Knicks had to spend this money ASAP. Randle and Barrett (and possibly Mitch) are coming up due for extensions and the money dries up regardless. The superstars are no longer changing teams via free agency. They make decisions way before and move before getting to free agency. Fournier makes the Knicks better and upgrades the team. With rose and Burks back the offense is much better. Noel was surprising but the defensive anchors are there. So we are marginally improved via free agency with money we had to spend in the next year and have kept the draft pick cupboard full for a big trade as this is the only way to acquire a big name these days.
Please stop making sense.
Knixkik wrote:Knicks had to spend this money ASAP. Randle and Barrett (and possibly Mitch) are coming up due for extensions and the money dries up regardless. The superstars are no longer changing teams via free agency. They make decisions way before and move before getting to free agency. Fournier makes the Knicks better and upgrades the team. With rose and Burks back the offense is much better. Noel was surprising but the defensive anchors are there. So we are marginally improved via free agency with money we had to spend in the next year and have kept the draft pick cupboard full for a big trade as this is the only way to acquire a big name these days.
Thats next season, not this season. Everything is now on the young players developing.
Did Evan Fournier make the Magic better? Did he make the Celtics better? I just don't see how he's an upgrade over Reggie Bullock when he's always injured and plays below average Defense?
But whatever hope you're right man.
They just *had* to spend this money anyway.
Cap "space".
NYKMentality wrote:Did Evan Fournier make the Magic better? Did he make the Celtics better? I just don't see how he's an upgrade over Reggie Bullock when he's always injured and plays below average Defense?
But whatever hope you're right man.
He was a 2nd option on a low level playoff team. Take it for what it’s worth. In Boston he had Covid and came alive in playoffs. Was their second guy.
Knixkik wrote:NYKMentality wrote:Did Evan Fournier make the Magic better? Did he make the Celtics better? I just don't see how he's an upgrade over Reggie Bullock when he's always injured and plays below average Defense?
But whatever hope you're right man.
He was a 2nd option on a low level playoff team. Take it for what its worth. In Boston he had Covid and came alive in playoffs. Was their second guy.
2nd option? How so?
Last year he ranked 5th amongst all Celtics in Points per game, 5th in Assists per game, 9th in Rebounds per game, 10th in FG% and 11th in Player Efficiency Rating.
But yet you wanna blow smoke and tell me he was there "2nd option"?
I could see the plan with resigning our guys but don't understand the doubling our spending to replace Bullock with Fournier...
jskinny35 wrote:I could see the plan with resigning our guys but don't understand the doubling our spending to replace Bullock with Fournier...
Fournier is a much better player. We needed another player who can shoot and create offense. Bullock took the full MLE from another team over 3 years, which many here didn’t believe he would get anywhere near. You take Fournier 10/10 times in this scenario. He’s younger and more dangerous at what matters. You miss the Bullock defense but can add a defensive stopper still with remaining cap space or the over the cap exception.
Knixkik wrote:jskinny35 wrote:I could see the plan with resigning our guys but don't understand the doubling our spending to replace Bullock with Fournier...
Fournier is a much better player. We needed another player who can shoot and create offense. Bullock took the full MLE from another team over 3 years, which many here didn’t believe he would get anywhere near. You take Fournier 10/10 times in this scenario. He’s younger and more dangerous at what matters. You miss the Bullock defense but can add a defensive stopper still with remaining cap space or the over the cap exception.
I wouldn't say Fournier is a MUCH better player. I don't see him adding a lot more wins. He's a step up from JAG. They need more pieces. if I had to choose between Reggie's Bullock and Jackson or Fournier, I would choose the Reggies. He's not even that much younger than Reggie. I'll hold off passing judgement on tonight until things play out, but I'm underwhelmed so far.
Knixkik wrote:jskinny35 wrote:I could see the plan with resigning our guys but don't understand the doubling our spending to replace Bullock with Fournier...
Fournier is a much better player. We needed another player who can shoot and create offense. Bullock took the full MLE from another team over 3 years, which many here didn’t believe he would get anywhere near. You take Fournier 10/10 times in this scenario. He’s younger and more dangerous at what matters. You miss the Bullock defense but can add a defensive stopper still with remaining cap space or the over the cap exception.
I have zero clue what Fournier does on D but I've always thought Bullock D was average at best
BigDaddyG wrote:Knixkik wrote:jskinny35 wrote:I could see the plan with resigning our guys but don't understand the doubling our spending to replace Bullock with Fournier...
Fournier is a much better player. We needed another player who can shoot and create offense. Bullock took the full MLE from another team over 3 years, which many here didn’t believe he would get anywhere near. You take Fournier 10/10 times in this scenario. He’s younger and more dangerous at what matters. You miss the Bullock defense but can add a defensive stopper still with remaining cap space or the over the cap exception.
I wouldn't say Fournier is a MUCH better player. I don't see him adding a lot more wins. He's a step up from JAG. They need more pieces. if I had to choose between Reggie's Bullock and Jackson or Fournier, I would choose the Reggies. He's not even that much younger than Reggie. I'll hold off passing judgement on tonight until things play out, but I'm underwhelmed so far.
Yeah I agree he doesn’t add a lot of wins. He just makes them more dangerous.
