GustavBahler wrote:Philc1 wrote:When did Hartenstein become Hakeem Olajuwon?
Hartenstein was a first rate glue guy for us. No superstar, but we need someone to fill his shoes.
He’s a good role player at Center. Mitch is better defensively. Hart is a good passer for a Center and he has one move around the basket on offense otherwise all his points come on put backs just like Mitch.
Dwightschrute wrote:I think okc overpaid
We have more than enough with mitch
I think we possibly trade for Kessler at some point as I think the coach likes him
It’s a bad contract. And I like Hartenstein
Philc1 wrote:Dwightschrute wrote:I think okc overpaid
We have more than enough with mitch
I think we possibly trade for Kessler at some point as I think the coach likes him
It’s a bad contract. And I like Hartenstein
Only 58 millions are guaranteed. Year 3 is a club option that OKC won't exercise I think. They will eventually have to pay all of their core players.
He bet on himself. I'm not sure he will have the same impact in OKC than he had in NY but unless his career spiral down to hell, he will earn more than 10 millions per after his 2 years in OKC that would have approximately matched the 4 years NY salary.
They over paid iHart for a piece they have a strong conviction for. If he is a final piece of a puzzle, its not an overpay. If he compliments Chet and free's him up to grow his game, its to an overpay. Its an investment.
His deal as mentioned is basically two years then a third with club option.
They can move on from him if and when they have a better option and if his contract after a year at worst is hard to move, they have plenty of trade capital and picks they can add as incentive. Since he can as free agent and cost them nothing, they can well afford to use something if need be to move him.
Its not a bad contract given the variables as I see it.
Philc1 wrote:Dwightschrute wrote:I think okc overpaid
We have more than enough with mitch
I think we possibly trade for Kessler at some point as I think the coach likes him
It’s a bad contract. And I like Hartenstein
Why is it bad if it fills a need under their salary circumstances without also affecting their level of play?
OKC GM is considered one of the best in the NBA. He thought it was a very very good contract.
They HAD to spend the money. If they did not, they would be penalized.
Who else would have been better for them? that would have made this go from bad to good for you? Cause that's the real question.
Seen Walker Kessler chatter heat up last few days anyone else? s
Think I saw Dadiet + Sims + DET pick + MIL pick ... seemed rather high
DLeethal wrote:Seen Walker Kessler chatter heat up last few days anyone else? s
I did see someone create a Knicks tweet based off of another hypothetical trade article that contained a small nugget of the Knicks wanting to trade for Wessler in June, and then that retread of a trade-fact was made into a full article saying nothing new since June, but it's now almost September so why not say the same thing again for clicks?
So, the usual.
DLeethal wrote:Think I saw Dadiet + Sims + DET pick + MIL pick ... seemed rather high
Mil Pick was already traded
martin wrote:DLeethal wrote:Seen Walker Kessler chatter heat up last few days anyone else? s
I did see someone create a Knicks tweet based off of another hypothetical trade article that contained a small nugget of the Knicks wanting to trade for Wessler in June, and then that retread of a trade-fact was made into a full article saying nothing new since June, but it's now almost September so why not say the same thing again for clicks?
So, the usual.
Leon been able to pull off the trades we thought were impossible recently. Watch Leon pull out a surprise, no one saw coming. He traded with Toronto, a team in court against the Knicks. With the Nets, for Gods sake. Maybe he can do the trifecta and get Kessler from Ainge on a fair deal. Or another young big.
But back to compensate for lack of Hart, can't we all just compensate like many men compensate by getting lots of guns and expensive cars, oh never mind
At least in the playoffs, I thought Precious and Mitchell played better than IHart. I also think Randle at center or other small ball lineups will be advantages for the Knicks.
I know nothing but I’d guess the Knicks would like to trade for Kessler but waiting on Danny to have a weak trade moment.
martin wrote:I know nothing but I’d guess the Knicks would like to trade for Kessler but waiting on Danny to have a weak trade moment.
For some reason this made me think of the early days of online sports commentary where someone would post a topic like "Knicks need Wembenyama."
