Moderators: HerSports85, NoLayupRule, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23, Deeeez Knicks, mpharris36, j4remi
KnicksGod wrote:Just make sure to send Fournier somewhere where he can be involved with competitive basketball. So as a starting point, a team that doesn't give him any minutes.
jrj202 wrote:The Knicks will blow it and he'll land with Brooklyn.
? 
winforlose wrote:So I am a Wolves fan with literally no skin in the game, but from a basketball perspective I just don’t get bringing in Mitchell to play next to Brunson. Instead if your willing to spend 6 picks, why not get Simmons from Brooklyn, Turner from Indiana, and a 6th man like Beasley or Beverly from the Jazz. I mean honestly, with us Rudy fit all our needs, but with you Mitchell doesn’t. Meanwhile Brunson, Simmons, Barrett, Randle, Turner spaces the floor, plays decent defense, and can score the ball. Plus Beverly as culture setter and above average backup guard.
I don’t have much love for Thibs, but as a fellow long standing sufferer, I don’t want to see you guys go this big on a guy who just doesn’t give you what you need. Especially when you have the picks to get the guys who do.
thebuzzardman wrote:El Poochio wrote:Only 2 more weeks without a trade for complete buzz meltdown
I'm building myself up. Could be epic.
thebuzzardman wrote:I'm going to do a Rose/Cam/Grimes/McBride one. Apologies to fans of each young guy. I don't even like this trade, but Rose/Cam needs Grimes or Obi to work - it's around the minimum salary Ainge can take back, so maybe this is what he wants. Maybe the Knicks want to keep Fournier. I mean, they were stupid enough to pair he and Kemba...
I know the defense sucks even worse on this one, just trying to war game what this FO and Ainge might do. Not doing the picks, just the lineup after.
Out: Rose/Cam/Grimes/McBride/Knicks 2023/Knicks 2025/Knicks 2027/Pistons 202X/Wiz 202X
(realistically, probably 1 player or pick lite)
Brunson/IQ
Mitchell/Fournier
RJ/Fournier
Randle/Obi
Meetch/Hartenstein/Sim
Outside the defense, Brunson/IQ/Mitchell/RJ/Fournier could be played in a number of different combinations
? Starksfor3yes wrote:Lost in all of this can we include the draft rights to Jokubitis? Evan, Rose, Cam, draft rights to Joku, three unprotected 1sts (2023, 2025, 2027) 1 draft swap in 2026, 2023 Det 1st and 2023 Wash 1st. Keep the youngins we drafted.
thebuzzardman wrote:I'd like to point out that in all the scenarios I've posted, with Fournier, Rose, Fournier and Rose, Cam, even Obi or Grimes, there is one I missed.
The F*ck Those Kids, Love The Picks trade
RJ/Obi/Grimes/IQ/McBride for Mitchell, no picks.
Brunson/Rose
Mitchell/Fournier
Fournier/Cam
Randle/Melo (need to get as old as possible)
Meetch/Hartenstein/Sims
oldshoolballer wrote:The one thing that sticks out to me is how much Ainge values Grimes. He sees Grimes as a potential All Star imo.
stuporman wrote:NoDopeOnSundays wrote:stuporman wrote:
Your label of meaningless is ... useless, who cares what it means to you?
To win in the playoffs team defense is important and Meetch/Hart will be helping the team play defense so not sure what you mean. You know how team defense works don't you? All the players on the team play it.
If you think DM and JB don't know how to play defense you foolin yourself... so really, the question to them is.. do they want to play defense.
That's what we'll find out.
That's not how the playoffs work, in the playoffs teams try to find a weakness, when they do they target and look to expose it. You cannot expect our centers to be able to cover for that kind of backcourt over the course of a 7 game series, because good teams have ways to negate that kind of defense that is reliant on the C anyway. In the regular season the Jazz were a top 5 defense most of the last 4 years, but in the playoffs they were horrible by comparison, teams would hunt for Gobert, Conley and Mitchell. If we trade for Mitchell, Brunson should take him out to dinner because part of his contract is due to how he completely worked Donovan.
CJ/Dame, awful defensively.
Sexton/Garland, awful defensively.
They physically can't play the type of defense you're expecting them to, they both have been the weak links on really good defensive teams
That's exactly how the playoffs work...there's no special playoff rule that teams can't play help defense. We just watch two teams that rely heavily on funneling, shading and helping from all over to contest shots.
