Mitch for a future 1st, even a late 1st, would make sense to replenish some draft stock.
Philc1 wrote:shinmen wrote:If we let IHart go, we'll be very thin in the 4/5 position. Mitch (injury prone), Randle, Sims and occasionally OG (injury prone). We have the potential to be unstoppable but if we get destroyed in the front court because of an injury, it's gonna counterweight the great 1,2, 3 positions. I'm sure the fo is aware of this but I'll wait to see what they do before getting my hopes up for a final/title.
Bridges and OG are both PF’s in todays nba. Sims is emerging as a solid defensive Center. Jacob Toppin has potential
We would struggle against the teams with size. Bridges/OG/Hart are not full time solutions.
Sims last year showed why he can't be counted to contribute in the playoffs. I'd cut him if he weren't so cheap.
i wonder how we feel about Randle? Take him out and we can run out OG/Mikal/DDV/Brunson along with a big man. that spacing and defensive switchability is nuts.
but I want Randle back, he creates alot of open looks and I would love to see him without the pressure of scoring 20+... just create, rebound, and draw fouls and only taking good shots.
Wow - what a wild trade. If OG returns we have the best wing defense in the NBA. Mikal more than good enough as a shooter and has the ability to get his own shot - or at least had to for 2 yrs in Brooklyn.
The cost is crazy- but only Bogey in terms of rotation players which means we remain stacked. Its the 2029 and 2031 unprotected picks - we couldnt have thrown some protections on that to make it work? Im sure the Nets made us pay a premium.
Hartenstein has to come back. Would be tough to lose him now.
VDesai wrote:Hartenstein has to come back. Would be tough to lose him now.
You're right. I hope they get creative to keep him. They can dump Mitch or they can max iHart with a player option in the year we have his full bird rights.
jaydh wrote:Philc1 wrote:shinmen wrote:If we let IHart go, we'll be very thin in the 4/5 position. Mitch (injury prone), Randle, Sims and occasionally OG (injury prone). We have the potential to be unstoppable but if we get destroyed in the front court because of an injury, it's gonna counterweight the great 1,2, 3 positions. I'm sure the fo is aware of this but I'll wait to see what they do before getting my hopes up for a final/title.
Bridges and OG are both PF’s in todays nba. Sims is emerging as a solid defensive Center. Jacob Toppin has potential
We would struggle against the teams with size. Bridges/OG/Hart are not full time solutions.
Sims last year showed why he can't be counted to contribute in the playoffs. I'd cut him if he weren't so cheap.
I don’t think Mitch and Precious with a drafted big man is that thin tbh. Every team plays to their strengths and this team would have by far the most dynamic wing defense in the league.
nycericanguy wrote:i wonder how we feel about Randle? Take him out and we can run out OG/Mikal/DDV/Brunson along with a big man. that spacing and defensive switchability is nuts.but I want Randle back, he creates alot of open looks and I would love to see him without the pressure of scoring 20+... just create, rebound, and draw fouls and only taking good shots.
I think OG was a credible 4 for them. He has a big extension looming. This gives them depth to withstand not keeping him (if they let him walk or deal him).
VDesai wrote:Wow - what a wild trade. If OG returns we have the best wing defense in the NBA. Mikal more than good enough as a shooter and has the ability to get his own shot - or at least had to for 2 yrs in Brooklyn.The cost is crazy- but only Bogey in terms of rotation players which means we remain stacked. Its the 2029 and 2031 unprotected picks - we couldnt have thrown some protections on that to make it work? Im sure the Nets made us pay a premium.
Hartenstein has to come back. Would be tough to lose him now.
We got Mikal without trading any players - there was a premium for that also. Not even Deuce went in the trade. Wild.
The perimeter D is so elite they could run Randle at the 5 and still be an elite D unit.
nycericanguy wrote:i wonder how we feel about Randle? Take him out and we can run out OG/Mikal/DDV/Brunson along with a big man. that spacing and defensive switchability is nuts.but I want Randle back, he creates alot of open looks and I would love to see him without the pressure of scoring 20+... just create, rebound, and draw fouls and only taking good shots.
