Jake Fischer has a notebook coming out this morning and Bleacher Report is releasing some snippets..
Nets are offering Kyrie a shorter term incentive laden deal, expected to talk up until the 29th deadline..
Knicks are trying to clear 25 million to sign Brunson
Quote:
but unloading salary to sign him outright would signal that Dallas has no interest in a sign and trade with the Knicks.
If that's the case, then you have to be careful about what sort of moves you make. You don't want to sacrifice too many draft assets to move off of salaries that are expiring at the end of next season. Rose and Noel are at least functional players when healthy and Burks is a genuine asset on a good deal.
Trading 11 for Brogdon would make me lose my mind. And trading a bunch of salary and 11 for Brogdon would be even worse.
how is clearing 25 million bad?
Well, it depends on who that salary is. If it's Rose and Noel, then you're dealing 2 players whose salary expires at the end of the upcoming season for a player who is signed for 3 more years and can't stay on the floor.
And you're trading for a PG so you can also go out and sign another PG. And you're using a draft pick to trade Randle at his lowest possible value in order to get off salary you gave him last year.
Trade Randle and 11 to move up, plus Brunson and I'm pretty happy. Realistic?
Quote:
but unloading salary to sign him outright would signal that Dallas has no interest in a sign and trade with the Knicks.
If that's the case, then you have to be careful about what sort of moves you make. You don't want to sacrifice too many draft assets to move off of salaries that are expiring at the end of next season. Rose and Noel are at least functional players when healthy and Burks is a genuine asset on a good deal.
Trading 11 for Brogdon would make me lose my mind. And trading a bunch of salary and 11 for Brogdon would be even worse.
how is clearing 25 million bad?
It depends on how you do it. At the same time I don't think this is a hard thing to do with all the expiring contracts we have, in the end it's what you do with it and I think Dallas matches any offer and move THJ to get space for Brunson
The best thing about Brogdon would be the cost would have to be pretty low considering he's on the last year of the contract. So, Pacers can not pay him 22M and the Knicks can let him have a lot of playing time while he tries to show he can be healthy for his next (last?) contract in the nba.
There's a lot of logic and good fit to bringing him in. But frustratingly, he's yet another stop gap. I guess that's why he's a clear "Plan C" here.
Quote:
at 25 million isn't "great" but it's not bad. #11 straight for Brogdon would be absolutely awful.
11 for Brogdon is such a typical Knicks move I can see it happening. It would reaffirm that Leon Rose is as bad as Isiah Thomas was in running the Knicks.
"typical Knicks move" >> there is NOTHING about this front office group to suggest this would be a typical Knicks move. Thus far, they've basically gathered assets, hit some singles/doubles but haven't made any harmful moves unless you consider the 4*$25 contract to Randle harmful. While that may be true, they couldn't have reasonably expected Randle to become what he became last season.
Quote:
In comment 15737010 Jan in DC said:
Quote:
but unloading salary to sign him outright would signal that Dallas has no interest in a sign and trade with the Knicks.
If that's the case, then you have to be careful about what sort of moves you make. You don't want to sacrifice too many draft assets to move off of salaries that are expiring at the end of next season. Rose and Noel are at least functional players when healthy and Burks is a genuine asset on a good deal.
Trading 11 for Brogdon would make me lose my mind. And trading a bunch of salary and 11 for Brogdon would be even worse.
how is clearing 25 million bad?
Well, it depends on who that salary is. If it's Rose and Noel, then you're dealing 2 players whose salary expires at the end of the upcoming season for a player who is signed for 3 more years and can't stay on the floor.
And you're trading for a PG so you can also go out and sign another PG. And you're using a draft pick to trade Randle at his lowest possible value in order to get off salary you gave him last year.
First off Pacers have 30 million in cap space this offseason, its not trading expirings into Brogdon deal, you are trading Randle for Brogdon, then adding Burks and Noel and clearing their salary, you arent taking on anything..
Second trading for Brogdon doesnt mean he is going to be your starting Point, he can play the 2 pretty easy, you can play Brunson and Brogdon as well together..
They don't need space. But at the same time, he is a UFA, so if he signs w NYK, there isn't an opportunity for Dallas to match.
Quote:
They drafted him, so can't they exceed the cap to sign him?
They don't need space. But at the same time, he is a UFA, so if he signs w NYK, there isn't an opportunity for Dallas to match.
