at how many people call this a 2-player draft vs. a 3 player draft. Is Barrett really that controversial of a player? He's a very solid prospect IMO. I think in reality this was a 1-player draft (given how rare of a prospect Zion is) and from there it's a pretty typical draft. Having the #3 pick in any draft is very nice, including this one, obviously the #1 pick in this draft would have been the #1 pick to choose out of all the drafts in the last 15 years, though. After Zion it's simply an average to above-average draft (and that's not a bad thing, some good players come out of every draft every year).
RE: RE: RE: RE: While I think Barrett will be a better pro Â
getting an 18 year old kid no matter the hype is not keep anthony davis, he is going to stay there for another 5 years waiting for zion to develop?
5 years? More like 5 months. Zion will more likely be 1st team all NBA in 4 years than still be developing.
Exactly. I said on a thread a few months ago Zion was the most hyped prospect to come out since Lebron and I got laughed at. Name another player in the last 15 years who was more of a sure-thing and more hyped than Zion. I don't even think the talk around Durant was this buzzy when he came out.
Oden was on the same level as Zion. Arguably AD as well. Both guys were absolutely dominant college freshman. That's not to take anything away from Zion. Those guys don't come around often.
at how many people call this a 2-player draft vs. a 3 player draft. Is Barrett really that controversial of a player? He's a very solid prospect IMO. I think in reality this was a 1-player draft (given how rare of a prospect Zion is) and from there it's a pretty typical draft. Having the #3 pick in any draft is very nice, including this one, obviously the #1 pick in this draft would have been the #1 pick to choose out of all the drafts in the last 15 years, though. After Zion it's simply an average to above-average draft (and that's not a bad thing, some good players come out of every draft every year).
Give it some time. Knick fans are upset at last night's outcome. If they wound up #2 we'd hear about how awful Morant is as a prospect.
This is and always was a one player and everyone else Draft. That player is Zion. Morant isn't in the same league as Zion. You want to say there are three tiers fine but don't but Ja on the same level as Zion cuz he ain't.
RE: 'how many people call this a 2-player draft vs. a 3 player draft'... Â
This is and always was a one player and everyone else Draft. That player is Zion. Morant isn't in the same league as Zion. You want to say there are three tiers fine but don't but Ja on the same level as Zion cuz he ain't.
I said in literally my very next sentence that this was a 1-player draft.
-emptying the cabinet of young assets for him and leaving the team thin and Pelican-like
-his injury prone tendencies
would rather the LAL trade all they were prepared to trade + the #4 and NYK have a team that consists of KD, Kyrie, Barrett and all they have now.
I am kind of in the same boat with you on this . I am hesitant to want to trade everything for AD although he is a great player and be left with AD and 2 MAX guys even if those turn out to be KD and KI. You are gutting the team of youth, draft picks, flexibility and putting all your eggs into this short window while KD is still in his prime .
You also have to take all the injuries into consideration and having 2 of the big 3 be injury prone is not great either.
It's a tough call because when healthy davis is great , but it's also very risky and you are left with literally nothing other then the big 3 and a bunch of ring chasers to fill out the starting lineup and bench both now and in the future with no way to improve the team/rebuild when those guys are gone
Last season, R.J. Barrett became the first player ever in NCAA Division 1 history to tally at least 850 points, 250 rebounds, 150 assists in a single season.
Barrett is also one of just three freshmen to score 850+ points (joining Kevin Durant, Michael Beasley, and Trae Young.)
seems like an uptick in efficiency as he improves would put him on the path to being an impact player.
and obviously if Durant is coming its up to him, but I'd sign the 2 max guys (KI/KD) and keep the pick and assets. Thing is the Knicks have an opportunity to do something they've never done in my lifetime- be a real contender AND have the flexibility to add what they need as they go along. When they've been good they've always been in cap hell with no picks or young assets. Now they have the ability to do that. Think what the Sixers did at the deadline this year adding Butler and Harris. Of course You can say that addition should be AD, but that pretty much clears out the roster as well as some of the picks depending on how many we give up. I think everyone looks at the Miami model as the norm, but truth be told its pretty much only the 2nd time the experiment has been tried in the past (Boston 07-08) and in both cases the 3 guys had a pretty strong history of durability and it held out as it needed to to work because there is no depth on the roster. This trio has missed a bunch of games over the years.
