SNY.com: Knicks agree to trade with Jazz for veteran C Ed Davis

From Scott Thompson:

The Knicks and Jazz are in agreement on a trade that would send veteran center Ed Davis to New York, SNY’s Ian Begley confirmed.

Utah will also be sending two second-round picks in the 2023 NBA Draft with Davis, per ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski.

With the Knicks declining the option for Taj Gibson, a trade for a younger Davis makes sense to back up Mitchell Robinson down low. And it’s a role Davis is used to in the Big Apple, having worked behind Jarrett Allen with the Brooklyn Nets two seasons ago. He was also behind Rudy Gobert on the Jazz last season.

At 6-foot-9, 218 pounds, Davis can also play at the four if need be. The 21-year-old averaged 10.8 minutes per game last year and only 1.8 points with 3.8 rebounds. With the Nets, he averaged 8.6 rebounds, his highest total of his career, with 5.8 points per game.

Davis only costs $5 million for the 2020-21 season.

Nice to see the Knicks actually taking on salary for future assets. It’s a thing of beauty. And it’s funny that Davis, who Rose just picked up as a salary dump, is not much worse than Taj Gibson, who the Knicks actively signed for $10 million.

Unless, of course, they then trade all of these second round picks for, like, Russell Westbrook.

I am sorry for putting that evil out into the world!

Liked it? Take a second to support Brian Cronin on Patreon!

334 thoughts to “SNY.com: Knicks agree to trade with Jazz for veteran C Ed Davis”

  1. Rose likes him the 2023 draft. This renting cap space for picks thing is kind of fun.

    Hopefully Hayward wants the rumored sign and trade to Indiana.

  2. I’ve liked Ed Davis for a long time, but he played (small sample) like he was done last season. Even if he is, who cares-we got something for nothing. Nice bit of business.

  3. nothing too crazy so far from rose, maybe there is a plan somewhere in the front office to land a point guard…

  4. So the Knicks replaced Gibson with Davis, who is younger and has a lower salary and received two second round picks in a probably very good draft for their troubles?

  5. Bagley says there is mutual interest in bringing Bobby Portis back, which is not awesome. I guess he used to be a Thibs guy.

    Given the draft picks this and interest in Portis, the new Knicks management clearly puts a value on shooting threes well.

  6. My OTB-napkin calculation says that the likelihood of Gordon Hayward becoming a Knick stands at 100%.

  7. I like.
    Not too upset with trading Oturu anymore. I still think Westbrook is on his way. I will say this though..I can’t wait to see Thibs unleash a Ntilikina/Quickley backcourt defensively. YEESH! Holy crap. I wanna see a lineup of Mitch/Obi(if he can move his feet on defense) or Knox/RJ/Quickley/Ntilikina for stretches where Thibs wants to slow a team down a little bit. Knox isn’t the bet option, but he is our best 2 way stretch 4 type as of now.

  8. I’d really like to see the Westbrook for Wall trade go down. Just for kicks as well as the Knicks not being stuck with Westbrook for three years.

    Yeah, a Frank/Quickly/RJB/?/Mitch lineup would be fun to watch defensively, but could it score? I guess RJB pick and roll with Mitch. Frank and Quickly spotting up with whoever the forward is. Over and over again…

  9. oooo…..I like Ed Davis. We seem to do a good job finding backup bigs. Gibson was OK. the beard. Kurt Thomas. let me think…..Marvin Webster. Herb Williams. The big white guy….name escapes me.

  10. Can’t fault that move.

    And I finally saw the video of Obi’s interview after getting the news. Ok, I’m all in with that dude, Clarence Weatherspoon be damned.

  11. Good trade, but the 5 mil hit to our cap is not insignificant.

    Gordon will be AT LEAST 20-25 per, which would make VanVleet impossible. That 5 mil earmarked for DSJr is starting to look big AF.

  12. We now have a nice amount of surplus picks:
    2021: NYK 1st, DAL 1st, CHA 2nd, DET 2nd
    2022: NYK 1st and 2nd
    2023: NYK 1st, DAL 1st (top 10 protected), NYK 2nd, DET 2nd, 2 2nd’s from Jazz (not clear which teams owned the picks originally)

  13. This I like. Ed Davis is solid and knows how to play defense and we are getting picks.

    Two second rounders seems like a high price to unload 5 million in salary but I am here for it

  14. chriskZIPCODE:
    so, wait.we got ed davis plus 2 seconds?what did we give up?

    Nothing announced, yet. Probably nothing, like the rights to Frederick Weiss.
    :-)
    We’re taking on $5m or so salary that Jazz wanted to clear.

  15. I refuse to get my hopes up but this is a promising sign. And it’s probably one of the 5 best trades we’ve made in the last twenty years.

  16. vincoug:
    I refuse to get my hopes up but this is a promising sign. And it’s probably one of the 5 best trades we’ve made in the last twenty years.

    Nothing can make up for not getting more for the #33 pick…

  17. It’s been a long time since the Knicks did something like this. Even with the Morris trade, they hemmed and hawed and weren’t going to do it before they finally did it.

    I am searching my databanks for something that I approved of this much and the only thing I could find was signing Tyson Chandler.

  18. Owen:
    It’s been a long time since the Knicks did something like this. Even with the Morris trade, they hemmed and hawed and weren’t going to do it before they finally did it.

    I am searching my databanks for something that I approved of this much and the only thing I could find was signing Tyson Chandler.

    The only one that liked that move more than you was Roy Hibbert

  19. Z-man: Nothing can make up for not getting more for the #33 pick…

    Aaaaaannnnd I’m off to go make some popcorn. Be right back.

  20. this is a solid deal although i don’t know why stockpiling 2nd rd picks in 3 years is some sort of thing for them….

  21. People were pretty amazed that we were able to unload Melo without throwing in sweetener. What’s different about this one is it isn’t on the heels of a billion bad moves made by the same FO.

    Rose & Co. said that they would be patient, and that fans needed to be patient. Whatever you think about anything they did, they haven’t made any rash moves. They also said that they would be open to taking on contracts into cap space to acquire assets. We’ve heard so much double-talk over the past 20+ years that it’s hard to fathom a measured, honest approach being real.

    It’s why I don’t get too caught up yet in the Kentucky/CAA stuff…it hasn’t been a significant detriment to team-building yet. Toppin was a chalk pick, Quickley was a minor reach, Pinson and Harper made sense, cutting all the Mills vets except Bullock seems logical (and I am pleasantly surprised that Gibson was waived). Letting Wooten and Dotson go is not a big deal. Ed Davis is a very nice move. No rash FA signings yet.

    And Rose is still learning as he goes. Phil and Isiah and Mills managed to fuck things up royally in far less time. I mean, he’s not Ujiri or anything but this is so refreshing, at least for the time being.

  22. My grades for the Front Office at the moment, recognizing that we’re only a little ways into the semester and there’s still time for them to get into crack and drop out:
    Obi Pick: B- (could be an A- but I can’t get past Haliburton)
    Quickley Pick: B- (I’m trying to like it…)
    Moving Up in the Lottery for Nothing: A+
    Trading Back Down and getting 33: B- (lost some points for causing my head to spin)
    Dumping 33: D- (I’d give it an F but at least they didn’t just flush it for nothing at all)
    Dumping Half the Team: Incomplete (potentially a B+, sad about Wooten and terrified what Elfrid’s loss might mean… and I really don’t want Portis back)
    Ed Davis: A (he’s a nothing burger, but it’s a need filled with something useful, and we got shiny other things from it instead of getting fleeced)

    Overall, not bad. Some inexplicable crap in there, but some impressive moves and some okay ones — so far it’s so much better than the last regime. Again, massive caveats. The drumbeat of terrible trades can still be heard in the near distance…

  23. The rumors about Hayward scare me though. If he had opted in, I would have loved to have taken him off the Celt’s hands for a pick/prospect or two…but a multi-year deal? Sheesh!

  24. I’m still trying to figure out what are they going to do at PG. If they don’t sign FVV I guess stop gap options like Teague or Augustin? I’m trying to not think about Westbrook…

  25. Even after mulling it over for 24 hours, I’m still irked by the utter rigidity of the Knicks’ approach last night. Drafts are fluid things that can quickly upend even the most carefully laid plans. Most teams understand going in that the draft will often unfold in unexpected ways and come prepared with contingency plans that allow them to pivot in real time should unforeseen opportunities present themselves. That’s the smart approach. Then, there’s the Knicks approach.

    It’s apparent that the Knicks were laser focused on just a handful of players last night and were hellbent on getting them, no matter what. Toppin was clearly their guy and they may well have traded up for him but for the surprising selections of Williams and Okoro at 4&5, which increased the chance of Obi falling to 8. Fortunately, the braintrust was able to recognize that likelihood and did not burn additional assets to secure the object of heir desire. The trade up from 27 to 23 was reportedly done in the hopes of nabbing Maxey but when he went to Philly at 21, the Knicks traded back to 25 for the other KY guard as a consolation prize. And word was they wanted VCJ at 33 but when Charlotte took him at 32, the Knicks simply said “fuck it” and booted their pick three years into the future.

    It’s great to have strong convictions and all but making them the inflexible basis of a draft strategy is usually a poor bet (and, yes, I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt here by not cynically ascribing their choices to nepotism) Even if the Knicks’ evaluations of the players targeted (and the worth of the 33rd pick) turn out to be more or less correct, it’s highly unlikely that their robotic selection process did not blind them to better opportunities that may have unexpectedly arisen along the way. I suspect that in 2-3 years time (if not sooner) we’ll look back and see the many roads not taken that other, savvier front offices would have.

  26. i realize it’s the ‘double draft’… but that’s not guaranteed to happen let alone yield any perceived value in the second rd….

    oubre to the warriors…. probably a good deal for them… depending on the picks involved….

  27. Count de Pennies: It’s great to have strong convictions and all but making them the inflexible basis of a draft strategy is usually a poor bet (and, yes, I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt here by not cynically ascribing their choices to nepotism) Even if the Knicks’ evaluations of the players targeted (and the worth of the 33rd pick) turn out to be more or less correct, it’s highly unlikely that their robotic selection process did not blind them to better opportunities that may have unexpectedly arisen along the way. I suspect that in 2-3 years time (if not sooner) we’ll look back and see the many roads not taken that other, savvier front offices would have.

    This is interesting…I agree that they had a rigid mindset with regard to the players they targeted, but better questions for me are a) were the players they targeted the best ones to target? (probably not…with Vassell, Lewis Jr., Hali still on the board….and with a trade-up for other guys picked above us probably doable, but we’ll see…but certainly better than the mindset that targeted Ntilikina and Knox) and b) did they do anything rash to acquire those players? (clearly not, and I don’t think it’s fair to assume they would have if someone was going to pick Toppin higher) And you kind of have to factor in that it’s Rose’s first rodeo at the draft…maybe he’ll learn from experience as most do.

    The thing I like most regarding what I’ve seen thus far is that they haven’t bid against themselves yet. That was the most sickening thing about prior regimes…they would pay far more than market value in one move after another. For example, they could have just taken Quickley at #23, but trading down brought them another asset. They could have preemptively traded up for Toppin based on rumors leading up to the draft. So it’s kind of a wash in that sense.

  28. BigBlueAL:
    I’m still trying to figure out what are they going to do at PG.If they don’t sign FVV I guess stop gap options like Teague or Augustin?I’m trying to not think about Westbrook…

    I thought Frank, DSjr and Harper were the answer…

    (to the question, what is the shittiest pg trio in nba history?)

  29. I agree with mr de pennies. I thought Scott Perry was just around because they didn’t want to pay him to go away, but that draft had a feel of a Perry draft.

  30. TheClashFan: I’d really like to see the Westbrook for Wall trade go down. Just for kicks as well as the Knicks not being stuck with Westbrook for three years.

    Don’t be surprised if this suddenly becomes Wall to the Knicks. He did go to Kentucky.

  31. The Obi pick does make it feel like signing FVV might make more sense than if we’d taken Vassell or Hali or another player expected to be an offensive complement rather than a centerpiece. We’re going to have to overpay him a bit no matter what, but he’s not built to be a team’s main offensive cog. Toppin could be. (In theory, so could RJ, but he’d have to shoot way better than he did as a rookie.)

  32. I would rather have Wall than Westbrook. Wall is bad move because he probably won’t play much, Westbrook is a bad move because he will.

  33. Wall and Westbrook have almost identical contracts. Wall hasn’t played since 12/26/2018 with an torn Achilles. I don’t know who would be worse.
    Any way you shake it, 2023 all that cap gets freed up. 2023. Take note.

  34. At this point I would love to get FVV if nothing else than to prevent Westbrook or Wall. I wish we had taken a flyer on Larkin or made a move for someone like Rubio, but FVV will do. I would actually prefer just starting Frank and getting a good pick.

    I think Westbrook is both the worst case scenario and totally plausible. It will be a good litmus for management. Houston doesn’t have enough sweeteners to make Westbrook palatable.

  35. Would you go 4 years $120M for FVV?

    Whoof… that’s a lot to pay a guy who’s not an all star and can’t be the best or second best player on a title contender. On the other hand, he solves a LOT of problems with this roster, he’s good at both ends, and he’s a young free agent at a time when all our other players of consequence are dirt cheap. If ever there’s a time to overpay for a good but not great point guard, it’s now, I think.

  36. there’s a lot of good guys potentially entering next year’s draft.. this is the next great draft…. it’d be tough to see us winning a ton of games but we should also stay in the running for a top 3 pick because that is the only potential gamechanger on the horizon for us left that’s coming anytime soon….

  37. Ben R:
    I think 3 years $80 million or 4 years $100 million is about my limit for FVV.

    Yeah, and even that would make me cringe. He’s really not worth even $20 million AAV.

  38. I think, to get FVV, it will take 4y/$120M. In order to get him, the Knicks are going to need to push Toronto to a point where they can’t match. They are over the cap but have some flexibility ($17M cap hold on FVV and $17M in practical space. That’s $34M. At what point do they break? Whatever Leon has up his sleeve, it’s been planned. There’s a PG coming. Tomorrow’s going to be wild.

