Trades and Transactions 2025 IV

[Jalen Bluntson]

Read on Twitter

What is Ainge doing over there? It's wild to see him clear house for picks and he's been shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic ever since. I need to take a deeper look at what he's actually acquired with all of his maneuvers.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Read on Twitter

What is Ainge doing over there? It's wild to see him clear house for picks and he's been shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic ever since. I need to take a deeper look at what he's actually acquired with all of his maneuvers.

2026 draft is the big one for them, they're doing everything they can to make sure that team ends up with a top 5 pick. Because there's 3-4 guys that could be on the same level as Cooper Flagg, with 1 of them potentially being higher.

[StlHawksFan]

If I told you 2 years ago after the Knicks won 47 games that they would trade all their youth and draft picks they had available to trade at that time along with a few core pieces to win 4 more games you wouldn't question some of the decisions this front office has made? Their assets management has been highly questionable especially for a roster that hasn't been a perfect fit together.

The Mikal deal seems like another poor use of assets. They could have pivoted to another player or waited for the price to come down. If Mikal came back to the Nets with that same broken re-worked jumper and the same early season struggle he had with the Knicks I can't imagine anyone would have come close to giving the amount of value the Knicks gave up for him.

I disagree. Look at what top tier guards have been going for:
This year: Des Bane has never played a full season in his career and he went for 4 firsts and KCP.
Last year: De'Aaron Fox went for 4 firsts and 3 seconds. He shot 27% from 3 for the Spurs after the trade. Are they complaining?
And the year before an aging Harden still went for 3 firsts, 3 seconds, and 2 swaps

We didn't know Bridges would have an off-year. And by the way, he still shot 42.3% from the corner which placed him in the top 50 in the league. 5 firsts and salary filler is expensive, but that's the market. I get that you aren't happy with him, but when a chance to land good talent comes around and you are flirting with the 2nd apron, you need to make the moves you can.

Remember we lost Grimes in order to keep our payroll alive so we'd have the financial means to trade for a guy like Bridges. Had we not made the move for Bridges, we'd have to give up another asset to turn Bogie's contract into someone else making $20M for this season. That would have had to have been Deuce or a pick. So suppose we gave up the Milwaukee first. Then what? Maybe Bridges goes for the same thing that Bane went for? 4 firsts? But we gave up one already so it's still 5 firsts.

[knickstape4ever]

If I told you 2 years ago after the Knicks won 47 games that they would trade all their youth and draft picks they had available to trade at that time along with a few core pieces to win 4 more games you wouldn't question some of the decisions this front office has made? Their assets management has been highly questionable especially for a roster that hasn't been a perfect fit together.

The Mikal deal seems like another poor use of assets. They could have pivoted to another player or waited for the price to come down. If Mikal came back to the Nets with that same broken re-worked jumper and the same early season struggle he had with the Knicks I can't imagine anyone would have come close to giving the amount of value the Knicks gave up for him.

I disagree. Look at what top tier guards have been going for:
This year: Des Bane has never played a full season in his career and he went for 4 firsts and KCP.
Last year: De'Aaron Fox went for 4 firsts and 3 seconds. He shot 27% from 3 for the Spurs after the trade. Are they complaining?
And the year before an aging Harden still went for 3 firsts, 3 seconds, and 2 swaps

We didn't know Bridges would have an off-year. And by the way, he still shot 42.3% from the corner which placed him in the top 50 in the league. 5 firsts and salary filler is expensive, but that's the market. I get that you aren't happy with him, but when a chance to land good talent comes around and you are flirting with the 2nd apron, you need to make the moves you can.

Remember we lost Grimes in order to keep our payroll alive so we'd have the financial means to trade for a guy like Bridges. Had we not made the move for Bridges, we'd have to give up another asset to turn Bogie's contract into someone else making $20M for this season. That would have had to have been Deuce or a pick. So suppose we gave up the Milwaukee first. Then what? Maybe Bridges goes for the same thing that Bane went for? 4 firsts? But we gave up one already so it's still 5 firsts.

