Thoughts on aggressive pursuit of Fred Van Vleet & Joe Harris/Davis Bertans

[god shammgod]

I'm sure the Pelicans and the Grizzlies agree, since they jumped into the #1 and #2 from the 7-9 slots

Yeah, they got lucky. You are wanting to rely on luck instead of math. The Knicks have had great luck, let's keep trying.

The math involved in the current lottery system isn't any more reliable than luck. That's my point.

You are trying to maximize sh*tty odds, no matter what you do. So you might as well actually build a team.

you gotta respect the cap if you plan on building a team that's any good. this is the opposite of that.

[robillionaire]

I'm sure the Pelicans and the Grizzlies agree, since they jumped into the #1 and #2 from the 7-9 slots

Yeah, they got lucky. You are wanting to rely on luck instead of math. The Knicks have had great luck, let's keep trying.

The math involved in the current lottery system isn't any more reliable than luck. That's my point.

You are trying to maximize sh*tty odds, no matter what you do. So you might as well actually build a team.

I'm not against building a team but once it becomes clear that the team you built isn't going anywhere, you pull the plug on it and play the kids. better yet, just play all young players right out of the gate and focus on player development.. we have refused.

[GONYK]

Yeah, they got lucky. You are wanting to rely on luck instead of math. The Knicks have had great luck, let's keep trying.

The math involved in the current lottery system isn't any more reliable than luck. That's my point.

You are trying to maximize sh*tty odds, no matter what you do. So you might as well actually build a team.

I'm not against building a team but once it becomes clear that the team you built isn't going anywhere, you pull the plug on it and play the kids. better yet, just play all young players right out of the gate and focus on player development.. we have refused.

Two different arguments though.

We can be better at being a young sh*tty team for sure. There is still progress that can be made under those circumstances.

[GONYK]

Yeah, they got lucky. You are wanting to rely on luck instead of math. The Knicks have had great luck, let's keep trying.

The math involved in the current lottery system isn't any more reliable than luck. That's my point.

You are trying to maximize sh*tty odds, no matter what you do. So you might as well actually build a team.

you gotta respect the cap if you plan on building a team that's any good. this is the opposite of that.

Not really, if the players are tradeable.

[Deeeez Knicks]

say you get van vleet for 25 per. and say you now, with some of mitch & rj's improvement, reach 38 wins. which is a best case scenario. now what ? sign giannis. what if he says no ? what if ad says no and kawhi says no ? sign demarr ? you're not getting any good pick at 38 wins. so what is the plan behind making a 1 year improvement ? what is the plan to actually become a contender ? the thing to accept is that nobody is coming to save this franchise most likely. and they certainly aren't coming alone. people bring up the nets and that they attracted durant & kyrie but they also had the cap space to do so. fred van vleet at 25 per on a long contract might become hard to move. so you've messed up the cap space. you've messed up our ability to get good picks. we would be in a worse position than now.

Yea, I am with you on that one. FVV would be a great fit and i like his game but it never works out paying that much to a non-star when you suck like the Knicks. It sounds more like a quick fix attempt.

[god shammgod]

The math involved in the current lottery system isn't any more reliable than luck. That's my point.

You are trying to maximize sh*tty odds, no matter what you do. So you might as well actually build a team.

you gotta respect the cap if you plan on building a team that's any good. this is the opposite of that.

Not really, if the players are tradeable.

i don't know that's he tradeable on a 5 year 25 per contract. he would have to show more.

[GONYK]

say you get van vleet for 25 per. and say you now, with some of mitch & rj's improvement, reach 38 wins. which is a best case scenario. now what ? sign giannis. what if he says no ? what if ad says no and kawhi says no ? sign demarr ? you're not getting any good pick at 38 wins. so what is the plan behind making a 1 year improvement ? what is the plan to actually become a contender ? the thing to accept is that nobody is coming to save this franchise most likely. and they certainly aren't coming alone. people bring up the nets and that they attracted durant & kyrie but they also had the cap space to do so. fred van vleet at 25 per on a long contract might become hard to move. so you've messed up the cap space. you've messed up our ability to get good picks. we would be in a worse position than now.