  39. GoNYGoNYGo – Tanking forever:
    I think, to get FVV, it will take 4y/$120M. In order to get him, the Knicks are going to need to push Toronto to a point where they can’t match.They are over the cap but have some flexibility ($17M cap hold on FVV and $17M in practical space.That’s $34M.At what point do they break? Whatever Leon has up his sleeve, it’s been planned. There’s a PG coming. Tomorrow’s going to be wild.

    And that is when I would say that we are doomed under Rose’s leadership. Why grossly overpay a guy like him? Even from. a marketing pov it makes no sense. I’d rather take Westbrook if he comes with assets and gets DSjr and Randle out of town.

    What about Carlos Boozer as a less bad Obi comparison?

  40. Boozer was much more groundbound and a lot more powerful. But definitely fits in the category of effective offensive 4s who can’t play defense at all.

  41. We now have $40 million in cap space per Sports headlines I’ve read. I suspect Hayward will go to Atlanta because they will be willing to pay more, and Toronto will retain Van Vleet because the Knicks won’t want to overpay. To me that means there is a significant chance we surround Frank with scorers and he is our point guard. The other possibility is we trade for someone. There are point guards who could be available.

  42. The other possibility is we trade for someone. There are point guards who could be available.

    Who would you guess is available for a trade who’d be more useful than just signing DJ Augustin on the cheap? (Or wildly overpaying Dragic on a 1-year deal?)

  43. More to the point, maybe Thibs is talking Rose into reincarnating the 2010-11 Bulls by getting Westbrook to be his Rose, Obi his Boozer, Frank his Ronnie Brewer, RJ his Deng, Mitch his Noah, Knox his Taj, etc…

  44. Z-man: And that is when I would say that we are doomed under Rose’s leadership. Why grossly overpay a guy like him? Even from. a marketing pov it makes no sense. I’d rather take Westbrook if he comes with assets and gets DSjr and Randle out of town.

    Because what you think makes sense, isn’t the reality of the NBA. Year after year I read “I wouldn’t go over ….” and whatever that number is becomes 1/2 of what the players go for. The NBA does not dole out fair contracts. The team willing to shell out big bucks can put a representative team on the floor. Trying to give out “fair” contracts results in rosters like we ended up with last season.

    I’ll give you perfect examples: Kemba Walker and Jimmy Butler. They both got 4/$140M. Aside from AD, FVV might be the top FA. Last year the league doled out contracts of $30M or more to 9 players. The Knicks topped out at $18M to Randle. The Knicks need to be free agent bullies if they are ever to see the playoffs again.

  45. Knick fan not in NJ: I suspect Hayward will go to Atlanta because they will be willing to pay more, and Toronto will retain Van Vleet because the Knicks won’t want to overpay.

    Then why did they clear $40M?

  46. Then why did they clear $40M?

    Because most of the players they let go sucked and/or were wildly overpaid, and the new management team recognizes there are smarter ways to use cap space, as they demonstrated today with the Davis deal?

    I mean, it’s entirely possible, maybe even probable, that we’re going to sign someone to a very large contract tomorrow. But clearing out Steve Mills’ deadweight deals doesn’t automatically mean we’re lining up to sign someone to a max deal.

  47. Alan: Who would you guess is available for a trade who’d be more useful than just signing DJ Augustin on the cheap? (Or wildly overpaying Dragic on a 1-year deal?)

    Harden is available and Houston might have to take less than they want. I think Dinwiddie could also be available. Devonte Graham might be available since Charlotte just drafted LaMelo. I haven’t done a thorough survey, but I can’t believe there aren’t some others available too.

  48. Alan: Because most of the players they let go sucked and/or were wildly overpaid

    Hahahahaha! What were Wooten and Pinson getting paid? $8M for Elfrid and Ellington? $9.5 for Taj? No. They cleared space to land a big fish.

  49. ps I was surprised to learn that Boozer was a second round pick…

    And drafting him so well ironically screwed over the Cavs when it came time to resigning him.

  50. Knick fan not in NJ: You don’t have to use the cap space on free agents you can trade for players and take their salary into cap space too

    The Knicks need a tier 1 or tier 2 players (see: Chad Ford Tiers). Tier 1=Multiple All-star appearance Tier 2=Best player on team and an All-star appearance. OK, fill in the blank. Who are we getting?

  51. For example, if Harden goes to Brooklyn, couldn’t we help by taking Dinwiddie’s contract into cap space?

  52. GoNYGoNYGo – Tanking forever: The Knicks need a tier 1 or tier 2 players (see: Chad Ford Tiers).Tier 1=Multiple All-star appearance Tier 2=Best player on team and an All-star appearance.OK, fill in the blank.Who are we getting?

    This is the logic of past Knick’s GMs. They thought it only mattered to get Tier one or Tier two players — everything else could be sacrificed for that. We know the results of that. We overpay for players and are screwed long term. I think if we have a coherent team of good players that includes a lot of young guys, stars will emerge.

  53. Knick fan not in NJ: This is the logic of past Knick’s GMs. They thought it only mattered to get Tier one or Tier two players — everything else could be sacrificed for that. We know the results of that. We overpay for players and are screwed long term. I think if we have a coherent team of good players that includes a lot of young guys, stars will emerge.

    It’s not. The Knicks GMs of the past failed to develop and retain home-grown talent. They gave away 1st round picks like candy on Halloween, missed big on the ones we kept (Sweetney, Jordan Hill, Balkman) or traded them just as they became viable players (KP, Shumpert, Gallo). Sure, they signed some real bonehead deals too but that was not the downfall.

    And this is a new NBA. There are 11 point guards with an average annual salary of $30M or more, 15 of $25M or more. There’s your market rate for a decent PG.

  54. GoNYGoNYGo – Tanking forever: Because what you think makes sense, isn’t the reality of the NBA. Year after year I read “I wouldn’t go over ….” and whatever that number is becomes 1/2 of what the players go for. The NBA does not dole out fair contracts. The team willing to shell out big bucks can put a representative team on the floor. Trying to give out “fair” contracts results in rosters like we ended up with last season.

    I’ll give you perfect examples: Kemba Walker and Jimmy Butler. They both got 4/$140M. Aside from AD, FVV might be the top FA. Last year the league doled out contracts of $30M or more to 9 players. The Knicks topped out at $18M to Randle. The Knicks need to be free agent bullies if they are ever to see the playoffs again.

    Kemba and Butler were established all-stars who went to teams with solid cores who needed one major piece to contend. Kemba may become an albatross yet. Randle was overpaid on promise of improvement, and thank the lord it was only a 2-year commitment.

    FVV is a nice player, but it would be insanity for these Knicks to pay him $30 mill per for 4 years.

  55. Not to quibble but most people on this blog thought Miami way overpaid for Butler to become a pseudo-contender. People said he was an all star but not a top player and was older so therefore not worth it.

    FVV puts up excellent numbers efficiently and is a good defender on a 50 plus win team and is way younger than Butler.

  56. Z-man: FVV is a nice player, but it would be insanity for these Knicks to pay him $30 mill per for 4 years.

    What’s insane is to buy from the discount rack. If Toppin, RJ and Mitch are for real, FVV will bring out the best in them. Maybe one of Knox, Frank or DSJr break out. Now MSG can draw FA players.

  57. “Owen
    November 19, 2020 at 9:41 pm
    I like FVV but I don’t want to pay a lot for that muffler.”

    Whoa, did they do a redux of that campaign, or are you actually referencing the Meineke commercials from 1987?

    As for the recent trades, is it indicative of anything that the 2023 draft is set to take place the same week that the Westbrook/Wall $130,000,000 expires?? Could it all be part of a tangible 3 year rebuilding plan??

  58. FVV is a nice player, but I think being on a good team makes him look better. So I worry about paying top dollar for him. That said, if we get a good price I won’t complain.

    GoNYGo, it’s easy to ask which tier one player should we get, but the only public sort of offers for such players are like what Houston is rumored to be asking for Harden. That would be throwing draft picks or other assets like candy, as you said. If we want such a player at a good price we either have to develop him ourselves or wait for a good opportunity. If that doesn’t come along, I’m
    Willing to wait.

  59. As for the recent trades, is it indicative of anything that the 2023 draft is set to take place the same week that the Westbrook/Wall $130,000,000 expires?? Could it all be part of a tangible 3 year rebuilding plan??

    The only problem with that plan is that both those guys (and Hayward) could — or likely will — get injured. Then you have hundreds of millions of dollars going towards nothing.

  60. “ess-dog
    November 20, 2020 at 12:00 am
    The only problem with that plan is that both those guys (and Hayward) could — or likely will — get injured. Then you have hundreds of millions of dollars going towards nothing.”

    Now that’s a plan! It’s the illusion of competing, while actually sucking. It’s Hinkie in disguise. It’s a Stealth Process.

  61. With Mitch and Obi, I would rather have a better pick and roll PG than FVV, but I don’t know if there’s any way for us to get one. Fred’s strength is he’s a good high volume 3 point shooter. Granted we also suck at 3 point shooting, but Obi & Mitch would be maximized with a lot of pick and roll.

  62. Wow, I just checked in on the old Ed Davis stat page. He had a 20% turnover rate last year, and averaged 10 fouls/100 possessions. He makes Mitchell Robinson seem passive. They should extend him until 2023. He could be pivotal in securing the #1, #31, #32, #33, #34, and #35 picks that year!

  63. RE: PG
    I think that the most likely direction is Westbrook. It would be more regrettable to overpay a guy like FVV than to trade for Westbrook. While FVV brings things that we need, he’s still only maybe the 3rd best starter on a playoff team- unless he has a side to his game no one has seen. As much as I hate to say it, Westbrook moves the needle. With the Knicks he becomes the unquestioned best player, and no less than your second best player should we add a star or RJ ascends to a star level player. I do think you’d have to start Ntilikina at the 2 if you add FVV, and find higher priced players that do more to build around him. With Russ you mostly need shooters and rebounding/ defense. You need that with every team obviously, but the point I’m trying to make is those guys are easier to find and usually cheaper than what you’d have to add with a FVV. And we kinda already have those cheaper role players in place already with Quickley, Ntilikina, Knox, Iggy, Davis, and Bullock. Much easier to fill the roster from there- especially if you can move Randle and DSJ for Westbrook.

    Now if FVV takes say..18/year, that all changes. But right now we’re talkin 20 plus million- that I can’t stomach knowing he won’t ever be better than your 3rd best player if things go well

  64. “I’ve got to admit it’s getting better (Better)
    A little better all the time (It couldn’t get no worse)
    I have to admit it’s getting better (Better)
    It’s getting better
    Since Leon’s assign”

    (Lennon-McCartney-Knew Your Nicks)

  65. Totes McGoats as Totes McGoats: I think that the most likely direction is Westbrook. It would be more regrettable to overpay a guy like FVV than to trade for Westbrook. While FVV brings things that we need, he’s still only maybe the 3rd best starter on a playoff team- unless he has a side to his game no one has seen.

    Your argument is valid and is likely why we heard pre-draft chatter.But Westbrook will cost more than dollars and cap space. It will cost those very valuable 1st round picks and other assets and we’re not getting anything else back. It’s probably why it didn’t happen. My belief is that we’re on to plan B and FVV. It’s not in our control so we’ll see tonight.

    BTW, this is why I’m upset by the draft. I was desperate for a PG so we didn’t have to go this route.

  66. The thing about FVV is that he cost Toronto nothing to acquire and virtually nothing to keep. If he was worth anywhere near $30 million for 4 years, Ujiri would not let him go. If he does, he’d be fleecing NY once again.

    FVV has a career TS% of .544 with a career high last year of .553. He doesn’t rebound or get to the line. His career AST% is 24.6 (career high last year of 27.7). He also played next to Kyle Lowry, who took lead guard pressure off of him.

    I would rather do what Ujiri did…either land a guy like Lowry on the cheap as teams get desperate for cap space, or find a diamond in the rough like FVV in the clearance bin. There’s no way that any smart GM pays top dollar to a second-string PG when the team has literally no talent around him, especially by bidding against himself, which is what we’d be doing. And FVV probably doesn’t want to come here anyway, driving the price up even more.

  67. OK. I see you didn’t wanna touch my questions. Too elementary. 33, 34, 35…too old. Will lose explosion. 35 Million plus, yikes! 30% threes, no bueno. On the plus side, 47% from the field last season and assist and rebound numbers both near double digits. He would make us a better team if he played basketball for us this December, but yeah, I can see how that trade would be a debacle. What about if they threw in like 8 first round picks? Sort of a salary dump on steroids. (See, this is why no one talks to me…I understand)

  68. I would rather do what Ujiri did…either land a guy like Lowry on the cheap as teams get desperate for cap space, or find a diamond in the rough like FVV in the clearance bin.

    I agree, we should’ve used the 33rd pick to nab one of the many intriguing guard prospects still on the board.

  69. I don’t think we are getting Van Vleet. There’s been basically zero chatter out there about the Knicks being that interested.

    The Hayward thing is very interesting to me. I think he’s a great fit, and even on a big contract, if it is structured well (and barring another serious injury), it seems likely he won’t be an albatross due to his size, shooting, and passing ability — he is a true wing-size player that can do the dribble/pass/shoot thing and is equally comfortable on and off ball. The connections to Johnny Bryant and Walt Perrin are there. Feels like it might happen, and maybe we get a draft asset from Boston in sign-and-trade so Boston at least creates a trade exception. Or maybe we can dump Julius Randle on them lol.

    Hayward is just a good player, and despite not getting to the line quite as much last season he still had a career high TS of 59.5 with per-36 numbers that are pretty much equal to his peak Utah days (18.8 points, 7.2 rebounds, 4.4 assists). Also promising for a guy getting back from injury, he shot 75% at the rim (and even in his comeback year last year he shot 65% at the rim).

  70. thenoblefacehumper: I agree, we should’ve used the 33rd pick to nab one of the many intriguing guard prospects still on the board.

    Is there someone you liked in particular at #33?

    In any case, there will be plenty of opportunities to get a reasonable PG in coming weeks. Lots of teams have to make roster decisions and will need to waive guys or leave them unprotected in the G-League (if there is one…). There will also be teams (especially in the West) that will be churning to get better as guys get injured, or as players get disgruntled about minutes. In the meantime we can see what we have in the guys on the roster. Maybe Quickley turns out to be that guy. He seems smart enough and has a good enough handle to be at least a combo guard. I mean, why build a coach-FO complex with notable scouts, capologists, and assistant coaches if you bail at the first shiny object just to make a splash?

