CBS Sports: Knicks’ Tom Thibodeau says team will prioritize ‘shooting and our offense’ in offseason

From Jack Maloney:

Thibodeau’s full comments:

“It’s something that we talked about going into the season. We wanted to build our foundation, starting with our defense of course, and adding to our shooting and our offense. We’re always looking to add that shooting. And it’s not only just shooting the three, it’s going off the dribble as well. And also continuing to add defensive players. It’s an all around game and to have success in the playoffs you have to be strong on both sides of the ball, so that’s what we’re striving towards.”

Thibodeau was asked specifically about draft prospects — the Knicks have two first-round picks at Nos. 19 and 21, as well as an early second-round pick at No. 32 — but those qualities apply to any player the Knicks will be after this offseason, whether through trades or free agency.

Last season the Knicks actually finished tied for second in the league in 3-point percentage at 39.2 percent. The bigger problem was that they just didn’t have enough outside threats. Only five players put up more than 100 3s, and Reggie Bullock and Julius Randle accounted for 36.3 percent of their 3-point attempts. Come playoff time, it’s just too easy for opponents when they know they can ignore half of your players on the perimeter.

As Thibodeau noted, it’s not just the shooting, though. Yes, that’s important, but adding a bunch of spot-up shooters will only get you so far. You also need players who can break down the defense and create those open shots. Randle was responsible for creating so much of the Knicks’ offense that when the Hawks loaded up and shut him down, the Knicks didn’t have many counters.

Nice to hear from Thibs. The draft is a good place to do that sort of thing.

As part of our all-poll content, here’s a good one…

How many picks will the Knicks make in the first 33 picks in this year's NBA Draft?

View Results

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

473 thoughts to “CBS Sports: Knicks’ Tom Thibodeau says team will prioritize ‘shooting and our offense’ in offseason”

  1. Voted for 2, slightly edging out 1. Obviously have no idea but I suspect the lesser likely outcomes are 3 (since that would mean they did no manoeuvres which would be a departure from last year), and 0 (since that would require a somewhat unique opportunity).

  2. The endgame for the Knicks seems to be landing star talent, so I don’t see how we pick at 19 and 21. We either trade up for a falling impact prospect, or we trade out for a 2022 1RP so we keep our trade ammunition. I think we pick once in the top 33.

    In other news, Tim Bontemps on The Hoop Collective podcast said he’s keeping his eye on the situation with SGA in OKC. I highly doubt anything actually happens on that front, but that’s the guy I’d trade the house for. I’d be willing to give up all of our excess picks plus Julius Randle if it meant pairing IQ, SGA, and RJ Barrett for a decade. I also loved the tidbit in Berman’s article about Brunson and how he can force the Mavs to trade him by not signing an extension in Dallas. Brunson to the Knicks would solve a lot of problems.

  3. It really seems counterproductive to be trading picks at this juncture… if we really want to be stepping up on the win curve we should be building depth on the roster… the raptors do this very well and by the same theory that many seem to be operating they wouldn’t have been making any picks these last few years… and they were competing for and won a championship…

    they wouldn’t have had delon wright or fvv or siakim or boucher or any number of the key rotation or trade pieces they have had… you cannot just simply fillout the back half of the rotation with vets every year because a) it gets very expensive and b) it’s very hard to get good vets that will tolerate sitting…

    that’s where draft picks come in.. even if you think that they won’t make an impact that first year.. that’s what the gleague was built for… are we trying to win titles next year or something? we still need to figure out who’s part of our core and we can’t just languish opportunities…

    in most drafts trading up would be the best strategy… but in this draft with our situation we need depth… and we still need talent… just because we saw a little taste of success doesn’t mean we should operate like the lakers and we only have the next few years to compete… we should act like we are trying to build a sustainable roster throughout the decade…

  4. The endgame for the Knicks seems to be landing star talent, so I don’t see how we pick at 19 and 21. We either trade up for a falling impact prospect, or we trade out for a 2022 1RP so we keep our trade ammunition. I think we pick once in the top 33.

    A star is not likely to fall to 19. And no one is going to trade us a superstar for the 19 & 21. We should just make all our picks so that when we do land a star, it won’t be him and a bunch of scrubs.

  5. Hubert: Or we could just make all our picks so that when we do land a star, it won’t be him and a bunch of scrubs.

    I don’t disagree with you at all. If it were up to me, I’m drafting replacements for Nerlens Noel and Reggie Bullock this summer because who has time to spend $20M a year on two bench guys that shouldn’t be playing more than 15 minutes in a playoff game? I just don’t think the Knicks value that mid roster depth over having draft assets to dangle in a trade.

  6. Hubert: A star is not likely to fall to 19. And no one is going to trade us a superstar for the 19 & 21. We should just make all our picks so that when we do land a star, it won’t be him and a bunch of scrubs.

    I also never said that a star would fall to 19 or that anybody would trade us a superstar for 19 and 21, so I’m not sure what you’re responding to here. I’m saying I think the Knicks will package 19 and 21 for a guy like Moses Moody (who I believe is an impact prospect from day one) if he makes it to 13 because a guy like that has more value to the Knicks as a trade asset than any player the Knicks could take later in the draft. If that trade isn’t there for the Knicks, I could also see them trading out because a 2022 1RP would go further on the trade market than a guy like Chris Duarte. It’s not what I would do, but I also wouldn’t have punted the 2RP last year so I’m not thinking about what I would do here.

  7. I think its gonna be difficult to turn 19, 21 and 32 into something that would outweigh just making those picks straight up, draft wise at least. Also i think teams are just gonna save us from ourselves by not taking those picks for a top 10 selection.

  8. Since the poll it’s not about what I would do, I voted 1 because I think the FO would like to stay competitive and will search for someone to make an impact.

    But yeah, we should keep all our picks. The last couple of years shown us that we can get very good players/prospects later on the draft (Mitch, IQ), so why reduce our chances of getting one almost for free?

  9. I’m hoping for 3..only because I like the fits of Bouknight, Duarte, and Bassey. I also like Jalen Johnson at SF as a backup plan. I feel like the team has enough assets to make that happen without giving up a tremendous amount of them. We have Knox and 2 second rounders to offer up in this draft..plus another Dallas 1st- which KP aside, will probably be another late 1st.

    I like Shariffe Cooper too..alot.

  10. I voted two. I believe Leon, Aller, and Thibs all recognize that we need cheap wing depth and this is a good draft in which to get it. But I also imagine they like some prospects more than others and will either combine two picks to move up a bit or sacrifice a pick in a trade for a vet. Or roll one of the picks over, in the belief that a future first will have more trade value than any player we pick in that slot.

  11. also to put it another way… we will be capped out after next summer and we only have at most 5 rotation pieces on multi-year deals… every roster spot not on a multi-year deal will require an exception or presumably an even later draft pick… ie. it’s going to get a lot harder to fill after next season…

    we basically have two offseasons to jam as many players into the cap as possible before extensions and big free agents kick in… that’s why there is some urgency to these decisions… these picks are valuable precisely because they’re at worst cheap roster spots and at best key rotation pieces… they’re efficient uses of cap space…

    I’d have to be believe that there is someone in this front office who realizes it..

  12. I was curious about the possibility of landing a star with one of our picks, so I checked the All-NBA teams from the last 10 years to see how many guys were drafted 19th or later. It’s pretty slim pickings. Of 150 All-NBA slots over that time, only 26 went to players drafted 19th or lower.

    This is the list: Rondo, David Lee (!!!), Tony Parker (3), Marc Gasol (3), DeAndre Jordan (3), Lowry, Butler (4), Draymond (2), Isaiah Thomas, Gobert (3), Jokic (3), Siakim.

  13. If the Knicks select 3 players in the draft I’d consider it a major disappointment.

    Everyone knows they need a legitimate #1 option, a PG, and more shooting. The hardest of the 3 to get is the #1 option. So that should be the priority while they still have the assets and space to pull it off. Of course if they could land a #1 option that’s also a PG that would solve 2 problems.

    If they make 3 picks that means there were no #1 options available for a trade and there was no one in the draft they could move up to get that might develop into a #1 option or at least solve the PG problem once and for all.

    That’s a disappointment. It may not be anyone’s fault, but it’s a fail. It means they are kicking the tires on a few players hoping one or two develop into solid rotation players because the expectation outside the lottery is not an all star or #1 option. We’d have to get lucky. Luck is not a good plan.

  14. Deeefense:
    If the Knicks select 3 players in the draft I’d consider it a major disappointment.

    Everyone knows they need a legitimate #1 option, a PG, and more shooting. The hardest of the 3 to get is the #1 option. So that should be the priority while they still have the assets that might good enough to pull it off.Of course if they could land a #1 option that’s also a PG that would solve 2 problems.

    If they make 3 picks that means there were no #1 options available for a trade and there was no one in the draft they could move up to get that might develop into a #1 option or at least solve the PG problem once and for all.

    That’s a disappointment.It may not be anyone’s fault, but it’s a fail.It means they are kicking the tires on a few players hoping one or two develop into solid rotation players because the expectation outside the lottery is not an all star or #1 option.Luck is not a plan.

    Great point. But I believe in this coaching staff so much that I believe we can pull off an updated version of LB’s Pistons. And by updated, I mean more shooting in the rotation. If Quickley can run the offense half as good as Billups did next season, we will be well on our way. Let’s not forget that Billups wasn’t a penetrator, nor was he a high assist guy. But he was a damn good PG. But I’m telling you, the key to pulling it off with Thibs at the helm, is keeping Mitch. Of course he’s gotta stay healthy and be reasonably priced, but we NEED him in the middle of our defense- more than we need Noel. I wanna keep both though. If we draft Bassey, that would make me feel better about losing Noel due to cost.

  15. I think you have to consider that a) all-star is only one measure of effective drafting b) this is thought to be a deep draft so if you set the bar at, say, the 15th pick where players of this quality are usually available, the odds improve and c) by having two picks, the odds go from 1 in 6 to 1 in 3 that we will have a shot at one of those guys (you still have to identify who that is, but it’s still having two lotto tickets vs. having only one.)

  16. There is also the more complex calculus of whether getting non all-star level but very good players facilitated trades for all-stars.

  17. Yeah, the argument I heard Macri make the other day is that a guy like Mikal Bridges will probably never be an All-Star, but he’s so darned valuable that you need Bridges types on your team if you want to win a title.

    [Cue “BUT HOW IS HE AT 3-ON-3?” garment-rending and wailing.]

  18. I

    Deeefense: If they make 3 picks that means there were no #1 options available for a trade and there was no one in the draft they could move up to get that might develop into a #1 option or at least solve the PG problem once and for all.

    That’s a disappointment. It may not be anyone’s fault, but it’s a fail.

    Tell you what, I don’t want you teaching MY kid. Besides a suite of faulty presumptions, the one you skip completely over is whether anyone is willing to trade down. At least at a cost that isn’t prohibitive.

  19. I think whether they trade up will depend on the intel they get about who is falling to their spots, at which point Aller will move us around as need be.

    The Knicks will have to weigh the cost of moving up for a more highly-rated player (Bouknight?) versus settling for a slightly lower-rated player (Springer?) But I don’t see them trading for a vet because a. that doesn’t seem doable with 19 and 21 and b. it will negatively affect their cap before free agency in 2022.

  20. I don’t personally believe that they were looking to trade up to nab Obi, but if you believe that, and you believe that there are GMs who believe that there is similar value at 19 and 21 as there is at, say, 10-15, then a trade-up seems realistic if they are targeting a specific player. That’s what PHX did for Mikal, a deal I thought was dumb at the time but turned out to be a huge win. It still comes down to talent evaluation and a bit of good luck.

  21. Z-man:
    There is also the more complex calculus of whether getting non all-star level but very good players facilitated trades for all-stars.

    I agree. This is similar to my thesis that as long as you sign free agents at fair to attractive prices you can eventually trade them later as part of a deal to bring in a better player or pick. But generally I suspect when you are talking about younger unproven guys a pick may be more attractive in a trade because the receiving team gets to select who they want. I have no big problem with any direction they go in as long as they take the best path available given what’s available on the market. Making 3 picks is just my least favorite option.

  22. I wonder if they could package #19 with our 2 2nds and a future 2nd to move up a few spots.

    I also wonder if they would throw Mitch into a move- up deal…

  23. Voted 3. It’s what i want, but it’s also what i think will happen. For a change, i trust in this front-office, and they will come to the conclusion, as djphan, TNFH and other draft-junkies have come, that in this draft is exactly the same to select 10 or 20. Of course they can fall in love with a specific player, but that can be the same level of nonsense as basing your decision on a 3-on-3. Let’s just make the picks and hope we get 2 useful players more of the 3. :)
    Of course, if a star becomes available and this picks are needed to make the trade, please be my guest and use all three. ;)

  24. Raven:
    I Tell you what, I don’t want you teaching MY kid. Besides a suite of faulty presumptions, the one you skip completely over is whether anyone is willing to trade down. At least at a cost that isn’t prohibitive.

    Of course if no one is willing to trade down we can’t go that route. Do I even have to say that? lmao

    The point is we know exactly what the team needs to take the next step. If possible we want the highest probability and certainty possible of achieving that.

    An established player is as close as you can get.

    If we can trade up and there’s someone we really like up there, that would very good too.

    The least favorable is drafting 3 players because we couldn’t come up with a better move.

  25. The other pick I’d consider using to move up is Dallas’s top-10 protected pick. You only get burned on that one if it winds up being 11-15 or so, even though 2023 is projected to be a deep draft.

  26. I voted 2. Didn’t they punt on a third pick last year?

    Chuckled to see Cuban’s “KP is who he is” quote.

  27. It would be so lame to trade up just because we feel like we should for whatever reason, yet that appears to be the plan. Hope I’m wrong.

    I voted for 2. Hopefully if there is a trade up they still realize the obvious fact that we have serious depth concerns and that’s before we even consider the possibility of losing our own free agents.

    Between Frank/Knox/Pelle and the two-way slots, we lit a bunch of roster spots on fire this past year. It’s such low hanging fruit to try to clean that up with these picks.

    If the Knicks select 3 players in the draft I’d consider it a major disappointment.

    Meaningless without context. What if the 3 players are…good? What if they have the guy they pick at 19 ranked higher than the guy drafted at, say, 14?

    No one disputes that the Knicks need a high-level talent infusion, but they also need an infusion of, well, talent generally, and since when are the 19th, 21st, and 32nd picks enough to land the former? All of your posts on the matter seem to imply that if the Knicks will it, they can surely find a team dying to give us a 30% USG, 60% TS guy for those picks. Is there any precedent for that?

  28. Z-man:
    I wonder if they could package #19 with our 2 2nds and a future 2nd to move up a few spots.

    I also wonder if they would throw Mitch into a move- up deal…

    IMO, Mitch is the one core player they might consider trading to land a star. I think we can be fairly certain they don’t want to trade Mitch, but if you could land a star at another position and sign Noel and Gibson back you would most likely be gaining more at the new position than you would be giving up at C and be better. If they think Mitch can really expand his game though, then he’d probably be off the table.

  29. an rj barrett stan account: I also loved the tidbit in Berman’s article about Brunson and how he can force the Mavs to trade him by not signing an extension in Dallas. Brunson to the Knicks would solve a lot of problems.

    Yeah, getting Brunson would be a great move. Let’s do it, Leon. :)

  30. I voted 1.

    Knicks front offices have been bundling up assets to trade for bright, shiny objects for so long that it’s hard for me to imagine them doing anything different this time around. I know… I know… there’s a whole new cast of characters who are now calling the shots but, last time I checked, this team was still owned by a man who has never shown himself to be a great believer in a patient, multi-year, step by step rebuild. As ever, his shadow looms large.

    Personally, I am also in the camp that would like to see the Knicks use their draft capitaI to populate the roster with 2-3 cost-controlled, rotation quality (or hopefully, better) players in advance of making a bigger splash down the road. Whether the current front office is inclined to go this route (or if the famously impatient Dolan will even allow it) remains very much an open question. Needless, to say, decades worth of Knick fan PTSD leaves me less than sanguine about the prospects.

    On a far more important note, let me also offer a belated mazel tov to swift & family for their beautiful addition to this world.

  31. Meaningless without context. What if the 3 players are…good? What if they have the guy they pick at 19 ranked higher than the guy drafted at, say, 14?

    What if they all suck as bad as Frank? :-)

    We are working with needs and probabilities.

    IMO the priority is landing a star. IMO, the best strategy is the one most likely to land a star. IMO, the best possible scenario is finding a disgruntled star still in his 20s that wants out and packaging picks to get him. Then I know exactly what I am getting qualitatively, if he fits, if he’s young enough to remain productive for the duration of his contract, etc.. If an attractive deal is not available, the next best option is trading up. If trading up is not available or there’s no one up there we want badly enough, then draft 3 players and pray. Everything is on the table, but some options are more likely to take us to the next level quickly and for long enough to matter.

  32. for such a thin free agent class there’s a surprising lack of rumors of where derozan might land

  33. Ian Begley:
    From earlier: “Tom Thibodeau is actually very much in that next-level thinking, cutting-edge thinking with @P3sportscience . I know that they’ve had conversations & he brings a lot his guys there to just get checked out.”
    https://twitter.com/IanBegley/status/1408498584694276106

    This is interesting. And the link has a video, if you want to know more.

  34. IMO, the best possible scenario is finding a disgruntled star still in his 20s that wants out and packaging picks to get him. Then I know exactly what I am getting qualitatively, if he fits, if he’s young enough to remain productive for the duration of his contract, etc..

    Players like this cost A LOT. Like, every possible pick you can trade away kind of A LOT. You’re not getting a disgruntled star with the 19, 21 and 32 picks. You’d have to throw in pretty much every asset you have.

    If an attractive deal is not available, the next best option is trading up.

    Trading up for the sake of trading up, in this particular draft, with the particular picks we hold, is a bad idea. You’re only going to move up a few slots with the 19, 21 and 32 picks, you’re not getting into the high lottery with that package. It has been widely commented that after you get past the high lottery that this is a deep draft, with not a lot of difference between, say, pick 10 and pick 20.

    Usually I follow the draft much more closely, because usually the Knicks are terrible and are drafting 9th overall, so I’m praying that somebody decent falls to us. This year’s draft is a little harder to follow, since we’re actually not terrible and we’re picking late, several times. In all of the mocks I look at, there are desirable players on the board when our turn comes up, and there aren’t too many guys where I’m saying “damn I wish we could have that guy but he projects to go around 10” or something.

    This is the year to sit tight, draft some high floor guys with our picks, coach them up, and build our depth. It’s a good chance to get a couple of cost-controlled rotation pieces who fit in with what Thibs is doing. I’ll be disappointed if we don’t roster all three.

  35. What if they all suck as bad as Frank? :-)

    That would be bad, so we shouldn’t draft players who were not good for Strasbourg. Thankfully we aren’t obligated to do that.

    IMO the priority is landing a star. IMO, the best strategy is the one most likely to land a star. IMO, the best possible scenario is finding a disgruntled star still in his 20s that wants out and packaging picks to get him. Then I know exactly what I am getting qualitatively, if he fits, if he’s young enough to remain productive for the duration of his contract, etc.. If an attractive deal is not available, the next best option is trading up. If trading up is not available or there’s no one up there we want badly enough, then draft 3 players and pray. Everything is on the table, but some options are more likely to take us to the next level quickly and for long enough to matter.

    Do you think anyone disagrees that we should try to find a star? Once that player is actually identified we can have a meaningful conversation about what package is worth trading for him.

    Similarly, do you think anyone disagrees that if we have an opportunity to trade up for a player much better than anyone in our range doing so is a reasonable option?

    It contributes nothing to the conversation to repeatedly allude to these incredibly broad ideas. Right now there is no star demanding a trade and that doesn’t seem likely to change between now and the draft, so if you want to turn these meaningless statements into meaningful contributions say who you want to target in a trade up and what package you’d surrender to do so.

    Your current shtick is no different than a guy watching a baseball game with a group of people and saying “unlike you all, I know the best outcome for this at-bat is a home run.”

  36. You ever have a contrarian friend who doesn’t like something that’s universally liked? Like somebody who hates The Beatles or ice cream or something like that? That’s Strat and the NBA draft, and players on rookie contracts in general. Unless they were Phil Jackson’s pet projects, those guys he likes.