Right. Dallas is banking on him wanting to stay with the winning situation they have now.
Totally agree. They need to prioritize getting him even if it means attaching a 1 (preferably the 2023 Maverick) to take on a big salary (preferably Randle but more likely Fournier) to allow a major offer to Brunson.
Quote:
In comment 15737013 nygiants16 said:
Quote:
In comment 15737010 Jan in DC said:
Quote:
but unloading salary to sign him outright would signal that Dallas has no interest in a sign and trade with the Knicks.
If that's the case, then you have to be careful about what sort of moves you make. You don't want to sacrifice too many draft assets to move off of salaries that are expiring at the end of next season. Rose and Noel are at least functional players when healthy and Burks is a genuine asset on a good deal.
Trading 11 for Brogdon would make me lose my mind. And trading a bunch of salary and 11 for Brogdon would be even worse.
how is clearing 25 million bad?
Well, it depends on who that salary is. If it's Rose and Noel, then you're dealing 2 players whose salary expires at the end of the upcoming season for a player who is signed for 3 more years and can't stay on the floor.
And you're trading for a PG so you can also go out and sign another PG. And you're using a draft pick to trade Randle at his lowest possible value in order to get off salary you gave him last year.
First off Pacers have 30 million in cap space this offseason, its not trading expirings into Brogdon deal, you are trading Randle for Brogdon, then adding Burks and Noel and clearing their salary, you arent taking on anything..
Second trading for Brogdon doesnt mean he is going to be your starting Point, he can play the 2 pretty easy, you can play Brunson and Brogdon as well together..
I addressed your concern in my response. It is obvious that I knew that they had cap space when I mentioned trading Noel, Rose, Randle and 11 for Brogdon. I feel like that's saying "Here's a good draft pick for salary mistakes that we have made" and not treating those expiring deals like assets.
Quote:
In comment 15737032 Heisenberg said:
Quote:
They drafted him, so can't they exceed the cap to sign him?
They don't need space. But at the same time, he is a UFA, so if he signs w NYK, there isn't an opportunity for Dallas to match.
Right. Dallas is banking on him wanting to stay with the winning situation they have now.
I wonder what Brunson wants:
Door #1:
Winning situation
Playing w a Top 3 player but also deferring to him as is necessary w stars
Door #2:
Being the lead guard on a young team (he may want more responsibility)
Playing w Thibs (established relationship), his dad
Other:
-whatever the financial considerations
-whatever his geography preference is
Quote:
In comment 15737021 Jan in DC said:
Quote:
In comment 15737013 nygiants16 said:
Quote:
In comment 15737010 Jan in DC said:
Quote:
but unloading salary to sign him outright would signal that Dallas has no interest in a sign and trade with the Knicks.
If that's the case, then you have to be careful about what sort of moves you make. You don't want to sacrifice too many draft assets to move off of salaries that are expiring at the end of next season. Rose and Noel are at least functional players when healthy and Burks is a genuine asset on a good deal.
Trading 11 for Brogdon would make me lose my mind. And trading a bunch of salary and 11 for Brogdon would be even worse.
how is clearing 25 million bad?
Well, it depends on who that salary is. If it's Rose and Noel, then you're dealing 2 players whose salary expires at the end of the upcoming season for a player who is signed for 3 more years and can't stay on the floor.
And you're trading for a PG so you can also go out and sign another PG. And you're using a draft pick to trade Randle at his lowest possible value in order to get off salary you gave him last year.
First off Pacers have 30 million in cap space this offseason, its not trading expirings into Brogdon deal, you are trading Randle for Brogdon, then adding Burks and Noel and clearing their salary, you arent taking on anything..
Second trading for Brogdon doesnt mean he is going to be your starting Point, he can play the 2 pretty easy, you can play Brunson and Brogdon as well together..
I addressed your concern in my response. It is obvious that I knew that they had cap space when I mentioned trading Noel, Rose, Randle and 11 for Brogdon. I feel like that's saying "Here's a good draft pick for salary mistakes that we have made" and not treating those expiring deals like assets.
