PG Thread: Oh no, we suck again!

[GONYK]

I think this team will show that they can beat any team but they can also lose to any team

I mean, that's every team.

We beat the Bucks by 30 last year

[mpharris36]

So mediocrity basically. Better than being a bottom of the barrel team I suppose

Yes and no. I was stonned for saying I would trade anyone on the roster for Suggs. But in reality if you think of trade value is there anyone on our roster that would net more return then him?

If you suck you can land a franchise piece via the draft. Currently right now we can only acquire that piece via trade and it takes two to tango rather than a draft pick not having an option where he goes.

I'm not saying either way is better or not. But there are pros and cons to each way of trying to build a legit contender.

True. I meant better for us in our situation since management is trying to just tread water right now until the chance at a star player arises

well yes if we committed this money to veteran players and still sucked it would be a total disaster.

There use to be 3 ways to play it. Draft/FA/Trade. There really isn't a FA path anymore since anyone worth a damn is extended since its financially better for them and then if they aren't happy they just ask out.

So its really Trade or Draft and while trade option probably results in better immediate success you can kinda cap your trajectory out if you don't do it the right way. Draft is a crap shoot as well if you don't pick top tier talent at the top of the draft but at least you have a shot at it.

[GONYK]

I think this team will show that they can beat any team but they can also lose to any team

So mediocrity basically. Better than being a bottom of the barrel team I suppose

Yes and no. I was stonned for saying I would trade anyone on the roster for Suggs. But in reality if you think of trade value is there anyone on our roster that would net more return then him?

If you suck you can land a franchise piece via the draft. Currently right now we can only acquire that piece via trade and it takes two to tango rather than a draft pick not having an option where he goes.

I'm not saying either way is better or not. But there are pros and cons to each way of trying to build a legit contender.

How many true franchise pieces are available in a draft? I mean #1 options on a championship team. One every 5-10 years?

There is premium on team building, regardless of the route.

[mpharris36]

I don't disagree. I think the "star trade" template is fairly set. A young piece or two, a bunch of picks, and some useful vets on movable deals for cap relief.

I think we will keep these template pieces in stock until the move is ready.

I also think we aren't passively waiting for certain players to declare they want out. We're operating behind the scenes to know (and maybe shape) the landscape.

The larger issue is that there are probably only 5 players in the league who are true #1s

I think guys like KAT/Spida/SGA would fit into that mold of guys we would nearly empty the cupboard for but those pieces could be 2-3 years down the road because they all are under contract and there teams have little incentive to move them at this moment.

You canvas the league and you try to find the next opportunity but there are no guarantees. The template works as long as keep pushing assets down the road. Maybe the Knicks g
Keep trading 1st rounders for future first. But once there guys on rookie deals contract starts coming up (Mitch this year/RJ next year so on). The assets to make the right deal might not be as appealing to a team.

It's interesting you bring up Mitchell. I almost put his name as the poster child of someone who would be expensive, but I don't think helps us that much and I don't think is a true #1.

I think the legend of Spida is starting to cast a bigger shadow than his actual production warrants. He needs to make another leap.

KAT...meh

SGA I'm all in on.

I'm just preparing you that if Mitchell becomes available they wont hesitate with him. That is what I'm saying though. If the plan is wait and strike and Mitchell is that guy (who I like but he isn't the most efficient). Does that put us over the top?

If it doesn't was the plan faulty because that is what the FO is doing. I also don't think the FO with its connections to KAT would hesitate on him either.

But if not them then is SGA the only guy right now that you would be excited about a deal? that is semi realistic becuase he's on a bad team and you could see him asking out...does anyone else fit that mold for you?

[3toheadmelo]

i bet JXL doesn’t make the next game thread. he usually makes game threads against the worst teams

[GONYK]

I think guys like KAT/Spida/SGA would fit into that mold of guys we would nearly empty the cupboard for but those pieces could be 2-3 years down the road because they all are under contract and there teams have little incentive to move them at this moment.

