Right now, he's not himself in the NBA. He's two different people out there when it comes to international competition. I bet the Spurs would take a Frank, Knox, 21 package for Murry from SAS.

PassTheBall wrote:Frank clearly deserved more mins last year but the coach didn’t play him....This is why I’m only 75% on the Thibs train and will continue to be until he shows he can coach with more wit and vision. Just look at all the adjustments made by coaches in this playoffs.

If you remove the "empty gym" wide open set shot three pointers at low volume, Ntilikina shot 19.4 percent from the field.

The few times he got to the line, he shot 44.4 percent.

Several times during his Knicks career, he would go into extended horrific shooting slumps.

Much has been made of Ntilikina, over the years from pundits, doing more to hunt corner threes. It's valuable shot and being able to hit it consistently creates all kinds of benefits to the team's offense. It would help the floor spacing and it would allow for better practical ball movement. What's the problem? Well you have to work your ass off moving off the ball and you need to actually body up/generate hard contact against defenders from time to time and you need to attack the rim enough to present a threat to keep defenders honest and open up better shot selection options for you. Was Frank N doing any of that? No.

This isn't complicated. If you want more minutes, you need to do something positive and impactful in the minutes you do get.

Jeremy Lin's entire basketball future came down to one game. Based on injuries and attrition, he was next man up or last man up to be clear about it. He was on the verge of being cut and if he wanted more minutes and to even stay on the roster, he needed to show something to earn it. So he did. Then he kept playing in a way where no one could bench him, much lest cut him.

John Starks was on a knife's edge when he got to the Knicks. The Warriors and Nellieball couldn't find a way to use him and he only had a few chances to prove himself. How did that turn out?

Notice a pattern here?

You "deserve" jack ****. But you may, from time to time, get an opportunity to EARN something better for yourself.

But! But! But Thibs didn't give him enough opportunities! It's not fair!

OK, it's not fair. Life is often not fair. Most people come to terms with that in the 7th grade. HOWEVER, Ntilikina had YEARS to take what were WIDE OPEN starting jobs on the roster. YEARS. With very little in front of him besides fringe journeymen, who still outplayed him, even in their brutal mediocrity, just enough to keep him on the bench.

Thibs just won Coach Of The Year. He took a roster no one believed would do anything this year and fought hard to the playoffs. He completely turned around the defense. The uptick in wins was among the largest jumps in all of league history from one season to the next. How much more wit and vision do you need?

So, let me get this straight, Thibs needs to go **** himself because Ntilikina can't hit a mother****ing free throw?

Nalod wrote:Most of us want the knicks to be good enough to have a guy like Frank to elevate the intangables provided by glue type players.
I think we all tend to over state to prove our points. Bottom line is Thibs loves his defense and cannot trust his offense in his tenure as coach. Thats kind of what we have seen. All players have a story/excuses/reasons for succeeding or not.
And lets be clear how **** works, The coach has some input on the roster but has to coach the players provided. How he does that is his job and its better if all are in concert with each other. If he don’t do. Good job he gets fired. If the GM don’t do a good job everyone gets fired.

Frank is not trash, nor is he “deserving” of more. He is a young player still who is physically undeveloped, has had 3 FO leadership changes in 4 years and 4 coaches. Add injuries and its a mess any way you want to label it. Not all careers pan out the way it “should” be.
Question is does our FO think his offensive potential is still valid? As a group some of us are bitter toward him and somehow have written a psychological profile on him which baffles me. That he is selfish, lazy and defiant towards his coach. If so I doubt he have seen the light of day as a 4 year player. Some might see him as stubborn but if he prevails as point he’ll be labeled as “unwavering confident in his ability”. The story is not finishished.
The very nature of it all is to keep him if so desired, we have to pay him 8mm a year. All things equal we denounce his rights he goes were he can get an opportunity to play. Might be here? Or else where? For a trade to happen we have to extend him then trade, thus the new team gets his rights and the 8mm payday.
What Do I think? I think he is done here. As a player? I hope he succeeds. Why shouldn’t I? Just to be ego driven to say I was right?

Not sure why Rainman1248 goes hyper on this young man other than he has hung his UK self esteem on issues to be able to say “I have been saying all along”. This is a ego driven narrative. Fanboys simply are rooting for this defensive player to get his offensive arse together and fulfil his potential because it benefits the team.

Simple really, his contract is at its end and he was not a staple in the rotation so its easy to assume his tenure with the knicks has expired. If anyone can gain any stature from this in the circle here or among your knick friends then I applaud your ascent as a fan who pretends to have insider insight. Perhaps you can sit up a little straighter and walk with your head held high. If your world will see you with a new found respect then it has been worth it after all!

This is the fundamental problem with drafting very young kids. At 18, unless they are man-child sized and skilled, it takes years to grow into the game. Add to that the expectations and anti-Phil flogging that Ntilikina endured (to this day) and you have a summary of neglect and indifferent development.

Quickley is just the latest shiny-object player to come along and co-opt minutes. Next year, they'll be a new kid in town...

