NYStateOfMind wrote:I agree with Panos, most are not judging him on offensive success. Deuce doesn't need to be a scoring machine, just score some shots. He was missing almost all his shots for a week. As much as fans appreciate his D, hitting an open 3 once in a while when he lights it up in the g-league, isn't much to ask for in a tight game. An open shot is an open shot, playground, g-league, or the NBA. He is a 2nd unit spark if he can hit open 3pt shots around 33-35%. Is that too much to ask for?

Panos wrote:

blkexec wrote:What I find interesting reading some of these posts lately. For a while, fans have been saying we don't have a bench and Deuce should not get the minutes he's getting.

But when we win, all of a sudden, we now have a bench. And now Deuce should get some minutes? SMH

Glad to see my boy Deuce hit some shots, since thats how fans measure his success. What I see is a consistent defender who gives 100% regardless if he's making shots and regardless of his minutes distribution. He's consistent on defense and this team needs more consistent players. Personally I don't care if he missed all his shots, he's contributing to winning basketball and his energy on defense spreads to other players and forces players to give a similar effort. Love it.

Making open shots is needed for this team. But having a player who Thibs can trust on defense is just an important. Now put the two together and we are seeing a solid 2 way guard develop in front of us. He was hand picked by Thibs and Deuce is a coaches dream. Blue collar worker who does everything the coach ask. Glad to see he's aggressive on offense. All he was missing was confidence he can score at this level. We already know he can score in the Gleague and he can score in college.

Congrats to Deuce. Lets hope Thibs utilizes these guys some more, and reduce RJ's starter minutes, while continuing to increase his second unit minutes. I like how Thibs is managing this situation between the big 3. JB and Randle are solid together and feed off each other. Let build around that.

When we've played a bunch of close games -- for example, the previous three games 2 were OT losses, and the other Knicks won by 2 pts -- yeah, it matters if he can hit a couple of shots. Could be the difference in a win or loss. Not to mention the kid's confidence.

All I'm saying is have patience with Deuce and his shot because even without it, he's giving you winning basetball plays (defense, steals, forced TOs, on ball pressure). Thats all I said. Some complain and ready for the quick hook. His recent play shows you a quick hook would've been premature. Can't have a team of all defense (agree). But the same can be said about offense (agree???). You need balance. And in this league where teams like to double JB or Randle, we need guys who can hit open shots (nobody disagrees with that).

I'm more worried about RJ hitting open shots than Deuce. When RJ miss, he will keep shooting until he hit. When Deuce miss, he doesn't keep shooting. So he's not going to shoot you out of a game. It's been 4 yrs now for RJ and his jumper is still not consistent while his defense got worse (I think he balked up too much). Deuce just getting playing time consistently this season, so it's not even a full season yet. RJ got consistent minutes from the day he was drafted. Lets have the same patience with Deuce. As you will see, if a lock down defender learns how to shoot, it's very rewarding for the team.

Eitherway, I'm happy for our team success this season.

My flowers goes out to Thibs. Complained about in game adjustments (check). Complained about not giving the yoots PT (check). I wanted Thibs to hold his big 3 accountable. Well we saw this with RJ's benching in the 4th (check).

“Obviously, some guys have been out, been down, and somebody needed to step up. I felt like it would be a great opportunity for me to come in and show what I have.”

https://nypost.com/2023/02/06/miles-mcbride-could-be-knicks-trade-deadline-answer/

blkexec wrote:

NYStateOfMind wrote:I agree with Panos, most are not judging him on offensive success. Deuce doesn't need to be a scoring machine, just score some shots. He was missing almost all his shots for a week. As much as fans appreciate his D, hitting an open 3 once in a while when he lights it up in the g-league, isn't much to ask for in a tight game. An open shot is an open shot, playground, g-league, or the NBA. He is a 2nd unit spark if he can hit open 3pt shots around 33-35%. Is that too much to ask for?

Panos wrote:

blkexec wrote:What I find interesting reading some of these posts lately. For a while, fans have been saying we don't have a bench and Deuce should not get the minutes he's getting.

But when we win, all of a sudden, we now have a bench. And now Deuce should get some minutes? SMH

Glad to see my boy Deuce hit some shots, since thats how fans measure his success. What I see is a consistent defender who gives 100% regardless if he's making shots and regardless of his minutes distribution. He's consistent on defense and this team needs more consistent players. Personally I don't care if he missed all his shots, he's contributing to winning basketball and his energy on defense spreads to other players and forces players to give a similar effort. Love it.

Making open shots is needed for this team. But having a player who Thibs can trust on defense is just an important. Now put the two together and we are seeing a solid 2 way guard develop in front of us. He was hand picked by Thibs and Deuce is a coaches dream. Blue collar worker who does everything the coach ask. Glad to see he's aggressive on offense. All he was missing was confidence he can score at this level. We already know he can score in the Gleague and he can score in college.

