MagicFan101 wrote: pepe1991 wrote:
Any deal would be more involved than just that.
The Knicks are a bad organization but they aren’t bad enough to give away #8 for #15 without getting something else back.
My point is that I’m confused on what else would be included. I’m not giving up AG for anything on their roster other than RJ who isn’t available. So I’m not sure I see a deal they would want.
sounds like logical trade, salaries match
Are you saying you would trade AG for Randle just to move up 7 spots in this class?
Pass for me.
They can have Aminu or Birch or 2nd rounder. Therefore ... I don’t see a deal they would accept.
No, i'm saying that is type of deal Knicks are looking for.
Moving few spots in a draft back,to take upgrade.
On paper Knicks shouldn't even be this bad, problem is complete lack of efficiency they have and concept of team defense.
Offense won't be upgraded with 3 PGs who can't shoot but good, smart GM could cook Knicks roster back into "watchable" fast.
Knicks can enter FA with proposed trade ( Smith, Randle for Gordon , pick swap) and offer VanVleet 4 years $70M contract and something like 3 years, $50M to Jeremi Grant ( or bit more for Otto Porter). Out of nowhere Knicks starting 5 is Vleet, Barrett, Grant, Gordon and MItchell Robinson. That's probably most balanced starting 5 in last decade for them.
But main reason why Knicks stayed irrelevant for years is that they try to go from zero to hero over span of 1 month and just miss on every single good FA under a sun.