I saw this article on trade ideas for Rivers, i like the idea of reuniting him with his dad with the 76ers and giving the knicks a new defensive backcourt player if the knicks have finally clised the door on Frank.
https://dailyknicks.com/2021/02/25/knick...
Sky is blue, grass is green and so is weed
Rivers offers another team the best match in terms of expense and contract.
Knox not far behind.
Frankie is an expensive buy given his lack of playing time.
Bullock and Payton are tougher to move.
---------------------
Three point shooters are at a premium (obvious).
Thybulle would be a nice pick-up (not a 3 point shooter per se).
But mining the league for a here-to-fore underperforming 3 pt shooting prospect works too.
I guess unless we cooking something else, we just release him and let him go as a favor. Not sure we just don’t pick up on waivers someone else as back up.
At the price he costs, why not keep him and coach him up?
I'd prefer to keep him unless he'd prefer to take a bigger role elsewhere. He comes off as pretty supportive in his interviews so if his teammates and coaches like having him around then why not?
TPercy wrote:I'd prefer to keep him unless he'd prefer to take a bigger role elsewhere. He comes off as pretty supportive in his interviews so if his teammates and coaches like having him around then why not?
I kind of agree with this, as long as he is ok with it. His pedigree and leadership are worth it for a a young team like this. Plus there are other pieces (some in the rotation) that I think we can use to upgrade. I like the Porter and Fournier deals in that article. They need to upgrade talent not do talent swaps. I doubt AR would be a deal breaker in those trades.
He’s on a good deal. I would love to package him with say Detroit’s second rounder and move into the late first round officially.
I wonder would Philly consider him
Panos wrote:At the price he costs, why not keep him and coach him up?
How are we coaching him up? He's been in the league several years. He is what he is a mediocre combo guard. If the knicks can somehow get anything for him even a 2nd that's fine.
joec32033 wrote:TPercy wrote:I'd prefer to keep him unless he'd prefer to take a bigger role elsewhere. He comes off as pretty supportive in his interviews so if his teammates and coaches like having him around then why not?
I kind of agree with this, as long as he is ok with it. His pedigree and leadership are worth it for a a young team like this. Plus there are other pieces (some in the rotation) that I think we can use to upgrade. I like the Porter and Fournier deals in that article. They need to upgrade talent not do talent swaps. I doubt AR would be a deal breaker in those trades.
We already have solid veteran leadership on the roster who are also better players like Randle and Bullock.
Easily replaced. 1 good game every 2 weeks.
wargames wrote:He’s on a good deal. I would love to package him with say Detroit’s second rounder and move into the late first round officially.I wonder would Philly consider him
I like this type of idea. I feel like thats realistic.
TPercy wrote:I'd prefer to keep him unless he'd prefer to take a bigger role elsewhere. He comes off as pretty supportive in his interviews so if his teammates and coaches like having him around then why not?
I can see this, but it will only last so long. He's a guy used to being in the rotation his entire career. He's a good teammate and good interview no question, but eventually the enthusiasm will be gone, it's only natural.
so trade him and when Payton or Rose gets hurt and Frank tweaks his groin, which he does with frightening regularity, we have no one.
Trade him so next year, when our back court is exactly who? Quigley is the only one under contract for next year?
Unless he asks for a trade, keep him. There will be enough spot opportunities this year for him, and likely next.
Philc1 wrote:joec32033 wrote:TPercy wrote:I'd prefer to keep him unless he'd prefer to take a bigger role elsewhere. He comes off as pretty supportive in his interviews so if his teammates and coaches like having him around then why not?
I kind of agree with this, as long as he is ok with it. His pedigree and leadership are worth it for a a young team like this. Plus there are other pieces (some in the rotation) that I think we can use to upgrade. I like the Porter and Fournier deals in that article. They need to upgrade talent not do talent swaps. I doubt AR would be a deal breaker in those trades.
We already have solid veteran leadership on the roster who are also better players like Randle and Bullock.
Rivers has a pedigree of being on winning teams, in the playoffs, and experience with big time games/moments. Neither Randle or Bullock have the same. Rivers has experience that our "veterans", exempting Rose, don't have. Bullock, Burks, Rivers are all on the same level. The only reason Rivers doesn't play is he is a PG/SG while Burks and Bullock can play the 3.
Knixkik wrote:TPercy wrote:I'd prefer to keep him unless he'd prefer to take a bigger role elsewhere. He comes off as pretty supportive in his interviews so if his teammates and coaches like having him around then why not?
I can see this, but it will only last so long. He's a guy used to being in the rotation his entire career. He's a good teammate and good interview no question, but eventually the enthusiasm will be gone, it's only natural.
Fair, it’d just be a shame because I really wanted him to thrive here.
joec32033 wrote:Philc1 wrote:joec32033 wrote:TPercy wrote:I'd prefer to keep him unless he'd prefer to take a bigger role elsewhere. He comes off as pretty supportive in his interviews so if his teammates and coaches like having him around then why not?
I kind of agree with this, as long as he is ok with it. His pedigree and leadership are worth it for a a young team like this. Plus there are other pieces (some in the rotation) that I think we can use to upgrade. I like the Porter and Fournier deals in that article. They need to upgrade talent not do talent swaps. I doubt AR would be a deal breaker in those trades.
We already have solid veteran leadership on the roster who are also better players like Randle and Bullock.
Rivers has a pedigree of being on winning teams, in the playoffs, and experience with big time games/moments. Neither Randle or Bullock have the same. Rivers has experience that our "veterans", exempting Rose, don't have. Bullock, Burks, Rivers are all on the same level. The only reason Rivers doesn't play is he is a PG/SG while Burks and Bullock can play the 3.
Yeah this. If you wanna build winning culture then you gotta have winners on your team, regardless of their capacity.
Yeah. I wouldn't actively shop him around. However, if another team comes up with a pick then I would be happy to take it.
martin wrote:Sky is blue, grass is green and so is weed
and now its legal in NJ
joec32033 wrote:Philc1 wrote:joec32033 wrote:TPercy wrote:I'd prefer to keep him unless he'd prefer to take a bigger role elsewhere. He comes off as pretty supportive in his interviews so if his teammates and coaches like having him around then why not?
I kind of agree with this, as long as he is ok with it. His pedigree and leadership are worth it for a a young team like this. Plus there are other pieces (some in the rotation) that I think we can use to upgrade. I like the Porter and Fournier deals in that article. They need to upgrade talent not do talent swaps. I doubt AR would be a deal breaker in those trades.
We already have solid veteran leadership on the roster who are also better players like Randle and Bullock.
Rivers has a pedigree of being on winning teams, in the playoffs, and experience with big time games/moments. Neither Randle or Bullock have the same. Rivers has experience that our "veterans", exempting Rose, don't have. Bullock, Burks, Rivers are all on the same level. The only reason Rivers doesn't play is he is a PG/SG while Burks and Bullock can play the 3.
I’m not sure how valuable that “pedigree of being on winning teams” is if you can’t play effectively on either side of the court
Bullock, Burks, Frank all play the same position as Rivers and are better
Can we just cut him?
His attitude is shit. The only reason he's in the league is because of his last name. He's an inconsistent usually net negative undersized SG. I get that “he plays the right way” but Phil and LB are both gone