    It doesn’t have to make sense, it only has to fit in with the “don’t draft 18 year olds who won’t be good for six years anyway” narrative. That’s why you get statements that are basically “we should get rid of these icky draft picks and trade them for some unspecified superstar.” It’s the concept of draft picks and young players that is bothersome to him.

  37. I want them to use all the three picks, but voted “one” because of Dolan’s Variant PTSD…

  38. The way I see it, there are only four players in this draft it’d be an absolute no-brainer to trade all 3 picks for: Suggs, Green, Cade, and Mobley. Needless to say that package isn’t in the stratosphere of what would be necessary to get one of those guys, and there probably isn’t even an RJ-less package we could put together to do so if you include our other assets.

    Reasonable people can disagree about the wisdom of trading all 3 for someone in the Barnes/Kuminga/Wagner/Moody/Bouknight/Giddey group. 19, 21, and 32 is still almost certainly not enough to get us here anyway but FWIW only Barnes would be pretty obviously worth it to me (fit be damned). I personally am high on Giddey and would probably pull the trigger for him too, but I’m far from sure about that. There are players in our range I could easily see being better than any of the others.

    Even for Barnes and Giddey, the price starts feeling steep if you start including other assets in the package.

    Even if your single-minded focus is landing a star, the obvious thing to root for is the Knicks nailing as many picks as possible to avoid the “new car losing 50% of its value once it leaves the lot” effect as our picks ripen into actual players. If we get 3 rotation level guys in this draft, that puts us in a better position to eventually get a star.

  39. JK47: You ever have a contrarian friend who doesn’t like something that’s universally liked? Like somebody who hates The Beatles or ice cream or something like that?

    Donnie, was JK47 two for two?

    Edit: WAIT YOU ARE A VEGAN YOU ALSO HATE ICE CREAM

    I love it

  40. thenoblefacehumper: The way I see it, there are only four players in this draft it’d be an absolute no-brainer to trade all 3 picks for: Suggs, Green, Cade, and Mobley. Needless to say that package isn’t in the stratosphere of what would be necessary to get one of those guys, and there probably isn’t even an RJ-less package we could put together to do so if you include our other assets.

    Agreed. One way they might try to pursuit would be to trade our 3 picks for a pick in the 8 to 10 range, and then package that pick with the 2023 DAL pick to the Cavs for the 3rd pick. They seem undecided and dumb enough to do it. But, like you, i just don’t see any team in the 8 to 10 range giving up the pick for our package.

  41. You know the guys to trade up, the ones with more potential (eg, Giddey, Josh), are also the ones that’ll set us back 10 years (LOL), right?

  42. ***Donnie, was JK47 two for two?***

    He could have added The Wire to that too.

    But not building through the NBA draft, even I’m not that lame.

  43. I could see the Knicks adding Mitchell Robinson to a trade, but I think they’d move him in a package for a “better” player. The 2018 draft class is up for extensions this off season and I’m not sure every player is going to get the offer they want/are worth. Could pick 19 and Mitch get you Jaren Jackson Jr, for example? Memphis could value having another crack at a rotation player to put around Ja and value Mitch’s rebounding over JJJr’s 3 point shooting. That’s really the only kind of trade I could see Mitch being involved in, one where we package him and one of our 1RPs for a starter that fits better with what we want to do.

  44. Let’s not overthink this. Just draft Sharife Cooper, Duarte, Springer, Christopher or Mann and Bassey or Queta. Then call it a day.

  45. I voted 2 because Thibs probably want more than that and we need to remain as competitive and attractive for a #1 scoring option as possible. I wouldn’t mind trading out of this years draft for an equivalent pick next year. Next year we can hope Beal or LaVine become available, or we’ll probably have to try the Piston type approach.

    Alternatively, I could see them signing DeRozan this year. Rose, Barrett, DeRozan, Randle, and Robinson would be a very good starting five without having to give up any assets. what would DeRozan cost?

    I don’t like the idea of Mitch putting on all this weight. I think it will cost him a lot of his quickness and leaping ability.

  46. Being at 275 during the off season isn’t the worst thing in the world. There’s no way he’ll be able to keep that weight up all season long and will likely drop down 15 pounds around training camp time.

  47. On queue, it sure sounds like a Lillard trade demand is all but inevitable.

    Some relevant questions:

    -Does OKC get involved? It’s probably curtains for us if so.

    -How much does Portland value Ben Simmons? That situation is so weird I could see him pushing Philly to the front of the pack or I could see him being little more than salary filler.

    -Would Dame even want to come here? It’s far from clear we’d be any better than Portland with him, and depending on the package we could easily be worse.

    -Related to that, will Dame give the Blazers a list? If so, and assuming we’re on it, I could see us being competitive in the sweepstakes. If not, I see no way we can top an NOP offer of Ingram + a boatload of picks.

  48. Rambling a bit here, but Lillard is signed for 4 more seasons and to my knowledge there’s no opt-outs/non-guaranteed years in there. So I’m not sure what a “list” would even mean in this context.

    Could be a fascinating situation when it comes to testing the extent of player empowerment.

  49. I like the Beatles but think they’re overrated. I love ice cream and it’s not overrated. I don’t eat it that much, though.

    If Dame’s on the market, the Knicks are going to offer up the farm for him; it’s inevitable.

  50. What does a reasonably competitive RJ-less offer look like?

    Mitch, Obi, Knox if they want him, our first 3 2021 picks, a 2022 swap, both of our 2023 firsts?

    It’s tough to say where exactly I’d draw the line because I think the timetables are simply not all that compatible, so even below market packages feel like too much. I definitely think we have to keep RJ since the entire point of this would be to pair Lillard with the good players we already have.

    This will not be well-received by some people but I kind of hope we lose these sweepstakes. I absolutely love watching Lillard and he’s truly great, but I just don’t see the path to contention for a core of Lillard, Randle, Barrett (assuming we could keep him, which is not clear), and…not much else.

  51. So if we’re reading the tea leaves and take Thibs comments at face value here is how i’m handicapping the draft’s ‘shooters’.. i use quotes because i’m ranking them on overall value/risk/potential and not purely on their shooting ability…

    also here is an interesting article series on projecting shooting in the draft… tldr; ft%, 3p% and volume all matter in terms of projecting shooting and shot versatility…. i list all those #s along with their age below:

    1. Moses Moody (ft% .812 / 3p% .358 / 3pa per 40 – 6.0 / age 19)
    2. Ayo Dosunmu (.783 / .390 / 3.3 / 21)
    3. Tre Mann (.831 / .402 / 5.8 / 20)
    4. Jaden Springer (.810 / .435 / 2.8 /19)
    5. Franz Wagner (.835 / .343 / 4.6 / 20)
    6. Nah’Shon Hyland (.862 / .371 / 9.7 / 21)
    7. Chris Duarte (.810 / .424 / 6.5 / 24)
    8. Kessler Edwards (.876 / .378/ 5.2 / 22)
    9. Corey Kispert (.878 / .440 / 8.1 / 22)
    10. Jared Butler (.780 / .416/ 8.1 / 21)
    11. Davion Mitchell (.641 / .447 / 5.7/ 23)

    Moody i think has the biggest upside tho he’s not exactly a slam dunk which makes trading up a risky endeavor since if his shooting doesn’t become elite then you basically have Ben McLemore… but there are shades of Klay Thompson’s soph year lingering in this profile which makes the upside appealing…

    Dosunmu and Springer have some volume issues… but overall should be fine catch and shoot wise and maybe able to sprinkle in some pullups eventually… Dosunmu in particular relies the least on his 3p shot and is more dependent on his dribble drive game so it’s not a huge concern… also the only pg of the bunch..

    Mann has a solid off the dribble game and overall great shooting metrics…

    Hyland is probably the best shooter of the whole draft in terms of shot versatility.. he not only copied IQ’s hair but his game beyond the arc…

    Everyone else is pretty solid but have upside concerns…

  52. Obviously this is a very narrow and literal take on what prioritizing shooting in the draft looks like… reading the tea leaves it doesn’t seem like there are many trade up opportunities… Bouknight i left out since he’s likely out of reach for us in the top 10 but he’s one of the only scenarios where trading up nets us someone who doesn’t have too many shooting concerns…

    Moody is the other… and if there’s someone we’re trading up for this is probably the guy… he’s projected outside the top 10.. he has defensive upside.. has size at the wing and is a pretty good shooter… his shot is probably a bit overrated as he’s far from automatic… but for someone who fits the mold of all these public comments and rumors this guy fits it all…

    other than that i think everyone else has a chance to fall to us… so if we are really prioritizing guys who can shoot then we should stay put since there’s plenty of guys who can do that and also has a diverse skillset… Mann has true 3 level scoring ability.. Dosunmu can play point.. Springer has athleticism and defense.. Duarte has all sorts of catch and shoot versatility…

    you do sacrifice some upside… but it’s not like Moody is some sort of shoe-in to be an allstar… Dosunmu.. Mann.. Springer.. Wagner and Hyland all have decent enough upside where it’s kind of marginal between them all.. and i would absolutely take any two of those guys over Moody …

  53. i’d have to think a lillard – ben simmons deal is destined… or lillard for ingram + motherload of picks if it happens this year… we’d have to include RJ in order to compete with either and 1) i’m not really prepared to do that.. and 2) it’s probably not enough anyway…

  54. We have 2 second rounders this year and a bunch in 2923, which is the double draft. I gotta think the play is to attach some of those to our firsts to move both first rounders up a bit. I can’t see us not making at least 2 picks this year. Even if Thibs wants to compete now, we have A bunch of vets to replace.

    You have Rose, Elf, Burks, Bullocks, Noel and Taj who all played significant minutes this year. Elf is replaced already by Vildoza. But not all of the rest are coming back. Most likely we bring back three of them, maybe four. There’s also Frank, who is not coming back for sure.

    Thibs can want to compete now all he wants. He’s not the GM. Rose has to know we need to keep adding cheap players and the draft is the best way to do that. And we can for sure find rotation players later in the first round and could even get lucky and find a star.

  55. Am I the only one that didn’t know (or at least forgot) about rape allegations against Chauncy Billups?

  56. I like the Beatles but think they’re overrated.

    As musicians yes, but otherwise this is like saying Chamberlain was overrated because he missed free throws.

  57. I get that the price tag for Lillard will be high, but remember you’re not just bringing in Lillard. You’d also be bringing KB poster and long-time dolan dissident Donnie Walsh back onto the team. And I’m a lot more fun when I’m not just complaining about Dolan, television, milk-based treats, and the Lennon/McCartney catalogue.

  58. JK47: You ever have a contrarian friend who doesn’t like something that’s universally liked? Like somebody who hates The Beatles or ice cream or something like that? That’s Strat and the NBA draft, and players on rookie contracts in general. Unless they were Phil Jackson’s pet projects, those guys he likes.

    It doesn’t have to make sense, it only has to fit in with the “don’t draft 18 year olds who won’t be good for six years anyway” narrative. That’s why you get statements t

    I love the Beatles and ice cream. :-)

    I used to like the draft too, but when teams started drafting 18-19 year old kids and giving out extensions before I could tell if the player was even worth it I realized I should adjust my thinking.

    The one major exception is when you have a very old team whose window is obviously closed. Then I think you should clean house, get some picks, tank, and start from scratch for 1 year. Then you should immediately start the march forward using every avenue possible to get better in a logical way.

    That’s true regardless of whether Phil made the pick, Mills made them, or Leon Rose makes them.

    Once we have a kid though, I’m very patient in development because a lot of kids don’t start blossoming until 24-25. Most players peak in their late 20s. It feels kind of foolish to use an asset to draft a player, try to develop him for a few years, and then bail out before you know what the finished product is even going to look like.

  59. Deefense,

    I agree that it is difficult to know whether to resign a young player after their rookie contract when drafted so young. That’s far more of an issue with lottery picks who are supposed to be franchise/Max players or right below. With picks in the late first round, you’re looking for rotation players and that is often where you end up drafting older players anyways. So I would think you’d be excited to make our picks this year. We had success bc we had a deep team of good role players but we can’t duplicate that every year with vets alone. Make those first round picks this year!

  60. Do you think anyone disagrees that we should try to find a star? Once that player is actually identified we can have a meaningful conversation about what package is worth trading for him.

    Similarly, do you think anyone disagrees that if we have an opportunity to trade up for a player much better than anyone in our range doing so is a reasonable option?

    I am open to all options including drafting 3 players (like everyone else) depending on what’s available.

    All else being equal my pecking order is simply different. Most people here seem to prefer picks to trades/free agency and retaining more picks than moving up (assuming that option is even available and there’s a good target for us up there).

    I am less worried about the very long term than I used to be. I want to get better as quickly as we can in a logical way without giving out terrible contracts. I’m on board for what we’ve been doing since Rose took over. IMO, we are finally doing it right.

    I’m not the biggest Lillard fan out there. But setting that aside, I’d gladly trade multiple 1st rounders to get a player like that even though he’s 30 and gets paid a ton of money. It would immediately make us contenders, we’d still have upside for several years from our young players, barring injury he should be highly productive for the full duration of the contract, and when his contract was up we’d still have some young players just reaching their peaks to start building the next team. IMO, that’s superior to adding 3 very young players in the draft this year and hoping one of them starts really panning out 2-3 years from now. The key is what else we’d have to give up besides picks.

  61. swiftandabundant:
    Deefense,

    I agree that it is difficult to know whether to resign a young player after their rookie contract when drafted so young. That’s far more of an issue with lottery picks who are supposed to be franchise/Max players or right below. With picks in the late first round, you’re looking for rotation players and that is often where you end up drafting older players anyways. So I would think you’d be excited to make our picks this year. We had success bc we had a deep team of good role players but we can’t duplicate that every year with vets alone. Make those first round picks this year!

    IMO, we should be trying to take the next step up where we are confident we are a solid playoff team even if Randle doesn’t exactly duplicate this last year. The goal is to get out of the 1st round next year. More or different role players are not going to get that done. We need a serious upgrade at at least one position. I don’t think we are going to find that in the draft unless we can move up (and have a target) or make a trade/sign a high level free agent. There’s no reason to pussyfoot around with more role players. We’ll be able to find role players.

  62. I voted for 2, because I think the Knicks will package 19 & 21 (or 32) to move up a few spots. I could see OKC flipping 16 for 19 & 21 (and then using at least one of those picks on a draft & stash Euro).

    I’ve been posting about Robinson for Brunson in a double extend & trade for weeks. The Knicks need a PG who gets to the rim. The Mavs need rim protection and a big who can catch and finish at the rim to unlock that part of Luka’s game.

  63. We’ll be able to find role players.

    continued

    If drafting 3 players is the only viable option given the availability out there, so be it. That doesn’t mean I’m going to be happy about it. I want use to be more aggressive if we can.

  64. Nah. This past season was found money. Before this season you’d want us to use every pick available to draft youth. Just cause Thibs is a good coach is no reason to push the chips in. Randle is 26. Just entering his prime. There is no rush to try to go all in right now.

  65. There’s also no reason not to make those picks bc we have cap some too so we can bring back some vets or bring in some new ones and make picks to develop young players. We’re in a perfect spot as long as we continue to be patient.

  66. You do not bring in Damian Lillard if you do not have a legit 2nd star coming in with him, and you absolutely do not trade RJ Barrett to bring him in. If you can get a trade done without RJ Barrett, it’s all about if you believe RJ has a Bam Adebayo type leap in him and if you can move Julius if you don’t believe he’s a legit 2nd banana.

  67. I love the crowd chanting during Giannis’ free throw.

    Can’t believe Bogdanovic hit a shot.

    Also, Marv is like a pitcher throwing an 86 mph fastball.

  68. Then I think you should clean house, get some picks, tank, and start from scratch for 1 year.

    The apocalypse is upon us

  69. There is a big difference between trading picks to consolidate with a higher pick versus trading picks for a veteran.

    If the Knicks FO likes a rookie and trades up to get their preferred player, that is entirely consistent with patience and player development.

    If they trade a pick for a role player, that is inching towards “win now.”

    If they trade all 3 picks for an established player, that is strongly “win now.”

  70. I want to get better as quickly as we can in a logical way without giving out terrible contracts.

    See, it always comes back to this. Yes, ideally we would get a lot better very quickly without having to do anything reckless.

    It feels almost patronizing to explain this at such a basic level, but whatever: in a market in which productive basketball players are a finite, zero-sum resource and there are 30 teams competing for them, it is extremely difficult to do that. Nobody is going to make a trade with us if they think it helps us get better quickly without much in the way of risk on our part, because why the hell would they do that?

    For this reason, “we should get a lot better quickly and not do anything stupid in the process” is not a recommendation or a vision. It’s a bland description of the optimal goal for every team in the NBA that almost all teams will necessarily deviate from to some extent (putting aside exceptional situations like the Heatles, etc.).

    This deviation can take the form of sacrificing the “quickly” part and building an asset chest over a period of years, or sacrificing the “not do anything stupid part” and capping out on a sub-contender.

    If you truly think there’s some way we can have the best of all worlds, you need to say what it is in order to be doing anything other than describing the obvious goal of every NBA team.

  71. Owen:
    I love the crowd chanting during Giannis’ free throw.

    Can’t believe Bogdanovic hit a shot.

    Also, Marv is like a pitcher throwing an 86 mph fastball.

    Greg Maddux had 355 wins with a subpar fastball.

  72. I voted “2”, but I think most of that was Knicks PTSD speaking. As I’ve said before, trading up more than a few slots seems unlikely to me because when I look at the teams drafting at the top, I can’t see any team likely to make that sort of deal. So taking all three picks seems quite possible, but I still don’t have 100% faith in the front office, hence my vote.

    I think our draft picks are actually more valuable to teams without good picks than to the teams that already have them. Portland is an example. If the Knicks don’t want three rookies, they could trade a pick for a player and a future pick. I don’t like the idea, but I can see it happening. There are have to be teams out there that are suffering financially and want the low costs if a rookie more than they want one of their future picks.

  73. Tre Mann was shooting effortless threes from mid court and making them at the combine. He’s an interesting one to watch.

  74. i love jalen brunson… i’m not sure if i do a mitch deal for him.. but that’s only because i’m warming up to dinwiddie and drafting a prospect behind him…

    brunson from an offensive perspective is basically a perfect fit for thibs and this offense… one of the best in the pnr last season… also great in isolation… and great catch and shoot… and i’m pretty sure with more minutes he would breakout to close to allstar level play…

    all that said… mitch is a great defender both in drop and switch coverages and has good value on the offensive end… he’s limited like most centers but as we saw he’s a fair bit more valuable than noel… other than getting a guy who does all that with a good 3pt shot … mitch brings more than most…

    on top of all that if we plan on contending we need someone to guard embiid and mitch does it better than most… that gives him the edge imo because there arent a lot of centers in the league that can stay on the court in as many matchups as mitch can…. for our defense that’s important..

    in a vacuum brunson is probably better.. but the immediate market favors mitch… mitch’s new weight does make me nervous tho…

  75. I said 2. I’m guessing the front office falls in love with 1 guy and trades up a few spots for him

  76. Atlanta’s ability to play defense with Young & Williams as the backcourt has shocked me.

    Edit: Young is clearly hurting. They may need to protect him from himself.

  77. All four of the Beatles were brilliant musicians. Paul McCartney is probably the greatest rock bass player of all time, George Harrison as a slide player alone is a wonderfully emotive guitarist, Ringo has a flawless, wide pocket that is almost impossible to correctly emulate, and Lennon, the weakest musician of the four, also had incredible feel and touch. Try to play the Travis-picking chord changes of “Julia” as seamlessly as Lennon then get back to me about how they were overrated as musicians.

  78. The Hawks fell apart. I don’t think that they’ll recover from tonight’s loss. The Bucks are manhandling them.

  79. Bogdanovic has been pretty bad all through the playoffs (3-16 tonight), if he’s not hitting his shots the Hawks have no chance vs the Bucks

  80. Even with Bogdonovic’s struggles, the Hawks were winning until Trae got hurt. When he scores at all three levels, the Hawks are formidable. When he can’t score, the Hawks can’t win.

  81. Oregon sharpshooting swingman Chris Duarte, who is 24, blew off the draft combine. The rumor in Chicago was Duarte had a guarantee early in the second round. The Knicks select 32nd.