Yea, I am with you on that one. FVV would be a great fit and i like his game but it never works out paying that much to a non-star when you suck like the Knicks. It sounds more like a quick fix attempt.

I'd give FVV a 2/25 deal and probably not even blink. He raises the floor of this team and gives us a foundation of a roster that actually makes sense.

That's a tradeable deal as well. Obviously, I don't know if he takes it.

[GONYK]

you gotta respect the cap if you plan on building a team that's any good. this is the opposite of that.

Not really, if the players are tradeable.

i don't know that's he tradeable on a 5 year 25 per contract. he would have to show more.

I don't advocate a 5/25 for FVV at all.

Short term big money or long term mediumish money is what I'd offer.

[god shammgod]

Not really, if the players are tradeable.

i don't know that's he tradeable on a 5 year 25 per contract. he would have to show more.

I don't advocate a 5/25 for FVV at all.

Short term big money or long term mediumish money is what I'd offer.

then you're not getting him

[GONYK]

i don't know that's he tradeable on a 5 year 25 per contract. he would have to show more.

I don't advocate a 5/25 for FVV at all.

Short term big money or long term mediumish money is what I'd offer.

then you're not getting him

So be it.

I think he's worth a 4/80 though, even if that's an overpay on our part.

I think TO at least thinks about that, even if they ultimately match.

[Deeeez Knicks]

say you get van vleet for 25 per. and say you now, with some of mitch & rj's improvement, reach 38 wins. which is a best case scenario. now what ? sign giannis. what if he says no ? what if ad says no and kawhi says no ? sign demarr ? you're not getting any good pick at 38 wins. so what is the plan behind making a 1 year improvement ? what is the plan to actually become a contender ? the thing to accept is that nobody is coming to save this franchise most likely. and they certainly aren't coming alone. people bring up the nets and that they attracted durant & kyrie but they also had the cap space to do so. fred van vleet at 25 per on a long contract might become hard to move. so you've messed up the cap space. you've messed up our ability to get good picks. we would be in a worse position than now.

Yea, I am with you on that one. FVV would be a great fit and i like his game but it never works out paying that much to a non-star when you suck like the Knicks. It sounds more like a quick fix attempt.

I'd give FVV a 2/25 deal and probably not even blink. He raises the floor of this team and gives us a foundation of a roster that actually makes sense.

That's a tradeable deal as well. Obviously, I don't know if he takes it.

That sounds pretty reasonable. I think for him to leave Toronto would take a long term commitment and more years. I would make the call, just would walk away if/when the price goes too high. And with the way he is playing and how Toronto seems to love him and vice versa, expecting it to be very high for him to leave.

[god shammgod]

I don't advocate a 5/25 for FVV at all.

Short term big money or long term mediumish money is what I'd offer.

then you're not getting him

So be it.

I think he's worth a 4/80 though, even if that's an overpay on our part.

I think TO at least thinks about that, even if they ultimately match.

he's making 18 per now. you didn't even give him much of a raise.

[BowlRips]

Again I think contract values are all a moot point until we know what the salary cap looks like in 2020-2021 - and what assets you could extract with our cap space changes my perspective on how to go about this offseason.

But assuming things aren't dramatically different then where they were pre-corona -

Giving $35mil combined to FVV and Bertans/Harris for the next 2 years definitely improves the team and our young players.
What you need to show FAs is that the core pieces around them are sufficient to build upon. It's what the Nets did with D'Lo.
And I think our young players would benefit extremely from having 2 pros in the lineup such as FVV and Joe Harris.

Realistically speaking, I don't think we are in the range of a superstar coming here (whether by FA/trade) before 2022. So makes sense to build everyone up between now and then.

