Knicks · The Two star approach vs. the 3 starphuch…. (page 2)
nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:If Randle/Brunson shooting % normalize and RJ sustains or even experiences a slight drop off, we have the potential for 3 "stars," with terrific depth. Not sure what makes a star these days, but all 3 guys should be able to average 20ppg - and if they can do so at 45% FG% and around 36%+ from 3 we are in good shape. Especially if Randle tosses in 9-10 rpg 4-5 apg and Brunson 6-7 apg.the issue is do we trust Randle and RJ to be "stars" come playoff time?
RJ showed great potential last season so I trust him to be good, but he's not a great shot creator under pressure.
I think we still lack a 2nd elite scorer and shooting. I think that's where a guy like Lavine could really help.
To be fair, I don't think the Knicks have 1 ball handler that I would really trust under pressure. IQ, Brunson are not at that level.
Teams like Miami and Boston are always going to give Knicks fits because of that IMO
i mean those are great defensive teams, they are going to give most teams fits.
but I think we beat MIA last year if we had a guy like Lavine. it was scoring and shooting more than forced TO's that really hurt us against MIA.
haha you just backdoor'ed your Lavine trade. love it
And yes, just against the elite teams.
Lavine or DM is what this team needs, but Lavine probably costs less.
Have had my eye in LaVine for some time because like the body type and scoring efficiency with potential to put up 4pm in big game BUT at same time his play style is a bit soft defensively and something seems just a bit missing.
LivingLegend wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:If Randle/Brunson shooting % normalize and RJ sustains or even experiences a slight drop off, we have the potential for 3 "stars," with terrific depth. Not sure what makes a star these days, but all 3 guys should be able to average 20ppg - and if they can do so at 45% FG% and around 36%+ from 3 we are in good shape. Especially if Randle tosses in 9-10 rpg 4-5 apg and Brunson 6-7 apg.the issue is do we trust Randle and RJ to be "stars" come playoff time?
RJ showed great potential last season so I trust him to be good, but he's not a great shot creator under pressure.
I think we still lack a 2nd elite scorer and shooting. I think that's where a guy like Lavine could really help.
To be fair, I don't think the Knicks have 1 ball handler that I would really trust under pressure. IQ, Brunson are not at that level.
Teams like Miami and Boston are always going to give Knicks fits because of that IMO
i mean those are great defensive teams, they are going to give most teams fits.
but I think we beat MIA last year if we had a guy like Lavine. it was scoring and shooting more than forced TO's that really hurt us against MIA.
haha you just backdoor'ed your Lavine trade. love it
And yes, just against the elite teams.
Lavine or DM is what this team needs, but Lavine probably costs less.
Have had my eye in LaVine for some time because like the body type and scoring efficiency with potential to put up 4pm in big game BUT at same time his play style is a bit soft defensively and something seems just a bit missing.
i agree but if he's cheap enough I'd take the risk that Thibs can figure it out. say what you want but Lavine's scoring, shooting and efficiency has been on par with DM & Booker for 5 years.
nycericanguy wrote:LivingLegend wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:If Randle/Brunson shooting % normalize and RJ sustains or even experiences a slight drop off, we have the potential for 3 "stars," with terrific depth. Not sure what makes a star these days, but all 3 guys should be able to average 20ppg - and if they can do so at 45% FG% and around 36%+ from 3 we are in good shape. Especially if Randle tosses in 9-10 rpg 4-5 apg and Brunson 6-7 apg.the issue is do we trust Randle and RJ to be "stars" come playoff time?
RJ showed great potential last season so I trust him to be good, but he's not a great shot creator under pressure.
I think we still lack a 2nd elite scorer and shooting. I think that's where a guy like Lavine could really help.
To be fair, I don't think the Knicks have 1 ball handler that I would really trust under pressure. IQ, Brunson are not at that level.