So many crazy combinations they can throw out there with Randle. However I would not be shocked if they flipped Randle now for a more conventional rotation (Mikal 3 and OG 4).
I saw we were checking in on Marcus Smart and JJJ. That kind of trade with Randle involved wouldn’t shock me at all.
2 summers ago the jazz wanted RJ, IQ and all of the picks for Mitchell. Knicks ended up getting both OG and mikal combined for the same package essentially
I don’t know what the lineups will be but it certainly seems like we have a much better chance to matchup w celts. Tatum/brown guarded by og/bridges
When we got Og we got longer. We’re now longer again. Can’t teach length
We need OG back
We want but don’t need iHart. Hopefully winning and fit are high on his list. There’s a huge risk he goes someplace else for 20+ and undeliverable compared to expectations. I do;t see him having the same impact on an arbitrary team. And conversely I suspect we can make a lot of centers work here as long as they’re active on D
Knixkik wrote:2 summers ago the jazz wanted RJ, IQ and all of the picks for Mitchell. Knicks ended up getting both OG and mikal combined for the same package essentially
this makes me feel better
martin wrote:Knixkik wrote:2 summers ago the jazz wanted RJ, IQ and all of the picks for Mitchell. Knicks ended up getting both OG and mikal combined for the same package essentially
Dang you right
Excellent point. Also 2 years ago one would have expected the picks to be better I would think
we still have 2 firsts this draft and the WSH/DET 1sts. and sure the WSH one probably turns into two seconds, but those would be HIGH seconds in that case, almost like late 1sts. then I heard we also got a 26' 2nd rounder from BK in the trade?
And maybe we can flip Mitch for a future 1st, + Rokas... I think we'll be fine with picks. the '29/31 1sts might be good but you gotta give to get.
nycericanguy wrote:we still have 2 firsts this draft and the WSH/DET 1sts. and sure the WSH one probably turns into two seconds, but those would be HIGH seconds in that case, almost like late 1sts. then I heard we also got a 26' 2nd rounder from BK in the trade?And maybe we can flip Mitch for a future 1st, + Rokas... I think we'll be fine with picks. the '29/31 1sts might be good but you gotta give to get.
We also have like 100 seconds. We will be able to add some guys every year to some degree and we might be able to trade in the late first where we would be drafting anyway if we kept our picks, using those 2nds.
Knixkik wrote:2 summers ago the jazz wanted RJ, IQ and all of the picks for Mitchell. Knicks ended up getting both OG and mikal combined for the same package essentially
i'll reply twice because this is a great post.
UTAH reportedly wanted RJ, IQ, 3 unprotected 1sts, + the MIL 1st + 2 seconds.
So we ended up giving up RJ, IQ, 4 unprotected, MIL 1st, DET 2nd + a swap for OG, Mikal and a 2nd. I'll take that. but of course now we know we are a legit contender so are earlier picks aren't nearly as valued.
Can't help but get the feeling a little bit that in the same way DDV and Hart meant the end for IQ and RJ, does this mean the end for Randle.
We have an elite volume shooting prototypical 2 in DDV. Mikal is not a 2 although he could probably pass for one in the current projected starting lineup. Just seems like each time we've made a move where things were slightly off, another move followed to balance it out.
DLeethal wrote:Can't help but get the feeling a little bit that in the same way DDV and Hart meant the end for IQ and RJ, does this mean the end for Randle. We have an elite volume shooting prototypical 2 in DDV. Mikal is not a 2 although he could probably pass for one in the current projected starting lineup. Just seems like each time we've made a move where things were slightly off, another move followed to balance it out.
and also Randle doesn't fit this new high IQ team... gonna be interesting, i'm fine either way, but OG at the 4 is risky considering the rebounding and how many games he misses.
I lean toward keeping Randle and having a deep, versatile team that can stay fresh.
martin wrote:Woooooooooooo!!!!
I hope I am wrong, yet to be on most things Knicks 
, but I have said that this type of deal for Bridges is overpaying for a role player. IMHO.
Only way Nets do this deal is if I am right.
Was this offer made to the Cavs? Anyone else?