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

Edit: + sold low on Obi too

[Jeff Van Gully]

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

but he wasn't doing those things consistently with the knicks, or anyone else, until this past silly season.

knicks is where he got the most run and best sustained role.

never understood this argument in the context of this offseason's transactions.

[StlHawksFan]

Read on Twitter

What is Ainge doing over there? It's wild to see him clear house for picks and he's been shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic ever since. I need to take a deeper look at what he's actually acquired with all of his maneuvers.

2026 draft is the big one for them, they're doing everything they can to make sure that team ends up with a top 5 pick. Because there's 3-4 guys that could be on the same level as Cooper Flagg, with 1 of them potentially being higher.

Right. There were 4 tanking teams last year and another 4 that got hit hard enough by injuries to basically be tanking by year end.
I expect to see a lot of teams that got hit with the injury bug, the lower tier middling teams, or teams that don't really have much of a future go all in for the draft this year.

That could include as many as 11 teams:
Boston, Brooklyn, Charlotte, Chicago, Indiana, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Portland, Toronto, Utah, and Washington.

I think the 3 West teams are a given to finish 13-15.
The 8 East teams on this list are positioned 8-15 meaning 3 of them are going to be play-in teams. It's going to be an ugly finish.

[spree8]

If I told you 2 years ago after the Knicks won 47 games that they would trade all their youth and draft picks they had available to trade at that time along with a few core pieces to win 4 more games you wouldn't question some of the decisions this front office has made? Their assets management has been highly questionable especially for a roster that hasn't been a perfect fit together.

The Mikal deal seems like another poor use of assets. They could have pivoted to another player or waited for the price to come down. If Mikal came back to the Nets with that same broken re-worked jumper and the same early season struggle he had with the Knicks I can't imagine anyone would have come close to giving the amount of value the Knicks gave up for him.

I disagree. Look at what top tier guards have been going for:
This year: Des Bane has never played a full season in his career and he went for 4 firsts and KCP.
Last year: De'Aaron Fox went for 4 firsts and 3 seconds. He shot 27% from 3 for the Spurs after the trade. Are they complaining?
And the year before an aging Harden still went for 3 firsts, 3 seconds, and 2 swaps

We didn't know Bridges would have an off-year. And by the way, he still shot 42.3% from the corner which placed him in the top 50 in the league. 5 firsts and salary filler is expensive, but that's the market. I get that you aren't happy with him, but when a chance to land good talent comes around and you are flirting with the 2nd apron, you need to make the moves you can.

Remember we lost Grimes in order to keep our payroll alive so we'd have the financial means to trade for a guy like Bridges. Had we not made the move for Bridges, we'd have to give up another asset to turn Bogie's contract into someone else making $20M for this season. That would have had to have been Deuce or a pick. So suppose we gave up the Milwaukee first. Then what? Maybe Bridges goes for the same thing that Bane went for? 4 firsts? But we gave up one already so it's still 5 firsts.

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

But you’re forgetting the part about him complaining about Thibs… just like Obi. While they should’ve gotten a lot more for him, the dude wanted out. Thibs crushed his confidence and Grimes made it known to the media. Thibs was never the right guy for the job because of stuff like this. Mikal will likely have a bounce back year in his absence too..

[Polk377]

If I told you 2 years ago after the Knicks won 47 games that they would trade all their youth and draft picks they had available to trade at that time along with a few core pieces to win 4 more games you wouldn't question some of the decisions this front office has made? Their assets management has been highly questionable especially for a roster that hasn't been a perfect fit together.

The Mikal deal seems like another poor use of assets. They could have pivoted to another player or waited for the price to come down. If Mikal came back to the Nets with that same broken re-worked jumper and the same early season struggle he had with the Knicks I can't imagine anyone would have come close to giving the amount of value the Knicks gave up for him.