Teams like Miami and Boston are always going to give Knicks fits because of that IMO
i mean those are great defensive teams, they are going to give most teams fits.
but I think we beat MIA last year if we had a guy like Lavine. it was scoring and shooting more than forced TO's that really hurt us against MIA.
haha you just backdoor'ed your Lavine trade. love it
And yes, just against the elite teams.
Lavine or DM is what this team needs, but Lavine probably costs less.
Have had my eye in LaVine for some time because like the body type and scoring efficiency with potential to put up 4pm in big game BUT at same time his play style is a bit soft defensively and something seems just a bit missing.
i agree but if he's cheap enough I'd take the risk that Thibs can figure it out. say what you want but Lavine's scoring, shooting and efficiency has been on par with DM & Booker for 5 years.
My opinion is that fans have not caught up to the implications of the new CBA and how being over the Apron and 2nd Apron will basically completely hamstring a team. Lavine will make between $40 - $49M per year over the next 4 seasons. This means that even after you give up assets for him, he will also essentially be taking the spot of 2 guys on the Knicks current roster. For all his offensive ability - he's got question marks on his knee and can be soft defensively.
foosballnick wrote:nycericanguy wrote:LivingLegend wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:If Randle/Brunson shooting % normalize and RJ sustains or even experiences a slight drop off, we have the potential for 3 "stars," with terrific depth. Not sure what makes a star these days, but all 3 guys should be able to average 20ppg - and if they can do so at 45% FG% and around 36%+ from 3 we are in good shape. Especially if Randle tosses in 9-10 rpg 4-5 apg and Brunson 6-7 apg.the issue is do we trust Randle and RJ to be "stars" come playoff time?
RJ showed great potential last season so I trust him to be good, but he's not a great shot creator under pressure.
I think we still lack a 2nd elite scorer and shooting. I think that's where a guy like Lavine could really help.
To be fair, I don't think the Knicks have 1 ball handler that I would really trust under pressure. IQ, Brunson are not at that level.
Teams like Miami and Boston are always going to give Knicks fits because of that IMO
i mean those are great defensive teams, they are going to give most teams fits.
but I think we beat MIA last year if we had a guy like Lavine. it was scoring and shooting more than forced TO's that really hurt us against MIA.
haha you just backdoor'ed your Lavine trade. love it
And yes, just against the elite teams.
Lavine or DM is what this team needs, but Lavine probably costs less.
Have had my eye in LaVine for some time because like the body type and scoring efficiency with potential to put up 4pm in big game BUT at same time his play style is a bit soft defensively and something seems just a bit missing.
i agree but if he's cheap enough I'd take the risk that Thibs can figure it out. say what you want but Lavine's scoring, shooting and efficiency has been on par with DM & Booker for 5 years.
My opinion is that fans have not caught up to the implications of the new CBA and how being over the Apron and 2nd Apron will basically completely hamstring a team. Lavine will make between $40 - $49M per year over the next 4 seasons. This means that even after you give up assets for him, he will also essentially be taking the spot of 2 guys on the Knicks current roster. For all his offensive ability - he's got question marks on his knee and can be soft defensively.
that stuff is for the FO to figure out.
that being said, 2nd apron doesn't mean you CANT keep your own guys, it just makes trades or signings more difficult. You're pretty much locked into the team unless you shed salary.
but we are a long way from being there.
I don't know if he is or not but that contract is bear to have and seems like Leon/Rosas/Aller got this.
We are respectable and while the next jump is the hardest its not likely on the whims of past performance.
Lavine is a fine player and has done well the last 5 years. Its the remainder of his contract going forward Im worried about.
Nalod wrote:Its been reiterated that he don't want NY and if Scott Perry speaks for what our outlook is by not having disgruntled dudes here we will pass.
I don't know if he is or not but that contract is bear to have and seems like Leon/Rosas/Aller got this.
We are respectable and while the next jump is the hardest its not likely on the whims of past performance.
Lavine is a fine player and has done well the last 5 years. Its the remainder of his contract going forward Im worried about.
