Knicks are shopping KAT - Should the Raps pursue?

PhilBlackson · Post #61 » by **PhilBlackson** » Yesterday 4:57 am

HELLLLLLLLLLLLL NO!!!

Mattatron · Post #62 » by **Mattatron** » Yesterday 12:05 pm

Blazing_royale wrote:Why the Knicks wanna get rid of him? Thought he was the perfect fit for them.

Mike Brown.

Johnny Bball · Post #63 » by **Johnny Bball** » Yesterday 12:52 pm

Boogie! wrote:Why do the Knicks want to get rid of him

Blazing_royale wrote:Why the Knicks wanna get rid of him? Thought he was the perfect fit for them.

Because he's a big that not only can't anchor a defense, he makes it worse, and they are better just playing a 3 and D SF and defend and space the floor better if that's how Towns is going to normally play.

Towns has alway been a difficult fit.

djsunyc · Post #64 » by **djsunyc** » Yesterday 2:22 pm

towns is being scapegoated right now. he is still a quality player.

YogurtProducer · Post #65 » by **YogurtProducer** » Yesterday 3:55 pm

Johnny Bball wrote:
Boogie! wrote:Why do the Knicks want to get rid of him

Blazing_royale wrote:Why the Knicks wanna get rid of him? Thought he was the perfect fit for them.

Because he's a big that not only can't anchor a defense, he makes it worse, and they are better just playing a 3 and D SF and defend and space the floor better if that's how Towns is going to normally play.

Towns has alway been a difficult fit.

It is true, but he also has been on teams that have made a WCF/ECF two years in a row.

Johnny Bball · Post #66 » by **Johnny Bball** » Yesterday 4:16 pm

YogurtProducer wrote:
Johnny Bball wrote:
Boogie! wrote:Why do the Knicks want to get rid of him

Blazing_royale wrote:Why the Knicks wanna get rid of him? Thought he was the perfect fit for them.

Because he's a big that not only can't anchor a defense, he makes it worse, and they are better just playing a 3 and D SF and defend and space the floor better if that's how Towns is going to normally play.

Towns has alway been a difficult fit.

It is true, but he also has been on teams that have made a WCF/ECF two years in a row.

So did Demar Derozan

Son Goku 25 · Post #67 » by **Son Goku 25** » Yesterday 4:19 pm

I believe we can cover his defensive flaws with Barnes and CMB. He can be a decent weak side defender or blocker similar to Porz. He needs to be able to stretch the floor and fit fts and rebound which he can do.

TGM · Post #68 » by **TGM** » Yesterday 4:27 pm

I would consider a Towns for Jak, RJ and a first type of deal. NY might not want RJ both he is easily moveable to a variety of teams.

A starting five of IQ, BI, CMB, Barnes and Towns would be pretty damn good. CMB and Barnes offset Towns defense. But his rebounding and 3 PT shooting address a big need for us.

YogurtProducer · Post #69 » by **YogurtProducer** » Yesterday 4:37 pm

Johnny Bball wrote:
YogurtProducer wrote:
Johnny Bball wrote:

Because he's a big that not only can't anchor a defense, he makes it worse, and they are better just playing a 3 and D SF and defend and space the floor better if that's how Towns is going to normally play.

Towns has alway been a difficult fit.

It is true, but he also has been on teams that have made a WCF/ECF two years in a row.

So did Demar Derozan

Demar has only made 1, and beat a pretty uninspiring group of teams in IND and MIA to make it.

KAT beat two former champs in the Jokic Nugs, and the Tatum Celtics (were up 3-1 when Tatum got hurt), to get to his conf finals.

Johnny Bball · Post #70 » by **Johnny Bball** » Yesterday 4:43 pm

YogurtProducer wrote:
Johnny Bball wrote:
YogurtProducer wrote:It is true, but he also has been on teams that have made a WCF/ECF two years in a row.

So did Demar Derozan

Demar has only made 1, and beat a pretty uninspiring group of teams in IND and MIA to make it.

KAT beat two former champs in the Jokic Nugs, and the Tatum Celtics (were up 3-1 when Tatum got hurt), to get to his conf finals.

