Knicks · Randle for Gordan Heyward (page 3)
GustavBahler wrote:Would rather gamble on Draymond Green, if he's healthy, and GS doesnt want to pay him.
His championship experience on a squad that excels at keeping the ball moving would
help the Knicks move closer to contender status. More than Hayward would IMO.
That's an interesting idea as we would improve defensively and play with more pace.
Philc1 wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Panos wrote:Alpha1971 wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Ugh. Let's see if Randle can get back his groove before we shoot ourselves in the foot for the next two seasons.What's Randles groove anyway, 30 percent from three, with a spin move into three defenders where he gets stripped ? Or on a overly difficult move he complains to the ref he doesn't get fouled ? Even prime Randle was vexing. Then what you want his wife to complain about bloggers or how the garden boos her husband ? Or want to see Randle heckled after a bad fee games ? It's time he goes,
Time out. Agree that last year and three years ago Randle was a minus on the court. However, let's not pretend that the year before last that he was anything short of amazing. He was doing everything, hitting threes, setting up teammates, and playing tough D.
Exactly.
Times two.
Randle has made the playoffs once ever
This is the kind of narrow view response that makes the hate so clear.
Let me ask you, who did you have in mind to replace Randle that has made the playoffs on a regular basis? Since that seems such an important factor for you. It's always easy to say get rid of this guy because he has not won a chip. But pretty ignorant to then suggest a guy that has played for a second be the one to replace him. Which is a lot of what is going on around here. In the real world, intelligent suggestions are not one sided without providing a complete solution.
GustavBahler wrote:Would rather gamble on Draymond Green, if he's healthy, and GS doesnt want to pay him.
His championship experience on a squad that excels at keeping the ball moving would
help the Knicks move closer to contender status. More than Hayward would IMO.
Did you see how good DG looked without Curry and Thompson?
jskinny35 wrote:gradyandrew wrote:jskinny35 wrote:martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:TheGame wrote:If Charlotte gave us a protected 1st round pick too with Heyward, I would do the trade. I have lost all confidence in Randle. He is too turnover prone and just does not seem to be able to handle the pressure of playing in NY. Trade him, move Heyward to the bench and start Obi. Well plus we get another 1st round pick.I'm down for this. I don't think Charlotte gives up first rounder though.
They ASK for a 1st rounder
You think they would take one of those protected first rounders we just landed at the draft? Hate to give up one of our 1st rounders despite my desire to relocate Randle asap.
What's the downside risk of waiting until the trade deadline to do a deal like this?
The downside could be several things...
Worst Case
Randle implodes during the season and he becomes completely untradeable (last season's behaviors suggest this is possible). We are now stuck with 4 years of a player and end up having to buy him out. We have also wasted another season despite knowing the unlikely probability that Randle would "turn it around" after the previous 2 out of 3 seasons of poor play.Likely Case
Randle doesn't implode but plays poorly - this negatively impacts team performance and his trade value. In the meantime - we still only have 12 minutes for Obi and our young players that like to push the pace are frustrated. Tension and playing time come to a head with young players - some are moved unnecessarily.Possible Case
Randle plays decently but with continued ball dominant/ISO style of play and slow pacing - as a result we underachieve and since we can't trade Randle we end up trading young players to compensate for Thibs "win now" approach.Best Case
Randle matures overnight (despite past), commits to D'Antoni's "7 Seconds or Less" offensive style, and improves both shot selection, efficiency and defensive consistency. As a result we overachieve and hope the maturity and consistency remain for the next 3 seasons.
I think in terms of probability and just don't see many likely scenarios where Randle being here the next 4 seasons will serve the best interest of the team. He's not new to the NBA and it's very hard to change patterns/habits you've worked on your entire life. This is not asking him to develop and outside shot as he gets older. Asking him to defer, change his shot selection, not pout when things don't go his way, not hold the ball, etc... it's a lot to ask of any player IMO.So I think realizing that we have other options and making a lateral move is the way to go asap.
Maybe a different question would be - what's really the risk if we moved Randle immediately?