    And to Totes’ point, at least with Russ there’s an outside chance that you get superstar production out of him for 2 years. He is a LeBron-Jordan level athlete, just one with a balky knee. FVV will never, ever give you #30mill worth of production, or be movable on a 4-year deal at that money w/o sweetener.

  71. We could sell Hayward on the idea that he’d be either primary or secondary ball handler all the time on the floor – start Frank, RJ, Hayward, Obi, Mitch, with Bullock, Quickley, Randle, DSJ, Knox, Iggy fighting for rotation minutes. If they believe in DSJ then give him 15 minutes/game. If they don’t believe in him, then sign DJ Augustin or Teague or someone as a veteran backstop that knows Thibs’s system. That is not that bad?

    I actually hope Iggy gets some run this year. Other than draft position, he is likely to be a much better NBA player than Knox.

  72. OK. I see you didn’t wanna touch my questions. Too elementary. 33, 34, 35…too old. Will lose explosion. 35 Million plus, yikes! 30% threes, no bueno. On the plus side, 47% from the field last season and assist and rebound numbers bth near double digits. He would make us a better team if he played basketball for us this December, but yeah, I can see how that trade would be a debacle. What about if they threw in like 8 first round picks? Sort of a salary dump on steroids. (See, this is why no one talks to me…I understand)

  73. Hayward’s injury history is deeply concerning. Last year he had nerve pain in his foot related to that gruesome injury, so tying major cap % up in him is not appealing. Boston has no real reason to include an asset or take back Randle. Personally I’d prefer Russ to him unless he agreed to something like $65 mill for 3 years, which he won’t. At least with Russ you solve a glaring problem at PG and dump Randle and prob DSjr, and if you don’t blink, either get assets or don’t give up any.

  74. Seriously, the best strategy right now is to do nothing. Training camp opens in a few days. A bunch of young guys have been working out for 8 months with no ability to judge them in a team construct. Let’s see what we have and work from there. With the shortened season and 10 teams making the playoffs in each conference, there’s plenty of time to re-evaluate and make measured moves. Maybe Thibs can pump up trade value for Randle, Frank, even DSjr so that we can sell high on them. Maybe Iggy becomes Hayward lite. Maybe Harper, Quickley or Powell surprises.

    I literally can’t wait for December!

  75. Personally I’d prefer Russ to him unless he agreed to something like $65 mill for 3 years, which he won’t. At least with Russ you solve a glaring problem at PG and dump Randle and prob DSjr, and if you don’t blink, either get assets or don’t give up any.

    I think Russ is much more likely to be detrimental to the games of our young prospects than Hayward would be. the injury history scares the crap out of me, but his game is very complementary to our other young prospects. On a smartly structured two year deal, Hayward (plus someone like Augustin or Teague for cheap) is a way better fit for the team than Russ, even if we essentially get Russ for free.

  76. FVV has a career TS% of .544 with a career high last year of .553. He doesn’t rebound or get to the line. His career AST% is 24.6 (career high last year of 27.7). He also played next to Kyle Lowry, who took lead guard pressure off of him.

    statistically it’s probably the opposite. last three years:

    with lowry (2183 mins) per 100: 18.7pts 7.3ast, TS 54.9
    without lowry (3025 mins) per 100: 24.1pts, 9.5ast, TS 55.1

    last year without lowry (848 mins) per 100: 30.0pts, 10.6ast, TS 58.9

    i wouldn’t pay 4/120. but i think he’s a good two way player with a great makeup and he could easily generate 20-25m a year worth of value. i don’t think it would be dumb to give him something like 4/95. he does come with injury risk being small and playing all out, tho probably not as much as brogdon.

  77. ptmilo:
    FVV has a career TS% of .544 with a career high last year of .553. He doesn’t rebound or get to the line. His career AST% is 24.6 (career high last year of 27.7). He also played next to Kyle Lowry, who took lead guard pressure off of him.

    statistically it’s probably the opposite.last three years:

    with lowry (2183 mins) per 100:18.7pts 7.3ast, TS 54.9
    without lowry (3025 mins) per 100:24.1pts, 9.5ast, TS 55.1

    last year without lowry (848 mins) per 100: 30.0pts, 10.6ast, TS 58.9

    i wouldn’t pay 4/120.but i think he’s a good two way player with a great makeup and he could easily generate 20-25m a year worth of value.i don’t think it would be dumb to give him something like 4/95.he does come with injury risk being small and playing all out, tho probably not as much as brogdon.

    Agreed, and I stipulated to that earlier. The larger point is, at this juncture, you want players who will outperform their contracts (as FVV laways has) rather than underperform them (as he surely will at $30 mill per.) I’m only opposed to significantly overpaying for him. $24mill x 3 is about the limit for me.

  78. Alan: I think Russ is much more likely to be detrimental to the games of our young prospects than Hayward would be. the injury history scares the crap out of me, but his game is very complementary to our other young prospects. On a smartly structured two year deal, Hayward (plus someone like Augustin or Teague for cheap) is a way better fit for the team than Russ, even if we essentially get Russ for free.

    Hayward is either a 3 or a 4. If a 3, that pushes RJ to the 2 (not ideal.) If a 4, that pushes Obi to the 5 (not ideal for Mitch.) And either way, it pushes Knox and Iggy out of the picture.

    Russ is a pure PG who is a lightning rod. He would take offensive pressure off of everyone else. I think he actually helps the young guys stay out of the limelight so they can develop w/o pressure of being the #1 guy. He also has the highest motor maybe in the entire NBA.

  79. Is there someone you liked in particular at #33?

    I posted my big board before the draft. Devon Dotson and Tre Jones both would’ve made perfect sense, and it’s far from a guarantee a prospect of either caliber will be available in the second round in 2023. They were both among the best prospects left purely on the merits and fit a need like a glove.

    Feels like it might happen, and maybe we get a draft asset from Boston in sign-and-trade so Boston at least creates a trade exception. Or maybe we can dump Julius Randle on them lol.

    There’s no chance we get an asset for signing Hayward, that makes no sense. If Boston sign-and-trades him they’ll be looking for an asset in return. They also have no reason to take on Randle.

    Guess I’ll just keep repeating myself: Hayward would hurt our own draft pick, greatly reduce our ability to take on salary dumps, greatly reduce out ability to sign younger free agents, and take a roster spot and playing time that could go to someone(s) younger. All of these things are indisputable. What are the countervailing benefits?

  80. Hayward’s injury history is deeply concerning. Last year he had nerve pain in his foot related to that gruesome injury, so tying major cap % up in him is not appealing. Boston has no real reason to include an asset or take back Randle.

    Injury history is definitely worrisome, which is why I would maybe give him 2 guaranteed years and partial guarantee on year 3.

    Meanwhile you are trying to sell us on 3 years $133MM all guaranteed for Russell Westbrook, who is generally acknowledged to be unable to make other players better. At 44MM annual salary, it is literally not possible to be buying low on Westbrook – we would need multiple unprotected firsts to take on that salary IMHO.

    Re: Boston – they are basically at the salary cap even if Hayward walks for nothing – so that leaves them just with the MLE if they want to get better. Or they could send us some sort of draft asset (or take a player we don’t want) to net an extremely large trade exception AND use the MLE. The idea is that they can’t replace Hayward and so losing him for something is better than losing him for nothing.

    The other possibilities for Boston include S&T elsewhere, but I’m not sure where that would be. There’s been talk of Indiana S&T Myles Turner for him, but honestly I’m not sure why Indiana would do that as they are already very well over the salary cap and would have to send at least Jeremy Lamb and/or other players to make that work. And then you have to ask whether Boston wants 2 years of Jeremy Lamb and/or other players.
    And Hayward also has to agree to that.

  81. Obviously the cheaper the better, but to me when it comes to FVV whether the contract is 4/$80M or 4/$100M or whatever is less important than the general question of whether or not it’s a good idea to sign him to a large contract. I don’t think the decision hinges on whether he’s paid $20M vs $25M AAV.

    It’s looking like 4/$80M is the bare minimum. It’s just hard for me to see what giving that to FVV, who I like a lot as a player, does for us. Market rate contracts for good-but-unspectacular free agents are not going to get us out of this morass. It would indicate that we’re haplessly trying to catch up to contending teams who are light years ahead of us as opposed to accepting we’re operating on a different timetable.

    It’s also always possible his production takes a step back with the Knicks as opposed to Toronto, and it wouldn’t take much of a drop off to make that contract an albatross.

  82. “What are the countervailing benefits?”

    The basis of the next step forward:
    Respectability as a serious and competitive FA destination.

  83. Hi everyone. Very long time without posting but have enjoyed re-engaging with the blog the last few weeks.

    The thing for me about our FA approach is that it really depends what we think we have in RJ, Mitch and Toppin. It seems most NFL teams have worked out that you want to get a top QB on a rookie contract then build around that before his true value second contract kicks in.

    The same logic should apply. If we think our young rookie scale guys are the real deal then we have a couple of summers of space before our cap gets eaten extending them. At that point in the cycle paying true production value (or a bit above) for high level FAs is probably fine because you’re getting, or will get, additional value from the young guys as they grow. This is more or less where Atlanta is. FWIW Hollinger reckons FVV project’s afternoon around 22m aav.

    But if we don’t have those guys yet we can’t fill out the cap with guys at open over their true value or we’re just giving up all our flex and locking in mediocrity. Good teams add up to more value than their total salary, almost by definition.

    For me, I’m not convinced we have those future stars on the roster so I’d roll the space forward/rent it out for more shots at drafting one.

    In any event, three year deals for guys in their thirties are definitely not the right move for me at this point in our development, much as in the abstract I can talk myself into Hayward.

  84. There’s no chance we get an asset for signing Hayward, that makes no sense. If Boston sign-and-trades him they’ll be looking for an asset in return. They also have no reason to take on Randle.

    Since Hayward is an unrestricted free agent, if he wants to leave then Boston either gets nothing and he walks or they get something (the trade exception) and he walks. It probably won’t be Julius Randle, but a 2nd round pick (in 2023?) would make sense.

    That trade exception is no small thing – let’s say Hayward signs a contract starting at $24MM/year generating a $24MM trade exception from the Knicks. That exception could then take in someone like Oladipo or something like that.

  85. The other option of course would be for NY to be the dumping ground enabling a S&T from Boston to wherever. Like if Indiana or Boston wants to give the Knicks a 1st round pick for taking on Lamb and McDermott, then fine.

  86. The same logic should apply. If we think our young rookie scale guys are the real deal then we have a couple of summers of space before our cap gets eaten extending them. At that point in the cycle paying true production value (or a bit above) for high level FAs is probably fine because you’re getting, or will get, additional value from the young guys as they grow. This is more or less where Atlanta is. FWIW Hollinger reckons FVV project’s afternoon around 22m aav.

    But if we don’t have those guys yet we can’t fill out the cap with guys at open over their true value or we’re just giving up all our flex and locking in mediocrity. Good teams add up to more value than their total salary, almost by definition.

    Yeah this summarizes it well. Until the guys we currently have show us they can do much of anything, it’s unwise to start “building around” them.

    If a group led by ???-Quickley-Barrett-Toppin-Mitch and co. can win 30 or so games this season (there’s no magic number, totality of the circumstances, etc.), it’s fair to start talking about how to supplement it.

    But as of now we have no reason to believe this core is anything but the absolute dregs of the NBA, meaning the optimal strategy is to let them be precisely that so we can add to it via the draft in a meaningful way.

  87. That trade exception is no small thing – let’s say Hayward signs a contract starting at $24MM/year generating a $24MM trade exception from the Knicks. That exception could then take in someone like Oladipo or something like that.

    This makes sense but I can’t think of an example of a team giving up draft capital in order to create a trade exception. My guess is no one wants to run the risk of having the exception expire after burning an asset to create it.

    The other option of course would be for NY to be the dumping ground enabling a S&T from Boston to wherever. Like if Indiana or Boston wants to give the Knicks a 1st round pick for taking on Lamb and McDermott, then fine.

    This is a much better idea than giving 4/$100M+ to a 31 year old with an explodey ankle.

  88. I completely understand and respect the position that The Knicks are not in a position right now to go big name hunting in free agency. We’ve made this mistake so many times in the past. I get that.

    But for me there is a really strong counter argument to be made for getting FVV. The PG position is arguably the most important position in the NBA today and beyond just being more competitive, a legit PG would really help with the development of our young players. It’s hard to run a modern NBA offense without a good PG and FVV is a good PG. Not a great one but a good one.

    And he’s young. If we have him a four year contract he would live up to it I imagine and we could resign him and he’d still be young enough to be part of a good Knicks team in 5 years.

    And he is good on defense.

    And he shoots the 3 well.

    And he can play on and off the ball. Signing FVV means that RJ could still do some playmaking or we could draft a pg next year if we wanted.

    He’s not an all star but he’s right below that level and he’s young enough that I can justify it. We haven’t had a good PG since Marbury and he was more of a score first pg. I would like the pg issue to finally be addressed for this team.

  89. RWestbrook, Hayward and FVV are not exactly the pieces that are missing from our puzzle right now.
    They are just a “small” step forward but with much (different type of) risk in each of the 3 possible signings.

    Is it better to avoid all of them ?
    It could be.
    Is it possible to hit jackpot with one of them due to his fit/production ?
    More difficult but not impossible.

    Do we need to risk, rush or overpay?
    I don’t think so…
    But if the price is right…
    Let’s go for it.

  90. What are the countervailing benefits?

    Prefacing all of this with the idea that signing Hayward is not the move I would make, let me take a shot at it, from both an on and off the court perspective:

    1)He’s a good shooter, scorer, and secondary playmaker without requiring the kind of Westbrook-ish high usage (or even Randle-ish high usage from last year) that would keep the ball away from our young prospects.

    2)Mitch and RJ will definitely be in the starting lineup. Frank might be, depending on what we do in free agency. Obi might be, too, especially if Randle is gone. We need a reliable outside shooter on the court at all times (and preferably two) to open things up for the young guys, RJ and Mitch especially. Hayward does that, and also mitigates the fact that our current point guards are [putting it kindly] not the best playmakers in the Association. And you can play him with lots of different lineups, for a good amount of minutes, as opposed to a Novak-type specialist.

