Knicks · Trade up to #2 pick (page 2)

Ira wrote:Two things.
1) I'd be very surprised if we were able to trade up to #2 without KP being a part of that trade.
2) If we were somehow able to do that, Doncic wouldn't be my target. I rate Ayton, Bagley and Jackson ahead of him.

It would be a non-starter with KP. KP is a better prospect than anyone in the draft. No obvious franchise guys here.

Knixkik wrote:

Ira wrote:Two things.
1) I'd be very surprised if we were able to trade up to #2 without KP being a part of that trade.
2) If we were somehow able to do that, Doncic wouldn't be my target. I rate Ayton, Bagley and Jackson ahead of him.

It would be a non-starter with KP. KP is a better prospect than anyone in the draft. No obvious franchise guys here.

jskinny35 wrote:While I like Frank and don't think we should try to move up... if you really think Luka is the real deal then we should offer Frank and this year's 9 pick. Don't want to give up a future possible top 5 pick and if Luka runs the point as a guard or forward - that leaves Frank probably as a first guard off bench type.

CrushAlot wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:While I like Frank and don't think we should try to move up... if you really think Luka is the real deal then we should offer Frank and this year's 9 pick. Don't want to give up a future possible top 5 pick and if Luka runs the point as a guard or forward - that leaves Frank probably as a first guard off bench type.

I agree with this. I think the Knicks are going to be really bad next year without KP. Giving up that pick would be too much in my opinion. The best thing might be to not make any move or try to buy a second second round pick.

StarksEwing1 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:While I like Frank and don't think we should try to move up... if you really think Luka is the real deal then we should offer Frank and this year's 9 pick. Don't want to give up a future possible top 5 pick and if Luka runs the point as a guard or forward - that leaves Frank probably as a first guard off bench type.

I agree with this. I think the Knicks are going to be really bad next year without KP. Giving up that pick would be too much in my opinion. The best thing might be to not make any move or try to buy a second second round pick.

yeah id rather just stand pat. We are gonna get a good player at 9 anyway

I agree. KP, Frank, and #9 is a decent start to the rebuild. No need to get fancy and overthink it.

Knixkik wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:While I like Frank and don't think we should try to move up... if you really think Luka is the real deal then we should offer Frank and this year's 9 pick. Don't want to give up a future possible top 5 pick and if Luka runs the point as a guard or forward - that leaves Frank probably as a first guard off bench type.

I agree with this. I think the Knicks are going to be really bad next year without KP. Giving up that pick would be too much in my opinion. The best thing might be to not make any move or try to buy a second second round pick.

yeah id rather just stand pat. We are gonna get a good player at 9 anyway

I agree. KP, Frank, and #9 is a decent start to the rebuild. No need to get fancy and overthink it.

We are years away from being good. Everything now is dependent on KP staying healthy and resigning

kingofelpaso wrote:On that note, if he slips to the 2nd pick, would offer the Kings a pick swap with our 9th pick this year and next year’s pick with minimal protection (top 1, maybe) for the 2nd pick to take Luka.

If the Knicks had the 2nd overall pick, would you want them to trade it for the 9th and FrankN? Or the 9th and some pick no one can determine in the future? This trade fails the Mirror Test

Would either the 9th and another pick or the 9th and FrankN be the best offer on the table if the Kings put the pick up for trade? Doubtful.

If the Knicks traded the 2nd overall for Frank N and the 9th or the 9th and some other pick no one can gauge now, people here would be up in arms. Someone would need to get fired.

BigDaddyG wrote:I could get behind this...next year's class is wing dominant, anyway. The only thing that would make me hesitate is that we need a big. But the big man classis expected to be weak next year anyway. But looking at the Philly/Boston trade from last year...I'm not sure that package is enough to move up.

So you'd get behind trading our 1st round pick in next years draft because it's wing dominant even though our biggest need is wing?? Hmmmmmmmmm

CrushAlot wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:While I like Frank and don't think we should try to move up... if you really think Luka is the real deal then we should offer Frank and this year's 9 pick. Don't want to give up a future possible top 5 pick and if Luka runs the point as a guard or forward - that leaves Frank probably as a first guard off bench type.

I agree with this. I think the Knicks are going to be really bad next year without KP. Giving up that pick would be too much in my opinion. The best thing might be to not make any move or try to buy a second second round pick.