Randle hasn't show leadership skills that are invaluable - we have RJ and Brunson who we want to handle the ball more anyway
We play at the slowest pace despite having some decent athletically talented young players
Adding Brunson and allowing RJ more touches can minimize (or possibly) replace the lost points and increase ball movement
We can finally see if Obi is a role player or more. We could offer Cam spot minutes at the 4 as well. Hart/Sims could offer minutes
If I'm wrong and we completely regress we will have played/developed the young players and obtain a much better draft pick in a good one
You're "Possible Case" really should be marked as the "Likely Case". At a minimum - Randle has always played "Decently" and 2 years ago he played at a very high level. NY Fans are on his case mainly due to expectations. They put him on a pedestal and expect him to be the Shining example of a Leader and when that does not happen - obsessively pick on his flaws. It has happened to almost every Knick player who was traded for or signed to be the "Guy". Knick fans obsessively watch every possession, every facial expression, even study body language to fuel their views that a player like Randle needs to be shipped out. Fact is that Randle is a "B" level player, and paid as a B level player....on a team that has been devoid of any "A" level talent. Randle is a rugged player who is pretty much always available and plays with a chip on his shoulder. Pair Randle with Curry, Ja, Doncic, Young.....how's he looking then? As many do here, I love Obi for his energy and effort. But he is still pretty much an unknown.
I see many here who want to dump Randle purely for Yoots. Do you don't dump Randle for a bag of beans in order to make room for a pretty much unknown factor? Let's draw a comparison. If the Atlanta Hawks gave away John Collins for nothing to make room and start Jalen Johnson would that be a sound Front Office move?
HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Would rather gamble on Draymond Green, if he's healthy, and GS doesnt want to pay him.
His championship experience on a squad that excels at keeping the ball moving would
help the Knicks move closer to contender status. More than Hayward would IMO.Did you see how good DG looked without Curry and Thompson?
Whoa, so your saying that Curry and Thompson, make Dray look good?
Nalod wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Would rather gamble on Draymond Green, if he's healthy, and GS doesnt want to pay him.
His championship experience on a squad that excels at keeping the ball moving would
help the Knicks move closer to contender status. More than Hayward would IMO.Did you see how good DG looked without Curry and Thompson?
Whoa, so your saying that Curry and Thompson, make Dray look good?
They would make Eddy Curry look good.
Although Phil is right DG>GH.
But I'm sure he has factored in the possibility DG would leave GS for the Knivks
Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:So haters need a whipping boy….Payton left and then it was Randle…if Randle plays well who is next in line? Fournier? Or if Brunson starts slow. Or anyone….Call it whatever you want. Hate? Ok. Last I checked Elf wasn’t even on an nba roster after barely being a 12th man in Phoenix last season
The criticisms of Randle are absolutely fair. He’s a ball stopper with a very bad contract who has yet to adjust his game to be more of an off ball player. I’d love to eat crow about Randle next season I hope he proves me wrong because it means we are a 4-5 seed by January but I don’t see it happening
In the modern parlance I would ascribe the term "hate" -- obsessive, constant, and narrow criticism without acknowledging positives. When virtually every thread turns into "I hate Randle trade Randle for ball sweat." When rather than pull for one's team, the preference is to trash your last all star. If being a 'homer" is the converse of that then gladly.
Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:So haters need a whipping boy….Payton left and then it was Randle…if Randle plays well who is next in line? Fournier? Or if Brunson starts slow. Or anyone….Call it whatever you want. Hate? Ok. Last I checked Elf wasn’t even on an nba roster after barely being a 12th man in Phoenix last season
The criticisms of Randle are absolutely fair. He’s a ball stopper with a very bad contract who has yet to adjust his game to be more of an off ball player. I’d love to eat crow about Randle next season I hope he proves me wrong because it means we are a 4-5 seed by January but I don’t see it happening
Surprised the coughing of black feathers has not clued you to how much crow you have eaten with your daft responses.
foosballnick wrote:jskinny35 wrote:gradyandrew wrote:jskinny35 wrote:martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:TheGame wrote:If Charlotte gave us a protected 1st round pick too with Heyward, I would do the trade. I have lost all confidence in Randle. He is too turnover prone and just does not seem to be able to handle the pressure of playing in NY. Trade him, move Heyward to the bench and start Obi. Well plus we get another 1st round pick.I'm down for this. I don't think Charlotte gives up first rounder though.
