martin wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

martin wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:

wargames wrote:
Exactly, that’s the real issue. There was no attempt to adjust. Not even a “let’s try this for a quarter”. The disciplinarian principles that got Randle and Thibs season awards left them exposed come the playoffs.

We’ll see what happens but they need some coaching improvements. Especially on the offense.

What the **** are you even talking about here?

Thibs just won Coach Of The Year. He pushed this team, which surprised everyone, into a 41 win team. (Which is like climbing Mount Doom from where the Knicks were before for 8 brutal years) They got the 4th seed and fought and took home court advantage in the playoffs. The defensive turnaround was remarkable. We are talking bottom of the barrel to near the top in several major categories. IIRC, the Knicks had the statistical 4th best overall defense in the entire league. The leap in wins was historic level against NBA modern history.

This team didn't have multiple ways to win, it didn't have the personnel. It had a limited set way to win games, relying heavily on Randle and RJB for offense and needing major defensive stops all the time. Once that was neutralized, there weren't too many other options.

Thibs did an incredible job this year. Many here were singing his praises and couldn't wait to start blowing him and now he's an ******* because he wouldn't play a lazy jogging ******* like Frank N?

Thibs EARNED the right to set his rotation the way he thought was best. Frank N was benched for most of the year and guess what? The Knicks won a ****load of games. So why would Thibs move away from that? If Frank N was the difference maker many of you claim he is and will be, he would have been a key contributor all year long. Was he? No.

Thibs has EARNED the benefit of the doubt. He did all this in ONE SEASON. And not just that, with a season stacked with limitations from the pandemic, basically no help from the top pick in Toppin and with many rusty players who were part of the Delete 8 layoff.

And yet some of you still want to cut off his balls for ..... Frank Ntilikina?

What did Ntilikina EARN this year? He didn't earn jack ****.

What more "coaching improvements" do you want from what Thibs gave this entire franchise this year? Was a historic turnaround and a playoff berth and a Coach Of The Year award not enough for you?

Plug in 'Payton' in all the places you have Frankie's name.

Thins inherited a very good Miller core (already playing .500ish ball) AND gained talent depth and health. Not so miraculous.

Don't couple Frankie to Thibs. Neither did anything for the other. Frankie was treated like a fifth wheel all season. No tears being shed here. The FO made their choices. There is no 'earn' involved (again see Payton whose mother may have more to do with his playing than anything else).

As for Frankie being lazy. I don't think so. He left in on the floor. Did he have off games. Yep. But NOBODY else on this team did.

Oh, and keep that turnaround in mind. This year may be equally miraculous... for Miami, Toronto, Indy,...

When you make an argument based off of a single fact and then try to grow it from there, best double check to make sure that starting point is actually correct.

Miller coached the team to a 17-27 record.

I never cited the win - loss record. I was referring to the quality of play by season's end. I need not repeat Fizdale's insipid coaching history and all-round bad judgement.

Miller's core team remained intact for Thibs. The FO surrounded that group nicely and with some luck so that the trajectory Miller had established should have/would have resulted in at least a .500 record. Add to that Thibs' own history of adding 10 wins to a team he takes over and you get a season like this one.

Not so much a miracle as the result of Phil Jackson's hires and organizational hardening (G-League, Miller and core players) blossoming and the new FO building on that.

But Thibs history includes not just first year 'miracles', it includes the years after the miracle.

Nobody:
You: Thibs team and Coach of Year were really built off of backs of Miller’s half year coaching and Phil Jackson’s hires and organizational skills.

That right there is the sweet sweet smell of a lot of disjointed argument making and desperation thinking

Jackson rebuilt the development program, the GLeague got respectful, Miller coached that team. When Miller succeeded Fizzdale the team began to gel. That core knew how bad it could be and clawed their way up.

Jackson took the heat for showing Porky the door.

Without Porky on the other side of that door no Randle, no picks and extra picks, no Bullock, or excess cap space to sign anyone.

Nobody?

