Knicks Morning News (2019.06.18)

No KP. No Zion. No Ja. No AD. No healthy KD. The hope against hope is that Kawhi and Kyrie want to team up on Knicks. If and when we strike out, I could have been more optimistic if we had Ja, Mitch and Mikal but no. Mitch is lone Knick player/pick who rates to be above average at the moment. Maybe a silver lining is that we still have Robinson and he could focus on developing his game on offense which wouldn’t have happened if Knicks were in win now mode.

What’s depressing is Knick interest in Randle. The focus should be on signing Vonleh and Kornet to value contracts instead of spending 15m+ on Randle. Both of them are younger than Randle and had higher RPMs last season. Noah shot more or less the same from 3 as Randle. The development staff should work to make his shooting motion more consistent (sometimes nice motion and sometimes flat). He’d be an excellent PF (better than Randle) if he could shoot 35%+ from 3.

Russell is high risk/high reward. I think I would first look if Griffin has any interest in trading Lonzo. The AD trade is scheduled to go through on July 6 so there may be time. Maybe offer Mavs protected pick and the 2 Charlotte picks. I’d even offer Knox and Mavs protected pick but no DSJ. The hope is one of Lonzo or DSJ shows significant improvement in Year 3. That imo is less risky than paying Russell 27m.

T-Wolves aggressively shopping Wiggins’ apparently.

Oh no. Please don’t tell me Wiggins is available and we have cap space. I will not be able to sleep until the off-season is over and he is not a Knick.

And please, don’t pretend Mills & Perry wouldn’t love that guys. Maybe Perry knows better but his selection of Knox and trades for Smith and Mudiay make me doubt that.

We might *give up* assets to get Wiggins.

Wiggins has always been way up there on the list of future Knicks. He ticks all the boxes….

Wiggins has always been way up there on the list of future Knicks. He ticks all the boxes….

I’ll send you the number of my therapist as soon as I’m sorted 😉

Nice promotion for Mike Miller. Given how good our G-league team has been at developing guards in particular, this seems to be a positive move.

Based on what I’ve seen from Perry, I would highly highly highly doubt he is dumb enough to take on Wiggins at all much less give assets for him.

is julius randle all that bad? he’s not great but he’s definitely not a bad player…. and he’s young! and he probably signs for much less than the max at that…. depending on the money involved… and i think the money will probably line up in the 1x mm per year range…. i don’t think randle is all that bad… he’s young!

this mentality of chasing rings has led everyone on this board to throw out every non-perfect player out there…. don’t let perfect get in the way of good…. and there aren’t many things better than signing a good young player…

Wiggins?

lmao

If they make a move for Wiggins, we better be getting back 5 1st rounders and a lot of Xanax.

They’re not trading fir Wiggins.
No way.
That goes against everything they’ve said they want to do.

Everybody knows Wiggins contract is a killer.

Are we gonna approach Washington for Wall ? Come on

I’m D’Angelo Russell-skeptic but I don’t hate the idea.

I truly despise the Julius Randle idea. He’s got some legitimate skills and could still be improving, but he’s a deeply flawed player who’s cut from an archetype that teams are shying away from (or at least shying away from at any price above, say, ~$7M AAV). I mean, his game isn’t all that different from Willy Hernangomez’, and despite the varying perspectives on him no one would want to pay Willy a significant amount of money.

Maybe his market collapses and we can get him on a deal that’s movable at any time, in which case I still don’t think it’s a very intriguing idea but sure go ahead I guess. Under any other circumstances it would be a very Phil-esque signing.

If you could convince me that Randle’s 3p% last year wasn’t a fluke and that he can learn how to play defense, I would sign him in a minute. He’s good at pretty much everything else.

However, he’s not a good fit next to Robinson. And when you are a liability on defense it pretty much negates almost everything else you do well these days. Modern offenses target and pummel weak defenders. But he’s going to pile up impressive looking numbers like Kanter. Vonleh is way more limited on offense, but he defends and if he can keep improving his 3 over time he fits perfectly. I’d way rather bring back Vonleh and he’ll be a LOT cheaper.

