martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

ToddTT wrote:

Dragon wrote:Can somebody help me understand something, when we got Bridges, we started advertising the wing stop on the bases that we have OG and Bridges which are very good in defence...... I understand when somebody struggle shooting the ball, but if you are a good defender, you will always be good defender.....
is that all because we don't have Rim protector? if Mitch is playing, then OG and Bridges will shutdown 3 points shooters (along with the Hart and the rest)? or there is something fundimantaly wrong/changed from last years great defence?

There was a reason why OKC willingly paid so far over market value to take him from us. That is why I was so sad when he left. He does so much on both ends of the floor. He covered for so many defensive mistakes when perimeter guys got beat. Mitch might help but I don't think he can get us back to what we had with ihart. I remember we clearly played better once he took over for Mitch as a starter.

100%

Let's even put aside his defense and rebounding.

iHart's ability to pick and then re-pick players and also make passes to cutters and move without the ball to create space.

He is a 7' version of Josh Hart in the way those intangible plays come to fruition.

And you have to guard him outside of just the dunkers spot, those middy floaters are killa

Yes, tried to say multiple times last year that iHart was our low key MVP behind Brunson. He was an offensive hub and didnt allow teams to trap Brunson bc he was so good at screening and making the 2nd pass out of the trap and was good in pick and roll with the floater. Add that his immense bball IQ in terms of offensive and defensive positioning and reboundimg, and great verticality at the rim.

Game 2 against Philly was an amazing series of events, but the offensive rebound and quick kickout and then following that up with a chase down block was incredible bball IQ and hustle.

I definitely thought 18mm would do it. OKC had the money not only to help themselves, hut also hurt us.

SergioNYK wrote:Did everyone forget how terrible Hartenstein was in the Pacers series? Averaged 6/9/4 and scored only 4 points in Game 6 and didn't score a point in Game 7 and got outplayed badly by Turner. He was a good player for us but let's not make this out to be bigger than what it is. We should not have taken this drastic step defensively.

Mitch and iHart have been the anchor of the Knicks defense before this year. Knicks replaced that oft-injured beast with KAT/Sims/Precious/Huk rotation.

It has not gone well defensively.

martin wrote:I can't exactly tell but KAT doesn't seem to set good picks, and that's half the battle of being a stretch 5.

His defense is not good. I can't tell if it's as bad as Randle's or worse or different. If Knicks can have a January of beatdowns with Randle at the 4, could the Knicks do so with KAT at the 4? Or was it just really iHart?

He isnt as good screening, but I think a few things going on

1) he is doubled immediately off the screen himself as defenders come off the corners. Precious and others are no threat.

2) decision making needs to be fast. If someone is leaking off the corner, that player has to cut and KAT needs to read that quickly and make the pass. iHart was really good at this.

3) we need to run pick and pop and KAT just needs to let it fly from 3. Brunson has assisted KAT on a startlingly low amount of 3s (heard this on a podcast recently but havent found the number).

VDesai wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

ToddTT wrote:

Dragon wrote:Can somebody help me understand something, when we got Bridges, we started advertising the wing stop on the bases that we have OG and Bridges which are very good in defence...... I understand when somebody struggle shooting the ball, but if you are a good defender, you will always be good defender.....
is that all because we don't have Rim protector? if Mitch is playing, then OG and Bridges will shutdown 3 points shooters (along with the Hart and the rest)? or there is something fundimantaly wrong/changed from last years great defence?

There was a reason why OKC willingly paid so far over market value to take him from us. That is why I was so sad when he left. He does so much on both ends of the floor. He covered for so many defensive mistakes when perimeter guys got beat. Mitch might help but I don't think he can get us back to what we had with ihart. I remember we clearly played better once he took over for Mitch as a starter.

100%

Let's even put aside his defense and rebounding.

iHart's ability to pick and then re-pick players and also make passes to cutters and move without the ball to create space.

He is a 7' version of Josh Hart in the way those intangible plays come to fruition.

And you have to guard him outside of just the dunkers spot, those middy floaters are killa

Yes, tried to say multiple times last year that iHart was our low key MVP behind Brunson. He was an offensive hub and didnt allow teams to trap Brunson bc he was so good at screening and making the 2nd pass out of the trap and was good in pick and roll with the floater. Add that his immense bball IQ in terms of offensive and defensive positioning and reboundimg, and great verticality at the rim.

Game 2 against Philly was an amazing series of events, but the offensive rebound and quick kickout and then following that up with a chase down block was incredible bball IQ and hustle.

I definitely thought 18mm would do it. OKC had the money not only to help themselves, hut also hurt us.

I love iHart, I think he did great things for us, but remember, he was the sub for Mitch, so if Mitch is back, will we solve all these issus? and besides, I understand his Defensive and rebounding pros, but is it that big difference from KAT? I understand that KAT is bad in defence, but i mean overall, is he making all that difference, basically back to my question, will Mitch solve all our issues, is it just a Def centre thing, or there is more to this?