Oh I see, that makes it justified then. KAT didn't do any of what you just said, his teams did in spite of him TBH.

The entire discussion is pointless. He's exactly the type of big the Raptors don't need and don't have the realistic salary to trade with.

ConSarnit · Post #71 » by **ConSarnit** » Yesterday 4:44 pm

Son Goku 25 wrote:I believe we can cover his defensive flaws with Barnes and CMB. He can be a decent weak side defender or blocker similar to Porz. He needs to be able to stretch the floor and fit fts and rebound which he can do.

He's awful at this. If he's not part of the primary action he has terrible defensive instincts and commits some of the dumbest fouls imaginable. Towns is only solid as a defender if he's switched onto someone or guarding the post, ie. the ball is right in front of him.

He has terrible defensive awareness off-ball.

YogurtProducer · Post #72 » by **YogurtProducer** » Yesterday 4:52 pm

Johnny Bball wrote:Oh I see, that makes it justified then. KAT didn't do any of what you just said, his teams did in spite of him TBH.

In spite of is pretty ridiculous man. He maybe shouldn't be a top 10 paid NBA player, but he is still a hell of a player.

The entire discussion is pointless. He's exactly the type of big the Raptors don't need and don't have the realistic salary to trade with.

I would argue a 3 point stretchy big is actually EXACTLY what we need with Barnes, even moreso now with CMB in the fold to.

I do agree that realistically he is unobtainable, but that is operating from a perspective that I don't think he is truly on the trade market. But if you wanna talk "in theory", the following deals work salary wise (obviously picks would be involved in all):

KAT + Yabusele for Ingram + Poeltl
KAT + Dadiet + Hukporti for RJ + Poeltl + Agbaji

Now who knows how seriously KAT is being moved, but he certainly is a guy we "could" acquire if we tried to.

TheGeneral99 · Post #73 » by **TheGeneral99** » Yesterday 4:55 pm

KAT is terrible defensively and very soft.

Yes he's talented offensively, but his deficiencies outweigh the strengths in my opinion.

ConSarnit · Post #74 » by **ConSarnit** » Yesterday 4:57 pm

TGM wrote:I would consider a Towns for Jak, RJ and a first type of deal. NY might not want RJ both he is easily moveable to a variety of teams.

A starting five of IQ, BI, CMB, Barnes and Towns would be pretty damn good. CMB and Barnes offset Towns defense. But his rebounding and 3 PT shooting address a big need for us.

All things considered, I would rather just have RJ.

The only time Towns has been able to function defensively is when he's been backed by Gobert. So unless you have a DPOY C behind him it doesn't work.

I absolutely hate the idea of paying a player the max when they cannot do one of the essential tasks that is needed from their position (in this case: Centers and rim protection).

I think Towns skillset can provide value. I don't that's worth $57m/yr though.

deeps6x · Post #75 » by **deeps6x** » Yesterday 5:09 pm

dTox wrote:
sidsid wrote:
Duffman100 wrote:
I think it's a huge red flag that the Knicks (generally viewed as a contender) are looking to trade him.

The idea that he's not "buy low" is quite suspect.

We actually have a trade to compare it to. He was traded after likely his most successful season in the playoffs with a genuine great performance against Jokic. That netted a talented, but locker room cancer threat in Randle and a solid Nova guy with a middling future 1st.

Now he's older and his last playoff stint ended in an embarrassing defensive flameout confirming what the haters thought.

It's not that far out from our RJ/Jak plus a good pick/swap, even if you need a 3rd team for RJ.

Randle is not a locker room cancer, where is this coming from? He might have been unhappy in certain times but he literally led that franchise turnaround, even before Brunson was signed. The Knicks were in turmoil and a laughing stock for many years (remember the Phil Jackson era?) until Randle came in and made a positive change to that org, and suddenly, they started winning again. He's also beloved with the Wolves now, and is outplaying KAT this year. Randle is good for the culture, certainly more than Kat. Ask the wolves fans

So trade for a cheaper Randle instead

dagger · Post #76 » by **dagger** » Yesterday 5:12 pm

I'd bet nothing comes of this, at all.

dTox · Post #77 » by **dTox** » Yesterday 5:13 pm

deeps6x wrote:
dTox wrote:
sidsid wrote:
The idea that he's not "buy low" is quite suspect.