They arent assets, you are not getting anything for them, the cap soace and the minutes opening up for your youth is better than having them on the roster
That makes sense given indications are if Sacramento keeps the pick they're leaning towards Murray. I actually think Detroit would be a better trade partner than Sacramento. They're more likely to have interest in a bunch of picks and a young player or two. Cade and Toppin for example would be a really fun duo
It would take a significant price. People in touch with Sacramento say that in the club’s conversations with New York, the Knicks have talked about offering multiple first-round picks in a package for the No. 4 pick. I don’t know which players were offered, but it wasn’t enough to lock a deal in.
Negotiations with the Kings for the No. 4 pick will probably extend into Thursday evening. Sacramento doesn’t have to trade the pick; why wouldn’t the Kings wait until the final hour to see what the best offer looks like?
No surprise there. I rather draft at 11 than trade it for Brogdon.
We gotta stop doing this.
He's the 16th highest paid shooting guard in the NBA before this offeseason even happens. And he was okay last year despite and shot 39% from 3 playing in a trash heap offense with no point guard and a 'superstar' having a terrible season. He has two years left on his contract, and the last year is a team option.
Hell even with massive cap space, their biggest move was signing Randle and second business was signing Fournier.
They will get Brogdon and then crow about how they final have their PG. Never mind that the guy plays 50 games a season and with the minutes that Thibs likes to play his guys, maybe he plays 25 games.
Heading into the third year of the Rose reign, they have very little to show. The extra first round picks were acquired before Rose came on; the cap space was built before Rose was hired; and Randle, love him or hate him, was a previous regime's hire.
Rose's HQ has acquired a ton of second round picks; Obi, Grimes, Quickly and Fournier. Whoopde-damn-do.
Hell even with massive cap space, their biggest move was signing Randle and second business was signing Fournier.
They will get Brogdon and then crow about how they final have their PG. Never mind that the guy plays 50 games a season and with the minutes that Thibs likes to play his guys, maybe he plays 25 games.
Heading into the third year of the Rose reign, they have very little to show. The extra first round picks were acquired before Rose came on; the cap space was built before Rose was hired; and Randle, love him or hate him, was a previous regime's hire.
Rose's HQ has acquired a ton of second round picks; Obi, Grimes, Quickly and Fournier. Whoopde-damn-do.
What a load of crap..
What move did they miss out on? What big star that came available did they miss out on..
The Rose rrgime has set up the Knicks with a young foundation that you can start to talk about building around..
Randle's massive contract is the 50th highest salary in the entire NBA, so big..
Fournier was actually a good player for the Kbicks last year..
You want to kill them for not making a big splash fine but then tell me what you would of done that they missed out on?
This has been my concern all along: the Knicks' roster is so bad that the only assets they have that other teams want are their future first round picks.
If other teams don't want your players, it should be clue that you're at square one and should be accumulating picks.
But this FO isn't going to accept that. Only real question is how big of a crater it will leave upon departure.
Quote:
People in touch with Sacramento say that in the club’s conversations with New York, the Knicks have talked about offering multiple first-round picks in a package for the No. 4 pick. I don’t know which players were offered, but it wasn’t enough to lock a deal in.
This has been my concern all along: the Knicks' roster is so bad that the only assets they have that other teams want are their future first round picks.
If other teams don't want your players, it should be clue that you're at square one and should be accumulating picks.
But this FO isn't going to accept that. Only real question is how big of a crater it will leave upon departure.
The Kbicks have no assets or youbg players to build around if they go get Ivey?
It would take a significant price. People in touch with Sacramento say that in the club’s conversations with New York, the Knicks have talked about offering multiple first-round picks in a package for the No. 4 pick. I don’t know which players were offered, but it wasn’t enough to lock a deal in.
Negotiations with the Kings for the No. 4 pick will probably extend into Thursday evening. Sacramento doesn’t have to trade the pick; why wouldn’t the Kings wait until the final hour to see what the best offer looks like?
Although I don't think it's going to happen, if it did it wouldn't happen until draft night. There's absolutely no reason the Knicks should make the deal now and then risk another team that covets Ivey jumping up to picks 1-3.
Quote:
People in touch with Sacramento say that in the club’s conversations with New York, the Knicks have talked about offering multiple first-round picks in a package for the No. 4 pick. I don’t know which players were offered, but it wasn’t enough to lock a deal in.
This has been my concern all along: the Knicks' roster is so bad that the only assets they have that other teams want are their future first round picks.
