Knicks · Pacers fire Sale....who are you willing to sacrifice (page 5)
Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
I said earlier, but in case people missed it- Brogdan CANNOT BE TRADED THIS SEASON BECAUSE HE SIGNED A 2 YEAR EXTENSION!
The Pacers have agreed to a two-year, $45-million contract extension for the 6-5 guard. ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski reported the extension was announced by Brogdon’s agent, Austin Brown.The Pacers confirmed the deal Monday night without disclosing terms.
That brings Brogdon to a guaranteed $89.3 million for four years. The extension prevents him from being traded for the next six months, meaning he can't be traded this season.
martin wrote:Jmpasq wrote:martin wrote:Jmpasq wrote:knicks1248 wrote:The Indiana Pacers are increasingly open to trading core players - such as either Domantas Sabonis or Myles Turner, and guard Caris LeVert - as part of a large-scale rebuilding effort, sources told The Athletic's Shams Charania and Bob Kravitz.More to come.
There's at least 2 players i want on their roster Turner or Brogdan..
A rebuild means they will want picks and young players in OBI, IQ, Grimes, Rj, Duece, Mitch, Knox draft picks.
You you can't just offer the worse guys on the knicks and think they will go for it, so who can we sacrifice ?
I wanted them both in the off-season when we could of taken them into cap space. Now to many pieces have to go out to make it work
How? How could this have worked? I don't see this at all.
Brogden makes $21M and Turner is $18M
We had 50 million in cap space (Your not signing Fournier) + Mitch, Knox, Obi, Vildozas contract was tradeable and non-guaranteed. Multiple First Round Draft Picks. It was feasible. Trading for Turner now is a bad idea. The only way I'd do it is if the cost was Noel, Knox, and picks. If we can upgrade the team with only giving a swap of rotation players so be it.
You are suggesting that Indiana would have traded Brogden and Turner for the likes of Noel (sign & trade), Knox and picks?
No thats not what I said. I said right now I would only do a "Turner" trade if it cost the team Noel, Knox, and picks. If it was the offseason I would be willing to part with more because some of the holes could of been plugged by available vets.
Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
Fournier or Randle would have to be traded to even approach the salaries needed.
Jmpasq wrote:Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
Fournier or Randle would have to be traded to even approach the salaries needed.
We only need Turner.
His impact would be as effective as D Rose acquisition last yr
smackeddog wrote:Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
I said earlier, but in case people missed it- Brogdan CANNOT BE TRADED THIS SEASON BECAUSE HE SIGNED A 2 YEAR EXTENSION!
The Pacers have agreed to a two-year, $45-million contract extension for the 6-5 guard. ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski reported the extension was announced by Brogdon’s agent, Austin Brown.The Pacers confirmed the deal Monday night without disclosing terms.
That brings Brogdon to a guaranteed $89.3 million for four years. The extension prevents him from being traded for the next six months, meaning he can't be traded this season.
I missed that. In my head it was the December 10 (Today!) date that was controlling for FA signings.
EwingsGlass wrote:smackeddog wrote:Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
I said earlier, but in case people missed it- Brogdan CANNOT BE TRADED THIS SEASON BECAUSE HE SIGNED A 2 YEAR EXTENSION!
The Pacers have agreed to a two-year, $45-million contract extension for the 6-5 guard. ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski reported the extension was announced by Brogdon’s agent, Austin Brown.The Pacers confirmed the deal Monday night without disclosing terms.
That brings Brogdon to a guaranteed $89.3 million for four years. The extension prevents him from being traded for the next six months, meaning he can't be traded this season.
I missed that. In my head it was the December 10 (Today!) date that was controlling for FA signings.
Erm.. December 15...next week. Both ways I am wrong on Brogdon.
knicks1248 wrote:Jmpasq wrote:Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
Fournier or Randle would have to be traded to even approach the salaries needed.We only need Turner.
His impact would be as effective as D Rose acquisition last yr
“Could be”.
Could we do RJ + picks? If so how many?
Or are we committed to Randle, and if so, what would Obi get us? While RJ has produced people are still evaluating Obi on “potential” so I’d say his value is higher
I would dare say that if the Knicks make ANY trade for a high quality NBA starter, it will have to include one, if not two (depending on who the return player is) of Obi/Barrett/Quickly.
