Absolutely nothing untouchable.
Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
Definitely nothing untouchable besides Barrett. Grimes is probably next due to his 3&D floor and ability to be more. Quickley looks the part of a 6th man but is more of a system player. Toppin and Mitch have promise as athletic bigs but are limited in skill set to be consistent difference makers.
BRIGGS wrote:Absolutely nothing untouchable.Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
I hear you but they all have potential and are not extremely young. The FO drafts guys with high floors probably based on how hard they realized it is for guys to make it in NY with low floors high ceilings. It’s a different strategy but it works. Same reason the Knicks have often hit on later picks. I think with all the distractions NYC offers they got to draft gym rats, not kids who feel they can slack off and turn it on during game time.
Anyhow all of the kids age wise should be hitting their grove in a season or two. The main issue this year is that Fournier and Kemba mixed with RJ/Randle/Mitch are not leading to winning basketball. I suppose Fournier needs to dominate the ball more than they thought and I think unfortunately Kemba has lost a step offensively and was never good st defense, just crafty.
The biggest thing the Knicks can do to fix this is make space for Brunson. His game with RJ and Randle could work great. Plus try to add wing depth for the eventual replacement of Fournier and Burks. Then the next step is find a coach who actually does offense and defense but that is still probably not happening until the NBA 23/24 season
I don’t think our front office is going to over react and make everyone available after this loss as bad as it was. I do agree with making a trade for a player that improves our team even if it costs us an asset or two. Four more days until the deadline. We have a btb mon/tues.
I wouldn't say anyone on the roster is untouchable, just that RJ is the toughest player to attach a value to. But we can all agree that RJ is balling in the second half of the season.
BRIGGS wrote:Absolutely nothing untouchable.Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
No they didn't play their best, they played their best for 1 half and that was it. And when you also play against 2 superstars and one who still thinks he is, that is high potential, not a terrible sign.
It's a terrible sign when you can't see the potential and only look at the sample size of 1 game output.
This is called growing. And developing.
BRIGGS wrote:Absolutely nothing untouchable.Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
IQ had a bad game. Time to dump him? Wow??
Grimes could no hit. Need to send him to the GLeague or shall we cut him?
Randle and RJ are not Lebron and AD. Lebron a top 5 Goat and AD will be HOF candidate.
Terrible sign? Please temper the drama if you want to be taken seriously.
BRIGGS wrote:Absolutely nothing untouchable.Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
I agree. I would trade them all in the right deal. There isn't one player on this roster thats off limits.
Jmpasq wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Absolutely nothing untouchable.Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
I agree. I would trade them all in the right deal. There isn't one player on this roster thats off limits.
RJ has always been off limits in my book.
He is showing clutch.
He is exploding to the rim and dunking on people. He is rarely injured, build like a brick shithouse and won’t be 22 until August. By many measures he could still be 4-5 years from his prime. We not contending with excess assets. (Memphis is getting there quickly!)
I wouldn’t trade him straight up for Donovan Mitchell at this point. I Like Spider a lot BTW.
I can handle the uncertainty of a future rather than pay a premium for it. Thats how you stay in mediocrity.
Wussing out never gets you anywhere.
An IQ/Burks & 2nd for Brunson / Klieber makes some sense for Dallas.
MS wrote:An IQ/Burks & 2nd for Brunson / Klieber makes some sense for Dallas.
IQ/Burks/Luka Samanic & Dallas 2023 pick for Bruson/Klieber/Theo Pinson
Given Dallas success this year I doubt they do this now. This has a lot of sign and trade potential in some manner.
Mitch could be a big piece over IQ for them.
Jmpasq wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Absolutely nothing untouchable.Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
I agree. I would trade them all in the right deal. There isn't one player on this roster thats off limits.
Iq is a player that I would not be opposed in using if something could make us better. Iq is a non point guard 38% shooter over 100 games.
BRIGGS wrote:Jmpasq wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Absolutely nothing untouchable.Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
I agree. I would trade them all in the right deal. There isn't one player on this roster thats off limits.
Iq is a player that I would not be opposed in using if something could make us better. Iq is a non point guard 38% shooter over 100 games.
What were his numbers last year before we tried to make him a PG? I’d be curious to see if he has regressed with added PG duties. He’s much better when he plays next to Rose.
I am not worried about IQ. His recent bad shooting is due to him playing PG. I noticed from summer league that once you give him increased responsibility his shooting plummets. Once he is back at what he is good at being a SG off the bench that can use his PG skills as a secondary skill instead of primary he will be fine. However, He does need to stop the Curry 3's and he needs to square up on his shots more. Him and Cam take too many off balanced shots for my liking.
Clean wrote:I am not worried about IQ. His recent bad shooting is due to him playing PG. I noticed from summer league that once you give him increased responsibility his shooting plummets. Once he is back at what he is good at being a SG off the bench that can use his PG skills as a secondary skill instead of primary he will be fine. However, He does need to stop the Curry 3's and he needs to square up on his shots more. Him and Cam take too many off balanced shots for my liking.
Fournier same way, when he squares up and has enough time to set himself, he shoots really well
Clean wrote:I am not worried about IQ. His recent bad shooting is due to him playing PG. I noticed from summer league that once you give him increased responsibility his shooting plummets. Once he is back at what he is good at being a SG off the bench that can use his PG skills as a secondary skill instead of primary he will be fine. However, He does need to stop the Curry 3's and he needs to square up on his shots more. Him and Cam take too many off balanced shots for my liking.
Yeah, I'm sure IQ will figure it out. Going back to his Kentucky days, he showed the ability to adjust season over season. As for the crazy 3s, his potential to make those and be a threat are what makes him intriguing at the PG spot. That gravity is what helps space the floor for Curry and Trae. But he needs bro chill if he ain't hitting.
Jmpasq wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Absolutely nothing untouchable.Mitch prob has the 2?nd spot of value but he’s up for a raise and his offense is dramatically limited limited
If the Knicks can get another better player for parts without giving up draft picks— they should think as out it. If I have to throw in Quickley in a deal—-that’s makes sense— yes fa sure
Also. We lost a game where our two best players played their best— terrible sign
I agree. I would trade them all in the right deal. There isn't one player on this roster thats off limits.
You have to add a player to go with Randle, Fournier and RJ.
depends on what we are trying to build. If we want a contending roster - something that can advance in the play offs- I wonder if we should process this and blow the whole thing up.
But if we're just trying to be the best we can be in the short term, I think Mitch, RJ, IQ, Grimes should be untouchable unless you are getting something really significant back.
martin wrote:MS wrote:An IQ/Burks & 2nd for Brunson / Klieber makes some sense for Dallas.
IQ/Burks/Luka Samanic & Dallas 2023 pick for Bruson/Klieber/Theo Pinson
why do that at this point? brunson will likely play like a$s once he gets here. klieber - where will he play? ahead of obi? theo is a bench warmer, period.
so we are giving up a 1st, plus IQ, plus Burks for Brunson? Pass
franco12 wrote:depends on what we are trying to build. If we want a contending roster - something that can advance in the play offs- I wonder if we should process this and blow the whole thing up.But if we're just trying to be the best we can be in the short term, I think Mitch, RJ, IQ, Grimes should be untouchable unless you are getting something really significant back.
could fox be significant? haliburton is outplaying fox, so not sure that makes sense. sexton could make sense - for kemba plus a 1st and second round pick... works in ESPN trade machine. I would give up IQ for sexton, but not sure how to get the math to work there. sexton could be better than fox, and likely cheaper. only thing is sexton is kyrie-lite in many ways