The Knicks would be bad next year if they did have KP. People need to stop trying to rush this rebuild and just let it happen cause it's gonna take a few years but if you try to rush it it could end up hurting the rebuild and we definitely don't need that. We need to FINALLY do this thing the right way and take our time with it. We don't need to trade any future draft picks. We need to hit big on this lottery pick and next years and hitting on those two lottery picks and with getting KP back and Frank with a full season and off season under his belt to go with the growth of our young guys and with T.Burke hopefully being a positive for us whether that's as our starting PG, our backup PG or our 6th man (Or Timmy) we'll have a good young team and that's when bigger name free agents will start looking at the Knicks as a free agent destination again and both Noah and C.Lee will be off the books in two years.

newyorker4ever wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:I could get behind this...next year's class is wing dominant, anyway. The only thing that would make me hesitate is that we need a big. But the big man classis expected to be weak next year anyway. But looking at the Philly/Boston trade from last year...I'm not sure that package is enough to move up.

So you'd get behind trading our 1st round pick in next years draft because it's wing dominant even though our biggest need is wing?? Hmmmmmmmmm

Yeah, if it means we get Luka, who also happens to be a wing.

TripleThreat wrote:

kingofelpaso wrote:On that note, if he slips to the 2nd pick, would offer the Kings a pick swap with our 9th pick this year and next year’s pick with minimal protection (top 1, maybe) for the 2nd pick to take Luka.

If the Knicks had the 2nd overall pick, would you want them to trade it for the 9th and FrankN? Or the 9th and some pick no one can determine in the future? This trade fails the Mirror Test

Would either the 9th and another pick or the 9th and FrankN be the best offer on the table if the Kings put the pick up for trade? Doubtful.

If the Knicks traded the 2nd overall for Frank N and the 9th or the 9th and some other pick no one can gauge now, people here would be up in arms. Someone would need to get fired.

I hear this. The thought is that Sacramento would get a high level pick next year whereas they have no pick next year as of now. I would be willing to up the offer to include a future second or even pick 36 to get it done. The other idea would be to take back bad salary (so long as it does not extend beyond Noah’s deal). The problem is that I don’t know that they have any to take back, except maybe Z-bo, who may have had issues with Fizdale in Memphis.

kingofelpaso wrote:

elmaestro33 wrote:I couldn't stomach a trade like this. With KP going to miss most of the upcoming season, we're looking at a top 3 pick in next year's draft. What's the rush? Let's pick at 9 this year and take our tank pick (hopefully top 3) next year. Every year people are saying that one class is going to be stronger than another, so I don't buy that next year is going to be weaker than this year.

It just sucks because if we had tanked properly this season, we'd have a top 3 pick this year instead of people talking about trading our 1st rounder and next year's first rounder for that same top 3 pick.

The thing about talking about picks is that they only opportunities to get a good player. A future pick sounds great, but we have no idea where it is going to land, who will be available, and how those players will pan out.

With this scenario, we know who we’re targeting: Luka. There is tons of evidence to support his ability to win against high level competition. If we have the chance to grab him with a trade, giving away our 2019 pick is well worth it. Luka seems pretty close to a sure thing. If I’m wrong, I’ll seem foolish, but I think he’s worth it.

At least it's not for a washed up vet. Rookie scale, youth, fits with team...I like it. We probs will eff up our lottery position next year, too. We always manage to do that.

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

elmaestro33 wrote:I couldn't stomach a trade like this. With KP going to miss most of the upcoming season, we're looking at a top 3 pick in next year's draft. What's the rush? Let's pick at 9 this year and take our tank pick (hopefully top 3) next year. Every year people are saying that one class is going to be stronger than another, so I don't buy that next year is going to be weaker than this year.

It just sucks because if we had tanked properly this season, we'd have a top 3 pick this year instead of people talking about trading our 1st rounder and next year's first rounder for that same top 3 pick.

Wait, when didn't they?

Exactly, i think we won 5 games from january to april

Right, Knicks were 2nd worst behind PHO within that time period, maybe it was Feb when KP went down. They tanked hard.

18-18 Dec 30. 23-31 when KP went down and sliding south fast

Knicks went 5-8 in their last 13 games. Let's say for the sake of argument we had lost all of those; we would have been tied for 3rd worst record in the league as opposed to finishing with the 9th worst record. Obviously we wouldn't have gone 0-13, but even 2-11 and you're looking at pick 5-6.

elmaestro33 wrote:

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

elmaestro33 wrote:I couldn't stomach a trade like this. With KP going to miss most of the upcoming season, we're looking at a top 3 pick in next year's draft. What's the rush? Let's pick at 9 this year and take our tank pick (hopefully top 3) next year. Every year people are saying that one class is going to be stronger than another, so I don't buy that next year is going to be weaker than this year.