I disagree. Look at what top tier guards have been going for:
This year: Des Bane has never played a full season in his career and he went for 4 firsts and KCP.
Last year: De'Aaron Fox went for 4 firsts and 3 seconds. He shot 27% from 3 for the Spurs after the trade. Are they complaining?
And the year before an aging Harden still went for 3 firsts, 3 seconds, and 2 swaps

We didn't know Bridges would have an off-year. And by the way, he still shot 42.3% from the corner which placed him in the top 50 in the league. 5 firsts and salary filler is expensive, but that's the market. I get that you aren't happy with him, but when a chance to land good talent comes around and you are flirting with the 2nd apron, you need to make the moves you can.

Remember we lost Grimes in order to keep our payroll alive so we'd have the financial means to trade for a guy like Bridges. Had we not made the move for Bridges, we'd have to give up another asset to turn Bogie's contract into someone else making $20M for this season. That would have had to have been Deuce or a pick. So suppose we gave up the Milwaukee first. Then what? Maybe Bridges goes for the same thing that Bane went for? 4 firsts? But we gave up one already so it's still 5 firsts.

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

Edit: + sold low on Obi too

Grimes is most effective as an on ball guard. We already have the most effective on ball guard in the league with JB. The role just didn't fit the player here.

[StlHawksFan]

If I told you 2 years ago after the Knicks won 47 games that they would trade all their youth and draft picks they had available to trade at that time along with a few core pieces to win 4 more games you wouldn't question some of the decisions this front office has made? Their assets management has been highly questionable especially for a roster that hasn't been a perfect fit together.

The Mikal deal seems like another poor use of assets. They could have pivoted to another player or waited for the price to come down. If Mikal came back to the Nets with that same broken re-worked jumper and the same early season struggle he had with the Knicks I can't imagine anyone would have come close to giving the amount of value the Knicks gave up for him.

I disagree. Look at what top tier guards have been going for:
This year: Des Bane has never played a full season in his career and he went for 4 firsts and KCP.
Last year: De'Aaron Fox went for 4 firsts and 3 seconds. He shot 27% from 3 for the Spurs after the trade. Are they complaining?
And the year before an aging Harden still went for 3 firsts, 3 seconds, and 2 swaps

We didn't know Bridges would have an off-year. And by the way, he still shot 42.3% from the corner which placed him in the top 50 in the league. 5 firsts and salary filler is expensive, but that's the market. I get that you aren't happy with him, but when a chance to land good talent comes around and you are flirting with the 2nd apron, you need to make the moves you can.

Remember we lost Grimes in order to keep our payroll alive so we'd have the financial means to trade for a guy like Bridges. Had we not made the move for Bridges, we'd have to give up another asset to turn Bogie's contract into someone else making $20M for this season. That would have had to have been Deuce or a pick. So suppose we gave up the Milwaukee first. Then what? Maybe Bridges goes for the same thing that Bane went for? 4 firsts? But we gave up one already so it's still 5 firsts.

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

Edit: + sold low on Obi too

OK let's suppose that we didn't move Obi and Grimes. Moving Obi let us sign Donte by putting us in a situation to have the full MLE. Donte was the piece that Minny wanted for KAT. Randle had no market. And he just signed a 3yr/$100M extension. Obi got a 4yr/$60M contract. Grimes wants 4/$100M and he'll probably get something closer to 4/$80M. Those 3 contracts are effectively = KAT+Bridges.

I get the nostalgia but would the team really be better like this today?
C Mitch, Yabusele
PF Randle, Obi
SF OG, Hart
SG Grimes, Deuce
PG Brunson, Clarkson

[thebuzzardman]

If I told you 2 years ago after the Knicks won 47 games that they would trade all their youth and draft picks they had available to trade at that time along with a few core pieces to win 4 more games you wouldn't question some of the decisions this front office has made? Their assets management has been highly questionable especially for a roster that hasn't been a perfect fit together.

The Mikal deal seems like another poor use of assets. They could have pivoted to another player or waited for the price to come down. If Mikal came back to the Nets with that same broken re-worked jumper and the same early season struggle he had with the Knicks I can't imagine anyone would have come close to giving the amount of value the Knicks gave up for him.

