Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 152
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    18,387
    Quote Originally Posted by ShadyOne View Post
    There is no “love affair”. He’s not untouchable.

    But I don’t see the love affair with accumulating weak 1st round picks. When we don’t want to use them, and also don’t effectively trade them. IQ is far from perfect, but he is a quality defender, gives us some speed/pace. We need that. And there’s plenty on this roster that should be getting the full attention of the FO, to move..
    Again why are we moving him for a weak pick he's worth a late lottery pick if you don't get that you keep him it's not that hard

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    61,061
    Quote Originally Posted by east fb knicks View Post
    Again why are we moving him for a weak pick he's worth a late lottery pick if you don't get that you keep him it's not that hard
    Trying to make sense of this post? What is the difference between a weak pick and a late first? Are you saying don't trade him for a 2nd? But it's okay to get a late first which honestly means not much.

    Is our Bucks pick worth much? If it was why did it cost us DM when Rose wouldn't swap it for our pick? That is rhetorical,

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    69,727

    IQ for a pic accomplishes what?

    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    i mean Brunson is looking like a steal.

    its worse for sure, but that wouldn't be such a bad thing to get a higher pick.

    but this idea that we dont use picks is kind of silly. last year was the only year we traded out, and it helped us get Brunson.

    the year we traded #19, we still got our guys in Grimes, IQ, Rokas and SIms. and that #19 turned into CAM, which isnt looking as bad now.

    we've drafted alot of players, even Keels had a great game last night in WS
    Add Barrett back in bc we do the smart thing and make him play it out and draft Griffen

    The team would be a similar spot now and in much better position moving forward if they committed to the rebuild and didn’t prioritize “tradable contracts” for the star move


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by ewing; 11-24-2022 at 12:30 PM.
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    7,374
    This forum is just exhausting lately, might tap out.

    We’re 9-9. Have almost as many 1sts as OKC, and nearly 4 1sts coming this year. We’re rumored to be asking for a 1st for a player that hasn’t shot over 40% in the three years he’s been in the league. I love IQ too but it’s far from unreasonable.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    39,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba313 View Post
    This forum is just exhausting lately, might tap out.

    We’re 9-9. Have almost as many 1sts as OKC, and nearly 4 1sts coming this year. We’re rumored to be asking for a 1st for a player that hasn’t shot over 40% in the three years he’s been in the league. I love IQ too but it’s far from unreasonable.
    agreed.

    if the shoe were on the other foot and we traded a mid 1st for IQ we'd also be calling for Rose's head, so its the true definition of cant win.

    All bias aside i'd be surprised if anyone was willing to move a mid 1st for IQ.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    22,396
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    just because we dont use EVERY single pick doesnt mean we arent using them. look at our roster, its filled with guys we've drafted in the past 3 years. Even CAM is the product of "using" the #19 pick.

    Mitch
    RJ
    Obi
    IQ
    Grimes
    CAM
    Miles
    Sims

    8 guys on our active roster that we've drafted or used a pick for in CAM's case in the past 3 years. With Rokas looming as well.

    and we clearly would use the picks in a trade. assets are assets.

    My opinion is, teams like Utah valued picks more than IQ in the DM trade talks, and that's with IQ on a rookie deal. So IQ if he gets 10-12m per year, or if he only has 1 year left of team control for cheap, he would be even less appealing.
    That’s 5 drafts worth, not “3 years”. and we traded totally out last year, and traded out with one the year before.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    61,061
    9-9 in the Playin, again time to celebrate or actually be more concerned based on schedule we are only 9-9?

    I'm not happy with 9-9 based on schedule and who was missing, if you are then by all means tap out, and have a ball and gloat about our team being mediocre?

    How long you a fan? You have to see right now the worse place to be with our roster is mediocre at best? When you have 3- 100m+ contracts and you then have Mitch making 17m, and Rose making 14m and Fourn making 18m and we are at best Mediocre?

    Yea we have tons to post about, i don't see 9-9 and one game from dropping out of the playin as anything to even remotely get me excited.

    Right now I like having Jalen, I have a good feeling with Grimes, I like how Cam has been conductive himself playing and off the court.
    Sims needs to grow but he's exceeded expectations

    Other than that, having Fourn's contract, Rose taking minutes, Randle's contract, RJ not taking that step up in a very important year 4, Harten not playing like he did, obi now showing regression, IQ as you said not shooting well, and Thibs as our coach.

    Lets just say it could be better!

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    22,396
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba313 View Post
    This forum is just exhausting lately, might tap out.

