We havent seen Brunson and Fournier on the same squad. Lets say Brunson and Fournier dont click. The FO would probably be looking for help through a trade.
One option which doesnt get mentioned much is putting RJ back at the 2, and looking for help at the 3. If there are some good trade options at the 3, but not the 2.
RJ does a very good job of playing "bully ball" against smaller 2s. Can post them up as well. Averaged 20 ppg against bigger defenders.
If Fournier isnt the answer, RJ gives the FO the flexibilty (now that we have a legit starting PG) of not getting locked in on an expensive fix at SG. Also gives us the size that Boston put to good use in the playoffs
The FO has several options on the roster, if the asking price for Mitchell is too much.
GustavBahler wrote:We havent seen Brunson and Fournier on the same squad. Lets say Brunson and Fournier dont click. The FO would probably be looking for help through a trade. One option which doesnt get mentioned much is putting RJ back at the 2, and looking for help at the 3. If there are some good trade options at the 3, but not the 2.
RJ does a very good job of playing "bully ball" against smaller 2s. Can post them up as well. Averaged 20 ppg against bigger defenders.
If Fournier isnt the answer, RJ gives the FO the flexibilty (now that we have a legit starting PG) of not getting locked in on an expensive fix at SG. Also gives us the size that Boston put to good use in the playoffs
The FO has several options on the roster, if the asking price for Mitchell is too much.
Very good point and I could not agree more. Though I like Donovan Mitchell a lot and bringing home to NY would make for a real feel good story, I do have serious reservations teaming two 6'1" guards in the back court. If the Knicks had not already signed Jalen Brunson, I would be a lot more willing to cough up the haul it would take to get Mitchell.
However, as is stands and as you wisely suggest, the Knicks should wait until someone a forward or bigger guard with appropriate size/length becomes available.
In the meantime, starting Grimes with Brunson seems like a better play to me.
In fact to further mitigate the size/length issue, I would hope that Cam Reddish get a legitimate chance to unseat Grimes in the starting lineup. If Thibs is right and Reddish is not the answer, the Knicks simply default back to Grimes.
I mean, I guess the simple question is whether either of Brunson or Fournier will fight over screens. I mean, in theory either could pick up the ball at half court. I think Fournier’s defensive weaknesses have been documented. Barrett consistently takes the tougher wing assignment. I think you are extremely soft with Brunson/Fournier as your two starting guards. I’m not inclined to give up all our youth and all our picks for Mitchell, but I also don’t think a starting 5 of Brunson/Fournier/Barrett/Randle/Robinson had a net positive plus/minus vs the other teams in the league. Rose/Quickley/Grimes/Toppin/Hart probably nails them out again. If we won 37 games last season with Walker, I’m not sure Brunson solves the lineup problems of who initiates the offense where you have 3 guys who all want to start with the ball in their hands and Fournier who, for a really good 3 point shooter, doesn’t really spread the floor, move without the ball and tends to stand 6 feet from the ball handler hoping for an open look.
I just don’t believe Brunson solves this team.
Im closer to pulling the plug and tanking than letting this nonsense pan out.
I’m not sure what a 2 is in todays positionless nba. But what we need is what Donovan brings and what RJ is working on and what Randle used to do. Be a dependable bucket getter in crunch time, regardless of position.
But what we don’t need is to overpay for d Mitch. I don’t think d Mitch brings us a championship but he does bring credibility to this team. And he will make NY an attractive destination for FAs. He’s a building block that’s key to adding solid players and vet chasing a ring and increasing their career status as a player who made NYC relevant again.
Dmitch is not a position of need but a 4th quarter closer and a zone buster.
Also Dmitch is taller than 6’1. And Brunson snd Dmitch plays bigger than their size. EF for example plays smaller and slower for his size.
blkexec wrote:I’m not sure what a 2 is in todays positionless nba. But what we need is what Donovan brings and what RJ is working on and what Randle used to do. Be a dependable bucket getter in crunch time, regardless of position. But what we don’t need is to overpay for d Mitch. I don’t think d Mitch brings us a championship but he does bring credibility to this team. And he will make NY an attractive destination for FAs. He’s a building block that’s key to adding solid players and vet chasing a ring and increasing their career status as a player who made NYC relevant again.
Dmitch is not a position of need but a 4th quarter closer and a zone buster.
Also Dmitch is taller than 6’1. And Brunson snd Dmitch plays bigger than their size. EF for example plays smaller and slower for his size.
