Signs of this popped up during Summer League. His stats might have looked good but the way he was playing I was not a fan of and I let it be known in those game threads.

His stats on the season are putrid. It might be time to give Grimes and McBride a look until he gets right.

5.6 pts
30% FG%
25% 3pt FG%

1 - His shot selection has been trash. Why is he always shooting Curry range 3's and he can barely ever make them.
2 - His float game used to be his specialty. It seems like its been average at best since midway last season.
3 - He has had some nice moments but he is extremely inconsistent. If its an off night he will ice cold.
4 - He is an abysmal PG. He can't break down the D and the added responsibility lowers his shot percentages even more.
5 - I love him in a secondary guard role. He is good at attacking a scrambling defense. However, his effectiveness in this role has been limited do to his poor shooting this year.
6 - Defense has never been his calling card so if he is not giving you anyone on offense he is a big negative on the court.

We know he can play because he did it last year but right now he is struggling and I think Thibs should give the other young guys a chance. What is the point of all this depth if we don't ever take advantage of it.

The game really has to slow down for him, he's either moving to fast or reacting to slow, thinking too much or not thinking at all.

They need to give up on trying to turn him into a traditional PG and focus on him making him a scorer. I remember earlier in their careers teams tried to turn Lou Willams and Jamaal Crawford into PG's and it really messed with their shooting %. I see the exact same thing going on with IQ.

blkexec wrote:Quickley has to adjust to the minutes cut, with Kemba and EF on board. Quick is like Aron Rogers waiting for Bret to retire. He has 2 vets in front of him running the point (Kemba and Rose). He has 2 vets in front of him at the SG position (EF and Burks), who just signed a large contract. Quick is still on his rookie contract and simply have to wait his turn. This reminds me when Knox went from playing a lot of minutes. Then the following season, under a new coach, Knox minutes dropped and finally disappeared. It's not easy to make that kind of an adjustment for young players. It will take him some time to learn how to impact with limited court time. Same with Obi, when Noel comes back.

Last year, we couldn't score and Quick was a perfect change of pace guard. This year we can score, so Quick's value dropped a little. But this is a good time for him to learn how to be a playmaking PG, and not just a half court steph type shooter.

Remember last year when Iq was playing like the lottery pick and folks were quick to declare OBI a wasted pick?

Chill.

Go for a walk. Talk to some girls. Get away from your keyboard complaining about five games.

I think it's option 3. Quick is probably playing and shooting at a similar clip. But with a better team around him, especially at the guard position, Quick's similar numbers to last year, now looks bad. Add to the fact that he's playing less mins than last season, and that explains his bad or inefficient start. But from what I've seen, Quick was never been an efficient player. He's a volume shooter. And volume shooters will always look bad when looking in a vacuum.

Melo for example, scored 28 pts and hitting almost all his 3s. And the lakers won their 1st game. Next game Melo scored 4 pts and missed all his 3s. Depending on which day you look at, Melo can go from the best player to the worst player in a 5 game stretch.

I love Quick as a player, because hes young and not afraid to shoot (we've seen the opposite of this in Philly). But if you're a volume shooter, that comes with consequences. Turnovers and lack of shooting efficiency. Dame's shooting numbers are probably worst than Quicks, during this early start of the season....But after 82 games, Dames numbers will improve (same with Quick). Quick needs to learn how to be more of a playmaker, which will off set his inefficient shooting.

Clean wrote:

foosballnick wrote:If I created a thread that the Knicks should cut IQ - in your opinion, would it be ridiculous?

WTF kind of question is this? Who even hinted at wanting to cut him I clearly said give other players a chance until Quick plays better.

My question was overtly was facetious. To me your proposition to bench Quickly after 5 games is ridiculous. The team is winning and he's shooting poorly but not playing poorly - his D is improved since last year, he's hustling and he's a streak shooter who because of the talent escalation around him is experiencing minutes squeeze. Overall the team is playing well and together - why upset the balance? These guys are not robots

foosballnick wrote:Did I miss the memo that IQ will be the new fan target of ire now that Frank is gone?

I don't know what other fans you are lumping me in with but I will criticize a player when they are playing poorly. This seems like it would be common sense.