    3)This relates to the earlier discussion about whether we have genuine young prospects or mostly fool’s gold. If you think all the kids are trash and that we have to start over, then of course you just tank again for the much better 2021 lottery. If you think Mitch has room to grow, and that RJ was bad as a rookie because most rookies are bad, and because the all-PF roster didn’t give him the spacing he needed, then you owe it to them to improve the team so they can in turn improve.

    4)Hayward leaving a model organization like the Celtics for an infamous clown show like ours helps rehabilitate our image for when other players become available down the road. We have to show basic organizational competence and the potential to be good if we ever want to get in on the action the next time an Anthony Davis type grows disgruntled with his current situation.

  91. Yeah I have no illusions about FVV making us “good.” We have too many young and inexperienced players to expect that. But I would expect FVV to make life easier for RJ, toppin and Mitch and I would much rather overpay for FVV and have him on our team for four seasons than get Westbrook. Even at 25 million a year I think FVV would be moveable at some point.

  92. I don’t think the decision hinges on whether he’s paid $20M vs $25M AAV.

    it does. at $15m a year it would be a no brainer. the marginal dollars between $20 and $25 matter just as much. there are two ways to have these conversations:

    (1) what we should do vs. what is optimal according to our personal win curve preferences
    (2) what we should do vs. constraints imposed by agency costs (ie management will use a too high discount rate except when it comes to the 2023 second round).

    i think paying FVV 4/95 would be close under (1) depending on available alternatives and a good outcome given (2).

  93. #..and I would much rather overpay for FVV and have him on our team for four seasons than get Westbrook. Even at 25 million a year I think FVV would be moveable at some point.#

    A few months ago i was in favour of “overpaying” FVV too as i had No Trust in knicks FOffices and thought that FVV would be a nice addition -Extremely Needed – even as overpaid.
    Right now i feel that FO is doing things right so i feel more comfortable to avoid overpaying for any player out there.

  94. Stupid idea or really stupid idea?

    Mike Conley and a pick for Randle. They both expire this year, I believe? Utah would save like 15 mil this year, which probably means a lot to their bottom line regardless of the cap.

  95. I like FVV for the reasons I liked Haliburton: He brings shooting, defense, playmaking, and versatility.

    To max out RJ’s value, he needs shooters around him and the ball in his hands in the halfcourt. We need to at least try him as our primary penetrator and pick and roll initiator (with Toppin and Mitch). So you definitely can’t have non-shooters around him like Westbrook. You need a pg that can shoot the three.

    I think RJ can handle the pressure, and if he’s not good, then we get a good pick in ’21 and take a better initiator.

    FVV will cost us, but he’s a great fit at a key position, and it’s not like we have a lot of other options. Hayward is a waste of money imo. Bullock gives you at least 75% of what he does, and there will be other opportunities to pick up 3 & D guys in the future.

    Most importantly, we need to put guys in positions that show off their best features, so they retain the most trade value possible (basically, the opposite of what we did with Randle).

  96. KnickFaninChicago:
    Stupid idea or really stupid idea?

    Mike Conley and a pick for Randle. They both expire this year, I believe?Utah would save like 15 mil this year, which probably means alot to their bottom line regardless of the cap.

    Mike Conley would be a perfect guy to bring in if there is an asset attached, or even just to get Randle and DSjr off of the roster. He may even have trade value at the deadline.

  97. No one is disputing that FVV is a very good player. The only question is at what price. ptmilo summed it up perfectly. The sweet spot is like $22 million. Anything above $24 mill is an overpay. Anything under $20 mill is a no-brainer.

  98. ugh, the moderation police caught me. In short, I like the Conley idea if we can include Randle and DSjr and get an asset or two back.

  99. What’s the deal with these sign and trade rumors for Malik Beasley? If he has his head screwed on straight, I would love that trade. Maybe Minny would take Randle?

  100. I love FVV as a player but I think it’s pretty scary to elevate him into a larger role (per Partnow): “While he has been one of the elite open 3-point shooters in the league over his career, he has been mediocre-to-poor on contested attempts. Given his size, it should not be a shock that he is also one of the least efficient finishers at the rim versus a contest.” That’s a scary thing to read about a guy that you’re thinking about taking from an effective ensemble and asking him to be the maestro. Also I really worry about the impact of the transition from the harmonious offensive system in Toronto to what is at least an uncertain offensive approach under Thibs (and potentially a pretty static, isolation-heavy one). If RJ has made a big leap in all the time off and is ready to be something like a co-lead ball handler then FVV would be a perfect accompaniment but if we’re going to be asking FVV to be Rose from the 2011 Bulls that’s not going to work out well I don’t think .

  101. To me, Hayward is exactly the kind of player you want on your team. By that I mean, unlike the rest of the Knicks, he actually knows how to play basketball the correct way and does it well. lol

    IMO, it would beneficial for the kids to play with someone like him (as opposed to playing with someone like Melo). If we also added a decent PG, we’d probably make the playoffs, if not this year, then certainly next year. That would further accelerate their development,

    The downsides are obvious.

    1. He’s 30 years old. So by the time our young players are reaching their peak he’d be on his way out.

    2. He has been injury prone. There’s not much benefit to “potential” playoff experience if you can’t get it because one of your best players is out all the time.

    3. He’s going to be very expensive.

    I’m the least worried about him being 30 years old. If they gave him 3 years, we made the playoffs, the kids got a lot better, then he moved on and we continued to build and develop the team, I’d be fine with that. But the huge price tag could limit the rest of our flexibility and if he’s always hurt, it would be a monumental waste.

  102. HyperSpinning Power Forward for sale.
    Offers are welcome

    All PFs must Go
    Make an offer

    For more info call Scott or Leon

  103. I like FVV. Personally, if I was the Knicks I wouldn’t nit pick about a couple of million dollars per year here or there. The question is whether you think he’s a good enough PG to lead a team to a championship with the right pieces around him. He played a lot of PG in Toronto, but he also had Lowery up there.

    I’m not 100% sure.

    If you think he’s good enough, I think you can and should overpay a bit to get him because he’s young enough, may still have some upside left, and finding a PG that’s good enough is obviously not an easy task.

    IMO, when you are talking abut supporting players, you should quibble over every dollar. When you are talking about the major pieces to a team, if you are constantly quibbling over every dollar you are never going to sign anyone. Even a cheapskate like Ainge overpays players at times when it’s the right piece to the puzzle.

  104. 4)Hayward leaving a model organization like the Celtics for an infamous clown show like ours helps rehabilitate our image for when other players become available down the road. We have to show basic organizational competence and the potential to be good if we ever want to get in on the action the next time an Anthony Davis type grows disgruntled with his current situation.

    1 and 2 relate to Hayward being a good addition if your goal is win as many games as possible in 2020-2021, which I don’t dispute.

    As for 3, I think it’s pretty simple; the kids have to prove something before you start adding 31 year old, $20M+ AAV players. That’s why I said if we more or less let the kids roam this year and they impress, I have no problem talking about additions after the season. But right now we have one genuinely good but limited prospect, one intriguing but thus far wildly unproductive prospect, and one draft pick we made 36 hours ago. I’m not going to say “the kids are trash,” but if you accept there’s a threshold to meet before you start signing guys like Hayward I don’t see how you can argue we’re there.

    Re: 4, I think this is premised on a deeply flawed theory. Namely, that future free agents will see what a team was able to accomplish with the help of guys they’ll be replacing and be intrigued. That’s not a pattern I’ve ever observed. KD and Kyrie went to the Nets because of the guys they’d be playing with, not the guys going out the door. Players aren’t stupid, I’ve never been convinced by this bait-and-switch idea.

    Additionally, it’s not like we have no experience in this regard. Well-respected players like Melo, Stoudemire, and Chandler chose to come here. It did not seem to do much for our reputation, because it didn’t lead to an appealing situation for free agents once they realized that, just as a cap matter, they would be replacing, not joining, those guys.

  105. I wouldn’t want FVV to be the number one option. I would want him to be what he is now, like the 3rd option. With Toppin and RJ being the 1 and 2 options on offense. To start, that might be a little ugly, but I think we drafted Toppin with the idea that he would be one of the first two options on offense and RJ should be as well. FVV probably would have a larger role to start but the idea is that his veteran influence and steady PG play would give room for Toppin and RJ to grow into the primary options on offense.

  106. I understand the hesitation about FVV. If we could get Conley, I would sign up for that. But if we can’t, FVV might be the way to go. Augustine does not do it for me. Might as well have kept Elfrid at $8M or just roll with DSJr.

    I’m also going to toss something else out. The Knicks are in much better position today than at the same juncture 2 years ago. We have 3 or 4 potential building blocks. RJ and Mitch look legit. If Toppin performs like we think he will, that’s 3 good, young assets. Free agents might start looking at us in a better light if the PG we get get the team into an upward trajectory. Getting a stop-gap PG will destroy that image and image is everything to free agents. Leon needs a PG that generates excitement. Is Lin around? LOL

  107. Like I said, TNH, I’m not really in favor of Hayward, though I wouldn’t hate it. Just playing devil’s advocate.

    As to the kid question, it’s a chicken-or-the-egg thing. The roster as currently constructed is not hugely conducive to RJ, Mitch, and Obi improving their games. So saying they have to prove they’re worth of being flanked by an expensive vet feels like a catch-22: given the mess past regimes made of the roster, they can’t prove their worthiness until they’re already flanked by somebody like a Hayward, even if he’s going to cost an obscene amount in the short term.

    The worst case scenario is that the kids do not improve even with better spacing, but Hayward’s presence, plus the Thibs system, is enough to again have us picking in the late lottery. But we were screaming all of last year that RJ and Mitch needed good shooters around them. Hayward would absolutely be that, while also providing other things good for their development. So I don’t want to totally dismiss the idea. We need a playmaker and we need wings who can shoot and pass. Better Hayward plus an Augustin or Teague than Russ plus a dollar store wing.

  108. GoNYGoNYGo – Tanking forever: Augustine does not do it for me. Might as well have kept Elfrid at $8M or just roll with DSJr.

    Augustin is a much better offensive player than Payton, and the team needs shooting and someone who makes defenders go over screens in the PnR. DSjr is a bottom-10 player in the NBA right now. If he shows something in training camp, sure, but otherwise it would be best to either include him as filler in a trade or just release him.

  109. FWIW I have no worries about FVV taking on a bigger role per se. For me, it’s all about the price. He’ll probably be a Malcolm Brogdan-level player and is worth every penny of $20-22 million. The extra $8 mill it will take to get him is just not worth it.

  110. Berman says that VanVleet will “probably” resign with Toronto because the Knicks don’t want to be used for leverage. And Mannix says that “Russell Westbrook is not a priority for the team at this point.”

    So that leaves… Augustin? Franky Smokes?

  111. As to the kid question, it’s a chicken-or-the-egg thing. The roster as currently constructed is not hugely conducive to RJ, Mitch, and Obi improving their games. So saying they have to prove they’re worth of being flanked by an expensive vet feels like a catch-22: given the mess past regimes made of the roster, they can’t prove their worthiness until they’re already flanked by somebody like a Hayward, even if he’s going to cost an obscene amount in the short term.

    The worst case scenario is that the kids do not improve even with better spacing, but Hayward’s presence, plus the Thibs system, is enough to again have us picking in the late lottery. But we were screaming all of last year that RJ and Mitch needed good shooters around them. Hayward would absolutely be that, while also providing other things good for their development. So I don’t want to totally dismiss the idea. We need a playmaker and we need wings who can shoot and pass. Better Hayward plus an Augustin or Teague than Russ plus a dollar store wing.

    Sure, but there’s plenty of middle ground between “do absolutely nothing roster wise to help your core play to their strengths” and “sign Gordon Hayward to a 4/$100M deal mostly because you think it’ll develop your core.” Gordon Hayward is not the only player on the planet capable of providing spacing and playmaking for the kids, he’s just the most expensive and, well, most likely to sell tickets.

    This is why I’m upset we didn’t grab a competent point guard at #33. The opportunity to put together a coherent, young roster was there. Now we’re talking about having to max Fred VanVleet and Gordon Hayward.

  112. As I said with my very au courant Meineke reference, I genuinely like FVV but he’s a good not great player. The way you build a championship team is by finding the next FVV after he goes undrafted, not signing him to a big money deal.

    Failing that, I would have preferred drafting Halliburton and giving him a shot.

    That said, I can’t kill the FO for signing FVV if they do. I genuinely don’t know how I would proceed if you gave me the keys and I actually had to worry about team revenues and couldn’t tank to my heart’s content.

  113. we’re def not on the part of the win curve where we start signing dudes to start winning games.. we don’t even know who is good on our team…

    but signing 25yo players isn’t the worst thing in the world… that’s why randle wasn’t a terrible gamble and someone like hayward probably is…. fvv is close and i would lean against it if only to try and get more ping pong balls for next year….

    i’m not sure if augustin has anything left but he’s a decent stop gap to replace payton….

  114. it does. at $15m a year it would be a no brainer. the marginal dollars between $20 and $25 matter just as much. there are two ways to have these conversations:

    (1) what we should do vs. what is optimal according to our personal win curve preferences
    (2) what we should do vs. constraints imposed by agency costs (ie management will use a too high discount rate except when it comes to the 2023 second round).

    i think paying FVV 4/95 would be close under (1) depending on available alternatives and a good outcome given (2).

    I should clarify that I meant I don’t think it hinges as much on the specifics. It’s a little hard for me to sign on to the idea that, say, 4/$90M makes sense while 4/$100M doesn’t.

    We disagree on 1, largely because I think FVV will see a drop off in productivity. As for 2, well, yeah, but you could justify a lot of suboptimal stuff with that line of thinking.

    This conversation also makes me mad we didn’t pursue D’Lo as a free agent. I think he makes more sense for this roster than VanVleet, and we already know he didn’t prove to be an albatross.

  115. Any player has a bargain price, an overpayment price and a fair price.
    There are players that fit in better with your system and the other ones you already have.
    There are players that don’t make players around them better and there are others that they do.

    When you find players that upgrade the others around them, fit your system and their price is right you get them.

    If your scouters are extraterrestrials and are able to find all the future assets/stars/superstars while the other teams are sleeping then you grab only bargain players.