They ASK for a 1st rounder
You think they would take one of those protected first rounders we just landed at the draft? Hate to give up one of our 1st rounders despite my desire to relocate Randle asap.
What's the downside risk of waiting until the trade deadline to do a deal like this?
The downside could be several things...
Worst Case
Randle implodes during the season and he becomes completely untradeable (last season's behaviors suggest this is possible). We are now stuck with 4 years of a player and end up having to buy him out. We have also wasted another season despite knowing the unlikely probability that Randle would "turn it around" after the previous 2 out of 3 seasons of poor play.Likely Case
Randle doesn't implode but plays poorly - this negatively impacts team performance and his trade value. In the meantime - we still only have 12 minutes for Obi and our young players that like to push the pace are frustrated. Tension and playing time come to a head with young players - some are moved unnecessarily.Possible Case
Randle plays decently but with continued ball dominant/ISO style of play and slow pacing - as a result we underachieve and since we can't trade Randle we end up trading young players to compensate for Thibs "win now" approach.Best Case
Randle matures overnight (despite past), commits to D'Antoni's "7 Seconds or Less" offensive style, and improves both shot selection, efficiency and defensive consistency. As a result we overachieve and hope the maturity and consistency remain for the next 3 seasons.
I think in terms of probability and just don't see many likely scenarios where Randle being here the next 4 seasons will serve the best interest of the team. He's not new to the NBA and it's very hard to change patterns/habits you've worked on your entire life. This is not asking him to develop and outside shot as he gets older. Asking him to defer, change his shot selection, not pout when things don't go his way, not hold the ball, etc... it's a lot to ask of any player IMO.So I think realizing that we have other options and making a lateral move is the way to go asap.
Maybe a different question would be - what's really the risk if we moved Randle immediately?
Randle hasn't show leadership skills that are invaluable - we have RJ and Brunson who we want to handle the ball more anyway
We play at the slowest pace despite having some decent athletically talented young players
Adding Brunson and allowing RJ more touches can minimize (or possibly) replace the lost points and increase ball movement
We can finally see if Obi is a role player or more. We could offer Cam spot minutes at the 4 as well. Hart/Sims could offer minutes
If I'm wrong and we completely regress we will have played/developed the young players and obtain a much better draft pick in a good oneYou're "Possible Case" really should be marked as the "Likely Case". At a minimum - Randle has always played "Decently" and 2 years ago he played at a very high level. NY Fans are on his case mainly due to expectations. They put him on a pedestal and expect him to be the Shining example of a Leader and when that does not happen - obsessively pick on his flaws. It has happened to almost every Knick player who was traded for or signed to be the "Guy". Knick fans obsessively watch every possession, every facial expression, even study body language to fuel their views that a player like Randle needs to be shipped out. Fact is that Randle is a "B" level player, and paid as a B level player....on a team that has been devoid of any "A" level talent. Randle is a rugged player who is pretty much always available and plays with a chip on his shoulder. Pair Randle with Curry, Ja, Doncic, Young.....how's he looking then? As many do here, I love Obi for his energy and effort. But he is still pretty much an unknown.
I see many here who want to dump Randle purely for Yoots. Do you don't dump Randle for a bag of beans in order to make room for a pretty much unknown factor? Let's draw a comparison. If the Atlanta Hawks gave away John Collins for nothing to make room and start Jalen Johnson would that be a sound Front Office move?
I'm not trying to knock Randle's abilities and I respect he works hard and comes to camp in good shape. I feel his play style is somewhat outdated for the current NBA as he's not efficient enough to hold the ball too long. I never saw him as an A level player - even in his stellar season the warts were there (as was my criticism and suggestions to sell high).
So now the hope is he can take a step back and defer to a younger but solid PG (Brunson) and allow RJ to take another step forward. I seriously doubt he will do this and even when he was at his best - he is simply a very good player that won't maximize his ceiling with this roster. Put him on a Denver, SA, GS, Dallas, Miami, etc and he would look terrific because the structure is in place and he would defer. It's one thing to ask a player to squash his own alpha mentality to allow others to succeed for the betterment of the team - it's another to additionally ask him to change his style of play. RJ, IQ, Toppin, Mitch and some of the other young players seem best suited to an uptempo style of play. We need energy - that's why I'm ok with swapping Obi for Randle and taking the lumps. Randle is clearly more talented but sometimes the team needs other things more then scoring - chemistry, tempo and ball movement.