It just sucks because if we had tanked properly this season, we'd have a top 3 pick this year instead of people talking about trading our 1st rounder and next year's first rounder for that same top 3 pick.

Wait, when didn't they?

Exactly, i think we won 5 games from january to april

Right, Knicks were 2nd worst behind PHO within that time period, maybe it was Feb when KP went down. They tanked hard.

18-18 Dec 30. 23-31 when KP went down and sliding south fast

Knicks went 5-8 in their last 13 games. Let's say for the sake of argument we had lost all of those; we would have been tied for 3rd worst record in the league as opposed to finishing with the 9th worst record. Obviously we wouldn't have gone 0-13, but even 2-11 and you're looking at pick 5-6.

Yup. But you can't just look a small window.

Knicks sat vets, played G-league call ups a lot, same with rookies.

Outside of knee capping themselves, what do you suggest?

martin wrote:

elmaestro33 wrote:

martin wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

martin wrote:

elmaestro33 wrote:I couldn't stomach a trade like this. With KP going to miss most of the upcoming season, we're looking at a top 3 pick in next year's draft. What's the rush? Let's pick at 9 this year and take our tank pick (hopefully top 3) next year. Every year people are saying that one class is going to be stronger than another, so I don't buy that next year is going to be weaker than this year.

It just sucks because if we had tanked properly this season, we'd have a top 3 pick this year instead of people talking about trading our 1st rounder and next year's first rounder for that same top 3 pick.

Wait, when didn't they?

Exactly, i think we won 5 games from january to april

Right, Knicks were 2nd worst behind PHO within that time period, maybe it was Feb when KP went down. They tanked hard.

18-18 Dec 30. 23-31 when KP went down and sliding south fast

Knicks went 5-8 in their last 13 games. Let's say for the sake of argument we had lost all of those; we would have been tied for 3rd worst record in the league as opposed to finishing with the 9th worst record. Obviously we wouldn't have gone 0-13, but even 2-11 and you're looking at pick 5-6.

Yup. But you can't just look a small window.

Knicks sat vets, played G-league call ups a lot, same with rookies.

Outside of knee capping themselves, what do you suggest?

I thought that was what we were doing when we started Mudiay lol This organization can't even get self harm right. But yeah, we did everything we could. Unfortunately, you can't put a tank on a player's pride.

As for trading our pick next year, no way I do it in a year KP might miss most of season and will be limited.
If we draft well this year and happen to improve then so be it. ALso the odds even out next draft so we can still end up very well in the draft.

Best player will not be in top 5? Great call, you have 55 other players to defy that. Also you have Donovan Mitchell on the brain.
How brilliant are you?

Nalod wrote:No sense crying over the tank. We had won a lot of games early and even still made up little ground.

As for trading our pick next year, no way I do it in a year KP might miss most of season and will be limited.
If we draft well this year and happen to improve then so be it. ALso the odds even out next draft so we can still end up very well in the draft.

Best player will not be in top 5? Great call, you have 55 other players to defy that. Also you have Donovan Mitchell on the brain.
How brilliant are you?

The new rules are strange. The bottom one or two teams in the league typically don't tank they are just that bad. The teams that do tank fall to the 3-5 range. Those teams are now going to be rewarded with better odds.

meloshouldgo wrote:

Nalod wrote:No sense crying over the tank. We had won a lot of games early and even still made up little ground.

As for trading our pick next year, no way I do it in a year KP might miss most of season and will be limited.
If we draft well this year and happen to improve then so be it. ALso the odds even out next draft so we can still end up very well in the draft.

Best player will not be in top 5? Great call, you have 55 other players to defy that. Also you have Donovan Mitchell on the brain.
How brilliant are you?

The new rules are strange. The bottom one or two teams in the league typically don't tank they are just that bad. The teams that do tank fall to the 3-5 range. Those teams are now going to be rewarded with better odds.

I don't have a problem with it, I still think the odds should vary each year depending on wins. A 20 win team and a 22 team win team are the same. The Knicks won 8 games less than the Suns should the Suns really have a 56% better chance at a top 3 pick. Now if its 15 or 20 wins I get it.

