Knicks Morning News (2023.06.15)

Haven’t finished today’s Macri podcast with Fred Katz, but it’s a good conversation so far about the IQ extension. Katz is of the opinion that the Knicks should just wait, since it would become much more complicated to trade IQ in this upcoming season if he has the same poison-pill contract issue that RJ had this past season. And Macri seems convinced that IQ is being traded at some point or other, simply because he wants to start and that opportunity is never going to be there on this team with Brunson here.

I know many here have argued that we should just start an IQ/Brunson backcourt. That’s pretty small, though, even if IQ has a huge wingspan. And it also makes having another real PG to come off the bench into a necessity. Regardless, it does not appear that Thibs wants to do it outside of situations where one of his wings is out with an injury. Even though Thibs loves IQ.

Here’s a question: How many teams in the NBA would view Immanuel Quickley as a better starting PG option than what they currently have?

Discuss.

Katz on the idea of the Knicks trading for Beal: https://theathletic.com/4613088/2023/06/15/bradley-beal-knicks-trade/

As always, I urge everybody to click on the link and read it, but some of the highlights:

1)Knicks FO has made it clear to Washington for a while that they’re interested if Beal ever hits the market.
2)Asset cost may not be that high because of Beal’s contract and his no-trade clause, since he gets to pick where to go. (Though his first choice is Miami, and he prefers warm weather in general.) Thinks it could be as little as Fournier and DRose for salary matching, giving Washington back its protected pick, and maybe one of the young guys.
3)Thinks Beal would be a great offensive fit next to Brunson, as his best seasons came alongside ball-dominant PGs Wall and Westbrook.
4)Is aware the defense could be a disaster, but wonders if Beal just isn’t trying as hard on defense these days because the team is bad, and that in the right team/culture, he’d go back to being the good defender he was earlier in his career.
5)The no-trade clause would transfer with him, so if we acquire him and he doesn’t work out, we are kind of stuck with him, unless he agrees to go to a team with enough cap/tax space to fit him in, and that is likely to be a bad team.

In other words, pass.

I would not add a sweetener to get rid of RJ, but I’d happily move him out for either neutral value or if he was part of a package for an upgrade.

Katz also mentioned the Wizards’ own pick is uniquely valuable to them, since getting it back would un-Stepien them for the purposes of other trades. The only relevant question re: Beal is whether we should be willing to take him on for salary and that pick, because anything else is too much IMO.

It’s just how much does he handicap you, cap/tax-wise, that makes it difficult to then make another move? That’s a huge worry for me, on top of him missing a lot of games over the last few years.

Katz did make an interesting point with Macri about the salary thing: the cap generally rises about 10 percent a year, and is expected to keep doing so for a long time to come, but rises on max contracts only rise 8% a year. So some of these terrifying-sounding numbers we’re hearing, like the $62 million that KAT will make if he takes his player option, will actually be less onerous than the salary he’s making right now.

Still don’t want a fugazi star, though.

Still more from Katz with Macri: Fred says the Knicks “know” they need to improve their shooting this offseason, and in a significant way rather than just picking up “another 3-and-D guy who’ll play 20 minutes” a night. But he’s also heard from around the league that, as of now, when teams have talked to them about acquiring Mitch — presumably in a trade for shooting — the Knicks have been adamant that he’s not moving. Fred says it could just be posturing, but if it’s not, by process of elimination, that has to mean they’re looking to move RJ or Julius.