fishmike wrote:

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

fitzfarm wrote:Love what brooks said about Thomas
”Lance plays hard,” Thunder coach Scott Brooks told reporters. “He plays every possession like it’s Game 7 of a championship series. ‘That’s why he’s in the league and that’s why he’s going to play another 10 years. When you have guys like that, you win.”

Then, no offense, why didn't OKC keep him?

It's not like their bench is so brimming with talent that they could jettison a valuable reserve.

Lance Thomas is a D League talent. In baseball terms, he'd be called a "Quad A" player ( i.e. more developed than the Triple A level, the top rung of MLB's farm system, but never quite good enough to truly crack a MLB 40 man roster consistently, much less the team's actual game day roster ) He's been trying to work his way into a full NBA season for 5 years now. He was literally, like Admundson and Kirk, throw ins in a larger trade because other team's roster churn still offers better upside than much of the Knicks 15 man roster they opened the season with, sadly.

Thomas is a solid and steady type of player. He will play hard, play the game the right way, make the right pass, do everything he is supposed to do. He just doesn't have very much talent. If you give any player, even a Quad A guy, enough minutes and shot opportunities, they are going to compile some kind of numbers, even on a bad team. ( Play MarShon Brooks 40 minutes a night and give him as many shots as he wants and he will score you 25-30 a night) As a fan of the game, I like Lance Thomas, he's a solid "character guy" on a team desperately lacking it.

If a team has leadership at the top of the roster, they don't need to invest valuable minutes and roster spots to fringe players, character guys, just to balance out a locker room.

Melo, STAT and Bargs are the veteran and highest paid players on the roster. They should accountable to act as leaders for this team. Their failures in leadership requires the Knicks spend a roster spot and valuable minutes on Thomas when they could be trying to develop another D League player with a higher talent ceiling who is younger and has more future upside. Thomas is the kind of guy you use when you are treadmilling, not truly developing. IMHO, he's a "tax" imposed on the Knicks for the cost of the lack of leadership at the top of the roster.

Again, as a fan of the game, I applaud Thomas and wish him the best. He's hard nosed and fights with everything he has. Hard not to root for a guy like that. But consider he wouldn't crack the 15 man roster of 2/3rds of the rest of the league.

As a fan of the Knicks though, the roster spot and minutes could be better spent elsewhere IMHO. IIRC, after Sprewell choked the living **** out of PJ Carlisimo, the Warriors drafted Todd Fuller or someone like that in the next draft. A player who clearly would not move the talent/development needle, but the team, weary of jack offs like Sprewell and Tim Hardaway, just wanted a guy who wouldn't exhaust them from being a gigantic *******. I consider Lance Thomas the fallout of Phil Jackson trying not to claw his eyes out from the raw selfishness/low BB IQ/lack of fundamental play of a Melo, STAT, Bargs, JR Smith, Shumpert, etc.

I see what you are saying and I agree with most but the why didn't OKC keep him point. OKC doesn't have a great track record. Why did they let Perkins play so much despite being one of the worst players in the league? Why did they trade for Waiters? Who knows why Okc do what they do?

Perkins is a really good low post defender.

like in 2008

yup. not that long ago.

maybe its just brooks.

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

fitzfarm wrote:Love what brooks said about Thomas
”Lance plays hard,” Thunder coach Scott Brooks told reporters. “He plays every possession like it’s Game 7 of a championship series. ‘That’s why he’s in the league and that’s why he’s going to play another 10 years. When you have guys like that, you win.”

Then, no offense, why didn't OKC keep him?

It's not like their bench is so brimming with talent that they could jettison a valuable reserve.

Lance Thomas is a D League talent. In baseball terms, he'd be called a "Quad A" player ( i.e. more developed than the Triple A level, the top rung of MLB's farm system, but never quite good enough to truly crack a MLB 40 man roster consistently, much less the team's actual game day roster ) He's been trying to work his way into a full NBA season for 5 years now. He was literally, like Admundson and Kirk, throw ins in a larger trade because other team's roster churn still offers better upside than much of the Knicks 15 man roster they opened the season with, sadly.

Thomas is a solid and steady type of player. He will play hard, play the game the right way, make the right pass, do everything he is supposed to do. He just doesn't have very much talent. If you give any player, even a Quad A guy, enough minutes and shot opportunities, they are going to compile some kind of numbers, even on a bad team. ( Play MarShon Brooks 40 minutes a night and give him as many shots as he wants and he will score you 25-30 a night) As a fan of the game, I like Lance Thomas, he's a solid "character guy" on a team desperately lacking it.

If a team has leadership at the top of the roster, they don't need to invest valuable minutes and roster spots to fringe players, character guys, just to balance out a locker room.

Melo, STAT and Bargs are the veteran and highest paid players on the roster. They should accountable to act as leaders for this team. Their failures in leadership requires the Knicks spend a roster spot and valuable minutes on Thomas when they could be trying to develop another D League player with a higher talent ceiling who is younger and has more future upside. Thomas is the kind of guy you use when you are treadmilling, not truly developing. IMHO, he's a "tax" imposed on the Knicks for the cost of the lack of leadership at the top of the roster.