Utah still owes okc a first round pick which is top 10 protected this year and top 8 next year. Danny has seemed pretty happy to tank to protect his picks, so maybe Kessler goes in order to protect draft positioning.
gradyandrew wrote:martin wrote:I know nothing but I’d guess the Knicks would like to trade for Kessler but waiting on Danny to have a weak trade moment.
For some reason this made me think of the early days of online sports commentary where someone would post a topic like "Knicks need Wembenyama."
Utah still owes okc a first round pick which is top 10 protected this year and top 8 next year. Danny has seemed pretty happy to tank to protect his picks, so maybe Kessler goes in order to protect draft positioning.
I was never under the impression that Danny felt the need to trade Kessler. He's young talent with a small salary. I think he's just gauging trade value and seeing what suckers are out there that are willing to overpay.
martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:Dwightschrute wrote:I think okc overpaid
We have more than enough with mitch
I think we possibly trade for Kessler at some point as I think the coach likes him
It’s a bad contract. And I like Hartenstein
Why is it bad if it fills a need under their salary circumstances without also affecting their level of play?
OKC GM is considered one of the best in the NBA. He thought it was a very very good contract.
They HAD to spend the money. If they did not, they would be penalized.
Who else would have been better for them? that would have made this go from bad to good for you? Cause that's the real question.
They already had Chet Holmgren at C. There were other UFA’s they could have signed
Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:Dwightschrute wrote:I think okc overpaid
We have more than enough with mitch
I think we possibly trade for Kessler at some point as I think the coach likes him
It’s a bad contract. And I like Hartenstein
Why is it bad if it fills a need under their salary circumstances without also affecting their level of play?
OKC GM is considered one of the best in the NBA. He thought it was a very very good contract.
They HAD to spend the money. If they did not, they would be penalized.
Who else would have been better for them? that would have made this go from bad to good for you? Cause that's the real question.
They already had Chet Holmgren at C. There were other UFA’s they could have signed
You can't just get away with the simple obvious right? No sir, this is not high school.
Chet will never be able to be a defending power backup C in the same way Mitch has some matchups that don't favor him.
If you think there were other UFA's that were possible and also filled out their salary cap, please list them. They need to meet the salary and skill level to pull that off, rotation player in the least.
martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:Dwightschrute wrote:I think okc overpaid
We have more than enough with mitch
I think we possibly trade for Kessler at some point as I think the coach likes him
It’s a bad contract. And I like Hartenstein
Why is it bad if it fills a need under their salary circumstances without also affecting their level of play?
OKC GM is considered one of the best in the NBA. He thought it was a very very good contract.
They HAD to spend the money. If they did not, they would be penalized.
Who else would have been better for them? that would have made this go from bad to good for you? Cause that's the real question.
They already had Chet Holmgren at C. There were other UFA’s they could have signed
You can't just get away with the simple obvious right? No sir, this is not high school.
Chet will never be able to be a defending power backup C in the same way Mitch has some matchups that don't favor him.
If you think there were other UFA's that were possible and also filled out their salary cap, please list them. They need to meet the salary and skill level to pull that off, rotation player in the least.
they literally signed IHart BECAUSE of Chet at center
martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:Dwightschrute wrote:I think okc overpaid
We have more than enough with mitch
I think we possibly trade for Kessler at some point as I think the coach likes him
It’s a bad contract. And I like Hartenstein
Why is it bad if it fills a need under their salary circumstances without also affecting their level of play?
OKC GM is considered one of the best in the NBA. He thought it was a very very good contract.
They HAD to spend the money. If they did not, they would be penalized.
Who else would have been better for them? that would have made this go from bad to good for you? Cause that's the real question.
They already had Chet Holmgren at C. There were other UFA’s they could have signed
You can't just get away with the simple obvious right? No sir, this is not high school.
Chet will never be able to be a defending power backup C in the same way Mitch has some matchups that don't favor him.
If you think there were other UFA's that were possible and also filled out their salary cap, please list them. They need to meet the salary and skill level to pull that off, rotation player in the least.
There are a lot of layers to OKC signing iHart.