Congrats to Deuce. Lets hope Thibs utilizes these guys some more, and reduce RJ's starter minutes, while continuing to increase his second unit minutes. I like how Thibs is managing this situation between the big 3. JB and Randle are solid together and feed off each other. Let build around that.

When we've played a bunch of close games -- for example, the previous three games 2 were OT losses, and the other Knicks won by 2 pts -- yeah, it matters if he can hit a couple of shots. Could be the difference in a win or loss. Not to mention the kid's confidence.

All I'm saying is have patience with Deuce and his shot because even without it, he's giving you winning basetball plays (defense, steals, forced TOs, on ball pressure). Thats all I said. Some complain and ready for the quick hook. His recent play shows you a quick hook would've been premature. Can't have a team of all defense (agree). But the same can be said about offense (agree???). You need balance. And in this league where teams like to double JB or Randle, we need guys who can hit open shots (nobody disagrees with that).

I'm more worried about RJ hitting open shots than Deuce. When RJ miss, he will keep shooting until he hit. When Deuce miss, he doesn't keep shooting. So he's not going to shoot you out of a game. It's been 4 yrs now for RJ and his jumper is still not consistent while his defense got worse (I think he balked up too much). Deuce just getting playing time consistently this season, so it's not even a full season yet. RJ got consistent minutes from the day he was drafted. Lets have the same patience with Deuce. As you will see, if a lock down defender learns how to shoot, it's very rewarding for the team.

Eitherway, I'm happy for our team success this season.

My flowers goes out to Thibs. Complained about in game adjustments (check). Complained about not giving the yoots PT (check). I wanted Thibs to hold his big 3 accountable. Well we saw this with RJ's benching in the 4th (check).

RJ is a month older than McBride.
Rj avg 20 pts last year. Hung 46 on Miami too.
His coach wants him to shoot.
Same coach that wants Grimes and Mcbride to keep shooting. He believes in them.

Awesome to see

You have to develop from within and when you play broken down vets over the young players, you only edlay their development and hurt the team long term for useless short term gains that only hurts draft stock when you are in the bottom of the league. We are at the next phase since we are so much better, but not play Deuce last year was a mistake.

fishmike wrote:

nyvector16 wrote:Imagine how much better McBride would be if he had actual playing time his rookie year, but instead we played vets that likely squeeked out another 4 wins. We would have had a better pick last year that maybe we would not have traded away or gotten nice return for besides salary dump.

You have to develop from within and when you play broken down vets over the young players, you only edlay their development and hurt the team long term for useless short term gains that only hurts draft stock when you are in the bottom of the league. We are at the next phase since we are so much better, but not play Deuce last year was a mistake.

he was so bad when he played. He got a ton of time in the gleague. He was in the right place and has had a lot of chances.

A lot of those minutes were given to IQ and I think we can all agree that they were fruitful. That said, Point Burks was a travesty. And I'm a Burks fan. If you want to tell me the Knicks were better off letting IQ sink or swim as the starting PG, with Burks playing some backup minutes and McBride getting a few more minutes here and there, I can't say that's the wrong.

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nyvector16 wrote:Imagine how much better McBride would be if he had actual playing time his rookie year, but instead we played vets that likely squeeked out another 4 wins. We would have had a better pick last year that maybe we would not have traded away or gotten nice return for besides salary dump.

You have to develop from within and when you play broken down vets over the young players, you only edlay their development and hurt the team long term for useless short term gains that only hurts draft stock when you are in the bottom of the league. We are at the next phase since we are so much better, but not play Deuce last year was a mistake.

he was so bad when he played. He got a ton of time in the gleague. He was in the right place and has had a lot of chances.

A lot of those minutes were given to IQ and I think we can all agree that they were fruitful. That said, Point Burks was a travesty. And I'm a Burks fan. If you want to tell me the Knicks were better off letting IQ sink or swim as the starting PG, with Burks playing some backup minutes and McBride getting a few more minutes here and there, I can't say that's the wrong.

No team wants to start Burks as a PG. But most will realize he at least knows what should be done in that role; Burks understood it better than IQ. Burks is not overtly good at being a pure PG but he knows where to be, where the ball needs to go, where players need to be (all with a grain of salt) - all at that level, all much better than IQ at the beginning of the year (IQ finally started to get it towards back half of season).

My guess is he was put in place because IQ would have caused too much chaos for the other starters. Knicks had 4 other guys in the starting lineup that also needed to know what to do and where to be and Burks was better at the setup stage than IQ. And he was also a good outlet shooter at the end of plays (as opposed to someone like IQ/Deuce).

So this had less to do with Burks/IQ (and who was better and how those minutes could have been better used for dev of IQ) and more to do with getting Mitch, Randle, RJ, Fournier the ball in spots they needed to and Burks could perhaps do it better than IQ.