Ntilikina will be fine. He's old enough now to know the drill and he'll be physically in the best shape of his life.
Doesn't matter where he plays as long as its not in a Knicks uniform - the abuse isn't worth it.

But its also a fair testament that the Knicks should not be drafting young kids unless they are a lock on day 1. Nothing good happens otherwise.

fwk00 wrote:

Nalod wrote:Most of us want the knicks to be good enough to have a guy like Frank to elevate the intangables provided by glue type players.
I think we all tend to over state to prove our points. Bottom line is Thibs loves his defense and cannot trust his offense in his tenure as coach. Thats kind of what we have seen. All players have a story/excuses/reasons for succeeding or not.
And lets be clear how **** works, The coach has some input on the roster but has to coach the players provided. How he does that is his job and its better if all are in concert with each other. If he don’t do. Good job he gets fired. If the GM don’t do a good job everyone gets fired.

Frank is not trash, nor is he “deserving” of more. He is a young player still who is physically undeveloped, has had 3 FO leadership changes in 4 years and 4 coaches. Add injuries and its a mess any way you want to label it. Not all careers pan out the way it “should” be.
Question is does our FO think his offensive potential is still valid? As a group some of us are bitter toward him and somehow have written a psychological profile on him which baffles me. That he is selfish, lazy and defiant towards his coach. If so I doubt he have seen the light of day as a 4 year player. Some might see him as stubborn but if he prevails as point he’ll be labeled as “unwavering confident in his ability”. The story is not finishished.
The very nature of it all is to keep him if so desired, we have to pay him 8mm a year. All things equal we denounce his rights he goes were he can get an opportunity to play. Might be here? Or else where? For a trade to happen we have to extend him then trade, thus the new team gets his rights and the 8mm payday.
What Do I think? I think he is done here. As a player? I hope he succeeds. Why shouldn’t I? Just to be ego driven to say I was right?

Not sure why Rainman1248 goes hyper on this young man other than he has hung his UK self esteem on issues to be able to say “I have been saying all along”. This is a ego driven narrative. Fanboys simply are rooting for this defensive player to get his offensive arse together and fulfil his potential because it benefits the team.

Simple really, his contract is at its end and he was not a staple in the rotation so its easy to assume his tenure with the knicks has expired. If anyone can gain any stature from this in the circle here or among your knick friends then I applaud your ascent as a fan who pretends to have insider insight. Perhaps you can sit up a little straighter and walk with your head held high. If your world will see you with a new found respect then it has been worth it after all!

This is the fundamental problem with drafting very young kids. At 18, unless they are man-child sized and skilled, it takes years to grow into the game. Add to that the expectations and anti-Phil flogging that Ntilikina endured (to this day) and you have a summary of neglect and indifferent development.

Quickley is just the latest shiny-object player to come along and co-opt minutes. Next year, they'll be a new kid in town...

Ntilikina will be fine. He's old enough now to know the drill and he'll be physically in the best shape of his life.
Doesn't matter where he plays as long as its not in a Knicks uniform - the abuse isn't worth it.

But its also a fair testament that the Knicks should not be drafting young kids unless they are a lock on day 1. Nothing good happens otherwise.

Obi not exactly a good answer to this.

fwk00 wrote:
This is the fundamental problem with drafting very young kids. At 18, unless they are man-child sized and skilled, it takes years to grow into the game. Add to that the expectations and anti-Phil flogging that Ntilikina endured (to this day) and you have a summary of neglect and indifferent development.

Quickley is just the latest shiny-object player to come along and co-opt minutes. Next year, they'll be a new kid in town...

Ntilikina will be fine. He's old enough now to know the drill and he'll be physically in the best shape of his life.
Doesn't matter where he plays as long as its not in a Knicks uniform - the abuse isn't worth it.

But its also a fair testament that the Knicks should not be drafting young kids unless they are a lock on day 1. Nothing good happens otherwise.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2017.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2016.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2015.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2014.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2013.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2012.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2011.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2010.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2009.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2008.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/draft/NBA_2007.html

Go back a full decade prior to Ntilikina's draft class. Take the top 12 picks from each class. What do you see? You see young players being drafted mostly by objectively bad teams. With rosters that will have heavy churn, many of those teams are perpetually losing, many have bad ownership and incompetent front offices and will and did have head coaching instability.

Lottery picks almost always walk into bad situations. That's the deal. That's how it works. You can play the blame game and point fingers at what the Knicks did or did not do coaching wise or "development" wise, but the question remains - Did Frank Ntilikina make the absolute most out of his situation? Did he do his part to ensure all doubts about him were not based on things he could control?

As a professional athlete, and I speak from experience, you can't control certain things. The things you can control, you are the one the most responsible for shaping your career. On offense, Frank N does not bust his ass moving off the ball. If he did, he'd get more corner three opportunities, which helps his team and helps his own career. That was something he could control. He just didn't give a ****. If you don't do it, there comes a point past your rookie year, where you are either incompetent or you just don't give a ****. There are "flashes" of games where Ntilikina will actually show some aggression. That means he can do it, but most of the time he chooses not to do it, so the issue of ability is off the table. The only thing left is just not giving a ****.

