martin wrote:VDesai wrote:I wonder why the Knicks didn't ask for Schroeder back alongside OG instead of Precious/Malachi. They must have really liked Precious as a backup big - and given he has been playing ahead of Sims whom they have been developing for 3 years, that would seem to be the case.
Because the Knicks did need a big. And Malachi sucks compared to Schroeder, so Toronto needs him next to IQ.
And the Knicks wouldn't have been able to swing the $$$ for Schroeder.
Pretty sure the salary matching would have worked if it was Schroeder instead of Achiuwa/Flynn coming back. We ended up with a trade exception in the deal so I though we sent more salary out then what came in. In any event, they obviously wanted Precious in the deal because they see him as more viable than Sims and from a scouting perspective found value in his skillset. Wasn't clear why that was the case the first few games, but certainly saw more promise against Toronto. I feel like he was very soft finishing at the rim in his early games with NY, but he showed out better in this regard. He is also a guy who like to step out occasionally for the 3- he's not shot it at a good rate, but we haven't really seen much of that in his game yet.
VDesai wrote:martin wrote:VDesai wrote:I wonder why the Knicks didn't ask for Schroeder back alongside OG instead of Precious/Malachi. They must have really liked Precious as a backup big - and given he has been playing ahead of Sims whom they have been developing for 3 years, that would seem to be the case.
Because the Knicks did need a big. And Malachi sucks compared to Schroeder, so Toronto needs him next to IQ.
And the Knicks wouldn't have been able to swing the $$$ for Schroeder.
Pretty sure the salary matching would have worked if it was Schroeder instead of Achiuwa/Flynn coming back. We ended up with a trade exception in the deal so I though we sent more salary out then what came in. In any event, they obviously wanted Precious in the deal because they see him as more viable than Sims and from a scouting perspective found value in his skillset. Wasn't clear why that was the case the first few games, but certainly saw more promise against Toronto. I feel like he was very soft finishing at the rim in his early games with NY, but he showed out better in this regard. He is also a guy who like to step out occasionally for the 3- he's not shot it at a good rate, but we haven't really seen much of that in his game yet.
I'm sure both teams could have found a way for salary to match up. But the value and type of players don't make sense in totality. Like, why would Toronto want to give up Schroeder in that deal versus Malachi?
And not for nothing, the Knicks needed to find out what they have in Deuce, he was at end of contract.
i thought the same, Schroeder would have been good insurance in case we couldn't make a trade, but maybe we just don't like his game?
maybe we legit wanted to give Grimes and Deuce a chance.
martin wrote:VDesai wrote:martin wrote:VDesai wrote:I wonder why the Knicks didn't ask for Schroeder back alongside OG instead of Precious/Malachi. They must have really liked Precious as a backup big - and given he has been playing ahead of Sims whom they have been developing for 3 years, that would seem to be the case.
Because the Knicks did need a big. And Malachi sucks compared to Schroeder, so Toronto needs him next to IQ.
And the Knicks wouldn't have been able to swing the $$$ for Schroeder.
Pretty sure the salary matching would have worked if it was Schroeder instead of Achiuwa/Flynn coming back. We ended up with a trade exception in the deal so I though we sent more salary out then what came in. In any event, they obviously wanted Precious in the deal because they see him as more viable than Sims and from a scouting perspective found value in his skillset. Wasn't clear why that was the case the first few games, but certainly saw more promise against Toronto. I feel like he was very soft finishing at the rim in his early games with NY, but he showed out better in this regard. He is also a guy who like to step out occasionally for the 3- he's not shot it at a good rate, but we haven't really seen much of that in his game yet.
I'm sure both teams could have found a way for salary to match up. But the value and type of players don't make sense in totality. Like, why would Toronto want to give up Schroeder in that deal versus Malachi?
And not for nothing, the Knicks needed to find out what they have in Deuce, he was at end of contract.
It's only 11 games but Deuce isn't looking like a PG. He might get by as an undersized SG or a combo guard if he can continue to shoot well from 3. He is strong enough to be effective as a defender. He does not look like a primary ball handler to me and his assist numbers aren't great either. I think his long term outlook is as an emergency bench reserve/practice player but I'm all for him having the rotation spot to lose for now. This should be the summer we bring that Euro stash PG over (I forgot his name). Deuce seems to get in trouble when he tries to do too much. Does playing time fix this, I dunno.
One of the downsides of being a competent franchise is that our picks are deemed less valuable because they're projected in the low 20s.🤣
BigDaddyG wrote:Lot of smoke...
boy that feel REALLY low for Murray. Is that his actual value?
But all parties making sure the Lakers are cared for....
How do the Lakers get these deals done man. That offer is atrocious.
frustrating, if Lakers get DJM for a 2029 1st and a swap, that tells me we just didn't go after him seriously. And just like KP, I think it's a mistake. Leon plays it a bit too safe sometimes.
We can easily offer Grimes, two 1sts and the WSH 1st which likely turns into two very good 2nd's and that wouldn't even affect our cupboard of assets much at all. We'd still have two 1sts this draft alone and all our own picks moving forward.
and if ATL really wants an unprotected golden ticket 5 years away, why not offer our own unprotected '29 and a swap along with Grimes who actually fits well there?
nycericanguy wrote:frustrating, if Lakers get DJM for a 2029 1st and a swap, that tells me we just didn't go after him seriously. And just like KP, I think it's a mistake. Leon plays it a bit too safe sometimes.