Randle is a Kanteresque big. He’s legitimately productive on offense, but some significant portion of that is given away because he’s a bad defensive player. He would probably make the Knicks better, but he’s also probably going to be seriously overpaid given how cheaply you can get decent bigs in the NBA right now. Someone compared him to Vonleh yesterday, and while they’re not the same style of player if you can get Noah Vonleh for a low price he’ll give you pretty much the production you’re going to get out of Randle. Maybe a you win another game or two if you have Julius, but given the current state of the Knicks roster who cares about two wins.

There’s not much of a reason to sign Randle when we already have Vonleh and Kornet, two players who equal his production at a fraction of the cost and who aren’t absolutely brutal defensively.

There are some rumors apparently that the Pelicans want to trade for #2 to take Barett.

@26 I’m with the owners on this one. If the players are bent out of shape about working conditions in the NBA, they can collectively bargain for better conditions, or form their own league with player ownership, or play in another league. Until then, they are some hybrid of employee/independent contractor with no rights beyond the contract they sign, the collective bargaining agreement and non-NBA specific legal protections.

There are some rumors apparently that the Pelicans want to trade for #2 to take Barett.

Sweet Jesus…. one time dealer!

I am getting ready for some 360 degree Linda Blair head spinning and crying here that, “The Knicks got screwed again Barrett will be a first ballot HOF’er” 🙂

Would any of those that follow college hoops closely be mad we got forced to accept Ja Morant?

I hell…. I’d swap them 3 for 4 with a nice tack on. If Memphis wants Barrett for themselves, so be it, we’ll be fine with Morant at 3. If Memphis takes Morant and NO wants to pair Barrett with Zion to make him happy, give me a #1 to move down and then do a Belicheck and offer the #4 to Atlanta or whomever wants Culver or Hunter or Garland badly enough.

Options options options……

Does James Dolan “entertain the public?” Fuck no,

What, you don’t like his song about Harvey Weinstein? How about the Trayvon Martin jam?

God, just when I was talking myself into RJ…

I think there are a lot of whispers about Ja slipping because of the knee “procedure” right now. One always has to wonder about knees and explosive guards (see: Livingston, Shaun), but if it really is minor, I think most people here would be elated to get Ja. It’s just hard to know what the deal is with his knee this close to the draft, and it wouldn’t shock me if Memphis got spooked and either picked RJ or pulled a trade.

Regarding a move from 3 to 4, I don’t really recommend it, but if the Pels want RJ bad enough to give us #4 and their 2020 1st to get him, that would be an incredibly prudent move that is so un-Knicksy, I’d have to question if Armageddon was soon approaching.

I enjoyed this article on the unfairness of the lack of choice for the NBA’s labor:

Not only does NBA labor have tons of choice, they actually collectively bargained for this current arrangement. The rookies have little choice, because they were shafted to get better deals for the vets. The Derek Fishers of the world share at least as much blame as the Dolans/Cubans.

Also, do you have a specific wage cutoff at which point you believe workers lose basic labor rights?

Basic labor rights? NBA players have better working conditions than just about anyone in the world. They are the privileged of the privileged. They agreed to give up location choice in the early stages of their careers for other benefits like guaranteed contracts, pensions, higher pay, etc. Because of one instance where their working conditions are lesser does not equate to lacking basic labor rights.

People like to criticize the process. What I want to know is what fairer governance structure they propose? Any organization is going to have different factions that don’t get exactly what they want. Do you want more rookie reps negotiating for the union? Propose a way to reach fairer outcomes instead of saying NBA owners should just give up all bargaining power.

Someone last week made the ridiculous comparison to Get Out. It’s absurd because not only are NBA conditions better than 99.999% of all humanity’s, but they’re better than other sports. Baseball has far worse working conditions: any player drafted can be held in the minor leagues for 5-6 years at less than the average US college graduate’s pay, often in crappy rural towns with long-distance buses to games. Then once in MLB the team has another 6 years of control, the first three at minimum salary.

If you are comparing likely future billionaire Zion having to spend 50-100 nights a year in NO to slavery / murder, surely you are going unhinged by the white MLB players who are treated far worse?

If New Orleans really likes RJ we should swap the 3/4 with them for like any future asset. RJ isn’t a terrible prospect but he’s not clearly better than a bunch of guys in this draft.

