ImageImageImageImageImage

Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier?

Moderators: Deeeez Knicks, Capn'O, K-DOT, mrpoetryNmotion, GONYK, j4remi, Jeff Van Gully, King of Canada, Thugger HBC, mpharris36, NoLayupRule

User avatar
Buttah304
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,794
And1: 2,176
Joined: Feb 09, 2011

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#41 » by Buttah304 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:27 pm

I don’t understand the argument of DeRozan and Randle being a poor long term plan when Fournier will be getting 3/54 and DeRozan will be receiving 3/82. They are quite literally both 3 years.

The real issue with the Knicks front office is that they actually believe having 2 carbon copies of every position is smart. Even Bullock bought into the whole “15 deep” nonsense last year.

Fournier/Burks is like looking in a mirror
Kemba/Rose are past their prime former all stars
Noel/Mitch are both non scoring/often injured C
Draft Obi (purely a 4) when we have Randle

I could have at least seen how sliding Devin Vassell next to RJ would have made sense in the SL/future.

But we constantly double up on role players as if that’s somehow a logical, shrewd plan.

When we end up crashing and burning we won’t be bad enough to land a Top 5 pick in the draft and we most likely won’t be good enough to even make the playoffs. Terrence Ross will be a Knick before we know it.
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 63,085
And1: 36,389
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Frankie N Baby
   

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#42 » by GONYK » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:29 pm

Deeeez Knicks wrote:
GONYK wrote:
Deeeez Knicks wrote:Derozan would have been better and it would be interesting to see what the team would look like with him. Ultimately its a lot to commit to Derozan and Randle and I dont see that team going anywhere. Maybe we are a little better now, but I don't see that as a good long term plan.


I think that's why they didn't do it.

Right now, everyone is wildly underperforming. Especially Evan and RJ.

If we can get them right, we're looking at an entirely different team. We were the #1 offense in the NBA when they were clicking. The offensive talent is here, but the chemistry is not. Too many people operate in the same space. Roles need to change to make it work and people need to hit shots.

So it's too early to say it was a mistake.

I also think we need to separate outcomes from process. I think the process to bring in Walker and Fournier was sound. We needed an upgrade at PG and more shooting and shot creation at the wing. We accomplished that with cap friendly deals on shortish commitments.

We aren't looking to compete right now. We're only looking to improve, make the playoffs and make a big trade to put us into contention.

The process the led to signing Walker and Fournier was sound and aligned with our goals. The FO doesn't know who is going to make or miss shots. They know what the player has done over the course of their careers, and Kemba and Evan have made a lot of shots.

So, all in all, I don't think it was a mistake to bring them in yet. If the presence of either of them prevents us from making the big trade, like bringing in Derozan's contract would have, then yes, it was a big mistake.

They also obviously need to play better to accomplish our twin goals of making the playoffs and having them as assets. Hopefully Thibs and the law of averages takes care of that.


Guess what I dont like about this process is we signed too many redundant guys to mid-size contracts that don't compliment each other. I see why they did it, but still think it would be better to leave minutes open for younger players to develop and find cheaper/replaceable options...like when we had Rivers and then were able to get rid of him fast when Quickley showed he could play and open up minutes for him.

But overall, I know this is not a finished product. They still have big moves they want to make and the big moves will be a bigger factor in our success. So we will see what they can do.


I hear you.

I don't think the young kids are going anywhere. They are depth pieces who will get in the rotation if we're able to pull a big deal that saps a lot of our current depth. I think that's the plan. But we'll see.

I'm on the same page with you that overall, it's just not a finished product. We're judging something after 15 games as fans who want to see wins. We have to let it play out. We started out rough last year and it eventually came together.

As fans, I think our issue is with Thibs and the players at the moment. The FO is thinking on a different timetable altogether.
Jimmit79
Analyst
Posts: 3,125
And1: 1,731
Joined: Mar 22, 2016
     

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#43 » by Jimmit79 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:33 pm

Everyone in media ready to chop off Leon Rose and Scott perry head the honeymoon phase is over we are in the endgame now boys.

Sent from my HD1905 using Tapatalk
User avatar
sol537
RealGM
Posts: 10,050
And1: 1,999
Joined: Nov 07, 2001

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#44 » by sol537 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:37 pm

Walker was a low risk move, but ultimately a mistake because Knicks will end up buying him out or parting ways this off-season. He's just taking minutes from better and younger players.

Fournier was not bad. He'd look better with a better PG next to him. His ideal role is off the bench as a 6th or 7th man type. 25 mins.