Swishfm3 wrote:I think Knick fans need to come to the realization (and accept) that any trade for Turner will have to include either O. Topping or R. Barrett. There is no way in hell the Pacers are going to accept a package around Mitchell Robinson, Charlotte's "top 18 protected" pick, and Kevin f3ckin Knox.I would dare say that if the Knicks make ANY trade for a high quality NBA starter, it will have to include one, if not two (depending on who the return player is) of Obi/Barrett/Quickly.
Nah, Knox, a pick, and maybe Kemba or our G league team should get us two good pieces. Can we still trade Elf and Frank and get three?
Swishfm3 wrote:I think Knick fans need to come to the realization (and accept) that any trade for Turner will have to include either O. Topping or R. Barrett. There is no way in hell the Pacers are going to accept a package around Mitchell Robinson, Charlotte's "top 18 protected" pick, and Kevin f3ckin Knox.I would dare say that if the Knicks make ANY trade for a high quality NBA starter, it will have to include one, if not two (depending on who the return player is) of Obi/Barrett/Quickly.
I agree that you cannot get Turner for Knox, Robinson and a Top18 protected pick.
That said, I think your analysis is flawed in the other direction.
Turner has the balance of this year and next year on his contract at 17.5mm (plus unlikely incentives). He will want a raise after this contract is up. So, you are buying a 1.5 year rental on a guy likely to test the market.
Barrett, Quickley and Toppin have pretty valuable contracts. I am not really looking to move them, but would want them valued properly.
I think 2 1st rd draft picks and filler is probably Turner's max value. I probably don't trade Toppin for 2 1st rd draft picks. I wouldn't trade Barrett for 2 1st rd draft picks either.
But, a trade for Turner is probably a commitment to Randle as well given -- their age and timelines. That might make Toppin available. But for me, that's Toppin and filler. Call it Toppin, Knox and Kemba and those weird conditional 2nds that are top 55 protected (so the article reads that they got more picks) for Turner.
But I would prefer to use some of the stash of picks we have to pick up Turner. Filler and picks is my choice.
EwingsGlass wrote:smackeddog wrote:Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
I said earlier, but in case people missed it- Brogdan CANNOT BE TRADED THIS SEASON BECAUSE HE SIGNED A 2 YEAR EXTENSION!
The Pacers have agreed to a two-year, $45-million contract extension for the 6-5 guard. ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski reported the extension was announced by Brogdon’s agent, Austin Brown.The Pacers confirmed the deal Monday night without disclosing terms.
That brings Brogdon to a guaranteed $89.3 million for four years. The extension prevents him from being traded for the next six months, meaning he can't be traded this season.
I missed that. In my head it was the December 10 (Today!) date that was controlling for FA signings.
Yeah, I stumbled on it twice by accident, that’s the only reason I ended up remember it!
smackeddog wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:smackeddog wrote:Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
I said earlier, but in case people missed it- Brogdan CANNOT BE TRADED THIS SEASON BECAUSE HE SIGNED A 2 YEAR EXTENSION!
The Pacers have agreed to a two-year, $45-million contract extension for the 6-5 guard. ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski reported the extension was announced by Brogdon’s agent, Austin Brown.The Pacers confirmed the deal Monday night without disclosing terms.
That brings Brogdon to a guaranteed $89.3 million for four years. The extension prevents him from being traded for the next six months, meaning he can't be traded this season.
I missed that. In my head it was the December 10 (Today!) date that was controlling for FA signings.
Yeah, I stumbled on it twice by accident, that’s the only reason I ended up remember it!
Not sure that it matters, but Randle also can't be traded until February.
jskinny35 wrote:Why would anyone trade a 3rd year player that has mostly improved and works hard (RJ) and/or a 2nd year player that has showed potential to be a solid rotation player (Obi, IQ) to surround an ISO-heavy, ball dominant 27 year old PF that is very good but nowhere near excellent? I get the notion of brining in a better player to make Randle the Beta - but Turner is not that and we would be left with Fournier (puke) and Burks (solid but old) as our wings.
I think you understate Myles Turner. His 7'4 wingspan is in line with Mitch and he is a bit more polished both on offense and defense. He is what I hope Mitch Robinson becomes in 5 years.
