martin wrote:

franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:

franco12 wrote:

martin wrote:

franco12 wrote:

Nalod wrote:If we play the and they don't develop fast enough. We are not good enough.
If we play our guys too many minutes, and we fall short, we are not good enough.
WE are not good enough to contend. Live with it. Last year Randle got hurt, iHart surged and it was great.
This year our starters are as good as any. But our bench is not.
Might want to ask yourselves what does Thibs know about his yoot that we don't.
Calling for his head as if some magic man coach will develop them faster is a nice thought.

I think our bench is fine. Thibs won’t play them because any number of reasons. I’m not looking for him to develop guys, I’m looking for Thibs to lessen the minute load on guys that we need for a play off run. If we can’t win with Kolek getting 5-10 minutes, then we’re not that good.

We saw Hukporti play and he looked decent- better than Sims, yet- zero time when Kat was out.

And here is the thing- we lost going with the starters for big minutes- they’re tired- next up, they will be sidelined with injuries.

What kind of nonsense is this? And why do you think that would be any coach's or FO's or team's prevailing thought or how they operate?

Be frustrated with the minutes thing but as soon as you get whacky, that's pure nonsense.

it's not nonsense. What I mean by it is - whether these players develop or not doesn't matter to me- of course, if they do, great.

What I am critically concerned with is the players we have not being driven into the ground and getting injured.

I don't need Kolek to become a better player- because I think he is fine for 5-10 minutes a night to keep Brunson from being over played. If he does, great- that is a seperate issue and I think less important than keeping Brunson fresh and uninjured for the play offs.

I don't see that has nonsense. We're not in develop players mode- we're in win now mode- and regular season wins are only so important.

That's not how any well run organization anywhere runs. Baseball, football, soccer, or the ones we work in. That's how organizations fail or become stale.

Players on other teams are already getting injured or burnt out. The Knicks have been lucky so far? Or perhaps they are doing something different.

Knicks have not played Deuce very much this year and he is the one that is constantly injured this year.

Let us know what you think about the prospects of second round picks and how they develop over 2-5 minutes spans in their rookie year versus what the Knicks have done with their GLeague team and the like over the past years. That's the key differences.

Honest question: Is Denver playing Jokic a lot and driving him into the ground this year? Is that your take? Cause it seems like a lot of the better players in the league fall into that same category.

We’re just going to have to disagree because I see this differently.

Yes- Denver might be taking a risk.

Of course, better players are going to play more minutes. And players will always be happy to play and do whatever is asked. That is why I think coaches need to hold them back, sometimes for their own good, and also sometimes to benefit the organization.

There is no doubt that minutes can slow down any type of player. Or parent.

What's the cost of not doing so? You OK if the Knicks potentially have a worse record? Cause that is definitely one of the downside risks.

OK with being without home court advantage and possibly be in the play-in territory? Cause that is definitely one of the downside risks.

Phoenix is doing exactly what you'd like, playing Dunn. They are less healthy and have a worse record. That's an example of the flip side of things in extreme.

Would you rather have home court and be missing OG and Kat or the play in with everyone healthy?

The last time the Knicks made it to the finals - pretty sure you are old enough to remember but not too old to forget- what seed were they?

I don’t mind playing on the road - there is so much pressure on the home team to win- as the underdog, you just have to win one road game and hold your court to advance.

The image I have in my head is the roster is a horse and Thibs is the jockey.

Maybe this is Thibs finding out what his horse can do, and he’ll let up over the next stretch and give guys less minutes and find a balance, but I worry this is Thibs and he, for better or worse, only knows one way- and that is petal to the metal with his top guys.

franco12 wrote:Would you rather have home court and be missing OG and Kat or the play in with everyone healthy?

The last time the Knicks made it to the finals - pretty sure you are old enough to remember but not too old to forget- what seed were they?

I don’t mind playing on the road - there is so much pressure on the home team to win- as the underdog, you just have to win one road game and hold your court to advance.

The image I have in my head is the roster is a horse and Thibs is the jockey.

Maybe this is Thibs finding out what his horse can do, and he’ll let up over the next stretch and give guys less minutes and find a balance, but I worry this is Thibs and he, for better or worse, only knows one way- and that is petal to the metal with his top guys.

Thibs doesn't develop players. Thibs doesn't know how to coach an offense and is a defensive only coach. Thibs only plays one way? At what point do with stop making ridiculous assumptions and just look around to what is going on and evaluate it on it's own? The Knicks consolidated talent and are top heavy. Did we miss that?

All the top players play heavy minutes. This is not unique to Thibs or the Knicks. Just go look it up. All the best coaches lean on their best players. So most all coaches only know how to play petal to the medal? All. Of. Them.

