Knicks · Knicks off season moves (page 32)
BigDaddyG wrote:jaydh wrote:Panos wrote:It might just be me, but I'm not keen on JJJ. Fails my eye test. Dude moves in slow motion.but how's his footwork?
His ability to create in ISO is almost 'OG" esque.
Man - not sure what either of you are looking at or talking about.
Jackson's footwork is outstanding - able to turn/spin and finish with either hand (left hand is GREAT).
In terms of moving slow -- I mean he's a LARGE HUMAN but he knocks down 3's and blows by guys all the time.
Knixkik wrote:I wonder if Isaiah Jackson from Indiana will be considered to replace (and upgrade) achiuwa. I believe he’s an unrestricted free agent this summer because he wasn’t extended and his QO hasn’t been picked up. He’s a Sam Rose client. He’s also injured, but should be back early in the year. Maybe the Knicks can get him on a cheap prove-it deal.
Always been a fan but would think Pacer's view him over T Bryant.
He hurt us 2 years ago with put backs, alley oops and swatting a bunch of shots in playoff loss to Pacers.
Knixkik wrote:Nnaji can indeed sign for the second round exception. It’s only 1.3M a year.
Saw a blip that signing Nnaji to that type deal (~$1M) would free up more CAP space to use tax payer MLE and still be under the 2nd tier apron.
That said I thought that ANY use of the tax payer MLE locks a team at the 2nd apron and triggers all the yucky stuff you want to avoid at that level.
CBA so clear.
LivingLegend wrote:Apparently James Nnaji (21) has informed Barcelona he is leaving to pursue career in NBA.Knicks acquired his right in Kat deal.
Goodbye Mitch
and hello to our new Huck/Nnaji back-up center tandem.
I joke on Mitch but seems Nnaji has 4 years of International experience and played some minutes past 2 years.
Remember his highlights looked uber athletic -- maybe our new Yves Messi
More like goodbye Precious. We should still extend Mitch
LivingLegend wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:jaydh wrote:Panos wrote:It might just be me, but I'm not keen on JJJ. Fails my eye test. Dude moves in slow motion.but how's his footwork?
His ability to create in ISO is almost 'OG" esque.Man - not sure what either of you are looking at or talking about.
Jackson's footwork is outstanding - able to turn/spin and finish with either hand (left hand is GREAT).
In terms of moving slow -- I mean he's a LARGE HUMAN but he knocks down 3's and blows by guys all the time.
Fact remains, he hasn't impressed as an offensive "ISO" creator. That's different than being able to take advantage of mismatches. He's not a guy you give to ball to and ask to create when the defense encroaches and he's stuck with the opposing teams best player. Heck he ranked behind Desmond Bane in points per shot during isolation this season.What you get from JJJ is capable scoring blender with top notch defense. But he's your third offense if you're a serious team.
BigDaddyG wrote:LivingLegend wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:jaydh wrote:Panos wrote:It might just be me, but I'm not keen on JJJ. Fails my eye test. Dude moves in slow motion.but how's his footwork?
His ability to create in ISO is almost 'OG" esque.Man - not sure what either of you are looking at or talking about.
Jackson's footwork is outstanding - able to turn/spin and finish with either hand (left hand is GREAT).
In terms of moving slow -- I mean he's a LARGE HUMAN but he knocks down 3's and blows by guys all the time.
Fact remains, he hasn't impressed as an offensive "ISO" creator. That's different than being able to take advantage of mismatches. He's not a guy you give to ball to and ask to create when the defense encroaches and he's stuck with the opposing teams best player. Heck he ranked behind Desmond Bane in points per shot during isolation this season.What you get from JJJ is capable scoring blender with top notch defense. But he's your third offense if you're a serious team.
Isn’t that what we need - 3rd option who defends, covers for Kat and protects the rim without having chop sticks for hands like Mitchy?
How many centers are asked to ISO create?
Kat is considered top 3 scoring / talented center.
Last 2 years in 2 less mins per game Jackson has avg only 1 point less than Kat.