I dunno. That '29 pick is almost guaranteed to be a lottery pick. Sure the Knicks could top it, but would you feel comfortable giving Fournier, Grimes and three first rounders for Murray?
BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:frustrating, if Lakers get DJM for a 2029 1st and a swap, that tells me we just didn't go after him seriously. And just like KP, I think it's a mistake. Leon plays it a bit too safe sometimes.
I dunno. That '29 pick is almost guaranteed to be a lottery pick. Sure the Knicks could top it, but would you feel comfortable giving Fournier, Grimes and three first rounders for Murray?
we have 8 1sts in the next 4 drafts, yes I would, what are we holding them for?
And if we give our own '29 and a swap and add Grimes, that's beating the Lakers offer right there with only 1 first and a swap
nycericanguy wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:frustrating, if Lakers get DJM for a 2029 1st and a swap, that tells me we just didn't go after him seriously. And just like KP, I think it's a mistake. Leon plays it a bit too safe sometimes.
I dunno. That '29 pick is almost guaranteed to be a lottery pick. Sure the Knicks could top it, but would you feel comfortable giving Fournier, Grimes and three first rounders for Murray?
we have 8 1sts in the next 4 drafts, yes I would, what are we holding them for?
And if we give our own '29 and a swap and add Grimes, that's beating the Lakers offer right there with only 1 first and a swap
Hawks are supposedly high on Bufkin and may not value Grimes the same way. That '29 pick becomes kind of limiting when you factor in Stepien rules and could hamper the team when a player they perceive as a franchise player comes along. Also, if I had to guess, that Lakers pick is probably going to be better. Lakers have no picks to give up for a while and Lebron will probably be gone by then. I don't do the deal if I'm the Knicks. I think the Knicks are hurt by the fact that their '24 don't really push the need much for Atlanta since they already have multiple picks in the draft.
we're not getting much for Grimes and a 1st, so if we want a real difference maker we gotta pay up.
While I would prefer to get Murray, a simpler question is whether DLO is better than Fournier? Could DLo (CAA client) be the bench scoring threat for the Knicks. Fournier's contract has a team option where Russell is guaranteed. But, is it possible the Knicks could facilitate the trade to make it work for all?
Now, not looking to get greedy or anything, but if we could get involved and manage to swipe Jarred Vanderbilt, that would be a coup!
Hawks get
Lakers 2029
Knicks 2024
Fournier
Whatever else LAL can give them.
LAL gets
Murray
Grimes
Knicks get
DLO
Vanderbilt
Rich Paul's allegiance again once Lebron retires.
I don't "Love" Dlo. Don't really want him in the starting lineup. But as a super 6th, I'd swallow that pill. I think of it as exercising Fournier's option next year to preserve salary cap.
McBride
DLO
Hart
Vanderbilt
Precious/Robinson
nycericanguy wrote:we're not getting much for Grimes and a 1st, so if we want a real difference maker we gotta pay up.
But is Murray a real difference maker. I think the Knicks are still looking at 3 or 4 in the East if they get Murray. I mean, that's still possible if they stay pat. The idea of Murray was palatable at a relatively neutral cost. Three picks plus Grimes and Fournier is an overpay for a guy who isn't even an All-Star.
BigDaddyG wrote:nycericanguy wrote:we're not getting much for Grimes and a 1st, so if we want a real difference maker we gotta pay up.
But is Murray a real difference maker. I think the Knicks are still looking at 3 or 4 in the East if they get Murray. I mean, that's still possible if they stay pat. The idea of Murray was palatable at a relatively neutral cost. Three picks plus Grimes and Fournier is an overpay for a guy who isn't even an All-Star.
IDC about tags or popularity contests, Brunson and OG have never been all stars either.
DJM can help us in alot of areas, we should get him.
ramtour420 wrote:What about D'Angelo Russell for our bench punch?
A part of me would be cool with and part is like "phuck the Lakers, I'm not helping th unless they give us a pick, which they dont have. Let them take that crap to Utah or the Bulls or whoever." Plus, I think Russell might cause Thibs to retire at the end of the season.
BigDaddyG wrote:ramtour420 wrote:What about D'Angelo Russell for our bench punch?
A part of me would be cool with and part is like "phuck the Lakers, I'm not helping th unless they give us a pick, which they dont have. Let them take that crap to Utah or the Bulls or whoever." Plus, I think Russell might cause Thibs to retire at the end of the season.
I would want Jarred Vanderbilt from LAL.
EwingsGlass wrote:While I would prefer to get Murray, a simpler question is whether DLO is better than Fournier? Could DLo (CAA client) be the bench scoring threat for the Knicks. Fournier's contract has a team option where Russell is guaranteed. But, is it possible the Knicks could facilitate the trade to make it work for all? Now, not looking to get greedy or anything, but if we could get involved and manage to swipe Jarred Vanderbilt, that would be a coup!
Hawks get
Lakers 2029
Knicks 2024
Fournier
Whatever else LAL can give them.
LAL gets
Murray
Grimes
Knicks get
DLO
Vanderbilt
Rich Paul's allegiance again once Lebron retires.
I don't "Love" Dlo. Don't really want him in the starting lineup. But as a super 6th, I'd swallow that pill. I think of it as exercising Fournier's option next year to preserve salary cap.
McBride
DLO
Hart
Vanderbilt
Precious/Robinson
I think D'Lo has a player option, some that would have to be worked out before any trade goes through.