You canvas the league and you try to find the next opportunity but there are no guarantees. The template works as long as keep pushing assets down the road. Maybe the Knicks g
Keep trading 1st rounders for future first. But once there guys on rookie deals contract starts coming up (Mitch this year/RJ next year so on). The assets to make the right deal might not be as appealing to a team.

It's interesting you bring up Mitchell. I almost put his name as the poster child of someone who would be expensive, but I don't think helps us that much and I don't think is a true #1.

I think the legend of Spida is starting to cast a bigger shadow than his actual production warrants. He needs to make another leap.

KAT...meh

SGA I'm all in on.

I'm just preparing you that if Mitchell becomes available they wont hesitate with him. That is what I'm saying though. If the plan is wait and strike and Mitchell is that guy (who I like but he isn't the most efficient). Does that put us over the top?

Of course they would. Same with KAT. Those guys are clear improvements over our current roster. That isn't quite the point I was making.

If it doesn't was the plan faulty because that is what the FO is doing. I also don't think the FO with its connections to KAT would hesitate on him either.

This is the larger question. I say no, the plan wasn't faulty. It's just not done. Either way, we're back to team building being the true skill, not star acquisition. There aren't enough true stars for the acquisition part of it to be the whole plan.

But if not them then is SGA the only guy right now that you would be excited about a deal? that is semi realistic becuase he's on a bad team and you could see him asking out...does anyone else fit that mold for you?

SGA would be great, but Presti would basically get the farm.

Since there aren't that many actual franchise players, I think any deal we do would have to be a two-fer. Guys coming to team up.

In that scenario, KAT and Mitchell would be better than either in isolation.

This is all crazy speculative, but I think the FO knows when they shoot their shot, it has to be a nuclear bomb, not a cannon ball, if you catch my drift.

If not, they will do things incrementally. As long as they put a competitive team out there, they will get the rope. Much like Masai did in TO until Kawhi was available.

[mpharris36]

So mediocrity basically. Better than being a bottom of the barrel team I suppose

Yes and no. I was stonned for saying I would trade anyone on the roster for Suggs. But in reality if you think of trade value is there anyone on our roster that would net more return then him?

If you suck you can land a franchise piece via the draft. Currently right now we can only acquire that piece via trade and it takes two to tango rather than a draft pick not having an option where he goes.

I'm not saying either way is better or not. But there are pros and cons to each way of trying to build a legit contender.

How many true franchise pieces are available in a draft? I mean #1 options on a championship team. One every 5-10 years?

There is premium on team building, regardless of the route.

right away? very few but just watching Ja Morant last night he is coming into his own now and you just have more time with younger players then you would have with a more veteran team/trade approach. LaMelo Ball and Anthony Edwards look to be making that next leap. This current class looks pretty good. All those drafts would have perceived more trade value throughout the league then anyone currently on our roster even though or roster is better in terms of winning.

I do think there was value to the knicks being competitive for the sake of the fan base of us being trashed on every year. So I get that.

But the Nets route where you can get better and FA will want to come just isn't a thing anymore. FA just isn't the same with these new max extension rules. Guys don't hit the open market anymore. And if they do they are more the Demar Derozan types where are they really franchise changers?

It will have to come via trade. And when that happens no one knows so it kinda has you in a holding pattern but priorities aren't young players they are wins so guys like Kemba/Burks/Rose/Fournier will be prioritized for wins and they are better than young players but we won't ever see if McBride or Grimes are players. Like I said I see pros and cons for both. I agree wins do hold value when trying to build a culture that was just erroded away from all the knicks ineptitude so I get that.

[mpharris36]

i bet JXL doesn’t make the next game thread. he usually makes game threads against the worst teams

selective GT's one of the oldest tricks in the realgm book!

[mpharris36]

It's interesting you bring up Mitchell. I almost put his name as the poster child of someone who would be expensive, but I don't think helps us that much and I don't think is a true #1.

I think the legend of Spida is starting to cast a bigger shadow than his actual production warrants. He needs to make another leap.

KAT...meh

SGA I'm all in on.

