PG: Knicks vs Celtics: Season opener!

[thebuzzardman]

If Mitch doesn’t get hurt (again) do we even make the KAT trade?

Once again Shams the greatest evil of all

[mpharris36]

Jarrett Allen probably another target we probably could have gotten for Randle and picks. I think his name has been floated around by the board by a few people. That probably would have been realistic.

I get the direction that probably makes us better defensively. I do think you then have a gaping hole with your #2 option on offense. And basically asking Brunson to do all the playmaking/scoring.

Our defense hasn't played a great game since February. They been awful.

I know its a small sample size alert but I don't know if I can ever get over Mitch absolutely sonning Allen in our playoff series. And on top of that he talked about how the lights were too bright. I mean that was in CLE...I don't exactly know how that translates playing with the Knicks where the lights are the brigthest.

Again not something I like the evaluate a player...want more statistics to back it up...but thats hard to get over.

[god shammgod]

If Mitch doesn’t get hurt (again) do we even make the KAT trade?

Once again Shams the greatest evil of all

good

[stuporman]

Also I don't think there's any guarantee you find positive or neutral value with an extra year for Randle. At best you receive just a generic contract with no picks to attach to it to build value for a trade.

I personally think we got out of that contract just at the right time.

I always hated the proposals to just dump Randle. He had/has value. Just an imperfect player and I'm glad we got good value for him. It was a good selling point. Also, I full well understand I've argued both sides of this trade today. I've been saying. I'm lukewarm towards KAT

R***** has the right blend of talent, production and expiring salary to get the Knicks something of value as opposed to being dumped but he wasn't valuable enough to get something of value without its own drawbacks.

Although, not having to watch him play for the Knicks anymore is invaluable.

[mpharris36]

What does any of that matter when criticizing KAT?

Can we only be critical of KAT based on what are other options were?

Cause that's giving sham a free pass for beign an Allonzo Trier fan cause the rest of the roster was trash.

Also The mikal trade being bad or worse doesn't negate criticizing KAT.

Its fair to comment on KATs game and criticize if he isn't playing well but its also fair to compare KAT's impact to Randle's impact because those were the two biggest pieces moved. If we didn't make the move its very fair to ask who is playing center for the Knicks right now?

Its also not fair to pin the celtics 3 point barrage solely on KAT. For a team just playing together defense and rotations will take time. Its not a video game.

It's fair to be critical of the kat move based solely on his 9 years of service in the league. And it's also fair to criticize him as the 2nd star they locked in next to Brunsons prime. Both of those are concerns regardless of who was going to play center for the Knicks.

Just because A was worse than B doesn't make B good. That math doesn't math.

Sorry about the late response...you know kids duty...

But his 9 years of service our better than Randles 10+. Not sure that can be argued against.

And while I understand the argument just because A was worse doesn't mean B good. I think under normal circumstances I can buy that argument. However with the new CBA and us now a apron team before the trade. We can't afford to lose contracts for nothing...which was a legit risk after no extension agreement was happening with Randle.

Sham mentioned we could have just traded Randle for any longer contract to maintain the salary but would that player be able to produce numbers the way Randle and now KAT can do? I don't think the Knicks were willing to take a step back (especially with Brunson trajectory) which trading randle for a contract but not talent would do.

So lets say even if the trade is a wash. Its still a slight win because we extend our window because KAT's contract situation under the new CBA is more valuable than Randle's expiring.

[aggo]

If Mitch doesn’t get hurt (again) do we even make the KAT trade?

we run to that trade even faster.



the more randle doesnt look like himself, the more proof that Leon did the right thing

[Guano]

Its fair to comment on KATs game and criticize if he isn't playing well but its also fair to compare KAT's impact to Randle's impact because those were the two biggest pieces moved. If we didn't make the move its very fair to ask who is playing center for the Knicks right now?

Its also not fair to pin the celtics 3 point barrage solely on KAT. For a team just playing together defense and rotations will take time. Its not a video game.

It's fair to be critical of the kat move based solely on his 9 years of service in the league. And it's also fair to criticize him as the 2nd star they locked in next to Brunsons prime. Both of those are concerns regardless of who was going to play center for the Knicks.

Just because A was worse than B doesn't make B good. That math doesn't math.

Sorry about the late response...you know kids duty...

But his 9 years of service our better than Randles 10+. Not sure that can be argued against.