I was a big fan of getting Lonzo but if he didn't want to come here, then what can you do. Derozan would have been a great get, too... what a bargain for his performance this year.
User avatar
Deeeez Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 36,808
And1: 26,048
Joined: Nov 12, 2004
Location: Bar stool

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#45 » by Deeeez Knicks » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:37 pm

Buttah304 wrote:I don’t understand the argument of DeRozan and Randle being a poor long term plan when Fournier will be getting 3/54 and DeRozan will be receiving 3/82. They are quite literally both 3 years.

The real issue with the Knicks front office is that they actually believe having 2 carbon copies of every position is smart. Even Bullock bought into the whole “15 deep” nonsense last year.

Fournier/Burks is like looking in a mirror
Kemba/Rose are past their prime former all stars
Noel/Mitch are both non scoring/often injured C
Draft Obi (purely a 4) when we have Randle

I could have at least seen how sliding Devin Vassell next to RJ would have made sense in the SL/future.

But we constantly double up on role players as if that’s somehow a logical, shrewd plan.

When we end up crashing and burning we won’t be bad enough to land a Top 5 pick in the draft and we most likely won’t be good enough to even make the playoffs. Terrence Ross will be a Knick before we know it.


Derozan can be better option then Fournier but it can also be true that both would be bad plans
Mavs
Nikola Jokic | Maxi Kleber
Giannis | Dario Saric
Mikal Bridges | Justin Holiday
Marcus Smart | Eric Gordon
Kyle Lowry | Derrick White

Reserves
House
Len
Mays
Samanic
Santi Aldama
Didi
Dev Dotson
Ponds
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 63,085
And1: 36,389
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Frankie N Baby
   

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#46 » by GONYK » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:40 pm

Deeeez Knicks wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:I don’t understand the argument of DeRozan and Randle being a poor long term plan when Fournier will be getting 3/54 and DeRozan will be receiving 3/82. They are quite literally both 3 years.

The real issue with the Knicks front office is that they actually believe having 2 carbon copies of every position is smart. Even Bullock bought into the whole “15 deep” nonsense last year.

Fournier/Burks is like looking in a mirror
Kemba/Rose are past their prime former all stars
Noel/Mitch are both non scoring/often injured C
Draft Obi (purely a 4) when we have Randle

I could have at least seen how sliding Devin Vassell next to RJ would have made sense in the SL/future.

But we constantly double up on role players as if that’s somehow a logical, shrewd plan.

When we end up crashing and burning we won’t be bad enough to land a Top 5 pick in the draft and we most likely won’t be good enough to even make the playoffs. Terrence Ross will be a Knick before we know it.


Derozan can be better option then Fournier but it can also be true that both would be bad plans



Agreed.

It's also the salary, not just the years. It's harder to move $30M than it is $18M, especially when trading for a MAX salary level player.
User avatar
Buttah304
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,794
And1: 2,176
Joined: Feb 09, 2011

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#47 » by Buttah304 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:52 pm

Deeeez Knicks wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:I don’t understand the argument of DeRozan and Randle being a poor long term plan when Fournier will be getting 3/54 and DeRozan will be receiving 3/82. They are quite literally both 3 years.

The real issue with the Knicks front office is that they actually believe having 2 carbon copies of every position is smart. Even Bullock bought into the whole “15 deep” nonsense last year.

Fournier/Burks is like looking in a mirror
Kemba/Rose are past their prime former all stars
Noel/Mitch are both non scoring/often injured C
Draft Obi (purely a 4) when we have Randle

I could have at least seen how sliding Devin Vassell next to RJ would have made sense in the SL/future.

But we constantly double up on role players as if that’s somehow a logical, shrewd plan.

When we end up crashing and burning we won’t be bad enough to land a Top 5 pick in the draft and we most likely won’t be good enough to even make the playoffs. Terrence Ross will be a Knick before we know it.


Derozan can be better option then Fournier but it can also be true that both would be bad plans


By no means am I saying that DeRozan is the end all be all plan. But the #1 goal of this front office was to win more games than last year. Thibs got COTY, they tasted the playoffs and got embarrassed. They were looking to go forward not backwards. We all know that Thibs loves workhorses. Demar would have been a guy that would play 36min a night and could give you an element to the offense that we severely lack. Again - I agree we don’t become some legitimate contender overnight, but at least we wouldn’t be looking for the approaching deadline to already dump Fournier on some team (as if that’s going to be easy).

But this is where I also struggle. I simply cannot buy into this notion that this is all somehow apart of this master plan. That we are gonna wake up one day and be happy that Burks is getting $10 mill and Fournier is getting $18 mill because we magically flipped them in a blockbuster deal.

Burks and Fournier, or Kemba and Fournier are just the 2021 version of Courtney Lee and Tim Hardaway JR. If we Harry Potter them onto another organization get ready to give up every future 1st we have and RJ and Obi.

The Knicks are so unbelievably bad at asset management. Just because we aren’t living in the IT days where he flipped picks like it was candy doesn’t mean we are doing a good job in that department.

