The State of the Knicks Salary Cap for the 2021 Free Agent Season

Free agency starts at 6pm tomorrow (in a change from the old days, they’ve recently started to kick it off at a reasonable hour instead of at midnight, because they realized how silly it was to make everyone take midnight meetings just because…what…tradition?), and it’s been quite a long time since the Knicks’ free agency situation was actually kind of interesting, so let’s take a look.

Teams are technically not allowed to sign deals until August 6th at 12:01 PM, but can negotiate and basically agree to deals starting Auguat 2nd at 6pm (teams are allowed to agree in principle with their own free agents before then). The reason for this moratorium is because the league isn’t actually sure about the salary cap figures until August 6th, as they perform an audit during the week. Teams can sign their own draft picks in the moratorium period, plus players can be signed to minimum contracts (plus players can accept qualifying offers). These deals rarely take place during the moratorium, but they are possible. In any event, this is a long way of telling you all that we don’t actually know for absolute certainty what the cap will be. We will know for sure on August 6th. That said, the league gives the teams an idea of what they think the cap will be, and it tends to be pretty darn accurate, so let’s go with the figure that the league told teams recently – $112.4 million.

The maximum initial salary that a free agent can sign for is based on how many years of service they have in the league, 1-6 years, 7-9 years and 10 years plus. They are 25% of the cap, 30% of the cap and 35% of the cap, respectively. Oddly enough, though, the league uses different math to figure out these percentages, so they tend to be less than actual percentages of the cap.

Players with 1-6 years experience can sign an initial contract of $28.1 million
Players with 7-9 years experience can sign an initial contract of $33.7 million
Players with 10 years plus experience can sign an initial contract of $39.3 million.

If a player resigns with their own team, they can sign a deal giving them 8% annual raises, up to five years.

If a player signs with a new team, they can sign a deal giving them 5% annual raises, up to four years.

Certain younger players are eligible for the 7-9 year totals based on special achievements (like making the All-NBA team a couple of times). It doesn’t matter this year, as I don’t believe any of the free agents out there have that apply to them.

Okay, with that out of the way, where do the Knicks currently stand?

The Knicks currently have six players under guaranteed contracts for next season:

Julius Randle – $21,780,000
RJ Barrett – $8,623,920
Kevin Knox – $5,845,978
Obi Toppin – $5,105,160
Immanuel Quickley – $2,210,640
Mitchell Robinson – $1,802,057

They also have Luca Vildoza on a non-guaranteed contract of $3,325,000. Let’s assume that he is making the team, though.

They also have the #25 pick and the #36 pick, Quentin Grimes and Miles McBride.

Since Grimes is a first-round pick, his cap hold is $2,168,760, so you add his money to above totals. McBride, interestingly, though, as a second-rounder, has no cap hold. They can just hold an empty roster space for him, which would be $925,000. The only issue there is if they need to spend more than $925,000 to sign him, then that could be a problem. Most second round picks just take that minimum, but whatever, let’s just say that we have to at least somewhat take into consideration that that could be a slight issue.

The Knicks are also moronically on the hook for $6,431,666 of Joakim Noah dead salary.

Teams also need to have cap holds for up to 12 roster spots and including Grimes and one cap spot held for McBride, that’s still just 9 spots, so do $925,000 three more times.

The whole thing means that the Knicks have about $52 million to spend on free agents.

Of course, they also have a lot of their own free agents.

Here are the cap holds for the Knicks’ free agents. What these numbers mean is that you have to deduct each of them from that $52 million to see how much you can spend on other free agents while still keeping the cap holds for these players. The reason why cap holds are important is because for some players, you can then go over the salary cap once you sign all of the other players by giving the players raises over their cap hold.

For instance, Derrick Rose has a cap hold of $9,987,805 and Reggie Bullock has a cap hold of $5,460,000. Those are important figures because the Knicks have Early Bird Rights for those two players. That means that they can sign them to either 175% of their most recent salary or 5% more than the league average salary (which is around $10,000,000, so let’s just say $10,000,000, okay?).

Rose, therefore, can be given a contract of around $13 million a year for up to four years and Bullock can be given a contract of roughly $10,0000,000 a year for up to four years, but their cap holds would only take up about $15.4 million of cap space, giving the Knicks room to spend $36.5 million on other free agents and then come back to Rose and Bullock.

The cap holds of the other Knicks free agents (Nerlens Noel and Alec Burks) don’t matter, since the Knicks don’t have any special Bird Rights for them (they can sign them for 120% raises, but that’s not significant in this instance).

On top of all that other salary, the Knicks would also have their “room” exception, which becomes available to teams that are under the salary cap but then spend enough to get to the cap. The league allows them to go over the cap via a “room” exception of $4,910,000, that they can spend on anyone they want (they can split up if they’d like).

Soo….yeah, $52 million on free agents plus the room exception or $36.5 million if they keep Rose and Bullock and then also the room exception.

EDITED TO ADD: dhphan wanted me to note that the cap space is even smaller if you consider that the Knicks presumably want to keep a max offer spot open for next season, when the cap is projected to be $115.7 million. Here’s some quick math on the Knick roster, using guys who we presumably think will be on the team next offseason, we’re looking at about $60 million committed to the main young guys currently still on the team (RJ, IQ, Luca, Grimes and McBride) plus $33 million in cap holds for Randle and Mitch (the Knicks have full Bird rights for both and can give them any contract over the cap). So that takes us to about $60 million out of a $115.7 million cap. So presuming you want to keep a 7-9 year max spot open (which will be $34.7 million), then that means you only really have about $21 million that you can spend on multi-year contracts this year before you run into problems with opening up max cap space next offseason.

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

358 thoughts to “The State of the Knicks Salary Cap for the 2021 Free Agent Season”

  1. It looks like the Lowry-DeRozan reunion is in the books, but in Miami…

    Chris Paul just declined his option and Leonard did it too…

    People expect Leonard to sign a new contract with the Clips,
    Paul’s situation is more fluid…

  2. Max: People expect Leonard to sign a new contract with the Clips,
    Paul’s situation is more fluid…

    I was thinking the opposite….but we’ll see.

  3. Over-Under for deals that will be announced tomorrow in the first hour of free-agency? 15?

  4. That is obviously a bad look on their scouting, but keeping some of the value in a future 1st might have been better than blindly picking a player.

    wait.. so we don’t expect our front office to know about every player? the logic behind excusing the pick continues to be confusing to say the least…

  5. also brian.. correct me if i’m wrong.. but we have something like 25-30mm to spend on actual multiyear deals before we run into a possible max slot for next summer right? given that it doesn’t look like randle or mitch is extending either …

    so we have a lot of room .. but actually not that as much as our actual cap room shows given that we likely don’t want to be locked into this roster forever.. unless this is the shot we’re taking…

  6. Very true. I’ll edit that in there.

    EDITED TO ADD: My quick math suggests that it is more like $21 million.

  7. Frank is, unsurprisingly, now an unrestricted free agent. No qualifying offer. Au revoir, French Prince.

    But Malik Monk, who finally seemed to be figuring some things out last season, is also UFA now. Anyone interested? And at what price?

  8. I expect Sims to make the roster as a 3rd C on a minimum deal and McBride to make slightly more than the minimum.

    We should have around $52M in cap space next year, assuming the CHA pick doesn’t convert and assuming we end up in a similar draft spot next year.

    That’s $12M before 10yr max and $18M before 7-9yr max.

    We can waive Vildoza for another $3M or try to sign Randle for less than $29.7M

  9. I expect Sims to make the roster as a 3rd C on a minimum deal and McBride to make slightly more than the minimum.

    Whether Sims makes it or not doesn’t change the cap math assuming it’s a minimum deal. McBride making more would change it, but yeah, not by a whole lot, I imagine.

    I have it at $21 million versus $18 million, but whatever, we’re basically at the same place there.

    It’s fascinating how quickly this shit eats up the cap space!

  10. Oh yeah, I just guessed at $3M for 2022 draft pick, so that’s probably the difference.

  11. Well, now that the Kumar Rocker fiasco has fully played out, I’ll say this for Brody Van Wag: he never totally botched a draft the way the current Mets management did in 2021.

    F–

    I feel much better about the Knicks draft, now.

  12. wow 21mm was less than i expected… but yea we can vaporize obi and vildoza if needed so it is somewhat 28-29mm effectively… which is why we shouldn’t get too attached to obi since he’s next to vildoza in terms of getting dusted if needed…

    that doesn’t leave a lot of room.. looks like Ball will go for 20mm aav and Lowry north of that so we are probably SOL… i think Graham.. Payne and Schroeder are the next candidates which will eat a fair chunk of it… probably 12-15mm… possibly Rose is in this also…

    the next thing is whether or not we bring back Bullock or someone equivalent with what’s left… that’s something about 5-8mm which isn’t much and almost assuredly not enough for Bullock… that is I think why there are some Oubre rumors out there since he may command a cheap 1 or 2 year type of deal to fill out the roster…

    other than that.. that leaves about a whopping 30mm on 1 year or 1+1 year type of deals left for about 5 to 6 roster spots..i honestly dont’ know who we could target since basically the leftovers of free agency will dictate how we fill it out but it’s going to be a gamble of some sort if they can contribute well enough… we’ll probably offer someone 1 or 1+1 deals for 15+mm to someone to fill out the rotation… maybe someone like McDermott who would presumably get that much over a couple years might take it but no idea who else would be a candidate but i think that’s the type we’re going after when we fill the pg slot…

  13. I’d probably try Grant Riller before Malik Monk if I was looking at charlotte castoffs

  14. Oh yeah, I just guessed at $3M for 2022 draft pick, so that’s probably the difference.

    That’s probably it exactly.

  15. wow 21mm was less than i expected… but yea we can vaporize obi and vildoza if needed so it is somewhat 28-29mm effectively… which is why we shouldn’t get too attached to obi since he’s next to vildoza in terms of getting dusted if needed…

    that doesn’t leave a lot of room.. looks like Ball will go for 20mm aav and Lowry north of that so we are probably SOL… i think Graham.. Payne and Schroeder are the next candidates which will eat a fair chunk of it… probably 12-15mm… possibly Rose is in this also…

    The timing of everything really is off for the Knicks. The more I think of it, the less I have any idea what the heck they are going to do if they’re intent on keeping the space open for a max guy next year. It’s really looking sort of like Derrick Rose and a bunch of one-year deals, right?

  16. If the cap space they wanted to keep open was for next year why the rush. We had no reason to waive Pelle or trade 19 to make cap space for next summer. I feel like they are wanting to do something big, right now.

  17. Not that it should have any bearing on last thread’s discussion, but is it correct that CHA can’t trade a first rounder in any of the next 4 drafts until after the pick conveys to the NYK, and if they wanted to, they would have to lift the protections and convey the pick?

  18. No offense to Pelle, but I could see his cutting being just that they didn’t want him anymore.

    But that said, sure, I wouldn’t be surprised if they make a big move now, as well. They’ll still be able to go over the cap to re-sign Mitch and Randle next year if they go over the cap this year.

  19. It’s really looking sort of like Derrick Rose and a bunch of one-year deals, right?

    seems so.. i think the only big move they could have done and probably actually be kind of clever was Ball and Sexton but it doesn’t look like it’s happening and i think we would need to go 25mm for Ball in order to make it happen… even Rose has rumors with reuniting with chicago so i have no idea who the pg is going to be .. but it’s likely going to get groans…

    If the cap space they wanted to keep open was for next year why the rush. We had no reason to waive Pelle or trade 19 to make cap space for next summer

    that’s cause it wasn’t for cap space… it was just a backwards rationalization for a poor deal…

  20. Not that it should have any bearing on last thread’s discussion, but is it correct that CHA can’t trade a first rounder in any of the next 4 drafts until after the pick conveys to the NYK, and if they wanted to, they would have to lift the protections and convey the pick?

    Correct.

  21. Paul is an interesting one. Kind of figured he would have taken that option with Phoenix given that seems the best situation for him at the moment. Maybe given his timeline he’s taking less to stay in Phoenix but that seems very doubtful.

    Frank is, unsurprisingly, now an unrestricted free agent. No qualifying offer. Au revoir, French Prince.

    If I am not mistaken, I think Frank’s cap hold was about $18 million. Seems like we were never going to extend that kind of qualifying offer. I mean we can offer him less, but that seems doubtful he would accept that. That being said, is anyone actually throwing money at Frank this off-season? Could be had for a bargain.

  22. they can’t trade a first unconditionally but they can trade a pick as “first available” with the earliest possible delivery as year 3. they can also make draft day trades of firsts that they keep bc they are no longer considered future picks under the stepein rule.

  23. they can’t trade a first unconditionally but they can trade a pick as “first available” with the earliest possible delivery as year 3. they can also make draft day trades of firsts that they keep bc they are no longer considered future picks under the stepein rule.

    I’m a bit wary about whether they can even do first available, because they can’t trade in back to back years, right? And what if the pick conveyed to the Knicks in year two?

  24. If I am not mistaken, I think Frank’s cap hold was about $18 million. Seems like we were never going to extend that kind of qualifying offer. I mean we can offer him less, but that seems doubtful he would accept that. That being said, is anyone actually throwing money at Frank this off-season? Could be had for a bargain.

    Yeah, his cap hold is crazy, but his QO was “only” $7 million or so, so they could have offered him that and made him an RFA with his full Bird Rights, but they chose not to do so.

  25. What difference does it make whether or not we make the pick as far as the value of the asset is concerned?

    Exactly what I said – that WHOEVER IS GETTING THE PICK DOESN’T CARE. Because a deal is almost certainly in place. I think it’s reasonable to think it’s part of a deal for Graham, but it could be some other trade where the extra cap space also made sense.

    As for it being collusive, do you not think that established agents with decades of experience talking to every front office in the league don’t “wink” at each other all the time? That’s why I keep saying it’s embarrassing how dense people are about how shit works. What’s Leon’s stock in trade? It’s RELATIONSHIPS. Through those relationships, he knows he can trade down and still get the guy his team believes is the best target. Through those relationships he knows he doesn’t have to pay Bobby freaking Portis $15 million but can sign Alec Burks for $6 mil.

    So yeah, I think all the negativity is absurd given that you can’t judge the move without context – and since people don’t seem to know what context is, that would mean THE OTHER MOVES THEY ARE ABOUT TO MAKE.

    If they don’t make those moves, if they don’t sign Graham or swing a trade that includes the Charlotte pick or squeeze a bunch of FAs under the cap without a dime to spare, then I’ll gladly concede I was wrong. But don’t bank on it.