I disagree. Look at what top tier guards have been going for:
This year: Des Bane has never played a full season in his career and he went for 4 firsts and KCP.
Last year: De'Aaron Fox went for 4 firsts and 3 seconds. He shot 27% from 3 for the Spurs after the trade. Are they complaining?
And the year before an aging Harden still went for 3 firsts, 3 seconds, and 2 swaps

We didn't know Bridges would have an off-year. And by the way, he still shot 42.3% from the corner which placed him in the top 50 in the league. 5 firsts and salary filler is expensive, but that's the market. I get that you aren't happy with him, but when a chance to land good talent comes around and you are flirting with the 2nd apron, you need to make the moves you can.

Remember we lost Grimes in order to keep our payroll alive so we'd have the financial means to trade for a guy like Bridges. Had we not made the move for Bridges, we'd have to give up another asset to turn Bogie's contract into someone else making $20M for this season. That would have had to have been Deuce or a pick. So suppose we gave up the Milwaukee first. Then what? Maybe Bridges goes for the same thing that Bane went for? 4 firsts? But we gave up one already so it's still 5 firsts.

You have to take into account everyone on here over rates, the youth

[knickstape4ever]

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

but he wasn't doing those things consistently with the knicks, or anyone else, until this past silly season.

knicks is where he got the most run and best sustained role.

never understood this argument in the context of this offseason's transactions.

he wasn't exactly given the freedom to thrive until this year. he was pigeon holed into a role, and once he hit a rough patch, the Knicks shipped him out.

they literally Grimes, who was untouchable in the Donovan Mitchell trade talks just a year earlier, to re-acquire Alec Burks, who the Knicks had just traded away assets to get rid of, and a really old Bogy

sucks that Knicks didn't really give Grimes a longer leash to play thru his struggles, esp. considering the upside was evident. Obi (never should have been the pick, but that's another story) was also an organizational failure.

also, this board was pretty bummed by that Grimes trade, no?

[StlHawksFan]

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

but he wasn't doing those things consistently with the knicks, or anyone else, until this past silly season.

knicks is where he got the most run and best sustained role.

never understood this argument in the context of this offseason's transactions.

he wasn't exactly given the freedom to thrive until this year. he was pigeon holed into a role, and once he hit a rough patch, the Knicks shipped him out.

they literally Grimes, who was untouchable in the Donovan Mitchell trade talks just a year earlier, to re-acquire Alec Burks, who the Knicks had just traded away assets to get rid of, and a really old Bogy

sucks that Knicks didn't really give Grimes a longer leash to play thru his struggles, esp. considering the upside was evident. Obi (never should have been the pick, but that's another story) was also an organizational failure.

also, this board was pretty bummed by that Grimes trade, no?

It was more about keeping the money alive for the offseason than the actual named players. It's why they never waived Fournier despite him probably willing to accept a buyout for little more than a plane ticket.

[knickstape4ever]

I disagree. Look at what top tier guards have been going for:
This year: Des Bane has never played a full season in his career and he went for 4 firsts and KCP.
Last year: De'Aaron Fox went for 4 firsts and 3 seconds. He shot 27% from 3 for the Spurs after the trade. Are they complaining?
And the year before an aging Harden still went for 3 firsts, 3 seconds, and 2 swaps

We didn't know Bridges would have an off-year. And by the way, he still shot 42.3% from the corner which placed him in the top 50 in the league. 5 firsts and salary filler is expensive, but that's the market. I get that you aren't happy with him, but when a chance to land good talent comes around and you are flirting with the 2nd apron, you need to make the moves you can.

Remember we lost Grimes in order to keep our payroll alive so we'd have the financial means to trade for a guy like Bridges. Had we not made the move for Bridges, we'd have to give up another asset to turn Bogie's contract into someone else making $20M for this season. That would have had to have been Deuce or a pick. So suppose we gave up the Milwaukee first. Then what? Maybe Bridges goes for the same thing that Bane went for? 4 firsts? But we gave up one already so it's still 5 firsts.