[Nazrmohamed]

I'm not as high as Bertans as some of you are. Its basically l I keep you want shooting so you find every shooter regardless of other skill. The guy plays PF and averages 4 boards. Now you have a new problem. Replace him with Christian Wood or even Marcus Morris and you get a few skills including rebounding and defense. Not to mention I don't think Thibs is as enamored with pace and space as we are. Im sure hes smart enough to realize your PF needs to be ABLE to shoot but to seek that out as the primary skill while ignoring everything else is not realistic. I like FVV and Harris though.

I like Harris, but I think his cost will be more than a rebuilding team without a star should pay.

Firstly, the Nets consider themselves contenders with Durant/Kyrie/Lavert(? - unless dealt for another 'star") and Harris is the kind of complimentary 3rd/4th option/floor spacer a contender would want and would pay for. So, considering the Nets can over the cap to do that, seems they would. Or another team would give him "Reddick Money"

And while he'd help the Knicks, minus the star player(s) or big time youth prospect, I don't think it's wise for the Knicks or a team like them to tie up that kind of money in that kind of player, as useful as that player is.

Bertrans might be ok at the right price, but I doubt his price is the right price, so I like more money to Morris or less money to a Jerami Grant type, or some other name I'm missing.

Also, again, not sure of price tag, but Aaron Baynes would be the kind of player I'd overpay for a year, MAYBE two. He'd give the Knicks a stretch 5 off the bench, to open up the floor when Mitch isn't on it, just in a different way.

I forgot about Jeremy Grant. Great choice. I loved Morris while he was here. Not so much the position he played, and I'd really only take him if we can unload Randle but I need that mix of skills even for a stretch 4. I think people get too carried away with the word stretch. I get that 4s need to shoot 3s but it shouldn't be the only shot they can take. Morris has that well rounded style for a 4 and tbh it isnt even all that well rounded for my standards of a traditional 4 but its better than some dude just camping all game

[GONYK]

then you're not getting him

So be it.

I think he's worth a 4/80 though, even if that's an overpay on our part.

I think TO at least thinks about that, even if they ultimately match.

he's making 18 per now. you didn't even give him much of a raise.

He's making 9 per now.

That's more than doubling his salary

[god shammgod]

So be it.

I think he's worth a 4/80 though, even if that's an overpay on our part.

I think TO at least thinks about that, even if they ultimately match.

he's making 18 per now. you didn't even give him much of a raise.

He's making 9 per now.

That's more than doubling his salary

oh. i read that wrong.

still. i saw 25-30 per floated. this seems like a big mistake if so.

[3toheadmelo]

Read on Twitter

I do like Fred and would take him without an overpay though

[Nazrmohamed]

I'm not as high as Bertans as some of you are. Its basically l I keep you want shooting so you find every shooter regardless of other skill. The guy plays PF and averages 4 boards. Now you have a new problem. Replace him with Christian Wood or even Marcus Morris and you get a few skills including rebounding and defense. Not to mention I don't think Thibs is as enamored with pace and space as we are. Im sure hes smart enough to realize your PF needs to be ABLE to shoot but to seek that out as the primary skill while ignoring everything else is not realistic. I like FVV and Harris though.

I definitely see your point. Jerian Grant has also turned into a solid 3 point shooter and provides defense so maybe that could work. My only concern is that we had Morris last year and it still didn't translate to success on the court. We still had spacing issues, I wonder if the jump from a good 3 point shooter (Morris) to an elite 3 point shooter (Bertans) is enough of a difference to negate his lack of other contributions.

I mean the other team CANNOT leave Bertans open, if they do we will probably win, guys like Morris, Grant and Woods won't inspire the same type of fear in the 3 point defense the way Bertans does. The question is how good can our team defense be on the other end.

Well remember, we had an abundance of PFs and Morris even at SF was better than any other option so we played him there.