    By the way, Z-man, I do think you’re out of line with humper – he actually does admit when he’s wrong, unlike others I could name, and his tone has been fairly moderate….

  26. Brian, great analysis. Thanks for all the legwork to make the situation clear.

    By the way, just to follow my previous post: I am not a “Leon Rose” fanboy. I’m simply saying that those who argue he’s lazy and the Knicks are unprepared and we already know it’s a disaster are at best premature and at worst fools. I don’t know what the moves are, but there are definitely moves coming. They could disastrous; they could be amazing. If they are star-f#cking or franchise-crippling I’ll be as critical as anyone.

  27. One thing we should keep in mind when it comes to landing a star in the future is that we are not limited to free agency and cap space. We can use picks, the players we have under contract now, and the players we sign this year in trades.

    To me, the FA to watch this week is Nerlens. From what I read previously he already had his bags packed. But today I saw an article suggesting the Knicks would like to bring him back. If that’s true, then they must be open to using Mitch as an asset. they’ll have to extend Mitch eventually and they are not going “pay” 2 Cs. It might be Mitch that’s gone if Nerlens is back. Otherwise they’d probably just go with Mitch, Taj, and whoever else they can scrounge up cheaply.

  28. So yeah, I think all the negativity is absurd given that you can’t judge the move without context – and since people don’t seem to know what context is, that would mean THE OTHER MOVES THEY ARE ABOUT TO MAKE.

    why do we have to assume another deal is in place when they did nearly the exact same thing last year with a 2nd rd pick?

    if we’re assuming that there’s something else… i think that’s a pretty crazy assumption based on not much but blind faith…. that doesn’t mean it can’t happen or it’s not possible… but given prior history.. and the risks imposed of making deals ahead of time… it’s very very likely this is it and you should probably judge it based on that….

    like i don’t know… those assumptions are inferring quite a lot … like if it happened before then i could wait on judgement but.. the evidence we do have infers quite the opposite and that i can’t really get behind…

    it doesn’t make sense … like at all… and this is the kind of logic we’re arguing against which makes thing difficult…

  29. kevin5318:
    I’m assuming Taj will be back as the third big

    I don’t think that’s a good assumption. If we can re-sign Noel and Sims is any good we will have three centers already. So it could go either way.

  30. I’m a bit wary about whether they can even do first available, because they can’t trade in back to back years, right? And what if the pick conveyed to the Knicks in year two?

    then the first available is year 4.

    j michael, who is generally pretty reliable, is reporting that the knicks are trying hard to get myles turner.

  31. Given the Knicks 2 draft picks I think it’s extremely likely Frank is out UNLESS he comes back as part of a package with Fournier, who is his teammate in France. Supposedly the Knicks have been interested in Fournier since last year. Boston does not want to pay him what he’s asking and they just did a trade with Dallas to pick up a SG/SF. So it looks like Fournier is very live in free agency.

    I’ll add one more thing. If the Knicks let Frank go instead of keeping him cheaply I think it’s a mistake, but it could be best for him anyway. So be it. But if they add Melo cheaply (which I am hearing is a possibility) that combination of changes, well, just pray for my soul.

  32. It’s 100% certain the KnIcks choice to trade that 19th pick and take the lower value protected Charlotte pick is about cap space and positioning for future deals and because they DID NOT LIKE anyone else at 19. Why is that so hard to understand?

    They were willing to lose a little value in the short term for a chance at better value later.

    Even if they fail, it wasn’t necessarily a bad move. If you want to argue they should have found a better pick trade, that’s just wishful thinking. You have to find someone willing to trade with you.

  33. Myles Turner news is weird. I guess they plan to move on from Mitch eventually. Not sure what Turner would cost either.

  34. The current Knicks are a team that wheels and deals during the draft. If you think about the mechanics of doing that, it’s got to take a lot of effort and planning. You can’t just decide on a deal, write up the paperwork and file it all in the twenty minutes between picks. But they manage to make some good deals like last year when they turned two picks into two better picks for no cost by making two separate deals or this year turning 32 into 34 and 36. It takes a lot of talking and negotiating to make those things happen. Sometimes things go wrong too and we get trades like this year’s trade number 19. I don’t like it when trades like that happen, but I accept it as a side effect of trying hard to get as much value as possible out of the draft.

  35. Big, big yes to Myles Turner. (Obviously price-dependent.) Dude’s one of the most underrated players in the association.

  36. >>>Other than strat – who took to this board shortly after trade 19 was made to praise its brilliance – is there anyone on here who regards it as a net positive for the Knicks?<<<

    Let’s clarify this.

    I never called it brilliant. I’m not sure how I feel about it because I don’t know the draft prospects well. I said it wasn’t nearly as bad as the management haters and doom and gloomsters were saying for all the reasons I’ve highlighted in this thread also.

    It’s OK to say, “I don’t like any of the prospects available in this area of the draft other than the players I can select later. So let me trade down, add a 2nd rounder, do a pick swap that will keep extra cap space this year, and retain an extra 1st rounder for next year”.

    There is value in that extra cap space and flexibility WHEN YOU DON’T LIKE ANYONE ELSE and your goals are grander than 19 year old role players you don’t like.

    No way in hell that was a doom and gloom disaster trade or move. It’s time to move past this we have to build via draft mentality. It’s so 2014.:-)

  37. Deeefense: It’s OK to say, “I don’t like any of the prospects available in this area of the draft other than the players I can select later. So let me trade down, add a 2nd rounder, do a pick swap that will keep extra cap space this year, and retain an extra 1st rounder for next year”.

    Dude, that’s not even what the trade was. They didn’t add a 2nd for the 19, they added a 2nd for the 21. And they most definitely did not “retain an extra first rounder for next year” for the 19.

  38. Knick fan not in NJ: Sometimes things go wrong too and we get trades like this year’s trade number 19. I don’t like it when trades like that happen, but I accept it as a side effect of trying hard to get as much value as possible out of the draft.

    Best review of the 19th pick trade that i’ve read so far.
    Oh, and btw, if we’re being honest, the highlights of criticism towards Leon’s work being some minor picks traded (last year’s pick #33 and this year’s pick #19) is a huge improvement from the FO’s we’re used to in the last 20 years.
    (just please don’t go read my comments on draft night, because at that time i was completely mad about it! LOL)

  39. A 2024 2 wasn’t close to fair value for moving from 21 to 25 either. They should have gotten three seconds for that (if they were going to settle for seconds, that is. They should have asked for a top-15 protected 1.)

    Kind of bizarre to claim that a natural side effect of trying to squeeze value from the draft is … dissipating value in the draft … but whatever. Rationalization gonna rationalize.

  40. When we traded down from 21 to 25 and got an extra future pick, that was a fine deal as long as you think the next few guys are all about the same level prospect. We traded the 19th pick for a future pick that has a good chance to be worse than the 19th pick and no chance to be substantially better. It was really dumb. If someone said hey we’ll give you a 2023 25th pick for the 19th pick this year you’d tell them to get fucked, but that’s what we might end up with.

  41. >>j michael, who is generally pretty reliable, is reporting that the knicks are trying hard to get myles turner.<<

    This adds more fuel to the fire that Mitch may be available for a trade given I read (and posted earlier) that they are also still interested in bringing Nerlens Noel back. Turner would be a better fit with RJ, Randle, etc than either Mitch or Nerlens.

  42. Dear Frankophiles, take a deep breath, there’s still hope. Everybody agrees Frank doesn’t deserve 7M, right? Even the Frankophiles, i think. So, of course the Knicks didn’t extend the QO, we don’t want to pay him 7M. But if there’s still a place available on the 15-man roster and he accepts the minimum, there’s a chance he can come back. I’m not advocating for this, i’m just saying that not extending the QO doesn’t mean anything, except that the Knicks don’t think he’s worth 7M (but that’s what all the league thinks).

  43. djphan: wow 21mm was less than i expected… but yea we can vaporize obi and vildoza if needed so it is somewhat 28-29mm effectively…

    I think in the vaporization top, Knox ranks higher than Obi and Vildoza. ;)

  44. Cyber,

    They just drafted a couple of guards that one could say are at least similar to Frank’s profile in that Frank is trying to become a 3&D guard with some playmaking skills. It looks to me like he’s out. I think he’ll find a job somewhere. He may wind up wherever Fournier goes or perhaps in Utah with Gobert. Pop has also had positive things to say.

  45. Z-man:
    Not that it should have any bearing on last thread’s discussion, but is it correct that CHA can’t trade a first rounder in any of the next 4 drafts until after the pick conveys to the NYK, and if they wanted to, they would have to lift the protections and convey the pick?

    I thought i read this somewhere 2 days ago but I’m glad you brought it up. Ultimately, this could be a nothingburger, but this little fact isn’t exactly nothing. Yes, the Knicks own a well-protected 1st, but they own it from a small-market team that is not known as a free-agent destination – the Hornets either need to trade for someone or overpay for a FA. So there’s a small chance that, say, if LaMelo keeps improving and they decide they wanna try and trade for a legit 2nd banana, they may need to package a multiple of 1st’s to do it. Enter the Knicks… “oh you got a line on xyz team that wants 2 firsts in exchange for their starting 4? That’s great. Oh that right, you can’t trade any of your 1sts bc of our lil pick swap from last summer, eh? Hmmm, well yes that is an interesting situation, isn’t it? Well… what’s it worth to ya? How bad do you want that PF?”

    Any little bit of leverage you can gain, you never know when it can come in handy.

  46. ptmilo:
    I’m a bit wary about whether they can even do first available, because they can’t trade in back to back years, right? And what if the pick conveyed to the Knicks in year two?
    then the first available is year 4.

    You were right the first time, Milo. They can trade like this: CHA sends (some team) a 2022 1RP protected 19-30, if pick doesn’t convey then a 2024 1RP (with the protections they want to put it, because the Knicks already got the 2022 pick).

  47. strat,

    Here’s what you posted shortly after the trade was announced:

    “Good move by NY.

    I knew these guys weren’t foolish enough to select 3-4 role players tonight. Keep the asset and try to use it more productively later in free agency sign and trades and regular trades or next year.”

    http://knickerblogger.net/nba-draft-night-thread-2021/#comment-759448

    Granted, you didn’t go so far as to call it “brilliant” but that comment certainly suggests a level of approval that exceeds your “not nearly as bad as the management haters and doom and gloomsters were saying” characterization of it that you posted upthread

    Of course, if you’ve changed your thinking and have come around to the idea that the trade at 19 was indeed a net negative, then I guess that brings this board to 100% unanimity on the subject.

  48. You guys are all crazy.

    Cap space and flexibility have value.

    Personally I think they are dumbasses because they didn’t get Tatum for that 1st rounder. Lol. Unfortunately that deal was not available.

    Do you think they were in some room playing with themselves?

    They were on the phone looking for the best deal available for each pick they had given what they were trying to accomplish. In the end they picked the players they were interested in (and avoided players they weren’t interested in), gained a little value trading down, and took a little loss now to be positioned better in free agency and next year. THE END

  49. You were right the first time, Milo. They can trade like this: CHA sends (some team) a 2022 1RP protected 19-30, if pick doesn’t convey then a 2024 1RP (with the protections they want to put it, because the Knicks already got the 2022 pick).

    no they can’t do that, because they can’t promise 22 with the possibility of owing 23 to the knicks. there is plenty of precedent for this. the language is first available.

  50. Count,

    At that stage I said it was a GOOD move because I was saying all week they weren’t going load up the roster with all kids. IMO that WOULD HAVE been dumb.

    Later, it was reported on Twitter about all the protections to the CHA pick. That made it less attractive, but I stuck with it not being the disaster people were calling it. I don’t love it, but I understand the thinking and still think it’s nowhere near as bad as the consensus here. All this craziness is because people here want to build primarily via draft. That’s over. We are building via free agency, trade and draft. They want the cap space and flexibility going forward more than little bit of value they may have given up. Plus that draft next year may be stronger.

  51. ptmilo:
    You were right the first time, Milo. They can trade like this: CHA sends (some team) a 2022 1RP protected 19-30, if pick doesn’t convey then a 2024 1RP (with the protections they want to put it, because the Knicks already got the 2022 pick).
    no they can’t do that, because they can’t promise 22 with the possibility of owing 23 to the knicks.there is plenty of precedent for this.the language is first available.

    Yeah, you’re right. Seemed perfect when i pictured the deal. LOL

  52. The cap is inherently unfair to us due to cost of living and tax reasons. Sure, some teams can overcome this because of weather or other reasons but the idea that a player would voluntarily take a 20 or 30 percent loss due to taxes is flawed. We’re at a big disadvantage.

  53. I don’t think that’s a good assumption. If we can re-sign Noel and Sims is any good we will have three centers already. So it could go either way.

    Based on Sims scouting report it looks like he might be with the Westies most of the year.

  54. @SBJLizMullen
    Free agent PG Elfrid Payton has signed with @Wasserman NFL/NBA agent Chafie Fields.

    He was formerly repped by CAA.

    Well, we no longer need to keep him around as a favor to Julius Randle’s agent and/or CAA…

  55. Great post and great thread Brian!

    Myles Turner is the kind of player who would make losing Mitch palatable.

  56. It’s 100% certain the KnIcks choice to trade that 19th pick and take the lower value protected Charlotte pick is about cap space and positioning for future deals and because they DID NOT LIKE anyone else at 19. Why is that so hard to understand?

    So they liked someone enough to make a pick at 25, 34, 36, and 58, but the options at 19, well, they were all just terrible?

  57. Myles Turner’s cap hit is exactly $18M, fwiw. Should be able to make our 2022 pick & afford a max salary player in 2022. Obviously, some other pieces are also likely to move in such a trade.

    Turner makes sense because he fits next to Randle better than Mitch does. The offense is built around Randle, so it makes more sense to open the floor for him. Also, drags Capela out of the paint.

  58. I would be slightly worried about these turner rumors considering how that deal impacts our 2022…. together with the rumors of all the top flight free agents going elsewhere… its possible we are getting shutout and likely searching for another stopgap at pg ..

    or it’s possible we are ditching 2022 plans also… which wouldn’t be terrible either considering sign and trades make cap room almost irrelevant…

  59. rama feels this is a watershed moment: By the way, Z-man, I do think you’re out of line with humper – he actually does admit when he’s wrong, unlike others I could name, and his tone has been fairly moderate….