And when you say pair Randle with Ja, Doncic, etc - I agree he would perform better there and we should look to find a deal for both sides. If Randle didn't have 4 years left I'd be more patient. The fact that he has such low trade value should be more concerning vs trying to spend this season pumping it back up to an acceptable level to trade him.
Re: the Hawks - if Jalen Johnson helped the team win more it would make sense to me. I think John Collins is a solid player but they've had 3 seasons to see how much he impacts winning and it doesn't seem like he does on Atl very much. That said -I'd consider swapping Collins for Randle so we could play more uptempo and often it's more about fit. Then again I don't think Atl would take that trade and that says a lot to me.
How did the Warriors do without Green last season? 19-17. A couple of games over .500.
This is what Quin Synder said about Green early last season.
I don’t think I have to qualify this by saying no disrespect to Steph [Curry] or Rudy [Gobert], but Draymond Green is as unique a player and is having as good of a year," Snyder said. "If you want to put someone in the MVP conversation, he’s someone to me, that’s -- the numbers don’t look as … they don’t match up to some of the numbers of some other guys put up, but as far as the way he impacts the game, whether it’s his passing, his defense, which, you obviously know how we feel about Rudy’s versatility and the things that he does, and Draymond is like that. He just does it in his way.“And then you add the leadership that he shows and the way he communicates. I just think he’s an unbelievable player and I think he’s showing that this year. He’s shown it before, but it stands out so much right now when you watch them play.”
HofstraBBall wrote:Nalod wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Would rather gamble on Draymond Green, if he's healthy, and GS doesnt want to pay him.
His championship experience on a squad that excels at keeping the ball moving would
help the Knicks move closer to contender status. More than Hayward would IMO.Did you see how good DG looked without Curry and Thompson?
Whoa, so your saying that Curry and Thompson, make Dray look good?
They would make Eddy Curry look good.
Although Phil is right DG>GH.
But I'm sure he has factored in the possibility DG would leave GS for the Knivks
GustavBahler wrote:How would any team look like without arguably the best backcourt in the NBA?How did the Warriors do without Green last season? 19-17. A couple of games over .500.
This is what Quin Synder said about Green early last season.
I don’t think I have to qualify this by saying no disrespect to Steph [Curry] or Rudy [Gobert], but Draymond Green is as unique a player and is having as good of a year," Snyder said. "If you want to put someone in the MVP conversation, he’s someone to me, that’s -- the numbers don’t look as … they don’t match up to some of the numbers of some other guys put up, but as far as the way he impacts the game, whether it’s his passing, his defense, which, you obviously know how we feel about Rudy’s versatility and the things that he does, and Draymond is like that. He just does it in his way.“And then you add the leadership that he shows and the way he communicates. I just think he’s an unbelievable player and I think he’s showing that this year. He’s shown it before, but it stands out so much right now when you watch them play.”
HofstraBBall wrote:Nalod wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Would rather gamble on Draymond Green, if he's healthy, and GS doesnt want to pay him.
His championship experience on a squad that excels at keeping the ball moving would
help the Knicks move closer to contender status. More than Hayward would IMO.Did you see how good DG looked without Curry and Thompson?
Whoa, so your saying that Curry and Thompson, make Dray look good?
They would make Eddy Curry look good.
Although Phil is right DG>GH.
But I'm sure he has factored in the possibility DG would leave GS for the Knivks
Intended to prove a point can we discuss at age 32 why he only played 46 games this past season?
How many did Klay play? 32 games. Im not the one to bring it up but since your trying to show drays value, can you tell us how many games Did both KLAY and Dray sit out?
Year before they were not so great were they? Klay out, Dray played 64 of 71 year before. How did that go?
I don’t really like him but respect his career immensely. He has played a lot of games and has had injury/conditioning/temper/testicle slapping/motivation issues and now seeks a payday.