To add insult to injury, I just know deep down that Leon Rose is gonna be silent all year sitting at home drinking Limoncello as this massacre really unfolds.
spree2kawhi
Head Coach
Posts: 6,768
And1: 2,109
Joined: Mar 01, 2005

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#48 » by spree2kawhi » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:55 pm

We should have rebuilt three years ago, but we didn’t. Now, back in the treadmill, these things all don’t make any real difference. Who cares about Fournier?

He’d be great on a great team, after a buyout or in a veteran deal.
User avatar
moocow007
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 94,733
And1: 21,810
Joined: Jan 07, 2002
Location: In front of the computer, where else?
       

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#49 » by moocow007 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 7:56 pm

Buttah304 wrote:
Deeeez Knicks wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:I don’t understand the argument of DeRozan and Randle being a poor long term plan when Fournier will be getting 3/54 and DeRozan will be receiving 3/82. They are quite literally both 3 years.

The real issue with the Knicks front office is that they actually believe having 2 carbon copies of every position is smart. Even Bullock bought into the whole “15 deep” nonsense last year.

Fournier/Burks is like looking in a mirror
Kemba/Rose are past their prime former all stars
Noel/Mitch are both non scoring/often injured C
Draft Obi (purely a 4) when we have Randle

I could have at least seen how sliding Devin Vassell next to RJ would have made sense in the SL/future.

But we constantly double up on role players as if that’s somehow a logical, shrewd plan.

When we end up crashing and burning we won’t be bad enough to land a Top 5 pick in the draft and we most likely won’t be good enough to even make the playoffs. Terrence Ross will be a Knick before we know it.


Derozan can be better option then Fournier but it can also be true that both would be bad plans


By no means am I saying that DeRozan is the end all be all plan. But the #1 goal of this front office was to win more games than last year. Thibs got COTY, they tasted the playoffs and got embarrassed. They were looking to go forward not backwards. We all know that Thibs loves workhorses. Demar would have been a guy that would play 36min a night and could give you an element to the offense that we severely lack. Again - I agree we don’t become some legitimate contender overnight, but at least we wouldn’t be looking for the approaching deadline to already dump Fournier on some team (as if that’s going to be easy).

But this is where I also struggle. I simply cannot buy into this notion that this is all somehow apart of this master plan. That we are gonna wake up one day and be happy that Burks is getting $10 mill and Fournier is getting $18 mill because we magically flipped them in a blockbuster deal.

Burks and Fournier, or Kemba and Fournier are just the 2021 version of Courtney Lee and Tim Hardaway JR. If we Harry Potter them onto another organization get ready to give up every future 1st we have and RJ and Obi.

The Knicks are so unbelievably bad at asset management. Just because we aren’t living in the IT days where he flipped picks like it was candy doesn’t mean we are doing a good job in that department.

To add insult to injury, I just know deep down that Leon Rose is gonna be silent all year sitting at home drinking Limoncello as this massacre really unfolds.


Absolutely. Assuming the Knicks are looking to maximize their ability to compete and not do what I think a lot of fans want (reset/reboot/rebuild) having Derozan goes a longer way towards that...especially now we have hindsight in play.
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 63,085
And1: 36,389
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Frankie N Baby
   

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#50 » by GONYK » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:04 pm

moocow007 wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:
Deeeez Knicks wrote:
Derozan can be better option then Fournier but it can also be true that both would be bad plans


By no means am I saying that DeRozan is the end all be all plan. But the #1 goal of this front office was to win more games than last year. Thibs got COTY, they tasted the playoffs and got embarrassed. They were looking to go forward not backwards. We all know that Thibs loves workhorses. Demar would have been a guy that would play 36min a night and could give you an element to the offense that we severely lack. Again - I agree we don’t become some legitimate contender overnight, but at least we wouldn’t be looking for the approaching deadline to already dump Fournier on some team (as if that’s going to be easy).

But this is where I also struggle. I simply cannot buy into this notion that this is all somehow apart of this master plan. That we are gonna wake up one day and be happy that Burks is getting $10 mill and Fournier is getting $18 mill because we magically flipped them in a blockbuster deal.

Burks and Fournier, or Kemba and Fournier are just the 2021 version of Courtney Lee and Tim Hardaway JR. If we Harry Potter them onto another organization get ready to give up every future 1st we have and RJ and Obi.

The Knicks are so unbelievably bad at asset management. Just because we aren’t living in the IT days where he flipped picks like it was candy doesn’t mean we are doing a good job in that department.

To add insult to injury, I just know deep down that Leon Rose is gonna be silent all year sitting at home drinking Limoncello as this massacre really unfolds.