    Thanks rama, appreciate the honest feedback. It doesn’t sit well with me when a poster is dead wrong and admits it, yet at the next opportunity spouts the same line of reasoning that led to being dead wrong with the same level of conviction. And our definitions of “moderate” are probably not in alignment, I think “alarmist” is a more apt term. If you don’t see it that way, we’ll have to agree to disagree. Maybe as a principal I have an outsized aversion to false alarms.

  60. Saw a pic today that Mitch was still in his walking boot at some team event. A little concerning didnt think he still needed to be wearing it.

  61. I’m not a huge Myles Turner fan, but he is pretty young and pretty good and $18M AAV isn’t outrageous, but I’d rather save the money at the 5 and spend it elsewhere.

  62. The Myles Turner stuff seems weird, if only because the Pacers have been pretty clear on them not wanting to trade him (and heck, even the rumors about the Knicks’ interest in Turner has been in the context of “The Pacers aren’t interested in trading him, but a bunch of teams like the Knicks are trying to acquire him). You don’t bring in Rick Carlisle to blow up your team, ya know?

  63. Wasn’t Turner being dangled in a sign-and-trade scenario for Hayward last year? (still can’t believe the Celts balked on that one lol!)

  64. Wasn’t Turner being dangled in a sign-and-trade scenario for Hayward last year? (still can’t believe the Celts balked on that one lol!)

    True, but that was more to get Hayward than to dump Turner, ya know? In other words, the only way they were interested in getting rid of Turner was for a “win now” player like Hayward, who teams are obviously typically not going to trade for him (that case was unique because Hayward was leaving no matter what. And yes, it was a shockingly bad idea by Boston to not to make that trade).

    However, I think that that deal is, as you note, the reason why everyone tries to trade for him now, as once you make him available in one trade, obviously everyone considers him very available.

  65. Apparently there is a mutual interest in Evan Fournier. One Frenchman out, another in by the looks of it. Wouldn’t hate the idea of Fournier as another shooting option.

  66. Zach Collins is now an UFA. We should grab him and slot him behind Mitch. He should come cheap, right?

  67. I have a lot of anxiety about what’s about to go down in what, 10h30m?

    We have a ton of $, no obvious plan has been outlined (which is ok, as long as FO has an actual plan), and a very large minefield to navigate.

    A possibility that I wouldn’t love but seems semi-plausible is the Lowry+DeRozan combo. I think that’s a big floor raiser but ceiling is very limited.

    We definitely need a wing shooter – would love to get Duncan Robinson especially if this Lowry -> Miami S&T happens. They’ll be hard capped and without looking at the actual #s, seem unlikely to be able to match a significant offer sheet. If no Duncan Robinson then I’m perfectly good with Fournier, who isn’t quite as good a shooter but is probably a more well-rounded player.

    Sure feels like a big swing is coming — based on Zach Lowe teasing “the Knicks have a big plan but I don’t have enough solid reporting to actually report it”.

  68. Totes McGoats as Totes McGoats: Zach Collins is now an UFA. We should grab him and slot him behind Mitch. He should come cheap, right?

    He’ll be cheap, yeah, but not because he’s under the radar of the rest of the league, it’s because of this:
    – 11 games played in 2019-20;
    – 0 (it’s a ZERO) games played in 2020-21;

    Latest news about him… only from a month ago… “Portland Trail Blazers forward/center Zach Collins underwent a second revision surgery today to repair a left medial malleolus stress fracture, it was announced by president of basketball operations Neil Olshey.

    Still want him?

  69. Meanwhile – realGM just tweeted out that Kawhi will listen to offers….
    wonder what the ACL story is.
    Some reports say he could be back at full strength by midseason.

  70. Will the team be better than last year’s, about the same, or worse when this week is over? Anything is possible.

  71. If we go grab Turner, a player i like a lot, i think we’re all-in this summer… a trade for Lillard? A max for Lonzo?

  72. Frank: Meanwhile – realGM just tweeted out that Kawhi will listen to offers…. wonder what the ACL story is.
    Some reports say he could be back at full strength by midseason.

    I thought it was very odd when Bobby Marks stated that by opting out, Kawhi wasn’t maximizing the potential money he could’ve earned. That’s not what you do when a partnership is going great.

  73. Hollinger floated a “renegotiate and extend” with Mitch. I am not totally sure how that works.

    Re: Fournier vs. Duncan Robinson-
    gotta be honest, I think I would rather have Fournier, who is capable of doing more stuff. That said – stealing Robinson from the Heat would have the dual benefit of adding an elite shooter and also taking an important player from the Heat. And teams absolutely couldn’t pack the paint if Quickley and Robinson were on the floor together.

  74. cybersoze: He’ll be cheap, yeah, but not because he’s under the radar of the rest of the league, it’s because of this:
    – 11 games played in 2019-20;
    – 0 (it’s a ZERO) games played in 2020-21;

    Latest news about him… only from a month ago… “Portland Trail Blazers forward/center Zach Collins underwent a second revision surgery today to repair a left medial malleolus stress fracture, it was announced by president of basketball operations Neil Olshey.

    Still want him?

    Shit…nope lol

  75. There are no perfect free agents this summer. Paul and Lowry are very old for their position. Kawhi is fragile in general, and rehabbing a major injury. Lonzo may not really be a PG (and is restricted). Etc etc etc. Given that, I don’t know who I would want (though, yeah, I’d probably want Kawhi). I have a stronger sense of guys I don’t want, like Schroeder, than the ones I do.

    Revisiting the question of Leon preserving max cap room for next summer, I honestly don’t think it matters. The Heat are a great example of how a team can be near the cap, or even above it, and still get the big free agents they want, if the FA wants to go there. They’re operating as an over-the-cap team, and they’re still likely to walk away with Lowry, and possibly DeRozan, too. If we’re good again next season, and if we have a lot of guys on tradeable contracts (i.e., under 20 mil/per), I imagine our FO could figure out how to get the guys who would want to come here. So I wouldn’t be surprised if we use up a lot of our space over the next few weeks, some of it on multi-year deals that will impact next year’s cap.

  76. Yeah – the 2022 cap space thing is not a big deal as long as we don’t sign bad contracts now. Any reasonable contract will be movable, and a good contract will actually bring back positive value.

    Vorkunov floated two players I hadn’t thought about — Otto Porter – obviously a ton of injury issues but still shot 40% from 3 and still is 6’8″ and a reasonable defender. Also Garrison Matthews was really good for the Wizards last year. Career 53/39/89 shooter in 1200 minutes, averages 7 3PA/36. Those seem like good numbers?

  77. Porter on a one year prove-it contract is interesting to me, given his positional flexibility, but I wouldn’t want to pay him anything real. Vorkunov’s piece was the first time I’d heard of Garrison Matthews before. He’s also restricted, so it becomes a question of how many offer sheets, if any, this FO is comfortable signing and letting that part of the cap be tied up for 72 hours.

  78. I’ve never thought they were bringing back Rose. Bullock and Noel, maybe, but not Rose or Burks. (Or Frank.)

  79. Hah, good point, Ingmarrrr. Kawhi plus a guy who has heard of load management but doesn’t seem to care for it would be a toxic combination. Though my guess is Kawhi and/or Uncle Dennis are aware of this and would probably steer clear of here as a result.

  80. Alan, this is a good point that I think we, as Knicks fans, forget. If you’re team is decent/good and you aren’t way overpaying for a player, most of your players you can figure out a way to trade because other teams will deem them to be productive/good players.

    Its when you way overpay for Noah or Tim Hardaway Jr and your team is near the bottom of the league in wins that teams view your players as negatives and you can’t dump them. I mean, Hardaway is a great example. We felt like we had to attach him to the KP deal in order to get rid of him but then Dallas got a lot of use out of him once he was there. He was never a bad player. He was just paid a bit more than he was probably worth and was on a horrible team.

    If our baseline is competent NBA team that is a playoff/fringe playoff team and we don’t give out massive contracts, we should be fine.

  81. Honestly, I think Lowry has already started falling off a cliff, and DeRozan can’t shoot threes. They would be a dangerous overpay for us.

    Personally, I’d prefer they go for a few “upside” guys rather than dying vets (Paul and Kawhi excluded), but those guys are all flawed in some regard.

    You could talk me into Ball or Cam Payne at PG (with fliers on Dotson or Riller as well). Same with Oubre at the right price or Horton-Tucker. But I’m guessing they will go biggest stars possible, starting with Paul/Kawhi and likely leading to Ball/Fournier/Powell/Schroeder.

  82. FWIW – Alan Hahn seems pretty bearish on us doing anything of note…

    while Leon, Wes & Co. tend to move in silence, there’s not much buzz at all about the #Knicks and their $50+M in cap space.

    Doesn’t mean #Knicks won’t upgrade the roster, but it’s too often become the theme this time of year: other teams (Lakers, Heat) are aggressively spending and being creative at Saks and the #Knicks are left safely shopping at Off 5th.

    Sure, Dennis Schroeder is an upgrade over Elfrid Payton. But that can’t be why a team keeps holding onto assets and cap space. These guys have to have a grander plan. Overpay CP3 to make Sarver blink? Or perhaps remain patient for the day Lillard finally goes the KG route.

  83. Wondering if The Knicks are gonna do like they did last year. BE quiet the first few days, let everyone overpay for the first tier of dudes and then swoop in and grab good vets are more reasonable deals since they’ll have all the cap space.

    This happens every year. The first 5 or so contracts handed out in free agency are ridiculous but then once the teams with cap space use their cap space, the rest of the vets you can get at reasonable prices. Maybe this is what htey’re thinking again and keep things relatively clean going forward. Jsut bid their time?

    I honestly have no idea what we’re going to do. ITs exciting!

  84. The Knicks really need Randle to become their #2 scorer, meaning they need a legit #1 who just isn’t out there this year unless they can flip Kawhi or Paul. Therefore, their priority will (again) be to not overpay anyone so they can roster tradable contracts for when a star demands a trade.

    Last year’s signings weren’t very predictable, so yeah, there will probably be some cheap rehab projects like Porter Jr. that come in the door (or some ex-Wildcats or CAA guys). Otherwise, some of the guys we had last year – Bullock on a fair contract and/or Noel.

    The great thing about this FO – its strength, really – is that it seems to very much understand the ever-fluctuating “value” of veteran players in this league.

  85. Gonna be funny to see Steve Mills’s “relationship with Uncle Dennis” back in Berman’s stories. I wonder if it will even get so far as to say the Knicks missed a great chance to get Kawhi because they didn’t take full advantage of said relationship.

    So now 2022 is the year great free agents are finally going to take the Knicks cap space after 12-plus years of not taking it? Ok, then.

  86. With Lowry seemingly heading to Miami it seems pretty likely that squeezes Nunn out – what do people make of him as a PG option? He’s young enough that you can still talk yourself into there being some upside and his style as more of a scoring guard seems like a logical fit for Thibs. I don’t love him as a player but with us seemingly missing out on the top tier of guys I think he’d be a reasonable flier at a lower price point.

  87. E, for most of the last 12 years the Knicks have been god awful. Having cap space means nothing if the team is garbage.

    Now maybe we jumped the gun and one surprise good season isn’t enough to lure the biggest names yet. But if we continue to be competent, the cap space and flexibility will eventually pay off.

  88. Didn’t we just punt a draft pick to save like 2.7M in cap space? If that’s used to acquire Dennis Schroeder and re-sign Derrick Rose that’s a pretty bad look

  89. https://theathletic.com/2745940/2021/08/02/hollinger-as-nba-free-agency-opens-what-im-hearing-and-what-teams-actions-are-saying/

    Finally, going back to the top, there’s Fournier and Boston. The Knicks reportedly have swooped in and are ready to make an offer for him that’s too rich for Boston’s blood, necessitating the Richardson deal. New York has also been linked to player trades — including one for Orlando’s Terrence Ross. These aren’t mutually exclusive since New York has the cap room to execute a multitude of moves. One other maneuver to keep an eye on: a “renegotiate-and-extend” with center Mitchell Robinson.

    looks like it’s evan fournier time… i think boston rejected 4/80 on fournier so we maybe somewhere south of that on our offer….

    fournier’s nice obv depends on the contract…. still awaiting what we do on the pg front but it looks like we will probably blow through our room this year given the ross.. turner.. and now this mitch extension rumor….

  90. Fournier would help solve one of the team’s biggest problems, which is low eFG%. He’s entering his late 20’s and his decline phase is looming though.

  91. Hmm, I wonder if the mitch is a sign and trade extension with Indiana for Miles Turner?

    Evan Fournier would be nice if its not too much. Is the plan to just bring back Rose and let Villadooza and McBride be the back ups? Could be risky.

    Also, Schroeder would fee like a huge letdown. And the money he’s asking for seems insane for his level of talent.

  92. If we spend all our cap money on Fournier & others, it’s not amazing but we’d have a solid team for the next couple years. It’s more than we’ve been able to say in a long time.

    I’d say there’s a good number of viable PGs & wings that likely come cheap if we wait until after the opening frenzy.

  93. Decline phase seems to come earlier and earlier these days.

    Evan Fournier is 28 years old. A 4 year deal means he would be 32 when its done. That is not THAT old in the NBA for a shooting guard. If its a 3 year deal, he’s 31.

    If he was 30 or 31 now, then I would agree with you but “decline phase” doesn’t mean the day you turn 30 you immediately fall off a cliff and its different for every player.

  94. I highly doubt Indiana trades Turner – even the rumors say that.

    If they want more shooting at center, they should just sign and utilize Noah more in that regard. He doesn’t have a 3-ball but is pretty good from inside the elbow. As for Mitch, I really have no idea if he’s ready to shoot or not. But if he really doesn’t fit the way they want to play with Randle, they should look into trading him for a legit PG. Now is the time.

    I’d be fine with Fournier. He kind of consolidates Bullock and Burks into one player, offensively at least.

  95. @TheSteinLine
    Luka Doncic will soon formally land a five-year, $202 million contract extension with Dallas, but league sources say those discussions will take place post-Olympics, with Doncic intent on keeping his focus on Slovenia’s MEDAL chase.

  96. My spider sense was leaning towards Dame, but now that i’ve read that Stephen A. is saying the same… i already know that i’m wrong. Didn’t he said that KD to the Knicks was a done deal, back in 2019?

  97. I like that nobody knows what Leon’s plans to the Knicks are. It’s also good for the “click-baiters”, they can come up with stupid rumors, and no one will be able to deny it because no one knows the Knicks plans.