Thibs inherited quite a bit that EVERYBODY claimed was nothing. Funny how winning fogs the memory.

martin wrote:

wargames wrote:

martin wrote:

wargames wrote:

martin wrote:The Knicks overachieve the entire season. Thibs asks and pushes his guys to overachieve the entire season. Thibs plays certain guys HEAVY the entire season, asking them to buy in and lead and overachieve. Thibs outlines exactly what is expected of EVERYONE and they buy in. Thibs gives each of his players a chance at a rotation spot throughout the year, lets them know what it will take to keep it, and makes it known that the rotation will be just about 10 guys. Thibs asks his entire team to buy in to his exact philosophy the entire year and it pays off for organization, team, individual players, coaching staff for the entire season.

And then some of you expect that to be all thrown out the window the second that Trae Young walks on the court cause Frank maybe once played well in spot games some time previously in his career? This your idea of how culture and everything else on down is done?

We are not really talking about a team who was destined to make real waves this playoffs. So throw out everything you have built for maybe the odd chance that Frank can hopefully do something (while ignoring the downside of an adding him to an already atrocious offense) for like maybe a microscopic chance at slowing down Trae (which is ****ing near impossible cause no one has stepped up to explain how to do it without Mitch and having Noel hobbling, Taj ain't doing it at the C spot) while demoralizing the rest of the warriors who got you to the playoffs? That would be a nice Fuck You

I don't want to go into a real battle with some of you cause you would wilt like a dandelion in a week long, climate change induced heat wave in a hot second

The arguments I am reading are some of the weakest put out there

No offense but it’s playoff basketball. The whole point is to find mismatches and take advantage of them.

What your talking about is the same liability that got the Jazz taken out because they refused to sit Gobert. This isn’t a college program where culture attracts recruits. It’s the league where winning trumps everything……… EVERYTHING!

Add to that a bunch of these horses he rode with into the playoffs were on one year contracts and yes, I don’t think Thibs coached well.

If you think Frank was the key to shutting down Atlanta's offense while kick starting the Knicks' offense, go with it.

But wear it proud and ANNOUNCE that Frank was the key to the whole series that the Knicks and everyone else missed

The NBA is also not the Throw anything against the wall to see if it works league either.

What you’re saying doesn’t make sense. I am saying that in a situation where a PG is killing you over a 5 games. Not putting your best perimeter defender on him to at least see if that could slow him down (except in game 2 for less than a minute to end the half and the game) is bad coaching. That’s not throwing something against the wall to see if it works. What Thibs actually did would fall under that. Let’s put Frank on Trae at the end of game 2 when the team is in foul trouble and see if he can stop him is a piss poor plan and in a lot of ways set him up to fail.

The KEY to the whole series was a lot of stuff you can point at bad coaching to explain. From over relying on Payton, to putting Bullock on Trae which allowed him to rest on defense, to having no adjustment for the fact that the defense kept pushing Randle right, to what I assume is Thibs giving Randle the green light through the worst playoff shooting performance in NBA history. To what I assume was a strategic choice to not have bigger players try to get switch offensively to try get better matchups. COY be damn Thibs did a **** job coaching the Knicks in that series and how he utilized Frank was a part of it.

Thibs tried Frank in the regular season and it failed. What makes you think that this next time out against a team that is planning against you and a very high level team will work this time?

Again, the theory that you must throw everything against the wall to see if it has a chance to stick is an odd strategy

I still have a hard time understanding why the use of Frankie in the playoffs is so outrageous to you.

You ask about NBA teams that reach deep and there's the Knicks. Right under your nose. Frankie was put in cold to do what nobody else could. He succeeded once and failed the second time.

When I watched ATL torching the Knicks, the VERY FIRST THING that came into my mind was "why not see if Frankie has better luck"? Crazy I know.

Now I didn't think that because Frankie would go in and score 40. No. I just though maybe Trae wouldn't score 40 and maybe, just maybe, that difference helps us squeeze out a victory.

Using Frankie against Trae isn't throwing anything at the wall. Frankie has some street cred. No? Thibs oddly enough thought so twice in a cruelly sacrificial lamb kinda way.

Just saying. Frankie was a legit option. Nothing more. Not say he should start every game... take over as captain... be resigned... or grow a reputation that would cause haters not to hate.