  116. To be honest, FVV is a tier-3 player. Market for a tier-3 is what it is, $30M per year. I’ll be shocked if FVV signs for less than $25M.

    Z-man: Augustin is a much better offensive player than Payton, and the team needs shooting and someone who makes defenders go over screens in the PnR. DSjr is a bottom-10 player in the NBA right now. If he shows something in training camp, sure, but otherwise it would be best to either include him as filler in a trade or just release him.

    And Payton is a better overall point guard but my point is that I want neither. They are tier-4 (fringe starter/rotation) players. We need a tier-3 (solid starter) or better PG.

    I can’t argue about how bad DSJr has been. He’s a tier-5 (bench) player but if we don’t cough up the dough, he’s what we’re left with. If that happens, all that money we saved or spent elsewhere will be wasted cap.

  117. Gordon Hayward is not the only player on the planet capable of providing spacing and playmaking for the kids, he’s just the most expensive and, well, most likely to sell tickets.

    This is why I’m upset we didn’t grab a competent point guard at #33. The opportunity to put together a coherent, young roster was there. Now we’re talking about having to max Fred VanVleet and Gordon Hayward.

    TNFH, You are right about the first part. And I would say our draftees seem to have been picked for just that need. I used to want Hayward because no one one the tram except Morris could really space the floor. But he definitely doesn’t fit the win curve and we have Toppin and Quickly. So now I have mixed feelings about Hayward, and lean toward not getting him and agreeing with you

    We couldn’t get both floor spacing and a good point guard in the draft. I’m not upset because at least we seemed to get one of those needs. I don’t think you should be upset either. If we’d drafted a point guard, we wouldn’t have gotten the useful offense we got. If we can use our cap space to upgrade at point guard for a reasonable price that’s fine with me. If not, then we live with Ntilikina.

  118. the only thing we need at this point is to be in the top 3 for next year’s draft… if it means we roll out frank for 4000 minutes then so be it… but it needs to happen…. it’s the only way we’re adding significant talent in the next few years….

  119. ***It’s a little hard for me to sign on to the idea that, say, 4/$90M makes sense while 4/$100M doesn’t.***

    What about a 4/$100M deal that looks like this:

    2020/2021: $27.5M
    2021/2022: $26.5M
    2022/2023: $24.5M
    2023/2024: $21.5M (player option)

    (This for the antithesis of Westbrook: a very very good point guard who plays completely in control and runs a 5 person offense. He was extremely good in Toronto—a big reason the teams was greater than the sum of its parts).

  120. DSJ right now looks like a tier-6 player to me (player-slapstick comedian) which is pretty cool and entertaining but not so good if you want to showcase competence.

  121. there is no point to dj augustin. he is not the kind of pg who makes players better and he’s probably replacement level-ish ate age 33. jonathan isaac has scored more points/100 with a higher TS when he plays without DJ. his assists at the rim last year were 2.4/100. payton was 6.5. frank was 2.85.

  122. DJ Augustin is great if your starting PG has a season ending injury but getting him as your starter ain’t that sexy…

  123. regular reminder that memphis has been so smart they’re overloaded with interesting players. some guys to think about poaching:

    1. melton
    2. konchar
    3. jontay porter

  124. Also DJAugustin has ‘bargain Messiah’ written all over him. Not exactly starter’s mentality material imo

  125. I would be losing my shit if we had Morant, Clarke, Tillman and Jackson. What a fun core to watch compete. I suspect they’ll be a top-3 seed by 2023 if they land a competent wing or two.

  126. The Pellies have a surplus of guards, so if a more veteran stop-gap is in order for our win now approach, maybe we can extract George Hill on the cheap.

  127. ***I would be losing my shit if we had Morant, Clarke, Tillman and Jackson. What a fun core to watch compete. I suspect they’ll be a top-3 seed by 2023 if they land a competent wing or two.***

    That would put their second round pick in the 57-60 range that year. No thanks.

  128. I think we should be looking to grab Malik Beasley, trade Julius Randle, and let Dennis Smith Jr and Frank Ntilikina battle it out at point guard. I mean maybe we can trade for Rozier considering Charlotte’s back court going forward will be Ball and Graham, but other than that there’s no real point to FVV, Westbrook, Augustin, or any of them.

    I’d also like to see us take a flyer on Kris Dunn.

  129. Sounds like Indiana is indeed in play for Hayward in a S&T. I would imagine if they’re willing to give up Myles Turner, it’ll get done. Hopefully we can get involved at least as a facilitator.

  130. The one thing to get across, no matter what players we discuss for this year, is that giving out “fair deals” is a losing strategy. Consider that in 2019 we shelled out $70M for Randle, Portis, Taj, Elfrid, Mook and Bullock. I would rather have seen us shell out $70M for Butler and Kemba. Consider that. Would you trade the 7 we signed for Butler and Kemba today? How much better would we be? I would say we would have made the playoffs.

  131. Donnie Walsh:
    ***It’s a little hard for me to sign on to the idea that, say, 4/$90M makes sense while 4/$100M doesn’t.***
    What about a 4/$100M deal that looks like this:

    2020/2021: $27.5M
    2021/2022: $26.5M
    2022/2023: $24.5M
    2023/2024: $21.5M (player option)

    (This for the antithesis of Westbrook: a very very good point guard who plays completely in control and runs a 5 person offense. He was extremely good in Toronto—a big reason the teams was greater than the sum of its parts).

    Structuring a deal like this is clever and I would buy that. Would he?
    I think it takes 35, 33.5, 31.5, 25 w/PO :)

  132. Bertans is going to need $25M+ too and won’t come without a PG in place. He should be the sign-and-trade for Randle.

  133. Fair Deals are not magicians.
    You also need a TRUE coach and some kind of plan.
    You can’t throw 5PFs in the game and expect to win.

  134. Locke’s point is that Hayward will sacrifice some cash to re-establish himself as an All-Star, which he doesn’t feel he can do as a third or fourth wheel in Boston. But Indiana’s a better team than we are, and he’d still get a ton of touches even next to Oladipo and Sabonis. And Boston would get Myles Turner back in a sign-and-trade, whereas we can’t (or shouldn’t) offer anything even close in value.

  135. @Alan – sure maybe but remember the PLAYER has to agree to a sign and trade, not just the teams.

    From David Locke’s tweets:

    This is just a reason based guess. I haven’t talked to anyone but I think Gordon Hayward goes to New York even if it costs him money. Here is the logic ……

    and

    I assume that makes Gordon believe he can still be a star. The place to go to leave your mark on the league, to have a chance to be an all-star again, to create a esteemed spot in the league is New York. If you are an all-star in New York you have a legacy. Just a guess

    If he decides he doesn’t want to re-sign with Boston, he’s leaving Boston. Matters zero to him if Boston is happy or unhappy with the return they get in a S&T — in fact the worse a deal it is for Boston, the better it is for him – I’m sure he’d rather play WITH Myles Turner in Indiana than WITHOUT him. If he can go to the Knicks and they can get a 1st rounder from Boston in return for that trade exception, that only makes his new team (the Knicks) better.

  136. “I would be losing my shit if we had Morant, Clarke, Tillman and Jackson. What a fun core to watch compete.”

    It really is. How much fun would it be to watch Morant and Mitch?

    If we get Morant rather than Barrett things would be so so different.

    Indiana seems like a far too logical place for Hayward for it not to happen

  137. —New poll question—

    Who is most likely to remain on the Knicks beyond their rookie deal?

    A) Frank Ntilikina

    B) R.J. Barrett

    C) Mitch Robinson

    D) Obi Toppin

    E) a 2023 second round draft pick

  138. DW, Mitch is not on a rookie deal per se…

    I’ll go with Frank…he’s breaking out this year. (maybe in hives, but whatever…)

  139. @JCMacriNBA
    Can’t confirm anything is done, but hearing some rumblings on the Gordon Hayward front…how would Knicks fans feel about three years, $70 million?

  140. Macri adds in a followup tweet:

    Want to reiterate that this isn’t done, and Indiana is still involved. But my understanding is that this offer is on the table and is under consideration by Hayward.

    Come on, Pacers…

  141. Quick! Someone tell Hayward that Mike Pence is from Indiana and that they’ve been dismantling public education in the name of “education reform” via Koch brothers money since 2011. That’ll seal the deal.

  142. Unless you’re just against it in principle, and there’s reason to be though I don’t necessarily share it, there’s no way to really criticize getting a guy as good as Hayward for only 23 a year.

    And, again while I don’t necessarily disagree with the superficial substance, the idea that we should be judging and rejecting basketball players because they support a sitting president is taking the whole politics thing quite a bit too far. A reassessment, and not of Hayward, is very much in order. In a diverse democracy there are proper and improper modes and norms of opposition and, with them, citizenship.

  143. You realize you are a Knicks fan when you try to talk yourself into this deal because you think the alternative front office plans may be even worse!

  144. I’d be 1000% fine with Hayward at 3/70 if that’s really the number, is that controversial? That pays him like a #3 option, and on a relatively short deal. Hayward was pretty good last year. I’m not saying that’s my first choice for the direction to take this team but if you want to move the team towards respectability at all that’s an excellent way to do it – gives the offense a focal point but one who will share the reigns with the kids, little long-term downside, good value, totally tradable on that deal. I wouldn’t quibble with it at all.

    Now I suspect the actual number is going to be much, much worse because I don’t totally understand why Hayward would opt out of 1/$35M playing for his college coach on a title contender to come play for us at 3/$70 but if that’s actually the number, yeah, sign me up.

  145. Paying Hayward is definitely better than paying Westbrook. But, uh, yeah, doesn’t make THAT much sense.

    He was absolutely the player I hope RJ becomes…

  146. Well the thing is-off court stuff aside-I don’t think what Hayward does is worth 23 million per. He’s likely not an all-star caliber player anymore. He’s still good, and he’s still probably more likely to be injured than an average player, so figure he makes us 3 or 4 wins better? What’s the plan here, try to win 39 games instead of 33 games?

  147. i think the rumors of hayward being a magat are a bit overblown and isn’t really fair to hayward… it’s mostly a twitter/reddit mob thing….

  148. I’d be okay with that deal. He’s likely to be movable at that price unless he gets hurt.

    Flash forward to January: Hayward has suffered a career-threatening injury jumping off a curb while running to a speaking engagement at a Trump 2024 rally…

  149. I’d rather win 39 than 33, yeah. The infinitesimal ping pong ball advantage between the two isn’t worth sitting through dreck and seeing the culture and brand further decay. The Rangers have gotten lucky with ping pong balls two years in a row and a bunch of NBA teams have, too; eventually, the Knicks also will. Sometimes we can’t really control our fate and destiny and just have to make our peace with caprice.

  150. Owen: Paying Hayward is definitely better than paying Westbrook. But, uh, yeah, doesn’t make THAT much sense.

    Who sez we won’t be paying Hayward AND Westbrook?

  151. Overpaying for fading players when you suck doesn’t make much sense, but maybe this time it will work out well for us.

  152. I saw a headline today about the clips asking about terry rozier and remembered that we allegedly looked at a randle for rozier deal last year where WE were giving up draft capital. It hit me that re-invigorating this deal would be such a Knicksy thing to do. He’s pretty bad, but I can absolutely see our FO talking themselves into his age and counting stats…

  153. ..and let the win curve stick it in its ass!
    Being good and retaining competitiveness while having youngsters playing for you usually creates assets.
    You don’t have to wait for Santa Claus to bring you the number 1 draft pick after sucking year after year…

  154. At that price, could we package Randle, DSjr and Ed Davis for Westbrook without going over the cap, right?

    Westbrook, Hayward, Toppin, Mitch, RJ…that’s a playoff team except in the highly unlikely event that Hayward or Russ gets injured…

    #StayMe7o

  155. Hayward’s likely to age way better than Westbrook. Shot 50/38/85 and TS 59.5 on middling but still 21 usage. Most important is that he fits any offensive construct.
    And from what I remember is not a bad defender either.
    As long as the contract number isn’t like $35MM AAV (and if it’s 3 for 70 like Macri said, that is really good!), worst case scenario he is probably movable.

    The only opportunity cost here is that our draft pick next year will likely be worse. I get that it’s supposed to be a great draft, but you can’t chase lottery picks forever. I saw somewhere on Twitter that Cleveland actually has all top 10 picks in their starting lineup (Sexton 8, Garland 5, Okoro 5, Love 5, Drummond 9). They are not good.

  156. We should be looking at smaller deals. To fill our backup center spot I’d go with Noel, or if he is too expensive or not interested, Willie Cauley-Stein. I’d also take flyers on Harry Giles and Michael Kidd-Gilchrist if both can be gotten for near the minimum. I agree that Malik Beasley could be a good option to buy low, he is facing legit legal trouble, if he can be gotten for less than 10 a year I think that’s a good move. Maybe sign and trade and send DSj and Bullock.

    For bigger moves, I would have loved to see us pursuing Ingram try to sell him on not spending his career in Williamson’s shadow and how the NY spotlight would make him a superstar. But it looks like we’re chasing Hayward instead which at 3/70 isn’t a disaster, but still not my preference.

    FVV would be fine if it was on a reasonablish deal. DJ Augustin though seems like a mediocre move, I would have rather just kept Peyton.

  157. We should be looking at smaller deals. To fill our backup center spot I’d go with Noel, or if he is too expensive or not interested, Willie Cauley-Stein. I’d also take flyers on Harry Giles and Michael Kidd-Gilchrist if both can be gotten for near the minimum. I agree that Malik Beasley could be a good option to buy low, he is facing legit legal trouble, if he can be gotten for less than 10 a year I think that’s a good move. Maybe sign and trade and send DSj and Bullock.

    For bigger moves, I would have loved to see us pursuing Ingram try to sell him on not spending his career in Williamson’s shadow and how the NY spotlight would make him a superstar. But it looks like we’re chasing Hayward instead which at 3/70 isn’t a disaster, but still not my preference.

    RE WCS / Giles / MKG – these are all just moves around the margins that have basically no chance of making any difference whatsoever.

    Beasley is interesting and given that it’d have to be a trade, I’m not sure that any Hayward deal really affects whether the Knicks can do that or not. Of course would need to figure out the legal stuff.

    Ingram is a restricted FA and no amount of convincing him about NY will make the Pelicans not match, so that’s a dead end.