For starters, I can see signing iHart was as much a defensive move as a roster addition. We all like iHart. His stats are solid. His chemistry was great here. His net rating (like all of the Knicks) is boosted by that amazing January. His other advanced stats are pretty good in moderate volume. Not $30mm good. But good. He fit well in NY. A guy I would target on the UFA market or the trade market.
When I survey the league, I see the Knicks as a major opponent within the same competitive horizon as OKC over the next 4-5 years. Losing iHart puts the Knicks in a little bind and no one is bailing the Knicks out. It weakens an otherwise strong squad. It’s a chink in our armor. Robinson can’t play 82 games. We will need alternatives.
Like the vultures picking over Miami’s carcass after the 2022 finals, they came pick off what they could from the Knicks roster. That’s why keeping OG is such a victory.
But I don’t think iHart wins a championship in OKC. I think he has traded his shot at a ring for $30m. New apron rules basically require salary to obtain salary - it’s much harder to add salary. So adding a serviceable player at $30mm is plausible if they want to have tradable salary to obtain the next superstar available. IHart will end up playing in Milwaukee or Phoenix or Miami or anywhere else on a depleted team. He thinks he signed with OKC, but he signed as trade filler. Serviceable trade filler, but trade filler. Teams need filler to go with youth to make trades now.
He is essentially Bruce Brown.
EwingsGlass wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:Dwightschrute wrote:I think okc overpaid
We have more than enough with mitch
I think we possibly trade for Kessler at some point as I think the coach likes him
It’s a bad contract. And I like Hartenstein
Why is it bad if it fills a need under their salary circumstances without also affecting their level of play?
OKC GM is considered one of the best in the NBA. He thought it was a very very good contract.
They HAD to spend the money. If they did not, they would be penalized.
Who else would have been better for them? that would have made this go from bad to good for you? Cause that's the real question.
They already had Chet Holmgren at C. There were other UFA’s they could have signed
You can't just get away with the simple obvious right? No sir, this is not high school.
Chet will never be able to be a defending power backup C in the same way Mitch has some matchups that don't favor him.
If you think there were other UFA's that were possible and also filled out their salary cap, please list them. They need to meet the salary and skill level to pull that off, rotation player in the least.
There are a lot of layers to OKC signing iHart.
For starters, I can see signing iHart was as much a defensive move as a roster addition. We all like iHart. His stats are solid. His chemistry was great here. His net rating (like all of the Knicks) is boosted by that amazing January. His other advanced stats are pretty good in moderate volume. Not $30mm good. But good. He fit well in NY. A guy I would target on the UFA market or the trade market.
When I survey the league, I see the Knicks as a major opponent within the same competitive horizon as OKC over the next 4-5 years. Losing iHart puts the Knicks in a little bind and no one is bailing the Knicks out. It weakens an otherwise strong squad. It’s a chink in our armor. Robinson can’t play 82 games. We will need alternatives.
Like the vultures picking over Miami’s carcass after the 2022 finals, they came pick off what they could from the Knicks roster. That’s why keeping OG is such a victory.
But I don’t think iHart wins a championship in OKC. I think he has traded his shot at a ring for $30m. New apron rules basically require salary to obtain salary - it’s much harder to add salary. So adding a serviceable player at $30mm is plausible if they want to have tradable salary to obtain the next superstar available. IHart will end up playing in Milwaukee or Phoenix or Miami or anywhere else on a depleted team. He thinks he signed with OKC, but he signed as trade filler. Serviceable trade filler, but trade filler. Teams need filler to go with youth to make trades now.
He is essentially Bruce Brown.
Regarding the bolded. iHart's advanced stats everywhere are pretty much A-MAZING. Not close to anything else. But they are not counting stats so they are hard to quantify. There is a bro on Reddit eg1400 something that has articulated this very well for any who want to look that up. Whole subreddit dedicated to that; it's well travelled.
IMHO iHart is worlds away from Bruce Brown. Or maybe he is the version of Bruce Brown in the very specific games in Denver on their way to championship, not the Toronto or other version.
Hot take - with Randle in tow, as the primary paint catcher and initiator, Robinson/Precious and their hands-off offensive style and relentless board crashing might be better than iHart who thrives when he's getting touches and creating.