Im thinking we can’t buy his past accomplishments nor think supplanting him on knicks will succeed. His net worth perhaps.
I’ll pass.
Other than that the Warriors are 54-51 career without him. Yes Klay was also absent for some games.Not enough to diminish his impact. Warriors have a slightly worse record without Klay. Demonstrates their respective importance to the success of GS through the years.
Giving a big contract to a 32 year old PG, that I wouldnt do, unless it was CP3. A big man with Green's credentials is another story.
I would be very happy with Green giving us 2 good years as a starter, and 2 as a backup. He's the kind of player you dont like until he's on your team leaving everything on the court, and showing what it takes to be a champion.
Nalod wrote:GustavBahler wrote:How would any team look like without arguably the best backcourt in the NBA?How did the Warriors do without Green last season? 19-17. A couple of games over .500.
This is what Quin Synder said about Green early last season.
I don’t think I have to qualify this by saying no disrespect to Steph [Curry] or Rudy [Gobert], but Draymond Green is as unique a player and is having as good of a year," Snyder said. "If you want to put someone in the MVP conversation, he’s someone to me, that’s -- the numbers don’t look as … they don’t match up to some of the numbers of some other guys put up, but as far as the way he impacts the game, whether it’s his passing, his defense, which, you obviously know how we feel about Rudy’s versatility and the things that he does, and Draymond is like that. He just does it in his way.“And then you add the leadership that he shows and the way he communicates. I just think he’s an unbelievable player and I think he’s showing that this year. He’s shown it before, but it stands out so much right now when you watch them play.”
HofstraBBall wrote:Nalod wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Would rather gamble on Draymond Green, if he's healthy, and GS doesnt want to pay him.
His championship experience on a squad that excels at keeping the ball moving would
help the Knicks move closer to contender status. More than Hayward would IMO.Did you see how good DG looked without Curry and Thompson?
Whoa, so your saying that Curry and Thompson, make Dray look good?
They would make Eddy Curry look good.
Although Phil is right DG>GH.
But I'm sure he has factored in the possibility DG would leave GS for the KnivksIntended to prove a point can we discuss at age 32 why he only played 46 games this past season?
How many did Klay play? 32 games. Im not the one to bring it up but since your trying to show drays value, can you tell us how many games Did both KLAY and Dray sit out?
Year before they were not so great were they? Klay out, Dray played 64 of 71 year before. How did that go?
I don’t really like him but respect his career immensely. He has played a lot of games and has had injury/conditioning/temper/testicle slapping/motivation issues and now seeks a payday.
Im thinking we can’t buy his past accomplishments nor think supplanting him on knicks will succeed. His net worth perhaps.
I’ll pass.
Still, Dray played only 46 games.
He admits to being in good shape this past season, motivated, and lost weight, and go this mojo back.
Thats great. He is vocal that he wants to get paid.
There are so many warning signs to not pay him unless its a reward for past performance and thats on the Warriors to do so.
His cred is awesome. He is no doubt a HOF player who contributed to the greatness that is the Warriors.
But thats in the past. Thats my point. “Apparent value”. What can he do going forward is all that matters if Im trading for him.
Why would GSW do that anyway? If he is this good, why not give him what he wants? Or has his best days behind him?
He has had an amazing career. Doe not mean it goes forever.
To put this in perspective, Draymond's usage is less than half of Kyrie's and Green consistently averages more assists per game over the course of each's career.
martin wrote:I am legit amazed at how many assists Dray averages a year, especially at his usage level.To put this in perspective, Draymond's usage is less than half of Kyrie's and Green consistently averages more assists per game over the course of each's career.
I'm not trying to knock him, or argue anything, but just want to note he can't shoot. If Kyrie shot like Rondo, I think his assist totals would drift towards Rondo's. That said, it is rare to see someone like Dray who is that adept at passing and does not play at guard
Dray is and was great for the system and the players around him. Had in prime Durant. That makes 3 Sure Fire HOF players around him! Bogert was pretty darn good also. Dray was surrounded by shooters.
If we are doing yoot, lets get our own young version of Dray. Not a retread starphuch who will be want a big bag.
https://citywinery.com/newyork/Online/ma...