    FVV I’d be fine with, but for fewer years and probably less $, I think I’d rather get Hayward to be honest, then look to find a PG some other way.

  158. Wait…are we supposed to believe Hayward hates it soooo much in Boston that he’ll take 3/70 to be a Knick and not 4/100 to stay a Celtic? That sounds like something being leaked to get Ainge to just take Indy’s offer.

    Mike

  159. I for one am looking forward to paying a not-superstar to marginally improve our team and fuck up our draft position in what’s supposed to be a great draft.

  160. I’d rather win 39 than 33, yeah. The infinitesimal ping pong ball advantage between the two isn’t worth sitting through dreck and seeing the culture and brand further decay. The Rangers have gotten lucky with ping pong balls two years in a row and a bunch of NBA teams have, too; eventually, the Knicks also will. Sometimes we can’t really control our fate and destiny and just have to make our peace with caprice.

    whoa E, you popping “happy” pills now too with me and strat…what’s with all the unbridled optimism…

    Life is hard. Then you die. Then they throw dirt in your face. Then the worms eat you. Be grateful it happens in that order.

  161. I guess Westbrook, Hayward, Toppin, Barrett, Robinson is a team worth watching. It’s not great, probably not even very good, but given the product they’ve put forth over the past 20+ years now, it is at least something.

  162. “You can’t chase lottery picks forever”, says fan of team that never chases lottery picks and has been good once in two decades

  163. New Orleans does not match Ingram if Ingram wants to leave. That’s what sign and trades are for. If he really wanted to leave I don’t think they wouldn’t simply match the offer and have a disgruntled star on their team when they are really trying to build something positive. I think if he wanted to leave we could potentially sign and trade for him if we gave up a couple of future picks and maybe Randle or DSj or Knox. It doesn’t matter because we aren’t chasing him and I have no idea if he wants to leave anyway, it would just be my first call to see if it was possible if I was GM.

    As for moves on the margins that’s exactly what you should be doing in free agency. There are three kinds of moves to make during free agency. Moves around the margins where you try and sign younger or undervalued players cheaply to fill out the back of your rotation, big moves for stars in which you move heaven and earth (Ingram is the only one out there right now and he barely qualifies), and finally moves to help facilitate other teams signings (taking on bad salary for picks, etc.). Anything else gets you saddled with regrettable contracts. You cannot sign decent starters for reasonable money. FVV, Hayward, etc. will all be bad values in two years. That’s how free agency works.

  164. I guess Westbrook, Hayward, Toppin, Barrett, Robinson is a team worth watching. It’s not great, probably not even very good, but given the product they’ve put forth over the past 20+ years now, it is at least something.

    This line of thinking is tempting, but if we ever want to put forth an unambiguously good product eventually we’re just going to have to take our damn medicine.

    Nobody is even arguing that wins added by Hayward wouldn’t be marginal–we have no chance of contending within 3 years (assuming the relatively optimistic Macri contract proposal is real). So what exactly is the point here? That’s the question no one can answer. You know, what the hell are we doing?

  165. I think if he wanted to leave we could potentially sign and trade for him if we gave up a couple of future picks and maybe Randle or DSj or Knox.

    we are not going to clockwork orange brandon ingram into pulling an anthony davis redux on new orleans. this is a bland pipe dream.

  166. “You can’t chase lottery picks forever”, says fan of team that never chases lottery picks and has been good once in two decades

    Reminder: we have “tanked” exactly once, and half-assedly at that (no salary dumps). It got us the 3rd overall pick, who is generally regarded as one of our precious few assets. We never did before then, and we sure as hell didn’t after.

  167. thenoblefacehumper: This line of thinking is tempting, but if we ever want to put forth an unambiguously good product eventually we’re just going to have to take our damn medicine.

    Nobody is even arguing that wins added by Hayward wouldn’t be marginal–we have no chance of contending within 3 years (assuming the relatively optimistic Macri contract proposal is real). So what exactly is the point here? That’s the question no one can answer. You know, what the hell are we doing?

    There’s always been more than a whiff of Puritanism — “take your medicine” — to all these insistences on being perpetually dreck. Penance isn’t owed for having a shitty team and again fate is linked to agency and effort far too closely. The “medicine” almost never works, and successful teams have very rarely availed themselves of it.

    There’s nothing sinful in preferring better basketball to dreck. Be comfortable with the happy pills.

  168. ***That’s the question no one can answer. You know, what the hell are we doing?***

    If you can have Hayward and Westbrook for just cap space, it’s not that bad. It’s not like Isiah at all because we’re not trading assets for the overpriced vets. The Knicks have a lot of picks lined up, and clearly have an eye to 2023, so these three years are basically throw away years anyway. With the flat odds and an array of future picks, winning hurts less (and helps a lot to casual fans, advertisers, and execs). IF you have a five year plan, part of the trick to implementing it is not getting yourself fired after two. If you have to swallow a few “stars” during the lean years, do it with an eye on the end zone. It’s not that different from the Donnie Walsh Doctrine, which was to try to win as many games as possible while positioning the team for 2010. The main difference is that Rose is starting from a much better place than Walsh was. He doesn’t have to sell crap to clear cap room, and doesn’t owe 1st round picks from a 6 year old trade made by his predecessor (ironically, see Hayward, Gordon).

    So, is it a perfect plan? No. But it IS a plan. And it’s not terrible, in the grand scheme of terrible Knick plans.

  169. In the same spirit, a lottery pick is a lottery pick. It matters not whether the lottery pick has been “chased.” The Knicks have had plenty of lottery picks. They’ve had shitty lottery luck.

  170. Overpaying for fading players when you suck doesn’t make much sense, but it’s a big part of what we do here.

    Fixed for you DRed.

  171. I think the tanking strategy while a good idea isn’t going to happen. Thibs isn’t here to purposely guide us to 15 wins.

    With that said I still don’t think we should make bad moves to improve. At this point in our rebuild we need to look at every contract 2-3 years down the line. If the contract will be gone, more valuable or equal you can make the move. If there is any reasonable chance it will be a bad contract you have to pass.

  172. Many of the debates on this forum come down to people thinking in different time frames.

    If your goal is to maximize the team in 2028 you are going to have a different view than if your goal is to maximize the medium term while simultaneously keeping 2028 in mind. Both strategies have positives and negatives. There are tradeoffs in terms of pick position next year, attractiveness of the franchise to free agents and players looking for trades, the win curve, getting playoff experience and developing players sooner, adding more or less picks now for the future, etc…

    IMO, there is no clear cut right answer. You can do it Pat Riley’s way or you can do it Hinkie’s way. It’s not a matter of right or wrong. It’s a matter of execution.

    The only obviously wrong way is trying to maximizing 2021 (unless of course you are one deal away from a potential championship) . That’s the kind of thing we used do several management teams ago. We are clearly not on that path anymore.

  173. And actually if Hayward blows off Boston to come here for 3/70, it should be taken as a decent vote of confidence for the new regime/culture.

  174. Seems to me (and sounds like several others here) that the best thing we can do is get a PG who can help out the younger players. Otherwise what’s the point of drafting in the lottery year after year when every one of our picks is underwhelming because of a lack of play creation? Do we really want to burn another year of development for RJ? I would even take Payton back at a discount just to have someone run the floor, he had a higher net rating than Morris and Robinson last year… (source: http://www.82games.com/1920/1920NYK.HTM)

    For that reason, wouldn’t be opposed to FVV or Bledsoe either if he’s available. I would even (gasp) take Russ if we could dump Randle back to the Rockets. I know, I know, the contract, his age, the optics… but his teammates have mostly raved about his influence. I’d rather given an honest shot at setting up RJ for success than rolling the dice on lottery odds which don’t reward tanking like they used to.

  175. Igno-Bot 3000:
    Seems to me (and sounds like several others here) that the best thing we can do is get a PG who can help out the younger players. Otherwise what’s the point of drafting in the lottery year after year when every one of our picks is underwhelming because of a lack of play creation? Do we really want to burn another year of development for RJ? I would even take Payton back at a discount just to have someone run the floor, he had a higher net rating than Morris and Robinson last year… (source: http://www.82games.com/1920/1920NYK.HTM)

    For that reason, wouldn’t be opposed to FVV or Bledsoe either if he’s available. I would even (gasp) take Russ if we could dump Randle back to the Rockets. I know, I know, the contract, his age, the optics… but his teammates have mostly raved about his influence. I’d rather given an honest shot at setting up RJ for success than rolling the dice on lottery odds which don’t reward tanking like they used to.

    Russ’ contract is awful but there’s no opportunity cost for signing up if nobody wants to sign with us anyway. We’ve had cap space for two years now and it hasn’t netted us anything. Would rather develop our young players.

  176. Reminder: we have “tanked” exactly once, and half-assedly at that (no salary dumps). It got us the 3rd overall pick, who is generally regarded as one of our precious few assets. We never did before then, and we sure as hell didn’t after.

    You can say this all you want and it will remain wrong.

    We were positioned 2nd in the draft when we got KP with the 4th pick. Regardless of whether tanking was the original intent at the start of the season or not, when we got off to a bad start and Melo was playing hurt, we cleaned house, put Melo on Ice, played all the trash players, and were in a position to get Towns until the last game or two. We dropped to 4th and got KP instead, just like we dropped from 1st to 3rd to get RJ. That’s how tanking usually works. You start out at least trying to be competitive or better. When/if you fail, you start cleaning house and/or playing young players to maximize your draft position. That’s tanking. It’s incredibly rare that you come into a season and the goal is to be last. Guys like that get run out of the NBA permanently.

  177. we have no chance of contending within 3 years (assuming the relatively optimistic Macri contract proposal is real). So what exactly is the point here? That’s the question no one can answer. You know, what the hell are we doing?

    By that logic we should just tank for the next 3 years? At some point I think you have to start building something. Throwing your money at Bobby Portis is one thing, but giving a reasonable contract to a very good player (Hayward), and maybe figuring out some S&T for Malik Beasley – that’s just good management. If you have good players on reasonable contracts, those things are assets that even if they don’t specifically work out on the court could still be flipped for assets or other players later on.

    The big issue this offseason is that we literally had no one that we could trade to teams desperate for upgrades – that’s how bare our cupboard of actual player talent is. Jrue Holiday is a good player not a great player, and yielded players + 3 picks + 2 pick swaps. Danny Green yielded a first and second (and Horford of course). Kelly Oubre = a 1st round pick. Ricky Rubio – another first round pick. Seth Curry – #36 AND Josh Richardson.

    You have to have good players that can a) win, or b) be assets in trade. We have none of these. It’s time to start getting some actual good players on reasonable deals — Hayward at 3/70 qualifies.

  178. Russ’ contract is awful but there’s no opportunity cost for signing up if nobody wants to sign with us anyway. We’ve had cap space for two years now and it hasn’t netted us anything. Would rather develop our young players.

    having a bloated albatross of a contract still makes you less flexible. The cap space we had last year was just used stupidly — the cap space itself wasn’t useless, it was the people wielding that were useless. Marcus Morris was signed with cap space (accidentally) and that turned into a first round pick.

  179. I know, I know, the contract, his age, the optics… but his teammates have mostly raved about his influence. I’d rather given an honest shot at setting up RJ for success

    Over 10 seasons, I can’t name a single teammate who has been set up for success by virtue of playing next to Russ. In fact, don’t we have a pretty prominent example of the opposite in Dipo (pre-injury)?

    Is my memory faulty, or is this argument?

  180. By that logic we should just tank for the next 3 years? At some point I think you have to start building something

    How about we just try it for the one? For once, can we please just not eat the marshmallow?

  181. We were positioned 2nd in the draft when we got KP with the 4th pick. Regardless of whether tanking was the original intent at the start of the season or not, when we got off to a bad start and Melo was playing hurt, we cleaned house, put Melo on Ice, played all the trash players, and were in a position to get Towns until the last game or two. We dropped to 4th and got KP instead, just like we dropped from 1st to 3rd to get RJ. That’s how tanking usually works.

    This is turning into a bit of a semantic debate. “Tanking” isn’t just “losing a bunch of games.” A proper rebuild strategy would involve going all-in to acquire assets. Phil didn’t do that. We had the miserable accidental tank season that got us Porzingis, and then instead of renting out cap space and bringing in more assets, we signed Arron Afflalo and Derrick Williams to utterly pointless contracts. When that didn’t work we went all-in on Joakim Noah and Derrick Rose.

    Forget the word “tank,” that seems to be torpedoing the conversation. What we need to do, and never really do, is commit to a multi-year rebuild. Generally we’ll lose a bunch of games one year, then go out and sign a bunch of mediocre win-now dudes to try to get back in, uh, “contention.” You gotta do the shit for more than one year, and you gotta acquire more than one guy at the top of the lottery for it to be fairly considered a rebuild.

    We’re in these bust-and-bust cycles where we’re terrible and draft at 3 or 4 then bring in a bunch of dreck and draft at 8 most of the time. That’s a treadmill I’d like to hop off.

  182. glidepath: Over 10 seasons, I can’t name a single teammate who has been set up for success by virtue of playing next to Russ. In fact, don’t we have a pretty prominent example of the opposite in Dipo (pre-injury)?

    Is my memory faulty, or is this argument?

    Oladipo specifically credits Russ for his improvement: https://clutchpoints.com/pacers-news-victor-oladipo-admits-being-around-russell-westbrook-last-year-helped-him/

    Kanter loved him: https://rocketswire.usatoday.com/2020/04/07/enes-kanter-on-westbrook-he-makes-everyone-better-around-him/

    Steven Adams loved him: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2681568-russell-westbrooks-teammates-swear-by-his-impact

    Austin Rivers loved him: https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/fjz308/austin_rivers_on_russell_westbrook_man_russ_is_my/

    I know a degree of this is hyperbole but IMO it’s needed to counteract the narrative of him being a selfish player or bad teammate. I think his work ethic and attitude would be good to turn around the team culture.

  183. I’m going to pretend everything is fine until there’s reason to believe otherwise. The thread we’re on right now is about a transaction where we chose to exchange cap space for draft capital. And after cutting Bobby et al loose, we’re one of the few teams who can do that right now

    There’s been plenty of chatter in the press about Rose planning to do exactly this. Maybe he will

  184. glidepath: Over 10 seasons, I can’t name a single teammate who has been set up for success by virtue of playing next to Russ. In fact, don’t we have a pretty prominent example of the opposite in Dipo (pre-injury)?