Essentially, the Knicks told Thibbs, you wanted these guys (Rose, McBride, and Grimes), well we got them, so go play them and win.
The other aspect of these deals is that Burks’s deal may be tradeable at the deadline to a team needing a third scorer. We might be able to pull another Morris like move and trade Burks for a late first rounder.
TheGame wrote:Essentially, the Knicks told Thibbs, you wanted these guys (Rose, McBride, and Grimes), well we got them, so go play them and win.The other aspect of these deals is that Burks’s deal may be tradeable at the deadline to a team needing a third scorer. We might be able to pull another Morris like move and trade Burks for a late first rounder.
with top 18 protection converting to a post card from San Diego in 5 years?
We’ll definitely know for sure if we simply overachieved or if we have something building in NY.
This strategy is very risky: instead of using your space to get a new starting PG and a new starting SF to improve the team in its weaknesses, we are doubling down on the lovable but imperfect team while slightly improving shooting with Fournier. This is dangerous if you actually overachieved while other rivals actually got stronger to arguably move above us.
Miami is better tonight. Chicago seems improved as well. You already had three teams above you and the team behind you proved to be better than you. Right now only the youth can prove to be the difference maker on this team, and considering our coach, that’s not very likely.
Yes sign four players who are what they are because we need to max out players?
Lonzo was a steal at $21MM and went to a team that in direct competition with us. Fits are time line and two needs.
I would have rather payed him and Holmes. That’s how you improve.
Not signing guys to 3 year deals.
Our best player we still don’t know about, can he perform when the building is packed? Unclear.
Your entire future rests on Obi, IQ, Mitch and RJ developing. If anyone thinks we executed a plan today we did not.
Really finding it hard to believe current roster post today’s signings represent the final core.
Are we not now like most of the league - almost capped out but still cabable of making sign & trade deals?
I’m not clear on when/if today’s signings can be moved - specifically Burks/Noel given they are re-upping with same team. Plus rest of team is on mostly reasonable contracts with some upside players like Toppin or Mitch that could go.
Could still see potential moves for guys like Schroeder (pg), Oubre (defensive/athletic wing) or Turner (spacing / rim protector).
Just can’t fathom this was final plan and we do have some parameters of other deals in the works.
martin wrote:Knixkik wrote:jskinny35 wrote:I could see the plan with resigning our guys but don't understand the doubling our spending to replace Bullock with Fournier...
Fournier is a much better player. We needed another player who can shoot and create offense. Bullock took the full MLE from another team over 3 years, which many here didn’t believe he would get anywhere near. You take Fournier 10/10 times in this scenario. He’s younger and more dangerous at what matters. You miss the Bullock defense but can add a defensive stopper still with remaining cap space or the over the cap exception.
I have zero clue what Fournier does on D but I've always thought Bullock D was average at best
I thought Bullock was pretty solid last year - sometimes very good. Certainly better than Burks and pretty sure better vs Fournier.
This makes me think Burks was signed to be packaged in s/t but maybe Knicks valued the off the bounce fame of Burke’s more — I’m dazed and confused right now.
TheGame wrote:Essentially, the Knicks told Thibbs, you wanted these guys (Rose, McBride, and Grimes), well we got them, so go play them and win.The other aspect of these deals is that Burks’s deal may be tradeable at the deadline to a team needing a third scorer. We might be able to pull another Morris like move and trade Burks for a late first rounder.
Given Re-signed with Knicks can he be moved now or does he fall into same bucket as any free agent who signs with a new team — in terms of when they can be moved?
LivingLegend wrote:martin wrote:Knixkik wrote:jskinny35 wrote:I could see the plan with resigning our guys but don't understand the doubling our spending to replace Bullock with Fournier...
Fournier is a much better player. We needed another player who can shoot and create offense. Bullock took the full MLE from another team over 3 years, which many here didn’t believe he would get anywhere near. You take Fournier 10/10 times in this scenario. He’s younger and more dangerous at what matters. You miss the Bullock defense but can add a defensive stopper still with remaining cap space or the over the cap exception.
I have zero clue what Fournier does on D but I've always thought Bullock D was average at best
I thought Bullock was pretty solid last year - sometimes very good. Certainly better than Burks and pretty sure better vs Fournier.
This makes me think Burks was signed to be packaged in s/t but maybe Knicks valued the off the bounce fame of Burke’s more — I’m dazed and confused right now.
Burks and Fournier bring significantly more to the table offensively than Bullock because they can actually dribble, so I see the logic behind choosing them.
This is underwhelming for sure, but the Knicks feel like the playoff pursuit and winning games is the best way to develop their young rotation and it's hard to argue against the logic that being a good player on a good team is different than being a good player on a bad team. The other side of the coin is that th deals for Fournier, Burks and Noel could be moved for assets or as filler for a star talent if it becomes available.
Knicks had the best defense in the league last season and with only Bullock and Fournier trading places， it seems reasonable that it can continue or even improve with familiarity. A win in the first 10 games counts as much as one in the last， expect the Knicks to play strong out of the gate.
Noel and Burks played their asses off on bargain deals. What signal does it send if we were to ditch them for Oubre and Drummond and leave them hunting vet minimum contracts? #culture