I'm not worried about it either. Lavine don't fit. I understand there are some players you bring in regardless based on their talent, but Lavine ain't one of them. I think the Magic, Sixers, Heat and Pacers (Not sure how they're feeling about Mathurin these days) are the best fits. And to be fair to Lavine, he hasn't historically been a "disgruntled" star. The Bulls are a dumpster fire and I'm sure most of that team would say they8 like to leave if you did an informal poll.
BigDaddyG wrote:Nalod wrote:Its been reiterated that he don't want NY and if Scott Perry speaks for what our outlook is by not having disgruntled dudes here we will pass.
I don't know if he is or not but that contract is bear to have and seems like Leon/Rosas/Aller got this.
We are respectable and while the next jump is the hardest its not likely on the whims of past performance.
Lavine is a fine player and has done well the last 5 years. Its the remainder of his contract going forward Im worried about.I'm not worried about it either. Lavine don't fit. I understand there are some players you bring in regardless based on their talent, but Lavine ain't one of them. I think the Magic, Sixers, Heat and Pacers (Not sure how they're feeling about Mathurin these days) are the best fits. And to be fair to Lavine, he hasn't historically been a "disgruntled" star. The Bulls are a dumpster fire and I'm sure most of that team would say they8 like to leave if you did an informal poll.
Hope Sixers take Lavine. That would be wonderful.
EwingsGlass wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Nalod wrote:Its been reiterated that he don't want NY and if Scott Perry speaks for what our outlook is by not having disgruntled dudes here we will pass.
I don't know if he is or not but that contract is bear to have and seems like Leon/Rosas/Aller got this.
We are respectable and while the next jump is the hardest its not likely on the whims of past performance.
Lavine is a fine player and has done well the last 5 years. Its the remainder of his contract going forward Im worried about.I'm not worried about it either. Lavine don't fit. I understand there are some players you bring in regardless based on their talent, but Lavine ain't one of them. I think the Magic, Sixers, Heat and Pacers (Not sure how they're feeling about Mathurin these days) are the best fits. And to be fair to Lavine, he hasn't historically been a "disgruntled" star. The Bulls are a dumpster fire and I'm sure most of that team would say they8 like to leave if you did an informal poll.
Hope Sixers take Lavine. That would be wonderful.
PHI would be the favorites if they got Lavine.
nycericanguy wrote:foosballnick wrote:nycericanguy wrote:LivingLegend wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:If Randle/Brunson shooting % normalize and RJ sustains or even experiences a slight drop off, we have the potential for 3 "stars," with terrific depth. Not sure what makes a star these days, but all 3 guys should be able to average 20ppg - and if they can do so at 45% FG% and around 36%+ from 3 we are in good shape. Especially if Randle tosses in 9-10 rpg 4-5 apg and Brunson 6-7 apg.the issue is do we trust Randle and RJ to be "stars" come playoff time?
RJ showed great potential last season so I trust him to be good, but he's not a great shot creator under pressure.
I think we still lack a 2nd elite scorer and shooting. I think that's where a guy like Lavine could really help.
To be fair, I don't think the Knicks have 1 ball handler that I would really trust under pressure. IQ, Brunson are not at that level.
Teams like Miami and Boston are always going to give Knicks fits because of that IMO
i mean those are great defensive teams, they are going to give most teams fits.
but I think we beat MIA last year if we had a guy like Lavine. it was scoring and shooting more than forced TO's that really hurt us against MIA.
haha you just backdoor'ed your Lavine trade. love it
And yes, just against the elite teams.
Lavine or DM is what this team needs, but Lavine probably costs less.
Have had my eye in LaVine for some time because like the body type and scoring efficiency with potential to put up 4pm in big game BUT at same time his play style is a bit soft defensively and something seems just a bit missing.
i agree but if he's cheap enough I'd take the risk that Thibs can figure it out. say what you want but Lavine's scoring, shooting and efficiency has been on par with DM & Booker for 5 years.