Givony throwing a monkey wrench into things:

Darius Garland will conduct a last-minute workout in Tarrytown with the New York Knicks tomorrow, a source told ESPN. Garland is in serious consideration for the No. 3 pick. Minnesota, Boston, Chicago are teams looking at potentially trading up to No. 4 with Garland in mind.

Apparently we’re bringing Garland in for a workout last minute. Seems like the kind of kid our front office would like.

Garland is a guy you have to at least evaluate. I don’t think there’s enough information on him to justify going 3rd, but he is one of my favorite players in the lottery based on what I’ve read from scouts (which is admittedly not terra firma).

I like the player Garland projects to be (Steph Curry lite) more than the player Morant projects to be (a Westbrook clone). Morant is a much better bet to reach his projection, though.

More Givony:

Source: The Atlanta Hawks have been aggressive exploring trades packaging the No. 8 and 10 picks to move up in the draft. Their offer to the Knicks for the No. 3 pick was apparently rebuffed. The Pelicans are considering the possibility of trading the No. 4 pick for 8+10.

Given the alleged top-heaviness of this draft, I wouldn’t trade 3 for 8 & 10. If we’re trading that pick, it should either be for a player or potentially better draft assets down the road.

Working out Garland is basic due diligence in the event of a trade down, and I find him somewhat intriguing (almost entirely via the eye test since he played 4 games), but I’d be apoplectic with him at #3. RJ Barrett is a weird prospect with plenty of flaws, but he’s an objectively good prospect (likely in the 6-8 range in better drafts) whereas Garland is a total enigma. If you’re taking on that risk it can’t be at #3.

I’d need an extra first from a different draft from the Hawks to move forward. In most drafts 3 for 8 and 10 would represent good value, but in this one you’re dealing with some pretty depressing names in the late lottery range.

Please oh please no Randle (Kanter with more range on his jumper?) or Ingram trade (WTF?).

If the Knicks stay at three, Barrett is the pick. But, sure, look at any trade that brings back an additional first rounder.

Forget Randle. Setting aside his lack of D (sick of that), Knox needs to play there. They should be beefing up Knox and have him shoot lots of threes in an attempt to become a decent stretch four. I’m not optimistic, but he needs to play at the four this year. RJB, Trier, and Frank at the two and three.

And as some earlier said, try to bring back Vonleh and Kornet inexpensively as rotation guys/backups at the four and five. In fact, I’d try to lock up both of those guys on 3-4 year inexpensive deals, if possible.

And Jowles, that’s just capital appreciation, which really is the least important aspect since so few owners ever sell. The revenue and the municipality pillaging is what makes ownership so attractive.

ABK hasn’t said it, per se, but he is dancing around the perfect rebuttal: this is ultimately on the players for not using their leverage as well as the owners. The owners will cancel a whole season to get what they want. The players aren’t willing to go on strike during the playoffs, or sit out an all star game. So the owners get the system they want.

I would take the 8 and 10 and draft Coby White and Clarke in a heartbeat.

The 8 and 10 represents value over the 3 alone according to various assessments of NBA draft pick value. That said, most GMs don’t perceive it that way, and it looks like ATL has the hots for RJ, so the Knicks really should’ve demanded the 8,10 and 17th picks. I think Atlanta would’ve actually taken that, from what I can tell. That would be a coup and a half.

That said I think the Knicks are pretty silly not to make the 8 and 10 trade–especially in a draft with only two truly guaranteed guys in Ja and Zion (maybe Culver can be a part of this conversation as well). Maybe they come back on the day of and demand an additional pound of flesh, say, a second rounder, to sweeten the pot. That would be clever negotiating–and wishful thinking.

How good will the Hawks be next year?

Next year’s draft will be much better. For instance, Anthony Edwards projects to be a much better SG prospect than Barrett. I think the Pels and Hawks should both be bad next year, so if we add one of those picks to a Mavs pick (also a bad team in a loaded West) and our own, then the rebuild would be for real. Plus, we could still get the Hawks’ #8 this year.

But are they ballsy enough to try that?

#3 pick for #8 pick, #35 pick, and 2020 FRP

Given the alleged top-heaviness of this draft, I wouldn’t trade 3 for 8 & 10. If we’re trading that pick, it should either be for a player or potentially better draft assets down the road.

I would jump at the trade on draft night depending on who was available. Draft Clarke at 8 and either Bol, Coby White, or the foreign kid Sekou at 10. Of course, if Atlanta is that interested in moving up then they can also throw in 17 and draft Okeke or a future 1st.