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

Edit: + sold low on Obi too

OK let's suppose that we didn't move Obi and Grimes. Moving Obi let us sign Donte by putting us in a situation to have the full MLE. Donte was the piece that Minny wanted for KAT. Randle had no market. And he just signed a 3yr/$100M extension. Obi got a 4yr/$60M contract. Grimes wants 4/$100M and he'll probably get something closer to 4/$80M. Those 3 contracts are effectively = KAT+Bridges.

I get the nostalgia but would the team really be better like this today?
C Mitch, Yabusele
PF Randle, Obi
SF OG, Hart
SG Grimes, Deuce
PG Brunson, Clarkson

that's not exactly how revisionist history works. if they kept Obi and and Grimes, other moves would have still followed, just different iterations

[DE FENSE]

KLove for the vet min after Jazz buy him out? I'm intrigued...

[ctorres]

KLove for the vet min after Jazz buy him out? I'm intrigued...

Him going to the Lakers makes too much sense

[Jeff Van Gully]

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

but he wasn't doing those things consistently with the knicks, or anyone else, until this past silly season.

knicks is where he got the most run and best sustained role.

never understood this argument in the context of this offseason's transactions.

he wasn't exactly given the freedom to thrive until this year. he was pigeon holed into a role, and once he hit a rough patch, the Knicks shipped him out.

they literally Grimes, who was untouchable in the Donovan Mitchell trade talks just a year earlier, to re-acquire Alec Burks, who the Knicks had just traded away assets to get rid of, and a really old Bogy

sucks that Knicks didn't really give Grimes a longer leash to play thru his struggles, esp. considering the upside was evident. Obi (never should have been the pick, but that's another story) was also an organizational failure.

also, this board was pretty bummed by that Grimes trade, no?

i was a huge grimes fan. wanted him to thrive in ways he never did. we certainly had some loud, persistent voices about the trade but i can't definitively say the forum was tilted in one way or another. i was pretty excited about the return as a bogey fan.

i mean, the whole time felt like an inconsistent rough patch for him. and it resulted in him being replaced in the starting lineup by donte divincenzo. and hope that grimes would score better as a focal point of the second unit. that didn't happen either. i don't find any of that controversial.

i remember grimes not being happy about it. but ultimately, he didn't perform to expectations and we made some changes. i remember him being the incumbent starter who benefitted greatly from what some argue to be institutionalized respect for that role.

hard for me to look at his value being low as a function of not getting opportunities as it's often portrayed. the job was his. pretty firmly. he never quite gave what was wanted. other guys were better at it. we traded him for other players we hoped could do a better job of giving what was needed.

his market value is higher now due to us finally having seen the scoring part come together consistently when it did. but i don't think it's wise to disregard the context of that performance. guys do that every season.

[Jalen Bluntson]

that's another example of mismanagement of assets, having to trade Grimes. right now, I would LOVE to have Grimes on this roster. he'd be great at the 2 next to Brunson because he can defend the POA, hit 3's w/ volume from all zones (not just the corners), and he's got more in his bag in terms of shot creation and playmaking

but he wasn't doing those things consistently with the knicks, or anyone else, until this past silly season.

knicks is where he got the most run and best sustained role.

never understood this argument in the context of this offseason's transactions.

he wasn't exactly given the freedom to thrive until this year. he was pigeon holed into a role, and once he hit a rough patch, the Knicks shipped him out.

they literally Grimes, who was untouchable in the Donovan Mitchell trade talks just a year earlier, to re-acquire Alec Burks, who the Knicks had just traded away assets to get rid of, and a really old Bogy

sucks that Knicks didn't really give Grimes a longer leash to play thru his struggles, esp. considering the upside was evident. Obi (never should have been the pick, but that's another story) was also an organizational failure.

also, this board was pretty bummed by that Grimes trade, no?

Grimes is probably part of the reason Thibs was fired. The way he handled the bench was atrocious. His dog house BS/Short leash/horrible minutes was wasting talent and money while hurting trade value.