You keep the pick and assets and you have the chance to build something sustainable for 5-6 years at least. Golden State is about to weaken after this season hopefully, and the other contenders in the East- Philly/Toronto/Milwaukee have huge roster questions going forward. 2 elite guys plus what we have and the picks going forward is really an opportunity for sustained dominance in the East. Now of course if Durant says he'll come here only if we make the AD trade, then throw my whole post out. I'm not an idiot. You'd make the trade then.
but the difference is that this isn't a trade for a guy like Melo or some other "generic" all-star type (e.g. Kevin Love, Jimmy Butler, etc.). Davis has been first team all nba 3x. For a guy like him, you take risks (assuming he gives assurances he'll sign long term).
and obviously if Durant is coming its up to him, but I'd sign the 2 max guys (KI/KD) and keep the pick and assets. Thing is the Knicks have an opportunity to do something they've never done in my lifetime- be a real contender AND have the flexibility to add what they need as they go along. When they've been good they've always been in cap hell with no picks or young assets. Now they have the ability to do that. Think what the Sixers did at the deadline this year adding Butler and Harris. Of course You can say that addition should be AD, but that pretty much clears out the roster as well as some of the picks depending on how many we give up. I think everyone looks at the Miami model as the norm, but truth be told its pretty much only the 2nd time the experiment has been tried in the past (Boston 07-08) and in both cases the 3 guys had a pretty strong history of durability and it held out as it needed to to work because there is no depth on the roster. This trio has missed a bunch of games over the years.
You keep the pick and assets and you have the chance to build something sustainable for 5-6 years at least. Golden State is about to weaken after this season hopefully, and the other contenders in the East- Philly/Toronto/Milwaukee have huge roster questions going forward. 2 elite guys plus what we have and the picks going forward is really an opportunity for sustained dominance in the East. Now of course if Durant says he'll come here only if we make the AD trade, then throw my whole post out. I'm not an idiot. You'd make the trade then.
Look at Boston they combined a couple stars with high upside developmental guys. Its didnt work out too well.
With KD Kyrie we are all in for win now mode. Its all about vets with specific roles to build around KD Kyrie and hopefully a 3rd max via trade.
but the difference is that this isn't a trade for a guy like Melo or some other "generic" all-star type (e.g. Kevin Love, Jimmy Butler, etc.). Davis has been first team all nba 3x. For a guy like him, you take risks (assuming he gives assurances he'll sign long term).
and obviously if Durant is coming its up to him, but I'd sign the 2 max guys (KI/KD) and keep the pick and assets. Thing is the Knicks have an opportunity to do something they've never done in my lifetime- be a real contender AND have the flexibility to add what they need as they go along. When they've been good they've always been in cap hell with no picks or young assets. Now they have the ability to do that. Think what the Sixers did at the deadline this year adding Butler and Harris. Of course You can say that addition should be AD, but that pretty much clears out the roster as well as some of the picks depending on how many we give up. I think everyone looks at the Miami model as the norm, but truth be told its pretty much only the 2nd time the experiment has been tried in the past (Boston 07-08) and in both cases the 3 guys had a pretty strong history of durability and it held out as it needed to to work because there is no depth on the roster. This trio has missed a bunch of games over the years.
You keep the pick and assets and you have the chance to build something sustainable for 5-6 years at least. Golden State is about to weaken after this season hopefully, and the other contenders in the East- Philly/Toronto/Milwaukee have huge roster questions going forward. 2 elite guys plus what we have and the picks going forward is really an opportunity for sustained dominance in the East. Now of course if Durant says he'll come here only if we make the AD trade, then throw my whole post out. I'm not an idiot. You'd make the trade then.
Look at Boston they combined a couple stars with high upside developmental guys. Its didnt work out too well.
With KD Kyrie we are all in for win now mode. Its all about vets with specific roles to build around KD Kyrie and hopefully a 3rd max via trade.
Obviously Kyrie is Kyrie, but no one on Boston is anywhere close to KD! When he's your "alpha", you have more room to gamble on upside with developmental guys.
That said, if KD really is coming here, I'd be shocked if they don't move whatever it takes to get AD.
RE: my whole point is that with Kyrie and Durant Â
and what else we have you can compete for the East right now.
I keep making this point - if Durant comes, we have no clue how long he's actually staying. Could only be 1 years. Might realistically be 3 years max. If you get AD and then re-sign him, you're getting at least 5 years with him - assuming he signs a 4+1 after next season.
but the difference is that this isn't a trade for a guy like Melo or some other "generic" all-star type (e.g. Kevin Love, Jimmy Butler, etc.). Davis has been first team all nba 3x. For a guy like him, you take risks (assuming he gives assurances he'll sign long term).
Bingo. And lets be honest this "cupboard of players and assets" people keep referring to have little to no chance into turning into a player of ADs caliber. And picks are nice in theory, until they are in the low 20s or worse. Just look at the Celtics much talked about "treasure chest of high picks". They are 14th and 20th in a top heavy draft and who knows what becomes of the Memphis.
I'll take my chances on acquiring the 26 year top big man in the league....
but NYK isn't handing over five #1 picks, and Knox + Robinson isn't a prime pair of assets, no matter how much you want it to be.
