Was it a mistake to bring in Walker and Fournier?

[Knicksfan1992]

Derozan at age 35 making 28 million in 3 years... Yep seems real appetizing for a team to take on lmao.

Fournier is still the better value given his past production. It hasn't worked out so far and I'm not a Fournier guy per se, but it's way easier to move 18-20 mill of him than it is to move 28 million of an aging Derozan who isn't really a plug and play guy himself...

Also after a hot start against weaker opponents, the Bulls are now 8-6 in their last 14. More where we thought they would be and DD's numbers over the last 8 or so games have started to regress to where he usually has been...25/4/4 47/33/90 splits. Still good but not nearly as good as how he started.

Again early season narratives tend to make people forget how long the season truly is. We've played about a month of ball and still have until April to finish this whole season.

[louisorr]

has anyone considered the possibility that Derozan on the Knicks right now might look like crap and Fournier on the Bulls could be balling?

[spree2kawhi]

Derozan at age 35 making 28 million in 3 years... Yep seems real appetizing for a team to take on lmao.

Fournier is still the better value given his past production. It hasn't worked out so far and I'm not a Fournier guy per se, but it's way easier to move 18-20 mill of him than it is to move 28 million of an aging Derozan who isn't really a plug and play guy himself...

Also after a hot start against weaker opponents, the Bulls are now 8-6 in their last 14. More where we thought they would be and DD's numbers over the last 8 or so games have started to regress to where he usually has been...25/4/4 47/33/90 splits. Still good but not nearly as good as how he started.

Again early season narratives tend to make people forget how long the season truly is. We've played about a month of ball and still have until April to finish this whole season.

I completely disagree with most of that post. BTW, Derozan averaged 27 ppg in 2017, so I don’t think we can bet on him regressing to any common numbers. This is nitpicking. Fournier takes us nowhere, he is not better value at all. Derozan is a legitimate difference maker, while Fournier’s just your average Joe.

[god shammgod]

Derozan at age 35 making 28 million in 3 years... Yep seems real appetizing for a team to take on lmao.

Fournier is still the better value given his past production. It hasn't worked out so far and I'm not a Fournier guy per se, but it's way easier to move 18-20 mill of him than it is to move 28 million of an aging Derozan who isn't really a plug and play guy himself...

Also after a hot start against weaker opponents, the Bulls are now 8-6 in their last 14. More where we thought they would be and DD's numbers over the last 8 or so games have started to regress to where he usually has been...25/4/4 47/33/90 splits. Still good but not nearly as good as how he started.

Again early season narratives tend to make people forget how long the season truly is. We've played about a month of ball and still have until April to finish this whole season.

I completely disagree with most of that post. BTW, Derozan averaged 27 ppg in 2017, so I don’t think we can bet on him regressing to any common numbers. This is nitpicking. Fournier takes us nowhere, he is not better value at all. Derozan is a legitimate difference maker, while Fournier’s just your average Joe.

he's the 6th best scorer in the league and is leading a team to the playoffs who hasn't been in the playoffs in years but a guy whose coach doesn't even really want to play after a month is a better value.

[nedleeds]

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.

I didn't see it as a bargain and many other people who thought, 'wow this guy got exposed in a real series where the other team tried' or 'well lets see how he does in a real season without covid outages and with fans'. I thought when he signed it that it was at best a neutral value contract. Not sure why I have to shove anything.

[Deeeez Knicks]

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?

Derozan locks our cap up and will be 34 by the end of the deal. Objectively, he looks great now but there's risk when he's 33 and 34 in this deal. More players then not start falling off in that age range. How moveable is that deal if he starts falling off? I don't think the risk is worth the reward in this case.

The mid range-game will hold up fairly well and he’s ridiculously skilled. Look up at what age Kobe, KG, Pierce, LeBron, Dirk and Jordan won their championships. I’m not putting him in that category, strictly putting that age in perspective.

You’re in denial if you can’t see how bad the rest of the league currently is and how Derozan would have been a killer addition. Same goes for Beal obviously.

Edit: People have been talking Lonzo and Simmons, but it’s really time to cut that BS already. We need a 25 ppg scorer.

I'm not putting Derozan in the same category as those guys. Derozan is good, not great. Unless are getting a Ray Allen and KG ttpe star i don't see how Derozan is going to take this team anywhere so i don't buy those comparisons. He doesn't fix our defense and we don't have the right pieces to fit him in. Bulls are built better for Derozan where he just needs to score.