The FO took a 21 win team to near top of the Eastern conference in 1 off season. 4 years later we are an ECF team. For all of this mismanagement of assets I would think they did an amazing job.

[Jeff Van Gully]

but he wasn't doing those things consistently with the knicks, or anyone else, until this past silly season.

knicks is where he got the most run and best sustained role.

never understood this argument in the context of this offseason's transactions.

he wasn't exactly given the freedom to thrive until this year. he was pigeon holed into a role, and once he hit a rough patch, the Knicks shipped him out.

they literally Grimes, who was untouchable in the Donovan Mitchell trade talks just a year earlier, to re-acquire Alec Burks, who the Knicks had just traded away assets to get rid of, and a really old Bogy

sucks that Knicks didn't really give Grimes a longer leash to play thru his struggles, esp. considering the upside was evident. Obi (never should have been the pick, but that's another story) was also an organizational failure.

also, this board was pretty bummed by that Grimes trade, no?

It was more about keeping the money alive for the offseason than the actual named players. It's why they never waived Fournier despite him probably willing to accept a buyout for little more than a plane ticket.

i don't think it's mutually exclusive that bogey was both a trade chip and scoring weapon. that value was diminished by an unfortunate injury in the playoffs.

[knicksstuff]

Read on Twitter

What is Ainge doing over there? It's wild to see him clear house for picks and he's been shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic ever since. I need to take a deeper look at what he's actually acquired with all of his maneuvers.

Assuming you are talking of the older Ainge because his son was just brought over this summer to the Jazz from Boston. Probably why they are more active with the sexton trade/ clarkson buyout etc. Just get players they want instead of holding out for imaginery value older ainge has created in his head

[JayTWill]

Exactly. The business element of how the Knicks operate is top notch. He checked all of the boxes for the price and cap hit they could work with to put a competing team together last year. The FO has done a phenomenal job of managing the on court with the business to be seamless.

If I told you 2 years ago after the Knicks won 47 games that they would trade all their youth and draft picks they had available to trade at that time along with a few core pieces to win 4 more games you wouldn't question some of the decisions this front office has made? Their assets management has been highly questionable especially for a roster that hasn't been a perfect fit together.

The Mikal deal seems like another poor use of assets. They could have pivoted to another player or waited for the price to come down. If Mikal came back to the Nets with that same broken re-worked jumper and the same early season struggle he had with the Knicks I can't imagine anyone would have come close to giving the amount of value the Knicks gave up for him.

There are only a few opportunities to get something done for a piece that you feel checks your boxes. Mikal is still in his prime, wasn't extended yet so the cap figure worked, didn't have to trade a rotation piece for him, fit next to JB and OG, plays every game and heavy minutes. Who were they going to wait on and who would they have to have given up from the current rotation to make the salaries work and of comparable value? Think about it and 90% is just fantasy.

I would have been ok with the move if it was the final piece to a championship contender but they made that move and then a week later they didn't have a healthy rotational center on the roster. They eventually traded for KAT months later but then they were left with no depth, limited financial flexibility and not many avenues to address the holes in the roster.

I have no problem with the player Mikal is. I think he was a great piece to add at his salary and age but it still doesn't justify the price paid imo. We are now competing against teams that are younger than the Knicks with more room for internal improvement and more assets to improve their roster while the Knicks are trying to find bargain pieces to fill major holes.

It's great they kept most of the core together but the core still has holes in it and they still ended up trading DDV and Randle and losing iHart in free agency with Mitch missing most of the year due to injury after the Mikal trade. Brunson, Hart, OG and Deuce were the only core pieces remaining that played most of the season and Brunson and OG may be the only irreplaceable pieces of that core.

As far as other options I prefer Mikal's fit over someone like DeAndre Hunter but if Hunter could have been acquired for Bogey and a couple firsts they could still have 3 firsts, a swap and some 2nds to attach to someone like Hart or Mitch's contract to make another upgrade to the roster. I would have even taken Grimes back for the limited cost the Mavs and Sixers paid for him. We could probably have both those guys for less than it cost to acquire Mikal.