I'm just preparing you that if Mitchell becomes available they wont hesitate with him. That is what I'm saying though. If the plan is wait and strike and Mitchell is that guy (who I like but he isn't the most efficient). Does that put us over the top?

Of course they would. Same with KAT. Those guys are clear improvements over our current roster. That isn't quite the point I was making.

If it doesn't was the plan faulty because that is what the FO is doing. I also don't think the FO with its connections to KAT would hesitate on him either.

This is the larger question. I say no, the plan wasn't faulty. It's just not done. Either way, we're back to team building being the true skill, not star acquisition. There aren't enough true stars for the acquisition part of it to be the whole plan.

But if not them then is SGA the only guy right now that you would be excited about a deal? that is semi realistic becuase he's on a bad team and you could see him asking out...does anyone else fit that mold for you?

SGA would be great, but Presti would basically get the farm.

Since there aren't that many actual franchise players, I think any deal we do would have to be a two-fer. Guys coming to team up.

In that scenario, KAT and Mitchell would be better than either in isolation.

This is all crazy speculative, but I think the FO knows when they shoot their shot, it has to be a nuclear bomb, not a cannon ball, if you catch my drift.

If not, they will do things incrementally. As long as they put a competitive team out there, they will get the rope. Much like Masai did in TO until Kawhi was available.

do you think we have enough trade ammo to get both from that "second tier" you are talking about. I personally don't' see us have the trade capital to land both KAT/Mitchell.

[3toheadmelo]

it’s gonna be impossible to acquire a first option player without giving up almost all of our assets including RJ. so I would look at some cheaper second option players. I keep saying this but I think CJ McCollum could be a nice get on the low.

[GONYK]

Yes and no. I was stonned for saying I would trade anyone on the roster for Suggs. But in reality if you think of trade value is there anyone on our roster that would net more return then him?

If you suck you can land a franchise piece via the draft. Currently right now we can only acquire that piece via trade and it takes two to tango rather than a draft pick not having an option where he goes.

I'm not saying either way is better or not. But there are pros and cons to each way of trying to build a legit contender.

How many true franchise pieces are available in a draft? I mean #1 options on a championship team. One every 5-10 years?

There is premium on team building, regardless of the route.

right away? very few but just watching Ja Morant last night he is coming into his own now and you just have more time with younger players then you would have with a more veteran team/trade approach. LaMelo Ball and Anthony Edwards look to be making that next leap. This current class looks pretty good. All those drafts would have perceived more trade value throughout the league then anyone currently on our roster even though or roster is better in terms of winning.

I think the overwhelming probability is that none of those guys will be perennial MVP candidates.

Every class looks good until the players get to the NBA. And then you see that there are a few all-stars, a few great starters, a bunch of bench players and every 10 years you get a Luka type.

I do think there was value to the knicks being competitive for the sake of the fan base of us being trashed on every year. So I get that.

But the Nets route where you can get better and FA will want to come just isn't a thing anymore. FA just isn't the same with these new max extension rules. Guys don't hit the open market anymore. And if they do they are more the Demar Derozan types where are they really franchise changers?

It will have to come via trade. And when that happens no one knows so it kinda has you in a holding pattern but priorities aren't young players they are wins so guys like Kemba/Burks/Rose/Fournier will be prioritized for wins and they are better than young players but we won't ever see if McBride or Grimes are players. Like I said I see pros and cons for both. I agree wins do hold value when trying to build a culture that was just erroded away from all the knicks ineptitude so I get that.

I agree with that. But I don't think that means that the draft is better. It means that our FO has to adapt. You need to hit on your later round picks, invest in team development, coaching, etc... and keep your cap manageable.

The draft is more of a crapshoot than paying for proven production though. There are so many variables, and even if things break right, you still don't get a gold jacket player, just a very good one (Lillard, Mitchell, KAT)

Lebrons, KDs, Currys only come around so often.

Draft vs. trade for star isn't the paradigm anymore.

It's team building vs. maximizing luck (tank).

[mpharris36]

it’s gonna be impossible to acquire a first option player without giving up almost all of our assets including RJ. so I would look at some cheaper second option players. I keep saying this but I think CJ McCollum could be a nice get on the low.