In most drafts I would say you have to do that trade, but the player pool at 8/10 in this one is really quite bleak.

Seeing as how the best players still potentially available are likely Clarke, Hayes, Bol, Washington, and Bitadze and our best young player is a rim running center, it’s even bleaker when you take into account fit (which you probably shouldn’t, but still).

The only way I’d accept the offer is if we get to pick 10 and Clarke is still on the board and the Hawks took Coby White at #8. Those two guys are worth the #3 pick, but I have my doubts that they’ll both be available (I have a pretty strong feeling White is going to the Bulls at 7).

In most drafts I would say you have to do that trade, but the player pool at 8/10 in this one is really quite bleak.

My thing is that I feel like everybody after 2 the next 10 or 12 prospects are all at around the same level (except for Reddish and Little who should be drafted in the late 2nd if at all). I’d rather have more shots to get the right guy. Basically, we should treat this year’s draft like the NFL draft because it’s so fucking bad.

I wouldn’t trade 3 for eight and ten, and it’s not a sign that our management is bad that they turned down that offer. We got Knox in that range in a strong draft and Ntilikina in that range in a weaker draft. I’d much rather have a top pick in this draft. It’s also possible that we will get a better offer for number three, so why take this offer now?

Re: Ponds, it’s downright insane to me that he isn’t ranked higher in this of all drafts.

There are plenty of reasonable concerns; he’s small, his AST% doesn’t jump off the page, etc.

But the dude has shown serious potential (2PT%, STL%, AST/TO) ever since he got to St. John’s and is competing with the likes of Cam Reddish and Nassir Little. I’d probably take him in the late lottery assuming certain guys were already gone.

I heard Tim Legler on ESPN radio floating the idea that the Knicks are considering Garland at 3 vs taking Barrett. I don’t know enough about garland to comment, thoughts?

Re Hollis Jefferson, I’d love to pick him up if the price is right – he’d be their best wing immediately. Good defender, high motor, a consistent 3 point shot at being very valuable. With the Knicks “stellar” player development track record that shouldn’t be much of a problem :-\

i think the 8,10 plus their high 2nd might do it. also they have to take any contract we accidentally give mudiay.

as we’ve discussed, risky reaches with high ceilings make a little more sense with younger draft ages and more expensive rookie scales. but if i was making one i might actually go jontay over bol, crazy as that sounds. i love bigs who can pass and fear those with bad instincts on D. speaking of the barbell draft strategy, grant williams should have some extra value as one of the guys most likely to add value to a good team during most or all of his control years. he seems like pj tucker at least, and maybe more?

Silky,

I’m not looking at it that way. I don’t think the Knicks screwed up with those picks. I think they are an OK drafting team that drafted the normal quality of player you expect in the 8 to 10 range. Of course, neither player performed at the hoped for level so far, but that happens to a lot of players in that range. DSJ was also drafted in that range and he’s not exciting anyone either. I expect they will get similarly promising players if they draft at 8 and 10 this year, because that is what teams typically get drafting in that range. I don’t want two un exciting players instead one possibly really good player.

garland’s an ok pick… but not in the top 5…

i just don’t value small guys who can shoot… and garland’s not a pg… at all… on top of that he missed significant time with a serious knee issue….

he is the type of guy that could wow in a workout by making all his 3pt shots or something….

i felt very comfortable in this draft knowing that there’s no possible way we could screw it up… but if we pick garland… we will be…

Next year’s draft will be much better. For instance, Anthony Edwards projects to be a much better SG prospect than Barrett.

A lot of these guys seem amazing as prep players until they start playing in college and their flaws are exposed. RJ was considered to be an elite blue chip prospect too, until he suited up for Duke and it started to become kind of obvious that his status was overinflated. So I don’t think you can really say that Anthony Edwards “projects to be a much better SG prospect than Barrett” until you get some college freshman data on him.

From a negotiating standpoint, it’s good to keep teams guessing as to who you are going to pick. You never know who is in love with who out there.

Re: these posts above:

He’s just so bad that I doubt it, too, but I don’t think he really goes against anything they have said. Heck, he still has a rep as a defensive player, ya know?

