Knicks · Knicks look good, but now they need a new 6th man (page 16)

Maybe a trade to add to the bench on a low scale, Simms and Evan for Bagley and Burks from Detroit if they want to go with Grimes and Deuce and they can't find a bigger deal. Is Bagley terrible ?

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Portland. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

even if he shoots better he's an awful defender.

you really want to bench Grimes/MB to find out?

You think that really helps us? Our bench is playing with such spirit, the defense and shooting from those 2 has been off the charts.

Miles is averaging 7.8ppg in just 13.4mpg and shooting 56% from 3 on very high volume since the OG trade.

Quentin Grimes has averaged 12.0 points in just 19mpg, 3.4 rebounds and 1.2 steals and 45% from 3 during that same time.

These kids are coming into their own, they are not untouchable but to bench or trade them for washed up 30+ year olds who don't defend is just begging to ruin the team chemistry.

nycericanguy wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Portland. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

even if he shoots better he's an awful defender.

you really want to bench Grimes/MB to find out?

You think that really helps us? Our bench is playing with such spirit, the defense and shooting from those 2 has been off the charts.

Miles is averaging 7.8ppg in just 13.4mpg and shooting 56% from 3 on very high volume since the OG trade.

Quentin Grimes has averaged 12.0 points in just 19mpg, 3.4 rebounds and 1.2 steals and 45% from 3 during that same time.

These kids are coming into their own, they are not untouchable but to bench or trade them for washed up 30+ year olds who don't defend is just begging to ruin the team chemistry.

Cool your jets fan boy. The last few games we went thru Jones, Gafford, and Brogdon. Next I mentioned Clarkson for discussion. Clarkson is a scorer. Even against Portland the team 8 minutes barely scoring. Team can use a confident scorer for the bench to prevent these lapses in the playoffs

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Utah. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

Is Clarkson that big of an upgrade over Fournier tho? I mean their career numbers are pretty close. I don't see the team wasting assets on that caliber of player at this point.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Utah. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

Is Clarkson that big of an upgrade over Fournier tho? I mean their career numbers are pretty close. I don't see the team wasting assets on that caliber of player at this point.

Depends on the price. Everything for Leon Rose depends on the asking price. Clarkson is a ball handler and off the bench scorer, I can't say he is not better then Evan. Evan can't seem too help at all

Alpha1971 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Utah. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

Is Clarkson that big of an upgrade over Fournier tho? I mean their career numbers are pretty close. I don't see the team wasting assets on that caliber of player at this point.

Depends on the price. Everything for Leon Rose depends on the asking price. Clarkson is a ball handler and off the bench scorer, I can't say he is not better then Evan. Evan can't seem too help at all

I mean, it's hard to find evidence that Evan exists. Joking aside, they're similar players. Solid offensive guys who kinda suck at defense. If Thibs doesn't want to play one guy, why should I feel confident that Thibs is gonna feel the new guy? You're right, everything depends on price, but is Utah giving up Clarkson for a second rounder or 2? I think that's his worth right now.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Utah. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

Is Clarkson that big of an upgrade over Fournier tho? I mean their career numbers are pretty close. I don't see the team wasting assets on that caliber of player at this point.

Depends on the price. Everything for Leon Rose depends on the asking price. Clarkson is a ball handler and off the bench scorer, I can't say he is not better then Evan. Evan can't seem too help at all

I mean, it's hard to find evidence that Evan exists. Joking aside, they're similar players. Solid offensive guys who kinda suck at defense. If Thibs doesn't want to play one guy, why should I feel confident that Thibs is gonna feel the new guy? You're right, everything depends on price, but is Utah giving up Clarkson for a second rounder or 2? I think that's his worth right now.

JC won't command much, probably just a 2nd rounder. the real price would be having to bench Grimes and Deuce which I have no idea why everyone is so quick to want to do for mediocre players.

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Utah. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

Is Clarkson that big of an upgrade over Fournier tho? I mean their career numbers are pretty close. I don't see the team wasting assets on that caliber of player at this point.