Absolutely. Assuming the Knicks are looking to maximize their ability to compete and not do what I think a lot of fans want (reset/reboot/rebuild) having Derozan goes a longer way towards that...especially now we have hindsight in play.


I don't think that is the Knicks #1 goal. That's where they may be a disconnect from fan expectations.

Looking at the contracts given out, the #1 goal is maintaining cap flexibility while being competitive. I don't think maximizing the ability to compete was their priority.

There were a few avenues to do that that they didn't explore, Derozan or otherwise, if that is what they wanted.
nedleeds
Head Coach
Posts: 6,073
And1: 5,144
Joined: Dec 25, 2016
Location: Bridgeport, NY
Contact:
       

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#51 » by nedleeds » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:06 pm

moocow007 wrote:The Knicks gave Randle that contract extension was because it was a bargain (just like Derozan's contract with the Bulls was) and they couldn't afford to let their most talented player leave given how little talent they have.


What? Randle was under contract for this year. This is nonsense. They gave a guy who hasn't proven anything a near max deal a year before they needed to for no good reason other than 'culcha'.
Zenzibar wrote:Nevertheless, Payton is not a finished product yet and unless the team moves him in a couple of weeks, I anticipate him trending upward with this coaching staff.
spree2kawhi
Head Coach
Posts: 6,768
And1: 2,109
Joined: Mar 01, 2005

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#52 » by spree2kawhi » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:07 pm

moocow007 wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:
Deeeez Knicks wrote:
Derozan can be better option then Fournier but it can also be true that both would be bad plans


By no means am I saying that DeRozan is the end all be all plan. But the #1 goal of this front office was to win more games than last year. Thibs got COTY, they tasted the playoffs and got embarrassed. They were looking to go forward not backwards. We all know that Thibs loves workhorses. Demar would have been a guy that would play 36min a night and could give you an element to the offense that we severely lack. Again - I agree we don’t become some legitimate contender overnight, but at least we wouldn’t be looking for the approaching deadline to already dump Fournier on some team (as if that’s going to be easy).

But this is where I also struggle. I simply cannot buy into this notion that this is all somehow apart of this master plan. That we are gonna wake up one day and be happy that Burks is getting $10 mill and Fournier is getting $18 mill because we magically flipped them in a blockbuster deal.

Burks and Fournier, or Kemba and Fournier are just the 2021 version of Courtney Lee and Tim Hardaway JR. If we Harry Potter them onto another organization get ready to give up every future 1st we have and RJ and Obi.

The Knicks are so unbelievably bad at asset management. Just because we aren’t living in the IT days where he flipped picks like it was candy doesn’t mean we are doing a good job in that department.

To add insult to injury, I just know deep down that Leon Rose is gonna be silent all year sitting at home drinking Limoncello as this massacre really unfolds.


Absolutely. Assuming the Knicks are looking to maximize their ability to compete and not do what I think a lot of fans want (reset/reboot/rebuild) having Derozan goes a longer way towards that...especially now we have hindsight in play.

Contending in the East with a duo of Randle and Derozan doesn’t sound unrealistic. It was always clear - at least to me it was - what kind of talent Derozan is. Believing we could contend with our current roster does sound like a joke though and it always did.

Dragic/Kemba, RJ, Derozan, Randle, Mitch/Noel sounds legit to me.
User avatar
NoDopeOnSundays
RealGM
Posts: 11,011
And1: 18,921
Joined: Nov 22, 2005
         

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#53 » by NoDopeOnSundays » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:18 pm

GONYK wrote:
NoDopeOnSundays wrote:
GONYK wrote:
I think that's why they didn't do it.

Right now, everyone is wildly underperforming. Especially Evan and RJ.

If we can get them right, we're looking at an entirely different team. We were the #1 offense in the NBA when they were clicking. The offensive talent is here, but the chemistry is not. Too many people operate in the same space. Roles need to change to make it work and people need to hit shots.

So it's too early to say it was a mistake.

I also think we need to separate outcomes from process. I think the process to bring in Walker and Fournier was sound. We needed an upgrade at PG and more shooting and shot creation at the wing. We accomplished that with cap friendly deals on shortish commitments.

We aren't looking to compete right now. We're only looking to improve, make the playoffs and make a big trade to put us into contention.

The process the led to signing Walker and Fournier was sound and aligned with our goals. The FO doesn't know who is going to make or miss shots. They know what the player has done over the course of their careers, and Kemba and Evan have made a lot of shots.

So, all in all, I don't think it was a mistake to bring them in yet. If the presence of either of them prevents us from making the big trade, like bringing in Derozan's contract would have, then yes, it was a big mistake.

They also obviously need to play better to accomplish our twin goals of making the playoffs and having them as assets. Hopefully Thibs and the law of averages takes care of that.