If other teams don't want your players, it should be clue that you're at square one and should be accumulating picks.
But this FO isn't going to accept that. Only real question is how big of a crater it will leave upon departure.
Agreed.
But let's not pretend that the floor here (not making any big trades but keeping picks and drafting solid players at their slot) is light years ahead of previous GMs.
My biggest gripe is the mismatch between coach and front office strategy to date. Is there a plan there?
But let's not pretend that the floor here (not making any big trades but keeping picks and drafting solid players at their slot) is light years ahead of previous GMs.
My biggest gripe is the mismatch between coach and front office strategy to date. Is there a plan there?
isn't light years ahead*
I don't agree re: Ivey. If they have conviction in Ivey as a potential star and they're right then whatever they give up will be too little. Imagine if the Knicks had paid an exorbitant price to move up 1 slot and get Curry, or traded with Atlanta to get Doncic or even gave up a couple of firsts to move up 1 slot and get Morant... we'd be in a very different situation as a franchise. Yet in any of those scenarios most fans (and likely the media) would've killed them in the near-term for paying the price it would likely have cost to move up.
Iq, Ivey, Rj, Obi, Mitch with a good bench and you are on to the future..
Iq, Ivey, Rj, Obi, Mitch with a good bench and you are on to the future..
I'd give up IQ or Obi in the deal provided the picks have some light protections (like top 3-4) as downside protection.
This has been my concern all along: the Knicks' roster is so bad that the only assets they have that other teams want are their future first round picks.
If other teams don't want your players, it should be clue that you're at square one and should be accumulating picks.
But this FO isn't going to accept that. Only real question is how big of a crater it will leave upon departure.
I think this is misrepresenting it a bit though. Sacto doesn't need anything the Knicks have. Where's the foothold for a trade?
Sacramento has Fox and Davion Mitchell. It's not surprising they aren't jumping to trade pick 4 for Quickley or McBride.
They have Sabonis. Why would they want Randle?
Grimes or Mitch, those would be the only things that make roster sense.
The fits don't match up with what the Knicks have to offer. I wouldn't fill in the blanks to translate that to "The Knicks have nothing of value". To me that's just tripping over into woe is me knicks babble.
Quote:
and not give up Iq, Rj or Obi and then go and resign Mitch which i am not the biggest fan of but i get it..You Then have your starting 5 for the next 10 years hopefully..
Iq, Ivey, Rj, Obi, Mitch with a good bench and you are on to the future..
I'd give up IQ or Obi in the deal provided the picks have some light protections (like top 3-4) as downside protection.
that would hurt, i get it but that would hurt and i love Ivey
The Kbicks have no assets or youbg players to build around if they go get Ivey?
No, I agree with Barkley. There is a lack of starter material on the roster.
Barrett is someone I can say I have rooted for as an individual, not just as a member of the team, but I can't say he has earned the contract he is going to want.
And projections about anyone else are based on flashes, nothing solid.
Agreed. A deal for Ivey is not going to look great for the Knicks on draft day, but if he is a future star then it's a bargain.
that would hurt, i get it but that would hurt and i love Ivey
For sure but I don't think either of them are franchise trajectory altering talents and I'd rather include one to get some light pick protections. In the case that it doesn't work out, you definitely don't want to compound the mistake by then missing out on a generational talent like Wembanyama.
I would think it's Obi he fits better with what the Kings need. If you trade multiple picks and Obi, grimes, etc. (Kings need wings)
You better be right and I am not sure Ivey is that change a franchise player.
Also I think Randle is on this team to start the season, which is going to be a big culture killer.
If Ivey is that good then he wouldn't last until four, especially since this isn't a great draft class from what I've read. Everybody needs a PG. The game is a lot more wide open that it was decades ago when teams were desperate for "bigs."
If Ivey is that good then he wouldn't last until four, especially since this isn't a great draft class from what I've read. Everybody needs a PG. The game is a lot more wide open that it was decades ago when teams were desperate for "bigs."
First off Ivey is not a PG, he is a combo guard, can play the 1 or 2..
Orlando just drafted Suggs and Cole Anthony..They need a big..
OKC has SGA, they could draft Ivey but most likely get a stretch big to pair with SGA..
Houston just drafted Green and Porter Jr, why would they take Ivey over 1 of the bigs?
Plenty of superstars in this league didnt go 1 or 2..