    This is an odd note from Berman of the Post (at the end of an article about Miles McBride working out for the Knicks), since pretty much every mock I’ve seen has Duarte going roughly in the neighborhood of our firsts, or at least by the end of the first round. Maybe the league is less high on Duarte than the draftniks are?

  82. I’m not sure the Bucks win if Trae didn’t get hurt, or even if a visibly limping Trae didn’t come back in.

  83. i don’t think anyone skips out based on a second rd promise… those contracts aren’t even guaranteed and are seen as just a deal to get a foot in the door in the league… berman should know better than that or he’s just trolling again..

    players will def skip workouts if they get a first rd promise and i’m pretty sure that’s what’s happening here… cam thomas and isaiah jackson also withdrew from the combine and same thing probably happened with them..

  84. players will def skip workouts if they get a first rd promise and i’m pretty sure that’s what’s happening here… cam thomas and isaiah jackson also withdrew from the combine and same thing probably happened with them..

    Yeah, first round promises are definitely things that affect player’s actions, but certainly not second round promises.

  85. djphan: i don’t think anyone skips out based on a second rd promise…

    Agree. And even if the rumour was true, for Berman to hint it might be the Knicks is equally strange. At this early stage teams don’t limit flexibility making second round promises–and especially for a team that is on record as saying they are open to all options on how they may use their picks.

  86. Love seeing JK’s defense of the Beatles as musicians. That’s not to say that I completely agree, I think there are musicians on every instrument that are technically superior…McCartney might not be technically better Stanley Clarke or Entwistle or Flea or Burton, but the melodic choices and the technical execution of them are second to none, and as you said, very hard to duplicate. The little guitar riff on Get Back is a prime example. Not technically difficult but in the context of that song, perfection. Same with Paul’s bass lines in Come Together.

    It’s the songwriting and production that sets them apart, but they were outstanding technical musicians with the ability to make brilliant choices without showboating.

  87. The Bucks are a big, physical team . It’s not surprising that they are breaking the Hawks down.

  88. I’m fine with us not getting any of those “promise” guys. My ideal draft would be trading up to 14 with the Warriors (17 and 32) to get Giddey and then taking Springer at 21. Probably won’t happen, but that’s who I like thus far. I do also like McBride if Springer isn’t there.

  89. Technical skills are to pop music what efficiency is to professional sports.

  90. “The Bucks are a big, physical team . It’s not surprising that they are breaking the Hawks down.”

    Interesting way of saying the ref’s foot

  91. If somehow Duarte dropped to 32, sign me up. It’s possible Duarte got a 2nd rd promise and the promise included certain contract terms. 2nd round contracts don’t have deal structures if I remember correctly, so he could actually get paid more than a late 1st in theory. Only real risk is getting taken 31 and signed to non-guarnteed.

    How big was Ringo’s butt? -Phil Jackson

  92. I have to think that the Lakers are gonna pick Duarte at 23. That team needs cost-controlled shooters ready to contribute now and he fits the bill perfectly. They could’ve given him a promise. If he drops to 32, we should probably take him.

  93. Duarte at 32 would be a godsend but I wouldnt risk it if we really liked him. Would be one of my prime targets at 19 or 21

  94. JK47: You ever have a contrarian friend who doesn’t like something that’s universally liked? Like somebody who hates The Beatles or ice cream or something like that?

    When you wrote this, were you already expecting the contrarians to scream “overrated” about The Beatles? :D

  95. Duarte at 32 would be very nice, but that’s what the combine is for, to get you to a higher pick. It’d be complete nonsense to forego the combine for a 2nd rd promise.

  96. If the Rockets fall in love with a player that might not be there at 23, and offer 23+24 for 19+32. Would you do it? I think i would, as it’d be more certain that good players would be there for the 3 picks.

  97. who knew that diabetes medicine causes sun sensitivity, how does shit like that even work???

    one of these days i should probably check out all the fucked up side effects from the 1,000 or so pills i take each day…i get why people rush to retirement so often – it takes a lot of extra time just to clean the house and keep yourself alive…

    ugh, i’m aging one painful lesson at a time…

  98. geo:
    who knew that diabetes medicine causes sun sensitivity, how does shit like that even work???

    one of these days i should probably check out all the fucked up side effects from the 1,000 or so pills i take each day…i get why people rush to retirement so often – it takes a lot of extra time just to clean the house and keep yourself alive…

    ugh, i’m aging one painful lesson at a time…

    geo, try a keto diet. I’ll bet that you can throw most of your pills away. Low, low carb.

  99. The Lakers promised Mitch they would take him in 2018 and that worked out pretty well for the Knicks. The idea of drafting a 24 year old in the 1st round makes me nauseous but if we can get him at 32 it wouldn’t be the end of the world.

  100. The idea of drafting a 24 year old in the 1st round makes me nauseous

    Seriously, we’re gonna have to stock up on Depends and Metamucil cause 24 is SO ancient.

  101. Ringo has a flawless, wide pocket that is almost impossible to correctly emulate

    JK47, I am curious what you mean by “wide pocket”. Could you explain it in a way a non musician like me would understand?

  102. aggregating some stuff from the combine:

    worked out: miles mcbride
    interviews: james bouknight.. ziaire wiliams.. scottie barnes… josh christopher… jalen johnson… jaden springer.. trey murphy… jared butler.. josh primo.. luka garza…

    this is probably not an exhaustive list as i’m just relying on some hearsay off twitter and the knick beat writers… none of this means much… combine stuff from what i hear is just meet and greets.. measurements and there’s some game in the background… private workouts and interviews are when stuff generally moves and those will be scheduled after..

    all that said… some notable omissions on that list… lack of any pg.. dosunmu (haven’t seen him release his interview list so maybe it happened)…. cooper (no knicks on his)…. lack of any big man besides garza…

    so if we were only talking about shooters we seem to be pretty consistent with that…. which brings in question what we plan on in free agency if that’s really the gameplan with our picks…

  103. Let me guess.

    I think “wide pocket” means the ability for a drummer to leave space/beats in between when they actually drum yet still keep the rhythm?

  104. Raven:
    Jowles, staying cool somehow? Keep hydrated, please…

    Safe over here, my man. 113 here yesterday, gonna hit that again. Feels oppressive in a way I’ve maybe never experienced. Lady J and our friend went on a walk during peak heat just to try it out and they said their eyeballs were drying up. We have Central AC so we’ve managed pretty well, but this is… not good.

  105. @TheSteinLine
    The Knicks’ Julius Randle was “right there” for an Olympic roster spot, @usabasketball executive director Jerry Colangelo said.

    Kevin Love’s international experience was key in his selection, Colangelo said. Love, Draymond Green and Kevin Durant are previous gold medalists.

    Would have been nice to have Julius there trying to recruit dudes. On the other hand, this gives him another long summer to obsessively work on improving his game. The last one of those seemed to work out pretty well for us.

  106. JK47: All four of the Beatles were brilliant musicians. Paul McCartney is probably the greatest rock bass player of all time, George Harrison as a slide player alone is a wonderfully emotive guitarist, Ringo has a flawless, wide pocket that is almost impossible to correctly emulate, and Lennon, the weakest musician of the four, also had incredible feel and touch. Try to play the Travis-picking chord changes of “Julia” as seamlessly as Lennon then get back to me about how they were overrated as musicians.

    100% this. Are they virtuosos? No, none. But that’s not what rock music is about. The Velvet Underground is and will always be a better band than Dream Theater, even if John Petrucci can play more notes in one song than Reed’s band can play in a whole album.

    There are certain exceptional musicians whose technical proficiency allows them to access and express elevated emotional ideas — Stevie Wonder and Prince come to mind — but that proficiency is not at all a requirement for most rock and pop acts. Likewise, you don’t have to be a musician to appreciate great music. It’s about creating a world, and sometimes the most beautiful worlds are the simplest ones. No one should ever complain that a Black Flag or Sex Pistols song doesn’t have enough augmented chords or polyrhythms in it. It’s about the attitude, the perspectives, the emotional world created through sound.

    The Beatles were an organic rags-to-riches story, going from a local band to a global phenomenon by powers outside of their control. And then they took the early rockabillly/skiffle/ballad stuff and rejected it, taking enough LSD to kill a horse, and invented entirely new ways of writing and recording music that are emulated to this day. There is no pop music as we know it without Revolver and Sgt. Pepper and Abbey Road.

  107. Certainly are guys you could take for the Olympics better than Julius Randle but Kevin Love is absolutely not one of them

  108. Re: Ringo’s wide pocket

    To me a player’s “pocket” is his particular feel, his particular interpretation of rhythm. Ringo’s is wide, in that it has a very generous and welcome “swing” to it. I’ll give an example: songs like “With A Little Help From My Friends” or “Good Day Sunshine” are songs with swing/shuffle feels. He excels at playing in those feels, and those songs swing HARD. Think of the piano solo in “Good Day Sunshine” or the tom fills between the verses of “With A Little Help From My Friends.” It’s the combination of the heavy backbeat and the gentle loping swing that really makes those songs come to life.

    But he also has a wide pocket on other songs that don’t have a swing feel– like take for instance “Ticket To Ride.” The way he interprets the rhythm is a little bit behind the beat, he’s interpreting it just slightly lazy. The result is that “Ticket To Ride” sounds HEAVY. It has a weight to it that it simply would not have with a tighter pocket. Another good example would be “Come Together.” It’s heavy and swampy because of Ringo’s great wide pocket.

    If you ever see a Beatles cover band, the drummer pretty much never sounds like Ringo. His particular pocket and feel is almost impossible to emulate. You have to just kind of BE him.

    The opposite would be a drummer like Jabo Starks, who played with James Brown. Great drummer at the other end of the spectrum, a “tight pocket” drummer.

  109. No one should ever complain that a Black Flag or Sex Pistols song doesn’t have enough augmented chords or polyrhythms in it. It’s about the attitude, the perspectives, the emotional world created through sound.

    Greg Ginn is one of my favorite musicians. GREAT guitar player.

  110. I think with musicians at jk47’s level (or any expert in their area) he has a concrete understanding of what the rest of us only understand in the abstract. He picks up on nuance that we don’t and I find people who have that expertise have more appreciation for what people in their field do that laypeople dismiss.

    Works best with arts or other subjective stuff because basketball a player can have all sorts of elite skills and add nuances to their moves, but at the end of the day they need to make the bucket.

  111. This is interesting to me because I’ve heard lots of people over the years be dismissive of Ringo’s musicianship relative to the rest of the band. A friend in college used to say stuff like, “Man, can you only imagine what The Beatles would have sounded like with Ginger Baker?” I’m generally not expert enough on this stuff to be able to tell things beyond my feeling about each song as an overall piece of music.

  112. I’m doing a music podcast with a friend of mine, we’re making the first episodes now and will probably launch in the next few months. One of the first episodes is about the band Badfinger, who were a very good band. I’ve been listening to their entire catalog, and it’s really hard not to notice how far they fall short of The Beatles, just on a musicianship level alone. The Beatles had a glue to them that very few bands can match, a chemistry and interplay that you can only really achieve if you have musicians who have great feel and who are great listeners.

    I can think of few other bands who achieved this uncanny chemistry– the Stones at their Exile On Main Street prime. The Band on their first few albums. The Clash. It’s rare.

  113. Greg Ginn was a cool guitarist, though apparently not a good person. Even Keith Morris, who pretty much hates him as a person, concedes that he was great.

    My mom loved the Beatles, so I grew up with them. And, I discovered The Clash in 1982, and they immediately struck me as a sort of the punk version of the Beatles in how their music changed over the space of 5-6 years. And sure enough, they soon imploded at the height of their popularity.

    I had lots of debates with college guys who thought that rock guys had to be super busy/skilled like Eddie Van Halen or Neal Peart in order to be “good.” I loved Johnny Ramone, Steve Jones, etc.

  114. pepper: this spain/croatia match is crazy…

    Croatia did what we couldn’t yesterday. :(
    I’m only following this one on LiveScore, but saw the first goal. Super funny. :P

  115. I tend to not really like “shred” guitarists but Eddie Van Halen is in a different category to me. He played with unbridled joy, and he was as great a rhythm guitarist as he was a lead guitarist. Kind of similar to the way Greg Ginn played with unbridled anger. Both of them, in their own way, play with a lot of emotion.

    EVH was like the Charlie Parker of guitar.

  116. JK47: I can think of few other bands who achieved this uncanny chemistry– the Stones at their Exile On Main Street prime. The Band on their first few albums. The Clash. It’s rare.

    Maybe Led Zeppelin also?

  117. cybersoze: Croatia did what we couldn’t yesterday. :(

    no offense…they kept calling Portugal an “aging squad”…might be time to give the young guys a shot…

  118. pepper: no offense…they kept calling Portugal an “aging squad”…might be time to give the young guys a shot…

    Agreed. And next time we should try with a REAL coach too. :P

  119. TheClashFan: I discovered The Clash in 1982, and they immediately struck me as a sort of the punk version of the Beatles in how their music changed over the space of 5-6 years. (…) I loved Johnny Ramone, Steve Jones, etc.

    It’s nice to have a fellow punk here at KB. I discovered them all a little later, as in 82 i wasn’t even 10. :P
    Do you know a band called G.B.H.? They’re british and mostly known for their punk songs, but i had an album called “A fridge too far” that was a clear evolution in their sound, liked it a lot at the time, but i guess punk folks weren’t ready for evolution. LOL

  120. (Do you need anybody?)
    I just need someone to love
    (Could it be anybody?)
    I want somebody to love

  121. cybersoze: It’s nice to have a fellow punk here at KB. I discovered them all a little later, as in 82 i wasn’t even 10. :P
    Do you know a band called G.B.H.? They’re british and mostly known for their punk songs, but i had an album called “A fridge too far” that was a clear evolution in their sound, liked it a lot at the time, but i guess punk folks weren’t ready for evolution. LOL

    I was 19 when I discovered punk/new wave/etc. Had to get to college to even be able to hear The Ramones or Sex Pistols’ songs. Supposedly, it all “sucked,” and the musicians couldn’t play, etc. Then, I heard “Never Mind the Bollocks”…

    Yes, heard of G.B.H., but I was never much up on the Brit punks bands beyond the Pistols and Clash, to be honest. Also, stuff like Gang of Four, Joy Division that you could hear on UT college radio in the early 80’s. Even The local indie music community had limits on what you were able to actually hear at the time.

    OTOH, I found tons of 80’s American punk and indie bands. What a great era for rock music. The book “Our Band Could Be Your Life” is a good starting point for this. By ’82, the “punk” scene was already pretty diverse when I discovered it, at least here in Knoxville.

  122. TheClashFan: The book “Our Band Could Be Your Life” is a good starting point for this.

    Added to my wishlist, thanks for the tip. :) Oh, and btw, only discovered Gang of Four in the 2010s, can you believe it? And i love their sound, been listening to them on Spotify for some years now. ;)

  123. Alan:
    Oh my, this Scottie Pippen video from the Dan Patrick Show where he calls out the Kukoc play as racially motivated, then doesn’t back down when Patrick asks if that means he’s calling Phil a racist

    “You understand english?” :O

  124. Alan:
    Oh my, this Scottie Pippen video from the Dan Patrick Show where he calls out the Kukoc play as racially motivated, then doesn’t back down when Patrick asks if that means he’s calling Phil a racist

    Offshoot of a cultural moral panic, and way to stay at least fleetingly relevant.

  125. I voted 3 because I am an optimist.

    The only scenarios in which I would be okay moving a pick would be to get a young star player like Simmons (maybe Randle+19 gets that done, which I would do in a second), or trading for a different young player that isn’t an ideal fit with their teams like Brunson or Clarke. Flipping a pick for a future one or packaging picks just for the sake of moving up a couple spots seems shortsighted.

    We need young talent and long-term cheap depth and if the Knicks think they are not in the position to bring in 3-4 rookies because somehow they are too good then we have very big problems with our leadership. We are a borderline playoff team who greatly overachieved in a weird season. We are not at the push our chips in stage of our development. We need to bring in as much young talent as possible. We need to look at teams like Toronto for good examples of building depth while being competitive.

    I want no part of roster gutting swings like Lillard or Beal. Let’s draft one project PG (I hoping for Cooper), sign a vet PG like Larkin (still my first choice), Brunson (if we can get him for a reasonable price), Micic, Ball, or Dinwiddie, and then draft a good wing shooter/defender (Springer/Dosunmu/Butler at 21 or Hyland/Prkacin/Duarte at 32), and a back up big (Jackson at 21 or Queta at 32 ). I would also love to see us buy our way into the mid-second round and draft Herbert Jones. We don’t need to make any huge swings this offseason. We need to just get a bit better and see how much of last season was a fluke.

  126. BEN R, 100 percent with you on this one.

    Even if we bring back most of the vets on big one year deals, there’s still plenty of room on the roster for 2 rookies plus Villadoza. Frank won’t be back. Knox could be gone and we had dudes like Pinson who never played. Even if the rookies we pick don’t play much the goal should be developing them to replace Burks, Noel, Rose, Bullocks, Taj in the next few seasons.

    Plus rookies don’t lose value from picks if they’re late first rounders that do well. Sure, Knox and Frank lost their value vs. what the value of their lotto picks would have been. But Mitch and IQ are worth more as players than they were as picks. So if we make good selections and develop them, those players could be thrown into a star trade next year or the year after.

    The goal should be replacing the production of the vets with cheaper young players with upside.

  127. When talking about the Beatles musical abilities you really have to start with the vocals- both Lennon and esp. McCartney were great lead vocalists who were equally good (and willing) harmony singers.

    And I always thought EVH was more interesting as a rhythm player than as a lead guitarist but both his harmonic and rhythmic sense was as avant-garde as you’ll find in top 40 music. He’s no Bird though.

  128. But Mitch and IQ are worth more as players than they were as picks.

    Right, this is a point that’s often overlooked. If you nail a late first rounder or second rounder, the whole analogy of the car leaving the showroom goes out the window.

  129. I think songs that enter one’s psyche at an impressionable age may suffer from a kind of auditory endowment effect. They go in, and you get attached, and your mind processes them as perfect, and when somebody else plays it, even if they do it better, it sounds “wrong”. If you were hearing these songs for the first time, you’d maybe have a different take than explaining someone’s inimitable style as having a “wide pocket”. It’s the Cookie Head Jenkins fallacy on full display.

  130. So…do we continue a slow build & use all three picks or do we just go for fences. Middle of the road approach is a pathway to mediocrity, IMO.

    ~$50M – 60M in cap space, plethora of picks and decent young talent, (Mitch, RJ, IQ), – can this be turned into an LAC and Brooklyn situation 2.0, just in reverse? – if I’m Dame, why not reach out to a free agent or even someone on an expiring to ask them if they want to come join Randle and myself in NYC? We do have elite specialist type supporting cast.

    If yes, whose games are complementary? – Dame and Kawhi? Dame and Beal? Dame and Simmons?

    Signing a worthy max free agent alone is history. Nowadays ballers pair up. That’s facts!

  131. They go in, and you get attached, and your mind processes them as perfect, and when somebody else plays it, even if they do it better, it sounds “wrong”.

    Well, that’s not exactly what I was saying.

    A drummer like Ringo, his skill set is more subtle than a drummer like Keith Moon, or a drummer like Jabo Starks. It may not seem that special to play the way Ringo plays, but then you try to duplicate it and it’s very difficult.

  132. Early Bird:
    I think with musicians at jk47’s level (or any expert in their area) he has a concrete understanding of what the rest of us only understand in the abstract. He picks up on nuance that we don’t and I find people who have that expertise have more appreciation for what people in their field do that laypeople dismiss.

    Works best with arts or other subjective stuff because basketball a player can have all sorts of elite skills and add nuances to their moves, but at the end of the day they need to make the bucket.

    Yeah, that’s the interesting thought project, isn’t it? The open questions would be whether there are people capable of seeing, say, basketball with the same insight that JK brings to music. My answer to that would be yes, just as there are people capable of seeing movies more deeply.

    The counterargument, of course, is But, what about data?? and it’s certainly a fair counter but my response would be to imagine the hypothetical world that will inevitably arrive, in which AI is able to “see” music the way JK can, or even “better,” and ascribe “reasons” and “data” that explain why it sounds like it does and moves the brain like it moves the brain and then people start generating “metrics” based on that data. In various bullshit sessions over the years, I’ve occasionally suggested that it’s impossible for one person to second guess another’s pure vision — IOW if someone looks at a rock and says, “I see a flower,” we can’t conclusively disprove that even though we know it’s false, because we don’t know exactly how their faculties of perception are working and the picture they’re painting for the person. Those bullshit sessions happened years before I’d even heard of something like the Singularity, Personal perception will one day be visible and subject to outside ratification. If someone says,…

  133. … “I see a flower,” that will be conclusively falsifiable by an outsider.