Bringing in DeMar would have given us a pathway to starting IQ, that's one of the major reasons I wanted Lonzo too. The most obvious thing to do with a player like IQ is put him in the off guard spot in terms offensive role, while he gets to guard the opposing PG. We had that sitting right in front of us, instead, they took this convoluted path and took two players who aren't as good as DeMar and make as much money as him, while he and Fournier have the same contract length.

We should have gone inhouse with one of those guard spots, our front office tried to get cute and it looks like a gigantic mistake.


I would have taken Lonzo over Fournier and put him at the 2. I think that 4th year was a little too rich for our plans though.

So in my scenario, I still wasn't starting IQ, but getting a very solid perimeter defender at the 2. Evan needs to shoot much better to offset just the general energy and defense IQ brings, even when his shot is off.

I think you may end up getting your wish in a roundabout way, with Thibs staggering IQ in with the starters earlier and earlier.

I also don't think signing Kemba was bad or detrimental. The actual only downside to it is how much cache he has, so it's hard to not start him. He's a huge upgrade from Elf, but situationally, we're in the same spot where it's either start him or take him out of the rotation completely.

I do wonder if he's as washed as he seems. Things look pretty interesting when we run the offense through him.



If IQ ends up playing more then it's a failure by the front office, because the starting guard was inhouse and they didn't realize it or they let Thibs have too much say in roster moves. The plan should have been to give him the starting job and be supplemented by a veteran guard who can step in if he's having a bad go of it. So many other teams are starting good young players, the Warriors did this with Poole, the Bulls were starting Williams before he got hurt and the Sixers have just discovered that Maxey may be that dude just because they started him.


Kemba is lower risk, but he was clearly washed if you just went by the last 2 seasons. His knee issues are real, and having a PG rotation as old as ours is another bad look for the front office. The plan by our front office doesn't seem to address short or long term goals much, why sign all these guys after drafting a bunch of guards? Why draft Obi and resign Randle? Nothing they do really makes much sense in regards to a plan, outside of hoping and praying someone will want to come here via trade, at which point we'll have to give up every pick for the next 8 years because nobody under the age of 25 outside of RJ is playing 30 minutes per game.
User avatar
moocow007
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 94,733
And1: 21,810
Joined: Jan 07, 2002
Location: In front of the computer, where else?
       

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#54 » by moocow007 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:23 pm

nedleeds wrote:
moocow007 wrote:The Knicks gave Randle that contract extension was because it was a bargain (just like Derozan's contract with the Bulls was) and they couldn't afford to let their most talented player leave given how little talent they have.


What? Randle was under contract for this year. This is nonsense. They gave a guy who hasn't proven anything a near max deal a year before they needed to for no good reason other than 'culcha'.


The point is that, at least at the time, that contract extension was viewed as a bargain. And Derozan's contract was also a bargain. So you can take that 'culcha' nonsense and shove it.
User avatar
moocow007
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 94,733
And1: 21,810
Joined: Jan 07, 2002
Location: In front of the computer, where else?
       

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#55 » by moocow007 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:27 pm

spree2kawhi wrote:
moocow007 wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:
By no means am I saying that DeRozan is the end all be all plan. But the #1 goal of this front office was to win more games than last year. Thibs got COTY, they tasted the playoffs and got embarrassed. They were looking to go forward not backwards. We all know that Thibs loves workhorses. Demar would have been a guy that would play 36min a night and could give you an element to the offense that we severely lack. Again - I agree we don’t become some legitimate contender overnight, but at least we wouldn’t be looking for the approaching deadline to already dump Fournier on some team (as if that’s going to be easy).

But this is where I also struggle. I simply cannot buy into this notion that this is all somehow apart of this master plan. That we are gonna wake up one day and be happy that Burks is getting $10 mill and Fournier is getting $18 mill because we magically flipped them in a blockbuster deal.

Burks and Fournier, or Kemba and Fournier are just the 2021 version of Courtney Lee and Tim Hardaway JR. If we Harry Potter them onto another organization get ready to give up every future 1st we have and RJ and Obi.

The Knicks are so unbelievably bad at asset management. Just because we aren’t living in the IT days where he flipped picks like it was candy doesn’t mean we are doing a good job in that department.

To add insult to injury, I just know deep down that Leon Rose is gonna be silent all year sitting at home drinking Limoncello as this massacre really unfolds.


Absolutely. Assuming the Knicks are looking to maximize their ability to compete and not do what I think a lot of fans want (reset/reboot/rebuild) having Derozan goes a longer way towards that...especially now we have hindsight in play.

Contending in the East with a duo of Randle and Derozan doesn’t sound unrealistic. It was always clear - at least to me it was - what kind of talent Derozan is. Believing we could contend with our current roster does sound like a joke though and it always did.