Spida, for all his flaws, is a legit offensive engine. He's a guy who can consistently score at all three levels while maintaining solid efficiency. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers at the rim are better than Randle and RJ's. Those contested midrange jumpers will look a lot better with Spida or JB taking them than Randle. My only concern, aside from giving away too many draft picks, is that having a short backcourt is kind of limiting, especially on the defensive end. It kind of limits the pieces you can bring in and kind of sets the tone for the offensive system the team can play to be successful. Plus, spending nearly $60M on a backcourt, kind of limits the players you'll be able to sign. I'm sure RJ could slide down to the 2, but who would you slot at the three? And would it even matter if RJ is still tasked with guarding the opposing team's biggest wing threat?
The last two roster spots should go to a 6’8” 3 and D guy and a brawny rebounder,
GustavBahler wrote:We havent seen Brunson and Fournier on the same squad. Lets say Brunson and Fournier dont click. The FO would probably be looking for help through a trade. One option which doesnt get mentioned much is putting RJ back at the 2, and looking for help at the 3. If there are some good trade options at the 3, but not the 2.
RJ does a very good job of playing "bully ball" against smaller 2s. Can post them up as well. Averaged 20 ppg against bigger defenders.
If Fournier isnt the answer, RJ gives the FO the flexibilty (now that we have a legit starting PG) of not getting locked in on an expensive fix at SG. Also gives us the size that Boston put to good use in the playoffs
The FO has several options on the roster, if the asking price for Mitchell is too much.
Mitchell should only be an opportunity gain. Our best bet is holding out for a star SF. Lets get someone who moves RJ back to the 2 where he's an impact player.
No but they want a superstar regardless of need.
BigDaddyG wrote:blkexec wrote:I’m not sure what a 2 is in todays positionless nba. But what we need is what Donovan brings and what RJ is working on and what Randle used to do. Be a dependable bucket getter in crunch time, regardless of position. But what we don’t need is to overpay for d Mitch. I don’t think d Mitch brings us a championship but he does bring credibility to this team. And he will make NY an attractive destination for FAs. He’s a building block that’s key to adding solid players and vet chasing a ring and increasing their career status as a player who made NYC relevant again.
Dmitch is not a position of need but a 4th quarter closer and a zone buster.
Also Dmitch is taller than 6’1. And Brunson snd Dmitch plays bigger than their size. EF for example plays smaller and slower for his size.
Spida, for all his flaws, is a legit offensive engine. He's a guy who can consistently score at all three levels while maintaining solid efficiency. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers at the rim are better than Randle and RJ's. Those contested midrange jumpers will look a lot better with Spida or JB taking them than Randle. My only concern, aside from giving away too many draft picks, is that having a short backcourt is kind of limiting, especially on the defensive end. It kind of limits the pieces you can bring in and kind of sets the tone for the offensive system the team can play to be successful. Plus, spending nearly $60M on a backcourt, kind of limits the players you'll be able to sign. I'm sure RJ could slide down to the 2, but who would you slot at the three? And would it even matter if RJ is still tasked with guarding the opposing team's biggest wing threat?
Thats an opportunity that might present itself this season. A 2 way SF, who is also capable of guarding the biggest wing threat. If Fournier is playing well, there doesnt seem to be a need to make any changes to the starting lineup, great.
If Fournier doesnt look like a good fit with the new lineup. The FO can focus exclusively on finding a replacement for Fournier. Promote someone off the bench like Grimes, or Quickley. If they arent ready there is always a trade.
Searching only for the solution at the 2 limits the number of potential candidates for a trade, because they're only looking for 2 guards. Players not big enough to play the 3. Better odds of building a contender if the FO has a larger pool of talent to choose from. Thats the flexibility RJ gives the FO.
Thats why we should be looking for the best SF we can find as well.
GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:blkexec wrote:I’m not sure what a 2 is in todays positionless nba. But what we need is what Donovan brings and what RJ is working on and what Randle used to do. Be a dependable bucket getter in crunch time, regardless of position. But what we don’t need is to overpay for d Mitch. I don’t think d Mitch brings us a championship but he does bring credibility to this team. And he will make NY an attractive destination for FAs. He’s a building block that’s key to adding solid players and vet chasing a ring and increasing their career status as a player who made NYC relevant again.
Dmitch is not a position of need but a 4th quarter closer and a zone buster.
Also Dmitch is taller than 6’1. And Brunson snd Dmitch plays bigger than their size. EF for example plays smaller and slower for his size.
