Jalen Brunson obsession

[KnicksNext]

Brunson is a good young starting pg, why would the Knicks want that? We got Alec Burks.

I feel like I'm in bizarro world hearing all the reasons our squad is just too good and talented to need a player like Brunson. Strange. I get the money aspect of it, but to suggest our young players are so good that we don't want him is so crazy to me.

If we were close to getting Ja Morant someone would say "he only scored 11 pts last game, iq can give you 90% of his production per 48"

It's true, though. Sad, but true.

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

I feel like I'm in bizarro world hearing all the reasons our squad is just too good and talented to need a player like Brunson. Strange. I get the money aspect of it, but to suggest our young players are so good that we don't want him is so crazy to me.

If we were close to getting Ja Morant someone would say "he only scored 11 pts last game, iq can give you 90% of his production per 48"

It's true, though. Sad, but true.

I'm one of the bigger stimulaters of this thread, but at this point it's become silly. The Knicks clearly desperately need Brunson and he may or may not want to play for them. Buckle up for the 120/4 contract if Jalen chooses the Knicks. And it won't be out of the realm of reasonableness.

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

the entire idea is that we need to take the ball out of Randle's hands.

Randle is not a #1 option, but he is on the Knicks because he is the best player.


Brunson is an upgrade. If you want to acquire a productive young player, unfortunately you have to overpay. Whatever it takes is simply the name of the game.

Is he worth it? No.... but he is a significant upgrade and gets the ball out of Randle's hands in half court sets.

Define "worth it". Is this season's Brunson better than the combination of this season's Rose and Walker? What happens when everyone is a year older? If the Mavs win tomorrow Brunson is careening towards getting a 25% max from someone. Why not the Knicks?

[Adelheid]

If we were close to getting Ja Morant someone would say "he only scored 11 pts last game, iq can give you 90% of his production per 48"

It's true, though. Sad, but true.

I'm one of the bigger stimulaters of this thread, but at this point it's become silly. The Knicks clearly desperately need Brunson and he may or may not want to play for them. Buckle up for the 120/4 contract if Jalen chooses the Knicks. And it won't be out of the realm of reasonableness.

less than 25m per with conditional bonuses and I'll bite

Knicks has to get rid of burden vets before anything else, and we might need to dole out a frp because of that, which I think is actually the real concern with the FO; are they willing to part with a pick to clear cap?

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

It's true, though. Sad, but true.

I'm one of the bigger stimulaters of this thread, but at this point it's become silly. The Knicks clearly desperately need Brunson and he may or may not want to play for them. Buckle up for the 120/4 contract if Jalen chooses the Knicks. And it won't be out of the realm of reasonableness.

less than 25m per with conditional bonuses and I'll bite

Knicks has to get rid of burden vets before anything else, and we might need to dole out a frp because of that

If Brunson really chooses the Knicks (and lord knows why he would do that, family and contacts and what not aside :? ) then it will be a s'n't and the Knicks will ship out various burdensome vets. But so will the Mavs. And to the last clause, yeah, ofc, the Dallas 2023 FRP would be part of any deal. The Mavs will just balk at any s'n't that doesn't include that - that pick is exactly the Knicks unique selling point as far as the Mavs are concerned, and why the Knicks are realistic options for a s'n't if Brunson and the Mavs are determined to part ways and Brunson doesn't want to go to one of the teams with the cap space to sign him (eg Detroit ... tho' I don't see why he wouldn't want to go there.. but maybe?)

[Adelheid]

I'm one of the bigger stimulaters of this thread, but at this point it's become silly. The Knicks clearly desperately need Brunson and he may or may not want to play for them. Buckle up for the 120/4 contract if Jalen chooses the Knicks. And it won't be out of the realm of reasonableness.

less than 25m per with conditional bonuses and I'll bite

Knicks has to get rid of burden vets before anything else, and we might need to dole out a frp because of that

If Brunson really chooses the Knicks (and lord knows why he would do that, family and contacts and what not aside :? ) then it will be a s'n't and the Knicks will ship out various burdensome vets. But so will the Mavs.