He makes us better, just not good enough. I see it more as you guys are in denial about the Knicks and seeing Derozan as our missing piece. Unfortunately, we are much further away.

[TexasMassacre]

Close to $80 MILLION for Fournier is a bloody travesty. Shambles. Waste of dollary doos!

[Garbagelo]

Yes

Also a mistake to re-sign Randle and not bring back Frank

[HarthorneWingo]

I think it was a mistake to sign Walker. Pairing them in the starting backcourt just compounds it.

[Knicksfan1992]

Derozan at age 35 making 28 million in 3 years... Yep seems real appetizing for a team to take on lmao.

Fournier is still the better value given his past production. It hasn't worked out so far and I'm not a Fournier guy per se, but it's way easier to move 18-20 mill of him than it is to move 28 million of an aging Derozan who isn't really a plug and play guy himself...

Also after a hot start against weaker opponents, the Bulls are now 8-6 in their last 14. More where we thought they would be and DD's numbers over the last 8 or so games have started to regress to where he usually has been...25/4/4 47/33/90 splits. Still good but not nearly as good as how he started.

Again early season narratives tend to make people forget how long the season truly is. We've played about a month of ball and still have until April to finish this whole season.

I completely disagree with most of that post. BTW, Derozan averaged 27 ppg in 2017, so I don’t think we can bet on him regressing to any common numbers. This is nitpicking. Fournier takes us nowhere, he is not better value at all. Derozan is a legitimate difference maker, while Fournier’s just your average Joe.

he's the 6th best scorer in the league and is leading a team to the playoffs who hasn't been in the playoffs in years but a guy whose coach doesn't even really want to play after a month is a better value.

The Spurs were at best a 7 seed with DeRozan as their best player and we're significantly below .500 the last 2 years he was there . We have to stop rewriting history with this guy because he had a good month with the Bulls lol. He was never an all star in the West.

Again I like DeRozan I don't think he's worth making a significant investment into his age 35 season. I'd rather have Fournier at a discount through his prime.

[GONYK]

Man, this thread served it's purpose the very first game

[br7knicks]

Close to $80 MILLION for Fournier is a bloody travesty. Shambles. Waste of dollary doos!

so are you from Texas, Australia, or England?

[TexasMassacre]

What kinda question is that, fair dinkum?

You blokes couldn't tell yer head from yer arse sometimes.

[spree2kawhi]

Derozan locks our cap up and will be 34 by the end of the deal. Objectively, he looks great now but there's risk when he's 33 and 34 in this deal. More players then not start falling off in that age range. How moveable is that deal if he starts falling off? I don't think the risk is worth the reward in this case.

The mid range-game will hold up fairly well and he’s ridiculously skilled. Look up at what age Kobe, KG, Pierce, LeBron, Dirk and Jordan won their championships. I’m not putting him in that category, strictly putting that age in perspective.

You’re in denial if you can’t see how bad the rest of the league currently is and how Derozan would have been a killer addition. Same goes for Beal obviously.

Edit: People have been talking Lonzo and Simmons, but it’s really time to cut that BS already. We need a 25 ppg scorer.

I'm not putting Derozan in the same category as those guys. Derozan is good, not great. Unless are getting a Ray Allen and KG ttpe star i don't see how Derozan is going to take this team anywhere so i don't buy those comparisons. He doesn't fix our defense and we don't have the right pieces to fit him in. Bulls are built better for Derozan where he just needs to score.

He makes us better, just not good enough. I see it more as you guys are in denial about the Knicks and seeing Derozan as our missing piece. Unfortunately, we are much further away.

You seem to be struggling to read my messages properly. But I don’t mind, it’s all good. Anyway, enjoy the treadmill ride.

[TheDavinciCHODE]

There's just no way to tell in such a limited amount of games, especially since i doubt we'd be seeing this thread if a few more 3s had fallen and we were 12-6 or 11-7 right now.

I liked the idea of bringing in Fournier, we desperately needed some extra creation and flexibility with the ball. And Kemba at that price was a no brainer.

Based on what we see now though, having both as starters in the back court has compromised our defense so maybe bringing in both was a mistake.

What's crazy to me is that this team is on pace to win 45 games in a season where the East is much stronger, and we're complaining like we got worse.

