Nalod wrote:Lilard had abdomional issues last season and they shut him down.
This is what knicks fan do. See a “Star” and how do we get him..
We could have Lillard for a fraction of what Mitchell would have cost. He was shut down because the blazers weren’t making the playoffs and the rest of the season was meaningless so why rush him back from surgery but maybe they should have simply signed Elf to be their point guard/pure shooter
Philc1 wrote:Nalod wrote:Lilard had abdomional issues last season and they shut him down.
This is what knicks fan do. See a “Star” and how do we get him..
We could have Lillard for a fraction of what Mitchell would have cost. He was shut down because the blazers weren’t making the playoffs and the rest of the season was meaningless so why rush him back from surgery but maybe they should have simply signed Elf to be their point guard/pure shooter
Lillard was available?
This is what knicks fan do. See a “Star” and how do we get him..
Really? you assume he could have been had for a fraction?
Martin, can you put an "Elf" emoji for our special PhilC person?
Lillard and McCollum had different games. McCollum was more of an SG, than PG, with a dribble drive. Lillard and Bruson's games are more similar.
LeBron and Kyrie worked because LeBron played the point, and Kyrie focused on mainly being an SG. I dont see Lillard wanting that role. Im guessing he still wants to run an offense. And I dont believe Brunson came to NY to have the ball taken out of his hands.
Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:foosballnick wrote:Philc1 wrote:Damian Lillard will be available next February and probably before that. Not saying give them the Mitchell offer but a couple picks plus Fournier and Obi might get it done
Please explain how bringing in Dame and getting rid of Obi, EF, Picks and Randle (based on you constantly whining here to get rid of him for a bag of rocks) works from a roster perspective.
Im a huge Lillard fan. But the main concern I had with the Mitchell trade was a potential backcourt with two ball dominant guards. Seems like a another case of overlap.
Worked fine with Lillard and CJ McCollum for several years and playoff appearances
Never want Lillard because his best days are numbered. He might already be passed his prime. Mitchell, Brunson and those types are at least young. Need to go 27 and younger or no point in burning assets for such a short window.
GustavBahler wrote:Lillard and McCollum had different games. McCollum was more of an SG, than PG, with a dribble drive. Lillard and Bruson's games are more similar. LeBron and Kyrie worked because LeBron played the point, and Kyrie focused on mainly being an SG. I dont see Lillard wanting that role. Im guessing he still wants to run an offense. And I dont believe Brunson came to NY to have the ball taken out of his hands.
Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:foosballnick wrote:Philc1 wrote:Damian Lillard will be available next February and probably before that. Not saying give them the Mitchell offer but a couple picks plus Fournier and Obi might get it done
Please explain how bringing in Dame and getting rid of Obi, EF, Picks and Randle (based on you constantly whining here to get rid of him for a bag of rocks) works from a roster perspective.
Im a huge Lillard fan. But the main concern I had with the Mitchell trade was a potential backcourt with two ball dominant guards. Seems like a another case of overlap.
Worked fine with Lillard and CJ McCollum for several years and playoff appearances
McCollum is a combo guard who plays a lot of pg. He and Lillard obviously made it work with multiple playoff appearances over several years in a conference that was tougher than the East. Yes Lillard likes the ball in his hands but he has also shown the ability to play off ball and be a spot shooter. He also doesn’t have Mitchell’s concussion history and again he would cost us a fraction of what Mitchell would have cost in trade assets
Philc1 wrote:Yes Lillard likes the ball in his hands but he has also shown the ability to play off ball and be a spot shooter. He also doesn’t have Mitchell’s concussion history and again he would cost us a fraction of what Mitchell would have cost in trade assets
Have the Knicks and the Blazers discussed specific terms of a Lillard trade? Unless you can cite hard facts, this is a pointless purely theoretical discussion, like solving for a formula of a spherical horse in vacuum.
I doubt that our brass would have passed up an opportunity to get Lillard without giving up on RJ and Randle. The fact that a trade like that has not gone down suggests to me that it was never on the table.
