I dont know about you but I want to seem them get a Quickley 2.0 out of this draft. Someone who can score in bunches especially from deep outside would be great.
The guy I'd love to see them get is Rob Dillingam out of Kentucky. He is a lights out shooter. He's a bit short at 6'1" - 6'2" but he shoots it well particularly from a dribble.
What do you all think they should do?
Quote from: Philosophers on June 12, 2024, 06:44:40 PMI dont know about you but I want to seem them get a Quickley 2.0 out of this draft. Someone who can score in bunches especially from deep outside would be great.
The guy I'd love to see them get is Rob Dillingam out of Kentucky. He is a lights out shooter. He's a bit short at 6'1" - 6'2" but he shoots it well particularly from a dribble.
What do you all think they should do?
That sounds good to me Phil.
I will confess I haven't done a great deal of work on this year's draft nor did I follow college basketball that closely this year.
One concern I have is with our bigs. It seems like we have a pretty high chance of losing Hartenstein, which is unfortunate but it just seems like we can't pay him what at least one other team who is interested can. I'm not s huge believer in Sims, although maybe he can develop. If Hartenstein isn't around, who is going to be our everyday big man whenever Robinson gets his annual 3 month injury?
I dunno, with a tough choice between our two pivot men (MitchRob & Hartenstein) we may need a cheap option at BIG either pick #24 or #25
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Frankly, when you're picking this low, I wouldn't force a pick based on a position. I'd take the player still on the board that I thought had the best shot at developing into at least a contributor if not a starter. At any position.
I also think getting fixated on one single player when you're picking this deep in the first round is a bit of a pointless exercise. Maybe he'll be there, maybe not. Maybe he'll go one pick before you, maybe six picks before you. Better to have the whole gamut of players fully scouted and evaluated and then simply take the best available. If you have exactly equal ratings on two guys that are sitting there, then, and only then, would I base the pick on position.
From all I've read, we could very well lose Hartenstein because of our cap...and Minnesota (flush with cap) wants him badly...and unfortunately, money talks. Oklahoma is also suddenly in the bidding. I-Hart no longer flying under the radar. He would love to stay a Knick, but is he willing to forfeit millions to stay a Knick? I don't want to lose him and I think we should do anything and everything to keep him
So...if we lose him, we'll be bundling picks and players to get a big man in the draft :(
IMO, these are the untouchables: Brunson, Anunoby, Hart, Hartenstein, Deuce, and Divi. Keep them and do what is necessary to build around them
Depending on what they do in free agency, and I think there's a move or 2 even if they cant land a star, I would prefer they find a wing who can run, shoot and play defense. That said, this is supposed to be a weak draft and that would be a reach even if they traded all 3 picks to move up. They need someone who can play PG when Brunson is not on the floor. Duece is not that guy at least not now. And, if IHart does leave, and I'm not so sure he will, backup center is an important need. But, both needs can be addressed thru free agency without spending huge money. NY has become a desirable destination
What about Anunoby? Do folks think he will automatically be re-signed? He seems like a really key player to me with his defense. If the Knicks decide it's an either or choice is IH a more important re-signing than Anunoby?
Quote from: Philosophers on June 13, 2024, 08:50:26 AMWhat about Anunoby? Do folks think he will automatically be re-signed? He seems like a really key player to me with his defense. If the Knicks decide it's an either or choice is IH a more important re-signing than Anunoby?
If I'm the Knicks I'm bringing him back.
Losing Hartenstein would be unfortunate (if it happens), but my red line priority would be keeping the Nova three (Hart, Donte, Brunson) and OG intact. To me, those four need to be untouchable. Seems like Mitch will be back too - maybe we'll get lucky and get more than 60 games out of him for a change, although I doubt it. Getting a competent backup center if we lose Hartenstein is going to be incredibly important. Simms is not a guy I want starting 35 games next year or having to play 30-plus minutes in playoff games.
Knicks want to keep Hartenstein, so they're shopping Mitch
https://nypost.com/2024/06/21/sports/knicks-offering-mitchell-robinson-in-trades-ahead-of-free-agency/
Quote from: Jolly Blue Giant on June 22, 2024, 08:51:52 AMKnicks want to keep Hartenstein, so they're shopping Mitch
https://nypost.com/2024/06/21/sports/knicks-offering-mitchell-robinson-in-trades-ahead-of-free-agency/
I like their thinking. Mitch is a 60 games a year guy, max. 20 missed games with him is a good outcome. More common is 30-40. It's untenable.
Mitch is really good but they can't be dependent on him if Hartenstein is gone. They'll need to replace Hartenstein with someone else who clearly won't be as good.
Also, Hartenstein is a big part of the chemistry of this team. I wouldn't really say Mitch is as much, because he is absent way too frequently.
Honestly Hartenstein might even be the better overall player at this point (when both are healthy).
I must be missing something in this conversation. What does trading Robinson have to do with retaining Hartenstein. IHart will either take the Knicks 4 year offer or more money from Oklahoma or another team or a shorter term offer from the Knicks. A shorter term offer will allow IHart to access full free agency earlier here but he's gambling that he produces and stays healthy.
Still, how would dealing Robinson make them better if they lose IHart? Would they be able to offer IHart more?