  98. Fournier would definitely give us some offensive juice on the wing which we could certainly use but I’m a little wary of it in the big picture. Signing good not great veterans to fair market free agency deals is a really tough way to build a top tier team. Our cap flexibility over the next couple years is the #1 thing we have going for us and if Fournier is the class of guy that we end up with filling that space with, it will be a bit of a disappointment in my eyes. There’s no way he’s taking a one year deal, right?

  99. If we do trade for Myles Turner, I doubt it’ll be for Mitch. The idea behind Turner perennially on the trade block is to move Sabonis to C, trading for Mitch doesn’t get that done and is a more awkward fir next to Sabonis than Turner.

  100. Celtics More Likely To Trade Marcus Smart Than Extend Him

    What’d the cost be? I like him, and Thibs certainly LOVES him. :D

  101. If we spend all our cap money on Fournier & others, it’s not amazing but we’d have a solid team for the next couple years. It’s more than we’ve been able to say in a long time.

    i think that highly depends on what pg we fill out the roster with and none of them seem all that appealing … considering the fact that we’d be.. barring a megatrade.. stuck with this squad for the foreseeable future…

    fournier… for all intents and purposes.. basically gives you a consistent version of burks last year… except better 2pt%… shooting zones and splits look very similar also… so he’s a piece.. but he’s also probably very expensive and has a fair chance to fall off the second half of a four year deal… at his best we know what that kind of contribution looks like on the team and we can absolutely use that… especially for more minutes…

    but i think we all know what we’re missing and that’s a pg that can unlock more things out of the guys we need it from… esp from what we saw in the playoffs so that’s hopefully something we can answer today…

  102. thenamestam,

    I certainly understand what you’re staying. I will only say this. The Knicks have sucked for the entire 21st century for the most part. Fielding teams that are as good or a little better than last year’s squad year after year would be a HUGE improvement for us. I think the big names will eventually come here either via free agency or a trade but getting to a base level of competency is a big accomplishment. And once you get to that level, say a consistent 2nd round team…its really just one step away from contender. And the value of your players is higher if you are at that level, making future trades easier to facilitate.

    At the end of the day, the future of this franchise really will depend on what level of star RJ an become. If he tops out a little better than he was in his second year, we are probably a mid level playoff team at best. But if he can really jump to superstar status (doesn’t even need to be top 5 player, just, say, top 20…then our future is a lot brighter. I would say the same is true, to a lesser degree, of IQ. If he can significantly improve, things will be much much easier for us.

  103. I don’t have any good ideas about what the Knicks should do but Evan Fournier on a market rate deal would be more than a little disappointing.

  104. There’s no way I’d do 4 for 40 for Fournier. Is he that much better than McBuckets?

  105. I agree with Swift, we’ll probably wait and sign some low hanging fruit later on. I still think that Sexton might be our guy after they traded for Rubio.

  106. Thanks for the write up and the heads up about Herring’s book BC. I pre-ordered immediately, as When the Garden Was Eden was eye-opening to me and I’m sure Herring is equally capable of filling me in about the other time this team was good. Looking forward to it.

    Macri seems to think our plan is to hit Duncan Robinson with a massive offer sheet right at the outset while Miami is still working out the kinks of their sign-and-trade with Lowry. They could theoretically still match and get Lowry, but their roster would be incredibly expensive before doing much of anything else e.g. extending Butler.

    From there, he thinks we try to sign Fournier and perhaps get Schroeder and a small asset in a sign-and-trade in which the Lakers get Hield and the Kings get Bullock. That seemed like a pretty easy “Kings say no” to me, but who knows with them?

    It’s tough to say what I think of that plan because it all comes down to the contracts. I don’t want Schroeder at all, but a two-year deal with an asset while McBride learns the ropes wouldn’t be the end of the world. There’s probably a good argument to be made that Robinson and Fournier could be moved painlessly almost regardless of contract because of how sought after their skillsets ate, but there are still figures that would make me cringe.

    The whole plan isn’t really my cup of tea. It’s admittedly tough to say what I’d do because the free agent market is so limited and a lot of the more intriguing options seem to be off the table already. I’m probably partial to a semi-punt into next year’s superior free agent class, which would presumably involve collecting assets while being open to deals for guys who are young and/or have some upside e.g. Payne, Graham, Lonzo, Hart, THT, Monk, Riller, and Justise Winslow who I can’t quite quit (I’m sure I’m missing some decent candidates).

  107. We should have drafted Sharife and given him the keys to the castle.

    yeah, my knick’s draft night 2021 regrets are ayo dosunmu and sharife cooper…my guess is – ayo isn’t ready yet to play nba level ball for a few years, and, cooper won’t be able to guard anyone in the nba…

    at least that’s my rationale for why we didn’t draft those two…wouldn’t have minded if we took a chance on jared butler either…

  108. I’m not super fired up about this whole Evan Fournier/Dennis Schroeder “market value contracts to decent free agents” plan. Seems like there’s a pretty hard ceiling to that approach.

    The one year deal strategy worked out last year but I don’t know how repeatable that is either. I’m (as usual) with tnfh. Get some young guys who at least have upside, and who you can move if you need to without attaching assets. Remember Courtney Lee? Let’s not do more Courtney Lee type deals.

  109. There’s no way I’d do 4 for 40 for Fournier.

    Well then you definitely won’t be happy when the 4/$80M deal is announced.

  110. Schroder & Fournier aren’t max contract players but they’re also not Courtney Lee. If nothing else they won’t be 32 until the end of their next contract, while Lee was 32 at the beginning.

    Both are also much better than Lee. They might not be the right choice but the Lee comparison isn’t too applicable here.

  111. I’m not sure if 4 for $40M is $40M per year or total, but neither are realistic options

  112. A sign-and-trade for Schroder theoretically has to be at least three years, but only one needs to be guaranteed. So if we wound up with that guy on what was effectively a one-year deal, whatever, and if there’s an asset attached that would actually be a nice little move.

    The major holdup of course is Schroder agreeing to that as it’s a pretty far cry from the 4/$84M extension he rejected (have a feeling that one might go alongside Nerlens Noel rejecting 4/$70M from the Mavs in the pantheon of bad decisions).

  113. Robinson and Fournier seem kind of duplicative, especially with RJ here. I wouldn’t mind either one, though obviously we still aren’t going anywhere without a PG. And I don’t think Schroeder is it.

    It’s possible we take a step back this year if we do this right – that is, don’t trade the farm for Dame, don’t overpay a player because of need (Schroeder), make marginal moves or sign good value free agents. I’m OK with that – we have one more year to line things up after this, so maintaining some flexibility would be a good thing. The reality is that even C- play from a PG would be significantly better than Elf, and that’s likely all we need not to take a big step backward.

  114. The major holdup of course is Schroder agreeing to that as it’s a pretty far cry from the 4/$84M extension he rejected (have a feeling that one might go alongside Nerlens Noel rejecting 4/$70M from the Mavs in the pantheon of bad decisions).

    Right? We can’t be the only ones so down on him, and dumb teams like the Kings already have 10 point guards….

  115. I suspect that Cooper was never in play for the Knicks with Thibs as head coach. Doubt they would have taken him even if he fell all the way to 58.

  116. Fournier is not an exact comp for Courtney Lee but it’s the same idea: market value contract for a good-not-great free agent. Yeah, he’s younger than Lee was but he’s also going to cost a lot more.

    In a vacuum I’m fine with Fournier as a player, but it’s just really hard to get surplus value out of contracts like that.

  117. Also, team USA is playing Spain tonight in single elimination. Spain is the #2 ranked team in the world although I think that’s more on rep than performance now given the age of their stars. USA may be eliminated by tomorrow morning.

  118. It doesn’t sit well with me when a poster is dead wrong and admits it, yet at the next opportunity spouts the same line of reasoning that led to being dead wrong with the same level of conviction.

    Lol. I’m curious as to what I was previously “dead wrong” about while employing the same line of reasoning as “you shouldn’t piss away the 19th overall pick in a deep draft for a less valuable pick.”

    Is this about me saying it was also a bad idea to piss away the 33rd overall pick last year? For the record, I still think that. There were a bunch of players taken after that point with more trade value than a 2023 DET 2nd.

    Throughout this argument you’ve blatantly misstated my past positions, accused me of being smug etc. without being able to actually cite an instance of it, and resorted to stupid little big board cheap shots despite having a whole ass buffet of past bad takes of your own. I’d be more annoyed about it if it wasn’t obvious to everyone else, including people who agree with you, that you’re out of line here.

    Just relax, man. If Rose and co. put together a contender no one will talk about pissing away the 19th pick anymore. Until/unless they do that, they’re simply not entitled to this kind of deference and people will think it’s bad they pissed away the pick.

  119. I am not a Fournier fan and think that Thibs will want to kill shi no-D ass before long. I’d rather overpay Bullock in the same role.

  120. Why are we talking about Schroeder when Cam Payne is out there, probably at much less of a cost?

  121. Z-man:
    I am not a Fournier fan and think that Thibs will want to kill shi no-D ass before long. I’d rather overpay Bullock in the same role.

    Payne, Bullock plus Oubre or Porter?

  122. It looks like all of the Knicks grand plans for free agency are drying up quickly. So much cap space , so few good/great players to spend it on – same old story. The biggest needs are point guard (going on 20 years now), an upgrade at the 3 ( sign Bullock but he’d be better coming off the bench) and a backup center ( for when Mitch ultimately misses time again)

    Unless they trade for Sexton or some other surprise move It’s going to look something like this:

    PG Rose, Viladoza, Mcbrde
    SG RJ, IQ, Grimes
    SF Bullock + I’d pick up Otto Porter perhaps or someone with a little more size than Reggie
    PF Randle Obi – (holding nose)Knox
    C Mitch , Nerlens or Taj, and or another pickup or Sims/Simms

    Not world beaters, but not too bad either. Oh and we have that golden asset to dangle – the CHA first round pick that might convey sometime in the next 5 years (maybe) and all that cap space (that sounds so great in theory but doesn’t seem to be so great in practice)

  123. From what I can tell, Schroeder has talked himself into not getting a good deal with all of his “I want 100 million, etc.). Seems he’s scared off teams and will now have to settle for the Nerlens contract. Some of these dudes really need someone in their corner who can explain to them what their true market value is.

  124. I wouldn’t want Schroeder on anything other than a very cheap deal as an Austin Rivers-type depth piece. He’s a little bit better than Rivers, but if Dennis Schroeder is logging heavy minutes as your point guard you are by nature below average at the point guard position.

    Best way to improve this team quickly is to acquire Lonzo IMO. He’d make the PG position a net plus. Also I don’t buy the “Lonzo isn’t a PG” argument. We have some other shot creation in the lineup so we don’t necessarily need an ultra-ball dominant guy at that spot.

  125. Fournier is a lot better than Bullock offensively. He is just as good if not a better shooter, is a more versatile shooter (ie. off dribble, better off screens etc) and can actually playmake if you close out on him.

    Bullock is certainly better defensively though.

  126. I can talk myself into Fournier or Robinson, Porter or Oubre, Nunn or Graham and so on,
    but I’m desperate at the idea of rooting for Schroder,
    he’s my lest liked free agent outside of Elfrid The Plague Chapter 3…

  127. After many hours of reading every post from draft night till this moment i have to say that it’s ok to not be ok!

    The main nuclear problem of the knicks fan base (trading the 19th pick) seems to me like OVERREACTION at best but let’s wait and see how it will end

    Allow me to trust our highly paid FO-MFKRS a tiny bit more than our KBCoProphets till they fuk things up with actual proof

    Schroeder ain’t likeable to anyone, not even to me! but I’m all in on getting him if we can’t get Lowry.

  128. Why are we talking about Schroeder when Cam Payne is out there, probably at much less of a cost?

    An excellent question.

  129. Schroeder ain’t likeable to anyone, not even to me! but I’m all in on getting him if we can’t get Lowry.

    What do you like about Schroeder?

  130. Brian Cronin: An excellent question.

    I’m guessing that Payne could be had for somewhere around $12 million and would probably be enticed to come over to be our starter. He’s 26 and seems to do everything fairly well.

  131. Fournier isn’t good if you’re championshipor bust. But if you’re content with being a very good team for multiple years, then he’s not a bad pickup. Depends on how likely you think we are to get a max FA next year or pull off a star trade that doesn’t completely decimate the roster.

  132. DudeInKnicksTown: Why are we talking about Schroeder when Cam Payne is out there, probably at much less of a cost?

    Because he’s never been reported as a Knicks target while Schroder, to my despair, has been a frequent rumor for weeks… :-(

  133. Jack Bauer: It looks like all of the Knicks grand plans for free agency are drying up quickly. So much cap space , so few good/great players to spend it on – same old story.

    A bunch of stories all winter about how the Knicks are going to get free agents, a bunch of talk of the “Mecca,” summer comes, the Knicks don’t get any free agents. Rinse and repeat.

    Still amazing that this team thought it was in a position to punt away the 19th pick in the draft. Incredible, really. The New York Knicks — the New York Knicks!!! — condescending to believe that they’re too good for mere rookies.

  134. Max: Because he’s never been reported as a Knicks target while Schroder, to my despair, has been a frequent rumor for weeks… :-(

    I’m hoping that not everything is being advertised for the world to see. He’d be a better choice.

  135. They punted a first round pick to sign Schroeder.

    Admittedly jumping ahead a bit but “we couldn’t pick 19th because we had to preserve our cap space to sign Dennis Schroder and Evan Fournier” is at least Near Peak LOLKnicks.

  136. I’m just about willing to forgive this front office for its 19th pick blunder if they don’t sign Dennis Schroder. I don’t even want to think about how I’d feel about them if they do.

  137. DudeInKnicksTown: I’m hoping that not everything is being advertised for the world to see. He’d be a better choice.

    Sign me in, Cam Payne is a much better choice than Schroder.

  138. #What do you like about Schroeder?#

    His playmaking and his cocky self-confidence.
    Something inside me tells me that his attitude will help the soft knicks get a bit tougher.

  139. We’re still four hours away from free agency, so it’s not fair to be too doom and gloom on their impending moves, as they might very pull off some really cool, surprising moves, but yes, after we got done discussing how trading the #19 pick to free up $2 million in cap space this offseason, it definitely does put a bit of an onus on them to then make that make sense (and not have it be “I got Melo to take a $2 million paycut in year one of his deal so that we could sign Derrick Williams and Arron Afflalo!”).

  140. Twitter saying that Evan Fournier looking like a Knick.

    So if we have $53MM to spend and he’s getting $18MM AAV, that leaves $35MM for this year ==> Chris Paul?

  141. Something inside me tells me that his attitude will help the soft knicks get a bit tougher.

    I know the Hawks made the Knicks look a bit rough, but I don’t know that I think that the Knicks are “soft,” per se. I think Randle is a tough player, he just had the worst of all worlds in that last playoff series.

  142. I just don’t quite get adding a guy who the Knicks themselves specifically hunted out on defense when they played Orlando. Seems like an odd fit. He’s a heck of a shooter, though (normally. You wouldn’t know it from the Celtics postseason, though).

  143. The 19 trade was almost certainly not done for cap space reasons. They have way too much cap space for anyone unless they know they’re getting Kawhi or CP3.

  144. **So if we have $53MM to spend and he’s getting $18MM AAV, that leaves $35MM for this year ==> Chris Paul?**

    I’d be amazed if Fournier didn’t get at least $20M and I’d guess $25M is not unlikely.

  145. The 19 trade was almost certainly not done for cap space reasons. They have way too much cap space for anyone unless they know they’re getting Kawhi or CP3.

    That was not my impression, either, but that’s been one of the current attempts to explain the logic of the trade (the other being that it is part of a larger deal with Charlotte).

  146. I’d be amazed if Fournier didn’t get at least $20M and I’d guess $25M is not unlikely.

    Particularly since the rumor is that the Knicks outbid the Celtics for him.

  147. I’m fine with Fournier and wanted him at the deadline — but it’s going to be a big overpay, isn’t it?

  148. I’d resign Bullock if that’s Fournier’s price. Especially after Googling his name.

  149. Berman floating the idea of bringing Rose back and adding Cam Payne on a 1+1 (team option).
    I would rather have that than Schroder. Less $ less years, and Cam Payne has been better than Schroder too.

  150. #I know the Hawks made the Knicks look a bit rough, but I don’t know that I think that the Knicks are “soft,” per se. I think Randle is a tough player, he just had the worst of all worlds in that last playoff series.#

    Randle choked pretty hard and RJ looks like a tough dude but he’s still a baby.
    The mentally toughest guy in these Playoffs was DRose.
    We need a “crazy confident” guy to run the point if we can’t get a solid star imo.

  151. If all it takes to pry Lonzo is 4/$80M (this is the rumored Bulls figure) I think it’d be a mistake for us not to pounce. I understand all of his flaws and the contract wouldn’t be totally risk-free (if he regressed it could look ugly), but whether or not he’s a point guard is less important than the fact that he’s good, young, and potentially still improving. Guys who fit that description tend to have trade value regardless of their position.

    I’d get him on the team and figure out his exact fit later.

  152. #Berman floating the idea of bringing Rose back and adding Cam Payne on a 1+1 (team option).#

    Not a bad idea

  153. I can’t imagine a more redundant player than DeRozan to team up with RJB

    edit: and still I would prefer it to Schroder

  154. Payne or McConnell on a multi-year deal is far ahead of Schroder on a multi-year deal for me.

    The only way I really want Schroder is on a 1yr deal because he struck out with every other team, and I do think there’s a real possibility there.

  155. **If all it takes to pry Lonzo is 4/$80M (this is the rumored Bulls figure) I think it’d be a mistake for us not to pounce.**

    I’d agree with that. Just stick him at SG if you need to or keep running the offense through Randle.

  156. Kevin Knox will play in the Summer League.

    IQ, Obi, Vildoza, the four picks, Simms and others…

    Very nice team!

  157. thenoblefacehumper: ou shouldn’t piss away the 19th overall pick in a deep draft for a less valuable pick.”

    They didn’t piss away anything. They made a sloppy transaction but still got return in draft capital and cap space. Not enough, but far from nothing. Same with last year’s #33.

    We don’t know whether Rose & co. will build a contender. But if you score them fairly based on every managerial decision they made so far, it would be something like 25-2-2 in terms of asset valuation, and the record in the standings and in the court of publi opinion speaks for itself. Even the very best GMs have hiccups along the way. Rose has had his, but in the context of every transaction he has made, this is small potatoes compared with the many excellent moves. So when you blow a gasket when the Derrick Rose transaction goes down, or when a player you hated was picked at #25 and turns out to one of the most exciting rookies in years, etc., etc., you should probably remember those things and subsequently cool your jets a bit when a draft trade-out falls marginally short of expected market value. Whatever deference that involves is derived from focusing more on the sparkling clean cap sheet (other than the Noah blemish, yuck!), the ample future draft asset cache that is large now than it was pre-draft, and what the actual picks this year turn out to be relative to their draft position.

  158. I think the danger with Ball and an offer sheet is that while you’re trying to jam through 4/20 … (it’s going to have to be higher than the bulls offer)…. if Lowry goes to Miami… then the Pels are very likely going to match unless you work out a deal for them to not match… and for them to not match will probably take a lot if they don’t like the rest of the pg market… which is the whole reason why we’re doing it begin with…

    and while they’re matching they will take all the time in the world while you’re negotiating and then all your other options on the pg market dry up…. and then you’re forced to take the Schroder shit sandwich…. or maybe that’s not even on the table anymore and you’re left with… elfrid payton..

  159. DudeInKnicksTown: Payne, Bullock plus Oubre or Porter?

    I think I’d prefer Oubre to Porter but he’s not my cup of tea either. Too hollywood w/o the resume to back it up.

  160. if there’s nothing more enjoyable to read on an internet forum… is the tone police…

    don’t be caught speeding folks…..

  161. If Ball prefers NY to CHI, you don’t need to beat the deal. We’d also still have $30M to play with while Ball is tied up. So it wouldn’t be as devastating to us as to other teams. I think the main issue is the Knicks just don’t seem to want him.

  162. Berman says we’re looking at $10-12 million AAV with Payne, in a 1+1 deal. Pairing him with DRose might be our best option. Then bring back Bullock, if possible.

  163. Why aren’t more teams in on Lonzo? It’s so weird. Unless they think New Orleans is matching no matter what (and it sure doesn’t sound like they want him, either, for whatever reason), why wouldn’t nearly every team be trying to sign him?

  164. Thibs probably doesn’t want Lonzo. Only thing that really makes sense. He’s a steal at that price.

  165. If Ball prefers NY to CHI, you don’t need to beat the deal. We’d also still have $30M to play with while Ball is tied up. So it wouldn’t be as devastating to us as to other teams. I think the main issue is the Knicks just don’t seem to want him.

    i don’t think it’s the dollar figure that’s the issue… if you want him to be your pg… you’re unlikely to give offers to other pgs while the Pelicans are floating you… then when they match the whole market moves against you… and you’re left holding the bag with no pgs left… that’s why you’re probably gonna need to juice it…. but the pels are probably going to match anyway cause they don’t have a pg either and they probably don’t like anything else out there just like us…

  166. Brian, I saw one rumor about a possible sign and trade sending Lonzo to join his brother in Charlotte. Graham would go to the Pels.

  167. Max:
    Kevin Knox will play in the Summer League.

    IQ, Obi, Vildoza, the four picks, Simms and others…

    Very nice team!

    Looking VERY forward to that!!

  168. **i don’t think it’s the dollar figure that’s the issue… if you want him to be your pg… you’re unlikely to give offers to other pgs while the Pelicans are floating you… then when they match the whole market moves against you… and you’re left holding the bag with no pgs left… that’s why you’re probably gonna need to juice it…. but the pels are probably going to match anyway cause they don’t have a pg either and they probably don’t like anything else out there just like us**

    Got it. Yeah, but we have a nice shiny CHA 1st rd pick to throw in!!! But I do think we could workout a S&T and still get value from Ball being on such a cheap contract.

  169. I’m chill, and don’t think anyone knows the Knicks plans and that’s why so many names are circling around. It’s kind of funny even. Last year it was Russ, Wall, and some others, maybe Oladipo, i don’t remember all the landmines… in the end, no landmine came here.

  170. Cade is #4 in this draft. Davion is a 2nd rounder.
    –Not Mike Schmitz

    maybe you should go back to the career where you tell the people you’re supposed to teach that you’re not interested in teaching them…. and then retire patting yourself on the back for that….

  171. Cameron Payne > Schroeder

    Far better choice IMO – Schroeder is bad news all the way around, not a fan

  172. Cam Payne would be so much better than Schroeder, but my weird thing with him is how can the Suns let him go for $12 million a year on a 1+1?

  173. Payne is a good option because he’s gonna want a short deal to prove himself as a starter and jump back into FA for a bigger deal.

  174. Yeah, Fournier isn’t worth 20-25 mil. Orlando was complaining when he made 17 mil. I hope we don’t go there.

    I’m all for a Rose/Payne timeshare, and there are plenty of options on the wing, including our own guys. Hey, maybe Kev Knox steps up this year?

  175. Cam Payne would be so much better than Schroeder, but my weird thing with him is how can the Suns let him go for $12 million a year on a 1+1?

    Only explanation would be Sarver extracting a cost for the CP3 contract and pending Ayton extension. You would think being fresh off a damn finals appearance he’d pay the damn tax and save money later, but, well, Robert Sarver.

  176. djphan: i don’t think it’s the dollar figure that’s the issue… if you want him to be your pg… you’re unlikely to give offers to other pgs while the Pelicans are floating you… then when they match the whole market moves against you… and you’re left holding the bag with no pgs left… that’s why you’re probably gonna need to juice it…. but the pels are probably going to match anyway cause they don’t have a pg either and they probably don’t like anything else out there just like us…

    I would normally agree with you but I think Lonzo is kind of a unique case because his iffy PG credentials would give you good reason to both sign him to an offer sheet and then also continue to pursue other PG options. For example, sign Lonzo to his offer sheet and then keep trying to bring back Rose. If you end up with both, that’s totally fine; Lonzo is the starter, Rose the backup and those guys could easily close games together with Rose running the offense and Ball taking the tougher defensive matchup. But if the Pels match on Lonzo, you’re not out in the cold with respect to the PG market.

    Probably all moot because it really seems like the Knicks just aren’t all the way there on Lonzo, but just pointing out that you can keep going after another PG even if you go for Lonzo.

  177. I’d be OK with Cameron Payne. He’s unquestionably an upgrade over Payton, young enough to fit longer term plans, and still eligible to improve further. I would just say it’s not 100% certain last year’s performance is repeatable, especially playing as a starter.

  178. Payne is unrestricted and he hasn’t made much money in his career. He’s not going back to PHX to backup CP3 & Booker. Even for the same price this contract, his next contract will be much bigger starting for another team than playing backup.

  179. Only explanation would be Sarver extracting a cost for the CP3 contract and pending Ayton extension. You would think being fresh off a damn finals appearance he’d pay the damn tax and save money later, but, well, Robert Sarver.

    To be fair, the Sun apparently are stuck at only being able to offer him $10.5 million. Still, they could do $10.5 million on a 1+1 (player option) with the implicit understanding that they’d resign him to a bigger deal the next season with his Early Bird rights.

  180. more rumbling on twitter = Fournier 3 years starting at $18MM –> but question is whether this is a declining contract? Aller structured a bunch of those in Cleveland if I remember correctly.

    I am generally fine with that. He is pretty good, and likely is movable at that #, especially if declining deal.

  181. I’m not sure Fournier is a lot better than Burks, but even less so at the numbers being tossed around.

  182. suns have extensions for ayton and bridges coming very soon… along with cp3 adding onto booker’s deal… they’re not in a position to pay out for a backup pg and i imagine they’d prioritize other bench options…

  183. Brian Cronin: To be fair, the Sun apparently are stuck at only being able to offer him $10.5 million. Still, they could do $10.5 million on a 1+1 (player option) with the implicit understanding that they’d resign him to a bigger deal the next season with his Early Bird rights.

    If CP gets a 3 year deal, they will be way way way into the luxury tax in 2022-23 (Ayton+Booker+CP3+Bridges). Kinda hard to pay your backup PG what will end up being probably $33MM in salary + taxes.

  184. I’m not sure Fournier is a lot better than Burks, but even less so at the numbers being tossed around.

    That’s what stands out to me. We’re all, “We can’t commit to Burks and Bullock long term at $10 million a year,” so they instead commit long term to Fourier for $18 million a year? Huh?

  185. Fournier deal if multi-year will probably be structured to keep max space this year and next. $18M would be a good # to get him at.

    Fournier is more versatile than either Bullock or Burks and a better offensive option. As good as Burks was, he was below league average efficiency.

    If you want a FA this year to take pressure off Randle, it’s a PG (and sounds like we’re not getting a top fight one) or a wing such is Fournier or DeRozan. I don’t think there many other options. Scoring wings get paid which is why the numbers can be headscratchers.

  186. If CP gets a 3 year deal, they will be way way way into the luxury tax in 2022-23 (Ayton+Booker+CP3+Bridges). Kinda hard to pay your backup PG what will end up being probably $33MM in salary + taxes.

    When your star point guard is 35 years old, isn’t a competent backup more valuable than other teams?

  187. The Honorable Cock Jowles:
    I can’t imagine a more redundant player than DeRozan to team up with RJB

    edit: and still I would prefer it to Schroder

    DeRozan is a good player, but I don’t see the fit. We need shooters, especially if Burks and Bullock are gone.

  188. Fournier is definitely better than Burks offensively – can really be a secondary playmaker. IQ + Fournier anchoring the second unit would be very strong. But all in all, generally underwhelming. Hope they have something else up their sleeve.

  189. Mudiay to play for the Blazers in the Summer League. Okay, so now they can trade Dame without worrying about the state of their franchise in Dame’s absence.

  190. Deeefense:
    I’m not sure Fournier is a lot better than Burks, but even less so at the numbers being tossed around.

    This is a tough one. I like Fournier. I like him better than Burks- if he’s playing the same role as Burks. But for 18/yr..he’s not coming here to do anything but start at SG. My only concern is his defense in comparison to who he’d presumably be replacing. I’m sure Thibs can figure out the scheme to mask his deficiencies..but it’s also nice to know he wasn’t bad in Boston’s defense. So..I’ll take it. We would now have 3 capable playmaker in the starting offense, so I wonder if it makes it easier to insert Quickley in the starting 5. If that happens, Grimes and McBride really have to show up in year 1. Smart start to free agency for us..not a move that we’d all say WTF to

  191. Yes:
    Ball
    Talen Horton-Tucker
    Payne
    Caruso
    Nunn
    Hart
    Porter
    Korkmaz

    Meh:
    Fournier
    Graham
    Powell
    Robinson
    Bullock
    Noel

    I Hope Not:
    Rose
    Dinwiddie
    Oubre Jr.
    McBuckets
    Burks

    Absolutely not:
    Schroder
    Lowry
    DeRozan
    Paul
    Oladipo

  192. Fournier is definitely better than Burks offensively – can really be a secondary playmaker. IQ + Fournier anchoring the second unit would be very strong. But all in all, generally underwhelming. Hope they have something else up their sleeve.

    I mean, I guess anyone whos is forced to be a playmaker in a pinch can be called a secondary playmaker, but playmaking sure isn’t a strength for Fournier, and he’s an actively poor defender. He can shoot it, though. That’s definitely a top level skill that he has. I actually like him as a scorer, and I can certainly see him having a role on the Knicks as a starting 2.

  193. When your star point guard is 35 years old, isn’t a competent backup more valuable than other teams?

    i think if something happens to your star 35 yo pg then it’s not going to matter either way who your backup pg is.. you’re toast anyway…

  194. Fournier seems like a more stable 2nd option than having both Burks and Bullock together. Maybe if Grimes has his shot together early he can slot into the Bullock role

  195. Brian Cronin:
    Mudiay to play for the Blazers in the Summer League. Okay, so now they can trade Dame without worrying about the state of their franchise in Dame’s absence.

    Portland should hire Fizdale. Maybe he can “straighten him out”.

  196. Okay, so if it is Fournier for $18 million for multiple years, then that leaves roughly $34 million. Wouldn’t the rest of that now have to be spent on one-year deals to preserve it for next year’s theoretical max free agent? Is this farewell to Rose? It sure seems like a farewell to Burks and Bullock and, I guess, Noel?

  197. Brian Cronin: When your star point guard is 35 years old, isn’t a competent backup more valuable than other teams?

    They can just sign Frank. Lol.

  198. To whatever extent Burks was a playmaker for us, Fournier is more than capable. He averages more asts per 100 than Burks.

    I also think people are overselling the defensive liability issue. Burks was never considered a good defender, but held up fine for NY last year. At least at some point in his career Fournier was a good defender.

    Fournier is not the defender Bullock is, but he’s a monumental offensive upgrade.

  199. Brian, I saw one rumor about a possible sign and trade sending Lonzo to join his brother in Charlotte. Graham would go to the Pels.

    If he’s willing to work with New Orleans on a sign and trade, then yeah, that’d explain the quiet aspect of his market.

  200. Fournier at 3x$18 million wouldn’t be great but he would help the team even if the cost is a bit much. I am truly terrified about Schroder, he is simply a bad player. I am also worried about moves that will hurt the team long-term like a big contract for Lowry or DeRozan. They are both very likely to decline hard on their next contract and I really don’t want to be holding the bag when that happens.

    I think rolling the dice on younger players is a better move. Horton-Tucker, Korkmaz, and Nunn seem like good roll the dice type moves. I think other than Ball, who we don’t seem very connected to, Payne would be probably the best signing to start at PG also I would love us to look at Caruso over bringing back Rose to lead our second unit. Porter on a small 1-year deal would be good and I would also kick the tires on Hart. If NO is too busy chasing Lowry maybe he could get stolen away.

    Also once again going to bang the Larkin drum. He would be a much better get than just about any of the PG prospects short of Ball and would be a lot cheaper.

  201. I also think people are overselling the defensive liability issue.

    There’s being an iffy defender and there’s being hunted out on defense. The Knicks were doing the latter to Fournier last year when they played the Magic.

  202. But yeah, I do agree with the fact that Fournier actually has a very useful skill that should help this team. That’s good.

  203. 1-year deal PG/McBride
    Fournier/Quickley
    RJ/Grimes
    Randle/Obi
    Mitch/1 year deal C/Simms

    It’s not an awful team and the rookies all have upside and they keep their powder dry for next year.

  204. d-mar:
    Frank to Fournier – The French Connection

    Sorry but after we sign Payne, Frank will be backing up CP3 and will be getting a ring.

  205. djphan: maybe you should go back to the career where you tell the people you’re supposed to teach that you’re not interested in teaching them…. and then retire patting yourself on the back for that….

    I don’t even know what this means. But my stock phrase to students is “I can’t teach you anything. I can only help you learn what you want to learn.” I’ve certainly learned from everyone on this site.

    But sadly, when I tried to help people learn that LaMelo was a far better pick than Killian for what should have been obvious reasons to all but the most rigid thinkers, or that we should wait and see on IQ because some synergy analysts saw some things that their models didn’t, or that maybe there was some upside to the Derrick Rose trade, or that Frank Ntilikina was a terrible pick if you’re looking for a PG, turns out they didn’t want to learn. Nevertheless, I’ll keep trying.

    In the meantime, if there’s a particular thing I posted with regard to the #19 trade-out that is vehemently disagree with, I’m more than happy to discuss that with anyone.

    As to my career as an educator, not sure why anyone would bring that up. Or any aspect of my personal life or family life. It shouldn’t have any relevance to what I post regarding the Knicks or the NBA.

  206. Fournier’s stats are remarkably similar to Bogdan Bogdanovic, who just signed a 4/72 last season, although that was as a RFA. Bogie actually had an outlier shooting year last year compared with his previous years in Sac.

    still can’t believe Sac let him just walk in RFA.

    If it’s 3 for 54 for Fournier, that’s ok for me. He has more diversity to his shooting than Bullock and has a lot more juice off the bounce. Defensively he’s probably more Burks than Bullock, but he probably will be ok enough. We’ll def need RJ to step up defensively.

    (By the way it wouldn’t be ridiculous to bring Bullock back anyway)

  207. I’d consider bringing in both Payne & Fournier on multi-year deals. If we need to move them for a max FA next year we can make it happen even if it isn’t great. Payne has the upside to fetch assets if he works out. $12M is too cheap to pass up his numbers on a short term deal.

  208. Rumor has it Frank is going to Dallas to play with KP again and upgrade the PG/wing defense so Doncic doesn’t have to get in good enough shape to play defense and can focus on his stat stuffing. lol Then again maybe I made that all up even though I do think he’d be a good pickup for them on a cheap contract. ;-)

  209. So, was that Myles Turner stuff just to get us hard last night? Cause it worked, but now it seems we are at the bar and the closing lights are about to come on, and we need to chug up and put our goggles on.

    (Also, I’m kind of surprised nobody here is stressing about trading for Buddy Hield. Wasn’t he about to be moved to the Lakers this week before Westbrook swooped in? I really want to see people here sweat through the Hield trade talks, just for fun. (…but, to be honest, Fournier isn’t that much more exciting. And at $20mil+ a year, Hield’s descending salary may actually make him a more attractive get at this point ($22, $20, $18).)

  210. If we get Payne and Fournier just would need a backup Wing and Center at that point. Could actually bring back Bullock with the money we have left over but maybe just left Grimes figure it out.

  211. We’ll get at least 1 backup wing in case Grimes can’t cut it as a rookie. It’ll be a player pretty far down the list though.

  212. Fournier does tend to miss a good chunk of games might be worth it to bring Bullock back.

  213. As for backup center, I think we should run Toppin out there for 10-15 minutes a game. If he takes a step forward this year he’ll need more than the 10-15 minutes a game he can get behind Randle and the only way for him to get it is if we figure out how to play them together. He was improving as a defender and while he’s not a shot-blocker neither was Gibson and Gibson played fine next to Randle.

    I think if Sims is ready to be a third-string center with spot minutes then I think we’re probably okay at center. If not I’d be down to bring back Gibson as long as he wasn’t a major part of the rotation and was just there for spot minutes and injuries.

  214. – Cam Payne sounds decent to me. It’s a small sample size, but I was impressed by how he had the confidence to step up in Chris Paul’s place in the playoffs.
    – Fournier makes sense from a team composition standpoint but he’s not the best fit for our win curve. I hope it’s not an overpay.
    – DO NOT WANT Schroeder unless it’s on very favorable terms to us. Bad vibes.
    – Lonzo would be exciting but I don’t think it’s happening. It’s a calculated risk to see if he has the driving ability to be a good PG. If he can’t unlock that next level, he’s a wing player that still fits the team but we’ll still need a lead guard.
    – I’m on board for bringing back Rose.

  215. Fournier at the reported figure followed by a slew of one-year/non-guaranteed deals wouldn’t be a horrible offseason. I think Fournier should be movable at that figure, especially if the third year has a low guarantee. Maybe there will be some space left over for salary dumps.

    I would still prefer to use our cap space to our advantage and take some legit upside swings since a lot of these one-year guys won’t be long for the team anyway, but that’s probably one of those things that went out the door as soon as Thibs was hired.

    If we sign Fournier for 3/$54M, Payne for 2/$28M with a team option, Rose for 2/$28M with a team option, Bullock for 2/$24M with a team option, and use the room exception on, say, OPJ:

    Payne/Rose/McBride
    Fournier/Bullock/Grimes/McBride
    RJ/OPJ/Bullock/Grimes/Knox
    Randle/Toppin/OPJ/Knox
    Mitch/Taj/Sims (this is thin and we should’ve drafted Charles Bassey)

    Would leave you with $37M or so in space for 2022 (assuming you reject all the team options and renounce the cap holds) with the ability to create a little more fairly easily. Not endorsing this approach (it’s…fine, I guess), just mapping it out.

  216. Mark me down as not a big fan of “trade away a first round pick for a worse one four years from now then sign a bunch of veterans to market level contracts” as a grand strategy.

    This is kinda like Phil Jackson’s strategy, no? Other than the “punt the 1RP” part.

  217. As to my career as an educator, not sure why anyone would bring that up. Or any aspect of my personal life or family life. It shouldn’t have any relevance to what I post regarding the Knicks or the NBA.

    because it just has so many rhymes to what we’ve all been seeing for years.. another bored retiree polluting the internet… or is this site just an extension of your school and people talk the way you don’t like and you just can’t have that? you seem to have a habit of attacking posters instead of the argument so i’d thought i’d see what it’s like to be z-man for a few seconds….. nobody fucking appreciates the tone police act… so please check yourself…

    and after promising to never include me in this tired act.. you just couldn’t help yourself .. and i let it go… but nope…

    it takes a true clown to try and shit on people trying to contribute to a community.. work they enjoy to do and share…. of which the only thing you contribute is just a series of opinions that you don’t even own… that you spent two seconds biting off the latest magazine he read and trying to pawn off as superior … you can’t even explain any of it yet you’re here trying to tear everyone else down for the simple reason that you don’t understand it…

    what is wrong with you?

  218. If Frank Ntilikina leaves (not saying “when” because I don’t want to jinx it) I am motioning for a hard limit on how often he’s allowed to be discussed here. I understand some discussion is inevitable but no more 500 post threads.

  219. I think Rose is a bad move. He feels like a player that could fall off a cliff or have an injury at any time, plus he’s hard to root for. If we want a backup PG someone like Caruso would be much better and would actually be a very nice pairing with Quickley off the bench. We need to move Thibs away from his security blanket players because his blinders make it pretty hard for our younger players to get minutes around them.,

    I think Ball/Larkin/Payne/Nunn at PG in that order to start and Caruso off the bench would do nicely.

    As for wing, I would like to take some upside swings on players like Korkmaz, Hart, or Tucker and if that did not work, Fournier or Bullock would be fine. Porter on a small contract could provide nice depth.

  220. thenoblefacehumper:
    If Frank Ntilikina leaves (not saying “when” because I don’t want to jinx it) I am motioning for a hard limit on how often he’s allowed to be discussed here. I understand some discussion is inevitable but no more 500 post threads arguing about whether he’s not an NBA player or could one day be a solid 11th man.

    500 post threads per user? Lol.

  221. I think it’ll be difficult to work team options into all those deals. I could see Rose & Payne, maybe. Bullock is likely looking for more years & security.

  222. I could definitely see IQ being allowed to go full Lou Williams with a bunch of rookies on the 2nd unit.

  223. JK47:
    Mark me down as not a big fan of “trade away a first round pick for a worse one four years from now then sign a bunch of veterans to market level contracts” as a grand strategy.

    This is kinda like Phil Jackson’s strategy, no? Other than the “punt the 1RP” part.

    It seems less bad when you view it from their perspective instead of the consensus view here.

    There weren’t two players in the draft they liked and thought were worth 1st round money. So rather than drafting someone they didn’t like and paying him for several years, they pushed that pick out to the future where they can use it or trade it and will use the extra space this year. People are struggling with this because they are viewing it through their own eyes. They wanted to draft player x, y, z now at 19. But the management didn’t like x, y, z.

    Think of this way.

    If given a choice between drafting Knox/Frank at their respective slots or pushing that pick out with protections what would you do?

  224. People are struggling with this because they are viewing in through their own eyes. They wanted to draft player x, y, z now at 19. But the management didn’t like x, y, z.

    Don’t Strat-splain it to me. I understand their reasoning. It’s just poor reasoning.

    We don’t know who they’re signing yet, but the plan they seem to be undertaking looks like it has a pretty hard ceiling to me.

  225. ***This is kinda like Phil Jackson’s strategy, no?

    It seems less bad when you…***

    …try to convince yourself that Phil Jackson’s strategy was great

  226. If given a choice between drafting Knox/Frank at their respective slots or pushing that pick out with protections what would you do?

    So wait, your argument is that there were only Kevin Knox-level players available at 19? That one’s a doozy

  227. Here’s the Fischer rumor dump.

    Burks at $10M AAV while Payne gets $6M from the Suns does not seem like a good use of resources to me, especially if we’re signing Fournier. Would also kind of call into question the wisdom of targeting an “NBA ready” type in Grimes (or call it into question even further, to be precise).

  228. There weren’t two players in the draft they liked and thought were worth 1st round money. So rather than drafting someone they didn’t like and paying him for several years, they pushed that pick out to the future where they can use it or trade it and will use the extra space this year. People are struggling with this because they are viewing it through their own eyes. They wanted to draft player x, y, z now at 19. But the management didn’t like x, y, z.

    Everyone gets it. It’s quite simple. It just doesn’t strike people as wise, because there’s no rule saying you have to draft bad players like Frank Ntilikina and Kevin Knox.