I guess it's fair, since the bench has propelled us and a our big name acquisitions are struggling.

Here are a few key points I'd like us to think about though:

1. Even if bringing in Fournier was a mistake, clearly what we were doing at the 1/2 last season WAS NOT working in the playoffs, and, if not for some serious injury luck, covid, and no fans, probably wouldn't have worked well last regular season either. We played WAY above our heads, and rattled off wins against covid/injury riddled teams. We were not a "real" 4-seed last season against healthy competition. Running it back with Bullock and Payton was not an option, we had to get better on offense.

2. Fournier was a 17-18ppg guy on 40% 3p shooting the previous few seasons also getting 4-5 FTAs a game. He looked like what we needed at that spot. Reggie averaged less than 1 FTA per game last season as our starting 2...jesus h christ. I don't hate the signing, especially since good starters are getting 20-25 mil now. He also averaged 3.6+ assists compared to reggie's 1.5. Same 3%, more FTAs, more assists, more scoring - Fournier is better than Bullock in every way and we needed that desperately. He just hasn't played up to his standard yet.

3. Getting Kemba at that price was a no brainer. Getting a player of Kemba's caliber at 8 mil or whatever was a no-brainer, regardless of how he's playing imo. He was worth the risk at that price with 0 long-term money and nothing to lose on our part.

So yeah. Evan has to step up and play better, but the process was right imo.

[duetta]

Given what was available and the likely cost of acquisition of better talent, I don't have a problem with Walker getting $16m over two. The Fournier deal goes a year longer than was ideal - but if the deal had been 2 years and a team option, he would be much easier to move. The fact that neither of these players is typically a strong defender is a big problem - as it is the fact that their presence is preventing McBride and Grimes from replacing the defensive toughness we let walk.

One of the big problems with the NBA cap is that you have to spend your money - and sometimes you spend it unwisely. We had the money - but now the money is getting in the way of young players with the ability to bring defensive intensity getting the chance to prove themselves. I think it's possible that Fournier could be moved somewhere after the trade moratorium ends in December. He has skills and a track record.

[prophet_of_rage]

I realise thr fanbase on this board not only wants to win but wants to win in a fashion they prefer or they are unhappy.

The Knicks aren't that team yet. They don't have an identity like say the Warriors. This is part of the process.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[Nazrmohamed]

Derozan at age 35 making 28 million in 3 years... Yep seems real appetizing for a team to take on lmao.

Fournier is still the better value given his past production. It hasn't worked out so far and I'm not a Fournier guy per se, but it's way easier to move 18-20 mill of him than it is to move 28 million of an aging Derozan who isn't really a plug and play guy himself...

Also after a hot start against weaker opponents, the Bulls are now 8-6 in their last 14. More where we thought they would be and DD's numbers over the last 8 or so games have started to regress to where he usually has been...25/4/4 47/33/90 splits. Still good but not nearly as good as how he started.

Again early season narratives tend to make people forget how long the season truly is. We've played about a month of ball and still have until April to finish this whole season.

Thanks for the context. I wasn't even aware of how the Bulls record played out. Still though, it's not working and in Kembas case I honestly think hes washed as a player. Maybe 1 of 3 games he'll give you a solid half of basketball and then coast but beyond that a major disappointment. Fournier I think just needs rhythm. He needs an offense where the ball moves the passes are timely and there's some level of deception in the system. This offense is predictable.

I agree with everything you said but think Derozen would've been better and here me out for a second cuz everything you said makes sense. But thinking of our coach and what I said was a predictable offense. Thibs probably sees the problem not as his system is slow and predictable; in his mind it's more like "why can't I have more individuals that can make something happen?" And to some extent he's right, we did go into the summer needing a guy who can create but to me not to the extent that you don't create easy baskets. So in a way Derozen would act as a Thibs enabler and vice versa.

Right now Thibs has no issue with the way Randle plays, he wishes he had more Randles. Ya see what I'm saying? I hope I'm getting my point across. I want Thibs to take a guy like Randle and play as if you don't need him to create his own shots but when it becomes necessary it's like an ACE card.

[Knicksfan1992]

Derozan at age 35 making 28 million in 3 years... Yep seems real appetizing for a team to take on lmao.

Fournier is still the better value given his past production. It hasn't worked out so far and I'm not a Fournier guy per se, but it's way easier to move 18-20 mill of him than it is to move 28 million of an aging Derozan who isn't really a plug and play guy himself...