  134. cybersoze: Added to my wishlist, thanks for the tip. :) Oh, and btw, only discovered Gang of Four in the 2010s, can you believe it? And i love their sound, been listening to them on Spotify for some years now. ;)

    My 21 year-old son also really likes early Gang of Four. Sad about Andy Gill passing ins 2020.

    OTOH, neither of my sons are Knicks fans….perhaps wisely.

  135. Donnie Walsh:
    I think songs that enter one’s psyche at an impressionable age may suffer from a kind of auditory endowment effect. They go in, and you get attached, and your mind processes them as perfect, and when somebody else plays it, even if they do it better, it sounds “wrong”. If you were hearing these songs for the first time, you’d maybe have a different take than explaining someone’s inimitable style as having a “wide pocket”. It’s the Cookie Head Jenkins fallacy on full display.

    Most of my favorite albums were discovered after adolescence. I listen to my favorite albums from age 11-17 with suspicion and often disgust. Used to love Weezer’s Pinkerton but now it sounds like a rich, whiny incel’s vlog readout. Still fun musically and for its wild brash production, but the lyrics and general themes make me gag.

    Re: Ringo, let’s not forget that he was also blazing a trail himself. His bandmates were bringing him nascent forms of popular music and he was every bit as involved as they were in bringing them to life. He was a product of lots of influences, but also hugely influential, like his bandmates. The slinky groove in Come Together? The creepy floor-tom backbeat in Strawberry Fields? He was a visionary, and a rock-solid backing man to boot. And by the end of the 900 page bio I read of them last year, the only Beatle who didn’t come off like an asshole of some sort. (George was known for his big heart, but he was a gullible, spoiled rich guy and had his flaws, no doubt.)

  136. Ben R: Micic

    I like your plan. Just adding the information that to sign Micic we’d have to trade for him with OKC.

    “The Serbian swingman was originally selected by the 76ers with the No. 52 pick in the 2014 draft. His rights were acquired by Oklahoma City in December (2020) as part of a multi-player deal.”
    “Micic wouldn’t be an NBA free agent. Oklahoma City currently holds his draft rights, so he’d have to sign with the Thunder unless they trade his rights to another team.”

    Did OKC really asked for him, or was he just a throw-in in the Horford for Danny Green deal? And the guy proceeded to win the Euroleague MVP!? What were the odds?

  137. Yeah I think Ringo gets dismissed by some people because his drumming wasn’t out there or over the top so people think he sucks but his drumming is perfect for the music they’re trying to make.

    I used to work for Blue Man Group in NYC (was part of their stage crew, props running during the show, etc). The Blue Men themselves did not have to be good drummers as it was all very staccato 4/4 drumming. They just had to be able to do it fast while still being in time. But the drummer in the band that backed up the Blue Man basically rand the show in a lot of ways because his drumming would inform the pace of the blue men’s acting, he would drum based on their reactions, etc. When you worked there long enough you could feel the difference in the show based on who was the drummer in the band. Some dudes were more rock and roll and the show would be more in your face and others were more laid back and experimental and those performances would be weirder and often more interesting.

    I remember one time one of the band captains told me that when he interviewed drummers for the job, he would ask them who their favorite drummer was and if they said “Keith Moon” or “John Bonham” that would kind of count against them in the interview because that was guy who wanted to show off whereas someone who said Ringo knew that the drummer was their to inform but also support the show.

  138. it’s pretty cool, some of you are at your very best when not speaking basketball…

    i completely intend this to be a compliment – of course…

  139. i think the plausible guy i would be most excited to see us trade up for is sengun. his profile sorta screams stay the hell away but idc. trading up for a semi-plodding big who shot no 3s seems like a good way to get filleted, but this kid’s upside is just so damn tantalizing. a million times more so than, say, deni or obi were last year.

  140. So Micic was the Euroleague MVP and OKC traded for his rights? That checks out

    Is Vildoza better than Micic?

  141. Cybersoze – I did forget to mention we’d have to get his rights, but I think if we wanted Micic and he wanted to sign with us, we could get his rights for a couple of future 2nds and maybe a bit of cash.

    I think people are on to a lot when it comes to the potential value of hitting on later picks. If our later picks turn into young rotation players they will end up having a lot more value than a late pick or a journeyman vet we just signed.

    Overall though, we shouldn’t be in any big rush. We need to be patient and make our picks, be smart about free agency, and continue to look overseas, which I really think is the best place to find excess value outside of the draft.

  142. Owen: So Micic was the Euroleague MVP and OKC traded for his rights? That checks out
    Is Vildoza better than Micic?

    It’s better than that, Presti has a crystal ball (or he knows a lot about basketball, you choose) and traded for him last December, and then he was Euroleague Final Four MVP this May.
    Vildoza is younger, he’s 25, and Micic is 27, so although Micic is better now, i think Vildoza seems to be on the rise. Maybe the Knicks will unlock that potential, at least we should hope so.

  143. swiftandabundant: I used to work for Blue Man Group in NYC (was part of their stage crew, props running during the show, etc).

    Serious? That’s awesome, they are hilarious, they must have one of the most memorable Tiny Desk concerts that i can remember. ;D
    And i think i remember them doing music with city sounds, like on Brooklyn bridge or something like that. I have to search for the video again.

  144. Owen – The big difference between Vildoza and Micic/Larkin, in my opinion, is I think Vildoza is better suited right now to be a backup and develop a bit but both Micic and Larkin could start right now. But more importantly, I think there is room for both.

    Micic was MVP of Euroleague this year, Larkin would have won it last year. They are probably two of the top 5 players in Europe and both are starting quality PGs in the NBA in my opinion.

    I would love it if our guard rotation next year was Micic/Larkin, Quickley, Vildoza, and our first pick maybe Cooper. That would be quite good I think, plus fun to watch with upside potential.

  145. I know there aren’t any better ways to end a soccer match, but PK’s don’t prove a damn thing.

  146. Cybersoze – You beat me to it. I agree Micic is better now but Vildoza might have more upside. I really hope he is seriously part of our long-term plan. Thibs is a bit of a hardass and can exclude players who are not “his” guys. His complete unwillingness to even look at Vilodoza in the playoffs really turned me a bit on Thibs. His coaching in the playoffs this year was very poor.

  147. Ben R: His complete unwillingness to even look at Vildoza in the playoffs really turned me a bit on Thibs. His coaching in the playoffs this year was very poor.

    You might be right, but some coaches don’t like to mess with the team’s chemistry and although i was mad watching the titanic (Knicks’ playoff performance) sink, i can see that his decision makes sense.
    And lately i was pleasantly surprised by Thibs involvement in the draft process, and i don’t know if you watched the video on Begley’s tweet that i shared up-thread, but Thibs taking the players to be evaluated by P3 Sports Sciences is a good approach. They analyze data to understand “athlete movement and development for performance optimization”, and their motto is “Athletic Performance and Injury Prevention Intelligence”.

  148. iserp: France – Switzerland does not lag behind…

    damn…i turned it off to get on a zoom call so I could pay attention and forgot about it…

  149. Jk this is from trouser press magazine in 74. I hadn’t thought about that band in decades but just read this the other day. Cool that you brought them up

    washington is not a big Brit-ish rock town. Bluegrass and Southern raunch draw big, but a group like ELO comes to town and leas than 400 people show. so · this Anglophile was quite happy when _two (count •em) British acts played cl~s in Georgetown with-in a week. First I -caught Badfinger at a place called the Bayou. The welsh quartet ran through a short but thoroughly enjoyable set, spot-lighting songs.off Straight up and No Dice, their two best al-bums. Nothing fancy about these boys, just those clean, precise harmonies and some energetic · musicianship. Badfinger showed that they can be a much heavier band than their recorded material would indicate. Guitarists Pete Ham and Joey Molland exchanged lead and rhythm parts f’luidly, while bassist Tom Evans and drummer Mika Gibbons drove them steadily onward. · ·. Throughout the •et, Badfinger seemed to be enjoying themselves thoroughly, ni~e to see in a day when many bands seem to approach performing as a pain in the ass. Their enthusiasm and overall mu-sical sound brought to mind the inevitable comparison with the Beatles which has followed Bad-finger ever since “Come and Get It” beca• a chart hit four years ago. Still, Badfinger must be considered talents in their own right. They are one of thtt few groups which consistently come up with great singles as well as having one of the tightest con-cert acts around. The highlights of the set were the beautiful,: slightly echoed vocals of Pete Ham ·on “Time-less” and the encore, Dave Mason•s “Only You Know And I Know,” not extremely different from Mason•s own version, but an interesting rendition nonetheless. After a couple of weak studio albums(!!!, and Badfinger) and considering the strength of their concert act, the. time may be right for. a live Badfinqer LP. *

  150. In my own musician experience, “wide pocket” would be a drummer whose timing isn’t as precise or consistent, but it works. It may not be consistent to a metronome, but it’s consistent to the song and the other musicians. It can create a kind of vibrancy, an alive quality, unique to that drummer’s musicality. “Tight pocket” is a drummer who is precise, like a machine. This is prized in jazz. Sometimes we call this “technical.”

    Questlove is another example of a “tight pocket” drummer — his drumming is modeled after drum machines (see: “You Got Me” by the Roots)

    Fun thing I learned: A drummer friend who competed in drum corps competitions (marching band drum lines, like the Nick Cannon movie) told me that all drummers either play slightly ahead of the beat or behind the beat. A very underrated drummer is Longineau Parsons of Yellowcard, whom my friend told me is one of the best ahead-of-the-beat drummers of all time.

  151. Ben R: His complete unwillingness to even look at Vilodoza in the playoffs really turned me a bit on Thibs. His coaching in the playoffs this year was very poor.

    Really? While I was a little disappointed Vildoza didn’t get any run, given how nothing else was working vs Atlanta, it makes sense how an NBA coach would rule out a player who had no experience in his system. Brooklyn did sign Mike James from Europe and play him big minutes, but they also had a lot of injuries.

  152. Wide pocket = the drummer from Big Thief
    Tight pocket = the drummer from The Strokes

  153. And also, it’s unclear how quickly Vildoza was even able to get into the country and pass various Covid protocols. Where Mike James had been with the Nets for the last several weeks of their season. I’m not sure there’s a precedent for a player to join a team in the playoffs and move into the rotation. Even Billy Ray Bates — whose improbable playoff scoring burst for the 79-80 Trailblazers, as chronicled in David Halberstam’s “The Breaks of the Game” — had already played 16 games for Portland that season.

  154. Alan:
    Even Billy Ray Bates — whose improbable playoff scoring burst for the 79-80 Trailblazers, as chronicled in David Halberstam’s “The Breaks of the Game” — had already played 16 games for Portland that season.

    that’s a blast from the past…I remember mimicking Billy Ray’s jumper that summer playing at the park…that was legendary…plus of course he had that cool name…

  155. Latest NBA Videos, ESPN.com

    “1:30 Kevin Hart still has faith in Ben Simmons”

    Who is Kevin Hart? Is this a Sixers FO executive I’ve never heard of? Or a member of the development staff?

  156. For those of you who follow the draft, this article is good information on player results from the draft combine. It’s behind a paywall though, so I’ll try and summarize a little.
    https://theathletic.com/2677827/2021/06/28/nba-draft-combine-news-notes-whose-stock-went-up-and-whose-went-down/

    This quote supports what I’ve felt:

    This gives rise to a more general question: There are lots of teams that might seek to trade up, but who trades down? According to my math, it requires two teams to complete a trade — and this could prove difficult.

    It lists people who helped themselves maybe move up and those who maybe moved down. It said Nah’shon Hyland, Keon Johnson, Joe Wieskamp, Quentin Grimes, Jericho Sims, AJ Lawson, Justin Champagnie, and Scottie Barnes probably helped themselves. Daishen Nix, Max Abmas, Johnny Juzang, Luka Garza and Jared Butler may have moved down.

  157. Interesting that the teams seemingly all want to move up. All the draft boards are all over the place which makes me think there isn’t much differentiation between players.

  158. Early Bird:
    Interesting that the teams seemingly all want to move up. All the draft boards are all over the place which makes me think there isn’t much differentiation between players.

    I agree. And if lots of teams want to move up and few want to move down, the price for moving up will be steep. I still don’t see it happening for us unless we are only moving one or two positions, and if the draft is flat maybe there is no need to move.

  159. To me, it’s not moving up in a vacuum, it’s moving up to target a specific player. So the question becomes whether the other teams looking to move up are targeting the same player that you covet. Then it becomes a bidding war.

  160. So, at least for tonight, the answer is, “Yes, Paul George can be the best player on championship contender.”

  161. paul george is an enigma wrapped in a riddle…he can dominate and at the same time he can make the most lazy passes and commit some really dumb dribbling turnovers…but when he is on…unstoppable..

  162. I think even when he is on his game, George appears like a guy who would be better suited to be the #2 on a team. Like when Pippen dragged the Bulls to the Semis against the Knicks in 1994. He was brilliant, but still seemed better suited to be a #2.

  163. I was a bit unclear about my critique of Thibs. Him not considering Vildoza was not the problem but a symptom of his overall lack of flexibility. He made almost no adjustments despite us being outplayed.

    His need to lean on his guys is a big reason I hope we don’t bring back both Rose and Gibson.

  164. I just don’t think Vildoza would have been an option for any coach. If we’re talking someone like an Austin Rivers, then sure, you could work guys like that in easily. But a guy from another league who has never played in the NBA? I don’t think anyone would ever try working him into the rotation during the playoffs.

  165. What do you guys think of Ayo Dosunmu? He’s mocked at 16 on nabdraft so in our range. Would you take him at 19 if available? Would you trade 19 and 32 for him?

  166. Ingmarrrr:
    What do you guys think of Ayo Dosunmu? He’s mocked at 16 on nabdraft so in our range. Would you take him at 19 if available? Would you trade 19 and 32 for him?

    You really want Clyde to retire, don’t you?

  167. Reggie Jackson, who is playing for the minimum, has earned himself several million with this playoffs run…

    I agree that PG-13 is better suited for a #2 role, but this Clippers are really like cockroaches, it’s hard to kill them.
    Who would have thought that they would arrive up here without Leonard?

  168. Ingmarrrr:
    What do you guys think of Ayo Dosunmu? He’s mocked at 16 on nabdraft so in our range. Would you take him at 19 if available? Would you trade 19 and 32 for him?

    I would not trade him for 19 and 32…
    In this draft I’d rather stay put and try to get three rotation players who are cost controlled at a low price for years…

    But I’ll be very surprised if they’ll follow that path.

  169. Z-man: You really want Clyde to retire, don’t you?

    It would break my girlfriend’s heart if she doesn’t get to see his suits on clydesofly ~80 times a year so no, I don’t.

    I watched 3-4 minutes of highlights of several prospects in our range and his was the most impressive to me. The stats are pretty solid too other than his age, he’s practically geriatric. So that’s all the info I have. I guess you and Max aren’t on board?

  170. lol no I’m totally neutral at this time, haven’t really looked carefully at anyone. On the surface, he seems really interesting so he will definitely be among those I scrutinize before draft time.

  171. I gave Dosunmu’s highlights a courtesy look and he did not strike me as someone to trade up for. Seems like he has a funky stroke and a loose handle. But I’ll keep an open mind.

  172. Vorkunov attempts to figure out how the Knicks could trade up for each pick from 1-18. Even he admits it’s a wildly improbable thought exercise, but still fun to read. Two examples:

    No. 11 Charlotte

    The offer: Mitchell Robinson and No. 21 for No. 11 and the rights to Boston’s 2023 second-round pick

    The Hornets need a center and the Knicks make their decision on Robinson. Instead, they add a wing with potential like Moses Moody or go big with Alperen Sengun.

    No. 10 New Orleans

    The offer: No. 19 for No. 10 and Eric Bledsoe

    How desperate are the Pelicans to get off of Bledsoe’s contract? Instead of attaching a first-round pick to get off of it, they just trade down nine spots. The Knicks get a point guard with only $4 million guaranteed for 2022-23 and a lottery pick as the price to take on that deal.

  173. Ingmarrrr: I guess you and Max aren’t on board?

    For me it’s not a knock on the player, If they think he’s ready to contribute I’m okay with getting him at 19 or 21if available, but I will not trade up for him (as for many others).

  174. Watched on YouTube recently the Rockumentary: “Lemmy: 49% Motherfucker, 51% Son Of A Bitch”
    about Lemmy Kilmister of the Motorhead (Recommended)

    Lemmy considers the Beatles as the best band of all times while also says that the Beatles were the badasses as being poor and coming from Liverpool while Stones were Londoners who went to expensive schools…

  175. I can get the complaints on the Beatles since their fame is bigger than life and some of their songs are melodically irritating or painfully overplayed but they simply are Pop Rock Perfection.

  176. The thing about the Vorkonov article that slaps you right in the face, and I agree with him, is how little value on the open market draft picks in the lower teens/high 20s have. The 19 and the Dallas 2023 gets you to … 12. Mitch and 21 get you to … 11 and a Boston 2023 2. All four 2021 and 2023 firsts get you to … 6.

    This is just another public service announcement not to overvalue these picks or get hopes all raised beyond the proverbial “objective facts.” Yeah, it’s better that they didn’t trade them away already for Bargnani or similar trash, but that’s a very low bar.

  177. Knew Your Nicks:
    Watched on YouTube recently the Rockumentary: “Lemmy: 49% Motherfucker, 51% Son Of A Bitch”
    about Lemmy Kilmister of the Motorhead (Recommended)

    Lemmy considers the Beatles as the best band of all times while also says that the Beatles were the badasses as being poor and coming from Liverpool while Stones were Londoners who went to expensive schools…

    The Stones are better. There, it’s said.

  178. new ESPN mock draft has us taking Sharife Cooper at 19 and Trey Murphy at 21.
    I like the Murphy pick but I have a hard time taking a little tiny guard who can’t shoot. That 6’3″ measurement or whatever it was is not actually listed in the NBA.com official anthropometric page, so my guess is that it is not real. On film he looks 6′ or under. Probably under.

    in terms of the guards still available on the ESPN board at #19, I’d rather go Tre Mann or Jared Butler. Dudes with some amount of size and are good shooters off the bat.

  179. @Alan – re: the Bledsoe trade idea – I really do like that. Could easily extort them gently suggesting that we’ll be coming after Ball and Hart with big RFA offers if they don’t make the trade. I think even if we had Bledsoe, I’d still try and sign Lowry. The more ball handlers the better, and the more defensive pests the better.

  180. Just for bleeps and giggles, Vorkunov has the 1 (and taking back Plumlee’s money) valued at RJ, both ’21s, Dallas ’23, and pick swaps in ’22 and ’24.

  181. #The Stones are better. There, it’s said.#

    Personally i prefer Pink Floyd over almost anyone not named Joy Division but if we wanna talk music-historically then the Beatles are more important than all of the above incl. The Stones.

    Art is heavily a matter of taste
    Otoh History of Art is written and being revealed through time.

  182. E, all merc’d out:
    Just for bleeps and giggles, Vorkunov has the 1 (and taking back Plumlee’s money) valued at RJ, both ’21s, Dallas ’23, and pick swaps in ’22 and ’24.

    And Detroit would probably still prefer Cade or Jalen Green to that package. Because the picks aren’t likely to be great, and RJ doesn’t have the new car smell of the top four prospects in this draft.

  183. Personally i prefer Pink Floyd over almost anyone

    All I’ll say is that imo David Gilmour says more with one guitar solo than most professional guitarists say in a lifetime. And if they are a shredder they are practically insulting the instrument compared to him.

  184. The Clippers are so much better than the Suns it’s a shame they may not be in the finals. This series would be long over if they were healthy.

  185. E, all merc’d out: The Stones are better.There, it’s said.

    I love the way Keith Richards plays rhythm guitar. I’m so glad I eventually grew up as a guitarist and could appreciate things other than great solos.

  186. How about this guy at 32 if you want Clyde gone?

    Rokas Jokubaitis

    Although why anyone would want Clyde gone I have no idea….

