NFT: Knicks trade talks and rumors

and the market is drying up?

tough the remainder of the season. We may end up dropping out of the top 10 and into the lottery if they continue to flounder. It would be painful but probably for the best going forward. Basically every player on the team sans Brunson should be made available in trade talks - whether it be now or this summer. Although I'd really want to keep IQ and Grimes.

and has very little trade value, are you?

maybe the good feelings lasts 2-3 days or even a week, before too long I get annoyed about them. The annoyance always wins the day.

simply preferred RH (more reliable albeit less long term upside) over CR

The Knicks are in a tough spot: They have a ton of draft that they probably can't use themselves and some players at the end of the bench who have some value. They need to flip those assets and consolidate them into better picks, better players, or both.

They are also clearly not good enough to make any serious run as currently constitutued. They're a solidly mediocre team — one of the worst things you can be in the NBA.

But other teams know that they need to make a trade, and will try to fleece them.

Any contender (in any sport) trying to fill a hole is usually going to overpay at the deadline. That's how it works. Other teams will treat the Knicks like a contender. Rose may be looking at this and thinking "We're NOT a contender, we aren't going to overpay like one." Fair. But at some point, he's got to find a way to make a move, preferably to improve the team for this season, but absolutely to improve the roster for future seasons. I have no idea what that would be. But I'm pretty sure "Clear cap space and lure a star free agent" isn't gonna work.

if Rose sits on his hands again this trade deadline, he needs to be fired..I dont care if its just a bench piece to add alittle scoring..

How you going to sit on your hands and not add anything? I dont care if they dont trade rose, Fournier or Reddish, but you need to add a bench piece..

Rose has become so afraid of making a trade

In comment 16011893 NYG22 said:

Quote:

simply preferred RH (more reliable albeit less long term upside) over CR

I had the same thought.

I think our insider here - aj - mentioned the Knicks made that offer. Probably an unprotected first and two protected or something.

New report indicates Toronto wants two unprotected firsts.

but if a contender came to you and offered 2 1sts for Randle, you should do it, i am not saying give him away for peanuts, but if someone came with a good offer, he shouldnt be off the table..

Same with anyone else other than Brunson..Grimes and Quick in the right deal..

In comment 16011958 nygiants16 said:

Quote:

but if a contender came to you and offered 2 1sts for Randle, you should do it, i am not saying give him away for peanuts, but if someone came with a good offer, he shouldnt be off the table.. Same with anyone else other than Brunson..Grimes and Quick in the right deal..

the more I see of Randle the more I feel like he needs to go. He has the emotional intelligence of a 5 year old. I just don't think you can win with a guy like that as one of your best players. The talent and work ethic is there. But he's a dummy.

In comment 16011859 Kmed6000 said:

Quote:

and the market is drying up?

Drying up for Cam and options are low with the cap number he has

In comment 16011966 Enzo said:

Quote:

In comment 16011958 nygiants16 said: Quote: but if a contender came to you and offered 2 1sts for Randle, you should do it, i am not saying give him away for peanuts, but if someone came with a good offer, he shouldnt be off the table.. Same with anyone else other than Brunson..Grimes and Quick in the right deal.. the more I see of Randle the more I feel like he needs to go. He has the emotional intelligence of a 5 year old. I just don't think you can win with a guy like that as one of your best players. The talent and work ethic is there. But he's a dummy.

Hopefully 2 unprotected and let one of them end up as top 10. Then replace Randle with a guy like Collins or a solid PF type. I could probably live with that.

In comment 16011968 larryflower37 said:

Quote:

In comment 16011859 Kmed6000 said: Quote: and the market is drying up? Drying up for Cam and options are low with the cap number he has

Trading Reddish for Grayson Allen would be hilarious

In comment 16011966 Enzo said:

Quote:

In comment 16011958 nygiants16 said: Quote: but if a contender came to you and offered 2 1sts for Randle, you should do it, i am not saying give him away for peanuts, but if someone came with a good offer, he shouldnt be off the table.. Same with anyone else other than Brunson..Grimes and Quick in the right deal.. the more I see of Randle the more I feel like he needs to go. He has the emotional intelligence of a 5 year old. I just don't think you can win with a guy like that as one of your best players. The talent and work ethic is there. But he's a dummy.

That is the thing with Randle, he can flat out take over games, but then all of sudden do 3 or 4 stupid things..

