ramtour420 wrote:More like : " Should the Knicks listen to offers of multiple unprotected first round picks for Grimes?" I don't think they should. I wouldn't trade Grimes for Donovan Mitchell straight up at this point.
Grimes was kept out of DM talks for a reason.
Been saying he is our best hopeful for a reason.
No way they include him in any trades talks. Especially for just draft capital.
Keep saying, it would be smart for Knicks to get another wing that can defend and shoot the three.
Rose , Cam and EF will be traded. They just don't want to include a draft pick doing so.
Winning streak points stronger to staying patient.
I think Knicks are set at SG.
I would reach out to Toronto and see if they would be interested in a RJ and OG Anunoby swap
Swishfm3 wrote:I think Knicks are set at SG.I would reach out to Toronto and see if they would be interested in a RJ and OG Anunoby swap
RJ being a local product, and playing well would get Toronto's attention, I'm guessing. But it probably wouldnt get us all the way. Probably would have to throw in a first round pick(s) Protected or not, not going to guess.
When we trading Cam for Alec Burks ? It's happening. Would we have to add a second rounder ?
We could also trade Cam for Reggie Bullock. Just saying players Thibs knows and who play defense and shoots the three to give RJ rest. Deuce, IQ, Reggie( or Burks ), Obi, Simms/Heart.
Alpha1971 wrote:We could also trade Cam for Reggie Bullock. Just saying players Thibs knows and who play defense and shoots the three to give RJ rest. Deuce, IQ, Reggie( or Burks ), Obi, Simms/Heart.
Sometimes it's best to let ships that sailed go.
Rather trade for a younger player that can be helpful long term.
Think Sims and Hart have done a lot of the little things on the second unit. But between both of them, Deuce and Rose, we have had no scoring from the second unit other than IQ and one of the starters. These high RJ, Randle, JB minutes will catch up.
I don't think we should necessarily be 'upgrading the SG', that said, I do think we need to trade 2 or 3 guys, and turn them into an upgrade somewhere in the roster. The reality is every position could be upgraded. Where? I don't know. But I personally believe in an 8 or 9 man rotation in the playoffs, so you need a little injury protection in the form of vets... but the rest of those spots should be up for development. So in two or three years we can rely on guys like Grimes and McBride, and not be in those postions of years past were we had to overpay Clarence Weatherspoon and Jerome James to 'fill the roster out'.
GustavBahler wrote:Swishfm3 wrote:I think Knicks are set at SG.I would reach out to Toronto and see if they would be interested in a RJ and OG Anunoby swap
RJ being a local product, and playing well would get Toronto's attention, I'm guessing. But it probably wouldnt get us all the way. Probably would have to throw in a first round pick(s) Protected or not, not going to guess.
OG is a future All-Star (maybe even this year)...I would be ok if the Knicks offered RJ Barrett, protected FRP, a FRP swap and a couple of 2ndRP.
I think something like that is fair.
HofstraBBall wrote:Alpha1971 wrote:We could also trade Cam for Reggie Bullock. Just saying players Thibs knows and who play defense and shoots the three to give RJ rest. Deuce, IQ, Reggie( or Burks ), Obi, Simms/Heart.
Sometimes it's best to let ships that sailed go.
Rather trade for a younger player that can be helpful long term.
Think Sims and Hart have done a lot of the little things on the second unit. But between both of them, Deuce and Rose, we have had no scoring from the second unit other than IQ and one of the starters. These high RJ, Randle, JB minutes will catch up.
If we can get a young building block sure. Trade for Tari Eason, Chris Duarte or some young two way players but if not able to get Burks back for the duration of the season only. Then use the draft to get us what we need. No risk move for Cam if we can't get value for him. We need Obi back for bench scoring. IQ is inconsistent so that's why I think we need to trade for a back up scoring wing with some size and who can defend.
martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:I don't think you'll see an upgrade unless it's for a "star." I don't think the FO will be pressured to make a big in-season trade as long as the Knicks remain competitive. The Donovan Mitchell trade still remains kinda the standard and this FO remains conservative in terms of its valuation of assets.
Is there a star SG out there that even makes sense for the Knicks, especially considering Brunson/Grimes?
I can't even come up with one reasonable name that I'd include Grimes in a trade and for which a team would give up a star SG. Cause there is no way you are keeping him out of the trade, right?
Jesus man, had me cracking up. Beal might be available since it looks like Washington is again going nowhere but we agree because if his contract an age, he's not a good fit. That's why I look at Rozier. Thibs likes his type of strong combo guard. He's not an all star, but he's close, something like 75% of Donovan Mitchell for half the price. He's the same.age as Randle and on a reasonable contract.
The rotation gets clogged with him JB and IQ, so for now, like any deal- I don't pull the trigger.