Dragic/Kemba, RJ, Derozan, Randle, Mitch/Noel sounds legit to me.


Yes. Especially when you consider the parity that is currently in the East. As of right now 13 of the 15 teams have a shot in the playoffs and the top team (the Bulls) isn't exactly giving anyone warm and fuzzies (other than Bulls fans) that they'll remain where they are. The Nets are likely without Kyrie for however long Covid lasts. The Bucks are currently 1 game in the win column ahead of the Knicks. The Sixers are mired in their own internal mess that doesn't appear to be clearing up any time soon (per their own GM). Wizards and Hornets will likely start tailing off and in any case are hardly world beaters. Raptors are mediocre. Hawks are struggling.
User avatar
moocow007
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 94,733
And1: 21,810
Joined: Jan 07, 2002
Location: In front of the computer, where else?
       

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#56 » by moocow007 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:31 pm

GONYK wrote:
moocow007 wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:
By no means am I saying that DeRozan is the end all be all plan. But the #1 goal of this front office was to win more games than last year. Thibs got COTY, they tasted the playoffs and got embarrassed. They were looking to go forward not backwards. We all know that Thibs loves workhorses. Demar would have been a guy that would play 36min a night and could give you an element to the offense that we severely lack. Again - I agree we don’t become some legitimate contender overnight, but at least we wouldn’t be looking for the approaching deadline to already dump Fournier on some team (as if that’s going to be easy).

But this is where I also struggle. I simply cannot buy into this notion that this is all somehow apart of this master plan. That we are gonna wake up one day and be happy that Burks is getting $10 mill and Fournier is getting $18 mill because we magically flipped them in a blockbuster deal.

Burks and Fournier, or Kemba and Fournier are just the 2021 version of Courtney Lee and Tim Hardaway JR. If we Harry Potter them onto another organization get ready to give up every future 1st we have and RJ and Obi.

The Knicks are so unbelievably bad at asset management. Just because we aren’t living in the IT days where he flipped picks like it was candy doesn’t mean we are doing a good job in that department.

To add insult to injury, I just know deep down that Leon Rose is gonna be silent all year sitting at home drinking Limoncello as this massacre really unfolds.


Absolutely. Assuming the Knicks are looking to maximize their ability to compete and not do what I think a lot of fans want (reset/reboot/rebuild) having Derozan goes a longer way towards that...especially now we have hindsight in play.


I don't think that is the Knicks #1 goal. That's where they may be a disconnect from fan expectations.

Looking at the contracts given out, the #1 goal is maintaining cap flexibility while being competitive. I don't think maximizing the ability to compete was their priority.

There were a few avenues to do that that they didn't explore, Derozan or otherwise, if that is what they wanted.


If the goal was to maximize cap flexibility while remaining competitive why would signing clearly the most talented player on a cheap contract (Derozan) not work towards that? If Derozan got a max deal then absolutely no way. But 3 years at an AAV of $29 million is an excellent deal for someone like that. I don't think the extra $9 million per (difference between Derozan and Fournier) was such the difference value wise between what Derozan can bring from a competitive standpoint. And I would seriously doubt that if the Knicks were to shop Fournier and the Bulls Derozan that it'll be easier to move Fournier.
User avatar
Deeeez Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 36,808
And1: 26,048
Joined: Nov 12, 2004
Location: Bar stool

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#57 » by Deeeez Knicks » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:37 pm

Buttah304 wrote:
Deeeez Knicks wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:I don’t understand the argument of DeRozan and Randle being a poor long term plan when Fournier will be getting 3/54 and DeRozan will be receiving 3/82. They are quite literally both 3 years.

The real issue with the Knicks front office is that they actually believe having 2 carbon copies of every position is smart. Even Bullock bought into the whole “15 deep” nonsense last year.

Fournier/Burks is like looking in a mirror
Kemba/Rose are past their prime former all stars
Noel/Mitch are both non scoring/often injured C
Draft Obi (purely a 4) when we have Randle

I could have at least seen how sliding Devin Vassell next to RJ would have made sense in the SL/future.

But we constantly double up on role players as if that’s somehow a logical, shrewd plan.

When we end up crashing and burning we won’t be bad enough to land a Top 5 pick in the draft and we most likely won’t be good enough to even make the playoffs. Terrence Ross will be a Knick before we know it.


Derozan can be better option then Fournier but it can also be true that both would be bad plans


By no means am I saying that DeRozan is the end all be all plan. But the #1 goal of this front office was to win more games than last year. Thibs got COTY, they tasted the playoffs and got embarrassed. They were looking to go forward not backwards. We all know that Thibs loves workhorses. Demar would have been a guy that would play 36min a night and could give you an element to the offense that we severely lack. Again - I agree we don’t become some legitimate contender overnight, but at least we wouldn’t be looking for the approaching deadline to already dump Fournier on some team (as if that’s going to be easy).