Depends on the price. Everything for Leon Rose depends on the asking price. Clarkson is a ball handler and off the bench scorer, I can't say he is not better then Evan. Evan can't seem too help at all

I mean, it's hard to find evidence that Evan exists. Joking aside, they're similar players. Solid offensive guys who kinda suck at defense. If Thibs doesn't want to play one guy, why should I feel confident that Thibs is gonna feel the new guy? You're right, everything depends on price, but is Utah giving up Clarkson for a second rounder or 2? I think that's his worth right now.

JC won't command much, probably just a 2nd rounder. the real price would be having to bench Grimes and Deuce which I have no idea why everyone is so quick to want to do for mediocre players.

If Thibs and Leon are willing to cut Grimes and Deuces minutes by acquiring Clarkson I think then it's a good risk if they do the deal

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Utah. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

Is Clarkson that big of an upgrade over Fournier tho? I mean their career numbers are pretty close. I don't see the team wasting assets on that caliber of player at this point.

Depends on the price. Everything for Leon Rose depends on the asking price. Clarkson is a ball handler and off the bench scorer, I can't say he is not better then Evan. Evan can't seem too help at all

I mean, it's hard to find evidence that Evan exists. Joking aside, they're similar players. Solid offensive guys who kinda suck at defense. If Thibs doesn't want to play one guy, why should I feel confident that Thibs is gonna feel the new guy? You're right, everything depends on price, but is Utah giving up Clarkson for a second rounder or 2? I think that's his worth right now.

JC won't command much, probably just a 2nd rounder. the real price would be having to bench Grimes and Deuce which I have no idea why everyone is so quick to want to do for mediocre players.

Yes, but we're dealing with Ainge. In all likelihood, they're not reaching an agreement.

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Alpha1971 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:Clarkson is shooting 40% from the field and 30% from three.

True and true. However, those figures are anomalous for his career. On our team he would be the 4th or 5th option as opposed to the second option in Utah. That change of responsibility may raise his game.

Is Clarkson that big of an upgrade over Fournier tho? I mean their career numbers are pretty close. I don't see the team wasting assets on that caliber of player at this point.

Depends on the price. Everything for Leon Rose depends on the asking price. Clarkson is a ball handler and off the bench scorer, I can't say he is not better then Evan. Evan can't seem too help at all

I mean, it's hard to find evidence that Evan exists. Joking aside, they're similar players. Solid offensive guys who kinda suck at defense. If Thibs doesn't want to play one guy, why should I feel confident that Thibs is gonna feel the new guy? You're right, everything depends on price, but is Utah giving up Clarkson for a second rounder or 2? I think that's his worth right now.

JC won't command much, probably just a 2nd rounder. the real price would be having to bench Grimes and Deuce which I have no idea why everyone is so quick to want to do for mediocre players.

Yes, but we're dealing with Ainge. In all likelihood, they're not reaching an agreement.

Fire up the lawsuits and that problem goes away!

He has two more years on a fresh extenstion he signed last summer. 2 yrs, 28mil.
Not a bad contract. He is 32 by seasons end.
I'll roll with DDV thank you.
I understand the DJM angle, maybe Brogdon (Got that Maurice Cheeks vibe)

Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Exactly this. They have a TPE or can also add a waived player. Do you think they waive Fournier if he isn't traded? Wait until he isn't playoff eligible and then waive him?

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Exactly this. They have a TPE or can also add a waived player. Do you think they waive Fournier if he isn't traded? Wait until he isn't playoff eligible and then waive him?

No need to waive. They can decline his option at the end of the season.

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Agreed. With a month before the deadline it gives us time to really evaluate this group, which I’m sure is their intention. I do think though at the very least the Knicks need to move Fournier for contracts which extend into next year so they have contracts outside of the core group to trade. Knicks aren’t trading Brunson, Hart, DDV this summer. OG and Hartenstein won’t be eligible. That leaves Randle and Mitch. Not that likely either. If the Knicks can move Fournier now for Gafford and Shamet they will get salary to move as early as this summer. Washington should bite for minimum draft comp. Adding Gafford as center insurance and shamet as some shooting depth helps. This type of deal or for Brogdon makes the most sense from a contract standpoint, not even talking about the basketball side.