So is your argument that the Knicks don't have the assets to make the best offer, or that they'll be unwilling to deploy enough of those assets to do what it takes. Because it seems like you're now arguing for the latter, which is an implicit admission that you were wrong about the former.
a Knicks fan but I still don't have some grand feeling that Davis is going to be traded to the Knicks, but this Lakers talk is ridiculous.
If anyone thinks in their right mind that David Griffin is going to make his first action as GM of the Pelicans be to trade Anthony Davis to the Lakers to assuage King James, you are out of your effing mind. The man lost his last job because he didn't feel like bowing down to the King. Griffin's team won a championship in Cleveland against a far superior Warriors team - the first championship that city saw in basically a century - and still couldn't keep his job because he didn't bow to LeBron. Do you think he is going to send his star player to his conference rival for anything less than a kings ransom? You better believe there will be an asshole tax involved in any trade discussion there.
Do I want the Knicks to trade for Davis? Yes. Do I think it will happen? Probably not. I do think something could be said for teaming RJ Barrett with Zion because realistically Zion is most likely going to leave that dumpster fire of a franchise as soon as possible; the only way they get him to stay is building a championship team or making him so comfortable he doesn't leave. Quite frankly I don't see them ever building a championship team down there, so could the comfort factor play a role? I guess. I aknowledge that guys like Knox, DSJ and Frank probably don't carry the trade value that Knicks fans hope they do. Every year we go into the offseason and think, "hey, maybe we can get a first round pick for Courtney Lee, he is a real solid 3 & d player" only to find out the Knicks need to add assets just to get rid of a guy like Courtney Lee. Still feel like some other team will jump out of no where and offer something for him like the Paul George scenario hoping they can convince him to stay even if he didnt have them on "his list". The Knicks never get players at discounted prices, why would it start with AD?
but NYK isn't handing over five #1 picks, and Knox + Robinson isn't a prime pair of assets, no matter how much you want it to be.
So is your argument that the Knicks don't have the assets to make the best offer, or that they'll be unwilling to deploy enough of those assets to do what it takes. Because it seems like you're now arguing for the latter, which is an implicit admission that you were wrong about the former.
It all depends on what Griffen thinks is a better structure for the future of the team. I could see it be either deal really.
The wild card again maybe Jrue he may want to shed that contract. Its long and expensive.
but the difference is that this isn't a trade for a guy like Melo or some other "generic" all-star type (e.g. Kevin Love, Jimmy Butler, etc.). Davis has been first team all nba 3x. For a guy like him, you take risks (assuming he gives assurances he'll sign long term).
Bingo. And lets be honest this "cupboard of players and assets" people keep referring to have little to no chance into turning into a player of ADs caliber. And picks are nice in theory, until they are in the low 20s or worse. Just look at the Celtics much talked about "treasure chest of high picks". They are 14th and 20th in a top heavy draft and who knows what becomes of the Memphis.
I'll take my chances on acquiring the 26 year top big man in the league....
Not that they're bad players and can't improve significantly, but I'm pretty confident saying that no one currently on the Knicks roster will end up being anywhere close to AD. Barrett/Morant might have the potential to be top 10 players, but Knicks will be lucky if they get a few all star seasons out Knox, Robinson, et al.
but the difference is that this isn't a trade for a guy like Melo or some other "generic" all-star type (e.g. Kevin Love, Jimmy Butler, etc.). Davis has been first team all nba 3x. For a guy like him, you take risks (assuming he gives assurances he'll sign long term).
Bingo. And lets be honest this "cupboard of players and assets" people keep referring to have little to no chance into turning into a player of ADs caliber. And picks are nice in theory, until they are in the low 20s or worse. Just look at the Celtics much talked about "treasure chest of high picks". They are 14th and 20th in a top heavy draft and who knows what becomes of the Memphis.
I'll take my chances on acquiring the 26 year top big man in the league....
Not that they're bad players and can't improve significantly, but I'm pretty confident saying that no one currently on the Knicks roster will end up being anywhere close to AD. Barrett/Morant might have the potential to be top 10 players, but Knicks will be lucky if they get a few all star seasons out Knox, Robinson, et al.
Of course, but thats not the bar here that one of them is the next AD. We know an AD comes along maybe once every 8-10 years. However when you have superstars then a roster of depth behind them you can win it all and withstand missed games.
but NYK isn't handing over five #1 picks, and Knox + Robinson isn't a prime pair of assets, no matter how much you want it to be.
So is your argument that the Knicks don't have the assets to make the best offer, or that they'll be unwilling to deploy enough of those assets to do what it takes. Because it seems like you're now arguing for the latter, which is an implicit admission that you were wrong about the former.
The former. I can't speak to their willingness to do the latter, only that it would be historic as best as I can remember.