But this is where I also struggle. I simply cannot buy into this notion that this is all somehow apart of this master plan. That we are gonna wake up one day and be happy that Burks is getting $10 mill and Fournier is getting $18 mill because we magically flipped them in a blockbuster deal.

Burks and Fournier, or Kemba and Fournier are just the 2021 version of Courtney Lee and Tim Hardaway JR. If we Harry Potter them onto another organization get ready to give up every future 1st we have and RJ and Obi.

The Knicks are so unbelievably bad at asset management. Just because we aren’t living in the IT days where he flipped picks like it was candy doesn’t mean we are doing a good job in that department.

To add insult to injury, I just know deep down that Leon Rose is gonna be silent all year sitting at home drinking Limoncello as this massacre really unfolds.


My #1 goal would be eventually to be a contender (and I assume its the front office goal) and I dont see how Derozan gets us there now or in the future. Again, neither does Fournier so can agree he was a bad signing.

Derozan is a good player, just hard to see how we could build around Derozan/Randle and get the necessary pieces around them without moving one. Just doesnt all fit together imo.
Mavs
Nikola Jokic | Maxi Kleber
Giannis | Dario Saric
Mikal Bridges | Justin Holiday
Marcus Smart | Eric Gordon
Kyle Lowry | Derrick White

Reserves
House
Len
Mays
Samanic
Santi Aldama
Didi
Dev Dotson
Ponds
User avatar
Deeeez Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 36,808
And1: 26,048
Joined: Nov 12, 2004
Location: Bar stool

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#58 » by Deeeez Knicks » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:38 pm

spree2kawhi wrote:
moocow007 wrote:
Buttah304 wrote:
By no means am I saying that DeRozan is the end all be all plan. But the #1 goal of this front office was to win more games than last year. Thibs got COTY, they tasted the playoffs and got embarrassed. They were looking to go forward not backwards. We all know that Thibs loves workhorses. Demar would have been a guy that would play 36min a night and could give you an element to the offense that we severely lack. Again - I agree we don’t become some legitimate contender overnight, but at least we wouldn’t be looking for the approaching deadline to already dump Fournier on some team (as if that’s going to be easy).

But this is where I also struggle. I simply cannot buy into this notion that this is all somehow apart of this master plan. That we are gonna wake up one day and be happy that Burks is getting $10 mill and Fournier is getting $18 mill because we magically flipped them in a blockbuster deal.

Burks and Fournier, or Kemba and Fournier are just the 2021 version of Courtney Lee and Tim Hardaway JR. If we Harry Potter them onto another organization get ready to give up every future 1st we have and RJ and Obi.

The Knicks are so unbelievably bad at asset management. Just because we aren’t living in the IT days where he flipped picks like it was candy doesn’t mean we are doing a good job in that department.

To add insult to injury, I just know deep down that Leon Rose is gonna be silent all year sitting at home drinking Limoncello as this massacre really unfolds.


Absolutely. Assuming the Knicks are looking to maximize their ability to compete and not do what I think a lot of fans want (reset/reboot/rebuild) having Derozan goes a longer way towards that...especially now we have hindsight in play.

Contending in the East with a duo of Randle and Derozan doesn’t sound unrealistic. It was always clear - at least to me it was - what kind of talent Derozan is. Believing we could contend with our current roster does sound like a joke though and it always did.

Dragic/Kemba, RJ, Derozan, Randle, Mitch/Noel sounds legit to me.


This team is much further away then Derozan from winning it all.
Mavs
Nikola Jokic | Maxi Kleber
Giannis | Dario Saric
Mikal Bridges | Justin Holiday
Marcus Smart | Eric Gordon
Kyle Lowry | Derrick White

Reserves
House
Len
Mays
Samanic
Santi Aldama
Didi
Dev Dotson
Ponds
User avatar
GONYK
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 63,085
And1: 36,389
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Frankie N Baby
   

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#59 » by GONYK » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:38 pm

NoDopeOnSundays wrote:
GONYK wrote:
NoDopeOnSundays wrote:

Bringing in DeMar would have given us a pathway to starting IQ, that's one of the major reasons I wanted Lonzo too. The most obvious thing to do with a player like IQ is put him in the off guard spot in terms offensive role, while he gets to guard the opposing PG. We had that sitting right in front of us, instead, they took this convoluted path and took two players who aren't as good as DeMar and make as much money as him, while he and Fournier have the same contract length.

We should have gone inhouse with one of those guard spots, our front office tried to get cute and it looks like a gigantic mistake.


I would have taken Lonzo over Fournier and put him at the 2. I think that 4th year was a little too rich for our plans though.

