Moderators: Deeeez Knicks, mpharris36, j4remi, NoLayupRule, HerSports85, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23
Juco24 wrote:Kampuchea wrote:KnixinSix wrote:
Is KAT our best play if Randle doesn't want a team workable contract? It might be.
We need KAT and his team friendly contract here already
I think this is the first time I've ever seen someone say KAT is on a team friendly contract. FOR YEARS, people have said "Don't want KATs MONSTROUS contract". Interesting
KnixinSix wrote:Juco24 wrote:Kampuchea wrote:
We need KAT and his team friendly contract here already
I think this is the first time I've ever seen someone say KAT is on a team friendly contract. FOR YEARS, people have said "Don't want KATs MONSTROUS contract". Interesting
KATs contract is not team friendly by any stretch. However with that said, his contract might be smaller and shorter in length than what Randles contract demands will be.
We so often with this front office have heard ahead of time on the guys who have signed team friendly deals to stay here. Latest was we heard Brunson a week or more before his extension eligibility that he was likely going to take a team friendly deal. Then we heard the same from Bridges camp who isn't even eligible for a while.
Not a PEEP on Randle considering an extension. In fact the Begley comments from a few weeks ago, made it sound like nothing was imminent for an extension at all.
Could be wrong, but just don't see them letting him play it out and then potentially losing him for almost nothing in the offseason (like the Clippers with PG).
KAT certainly ain't perfect but with one of.the best big men coaches now in the fold and with his encouraging defensive play this year and most of the playoffs, I think he could be a better player and fit than Randle was.
I like Randle a lot though but 4 years of KAT to me on a locked in roster (which it seems Aller /Rose are tyring to do) is much better than 1 year of Randle and then lose him for nothing.
Meat wrote:Chanel Bomber wrote:Ayton stopped playing defense once he got his second contract, which happened to be his definition of success in a pre-draft interview.
He's talented but he's a walking red flag.
eh so did bridges
spree2kawhi wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:has kat ever had a playoff run like this where he was elite defensively? yet alone even average on defense?
Didn’t you see with your own eyes that Towns is a very capable defender against heavy bigs? He’ll guard Embiid, Jokic, KP and Horford, Turner, Adebayo etc effectively and give them fits on offense, stretch the floor for Brunson, move the ball efficiently, won’t pound the ball or act like he’s LeBron’s second coming. We need that.
It’s beyond me how people cannot see that and talk like he wouldn’t add incredibly important aspects that we have been lacking specifically during our last playoff run. It’s all a stupid narrative. He solves what we‘re bad at. Unlike Randle, this one particular player does that. Ayton, I will admit, opens up the floor too, and I’d like him guarding bigger centers too. I’m down with that, but KAT is on a whole different level.
Capn'O wrote:Damnit Melo
VirginiaKnickFan wrote:KnixinSix wrote:Juco24 wrote:
I think this is the first time I've ever seen someone say KAT is on a team friendly contract. FOR YEARS, people have said "Don't want KATs MONSTROUS contract". Interesting
KATs contract is not team friendly by any stretch. However with that said, his contract might be smaller and shorter in length than what Randles contract demands will be.
We so often with this front office have heard ahead of time on the guys who have signed team friendly deals to stay here. Latest was we heard Brunson a week or more before his extension eligibility that he was likely going to take a team friendly deal. Then we heard the same from Bridges camp who isn't even eligible for a while.
Not a PEEP on Randle considering an extension. In fact the Begley comments from a few weeks ago, made it sound like nothing was imminent for an extension at all.
Could be wrong, but just don't see them letting him play it out and then potentially losing him for almost nothing in the offseason (like the Clippers with PG).
KAT certainly ain't perfect but with one of.the best big men coaches now in the fold and with his encouraging defensive play this year and most of the playoffs, I think he could be a better player and fit than Randle was.
I like Randle a lot though but 4 years of KAT to me on a locked in roster (which it seems Aller /Rose are tyring to do) is much better than 1 year of Randle and then lose him for nothing.
KAT is too soft.
3toheadmelo wrote:Ayton on his worst day is still a much better defender than KAT on his best day.
aggo wrote:trading for ayton == trading for eddy curry
3toheadmelo wrote:spree2kawhi wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:has kat ever had a playoff run like this where he was elite defensively? yet alone even average on defense?
Didn’t you see with your own eyes that Towns is a very capable defender against heavy bigs? He’ll guard Embiid, Jokic, KP and Horford, Turner, Adebayo etc effectively and give them fits on offense, stretch the floor for Brunson, move the ball efficiently, won’t pound the ball or act like he’s LeBron’s second coming. We need that.
It’s beyond me how people cannot see that and talk like he wouldn’t add incredibly important aspects that we have been lacking specifically during our last playoff run. It’s all a stupid narrative. He solves what we‘re bad at. Unlike Randle, this one particular player does that. Ayton, I will admit, opens up the floor too, and I’d like him guarding bigger centers too. I’m down with that, but KAT is on a whole different level.
aggo wrote:you already saw what happens when teams play 5 out vs us.
look what indiana forced us to play.
there wont be a big to defend the post or corner or dunker spot because the best teams in the east rn play 5 out.
you all saw this over 7 games.
but dont lack the actual ball knowledge to understand that if we are defending 5 out, which is a nearly impossible task because ythere is no paint help defense,
the correct adjustment isn't to believe we need a defensive C.
the correct adjustment is to just score more points because you are not going to scheme yourself into defending the rim when they are playing 5 out. there is no scheme to fix this. we already know this because we got another elite 2 way player. the best remedy is to just have defenders that can stick to the ball at the point of attack for as long as possible so that when you do rotate, the rotation doesnt have to happen after the first step.
RIP mags 
aggo wrote:you already saw what happens when teams play 5 out vs us.
look what indiana forced us to play.
there wont be a big to defend the post or corner or dunker spot because the best teams in the east rn play 5 out.
you all saw this over 7 games.
but dont lack the actual ball knowledge to understand that if we are defending 5 out, which is a nearly impossible task because ythere is no paint help defense,
the correct adjustment isn't to believe we need a defensive C.
the correct adjustment is to just score more points because you are not going to scheme yourself into defending the rim when they are playing 5 out. there is no scheme to fix this. we already know this because we got another elite 2 way player. the best remedy is to just have defenders that can stick to the ball at the point of attack for as long as possible so that when you do rotate, the rotation doesnt have to happen after the first step.