For me, Ingram healthy, Kuzma, Ball, #4 pick, and a future #1 is a better deal. I don't see how yours is clear cut better.
Throw in the Easter Bunny too while you're at it if you're just going to pretend Ingram is healthy for the purposes of calculating the value of the package.
Ok, top THIS package: Robinson as the next Olajuwon, Barrett as the next Kobe, and 3 #1 picks that become the next LeBron, Jordan, and Magic. As long as we're going to make Ingram healthy, let's just imagine the best for the Knicks' assets too.
Zach Lowe spelled it out pretty well. If he's not healthy and it harpoons a deal, so be it. As I said, there's belief among the LA beat the Lakers have a shot at making a deal without including BI.
Zach Lowe spelled it out pretty well. If he's not healthy and it harpoons a deal, so be it. As I said, there's belief among the LA beat the Lakers have a shot at making a deal without including BI.
Interestingly Pels didn't seem interested in 4 or 5 in this draft. That plays a big role.
Zach Lowe spelled it out pretty well. If he's not healthy and it harpoons a deal, so be it. As I said, there's belief among the LA beat the Lakers have a shot at making a deal without including BI.
I think that's a fair take, though I (obviously) question whether anyone will have enough info to feel comfortable about Ingram's healthy by the time the trade momentum will be building. If he's still a question mark in mid/late summer, his value is reduced enormously as is the Lakers full arsenal of trade assets since he'd be the centerpiece.
Separately, do you think the LA beat is more reliable than the NY beat? You mentioned that you have a friend on the LA beat, so that gives you some insight (but maybe some bias too?) - we see NY beat writers throw crap against the wall regularly. I'd be much more inclined to note whether the NOLA beat thinks the Pelicans would make that deal w/o BI, though I don't dismiss the LA beat's POV if people think they're somehow more reliable than a west coast version of Isola.
Zach Lowe spelled it out pretty well. If he's not healthy and it harpoons a deal, so be it. As I said, there's belief among the LA beat the Lakers have a shot at making a deal without including BI.
Lowe didn't spell anything out. He simply listed potentially available assets and made the following concluding statement: "If the Davis sweepstakes still happens, the Lakers probably come out of the lottery ahead of Knicks." Would be interesting to see him (or decent writer) do a real deep dive on what packages might be out there for Davis.
RE: RE: Healthy, he tilts the deal to the Lakers Â
Zach Lowe spelled it out pretty well. If he's not healthy and it harpoons a deal, so be it. As I said, there's belief among the LA beat the Lakers have a shot at making a deal without including BI.
I think that's a fair take, though I (obviously) question whether anyone will have enough info to feel comfortable about Ingram's healthy by the time the trade momentum will be building. If he's still a question mark in mid/late summer, his value is reduced enormously as is the Lakers full arsenal of trade assets since he'd be the centerpiece.
Separately, do you think the LA beat is more reliable than the NY beat? You mentioned that you have a friend on the LA beat, so that gives you some insight (but maybe some bias too?) - we see NY beat writers throw crap against the wall regularly. I'd be much more inclined to note whether the NOLA beat thinks the Pelicans would make that deal w/o BI, though I don't dismiss the LA beat's POV if people think they're somehow more reliable than a west coast version of Isola.
We're not far apart on the BI aspect. The timing is shit for the Lakers for sure. I think he clearly tilts the offer power if he's healthy. And, he might not be when the time arrives.
On the second, it's a game of chess that's definitely about to pick up ... but what I posted wasn't in the media print (that I'm aware of), it was shared with me on the side. That said, it is one side of a three-sided story.
RE: RE: Healthy, he tilts the deal to the Lakers Â
Zach Lowe spelled it out pretty well. If he's not healthy and it harpoons a deal, so be it. As I said, there's belief among the LA beat the Lakers have a shot at making a deal without including BI.
Lowe didn't spell anything out. He simply listed potentially available assets and made the following concluding statement: "If the Davis sweepstakes still happens, the Lakers probably come out of the lottery ahead of Knicks." Would be interesting to see him (or decent writer) do a real deep dive on what packages might be out there for Davis.
I would think he's giving an informed opinion based on what he's hearing out there.
We can all agree we have no idea what david griffin wants Â
How is this a better deal than what the Knicks can offer?
- Ingram healthy: He's currently not healthy so this isn't really a thing. If he starts the season and can show for a few months that he's fine maybe then New Orleans feels comfortable with a package centered around him, but how do you take that risk before that?
- Kuzma: What is the value here? New Orleans already has Julius Randle who plays the same position, is a better player, and probably won't cost them a ton to retain if they so choose. Also, are we sure teams would rather have Kuzma than Knox? Knox is 4 years younger, shot a respectable % from 3 and at the line, if those 2 areas are any indication he has the potential to be a good shooter and should show improvement as he develops.