Spida, for all his flaws, is a legit offensive engine. He's a guy who can consistently score at all three levels while maintaining solid efficiency. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers at the rim are better than Randle and RJ's. Those contested midrange jumpers will look a lot better with Spida or JB taking them than Randle. My only concern, aside from giving away too many draft picks, is that having a short backcourt is kind of limiting, especially on the defensive end. It kind of limits the pieces you can bring in and kind of sets the tone for the offensive system the team can play to be successful. Plus, spending nearly $60M on a backcourt, kind of limits the players you'll be able to sign. I'm sure RJ could slide down to the 2, but who would you slot at the three? And would it even matter if RJ is still tasked with guarding the opposing team's biggest wing threat?
Thats an opportunity that might present itself this season. A 2 way SF, who is also capable of guarding the biggest wing threat. If Fournier is playing well, there doesnt seem to be a need to make any changes to the starting lineup, great.
If Fournier doesnt look like a good fit with the new lineup. The FO can focus exclusively on finding a replacement for Fournier. Promote someone off the bench like Grimes, or Quickley. If they arent ready there is always a trade.
Searching only for the solution at the 2 limits the number of potential candidates for a trade, because they're only looking for 2 guards. Players not big enough to play the 3. Better odds of building a contender if the FO has a larger pool of talent to choose from. Thats the flexibility RJ gives the FO.
Thats why we should be looking for the best SF we can find as well.
It's like Wargames said, I don't think they're just focusing on a 2 per se. They want a guy a that the offense can run through on the perimeter. They were chasing Gordan Hayward just two years ago (thankfully that fell flat). I think they just see a star that's available and want to pounce. I don't think it's the right time .to be honest and would prefer if they waited for a better fit. But who else is out there? Masai is going to also violate the Knicks in an OG package, and I don't think OG is that good. Shai? Presto will probably be less fun to deal with than Ainge. It's easy for me to say wait, but I can't think of any appetizing options.
BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:blkexec wrote:I’m not sure what a 2 is in todays positionless nba. But what we need is what Donovan brings and what RJ is working on and what Randle used to do. Be a dependable bucket getter in crunch time, regardless of position. But what we don’t need is to overpay for d Mitch. I don’t think d Mitch brings us a championship but he does bring credibility to this team. And he will make NY an attractive destination for FAs. He’s a building block that’s key to adding solid players and vet chasing a ring and increasing their career status as a player who made NYC relevant again.
Dmitch is not a position of need but a 4th quarter closer and a zone buster.
Also Dmitch is taller than 6’1. And Brunson snd Dmitch plays bigger than their size. EF for example plays smaller and slower for his size.
Spida, for all his flaws, is a legit offensive engine. He's a guy who can consistently score at all three levels while maintaining solid efficiency. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers at the rim are better than Randle and RJ's. Those contested midrange jumpers will look a lot better with Spida or JB taking them than Randle. My only concern, aside from giving away too many draft picks, is that having a short backcourt is kind of limiting, especially on the defensive end. It kind of limits the pieces you can bring in and kind of sets the tone for the offensive system the team can play to be successful. Plus, spending nearly $60M on a backcourt, kind of limits the players you'll be able to sign. I'm sure RJ could slide down to the 2, but who would you slot at the three? And would it even matter if RJ is still tasked with guarding the opposing team's biggest wing threat?
Thats an opportunity that might present itself this season. A 2 way SF, who is also capable of guarding the biggest wing threat. If Fournier is playing well, there doesnt seem to be a need to make any changes to the starting lineup, great.
If Fournier doesnt look like a good fit with the new lineup. The FO can focus exclusively on finding a replacement for Fournier. Promote someone off the bench like Grimes, or Quickley. If they arent ready there is always a trade.
Searching only for the solution at the 2 limits the number of potential candidates for a trade, because they're only looking for 2 guards. Players not big enough to play the 3. Better odds of building a contender if the FO has a larger pool of talent to choose from. Thats the flexibility RJ gives the FO.
Thats why we should be looking for the best SF we can find as well.
It's like Wargames said, I don't think they're just focusing on a 2 per se. They want a guy a that the offense can run through on the perimeter. They were chasing Gordan Hayward just two years ago (thankfully that fell flat). I think they just see a star that's available and want to pounce. I don't think it's the right time .to be honest and would prefer if they waited for a better fit. But who else is out there? Masai is going to also violate the Knicks in an OG package, and I don't think OG is that good. Shai? Presto will probably be less fun to deal with than Ainge. It's easy for me to say wait, but I can't think of any appetizing options.