City Winery New York presents I Am Athlete with special guest Julius Randle live on Saturday September 10 at 8 PM.I Am Athlete was founded by former NFL wide receiver Brandon Marshall. Alongside Adam "Pacman" Jones and LeSean "Shady" Mccoy, all 3 host each show with special added guests such as current and former pro athletes from all sports, artists, and public figures.
Nalod wrote:IM fatigued by starphuching to think all players will transpose success going forward without consideration to age, health, and the dozens of factors that go into how that player succeeded.
Dray is and was great for the system and the players around him. Had in prime Durant. That makes 3 Sure Fire HOF players around him! Bogert was pretty darn good also. Dray was surrounded by shooters.If we are doing yoot, lets get our own young version of Dray. Not a retread starphuch who will be want a big bag.
Who thinks all players can repeat their success on another team? Always a gamble, no sure thing. Grant Hill looked as close to a sure thing as any player in Orlando. Until he rolled his ankle. Dont believe trading for Green would be "Star... with 2 perennial all stars almost everyone thinks of, before Green.
Funny how those three HOFers were slightly above .500 without Green in the lineup. You can chalk it up to some statistical anomaly, or it could be something else. Like Draymond keeps the ball from sticking at a very high level. Thats what I remember the last Knicks championship team doing very well.
As I said before, Id be happy with 2 good years from Green as a starter. Believe that he could shave a season off of however long it takes to contend. Draft a PF with a high pick in 23' to watch and learn from Green. In case Obi doesnt work out.
.
GustavBahler wrote:Nalod wrote:IM fatigued by starphuching to think all players will transpose success going forward without consideration to age, health, and the dozens of factors that go into how that player succeeded.
Dray is and was great for the system and the players around him. Had in prime Durant. That makes 3 Sure Fire HOF players around him! Bogert was pretty darn good also. Dray was surrounded by shooters.If we are doing yoot, lets get our own young version of Dray. Not a retread starphuch who will be want a big bag.
Who thinks all players can repeat their success on another team? Always a gamble, no sure thing. Grant Hill looked as close to a sure thing as any player in Orlando. Until he rolled his ankle. Dont believe trading for Green would be "Star... with 2 perennial all stars almost everyone thinks of, before Green.
Funny how those three HOFers were slightly above .500 without Green in the lineup. You can chalk it up to some statistical anomaly, or it could be something else. Like Draymond keeps the ball from sticking at a very high level. Thats what I remember the last Knicks championship doing very well.
As I said before, Id be happy with 2 good years from Green as a starter. Believe that he could shave a season off of however long it takes to contend. Draft a PF with a high pick in 23' to watch and learn from Green. In case Obi doesnt work out.
.
Stop it, nobody saying Green is not the little engine that could. He missed played 46 games. He got in great shape and came back and they won a chip.
Klay played 32 games. He was good enough and they won a chip.
That don't mean bring him here. He wants to be paid. I get it. All money the same, would I trade him stright up for Randle and pay him 29 mil at age 36? And likely attach picks?
I'd think about it. I'd think who he is playing with and can also do much of that here.
Did anyone say he is not a HOF player himself?
Lets be rooted in some reality here. How much you want to pay him? He talks max. You going Max?
Nalod wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Nalod wrote:IM fatigued by starphuching to think all players will transpose success going forward without consideration to age, health, and the dozens of factors that go into how that player succeeded.
Dray is and was great for the system and the players around him. Had in prime Durant. That makes 3 Sure Fire HOF players around him! Bogert was pretty darn good also. Dray was surrounded by shooters.If we are doing yoot, lets get our own young version of Dray. Not a retread starphuch who will be want a big bag.
Who thinks all players can repeat their success on another team? Always a gamble, no sure thing. Grant Hill looked as close to a sure thing as any player in Orlando. Until he rolled his ankle. Dont believe trading for Green would be "Star... with 2 perennial all stars almost everyone thinks of, before Green.
Funny how those three HOFers were slightly above .500 without Green in the lineup. You can chalk it up to some statistical anomaly, or it could be something else. Like Draymond keeps the ball from sticking at a very high level. Thats what I remember the last Knicks championship doing very well.