  229. djphan: because it just has so many rhymes to what we’ve all been seeing for years.. another bored retiree polluting the internet… or is this site just an extension of your school and people talk the way you don’t like and you just can’t have that?you seem to have a habit of attacking posters instead of the argument so i’d thought i’d see what it’s like to be z-man for a few seconds….. nobody fucking appreciates the tone police act… so please check yourself…

    and after promising to never include me in this tired act.. you just couldn’t help yourself .. and i let it go… but nope…

    it takes a true clown to try and shit on people trying to contribute to a community.. work they enjoy to do and share….of which the only thing you contribute is just a series of opinions that you don’t even own… that you spent two seconds biting off the latest magazine he read and trying to pawn off as superior … you can’t even explain any of it yet you’re here trying to tear everyone else down for the simple reason that you don’t understand it…

    what is wrong with you?

    Now there’s a proportional response. I point out your terrible basketball opinions on a basketball blog and the language you use to express them (incinerated the pick, lol), you attack my personal life and career.

    But in deference to Alan, I’ll let it go. For a while, anyway.

  230. thenoblefacehumper: If Frank Ntilikina leaves (not saying “when” because I don’t want to jinx it) I am motioning for a hard limit on how often he’s allowed to be discussed here. I understand some discussion is inevitable but no more 500 post threads.

    I’ll take the over! :P

  231. JK47: Don’t Strat-splain it to me. I understand their reasoning. It’s just poor reasoning.

    We don’t know who they’re signing yet, but the plan they seem to be undertaking looks like it has a pretty hard ceiling to me.

    They could sign me for 1 year this evening and it might still be the right move.

    Setting aside my view that Frank and Knox still have upside, the Knicks paid both very good 1st round money for years and got nothing out of either.

    Would the Knicks have been better off pushing those picks out with protections or drafting Frank and Knox, paying them all that money, tying up that cap space, and getting nothing?

    I’d vote to push the picks out and keep the space.

    Now look at the 19th and 21st pick this year. They saw Grimes who they liked and could get at 25 and a bunch of Franks and Knoxs who they didn’t like with 1st round money. So they punted the pick rather than draft another Frank or Knox and pay them 1st round money for years .

  232. The market for Payne is puzzling to me. I watched enough of him this year to be a believer that he will be a quality NBA player going forward. I’d much rather have him than Schroeder and I think Fournier too, whose defense is IMO actively atrocious. and who I think Thibs will hate.

    I get Payne doesn’t have a huge track record and there probably are risks to Payne I am not aware of or reasons why his market is so soft but all the projected dollar figures for him seem laughably small for the production he put up.

  233. So Payne and Mcconnell seem to be off the list for PG’s. Options slowly dwindling

  234. So wait, they’re seriously running back the same team with Fournier in place of Bullock? That’s….an approach. Oh wait, we don’t even know who the team’s point guard will be yet, though, right?

  235. thenoblefacehumper: Everyone gets it. It’s quite simple. It just doesn’t strike people as wise, because there’s no rule saying you have to draft bad players like Frank Ntilikina and Kevin Knox.

    Absolutely.

    But there’s no rule that says anyone here has the God like ability to always be right about who to draft at 19 and 21. They are the ones doing the drafting and they saw poor value at 19 and 21. So they punted 19 and took Grimes with 25th money and a 2nd rounder.

  236. They’re just going to run it back and aren’t even going to run it back with the injection of any high-ceiling rookies. Thibs and his guys. Just lame beyond words.

    Hopefully whomever it was that “reported” that is wrong.

  237. Would the Knicks have been better off pushing those picks out with protections or drafting Frank and Knox, paying them all that money, tying up that cap space, and getting nothing?

    They would have been better off drafting the good players who were still on the board instead of those two chumps.

    This is maybe the worst argument I’ve seen you make and that is saying a LOT.

  238. Strat’s logic is EXACTLY the logic Raiders fans use to rationalize Jon Gruden’s dumbfuckery.

    “Yeah, we traded away that draft pick, but Gruden never drafts good players anyway! So this is a win!”

  239. Brian Cronin:
    So wait, they’re seriously running back the same team with Fournier in place of Bullock? That’s….an approach. Oh wait, we don’t even know who the team’s point guard will be yet, though, right?

    I got it…
    Obi will be traded along with a future 1st for Sexton and Melo will be signed to replace Obi! Voila! LOL

  240. JK47: So wait, your argument is that there were only Kevin Knox-level players available at 19? That one’s a doozy

    I think the argument from Rose & co. is that there was no one at 19 that was obviously better in our evaluation that what we could get at 21 (and then at 25) so we’ll convert it into a future asset and have a little more cap wiggle room. It’s not a convincing argument, but whatever.

    I don’t really see the Phil similarity. Thibs is far better than any coach Phil hired, he didn’t have to pass the triangle test; neither did any draft picks or acquisitions. For a guy with no. prior GM experience and just starting his second full year on the job, he’s already done more good than Phil did in good or harm combined (mostly the later) and has a 4th seed and a playoff series under his belt when Vegas had us as the worst team in the entire league. He did it without any long-term asset-squandering deals, in fact, while actually accumulating both draft assets and cap space. Obi may have been a mistake, but not a Ntilikina/Knox-level one. IQ was a Mitch-level find. Iggy didn’t pan out but had decent college stats. And they are pretty tight-lipped, no “How’s it goink?” stuff out of Rose.

    I don’t believe that any of the players Rose drafted went to Kentucky (remember the BJ Boston is inevitable stuff?). McBride may be CAA, but at #36 who cares?

    You really have to squint to see any Phil in this regime. Some dumb moves, for sure, mostly good ones. Even the bad ones are a looong way from Noah, MeloMax, Chandler for Dalembert, Afllalo, Fisher/Rambis, stuff like that.

  241. JK47: So wait, your argument is that there were only Kevin Knox-level players available at 19? That one’s a doozy

    I’m not a draft expert.

    THEY decided that the players available at 19 an 21 were not worth multi year 1st round money. So they punted. You are entitled to disagree if you liked someone in that range and wanted to pay him a multi year first round contract. That’s a far cry from them being crazy, incompetent, it being a disaster, they incinerated a pick, or a management sucks kind of situation just because Rose, Thibs, Perry, Perrin, Wesley, and scouts decided no one available in that range was worth the 1st round multi year salary,

  242. The individual moves are better than Phil, but the grand strategy is the same: build a team around market value free agent contracts.

    Good luck with that strategy. It has a hard ceiling, because you simply won’t get enough surplus value out of those FAs.

  243. I don’t really see the Phil similarity.

    I think any Phil similarities would revolve around whether you think that this team is on the upswing. If you think it’s a legit #4 seed next season, then it’s completely different than Phil, since he went all in on a team that was a fringe #8 seed contender at best. If you don’t, then signing a bunch of decent free agents to long term deals while none of them move the needle too much bears some resemblance to Phil’s free agency decisions.

    But yes, otherwise, I do agree that on all other matters, Rose is nothing like Phil.

  244. “Fournier does tend to miss a good chunk of games might be worth it to bring Bullock back.”

    Good idea – offense and defense, adds to the roster flexibility. Plus Bullock seems like a team leader/glue guy. It would be nice to have some continuity on the team from one year to the next for a change

  245. I think the Sexton option died when Mobley went to CLE instead of a guard. Maybe I’m wrong, but they don’t need a PF and they do need a SG.

  246. JK47: They would have been better off drafting the good players who were still on the board instead of those two chumps.

    This is maybe the worst argument I’ve seen you make and that is saying a LOT.

    You are being silly (aside from insulting me for no good reason).

    You are assuming you know who the good players are and they have no ability to judge whether the players available at 19 and 21 were worth what they would have had to pay them.

    I can tell you with confidence I’m not arrogant enough about my own ability in the draft to think I can do that better than them. And while I am generally encouraged by what I’ve seen from new management so far, I remain skeptical of them also. But I’m not losing sleep because they punted 19 because they didn’t think there was good value there. We have 10 things more important coming up than that marginal decision that they could ultimately be right about.

  247. Paying players their actual market value is fine. Paying players above market value is not fine. Phil Jackson did the latter.

  248. Isn’t Rose pretty much a necessity at this point, if you’re bringing everyone else back?

  249. Seems like Brian but if we sign Fournier we wont really have much money for an actual starting PG

  250. Brandon Tierney, “Bag on Knox all you want, but the fact that he swallowed his pride and actively sought out Summer League action for reps is impressive. Humbling, but impressive. Good for him.” I dunno, doesn’t this seem like the bare minimum that he should be doing? Is it really impressive to see him do something that he clearly desperately needed to do to have any chance of sticking here?

  251. Seems like Brian but if we sign Fournier we wont really have much money for an actual starting PG

    Rose’s cap hold of roughly $10 million is small enough that they can sign Fournier for $18 million, Burks for $10 million and Noel for $11 million (so $39 million) and still go over the cap to re-sign Rose to a $13 million deal. Heck, it’s close enough that they could even fit Bullock’s cap hold (roughly $5 million) in there, too, if they shave a $1 million or so from the first three guys.

  252. Does this Jake Fischer guy have a record as a big time NBA news breaker? Because if he’s scooping every other NBA reporter with these contracts that’s a really big deal. I’m pretty skeptical.

  253. Does this Jake Fischer guy have a record as a big time NBA news breaker? Because if he’s scooping every other NBA reporter with these contracts that’s a really big deal. I’m pretty skeptical.

    I share a publisher with him, so I am going to say yes. ;) But in reality, no idea. Seems like an oddly specific thing to make up, though, no?

  254. This team has RJ, Mitch, Obi, IQ, Grimes, and possibly McBride on it (not counting Knox who I haven’t totally given up on yet). That’s a lot of talent and youthful upside to go along with Randle and whoever they fill the roster out with using all that cap space.

    Assuming they do a good job this week, that’s a playoff team with a LOT of upside.

    There are no easy paths to contention, but we could easily end this week and go into camp with a legitimate 4th seed (not the bogus 4th seed we got last year), a lot of upside, all those surplus picks, and continued flexibility. I’d gladly co sign for that. We have to get this week right!!!! The strategy and plan is good.

  255. I think these guys are better than Phil et al. Overall, my impression pretty much matches the picture painted in the Weitzman articles: competing agendas, some smart people who understand asset management, some impulsive “connection oriented” types, and Leon Rose left sorting through it all despite not necessarily being qualified to do so.

    You see it in things like doing the Ed Davis trade but also pissing away value in the draft.

    I have no idea how it’ll all turn out, but I would prefer a front office in which the smart people always carried the day.

  256. I’m gonna wait and see what they actually do instead of relying on the rumors.

    Running back the same team, but with Fournier instead of Bullock, and no real solution at PG, is not an outcome I’m super psyched about. That’s a decent team, but it doesn’t seem to be moving towards “true contender” in a meaningful way.

    I hope there are some surprises left.

  257. Dang, Jarrett Allen to get 5-year/$100 million offer from the Cavs! Mitch’s eyes are probably giant dollar signs right now.

  258. I actually think it’s smarter to sign guys to 2 or 3 yr deals instead of continuing with the 1 yr deals. As long as they are sensible, market value contracts it makes it easier to trade them. Young players on rookie contracts and future draft picks aren’t the only assets teams have to trade, quality veterans on market value contracts are also valuable assets.

  259. Brian Cronin: I share a publisher with him, so I am going to say yes. ;) But in reality, no idea. Seems like an oddly specific thing to make up, though, no?

    Yeah – it is. I tend to assume that people who write this kind of thing have some connections, but just less connections than the big players and probably also a sloppier standard with regards to how they report this stuff. So maybe he’s not actually “making it up”, maybe he talked to somebody who said that’s what the Knicks offered Burks (or maybe what Burks asked for), but doesn’t actually know whether an agreement is in place and reports it as “Alec Burks is also expected to re-sign with the Knicks on a three-year agreement worth roughly $30 million”, when Woj or somebody like that wouldn’t feel confident reporting it until the deal is actually agreed upon and it’s confirmed with two sources. That kind of thing.

  260. I actually think it’s smarter to sign guys to 2 or 3 yr deals instead of continuing with the 1 yr deals. As long as they are sensible, market value contracts it makes it easier to trade them. Young players on rookie contracts and future draft picks aren’t the only assets teams have to trade, quality veterans on market value contracts are also valuable assets.

    Courtney Lee says hai

  261. JK47: Courtney Lee says hai

    Courtney Lee was a 32yo FA signed to a 4yr deal, that’s nowhere near the same as potentially signing guys like Fournier, Burks and Noel to 3 yr deals.

  262. Brian Cronin:
    Dang, Jarrett Allen to get 5-year/$100 million offer from the Cavs! Mitch’s eyes are probably giant dollar signs right now.

    -1 hour into free agency and we have a strong contender for worst contract!

  263. BigBlueAL:
    I actually think it’s smarter to sign guys to 2 or 3 yr deals instead of continuing with the 1 yr deals.As long as they are sensible, market value contracts it makes it easier to trade them.Young players on rookie contracts and future draft picks aren’t the only assets teams have to trade, quality veterans on market value contracts are also valuable assets.

    Thank you!

    There are times when it make sense for both sides to do a 1 year deal, but if you can get a good player on a cheap deal it should be for multiple years. Then you turn him into a trade asset also. I wish we had Noel, Bullock and Burkes locked up at last year’s salaries.

  264. Cam Payton is a best PG player/fit for us – who need both an efficient shot creator and ability to run an offense. He’s a good spot up shooter too. Last year, – Payne posted insane advanced stats:

    a) above 56% effective field goal percentage
    b) was only assisted on fewer than half his shots,
    c) increased his team’s eFG% by at least one percent
    d) their offensive rating by at least two points per 100 possessions
    e) accounted for at least a quarter of his team’s assists when he played.

    He’s a no brainer at $12M per year. Rose needs to wheel him in asap and not play matching/poison pill games with Lonzo Ball.

  265. BigBlueAL: Courtney Lee was a 32yo FA signed to a 4yr deal, that’s nowhere near the same as potentially signing guys like Fournier, Burks and Noel to 3 yr deals.

    Courtney Lee turned 31 right at the start of his first Knicks season, right?

  266. My point is, people said the same thing about Courtney Lee. “We’ll be able to trade him for a first round pick if we need to!”

    We couldn’t.

  267. fun thread today :)

    my favorite so far:

    thenoblefacehumper:
    If Frank Ntilikina leaves (not saying “when” because I don’t want to jinx it) I am motioning for a hard limit on how often he’s allowed to be discussed here. I understand some discussion is inevitable but no more 500 post threads arguing about whether he’s not an NBA player or could one day be a solid 11th man.

    DudeInKnicksTown:
    500 post threads per user? Lol.

  268. Now there’s a proportional response. I point out your terrible basketball opinions on a basketball blog and the language you use to express them (incinerated the pick, lol), you attack my personal life and career.