Im not saying that doesn't improve us because it does.

But does that put us above certain teams in the east? Then factor in the contracts we would have to trade to match CJ's...Is that the direction we want to go with a CJ/Randle/RJ team for the foreseeable future along with whatever assets we would have to move to make it happen?

[sol537]

If we got Rubio over Walker, we would be in a much better position for the season. Maybe we can still swing a deal with Cleveland for Rubio. Knox + 2nd?

[3toheadmelo]

it’s gonna be impossible to acquire a first option player without giving up almost all of our assets including RJ. so I would look at some cheaper second option players. I keep saying this but I think CJ McCollum could be a nice get on the low.

Im not saying that doesn't improve us because it does.

But does that put us above certain teams in the east? Then factor in the contracts we would have to trade to match CJ's...Is that the direction we want to go with a CJ/Randle/RJ team for the foreseeable future along with whatever assets we would have to move to make it happen?

considering he’s a massive upgrade over Fournier I say do it.

i know you want Donovan mitchell but the likelihood of him asking out is slim. they’re also going to ask for RJ at the very minimum. are you willing to give up RJ?

[GONYK]

Of course they would. Same with KAT. Those guys are clear improvements over our current roster. That isn't quite the point I was making.

If it doesn't was the plan faulty because that is what the FO is doing. I also don't think the FO with its connections to KAT would hesitate on him either.

This is the larger question. I say no, the plan wasn't faulty. It's just not done. Either way, we're back to team building being the true skill, not star acquisition. There aren't enough true stars for the acquisition part of it to be the whole plan.

But if not them then is SGA the only guy right now that you would be excited about a deal? that is semi realistic becuase he's on a bad team and you could see him asking out...does anyone else fit that mold for you?

SGA would be great, but Presti would basically get the farm.

Since there aren't that many actual franchise players, I think any deal we do would have to be a two-fer. Guys coming to team up.

In that scenario, KAT and Mitchell would be better than either in isolation.

This is all crazy speculative, but I think the FO knows when they shoot their shot, it has to be a nuclear bomb, not a cannon ball, if you catch my drift.

If not, they will do things incrementally. As long as they put a competitive team out there, they will get the rope. Much like Masai did in TO until Kawhi was available.

do you think we have enough trade ammo to get both from that "second tier" you are talking about. I personally don't' see us have the trade capital to land both KAT/Mitchell.

No. Somebody has to hit the market.

We build incrementally until then.

[JXL]

Now that melo's streak is over, guess who's gonna lead us to a new streak starting tomorrow!


(referring to me )

[mpharris36]

How many true franchise pieces are available in a draft? I mean #1 options on a championship team. One every 5-10 years?

There is premium on team building, regardless of the route.

right away? very few but just watching Ja Morant last night he is coming into his own now and you just have more time with younger players then you would have with a more veteran team/trade approach. LaMelo Ball and Anthony Edwards look to be making that next leap. This current class looks pretty good. All those drafts would have perceived more trade value throughout the league then anyone currently on our roster even though or roster is better in terms of winning.

I think the overwhelming probability is that none of those guys will be perennial MVP candidates.

Every class looks good until the players get to the NBA. And then you see that there are a few all-stars, a few great starters, a bunch of bench players and every 10 years you get a Luka type.

I do think there was value to the knicks being competitive for the sake of the fan base of us being trashed on every year. So I get that.

But the Nets route where you can get better and FA will want to come just isn't a thing anymore. FA just isn't the same with these new max extension rules. Guys don't hit the open market anymore. And if they do they are more the Demar Derozan types where are they really franchise changers?

It will have to come via trade. And when that happens no one knows so it kinda has you in a holding pattern but priorities aren't young players they are wins so guys like Kemba/Burks/Rose/Fournier will be prioritized for wins and they are better than young players but we won't ever see if McBride or Grimes are players. Like I said I see pros and cons for both. I agree wins do hold value when trying to build a culture that was just erroded away from all the knicks ineptitude so I get that.

