Knicks · Trade #8 for levine or some kind of special player (page 1)

knox and Frank makes me not want to draft a player here.....

I agree, I just don't see 3 more yrs of 50+ loses being good for anybody associated.

knicks1248 wrote:I agree, I just don't see 3 more yrs of 50+ loses being good for anybody associated.

Agreed. Just not sure if we can put together a package for LaVine. Does the 8th pick and both Dallas picks do it?

Okay, so suppose we get LaVine? What does it turn us into? Into what the Bulls are right now? Is it worth it?

Gonna take more than the 8th pick for levine

No, just draft Kira..... they are going to want to much for Lavine

Levine can create unlike are roster. Barret needs to be a 3 he has no explosion and his ball skills bad

What about trading the 8th pick for Buddy Hield or Bogdanovic? I know the 8th will not be enough but a package with it(don't include our 1st next year please). Hield is the most likely player to be dealt but i like Bogdanovic better. They are no stars but they can be the 2nd or 3rd best scorer in the team.

I like Beal also but that will take some serious assets to get him here. Any other possible players thats worth looking at?

knicks1248 wrote:I agree, I just don't see 3 more yrs of 50+ loses being good for anybody associated.

If it were for ONLY the number 8 pick, I’d say go for it. Levine is not the player you see though. He plays stupid and lazy too much.

dwiley20 wrote:knox and Frank makes me not want to draft a player here.....

https://www.basketball-reference.com/tea...

Jason Richardson
Mike Dunleavy
Mickael Pietrus
Andreis Biedrins
Ike Diogu
Patrick O'Bryant
Marco Belinelli
Anthony Randolph

Finally

Steph Curry

Ekpe Udoh

Most of these picks were in the 3 to 11 range.

A team will miss on picks. It happens. Do your best given the time and place, and if it doesn't work out, keep trying. Warriors were picking in the range the Knicks are now. Not exactly but close. Also no key free agent wanted to sign with the Warriors. It was ugly for Golden State for a long time after Nellie Ball.

Does that mean you should never ever trade a first round pick? No, no one is saying that. But usually keeping your first rounder is the best market based decision.

The best arguments to trade a first round pick become

A) At the top of the draft, rookie slotting turns into a middle class contract immediately. Since most picks fail, this is actually a tax on bad teams when they miss.

B) It facilitates getting out of the tax zone ( teams needing others to eat their excess salary) while pushing other teams to reach the cap floor ( teams swallowing excess salary ). Which, combined with the current Veterans Minimum Exception, only aids better teams and punishes teams already struggling.

The value of a first round pick against it's Rookie Scale slotting only normalizes when a teams entire rotation ( not it's entire roster) becomes, at minimum, producing at the league average for Offensive Rating ( which correlates to wins and making the playoffs).

The draft is not the first problem on the list for a perpetually losing team.

The first issue is the GAP between the cap floor and your existing salary for players operating at replacement level ( at minimum) PLUS 120 percent of your rookie slotting as a cap hold. When the league ousted Sam Hinkie, the entire league was told any tanking team operating under the cap floor would never "win" a lottery pick in the top four in the future. Ever again. If you go under the cap floor even just once post Hinkie, your franchise is fucked forever.

You need to IMMEDIATELY maximize the potential offensive rating possible with this gap. For perpetually losing teams, this typically means looking to trade to absorb veteran contracts with some built in sub market inefficiency for more draft choices ( i.e. "Renting Your Cap Space") Perpetually losing teams cannot maintain consistent open cap space year to year without overpaying to market on short term deals for Tier 4/5 free agents. The less likely (rare as fuck) pathway is trying to find a FA/UDFA who offers exponential returns like Jeremy Lin. Jeremy Lin made 762K during Linsanity. But teams have to consider the rule not the exceptions.

You must continue to draft the best you can, you must also maximize your return on getting to cap floor.

Does your projected 8th overall improve your overall offensive rating against the opportunity cost of a "rented" veterans contract for the remaining length of said veterans contract? That's the tipping point for choosing one versus the other.

**

https://www.basketball-reference.com/abo...

The basic building blocks of the Offensive Rating calculation are Individual Total Possessions and Individual Points Produced. The formula for Total Possessions is broken down into four components: Scoring Possessions, Missed FG Possessions, Missed FT Possessions, and Turnovers.

******

Morey opened up about their scouting report on Lin on Michael Lewis’ 2016 book titled “The Undoing Project.” On the book, Morey claimed their model told them that Lin belongs in the top 15 of the draft. However, during this time, Morey still didn’t trust their model completely and passed on him

“He lit up our model,” said Morey. “Our model said take him with, like, the 15th pick in the draft.”

Lin went undrafted in 2010 and spent the 2010-11 season as a fringe player for the Golden State Warriors.

A year later after passing on Lin, the Rockets began measuring the first two steps of basketball players. The result: Lin’s first step was faster than any other basketball player measured. Morey wrestled with the thought on why they passed on Lin.

“He’s incredibly athletic,” said Morey. “But the reality is that every fucking person, including me, thought he was unathletic. And I can’t think of any reason for it other than he was Asian.”

How about something like Knox, D.Smith Jr, Portis (resigned for trade), future Dallas 1st and this year's #8 and 2nd rounder for Lavine and Lauri? No need to take as big a risk on C.Wood and Lavine and RJ can line up with Frank, Mitch and Lauri as a starting five. Stretch 4 would help Mitch, Lavine seems to be a pretty good outside shooter which would work well off of RJ. Frank there to cover for Lavine's defense deficiencies. Randle, Taj, Dotson, Harper, Iggy, Wooten (maybe opt in on Bullock) off the bench?

