Will he be too costly to keep long term and the will the team get value for him now ?
Alpha1971 wrote:Will he be too costly to keep long term and the will the team get value for him now ?
Not sure "too costly" but he'll want to start and JB is now the man. I don't see him as a starting 2 as we need a bit more length there. Thus, his trade value could be very attractive.
It depends on what comes back. Alone, Im not trading him.
If I can get Beal or Ayton and keep my core of RJ, Randle, and JB then a consolidation trade can work.
May go as an enhancement to bigger trade.
Given IQ has contributed Zero last 2 playoff appearances—- not like we’d be losing something from a playoff contribution standpoint.
? Is - what would be right price and for who?
Nalod wrote:Alpha1971 wrote:Will he be too costly to keep long term and the will the team get value for him now ?
Not sure "too costly" but he'll want to start and JB is now the man. I don't see him as a starting 2 as we need a bit more length there. Thus, his trade value could be very attractive.
It depends on what comes back. Alone, Im not trading him.
If I can get Beal or Ayton and keep my core of RJ, Randle, and JB then a consolidation trade can work.
I 100% believe IQ can start next to Brunson. But the problem shifts to finding a backup PG you trust handling the ball and running the offense. Clearly that's not Deuce at this stage unless the 23-24 season involves the same crash course IQ was put through 21-22.
We'll spend the better part of the summer talking IQ vs. Grimes, but it's not a conversation we actually need to have right now. We can afford a good salary for IQ and the value he brings. If coming off the bench is a deal breaker for IQ (no indication that it would be), we still have another year to let things play out and shape the roster.
Anyone not named Jalen is on the table if the right trade came along. I like Ayton - would have to think about that one for a while...
LivingLegend wrote:May go as an enhancement to bigger trade.Given IQ has contributed Zero last 2 playoff appearances—- not like we’d be losing something from a playoff contribution standpoint.
? Is - what would be right price and for who?
No one is putting an value on that first one though? And young players have not good playoffs all the time so it's not really anything to worry about?
I think the Knicks lose a lot if they move on from IQ. IMO he is not as valuable a starter as he is off bench for Knicks given their roster and may have a ton to prove in any starting lineup. But he is a high value type plyaer for me.
martin wrote:LivingLegend wrote:May go as an enhancement to bigger trade.Given IQ has contributed Zero last 2 playoff appearances—- not like we’d be losing something from a playoff contribution standpoint.
? Is - what would be right price and for who?
No one is putting an value on that first one though? And young players have not good playoffs all the time so it's not really anything to worry about?
I think the Knicks lose a lot if they move on from IQ. IMO he is not as valuable a starter as he is off bench for Knicks given their roster and may have a ton to prove in any starting lineup. But he is a high value type plyaer for me.
You don't think we could swap his and Grimes' roles, and have a secondary ball handler (IQ) to alleviate JB from some of the traps he's been looking at lately? I think we need someone, and Grimes -- while I think capable with the ball in his hands -- is either shooting or moving the ball, but not necessarily making plays for others.
Panos wrote:martin wrote:LivingLegend wrote:May go as an enhancement to bigger trade.Given IQ has contributed Zero last 2 playoff appearances—- not like we’d be losing something from a playoff contribution standpoint.
? Is - what would be right price and for who?
No one is putting an value on that first one though? And young players have not good playoffs all the time so it's not really anything to worry about?
I think the Knicks lose a lot if they move on from IQ. IMO he is not as valuable a starter as he is off bench for Knicks given their roster and may have a ton to prove in any starting lineup. But he is a high value type plyaer for me.
You don't think we could swap his and Grimes' roles, and have a secondary ball handler to alleviate JB from some of the traps he's been looking at lately? I think we need someone, and Grimes -- while I think capable with the ball in his hands -- is either shooting or moving the ball, but not necessarily making plays for others.
If you wanted to relieve pressure on that one and only thing that you are pointing out that IQ does better than Grimes, than I think that would help. In a particularly well defined vacuum of sorts.
But it would also ignore a lot of other things that IQ does better off the bench (PG duties and such) or Grimes does starting (POA defense, 3point spacing threat).
martin wrote:Panos wrote:martin wrote:LivingLegend wrote:May go as an enhancement to bigger trade.Given IQ has contributed Zero last 2 playoff appearances—- not like we’d be losing something from a playoff contribution standpoint.
? Is - what would be right price and for who?
No one is putting an value on that first one though? And young players have not good playoffs all the time so it's not really anything to worry about?
I think the Knicks lose a lot if they move on from IQ. IMO he is not as valuable a starter as he is off bench for Knicks given their roster and may have a ton to prove in any starting lineup. But he is a high value type plyaer for me.
You don't think we could swap his and Grimes' roles, and have a secondary ball handler to alleviate JB from some of the traps he's been looking at lately? I think we need someone, and Grimes -- while I think capable with the ball in his hands -- is either shooting or moving the ball, but not necessarily making plays for others.
If you wanted to relieve pressure on that one and only thing that you are pointing out that IQ does better than Grimes, than I think that would help. In a particularly well defined vacuum of sorts.
But it would also ignore a lot of other things that IQ does better off the bench (PG duties and such) or Grimes does starting (POA defense, 3point spacing threat).
I think IQ is also a good POA defender, and when not playing dog-shit in the playoffs, also a good 3 point spacer.
And we can see if Grimes can do some backup PG duties. If not, there is always your boy, Rokas.
Panos wrote:martin wrote:Panos wrote:martin wrote:LivingLegend wrote:May go as an enhancement to bigger trade.Given IQ has contributed Zero last 2 playoff appearances—- not like we’d be losing something from a playoff contribution standpoint.
? Is - what would be right price and for who?
No one is putting an value on that first one though? And young players have not good playoffs all the time so it's not really anything to worry about?
I think the Knicks lose a lot if they move on from IQ. IMO he is not as valuable a starter as he is off bench for Knicks given their roster and may have a ton to prove in any starting lineup. But he is a high value type plyaer for me.
You don't think we could swap his and Grimes' roles, and have a secondary ball handler to alleviate JB from some of the traps he's been looking at lately? I think we need someone, and Grimes -- while I think capable with the ball in his hands -- is either shooting or moving the ball, but not necessarily making plays for others.
If you wanted to relieve pressure on that one and only thing that you are pointing out that IQ does better than Grimes, than I think that would help. In a particularly well defined vacuum of sorts.
But it would also ignore a lot of other things that IQ does better off the bench (PG duties and such) or Grimes does starting (POA defense, 3point spacing threat).
I think IQ is also a good POA defender, and when not playing dog-shit in the playoffs, also a good 3 point spacer.
And we can see if Grimes can do some backup PG duties. If not, there is always your boy, Rokas.
IQ's 3point shooting was pretty good this year, I just think that long term Grimes will be much much better distance threat and all around shooter.
And IQ's team defense is off the charts but his POA and 1-on-1 defense is nowhere near that of Grimes, mostly because of strength. Stats really show this out and I was surprised to see how not good IQ had been all year (don't have them in front of me). Grimes can guard 1-3 really well, IQ not so much.
Grimes/RJ definitely both need to up their secondary ball handling and I think Grimes has it in him.
Removing IQ from bench would leave a mega wide backup PG off bench role empty and I just think that is more important.
I think IQ has a special place in Thibs and FO's collective heart. My guess is he won't be gone because of money. That said i could see him as a significant asset in a trade (not my hope at all), and i could see his role changing so he gets more minutes off ball where he can shoot and space the floor better for us
I'm still blown away how he had 0 breakout games in the playoffs prior to the turned ankle.