Not so sure they considered moving RJ back to the 2, if a SF out there looked like a great fit. After all the misfires, I'm a bit weary of hearing "Coming home" on the PA system again. There is an air of inevitability that usually doesnt end well. Not predicting anything.
GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:blkexec wrote:I’m not sure what a 2 is in todays positionless nba. But what we need is what Donovan brings and what RJ is working on and what Randle used to do. Be a dependable bucket getter in crunch time, regardless of position. But what we don’t need is to overpay for d Mitch. I don’t think d Mitch brings us a championship but he does bring credibility to this team. And he will make NY an attractive destination for FAs. He’s a building block that’s key to adding solid players and vet chasing a ring and increasing their career status as a player who made NYC relevant again.
Dmitch is not a position of need but a 4th quarter closer and a zone buster.
Also Dmitch is taller than 6’1. And Brunson snd Dmitch plays bigger than their size. EF for example plays smaller and slower for his size.
Spida, for all his flaws, is a legit offensive engine. He's a guy who can consistently score at all three levels while maintaining solid efficiency. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers at the rim are better than Randle and RJ's. Those contested midrange jumpers will look a lot better with Spida or JB taking them than Randle. My only concern, aside from giving away too many draft picks, is that having a short backcourt is kind of limiting, especially on the defensive end. It kind of limits the pieces you can bring in and kind of sets the tone for the offensive system the team can play to be successful. Plus, spending nearly $60M on a backcourt, kind of limits the players you'll be able to sign. I'm sure RJ could slide down to the 2, but who would you slot at the three? And would it even matter if RJ is still tasked with guarding the opposing team's biggest wing threat?
Thats an opportunity that might present itself this season. A 2 way SF, who is also capable of guarding the biggest wing threat. If Fournier is playing well, there doesnt seem to be a need to make any changes to the starting lineup, great.
If Fournier doesnt look like a good fit with the new lineup. The FO can focus exclusively on finding a replacement for Fournier. Promote someone off the bench like Grimes, or Quickley. If they arent ready there is always a trade.
Searching only for the solution at the 2 limits the number of potential candidates for a trade, because they're only looking for 2 guards. Players not big enough to play the 3. Better odds of building a contender if the FO has a larger pool of talent to choose from. Thats the flexibility RJ gives the FO.
Thats why we should be looking for the best SF we can find as well.
It's like Wargames said, I don't think they're just focusing on a 2 per se. They want a guy a that the offense can run through on the perimeter. They were chasing Gordan Hayward just two years ago (thankfully that fell flat). I think they just see a star that's available and want to pounce. I don't think it's the right time .to be honest and would prefer if they waited for a better fit. But who else is out there? Masai is going to also violate the Knicks in an OG package, and I don't think OG is that good. Shai? Presto will probably be less fun to deal with than Ainge. It's easy for me to say wait, but I can't think of any appetizing options.
Not so sure they considered moving RJ back to the 2, if a SF out there looked like a great fit. After all the misfires, I'm a bit weary of hearing "Coming home" on the PA system again. There is an air of inevitability that usually doesnt end well. Not predicting anything.
Jalen Brunson is coming home 
Writing him off already? Jokes aside, I wouldn't expect much this season if a trade goes through. But I'm willing to give Leon the benefit of the doubt, until it all goes to hell.
BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:blkexec wrote:I’m not sure what a 2 is in todays positionless nba. But what we need is what Donovan brings and what RJ is working on and what Randle used to do. Be a dependable bucket getter in crunch time, regardless of position. But what we don’t need is to overpay for d Mitch. I don’t think d Mitch brings us a championship but he does bring credibility to this team. And he will make NY an attractive destination for FAs. He’s a building block that’s key to adding solid players and vet chasing a ring and increasing their career status as a player who made NYC relevant again.
Dmitch is not a position of need but a 4th quarter closer and a zone buster.
Also Dmitch is taller than 6’1. And Brunson snd Dmitch plays bigger than their size. EF for example plays smaller and slower for his size.
Spida, for all his flaws, is a legit offensive engine. He's a guy who can consistently score at all three levels while maintaining solid efficiency. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if his numbers at the rim are better than Randle and RJ's. Those contested midrange jumpers will look a lot better with Spida or JB taking them than Randle. My only concern, aside from giving away too many draft picks, is that having a short backcourt is kind of limiting, especially on the defensive end. It kind of limits the pieces you can bring in and kind of sets the tone for the offensive system the team can play to be successful. Plus, spending nearly $60M on a backcourt, kind of limits the players you'll be able to sign. I'm sure RJ could slide down to the 2, but who would you slot at the three? And would it even matter if RJ is still tasked with guarding the opposing team's biggest wing threat?