It is the same with Rj..

If Rj and randle were smarter players, Knicks would be a no doubt top 6 team

In comment 16011958 nygiants16 said:

Quote:

but if a contender came to you and offered 2 1sts for Randle, you should do it, i am not saying give him away for peanuts, but if someone came with a good offer, he shouldnt be off the table.. Same with anyone else other than Brunson..Grimes and Quick in the right deal..

Everyone is on the table, I don't think their is a big deal out there but this roster is not winning a championship so you listen to everyone

In comment 16011947 bceagle05 said:

Quote:

I think our insider here - aj - mentioned the Knicks made that offer. Probably an unprotected first and two protected or something. New report indicates Toronto wants two unprotected firsts.

Correct on the breakdown

I wonder if including RJB along with draft compensation makes sense.

Toronto perspective: While it shouldn't matter, RJBs Canadian roots would be well received there. He is young and cost controlled. He also plays a position that will be lightened by Onunoby (in this trade) and Trent (walk year of contract).

NYK perspective: Onunoby is the best wing defender in the league. Also a solid offensive player with an efficient 17 ppg.

is a group I'd enjoy watching until something bigger and better came along (if it ever does). Much better shooting, defense and athleticism. I think we've gone as far as we're gonna go with the Randle/RJ forward combo.

In comment 16011989 bceagle05 said:

Quote:

is a group I'd enjoy watching until something bigger and better came along (if it ever does). Much better shooting, defense and athleticism. I think we've gone as far as we're gonna go with the Randle/RJ forward combo.

Problem is Thibs is never playing that lineup

But if they get OG I think you have to move Barrett. I don’t see the fit.

Makes too much sense he is loved up there .
Problem is they don't need to sell tickets they need wins and they want a haul.
OG is cheap for the next 2 1/2 years and if they are rebuilding they want picks too.
No way the Knicks should give up multiple 1st and RJ for OG and filler.
He just doesn't move the needle enough over RJ.
3 or 4 more wins?

RJB as a bit of a fool's gold player. Is he going to average 20-ish? Sure. But it will always be inefficient and he will always struggle to finish in traffic while being barely adequate from the perimeter, especially if off the dribble.

For OG.
NBA radio just said someone offered 3 first for OG.
Scalabrini said it must be the Knicks

In comment 16012024 larryflower37 said:

Quote:

For OG. NBA radio just said someone offered 3 first for OG. Scalabrini said it must be the Knicks

yes and then trade Rj in the offseason

instead of seeing lineups of Brunson or Iq with 3 wings and Mitch or Randle, you would see OG at the 2 or 3 only, Iq and Grimes minutes cut and have Mitch or Hartenstein playing the 48 at center..

He wouldnt use the value of OG properly

In comment 16012043 nygiants16 said:

Quote:

instead of seeing lineups of Brunson or Iq with 3 wings and Mitch or Randle, you would see OG at the 2 or 3 only, Iq and Grimes minutes cut and have Mitch or Hartenstein playing the 48 at center.. He wouldnt use the value of OG properly

Yep
No way Thibs moves RJ out of the lineup, he would move Grimes to the 2nd unit first off the bench.
Also in that scenario if you want to trade Barrett its the smart move.

He reported the LAC have shown interest in a reunion with New York Knicks backup center Isaiah Hartenstein as well, which would address a lack of depth behind Ivica Zubac.

In comment 16012101 larryflower37 said:

Quote:

He reported the LAC have shown interest in a reunion with New York Knicks backup center Isaiah Hartenstein as well, which would address a lack of depth behind Ivica Zubac.

Cam and Hartenstein for a future first. Do it.

In comment 16012101 larryflower37 said:

Quote:

He reported the LAC have shown interest in a reunion with New York Knicks backup center Isaiah Hartenstein as well, which would address a lack of depth behind Ivica Zubac.

TAKE HIM

Very different than in the past.

Defense is always plus but guards and small forwards have to average 25+ points per 48 minutes and preferably 30 points per 48.

Grimes would have fit like a glove with Ewing-Oakley Knicks but today he just does not score enough.

Given that Brunson, RJ and Randle can score but not at a Durant, Luca, Mitchell level, they need a big man who can score and score from 3 point land.

That's the only way this team, with this core becomes a contender. Either that or you have to rip it all up again (which would be bad imo)

For reasons such as self preservation,lack of confidence,or not knowing if the coach will get along / play the new acquisition.