My opinion is that fans have not caught up to the implications of the new CBA and how being over the Apron and 2nd Apron will basically completely hamstring a team. Lavine will make between $40 - $49M per year over the next 4 seasons. This means that even after you give up assets for him, he will also essentially be taking the spot of 2 guys on the Knicks current roster. For all his offensive ability - he's got question marks on his knee and can be soft defensively.that stuff is for the FO to figure out.
that being said, 2nd apron doesn't mean you CANT keep your own guys, it just makes trades or signings more difficult. You're pretty much locked into the team unless you shed salary.
but we are a long way from being there.
Everything is for the FO to figure out. Us fans just like playing pretend GM on a message board. That said, in your Lavine on the Knicks thoughts have you considered any of the negative impacts? People here want to ship Randle out at $30m.....how's Lavine at close to $50m gonna look when he hamstings the roster and his salary eats up the bench strength? What you giving up to get him? Once you bring him here if you then re-sign IQ or Grimes you're going over the first or even 2nd Apron.
1st Apron Penalties....MLE reduction to $5M and restricted to 2 year signing lose the ability to make a sign and trade if it keeps you over the apron. Can't sign a waived player if he made over ~$12m. Salary match in trades must be within 10%....cant take on more salary than sending out.
2nd Apron Penalties.....lose the MLE, no use of trade exceptions combining multiple players, no cash in trades to level deals, no trade exception carry overs from prior years, 1st round picks are frozen 7 years out and cannot be traded, first round picks are moved to the end of the first round if in the 2nd Apron for 2 out of 4 years.
Essentially its not worth it to bring in an expensive salary unless it brings you close to a championship. Lavine would be a major liability for 4 years.
nycericanguy wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Nalod wrote:Its been reiterated that he don't want NY and if Scott Perry speaks for what our outlook is by not having disgruntled dudes here we will pass.
I don't know if he is or not but that contract is bear to have and seems like Leon/Rosas/Aller got this.
We are respectable and while the next jump is the hardest its not likely on the whims of past performance.
Lavine is a fine player and has done well the last 5 years. Its the remainder of his contract going forward Im worried about.I'm not worried about it either. Lavine don't fit. I understand there are some players you bring in regardless based on their talent, but Lavine ain't one of them. I think the Magic, Sixers, Heat and Pacers (Not sure how they're feeling about Mathurin these days) are the best fits. And to be fair to Lavine, he hasn't historically been a "disgruntled" star. The Bulls are a dumpster fire and I'm sure most of that team would say they8 like to leave if you did an informal poll.
Hope Sixers take Lavine. That would be wonderful.
PHI would be the favorites if they got Lavine.
We clearly have different opinions about Lavine’s ability to help teams win games. I see Lavine as an overpriced player that is injured very often whose fgame is reliant on his athleticism. He is a half-hearted defender. On offense, needs the ball in his hands to be remotely effective.
If the goal of basketball is to win games and to outscore your opponent, he does neither of these things. His career win loss is 210-357 and his career plus minus is -1657. The fact is that he cannot win games.
What choice do we have? Not endorse it if it don’t work be that guy who shits on it and gets off on being right? LOL…..
I’d put a nalodian spinover on it that it was a good idea that did not execute!
Truth if it failed and team falters, knick fans have little patience anymore. Bulls have sucked for a while but they had a dynasty to build on a few good runs since. Its been a while but we are barren for 50 years with only one good run in between in the ewing era. The 1999 short season was fun as hell, but SAS kicked our ass and we were pretty beat by the time the series came around.
Knixkik wrote:KnickDanger wrote:Look at the Clips and their “4 Star” roster. So glad the FO has resisted pressure from the gasbags and bing bongers.Just because a player was a star doesn’t mean he is for his entire career. Westbrook hasn’t been a star in years. Harden has fallen off I think. So you have 2 stars and 2 former stars. The issue is the former stars getting current star treatment. Otherwise westbrook wouldn’t be starting and harden wouldn’t have landed with the clippers. The league changes fast. Guys like Maxey and Haliburton have replaced guys like Westbrook and harden as stars of the league. It comes down to not everyone is lebron or KD or Steph and can remain a star in his mid 30s.