It's a message board. If your criticism is knee jerk or weak, expect a response. If you can't take the heat for a relatively weak, knee jerk, subjective criticism that is not really even supported with significant data - I really don't know what to tell you.

foosballnick wrote:I'm not sure the point of "having all this depth" - but I can imagine that a professional head coach is not going to use all his players - especially rookies - just for the sake of using them - just to take advantage of using the bench - especially after just 5 games when his team is 4-1.

Who said to use every player on the bench? I clearly said to give 1 or 2 players a chance. I even named those 2 players. Just because a team starts 4-1 does not mean we can't improve. We played pretty well leading into the playoffs last season and guess what. All those problems we got away with in the regular season came back to haunt us in the playoffs.

Again - look up facetious or sarcasm. I would turn the question back to you. Why would you give 1 or 2 players a chance without seeing them at practice. What exactly have they done to deserve the burn on a 4-1 team that is playing well? Further your playoff analogy from last year is silly. Are you really saying that Thibs needs to bring in Grimes and McBride to take IQ's 14 minutes and that will exorcise the ghosts of last season's playoffs? Why would you even be focused on that with 60% of the starting lineup different from the series vs the Hawks?

foosballnick wrote:The stats you use above don't take into account relatively low mpg as well as fairly limited attempts so far this year.

His playing time is down because he has not played well when he got on the court. Its a simple concept to understand.

foosballnick wrote:The 5 points you make are just subjective opinions. Have you even taken the time to look at IQ's shot charts this year?

It was 6 points and where did I ever say they were not subjective. I am clearly giving my opinion on his play this year. That is the very essence of being subjective. I am guessing me numbering my points confused you. The numbers are there to make the points easier to understand instead of being a wall of text.

....and I'm clearly disagreeing with your bullet points and using facts in my argument. If you start a thread with a strong opinion wanting to bench a guy 5 games in - are you just looking for acceptance and validation of this view? Is the point here discussion, debate and dissemination of information or is it for all of us to hold hands and sing kumbayas?

Look I don't know why it seems like you took this personal but I don't think Quick has been good this year. I am sure many others would agree with that. If you think a player who is not known for his defense shooting 30% FG% and 25% 3pt FG% is good that is your opinion. Obviously, Thibs agree with my line of thinking which is why Quicks minutes are so low.

I didn't take it personal at all. I'm arguing the counter-point and also a bit confused by the visceral reaction to IQ after just 5 games. There are a number of posters jumping on the kid. Serious question - as I mentioned previously - is that really enough time and data to make a proper decision on an athlete given what you saw last season? To me performance is generally up and down. A good HC knows this, he also sees these guys in practice as well as how they work together. My observation is that Thibs values this group as a cohesive and hard working unit without any prima donna's. They trust him and he trusts them. Plucking and plugging guys in and out of the line-up based on a couple games performance at the beginning of the season after a 4-1 start kind of breaks that trust. Real life isn't a video game.

Clean wrote:I understand he is hard working and put in a lot of work in the offseason. However, he is not looking like an NBA player this year.

Signs of this popped up during Summer League. His stats might have looked good but the way he was playing I was not a fan of and I let it be known in those game threads.

His stats on the season are putrid. It might be time to give Grimes and McBride a look until he gets right.

5.6 pts
30% FG%
25% 3pt FG%

1 - His shot selection has been trash. Why is he always shooting Curry range 3's and he can barely ever make them.
2 - His float game used to be his specialty. It seems like its been average at best since midway last season.
3 - He has had some nice moments but he is extremely inconsistent. If its an off night he will ice cold.
4 - He is an abysmal PG. He can't break down the D and the added responsibility lowers his shot percentages even more.
5 - I love him in a secondary guard role. He is good at attacking a scrambling defense. However, his effectiveness in this role has been limited do to his poor shooting this year.
6 - Defense has never been his calling card so if he is not giving you anyone on offense he is a big negative on the court.

We know he can play because he did it last year but right now he is struggling and I think Thibs should give the other young guys a chance. What is the point of all this depth if we don't ever take advantage of it.

No.

Just ... no.

No.