What a mess

In comment 16012048 larryflower37 said:

Quote:

In comment 16012043 nygiants16 said: Quote: instead of seeing lineups of Brunson or Iq with 3 wings and Mitch or Randle, you would see OG at the 2 or 3 only, Iq and Grimes minutes cut and have Mitch or Hartenstein playing the 48 at center.. He wouldnt use the value of OG properly Yep No way Thibs moves RJ out of the lineup, he would move Grimes to the 2nd unit first off the bench. Also in that scenario if you want to trade Barrett its the smart move.

Young guys need consistent minutes to develop. Playing IQ 40 minutes one night and 10 the next is not the way to go. But that's what coaches do, who fear losing their job. And this fear is clearly whats driving Thibs now

In comment 16012153 ghost718 said:

Quote:

For reasons such as self preservation,lack of confidence,or not knowing if the coach will get along / play the new acquisition. What a mess

Solution: fire Thibs.

But meanwhile, maybe he's hesitant because he usually gets taken to the cleaners on his trades.

Him and his team are likely gone.

In comment 16012152 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

Very different than in the past. Defense is always plus but guards and small forwards have to average 25+ points per 48 minutes and preferably 30 points per 48. Grimes would have fit like a glove with Ewing-Oakley Knicks but today he just does not score enough. Given that Brunson, RJ and Randle can score but not at a Durant, Luca, Mitchell level, they need a big man who can score and score from 3 point land. That's the only way this team, with this core becomes a contender. Either that or you have to rip it all up again (which would be bad imo)

You cant have a scorer at every position, thats not how it works, Grimes is actually a perfect fit next to other scorers..

In comment 16012165 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

Him and his team are likely gone.

can't wait to see what unqualified exec they bring in next.
Allan Houston?

In comment 16011958 nygiants16 said:

Quote:

but if a contender came to you and offered 2 1sts for Randle, you should do it, i am not saying give him away for peanuts, but if someone came with a good offer, he shouldnt be off the table.. Same with anyone else other than Brunson..Grimes and Quick in the right deal..

It would be bold but I honestly think it would be a prudent move at this point. At some point you need to find out what you have in Toppin. If it doesn’t work out and you dip into the lottery the so be it.

Are there any potential teams for Randle at this point?

It’s not all doom for the Knicks but they are just in a really shitty roster situation of no man’s land.

In comment 16012160 Anakim said:

Quote:

Solution: fire Thibs. But meanwhile, maybe he's hesitant because he usually gets taken to the cleaners on his trades.

The whole Cam thing is enough for me.It's not like this guy was proving to be just another goofball with athletic ability.You could see the improvement as he got more playing time.But we have a coach here who's delusional

In comment 16012165 ajr2456 said:

Quote:

Him and his team are likely gone.

I'm fine with that

is shit or get off the pot, yeah you can say hey look at the draft capital, look at the talent we have added but at some point you have to build a team and say ok here we go..

Every year its well we are set up to add some pieces..

After that 1st year, it was ok we got cap space lets add to a 4th seed team, instead they sign everyone back to manageable contracts and add Kemba and Ofurnie still look for a star..

after the 2nd year it was ok lets get rid of those contracts bring in Brunson, great, but you are still holding onto draft picks and flexibiloty rather than taking the big swing..

Now this year you still sit on your hands..You have yo make a move to at least show the fans this is what we built, lets see what happens..But for the Knicks its still hey we got draft picks and flexibiloty..

Fricken do something..Rant over

In comment 16012152 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

Very different than in the past. Defense is always plus but guards and small forwards have to average 25+ points per 48 minutes and preferably 30 points per 48. Grimes would have fit like a glove with Ewing-Oakley Knicks but today he just does not score enough. Given that Brunson, RJ and Randle can score but not at a Durant, Luca, Mitchell level, they need a big man who can score and score from 3 point land. That's the only way this team, with this core becomes a contender. Either that or you have to rip it all up again (which would be bad imo)

Center is the obvious spot for an upgrade, followed by shooting guard. Mitch is a nice piece but this team, as currently constitutued, isn't going anywhere with him as the starting center. Hartenstein isn't providing the production they hoped for. Sims is nice depth; wish he'd develop more of an offensive game.

In the draft, they should be able to get one of the top bigs after Wembanyana — but the top bigs aren't the top players in the draft. Some mock drafts have them taking wings, some taking bigs.

