their ineptitude, we should NEVER again trade our 1st round pick under any circumstance.
Malcolm wrote:crzymdups wrote:We can't trade the 2017 pick because we traded the 2016 pick. Thank god, because we probably would've traded it five times over by now.Earliest pick we can trade is 2018.
Right -- thanks.So have the same conversation, except: What is the 2018 pick really worth (?)
Pretty sure you can trade it on draft night once you've made the pick, which means you would be drafting for another team, but you can't trade the pick before then...unless you were getting a #1 from somewhere else, I think.
Malcolm wrote:The next #1 pick that the Knicks have is apparently in 2017 -- right (?)Why wait around for that, for heaven's sake (!)
It shouldn't be much better than a 15 overall.
What does that get you -- another Jerian Grant (sheeesh) (?)
If (for example) Atlanta wants that #1 pick as part of a deal for Teague . . . whyever not (?)
We could do something like trade Boston out future on draft night (restricted) for one of their 3(they have 8 and select Denzell Valentine--but why would we do that 
maybe we could buy pick 34 and grab both Felder and Valentine--it would change some dynamics in both unit 1---Valentine and unit 2 Felder.
Im so damn tired of trading picks. Let me put it this way, for 15 years we have traded a shitload of picks....and have gotten worse
crzymdups wrote:We can't trade the 2017 pick because we traded the 2016 pick. Thank god, because we probably would've traded it five times over by now.Earliest pick we can trade is 2018.
Yea rest assure that if Phil bolts the 2018 pick gets traded. The 2017 as well if they could. We will go back to the quick fix route and prolong the losing for another decade+
markvmc wrote:Malcolm wrote:The next #1 pick that the Knicks have is apparently in 2017 -- right (?)Why wait around for that, for heaven's sake (!)
It shouldn't be much better than a 15 overall.
What does that get you -- another Jerian Grant (sheeesh) (?)
If (for example) Atlanta wants that #1 pick as part of a deal for Teague . . . whyever not (?)
Ah, the old "trade the pick, because we'll be good when its used and won't need it" number. A Knicks classic.
lol Knicks fans never learn do they? I just hope Dolan gets it now but probably not
If there's not a great group of prospects, then trade the pick. With Porzingis (as he develops) we will not pick higher than 15.
Next question; for who?
I would not trade it for Teague but I would for Horford (which I would bet we can re-sign)
This enables Horford to finally play his position of PF and Porzingis moves to Center.
Lopez would obviously be included in the deal but I'd want one of their regular point guards (preferably Schroder)
Horford would be a "rich mans" Horace Grant for us. (Ironically Jerian Grant would likely be included in the deal)
gunsnewing wrote:markvmc wrote:Malcolm wrote:The next #1 pick that the Knicks have is apparently in 2017 -- right (?)Why wait around for that, for heaven's sake (!)
It shouldn't be much better than a 15 overall.
What does that get you -- another Jerian Grant (sheeesh) (?)
If (for example) Atlanta wants that #1 pick as part of a deal for Teague . . . whyever not (?)
Ah, the old "trade the pick, because we'll be good when its used and won't need it" number. A Knicks classic.
lol Knicks fans never learn do they? I just hope Dolan gets it now but probably not
You got that right, Guns. Eddy Curry as center? Don't even need to protect those picks. Barnyarni? Well worth it, he'll put us over the edge.
StarksEwing1 wrote:Im so damn tired of trading picks. Let me put it this way, for 15 years we have traded a shitload of picks....and have gotten worse
So we used a 2015 pick and got Jerian Grant at #19 (about the same pick as we will have in 2018).
Blah. What good has he been (?)
It doesn't matter whether we trade a pick or use it . . . it's we get from it that matters.
Malcolm wrote:StarksEwing1 wrote:Im so damn tired of trading picks. Let me put it this way, for 15 years we have traded a shitload of picks....and have gotten worse
So we used a 2015 pick and got Jerian Grant at #19 (about the same pick as we will have in 2018). Blah. What good has he been (?)
It doesn't matter whether we trade a pick or use it . . . it's we get from it that matters.
first of all giving up on a rookie isnt too smart especially since jerian has been misused most of the time. Secondly phil seems to value the draft so thankfully we wont be making yet another dumb trade
You know . . . I really don't get the fascination with draft picks beyond the top 5 or so.
I mean really: what are the numbers on this (?)
Does a number 6 or 7 or 10 overall pick amount to something special often enough . . . that you'd turned down a PROVEN starter (say: Teague, 27 years old with per of 17.0) in order to have the pick instead (?)
Come on, I can't see that (!)
Malcolm wrote:You know . . . I really don't get the fascination with draft picks beyond the top 5 or so.I mean really: what are the numbers on this (?)