Again, as a fan of the game, I applaud Thomas and wish him the best. He's hard nosed and fights with everything he has. Hard not to root for a guy like that. But consider he wouldn't crack the 15 man roster of 2/3rds of the rest of the league.

As a fan of the Knicks though, the roster spot and minutes could be better spent elsewhere IMHO. IIRC, after Sprewell choked the living **** out of PJ Carlisimo, the Warriors drafted Todd Fuller or someone like that in the next draft. A player who clearly would not move the talent/development needle, but the team, weary of jack offs like Sprewell and Tim Hardaway, just wanted a guy who wouldn't exhaust them from being a gigantic *******. I consider Lance Thomas the fallout of Phil Jackson trying not to claw his eyes out from the raw selfishness/low BB IQ/lack of fundamental play of a Melo, STAT, Bargs, JR Smith, Shumpert, etc.

I see what you are saying and I agree with most but the why didn't OKC keep him point. OKC doesn't have a great track record. Why did they let Perkins play so much despite being one of the worst players in the league? Why did they trade for Waiters? Who knows why Okc do what they do?

Perkins is a really good low post defender.

So is/was Bargs.

when was that?

actually, a long time throughout his career. He is a great low post/isolation defender but that's it.

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

fitzfarm wrote:Love what brooks said about Thomas
”Lance plays hard,” Thunder coach Scott Brooks told reporters. “He plays every possession like it’s Game 7 of a championship series. ‘That’s why he’s in the league and that’s why he’s going to play another 10 years. When you have guys like that, you win.”

Then, no offense, why didn't OKC keep him?

It's not like their bench is so brimming with talent that they could jettison a valuable reserve.

Lance Thomas is a D League talent. In baseball terms, he'd be called a "Quad A" player ( i.e. more developed than the Triple A level, the top rung of MLB's farm system, but never quite good enough to truly crack a MLB 40 man roster consistently, much less the team's actual game day roster ) He's been trying to work his way into a full NBA season for 5 years now. He was literally, like Admundson and Kirk, throw ins in a larger trade because other team's roster churn still offers better upside than much of the Knicks 15 man roster they opened the season with, sadly.

Thomas is a solid and steady type of player. He will play hard, play the game the right way, make the right pass, do everything he is supposed to do. He just doesn't have very much talent. If you give any player, even a Quad A guy, enough minutes and shot opportunities, they are going to compile some kind of numbers, even on a bad team. ( Play MarShon Brooks 40 minutes a night and give him as many shots as he wants and he will score you 25-30 a night) As a fan of the game, I like Lance Thomas, he's a solid "character guy" on a team desperately lacking it.

If a team has leadership at the top of the roster, they don't need to invest valuable minutes and roster spots to fringe players, character guys, just to balance out a locker room.

Melo, STAT and Bargs are the veteran and highest paid players on the roster. They should accountable to act as leaders for this team. Their failures in leadership requires the Knicks spend a roster spot and valuable minutes on Thomas when they could be trying to develop another D League player with a higher talent ceiling who is younger and has more future upside. Thomas is the kind of guy you use when you are treadmilling, not truly developing. IMHO, he's a "tax" imposed on the Knicks for the cost of the lack of leadership at the top of the roster.

Again, as a fan of the game, I applaud Thomas and wish him the best. He's hard nosed and fights with everything he has. Hard not to root for a guy like that. But consider he wouldn't crack the 15 man roster of 2/3rds of the rest of the league.

As a fan of the Knicks though, the roster spot and minutes could be better spent elsewhere IMHO. IIRC, after Sprewell choked the living **** out of PJ Carlisimo, the Warriors drafted Todd Fuller or someone like that in the next draft. A player who clearly would not move the talent/development needle, but the team, weary of jack offs like Sprewell and Tim Hardaway, just wanted a guy who wouldn't exhaust them from being a gigantic *******. I consider Lance Thomas the fallout of Phil Jackson trying not to claw his eyes out from the raw selfishness/low BB IQ/lack of fundamental play of a Melo, STAT, Bargs, JR Smith, Shumpert, etc.

I see what you are saying and I agree with most but the why didn't OKC keep him point. OKC doesn't have a great track record. Why did they let Perkins play so much despite being one of the worst players in the league? Why did they trade for Waiters? Who knows why Okc do what they do?

Perkins is a really good low post defender.

So is/was Bargs.

when was that?

actually, a long time. He is a great low post/isolation defender but that's it.

I defend the half court line really well.

I heard you gave up 50 pts last game. lol. j/k.

My point is OKC does not make smart decisions on playing time. Just like them playing Fisher when he was there.

CrushAlot wrote:^^^How can you write so much during a game?

Speech to text

gunsnewing wrote:Thats impressive. I can't even blow on my soup to cool it down and watch the game at the same time

now that's funny!

gunsnewing wrote:Hope Lance doesn't start to suck now that he's signed for the year

start?

TripleThreat wrote:

nixluva wrote:At this point that's a huge development. It's just the start of the process. I have no idea why people are looking to throw cold water on this.

“Coach, if you need one yard, I’ll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I’ll get you three yards.”
- Leroy Hoard, NFL short yardage running back/full back.

The nice thing about Lance Thomas is you know what you will get as a coach and front office at this point. The bad thing about Lance Thomas is you know what you will get as a coach and front office at this point.

Saying a player is 'only 26' tends to move the needle when he's proven he's at least NBA rotation caliber. Thomas has struggled his ENTIRE career to show he's even 15 man roster caliber. Huge difference.

What has more future upside? A tweener wing who can't shoot the three ball, isn't a lock down defender, has minimal athleticism and can barely scratch most NBA rosters as a Quad A/D league type guy, already at 26, 5 years into his pro career. He's not suddenly going to make leaps and bounds into being a solid consistent NBA rotation player.

Or some D League guy out there who is like 19 years old, who has a higher overall talent ceiling or at least some tangible skill set the Knicks could exploit for long term use ( like a strong 3 point shooter or a guy who defend the rim, etc)?

For a talent deficient roster, the Knicks should be heavily mining the D League right now. For long term help. LONG TERM HELP. LONG TERM PROSPECTS. LONG TERM INVESTMENTS AT THE COST OF PRECIOUS MINUTES.

No one here is here to piss on Lance Thomas. Good for him. Make the most of his opportunities. Play the game the right way. But his long term future for the Knicks shows a smaller option tree than say a Bryce Cotton. Or any number of very young D Leaguers out there who haven't established themselves as fringe journeymen.

I said this during the offseason, and it seems to elude you Nixluva. There's a reason why the guys who are available after most rosters have been formed or during the season are available in the first place. The reason usually is the player in question usually can't help most teams.

Not cold water but GRAIN OF SALT. You can actually like a player as a fan but also see as a Knicks fan how the guy might not be the best overall use of minutes/roster space.

Benching the selfish shotjacking non leadership *******s on the roster and running out D Leaguers who will play team ball because they just want to stick on any roster is NOT CULTURE CHANGE. When DeMarcus Cousins came back from Team USA and clearly was a changed player who took responsibility for his past and his past stupidity and started acting and playing like a leader, that's CULTURE CHANGE potential right there. Lance Thomas is here as a tax. A tax on the failures of leadership by Melo, STAT, Bargs, JR Smith and the rest of the established veterans on the roster. Teams that win and foster a winning culture, their leadership starts at the top of their depth chart, and they just try to develop the best talent they can find. Phil Jackson had to actually dig down deep to find some ex Duke guys because there were just too many established *******s on his current roster.

Which is why I'm getting angry we won't dedicate full

Seasons to players who are younger with proper development

We always allow things to stunt the process

Yet you'll have nixluva telling us as fans to be patient with

The overall process, I agree I said when are we going to see

The youth be part of our future for the long term

Fisher has such short leashes on Early and Wear

But of course you'll have fans claiming immediate victories for Phil

Pom-Poms out and all saying how he got great value in trades

Even posting ages of the players he brought here but then

Not have any problems with these players losing time falling further out

Of the rotation when he most definitely gave up more value to acquire them

We should see more of

Langston
THJR
Early
Wear
Cole

or

Larkin
Langston/Than[if called up]
Wear
Acy/Lance
Lou

Lineups out there

We aren't going anywhere but to the lottery, for heavens sake

Learn how to develop the youth simultaneously instead of in piece-meal fashion or singularly

But to burst your bubble TT Fisher begs to differ about leadership

Read this malarkey of an article

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/knicks/post/_/id/60990/leading-development-in-melos-knicks-role

CrushAlot wrote:^^^^Maybe Early and Wear should be assigned to Westchester so they can get some run and continue to work with Knicks coaches. Another benefit to Thanasis not being under contract while learning is the Knicks can assign two players to Westchester in addition to having their unsigned second rounder there.

Maybe not a bad idea, but they probably need

Them on the team so Fisher can run full practices

Vets usually practice very sparingly in this day and age

Whatever the case we aren't quite doing things by design or with any decree of purpose

CrushAlot wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:^^^^Maybe Early and Wear should be assigned to Westchester so they can get some run and continue to work with Knicks coaches. Another benefit to Thanasis not being under contract while learning is the Knicks can assign two players to Westchester in addition to having their unsigned second rounder there.

Maybe not a bad idea, but they probably need

Them on the team so Fisher can run full practices

Vets usually practice very sparingly in this day and age

Whatever the case we aren't quite doing things by design or with any decree of purpose

They would still have thirteen guys on the roster. Stat, and Bargs don't practice and Melo is in and out but that still leaves enough guys to go 5 on 5.

Not sure all positions would be covered

I think you could practice but with guys out of position

Not doing or filling roles they would normally in a real game