  187. Personally i prefer Pink Floyd over almost anyone

    All I’ll say is that imo David Gilmour says more with one guitar solo than most professional guitarists say in a lifetime. And if they play shred guitar they are insulting the instrument compared to him.

  188. Is Jeff Van Gundy going to take any heat for his comments about the game and flagrant fouls?

  189. For better or worse, even if Lillard is available, it sounds like there are a couple of teams interested that can and may be willing to give up more than the Knicks rumored willingness to give up 3 first rounders.

    It also sounds like a couple of other teams may be interested in moving up in this draft. So assuming there is someone up there we are even interested in, it’s probably going to be expensive.

    We may wind up focusing on finally get the PG position right, make a clear gain over Payton, and worrying about adding another star later.

  190. Z-man: Seems like he has a funky stroke and a loose handle.

    Are you talking about Dosunmu’s sort of a lean forward, push shot? It seems like other players are using it a lot more now. IQ for example.

    On another topic 3 years ago we were upset with Knox shooting floaters in the paint. Now it’s a very legit shot and everyone seems to be using it. The game probably is ever faster now than before and that split second between a one hander and a traditional shot matters.

    (This is not an endorsement of Knox. This is not an endorsement of Knox. This is not an endorsement of Knox. This is not an endorsement of Knox. Thank you).

  191. Bouknight is probably the only trade up target I would endorse…

    Alperen Sengun is also probably worth it from a pure value standpoint but a)it’s probably unrealistic that he’s a target… and b)he would cause a rejiggering of the roster… but the guy was the turkish league mvp at 18 so tough to argue with that kind of production…

    Jalen Johnson is talented… but unfortunately can’t shoot and pretty poor overall in the halfcourt…. he’s a bit a mix of the worst qualities of lamar odom and ben simmons only without the natural basketball instincts that either had… that sounds terrible but he’s def talented but not sure how that fits on a team with randle/mitch already…. on top of that he is a bit of a flake so there’s some part of his personality that could torpedo all that talent which makes the overall risk profile too high to be sending significant assets in exchange for him imo… he might drop anyway so who knows…

    Scottie Barnes also seems like a target and has nice upside.. also seems to be a pretty high character guy… but there are probably more questions about his halfcourt game…. namely his shooting and his ability to create off the dribble… he’s pretty nice as a draymond-esque or jonathan isaac kind of big who can be a defensive stopper but there are serious questions about how good his offensive game could be which makes trading up for him kind of curious… he doesn’t fit position or from a playstyle perspective….

    Jonathan Kuminga was also rumored earlier in the year… he makes more sense… seems to have more offensive skills… and along with Green probably the draft’s most explosive athlete… but his ball skills are also a question mark along with his shooting…. i’d have to believe he’s still on our radar… he represents some very decent upside but is also pretty high risk… loads of questions from his gleague appearance and it’s enough where i would likely pass on him too…

  192. Dosunmu is probably the best non-Suggs pg in the draft… i think i have Giddey slightly ahead but i think from a fit perspective Ayo is better… the entire illini offense ran variations of the screen and roll….

    he’s not perfect and i’m also not excited about trading up for him but it’s likely that we wont need to…

  193. Based on who the Knicks followed at the combine, it doesn’t sound like we’re drafting a PG. Means we’re (1) probably drafting a shooting wing and (2) signing a PG in FA whether that’s just re-signing Rose or going after another player (and I assume still signing Rose).

    Seems like there’s a number of solid 3&D wings this year

  194. RJ playing in qualifiers tonite against Greece and China tomorrow… they should both be relatively easy games for Canada… selfiishly rooting against them advancing since i’d rather see RJ work on his game stateside and avoiding the likelihood of a tokyo cluster****… but always rooting for him to do well….

  195. Based on who the Knicks followed at the combine, it doesn’t sound like we’re drafting a PG.

    I wouldn’t read too much into that. Teams often choose to meet with players they have less intel on, not necessarily the ones they’re aiming for. If anything, you often hear of teams deliberately not meeting with certain players they are hot for, just to disguise their interest and keep another team from trying to leapfrog them for that player.

    Assuming we do not trade up, my ideal outcomes in order:

    1)A PG and a 3-and-D guy with our firsts, in whatever order makes sense (i.e., at 19 take the guy Atlanta is more likely to take at 20 if he’s still there), and a big man at 32
    2)Two wings with our firsts, and a PG or big man at 32
    3)Two point/combo guards with our firsts, and a wing or big man at 32
    4)A wing and a big man with our firsts — if they are convinced somebody like Jackson or Garuba has Mitch-like potential, and/or if Mitch is not long for the team — and a PG at 32. (I’d still much rather just wait til the Detroit pick to take a big, unless Mitch is gonna be used to fill one of the other two holes.)
    5)A point guard and a big man with our firsts, and a wing at 32. (I could easily flip 4 and 5, since the wing and PG prospects in that 20-32 range seem about equally deep and flawed.)

  196. In HoopsRumors.com:
    There’s a belief that the Pelicans won’t be especially eager to add another rookie to an already young roster, according to Jonathan Givony of ESPN, who says the No. 10 pick in next month’s draft, currently held by New Orleans, is considered one of the most available in the lottery.

  197. @Alan: i like your outcomes 1 and 3, both with Queta as the big at 32, of course. :P

  198. Hey Pepper, so much for the “group of death”… it was more like the “group of the dead” :P

  199. I was checking news on HoopsRumors.com and they were having a live chat, so i placed the following question:

    Do you think the Knicks will pick 3 times in the top 32, or will they try to move up? And if it’s the latter, what kind of deal would that be?

    And the moderator (Luke Adams) replied:

    They’ll try to trade up, especially if there’s a guy they like in the late lottery. It might be tough though. Teams like Indiana (13), Golden State (14), etc. would probably rather trade their picks for vets rather than MORE picks.

  200. cybersoze:
    Hey Pepper, so much for the “group of death”… it was more like the “group of the dead” :P

    yeah..who’da thunk it?

  201. If the Knicks wind up bringing back 3 out of 4 of Noel. Burks, Bullock, and Rose, add a solid starting PG via trade/FA, and draft 1-2 players in the 1st round, that may not be the ideal outcome, but it would OK, A clear improvement at PG, upside from RJ, the return and possible upside from Mitch, Quick and Obi growing into their roles, and some new blood would not be the worst possible outcome. We HAVE TO come away with a starting PG.

  202. We only have something like 20-25mm we can commit in additional money past this year if we want to keep cap open for next summer… and i imagine that’s going to be a worthwhile endeavor to do so…. going over that amount is not the end of the world but it would require us vaporizing some contracts… like Obi’s 5mm aav deal … in order to sign someone like Beal or Lavine….

    i think that probably precludes us from bringing most of the guys back… i think the bulk of that room is going to a pg…. and then whatever is left over to entice a starting SF… like Bullock…. and then the rest will be one year deals and draft picks….

    if we decide to bring the band back… or if we are splurging in FA… then we are essentially locked into it for however long those contracts run and will be HEAVILY reliant on draft picks breaking through because we won’t have cap room to sign anyone for basically the next 5 years…. whatever the case may be .. we have this year and next offseason to determine what roster we are running with for the next 5 years because we will be capped out no matter what….

  203. I posted a suggestion for a version of the trade with the Pels for no10 and Bledsoe the other day – I think it definitely has its attractions. I’m not sure I’d give them no21 – maybe 32? We’d be giving them 20m of relief this year. Bledsoe is a serviceable guard for this year alongside Rose and Vildoza. We’d then have 21, 19 and 10 to either pick cost controlled players or package two or all three to move up if that gets us into the discussion for top 5/6. Bledsoe has a small guarantee for the following year so we can waive him and afford at least a couple of our own FAs on multi-year deals while keeping space for next summer. Don’t know how keen the Pels are to free up that space but I’ve seen several commentators say they’d like to get out from under the Bledsoe deal.

  204. I’m into things like trading a low pick for a higher pick and a bad contract but not for packaging our picks to move up. We need more guys

  205. It would be amazing if we could somehow get 10 in exchange for 32 and taking on Bledsoe’s deal. But NOLA management has two potentially conflicting priorities right now: 1)Appease Zion, and 2)Don’t make this side project punitively expensive for an ownership that cares much more about the Saints and treats the Pels as a side thing.

    I suppose the two could work in harmony, with Griffin selling it to Zion as, “Getting out from under Bledsoe’s deal allows us to keep your buddy Lonzo, and have more flexibility overall.” But I feel like they would want to get some kind of useful piece back that would make their superstar a little more gruntled (or is it less gruntled?).

  206. That trade for Bledsoe and #10 would be excellent. I’d even throw in Knox if they needed more sweetener. Bledsoe would be a nice stopgap PG and getting another pick would be awesome.

    If we don’t have Vildoza and at least two other rookies in the rotation next year I will deem this off-season a failure. I would like to see Mitch, Randle, Obi, Barrett, Quickley, Vildoza, plus two rookies all in the rotation. That leaves a max of two free agents or vets brought back. The last thing I want is a bunch of no upside veterans clogging up our rotation.

    I am also open to trading Randle. Randle 19 for Simmons or Randle for Oubre(S&T) 7 14.

    Mainly I want Obi, Quickley, and Vildoza to each play over 20mpg and two rookies we draft to play at least 10mpg. We need depth and to develop our young players much more than trying to chase the 4 seed again and get embarrassed in the playoffs.

  207. if we decide to bring the band back… or if we are splurging in FA… then we are essentially locked into it for however long those contracts run and will be HEAVILY reliant on draft picks breaking through because we won’t have cap room to sign anyone for basically the next 5 years…. whatever the case may be .. we have this year and next offseason to determine what roster we are running with for the next 5 years because we will be capped out no matter what….

    Bringing part of the band back does not necessarily preclude using those players to make a trade for a star later as long as most of the contracts are not too long. More important in that scenario is holding onto our own picks and the future Dallas pick. Usually, when a star demands a trade, the team immediately moves towards a rebuild. If you can include some 1st rounders and maybe 1 young player you can probably get it done even including a couple of those guys. What we can’t do is give these role players really long contracts unless the deal is so favorable it can easily be moved for a pick if we need an extra one. A rebuilding team is probably not going to take even a fair very long term contract for an older role player.

    What I don’t want to do (and I hope the team is smart enough not to do), is take a huge step backwards with a eye towards some theoretical future 3-4 years down the road. We should try to get better this year. That probably means either some of this band has to be back in free agency or we have to find even better bandmates over and above a PG.

  208. I love all of you, but we aren’t getting lillard. we aren’t getting the 10 for taking on Bledsoe. We aren’t trading for Zion. If we move up, it’s only going to be for a few picks.

  209. Bringing part of the band back does not necessarily preclude using those players to make a trade for a star later as long as most of the contracts are not too long.

    If they require two year deals at the market rate (and they’re likely all going to require at least two year deals), which of the four big free agents would you want the Knicks to re-sign?

  210. I personally wouldn’t bring back any of our free agents for what they are going to cost but if I had to bring back two it would be Noel and Bullock.

    I think we should definitely let Rose and Burks walk. They will be expensive and they both do their best work in isolation and I would rather try and build a move inclusive modern offense.

  211. Like all of you, I would be happy to take on Bledsoe and number ten for number nineteen but from what’s quoted above, it doesn’t meet New Orleans’ desire for some experienced players to go with all their young ones. And since I don’t see any such player on our roster that has a contract past next year that we’d be willing to trade in such a deal, I agree with Chris and don’t see it happening. Other teams will probably make better offers.

  212. I don’t think the trade for Bledsoe is likely, I was just commenting on the article. Of all the trades it is the only one I’d even consider.

    I’d even do 19 for Bledsoe & 10. I think taking on a bad contract especially one that comes with a semi useful player is exactly what we should do.

    The thing I don’t want is to simply run back our team with a better pg. I want to see at least 3-4 new faces in the rotation and both Quickly and Toppin getting major minutes.

  213. Wow Trae out for game 4.

    Bucks should cruise to the Finals, the asterisk grows and grows….,

  214. that really sucks no trae. i’m only half watching canada greece — is nurse subbing rj out after like 1-2 minute shifts?

  215. As I understand it a bone bruise is like an incipient broken bone. It’s both serious and painful. It sucks that he is out, but I am not surprised.

  216. RJ should be dominant in international competition. Would love to see him rack up 10 asts in one of these games to really flex the passing, but maybe he’s just too good going to the hoop 7/8 inside the 3pt line.

  217. there aren’t many okongwu types floating around any more. sort of a classic 90s 4 who can defend the rim and is a nice and clever finisher from a few feet out but not much stretch or playmaking. a little horace grantish maybe.

  218. This has been a weird playoffs, which is fitting, because it was such a weird season. It seems like nobody wants to win the title. Clippers lose Kawhi and get better. Suns get Paul back and get worse. Atlanta, who is nothing without Young, is up 20. The best thing to happen to the Bucks is probably this Giannis injury. The Bucks will probably close the gap within minutes.

    What is the lesson here? Stars are overrated?

  219. AD, Kyrie, Harden, Murray, Kawhi, Trae, Giannis

    And the 2020-2021 NBA champion is……*

  220. d-mar:
    AD, Kyrie, Harden, Murray, Kawhi, Trae, Giannis

    And the 2020-2021 NBA champion is……*

    Don’t forget Mitch…

  221. I get back from the gym (the gym! the effing gym! after a year and a half not lifting anything heavier than a fork…), turn on the TV and find Giannis crumpled on the sidelines. That sucked.

    So if the Hawks win everything, does that change the Knicks narrative?

  222. This game is like watching Happy Days but Fonzie and Richie Cunningham aren’t in the show anymore

  223. Like if by some miracle Giannis didn’t tear anything there’s still no way he didn’t sprain things badly enough to miss the rest of this series

  224. Raven:

    So if the Hawks win everything, does that change the Knicks narrative?

    Not really. But it changes the Hawks narrative and the Nate as a playoff coach narrative. Even before Giannis went down they were playing very inspired ball w/o Trae. They are a very balanced and deep team, way better than us. It was obvious then and should be more obvious now.

  225. do they keep john collins, or just go with okongku and danilo next season at power forward…

  226. RJ Barrett had 22 points (8-14 from the field, 5-7 from the line) including a step back 3 off the dribble, 5 rebounds, and 3 assists in 29 minutes against Greece.

    If you’re an RJ Barrett skeptic, this is going to be a long summer for you because the Barrett Hive is committed to being very annoying.

  227. No matter who wins the NBA title, they are going to be by far the weirdest ass winner ever. The winner of this NBA Finals is going to make those Bullets/Sonics Finals look like the Celtics/Lakers.

    Amusingly, the #5 seed had never made it to an NBA Finals before last season and now it might happen in back-to-back seasons! And hell, a #5 seed might win the whole thing!

    The Suns are probably still the current favorite, overall, and if they won the title, it wouldn’t be that weird, as they had the second best record in the NBA, but who the fuck knows what will happen?

  228. The real question is whether or not capitalism will win the NBA Finals

  229. It’s occurred to me that what we have here is some kind of bizarro playoffs in which every star except Chris Paul is getting injured. Either this is a karmic payback for all his heartbreak… or he’s pulling a hamstring tonight.

  230. I was just thinking..

    If there was one possibly disgruntled star for us to trade a ton of assets to get, I think Donovan Mitchell would be the most likely one. And that’s mostly because Utah builds with assets like the 19th and 21st pick- know what I’m sayin? Mid to late 1sts feel Utah-y. And honestly, I wouldn’t mind giving up our 19, 21; and that future Dallas 1st along with Obi and Knox for Mitchell..or even Dame if it were on the table. What do you all think?

  231. cybersoze:
    Kelly Oubre to the Knicks is getting lot of smoke recently, this time it’s Begley…

    Depending on the price, might be a good option. What do you guys think?

    He might be a good value at the league minimum and even then I wouldn’t want him. Oubre’s terrible and has been his entire career. The only possible value he would have is if he put up decent counting stats and you’re able to trick a team into trading for him.

  232. Depending on the price, might be a good option. What do you guys think?

    I don’t hate Oubre, but it’d be purely “signing a guy only because he’s available” and that’s usually a recipe for disaster. Oubre just played his best ball as a small ball 4/super small ball center, and now he’s going to play the three here? I don’t see it.

  233. Finals prediction:

    Suns in 3, as there will not be enough East Champs players to field a squad for 48 minutes

  234. I can truly see a scenario where a Giannis-less Bucks team edges out the Hawks, which is hilarious.

  235. Count me out on superstar trades and Kelly Oubre Jr. Kelly Oubre doesn’t fit our team at all, so no thanks. Superstar trades are going to deplete our roster depth, our cap space, and our draft picks and leave us with minimal to actually build with, so no thank you because I think we’re a season’s worth of smart moves away from being able to absorb the damage a trade for a star would do to the roster. As of right now, a star trade would require all of Barrett, Toppin, Quickley, and every movable 1RP until 2025. We shouldn’t be interested in giving all that up just to get crushed by a healthy Nets team no matter what we do.

  236. Yeah, the Begley article even notes that Oubre didn’t really start playing well until Wiseman was out and the Warriors had to go to small-ball lineups where he played the 4 and 5. So the only ways he makes ANY sense here are:

    1)Thibs is planning to reshape his entire defensive scheme and have Randle and Obi play a lot of minutes at the 5, leaving room for Oubre to be a stretch 4; or

    2)Obi is going to be traded in the offseason, and Oubre would be Randle’s backup.

    Either way, pass. His value on the wing just isn’t high enough for the salary he will almost certainly command.

  237. Oubre’s value is really tied to his 3pt shooting and as we saw last season… perception around a player can change drastically if they manage to right their outside shooting… (e.g bullock.. rj.. randle.. rose)… so i don’t think he’s a terrible target depending on the cost… Oubre made 15mm last year… i don’t think he would get that kind of money again but that’s a high price to pay for that kind of production…

    but mid level money? would oubre take a challenge deal like… 16mm for 1 year? would he take 2 yrs for 22? if that’s the ballpark an age 25 wing who’s a very good defender… who also happens to be a regular drew hanlen client…. is not the most terrible bet to make….

  238. Ok, i see Oubre gets KB to unanimity. LOL

    @Totes: i don’t think you can get DMitchell for 3 picks in the 20s and Obi + Knox (does he have positive value!?)

  239. ***every star except Chris Paul is getting injured. Either this is a karmic payback for all his heartbreak… or he’s pulling a hamstring tonight.***

    You forgot the Door #3 scenario: Paul George gets injured in the 1st quarter tonight and the Suns still lose the series, adding to Chris Paul’s karmic heartbreak.

  240. How many ways can I say no to Kelly Oubre? Who for some reason has a national tv commercial. I would say yes to his agent.

    I really hope Giannis just sprained his knee but having done that and my ACL I am 95% certain his ACL is in 1000 pieces right now.

    Also, I know that it’s the hot topic to say all these injuries are because of the compressed schedule but it seems a big reach to me to attribute this kind of injury to too much of season. He had a week off and hasn’t played a back to back in a month. I don’t know, it’s a narrative but I don’t think I buy it in this case, as opposed to wear and tear and chronic injuries.

  241. cybersoze:
    Ok, i see Oubre gets KB to unanimity. LOL

    @Totes: i don’t think you can get DMitchell for 3 picks in the 20s and Obi + Knox (does he have positive value!?)

    You’re right. I should have clarified. I meant I have no problem including those in that package lol..my bad

  242. @wojespn
    The Lakers are finalizing a deal to hire former Knicks and Grizzlies coach David Fizdale as an assistant coach, sources tell ESPN.

    Take that for competence!

    (And, yeah, I know that LeBron loves Fizdale, and his role on the staff may just be to keep their best player happy. But still bitter about his terribleness.)

  243. Alan: Take that for competence!
    (And, yeah, I know that LeBron loves Fizdale, and his role on the staff may just be to keep their best player happy. But still bitter about his terribleness.)

    Yeah, he was terrible as Knicks head coach, but seemed like a cool guy. Maybe assistant coach fits him better, and he can do well.

  244. I would consider Oubre on a 1yr deal to preserve cap space for 2022 and field a viable wing. He’s a 3pt shot away from being decent. For a multi-year, the value would be below what he would want & we’d bet on the staff fixing his shot. I don’t particularly want him.

  245. Re: Pelle

    He seems like an athletic freak and similar to Mitch his problem is how to turn a block & foul machine into a real defender. I’m optimistic based on the rapid improvement Mitch made last off-season.