    But in deference to Alan, I’ll let it go. For a while, anyway.

    oh how lucky for us that we get to post in peace lest the next time we get caught speeding….

    when you attack and tear down the work of people trying to give a positive contribution to the community… for nothing less than you not understanding it… then yes everything you say is fair game… yes even these terrible leadership quotes you give to your students on a yearly basis that you thought was so clever…. which has amazing symmetry to your online persona that i just can’t help myself but point out the irony…

    here’s a pro tip with interacting with people that you maybe should have learned in school… stick to the argument at hand and attack the argument on its merits and you will almost always keep it civil…. and i cannot believe i had to tell someone who led our children this… but here i am…

  269. I think we focus on the wrong thing when we focus on how much X free agent got and whether we were able to trade him.

    Courtney Lee did not play as well for us as he did for The Hornets before we signed him. On top of that, the Knicks were a disaster when he was on our team, thus deflating his value.

    The worse a team is, the lower trade value ALL of their players have. Their lottery picks, their franchise players, their veteran free agents. Yes, you want them all to be signed to market fair rates (or better) but the dollar amount is somewhat irrelevant if the team is garbage. On the flip side, if the team is good, the individual player can be slightly overpaid and still valued because they’re contributing to “winning basketball.”

    Of course this isn’t something you can measure and no amount of team success last year was going to make Payton a desirable trade chip. But the point still stands.

    And yes, a few million here, an extra year there. A few years older, etc. All of these are part of the calculus.

    Courtney Lee at 31 for 4 years playing for a losing basketball team is going to be harder to trade than 28 Evan Fournier on a 3 year deal playing for a winning basketball team. This is logical.

  270. JK47:
    My point is, people said the same thing about Courtney Lee. “We’ll be able to trade him for a first round pick if we need to!”

    We couldn’t.

    I was one of the people that was eventually very wrong on his contract. However that overpay did have unique circumstances that are not true today. The year he was signed some hugely optimistic projections were made about the NBA cap going forward. So a lot of the salaries given out that year were based on projections that weren’t accurate. That changed some contracts from looking OK/meh at the time they were given out to looking bad a couple of years later. I don’t think that’s much of a risk now. Plus, I still think he was a pretty good player in his role until he got hurt.

  271. Noel for 11M looks like an overpay to me

    not if mitch thinks he can get jarret allen money…

    noel’s two big weaknesses are hands and base weight…that’s easier to find than elite rim defense…nerlens affected some game outcomes with his defense…

    from a rooting for your team standpoint: i’d be really happy if we kept nerlens…

  272. Courtney Lee at 31 for 4 years playing for a losing basketball team is going to be harder to trade than 28 Evan Fournier on a 3 year deal playing for a winning basketball team. This is logical.

    i’m pretty sure we signed Courtney Lee with the mind that we weren’t going to be a terrible basketball team just like we probably assume that we’re going to be totally awesome with Evan Fournier..

  273. okay, so for all you: i’m freaking out like crazy fans – if we don’t have our starting point guard by wednesday morning – that’s the state that i will then be in…

    until i find out who our point guard will be, not too optimistic about anything…which has basically been the same for the most of the last 2 decades…

  274. If Cameron Payne signs back with the Suns for 6m we better have a very good idea for PG to not outbid them by enough for him to change his mind. It’s not even like I love Payne, but he would be a clear upgrade at PG and is young enough to be part of the team for awhile. We should be able to do better than 6m? 6m feels like a steal.

  275. We should be able to offer near double what Phoenix is offering not fully buying hes returning yet

  276. I’m not even saying that you can’t trade Burks at 3 years/$30 million or Noel at similar money or even Fournier at 3 years/$54 million. I am saying that…so what? What good does that do you that you could later trade them? I think we can all agree that if you’re aspiring to be a good team, “Ability to dump player if need be” is not really high on the list of pros about a signing. Now, if the question is “Can you trade them for an even better player?” then I would say, “Don’t believe so, no.”

    “Ability to trade for a pick” is a worthwhile pro if you’re the Knicks of two years ago, but now, if Burks is playing well enough for a team to want him, why would the Knicks be trading him? And if he’s playing poorly enough that the Knicks want to trade him, why would any team want him? That’s the problem with signing decent veterans to market value contracts. When they’re joining a good team, it makes sense, because the other star players are the ones who drive the engine, so you can pay Brook Lopez the market rate because you already have Giannis and Middleton (or young teams like the Hawks who added market rate free agents to their impressive young core), but otherwise, you’re unlikely to be building on anything with guys like these signed to long-term, market rate deals.

  277. djphan: i’m pretty sure we signed Courtney Lee with the mind that we weren’t going to be a terrible basketball team just like we probably assume that we’re going to be totally awesome with Evan Fournier..

    I’m not sold on Fournier at 18m. I think he’s a good player with some skills we need. So it’s a good fit. But again, even if he’s an all around better than Burks on offense, I’m not buying that it’s by many millions given he’s probably not even an average defender.

  278. I’m not even saying that you can’t trade Burks at 3 years/$30 million or Noel at similar money or even Fournier at 3 years/$54 million. I am saying that…so what? What good does that do you that you could later trade them?

    It depends on the trade. Players like that are sometimes combined with picks for a star player that becomes available later. When you have attractive contracts they can become part of a deal to roll up. It’s not always a sideways move.

  279. It depends on the trade. Players like that are sometimes combined with picks for a star player that becomes available later. When you have attractive contracts they can become part of a deal to roll up. It’s not always a sideways move.

    Are they, though? I’m seriously not being snarky here, I just can’t think of an example. Have veteran market rate free agency signings ever really been attached with picks for star players?

  280. geo: from a rooting for your team standpoint: i’d be really happy if we kept nerlens…

    I’m with you, geo, just not at 11M AAV. Maybe 3/$24M ?

  281. Will Jarrett Allen’s contract (5/$100M) set the Knicks up for failure at re-signing Mitch next summer?

  282. The problem I see with a bunch of people here is they either want the Knicks to be God awful so they potentially win the lottery or be a no doubt championship contender with nothing in between.

    I guess I’m different cause I’d gladly take a team that wins between 45-50 games that is fun to watch with a pretty young group and reasonable veterans that doesn’t preclude them from getting better and improving in the future.

  283. @Schultz_Report
    League sources believe the Spencer Dinwiddie sweepstakes are a three-way race between the #Pelicans, #Knicks and possibly #Wizards. I’m told the Pels have been coveting Dinwiddie and could they have the inside track – perhaps w/a longer deal that would pay him upwards of $20M per

  284. Brian Cronin: Are they, though? I’m seriously not being snarky here, I just can’t think of an example. Have veteran market rate free agency signings ever really been attached with picks for star players?

    Virtually every “star” trade contains a few “contracts” along with the picks. Naturally they’d prefer very young talent and picks and it’s not going to be a bunch of really old guys, but I’m mostly not talking about really old guys.

  285. The problem I see with a bunch of people here is they either want the Knicks to be God awful so they potentially win the lottery or be a no doubt championship contender with nothing in between.

    I guess I’m different cause I’d gladly take a team that wins between 45-50 games that is fun to watch with a pretty young group and reasonable veterans that doesn’t preclude them from getting better and improving in the future.

    He not busy being born is busy dying. You’re either working towards being a contender or you’re not. Last season was fun, but a lot of of the fun in it was the hope that it was the start of something, not just, “Okay, we’re good here.” If these rumored moves are the moves, is that them working towards being a contender?

  286. I will be very depressed if we resign Rose, Noel, and Burks at worse contracts and our only upgrade is turning Bullock into Fournier for twice the money. That is a very poor offseason. We had everything break our way last year and still got almost swept out of the first round.

    We were good because we did it with a low cap number and lots of future flexibility. If we resign everyone on long contracts they all start to look a lot worse. Bullock and Burks were great because they were placeholders, Rose was good because there was no long-term risk. This is shaping up to be ugly.

  287. It is important to note, though, that until these moves are actually made, they’re all still rumors. So we shouldn’t judge them until they’re officially made.

  288. I just don’t want to be locked into mediocrity. The FA deals we have signed the past few years have allowed us to retain some flexibility. Now we seem to be giving out some long term deals, which by nature are going to hamper our flexibility.

  289. Every time Fournier takes a shot, it’s expected to be above league average in efficiency.

    When Burks takes a shot, it’s below league average efficiency.

    The Knicks offense was so bad last year, Burks seemed like a good offensive player. He’s not, Fournier is. That’s the difference.

    Fournier can also play on or off the ball. Burks value drops when he’s off the ball because he’s not as good shooting off the catch.

  290. I’d be happy with Dinwiddie and Fournier as the additions. And have them ready as trade bait for Lillard if he demands a trade :)

  291. Seems like only Fischer is reporting about the Burks and Noel moves for now. Everyone else talking about fournier

  292. Every time Fournier takes a shot, it’s expected to be above league average in efficiency.

    When Burks takes a shot, it’s below league average efficiency.

    Well, good news/bad news… ;)

  293. Dinwiddie i’ve always felt was the best out of a bunch of bad options…. injury concerns obv with someone who has two acl injuries but hopefully we’re not committing 4 years to that…

  294. Yeah, Dinwiddie is starting to look better by comparison. But not at $20 million.

  295. I get that Brian but there really isn’t much to do this summer that will put them into true championship contention. We’ve talked about this before, the Knicks are in a very tough spot with alot of different scenarios. I have no problem being a solid, competent team like last season without mortgaging the future.

    I know many here would prefer to take a step back if there is nothing great available rather than basically run back the same team with just marginal upgrades. I understand that position but you also have to look at it in a realistic view from this front office’s perspective and what they are trying to establish in not having the Knicks being a total joke around the NBA anymore.

  296. I don’t get the Dinwiddle love. IMO, he’s not all that good to begin with and you may be getting damaged goods. Not sure why he’s a hot ticket around the NBA, but maybe I didn’t see enough.

  297. Deeefense:
    I don’t get the Dinwiddle love. IMO, he’s not all that good to begin with and you may be getting damaged goods.Not sure why he’s a hot ticket around the NBA, but maybe I didn’t see enough.

    Strat, unless you’re willing to play point guard we will need someone else to do it.

  298. Fournier would be fine but only if he is replacing Burks. We do not need both players. Noel is great but it kind of locks Toppin out of even getting a bit of time next to Randle which I think he has earned after his nice showing in the playoffs.

    Rose is an injury/age decline waiting to happen plus he is really hard to root for so out of everyone we could bring back short of Payton I want him gone the most.

  299. Dinwiddie can’t shoot the three. I’d really like a point guard that can shoot the three.

    This is a guy with a career eFG% that is well under .500, I don’t really think he’s a great fit for us considering we really badly need to beef up team eFG%.

    Cam Payne and Evan Fournier would be an interesting pair. Lonzo and a cheaper SG.
    Something like that.

  300. Yeah, Woj says the Bulls deal is done with Lonzo, in a sign and trade.

    Really don’t get the Knicks thinking with Ball.

  301. Brian, I like your lineup, but the second team has the height of an Ivy League pick-up team, with Grimes, IQ and McBride. Good defenders, but you can’t teach height…

  302. Chicago has some good talent. They’ve just had injuries and other issues. Ball may help them put it all together. If they do, Lavine isn’t leaving.

  303. The Chicago Bulls are sending Tomas Satoransky, Garrett Temple and a second-round pick to New Orleans for Lonzo Ball,

  304. The Burks deal is confirmed. Good for that guy whose name I have already forgotten. Fischer?

  305. Here we are, less than an hour before D-day. Deals were struck weeks ago. I’m not the least bit surprised. I hope to see a Leon Rose interview some time next week, if not 2023 :)

    I am all for adding back Fournier and bringing back Noel and Burks.
    Fornier 3yr/52 – avg 18M
    Noel 3yr/$32 – avg 10.1M
    Burks 3yr/$30 avg 10M
    That looks half the cap. There’s $26M left.

  306. I can live with the Noel contract as long as we are still committing to Robinson. He is a much better player.

    The Burks contract is trash.

  307. Why not let free agency play out a bit before committing to resign Noel and Burks. I don’t think the market was that hot on them.

    This reminds me a bit of Miami spending big a couple years ago to keep James Johnson, Dion Waiters, and Kelly Olynyk so they can make sure to keep their middling 41 win team together. That kind of feels like what we are doing.

  308. Jonathan Macri Retweeted

    @ChrisBHaynes

    Free agent guard Cameron Payne has agreed to re-sign with the Phoenix Suns on a three-year, $19 million deal, league sources tell

    @YahooSports

    .

  309. How in the world are we paying Burks $30 million when Payne is only getting $19 over the same span?

  310. Bullock is more important to re-sign than Burks imo. There’s still time I guess

    Knicks 2021 slogan – Let’s run the band back, with a different Frenchman this time!

  311. Actually, what I want to see is Derrick Rose as the starting PG. Screw it. I can live with Rose, Vildoza and McBride and/or IQ at point guard. Here’s what I see the roster looking like:
    PG: D-Rose|Dinwidy|Schroeder???? – Luca Vildoza – Miles McBride
    SG: Imanuel Quickley – Quentin Grimes –
    SF: RJ Barrett – Alec Burks –
    PF: Julius Randle – Obi Toppin – Jericho Sims
    C: Mitchell Robinson – Nerlens Noel

  312. djphan: when you attack and tear down the work of people trying to give a positive contribution to the community… for nothing less than you not understanding it… then yes everything you say is fair game…

    Obviously this absurd reaction is rooted in you being unable to defend your often horrendous basketball takes. It must strike a nerve when your fails are pointed out to you because despite all the time and effort you put into it, you continue to generate one demonstrable terrible conclusion after another. Yes, I don’t understand how you come up with your ludicrous draft board and terrible hot takes every year. Why would I want to? So that I can learn the art of valuing LaMelo Ball outside the top ten? To me, you’re just a more boring version of strat…at least he has a sense of humor and a thick skin when guys like you beat up on him for his terrible takes.

  313. Which point guards are still available? Jeff Teague?

    Pretty much just a Rose reunion, right?

  314. Rose, Dinwiddie & Schroeder are on the table from what I’ve seen on the feed.

    EDIT: I have no problem with D-Rose playing 25 minutes and starting.

    EDIT2: Berman reporting that Rose is close to signing with the Knicks

  315. Marc Stein

    @TheSteinLine

    The Mavericks are nearing a deal with Knicks free agent Reggie Bullock, league sources say.

Comments are closed.