If Lauri plays to his potential and is healthy - wouldn't this accelerate us to a near playoff team? Do we think someone we would pick at #8 will be a better player than Lavine? I prefer the 2 way players but not sure I see one that fits our timeline and maybe on the trading block soon...

jskinny35 wrote:How about something like Knox, D.Smith Jr, Portis (resigned for trade), future Dallas 1st and this year's #8 and 2nd rounder for Lavine and Lauri? No need to take as big a risk on C.Wood and Lavine and RJ can line up with Frank, Mitch and Lauri as a starting five. Stretch 4 would help Mitch, Lavine seems to be a pretty good outside shooter which would work well off of RJ. Frank there to cover for Lavine's defense deficiencies. Randle, Taj, Dotson, Harper, Iggy, Wooten (maybe opt in on Bullock) off the bench?

If Lauri plays to his potential and is healthy - wouldn't this accelerate us to a near playoff team? Do we think someone we would pick at #8 will be a better player than Lavine? I prefer the 2 way players but not sure I see one that fits our timeline and maybe on the trading block soon...

I would trade the 8th pick plus randle plus DSJr for Lavine and Lauri. At least it makes us more balanced structurally. But the Bulls will see this as too little, and this move does not improve us so radically as to justify throwing in more first rounders.

I really like the idea of trading for Lavine and Laurie but what package can we realistically give for that? Im not crunching any numbers but here is the package im willing to give-

Players: Randle, DSJ and Dot or Iggy plus Portis
Picks: this year's 8th and the 37th, Dallas 1st round next year and our 1st round 2022(top 15 protected)

This will definitely speed up our rebuild and wont drastically hurt our draft future by maintaining a 1st rounder each year moving forward.

A starting line up:

Mitch, Laurie, RJ, Lavine and frank

Bench:

Taj, knox, iggy, pinson, Terry(clippers pick)

I dont know what our cap will look like after this trade but if they can still sign a big free agent, il go hard for FVV, slide frank to the bench.

With the guidance from Thibs we might reach the play off next year and be a top 5 team in the east a year after.

If only its that easy.

Why would Chicago accept Knox (zero value), DSJ (minus value plus they already have Coby White), or Randle (zero value), a future Dallas (likely to be in the 20s) and the 8th pick (when they have the 4th) for LaVine AND Lauri? That would be ridiculous on their part.

Would you trade Lauri and LaVine for Randle?!

smackeddog wrote:Why would Chicago accept Knox (zero value), DSJ (minus value plus they already have Coby White), or Randle (zero value), a future Dallas (likely to be in the 20s) and the 8th pick (when they have the 4th) for LaVine AND Lauri? That would be ridiculous on their part.

Would you trade Lauri and LaVine for Randle?!

Maybe they hate their players as much as we hate ours. Randle is a young consistent 20/10 power forward, something that Lauri may or may never become. LaVine is a dynamic young scorer, who, however, does not help you win lots of games, and there is talk that Chicago does not want to commit a big contract to him. And they get picks in the mix.

My question is why would the NYK want to hinge their future on LaVine? I certainly would not if it means giving up all them future picks.

ESOMKnicks wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Why would Chicago accept Knox (zero value), DSJ (minus value plus they already have Coby White), or Randle (zero value), a future Dallas (likely to be in the 20s) and the 8th pick (when they have the 4th) for LaVine AND Lauri? That would be ridiculous on their part.

Would you trade Lauri and LaVine for Randle?!

Maybe they hate their players as much as we hate ours. Randle is a young consistent 20/10 power forward, something that Lauri may or may never become. LaVine is a dynamic young scorer, who, however, does not help you win lots of games, and there is talk that Chicago does not want to commit a big contract to him. And they get picks in the mix.

My question is why would the NYK want to hinge their future on LaVine? I certainly would not if it means giving up all them future picks.

NO ONE hates their players as much as we hate ours

smackeddog wrote:

NO ONE hates their players as much as we hate ours

And perhaps this is at the root of our whole predicament.

Jimbo5 wrote:I really like the idea of trading for Lavine and Laurie but what package can we realistically give for that? Im not crunching any numbers but here is the package im willing to give-

Players: Randle, DSJ and Dot or Iggy plus Portis
Picks: this year's 8th and the 37th, Dallas 1st round next year and our 1st round 2022(top 15 protected)

This will definitely speed up our rebuild and wont drastically hurt our draft future by maintaining a 1st rounder each year moving forward.

A starting line up:

Mitch, Laurie, RJ, Lavine and frank

Bench:

Taj, knox, iggy, pinson, Terry(clippers pick)

I dont know what our cap will look like after this trade but if they can still sign a big free agent, il go hard for FVV, slide frank to the bench.

With the guidance from Thibs we might reach the play off next year and be a top 5 team in the east a year after.

If only its that easy.

Dot is a good player for the money and knows his role,so I keep him. Randle,dsj,iggy and the 8 might get lavine and laurie imho

ESOMKnicks wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Why would Chicago accept Knox (zero value), DSJ (minus value plus they already have Coby White), or Randle (zero value), a future Dallas (likely to be in the 20s) and the 8th pick (when they have the 4th) for LaVine AND Lauri? That would be ridiculous on their part.

Would you trade Lauri and LaVine for Randle?!

Maybe they hate their players as much as we hate ours. Randle is a young consistent 20/10 power forward, something that Lauri may or may never become. LaVine is a dynamic young scorer, who, however, does not help you win lots of games, and there is talk that Chicago does not want to commit a big contract to him. And they get picks in the mix.

My question is why would the NYK want to hinge their future on LaVine? I certainly would not if it means giving up all them future picks.

One of the top ten posts of all time on this board.