Zach Braziller of the NY Post is proposing a trade of Obi Toppin, our #11 pick, and some second round picks for the #4 if Jaden Ivey is there.
Interesting trade offer. It really depends on if the Kings see Sabonis as a center or PF. Toppin is a good young PF with the potential to be a 20 point scorer. I personally don't think the Kings bite on this trade if they believe Ivey is special. What do people think about this offer?
Man, I would love to watch a defensive frontcourt of Sabonis and Obi. I challenge the Kings to make that trade!
my own sense based on no facts is that the Kings are probably thinking of someone more like Damian or Gobert
I saw this thrown out on RealGM: Randle, 11, next year's Dallas pick and two pick swaps for #4 and probably Barnes. I 5hink I would do that if Ivey is still on the board.
I personally don't think the Kings bite on this trade if they believe Ivey is special.
Kings just traded Haliburton because they're already loaded at PG with Fox and Mitchell. I don't see them shifting gears now to focus on Ivey.
...but Sacramento is also the one team I can count on to have absolutely no overall plan. So who knows?
No way sac makes that trade. Would need multiple first rounders. I believe it may have to be a 3 team trade that involves #11 going to a team for a win-now player to be sent to Sac as well as 2 future firsts headed to Sac. If Sac wants win-now maybe they like someone such as Brogdon who can play multiple positions providing they get future firsts to eventually trade for more win-now pieces. Or maybe 11 can be moved to Detroit for Grant to be flipped to Sac.
1. Not enough to trade up. Would require additional assets to include IQ
2. Sabonis and Obi play the same position
I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!
Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
smackeddog wrote:I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
hard to argue with the bold... they are a very conservative FO.
fishmike wrote:smackeddog wrote:I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
hard to argue with the bold... they are a very conservative FO.
Hype machine makes us conservative.
But they only in place a few years where Ainge was there 18 years. Not every year was super aggressive. Same for RIley. in fact, he had some dud's as well! But with longevity and success we forget the bad stuff and focus on the results. Leon came on board March of 2020, or 27 months. Not much time for wheeling and dealing. Ainge had some remarkable era defining deals. THis will be Leons third draft. I think we are prime to make a move via trade but will it be era defining? Hindsight will tell us in time.
For now the era is Randle, who became an allNBA player, and now is under our watchful eye to see if he can get that bug out his ass.
From april pressor:
Rose noted nine players on the roster are 24 and under and that the Knicks own 13 draft picks over the next three drafts, including four first-rounders.
I don't know where we going with that but that "era defining" and will take time to unwind. He got perry and aller locked in the basement I guess doing all kinds of "Weird Science" shit cooking up who knows what.
fishmike wrote:smackeddog wrote:I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
hard to argue with the bold... they are a very conservative FO.
Not for me. Last 2 years the FO hasn't had the right opportunity to strike, that's very different than being conservative. They are plodding to an extent but I think it's more calculated than conservative as well.
When you don't have bullets, you can shoot the gun. The Knicks now have some bullets. We shall see where it goes.
if it came down to it, one or the other............To get a deal done for Ivey one of Obi or IQ, which one would you prefer. Not Cam, or Grimes. It hurts to make a deal, but if
The 11, 2 2nds, and say a future top 5 protected Plus one or the other? Sounds rich, but IF the thought is Ivey is a 75% future allstar. Watcha do?
martin wrote:fishmike wrote:smackeddog wrote:I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
hard to argue with the bold... they are a very conservative FO.
Not for me. Last 2 years the FO hasn't had the right opportunity to strike, that's very different than being conservative. They are plodding to an extent but I think it's more calculated than conservative as well.
When you don't have bullets, you can shoot the gun. The Knicks now have some bullets. We shall see where it goes.
50-$60mm in cap space isnt bullets? They didnt attack any impact FAs, they resigned guys and added role players. I have liked their drafts but they have surely played it safe. If that's not conservative I dont know what it is... I actually dont have a problem with it tbh, but I think I am calling it like I see it.
Maybe we trade Fournier or Burks but you knows its gonna be Randle/RJ/Mitch etc. I hope you are right but I got a hard vibe we are running it back next year (and good chance that's the right move)
fishmike wrote:martin wrote:fishmike wrote:smackeddog wrote:I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
hard to argue with the bold... they are a very conservative FO.
Not for me. Last 2 years the FO hasn't had the right opportunity to strike, that's very different than being conservative. They are plodding to an extent but I think it's more calculated than conservative as well.
When you don't have bullets, you can shoot the gun. The Knicks now have some bullets. We shall see where it goes.
50-$60mm in cap space isnt bullets? They didnt attack any impact FAs, they resigned guys and added role players. I have liked their drafts but they have surely played it safe. If that's not conservative I dont know what it is... I actually dont have a problem with it tbh, but I think I am calling it like I see it.Maybe we trade Fournier or Burks but you knows its gonna be Randle/RJ/Mitch etc. I hope you are right but I got a hard vibe we are running it back next year (and good chance that's the right move)
What big Free Agent is targeting a 20 win team? Who were the big names out there and why would they come to the Knicks over where they ended up?
And not for nothing, but the Knicks turned that 20 win season into 4th place in East.
martin wrote:fishmike wrote:martin wrote:fishmike wrote:smackeddog wrote:I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
hard to argue with the bold... they are a very conservative FO.