Good point. Aging stars are more hit and miss when it comes to availability and consistency.
3 stars gives you a plan b and c. If one or two of them are hurt during the season.
With the Knicks, it comes down to what we are going to do with IQ and RJ I doubt IQ. wants to spend the bulk of his next contract coming off the bench. Too talented.
RJ looks like he's trending towards all star territory, IQ as well, if he can start somewhere. We have 5 all stars, or near all stars if you count Mitch's season so far.. We have the assets to get a star in his prime, but should we? Chemistry is important.
GustavBahler wrote:Knixkik wrote:KnickDanger wrote:Look at the Clips and their “4 Star” roster. So glad the FO has resisted pressure from the gasbags and bing bongers.Just because a player was a star doesn’t mean he is for his entire career. Westbrook hasn’t been a star in years. Harden has fallen off I think. So you have 2 stars and 2 former stars. The issue is the former stars getting current star treatment. Otherwise westbrook wouldn’t be starting and harden wouldn’t have landed with the clippers. The league changes fast. Guys like Maxey and Haliburton have replaced guys like Westbrook and harden as stars of the league. It comes down to not everyone is lebron or KD or Steph and can remain a star in his mid 30s.
Good point. Aging stars are more hit and miss when it comes to availability and consistency.
Lavine has been very durable and he'll only be 31 at the start of his final contract year.
nycericanguy wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Knixkik wrote:KnickDanger wrote:Look at the Clips and their “4 Star” roster. So glad the FO has resisted pressure from the gasbags and bing bongers.Just because a player was a star doesn’t mean he is for his entire career. Westbrook hasn’t been a star in years. Harden has fallen off I think. So you have 2 stars and 2 former stars. The issue is the former stars getting current star treatment. Otherwise westbrook wouldn’t be starting and harden wouldn’t have landed with the clippers. The league changes fast. Guys like Maxey and Haliburton have replaced guys like Westbrook and harden as stars of the league. It comes down to not everyone is lebron or KD or Steph and can remain a star in his mid 30s.
Good point. Aging stars are more hit and miss when it comes to availability and consistency.
Lavine has been very durable and he'll only be 31 at the start of his final contract year.
Which definition of “durable” are you using? He misses an average of 20 games a year.
He makes 40mm and has a 15% trade kicker.
Hard pass for me.
EwingsGlass wrote:nycericanguy wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Knixkik wrote:KnickDanger wrote:Look at the Clips and their “4 Star” roster. So glad the FO has resisted pressure from the gasbags and bing bongers.Just because a player was a star doesn’t mean he is for his entire career. Westbrook hasn’t been a star in years. Harden has fallen off I think. So you have 2 stars and 2 former stars. The issue is the former stars getting current star treatment. Otherwise westbrook wouldn’t be starting and harden wouldn’t have landed with the clippers. The league changes fast. Guys like Maxey and Haliburton have replaced guys like Westbrook and harden as stars of the league. It comes down to not everyone is lebron or KD or Steph and can remain a star in his mid 30s.
Good point. Aging stars are more hit and miss when it comes to availability and consistency.
Lavine has been very durable and he'll only be 31 at the start of his final contract year.
Which definition of “durable” are you using? He misses an average of 20 games a year.
He makes 40mm and has a 15% trade kicker.
Hard pass for me.
he had 1 surgery 6-7 years ago, since then when comparing his offensive numbers with DM and Booker, he's played more games than both of them and thats despite the fact that CHI was resting him on B2B's even when he was healthy coming off the surgery. I guess you wouldn't want DM or Booker either? since those guys aren't durable according to you and dont defend either? Just saying there's no perfect player out there, we have a window where we can go for it and our biggest need is scoring and shooting and Lavine is elite at both of those. He would easily be our best scorer.
stars get max. a guy who puts up 25/5/5 on near 48/40/84 is going to get max. Anyone worth trading for is going to be making max.
