RealGM

There’s speculation and rumors that it can happen, and assuming Portland loses to Denver, and Lillard wants out. You have to imagine Portland would want RJ Barrett, Quickley and picks into a deal. You can’t expect Portland to take less.

I say keep what we got going on and don’t think twice, easy no. To me build youth is what makes this team so exciting. And you look at the Nets now, I couldn’t be connected and satisfied to the superstars they have. It’s not like GSW and Miami Heat big 3’s because they atleast had home grown talent.

But you trade for Lillard, and other star players would want to join and become a consistent 50 win team that will make deep runs.

It would be foolish if Mills decides to deal our kids when we can have them develop, play in the playoffs, and wait for a super star FA to become available.

Unless Giannis becomes available, it’s a no for me.

Well ... this is our only chance if we want to compete with the Nets. Trade for Lillard and sign LaVine/Beal in 2022.

team iq approves this thread

Free agency or draft. The team has chemistry already, just need to add. Not subtract..

Let's say for some reason Kawhi decides to opt out(this won't happen) and signs with us.

Then you go after Lillard to form your big 3 and surround roster with ring chasing vets.

But unless a situation like that were to come to fruition, you stand pat until 2022. You can just sign someone like Levine outright.

I say go for Lillard if you can keep RJ. If not, pass, you aren’t winning with Randle, 32 year old Lillard and scrubs.

Don’t trade for KAT or Beal if we have to empty the war chest. I don’t see any scenario we win with one of those two as our best player.

I wouldn't trade the farm for lillard but I would consider trading for a younger player who fits the timeline better if they became available

Keep RJ and IQ no matter what.

Offer any combination of picks and players to bring in another star to play alongside Randle, RJ and IQ.

For instance, I'd trade a few firsts and either Obi or Mitch for Lavine. I'd probably trade both, both Dallas picks and a couple firsts for Dame.

RJ and IQ are special. Keep them.

It's not just me being sentimental. Rationally speaking, their contracts also offer you the flexibility to build for two more seasons and then keep all your elite talent as you hit the luxury tax, which Dolan will be willing to pay. This puts us in a unique position to accumulate and maximize talent.

Again...if there was no cap space and humans lived for 150 years I'd say we wait and see. But the reality is that IF the goal is to win (and it sure looks like it...again...considering who they hired for the front office and to coach the team) then you have a win now front office, a win now coach, a 26 year old star that has 3 or 4 years of prime prime you should be looking to win sooner rather than later. That's before you even factor in the salary cap making things potentially real difficult in a year or two to build. All that together, yeah if you get a chance land a superstar to pair with Randle, you do that now.

No, keep the kids. Build around Randle/RJ/IQ/Mitch. Randles game should age pretty well, and once RJ keeps having these summers of drastic improvements in one area of his game, for the next 3-4 years, he'll be the best player on this team. Sign someone young that fits the squad.

moocow007 wrote:Again...if there was no cap space and humans lived for 150 years I'd say we wait and see. But the reality is that IF the goal is to win (and it sure looks like it...again...considering who they hired for the front office and to coach the team) then you have a win now front office, a win now coach, a 26 year old star that has 3 or 4 years of prime prime you should be looking to win sooner rather than later. That's before you even factor in the salary cap making things potentially real difficult in a year or two to build. All that together, yeah if you get a chance land a superstar to pair with Randle, you do that now.

I think whether you have to depends on the price.

You trade RJ, IQ, picks for a 31-year-old Dame (who's never led the Blazers to the Finals by the way) and you simply have no safety net in case things don't work out, the team underachieves or one of Randle or Dame gets injured. You just stand there naked with no assets and no shot at contending for a chip.

You also have to evaluate your talent properly. RJ or Quickley could become major contributors and big time players sooner than anticipated, in which case they would provide on-court value and a great deal of flexibility to upgrade the roster while they're still on their rookie contracts.

Kobe wasn't Kobe in 1999-00, yet if the Lakers had decided to go all in they could've traded him for an established player that better fit Shaq's timeline. That of course would've been disastrous. I'm not comparing RJ or IQ to Kobe, but keeping that young and unpolished (in 1999) foundational piece allowed them to have sustained success through an entire decade. They were able to withstand Shaq's departure and retool around the once-young player they had kept. Ten years later, they won two more chips without Shaq.