So in my scenario, I still wasn't starting IQ, but getting a very solid perimeter defender at the 2. Evan needs to shoot much better to offset just the general energy and defense IQ brings, even when his shot is off.

I think you may end up getting your wish in a roundabout way, with Thibs staggering IQ in with the starters earlier and earlier.

I also don't think signing Kemba was bad or detrimental. The actual only downside to it is how much cache he has, so it's hard to not start him. He's a huge upgrade from Elf, but situationally, we're in the same spot where it's either start him or take him out of the rotation completely.

I do wonder if he's as washed as he seems. Things look pretty interesting when we run the offense through him.



If IQ ends up playing more then it's a failure by the front office, because the starting guard was inhouse and they didn't realize it or they let Thibs have too much say in roster moves. The plan should have been to give him the starting job and be supplemented by a veteran guard who can step in if he's having a bad go of it. So many other teams are starting good young players, the Warriors did this with Poole, the Bulls were starting Williams before he got hurt and the Sixers have just discovered that Maxey may be that dude just because they started him.


I think this comparison is happening a bit out of context. It's easier to slot a young guy into your roster, when you have a desire to win, when you have Embiid and Steph Curry, or some other franchise level talent who is doing all of the heavy lifting. It's a little harder for a team in our position to take that risk, IMO, because we have a smaller margin for error.

Also, we start RJ and play him a ton (when he's not sh*tting the bed). I see that as very similar to Patrick Williams in CHI.

I don't think we should have planned for IQ to be our starting 2G, because he's undersized and is a bit inconsistent. I do think we have the structure in place to do what you said though, since Thibs hasn't really shown any hesitation to limit Fournier's minutes. But Fournier has been an 18PPG guy on 45/40/81 splits. I think it was worth it to take the shot on him, knowing IQ was there to mop up rather than thrust IQ into the role if you didn't believe him to be ready.

But that's a question of preference I guess. It probably also comes down to whether or not you think Fournier will get better than he is right now.

Kemba is lower risk, but he was clearly washed if you just went by the last 2 seasons. His knee issues are real, and having a PG rotation as old as ours is another bad look for the front office. The plan by our front office doesn't seem to address short or long term goals much, why sign all these guys after drafting a bunch of guards? Why draft Obi and resign Randle? Nothing they do really makes much sense in regards to a plan, outside of hoping and praying someone will want to come here via trade, at which point we'll have to give up every pick for the next 8 years because nobody under the age of 25 outside of RJ is playing 30 minutes per game.


Obi vs Randle is it's own thing, so I will answer that first. I think Randle was supposed to be traded, point blank. Then he blew up and the rest is history. I also don't think they thought Obi would be that raw his rookie year. He's still developing nicely though. I would love to see his time expanded, but he still makes a ton of mistakes on D. Almost all of those late Chicago 3's were on him. So it's a balance.

I still do wonder about how far Leon and Co. would have leaned into the slide if they did trade Randle.

As for the overall plan, it's more cap management than pure roster building. Forgive me for being repetitive, but I do think things make sense if you always keep two things in mind:

1. Everyone is here to be traded.
2. Thibs has rigid roles and a 10 man rotation.

So the medium term plan is focused on the cap, not the court. It's basically an algorithmic approach to tradable assets. That's what Aller's specialty is.

They made that algorithm fit Thibs' preferences the best they could. That's why the bench replicates the starters in a few areas.

The draft is irrelevant, IMO. We drafted those guys to play after we clear out the vets via trade. They are essentially cheap FA's who are situational. We didn't draft them to play right now.

That's how I interpret what I see going on. Would I do things differently? In some areas, yes, others no. I just think it's a plan that makes sense in today's NBA where stars are always hitting the market.

Time will tell if they can ultimately execute.
User avatar
moocow007
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 94,733
And1: 21,810
Joined: Jan 07, 2002
Location: In front of the computer, where else?
       

Re: Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier? 

Post#60 » by moocow007 » Tue Nov 23, 2021 8:45 pm

Deeeez Knicks wrote:
spree2kawhi wrote:
moocow007 wrote:
Absolutely. Assuming the Knicks are looking to maximize their ability to compete and not do what I think a lot of fans want (reset/reboot/rebuild) having Derozan goes a longer way towards that...especially now we have hindsight in play.

Contending in the East with a duo of Randle and Derozan doesn’t sound unrealistic. It was always clear - at least to me it was - what kind of talent Derozan is. Believing we could contend with our current roster does sound like a joke though and it always did.

Dragic/Kemba, RJ, Derozan, Randle, Mitch/Noel sounds legit to me.


This team is much further away then Derozan from winning it all.


It's not about winning it all though. It about being as competitive as possible without locking up your cap or trading away your assets right? It's not like Walker and Fournier would get them closer to winning it all.

Return to New York Knicks