Age is a factor in the NBA for draft picks, but what's more important is where you stand against your peers RELATIVE to your age.

Obi Toppin at 22 was expected to dominate in college. He was more physically developed, knew the landscape of the college game, had rapport with his coaches, and usually older players have their offenses built around them. The reasons players don't become One And Dones is they usually weren't able to make that leap to the NBA at 19. So when Toppin was 19, how did he fare against the other NBA prospects who were 19 at the time?

There are players in the NBA who are 23 right now who have been carving out a career in the league and establishing themselves while Toppin was in college. They've been playing in the league since they were 19. The premise that it's a bad idea to draft a 19 year old would have ruled out types like Jayson Tatum.

How many years to "grow" do you expect the Knicks or any NBA team to give Frank Ntilikina to do something to show he can actually help this team win basketball games?

All your ****ing excuses had to come to a fulcrum where now you are implying IQ didn't just come out and make his mark in the league in his first year. IQ earned his minutes. He helped this team win games. He showed more practical understanding of how to function in the NBA in his first 10 games and showed more decisiveness than Ntilikina did in his entire career. If you help your team win, you get to play. If you don't, you eat the bench. It's that simple. In order to make more excuses for Ntilikina, you have to reinvent the wheel.

Ntilikina didn't get it done. It's just that simple. His situation wasn't always ideal, many times far from ideal, but that's part of how it all works. If it's not fair then newsflash - Life isn't going to be fair most of the time.

Excuses are how losing teams stay losing teams.

For the last decade here, I have a pretty solid record on my prospect touts. I don't do it often, but my hit ratio is absurdly high. I've had a few misses but odds on, it's more than clear I know my ****. And basketball is not even my bread and butter zone. My stock and trade is pigskins. Why? Because I see what works to win actual basketball games and I don't try to make excuses or rationalize players into what they are not nor what they will never ever be.

Philc1 wrote:Lots of defensive Frank haters

The vehemence of some posters is absurd. If you posit that he's still young, perhaps he'll do better elsewhere, maybe he'll improve -- even if you simply say you are pulling for him -- you elicit a multi-paragraph diatribe (or ten) about how he's a piece of s#!t who hasn't earned s#!t. Christ almighty did the Frenchman take a merde on your cornflakes? My theory is it's the perception that it was Phil who took the perceived dump on their breakfast, but since after all Frankie was his "triangle" pick and Phil is long gone, why not let out the pent up rage on Frank?

Just ridiculous.

TheGame wrote:The bottomline is this. The Knicks are not resigning Frank and even his strongest supporters, which includes me, realize it is time to move on. I like him and I hope he does well where ever he goes as long as it is not with the Knicks because it does not look like he can grow here, and I want Quickley to get those minutes next year. Frank is already a success in life even if he is out of the league in 2 years because, based on his FIBA play, he could play EU ball for the next 8 years. Frank will be fine and the Knicks will be fine.

My sentiments exactly.

MS wrote:Frank would be best served on two teams the Warrior or the Mavericks. Where he can play a little off ball, a little three and slot into the shooting guard position.

Right now, he's not himself in the NBA. He's two different people out there when it comes to international competition. I bet the Spurs would take a Frank, Knox, 21 package for Murry from SAS.

Why would you think Frank can crack the rotation on GS or the Mavs when he can not on the Knicks? As for Frank as a SG? He shot 19% from the field. Shot 44% from the line and is extremely unaggressive. Think 99% of the SG's in FA would be better options.

The path I see for Frank is that the Knicks will not want to pay the $7M to keep him. Not will Frank want to sign with the Knicks for less due to the perception that he is not getting an opportunity. He will end up signing with someone else that may give him a chance to get minutes. And I do not think that will be with any team looking to contend.

Philc1 wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

Philc1 wrote:Lots of defensive Frank haters

The vehemence of some posters is absurd. If you posit that he's still young, perhaps he'll do better elsewhere, maybe he'll improve -- even if you simply say you are pulling for him -- you elicit a multi-paragraph diatribe (or ten) about how he's a piece of s#!t who hasn't earned s#!t. Christ almighty did the Frenchman take a merde on your cornflakes? My theory is it's the perception that it was Phil who took the perceived dump on their breakfast, but since after all Frankie was his "triangle" pick and Phil is long gone, why not let out the pent up rage on Frank?

Just ridiculous.

I’m positing that Frank is 22 and other players, given the opportunity, have imporoved. That’s some audacity right there.

All I’m saying is he should be in the rotation next year and benching him in favor of Elf who sucked at everything and playing a 32 year old Derrick Rose 35+ minutes a night in the playoffs was a mistake

Real question. What was our record when Elf and Rose started? Was this not the best year we have had in a long time? Yet Frank had little to do with it and Elf and Rose did? But you are still mad? Would you rather Frank play 30 minutes and we still have a ****ty record?

What about Franks's numbers make you think he should be in the rotation. Don't you think the whole "I think he deserves more minutes" is getting old after four years of playing like a fringe rotation player?