Putting Myles aside, I agree I wouldn't trade Barrett for him. The question is Toppin -- not because I don't love Toppin but on an allocation of resources basis, will Toppin be utilized the way Turner would? I don't think so. I think he is under-utilized at 12-18 minutes here based on Randle's owning the PF spot for 36+ minutes a night.
SO - unemotionally and affection aside, if you could swap a promising Toppin for 1.5 years of Turner, I think you have to pull that trigger.
More so, putting Turner aside for a moment, I think you have to choose between Randle and Toppin eventually.
EwingsGlass wrote:
Not sure that it matters, but Randle also can't be traded until February.
His 6 months would be after the trade deadline as well - so not until the off season.
MaTT4281 wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:
Not sure that it matters, but Randle also can't be traded until February.His 6 months would be after the trade deadline as well - so not until the off season.
Just looked it up - Randle can't be traded until Feb 3rd. Trade deadline is Feb 10th so that leaves a week :)
knicks1248 wrote:Jmpasq wrote:Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
Fournier or Randle would have to be traded to even approach the salaries needed.We only need Turner.
His impact would be as effective as D Rose acquisition last yr
Turner is better than Mitch overall - so it would probably help if the chemistry is good. That said, we would still need a PG or someone to help Randle not dominate the ball so much. This shouldn't be viewed as a one step move. We need at least three moves in my estimation.
EwingsGlass wrote:jskinny35 wrote:Why would anyone trade a 3rd year player that has mostly improved and works hard (RJ) and/or a 2nd year player that has showed potential to be a solid rotation player (Obi, IQ) to surround an ISO-heavy, ball dominant 27 year old PF that is very good but nowhere near excellent? I get the notion of brining in a better player to make Randle the Beta - but Turner is not that and we would be left with Fournier (puke) and Burks (solid but old) as our wings.I think you understate Myles Turner. His 7'4 wingspan is in line with Mitch and he is a bit more polished both on offense and defense. He is what I hope Mitch Robinson becomes in 5 years.
Putting Myles aside, I agree I wouldn't trade Barrett for him. The question is Toppin -- not because I don't love Toppin but on an allocation of resources basis, will Toppin be utilized the way Turner would? I don't think so. I think he is under-utilized at 12-18 minutes here based on Randle's owning the PF spot for 36+ minutes a night.
SO - unemotionally and affection aside, if you could swap a promising Toppin for 1.5 years of Turner, I think you have to pull that trigger.
More so, putting Turner aside for a moment, I think you have to choose between Randle and Toppin eventually.
You're right that Obi's ability would be wasted here if Randle continues at 36 min per night. Just really hope it doesn't come to that and FO realizes that moving Randle could open up more options for other players (eg RJ, Toppin specifically). We would also likely improve chemistry, ball movement and pace play. I would be all in for Mitch and Randle for Turner but Indy would have to dump Sabonis if they took on Randle. I'd also be willing to try a lateral move for Sabonis as he offers similar production and isn't a ball stopper. Worst case we'd be in a similar position if Sabonis didn't help much.
jskinny35 wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Jmpasq wrote:Knixkik wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:It’s interesting, because on paper, Pacers are better than us IMO. We don’t match up well with them. When healthy, I’d expect them to be much better than us.Salary aside, Barrett is the only player in the starting lineup I wouldn’t trade straight up for the Pacer’s counterpart. Randle vs Sabonis is the only question mark.
But if we could pick up Brogdon and Turner, I dunno. I’d be deep in conversations.
I’d go all in for a brogdon/Turner combo.
C Turner
F Randle
F Barrett
G Fournier or Burks
PG BrogdonThat is a dangerous group if it clicks.
Fournier or Randle would have to be traded to even approach the salaries needed.We only need Turner.
His impact would be as effective as D Rose acquisition last yr
Turner is better than Mitch overall - so it would probably help if the chemistry is good. That said, we would still need a PG or someone to help Randle not dominate the ball so much. This shouldn't be viewed as a one step move. We need at least three moves in my estimation.
In order for that not to happen you would have to hire a new coach.
Have you ever seen THIBS bark at Randle after one of his bone headed turnovers, he's quick to blame the refs or one of his teammates.
Rose, Taj and Randle can do no wrong in THIBS eyes