    We can always have Taj waiting to jump on the court.

  246. What odds did Hubert get? This is gettting interesting.

    DeRozan is out there as a free agent also. I think he could be a nice fit at the 3 for us.

  247. I got +3500, which was insane. The Suns had the 2nd highest SRS in the league at the time.

    My plan was to wait til they get to the finals and place a considerable wager on the Bucks to ensure I end up with a healthy payout. Now it doesn’t seem like I need to do that. If it gets to game 7 vs the Clippers, I will not remain idle. Too much weird shit in these playoffs to be confident.

  248. Wow! Good luck man! I’m not a gambler, but I’ve never seen higher odds get this close.

  249. Oubre was a useful piece for the 2019-2020 bubble Phoenix Suns, but he has mostly been not very good over his career. He’s maybe an okay situational player but his fame and reputation seem to be greater than his productivity. I wouldn’t want him on anything other than a cheap contract, and he’s probably going to be overpaid, so I’d pass.

  250. Hubert: I got +3500, which was insane. The Suns had the 2nd highest SRS in the league at the time.

    I promise I won’t judge you if you tell us how big the wager was and it strikes me as horribly irresponsible regardless of income or net worth. And do be sure to say hi to Chrissy for me.

  251. Owen: How many ways can I say no to Kelly Oubre? Who for some reason has a national tv commercial. I would say yes to his agent.

    Well, he is very handsome.

  252. back when the suns were playing the lakers and I assumed I would lose I mentioned the amount.

    TNFH put some money on the Suns, too, at the same time.

    I still don’t think I’m going to win, though. So not getting carried away.

  253. DeRozan has been playing the 4, so I’m not sure he fits next to Randle. Not sure if he keeps his improved efficiency moving back to the 3. It may have just been to keep Keldon Johnson in the starting lineup though.

  254. Hubert:
    I got 3500, which was insane. The Suns had the 2nd highest SRS in the league at the time.

    My plan was to wait til they get to the finals and place a considerable wager on the Bucks to ensure I end up with a healthy payout. Now it doesn’t seem like I need to do that. If it gets to game 7 vs the Clippers, I will not remain idle. Too much weird shit in these playoffs to be confident.

    From one gambler to another, congratulations.

    It’s wonderful to be in a can’t lose position. :-)

    From here it’s just a matter of how you want to hedge, if at all.

  255. I should also point out i’m a little scared of winning. My friend has “a guy”, and that’s who I bet with. My friend is a fireman who spends money like he’s Drake. So there’s definitely something sopranos going on there. I keep thinking of a pissed off paulie walnuts deciding it’s better to break my legs than to pay me.

  256. Kelly Oubre

    He supposedly played better in the 2nd half of the season, but I’m a “no” on him.

  257. Z-man:
    Cam Reddish with some nice minutes tonight.

    IMO people are giving up on him WAY too soon. He doesn’t have to become a superstar for the selection to be a good one. He looked pretty active on defense to me and he’s way too young to give up on him developing that 3 point stroke.

  258. Hubert:
    I should also point out i’m a little scared of winning. My friend has “a guy”, and that’s who I bet with. My friend is a fireman who spends money like he’s Drake. So there’s definitely something sopranos going on there. I keep thinking of a pissed off paulie walnuts deciding it’s better to break my legs than to pay me.

    lmao

    That’s not a laugh at you so much as I understand the feeling. :-)

    Seriously, unless it’s a really huge bet I don’t think you have anything to worry about. Just don’t sit with your back to the door when you go out to dinner or anything . ;-)

  259. attn: mods

    All attempted edits to my posts are being marked as spam. Any idea why?

    IMO people are giving up on him WAY too soon.

    > Porzingis has entered the chat
    > Ntilikina has entered the chat
    > Reddish has entered the chat

    Who else, strat?

  260. > Porzingis has entered the chat
    > Ntilikina has entered the chat
    > Reddish has entered the chat

    Who else, strat?

    It wouldn’t shock me if you didn’t like Durant’s rookie year. I know the WOW people wrote a bunch of articles like that at the time. lol

    Seriously. it depends what the standard is.

    The league is full of guys that didn’t get good until 24 or so.

    If it’s superstar or bust, then almost every player is a failure. But outside the top couple of picks, if you get an all star you’ve done really well. Below the top few you get a solid 3&D starter you’ve done fine. Beverley didn’t make the NBA until he was 24. Danny Green broke out at 24. If Frank was a taller, longer, more switchable Beverley I’d throw a party and even invite you. Why don’t we wait and see what Frank and Cam become. They are YEARS away from their peak.

  261. It’s certainly possible that you can stink at age 19 and then stink again at age 20, and eventually make it. It’s just that the longer you stink, the more the odds are against you.

    There are a handful of players from the 2019 lottery who have been real bad. Jarrett Culver, Reddish, Darius Garland. Maybe one or more of those guys turns it around, it’s certainly possible. The odds just aren’t super good. Usually you show a little something in the way of improvement if you’re going to turn out to be a good player. Kevin Durant made a large leap at age 20, the three guys I mentioned… notsomuch.

  262. Well, the reason the odds were +3500 on the Suns was because of where they were on the win cu…. um … er … good luck collecting, Hubert; it was a great bet.

    Oubre is athletic and the Knicks could use some athleticism on the wing, for sure; I just don’t think he’s that good. And there’s no interest here in another “well, if he could just shoot, he’d really be something” guy. But everything has a price and if his is low enough, so be it.

  263. JK47:
    It’s certainly possible that you can stink at age 19 and then stink again at age 20, and eventually make it. It’s just that the longer you stink, the more the odds are against you.

    There are a handful of players from the 2019 lottery who have been real bad. Jarrett Culver, Reddish, Darius Garland. Maybe one or more of those guys turns it around, it’s certainly possible. The odds just aren’t super good. Usually you show a little something in the way of improvement if you’re going to turn out to be a good player. Kevin Durant made a large leap at age 20, the three guys I mentioned… notsomuch.

    I agree with you if the standard is SUPERSTAR or ALL STAR.

    If the standard is solid starter, plenty of players get good in their mid 20s or don’t even make the league until that age. Sure the probabilities change after each passing year, but it’s far from over.

    In Cam’s case, we didn’t even learn much from year 2. He only played 700 minutes before he got hurt. He looked better in some ways during that period but had a very rough start shooting from 3. It’s way too soon to know what he’s going to be eventually unless the standard is superstar or bust. I don’t think Atlanta minds having him. They gave him important minutes in the playoffs as soon at they could at age 21 and he looked good. They are already talking about hoping they can drop his minutes restriction. That doesn’t sound like a team that hated his defense and whatever he could bring to the table on offense at this stage.

  264. Deeefense: It wouldn’t shock me if you didn’t like Durant’s rookie year. I know the WOW people wrote a bunch of articles like that at the time. lol

    Yeah, I didn’t like his rookie year. Because he sucked. But that doesn’t mean I would write off his entire career. Reddish shooting 26% from three in his second year is not at all what Durant did.

    Deeefense: Danny Green broke out at 24. If Frank was a taller, longer, more switchable Beverley I’d throw a party and even invite you. Why don’t we wait and see what Frank and Cam become.

    Danny Green played 207 total minutes before that age-24 season, playing on two consecutive 61-win Finals contending teams (CLE and SAS). Cam Reddish has played 2301 minutes and Ntilikina ~4400. Do you really think Danny Green is a good comparison?

    Beverley was a 2nd rounder out of Arkansas who got traded for cash considerations before he played a game, and earned his first appearance over three years later. Cam Reddish went to Duke as a top-5 prospect and got drafted in the lottery. Ntilikina has played professional basketball since he was 17 and also was drafted in the lottery. Do you really think Patrick Beverley is a good comparison?

  265. Neil Olshey confirmed that the team conducted an independent investigation into the 1997 sexual assault allegations against Billups, and came away confident that he hadn’t engaged in any wrongdoing

    Billups, meanwhile, said the ’97 incident had a major impact on him and shaped his decision-making going forward

    However, a Blazers PR person shut down further questions to Billups on how exactly the incident shaped him, and Olshey declined to provide any details on the team’s investigation, calling that information “proprietary” and asking reporters and fans to “take us at our word” that the investigation was thorough. As a result, there was no real sense of transparency in the presser

    What a mess, it’d have been better to just avoid the subject.

  266. Hubert, my understanding from watching The Sopranos and tons of mob movies is that the mob will pay up on a bet you win because if they didn’t no one would bet with them and gambling is how they make their money. The problem arises when you borrow money from them to make a bet and then lose and now you owe them.

  267. Okay, apparently I can’t use hyperlinks either today. Cool!

    Jesus christ, swift. You make me wanna cry. It’s a movie.

    (s6e8, “Johnny Cakes”)

  268. If they were willing to take your bet, I’m guessing they can cover it. They’re probably more than happy to pay you out given that every other person putting money in likely lost big.

  269. Giannis really is a freak… no structural damage…

    I kind of doubt he returns in either case but maybe it’s just a partially torn meniscus in which case he might return soon?

    in any case I’m just glad he won’t miss next season also…. this playoffs has been like the red wedding…

  270. I don’t understand the appeal of Oubre other than the occassional highlight dunk or block. Otto Porter Jr. would be a good 1 year make good contract candidate if he can still play the 3.

  271. Giannis won’t play for at least the rest of this series, I’d imagine. I cannot believe he didn’t tear anything. They better do like 3 more MRIs to be sure.

  272. @TheSteinLine
    The Hawks say Trae Young (right foot bone bruise) is questionable for Game 5 of the Eastern Conference finals, as Clint Capela (right eye inflammation).

    The Finals will just be Middleton, Jrue, Mikal Bridges and Ayton playing 2-on-2.

  273. “The Finals will just be Middleton, Jrue, Mikal Bridges and Ayton playing 2-on-2.”

    Bet they wish they had drafted Knox then

  274. one of my favorite short scenes in Desperado is with tito larriva (tavo) and cheech marin (short bartender) going over their “books” behind the bar:

    Tavo : [in Spanish] How much in dollars?

    Short Bartender : [in Spanish; counts] 18,000.

    Tavo : [in Spanish] Fuck. Should we pay him or kill him? More for us…

    Short Bartender : [from behind the counter] I have a house payment.

    Tavo , Short Bartender : [in Spanish] Kill ’em.

  275. I watched a little bit of Canada versus China this morning. I Was not surprised that Canada was doing well. Barrett was just playing as part of the team, but was getting points anyway. Canada had a lot of assists. What was surprising to me was that Canada was out rebounding China and China was shooting threes. I think of Chinese big men as better than Chinese guards, and Canada is not a particularly big team, but China’s big men were not doing very well. I don’t think of China as a good shooting team, but they shot 50% for the first half. Besides being out rebounded, China had a lot of turnovers. Overall, I think Canada’s defense was very good and caused problems for China. I had to turn it off to go to work, so I didn’t see most of the second half.

  276. I love the tacit agreement to not discuss the huge NCAA news of the day, as literally no one wants this thread to become that thread again

  277. Not sure what Beverley’s landing plan was….

    Clearly a flagrant to me but what do I know

    NCAA, I also don’t know. It’s a brave new world. I like to think it will be better but probably will be a mess.

  278. The last 9 minutes of Game 6 are pivotal to Chris Paul’s legacy. If they blow a 20 point lead, it will mar everything he did this year.

    Edit: Chris Paul stepped up.

  279. I dug up the old ringer article about CP3 being too small to win in the playoffs but the author is fighting cancer so I’m not going to tweet at him.

    Pat Bev is such a punk

  280. Awesome turnaround from CP3 who was legitimately bad in game 5. Really rooting for Phoenix and CP3 to win the Finals.

  281. Good for Chris Paul, an all-time great player delivering an all-time great 4th quarter performance and carrying his to the finals. Dude literally must have said, “Young bloods, just give me the ball and get out of my way.”

    Beverley should be suspended for like 20 games for that shove in the back.

  282. The Finals start July 8, which means the Suns will get over one week to rest. If the Hawks-Bucks goes 7, they will finish on July 5. Even if it only goes 6 on July 3, the Suns will be much fresher.

  283. Phoenix is likely going to play the Hawks without a functional Trae or the Bucks without one of the best two-way players in league history. Chris Paul is gonna win a ring and Hubert is going to buy Knickerblogger.

  284. Masterful virtuoso performance for Chris Paul,
    despite his kind words for Clippers’ fans revenge must be sweet…

    Phoenix with one week to prepare for the meeting with the Eastern Conference Mash Unit Tournament winner.

  285. I know the Suns have benefitted from opposing stars going down, but they look pretty legit to me. I wonder how the KB guys who mocked them a couple of years ago when they maxed Booker and drafted Ayton are feeling about them now…

  286. I’m rooting for CP3 to get a ring, he deserves it. And, btw, i nailed my Suns in 6 prediction. The Bucks in 7 is up in the air, but it’ll be hard without Giannis.

  287. vincoug: Really rooting for Phoenix and CP3 and the Surf Lodge KB gathering sponsored by Hubert to win the Finals.

    There, i corrected it for you. ;)

  288. Hubert deserves to finally nail a prediction !
    I don’t know about Paul tho…
    ;-p

  289. The Bulls ought to consider re-signing unrestricted free agent Derrick Rose, K.C. Johnson of NBC Sports Chicago opines. Rose is coming off a strong season and if he’d be willing to accept some or all of their mid-level exception, it would energize the fan base.

  290. Interesting Aldridge and Hollinger piece on realistic packages the Blazers could get for Dame. Two excerpts from the Knicks section, from Hollinger:

    The question, as ever: What might it cost the Knicks? At the moment, at least, New York would be in the fortunate position of being so far under the cap that it could swallow Lillard’s contract completely whole. In fact, the Knicks would only need to send Portland the 19th and 21st pick and recent first-rounders Obi Toppin and Kevin Knox, and they would have enough money left over to still re-sign Reggie Bullock, Alec Burks, Nerlens Noel and Derrick Rose via their low cap holds.

    Now, obviously, picks 19 and 21 aren’t getting a deal of this magnitude to the finish line. Realistically, it probably also costs the Knicks Mitchell Robinson and heaps of future draft capital. Surely Portland would demand New York’s firsts in 2022, 2024 and 2026, as well as the 2023 first-round pick owed by Dallas. All told, that would be six first-round picks plus Robinson, Toppin and Knox, but only two of them would have a realistic chance to be in the lottery. (A protected future first from Dallas isn’t hitting the jackpot as long as Luka is ambulatory, and neither is a 2022 Knicks first with Lillard on board.)

    He also notes that the Knicks would need to keep RJ to make the team strong enough for Dame to want to come here. But then we get to the part explaining why New York might be able to outbid a New Orleans, despite having a weaker asset base:

    The reason Portland might prefer it, however, is that financially, it offers a massive reset. A Blazers deal with New York like this cuts $110 million or so in payroll over the next three years and puts the Blazers in position to have massive cap room in 2022 and rebuild almost immediately.

  291. 6 first round picks for a 31 year old player makes me throw up in my mouth a little. If we’re keeping RJ and Quickley at least there is that but still. How many more years is DAME at peak DAME? 3 years? Seems like we’re doing another Melo deal in this situation and then relying on second rounders and mid levels to fill out the roster and once Dame declines, we have no young players in the pipeline to rebuild. I’m not a fan.

    I just don’t get this desire to star fuck. Eventually, sure. But we really are ahead of ourselves as far as a timeline to compete. Last year was found money. We overperformed because Randle and RJ stepped up and Thibs is a good coach who laid down a defensive scheme that everyone bought into. I don’t know. Maybe I’m too wary of this stuff anymore but I’d rather build slow and have a playoff team for the next 5 to 7 years then go all in right now. It seems way too soon.

  292. I love Dame and I’m trying to stay away from what Jowles correctly described as “KB fanfic season”
    but Hollinger’s proposal made me puke (as Hollinger usually does when he talks Knicks).

    So, we bring back the team that was destroyed by the Hawks (minus Obi),
    add Lillard and his huge contract, go over the cap resigning everyone (and Randle),
    don’t pick in the first round until 2023… then what?

    Does someone really think that, injuries aside, last year team plus Lillard (minus Mitch, Obi, cap space and picks) can win the title in 3 years?

    Seasons went by, years have passed, he changed jobs and employers, but still after all this time the gentler thing I can say to John Hollinger is “fuck you sir”.

  293. Begley’s two Dame trade proposals (with more details at this link):

    Trade Scenario #1: Trade RJ Barrett, Obi Toppin, Immanuel Quickley, a 2021 first round pick, 2023 first-round pick, pick swaps for 2022 and 2024 for Damian Lillard

    Trade scenario #2 Trade RJ Barrett, Obi Toppin, Mitchell Robinson, a 2021 first round pick, 2023 first-round pick, pick swaps for 2022 and 2024 for Damian Lillard

  294. I would have to think RJ is NOT a future allstar, ever, to trade him for a 31 year old Dame.

    Overall it’s really sad that in the NBA only LA and Miami, and theoretically NY can dream of adding the megastar they need to win with. I mean can anyone see Pat Riley even *considering* trading a Lillard level player instead of fishing for the players he and Lillard can win with?

  295. there isn’t a trade that gets us dame that would make us better than the blazer team that he’s already on…. we would have to get him through cap space or picks alone and that’s probably never going to happen…. so i’m over dame….

    i think we do have a chance at a sustainable contender if we were to nab Lavine or Beal next summer … along with a pg this summer…. that’s probably the better way to go….

  296. The argument I have made and will continue to make is this: Randle would be a much better fitting number 2 than anyone Dame has ever played with. Their games are incredibly complementary of one another, and the parts you would need to put around them as a core (defenders and/or shooters) to be a serious contender are easier to acquire than a player like either one of them individually.

    I don’t especially want to give up all those assets for anyone, but Dame is both great and exactly the kind of player for whom you should be willing to give up the bag.

  297. We could easily build a contender with Lillard but we would also need 2 aliens from outterspace to land in msg.
    And these 2 aliens should know good basketball!
    And they should accept to play for Vet’s Minimum!

    In other words:
    Dame breaks down The Win Curve…

    Or in Max Words:
    Bbbhhhbbbbhhbouuuuuuuuughghghgh!!!!!
    (Extreme puke sound effect)

  298. If the Nets with 3futHOF fail to go to the ECF you realize that getting a superstar don’t work easily…or every time…

    Fucking your future for a slim chance of possible glory is always a temptation but i seriously doubt that it’s really worth it…
    Especially now that we put some order in this team

    5-10 years ago with the previous FO and with Woody or Fiz I’d say DO IT NOW! as being the only way to success through luck…

    Not Now
    I’m out on this one
    And i love Dame

  299. lillard and randle would work out wonderfully.. i just have my doubts about the team around them…. it would be sort of like the poor man’s version of the lakers…. only lillard and randle are nothing like lebron and AD…. and we would be stuck with a similar supporting cast….

    we have brooklyn… milwaukee.. philly… and now atlanta… it’s a tough ask to break through even the first rd…. and i think a lillard/randle team is probably missing another piece to truly run with those guys…. if we keep RJ it starts becoming a real possibility tho but i’m not sure how realistic keeping him is….

    that’s why i think targeting the window just past next year is where we start to really shine…. the superfriend contracts are up in bk and they may want to breakup… middleton/holiday would be well into their 30s… philly may have another year of dysfunction…. i would probably only worry about atlanta at that point but who knows how the new officiating would impact trae…

    lillard is a nice idea.. but ultimately i think it’s just another melo deal given what we would have to compete with.. and he has zero leverage to force his way to us on top of it….

  300. For the sake of argument, let’s flesh this out a bit more. According to Begley, the trade leaves us with $28M of cap space, Mitch, the room exception (~$5M), & three 2021 picks.

    PG: Lillard, Rose ($13M salary, but use EB & it’s $7M against the cap), Vildoza
    SG: Bullock ($10M), Duarte (1st)
    SF: Burks ($10M)
    PF: Randle, Knox (?)
    C: Mitch, Pelle, Gibson

    We still have $5M room exception, pick 32, pick 58, & min contracts.

    I do think that’s more balanced than Portland if only because the team can defend. We basically run it back with the same team (already with a better SRS than Portland) and add Dame.

  301. I used Rose’s salary this year, not his caphold, so you need to cut $3M from Burks/Bullocks salary. With Rose & Lillard on-board, Burks may just become redundant anyways.