And while I understand the argument just because A was worse doesn't mean B good. I think under normal circumstances I can buy that argument. However with the new CBA and us now a apron team before the trade. We can't afford to lose contracts for nothing...which was a legit risk after no extension agreement was happening with Randle.

Sham mentioned we could have just traded Randle for any longer contract to maintain the salary but would that player be able to produce numbers the way Randle and now KAT can do? I don't think the Knicks were willing to take a step back (especially with Brunson trajectory) which trading randle for a contract but not talent would do.

So lets say even if the trade is a wash. Its still a slight win because we extend our window because KAT's contract situation under the new CBA is more valuable than Randle's expiring.

No worries, mate. I get it.

What window did we extend and what's the ceiling with this team? And if that ceiling isn't a championship team do we have the pieces to make that happen?

My worry is they depleted their resources locking into a team that isn't championship caliber.

[Jalen Bluntson]

It's fair to be critical of the kat move based solely on his 9 years of service in the league. And it's also fair to criticize him as the 2nd star they locked in next to Brunsons prime. Both of those are concerns regardless of who was going to play center for the Knicks.

Just because A was worse than B doesn't make B good. That math doesn't math.

Sorry about the late response...you know kids duty...

But his 9 years of service our better than Randles 10+. Not sure that can be argued against.

And while I understand the argument just because A was worse doesn't mean B good. I think under normal circumstances I can buy that argument. However with the new CBA and us now a apron team before the trade. We can't afford to lose contracts for nothing...which was a legit risk after no extension agreement was happening with Randle.

Sham mentioned we could have just traded Randle for any longer contract to maintain the salary but would that player be able to produce numbers the way Randle and now KAT can do? I don't think the Knicks were willing to take a step back (especially with Brunson trajectory) which trading randle for a contract but not talent would do.

So lets say even if the trade is a wash. Its still a slight win because we extend our window because KAT's contract situation under the new CBA is more valuable than Randle's expiring.

No worries, mate. I get it.

What window did we extend and what's the ceiling with this team? And if that ceiling isn't a championship team do we have the pieces to make that happen?

My worry is they depleted their resources locking into a team that isn't championship caliber.

The Bridges trade did that.

[3toheadmelo]

how is this semantics...that WASN'T AVAILABLE!!!

if it was Giannis would be wearing a knicks jersey right now. It takes two to tango.

When did I say Giannis was available in the past? Please show me where.

It’s possible he might become available. He literally said if they don’t win the chip this year, he thinks he’s getting traded. The smart move would’ve been to wait for him instead of doubling down on a move that literally changed the whole identity of the team.

Where did Giannis say that? On a pod? I missed that.

Waiting on Giannis would’ve made sense except it would’ve been a league wide bidding war and we wouldn’t have had enough to compete after the Mikal trade. Plus, we probably wouldn’t have Randle as he’d be a free agent after this season. Like both of the OG/Mikal trades the timing was key. IQ’s impending free agency and the cap closing in on us before the Mikal trade forced those moves. I get the timing of the KAT trade; just wished it were for someone who’d be a better fit defensively also and where we wouldn’t have had to give up Donte.

C’est la vie…

Read on Twitter

I wouldn't have went all in on Mikal either. Save those picks for the Giannis trade. But it's too late now.

I doubt Randle would've opted out since there's barely any teams with cap space that make sense for him to sign there.

[Guano]

Sorry about the late response...you know kids duty...

But his 9 years of service our better than Randles 10+. Not sure that can be argued against.

And while I understand the argument just because A was worse doesn't mean B good. I think under normal circumstances I can buy that argument. However with the new CBA and us now a apron team before the trade. We can't afford to lose contracts for nothing...which was a legit risk after no extension agreement was happening with Randle.

Sham mentioned we could have just traded Randle for any longer contract to maintain the salary but would that player be able to produce numbers the way Randle and now KAT can do? I don't think the Knicks were willing to take a step back (especially with Brunson trajectory) which trading randle for a contract but not talent would do.

So lets say even if the trade is a wash. Its still a slight win because we extend our window because KAT's contract situation under the new CBA is more valuable than Randle's expiring.

No worries, mate. I get it.

What window did we extend and what's the ceiling with this team? And if that ceiling isn't a championship team do we have the pieces to make that happen?

My worry is they depleted their resources locking into a team that isn't championship caliber.

The Bridges trade did that.

It wasn't just Randle in the kat trade

[Jalen Bluntson]

No worries, mate. I get it.

What window did we extend and what's the ceiling with this team? And if that ceiling isn't a championship team do we have the pieces to make that happen?