I don’t know when this bulletproof front office you guys are speaking of took over. Y’all think the same people who gave Hardaway a $76mm deal with a trade kicker, traded a 2nd round pick for Mudiay, and used the 9th pick of Kevin Knox are too sensible to acquire a former #1 pick with a 19.4 ppg average?

I want to see us get through this offseason before I act like this team is suddenly guaranteed to have enough good sense to not make obvious mistakes.

the Mills + Perry FO (as opposed to the Mills by himself FO) definitely has a type – athletic upside and especially if they are distressed assets. That’s why these “second draft” type guys are who we’ve been picking up. Wiggins is very athletic but is definitely NOT a distressed asset. I can’t for even a second believe that they would use their hard-earned cap space on Andrew Wiggins unless we got a bigger deal in return than the Lakers gave for Anthony Davis.

Re: the THJ contract – that was Mills. Not Perry.

Re: Mudiay – not a good use of a 2nd round pick, but we’re talking a 2nd round pick here, not a $30MM/year contract x 4 years.

Re Knox – the jury is still out on him. Not a great start obviously but let’s see how it goes before we say it was evidence of the ineptitude of a front office.

I’m not feeling trading #3 for #8 & #10, and absolutely not for Ingram and Ball, who I view at least as depressed assets. I understand the legit concerns about RJ, but think enough folks out there view him as a potential star to include him when folks say, “this is a top-heavy draft”.

Perhaps Culver and, say, Garland, end up just as good of pros as RJ. But the illusion, the narrative is that they’re part of the “drop-off” from the top three. I’m fine with the Knicks drafting RJ, but if they do trade #3, I want them to cash in intelligently and use said narrative to their advantage.

Of course, if Memphis does something other than draft Morant at #2, you pick him at #3 and head for the hills smiling.

Atlanta has 2 first next years…..theirs, plus Cle, which is top 10 protected, in which case it would become 2 2nd round picks. I don’t want that asset, and I don’t see them throwing their 1st in next year. I would wait until we are on the clock and see; but I don’t want a bunch of 2nd round picks unless we can do something else with them.

I would definitely wait to see if Ja drops to us and would most likely take Barrett at #3. But a high, unprotected draft pick in 2020 and a few picks in this draft would probably change my mind. And if they don’t find trade partners, we could probably just buy a late first/early second from a team like Atlanta or Boston, who have too many picks to handle right now.

I just want us to imagine a team where every starter is a ~2.0 BPM player. Not a superstar, just good. Not swinging for the fences, just drafting solid guys with every pick and letting go of those who severely underperform.

Then imagine them all being on rookie-scale contracts and still having the space and/or trade assets to snatch up a significant player when he becomes available, a la Kawhi or Jimmy Buckets. That’s what I want, and it’s far more likely to get those players than to get the next guy who’s going to put up a .250 WS48 in the playoffs.

It seems totally insane for Atlanta to not continue to stockpile these young, promising players, especially since they seem to have a good idea about what a productive player looks like. If they have 10 picks in the next 3 years, you really only need 3 or 4 of them to pan out to have a deep squad with Bird rights aplenty. And maybe you even have enough cap space to sign a max player before you extend Collins and get into Warriors/Rockets cap territory.

I’m not even a big RJ fan but those Ringer comps are pretty lazy. Model284 has comps that are actually based on statistics (and they do pretty good work in general) and the RJ comps are much more favorable.

@89

The Dallas picks put us in a pretty good position to follow that plan. We can trade down the the 8 and 10 and grab say, Hunter or Doumbouya and Clarke, keeping all future picks plus a 2nd rounder from Atlanta. Then even if we go for a guy like D’Angelo Russell, there would be a 4 year window to add players through the draft and work out which of the prospects should become the rotation players, while Mitch, Clarke, Russell et al have time to develop.

I really like this plan, specially as it keeps a max slot to work with to absorb a potential available star through trade or to rent for even more assets to eventually get a real superstar through trade.

IMHO we should be aiming to hit doubles and triples at this point. Trading #3 for #8 and #10 feels a little like gambling that dudes with huge question marks will hit ie. Bol Bol and Cam Reddish or the like. To some extent with RJ you pretty much know what you’re going to get.

I disagree with literally everything you’ve just said.