True. We might be getting back timmy or reggie or bertans

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

less than 25m per with conditional bonuses and I'll bite

Knicks has to get rid of burden vets before anything else, and we might need to dole out a frp because of that

If Brunson really chooses the Knicks (and lord knows why he would do that, family and contacts and what not aside :? ) then it will be a s'n't and the Knicks will ship out various burdensome vets. But so will the Mavs.

True. We might be getting back timmy or reggie or bertans

The Mavs would very much like to hop off Bertans - essentially one of the worst non max contracts in the league. (A flat $16m/year with ?4? years left.) They'd probably insist on that - and it's not completely unreasonable given the salary matching constraints. They'll keep Reggie - he's done well enough and is super-useful. Timmy - it's hard to say - this year before he was hurt he wasn't good. But the two years previously he was up to his contract .. which is decreasing and shortly to expire. They could include him, but I think either Dinwiddie or a platter of Trey Burke & Frank & Chriss is maybe a more likely a possibility.

From the Knicks pov they certainly send Noel and Walker and then start climbing up the chart of players they don't really want. It's hard to see who Dallas would covet on the Knicks ... Mitch, of course, is one, but that's a completely different deal and they have people in line before Mitch who they would like to take better ... EF? I don't really see it. Idk - matched against Dinwiddile as salary maybe??? And of course Jules. People talk about this, but what Dallas needs is 3pt shooting guards. Or forwards. And Jules's shooting stats this year were awesomely bad. So I wouldn't take him if I'm the Mavs. But there are arguments (some played out to some extent on other threads) that Luka/Jules would be a good 1/2 combo.

[Adelheid]

lol bertans got that contract from the wizards for real? damn that cracked me up

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

lol bertans got that contract from the wizards for real? damn that cracked me up

He shot an insane %age from 3pt at a very high usage rate.

Theoretically, he's just in a gully right now and he should revert to a reasonably decent 3pt shooter. But, who's never, ever, ever played a lick of D in his life and essentially has no other relevant bball skills. So .. yeah .. pretty funny.

Watch on YouTube

[Adelheid]

If Brunson really chooses the Knicks (and lord knows why he would do that, family and contacts and what not aside :? ) then it will be a s'n't and the Knicks will ship out various burdensome vets. But so will the Mavs.

True. We might be getting back timmy or reggie or bertans

The Mavs would very much like to hop off Bertans - essentially one of the worst non max contracts in the league. (A flat $16m/year with ?4? years left.) They'd probably insist on that - and it's not completely unreasonable given the salary matching constraints. They'll keep Reggie - he's done well enough and is super-useful. Timmy - it's hard to say - this year before he was hurt he wasn't good. But the two years previously he was up to his contract .. which is decreasing and shortly to expire. They could include him, but I think either Dinwiddie or a platter of Trey Burke & Frank & Chriss is maybe a more likely a possibility.

From the Knicks pov they certainly send Noel and Walker and then start climbing up the chart of players they don't really want. It's hard to see who Dallas would covet on the Knicks ... Mitch, of course, is one, but that's a completely different deal and they have people in line before Mitch who they would like to take better ... EF? I don't really see it. Idk - matched against Dinwiddile as salary maybe??? And of course Jules. People talk about this, but what Dallas needs is 3pt shooting guards. Or forwards. And Jules's shooting stats this year were awesomely bad. So I wouldn't take him if I'm the Mavs. But there are arguments (some played out to some extent on other threads) that Luka/Jules would be a good 1/2 combo.

I can see DAL wanting Fournier (revived 3pt pct plus european) but not sure how the numbers would fit in as they are getting capped

[Jay10]

Jake Fischer just said on his podcast that a former Knicks executive told him the Knicks tried to trade Nerlens and Burks before the trade deadline to create cap space for Jalen.

[moocow007]

If we were close to getting Ja Morant someone would say "he only scored 11 pts last game, iq can give you 90% of his production per 48"

It's true, though. Sad, but true.