In reality land guys like Beal, Rozier, and Lavine make zero sense to even mention. Like wasted typing time. I don't even know why you'd bring them up.
LaVine and Beal both have the same contract and injury risk, but swapping RJ out for one of those guys... I just think we get biased to our own players. What, 99% of NBA fans make that trade* in a second,I have a hard time believing I'm that much smarter than public opinion.
*Something like Rose, Fournier, RJ, Cam, and draft picks. With RJ's contract it's a little funky because it counts for different amounts going in and out. As the size of the deal goes up, this becomes less of an issue.
As far as Rozier, we love Deuce, but again 99%. That goes for a Grimes/ Mitchell trade as well.
gradyandrew wrote:martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:I don't think you'll see an upgrade unless it's for a "star." I don't think the FO will be pressured to make a big in-season trade as long as the Knicks remain competitive. The Donovan Mitchell trade still remains kinda the standard and this FO remains conservative in terms of its valuation of assets.
Is there a star SG out there that even makes sense for the Knicks, especially considering Brunson/Grimes?
I can't even come up with one reasonable name that I'd include Grimes in a trade and for which a team would give up a star SG. Cause there is no way you are keeping him out of the trade, right?
Jesus man, had me cracking up. Beal might be available since it looks like Washington is again going nowhere but we agree because if his contract an age, he's not a good fit. That's why I look at Rozier. Thibs likes his type of strong combo guard. He's not an all star, but he's close, something like 75% of Donovan Mitchell for half the price. He's the same.age as Randle and on a reasonable contract.
The rotation gets clogged with him JB and IQ, so for now, like any deal- I don't pull the trigger.
In reality land guys like Beal, Rozier, and Lavine make zero sense to even mention. Like wasted typing time. I don't even know why you'd bring them up.
LaVine and Beal both have the same contract and injury risk, but swapping RJ out for one of those guys... I just think we get biased to our own players. What, 99% of NBA fans make that trade* in a second,I have a hard time believing I'm that much smarter than public opinion.
*Something like Rose, Fournier, RJ, Cam, and draft picks. With RJ's contract it's a little funky because it counts for different amounts going in and out. As the size of the deal goes up, this becomes less of an issue.
As far as Rozier, we love Deuce, but again 99%. That goes for a Grimes/ Mitchell trade as well.
Lavine is definitely a good player. Switching him out for RJ, however, does not change the issue we have Imo, Several guys that need a lot of shots. He would be a much more expensive player who also needs a lot of shots to be happy. Issue he is having playing with Derozan. Same with Beal
I wanted Rozier. But that was before we got JB. Trading to have him back up JB for $20plus a year would be tough to do right now.
Not for trading Grimes. I may be doing what I have accused so many on here of doing (overvaluing theri favorite hopefuls) but think he is going to be elite. Also feel we can get another wing in SL without giving up Grimes, IQ or heavy draft capital.
Do trades for Gordon, Harris or Kuzma require heavy draft capital? Not sure. But feel one of those in the SL and Grimes in the second unit helps.
I think the problem is you are trying to upgrade roles, or you want to get players who are better versions of the players we already have.
They probably need a better version of Grimes (a stout, versatile wing defender who can defend the top wing opponent who can consistantly hit the 3 and get about 15 per game). Jaylen Brown?
They need a better version of Barrett (a young wing who can get to the rim almost at will and finish or make the right pass and consistenly hit the 3). Anunoby?
They need a better version of Julius (minus the headcase and ball pounding). Zion?
They need a better version of Robinson (non-injury prone who can space the floor a bit). Ayton? Turner?
They need a better Version of IQ, McBride.....
This team is put together a certain way where the pieces are very precise (IMO). I think it is really tricky to find what the Knicks are looking for because you really are just looking for better versions of what you already have and you can't trade guys like Fournier, Cam, Rose, or picks unless you want to expand the rotation.
SupremeCommander wrote:I don't think we should necessarily be 'upgrading the SG', that said, I do think we need to trade 2 or 3 guys, and turn them into an upgrade somewhere in the roster. The reality is every position could be upgraded. Where? I don't know. But I personally believe in an 8 or 9 man rotation in the playoffs, so you need a little injury protection in the form of vets... but the rest of those spots should be up for development. So in two or three years we can rely on guys like Grimes and McBride, and not be in those postions of years past were we had to overpay Clarence Weatherspoon and Jerome James to 'fill the roster out'.
Grimes is my favorite player. However, we have had more disappointments, the last 20 years, in hopefuls that just did not pan out over ones that we overpaid. Have to be careful of both.