We actually have a trade to compare it to. He was traded after likely his most successful season in the playoffs with a genuine great performance against Jokic. That netted a talented, but locker room cancer threat in Randle and a solid Nova guy with a middling future 1st.

Now he's older and his last playoff stint ended in an embarrassing defensive flameout confirming what the haters thought.

It's not that far out from our RJ/Jak plus a good pick/swap, even if you need a 3rd team for RJ.

Randle is not a locker room cancer, where is this coming from? He might have been unhappy in certain times but he literally led that franchise turnaround, even before Brunson was signed. The Knicks were in turmoil and a laughing stock for many years (remember the Phil Jackson era?) until Randle came in and made a positive change to that org, and suddenly, they started winning again. He's also beloved with the Wolves now, and is outplaying KAT this year. Randle is good for the culture, certainly more than Kat. Ask the wolves fans

So trade for a cheaper Randle instead

It would be nice! But few things I do see as road blocks, Wolves are looking to contend, and they may not want to disturb what's working for them midway through the year. Randle + Scottie on offense (or Randle + CMB) may not be as smooth as Towns, whose offensive game better compliments our forwards.

Johnny Bball · Post #78 » by **Johnny Bball** » Yesterday 5:37 pm

TheGeneral99 wrote:KAT is terrible defensively and very soft.

Yes he's talented offensively, but his deficiencies outweigh the strengths in my opinion.

I don't get why this is so hard for everyone to see.

Johnny Bball · Post #79 » by **Johnny Bball** » Yesterday 5:40 pm

YogurtProducer wrote:
Johnny Bball wrote:Oh I see, that makes it justified then. KAT didn't do any of what you just said, his teams did in spite of him TBH.

In spite of is pretty ridiculous man. He maybe shouldn't be a top 10 paid NBA player, but he is still a hell of a player.

The entire discussion is pointless. He's exactly the type of big the Raptors don't need and don't have the realistic salary to trade with.
I would argue a 3 point stretchy big is actually EXACTLY what we need with Barnes, even moreso now with CMB in the fold to.

I do agree that realistically he is unobtainable, but that is operating from a perspective that I don't think he is truly on the trade market. But if you wanna talk "in theory", the following deals work salary wise (obviously picks would be involved in all):

KAT + Yabusele for Ingram + Poeltl
KAT + Dadiet + Hukporti for RJ + Poeltl + Agbaji

Now who knows how seriously KAT is being moved, but he certainly is a guy we "could" acquire if we tried to.

Ok, when I said the salary part I was never thinking anyone wouldn't be ridiculous enough to include Ingram and then add more. Or either of the guys they traded away already.

YogurtProducer · Post #80 » by **YogurtProducer** » Yesterday 5:53 pm

Johnny Bball wrote:
YogurtProducer wrote:
Johnny Bball wrote:Oh I see, that makes it justified then. KAT didn't do any of what you just said, his teams did in spite of him TBH.

In spite of is pretty ridiculous man. He maybe shouldn't be a top 10 paid NBA player, but he is still a hell of a player.

The entire discussion is pointless. He's exactly the type of big the Raptors don't need and don't have the realistic salary to trade with.
I would argue a 3 point stretchy big is actually EXACTLY what we need with Barnes, even moreso now with CMB in the fold to.

I do agree that realistically he is unobtainable, but that is operating from a perspective that I don't think he is truly on the trade market. But if you wanna talk "in theory", the following deals work salary wise (obviously picks would be involved in all):

KAT + Yabusele for Ingram + Poeltl
KAT + Dadiet + Hukporti for RJ + Poeltl + Agbaji

Now who knows how seriously KAT is being moved, but he certainly is a guy we "could" acquire if we tried to.

Ok, when I said the salary part I was never thinking anyone wouldn't be ridiculous enough to include Ingram and then add more. Or either of the guys they traded away already.

I dont think it is ridiculous to include Ingram by any means. KAT is a much, much better player than Ingram.

Both are flawed defenders, but KAT is a much better offensive piece. Not to mention a SIGNIFICANTLY better fit offensively with Scottie.