- Ball: LOL, New Orleans would probably rather have Dennis Smith at this point.
- Future #1: The Knicks have their own picks, and 2 from Dallas. They can offer better future picks and a better current pick.
-
"an informed opinion based on what he's hearing" Â
the Laker package of players was well known and evaluated by the whole world months ago. The Knick offer for Davis was never really any of the guys we're discussing. The prime piece was Porzingis + secondary pieces. In other words, I question how current his information might be regarding the Knick pieces. Knox was scuffling mid-season and then came on at the end. As did Mitch (much more significantly). But it goes both ways. Frank regressed and then got hurt and is basically more of a negative asset then he was mid-season...so much so that I'm surprised Lowe even mentioned him. To me, Trier should have much more value on the open market than Frank.
Use the cap space effectively, continue to herd first round picks (best value in the NBA) and give your young players, Barrett, Knox, Robinson, DSR, time to develop.
The Knicks could have both cap space for stars, and lots of picks for trades or player development.
Team is in a good spot. I just hope they don't get impatient and do something really short term.
RE: I'm with Stu11; don't trade the store for AD Â
Use the cap space effectively, continue to herd first round picks (best value in the NBA) and give your young players, Barrett, Knox, Robinson, DSR, time to develop.
The Knicks could have both cap space for stars, and lots of picks for trades or player development.
Team is in a good spot. I just hope they don't get impatient and do something really short term.
This is so, so true.
Everyone seems pretty down on Knox and high on Ingram Â
They are pretty similar players from a potential standpoint, one just happens to be 2 years further in his development. Here is a look at how they compare after their rookie seasons:
They are pretty similar players from a potential standpoint, one just happens to be 2 years further in his development. Here is a look at how they compare after their rookie seasons:
They are pretty similar players from a potential standpoint, one just happens to be 2 years further in his development. Here is a look at how they compare after their rookie seasons:
Quote:
In comment 14444439 nygiants16 said:
Quote:
getting an 18 year old kid no matter the hype is not keep anthony davis, he is going to stay there for another 5 years waiting for zion to develop?
5 years? More like 5 months. Zion will more likely be 1st team all NBA in 4 years than still be developing.
Exactly. I said on a thread a few months ago Zion was the most hyped prospect to come out since Lebron and I got laughed at. Name another player in the last 15 years who was more of a sure-thing and more hyped than Zion. I don't even think the talk around Durant was this buzzy when he came out.
Oden was on the same level as Zion. Arguably AD as well. Both guys were absolutely dominant college freshman. That's not to take anything away from Zion. Those guys don't come around often.
Give it some time. Knick fans are upset at last night's outcome. If they wound up #2 we'd hear about how awful Morant is as a prospect.
-emptying the cabinet of young assets for him and leaving the team thin and Pelican-like
-his injury prone tendencies
would rather the LAL trade all they were prepared to trade + the #4 and NYK have a team that consists of KD, Kyrie, Barrett and all they have now.
like hunter is viewed already as an elite defender who has a stroke, much less 1 on 1 game though--- but it will be interesting.
I said in literally my very next sentence that this was a 1-player draft.
1. Oden
2. Davis
3. Durant
4. Zion
5. Rose
6. Wall
7. Towns
8. Beasley
9. Simmons
10. Wiggins
Something like that, with a clear Top 6 tier. Embiid would be Top 5 without his injuries, possibly ahead of Zion.
Me thinks my little man took a few days off from school after that debacle...
-emptying the cabinet of young assets for him and leaving the team thin and Pelican-like
-his injury prone tendencies
would rather the LAL trade all they were prepared to trade + the #4 and NYK have a team that consists of KD, Kyrie, Barrett and all they have now.
I am kind of in the same boat with you on this . I am hesitant to want to trade everything for AD although he is a great player and be left with AD and 2 MAX guys even if those turn out to be KD and KI. You are gutting the team of youth, draft picks, flexibility and putting all your eggs into this short window while KD is still in his prime .
You also have to take all the injuries into consideration and having 2 of the big 3 be injury prone is not great either.
It's a tough call because when healthy davis is great , but it's also very risky and you are left with literally nothing other then the big 3 and a bunch of ring chasers to fill out the starting lineup and bench both now and in the future with no way to improve the team/rebuild when those guys are gone
Last season, R.J. Barrett became the first player ever in NCAA Division 1 history to tally at least 850 points, 250 rebounds, 150 assists in a single season.
Barrett is also one of just three freshmen to score 850+ points (joining Kevin Durant, Michael Beasley, and Trae Young.)
seems like an uptick in efficiency as he improves would put him on the path to being an impact player.