    Is my memory faulty, or is this argument?

    Oladipo specifically credits Russ for his improvement: https://clutchpoints.com/pacers-news-victor-oladipo-admits-being-around-russell-westbrook-last-year-helped-him/

    Kanter loved him: https://rocketswire.usatoday.com/2020/04/07/enes-kanter-on-westbrook-he-makes-everyone-better-around-him/

    Steven Adams loved him: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2681568-russell-westbrooks-teammates-swear-by-his-impact

    Austin Rivers loved him: https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/fjz308/austin_rivers_on_russell_westbrook_man_russ_is_my/

    I know a degree of this is hyperbole but IMO it’s needed to counteract the narrative of him being a selfish player or bad teammate. I think his work ethic and attitude would be good to turn around the team culture.

    Fair point, I hadn’t heard that before (if I were to quibble, I’d say if Kanter/Austin Rivers are examples of the benefits RJ could receive from playing with Russ, I’d sooner send Russ to Siberia)

  185. How about we just try it for the one? For once, can we please just not eat the marshmallow?

    Bears remembering this:
    Best teams last year:
    Milwaukee – best players = Giannis + Middleton – not lottery picks
    Toronto — best players = Lowry (received in trade), FVV (UDFA), Siakam (late 1st round pick)
    Lakers — best players = Lebron (free agent), Anthony Davis (trade – granted they sent two #2 picks to NO)
    Clippers – best players = Kawhi (FA), PG (trade)
    Celtics – best players = Tatum/Brown/Smart (all drafted by Boston in lottery- this is an exception)
    Nuggets – best players = Jokic (2nd round), Murray (#7)
    Pacers – best players = Oladipo (trade), Sabonis (trade) – received for Paul George (#9 pick)
    Rockets – best players = Harden (trade), Russ (trade), PJ Tucker (scrap heap), Covington (trade)
    OKC – best players = CP3 (trade), SGA (trade), Adams (late lottery), Gallo (trade? I don’t remember)
    Utah – best players = Mitchell (end of lottery), Gobert (late first)
    Miami – best players = Butler (trade), Bam (late lottery), Herro (late lottery)
    76ers – best players = Embiid (early lottery), Simmons (#1)
    Mavs – best players = Luka (early lottery), KP (trade)
    Nets – best players this year = KD (trade), Kyrie (FA), Dinwiddie (scrap heap), Levert (late first), Harris (scrap heap)
    Trail Blazers = best players = Dame (#6), McCollum late lottery, Nurkic (Trade)

    Point is – the vast majority of teams are not winning with early lottery picks of their own. Tanking for picks is not the only way, and in fact is extremely rare to actually result in the selecting team winning a championship with that team. Many true game changers in the NBA have changed teams, some multiple times – Lebron, AD, Harden, KD, Kawhi, etc.

    The name of the game has to be asset accumulation using every means possible. Smart signings, smart trades, draft picks, development, etc. —

  186. glidepath: Fair point, I hadn’t heard that before (if I were to quibble, I’d say if Kanter/Austin Rivers are examples of the benefits RJ could receive from playing with Russ, I’d sooner send Russ to Siberia)

    Yeah, idk. I understand his value is horrible relative to his contract. I’m not personally sold on Russ, but I think people are underrating his value because fo the contract. I don’t think it’s the disaster people make it out to be. I’d rather spend our season putting our young players in the best position to succeed rather than playing 3D chess to try and get late-first round picks while our four consecutive lottery picks (really five if you count DSJ) all underperform. If we can do that with a cheaper PG option I’m fine with that, but getting a player that will make his teammates’ better is a better choice than flat-out tanking IMO.

  187. Frank, I hear you, but I think I’m being misunderstood here. It’s not about getting a top lottery pick, it’s just about having a modicum of patience rather than talking ourselves into another short-sided move.

    None of the teams on your list would look at our core and think “if we can just add two extremely expensive injury prone players to that, we’re set!”

    Just rent the damn cap space for 2020-21. This is the one year where we can actually get something useful out of the Dolan ownership

  188. The name of the game has to be asset accumulation using every means possible. Smart signings, smart trades, draft picks, development, etc

    Ahhh – I think we’re on the same page and just talking around each other

  189. How many of those teams on Frank’s list got to where they are by giving out market value contracts to players entering their decline phase?

    The one kind of move that continually fails is the one kind of move we continually make.

  190. You know what would be interesting? If the Warriors want to try and go all-in and trade for Beal or S+T for Hayward and need to dump Wiggins somewhere. Their late 2020s picks could become quite valuable…

  191. I dislike trading 33rd overall for the 2023 2nd rounder less as time goes on. When was the last time a NYK exec planned more than 3 months ahead, let alone three years?

    It’s fair to disagree with the valuation if there was a player you really liked, and it contributes to the optics of a haphazardly planned draft after the two picks they did make each had wafts of nepotism.

    BUT, seeing them double down on the strategy by grabbing more 2023 2nd rounders, it seems like this is a cohesive, future-oriented strategy a Knicks executive is executing? This is possible?

    If the Knicks continue to build and have a real team in 3 years, or the beginnings of one, being able to reach deep into the double draft could be a major boost. If we are reading tea leaves, it could mean that Leon Rose is at least willing to be first to an idea, whether it’s already proven to be a good one or not. That’s a definite departure from every NYK executive I’ve watched operate in the last 20ish years.

  192. Woj says that FVV is “very likely” to return to Toronto, which is how this seemed to be trending all along. It’s been a while since we’ve had any hints that New York wanted to pay what it would cost to pry him away.

  193. My predictions for the Knicks today …

    1) Sign Fred VanVleet for 4yrs / $120M. ($30M AAV)
    2) Sign & trade: Davis Bertans for 3yrs / $66M. ($22M AAV using $18.9M of Randle).
    3) Sign Carmelo Anthony (1 year/$4M using the trade exception for Mook)
    4) Sign Tyson Chandler (1 year/$4M using cap space)

  194. Why are we after Hayward?
    Other note there is no incentive in losing it all. It’s also sucks that it’s seems like we have no chance of winning in any games. Maybe Russ rentals with assets and melo will make us run to the 8th seed. Indint know but hoping for the best. The Marbury era seems better that the last few years. I’m patient in rebuilding but we suck for the last few years and feels like we are not moving the needle

  195. Alan:
    Woj says that FVV is “very likely” to return to Toronto, which is how this seemed to be trending all along. It’s been a while since we’ve had any hints that New York wanted to pay what it would cost to pry him away.

    And with the Kings and Bucks supposedly in hot water over the Bogdan situation you know everyone is going to be asking Woj not to report deals as “done” until at least like 6:03 EST. So I’d bet on that being totally wrapped up.

  196. Jonathan Macri
    @JCMacriNBA
    Can’t confirm anything is done, but hearing some rumblings on the Gordon Hayward front…how would Knicks fans feel about three years, $70 million?

  197. So, per reports, we have no interest in Westbrook and no interest in VanVleet. Hmm…

    Since we waived the entire roster, and the salary floor is $98,000,000, what do the reports suggest?

    (I understand why FVV wouldn’t want to come to NY, but there is literally no other player out there as appealing given age, $, and production. Unless Nick Nurse is some kind of magician, VanVleet would be such a tremendous upgrade at a position that has been so dismally represented in NY for the past 30-plus years that I’m kind of dismayed that the Knicks aren’t at least throwing something at him).

  198. The 2021 Draft is a great opportunity to win outside of the first handful of picks. There will be a whole lot of unproven players being drafted on upside. Guys who might have gone top-5 could fall to the late lottery simply via a glut of “upside” and “intrigue.” And of course, everyone gets pushed back a slot for every 18-year-old taken early.

    Hard to see exactly how it shakes out, but it’s simply a flatter draft in terms of pick value. I’d be fishing for picks right now. Hell, I’d probably take on salary in 2021-22 for the honor of picking early in 2021.

  199. The Hayward stuff is confusing. If he just stayed in Boston, he’d get $34 million. So he is going to add two more years and just $36 million to that? If Hayward was a free agent next year, would he seriously not beat 2 years/$36 million? It doesn’t make sense.

  200. Donnie Walsh:
    So, per reports, we have no interest in Westbrook and no interest in VanVleet. Hmm…

    Since we waived the entire roster, and the salary floor is $98,000,000, what do the reports suggest?

    (I understand why FVV wouldn’t want to come to NY, but there is literally no other player out there as appealing given age, $, and production. Unless Nick Nurse is some kind of magician, VanVleet would be such a tremendous upgrade at a position that has been so dismally represented in NY for the past 30years that I’m kind of dismayed that the Knicks aren’t at least throwing something at him).

    Sounds a lot like Hayward and either a FA PG or one of the Pelicans excess PGs

  201. In 2008, Mike D’Antoni appealed to the NY front office to “get me my engine”. They got him Chris Duhon.

    Since that time, D’Antoni’s system has become the de facto offense in the NBA.

    And, yet, NY is still getting the Chris Duhons of engines, 12 years later…

  202. Brian Cronin:
    The Hayward stuff is confusing. If he just stayed in Boston, he’d get $34 million. So he is going to add two more years and just $36 million to that? If Hayward was a free agent next year, would he seriously not beat 2 years/$36 million? It doesn’t make sense.

    Guaranteed money is guaranteed money. Decline or injury means he won’t get much.

    But I think the tweet thread Alan posted earlier explains it. Hayward wants to be a star and NY is the best place for him to cement his legacy. He also knows luke half the staff. So it’s a rare instance of a player actually taking a paycut.

    Of course, he hasn’t actually taken the paycut yet…

  203. Donnie Walsh:
    In 2008, Mike D’Antoni appealed to the NY front office to “get me my engine”. They got him Chris Duhon.

    Since that time, D’Antoni’s system has become the de facto offense in the NBA.

    And, yet, NY is still getting the Chris Duhons of engines, 12 years later…

    It’s too bad that we missed out on D’Antoni and all of the championships he’s won since his departure.

  204. The Hayward stuff is confusing. If he just stayed in Boston, he’d get $34 million. So he is going to add two more years and just $36 million to that? If Hayward was a free agent next year, would he seriously not beat 2 years/$36 million? It doesn’t make sense

    He broke his leg in half three years ago, he has nerve problems in his foot, he’s had ankle problems, he might think he’s one bad injury away from making 3 million dollars in 2022. I’d rather have 70 million than 35 million. There was also some talk about him feeling betrayed by Boston

  205. @KnickSchool

    As part of the trade that sent the 23rd pick to the Wolves on draft night, the Knicks will net the draft rights to forward Mathias Lessort, along with Detroit’s 2023 second round pick via the Clippers

  206. DRed: He broke his leg in half three years ago, he has nerve problems in his foot, he’s had ankle problems, he might think he’s one bad injury away from making 3 million dollars in 2022.I’d rather have 70 million than 35 million.There was also some talk about him feeling betrayed by Boston

    He has made $120M in his career already though, he doesn’t exactly need to be risk averse. I agree there’s plenty of non-financial reasons to think he might want to change things up but I don’t think there’s any way around the idea that opting out of 1/35 to take 3/70 would be pretty surprising from a purely financial perspective.

  207. What I really want to see now is Mitch faking a 3pt shot and driving the lane. Him being a 7-foot inside-out threat that can handle the rock will make everyone better… as long as he also learns how to stay out of foul trouble! I would make him watch a full length video (as punishment) of every foul he’s committed in the NBA every time he gets 3 fouls in the 1st half of a game. The video will grow in length every game.

  208. thenamestsam: He has made $120M in his career already though, he doesn’t exactly need to be risk averse. I agree there’s plenty of non-financial reasons to think he might want to change things up but I don’t think there’s any way around the idea that opting out of 1/35 to take 3/70 would be pretty surprising from a purely financial perspective.

    It sounded like he was pissed at Ainge but sacrificing tens of millions of dollars to go from a championship contender to a bottom-3 team feels like wishful thinking

  209. D’Antoni hitched his wagon to Amar’e in NY. That was his and all of our downfall. That was the downfall of the Melo-drama. We went after an uninsurable player and, though he was beautiful, he only stayed healthy a half season. Yes, we bemoaned the loss of talent that came with concocting that duo, but it would have been a playoff team, if not a champ, for a few years, especially after getting lucky with a flier on Jeremy Lin and making a great deal for the still potent Tyson Chandler. What I’m saying is that Russ + Gordon would be fun if we got all the upside. Maybe you do. (as a k fan I’m once bit and twice shy) You do have to get lucky, though. If we had picked 2nd in 1985 we would have selected the great Steve Stipanovich

  210. I should add, that there were obvious red flags with STAT. Maybe not with Hayward? Russ? How likely are they to miss games?

  211. we should have had a thread solely dedicated to guessing the combined salary in 2020-21 of our exiled 2019-20 body men

  212. With all the normal and important caveats, if Mitch can even hit one 3 a game or every other game, it really opens up the floor for Obi’s game to shine.

  213. danvt:
    I should add, that there were obvious red flags with STAT. Maybe not with Hayward? Russ? How likely are they to miss games?

    The red flag with Russ is how bad he played last year. Maybe he bounces back after leaving Houston, but he was already trending downward in OKC.

    Even if Russ puts up the strong numbers he had in OKC 2 years ago, you wonder if it’s worth $43M. He might be worth it next year. No way is he worth it in year 3.

  214. @Carchia
    Restricted free agent Bogdan Bogdanovic is expected to sign an offer sheet with the Atlanta Hawks when free agency begins, a source tells @Sportando

    My gosh, did Milwaukee mess that up.

  215. It’s hard to respond to all the faulty logic in this thread but:

    -Malik Beasley is 23 and thus very different than Gordon Hayward. I suggested trying to pry him ages ago. If you can do so at a reasonable price, go for it.

    -I do not think Gordon Hayward opted out of 1/$34M to sign 3/$70M, but even if he did I think it’s quite far from a guarantee that contract would be tradable between the AAV, his age, and injuries. More importantly, if they idea is to just try to trade him anyway, isn’t it a lot easier to cut out the middle man and just take on salary dumps?