You think Curry and Poole are great defenders? They both certainly give defensive effort but their efforts alone are not what made them a good defensive team, it's the team defense effort and execution. It's how good defensive teams counter when opposing teams target.
I've said I don't know if it's the right thing or if it will work, you apparently haven't been following this convo or my posts if you think I'm saying it will or they can... I'm just not accepting the assumption they can't or it won't, I'm leaving open the possibility.
The reason I'm leaving open the possibility is because they have been a good defenders in college not based on physical profile and athleticism so they understand how to play defense and gave the effort needed to be a good defender. Plus the Knicks have a defensive coach who can scheme it.
That's all I've been saying but apparently the only 'right' opinion is "OMG they will be the worst defensive back court in the history of basketball" and if I don't say that then I have a steady stream of posters yapping at me assuming I think they will be a great defensive back court.
Understand my position now?
Meat wrote:oldshoolballer wrote:The one thing that sticks out to me is how much Ainge values Grimes. He sees Grimes as a potential All Star imo.
We all see it, maybe not all star but certainly starter level.
Buttah304 wrote:The reality is this deal is not getting done without the Knicks unprotected 2023, 2025, 2027. We cannot give up the 2029 as that is way too far out.
You then have the 3 highly protected 1sts and that’s Danny’s “majority” request.
I don’t believe you can give them ALL 6 of those firsts on top of a Obi/Grimes combination. At some point this all gets truly ridiculous. Ainge should be picking 1 of OBI-Grimes-IQ.
Just feels like there is a deal to be made but Danny as we all know is a snake and brutal to work with.
Who else are they going to call up across the league that is willing to come close to the above mentioned deal.
NoDopeOnSundays wrote:stuporman wrote:NoDopeOnSundays wrote:
That's not how the playoffs work, in the playoffs teams try to find a weakness, when they do they target and look to expose it. You cannot expect our centers to be able to cover for that kind of backcourt over the course of a 7 game series, because good teams have ways to negate that kind of defense that is reliant on the C anyway. In the regular season the Jazz were a top 5 defense most of the last 4 years, but in the playoffs they were horrible by comparison, teams would hunt for Gobert, Conley and Mitchell. If we trade for Mitchell, Brunson should take him out to dinner because part of his contract is due to how he completely worked Donovan.
CJ/Dame, awful defensively.
Sexton/Garland, awful defensively.
They physically can't play the type of defense you're expecting them to, they both have been the weak links on really good defensive teams
That's exactly how the playoffs work...there's no special playoff rule that teams can't play help defense. We just watch two teams that rely heavily on funneling, shading and helping from all over to contest shots.
You think Curry and Poole are great defenders? They both certainly give defensive effort but their efforts alone are not what made them a good defensive team, it's the team defense effort and execution. It's how good defensive teams counter when opposing teams target.
I've said I don't know if it's the right thing or if it will work, you apparently haven't been following this convo or my posts if you think I'm saying it will or they can... I'm just not accepting the assumption they can't or it won't, I'm leaving open the possibility.
The reason I'm leaving open the possibility is because they have been a good defenders in college not based on physical profile and athleticism so they understand how to play defense and gave the effort needed to be a good defender. Plus the Knicks have a defensive coach who can scheme it.
That's all I've been saying but apparently the only 'right' opinion is "OMG they will be the worst defensive back court in the history of basketball" and if I don't say that then I have a steady stream of posters yapping at me assuming I think they will be a great defensive back court.
Understand my position now?
In the playoffs you want to limit how often you send help defense, that is the difference between the regular season and playoff basketball, it's why teams are falling over themselves to have at minimum 4 guys on the court that are two way players. You cannot rely on your center to defend a smallball team, the entire purpose of that small ball team is to pull your center out the paint. If our centers are the backbone of our defense, what exactly happens if we were to play a team that has a wing that can score, and a stretch big that preoccupies the centers? You expect Mitch to cover everyone? Most teams going "small" would have a bigger backcourt than us, and will try to make our centers choose between helping, or giving up threes, either way the smaller backcourt will get exposed to more types of attacks, even post ups, Marcus Smart posts up smaller guards all the time.
Curry and Poole didn't share the court together much in the finals, Poole only played 20mpg, because that type of pairing would be targeted for post ups which causes defense to collapse and help, there's a big difference between Poole and Curry playing a couple minutes here and there and a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt starting and finishing games together. I'm not saying it's going to be the worst defensive backcourt ever, but it will not be good and it'll be hard to put together a team with championship aspirations if your backcourt is that small.