When you don't have expectations of deep playoffs, you operate differently.

jskinny35 wrote:I think Precious has to stay... especially if we are parting with Mitch.

Personally I think we should hold on and not make a move (given the options being reported).

I think mixing up the lineups to help the bench would be my suggestion. Hart back to the 2nd unit with Shamet as the 2 guard or Precious at the 4. Hart can still play with the starters to close out but Shamet would give more outside shooting... or Precious helps with size and switching against bigs. Either way we didn't lose last night because of the bench issues (even with Deuce out).

I wonder how Precious being an expiring is viewed by Knicks and the league

- do Knicks like that because they don't have to commit $ to him next year?
- do other teams who maybe could be some salary cap troubles view the expiring as a positive way to remove multi-year deals off their cap

Not clear to me if Knicks would prefer to replace Precious expiring with say a fixed cost player on a 2-year deal (cost certainty)
or if the preference is to just play the year out and allow Precious to test market again

Given cap situation around the league - Precious isn't breaking any records on his next deal

Same thing with Mitch.

Do Knicks prefer to keep Mitch because his salary declines a few $M next season (potentially freeing more space below apron) and also offering cost certainty or do they use his declining deal to entice other teams.

Dazed and confused what the plan will be but we ain't getting Herb for Mitch straight up and 2 2nd aren't going to help either when other teams could blow that out of the water.

LivingLegend wrote:

jskinny35 wrote:I think Precious has to stay... especially if we are parting with Mitch.

Personally I think we should hold on and not make a move (given the options being reported).

I think mixing up the lineups to help the bench would be my suggestion. Hart back to the 2nd unit with Shamet as the 2 guard or Precious at the 4. Hart can still play with the starters to close out but Shamet would give more outside shooting... or Precious helps with size and switching against bigs. Either way we didn't lose last night because of the bench issues (even with Deuce out).

I wonder how Precious being an expiring is viewed by Knicks and the league

- do Knicks like that because they don't have to commit $ to him next year?
- do other teams who maybe could be some salary cap troubles view the expiring as a positive way to remove multi-year deals off their cap

Not clear to me if Knicks would prefer to replace Precious expiring with say a fixed cost player on a 2-year deal (cost certainty)
or if the preference is to just play the year out and allow Precious to test market again

Given cap situation around the league - Precious isn't breaking any records on his next deal

Same thing with Mitch.

Do Knicks prefer to keep Mitch because his salary declines a few $M next season (potentially freeing more space below apron) and also offering cost certainty or do they use his declining deal to entice other teams.

Dazed and confused what the plan will be but we ain't getting Herb for Mitch straight up and 2 2nd aren't going to help either when other teams could blow that out of the water.

The one takeaway that I got from reading what is out there is that Precious really wants to be in NY. Brooklyn born? I can't remember but there are close ties.

I think the Knicks and Precious both know the free agent market is limited - last year and this coming one.

Precious play rest of year will set his market value.

5 years of Thibs later, I see this.

1) Players he trusts will get minutes among the highest percentile in the league and will get a long leash even when they are playing poorly.

2) Usage will be a pecking order that the players seem to know where they are in the food chain. Brunson > Towns > Bridges > Hart > OG (this might be swapped), but the higher the pecking order, the more likely they are able to just call "ball". Some might refute this and I'm not making it a hard and fast rule. Just a generality of the way shots are allocated. It was Randle > Brunson > RJ > Grimes > Mitch for a while and you would see RJ call priority over Grimes regularly.

3) Thibs plays GAMES to win, not to develop players. This is a clever variant on the statement that he doesn't develop players. We have seen the growth in McBride, Quickley.. maybe a few others that speaks to players being developed. It just doesn't happen during GAMES. You aren't seeing Dadiet getting reps. Young guys get a taste to understand what the game feels like and then once their weaknesses are exposed they seem to be relegated to practice reps or GLeague to work out their issues. Now. I for one think that IQ and Deuce's development may have been more tied to Johnnie Bryant than Thibs, but that's me.

4) This speaks to my next point. I see Thibs as a guy that can really prepare for games better than most coaches. He seems to have a plan coming into games that often stifles the best player. In game, I don't really see changes to the gameplan quickly. I think he trusts his gameplans and lets them play (much like his trust of players. More often than not, he wins with this mentality, but when it fails it is easily viewed as an inability to adapt. We saw Utah school us with Markannen going off. Thibs switched OG on him in the 4th too little to late leading to an embarrassing loss. Next game, OG had Markannen the whole game and Lauri had a game he will try to forget.