You keep the pick and assets and you have the chance to build something sustainable for 5-6 years at least. Golden State is about to weaken after this season hopefully, and the other contenders in the East- Philly/Toronto/Milwaukee have huge roster questions going forward. 2 elite guys plus what we have and the picks going forward is really an opportunity for sustained dominance in the East. Now of course if Durant says he'll come here only if we make the AD trade, then throw my whole post out. I'm not an idiot. You'd make the trade then.
You keep the pick and assets and you have the chance to build something sustainable for 5-6 years at least. Golden State is about to weaken after this season hopefully, and the other contenders in the East- Philly/Toronto/Milwaukee have huge roster questions going forward. 2 elite guys plus what we have and the picks going forward is really an opportunity for sustained dominance in the East. Now of course if Durant says he'll come here only if we make the AD trade, then throw my whole post out. I'm not an idiot. You'd make the trade then.
Look at Boston they combined a couple stars with high upside developmental guys. Its didnt work out too well.
With KD Kyrie we are all in for win now mode. Its all about vets with specific roles to build around KD Kyrie and hopefully a 3rd max via trade.
Yes. This.
Look at Boston they combined a couple stars with high upside developmental guys. Its didnt work out too well.
Not applicable at all. They have Kyrie, but who else on that roster is in the same universe as Durant talent wise?
Quote:
and obviously if Durant is coming its up to him, but I'd sign the 2 max guys (KI/KD) and keep the pick and assets. Thing is the Knicks have an opportunity to do something they've never done in my lifetime- be a real contender AND have the flexibility to add what they need as they go along. When they've been good they've always been in cap hell with no picks or young assets. Now they have the ability to do that. Think what the Sixers did at the deadline this year adding Butler and Harris. Of course You can say that addition should be AD, but that pretty much clears out the roster as well as some of the picks depending on how many we give up. I think everyone looks at the Miami model as the norm, but truth be told its pretty much only the 2nd time the experiment has been tried in the past (Boston 07-08) and in both cases the 3 guys had a pretty strong history of durability and it held out as it needed to to work because there is no depth on the roster. This trio has missed a bunch of games over the years.
You keep the pick and assets and you have the chance to build something sustainable for 5-6 years at least. Golden State is about to weaken after this season hopefully, and the other contenders in the East- Philly/Toronto/Milwaukee have huge roster questions going forward. 2 elite guys plus what we have and the picks going forward is really an opportunity for sustained dominance in the East. Now of course if Durant says he'll come here only if we make the AD trade, then throw my whole post out. I'm not an idiot. You'd make the trade then.
Look at Boston they combined a couple stars with high upside developmental guys. Its didnt work out too well.
With KD Kyrie we are all in for win now mode. Its all about vets with specific roles to build around KD Kyrie and hopefully a 3rd max via trade.
Obviously Kyrie is Kyrie, but no one on Boston is anywhere close to KD! When he's your "alpha", you have more room to gamble on upside with developmental guys.
That said, if KD really is coming here, I'd be shocked if they don't move whatever it takes to get AD.
I keep making this point - if Durant comes, we have no clue how long he's actually staying. Could only be 1 years. Might realistically be 3 years max. If you get AD and then re-sign him, you're getting at least 5 years with him - assuming he signs a 4+1 after next season.
Bingo. And lets be honest this "cupboard of players and assets" people keep referring to have little to no chance into turning into a player of ADs caliber. And picks are nice in theory, until they are in the low 20s or worse. Just look at the Celtics much talked about "treasure chest of high picks". They are 14th and 20th in a top heavy draft and who knows what becomes of the Memphis.
I'll take my chances on acquiring the 26 year top big man in the league....
So is your argument that the Knicks don't have the assets to make the best offer, or that they'll be unwilling to deploy enough of those assets to do what it takes. Because it seems like you're now arguing for the latter, which is an implicit admission that you were wrong about the former.
If anyone thinks in their right mind that David Griffin is going to make his first action as GM of the Pelicans be to trade Anthony Davis to the Lakers to assuage King James, you are out of your effing mind. The man lost his last job because he didn't feel like bowing down to the King. Griffin's team won a championship in Cleveland against a far superior Warriors team - the first championship that city saw in basically a century - and still couldn't keep his job because he didn't bow to LeBron. Do you think he is going to send his star player to his conference rival for anything less than a kings ransom? You better believe there will be an asshole tax involved in any trade discussion there.
Do I want the Knicks to trade for Davis? Yes. Do I think it will happen? Probably not. I do think something could be said for teaming RJ Barrett with Zion because realistically Zion is most likely going to leave that dumpster fire of a franchise as soon as possible; the only way they get him to stay is building a championship team or making him so comfortable he doesn't leave. Quite frankly I don't see them ever building a championship team down there, so could the comfort factor play a role? I guess. I aknowledge that guys like Knox, DSJ and Frank probably don't carry the trade value that Knicks fans hope they do. Every year we go into the offseason and think, "hey, maybe we can get a first round pick for Courtney Lee, he is a real solid 3 & d player" only to find out the Knicks need to add assets just to get rid of a guy like Courtney Lee. Still feel like some other team will jump out of no where and offer something for him like the Paul George scenario hoping they can convince him to stay even if he didnt have them on "his list". The Knicks never get players at discounted prices, why would it start with AD?