The question for me was: what/who was better for Mitch, Randle, RJ, Fournier and less to do with: Is IQ getting starter or bench minutes? That was my thought process.

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

nyvector16 wrote:Imagine how much better McBride would be if he had actual playing time his rookie year, but instead we played vets that likely squeeked out another 4 wins. We would have had a better pick last year that maybe we would not have traded away or gotten nice return for besides salary dump.

You have to develop from within and when you play broken down vets over the young players, you only edlay their development and hurt the team long term for useless short term gains that only hurts draft stock when you are in the bottom of the league. We are at the next phase since we are so much better, but not play Deuce last year was a mistake.

he was so bad when he played. He got a ton of time in the gleague. He was in the right place and has had a lot of chances.

A lot of those minutes were given to IQ and I think we can all agree that they were fruitful. That said, Point Burks was a travesty. And I'm a Burks fan. If you want to tell me the Knicks were better off letting IQ sink or swim as the starting PG, with Burks playing some backup minutes and McBride getting a few more minutes here and there, I can't say that's the wrong.

No team wants to start Burks as a PG. But most will realize he at least knows what should be done in that role; Burks understood it better than IQ. Burks is not overtly good at being a pure PG but he knows where to be, where the ball needs to go, where players need to be (all with a grain of salt) - all at that level, all much better than IQ at the beginning of the year (IQ finally started to get it towards back half of season).

My guess is he was put in place because IQ would have caused too much chaos for the other starters. Knicks had 4 other guys in the starting lineup that also needed to know what to do and where to be and Burks was better at the setup stage than IQ. And he was also a good outlet shooter at the end of plays (as opposed to someone like IQ/Deuce).

So this had less to do with Burks/IQ (and who was better and how those minutes could have been better used for dev of IQ) and more to do with getting Mitch, Randle, RJ, Fournier the ball in spots they needed to and Burks could perhaps do it better than IQ.

The question for me was: what/who was better for Mitch, Randle, RJ, Fournier and less to do with: Is IQ getting starter or bench minutes? That was my thought process.

funny... last night Casey benched Hayes and started Burks at PG. Obviously not a future based move beyond getting the team to just play better quality ball.

Difference is they have Ivey. And Hayes is one of the NBA PGs out there that is worse at it that Burks. I'd argue it was a future based move in sense. The org got to see what it has in French kid and decided to move on. Now they're lead guard of the future gets more reps and has a veteran to lean on in the backcourt.

nyvector16 wrote:Imagine how much better McBride would be if he had actual playing time his rookie year, but instead we played vets that likely squeeked out another 4 wins. We would have had a better pick last year that maybe we would not have traded away or gotten nice return for besides salary dump.

You have to develop from within and when you play broken down vets over the young players, you only edlay their development and hurt the team long term for useless short term gains that only hurts draft stock when you are in the bottom of the league. We are at the next phase since we are so much better, but not play Deuce last year was a mistake.

So refreshing to hear a poster who's on the same page. This was my argument as well. Unless the vets are leading us to the eastern conference finals. But thats not the case for the role player vets we added. I hope we do not repeat that issue again.

fishmike wrote:

blkexec wrote:

nyvector16 wrote:Imagine how much better McBride would be if he had actual playing time his rookie year, but instead we played vets that likely squeeked out another 4 wins. We would have had a better pick last year that maybe we would not have traded away or gotten nice return for besides salary dump.

You have to develop from within and when you play broken down vets over the young players, you only edlay their development and hurt the team long term for useless short term gains that only hurts draft stock when you are in the bottom of the league. We are at the next phase since we are so much better, but not play Deuce last year was a mistake.

So refreshing to hear a poster who's on the same page. This was my argument as well. Unless the vets are leading us to the eastern conference finals. But thats not the case for the role player vets we added. I hope we do not repeat that issue again.

how do you know it wouldnt have made him worse and even further damaged his confidence? Forcing a struggling young player out there makes zero sense. They sent him to the minors where he did really well.

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:

blkexec wrote:

nyvector16 wrote:Imagine how much better McBride would be if he had actual playing time his rookie year, but instead we played vets that likely squeeked out another 4 wins. We would have had a better pick last year that maybe we would not have traded away or gotten nice return for besides salary dump.

You have to develop from within and when you play broken down vets over the young players, you only edlay their development and hurt the team long term for useless short term gains that only hurts draft stock when you are in the bottom of the league. We are at the next phase since we are so much better, but not play Deuce last year was a mistake.

So refreshing to hear a poster who's on the same page. This was my argument as well. Unless the vets are leading us to the eastern conference finals. But thats not the case for the role player vets we added. I hope we do not repeat that issue again.

how do you know it wouldnt have made him worse and even further damaged his confidence? Forcing a struggling young player out there makes zero sense. They sent him to the minors where he did really well.

I'm all for the old school way of youth development