Jmpasq wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

Nalod wrote:No sense crying over the tank. We had won a lot of games early and even still made up little ground.

As for trading our pick next year, no way I do it in a year KP might miss most of season and will be limited.
If we draft well this year and happen to improve then so be it. ALso the odds even out next draft so we can still end up very well in the draft.

Best player will not be in top 5? Great call, you have 55 other players to defy that. Also you have Donovan Mitchell on the brain.
How brilliant are you?

The new rules are strange. The bottom one or two teams in the league typically don't tank they are just that bad. The teams that do tank fall to the 3-5 range. Those teams are now going to be rewarded with better odds.

I don't have a problem with it, I still think the odds should vary each year depending on wins. A 20 win team and a 22 team win team are the same. The Knicks won 8 games less than the Suns should the Suns really have a 56% better chance at a top 3 pick. Now if its 15 or 20 wins I get it.

I was coming at it from the POV of them trying to stop teams from tanking. I think they just encouraged more teamson eth otside looking in to try to get in the bottom 5 now.

kingofelpaso wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

kingofelpaso wrote:On that note, if he slips to the 2nd pick, would offer the Kings a pick swap with our 9th pick this year and next year’s pick with minimal protection (top 1, maybe) for the 2nd pick to take Luka.

If the Knicks had the 2nd overall pick, would you want them to trade it for the 9th and FrankN? Or the 9th and some pick no one can determine in the future? This trade fails the Mirror Test

Would either the 9th and another pick or the 9th and FrankN be the best offer on the table if the Kings put the pick up for trade? Doubtful.

If the Knicks traded the 2nd overall for Frank N and the 9th or the 9th and some other pick no one can gauge now, people here would be up in arms. Someone would need to get fired.

I hear this. The thought is that Sacramento would get a high level pick next year whereas they have no pick next year as of now. I would be willing to up the offer to include a future second or even pick 36 to get it done. The other idea would be to take back bad salary (so long as it does not extend beyond Noah’s deal). The problem is that I don’t know that they have any to take back, except maybe Z-bo, who may have had issues with Fizdale in Memphis.

OK I'll run the scenario for the sake of discussion.

If a trade could occur WITHOUT KP involved, market value for the 2nd overall to the Knicks would cost

- This years 9th overall pick
- Frank N
- Dotson
- Three MORE first round picks, two of which would need to be completely unprotected.

Under the Stepien Rule, a team cannot trade consecutive first round picks if they have no other first round picks in that draft. So to balance it out, Sacto would send a series of 2nds to the Knicks, and the Knicks would be forced to offer first round pick swaps every other year. The other huge problem is pick protections must have full conversion in three season spans under the current CBA. You cannot protect a traded pick indefinitely. Which is why many trades with "phantom" first round picks that are so heavily protected they are unlikely to be realized, convert to a pair of 2nd rounders in the third season from the trade. Even if the Knicks wanted to heavily protect their picks, the conversion problem and the Stepien Rule would force them into pick swap situations and be forced to leave most of those draft assets completely unprotected.

Would you trade the 2nd overall for a 9th overall plus some random pick ( or Frank N) plus a 2nd rounder?

You would not. I won't even go into the typical "Everyone has a right to their viewpoint" churn here. You would not. You are proposing a trade that you would not take yourself if the situation was reversed. And if you took it, and you were the Knicks GM, do you think you would keep your job?

Your assessment of actual market value for the 2nd overall is so far off, you are not even in the same sport anymore. You could literally be talking about cricket right now or high powered ping pong for the Olympics and have that suss out better.

To get the 2nd overall would destroy this team. For the NEXT 15 YEARS. Trading what would be the equivalent of 5 first round picks, two full unprotected with additional pick swaps implied, would gut this team for nearly two decades.

Doncic might be a star. He might not. You are asking the team to bet the next FIFTEEN YEARS on that.

I've given you a realistic assessment of market value. If you can find a trade that fits within that, go for it. But, to be fair, you won't.

Which is why YOU NEVER SEE A TEAM TRADING FROM THE 9th RANGE TO THE 2nd OVERALL RANGE. NEVER.

I give you credit for trying, but sorry, you'll have to keep trying.

TripleThreat wrote:

kingofelpaso wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

kingofelpaso wrote:On that note, if he slips to the 2nd pick, would offer the Kings a pick swap with our 9th pick this year and next year’s pick with minimal protection (top 1, maybe) for the 2nd pick to take Luka.