    -Frank I’m sorry but your list is nonsense. Almost every team on it got the ball rolling with high draft picks of their own (Toronto, Lakers, Clippers, Celtics, OKC, Miami, Sixers, Mavs–if you need a historical explainer here I can provide it but it’s rather intuitive if you think about all of these situations individually), or was able to acquire high picks from another team. Additionally, regardless of where they were picking, plenty of them emphasized having as many damn darts as possible. That’s completely inconsistent with a “sign the best players who will take your money at all times” approach.

    -Strat is on his usual bullshit. If you abandon an asset accumulation strategy the second it starts, you know, working, you never actually undertook one.

  216. ***It’s too bad that we missed out on D’Antoni and all of the championships he’s won since his departure.***

    I don’t even get this. Has D’Antoni’s offense not been the offense of all the good teams of the past 6 years? Are you satisfied with what NY has done since then? What is even the point of this post?

  217. Noble, aren’t we collecting a lot of darts though?

    2 first rounders this year. Two next year. One in 2022, two in 2023…not to mention all our second rounders now.

    I’m ok with going after a good vet player to help the team compete. Not sure if Gordon is that guy or not though. I’d rather lockdown FVV so we feel good about the PG spot. But any big money we spend on free agents we do have a lot of darts in the drafts coming up.

  218. We should probably get a new thread for FA starting in 15. Maybe a poll on how we feel about Hayward or who we want?

  219. Kings can just match and trade him to Bucks still

    You can’t sign and trade a guy if he’s signed an offer sheet with another team.

  220. ***Looks like the Mike Pence angle may have appealed to Hayward, Jowles.***

    Hey, Dolan is a spiteful trump supporter who helped get the Staten Island scrub into congress. That has to count for something, right?

  221. Brian Cronin: You can’t sign and trade a guy if he’s signed an offer sheet with another team.

    I stand corrected. Did not know that. Alan was right, they screwed that up.

    Do you think Kings try to match anyways and try the trade again in Feb?

  222. @GwashburnGlobe
    #Pacers-#Celtics sign-and-trade update. Hayward wants to play in Indiana. He’s told the #Celtics that.

    IND offering Turner and McDermott

    BOS wants Turner and Warren or Oladipo.

    That’s a big difference.

    Hayward saving us from ourselves.

  223. Noble, aren’t we collecting a lot of darts though?

    2 first rounders this year. Two next year. One in 2022, two in 2023…not to mention all our second rounders now.

    I am happy about this, but no matter how meritorious one might think it is to “remain competitive while rebuilding” or whatever, the teams we’re competing with timeline wise are under no obligation to feel the same way. If we decide we’re satisfied with our current number of future assets and thus can start thinking about how to maximize 2021 wins, that’s pointlessly ceding an advantage to other rebuilding teams.

    It’s a bit like Clausewitz’s theory of absolute war. The most logical form of rebuilding is collecting as many future assets as possible with no regard for marginal wins. I understand that practical considerations make this unlikely for a variety of reasons, but the further you deviate from it the more likely you are to lose out to a team with fewer compunctions.

    Sam Presti doesn’t give a shit that we’re happy about having a few extra picks here and there.

  224. marechal: Am I reading this right? Did they get an additional 2nd round pick than reported on draft night?

    No, that’s the 2nd round pick in 2023 that was traded for the 33rd pick this year. Lessort is new if he counts as a second round pick. That was reported only a few hours ago.

  225. Donnie Walsh:
    ***It’s too bad that we missed out on D’Antoni and all of the championships he’s won since his departure.***

    I don’t even get this. Has D’Antoni’s offense not been the offense of all the good teams of the past 6 years? Are you satisfied with what NY has done since then? What is even the point of this post?

    Lol I mean you brought him up. D’Antoni signed a big contract here with full knowledge of what our plan was at the time. For him to retroactively throw management under the bus for sticking to their plan is small, but unsurprising for someone who’s thrown anyone, including his own players, under the bus for not worshipping at his altar. Remember when the team played much better after he was let go? For the record, his style of coaching has been shown to be unsuccessful in the playoffs for fifteen years now across four different teams. The Rockets missing TWENTY-SEVEN threes in a row in Game 7 of 2018 should go down as a once-in-a-generation coaching failure, except it may be eclipsed by his own team, the year before, losing a Game 7 at home to a Spurs team led by LaMarcus Aldridge.

    D’Antoni is now an assistant coach and he was always overqualified to be anything but that. There are plenty of reasons to dunk on Knicks ownership, but if he was ever the answer to our problems, it was a stupid question to begin with.

  226. Yet again, the Knicks cap space, dating back to the days of Reggie Miller and Chris Webber, is used as nothing more than a negotiating tool by players with no intention of actually wearing Knicks laundry?

  227. -Strat is on his usual bullshit. If you abandon an asset accumulation strategy the second it starts, you know, working, you never actually undertook one.

    I know you and many others here like Hinkie style tanking. I have no problem with that. I understand it fully and think it can work. But that’s not how most tanks work.

    In the real world, managements are usually trying to avoid everyone in NBA hating them and getting themselves barred from the league. Teams try to get better until they reach a point where they realize their window is closed due to age, they have middling talent and won’t make the playoffs, they have an injury opportunity etc.. Then they tank. That’s what we did,.

    We got rid of all the problem contracts (Felton, JR Smth, Chandler who wanted out) and tried to retool, but the team sucked and Melo was playing hurt. So we traded everyone else, put Melo on the shelf, and TANKED the remainder of the season for KP. That’s not what Hinkie did, but it was a tank job that should have gotten us Towns except the idiots screwed up at the end.

    By your definition the Mavs didn’t tank to get Doncic.

    What happened was they tried to be competitive, failed, changed gears, and slowly worked their way down (or up as it may be) to be 6th in the draft. That put them in a position to trade up and get him. They TANKED even though they were trying to win at the start of the season. That’s how it works in most cases.

    It’s no big deal to admit we tanked to get KP when we OBVIOUSLY DID. It doesn’t change that what Hinkie did got him Embiid and Simmons which may be the core to a championship.

  228. Danny Ainge trying to trade Hayward for TJ Warren. Shut the fuck up man. Just take Myles Turner and get some dunkin donuts.

  229. ***D’Antoni signed a big contract here with full knowledge of what our plan was at the time. For him to retroactively throw management under the bus for sticking to their plan is small***

    That’s not what he did. It wasn’t retroactive. He said he needed a good point guard for his offense to run correctly. 12 years later the Knicks are still shuffling through the Chris Duhons, Ray Feltons, Mike Bibbys, Baron Davises, TDGDWTDs, Ray Feltons again, Tour’e Murrays, Chris Smiths, Jerian Grants, Brandon Jennings, Chasson Randles, washed up Derrick Roses, Emmanuel Mudiays, Ramon Sessions, Trey Burkes, Frank Ntilikinas, Dennis Smiths, Elfrid Paytons of the league. Fred VanVleet would end that, starting tonight, if the powers that be allow it to happen.

  230. Deeefense: It’s no big deal to admit we tanked to get KP when we OBVIOUSLY DID. It doesn’t change that what Hinkie did got him Embiid and Simmons which may be the core to a championship.

    He only got Simmons because the ping pong balls bounced his way. If they hadn’t, he wouldn’t have gotten Simmons.

  231. ***Danny Ainge trying to trade Hayward for TJ Warren. Shut the fuck up man. Just take Myles Turner and get some dunkin donuts.***

    Hayward for Turner is a coup by the Celtics.

  232. Early Bird: No, that’s the 2nd round pick in 2023 that was traded for the 33rd pick this year. Lessort is new if he counts as a second round pick. That was reported only a few hours ago.

    Thanks. I figured it was too good to be true.

  233. I’m going to guess the Knicks return to the 1-and-1 strategy from last year. Sounds like none of the splashy “star” names are going to come here.

  234. Maybe the Malik Beasley plan comes back to the forefront? I still don’t like the idea given the legal mess.

  235. Early Bird:
    Shams:

    Could mean KCP is actually available?

    I think Wes is the Danny Green replacement right? I would be legitimately shocked if KCP was doing anything other than setting his market for the Lakers. He’s a Klutch client, was awesome for them in the finals, and they have bird rights. Pretty sure they’ll end up paying his price.

  236. Donnie Walsh:
    ***D’Antoni signed a big contract here with full knowledge of what our plan was at the time. For him to retroactively throw management under the bus for sticking to their plan is small***

    That’s not what he did. It wasn’t retroactive. He said he needed a good point guard for his offense to run correctly. 12 years later the Knicks are still shuffling through the Chris Duhons, Ray Feltons, Mike Bibbys, Baron Davises, TDGDWTDs, Ray Feltons again, Tour’e Murrays, Chris Smiths, Jerian Grants, Brandon Jennings, Chasson Randles, washed up Derrick Roses, Emmanuel Mudiays, Ramon Sessions, Trey Burkes, Frank Ntilikinas, Dennis Smiths, Elfrid Paytons of the league. Fred VanVleet would end that, starting tonight, if the powers that be allow it to happen.

    I agree that they desperately need a PG and have been shockingly lacking in that department even by their standards. I have an axe to grind with that coach specifically, clearly, but we’re on the same page. Though I wouldn’t mind Burke or Payton back on small deals and am ready to give Frank one more shot.

  237. The problem with our pg situation is even if the plan is to start Frank who is his backup? Harper is on a two-way, Quickley is a wing, and Smith Jr hopefully won’t be here next year.

  238. Alan:
    Dragic signing a two-year deal with Miami, so he’s out as a backup option…

    $37.4M for 2 years. A steal! ($18.7M AAV)

  239. I said it a couple weeks ago and I’ll say it again. Let’s sign Shane Larkin. He has an NBA exit clause in his contract and makes about 4 million a year. Let’s do three years 20 million and get our PG for the next 3 years taken care of.

  240. I don’t want to pick on Frank anymore but dude is not a point guard.

    Although if you’re looking to tank and get in the high lotto of the 2021 draft, running Frank out there for 2000 minutes at PG is a good way to achieve that

  241. Early Bird:
    Macri saying Knicks are moving on from Hayward. They think Hayward to IND is invevitable

    Yay! What the Knicks should be doing is nosing around and trying to help facilitate that and other trades for Cracker Jack toy prizes.

  242. Woj tweet: Free agent center Mason Plumlee has agreed to a three-year, $25M deal with the Detroit Pistons, his agent Mark Bartelstein of
    @PrioritySports
    tells ESPN.

    I wonder if we can sneak in and sign Christian Wood as a backup PF/C

  243. Frank should play backup PG / off-ball as a 2. I wonder if Bledsoe or Lonzo are available. Hard to tell what the Pelicans’ cap sheet is at the moment with all of the moving parts.

  244. ***Let’s sign Shane Larkin.***

    Larkin is a fine option, but the Knicks HAVE to spend $98,000,000 on somebody, and the 7 or 8 fans in Cincinnati aren’t going to float the MSG boat for three years.

  245. ***Free agent center Mason Plumlee has agreed to a three-year, $25M deal with the Detroit Pistons***

    Oh, man, the Pistons are really trying to fuck with our 2023 second round draft.

  246. Was also going to say that Hayward for Turner and Warren is hilarious.

    Is he better than either of those guys right now? Warren an obvious sell high I guess coming off that hot stretch but really made me chuckle.

    Otherwise, searching for one of those “wait, something terrible didn’t happen?” GIFs

  247. Nate Duncan: Pistons can only sign Wood to the Early Bird contract for 4yrs @ $45M.

    We could beat that even if that’s a little rich for a backup, we need someone to spell Mitch when he fouls out. May also fit better with Obi since he can shoot.

  248. So…

    Free agent center Jahlil Okafor has agreed to a two-year deal with the Detroit Pistons, sources tell ESPN.

  249. well, at least we ain’t shit ourselves yet…

    more and more i’m thinking the FO has some plan to acquire a decent starting point guard…i mean, they have to, right?

  250. jordon clarkson just signed a 4/52 million deal for utah – they have to wanna get rid of conley…

    my current wish list for point guard:
    eric bledsoe
    mike conley
    jeff teague

    make it happen leon…

  251. Amazing. 1.5 hours into free agency, and there are only 3 teams with over $10 mil in cap space: Atlanta, New York and Charlotte.

  252. Amazing. 1.5 hours into free agency, and there are only 3 teams with over $10 mil in cap space: Atlanta, New York and Charlotte.

    that should be a good thing for us, right?

  253. There have been all flavors of Knicks fan angst on KB these past days. So far, we have a meh draft and a good little trade. I feel like we’re playing Asteroids in slow motion…

  254. Would Utah have any use for Randle? They got a first rounder or two in their pocket? Hint hint. Say no more. Say no more.

    Hey, if they have a 2023 first rounder available to trade, how can Rose resist?

  255. Guess Utah is actually just under tax thanks to Davis trade. Still think they might want to dump Conley at some point though.

  256. Larkin is a fine option, but the Knicks HAVE to spend $98,000,000 on somebody, and the 7 or 8 fans in Cincinnati aren’t going to float the MSG boat for three years.

    They have to spend $98 million, but it doesn’t have to be on free agents. Anything they spent under $98 million would just be divided up and paid out to the current Knicks.

  257. 4/$50M or so for Wood is a no brainer. Fit be damned, we need good players.

    Get rid of Randle and then Wood/Toppin/Mitch can just split the 4/5 minutes.

  258. Taking a flyer on Larkin, even as a backup, seems like a good idea.

    Get rid of Randle and then Wood/Toppin/Mitch can just split the 4/5 minutes.

    Now we’re talking!

  259. ***They have to spend $98 million, but it doesn’t have to be on free agents. Anything they spent under $98 million would just be divided up and paid out to the current Knicks.***

    Right, but in reality, they will spend it on players, and, if not on good players, then on players that casual fans want to watch. This isn’t the Flint Tropics, it’s the New York Knicks.

  260. I miss Chris Herring on the Knicks beat:

    @Herring_NBA
    OK, we’ve officially reached the stage where if you made a joke about all the Knicks’ forwards last free agency, you now have to make one about the Pistons’ centers

    followed by

    @Herring_NBA
    The East is big, man

  261. I see that the Knicks also picked up the draft rights to Mathias Lessort in their #23 pick trade. Anyone know if he’s anything?

  262. So the Pistons signed Josh Jackson….is that in anticipation of losing Wood?

    All of their moves seem to have been made with that in mind, yes.

Leave a Reply