If the Knicks trade RJ or Quickley in a win-now move, I'm confident it will be remembered as a franchise-altering blunder.

Why rush what we're doing? We are already ahead of schedule. Let's just continue to build on what we have and add pieces as they make sense.

Trading all of our youth/draft capital for a roster that has a limited shelf life doesn't sound like the prudent thing to do.

The Knicks have a Godfather offer in them that doesn't include RJ and IQ.

- Two first-round picks from Dallas
- Three to four first-round picks from NY
- A former lottery pick and second year player in Obi
- A defensive anchor in Mitch

Very few teams can compete with that, assuming this is even the direction to go. (I personally think we should target a younger star like Lavine instead of trading the farm for an older superstar like Dame.)

Trading RJ and IQ for an old superstar is committing franchise suicide imo. But apparently I'm cursed so what do I know.

Chanel Bomber wrote:The Knicks have a Godfather offer in them that doesn't include RJ and IQ.

- Two first-round picks from Dallas
- Three to four first-round picks from NY
- A former lottery pick and second year player in Obi
- A defensive anchor in Mitch

Very few teams can compete with that, assuming this is even the direction to go. (I personally think we should target a younger star like Lavine instead of trading the farm for an older superstar like Dame.)

Trading RJ and IQ for an old superstar is committing franchise suicide imo. But apparently I'm cursed so what do I know.

If you trade for Dame, you're basically saying you believe Dame/Randle + whoever's left is enough to win a chip, because there'd be no meaningful path to acquiring a 3rd star, since Dame's cap hit is over 40 mil. If you can't trade for anyone else this offseason, Randle's gonna be asking for over 30 mil next offseason most likely. Very difficult to sign someone with Randle/Dame on the roster, and you probably have to trade our biggest assets realistically to get Dame, so difficult to trade for a 3rd star too

We don't have to make a move this offseason. By next offseason, yes, but this offseason, we can hold. I trust that Leon is gonna test the waters, and not make a panic move to get a star if he doesn't think it's a good deal. Or, if we can get Dame without giving up RJ/Quick like Chanel thinks, by all means.

No star phucking...

If one wants to come as a FA, wants to join the already growing culture then that's cool, as long as the FO and staff think they fit what they are building.

If the FO thinks they can get great value in a trade both in talent acquired and limit the asset value spent to get the deal done while building on the culture already laid in the foundation, yea, that's fine.

But no overpaying in FA or trades for some player who thinks they deserve more than they have earned because the Knicks are being built on achieving more than is expected and that drive is celebrated in NY.

K-DOT wrote:If you trade for Dame, you're basically saying you believe Dame/Randle + whoever's left is enough to win a chip, because there'd be no meaningful path to acquiring a 3rd star, since Dame's cap hit is over 40 mil. If you can't trade for anyone else this offseason, Randle's gonna be asking for over 30 mil next offseason most likely. Very difficult to sign someone with Randle/Dame on the roster, and you probably have to trade our biggest assets realistically to get Dame, so difficult to trade for a 3rd star too

We don't have to make a move this offseason. By next offseason, yes, but this offseason, we can hold. I trust that Leon is gonna test the waters, and not make a panic move to get a star if he doesn't think it's a good deal. Or, if we can get Dame without giving up RJ/Quick like Chanel thinks, by all means.

Just to clarify, I meant I believe we can put together a Godfather offer without Quickley and RJ.

But whether Portland are willing to consider it for Lillard is another question. If they want more than say, 6 first round draft picks, Obi and Mitch for Dame, then that trade simply isn't worth it to begin with imo. But I'd still consider that a Godfather offer, especially for a 31-year old.

moocow007 wrote:Again...if there was no cap space and humans lived for 150 years I'd say we wait and see. But the reality is that IF the goal is to win (and it sure looks like it...again...considering who they hired for the front office and to coach the team) then you have a win now front office, a win now coach, a 26 year old star that has 3 or 4 years of prime prime you should be looking to win sooner rather than later. That's before you even factor in the salary cap making things potentially real difficult in a year or two to build. All that together, yeah if you get a chance land a superstar to pair with Randle, you do that now.

But a superstar not named Lebron on the wrong side of 30? I personally wouldnt do it...wouldn't gut the team for Lillard at this point. and I love Lillard....

i'd rather have rj's ascending game at 20 vs lillard's game which will only descend.

After everything we’ve been through, have we not yet learned our lesson?? No, no and also no.