I forget where I saw it (I think it was from Larry Brown's own mouth), but the team comparison that I saw that I agree liked, that we should try to emulate, is the Billups/Rip/Prince/Sheed/Wallace Detroit Pistons. I think we're not quite there. But I do think it's doable. And I do think that having a team with no holes in terms of rotation strength is an incredibly effective way to deal with a team that's top heavy. I think running out five above average players no matter the situation is the best way to destroy a team like the Clippers. I think it is much less effective against a team like the present day 76ers.
TLDR; you want more depth if the best teams completely starphuck, and you want to have more elite players if the stars are more spread out across the league
gradyandrew wrote:Two best teams are Nuggets and Boston, each with 4 guys who fit the "starsp" criteria in Jokic, Murray, Gordon, and Porter Jr. and Tatum, KP, Brown, and Holiday. Gordon has a below max contract but I think that has more to do with him valuing winning over the big contract dollars.You could compare Gordon to Jerami Grant as an example for the winning team tax.Until Knicks can hang with Boston Philly and Milwaukee, they are still a second tier team.
see, I disagree. Starphuck implies, to me anyway, cashing in your chips and depleting the rest of your roster to acquire stars, like the Clippers of present day
The Nuggets guys are homegrown. So they might have some star power, but its mostly homegrown. Murray is great but never voted to an all star game. Aaron Gordon, was labelled a bust, but can play, never been to ASG. Porter Jr, a stud who fell because people were afraid of his injury history, also never been to ASG. To me, the Nuggets are the quintessential 'buy low' team
As for the Celtics, they drafted two supermax studs, and made some moves that at first glance appear like a starphuck, but I don't think so. They traded a lockdown defender to get a stretch 5, which is something that the Cs sorely needed. Jaylen Brown looks even better with KP. Then, they replaced their lockdown defender with a better lockdown defender. I think their acquisitions filled needs, as opposed to the Clippers who just built a fantasy team
Ultimately we need to upgrade those areas, the thing is, it's likely going to be at the expense of some defense, because where is the two way star scorer coming from? those guys are almost nonexistent. Donovan Mitchell isn't a good defender either.
fortunately I think DDV and Jhart for a full season over Obi did improve our defense a good bit and allows us to make a bit of a trade off.
Nalod wrote:Thus far I trust this FO and perhaps blindly if they deemed it with enthusiasm to go for Lavine I’d root for it too work.
What choice do we have? Not endorse it if it don’t work be that guy who shits on it and gets off on being right? LOL…..
I’d put a nalodian spinover on it that it was a good idea that did not execute!Truth if it failed and team falters, knick fans have little patience anymore. Bulls have sucked for a while but they had a dynasty to build on a few good runs since. Its been a while but we are barren for 50 years with only one good run in between in the ewing era. The 1999 short season was fun as hell, but SAS kicked our ass and we were pretty beat by the time the series came around.
I trust the FO in terms of negotiation of salaries. In terms of roster construction, still have concerns.
nycericanguy wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Nalod wrote:Its been reiterated that he don't want NY and if Scott Perry speaks for what our outlook is by not having disgruntled dudes here we will pass.
I don't know if he is or not but that contract is bear to have and seems like Leon/Rosas/Aller got this.
We are respectable and while the next jump is the hardest its not likely on the whims of past performance.
Lavine is a fine player and has done well the last 5 years. Its the remainder of his contract going forward Im worried about.I'm not worried about it either. Lavine don't fit. I understand there are some players you bring in regardless based on their talent, but Lavine ain't one of them. I think the Magic, Sixers, Heat and Pacers (Not sure how they're feeling about Mathurin these days) are the best fits. And to be fair to Lavine, he hasn't historically been a "disgruntled" star. The Bulls are a dumpster fire and I'm sure most of that team would say they8 like to leave if you did an informal poll.
Hope Sixers take Lavine. That would be wonderful.
PHI would be the favorites if they got Lavine.
He'd put a 40 spot on our heads in round 2 or somewhere along the line.