Quote:
but NYK isn't handing over five #1 picks, and Knox + Robinson isn't a prime pair of assets, no matter how much you want it to be.
So is your argument that the Knicks don't have the assets to make the best offer, or that they'll be unwilling to deploy enough of those assets to do what it takes. Because it seems like you're now arguing for the latter, which is an implicit admission that you were wrong about the former.
It all depends on what Griffen thinks is a better structure for the future of the team. I could see it be either deal really.
The wild card again maybe Jrue he may want to shed that contract. Its long and expensive.
Quote:
but the difference is that this isn't a trade for a guy like Melo or some other "generic" all-star type (e.g. Kevin Love, Jimmy Butler, etc.). Davis has been first team all nba 3x. For a guy like him, you take risks (assuming he gives assurances he'll sign long term).
Bingo. And lets be honest this "cupboard of players and assets" people keep referring to have little to no chance into turning into a player of ADs caliber. And picks are nice in theory, until they are in the low 20s or worse. Just look at the Celtics much talked about "treasure chest of high picks". They are 14th and 20th in a top heavy draft and who knows what becomes of the Memphis.
I'll take my chances on acquiring the 26 year top big man in the league....
Not that they're bad players and can't improve significantly, but I'm pretty confident saying that no one currently on the Knicks roster will end up being anywhere close to AD. Barrett/Morant might have the potential to be top 10 players, but Knicks will be lucky if they get a few all star seasons out Knox, Robinson, et al.
Quote:
In comment 14445052 Enzo said:
Quote:
but the difference is that this isn't a trade for a guy like Melo or some other "generic" all-star type (e.g. Kevin Love, Jimmy Butler, etc.). Davis has been first team all nba 3x. For a guy like him, you take risks (assuming he gives assurances he'll sign long term).
Bingo. And lets be honest this "cupboard of players and assets" people keep referring to have little to no chance into turning into a player of ADs caliber. And picks are nice in theory, until they are in the low 20s or worse. Just look at the Celtics much talked about "treasure chest of high picks". They are 14th and 20th in a top heavy draft and who knows what becomes of the Memphis.
I'll take my chances on acquiring the 26 year top big man in the league....
Not that they're bad players and can't improve significantly, but I'm pretty confident saying that no one currently on the Knicks roster will end up being anywhere close to AD. Barrett/Morant might have the potential to be top 10 players, but Knicks will be lucky if they get a few all star seasons out Knox, Robinson, et al.
Of course, but thats not the bar here that one of them is the next AD. We know an AD comes along maybe once every 8-10 years. However when you have superstars then a roster of depth behind them you can win it all and withstand missed games.
Quote:
but NYK isn't handing over five #1 picks, and Knox + Robinson isn't a prime pair of assets, no matter how much you want it to be.
So is your argument that the Knicks don't have the assets to make the best offer, or that they'll be unwilling to deploy enough of those assets to do what it takes. Because it seems like you're now arguing for the latter, which is an implicit admission that you were wrong about the former.
The former. I can't speak to their willingness to do the latter, only that it would be historic as best as I can remember.
Throw in the Easter Bunny too while you're at it if you're just going to pretend Ingram is healthy for the purposes of calculating the value of the package.
Ok, top THIS package: Robinson as the next Olajuwon, Barrett as the next Kobe, and 3 #1 picks that become the next LeBron, Jordan, and Magic. As long as we're going to make Ingram healthy, let's just imagine the best for the Knicks' assets too.
I must have been mooning a healthy Ingram.
Interestingly Pels didn't seem interested in 4 or 5 in this draft. That plays a big role.
The best offer the Knicks can make contains #3/Barrett + Robinson + Dallas unprotected 2021.
It's just that the Knicks have the ability to add Knox and/or Frank and/or DSJ and/or Dallas 2023 protected pick and/or their own 1sts.
I still see Laker fans trying to argue that #4 is not different than #3, it is.
On top of the actual assets, the circumstances also favor the Knicks.
Out of conference
Zion-Barrett connection
Pelicans/Griffin sticking it to LeBron/Lakers
I think that's a fair take, though I (obviously) question whether anyone will have enough info to feel comfortable about Ingram's healthy by the time the trade momentum will be building. If he's still a question mark in mid/late summer, his value is reduced enormously as is the Lakers full arsenal of trade assets since he'd be the centerpiece.