As I said before, Id be happy with 2 good years from Green as a starter. Believe that he could shave a season off of however long it takes to contend. Draft a PF with a high pick in 23' to watch and learn from Green. In case Obi doesnt work out.
.
Stop it, nobody saying Green is not the little engine that could. He missed played 46 games. He got in great shape and came back and they won a chip.
Klay played 32 games. He was good enough and they won a chip.
That don't mean bring him here. He wants to be paid. I get it. All money the same, would I trade him stright up for Randle and pay him 29 mil at age 36? And likely attach picks?
I'd think about it. I'd think who he is playing with and can also do much of that here.
Did anyone say he is not a HOF player himself?
Lets be rooted in some reality here. How much you want to pay him? He talks max. You going Max?
All the "little engine that could" could do was try. Not keep an offense moving with some of the greatest scorers that ever lived. Over the span of his career ( not just last season) they barely break .500 without him. You pay him compliments while diminishing his role in keeping GS from looking like the first 3 quarters of an all star game.
Id be willing to see the Knicks pay close to max to help very good scorers take their games to the
next level. Starphuching would be going for a player who is mostly about getting buckets. Green is mostly about defense, and sharing the rock. Believe the yoots could learn a few things from Green, and speed up the team's collective learning curve.
GustavBahler wrote:Nalod wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Nalod wrote:IM fatigued by starphuching to think all players will transpose success going forward without consideration to age, health, and the dozens of factors that go into how that player succeeded.
Dray is and was great for the system and the players around him. Had in prime Durant. That makes 3 Sure Fire HOF players around him! Bogert was pretty darn good also. Dray was surrounded by shooters.If we are doing yoot, lets get our own young version of Dray. Not a retread starphuch who will be want a big bag.
Who thinks all players can repeat their success on another team? Always a gamble, no sure thing. Grant Hill looked as close to a sure thing as any player in Orlando. Until he rolled his ankle. Dont believe trading for Green would be "Star... with 2 perennial all stars almost everyone thinks of, before Green.
Funny how those three HOFers were slightly above .500 without Green in the lineup. You can chalk it up to some statistical anomaly, or it could be something else. Like Draymond keeps the ball from sticking at a very high level. Thats what I remember the last Knicks championship doing very well.
As I said before, Id be happy with 2 good years from Green as a starter. Believe that he could shave a season off of however long it takes to contend. Draft a PF with a high pick in 23' to watch and learn from Green. In case Obi doesnt work out.
.
Stop it, nobody saying Green is not the little engine that could. He missed played 46 games. He got in great shape and came back and they won a chip.
Klay played 32 games. He was good enough and they won a chip.
That don't mean bring him here. He wants to be paid. I get it. All money the same, would I trade him stright up for Randle and pay him 29 mil at age 36? And likely attach picks?
I'd think about it. I'd think who he is playing with and can also do much of that here.
Did anyone say he is not a HOF player himself?
Lets be rooted in some reality here. How much you want to pay him? He talks max. You going Max?All the "little engine that could" could do was try. Not keep an offense moving with some of the greatest scorers that ever lived. Over the span of his career ( not just last season) they barely break .500 without him. You pay him compliments while diminishing his role in keeping GS from looking like the first 3 quarters of an all star game.
Id be willing to see the Knicks pay close to max to help very good scorers take their games to the
next level. Starphuching would be going for a player who is mostly about getting buckets. Green is mostly about defense, and sharing the rock. Believe the yoots could learn a few things from Green, and speed up the team's collective learning curve.
Green is the quintessential role player. The kind of player EVERY chip team needs in the roster. Hard working GLUE guy. Imo, If he was not playing along side two of the best shooters in the world, he would not be so heralded though. As there are many good role players that do the same but just don't have the talent around them to hand them a chip. Not knocking his defense and heart but it is what it is. In terms of individual ability, there are many others you would prefer having on the Knicks squad. Especially if we are talking adding him for the price rumored and expecting him to do what he did in GS here. We just don't have the pieces. With DG it would look like it did in GS when Curry and Thompson were out.
As for this past season, can be argued that Wiggins and Poole contributed more to the championship than DG. Also remember Iguodala and KD being a pretty big factor in the earlier championships.