Also after a hot start against weaker opponents, the Bulls are now 8-6 in their last 14. More where we thought they would be and DD's numbers over the last 8 or so games have started to regress to where he usually has been...25/4/4 47/33/90 splits. Still good but not nearly as good as how he started.

Again early season narratives tend to make people forget how long the season truly is. We've played about a month of ball and still have until April to finish this whole season.

Thanks for the context. I wasn't even aware of how the Bulls record played out. Still though, it's not working and in Kembas case I honestly think hes washed as a player. Maybe 1 of 3 games he'll give you a solid half of basketball and then coast but beyond that a major disappointment. Fournier I think just needs rhythm. He needs an offense where the ball moves the passes are timely and there's some level of deception in the system. This offense is predictable.

I agree with everything you said but think Derozen would've been better and here me out for a second cuz everything you said makes sense. But thinking of our coach and what I said was a predictable offense. Thibs probably sees the problem not as his system is slow and predictable; in his mind it's more like "why can't I have more individuals that can make something happen?" And to some extent he's right, we did go into the summer needing a guy who can create but to me not to the extent that you don't create easy baskets. So in a way Derozen would act as a Thibs enabler and vice versa.

Right now Thibs has no issue with the way Randle plays, he wishes he had more Randles. Ya see what I'm saying? I hope I'm getting my point across. I want Thibs to take a guy like Randle and play as if you don't need him to create his own shots but when it becomes necessary it's like an ACE card.

I think your last 2 paragraphs has more to do with the backcourt's inconsistencies than it does with Thibs... Thibs is actually much more flexible on O than people give him credit for. A lot of his Bulls offenses ran through a non iso scoring Joakim Noah post-Rose injury.

Randle is going to iso just like any star player. There needs to be other guys making plays or else the offense is naturally going to look stagnant because they'll become too reliant on Randle.

[JXL]

Derozan at age 35 making 28 million in 3 years... Yep seems real appetizing for a team to take on lmao.

Fournier is still the better value given his past production. It hasn't worked out so far and I'm not a Fournier guy per se, but it's way easier to move 18-20 mill of him than it is to move 28 million of an aging Derozan who isn't really a plug and play guy himself...

Also after a hot start against weaker opponents, the Bulls are now 8-6 in their last 14. More where we thought they would be and DD's numbers over the last 8 or so games have started to regress to where he usually has been...25/4/4 47/33/90 splits. Still good but not nearly as good as how he started.

Again early season narratives tend to make people forget how long the season truly is. We've played about a month of ball and still have until April to finish this whole season.

Thanks for the context. I wasn't even aware of how the Bulls record played out. Still though, it's not working and in Kembas case I honestly think hes washed as a player. Maybe 1 of 3 games he'll give you a solid half of basketball and then coast but beyond that a major disappointment. Fournier I think just needs rhythm. He needs an offense where the ball moves the passes are timely and there's some level of deception in the system. This offense is predictable.

I agree with everything you said but think Derozen would've been better and here me out for a second cuz everything you said makes sense. But thinking of our coach and what I said was a predictable offense. Thibs probably sees the problem not as his system is slow and predictable; in his mind it's more like "why can't I have more individuals that can make something happen?" And to some extent he's right, we did go into the summer needing a guy who can create but to me not to the extent that you don't create easy baskets. So in a way Derozen would act as a Thibs enabler and vice versa.

Right now Thibs has no issue with the way Randle plays, he wishes he had more Randles. Ya see what I'm saying? I hope I'm getting my point across. I want Thibs to take a guy like Randle and play as if you don't need him to create his own shots but when it becomes necessary it's like an ACE card.

I think your last 2 paragraphs has more to do with the backcourt's inconsistencies than it does with Thibs... Thibs is actually much more flexible on O than people give him credit for. A lot of his Bulls offenses ran through a non iso scoring Joakim Noah post-Rose injury.

Randle is going to iso just like any star player. There needs to be other guys making plays or else the offense is naturally going to look stagnant because they'll become too reliant on Randle.

Correct. Randle's ISO plays have a purpose, but it's up to the other guys on the court with him to bend the defense so he can work. If he sees a shadow double team, that means the defender is about a foot away from his passes, so he should take it and draw the double instead of leaning to a contested fadeaway. Have others bend the defense so he can see the open shooter.