Kids pretty good at 25.
LivingLegend wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:LivingLegend wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:jaydh wrote:Panos wrote:It might just be me, but I'm not keen on JJJ. Fails my eye test. Dude moves in slow motion.but how's his footwork?
His ability to create in ISO is almost 'OG" esque.Man - not sure what either of you are looking at or talking about.
Jackson's footwork is outstanding - able to turn/spin and finish with either hand (left hand is GREAT).
In terms of moving slow -- I mean he's a LARGE HUMAN but he knocks down 3's and blows by guys all the time.
Fact remains, he hasn't impressed as an offensive "ISO" creator. That's different than being able to take advantage of mismatches. He's not a guy you give to ball to and ask to create when the defense encroaches and he's stuck with the opposing teams best player. Heck he ranked behind Desmond Bane in points per shot during isolation this season.What you get from JJJ is capable scoring blender with top notch defense. But he's your third offense if you're a serious team.Isn’t that what we need - 3rd option who defends, covers for Kat and protects the rim without having chop sticks for hands like Mitchy?
How many centers are asked to ISO create?
Kat is considered top 3 scoring / talented center.
Last 2 years in 2 less mins per game Jackson has avg only 1 point less than Kat.
Kids pretty good at 25.
No one is saying he sucks. I'm not even ruling out the idea he might make some incremental improvements. I'm just saying people need to be more realistic about his offensive contributions. Also, does knowing that ceiling change how much of haul you'd be willing to give for him. This all hypothetical of course. All signs are pointing to Memphis keeping him.
Makes sense for Dallas as they need a 2nd scorer with Kyrie out. They are also leaning into 2 way players. Interesting one for both teams. Maybe we can get some picke back too
VDesai wrote:I listened to the Game Theory podcast Knicks offseason preview. One move they proposed if we don't want to extend Bridges and to get more depth was Bridges to Dallas for Max Christie and PJ Washington. I am kinda into this trade. Chrisitie is a solid perimeter defender and can shoot some - reminds me a bit of Grimes, but maybe less oft the bounces. Washington is a solid 4 who can shoot the 3 and play some small ball 5. A good depth piece to replace Achiuwa with better shooting. Gives us some opportunity to play full size 5 out lineups.Makes sense for Dallas as they need a 2nd scorer with Kyrie out. They are also leaning into 2 way players. Interesting one for both teams. Maybe we can get some picke back too
that's an awful trade, Christie is a worse version of Grimes and PJ sucks.
You could do ALOT better for Mikal than that if you put him on the market.
nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:I listened to the Game Theory podcast Knicks offseason preview. One move they proposed if we don't want to extend Bridges and to get more depth was Bridges to Dallas for Max Christie and PJ Washington. I am kinda into this trade. Chrisitie is a solid perimeter defender and can shoot some - reminds me a bit of Grimes, but maybe less oft the bounces. Washington is a solid 4 who can shoot the 3 and play some small ball 5. A good depth piece to replace Achiuwa with better shooting. Gives us some opportunity to play full size 5 out lineups.Makes sense for Dallas as they need a 2nd scorer with Kyrie out. They are also leaning into 2 way players. Interesting one for both teams. Maybe we can get some picke back too
that's an awful trade, Christie is a worse version of Grimes and PJ sucks.
You could do ALOT better for Mikal than that if you put him on the market.
Can you do much better? If so I think we'd have to listen. Id be happy to shop him - Knicks definitely lacked depth, this sort of deal gives you 2 switchable defenders and guys who can knock down 3's at a passable rate to help space. I think do think we should get picks back in something like this, but if you can get 2 rotation or fringe starting level players for Bridges I think that makes some sense from a roster building perspective.. Christie took a step up last year, and I don't think PJ sucks...PJ has been a good contributor on Dallas he got traded there. Bit of a chucker on Charlotte, but I think has thrived on a better roster.
Another one they suggested was Keon Ellis and Malik Monk....I love Ellis and Monk is a microwave, but I see that as making less sense for Sacramento given they already have Derozan and Lavine.