To me this whole conversation assumes Randle is traded unless you guys are talking about bench options

At PF I think he'd be more impactful but in any case, it doesn't have to be Morris. I just mean a player like that. Sure you gotta shoot but I need you to muscle up guys as well. Im not looking to create a Dantoni offense here

[NoDopeOnSundays]

say you get van vleet for 25 per. and say you now, with some of mitch & rj's improvement, reach 38 wins. which is a best case scenario. now what ? sign giannis. what if he says no ? what if ad says no and kawhi says no ? sign demarr ? you're not getting any good pick at 38 wins. so what is the plan beyond making a 1 year improvement ? what is the plan to actually become a contender ? the thing to accept is that nobody is coming to save this franchise most likely. and they certainly aren't coming alone. people bring up the nets and that they attracted durant & kyrie but they also had the cap space to do so. fred van vleet at 25 per on a long contract might become hard to move. so you've messed up the cap space. you've messed up our ability to get good picks. we would be in a worse position than now.

You're banking on the development of RJ and whoever we draft this year and next, not on landing big time free agents. I have no delusions about signing Giannis he's not coming here, and neither is anyone else if we can't get quality players. On that front I want player development and smart signings and to me FVV is a very smart move because it finally gives us a PG for the next 4-5 yrs. He is the absolute perfect type of PG to pair with someone like RJ because he can function on and off the ball at a high level, the Toronto system requires everyone but the center to be able to create to some degree or shoot the 3 when open, there's nobody in the draft that is ready to do that, not yet at least and that's not even taking into account his defense.

I'd rather have him at 20-23 million per year than Randle at the same numbers, just think about his salary going a year longer, but with the same money as Randle while being a much better player and fit for the team. Is it worth it to have a player who can shoot high volume threes off the ball, while also being an on ball threat? Yes. Can you build around that if your PG is set for 4 years? yes. Even in terms of position he doesn't stop you from drafting another PG, because he's currently playing SG in a midget backcourt with Lowry while guarding people much bigger than himself. Every single one of our best players are on rookie contracts, I don't see the big worry with signing him.

[god shammgod]

say you get van vleet for 25 per. and say you now, with some of mitch & rj's improvement, reach 38 wins. which is a best case scenario. now what ? sign giannis. what if he says no ? what if ad says no and kawhi says no ? sign demarr ? you're not getting any good pick at 38 wins. so what is the plan beyond making a 1 year improvement ? what is the plan to actually become a contender ? the thing to accept is that nobody is coming to save this franchise most likely. and they certainly aren't coming alone. people bring up the nets and that they attracted durant & kyrie but they also had the cap space to do so. fred van vleet at 25 per on a long contract might become hard to move. so you've messed up the cap space. you've messed up our ability to get good picks. we would be in a worse position than now.

You're banking on the development of RJ and whoever we draft this year and next, not on landing big time free agents. I have no delusions about signing Giannis he's not coming here, and neither is anyone else if we can't get quality players. On that front I want player development and smart signings and to me FVV is a very smart move because it finally gives us a PG for the next 4-5 yrs. He is the absolute perfect type of PG to pair with someone like RJ because he can function on and off the ball at a high level, the Toronto system requires everyone but the center to be able to create to some degree or shoot the 3 when open, there's nobody in the draft that is ready to do that, not yet at least and that's not even taking into account his defense.

I'd rather have him at 20-23 million per year than Randle at the same numbers, just think about his salary going a year longer, but with the same money as Randle while being a much better player and fit for the team. Is it worth it to have a player who can shoot high volume threes off the ball, while also being an on ball threat? Yes. Can you build around that if your PG is set for 4 years? yes. Even in terms of position he doesn't stop you from drafting another PG, because he's currently playing SG in a midget backcourt with Lowry while guarding people much bigger than himself. Every single one of our best players are on rookie contracts, I don't see the big worry with signing him.

i guess i wouldn't bank on that. rj, whoever we draft at 8, and whoever we draft next year with a pick worse than 8 might not really be worth building around. i'd want to see a young player perform at a high level before i make that decision. if we had drafted a ja morant i could see this plan. we didn't. until then, keep the cap space open and keep ourselves as high in the draft as possible.