A bit of a stretch but I wonder if the Knicks could trade Reddish for Ingles and Beauchamp. Reddish should be able to be part of their playoff rotation. Meanwhile the Knicks eat Ingles contract for Beauchamp who has shown some sign a of being a good player but probably won’t get playing time any more unless a injury happens .
wargames wrote:A bit of a stretch but I wonder if the Knicks could trade Reddish for Ingles and Beauchamp. Reddish should be able to be part of their playoff rotation. Meanwhile the Knicks eat Ingles contract for Beauchamp who has shown some sign a of being a good player but probably won’t get playing time any more unless a injury happens .
Cam could be part of Milwaukee’s bench-sitting rotation?
Do you understand why the Bucks sign Ingles even though he tore his ACL a year ago?
martin wrote:wargames wrote:A bit of a stretch but I wonder if the Knicks could trade Reddish for Ingles and Beauchamp. Reddish should be able to be part of their playoff rotation. Meanwhile the Knicks eat Ingles contract for Beauchamp who has shown some sign a of being a good player but probably won’t get playing time any more unless a injury happens .
Cam could be part of Milwaukee’s bench-sitting rotation?
Do you understand why the Bucks sign Ingles even though he tore his ACL a year ago?
No because I don’t pay attention to the bucks…. You could just say why because I do not have any urge to do research on Joe Ingles, who just got back from a injury. I know MarJon because I watched a lot of predraft stuff for him and thought he was a Thibs guy.
Also if I start a proposal with “a bit of a stretch” I am not looking to do any defense of that plan. It’s a hypothetical.
wargames wrote:martin wrote:wargames wrote:A bit of a stretch but I wonder if the Knicks could trade Reddish for Ingles and Beauchamp. Reddish should be able to be part of their playoff rotation. Meanwhile the Knicks eat Ingles contract for Beauchamp who has shown some sign a of being a good player but probably won’t get playing time any more unless a injury happens .
Cam could be part of Milwaukee’s bench-sitting rotation?
Do you understand why the Bucks sign Ingles even though he tore his ACL a year ago?
No because I don’t pay attention to the bucks…. You could just say why because I do not have any urge to do research on Joe Ingles, who just got back from a injury. I know MarJon because I watched a lot of predraft stuff for him and thought he was a Thibs guy.
Also if I start a proposal with “a bit of a stretch” I am not looking to do any defense of that plan. It’s a hypothetical.
Be informed and then you won’t sound ridiculous. It’s a trade that Bucks would hang up on fast.
martin wrote:wargames wrote:martin wrote:wargames wrote:A bit of a stretch but I wonder if the Knicks could trade Reddish for Ingles and Beauchamp. Reddish should be able to be part of their playoff rotation. Meanwhile the Knicks eat Ingles contract for Beauchamp who has shown some sign a of being a good player but probably won’t get playing time any more unless a injury happens .
Cam could be part of Milwaukee’s bench-sitting rotation?
Do you understand why the Bucks sign Ingles even though he tore his ACL a year ago?
No because I don’t pay attention to the bucks…. You could just say why because I do not have any urge to do research on Joe Ingles, who just got back from a injury. I know MarJon because I watched a lot of predraft stuff for him and thought he was a Thibs guy.
Also if I start a proposal with “a bit of a stretch” I am not looking to do any defense of that plan. It’s a hypothetical.
Be informed and then you won’t sound ridiculous. It’s a trade that Bucks would hang up on fast.
You know what…. That was so informative I feel inspired to go. Thanks
Only one game but have to say that our offense where RJ was not hogging shots and Grimes got more looks, looked pretty good. Randle was a more willing passer with Grimes. Maybe because he gets the ball back sometimes and Grimes makes quick decisions. IQ also fit well and made the offense flow. Something I noticed considering talk Randle is the ball stopper on offense. Last night showed a glimpse that it may be RJ and JB who need to improve with that. Keep saying we need a better wing. Not giving up on RJ but he should take notice because maybe a better all around upgrade for him, may be what some start to notice is needed?
HofstraBBall wrote:Only one game but have to say that our offense where RJ was not hogging shots and Grimes got more looks, looked pretty good. Randle was a more willing passer with Grimes. Maybe because he gets the ball back sometimes and Grimes makes quick decisions. IQ also fit well and made the offense flow. Something I noticed considering talk Randle is the ball stopper on offense. Last night showed a glimpse that it may be RJ and JB who need to improve with that. Keep saying we need a better wing. Not giving up on RJ but he should take notice because maybe a better all around upgrade for him, may be what some start to notice is needed?
I think what you saw was guys hitting outside shots which opens things up. Grimes got more looks and he answered the call. Seems that Randle is more versatile than the stereotype we painted him to be.
Im not saying last night was not good. there was positives and we now see why Thibs had Grimes penciled in all along!
He finally has gotten his legs and rhythm and showing what he can do. This team is a work in progress.
Your not wrong BTW.
Lets celebrate Grimes as a major win for the FO via the draft! There was some silver linings to last night.