Quote from: nb587 on June 22, 2024, 10:29:56 AMI must be missing something in this conversation. What does trading Robinson have to do with retaining Hartenstein. IHart will either take the Knicks 4 year offer or more money from Oklahoma or another team or a shorter term offer from the Knicks. A shorter term offer will allow IHart to access full free agency earlier here but he's gambling that he produces and stays healthy.
Still, how would dealing Robinson make them better if they lose IHart? Would they be able to offer IHart more?
Yeah, I think that's their reasoning...they can pay him more. IHart is a big part of the core group they want to build around. Easier to draft (or trade for) a decent big man as IHart's backup then to replace IHart. I think they might also be willing to move Randle for the right deal. As it stands, the "seemingly" untouchables that Thibs wants to build around is Brunson, Divy, OG, IHart, and Randle...and he also wants Deuce and Hart to lead the second team and I think Precious Achiuwa might also be a mainstay on team two. Achiuwa has proven himself to fit in with the team very nicely. Don't know if Bogdanović or Sims have proven themselves as keepers
I have a lot of faith in Thibs' decision making
Quote from: nb587 on June 22, 2024, 10:29:56 AMStill, how would dealing Robinson make them better if they lose IHart? Would they be able to offer IHart more?
Oh I don't want them to trade Robinson if they're going to lose Hartenstein. I just meant if presented with a scenario where it was one versus the other, I'd prefer to have Hartenstein.
I always thought what a team can offer its own player is 100% independent of other players on the team. It's not like they can offer him a number higher than existing max contract by letting another player go. Unless they are not offering IH a max deal and just want to free up more money.
Believe it or not one of our biggest challenge areas was missed free throws...they literally lost several games for us.
As much as I love Robinson's game...he has two major Achilles; injuries (missed time) and terrible free throw percentage.
If we move him for something decent, sign Anunoby and Hartenstein...we can draft a solid back-up C late in the first or in the 2nd round.
Keep the core together including the Nova3 and we're good.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Quote from: andrew_nyGiants on June 22, 2024, 12:04:24 PMBelieve it or not one of our biggest challenge areas was missed free throws...they literally lost several games for us.
As much as I love Robinson's game...he has two major Achilles; injuries (missed time) and terrible free throw percentage.
If we move him for something decent, sign Anunoby and Hartenstein...we can draft a solid back-up C late in the first or in the 2nd round.
Keep the core together including the Nova3 and we're good.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
What :what:
You don't think he should throw the ball at the net without an arch from the foul line??? =))
I never realized how cheap the Knicks have been the last few years. They've avoided the luxury tax and kept salaries way down. Now they are going to have to pony up in order to keep OG and IHart. Good article" https://nypost.com/2024/06/22/sports/knicks-must-pay-luxury-tax-toll-if-they-want-to-keep-team-together/
Quote from: Jolly Blue Giant on June 23, 2024, 11:00:26 AMI never realized how cheap the Knicks have been the last few years. They've avoided the luxury tax and kept salaries way down. Now they are going to have to pony up in order to keep OG and IHart. Good article" https://nypost.com/2024/06/22/sports/knicks-must-pay-luxury-tax-toll-if-they-want-to-keep-team-together/
I can sort of understand not wanting to overspend when you're not remotely a contender. This is the first season that the Knicks (when healthy) have felt like a bona fide top 3 team in the East. With an even mildly healthier team, they were for sure going to the ECF.
We need to remember that, while the general view of Knicks fans is that they're iffy at best about Randle overall, the guy was beasting out this year before he got hurt.
With a fully healthy roster I think the Knicks are still one cut below being championship caliber, but they're getting a lot closer.
Lotta rumors floating around of Knicks' interest in Karl-Anthony Towns. Minnesota has to find a way to trim its roster. The Wolves are seemingly open to paying the luxury tax, that might not be possible with Anthony Edwards, Karl-Anthony Towns, and Rudy Gobert all set to make at least $30 million next season. Towns alone will make $49 million. Towns is arguably their third-most important player, with Gobert being responsible for improving their defense. They also have an obvious candidate to replace Towns with 2023–24 Sixth Man of the Year winner Naz Reed
A suggested trade would be:
(https://i.postimg.cc/X7QvVrXy/000000000.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Quote from: Jolly Blue Giant on June 23, 2024, 03:38:38 PMLotta rumors floating around of Knicks' interest in Karl-Anthony Towns. Minnesota has to find a way to trim its roster. The Wolves are seemingly open to paying the luxury tax, that might not be possible with Anthony Edwards, Karl-Anthony Towns, and Rudy Gobert all set to make at least $30 million next season. Towns alone will make $49 million. Towns is arguably their third-most important player, with Gobert being responsible for improving their defense. They also have an obvious candidate to replace Towns with 2023–24 Sixth Man of the Year winner Naz Reed
A suggested trade would be:
(https://i.postimg.cc/X7QvVrXy/000000000.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Doesn't KAT have a lot of miles on him now? A trade like this screams Glen Rice trade to me. Overpaid player on the downside of his career.
Quote from: Philosophers on June 24, 2024, 09:23:07 AMDoesn't KAT have a lot of miles on him now? A trade like this screams Glen Rice trade to me. Overpaid player on the downside of his career.
I don't know about miles or past injuries. I know that he's a year younger than Randle and at 7'0", he's developed into a very good 3-pt shooter. Overall, KAT is a better offensive player - a shoot first, defense second type of guy. Randle is a better defender than KAT. I suppose it has to do with Thibs' idea of team chemistry and of course "the almighty dollar"