Knicks · I don’t get the recent KAT chatter, if that is a thing. (page 3)
martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Bagley reports today that Knicks were talking with Portland about trading Robinson for multiple picks. My main point is that a Knicks trade for KAT would be adding him to Randle and Brunson. The attraction of playing with Randle is one of the big draws for KAT.I dont think that's a good interpretation of what Bagley is stating. Could you point us to the article you are getting your info from cause I have not seen that.
Also, KAT is under contract, there is no need to draw him or attract him to Randle. If you want KAT on team, you just trade whatever for him if that makes sense for the team.
And a combo of Randle and KAT doesn't make sense to me at least.
I would think if Kat is coming Randle would be going (at least somewhere) but Randle would actually fit in Minny next to Gobert and off of Ant.
Towns/Randle combo sounds yuck and it’s really because you really can’t count on Randle to function in playoffs or defend hard all the time.
Issue with Kat to Knicks would be could he fit with Mitch? Not so sure there.
Thing I like about Kat is he is decisive with the ball - shoot or pass and skill level really high.
Things I don’t like are injuries, soft around rim and defensive effort.
Still think Julius limits any legit past 2nd round dreams we may have because he doesn’t fit smoothly with others or defend.
LivingLegend wrote:martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Bagley reports today that Knicks were talking with Portland about trading Robinson for multiple picks. My main point is that a Knicks trade for KAT would be adding him to Randle and Brunson. The attraction of playing with Randle is one of the big draws for KAT.I dont think that's a good interpretation of what Bagley is stating. Could you point us to the article you are getting your info from cause I have not seen that.
Also, KAT is under contract, there is no need to draw him or attract him to Randle. If you want KAT on team, you just trade whatever for him if that makes sense for the team.
And a combo of Randle and KAT doesn't make sense to me at least.
I would think if Kat is coming Randle would be going (at least somewhere) but Randle would actually fit in Minny next to Gobert and off of Ant.
Towns/Randle combo sounds yuck and it’s really because you really can’t count on Randle to function in playoffs or defend hard all the time.
Issue with Kat to Knicks would be could he fit with Mitch? Not so sure there.
Thing I like about Kat is he is decisive with the ball - shoot or pass and skill level really high.
Things I don’t like are injuries, soft around rim and defensive effort.
Still think Julius limits any legit past 2nd round dreams we may have because he doesn’t fit smoothly with others or defend.
The frustrating thing about Randle is that he can defend, we’ve seen him do it. He can defend at an elite level for short bursts when he wants to. Eventually that light bulb is going to go on and he will make it a priority to defend.
BUT, assuming there was any legs to a KAT deal, which we all seemed to agree made little sense based on the salary escalation for KAT versus his average games played. That said, I think he probably fits fine next Randle.
If you pull the Center out of the paint on offense, KAT shoots near 50% from the top of the key and is well positioned on defense from there. This clears out the paint for both Brunson and Randle. You probably want Hart in that lineup for added rebounding. But I think it could work.
There are plenty reasons not to trade for KAT, but being next to Randle isn’t one of them.
Anyway, I don't think a deal is imminent but if Minnesota struggles out the gate it could be.
EwingsGlass wrote:Ok. I have a long-standing love of Robinson, so let’s not go so far as to say that I want to trade him. And, with Portland having Ayton, not sure what they would do with Robinson. So, the info sounds dated as this rumor appeared months ago before the Lillard trade.
BUT, assuming there was any legs to a KAT deal, which we all seemed to agree made little sense based on the salary escalation for KAT versus his average games played. That said, I think he probably fits fine next Randle.If you pull the Center out of the paint on offense, KAT shoots near 50% from the top of the key and is well positioned on defense from there. This clears out the paint for both Brunson and Randle. You probably want Hart in that lineup for added rebounding. But I think it could work.
There are plenty reasons not to trade for KAT, but being next to Randle isn’t one of them.
Rumor is that Mitch's name came up in early Holiday trade talks. Seeing as how Portland eventually completesd a trade that included "Timelord," the rumors seem plausible. Mitch, Fournier/IQ and picks? Who knows? If true, glad the front office moved on. As for Kat's fit with Randle don't see it defensively. KAT has given us several years of data to show he's not really effective defensively at that spot. KAT/Mitch would probably make more sense. But how much would you give up? How could you build up on the roster with KAT's ascending yearly salary? I don't think a KAT trade moves the team's ceiling much higher than it is now when you take everything into consideration. The Paul George talks that took place earlier this year made more sense and I think that still would've been a bad move given his pending extension.
EwingsGlass wrote:Ok. I have a long-standing love of Robinson, so let’s not go so far as to say that I want to trade him. And, with Portland having Ayton, not sure what they would do with Robinson. So, the info sounds dated as this rumor appeared months ago before the Lillard trade.BUT, assuming there was any legs to a KAT deal, which we all seemed to agree made little sense based on the salary escalation for KAT versus his average games played. That said, I think he probably fits fine next Randle.
If you pull the Center out of the paint on offense, KAT shoots near 50% from the top of the key and is well positioned on defense from there. This clears out the paint for both Brunson and Randle. You probably want Hart in that lineup for added rebounding. But I think it could work.
There are plenty reasons not to trade for KAT, but being next to Randle isn’t one of them.
Neither of them (KAT/Randle) defend or protect the rim --- add in RJ/Brunson and now you have 4 poor defenders.
Add in the fact that Randle will get his panties in a wad when he becomes 3rd/4th option behind Brunson/KAT ---- I don't think it works. If Randle were Aaron Gordon or someone with a smaller ego maybe it would work but Julius is used to being catered to here even if he has pooped the bed in 2 playoff appearances.
I don't see it but respect your opinion --- I do believe KAT is highly skilled and would produce in playoffs but I'm old enough to remember the excitement when Knicks started McAdoo/Hayward/McMillan/Monroe/Frazier and there weren't enough balls or defense.
Rookie wrote:LivingLegend wrote:martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Bagley reports today that Knicks were talking with Portland about trading Robinson for multiple picks. My main point is that a Knicks trade for KAT would be adding him to Randle and Brunson. The attraction of playing with Randle is one of the big draws for KAT.I dont think that's a good interpretation of what Bagley is stating. Could you point us to the article you are getting your info from cause I have not seen that.
Also, KAT is under contract, there is no need to draw him or attract him to Randle. If you want KAT on team, you just trade whatever for him if that makes sense for the team.
And a combo of Randle and KAT doesn't make sense to me at least.
I would think if Kat is coming Randle would be going (at least somewhere) but Randle would actually fit in Minny next to Gobert and off of Ant.
Towns/Randle combo sounds yuck and it’s really because you really can’t count on Randle to function in playoffs or defend hard all the time.
Issue with Kat to Knicks would be could he fit with Mitch? Not so sure there.
Thing I like about Kat is he is decisive with the ball - shoot or pass and skill level really high.
Things I don’t like are injuries, soft around rim and defensive effort.
Still think Julius limits any legit past 2nd round dreams we may have because he doesn’t fit smoothly with others or defend.
The frustrating thing about Randle is that he can defend, we’ve seen him do it. He can defend at an elite level for short bursts when he wants to. Eventually that light bulb is going to go on and he will make it a priority to defend.
You right. It confounds me how hopeless Randle is on D some times and then all of a sudden the lightbulb accidentally flashes ON for a few minutes and he remembers how to play defense. But only for exactly 2 minutes and then done.
He has all the ability - strength, quick feet but he clearly isn't engaged or wanting defensively 90% of the time.
LivingLegend wrote:Yep = only brief flashes and even then he will over do it and almost hurt himself over-hustling - lol.He has all the ability - strength, quick feet but he clearly isn't engaged or wanting defensively 90% of the time.
And you can always see it coming about a mile away too. Instant foul
LivingLegend wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:Ok. I have a long-standing love of Robinson, so let’s not go so far as to say that I want to trade him. And, with Portland having Ayton, not sure what they would do with Robinson. So, the info sounds dated as this rumor appeared months ago before the Lillard trade.BUT, assuming there was any legs to a KAT deal, which we all seemed to agree made little sense based on the salary escalation for KAT versus his average games played. That said, I think he probably fits fine next Randle.
If you pull the Center out of the paint on offense, KAT shoots near 50% from the top of the key and is well positioned on defense from there. This clears out the paint for both Brunson and Randle. You probably want Hart in that lineup for added rebounding. But I think it could work.
There are plenty reasons not to trade for KAT, but being next to Randle isn’t one of them.
Neither of them (KAT/Randle) defend or protect the rim --- add in RJ/Brunson and now you have 4 poor defenders.
Add in the fact that Randle will get his panties in a wad when he becomes 3rd/4th option behind Brunson/KAT ---- I don't think it works. If Randle were Aaron Gordon or someone with a smaller ego maybe it would work but Julius is used to being catered to here even if he has pooped the bed in 2 playoff appearances.
I don't see it but respect your opinion --- I do believe KAT is highly skilled and would produce in playoffs but I'm old enough to remember the excitement when Knicks started McAdoo/Hayward/McMillan/Monroe/Frazier and there weren't enough balls or defense.
I don’t agree on your assessment of Randle on defense. Now, Randle’s frustration is palpable at times, but he can body the biggest PFs in the league and bang with them. Giannis looks miserable playing Randle cause he can’t simply push him around. Randle makes Giannis a jump shooter. I think people remember the worst of Randle and not the best. He’s improved pretty much every year.
KAT? I’m not going to comment on his defense. Haven’t watched a ton of Minnie games. He has the length. But someone else can speak to that.
I wouldn’t use Barrett’s defense as a reason not to talk about KAT. If you are trading for KAT, chances are you are including Barrett.
Brunson/Grimes/Hart/Randle/KAT? Seems better than our existing lineup.
martin wrote:LivingLegend wrote:Yep = only brief flashes and even then he will over do it and almost hurt himself over-hustling - lol.He has all the ability - strength, quick feet but he clearly isn't engaged or wanting defensively 90% of the time.
And you can always see it coming about a mile away too. Instant foul
So true 
While I agree KAT would be a big risk, price would matter. A lot.
This article is weak. Citing they blew a lead 5 years ago and alluding some coaching decisions mattered, its all rear view kind of stuff.
Does he pose a risk? Yes. He played 29 games last year and had some soft years. Covid and mom dying related was part of it.
Was he soft with Jimmy? Yeah. Is he still? 5 years later? Has me matured?
Im sure Thibs would be polite and not say negative things when asked but the true question is would he approve a trade opportunity.
We don't know. All fans have is the past. If so, then the answer is no. But its about the future too.
Wiggins was soft also. He matured. JImmy was not jimmy until 25-26 years old. Not all players are Kobe and ready to eat the world at age 20.
I seriously doubt there is any legit chatter. The CAA thing preceded his big Sketcher thing. With that I doubt we'll also Jules give the finger out to the fans anymore either.
I do believe Randle, an two time all NBA player and allstar on a very reasonable deal would be big trade chip on any deal. I also think IQ is as well. Issue here is his extension deadline. Given the roster constructed im sure he is fine to go to RFA and find a team that he can start and get paid. Who is that team? Todays NBA is not about PG or SG. Its lead guard and off ball guard. Same difference. Where is IQ on that and whats the market for his services and competition others might have coming to the the summer.
For that matter, Maxy has yet to sign an extension, correct?
I'd be shocked if the Knicks big move, their all in go for it move, was for Towns. I understand the smoke and chatter and Towns does bring a 21st century skill that is essential to today's game, but liquifying all our assets..for that guy? No thx.
doomed wrote:why on earth would the Knicks trade Randle for Towns straight up let alone Randle AND IQ AND PICKS????? Look I get why the Wolves wouldn't trade Towns for "only" Randle. Towns is younger. Towns came into the NBA a higher rated prospect. Towns has shot the ball better, notably from 3land. But he's not a better player this moment even if he has a higher skill set and ceiling. That said, if the Knicks traded IQ and Randle and that alone for Towns i'd be pissed off. We'd be worse off. And picks? Go piss up a rope.I'd be shocked if the Knicks big move, their all in go for it move, was for Towns. I understand the smoke and chatter and Towns does bring a 21st century skill that is essential to today's game, but liquifying all our assets..for that guy? No thx.
Thank you.
Knixkik wrote:I’d only trade for KAT if it means keeping Randle because i don’t think KAT gives them a higher ceiling unless we add him to the core. We could bank on him being remotivated in NY compared to Minnesota. I would consider offering Barrett, an extended IQ and some picks to replenish what they gave up for Gobert. I would keep Mitch to come off the bench behind Towns and Randle to provide defensive coverage. Hart/ grimes starting on the wings would help offset the questionable defense of Brunson, Randle and towns. But the ceiling would be higher given the talent the Knicks would have. Ultimately towns would need to really peak with a change of scenery and Randle would have to be fine moving to sort of an option 3. Usage probably wouldn’t be an issue if Barrett is going out in the deal. But this is really the only way it makes sense for the Knicks. Minnesota getting back a PG replacement for Conley, a young wing in Barrett and picks might make sense for them. A little bit of a reset around Edwards.
x2
This is exactly where I am. Brunson DDV Grimes and Hart are all on good value contracts.There's also a lot of over lap between those 4 and IQ and RJ. It's really too early to talk about a KAT trade. Minnesota is going to want to give at least 20 games to see how well their big 3 mesh on court with Mike Conley running the show. They jumped 3 spots in defensive rating (from 13 to 10) but crashed 15 in offense (8/23) and their net rating dropped 10 (20/10). I don't think Minnesota is going to want to pay the luxury tax for the 20th best team.
Gobert might also be a possibility. I floated it at the deadline last year. I'm not sure how we feel about a Robinson and Barrett for Gobert trade.
gradyandrew wrote:Knixkik wrote:I’d only trade for KAT if it means keeping Randle because i don’t think KAT gives them a higher ceiling unless we add him to the core. We could bank on him being remotivated in NY compared to Minnesota. I would consider offering Barrett, an extended IQ and some picks to replenish what they gave up for Gobert. I would keep Mitch to come off the bench behind Towns and Randle to provide defensive coverage. Hart/ grimes starting on the wings would help offset the questionable defense of Brunson, Randle and towns. But the ceiling would be higher given the talent the Knicks would have. Ultimately towns would need to really peak with a change of scenery and Randle would have to be fine moving to sort of an option 3. Usage probably wouldn’t be an issue if Barrett is going out in the deal. But this is really the only way it makes sense for the Knicks. Minnesota getting back a PG replacement for Conley, a young wing in Barrett and picks might make sense for them. A little bit of a reset around Edwards.x2
This is exactly where I am. Brunson DDV Grimes and Hart are all on good value contracts.There's also a lot of over lap between those 4 and IQ and RJ. It's really too early to talk about a KAT trade. Minnesota is going to want to give at least 20 games to see how well their big 3 mesh on court with Mike Conley running the show. They jumped 3 spots in defensive rating (from 13 to 10) but crashed 15 in offense (8/23) and their net rating dropped 10 (20/10). I don't think Minnesota is going to want to pay the luxury tax for the 20th best team.
Gobert might also be a possibility. I floated it at the deadline last year. I'm not sure how we feel about a Robinson and Barrett for Gobert trade.
I don’t like Gobert at this point. Not sure if I would even trade Mitch and Fournier for him. Gobert hasn’t been the most impactful, and he’s starting to age. I would definitely consider KAT at the right price though. I think he rep of being sort of a lazy player has been enhanced being in Minnesota. He took his money but really doesn’t want to be there.
martin wrote:Rookie wrote:LivingLegend wrote:martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Bagley reports today that Knicks were talking with Portland about trading Robinson for multiple picks. My main point is that a Knicks trade for KAT would be adding him to Randle and Brunson. The attraction of playing with Randle is one of the big draws for KAT.I dont think that's a good interpretation of what Bagley is stating. Could you point us to the article you are getting your info from cause I have not seen that.
Also, KAT is under contract, there is no need to draw him or attract him to Randle. If you want KAT on team, you just trade whatever for him if that makes sense for the team.
And a combo of Randle and KAT doesn't make sense to me at least.
I would think if Kat is coming Randle would be going (at least somewhere) but Randle would actually fit in Minny next to Gobert and off of Ant.
Towns/Randle combo sounds yuck and it’s really because you really can’t count on Randle to function in playoffs or defend hard all the time.
Issue with Kat to Knicks would be could he fit with Mitch? Not so sure there.
Thing I like about Kat is he is decisive with the ball - shoot or pass and skill level really high.
Things I don’t like are injuries, soft around rim and defensive effort.
Still think Julius limits any legit past 2nd round dreams we may have because he doesn’t fit smoothly with others or defend.
The frustrating thing about Randle is that he can defend, we’ve seen him do it. He can defend at an elite level for short bursts when he wants to. Eventually that light bulb is going to go on and he will make it a priority to defend.
You right. It confounds me how hopeless Randle is on D some times and then all of a sudden the lightbulb accidentally flashes ON for a few minutes and he remembers how to play defense. But only for exactly 2 minutes and then done.
Randle is always in great shape, but he works really hard on offense and his defense suffers. I think he figures with Mitch or Hartenstein behind him he can coast on that end since he’s maximizing effort on offense.
Knixkik wrote:martin wrote:Rookie wrote:LivingLegend wrote:martin wrote:gradyandrew wrote:Bagley reports today that Knicks were talking with Portland about trading Robinson for multiple picks. My main point is that a Knicks trade for KAT would be adding him to Randle and Brunson. The attraction of playing with Randle is one of the big draws for KAT.I dont think that's a good interpretation of what Bagley is stating. Could you point us to the article you are getting your info from cause I have not seen that.
Also, KAT is under contract, there is no need to draw him or attract him to Randle. If you want KAT on team, you just trade whatever for him if that makes sense for the team.
And a combo of Randle and KAT doesn't make sense to me at least.
I would think if Kat is coming Randle would be going (at least somewhere) but Randle would actually fit in Minny next to Gobert and off of Ant.
Towns/Randle combo sounds yuck and it’s really because you really can’t count on Randle to function in playoffs or defend hard all the time.
Issue with Kat to Knicks would be could he fit with Mitch? Not so sure there.
Thing I like about Kat is he is decisive with the ball - shoot or pass and skill level really high.
Things I don’t like are injuries, soft around rim and defensive effort.
Still think Julius limits any legit past 2nd round dreams we may have because he doesn’t fit smoothly with others or defend.
The frustrating thing about Randle is that he can defend, we’ve seen him do it. He can defend at an elite level for short bursts when he wants to. Eventually that light bulb is going to go on and he will make it a priority to defend.
You right. It confounds me how hopeless Randle is on D some times and then all of a sudden the lightbulb accidentally flashes ON for a few minutes and he remembers how to play defense. But only for exactly 2 minutes and then done.
Randle is always in great shape, but he works really hard on offense and his defense suffers. I think he figures with Mitch or Hartenstein behind him he can coast on that end since he’s maximizing effort on offense.
Always seems to me that it is more mental focus instead of resting on D.