I agree with that. But I don't think that means that the draft is better. It means that our FO has to adapt. You need to hit on your later round picks, invest in team development, coaching, etc... and keep your cap manageable.

The draft is more of a crapshoot than paying for proven production though. There are so many variables, and even if things break right, you still don't get a gold jacket player, just a very good one (Lillard, Mitchell, KAT)

Lebrons, KDs, Currys only come around so often.

For the first part its not a just about them needing to be MVP candidates. Lets say tomorrow SGA was put on the market. And every team wanted to acquire him. Everything equal in headlining a deal if the Hornets put LaMelo in the package or Minny put Anthony Edwards in the package or if DET/HOU/CLE/TOR/ORL put any of Cade/Green/Mobley/Barnes/Suggs...wouldn't those packages all be headlined by more enticing young players on there rookie deals. RJ probably headlines our deal the best but we have more a quantity over quality package.

Also the moves we made while maybe adding more wins I could maybe make the case its suppressing some other of our trade assets. Obi and IQ are the 9th and 10th men in the rotation. With a healthy big man rotation Thibs is going back to playing Obi 12 minutes a game because he is just Randles crutch when he needs a rest. Same with IQ. Thibs will go with Kemba/Rose/Fournier/Burks and RJ before he turns to IQ. We have no idea what we have in McBride and Grimes and neither will other teams.

So yes are we better playing our current rotation. Absolutely. Does it make us a more enticing trade partner? That I am not sure of. Which I think you agree with is still the main focus of the FO...finding that big trade they have been working the back channels for.

[mpharris36]

Of course they would. Same with KAT. Those guys are clear improvements over our current roster. That isn't quite the point I was making.



This is the larger question. I say no, the plan wasn't faulty. It's just not done. Either way, we're back to team building being the true skill, not star acquisition. There aren't enough true stars for the acquisition part of it to be the whole plan.




SGA would be great, but Presti would basically get the farm.

Since there aren't that many actual franchise players, I think any deal we do would have to be a two-fer. Guys coming to team up.

In that scenario, KAT and Mitchell would be better than either in isolation.

This is all crazy speculative, but I think the FO knows when they shoot their shot, it has to be a nuclear bomb, not a cannon ball, if you catch my drift.

If not, they will do things incrementally. As long as they put a competitive team out there, they will get the rope. Much like Masai did in TO until Kawhi was available.

do you think we have enough trade ammo to get both from that "second tier" you are talking about. I personally don't' see us have the trade capital to land both KAT/Mitchell.

No. Somebody has to hit the market.

We build incrementally until then.

thats a long time bro

[mpharris36]

it’s gonna be impossible to acquire a first option player without giving up almost all of our assets including RJ. so I would look at some cheaper second option players. I keep saying this but I think CJ McCollum could be a nice get on the low.

Im not saying that doesn't improve us because it does.

But does that put us above certain teams in the east? Then factor in the contracts we would have to trade to match CJ's...Is that the direction we want to go with a CJ/Randle/RJ team for the foreseeable future along with whatever assets we would have to move to make it happen?

considering he’s a massive upgrade over Fournier I say do it.

i know you want Donovan mitchell but the likelihood of him asking out is slim. they’re also going to ask for RJ at the very minimum. are you willing to give up RJ?

I really like RJ. But if OKC put SGA on the market I would trade RJ. Mitchell I would have to think about it just from an EFF POV.

Its the same way I was ripped for saying if anyone in the top 5 of this draft I would have traded RJ to get into the top 5 to land Cade/Green/Suggs/Mobley/Barnes. I think at minimum when you trade for younger guys you just reset the timeline and if any of those teams offered any one of those guys in a trade tomorrow they would have more value then any current knick would on the open market. Thats not saying they are all better then our guys but from a trade value perspective a team trading a star would be more searching for a deal headlined by on of those guys then any of our guys.

[god shammgod]

the question you have to ask yourself is if julius randle is enough of a draw for someone to ask to come here to play with ? i don't know. harden left to team up with kd & kyrie. ad left to join lebron. pg left to join kawhi. it's not exactly the same thing.