VDesai wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:I listened to the Game Theory podcast Knicks offseason preview. One move they proposed if we don't want to extend Bridges and to get more depth was Bridges to Dallas for Max Christie and PJ Washington. I am kinda into this trade. Chrisitie is a solid perimeter defender and can shoot some - reminds me a bit of Grimes, but maybe less oft the bounces. Washington is a solid 4 who can shoot the 3 and play some small ball 5. A good depth piece to replace Achiuwa with better shooting. Gives us some opportunity to play full size 5 out lineups.Makes sense for Dallas as they need a 2nd scorer with Kyrie out. They are also leaning into 2 way players. Interesting one for both teams. Maybe we can get some picke back too
that's an awful trade, Christie is a worse version of Grimes and PJ sucks.
You could do ALOT better for Mikal than that if you put him on the market.
Can you do much better? If so I think we'd have to listen. Id be happy to shop him - Knicks definitely lacked depth, this sort of deal gives you 2 switchable defenders and guys who can knock down 3's at a passable rate to help space. I think do think we should get picks back in something like this, but if you can get 2 rotation or fringe starting level players for Bridges I think that makes some sense from a roster building perspective.. Christie took a step up last year, and I don't think PJ sucks...PJ has been a good contributor on Dallas he got traded there. Bit of a chucker on Charlotte, but I think has thrived on a better roster.
Another one they suggested was Keon Ellis and Malik Monk....I love Ellis and Monk is a microwave, but I see that as making less sense for Sacramento given they already have Derozan and Lavine.
trading Bridges doesnt really help our depth, you gotta remember he's a near lock to play 80 games and 35mpg. he plays the minutes of 1.5 players during a season.
trading him for two fringe players doesnt make us better just because its TWO players.
We'd be better off just playing Shamet a bit more.
I also don't see depth as being a big issue.
We have alot of guys now entering their 2nd season where they may be able to be contributors, and we also have the $5m MLE to add another rotation player.
Not to mention Mitch and Shamet starting the season healthy is a big difference from last season.
Mitch, Deuce, Shamet + guys like Kolek, Huk, Naj + wildcards like McCullar, Dadiet... + a vet signing this summer... I mean our bench could end up being a strength. Especially is we move Hart to the bench.
nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:I listened to the Game Theory podcast Knicks offseason preview. One move they proposed if we don't want to extend Bridges and to get more depth was Bridges to Dallas for Max Christie and PJ Washington. I am kinda into this trade. Chrisitie is a solid perimeter defender and can shoot some - reminds me a bit of Grimes, but maybe less oft the bounces. Washington is a solid 4 who can shoot the 3 and play some small ball 5. A good depth piece to replace Achiuwa with better shooting. Gives us some opportunity to play full size 5 out lineups.Makes sense for Dallas as they need a 2nd scorer with Kyrie out. They are also leaning into 2 way players. Interesting one for both teams. Maybe we can get some picke back too
that's an awful trade, Christie is a worse version of Grimes and PJ sucks.
You could do ALOT better for Mikal than that if you put him on the market.
Can you do much better? If so I think we'd have to listen. Id be happy to shop him - Knicks definitely lacked depth, this sort of deal gives you 2 switchable defenders and guys who can knock down 3's at a passable rate to help space. I think do think we should get picks back in something like this, but if you can get 2 rotation or fringe starting level players for Bridges I think that makes some sense from a roster building perspective.. Christie took a step up last year, and I don't think PJ sucks...PJ has been a good contributor on Dallas he got traded there. Bit of a chucker on Charlotte, but I think has thrived on a better roster.
Another one they suggested was Keon Ellis and Malik Monk....I love Ellis and Monk is a microwave, but I see that as making less sense for Sacramento given they already have Derozan and Lavine.
trading Bridges doesnt really help our depth, you gotta remember he's a near lock to play 80 games and 35mpg. he plays the minutes of 1.5 players during a season.
trading him for two fringe players doesnt make us better just because its TWO players.