Does a number 6 or 7 or 10 overall pick amount to something special often enough . . . that you'd turned down a PROVEN starter (say: Teague, 27 years old with per of 17.0) in order to have the pick instead (?)
Come on, I can't see that (!)
Your statement is ironic because you're overlooking the value of draft picks past number 5, yet you are implying we trade a pick for Jeff Teague, who was the 19th pick.
Malcolm wrote:You know . . . I really don't get the fascination with draft picks beyond the top 5 or so.I mean really: what are the numbers on this (?)
Does a number 6 or 7 or 10 overall pick amount to something special often enough . . . that you'd turned down a PROVEN starter (say: Teague, 27 years old with per of 17.0) in order to have the pick instead (?)
Come on, I can't see that (!)
You have not been a knick fan all that long, right? for those of us who have seen this team trade away tons of picks to get some guy who "cant fail" and have it blow up (see guns and markvmc posts)... draft picks are now cost controlled assets. you do not give those away so easily now.
Allanfan20 wrote:Malcolm wrote:You know . . . I really don't get the fascination with draft picks beyond the top 5 or so.I mean really: what are the numbers on this (?)
Does a number 6 or 7 or 10 overall pick amount to something special often enough . . . that you'd turned down a PROVEN starter (say: Teague, 27 years old with per of 17.0) in order to have the pick instead (?)
Come on, I can't see that (!)
Your statement is ironic because you're overlooking the value of draft picks past number 5, yet you are implying we trade a pick for Jeff Teague, who was the 19th pick.
Show me ALL the numbers . . . not just a coincidental one, please.
I can read what Teague's pick # was just as good as anyone else.
How many, for example, of these are as good as Jeff Teague (?):
2014:
6. Celtics Marcus Smart PG
7. Lakers Julius Randle PF
8. Kings Nik Stauskas SG
9. Hornets Noah Vonleh PF
10. 76ers Elfrid Payton PG
11. Nuggets Doug McDermott SF
12. Magic Dario Saric PF
13. Timberwolves Zach LaVine PG
14. Suns T.J. Warren SF
15. Hawks Adreian Payne PF
16. Bulls Jusuf Nurkic C
17. Celtics James Young SF
18. Suns Tyler Ennis PG
19. Bulls Gary Harris SG
20. Raptors Bruno Caboclo SF
21. Thunder Mitch McGary PF
22. Grizzlies Jordan Adams SG
23. Jazz Rodney Hood SG
24. Hornets Shabazz Napier PG
25. Rockets Clint Capela PF
26. Heat P.J. Hairston SG
27. Suns Bogdan Bogdanovic SG
28. Clippers C.J. Wilcox SG
29. Thunder Josh Huestis PF
30. Spurs Kyle Anderson PF
Malcolm wrote:Allanfan20 wrote:Malcolm wrote:You know . . . I really don't get the fascination with draft picks beyond the top 5 or so.I mean really: what are the numbers on this (?)
Does a number 6 or 7 or 10 overall pick amount to something special often enough . . . that you'd turned down a PROVEN starter (say: Teague, 27 years old with per of 17.0) in order to have the pick instead (?)
Come on, I can't see that (!)
Your statement is ironic because you're overlooking the value of draft picks past number 5, yet you are implying we trade a pick for Jeff Teague, who was the 19th pick.
Show me ALL the numbers . . . not just a coincidental one, please.I can read what Teague's pick # was just as good as anyone else.
How many, for example, of these are as good as Jeff Teague (?):
2014:
6. Celtics Marcus Smart PG
7. Lakers Julius Randle PF
8. Kings Nik Stauskas SG
9. Hornets Noah Vonleh PF
10. 76ers Elfrid Payton PG
11. Nuggets Doug McDermott SF
12. Magic Dario Saric PF
13. Timberwolves Zach LaVine PG
14. Suns T.J. Warren SF
15. Hawks Adreian Payne PF
16. Bulls Jusuf Nurkic C
17. Celtics James Young SF
18. Suns Tyler Ennis PG
19. Bulls Gary Harris SG
20. Raptors Bruno Caboclo SF
21. Thunder Mitch McGary PF
22. Grizzlies Jordan Adams SG
23. Jazz Rodney Hood SG
24. Hornets Shabazz Napier PG
25. Rockets Clint Capela PF
26. Heat P.J. Hairston SG
27. Suns Bogdan Bogdanovic SG
28. Clippers C.J. Wilcox SG
29. Thunder Josh Huestis PF
30. Spurs Kyle Anderson PF
Bruno Caboclo (???)
PER of (-17.64) (Yes . . . that's MINUS 17.64).