My worry is they depleted their resources locking into a team that isn't championship caliber.

The Bridges trade did that.

It wasn't just Randle in the kat trade

So? We would not be locked in if we had those picks to make other trades down the road. I don't even like the KAT trade but, it is what it is. Giving up all of those picks for Bridges hurts us more than losing DDV.

[mpharris36]

It's fair to be critical of the kat move based solely on his 9 years of service in the league. And it's also fair to criticize him as the 2nd star they locked in next to Brunsons prime. Both of those are concerns regardless of who was going to play center for the Knicks.

Just because A was worse than B doesn't make B good. That math doesn't math.

Sorry about the late response...you know kids duty...

But his 9 years of service is better than Randles 10+. Not sure that can be argued against.

And while I understand the argument just because A was worse doesn't mean B good. I think under normal circumstances I can buy that argument. However with the new CBA and us now a apron team before the trade. We can't afford to lose contracts for nothing...which was a legit risk after no extension agreement was happening with Randle.

Sham mentioned we could have just traded Randle for any longer contract to maintain the salary but would that player be able to produce numbers the way Randle and now KAT can do? I don't think the Knicks were willing to take a step back (especially with Brunson trajectory) which trading randle for a contract but not talent would do.

So lets say even if the trade is a wash. Its still a slight win because we extend our window because KAT's contract situation under the new CBA is more valuable than Randle's expiring.

No worries, mate. I get it.

What window did we extend and what's the ceiling with this team? And if that ceiling isn't a championship team do we have the pieces to make that happen?

My worry is they depleted their resources locking into a team that isn't championship caliber.

The goal should absolutely be a championship. I think we have a top 5 player in the sport. I think winning a championship requires a lot of other facters...good circumstance, injury luck...ect. But the key is to be a consistent contender year in and year out so you can take adv of your opportunity when things break your way.

Let me ask you a question do you think we could have maintained our last season success without depleting some of our resources since our big man rotation (which was integral to our success left in FA or significantly injured?).

Until we reach a conference finals or a finals or win it...tough to officially evalaute the trade. I'm assuming you are more referencing the Mikal trade because I don't think we moved a crazy amount of assets for KAT (Randle was an expiring and we also traded a heavily protected 1st). I think the argument can be made Divo was the most valuable piece but maybe the Knicks also felt that McBride was ready for an increased role scoring the ball.

So now we go back to the Mikal trade...I don't know necessarily we will see the impact in the regular season on a counting stats basis. I think this play was with an eye on how the playoffs are impacted and 2-way wings can have impact especially to combat the BOS perimeter players. Now the other night certainly didn't help calm concerns...but it is only one game. The team will need time.

I would like to be peaking around playoff and I didn't expect to come out of the gate being able to compete the BOS. But certainly we will need to get past them to reach our ultimate goal.

[Guano]

The Bridges trade did that.

It wasn't just Randle in the kat trade

So? We would not be locked in if we had those picks to make other trades down the road. I don't even like the KAT trade but, it is what it is. Giving up all of those picks for Bridges hurts us more than losing DDV.

Makes life a lot less stressful when we lean into this

And we arent in disagreement about the trades.

[Guano]

Sorry about the late response...you know kids duty...

But his 9 years of service is better than Randles 10+. Not sure that can be argued against.

And while I understand the argument just because A was worse doesn't mean B good. I think under normal circumstances I can buy that argument. However with the new CBA and us now a apron team before the trade. We can't afford to lose contracts for nothing...which was a legit risk after no extension agreement was happening with Randle.

Sham mentioned we could have just traded Randle for any longer contract to maintain the salary but would that player be able to produce numbers the way Randle and now KAT can do? I don't think the Knicks were willing to take a step back (especially with Brunson trajectory) which trading randle for a contract but not talent would do.

So lets say even if the trade is a wash. Its still a slight win because we extend our window because KAT's contract situation under the new CBA is more valuable than Randle's expiring.

No worries, mate. I get it.

What window did we extend and what's the ceiling with this team? And if that ceiling isn't a championship team do we have the pieces to make that happen?

My worry is they depleted their resources locking into a team that isn't championship caliber.

The goal should absolutely be a championship. I think we have a top 5 player in the sport. I think winning a championship requires a lot of other facters...good circumstance, injury luck...ect. But the key is to be a consistent contender year in and year out so you can take adv of your opportunity when things break your way.