I'm one of the bigger stimulaters of this thread, but at this point it's become silly. The Knicks clearly desperately need Brunson and he may or may not want to play for them. Buckle up for the 120/4 contract if Jalen chooses the Knicks. And it won't be out of the realm of reasonableness.

Until he proves that he's not able to do what the Knicks (including the fans) expect him to do. And before anyone says that Knicks fans will be reasonable in terms of what they will expect to do...

Haven't we all gone around the track long enough to know what fans do? They build guys up to something more than they are (guys are already doing it with Brunson) and then when the player fails to live up to it, fans tear them down and want to burn them at the stake.

[moocow007]

Jake Fischer just said on his podcast that a former Knicks executive told him the Knicks tried to trade Nerlens and Burks before the trade deadline to create cap space for Jalen.

I'm sure they did but no one was interested is the problem. I said this before the season when the vibes from last season was still in bloom and folks on this board were saying (or maybe trying to convince themselves) that the contracts weren't bad. Every one of the contracts Rose gave up was not necessary and that by doing so he made it extremely difficult for them to move on from any of them if things didn't go well. The "team option" doesn't make up for the unnecessarily high per year money for the guaranteed years on the contract. That's more important than the length when you're dealing with solid role players. For solid role players, slightly longer contracts but with much more reasonable AAV actually makes more sense than less years by higher AAV if you think about it. No one wants to pay Nerlens Noel $9.25 million a year to be a backup C when you can find backup C's nowadays for slightly above vet minimum to the $5 million or so range.

[Chanel Bomber]

Jake Fischer just said on his podcast that a former Knicks executive told him the Knicks tried to trade Nerlens and Burks before the trade deadline to create cap space for Jalen.

I'm sure they did but no one was interested is the problem. I said this before the season when the vibes from last season was still in bloom and folks on this board were saying (or maybe trying to convince themselves) that the contracts weren't bad. Every one of the contracts Rose gave up was not necessary and that by doing so he made it extremely difficult for them to move on from any of them if things didn't go well. The "team option" doesn't make up for the unnecessarily high per year money for the guaranteed years on the contract. That's more important than the length when you're dealing with solid role players. For solid role players, slightly longer contracts but with much more reasonable AAV actually makes more sense than less years by higher AAV if you think about it. No one wants to pay Nerlens Noel $9.25 million a year to be a backup C when you can find backup C's nowadays for slightly above vet minimum to the $5 million or so range.

They should've doubled the amount and cut the years in half. Sign Rose and Bullock (the two most important players of the bunch) to about $40 million each with a team option for the second year.

They get their money, the Knicks keep their flexibility. Also it would've prevented overloading the team with too many players of (approximately) the same level.

[cgmw]

Jake Fischer just said on his podcast that a former Knicks executive told him the Knicks tried to trade Nerlens and Burks before the trade deadline to create cap space for Jalen.

I'm sure they did but no one was interested is the problem. I said this before the season when the vibes from last season was still in bloom and folks on this board were saying (or maybe trying to convince themselves) that the contracts weren't bad. Every one of the contracts Rose gave up was not necessary and that by doing so he made it extremely difficult for them to move on from any of them if things didn't go well. The "team option" doesn't make up for the unnecessarily high per year money for the guaranteed years on the contract. That's more important than the length when you're dealing with solid role players. For solid role players, slightly longer contracts but with much more reasonable AAV actually makes more sense than less years by higher AAV if you think about it. No one wants to pay Nerlens Noel $9.25 million a year to be a backup C when you can find backup C's nowadays for slightly above vet minimum to the $5 million or so range.

They should've doubled the amount and cut the years in half. Sign Rose and Bullock (the two most important players of the bunch) to about $40 million each with a team option for the second year.

They get their money, the Knicks keep their flexibility. Also it would've prevented overloading the team with too many players of (approximately) the same level.

It was the same story in 2019 with Randle and all of the other unnecessary consolation FAs. Same thing before that with THJr. Same thing before that going all the way back to Shandon Anderson days.