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Agreed. With a month before the deadline it gives us time to really evaluate this group, which I’m sure is their intention. I do think though at the very least the Knicks need to move Fournier for contracts which extend into next year so they have contracts outside of the core group to trade. Knicks aren’t trading Brunson, Hart, DDV this summer. OG and Hartenstein won’t be eligible. That leaves Randle and Mitch. Not that likely either. If the Knicks can move Fournier now for Gafford and Shamet they will get salary to move as early as this summer. Washington should bite for minimum draft comp. Adding Gafford as center insurance and shamet as some shooting depth helps. This type of deal or for Brogdon makes the most sense from a contract standpoint, not even talking about the basketball side.

If no DJM then I agree Evan and a 1st for Gafford & Shamet is a great trade for the reasons you mentioned and doesn't take away min from the backcourt.

Precious does not look like he will be playable come playoff time so having Gafford behind Hart would be huge.

nycericanguy wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Agreed. With a month before the deadline it gives us time to really evaluate this group, which I’m sure is their intention. I do think though at the very least the Knicks need to move Fournier for contracts which extend into next year so they have contracts outside of the core group to trade. Knicks aren’t trading Brunson, Hart, DDV this summer. OG and Hartenstein won’t be eligible. That leaves Randle and Mitch. Not that likely either. If the Knicks can move Fournier now for Gafford and Shamet they will get salary to move as early as this summer. Washington should bite for minimum draft comp. Adding Gafford as center insurance and shamet as some shooting depth helps. This type of deal or for Brogdon makes the most sense from a contract standpoint, not even talking about the basketball side.

If no DJM then I agree Evan and a 1st for Gafford & Shamet is a great trade for the reasons you mentioned and doesn't take away min from the backcourt.

Precious does not look like he will be playable come playoff time so having Gafford behind Hart would be huge.

You do that deal and you run a real risk of not bringing iHart back. You can't have three centers, with two being injury risks, at that salary. You could just bring back Precious and Flynn back at inflated salaries.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Exactly this. They have a TPE or can also add a waived player. Do you think they waive Fournier if he isn't traded? Wait until he isn't playoff eligible and then waive him?

No need to waive. They can decline his option at the end of the season.

You would be doing Fournier a solid for being a good soldier.

BigDaddyG wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Agreed. With a month before the deadline it gives us time to really evaluate this group, which I’m sure is their intention. I do think though at the very least the Knicks need to move Fournier for contracts which extend into next year so they have contracts outside of the core group to trade. Knicks aren’t trading Brunson, Hart, DDV this summer. OG and Hartenstein won’t be eligible. That leaves Randle and Mitch. Not that likely either. If the Knicks can move Fournier now for Gafford and Shamet they will get salary to move as early as this summer. Washington should bite for minimum draft comp. Adding Gafford as center insurance and shamet as some shooting depth helps. This type of deal or for Brogdon makes the most sense from a contract standpoint, not even talking about the basketball side.

If no DJM then I agree Evan and a 1st for Gafford & Shamet is a great trade for the reasons you mentioned and doesn't take away min from the backcourt.

Precious does not look like he will be playable come playoff time so having Gafford behind Hart would be huge.

You do that deal and you run a real risk of not bringing iHart back. You can't have three centers, with two being injury risks, at that salary. You could just bring back Precious and Flynn back at inflated salaries.

you're right but we could prob unload either Mitch or Gafford for a 1st in the offseason. would make it even more of a win.

I mean DAL would kill for someone like Mitch and I'm sure they would give up a future 1st.

I think right now the starting job is Ihart's to lose going forward.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Exactly this. They have a TPE or can also add a waived player. Do you think they waive Fournier if he isn't traded? Wait until he isn't playoff eligible and then waive him?

No need to waive. They can decline his option at the end of the season.

No advantage to the team to decline his option. If we don't trade him and get back at least a useful player at his salary level, we then lose a contract for future trades. If we don't find a trade for hi to be used in the we have to extend him.

Rookie wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks comfortably in the position to sit back and take their time with the next moves.

Exactly this. They have a TPE or can also add a waived player. Do you think they waive Fournier if he isn't traded? Wait until he isn't playoff eligible and then waive him?

No need to waive. They can decline his option at the end of the season.

You would be doing Fournier a solid for being a good soldier.

Money wise at this point Evan will be happy if the Knicks pick up his option. No one will give him 18 million next season.