Knicks · Is DDV showing that Grimes is expendable? (page 7)
nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
But that's a lot of juice to give up for a guy we might be able to get a lot cheaper if he simply tells people he wants to play in NY
nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
It's not probably, it's for sure too many guys that require the ball to be effective. As it us our guys are complaining about the lack of touches. Besides, DM means we have only one defensive player in Mitch in the SL. DM is not a winning player, far from it.He would require an overhaul of the SL to be a net positive
nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.
BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.
I'm surprised that there still would be interest in DM, if yet another team wanted to trade him while he's young and putting up gawdy numbers. Why was Ainge, now (maybe) the Cavs, so willing to part with Mitchell, instead of offering him a max deal?
My guess is the lack of a clutch game. Will that improve in NY when the pressure to perform in his home town will be greater? IDK. Wouldnt give away the store to find out.
I'd rather take a chance on Zion, and his sketchy history as a pro. Because he's clutch, and he also wanted to be a Knick since before he was drafted. Thats what we need, an elite player who is also clutch.
BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.
If DM makes it known he's not staying, then Lavine & IQ is a heck of a package for him, they are a team that wants to win so they'd probably value players over picks.
nycericanguy wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.If DM makes it known he's not staying, then Lavine & IQ is a heck of a package for him, they are a team that wants to win so they'd probably value players over picks.
I get that DM could force them to make a move, but that shoe hasn't dropped yet. For now, I have to think that Cle gave up way to many assets to consider making a move like this now.
GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.I'm surprised that there still would be interest in DM, if yet another team wanted to trade him while he's young and putting up gawdy numbers. Why was Ainge, now (maybe) the Cavs, so willing to part with Mitchell, instead of offering him a max deal?
My guess is the lack of a clutch game. Will that improve in NY when the pressure to perform in his home town will be greater? IDK. Wouldnt give away the store to find out.
I'd rather take a chance on Zion, and his sketchy history as a pro. Because he's clutch, and he also wanted to be a Knick since before he was drafted. Thats what we need, an elite player who is also clutch.
It's just conjecture, but nothing concrete has come up that the Cavaliers want to move on from DM. Also, while DM has had some stinkers he's also had some ridiculous post-season games. I don't question his clutchness. It's that his size and defense make building around him a bit difficult.
BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.I'm surprised that there still would be interest in DM, if yet another team wanted to trade him while he's young and putting up gawdy numbers. Why was Ainge, now (maybe) the Cavs, so willing to part with Mitchell, instead of offering him a max deal?
My guess is the lack of a clutch game. Will that improve in NY when the pressure to perform in his home town will be greater? IDK. Wouldnt give away the store to find out.
I'd rather take a chance on Zion, and his sketchy history as a pro. Because he's clutch, and he also wanted to be a Knick since before he was drafted. Thats what we need, an elite player who is also clutch.
It's just conjecture, but nothing concrete has come up that the Cavaliers want to move on from DM. Also, while DM has had some stinkers he's also had some ridiculous post-season games. I don't question his clutchness. It's that his size and defense make building around him a bit difficult.
It’s true. Kinda why I think Knicks are looking at OG for SF in that lineup. Then maybe you can kinda sorta try it?
BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.I'm surprised that there still would be interest in DM, if yet another team wanted to trade him while he's young and putting up gawdy numbers. Why was Ainge, now (maybe) the Cavs, so willing to part with Mitchell, instead of offering him a max deal?
My guess is the lack of a clutch game. Will that improve in NY when the pressure to perform in his home town will be greater? IDK. Wouldnt give away the store to find out.
I'd rather take a chance on Zion, and his sketchy history as a pro. Because he's clutch, and he also wanted to be a Knick since before he was drafted. Thats what we need, an elite player who is also clutch.
It's just conjecture, but nothing concrete has come up that the Cavaliers want to move on from DM. Also, while DM has had some stinkers he's also had some ridiculous post-season games. I don't question his clutchness. It's that his size and defense make building around him a bit difficult.
So has Randle, but would you call him clutch?
martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.I'm surprised that there still would be interest in DM, if yet another team wanted to trade him while he's young and putting up gawdy numbers. Why was Ainge, now (maybe) the Cavs, so willing to part with Mitchell, instead of offering him a max deal?
My guess is the lack of a clutch game. Will that improve in NY when the pressure to perform in his home town will be greater? IDK. Wouldnt give away the store to find out.
I'd rather take a chance on Zion, and his sketchy history as a pro. Because he's clutch, and he also wanted to be a Knick since before he was drafted. Thats what we need, an elite player who is also clutch.
It's just conjecture, but nothing concrete has come up that the Cavaliers want to move on from DM. Also, while DM has had some stinkers he's also had some ridiculous post-season games. I don't question his clutchness. It's that his size and defense make building around him a bit difficult.
It’s true. Kinda why I think Knicks are looking at OG for SF in that lineup. Then maybe you can kinda sorta try it?
I think adding Mitchell and OG in place of Grimes and Barrett is the plan, but who knows if they can pull it off. OG is tough because of the lawsuit with Toronto, but as an upcoming free agent he’s also now represented by Sam Rose.
GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.I'm surprised that there still would be interest in DM, if yet another team wanted to trade him while he's young and putting up gawdy numbers. Why was Ainge, now (maybe) the Cavs, so willing to part with Mitchell, instead of offering him a max deal?
My guess is the lack of a clutch game. Will that improve in NY when the pressure to perform in his home town will be greater? IDK. Wouldnt give away the store to find out.
I'd rather take a chance on Zion, and his sketchy history as a pro. Because he's clutch, and he also wanted to be a Knick since before he was drafted. Thats what we need, an elite player who is also clutch.