I fully expect Leon to continue the long tradition of Knick executives overspending Dolan’s money on leftover veterans instead of just telling him the truth which is that the organization needs a total scorched earth redo from the top down, including at least 3 if not 5 shots at a top 5 pick since there’s literally no other means of attracting Tier 1 talent to the Dolan organization.

[Chanel Bomber]

I'm sure they did but no one was interested is the problem. I said this before the season when the vibes from last season was still in bloom and folks on this board were saying (or maybe trying to convince themselves) that the contracts weren't bad. Every one of the contracts Rose gave up was not necessary and that by doing so he made it extremely difficult for them to move on from any of them if things didn't go well. The "team option" doesn't make up for the unnecessarily high per year money for the guaranteed years on the contract. That's more important than the length when you're dealing with solid role players. For solid role players, slightly longer contracts but with much more reasonable AAV actually makes more sense than less years by higher AAV if you think about it. No one wants to pay Nerlens Noel $9.25 million a year to be a backup C when you can find backup C's nowadays for slightly above vet minimum to the $5 million or so range.

They should've doubled the amount and cut the years in half. Sign Rose and Bullock (the two most important players of the bunch) to about $40 million each with a team option for the second year.

They get their money, the Knicks keep their flexibility. Also it would've prevented overloading the team with too many players of (approximately) the same level.

It was the same story in 2019 with all the unnecessary consolation FAs. Same thing before that with THJr. Same thing before that going all the way back to Shandon Anderson days.

I fully expect Leon to continue the long tradition of Knick executives overspending Dolan’s money on leftover veterans instead of just telling him the truth which is that the organization needs a total redo from the top down, including at least 3 if not 5 shots at a top 5 pick since there’s literally no other means of attracting Tier 1 talent to the Dolan organization.

The other avenue is a trade for a star (since they don't come in free agency) but all the options right now come with some question marks or significant risk - although that's why these trades might be on the table in the first place.

I would be happy with a complete teardown and players (including some of the younger ones) getting traded for draft picks. Keeping Rose and Bullock on flexible contracts and trading Randle for draft picks was the direction the Knicks should've taken last summer. It was a golden opportunity to reset while keeping a good mix of vets - alas the Knicks predictably chose the treadmill. They might further lock themselves into that box depending on what they do this summer. We'll see.

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

Jake Fischer just said on his podcast that a former Knicks executive told him the Knicks tried to trade Nerlens and Burks before the trade deadline to create cap space for Jalen.

I'm sure they did but no one was interested is the problem. I said this before the season when the vibes from last season was still in bloom and folks on this board were saying (or maybe trying to convince themselves) that the contracts weren't bad. Every one of the contracts Rose gave up was not necessary and that by doing so he made it extremely difficult for them to move on from any of them if things didn't go well. The "team option" doesn't make up for the unnecessarily high per year money for the guaranteed years on the contract. That's more important than the length when you're dealing with solid role players. For solid role players, slightly longer contracts but with much more reasonable AAV actually makes more sense than less years by higher AAV if you think about it. No one wants to pay Nerlens Noel $9.25 million a year to be a backup C when you can find backup C's nowadays for slightly above vet minimum to the $5 million or so range.

+1'ed but I want to explicitly co-sign this. agree 100%

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

Jake Fischer just said on his podcast that a former Knicks executive told him the Knicks tried to trade Nerlens and Burks before the trade deadline to create cap space for Jalen.

I'm sure they did but no one was interested is the problem. I said this before the season when the vibes from last season was still in bloom and folks on this board were saying (or maybe trying to convince themselves) that the contracts weren't bad. Every one of the contracts Rose gave up was not necessary and that by doing so he made it extremely difficult for them to move on from any of them if things didn't go well. The "team option" doesn't make up for the unnecessarily high per year money for the guaranteed years on the contract. That's more important than the length when you're dealing with solid role players. For solid role players, slightly longer contracts but with much more reasonable AAV actually makes more sense than less years by higher AAV if you think about it. No one wants to pay Nerlens Noel $9.25 million a year to be a backup C when you can find backup C's nowadays for slightly above vet minimum to the $5 million or so range.