  302. You could also go all-in on “superstar” DeRozan:

    Lillard
    Duarte
    DeRozan
    Randle
    Mitch

    Plus 12 scrubs

  303. The jury is very, very much out on whether Randle can be a good #2 for Dame, or anyone else. That’s the fundamental issue with all of these star deals — what happens when you completely change Randle’s role and put the ball in someone else’s hands? If it’s some kind of “my turn, now your turn” arrangement, count me as out as out can be counted.

    Begley’s proposals are complete non-starters.

    Objectivity compels me to report that I don’t see this summer ending particularly well.

  304. I’d imagine you’d just run a pick and roll every time down the court with Dame and Randle.

  305. Actually, league average salary may get you to $10M for Bullock (fitting him within Early Bird rights & $5.5M cap hold). So that saves us an extra $4.5M. Subtract $3M for Rose & we can fit the above team. I really don’t see it as a terrible option despite the hefty price for Lillard.

  306. DRed:
    Portland isn’t trading Lillard this offseason

    I agree with this. It doesn’t seem like he’s trying hard to get out of there.

  307. Bring here Lowry, 2 Draft steals and a bunch of rough riders and Let’s Kick Asses!

  308. I’m not saying you do the trade, but I don’t know why people are dismissing it out of hand.

    The pick swaps likely don’t affect us because we should be better than Portland for 3 years.

    We still have 1st rd picks every year, despite giving 2 up. We still have all 30 2nd rd picks in the potential double draft.

    Hefty price, but we aren’t as stripped as people seem to think.

  309. Furthermore, Portland is going to give up all its assets to acquire someone. We should be offering them Randle, not trying to get Lillard. We could get a good player like Covington or Jurkic and add like 4 unprotected firsts and multiple pick swaps.

  310. #Hefty price, but we aren’t as stripped as people seem to think.#

    I think we’re more stripped than a very hardcore porn magazine.
    The main reason we looked classy as a Playboy is Thibs but as we saw at the playoffs we switched very fast to a b-class Hustler magazine…

  311. At some point it becomes fair to wonder if we could have won the championship this year if we had traded for Chris Paul.

  312. didn’t Portland just say Chauncy was Lillard’s preference? they aren’t trading him to rebuild. maybe if they got simmons and those picks. I think the more likely is CJ for simmmons, somehow

  313. So, if you saw a guy on the street in a knicks shirt…..whose name would have to be on it for you to stop him and say…..shit, that’s cool? so it can’t be something that was real common at the time, like ewing or houston or reed or even starks. too obvious. and it can’t something that was popular at the time and has been in his drawer, like lin or oak or even novak. it’s gotta be unique and a little obscure, but would bring back a memory?

    First that came to my mind is mason.

    although, i would also stop strangers wearing Louis Orr, Marvin Webster, Trent Tucker, Truck Robinson, bill cartwright.

  314. Mason is a good one, but it’s King.

    But you really want obscure (Mason isn’t obscure at all) it’s my namesake Hubert Davis and his #44.

  315. A custom made Terrance Ferguson Knicks jersey would possibly impress me

  316. Anyone who thinks that Guitar Jimmy would never give up a Hollinger/Begley type package + a bag of crisps to starfuck a player of Dame’s caliber is just whistling past the graveyard.

    I know the idea is just idle speculation at this point but shit could get terrifyingly real quick fast in a hurry should Neil Olshey ever decide to phone a friend at 2 Penn Plaza. Until the day this team gets a new owner, these type of nightmare scenarios will always remain well within the realm of possibility.

    #buytheknickshubert

  317. you’re right on hubert. bernard has to be on the obvious list though, although i think he’s universally loved.

  318. we had a long debate once at work about whose jersey can you never wear in public under any circumstances. the clear winner, buffalo bills 32 with “Simpson” on the back. 2nd was a South African track suit reading “Pistorius”. 3rd of course… NY Jets, 6. “Sanchez”

  319. Harthone Wingo’s #43, Greg Butler’s #54, anyone from the 1983-84 Knicks, but Dave Stallworth’s #9 would be the coolest considering he came back from a heart attack to help the Knicks win the 1970 Championship. I would also stop anyone rocking Hubie Brown’s 80’s perm.

  320. That was really an amazing line from Paul last night. Just incredible.

    Not much to add on Dame. Love him. Don’t want to trade everything for him. Just once, let’s try a patient rebuild.

  321. Yeah but Dame is 31. 31 years old! He will not remain elite elite for that much longer and even if he’s still a good offensive player at age 34 or 35, he will be a liability on defense and he will cost a huge chunk of our cap space.

    We JUST recovered from the Melo trade and now people are speculating we do a similar deal for an older player? Don’t get me wrong, DAME is a great player, probably better than peak Melo was, but he is 31 years old. 6 first round picks feels like so much to give up especially if Obi and Mitch are on top of that. For what? A 2 year window?

    I know anything can happen as these playoffs have shown. But also these playoffs are a fluke bc of the shortened season and if anything it shows that going all in on a star heavy team can be disasterous if that star gets injured. The Suns have been able to weather CP3 being out for some games because they have a young and deepish team. Teams like Brooklyn, THe Bucks, Lakers…all coming up short bc their stars got hurt. And if this is a fluke year, I just don’t think a team with Randle, Dame and RJ is good enough to beat a healthy Nets or Bucks team. I don’t know. I guess if we keep RJ and IQ, I could talk myself into it. We’d be good for a few seasons for sure. But it feels like a lot.

    I’m not coutning on the second rounders, even in the double draft, to amount to much.

    If Dam was 3 years younger I’d be down.

  322. Well, Bernard King is easily among my Top-5 all-time favorite players in any sport so his #30 jersey would be my first choice. But if that’s too obvious, then I’d have to go with #20, Michael Ray Richardson. Not only did I love him as a player (even with all of his issues) but his famous quote of “The ship be sinking” has never been bettered as an unofficial motto for this team in the 40 years since it was uttered.

  323. Why would the Lillard Knicks be much better than the Lillard Blazers?

    Put me down as a “nah.”

  324. #Why would the Lillard Knicks be much better than the Lillard Blazers?#

    Only because of the East – West competition difference…
    Which seems to be Not as much as it used to be…
    If none…

  325. swift’s on point with dame’s age being a large factor… our window would be relatively short if it’s just lillard and randle and while dame should age relatively gracefully… it’d be tough to assume that he would be as dominating at 34 and if he loses even a little bit off his fastball… along with the age curves on soso guys like burks and bullock.. then this team starts looking bad after year 2 or 3…

    i don’t even think last year’s knicks with dame would make it past the second rd.. i mean if we start knocking out giannis… harden and kyrie… and have the sixers collectively choke for half the series… then we could go as far as our voodoo dolls take us…. but i don’t think it’s going all that far next year….

    and if you’re making a deal like that that mortgages your future and you can’t even be sure that it makes you to the ECF.. then there’s zero reason to do it….

  326. Toppin and Quickley both chosen for the USA men’s select team, the squad of younger players who scrimmage against the Olympic team.

  327. Dame played like Jesus from Nazareth walking on water in these Playoffs and they were still eliminated!
    With the Knicks he should start flying to have a real chance!

  328. #1 we were already better than the Dame Blazers last year by SRS.

    #2 we would add Dame Lillard. QED.

    We had a top 3 defense last year, if you add Dame that’s a top 10 offense at least.

    I don’t think you make the trade, but coming out of the East that’s a strong team.

    People are overly dismissive without really looking at what we have after the trade. Maybe we don’t win a championship, but we’re not a Trailblazers redux.

  329. I think the argument for the Lillard Knicks being better than the Lillard Blazers is more about Thibs than anything. If you could add Lillard for offense and Thibs can still do his Thibs thing to get you a top-5 defense then you would really have something because the Blazers during Lillard’s prime have ranked 10th, 20th, 24th, 8th, 16th, 28th and 29th on defense. They have really struggled to put a championship-caliber defense around him, and while some of that is on him certainly, if there’s any coach you’d bet on being able to work around his limitations and build a strong defense Thibs would be the guy.

    I’m not saying I’m in favor of doing a trade like that proposed or that this argument is even necessarily a good one, but that’s the case imo.

  330. If our D and a superstar gives us a real contending chance why trade for one and Not just wait and sign one?

  331. styling and profiling in a knicks’ jersey – that’s easy, number 20…

    #jaredjeffriesforever

  332. “If our D and a superstar gives us a real contending chance why trade for one and Not just wait and sign one?”

    Kyrie & KD are FAs next year, there’s no way they pass up the Knicks for another team!!!

  333. Anyone here would make one of the 3 proposed trades (one from Hollinger and two from Begley) for Dame?

  334. #Kyrie & KD are FAs next year, there’s no way they pass up the Knicks for another team!!!#

    If you build a healthy foundation/team like the Spurs did in the last 2 decades all you have to do is Wait for the right chance!
    Instead of being The worst for 10yrs to have a chance every 20yrs!

  335. “If you build a healthy foundation/team like the Spurs did in the last 2 decades all you have to do is Wait for the right chance!
    Instead of being The worst for 10yrs to have a chance every 20yrs!”

    I actually agree with you, but the worry is nobody comes and re-signing Randle & RJ maxes us out for the foreseeable future. Plus, Lillard is REALLY good!!

    I think Beal & LaVine are both disgruntled enough to leave. KD will be if his team falls apart from injury again. It’s just a bird in the hand vs 2 in the bush.

  336. at this point, i’d rather we paid lowry or conley some large two year deal rather than send out assets for dame…

    although, whereas last year i though it was critical to get thibs a vet starting point guard – i don’t feel the same now…i’d be happy if we tried promoting a youngish (24 to 28) year old backup (graham, mcconnell, payne) that we can simply sign as a free agent…

    honestly, at this point it’s hard for me to imagine letting any of our assets go (other than money) to bring in a player…

  337. #I actually agree with you, but the worry is nobody comes and re-signing Randle & RJ maxes us out for the foreseeable future. Plus, Lillard is REALLY good!!

    I think Beal & LaVine are both disgruntled enough to leave. KD will be if his team falls apart from injury again. It’s just a bird in the hand vs 2 in the bush.#

    We just had ONE Good season

    ONE

    Our first One!

    Patience!

  338. I’ll pass on Dame, who to me is the most New York superstar in the NBA. I don’t like the idea of having no cap space and no draft picks to do anything of substance around Dame and Julius, and I doubly don’t like it when you consider that all of Jalen Brunson, Terry Rozier, Collin Sexton, and maybe even SGA could be had for less trade assets and paying them would be at least $20M cheaper than paying Dame. I’d much prefer to do something like:

    – Give Dallas their picks back in exchange for a 25 year old Jalen Brunson
    – See what Michael Jordan wants in exchange for a 27 year old Terry Rozier
    – See if we can get all of GSW, OKC, CLE, and NOP involved in a deal that gets OKC the 3rd and 7th picks, CLE picks 6, 10, and 21, GSW Julius Randle, NOP pick 19 and Collin Sexton, and we get Eric Bledsoe and SGA. Wild I know, but I think everybody walks away happy.

    Long story short, there are multiple ways to spend our assets and still have cap space and a full roster. We don’t have to blow everything for a 31 year old point guard who has never played less than 35 minutes a game or missed more than 16 games in a season. He’s older, very expensive, and logged a ton of minutes already.

  339. I don’t mind much and understand the thinking in trading for Lillard or Beal. But just please don’t trade RJ in any deal for them, that would be Knicksy and giving up way too much.

  340. ***Anyone here would make one of the 3 proposed trades (one from Hollinger and two from Begley) for Dame?***

    I would.

    And I understand win-curves (I’m not a denier), and how adding expensive 31 year-olds is antithetical to the organic rebuild approach; however, I would like to suggest that the “win curve” be reimagined more as a “win spike”. As we’ve seen, the body (and the world) is a fragile thing. In the era we are in, ligament injuries are costing star players entire years of their primes at abnormally high rates. Due to the salary cap system, we’ve seen it’s impossible for a team to compete when 30% of their payroll is contributing as much on the court as you and I are. So it seems that “5 year plans” or what have you are effectively moot, in that few win curves are actually parabolic. They spike upwards when a player breaks out (see Randle, 2021), and they spike downwards when a star player gets injured (see Klay Thompson, 2020).

    In team building it is impossible to predict either the spike up or the spike down. So what can you do to maximize your potential? You can try to “flatten the curve” a bit by investing in players who are durable, over players with higher peak primes. Kyrie Irving and Anthony Davis are statistically excellent pillars to a championship team IF they can play. But the Lakers, frankly, got lucky that Davis had 3 months to rest before the bubble playoffs last year. Otherwise, an upstart Heat or upstart Nuggets team would have won the title. And this year it is literally down to last star standing.

    So, all that said, I think Lillard, even at 31, should transcend the “win curve” thinking a bit, as he is the most durable player in the league and a true superstar at the most important position to boot. Randle and RJ also appear to be highly durable, and that puts you closer to a title than some people may wish to acknowledge.

  341. I think there’s a lot of hesitance over a lillard/randle pairing because the third guy we’re depending on is … alec burks…. out of all the potential third options in the east… burks is BY FAR the worst and least reliable.. and we’re hanging contention hopes basically on him repeating it for however long…. that’s very shaky in my book…

    also i don’t think it’s a foregone conclusion that bringing the band back would result in a top 5 defense again (opp 3p fg%… personnel… among other reasons)… and i also don’t think that just adding dame would result in a top 10 offense…. the stotts vs thibs offenses are miles apart from each other….

    just looking at the roster vs other contenders as a whole… i just don’t see how it would ever stack up… i dont’ think we would a) have homecourt in the first rd… and b)make it to the second.. i think it’s probably a coinflip if we do.. not too different than where we were this year…

  342. I am a hard NO NO NO on trading for Lillard. We are still firmly in the asset collection stage, much as PHX was a couple of years ago. We should keep building the good karma and then sign a FA when the time is right. There is absolutely no path to the finals that leads through Damian Lillard minus the assets required to sign him.

  343. Let’s stay the course. My list of “I’d be happy with” draftees has grown to include:

    Butler, Springer, Cooper, Duarte, Dosunmo, Mann, Christopher, Murphy, Queta, Hyland, Bassey and McBride.

    That’s 12! Let’s add another pick or two.

    Edit: Add Jericho Sims and Quentin Grimes too.

  344. Answering my own question, i wouldn’t do it because of several things, but let’s just focus on the assets we’d give up…
    SIX FIRST ROUND PICKS!? Is Hollinger mad? Not AD, not Harden, no player has brought that kind of assets back, the proposed trade is borderline insane.
    Begley is a sane guy, so his proposed trades are logical, i’ll give him that, but there should be a rule for Leon that says NO TRADE INVOLVING RJ IS ALLOWED.

  345. I would be all-in on giving Dame a 4-year max in free agency, regardless of his age right now. Sending 4 or more picks plus young talent to get him reeks of the Carmelo trade, even if Dame is better than Carmelo ever was. Hard pass. The trade price for a superstar only makes sense if you’re the Bucks or Clippers and trying to go from, say, 60 wins to 65. We are not there yet. Julius turns into a pumpkin and we are fucked.

  346. The Honorable Cock Jowles: Julius turns into a pumpkin and we are fucked.

    This is the key, imo. I think people are getting way overboard because of just one single season. If i hope this is the new Julius? Hell yeah, i hope so. But should Leon bank on it when planning the future of our team? Hell no! Anyone remember the all star season of Victor Oladipo? Has he reached that level again? We’ll need one or two more seasons like this one to know that this is Julius’ new level of play.

  347. Also, Donnie: I disagree with your post but only in terms of risk. And of course the fact that Giannis is the most durable player in the league and there’s virtually no argument against it after a couple nights ago. I still can’t believe he’s not in surgery right now.

  348. and I doubly don’t like it when you consider that all of Jalen Brunson, Terry Rozier, Collin Sexton, and maybe even SGA could be had for less trade assets and paying them would be at least $20M cheaper than paying Dame.

    I would rather pay Dame $60M a year than pay Sexton or Rozier $10M. You’re comparing a BMW M5 to a Geo Prism, dude. Brunson ain’t all that either. SGA is a future All-NBA first-teamer so I’ll give you a pass on this.

    Sexton and Rozier suck ass at basketball.

  349. i think a few folks mentioned the possibility of signing derozan…. but what about the possibility of signing derozan to be our pg? his assist% has been steadily climbing for years and it’s over 30% now… i can’t say that all i’m that familiar with derozan’s game since he joined the spurs but in terms of just jamming as much talent under the cap… derozan’s pretty good… could he fetch less than 20mm? maybe around there?

    then let’s say we add beal or lavine next offseason… our team would look like:

    pg: derozan
    sg: beal/lavine
    sf: barrett
    pf: randle
    c: robinson

    that might be a bit too much like a daily fantasy team… and not sure how it defends… but that would be a good offense.. and maybe even a great one…

    is that crazy? or crazy good?

  350. DeRozan is a master of the midrange, an underrated passer and a better defender than many believe,
    but after years of Payton and the likes I’d prefer my PG to be a three point threat and a shooter, so I’d rather give the money to Lowry.

    And I’d love to shower Lillard with money if he was a free agent but in the real world,
    while waiting for Julius to show us if his new “stardom” is real or fluke,
    I consider RJ, IQ, Obi and Mitch the base to which add good players, not assets to be traded in bunches for a star.

    We’re not one player away from contender status and yes, I have Carmelo’s Trade PTSD.

  351. Julius turns into a pumpkin and we are fucked.

    Julius is what he is. He’s not a mystery.

    He’s better than the player from two years ago when he was asked to be the #1 option on a horrible team in a horrible offense with no space and he’s not going to put up the same assist or scoring stats he did last year if we add a legitimate PG to run the offense and another scorer (who could also be that PG). About the only thing we don’t know about Randle is his sustainable 3p% on a good team where he’s not forcing up too much trash. So split the difference and call it 35% from 3, fewer assists, fewer TOs, a few PPG less, but better shot selection overall (assuming we add a solid piece or two).

  352. ***Also, Donnie: I disagree with your post but only in terms of risk. And of course the fact that Giannis is the most durable player in the league and there’s virtually no argument against it***

    My post was about risk mitigation, so what is it that you disagree with? That it’s not risky enough?

    Giannis and Lillard are both exquisite physical machines, but there IS argument that Lillard is safer to bet on going forward than Giannis. Since turning 26 (Giannis’s current age), Lillard has played in 93% of his teams games and all of their playoff games (including a trip to the WCF). Even if Antetokounmpo wasn’t sitting tonight, would you expect him to match that over the next four years? And since Lillard only has one more season of NBA wear-and-tear on him, they are more apples to apples than their ages indicate.

    A player who’s production exceeds his max value AND plays in 93% of his team’s games, how is that not the most valuable contract in the league? It’s based on kinetic production, not potential production, and it effectively eliminates any consideration of opportunity cost.

    Obviously, you need to preserve enough picks, contracts, and bodies to put around a player like that. But I think that trading a large package for Lillard is a safer bet than trading a large package for a Harden, or a Holiday, or a Beal, or a LaVine, or pretty much anybody out there over the age of 23 who has recently been fitted with a price tag.

  353. Lillard is exactly what we need. Adding him would be great if we could do it for 3 first rounders and maybe Robinson because we could bring back Noel, not lose a ton at the C position, and we’d be gaining a ton now with the addition of Lillard and still have a several year window to keep improving. There’s still plenty of upside with RJ, Quick, Obi, any draft picks we retain, and other deals.

    I’d be opposed to including RJ because he was a key piece to our success last year, still has a lot of upside, and we’d be taking 1 step back by losing him to gain 2 steps with Lillard. That’s not enough and we’d be losing upside.

    Some of the other trades being tossed around online are brain dead stupid. We’d be doing exactly what we did with Melo. Granted Lilliard is better than Melo, but most of the scenarios I’ve seen would leave the current team and it’s future gutted. That would be insane.

  354. No one here has a problem thinking long term. Right?

    There is nothing wrong with taking only one step forward this year. They could always simply consider bringing back as much of the veteran core as makes sense given the prices/contract durations, try to replace or improve on that veteran core and add players at bargain pieces like last year if possible, and ADD A SOLID PG.