It's just conjecture, but nothing concrete has come up that the Cavaliers want to move on from DM. Also, while DM has had some stinkers he's also had some ridiculous post-season games. I don't question his clutchness. It's that his size and defense make building around him a bit difficult.
So has Randle, but would you call him clutch?
While Mitchell performances the past few years have dropped off from his regular season, he's still been solid. He's not the clutchest player, but I wouldn't call him "unclutch." Randle has just been putrid in the post season for his career. I think there have been times where Randle has put me in cardiac crisis when he has the ball in the playoffs.
https://stathead.com/tiny/MjoBI
2 post seasons with the Knicks. We know the rest.
martin wrote:Is Randle's playoff career even worth looking at? Those circumstances are so unkindly unique that it seems worthless to be honest.2 post seasons with the Knicks. We know the rest.
I think this is a case where the eye test don't do justice to how bad the numbers are.
BigDaddyG wrote:martin wrote:Is Randle's playoff career even worth looking at? Those circumstances are so unkindly unique that it seems worthless to be honest.2 post seasons with the Knicks. We know the rest.
I think this is a case where the eye test don't do justice to how bad the numbers are.
Randle was shitty. So were his teammates and ankle.
For me, not much to go off of.
A lot of really good players have shitty playoffs. Until they don't.
BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.I'm surprised that there still would be interest in DM, if yet another team wanted to trade him while he's young and putting up gawdy numbers. Why was Ainge, now (maybe) the Cavs, so willing to part with Mitchell, instead of offering him a max deal?
My guess is the lack of a clutch game. Will that improve in NY when the pressure to perform in his home town will be greater? IDK. Wouldnt give away the store to find out.
I'd rather take a chance on Zion, and his sketchy history as a pro. Because he's clutch, and he also wanted to be a Knick since before he was drafted. Thats what we need, an elite player who is also clutch.
It's just conjecture, but nothing concrete has come up that the Cavaliers want to move on from DM. Also, while DM has had some stinkers he's also had some ridiculous post-season games. I don't question his clutchness. It's that his size and defense make building around him a bit difficult.
So has Randle, but would you call him clutch?
While Mitchell performances the past few years have dropped off from his regular season, he's still been solid. He's not the clutchest player, but I wouldn't call him "unclutch." Randle has just been putrid in the post season for his career. I think there have been times where Randle has put me in cardiac crisis when he has the ball in the playoffs.
https://stathead.com/tiny/MjoBI
Point taken. I still dont want to trade for him. Ainge saw something he didnt like early on. Mitchell has shown why in the postseason for 2 teams. Id rather take a chance, pay a king's ransom,for a star we know will be clutch from day one. Not hoping it will happen down the road.
If Mitchell has a better playoffs this year, of course I'd have a change of opinion. But I'd like it changed before he's a Knick.
Panos wrote:Watch, after the outburst, Grimes goes off for 20 tonight
He will definitely be more aggressive.
Panos wrote:Watch, after the outburst, Grimes goes off for 20 tonight
I would bet anything he scores 0 tonight...
GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:GustavBahler wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:nycericanguy wrote:I wonder if we can pull off a 3 way with CHI & CLECHI - Grimes, + our 4 picks this year.
CLE - Lavine + IQ
NY - DMCLE gets Lavine who is locked up and gives them a much needed sniper wing, plus they get IQ to fill DM's role and defend.
CHI gets a good young player and some nice picks this year. Ours, DAL, DET 2nd, and another 2nd we have.
and we get our guy in DM and clear the logjam a bit while keeping all our picks going forward after this summer.
Interesting trade
You can probably make the same trade with RJ instead of Grimes and keep some of the picks instead.
Probably too many scorers if we had Randle, Brunson, RJ and DM.
I don't think adding RJ instead of Grimes changes the number of picks, but it would change the level of protections you could add on the picks. I don't see Cleveland moving in this, but I'd have to consider if I'm the Knicks.I'm surprised that there still would be interest in DM, if yet another team wanted to trade him while he's young and putting up gawdy numbers. Why was Ainge, now (maybe) the Cavs, so willing to part with Mitchell, instead of offering him a max deal?
My guess is the lack of a clutch game. Will that improve in NY when the pressure to perform in his home town will be greater? IDK. Wouldnt give away the store to find out.
I'd rather take a chance on Zion, and his sketchy history as a pro. Because he's clutch, and he also wanted to be a Knick since before he was drafted. Thats what we need, an elite player who is also clutch.
It's just conjecture, but nothing concrete has come up that the Cavaliers want to move on from DM. Also, while DM has had some stinkers he's also had some ridiculous post-season games. I don't question his clutchness. It's that his size and defense make building around him a bit difficult.
So has Randle, but would you call him clutch?
While Mitchell performances the past few years have dropped off from his regular season, he's still been solid. He's not the clutchest player, but I wouldn't call him "unclutch." Randle has just been putrid in the post season for his career. I think there have been times where Randle has put me in cardiac crisis when he has the ball in the playoffs.
https://stathead.com/tiny/MjoBIPoint taken. I still dont want to trade for him. Ainge saw something he didnt like early on. Mitchell has shown why in the postseason for 2 teams. Id rather take a chance, pay a king's ransom,for a star we know will be clutch from day one. Not hoping it will happen down the road.
If Mitchell has a better playoffs this year, of course I'd have a change of opinion. But I'd like it changed before he's a Knick.
I can see the hesitancy on Mitchell. I think what Ainge saw is that while Mitchell is a premier offensive engine, he's not going to bring you to the promised land by himself. Ainge decided to pivot and take a shot at Wemby, but Lauri threw a wrench in those plans. I'd prefer a wing shot-creator myself, but I wouldn't hang up the phone immediately if Mitchell is being offered. Would a Mitchell/Brunson frontcourt bring home a title? Probably not. But it would be fun to watch.