They should've doubled the amount and cut the years in half. Sign Rose and Bullock (the two most important players of the bunch) to about $40 million each with a team option for the second year.

They get their money, the Knicks keep their flexibility. Also it would've prevented overloading the team with too many players of (approximately) the same level.

"luckily" they let Reggie go ... and kept Burks as their primary PG. thebuzzardman told me that was a good idea as Burks can do a little bit of everything.

Watch on YouTube

[KnixtapeH20]

the entire idea is that we need to take the ball out of Randle's hands.

Randle is not a #1 option, but he is on the Knicks because he is the best player.


Brunson is an upgrade. If you want to acquire a productive young player, unfortunately you have to overpay. Whatever it takes is simply the name of the game.

Is he worth it? No.... but he is a significant upgrade and gets the ball out of Randle's hands in half court sets.

LOL

ag... Come on bro. WAS the best player. He's not even better than Obi anymore. That didnt take long. U don't wanna speak too prematurely on Obi? bet, but RJ is so far and away the better player in EVERY regard. Every category.

Idk if you're a Randle fan but I've spammed this question over and over on here, just 20 minutes ago... I'll ask u the same based off your best player sentiment.


>>> Randle **** sucks. He has no place on this team. I challenged ANY Randle supporter to tell me where Randle fits on this team. What's his game? What does he do well? He's a HORRENDOUS defender. He's TERRIBLE at ISO ball. He's a horrible passer. He can't shoot. Can't really drive past his man for a layup, its more bull in a china shop, aggressive finish. Can't shoot free throws anymore. His 3 ball is completely non existent. Has no dribble. Gets ripped constantly.

But...

ABOVE ALL ELSE ------ CAN HE PLAY WITH RJ BARRETT? That's really all that matters. RJ is the primary option like it or not and if no then he should come off the bench if he's staying. Bc again, yall can like it or not but RJ Barrett is going to get PAID by the knicks and be a Knick for a VERY long time. It may not be the MAX but he's going to get a long term contract. Stop me if I said anything false

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

I'm sure they did but no one was interested is the problem. I said this before the season when the vibes from last season was still in bloom and folks on this board were saying (or maybe trying to convince themselves) that the contracts weren't bad. Every one of the contracts Rose gave up was not necessary and that by doing so he made it extremely difficult for them to move on from any of them if things didn't go well. The "team option" doesn't make up for the unnecessarily high per year money for the guaranteed years on the contract. That's more important than the length when you're dealing with solid role players. For solid role players, slightly longer contracts but with much more reasonable AAV actually makes more sense than less years by higher AAV if you think about it. No one wants to pay Nerlens Noel $9.25 million a year to be a backup C when you can find backup C's nowadays for slightly above vet minimum to the $5 million or so range.

They should've doubled the amount and cut the years in half. Sign Rose and Bullock (the two most important players of the bunch) to about $40 million each with a team option for the second year.

They get their money, the Knicks keep their flexibility. Also it would've prevented overloading the team with too many players of (approximately) the same level.

It was the same story in 2019 with Randle and all of the other unnecessary consolation FAs. Same thing before that with THJr. Same thing before that going all the way back to Shandon Anderson days.

I fully expect Leon to continue the long tradition of Knick executives overspending Dolan’s money on leftover veterans instead of just telling him the truth which is that the organization needs a total scorched earth redo from the top down, including at least 3 if not 5 shots at a top 5 pick since there’s literally no other means of attracting Tier 1 talent to the Dolan organization.

I think we (on this board) exaggerate the Timmy thing. Obviously he wasn't able to fill a #1 role. But otoh he wasn't paid to do that - and he wasn't expected to do that - KP should have been the #1 option. And, fwiw, KP still looks reasonable for that. But that's irrelevant. Tim was not per se a problematic signing for the money he got ... he just wasn't a #1 ...not his fault.