We'd be better off just playing Shamet a bit more.
I also don't see depth as being a big issue.
We have alot of guys now entering their 2nd season where they may be able to be contributors, and we also have the $5m MLE to add another rotation player.
Not to mention Mitch and Shamet starting the season healthy is a big difference from last season.
Mitch, Deuce, Shamet + guys like Kolek, Huk, Naj + wildcards like McCullar, Dadiet... + a vet signing this summer... I mean our bench could end up being a strength. Especially is we move Hart to the bench.
I don't see them as Fringe players - they might be fringe starters but both guys are two legitimate rotation players that decent on defense and can shoot 3's. Have been on playoff teams. I don't want 40+ mpg of Bridges averaging 1 FT per game next year and not fighting over screens. I still find him an awkward fit. Maybe another coach plays him less and tells him to play more physical and he starts to fight over screens again. I think with his lack of physicality, ballhandling and his erratic 3 pt shooting, its not really a great fit in our starting 5. I know he can turn it up defensively at time, but we saw it against Boston and then didn't see it against Indiana...if he's not willing to give it in the ECF, then I'm not sure who's gonna change his mentality.
With The east as it might stand now the window is NOW.
Orlando and Cleveland know this also.
After next year we can worry about it.
In fact, no need to worry. FO knows all this and beyond anything most of us can imagine.
VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....
2nd Apron increases by $57mm over the next 3 years. Better question is whether teams can afford not to.
This easing isn't about how much teams make or have to pay in luxury tax. The profit is there. The willingness to spend varies. But when Golden State added Kevin Durant using salary cap while still keeping its championship squad of Curry, Thompson and Green, they realized they couldn't add that much salary cap space in one step.
Long term contracts under the existing cap become dramatically more valuable over the next 3 years.
EwingsGlass wrote:VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....2nd Apron increases by $57mm over the next 3 years. Better question is whether teams can afford not to.
This easing isn't about how much teams make or have to pay in luxury tax. The profit is there. The willingness to spend varies. But when Golden State added Kevin Durant using salary cap while still keeping its championship squad of Curry, Thompson and Green, they realized they couldn't add that much salary cap space in one step.
Long term contracts under the existing cap become dramatically more valuable over the next 3 years.
Yeah players salaries on the roster and off are also escalating. How much of the bench in the future do you want being minimum salaries? The playoffs are turning into a grind with injury attrition. Perhaps what the Thunder and Pacers showed us is having more quality depth 1-10 in your rotation is the right model to follow - of course the Pacers losing their one irreplaceable guy shows that even that model can teeter.
I also personally think the Knicks make more sense with 2 solid rotation guys vs. one Bridges with the way they play today. That said no one has a lens into what the style will be with a new coach and we're working off 5 years of Thibs. Maybe someone has to the key to unlock it in an even better way, but I think 2 shooters that play defense along with Jalen/KAT/OG makes a lot of sense.
VDesai wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....2nd Apron increases by $57mm over the next 3 years. Better question is whether teams can afford not to.
This easing isn't about how much teams make or have to pay in luxury tax. The profit is there. The willingness to spend varies. But when Golden State added Kevin Durant using salary cap while still keeping its championship squad of Curry, Thompson and Green, they realized they couldn't add that much salary cap space in one step.
Long term contracts under the existing cap become dramatically more valuable over the next 3 years.
Yeah players salaries on the roster and off are also escalating. How much of the bench in the future do you want being minimum salaries? The playoffs are turning into a grind with injury attrition. Perhaps what the Thunder and Pacers showed us is having more quality depth 1-10 in your rotation is the right model to follow - of course the Pacers losing their one irreplaceable guy shows that even that model can teeter.
I also personally think the Knicks make more sense with 2 solid rotation guys vs. one Bridges with the way they play today. That said no one has a lens into what the style will be with a new coach and we're working off 5 years of Thibs. Maybe someone has to the key to unlock it in an even better way, but I think 2 shooters that play defense along with Jalen/KAT/OG makes a lot of sense.
Both teams were playing mainly 8 players in the playoffs. So much so that Mathurin was almost completely out of the rotation in the playoffs at one point. Fringe players can easily become unplayable in the playoffs. Mikal is much more valuable than two fringe players.
IDK where this idea comes from that everyone else was going 10 deep in the playoffs. That's just not the case.
I'd like for us to play 9-10 deep in reg season, get more guys in rhythm, try more things, and I think the next coach will do that. But come playoff time teams are gonna shorten to 8 guys, thats just what it is.
Mikal is not the problem, 29 teams would love to have him. I could see him putting up 20ppg on 50/38 next season now that he's more comfortable here, and I do think he can be better utilized.
nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....2nd Apron increases by $57mm over the next 3 years. Better question is whether teams can afford not to.
This easing isn't about how much teams make or have to pay in luxury tax. The profit is there. The willingness to spend varies. But when Golden State added Kevin Durant using salary cap while still keeping its championship squad of Curry, Thompson and Green, they realized they couldn't add that much salary cap space in one step.
Long term contracts under the existing cap become dramatically more valuable over the next 3 years.
Yeah players salaries on the roster and off are also escalating. How much of the bench in the future do you want being minimum salaries? The playoffs are turning into a grind with injury attrition. Perhaps what the Thunder and Pacers showed us is having more quality depth 1-10 in your rotation is the right model to follow - of course the Pacers losing their one irreplaceable guy shows that even that model can teeter.
I also personally think the Knicks make more sense with 2 solid rotation guys vs. one Bridges with the way they play today. That said no one has a lens into what the style will be with a new coach and we're working off 5 years of Thibs. Maybe someone has to the key to unlock it in an even better way, but I think 2 shooters that play defense along with Jalen/KAT/OG makes a lot of sense.
Both teams were playing mainly 8 players in the playoffs.
IDK where this idea comes from that everyone else was going 10 deep in the playoffs. That's just not the case.
I'd like for us to play 9-10 deep in reg season, get more guys in rhythm, try more things, and I think the next coach will do that. But come playoff time teams are gonna shorten to 8 guys, thats just what it is.
Mikal is not the problem, 29 teams would love to have him. I could see him putting up 20ppg on 50/38 next season now that he's more comfortable here, and I do think he can be better utilized.
Pacers had 9 guys play 14mpg or more. Their 10th/11th guys rotated as a reserve center and played about 10mpg depending on the matchup (and one of those guys hit 4 3's against us in the decisive game) and had an 12th guy in Walker who played meaningful minutes in a handful of games throughout the playoffs with an ankle injury. They meaningfully used 12 guys.
VDesai wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....2nd Apron increases by $57mm over the next 3 years. Better question is whether teams can afford not to.
This easing isn't about how much teams make or have to pay in luxury tax. The profit is there. The willingness to spend varies. But when Golden State added Kevin Durant using salary cap while still keeping its championship squad of Curry, Thompson and Green, they realized they couldn't add that much salary cap space in one step.
Long term contracts under the existing cap become dramatically more valuable over the next 3 years.
Yeah players salaries on the roster and off are also escalating. How much of the bench in the future do you want being minimum salaries? The playoffs are turning into a grind with injury attrition. Perhaps what the Thunder and Pacers showed us is having more quality depth 1-10 in your rotation is the right model to follow - of course the Pacers losing their one irreplaceable guy shows that even that model can teeter.
I also personally think the Knicks make more sense with 2 solid rotation guys vs. one Bridges with the way they play today. That said no one has a lens into what the style will be with a new coach and we're working off 5 years of Thibs. Maybe someone has to the key to unlock it in an even better way, but I think 2 shooters that play defense along with Jalen/KAT/OG makes a lot of sense.
Both teams were playing mainly 8 players in the playoffs.
IDK where this idea comes from that everyone else was going 10 deep in the playoffs. That's just not the case.
I'd like for us to play 9-10 deep in reg season, get more guys in rhythm, try more things, and I think the next coach will do that. But come playoff time teams are gonna shorten to 8 guys, thats just what it is.
Mikal is not the problem, 29 teams would love to have him. I could see him putting up 20ppg on 50/38 next season now that he's more comfortable here, and I do think he can be better utilized.
Pacers had 9 guys play 14mpg or more. Their 10th/11th guys rotated as a reserve center and played about 10mpg depending on the matchup (and one of those guys hit 4 3's against us in the decisive game) and had an 12th guy in Walker who played meaningful minutes in a handful of games throughout the playoffs with an ankle injury. They meaningfully used 12 guys.
if thats the criteria then we used 10-11 guys as well.
Wright, Precious, Shamet, Mitch, CAM, Deuce all played meaningful minutes at points during the playoffs.
but outside of spot and situtional minutes teams are gonna play their top 8 guys in the playoffs.
nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:nycericanguy wrote:VDesai wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:VDesai wrote:I also wonder if any team - Knicks included, can afford having 4 players make 35mm+ per year the 2nd apron era....2nd Apron increases by $57mm over the next 3 years. Better question is whether teams can afford not to.
This easing isn't about how much teams make or have to pay in luxury tax. The profit is there. The willingness to spend varies. But when Golden State added Kevin Durant using salary cap while still keeping its championship squad of Curry, Thompson and Green, they realized they couldn't add that much salary cap space in one step.
Long term contracts under the existing cap become dramatically more valuable over the next 3 years.
Yeah players salaries on the roster and off are also escalating. How much of the bench in the future do you want being minimum salaries? The playoffs are turning into a grind with injury attrition. Perhaps what the Thunder and Pacers showed us is having more quality depth 1-10 in your rotation is the right model to follow - of course the Pacers losing their one irreplaceable guy shows that even that model can teeter.
I also personally think the Knicks make more sense with 2 solid rotation guys vs. one Bridges with the way they play today. That said no one has a lens into what the style will be with a new coach and we're working off 5 years of Thibs. Maybe someone has to the key to unlock it in an even better way, but I think 2 shooters that play defense along with Jalen/KAT/OG makes a lot of sense.
Both teams were playing mainly 8 players in the playoffs.
IDK where this idea comes from that everyone else was going 10 deep in the playoffs. That's just not the case.
I'd like for us to play 9-10 deep in reg season, get more guys in rhythm, try more things, and I think the next coach will do that. But come playoff time teams are gonna shorten to 8 guys, thats just what it is.
Mikal is not the problem, 29 teams would love to have him. I could see him putting up 20ppg on 50/38 next season now that he's more comfortable here, and I do think he can be better utilized.
Pacers had 9 guys play 14mpg or more. Their 10th/11th guys rotated as a reserve center and played about 10mpg depending on the matchup (and one of those guys hit 4 3's against us in the decisive game) and had an 12th guy in Walker who played meaningful minutes in a handful of games throughout the playoffs with an ankle injury. They meaningfully used 12 guys.
if thats the criteria then we used 10-11 guys as well.
Wright, Precious, Shamet, Mitch, CAM, Deuce all played meaningful minutes at points during the playoffs.
but outside of spot and situtional minutes teams are gonna play their top 8 guys in the playoffs.
Its not the same- and its merely a matter of counting - The Knicks did not have nearly the number of guys playing the number of games and minutes per game as the Pacers. To say differently is just ignoring what actually happened and the counting numbers that evidence that.
It's fine - I get the crux of your argument, you think 1 Bridges is more valuable than 2 rotation pieces, and that's a fair side of the argument to take . I'm on the other side and I have a lot of pause about giving Bridges the 4 yr extension and committing to him as a piece - I think we'd better off switching gears based on what I observed last year, but a new coach might unlock the things from him he didn't do this year - play more physical defense, fight over screens, not shy away from contact when finishing, get to the line. Bridges didn't seem to love playing for Thibs. We have seen him be better before. He might work better with a different coach and a different distribution of minutes/role.