Let me ask you a question do you think we could have maintained our last season success without depleting some of our resources since our big man rotation (which was integral to our success left in FA or significantly injured?).

Until we reach a conference finals or a finals or win it...tough to officially evalaute the trade. I'm assuming you are more referencing the Mikal trade because I don't think we moved a crazy amount of assets for KAT (Randle was an expiring and we also traded a heavily protected 1st). I think the argument can be made Divo was the most valuable piece but maybe the Knicks also felt that McBride was ready for an increased role scoring the ball.

So now we go back to the Mikal trade...I don't know necessarily we will see the impact in the regular season on a counting stats basis. I think this play was with an eye on how the playoffs are impacted and 2-way wings can have impact especially to combat the BOS perimeter players. Now the other night certainly didn't help calm concerns...but it is only one game. The team will need time.

I would like to be peaking around playoff and I didn't expect to come out of the gate being able to compete the BOS. But certainly we will need to get past them to reach our ultimate goal.

I don't think the randle/divo for kat deal was terrible all things considered.

Numerous factors forced their hand - not retaining iHarts bird rights, mitchs injury factors, randles contract, the cba, keeping the money on the books, Sims a potential starter, having deuce.m, playing 5 out. All that makes sense on making the deal.

We both know we wouldn't have been able to improve the C position without giving up assets. You have to give to get.

I honestly don't know what they could have done. Maybe this is the best timeline of all the universes out there. And I'm willing to give it time. What else are we going to do. This might end up the best team we've ever watched (besides wingo watching the championship teams).

I think we need other teams to have serious problems and to have unachievable heights reached to win it all. I seriously don't think its possible to be a championship team with kat at the 5. We weren't title contenders before the trades either. But we had flexibility. I think that's what bums me most about this team. Even though they're really good. I can't see a window to a chip. I don't think Brunson has a running mate.

I don't dislike mikal but that package was heavy.

[prophet_of_rage]

Anybody concerned none of our starting wings can turn the corner on a drive?

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[prophet_of_rage]

For the Randle bashers he just hung 33 on thecKings on 13/17 shots.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[Jalen Bluntson]

For the Randle bashers he just hung 33 on thecKings on 13/17 shots.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

I would have preferred them to just figure out the Center position. Oh well. Really don't care what Randle does elsewhere. He is the enemy now.

[stuporman]

Did people actually think others think R***** would never produce any more just because he's not on the Knicks? Hm...that's...interesting. Do those people also think him producing means something? Hm...even more...interesting.

Hey but D***...4-10/1-6...Deuce better?

[Chanel Bomber]

you could always just find similar money with an extra year on it if he had no actual value in a trade.

plus there's nowhere to go. there's 2 teams in the league expected to have any kind of real cap room this summer in the nets and wizards. neither of them are investing in him in the beginning of a rebuild. he'd have to either settle or he would just pick up his option at that point and ask for a trade if he's really unhappy. and at that point we could see what our options were.

I think Detroit will have the right amount of capspace and desperation to pay him 40 plus. And isn't Randle the ultimate Piston? Wizards is a strong match too. Both franchises are delulu so I think they're plausible destinations.

Also I don't think there's any guarantee you find positive or neutral value with an extra year for Randle. At best you receive just a generic contract with no picks to attach to it to build value for a trade.

I personally think we got out of that contract just at the right time.

i'm pretty sure detroit doesn't have cap space until 2026. and the wiz already have kuzma at the 4 and seem to like him.

and i agree. i'm not sure you can get anything for him with any kind of real value. but at worst you can just get the same salary back for him with an extra year on the deal. teams always want to save money.

But what's the point of having an expiring contract of neutral value if you can't attach picks to it for a meaningful trade?

Giannis and Embiid became pipe dreams the minute they traded all the picks for Mikal. But you'd have a better shot at getting Giannis using Towns than a generic expiring contract without draft equity.

We've seen teams settle for a player because he was decorated before. Bucks traded Allen for Payton. Nets traded Harden for Simmons. KAT is better than Payton and Simmons were then but my point is how teams sometimes sell themselves on All-Star resumes. Not saying we will be able to get a superstar for KAT, but it's more plausible than with a random expiring. We're not getting a superstar or even just a star for an expiring contract.

[knicksNOTslick]

For the Randle bashers he just hung 33 on thecKings on 13/17 shots.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

This is not news. With the Knicks, Randle always played well against the Kings because they have Sabonis aka the White Randle. They're both horrible on D.