I don't know whether they have enough draft capital to trade up, or if they'd find a trade partner, or if there's anyone worth trading up for.

Or, maybe they fall apart the rest of the way, land in the lottery and get lucky.

as the cap goes up (supposedly another spike is coming unless everyone agrees for more gradual increases), his contract starts to look really good given his production.

In comment 16012173 nygiants16 said:

Quote:

In comment 16012152 Vanzetti said: Quote: Very different than in the past. Defense is always plus but guards and small forwards have to average 25+ points per 48 minutes and preferably 30 points per 48. Grimes would have fit like a glove with Ewing-Oakley Knicks but today he just does not score enough. Given that Brunson, RJ and Randle can score but not at a Durant, Luca, Mitchell level, they need a big man who can score and score from 3 point land. That's the only way this team, with this core becomes a contender. Either that or you have to rip it all up again (which would be bad imo) You cant have a scorer at every position, thats not how it works, Grimes is actually a perfect fit next to other scorers..

You can't have a shooting guard who averages ten points a game in today's NBA.

In comment 16012233 nygiants16 said:

Quote:

is shit or get off the pot, yeah you can say hey look at the draft capital, look at the talent we have added but at some point you have to build a team and say ok here we go.. Every year its well we are set up to add some pieces.. After that 1st year, it was ok we got cap space lets add to a 4th seed team, instead they sign everyone back to manageable contracts and add Kemba and Ofurnie still look for a star.. after the 2nd year it was ok lets get rid of those contracts bring in Brunson, great, but you are still holding onto draft picks and flexibiloty rather than taking the big swing.. Now this year you still sit on your hands..You have yo make a move to at least show the fans this is what we built, lets see what happens..But for the Knicks its still hey we got draft picks and flexibiloty.. Fricken do something..Rant over

I don't necessarily have an issue with him having a ton of patience, but to me the bigger problem is that his plan isn't working. Seems like the plan was to be "good" while also accumulating assets for trades. Here we are in year 3 and they're just not very good. I get it that they're basically league average on defense and good on offense (top 5!) - but we all know what happens to the offense in the 4th quarter. And it's not translating to enough wins.

And he hired the wrong coach.

In comment 16012265 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

In comment 16012173 nygiants16 said: Quote: In comment 16012152 Vanzetti said: Quote: Very different than in the past. Defense is always plus but guards and small forwards have to average 25+ points per 48 minutes and preferably 30 points per 48. Grimes would have fit like a glove with Ewing-Oakley Knicks but today he just does not score enough. Given that Brunson, RJ and Randle can score but not at a Durant, Luca, Mitchell level, they need a big man who can score and score from 3 point land. That's the only way this team, with this core becomes a contender. Either that or you have to rip it all up again (which would be bad imo) You cant have a scorer at every position, thats not how it works, Grimes is actually a perfect fit next to other scorers.. You can't have a shooting guard who averages ten points a game in today's NBA.

tell that to the Bucks, Nuggets, Nets, Clips, etc.

Your point is reductive and simply wrong.

In comment 16012265 Vanzetti said:

Quote:

In comment 16012173 nygiants16 said: Quote: In comment 16012152 Vanzetti said: Quote: Very different than in the past. Defense is always plus but guards and small forwards have to average 25+ points per 48 minutes and preferably 30 points per 48. Grimes would have fit like a glove with Ewing-Oakley Knicks but today he just does not score enough. Given that Brunson, RJ and Randle can score but not at a Durant, Luca, Mitchell level, they need a big man who can score and score from 3 point land. That's the only way this team, with this core becomes a contender. Either that or you have to rip it all up again (which would be bad imo) You cant have a scorer at every position, thats not how it works, Grimes is actually a perfect fit next to other scorers.. You can't have a shooting guard who averages ten points a game in today's NBA.

You can when your PG averages 22, your SF who hlaverages 20 and a PF who averages 25..No matter who you put there, unless you move Brunson, Rj or Randle, they are not going to average a lot of points..

He is a shooter and defender, thats what you need next to the guys they have..

If they add a star, its not to replace Grimes

that is the best path forward

Last year when we sucked he got quite a bit of attention for his play overseas. I wonder if they'll promise him a role next year with Derrick Rose gone and McBride failing to step up. We need another lefty!

if Knicks cave by the deadline and offer 2 unprotected to the Raptors