Also, in relation to Curry, here -
You wont find anything like this for Brunson or Mitchell. One of them you can live with, both of them? You're asking for trouble.
? 
nykballa2k4 wrote:winforlose wrote:So I am a Wolves fan with literally no skin in the game, but from a basketball perspective I just don’t get bringing in Mitchell to play next to Brunson. Instead if your willing to spend 6 picks, why not get Simmons from Brooklyn, Turner from Indiana, and a 6th man like Beasley or Beverly from the Jazz. I mean honestly, with us Rudy fit all our needs, but with you Mitchell doesn’t. Meanwhile Brunson, Simmons, Barrett, Randle, Turner spaces the floor, plays decent defense, and can score the ball. Plus Beverly as culture setter and above average backup guard.
I don’t have much love for Thibs, but as a fellow long standing sufferer, I don’t want to see you guys go this big on a guy who just doesn’t give you what you need. Especially when you have the picks to get the guys who do.
Mitchell would immediately become our best player above RJ and Randle. Brunson probably would not be happy with the deal because it reduces his chances of being an all-star and take the ball out of his hands (which is really 50% of what he wanted coming to NY, other half being $$).
Adding other star-role players or guys who would be "Alfred" to the established players mentioned above, really does nothing for us. In a perfect world we are landing Giannis for a god-father package, but he is not on the market, so getting a B-level superstar (top 10-20 player) would make us take a jump and could make us a contender.
stuporman wrote:NoDopeOnSundays wrote:stuporman wrote:
That's exactly how the playoffs work...there's no special playoff rule that teams can't play help defense. We just watch two teams that rely heavily on funneling, shading and helping from all over to contest shots.
You think Curry and Poole are great defenders? They both certainly give defensive effort but their efforts alone are not what made them a good defensive team, it's the team defense effort and execution. It's how good defensive teams counter when opposing teams target.
I've said I don't know if it's the right thing or if it will work, you apparently haven't been following this convo or my posts if you think I'm saying it will or they can... I'm just not accepting the assumption they can't or it won't, I'm leaving open the possibility.
The reason I'm leaving open the possibility is because they have been a good defenders in college not based on physical profile and athleticism so they understand how to play defense and gave the effort needed to be a good defender. Plus the Knicks have a defensive coach who can scheme it.
That's all I've been saying but apparently the only 'right' opinion is "OMG they will be the worst defensive back court in the history of basketball" and if I don't say that then I have a steady stream of posters yapping at me assuming I think they will be a great defensive back court.
Understand my position now?
In the playoffs you want to limit how often you send help defense, that is the difference between the regular season and playoff basketball, it's why teams are falling over themselves to have at minimum 4 guys on the court that are two way players. You cannot rely on your center to defend a smallball team, the entire purpose of that small ball team is to pull your center out the paint. If our centers are the backbone of our defense, what exactly happens if we were to play a team that has a wing that can score, and a stretch big that preoccupies the centers? You expect Mitch to cover everyone? Most teams going "small" would have a bigger backcourt than us, and will try to make our centers choose between helping, or giving up threes, either way the smaller backcourt will get exposed to more types of attacks, even post ups, Marcus Smart posts up smaller guards all the time.
Curry and Poole didn't share the court together much in the finals, Poole only played 20mpg, because that type of pairing would be targeted for post ups which causes defense to collapse and help, there's a big difference between Poole and Curry playing a couple minutes here and there and a Brunson/Mitchell backcourt starting and finishing games together. I'm not saying it's going to be the worst defensive backcourt ever, but it will not be good and it'll be hard to put together a team with championship aspirations if your backcourt is that small.
Also, in relation to Curry, here -
You wont find anything like this for Brunson or Mitchell. One of them you can live with, both of them? You're asking for trouble.
Your opinion has been duly noted.... thanks for your submission.
Ghetto Gospel wrote:Meat wrote:oldshoolballer wrote:The one thing that sticks out to me is how much Ainge values Grimes. He sees Grimes as a potential All Star imo.
We all see it, maybe not all star but certainly starter level.
The Athletic put up a tier list rating of the current top 125 NBA players and Grimes was in the 85-125 player range along with RJ, Randle and IQ. so it isn't just the fans and Ainge that value Grimes