Thats an opportunity that might present itself this season. A 2 way SF, who is also capable of guarding the biggest wing threat. If Fournier is playing well, there doesnt seem to be a need to make any changes to the starting lineup, great.
If Fournier doesnt look like a good fit with the new lineup. The FO can focus exclusively on finding a replacement for Fournier. Promote someone off the bench like Grimes, or Quickley. If they arent ready there is always a trade.
Searching only for the solution at the 2 limits the number of potential candidates for a trade, because they're only looking for 2 guards. Players not big enough to play the 3. Better odds of building a contender if the FO has a larger pool of talent to choose from. Thats the flexibility RJ gives the FO.
Thats why we should be looking for the best SF we can find as well.
It's like Wargames said, I don't think they're just focusing on a 2 per se. They want a guy a that the offense can run through on the perimeter. They were chasing Gordan Hayward just two years ago (thankfully that fell flat). I think they just see a star that's available and want to pounce. I don't think it's the right time .to be honest and would prefer if they waited for a better fit. But who else is out there? Masai is going to also violate the Knicks in an OG package, and I don't think OG is that good. Shai? Presto will probably be less fun to deal with than Ainge. It's easy for me to say wait, but I can't think of any appetizing options.
Not so sure they considered moving RJ back to the 2, if a SF out there looked like a great fit. After all the misfires, I'm a bit weary of hearing "Coming home" on the PA system again. There is an air of inevitability that usually doesnt end well. Not predicting anything.
Jalen Brunson is coming home Writing him off already? Jokes aside, I wouldn't expect much this season if a trade goes through. But I'm willing to give Leon the benefit of the doubt, until it all goes to hell.
Point taken. Brunson is an FA. Its a good deal, no matter where he's from. Dont want to see the Knicks pay too much for a NY product. When there are other alternatives. The NY angle, CAA family, puts more pressure on the FO to close the deal. They've been patient Hope they stay patient.
I don’t believe we need help at the SG position. Moving RJB to SG and starting Obi at the SF position make a lot of sense to me. I feel Obi is athletic enough to be a sf. You have Cam who can play sf as well. RJB, Grimes and Fournier occasionally Quickly. The best core would be.
Obi
Randle
Mitch
RJB
Brunson
This team creates a lot of mismatches and defensively having Obi on the floor makes the team long and athletic. Honesty a lot more fun to watch.
Vmart wrote:I don’t believe we need help at the SG position. Moving RJB to SG and starting Obi at the SF position make a lot of sense to me. I feel Obi is athletic enough to be a sf. You have Cam who can play sf as well. RJB, Grimes and Fournier occasionally Quickly. The best core would be.
Obi
Randle
Mitch
RJB
Brunson This team creates a lot of mismatches and defensively having Obi on the floor makes the team long and athletic. Honesty a lot more fun to watch.
Obi cannot play SF. Its a defensive mishap waiting to happen.
Obi is 6’9” 220-230. That is not PF he is tweener at best. I feel like he is more in the mold of a James Worthy than a PF. I see him creating mismatches on the offensive end as well using this height. If Obi has improved his shooting and handle I don’t see why he wouldn’t e able to play SF and start.
GustavBahler wrote:We havent seen Brunson and Fournier on the same squad. Lets say Brunson and Fournier dont click. The FO would probably be looking for help through a trade. One option which doesnt get mentioned much is putting RJ back at the 2, and looking for help at the 3. If there are some good trade options at the 3, but not the 2.
RJ does a very good job of playing "bully ball" against smaller 2s. Can post them up as well. Averaged 20 ppg against bigger defenders.
If Fournier isnt the answer, RJ gives the FO the flexibilty (now that we have a legit starting PG) of not getting locked in on an expensive fix at SG. Also gives us the size that Boston put to good use in the playoffs
The FO has several options on the roster, if the asking price for Mitchell is too much.
I am sure you are not saying EF and Grimes would be better than DM.
What would you think is too much?
Feel if we trade Obi, Rose, McBride, EF and Roka plus picks, I would be real happy.
Gotta say, may even be okay with RJ in there. Only because it seems as though Grimes can do
so much and the fact RJ will be due for big money soon.