You're leaving out what Brunson wants. If he wanted to play that style of offense, he would have stayed in Dallas with Luka. Lillard was still the primary ball handler. He probably wouldnt be in NY. Would likely lead to RJ being moved. Lillard is a great player, but also an over 30 PG. Portland wont be asking for peanuts.
Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Lillard and McCollum had different games. McCollum was more of an SG, than PG, with a dribble drive. Lillard and Bruson's games are more similar. LeBron and Kyrie worked because LeBron played the point, and Kyrie focused on mainly being an SG. I dont see Lillard wanting that role. Im guessing he still wants to run an offense. And I dont believe Brunson came to NY to have the ball taken out of his hands.
Philc1 wrote:GustavBahler wrote:foosballnick wrote:Philc1 wrote:Damian Lillard will be available next February and probably before that. Not saying give them the Mitchell offer but a couple picks plus Fournier and Obi might get it done
Please explain how bringing in Dame and getting rid of Obi, EF, Picks and Randle (based on you constantly whining here to get rid of him for a bag of rocks) works from a roster perspective.
Im a huge Lillard fan. But the main concern I had with the Mitchell trade was a potential backcourt with two ball dominant guards. Seems like a another case of overlap.
Worked fine with Lillard and CJ McCollum for several years and playoff appearances
McCollum is a combo guard who plays a lot of pg. He and Lillard obviously made it work with multiple playoff appearances over several years in a conference that was tougher than the East. Yes Lillard likes the ball in his hands but he has also shown the ability to play off ball and be a spot shooter. He also doesn’t have Mitchell’s concussion history and again he would cost us a fraction of what Mitchell would have cost in trade assets
ESOMKnicks wrote:Philc1 wrote:Yes Lillard likes the ball in his hands but he has also shown the ability to play off ball and be a spot shooter. He also doesn’t have Mitchell’s concussion history and again he would cost us a fraction of what Mitchell would have cost in trade assets
Have the Knicks and the Blazers discussed specific terms of a Lillard trade? Unless you can cite hard facts, this is a pointless purely theoretical discussion, like solving for a formula of a spherical horse in vacuum.
I doubt that our brass would have passed up an opportunity to get Lillard without giving up on RJ and Randle. The fact that a trade like that has not gone down suggests to me that it was never on the table.
Next February Lillard will be available. If Portland is willing to do Lillard for Randle or EF, IQ plus a couple draft picks that’s a no brainer
Philc1 wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:Philc1 wrote:Yes Lillard likes the ball in his hands but he has also shown the ability to play off ball and be a spot shooter. He also doesn’t have Mitchell’s concussion history and again he would cost us a fraction of what Mitchell would have cost in trade assets
Have the Knicks and the Blazers discussed specific terms of a Lillard trade? Unless you can cite hard facts, this is a pointless purely theoretical discussion, like solving for a formula of a spherical horse in vacuum.
I doubt that our brass would have passed up an opportunity to get Lillard without giving up on RJ and Randle. The fact that a trade like that has not gone down suggests to me that it was never on the table.
Next February Lillard will be available. If Portland is willing to do Lillard for Randle or EF, IQ plus a couple draft picks that’s a no brainer
Care to put your continued posting availability on the line for that statement? Seems fair?
Philc1 wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:Philc1 wrote:Yes Lillard likes the ball in his hands but he has also shown the ability to play off ball and be a spot shooter. He also doesn’t have Mitchell’s concussion history and again he would cost us a fraction of what Mitchell would have cost in trade assets
Have the Knicks and the Blazers discussed specific terms of a Lillard trade? Unless you can cite hard facts, this is a pointless purely theoretical discussion, like solving for a formula of a spherical horse in vacuum.
I doubt that our brass would have passed up an opportunity to get Lillard without giving up on RJ and Randle. The fact that a trade like that has not gone down suggests to me that it was never on the table.
Next February Lillard will be available. If Portland is willing to do Lillard for Randle or EF, IQ plus a couple draft picks that’s a no brainer
Thats a Fraction? Oh wait, you don't do math.
And again, his contract and your responses are not rooted in reality.