    We’re 9-9. Have almost as many 1sts as OKC, and nearly 4 1sts coming this year. We’re rumored to be asking for a 1st for a player that hasn’t shot over 40% in the three years he’s been in the league. I love IQ too but it’s far from unreasonable.
    It isn’t unreasonable. But for what, is the question. Like you said, we have some picks already. Going to sit on more, and wait for something? Ehh…

    I think he had more value to us playing, than what his return would be. And he’s a type of guy I wouldn’t mind keeping around long term
    Last edited by ShadyOne; 11-24-2022 at 12:46 PM.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    61,061
    Quote Originally Posted by ShadyOne View Post
    That’s 5 drafts worth, not “3 years”. and we traded totally out last year, and traded out with one the year before.
    yea I said this already, it must be the new math lol

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    61,061
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    agreed.

    if the shoe were on the other foot and we traded a mid 1st for IQ we'd also be calling for Rose's head, so its the true definition of cant win.

    All bias aside i'd be surprised if anyone was willing to move a mid 1st for IQ.
    define a mid first because I sure can't?

    I mean what if the Heat for example and just an example would take him, they are 8-11?

    the way this season is going there is no one who can tell you what a mid vs late first is unless you are talking bucks, Boston, everything else is in the category of who the hell knows how it will go.


    Now typing this maybe, but I won't give Rose this much credit, maybe he's looking to get lucky and trade IQ to a team that should be a contender but winds up not being one? That could make sense but you know the pick will be protected so there is that as well. So we are back to mid first to late first and then our luck it will be protected that team will fall apart and we get a second.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    7,374
    Quote Originally Posted by still a fan View Post
    9-9 in the Playin, again time to celebrate or actually be more concerned based on schedule we are only 9-9?

    I'm not happy with 9-9 based on schedule and who was missing, if you are then by all means tap out, and have a ball and gloat about our team being mediocre?

    How long you a fan? You have to see right now the worse place to be with our roster is mediocre at best? When you have 3- 100m+ contracts and you then have Mitch making 17m, and Rose making 14m and Fourn making 18m and we are at best Mediocre?

    Yea we have tons to post about, i don't see 9-9 and one game from dropping out of the playin as anything to even remotely get me excited.

    Right now I like having Jalen, I have a good feeling with Grimes, I like how Cam has been conductive himself playing and off the court.
    Sims needs to grow but he's exceeded expectations

    Other than that, having Fourn's contract, Rose taking minutes, Randle's contract, RJ not taking that step up in a very important year 4, Harten not playing like he did, obi now showing regression, IQ as you said not shooting well, and Thibs as our coach.

    Lets just say it could be better!
    You keep saying the schedule has been so easy. Our losses are:

    @Memphis
    @Cleveland
    @Milwaukee
    Atlanta
    Boston
    @Brooklyn
    OKC
    @GS
    @Phoenix

    The worst team there is the 7-11 OKC, who we just beat at their place. The schedule has been far from a cake walk.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    69,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba313 View Post
    This forum is just exhausting lately, might tap out.

    We’re 9-9. Have almost as many 1sts as OKC, and nearly 4 1sts coming this year. We’re rumored to be asking for a 1st for a player that hasn’t shot over 40% in the three years he’s been in the league. I love IQ too but it’s far from unreasonable.
    Not unreasonable at all but also doesn’t answer the OP’s question. I don’t think people expect more for IQ. They just not want to trade him


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    6,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba313 View Post
    This forum is just exhausting lately, might tap out.

    We’re 9-9. Have almost as many 1sts as OKC, and nearly 4 1sts coming this year. We’re rumored to be asking for a 1st for a player that hasn’t shot over 40% in the three years he’s been in the league. I love IQ too but it’s far from unreasonable.
    So we have too many firsts and trading the best two-way guard on the team for yet another first makes sense? Especially given that he costs us nothing.

    Whatever

    Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

  14. #44
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    61,061
    Anyone have any thoughts on who these mysterious teams are interested in IQ?

    I go down the list and really not much makes sense?

    Atl, bos, Nets, charl, Clev,detroit, Indy, Heat, Bucks, Orlando, Philly, Dallas, Denver, GS, Houston, LA clips, memphis, minny, NO, OKc, Suns, Port Sac SA, Utah, makes no sense?

    toronto has no backup pg and Wash only has Monte, that's all I got.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    7,374
    Quote Originally Posted by ShadyOne View Post
    It isn’t unreasonable. But for what, is the question. Like you said, we have some picks already. Going to sit on more, and wait for something? Ehh…

    I think he had more value to us playing, than what his return would be. And he’s a type of guy I wouldn’t mind keeping around long term
    He’s fine for now. Do you want to pay him $10 to $15M per in a year or two?

    Also factor in that he’s not happy with his role and may even want out so he can try to win a starting spot elsewhere (and thus make more $).

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •