knicks1248 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

PassTheBall wrote:Yep. This brand of basketball is very hard to watch. Isolation plays nearly every possession. No defense when Mitch and frank are on the bench.

I think Fiz is very overrated.

He's not a head coach, he's a good assistant coach

He came to NY with no identity other than being a cool guy who lets players play the way they feel comfortable playing.

Like why would you play a rookie (Rj) 40 min when there's 6 to 7 other guys your trying to evaluate.

Iggy could have gotten more min, frank could have gotten more, and we didn't see a peep form any of the 2 way guys.

That's why the grumble of mins came up in..

Maybe Fiz and this team of developmental coach's all agree the best way to develop blue chip rookies is to play them. Knox, Mitch and now RJ. The results are not apparent but there might be a plan.
It would appear Iggy does not play the same position as Frank. I think knicks have enough of what they have seen in Frank to make up their minds on him. What is still in the air you might guess as the rotation to start the season. I agree with others who state this will be a fluid situation.

Its also possilble the "grumble" is not due to a coaching error or incompetence as you love to suggest. You don't know do you? So you take the players side as it aligns with your distain for Fiz.

I've been a defender of Fizdale. I thought he got guys to play hard last year. We were in a lot of games early, and with more talent (like a healthy KP), I thought we could have been 500 mid way through the year.

It certainly ended poorly, but dumping your star player to clear cap is going to do that.

However, the little that I have watched of the preseason, where we're struggling against bad teams is worrying. I think (and I could be wrong) we have the talent to do better.

Also curious why we had an option for 6 preseason games and opted for 4.

Think about our roster, and who on it could be part of a future, theoretical championship squad? It's RJ and Robinson, and that is pretty much it. Everyone else is filler or likely not part of the long term here.

what you are saying is not unfair, but I think you are missing the value in developing role players. Those are important as well, and critical to make the top tier talent stand up. Also important in the development of the players around them. The whole team matters. The elite guys are the hardest to get, so value-wise it makes sense they get the most attention. Draymond is a great example of developing a role player and investing time in a group of players, vs. just starting at the top and plugging holes. A lot of this isnt even a team's choice. We pick 2 and we are building the team around Ja. We were lucky to be 3 and get RJ who certainly looks like a man child with a handle. Knox is raw but like his talent and hops. Dont poopoo Randle. Top Kentucky recruit, would have been a top lottery pick if he wasnt hurt. He's just coming into his own and working hard. He's already an eff% scorer and good rebounder. If he improves defensively (effort looks good so far) and continues to find teammates he could be a core guy as well. The other guy because of his skill set is Frank. Hopefully he's our Draymond. Look at how bad Green was offensively his first few years. If Frank gets stronger we would have a guy who can guard 3-4 spots on the floor, hit clutch shots and run an offense (a guy can dream)

Agree, that you have to develop players with different roles. Btw, in terms of Draymond, you fail to mention that GS had the luxury of not needing Green to score since they had those guys named Curry, Thompson and KD. Unfortunately, none of those guys are on the Knicks or on most NBA teams. Who's to say that Draymond is not over rated due to having those players as support. Also, think you are trying to once again defend Frank. Most agree Frank can be a good player. Problem is, even Draymond had more to offer than just defense. He generated offense by cutting and finishing around basket, rebounded extremely well, and even developed a 3pt shot once in a while. All things you just can mention that Frank still needs to add. Just don't understand why some can't deal with the fact he still needs to learn. And the fact that if he does not, he will not be a part of any starting line up. Just like any other young player with weaknesses.

IMO, We don't have anything yet in any of our players that show they will be integral parts of a playoff team. No matter how much we try to build up small positive traits of any of our players. The only thing we can hope is that some of our draft picks develop and once they do the Knicks don't screw the relationship up like they did with KP. We also have to hope that Randle takes next step up during his tenure here. Other than that, we just have whole bunch of vets that were average and thus have traveled the NBA merry go round. And a whole bunch of young guys that we have no idea how they will turn out. Time will tell if all these pieces can win a game. Like every year in the last 6, we can all claim what is going to happen but the reality is that we just have as many questions as any previous year. No matter which players fans cling their hopes with.

Draymond talks alot about how he was allowed to make mistakes and develop there. Im not defending Frank at all... he's got to defend himself with good play. Draymond is just an example of a great player who started slow and never became great on offense, but really started at level zero there by NBA standards. The enticing thing about Frank is his position and body type. It would be rare and game changing asset, but obv not if he's shooting 35%

Would agree with that. Not too many players have come out to be immediate All Stars. Do not think anyone really knows when its time to give up on a kid. Problem is that once a team does it basically dooms that player regardless if it was warranted. Gotta give these young kids at 19, 20 at least 5 years.

It's hard to give any player 5 yrs if the team isn't getting better has a whole...

It's been 6 yrs with no playoffs, so it's tough to say your going to sacrifice another 5 developing role players, because role players are what make up 85% of NBA players, there almost a dime a dozen

Shumpert coming in looked like the next sprewell, 5 yrs later he didn't look much better.

You think Houston was crying when the gave up on Lowry, but utah was when haywood gave up on them.

the window should always be 3 yrs, for everyone, player, coach, GM, and presidents.

lol you include the last 6 years of failure when considering Frank's development?

fishmike wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

PassTheBall wrote:Yep. This brand of basketball is very hard to watch. Isolation plays nearly every possession. No defense when Mitch and frank are on the bench.

I think Fiz is very overrated.

He's not a head coach, he's a good assistant coach

He came to NY with no identity other than being a cool guy who lets players play the way they feel comfortable playing.

Like why would you play a rookie (Rj) 40 min when there's 6 to 7 other guys your trying to evaluate.

Iggy could have gotten more min, frank could have gotten more, and we didn't see a peep form any of the 2 way guys.

That's why the grumble of mins came up in..

Maybe Fiz and this team of developmental coach's all agree the best way to develop blue chip rookies is to play them. Knox, Mitch and now RJ. The results are not apparent but there might be a plan.
It would appear Iggy does not play the same position as Frank. I think knicks have enough of what they have seen in Frank to make up their minds on him. What is still in the air you might guess as the rotation to start the season. I agree with others who state this will be a fluid situation.

Its also possilble the "grumble" is not due to a coaching error or incompetence as you love to suggest. You don't know do you? So you take the players side as it aligns with your distain for Fiz.

I've been a defender of Fizdale. I thought he got guys to play hard last year. We were in a lot of games early, and with more talent (like a healthy KP), I thought we could have been 500 mid way through the year.

It certainly ended poorly, but dumping your star player to clear cap is going to do that.

However, the little that I have watched of the preseason, where we're struggling against bad teams is worrying. I think (and I could be wrong) we have the talent to do better.

Also curious why we had an option for 6 preseason games and opted for 4.

Think about our roster, and who on it could be part of a future, theoretical championship squad? It's RJ and Robinson, and that is pretty much it. Everyone else is filler or likely not part of the long term here.

what you are saying is not unfair, but I think you are missing the value in developing role players. Those are important as well, and critical to make the top tier talent stand up. Also important in the development of the players around them. The whole team matters. The elite guys are the hardest to get, so value-wise it makes sense they get the most attention. Draymond is a great example of developing a role player and investing time in a group of players, vs. just starting at the top and plugging holes. A lot of this isnt even a team's choice. We pick 2 and we are building the team around Ja. We were lucky to be 3 and get RJ who certainly looks like a man child with a handle. Knox is raw but like his talent and hops. Dont poopoo Randle. Top Kentucky recruit, would have been a top lottery pick if he wasnt hurt. He's just coming into his own and working hard. He's already an eff% scorer and good rebounder. If he improves defensively (effort looks good so far) and continues to find teammates he could be a core guy as well. The other guy because of his skill set is Frank. Hopefully he's our Draymond. Look at how bad Green was offensively his first few years. If Frank gets stronger we would have a guy who can guard 3-4 spots on the floor, hit clutch shots and run an offense (a guy can dream)

Agree, that you have to develop players with different roles. Btw, in terms of Draymond, you fail to mention that GS had the luxury of not needing Green to score since they had those guys named Curry, Thompson and KD. Unfortunately, none of those guys are on the Knicks or on most NBA teams. Who's to say that Draymond is not over rated due to having those players as support. Also, think you are trying to once again defend Frank. Most agree Frank can be a good player. Problem is, even Draymond had more to offer than just defense. He generated offense by cutting and finishing around basket, rebounded extremely well, and even developed a 3pt shot once in a while. All things you just can mention that Frank still needs to add. Just don't understand why some can't deal with the fact he still needs to learn. And the fact that if he does not, he will not be a part of any starting line up. Just like any other young player with weaknesses.

IMO, We don't have anything yet in any of our players that show they will be integral parts of a playoff team. No matter how much we try to build up small positive traits of any of our players. The only thing we can hope is that some of our draft picks develop and once they do the Knicks don't screw the relationship up like they did with KP. We also have to hope that Randle takes next step up during his tenure here. Other than that, we just have whole bunch of vets that were average and thus have traveled the NBA merry go round. And a whole bunch of young guys that we have no idea how they will turn out. Time will tell if all these pieces can win a game. Like every year in the last 6, we can all claim what is going to happen but the reality is that we just have as many questions as any previous year. No matter which players fans cling their hopes with.

Draymond talks alot about how he was allowed to make mistakes and develop there. Im not defending Frank at all... he's got to defend himself with good play. Draymond is just an example of a great player who started slow and never became great on offense, but really started at level zero there by NBA standards. The enticing thing about Frank is his position and body type. It would be rare and game changing asset, but obv not if he's shooting 35%

Would agree with that. Not too many players have come out to be immediate All Stars. Do not think anyone really knows when its time to give up on a kid. Problem is that once a team does it basically dooms that player regardless if it was warranted. Gotta give these young kids at 19, 20 at least 5 years.

It's hard to give any player 5 yrs if the team isn't getting better has a whole...

It's been 6 yrs with no playoffs, so it's tough to say your going to sacrifice another 5 developing role players, because role players are what make up 85% of NBA players, there almost a dime a dozen

Shumpert coming in looked like the next sprewell, 5 yrs later he didn't look much better.

You think Houston was crying when the gave up on Lowry, but utah was when haywood gave up on them.

the window should always be 3 yrs, for everyone, player, coach, GM, and presidents.

lol you include the last 6 years of failure when considering Frank's development?

you should LOL @ mills talking about trust the process..you know, with all his experience building successful NBA team