1) We have no NBA-quality player under contract at PG, SG, SF or PF. To use your analogy, it’s like trying to hit a triple when you’ve got no one on base.
2) The draft is always a gamble, but the #8 and #10 picks are in value not much different than the #3. It’s a different risk, but equal in magnitude.
3) You do not have to take Bol or Reddish at #8 or #10. You especially don’t have to do it simply because the pundits told you to.
4) You do not know what you’re getting with Barrett. He could be Wiggins, Barnes or Jimmy Butler. Hell, he could be Kawhi. We have absolutely no clue what his NBA ceiling is. He underachieved at Duke due to poor shooting and there’s no good mitigating explanation as to why.

@96
They might, though Atlanta might find another trade in the meantime. The scary scenario is Reddish is there at 8 and the Knicks decide to trade and draft him.

@Jowles – we can agree to disagree on this one. I am not an NBA scout, but pretty much everything one reads about this draft suggests that there is Zion, a huge gulf, then Ja+RJ, then a whole bunch of crapshoot. Garland could be great, but he doesn’t pass and turns it over too much and is tiny. Culver does lots of things well but isn’t athletic and also can’t shoot. Deandre Hunter is a robot that shot well in small samples, good on-ball, but not great off-ball defender. Cam Reddish looks like a really good basketball player and would be super awesome if putting the ball in the basket wasn’t important. Bol Bol has crazy awesome numbers but 74% of the time looks like he doesn’t care at all, gets backed under the rim by Iowa’s backup center, and oh yeah just had a foot fracture. Brandon Clarke’s best position is small ball center but he’s the size of Klay Thompson. etc etc etc.

Picks 8+10 historically have not been sure things at all, although of course your risk is mitigated by having two bites at the apple. 82games did an analysis a few years ago suggesting that the dropoff is relatively steep after the first few picks in terms of “relative value” whatever that means.

Would anyone be upset if we offered Al Horford 3 years @$25mill per year just to fuck with the Celts?

Brandon Clarke’s best position is small ball center but he’s the size of Klay Thompson.

Klay is precisely the same height (6’5.75″ without shoes) as his small-ball center, one Mr. Draymond Green (who, like Clarke, came to dominate the NCAA by the end of his tenure). And Clarke is a legit 6’7.25″ without shoes, which is plenty tall to play SF through small-ball C in today’s NBA. I would be worried about his wingspan if he weren’t the consensus best interior defender in the NBA last year. (This is backed up by his NCAA 3rd-ranked DBPM of 10.0, an absurd number for a guy whose measurables were “underwhelming,” and just fractions of a point behind Tariq Owens, who also looks like an NBA-caliber prospect.)

https://www.thestepien.com/2019/06/13/uniqueness-brandon-clarke/

Clarke’s statistical achievements in having one of the most productive and efficient college seasons that has tangibly contributed to winning that we’ve seen in recent memory is how he’s often identified as a prospect. Put more bluntly, Clarke is viewed by many as an “analytics” play in the draft. But for the people who actually watched full college games this year with regularity it was really Clarke’s play on the floor and how demonstrably better he was than every other player in college basketball save for one that was the draw.

Yes, Clarke was that damn good. In a year where basically the entire freshman class disappointed, the chasm between Clarke and that lot in regards to feel, instincts, functional athleticism and general effectiveness was stark.

Clarke is not Zion, but he’s the only other player I saw in the NCAA who looked like a man playing with boys. I will not be surprised when he is the 2nd-best player in this draft.

Clarke is not Zion, but he’s the only other player I saw in the NCAA who looked like a man playing with boys

Well he was a man playing against boys.

A late first would be a fuckin’ win. That would really take the edge off missing out on Zion.

2) The draft is always a gamble, but the #8 and #10 picks are in value not much different than the #3. It’s a different risk, but equal in magnitude.

I think you don’t do that trade until draft night, if Ja Morant was not available at 3 (and you picked RJ) and there is a couple of players you like at 8. It seems way riskier doing it beforehand, and RJ will keep trade value for long.

I think you don’t do that trade until draft night, if Ja Morant was not available at 3 (and you picked RJ) and there is a couple of players you like at 8. It seems way riskier doing it beforehand, and RJ will keep trade value for long.