If the Knicks had the 2nd overall pick, would you want them to trade it for the 9th and FrankN? Or the 9th and some pick no one can determine in the future? This trade fails the Mirror Test

Would either the 9th and another pick or the 9th and FrankN be the best offer on the table if the Kings put the pick up for trade? Doubtful.

If the Knicks traded the 2nd overall for Frank N and the 9th or the 9th and some other pick no one can gauge now, people here would be up in arms. Someone would need to get fired.

I hear this. The thought is that Sacramento would get a high level pick next year whereas they have no pick next year as of now. I would be willing to up the offer to include a future second or even pick 36 to get it done. The other idea would be to take back bad salary (so long as it does not extend beyond Noah’s deal). The problem is that I don’t know that they have any to take back, except maybe Z-bo, who may have had issues with Fizdale in Memphis.

OK I'll run the scenario for the sake of discussion.

If a trade could occur WITHOUT KP involved, market value for the 2nd overall to the Knicks would cost

- This years 9th overall pick
- Frank N
- Dotson
- Three MORE first round picks, two of which would need to be completely unprotected.

Under the Stepien Rule, a team cannot trade consecutive first round picks if they have no other first round picks in that draft. So to balance it out, Sacto would send a series of 2nds to the Knicks, and the Knicks would be forced to offer first round pick swaps every other year. The other huge problem is pick protections must have full conversion in three season spans under the current CBA. You cannot protect a traded pick indefinitely. Which is why many trades with "phantom" first round picks that are so heavily protected they are unlikely to be realized, convert to a pair of 2nd rounders in the third season from the trade. Even if the Knicks wanted to heavily protect their picks, the conversion problem and the Stepien Rule would force them into pick swap situations and be forced to leave most of those draft assets completely unprotected.

Would you trade the 2nd overall for a 9th overall plus some random pick ( or Frank N) plus a 2nd rounder?

You would not. I won't even go into the typical "Everyone has a right to their viewpoint" churn here. You would not. You are proposing a trade that you would not take yourself if the situation was reversed. And if you took it, and you were the Knicks GM, do you think you would keep your job?

Your assessment of actual market value for the 2nd overall is so far off, you are not even in the same sport anymore. You could literally be talking about cricket right now or high powered ping pong for the Olympics and have that suss out better.

To get the 2nd overall would destroy this team. For the NEXT 15 YEARS. Trading what would be the equivalent of 5 first round picks, two full unprotected with additional pick swaps implied, would gut this team for nearly two decades.

Doncic might be a star. He might not. You are asking the team to bet the next FIFTEEN YEARS on that.

I've given you a realistic assessment of market value. If you can find a trade that fits within that, go for it. But, to be fair, you won't.

Which is why YOU NEVER SEE A TEAM TRADING FROM THE 9th RANGE TO THE 2nd OVERALL RANGE. NEVER.

I give you credit for trying, but sorry, you'll have to keep trying.

Put down the shovel, Trip.

Just because something has never been done doesn't mean it won't get done. Furthermore if its never been done then nothing you are speculating about has any veracity. Trading for a desirable pick doesn't mean you need to send 500 picks back - its absurd. Now, having said that, yes there are ownerships that can do and actually do stupid things. But again that doesn't mean its inevitable.

IMO, the Memphis pick is one that *could* move for the following reasons. Gasol isn't getting younger. They still have a fairly solid team that could make a run NOW. And they have a massive albatross contract in Parsons that prevents them from building out their immediate needs. Waiting a year to "blow it up" and having multiple first-rounders then is one way to approach their future.

So the criteria for trading the pick is: 1.) somebody has to take Parsons off their hands and replace that with players who satisfy a need or can be repackaged elsewhere.

The team swallowing the Parsons contract isn't going to be asked for 10 first-rounders - they'll be fiscally bailing out a contender on its knees.

Here the Knicks can offer some nice assets in some combination of Lee, Baker, Thomas, Dotson, and so on.

The second criteria is that the 4 pick be replaced next year, more or less in kind. With KP down, adding Parsons to Noah, and with the Knicks parting with their best veterans, Memphis would be virtually guaranteed a top ten pick. giving them the option next year of a rebuild with a draft based youth movement if that's the way their season goes.

That's a decent haul for Memphis and a reasonable risk for NY. The Parsons contract next year is just money. The team isn't going anywhere. Let Noah and Parsons warm that bench.

Hope that with #4 added to Frankie that there's a long term core of a team in the making. Its not a given.