Not for me. Last 2 years the FO hasn't had the right opportunity to strike, that's very different than being conservative. They are plodding to an extent but I think it's more calculated than conservative as well.
When you don't have bullets, you can shoot the gun. The Knicks now have some bullets. We shall see where it goes.
50-$60mm in cap space isnt bullets? They didnt attack any impact FAs, they resigned guys and added role players. I have liked their drafts but they have surely played it safe. If that's not conservative I dont know what it is... I actually dont have a problem with it tbh, but I think I am calling it like I see it.Maybe we trade Fournier or Burks but you knows its gonna be Randle/RJ/Mitch etc. I hope you are right but I got a hard vibe we are running it back next year (and good chance that's the right move)
What big Free Agent is targeting a 20 win team? Who were the big names out there and why would they come to the Knicks over where they ended up?
And not for nothing, but the Knicks turned that 20 win season into 4th place in East.
Give the Knicks credit for grabbing the 4th seed in the east in a very unique season. Then, they followed that up with the 11th seed the following year. The ball is in the front offices court...
The more I learn about Ivey I think we are best served to not trade up and take one of the available at #11 (J.Davis, Branham, Griffin, Eason) as it would cost too much if we are able to move up. Randle is not long for this team (eg I believe will be gone by deadline next season) so we should try to keep Obi. Not interested in parting with IQ unless it's for a veteran PG.
Also if you watched video when J. Davis matched up with Ivey - he pretty much handled him overall. Not saying Ivey isn't going to be a really good player - but not sure we should lose picks and young players when we are already needing talent at most every position. And J. Davis/Mathurin could also be a really good player. We def need talent in bulk and don't think we should consolidate with parting with the younger players who are still developing.
The top 3 of Chet, Jabari and Pablo look like can't miss prospects.
It's pretty much a crapshoot after top 3 so will trust our FO and hope someone falls... almost always happens.
jskinny35 wrote:The more I learn about Ivey I think we are best served to not trade up and take one of the available at #11 (J.Davis, Branham, Griffin, Eason) as it would cost too much if we are able to move up. Randle is not long for this team (eg I believe will be gone by deadline next season) so we should try to keep Obi. Not interested in parting with IQ unless it's for a veteran PG. Also if you watched video when J. Davis matched up with Ivey - he pretty much handled him overall. Not saying Ivey isn't going to be a really good player - but not sure we should lose picks and young players when we are already needing talent at most every position. And J. Davis/Mathurin could also be a really good player. We def need talent in bulk and don't think we should consolidate with parting with the younger players who are still developing.
The top 3 of Chet, Jabari and Pablo look like can't miss prospects.
It's pretty much a crapshoot after top 3 so will trust our FO and hope someone falls... almost always happens.
I am all for combining and upgrading talent, but I'm not sure Ivey is a sure fire better talent than many of the players available to us at 11.
I personally am really liking Agbaji and hope we get him to drop and we can pick him.
martin wrote:fishmike wrote:smackeddog wrote:I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
hard to argue with the bold... they are a very conservative FO.
Not for me. Last 2 years the FO hasn't had the right opportunity to strike, that's very different than being conservative. They are plodding to an extent but I think it's more calculated than conservative as well.
When you don't have bullets, you can shoot the gun. The Knicks now have some bullets. We shall see where it goes.
You may be right. One thing to keep in mind is that, so far, the FO seems to like going for value in the draft. Which seems to be by trading down and getting multiple picks then filling a need with a player they felt has fallen to them and represented good value.
However, as you mentioned, perhaps they have not seen a true difference maker within grasp who they felt was worth trading up for. Ivey may be one. Or maybe it was because it proved too costly to do so. Which may be the case with Ivey.
HofstraBBall wrote:martin wrote:fishmike wrote:smackeddog wrote:I'm not even entertaining this as it's just going to disappoint me more on draft day when we draft a role player and/or trade down to do so. Rose in danger of becoming Danny Ainge-esq with the 'almost trades' that never seem to happen!Would love it if it happened though- I always think of that quote that GM's/teams are either selling results or hope- we have neither at the moment, so a trade like this gives us clear direction (hope) rather than the 'tread water and hope a star becomes available' (while being a limbo fringe playoff team with late lottery to mid first round picks)
hard to argue with the bold... they are a very conservative FO.
Not for me. Last 2 years the FO hasn't had the right opportunity to strike, that's very different than being conservative. They are plodding to an extent but I think it's more calculated than conservative as well.
When you don't have bullets, you can shoot the gun. The Knicks now have some bullets. We shall see where it goes.
You may be right. One thing to keep in mind is that, so far, the FO seems to like going for value in the draft. Which seems to be by trading down and getting multiple picks then filling a need with a player they felt has fallen to them and represented good value.
However, as you mentioned, perhaps they have not seen a true difference maker within grasp who they felt was worth trading up for. Ivey may be one. Or maybe it was because it proved too costly to do so. Which may be the case with Ivey.
Not for nothing but the Knicks have been the opposite of conservative, but it has been on the trade down track to gather assets. They have been aggressively doing that. They just haven't made the high profiles upward splash.
I think they are going to go hard after Ivey but need to do it in a way to not outbid themselves.