    We were so terrible at PG last year other than when Rose was on the court that a solid addition at that position and any upside we get from RJ, Obi, Quick, the return of Mitch, and whoever we draft, is a nice move forward. Naturally, if we can add a star in a deal that makes some sense we should do it. But I would have no problem with us taking 1 step at a time. All I don’t want to do is take a step backwards now for some theoretical pick advantage that accrues 3-5 years from now. The idea is to get better every year and keep our current upside possibilities open!

  355. I think we’ve already made a solid addition at point guard. We may add another point guard prospect via the draft, but Thibs is only going to have a 10 man rotation. Rose and Vildoza will get the lion’s share of pg minutes in my opinion.

  356. A player who’s production exceeds his max value AND plays in 93% of his team’s games, how is that not the most valuable contract in the league? It’s based on kinetic production, not potential production, and it effectively eliminates any consideration of opportunity cost.

    well according to RAPTOR .. dame is probably only outplaying his contract next season… probably breakeven the year after and probably underwater every year after that…

    you might not believe in RAPTOR projections but those age 30+ supermax deals are not exactly cheap and it’s not some slam dunk for even a guy of dame’s caliber to outperform ….

    it’s true for a guy his skill level he’ll age pretty well… but if we’re stuck with randle and alec burks as our best players after a deal with him then he needs to be the dame we all know and love for the life of the deal… any less and we’re probably first round fodder… we might even be that even if dame is super anyway…

  357. Vildoza may be a fine addition, but I doubt he’s good enough to move the chain forward significantly. If our PGs are Rose and Vildoza we still have problems at that position.

  358. A team adding Dame should have a reasonable path to compete for a title in the next 2 years because he’s exiting his prime. Dame is a really good player, somewhere in that 10-20 range, but Dame + Randle isn’t going to get you past a healthy Nets team, or whoever comes out of the west. I’d love him on the Knicks, but I don’t see how we get him without giving up so much that we’re the TrailBlazers east. (and like I said, I don’t think they’re trading him)

  359. Lillard is exactly what we need. Adding him would be great if we could do it for 3 first rounders and maybe Robinson

    Just a question of if, huh? You’re a gambler, Strat, what do you think the odds are of the Blazers accepting 3 non-lotto picks and Mitch for Dame Lillard?

    We don’t even know if he’s even on trading block. A lot of these proposals coming from Knicks fans are delusional. Can we at least wait for something a bit more concrete before we start playing fantasy GM?

  360. Dame costs $50M at age 33 and then again at age 34. Doesn’t that seem to be a problem?

  361. Yeah, that’s why I said you should only think about trading for him if you think you have a reasonable path to the title in the next 2 years.

  362. Randle’s WP48 last year was .097. Career .091. That’s not the entirety of the reality but it is what it is.

    He’s also Most Improved and second team All-NBA. That’s not the entirety of the perception but it is what it is.

    The danger isn’t Randle turns into a pumpkin. The danger is everybody figures out he was never a carriage or whatever in the first place.

  363. JK47:
    Dame costs $50M at age 33 and then again at age 34. Doesn’t that seem to be a problem?

    A fact is that you win championships by having a collection of the best players you can have. You need a all-NBA players as well as all-stars. I can’t remember a team that has won without that configuration. That makes arguments about contract value unconvincing when it comes to the cornerstone player. How much money you pay players does matter but it applies to the rank-and-file. You don’t want to give a player a max deal unless you have a high degree of confidence that they will deliver a couple of years of expected production.

    If Dame can be expected to perform at his all-NBA level for two years, I give up a lot to get him. Money is the means to the ends. It would be a dream scenario to add Lillard and Kawhi. Trading for Lillard makes Kawhi a better bet. So I would jump at trading 3 firsts and Mitch if I knew I could pull that off.

  364. JK47: Why are we acting like three firsts plus Mitch is the actual price

    Don’t have a clue.
    There’s only two ways to get Dame, a lot more picks, meaning 4 picks and 2 swaps, or else we’d have to include RJ.

  365. wow, the washington football team just got hit with a 10 million dollar fine, i don’t recall ever seeing a penalty that high before…

    i wonder how close the nfl was to making him sell the team…

  366. I was going to turn this game on, but the starting lineups looked like something you’d see on the last day of the regular season, not game 5 of a conference final. So I decided against it and paid bills in silence instead. (Did I make the right choice?)

  367. “How could we let playoff legend Bobby Portis walk for nothing??”

    Playoff “P”

  368. “Why are we acting like three firsts plus Mitch is the actual price”

    It is a price. If it can’t get it done, that’s fine. Maybe you can add in Obi or something like that. But the prices in the media are brain damaged level stupid. They are so stupid I’m assuming it’s just a bunch if dopey media guys trolling Knicks fans.

  369. Just for clarity, Dame is a great offensive player, but he’s not the same caliber player as Harden. Harden is an MVP and probably got screwed out of one or two of them. The Nets trade for Harden is not the template for Dame. You can add something to the 3 picks and Mitch, but no way can you substitute RJ, add a 4th 1st round pick, and/or add a huge series of swaps or multiple young players etc.. They can’t possibly be that stupid.

  370. ***Dame is a great offensive player, but he’s not the same caliber player as Harden. The Nets trade for Harden is not the template for Dame.***

    He is the same caliber player as Harden, but, regardless, the template is Jrue Holiday: Bledsoe, George Hill, three future first-round picks, and two additional draft pick swaps.

  371. I was going to turn this game on, but the starting lineups looked like something you’d see on the last day of the regular season, not game 5 of a conference final. So I decided against it and paid bills in silence instead. (Did I make the right choice?)

    okay, so i, yeah, the no phone thing while out of the home is haunting me a bit…understand – i can go a day or a few when it comes to returning messages, but the abundance of information and connections available to you from toting around that little spy cam lo jack thing would seem to nearly mandate its need to be taken with you, wherever, once you leave your home…it tells you where your at and plays music too…

    my sister just recently (a couple of years ago) got a mobile device, my mom got it for her of course…she’s like a deadhead san fran hippie though, i get that…

    you seem like you’re engaged with your surroundings a little differently…so, the question is:
    – is the no phone carrying a new thing for you?
    – do you have someone, partner or assistant just help keep you pointed in the right direction?
    – do you find it makes you less anxious to disconnect like that?
    – i kind of remember you mentioning running in the hills, you don’t listen to music or measure your runs?
    – am i just imagining you said you don’t carry a phone out of the home?

  372. Sorry I’ve been haunting you, Geo! You didn’t imagine it, though. I broke my iPhone for the zillionth time and decided not to replace it. That was 2 1/2 years ago now.

    I have a computer that provides me 98% of what the iPhone did, and living without the other 2% is well worth the reward of actually seeing the world around me.

  373. truth to be told donnie, owen has been posting mostly normal shit for a while, and i couldn’t poke on him none, and – your lillard thing sort of caught my attention…

    the thought of cleaning out most if not all our picks, probably RJ and mitch both, having one player sucking up sooooo much of the roster payroll doesn’t sound so good…but, after reading what you and GoNy said it sort of made sense, then it didn’t again…

    the reward of actually seeing the world around me.

    i get it now…i really don’t wanna know the exact time of day, or, even what day of the week it is, it shouldn’t matter…

  374. ***so you don’t leave your house?***

    I didn’t for a year of it!

    (And recently I’ve only really been leaving to go to Clippers games, but they are eliminated now (phew)).

  375. Sometimes I forgot that Lopez, before he started bombing threes, was (and is) a very good “old style” offensive player (he kicked our asses many times while in BRK)…

  376. Dame costs $50M at age 33 and then again at age 34. Doesn’t that seem to be a problem?

    In and of itself, no. I think we have to move past the point of applying the average player’s decline phase to the outlier player. This was the anti-Chris Paul argument, too, and that guy turned out to be worth every penny and then some at age 35.

  377. The problem with Lillard is not going to be how much we pay him, it’s how much we have to pay Portland.

    But again, Portland has a big neon sign over them saying “take all our assets”. We should be focused on trading Randle to them for a Paul George-like package, not throwing everything we have at them for Dame.

  378. I’d like to be on record as saying that i’d trade for Dame IF IT’S THE RIGHT PACKAGE. :D

  379. I keep seeing these Lillard to NY proposals that include Mitch, RJ, Quickley, and 1sts. I’m sorry..I LOVE Dame. But I’m not giving up that much for anyone less than Giannis, Luka, or Embiid. Not because I think our guys are that good- but because of how important those guys are to our roster. It’s just too much. Dame is not going to replace what those 3 players bring- even if he averages 30 a night for us. So..I am a hard pass on Dame right now. It’s just gonna cost way too much to get a 30 yr old guard with some real mileage and whose game is predicated on burst. Giving up those guys in exchange for Dame isn’t really gonna improve the team enough to make it worth it.

  380. “Not because I think our guys are that good- but because of how important those guys are to our roster.”

    Mitch missed half the season & we started playing better

    IQ played about 10min a game after we got Rose

    So, are you saying RJ is better than Damien Lillard? Because that’s insane.

  381. Hubert: The problem with Lillard is not going to be how much we pay him, it’s how much we have to pay Portland.

    I don’t agree with this, and maybe you didn’t do the math, i guess. The problem in trading for Dame is that even if it’s for a fantasy package of few picks and a young player, let’s just say you’d be able to keep Julius, RJ, Quick and Obi, waive Vildoza, Pelle (to save money) and don’t pick in the first round. That’ll get you to 28.9M, which is good for a 25% MAX, seems great, right? But the 25% MAX players are of the RFA kind, and to make matters worse, there’s exactly 2 good players (Collins and Lonzo) that fit this money, and Lonzo probably doesn’t deserve it. Other option, spread the money between 2 players, but who? Dinwiddie? Who else? The free agency crop this year is weak.
    Last option, wait for next year and let’s just say for the most money that Julius signs the extension, with the increased salaries of the 5 players you have plus Julius extension being 4.5M more than in 2021, we’d be left with 18M, which is an even worse situation.
    So the problem in trading for Dame is the money and the timing (weak free agency). The only chance is if they can line up a trade for another very good player using those 28.9M and Obi or Quick, which is good to get you a player like KAT. But is there a player like this to get this offseason? Because next offseason we’d only improve upon giving up on Julius.
    Dame is my favorite PG, i think i’ve mentioned it, and i would absolutely love to have him ignite the MSG crowd (it’d be amazing times, that’s for sure), but unless they can get another piece right now, the timing is not right for us.

  382. Hubert: We should be focused on trading Randle to them for a Paul George-like package, not throwing everything we have at them for Dame.

    What package do you think Randle can fetch us?

  383. Early Bird:
    “Not because I think our guys are that good- but because of how important those guys are to our roster.”

    Mitch missed half the season & we started playing better

    IQ played about 10min a game after we got Rose

    So, are you saying RJ is better than Damien Lillard? Because that’s insane.

    No dude lol..I literally said not because I think those guys are better. What I am saying is we are giving up 3 core pieces and picks. That’s alot to give up for a player like Dame. The upside of that deal is not worth it because you can’t bank on good players signing for cheap for the chance to play with Dame and Jules. You just can’t. Especially with the current FA market. Don’t get me wrong..I would LOVE to have Dame. But at what cost? Dame’s no spring chicken anymore. Are we really willing to mortgage the future for a couple more years of Prime Dame? It is tempting as hell though.

  384. cybersoze:
    I’d like to be on record as saying that i’d trade for Dame IF IT’S THE RIGHT PACKAGE. :D

    This I agree with. I also think it has to be part of a broader plan. Lillard alone is not enough if we’re trading our core away. I hope that’s how things work under Leon Rose.

  385. Two of those guys barely play, how are they core pieces of our roster? Mitch missed half the year and it made no difference, doesn’t really seem core. IQ plays 10min a night, doesn’t really seem core. Neither player is worth holding up a deal. It still may not be the right move, but those guys had minimal bearing on last season

  386. What package do you think Randle can fetch us?

    From Portland? I think we can get everything that isn’t glued to the floor. Zach Collins, Anfernee Simmons, unprotected firsts in 2023 2025 2027, multiple pick swaps. They probably want to hold on to covington and nurkic but you might be able to steal one of them, too.

    It’s the perfect storm. You have a team that’s desperate plus an asset in Randle that’s wildly overvalued.

  387. Early Bird:
    Two of those guys barely play, how are they core pieces of our roster? Mitch missed half the year and it made no difference, doesn’t really seem core. IQ plays 10min a night, doesn’t really seem core. Neither player is worth holding up a deal. It still may not be the right move, but those guys had minimal bearing on last season

    Don’t let the season fool you into thinking Mitch and Quickley are not core pieces for this particular squad. Take Dame out of the conversation and look at the team. We have one PG and one C on the roster who will be here long term. One. Both of whom have played roles in this team’s success. Quickley more so than Mitch because Mitch got hurt. And don’t let Mitch’s injury fool you either. It just so happens that Thibs was able to pull everything out of Noel in Mitch’s stead. But Noel got exposed once the physical play started. Not to discount Noel because he did a helluva job,, but Mitch is better than Noel.

    Now..bring Dame back in. We make that trade and the only “core” pieces we have afterwards are Julius, Dame, Knox, and Obi. Then we have to re-sign Burks, Rose, Noel, Taj, and Bullock somehow- and add free agents to fill the roster. Oh and we will have zero decent draft picks to work with. Does that really sound better than using the draft and free agency to add to this team? And we don’t necessarily have to stay at 19 & 21. We can package Obi and one of the 1sts and #32 to move up. Hell..GS will probably take Knox, 19 & 21 for one of their top 15 picks if someone we want is there. Look I’m just saying we lose a ton of flexibility by losing Mitch, RJ, and Quickley to add Dame. Maybe I’m crazy but this feels worse than the Melo trade for us to me.

  388. Hubert: From Portland? I think we can get everything that isn’t glued to the floor. Zach Collins, Anfernee Simmons, unprotected firsts in 2023 2025 2027, multiple pick swaps. They probably want to hold on to covington and nurkic but you might be able to steal one of them, too.
    It’s the perfect storm. You have a team that’s desperate plus an asset in Randle that’s wildly overvalued.

    Well, Zach Collins is always injured, that’s… not good. Simmons showed a little, so that’s promising. And then a lot of picks. I doubt Randle would fetch that many picks, but even if he does, we’d be back in the lottery for 2 more years at least. I wouldn’t do it. Only way i’d give up Randle right now is in a trade for a superstar.

  389. Considering where our roster and cap is right now, I would much rather trade Randle than trade for Lillard. But Randle isn’t going anywhere and Lillard isn’t coming here unless we blow up the intelligent rebuild we seem to have started and instead commit to the fake contender strategy for the next 5 years. It would really be a colossal blunder, and I’m shocked that anyone here is advocating for it. Especially when none of the remaining teams have made that sort of blunder at our stage in the win curve.

    So if you’re going to go ahead fantasize about trading for him, fine, just a) stop with the low-ball offers, he will cost a king’s ransom of picks/pick swaps/assets and b) stop thinking that it gets us even into the finals, much less a chip, with the shit we have left when we’re capped out.

  390. Early Bird:
    Two of those guys barely play, how are they core pieces of our roster? Mitch missed half the year and it made no difference, doesn’t really seem core. IQ plays 10min a night, doesn’t really seem core. Neither player is worth holding up a deal. It still may not be the right move, but those guys had minimal bearing on last season

    All of you who are saying the three guys are not really good are only looking at their performance last season. I agree with Totes, that is not reasonable. They are all young and likely to improve. Same is great but unlikely to improve and could get worse. And he’s at an age where injuries can pile up. For all the praise Paul is getting remember that he’s had injuries in the past (but a similar age to what Dame is now) that hurt his team a lot. Of course if neither RJ, Mitch or Quickley improve at all Dame at his current level of play is better. But that is a four fold gamble. Its very unlikely all of that will happen and It’s not worth it.

  391. I believe enough in Randle to extend him this offseason if he’ll take that extension. I don’t believe in him enough yet to wait a year and extend him then when it will cost way more. Although I guess if he replicates this past season AND does better in the playoffs next year, he might be worth that 5 year max. But I think if Randle takes the 4 year extension this off season, even if he regresses a bit, he is still a tradeable asset. If he is somewhere between this last season and the season before, then he’s still a good player. Its only if he regresses fully to the Fizdale era Randle that the 4 year extension would be an albatross.

    Randle had a bad playoff series but an amazing season this year. I believe in him as a core piece (for now). Ideal situation would be he takes the 4 year, still plays at the same level, Obi develops and eventually we feel comfortable enough to deal Randle for another star and let Obi take over in 2 years or so.

  392. Randle on a supermax is an albatross. Hopefully Rose & co. can see that. They should tell WWW to use all of his powers and all of his skills to convince Randle to settle for the maximum they can offer this offseason. If he can’t be convinced (likely) then don’t make a peep about his impending free agency again until after the trade deadline. Then balance what he wants with what he can be offered in a sign-and-trade in summer 2022.

    In short, at this time, the question of whether we should max him is not a question for Rose & co. or for KB bloggers right now. Let’s see how he plays for the first half of the season.

  393. I’m interested to see how Obi does with the Select team, hopefully with the training wheels off.

  394. I love that IQ and Obi are getting this experience.

    RE: Randle…I don’t know. Its assumed he will reject the extension but are we really sure about that?

    It’s a guaranteed 100 million dollar 4 year contract. In a league where ACL tears happen all the time, is Randle going to reject the guaranteed money in the hopes that he can replicate this past season and stay healthy? I mean, he could play just as well as he did this last year and tear his ACL in the playoffs and then he’d be out all of that money. I know oftentimes these athletes have such supreme confidence in themselves that they bet on themselves but it blows up in their faces just as often as it works out in their favor. Considering how long its taken Randle to get to this level in his career and the work he’s had to put in to get to this level, I don’t know if he’d turn away 100 million dollars this off season. I get that he’s possibly leaving even more money on the table but its still 100 million dollars! This is life changing money and with a 4 year contract, he’d be up for one last huge contract at age 30 if he’s still at this level.

    I just don’t know. I mean maybe these athletes in this situation are thinking well, I have made tens of millions already so its not like I’ll be broke if this doesn’t work out, but if it was me I don’t know if I’d make that gamble because one injury and now he’s making $10 million a year again.

  395. swift, I agree that he will give the $100 million a good, long look. I also think there are several reasons why waiting is risky, and among them is that his play regresses a bit and he’s not viewed as a $$35 mill player any more. If I had to bet one way or another I would say he rejects the extension, but wouldn’t feel confident in that bet at all.

    There’s also no question that his poor playoff performance is a factor, that certainly didn’t help his perceived value around the league. I don’t think teams will be lining up to max him, especially in a sign-and-trade, based on this season. Next season is pretty much a clean slate.

  396. We’re not trading for Dame and we’re not trading Randle. Why are we even talking about it?

  397. if Randle doesn’t sign the extension then we would probably have to entertain the possibility of trading him sometime before the deadline…

  398. On the positive side of things, it’s much better to stress about a trade for Dame, than it was to stress about a trade for Russ or Wall. We’re progressing. :)

  399. If Randle does not sign the extension this summer, the Knicks will have months of additional data before they have to decide what to do at the deadline.

    1. If Randle plays at the same level as last year’s regular season, he is worth more than the $26M that he could get in an extension this summer. Second team All-NBA is worth the 30% Max he could get next summer.

    2. If Randle regresses to 2019-20 levels, he would not be a viable trade asset.

    3. If he is an All-Star (but not All-NBA), his market value will be above his current $21M but below the 30% Max.

    Bottom line, if Randle bets on himself, we have to wait to see the results.

  400. DJ, I agree. Good thing Obi showed progress. I wouldn’t even be opposed to trading Randle if he does take the extension in a season or two and let Obi take over if Obi is progressing well.

    As rough as his start was, Obi did show something later in the season and his defense was not atrocious at all. He’s still got potential to be good. Maybe not as good as Randle but maybe that means we can divert our money elsewhere down the road or Randle on an extension could be traded for something valuable.

  401. Bottom line, if Randle bets on himself, we have to wait to see the results.

    I respectfully disagree. I would make it very clear to Randle that if he bets on himself, he will have to prove it on another team. There’s no reason we should be left holding the bag if he regresses. Portland is the perfect trading partner. I’m confident Randle can get us the Jrue Holliday package and then some from them.

    If we wait til the season starts, Portland will have likely blown their ammo by then, and no other team is as desperate as them.

Comments are closed.