As for SF, who is realistically out there at the level of DM?
Mabye we look at is as a soon to be 26 year old in his prime with a good contract, an allstar with playoff clutch gene who is no doubt better than EF. With a line up of Brunson, DM, RJ, Jules, and MROb your not better with Grimes, IQ, or Obi in starting roles.
Non is better than the guy in front of them. WE may hope for it, but if they do this deal they don’t “feel”, they think.
Now, 2nd units are imnportant and its very imporobable all this depth and picks can be used. It a great luxury to think it and the promise of picks in bulk will become special. It might. It might not. Its why you pay up for proven talent.
Again, RJ is still not close to his ceiling and we have seen what jules is.
We are not sniffing a chip anytime soon either way.
Will it work if we bring in DM? I don’t know. Will he and Brunson unleash each other and RJ/Jules?
Eddy Curry failed not because of Akdridge and noah. Knicks failed on the court.
We don’t know the price do we? Only that Ainge is some legendary badd ass for stealing picks from Nets. Fact is Ainge over played his hand. Not blaming him for Kyrie Flake out, Little Isiah hip, or Gordan Haywoods ankle. Some bad shit happend. He overpaid for Al Horford and could have gone in another directon with that money. That is on him. Brad Stevens did a good job and got them to the finals. Ainge has to take some cred there I suppose.
I know most of us won’t be happy if at the DM price. Im curious what the final roster will be.
HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:We havent seen Brunson and Fournier on the same squad. Lets say Brunson and Fournier dont click. The FO would probably be looking for help through a trade. One option which doesnt get mentioned much is putting RJ back at the 2, and looking for help at the 3. If there are some good trade options at the 3, but not the 2.
RJ does a very good job of playing "bully ball" against smaller 2s. Can post them up as well. Averaged 20 ppg against bigger defenders.
If Fournier isnt the answer, RJ gives the FO the flexibilty (now that we have a legit starting PG) of not getting locked in on an expensive fix at SG. Also gives us the size that Boston put to good use in the playoffs
The FO has several options on the roster, if the asking price for Mitchell is too much.
I am sure you are not saying EF and Grimes would be better than DM.
What would you think is too much?
Feel if we trade Obi, Rose, McBride, EF and Roka plus picks, I would be real happy.
Gotta say, may even be okay with RJ in there. Only because it seems as though Grimes can do
so much and the fact RJ will be due for big money soon.
As for SF, who is realistically out there at the level of DM?
Not statistically better, but maybe a better fit. In Grimes's case, better defense. I get the offensive firepower Mitchell brings, but those few extra PPG come at a big price, and a huge cap hit. We would also be giving up talent and picks as well.
I dont see the urgency to trade for Mitchell, after signing Brunson. Id like to see how Brunson affects chemistry first. See if the cap space can be better used in another way(s).
GustavBahler wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:We havent seen Brunson and Fournier on the same squad. Lets say Brunson and Fournier dont click. The FO would probably be looking for help through a trade. One option which doesnt get mentioned much is putting RJ back at the 2, and looking for help at the 3. If there are some good trade options at the 3, but not the 2.
RJ does a very good job of playing "bully ball" against smaller 2s. Can post them up as well. Averaged 20 ppg against bigger defenders.
If Fournier isnt the answer, RJ gives the FO the flexibilty (now that we have a legit starting PG) of not getting locked in on an expensive fix at SG. Also gives us the size that Boston put to good use in the playoffs
The FO has several options on the roster, if the asking price for Mitchell is too much.
I am sure you are not saying EF and Grimes would be better than DM.
What would you think is too much?
Feel if we trade Obi, Rose, McBride, EF and Roka plus picks, I would be real happy.
Gotta say, may even be okay with RJ in there. Only because it seems as though Grimes can do
so much and the fact RJ will be due for big money soon.
As for SF, who is realistically out there at the level of DM?
Not statistically better, but maybe a better fit. In Grimes's case, better defense. I get the offensive firepower Mitchell brings, but those few extra PPG come at a big price, and a huge cap hit. We would also be giving up talent and picks as well.
I dont see the urgency to trade for Mitchell, after signing Brunson. Id like to see how Brunson affects chemistry first. See if the cap space can be better used in another way(s).
The FO is not urgent to trade DM, The urgency is on Ainge at this point. He’s asking for 7 pick I heard which is crazy. Picks or youths not both.
I think NY has to at least present a valuable offer but they don’t have to cave into ainge demands.