Separately, do you think the LA beat is more reliable than the NY beat? You mentioned that you have a friend on the LA beat, so that gives you some insight (but maybe some bias too?) - we see NY beat writers throw crap against the wall regularly. I'd be much more inclined to note whether the NOLA beat thinks the Pelicans would make that deal w/o BI, though I don't dismiss the LA beat's POV if people think they're somehow more reliable than a west coast version of Isola.
Lowe didn't spell anything out. He simply listed potentially available assets and made the following concluding statement: "If the Davis sweepstakes still happens, the Lakers probably come out of the lottery ahead of Knicks." Would be interesting to see him (or decent writer) do a real deep dive on what packages might be out there for Davis.
Quote:
Zach Lowe spelled it out pretty well. If he's not healthy and it harpoons a deal, so be it. As I said, there's belief among the LA beat the Lakers have a shot at making a deal without including BI.
I think that's a fair take, though I (obviously) question whether anyone will have enough info to feel comfortable about Ingram's healthy by the time the trade momentum will be building. If he's still a question mark in mid/late summer, his value is reduced enormously as is the Lakers full arsenal of trade assets since he'd be the centerpiece.
Separately, do you think the LA beat is more reliable than the NY beat? You mentioned that you have a friend on the LA beat, so that gives you some insight (but maybe some bias too?) - we see NY beat writers throw crap against the wall regularly. I'd be much more inclined to note whether the NOLA beat thinks the Pelicans would make that deal w/o BI, though I don't dismiss the LA beat's POV if people think they're somehow more reliable than a west coast version of Isola.
We're not far apart on the BI aspect. The timing is shit for the Lakers for sure. I think he clearly tilts the offer power if he's healthy. And, he might not be when the time arrives.
On the second, it's a game of chess that's definitely about to pick up ... but what I posted wasn't in the media print (that I'm aware of), it was shared with me on the side. That said, it is one side of a three-sided story.
Quote:
Zach Lowe spelled it out pretty well. If he's not healthy and it harpoons a deal, so be it. As I said, there's belief among the LA beat the Lakers have a shot at making a deal without including BI.
Lowe didn't spell anything out. He simply listed potentially available assets and made the following concluding statement: "If the Davis sweepstakes still happens, the Lakers probably come out of the lottery ahead of Knicks." Would be interesting to see him (or decent writer) do a real deep dive on what packages might be out there for Davis.
I would think he's giving an informed opinion based on what he's hearing out there.
It depends what he wants and how he views each asset
Kind of like how Gettleman didn't even bother returning John Lynch's phone call...
- Ingram healthy: He's currently not healthy so this isn't really a thing. If he starts the season and can show for a few months that he's fine maybe then New Orleans feels comfortable with a package centered around him, but how do you take that risk before that?
- Kuzma: What is the value here? New Orleans already has Julius Randle who plays the same position, is a better player, and probably won't cost them a ton to retain if they so choose. Also, are we sure teams would rather have Kuzma than Knox? Knox is 4 years younger, shot a respectable % from 3 and at the line, if those 2 areas are any indication he has the potential to be a good shooter and should show improvement as he develops.
- Ball: LOL, New Orleans would probably rather have Dennis Smith at this point.
- Future #1: The Knicks have their own picks, and 2 from Dallas. They can offer better future picks and a better current pick.
-
The Knicks could have both cap space for stars, and lots of picks for trades or player development.
Team is in a good spot. I just hope they don't get impatient and do something really short term.
The Knicks could have both cap space for stars, and lots of picks for trades or player development.
Team is in a good spot. I just hope they don't get impatient and do something really short term.
This is so, so true.
Knox
MPG 28.8, 12.8 pts, 4.5 reb, 1.1 ast, .370/.343/.717 shooting, ORtg 93 DRtg 116
Ingram
MPG 28.8, 9.4 pts, 4.0 reb, 2.1 ast, .402/.294/.621 shooting, ORtg 96 DRtg 115
Knox
MPG 28.8, 12.8 pts, 4.5 reb, 1.1 ast, .370/.343/.717 shooting, ORtg 93 DRtg 116
Ingram
MPG 28.8, 9.4 pts, 4.0 reb, 2.1 ast, .402/.294/.621 shooting, ORtg 96 DRtg 115
Don't use logic or compare apples to apples. That isn't welcome here.
Knox
MPG 28.8, 12.8 pts, 4.5 reb, 1.1 ast, .370/.343/.717 shooting, ORtg 93 DRtg 116
Ingram
MPG 28.8, 9.4 pts, 4.0 reb, 2.1 ast, .402/.294/.621 shooting, ORtg 96 DRtg 115
Not everyone. Only Lakers fans who say they have the best deal for Davis because they and an LA beat writer say so.
And I’ve seen some crazy proposals but the Lakers getting Davis without including Ingram takes the cake. He’s by far their best young player.