I agree with this. Who knows what kind of offer Memphis will get to trade down? What if they accept Ingram and Ball for the #2 pick and New Orleans takes Barrett #2 to give Zion his BFF for at least four years? I wouldn’t trade the pick unless it were a serious value (three ATL firsts) or my 2 out of my 3 favorite players were still available when ATL is on the clock at #8.

If we could get a late 1st for Frank, hopefully be in a position to draft Okeke, that would be incredible. It would probably be a top 5 move for the Knicks over the last two decades. Right up there with trading THJr to ATL for a mid-round 1st, trading KP to Dallas, drafting DLee with the last pick in the 1st round, and picking up Lin at waivers.

We’re not getting a first for Frank Ntilikina. I mean, think about the teams that have late firsts. They’re good teams, presumably trying to get better. So what use do they have for two seasons of Frank Ntilikina?

The executive quoted in the article isn’t positive we could even get a second, so I’d take that as a win too.

I mean, it’s a really tough call, because of loss aversion (“what if RJ does become great and fulfills his promise?”), but making worse decisions because you fear making mistakes is how you lose. Three bites of the apple when there are CERTAIN to be hidden gems like Kawhi is a better path for a team with next to nothing on its roster.

Also, an unprotected first has much much more value than it used to because of the odds. 6% chance can get you #1, you know?

Spitballin is kinda fun…. just looking at Portland’s roster and they have Evan Turner, Harkness and Meyers Leonard coming off the books for 41M. Throw Zach Collins in and that 46M….. enough space to get into the Kawhai/Jimmy Butler sweepstakes. Playing along with mid 20ish Lillard/Mc Collum might be very attractive to top players in a terrific city……

If Atlanta offers 8, 10 and 17 I think we should simply take it and run with it. There’s intriguing guys at the bottom of the draft, like Thybulle, Okeke, Samanic, Alexander-Walker, and we would have three chances at coming up with at least one pretty good prospect out of a weak draft.

I’m fine with either Barrett or stocking up with young guys, and the best scenario is Morant dropping still.

Here’s how it goes down:

-We get a 1st round pick for Frank.

– Frank marginally improves his game

– 3 years later we sign Frank to a 3 year, $70 million deal

Al Horford just broke off talks with the Celts and is looking for a 4-year deal. I love his game and think he would be a perfect complement to Mitch. I’d give him a 3-year deal but so would much better teams than us. Four years? Pass.

i was surpirsed to hear horford was gonna opt out and walk from 30 million for next year…horford must have really wanted out of boston, i can’t imagine he’ll make more than 15 million a year if he gets a 3 or 4 year deal…or, am i undervaluing horford?

has horford made enough, and, simply wants to chase a ring?

hmmm, think ainge can get hayward to opt out also…

Brad Stevens doesn’t know how to relate to star players, only scrappy tryhards.

I wonder if Horford grew tired of the infighting and the coddling of Hayward and Irving.

Seniors: 477
Juniors: 429
Sophomores: 320
Freshmen: 189

Hard to find the data aside from the arbitrary MP numbers. That’s 64% of D1 players ostensibly 21+.

Fake math!

Man, this draft can’t come soon enough.

I wouldn’t be averse to Horford, but I think his timeline and desire for a 4 year deal (at age 33) doesn’t really fit with us. 3 years for $10-15 million though? Sign me up for Horford mentoring Mitch at that price. Could spend money on worse things than a veteran of Horford’s ilk.

Maybe we should take Jemerrio Jones off the Lakers hands.

Horford will likely be worth every penny of a $25-30 million contract for the next 2 years. After that it’s a total crap shoot.

Unless I’m missing something, the Lakers could strip the roster all the way down to LeBron, AD, and Kuzma and still not have a full max slot, and that’s assuming AD waives his trade kicker.

I am totally baffled as to how the Lakers negotiated one of the biggest trades of all time without coming to any kind of agreement about this crucially important timing aspect. There’s no chance the Pelicans would’ve held up the incredible deal they got in order to get the #4 pick on their own summer league roster (that would be the sole implication for them, as far as I can tell).

If I were the Lakers I would tell the Pelicans the deal needs to be made on July 30th or else there will be one less first round pick. They’d still have the best offer by a country mile–now that the Celtics offer will almost certainly be gone, the second best very well might contain Frank Ntilikina. Maybe it would be considered kind of scummy to do that after agreeing to a deal, since the Lakers should’ve been responsible for keeping track of their own cap situation (again, I am totally blown away that they seem to have had no idea about this), but I really don’t see a better option for them right now.

