DLeethal wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:its crazy that people expected Thibs to go 10-11 deep last year WITHOUT having Mitch, Shamet or Clarkson. And with Kolek being a rookie.

Last year all 5 starters I believe were top 15 in minutes, with 3 of them being in the top 5. That's not normal. Mike Brown still ran a bench out there when guys have gone down and they performed. Out of panic and necessity, Thibs tried to tap into his deeper bench for the first time all year in the ECF. Thibs should have empowered more guys last year off the bench and managed the starters minutes better. But obviously no one thinks he should have gone 11 deep, and no one thinks Brown should go 11 deep.

Which guys. Name them so we can have a clear discussion about who should have played more. Sims, Precious, Payne, Dadiet, Jacob Toppin, Hukporti, Kolek? Those are the guys who were mostly available.

Shamet missed 30 games. Mitch only played 17. Deuce missed 20 games.

This is the dilemma.

nycericanguy wrote:

BlueKnickers wrote:QUESTION:

Has Mitch been any good lately?

Tonight, while the rest of the team was fairly solid, I found myself wondering the whole time what exactly is Mitch doing out there?

He seems so unfocused and random and not particularly effective at anything lately.

Anybody else getting that feeling?

Mitch has bad runs like anyone else, don't let it fool you. we had people here last year saying we should trade him. come playoff time if he's healthy he will be a game changer once he locks in.

There are people saying to trade Mitch this year as well.

Also in this thread.

Also in this post.

He is not reliable/available and has caused instability in the team and rotations for years.

Trading a player does not mean giving them away for nothing. Get back a big that produces on both ends of the floor, can hit free throws, and is less injury prone. If that player exists I’d pull the trigger.

Leon screwed the pooch by only signing iHart for two years. I loved his game from day one, and he immediately raised the IQ of the team.

martin wrote:

DLeethal wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:its crazy that people expected Thibs to go 10-11 deep last year WITHOUT having Mitch, Shamet or Clarkson. And with Kolek being a rookie.

Last year all 5 starters I believe were top 15 in minutes, with 3 of them being in the top 5. That's not normal. Mike Brown still ran a bench out there when guys have gone down and they performed. Out of panic and necessity, Thibs tried to tap into his deeper bench for the first time all year in the ECF. Thibs should have empowered more guys last year off the bench and managed the starters minutes better. But obviously no one thinks he should have gone 11 deep, and no one thinks Brown should go 11 deep.

Which guys. Name them so we can have a clear discussion about who should have played more. Sims, Precious, Payne, Dadiet, Jacob Toppin, Hukporti, Kolek? Those are the guys who were mostly available.

Shamet missed 30 games. Mitch only played 17. Deuce missed 20 games.

This is the dilemma.

Who besides Jordan Clarkson do we have that we didn't have last year? Sims, Precious, Huk, Shamet, Kolek, Delon, McCullar all could have eaten more minutes across the regular season. Would they have been a good bench? Probably not. But honestly most quality benches are chock full of random guys that aren't very good, but they play well as a unit.

Deuce and Shamet is a good starting point for any bench, add a defensive big and you aren't far off right there. "Being a rookie" is not an excuse to not play off the bench, especially in a role as minimal as Brunson's backup. The majority of good benches field at least one rookie. One of Thibs' problems was he would never play smalls next to each other. Deuce should have played way more last year. He's playing more mpg this year, with like 3 extra guys in the rotation eating minutes at his positions.

There is never a reason to have all 5 starters be top 15 in minutes, and 3 in the top 5 on one team. That's just not normal stuff.

DLeethal wrote:

martin wrote:

DLeethal wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:its crazy that people expected Thibs to go 10-11 deep last year WITHOUT having Mitch, Shamet or Clarkson. And with Kolek being a rookie.

Last year all 5 starters I believe were top 15 in minutes, with 3 of them being in the top 5. That's not normal. Mike Brown still ran a bench out there when guys have gone down and they performed. Out of panic and necessity, Thibs tried to tap into his deeper bench for the first time all year in the ECF. Thibs should have empowered more guys last year off the bench and managed the starters minutes better. But obviously no one thinks he should have gone 11 deep, and no one thinks Brown should go 11 deep.

Which guys. Name them so we can have a clear discussion about who should have played more. Sims, Precious, Payne, Dadiet, Jacob Toppin, Hukporti, Kolek? Those are the guys who were mostly available.

Shamet missed 30 games. Mitch only played 17. Deuce missed 20 games.

This is the dilemma.

Who besides Jordan Clarkson do we have different than last year? Sims, Precious, Huk, Shamet, Kolek, Delon, McCullar all could have eaten more minutes across the regular season. Would they have been a good bench? Probably not. But honestly most quality benches are chock full of random guys that aren't very good, but they play well as a unit.

Deuce and Shamet is a good starting point for any bench, add a defensive big and you aren't far off right there. "Being a rookie" is not an excuse to not play off the bench, especially in a role as minimal as Brunson's backup. The majority of good benches field at least one rookie. One of Thibs' problems was he would never play smalls next to each other. Deuce should have played way more last year. He's playing more mpg this year, with like 3 extra guys in the rotation eating minutes at his positions.

There is never a reason to have all 5 starters be top 15 in minutes, and 3 in the top 5 on one team. That's just not normal stuff.

All this year: We have an upgraded Kolek. We have Mitch. Shamet played and started in a pinch until he couldn't.

"Sims, Precious, Huk, Shamet, Kolek, Delon, McCullar all could have eaten more minutes across the regular season."

These things dont really meet reality though. Delon was on roster for a hot minute. McCullar was hurt for the year until very end. They in fact did not have McCullar.

Shamet missed first ~30 games, came back at end of Dec and Jan and then was out again. Deuce also missed games at the same time Shamet went down in Nov and Jan. Weeks. So 2 missing rotation players at same time.

OG goes down early Feb til after all start break. Jalen misses games in March. Huk went down with minicus for March and April.

So there are overlapping injuries too.

The Knicks certainly could have given more time to Sims and Precious and then watched even more of the Josh Harts minutes with those guys and how the offense went. 2-3 non shooters at the same time? Those guys could certainly have played time together more.

Or Thibs could have rolled with Kolek who barely was a basketball player THIS year early on until he made a business decision on playing tough defense.

ToddTT wrote:

nycericanguy wrote:

BlueKnickers wrote:QUESTION:

Has Mitch been any good lately?

Tonight, while the rest of the team was fairly solid, I found myself wondering the whole time what exactly is Mitch doing out there?

He seems so unfocused and random and not particularly effective at anything lately.

Anybody else getting that feeling?

Mitch has bad runs like anyone else, don't let it fool you. we had people here last year saying we should trade him. come playoff time if he's healthy he will be a game changer once he locks in.

There are people saying to trade Mitch this year as well.

Also in this thread.

Also in this post.

He is not reliable/available and has caused instability in the team and rotations for years.

Trading a player does not mean giving them away for nothing. Get back a big that produces on both ends of the floor, can hit free throws, and is less injury prone. If that player exists I’d pull the trigger.

Leon screwed the pooch by only signing iHart for two years. I loved his game from day one, and he immediately raised the IQ of the team.

Hartenstein would have a radical impact on this club. OKC shows he's best with other C depth so he's not the sole big in the rotation, but boy I was sad to see him go.