thebuzzardman wrote:Jeff Van Gully wrote:that just cost you a +1 and earned you a side eye.
Lol. And I alway yell "Broke Lopez!" when he's playing.
I look at it like this. IF DJ wants to team up with BFF KD and take a huge paycut, which nothing in his career has ever indicated, then while I think that's a pretty good C to team with Mitch, I'm not totally sold on it. I get that DJ is basically the matured version of what Mitch might become (unless Mitch really can add all that shooting, moves etc), but for now, and probably a couple of seasons, it's playing 48 mpg with essentially the same kind of C. Only DJ has kind of been going downhill slowly defensively. Anway, it'd fit the "solid vet C with some defense" who might be cheap.
And sure, Kornet gives them that other look, spacing, but c'mon. Kornet not really cutting it against better teams with better bigs. We got aspirations now.
Broke gives the 3 point shooting that provides a different look from Mitch, plus opens the floor for Zion to operate in the post, as Zion would be the only low post threat on the team. That's another concern. Broke can also function in a competent NBA way in the low post for 15-20 mpg. He can also still defend, some.
What's the alternative? Could also go with Nerlens Noel and feature 48 mpg of two raw gangly f*cks blocking everything in sight, but not providing anything on offense but alley opps and putbacks.
It's one of the interesting questions around the "Get KD and Kyrie". Need capable backup PF and C. Not the end of the world, but they vary in price and some are better than others and some are better fits than others.
On a side note, there's lots of "When Zion gets here" speculation, and the roster around it - hell, I just did it, but the ODDS are the knicks pick somewhere 2-6, and every player projected there right now is a SG, and a couple (or one) PG.
Would be kind of interesting to see more talk around who the Knicks draft around 4, who that might be, and why a good fit with DSJr, but no Kyrie, Kyrie but no DSJr (moved in trade), etc etc, and then the implications on Trier and Frank.