Where does that leave me? Giving credit to Thibs for being a defensive strategist. Confused because the offense started pretty well but is starting to stifle and I am not seeing any changes. I am a little concerned that a lot of the efficiency arguments on the court I attributed to Johnnie Bryant and I see Cleveland working really well with those concepts and us faltering. I'm not anti-Thibs. Just missing Johnnie Bryant during a losing streak - remembering how he would run over to Thibs and whisper to him with some gameplay change which would alter the dynamic of the game. I don't really see that anymore. Just the pure Thibsian desire to win every minute of every game.

For us we get a healthier version of what Mitch is supposed to bring. I don't think Richards is where Robinson is defensively but he offers good rebounding and shotblocking with some finishing. Martin is the kind of extra wing that makes sense - he gets rebounds and steals, plays big and gets under people's skin. His corner 3 isn't the best, but he puts em up and can hit them on occasion. Its the kind of depth that isn't perfect, but fits. If we're trying to reduce minutes and add more depth, its the kind of move that works with what Thibs wants. Trade ID #8827503 on RealGM!

martin wrote:

VDesai wrote:I think the best move out there that works under the cap and may have some semblance in reality is Mitch for Cody Martin and Nick Richards. We would probably need to throw in 2-3 2nd rounders to give the Hornets some incentive. Hornets would probably attempt to flip Mitch in the offseason to try and extract more value if he manages to stay healthy - so for them its a way to extract some extra picks without really changing their salary situation. May not be enough but it seems within the realm of possibility.

For us we get a healthier version of what Mitch is supposed to bring. I don't think Richards is where Robinson is defensively but he offers good rebounding and shotblocking with some finishing. Martin is the kind of extra wing that makes sense - he gets rebounds and steals, plays big and gets under people's skin. His corner 3 isn't the best, but he puts em up and can hit them on occasion. Its the kind of depth that isn't perfect, but fits. If we're trying to reduce minutes and add more depth, its the kind of move that works with what Thibs wants. Trade ID #8827503 on RealGM!

I really don't know the Charlotte players, I'll start there.

Are Cody Martin and Nick Richards giving you much more than what a combo of Precious, Sims, Shamet giving you to make it worthwhile to add assets to Mitch and lose his potential play and then trade value this season into the summer? Or would it be at the expense of the playing time rotation minutes of Shamet and Precious?

I'd guess there is no doubt those guys could give you a quick shot in the arm, especially in terms of current depth. Do they realistically push you over the potential hump of Boston, Cleveland, Philly and whatnot playoff opponent to make it worthwhile to move Mitch now? I'd guess that's the parameters Leon has set up for any Mitch trade.

Who knows if lets you beat Boston/Cle, but I think the issue is getting there and without the depth that might be a real question mark. If Mitch isn't reliably playing, than Richards at minimum gives you a presence for rebounding and rim protection that will actually be able to play. I think Martin is bigger and more stout than Shamet and adds better wing defense and rebounding (and thus is better depth for the Wingstop guys on that end) and has more offensive versatility than Precious and can occasionally slide to the 4. So I think they give you more than what you have on the bench now and solve some of the minutes conundrum (which is to say - instead of 38 mins, guys might play 34...). There will be a point this year where one of these wing guys has to miss some time - and at the momentum we cannot replace any of what they bring with the depth the team has now. And the availability of Richards may trump what you are waiting for with Mitch. Getting 2 playable bodies that Thibs would actually like for 1 may be a big deal for this team and its ability to make the 2nd round or ECF.

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/travbryanmusic/status/1877224022368227824

I will say - Mobley and Allen are the catalysts for what the Cavs are doing and the Cavs dominate the boards and rim protection. And yet they are the personal property of Mitchell Robinson.

Panos wrote:

VDesai wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/travbryanmusic/status/1877224022368227824

I will say - Mobley and Allen are the catalysts for what the Cavs are doing and the Cavs dominate the boards and rim protection. And yet they are the personal property of Mitchell Robinson.

Were.
We don't know if Mitch will ever be back to form.

MitchBeast owns them. It is known.

Panos wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Panos wrote:

VDesai wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/travbryanmusic/status/1877224022368227824

I will say - Mobley and Allen are the catalysts for what the Cavs are doing and the Cavs dominate the boards and rim protection. And yet they are the personal property of Mitchell Robinson.

Were.
We don't know if Mitch will ever be back to form.

MitchBeast owns them. It is known.

Not if he retires early.

Or if he turns into a turtle.

EwingsGlass wrote:

Panos wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Panos wrote:

VDesai wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/travbryanmusic/status/1877224022368227824

I will say - Mobley and Allen are the catalysts for what the Cavs are doing and the Cavs dominate the boards and rim protection. And yet they are the personal property of Mitchell Robinson.

Were.
We don't know if Mitch will ever be back to form.

MitchBeast owns them. It is known.

Not if he retires early.

Or if he turns into a turtle.