Side note: if we’re able to buy a second rounder besides #55 (blech), does Zach Norvell look like a decent target to anyone else?

Paul would make us significantly better (probably) next year, but that’s as much a function of how shitty our guards are, and it’s not like he’s making us into a contender. So we’re making our own picks worse, the Rockets are still going to be good for at least the short term and Paul is making so much money it hurts our ability to add good free agents when he’s likely to not be that good himself. Houston doesn’t have any other teams picks, so they’d have to give us a lot of picks to make it worth it. There’s probably a point it makes sense but it’s committing the team to a loooong rebuild

I want odds on AD leaving the Lakers after 1 Season.

What are the chances the Celtics miss the playoffs next year? Without Horford and Kyrie Irving, they’re probably looking at a starting line up of Rozier, Brown, Tatum, Hayward, and Aron Baynes or Daniel Theiss. Of course we’ve yet to see the NBA Draft (the Celtics suck at drafting) or free agency, but Boston looks more like a 6th seed and that’s only because I’m not discounting Wonderboy Stevens.

And the Lakers need to take whatever money they have and turn it into depth. When you have LeBron James and Anthony Davis, all you have to do is call good plays and get guys who won’t miss open jumpers.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/news/nba-draft-rumors-celtics-interested-in-trading-up-to-no-4/19temkvxi1th6195ysgcizrbp7

Now it makes sense! The Knicks are trolling Danny Ainge!
🙂

The key passage:
Boston has the No. 14, 22 and 51 picks in this year’s draft. It could package a couple of those to get up to No. 4 to take Garland. However, the Knicks are reportedly working out Garland on Wednesday and considering taking him at No. 3.

Getting guys who won’t miss open jumpers isn’t trivial

Brandon Clarke seems to be going somewhere between 11 and 17 in mocks. I wonder how hard it would be trade for him. I’d be thrilled to come away with Barrett and him.

I wonder where DeAndre Jordan will wind up. I still can’t believe that he didn’t want to go to a contender before the playoff roster deadline last year.

Horford had a career year at 32 based on shooting 50%+ from mid range. Opting out is probably a very smart move for him. Nail down one last huge payday before you run the risk of showing signs of decline.

Cp3 Demanded a trade.
Only if houston have some assets, we can rent cp3 for 2 years and he can be our best pg in the recent years.

Well, he can demand a trade, but is there anyone even willing to trade for him? I really think he has no market, he doesn’t make sense as a 2nd or 3rd piece for most contenders and he would just be miserable and annoying to any non-contending team.

I think Horford made a very good move for himself. He’s on a slight decline already, but still good enough to have a good market of teams chasing him. The ideal landing spot for him would probably be the Bucks, but I don’t think they have the cap space for him unless Middleton leaves, then they trade Snell and or Ilyasova.

@162

During the mid-nineteenth century origins of the American Industrial Revolution many New England farmers dispossessed from their land and driven into factory work made the comparison between slavery and their wage labor work, seeing it as an attack on their personal liberty. This was such a popular view at the time that it was a centerpiece of the Republican Party.

We accept it today as a given that capital has the authority to tell labor how, when and where to live. But its not the only way of working. I like the old Republican Party line that the people who work in the mills should be the ones who own them and determine their own destiny.

Besides, you’re missing the point. I’m not likening the NBA to slavery. I just think the draft (and specificially the lottery) sucks and is a stupid way to distribute talent. The players and the fans and the league would all be better off if there was some arrangement by which incoming rookies and teams could be matched based on mutual interest.

The only reason we don’t have a system like this is because no one would want to go to small markets.

But here’s the thing: the league doesn’t need small markets. The league would be perfectly fine with 20 teams playing only in cities that can sustain them. There are only two reasons small market teams exist:

1 – so the cartel of owners could grow

2 – because said cartel found another municipality it could pillage

So it’s bad enough these teams exist, subsidized by local governments and large market teams like ours, diluting the talent and entertainment value of the league. But not only do they exist, all the rules are created to favor them, which is even more detrimental to the league, fans, and players.

Bleacher report thinks Barrett will be a disappointment at three