No. Just saying maybe we coulda won one more game.

fwk00 wrote:

martin wrote:

wargames wrote:

martin wrote:

wargames wrote:

martin wrote:The Knicks overachieve the entire season. Thibs asks and pushes his guys to overachieve the entire season. Thibs plays certain guys HEAVY the entire season, asking them to buy in and lead and overachieve. Thibs outlines exactly what is expected of EVERYONE and they buy in. Thibs gives each of his players a chance at a rotation spot throughout the year, lets them know what it will take to keep it, and makes it known that the rotation will be just about 10 guys. Thibs asks his entire team to buy in to his exact philosophy the entire year and it pays off for organization, team, individual players, coaching staff for the entire season.

And then some of you expect that to be all thrown out the window the second that Trae Young walks on the court cause Frank maybe once played well in spot games some time previously in his career? This your idea of how culture and everything else on down is done?

We are not really talking about a team who was destined to make real waves this playoffs. So throw out everything you have built for maybe the odd chance that Frank can hopefully do something (while ignoring the downside of an adding him to an already atrocious offense) for like maybe a microscopic chance at slowing down Trae (which is ****ing near impossible cause no one has stepped up to explain how to do it without Mitch and having Noel hobbling, Taj ain't doing it at the C spot) while demoralizing the rest of the warriors who got you to the playoffs? That would be a nice Fuck You

I don't want to go into a real battle with some of you cause you would wilt like a dandelion in a week long, climate change induced heat wave in a hot second

The arguments I am reading are some of the weakest put out there

No offense but it’s playoff basketball. The whole point is to find mismatches and take advantage of them.

What your talking about is the same liability that got the Jazz taken out because they refused to sit Gobert. This isn’t a college program where culture attracts recruits. It’s the league where winning trumps everything……… EVERYTHING!

Add to that a bunch of these horses he rode with into the playoffs were on one year contracts and yes, I don’t think Thibs coached well.

If you think Frank was the key to shutting down Atlanta's offense while kick starting the Knicks' offense, go with it.

But wear it proud and ANNOUNCE that Frank was the key to the whole series that the Knicks and everyone else missed

The NBA is also not the Throw anything against the wall to see if it works league either.

What you’re saying doesn’t make sense. I am saying that in a situation where a PG is killing you over a 5 games. Not putting your best perimeter defender on him to at least see if that could slow him down (except in game 2 for less than a minute to end the half and the game) is bad coaching. That’s not throwing something against the wall to see if it works. What Thibs actually did would fall under that. Let’s put Frank on Trae at the end of game 2 when the team is in foul trouble and see if he can stop him is a piss poor plan and in a lot of ways set him up to fail.

The KEY to the whole series was a lot of stuff you can point at bad coaching to explain. From over relying on Payton, to putting Bullock on Trae which allowed him to rest on defense, to having no adjustment for the fact that the defense kept pushing Randle right, to what I assume is Thibs giving Randle the green light through the worst playoff shooting performance in NBA history. To what I assume was a strategic choice to not have bigger players try to get switch offensively to try get better matchups. COY be damn Thibs did a **** job coaching the Knicks in that series and how he utilized Frank was a part of it.

Thibs tried Frank in the regular season and it failed. What makes you think that this next time out against a team that is planning against you and a very high level team will work this time?

Again, the theory that you must throw everything against the wall to see if it has a chance to stick is an odd strategy

I still have a hard time understanding why the use of Frankie in the playoffs is so outrageous to you.

You ask about NBA teams that reach deep and there's the Knicks. Right under your nose. Frankie was put in cold to do what nobody else could. He succeeded once and failed the second time.

When I watched ATL torching the Knicks, the VERY FIRST THING that came into my mind was "why not see if Frankie has better luck"? Crazy I know.

Now I didn't think that because Frankie would go in and score 40. No. I just though maybe Trae wouldn't score 40 and maybe, just maybe, that difference helps us squeeze out a victory.

Using Frankie against Trae isn't throwing anything at the wall. Frankie has some street cred. No? Thibs oddly enough thought so twice in a cruelly sacrificial lamb kinda way.

Just saying. Frankie was a legit option. Nothing more. Not say he should start every game... take over as captain... be resigned... or grow a reputation that would cause haters not to hate.

No. Just saying maybe we coulda won one more game.

+1 to Frank being a Christlike figure.

gradyandrew wrote:

martin wrote:
You’ve moved the goal posts to suit your argument.

Mann was very much part of the LAC rotation. And I don’t know why you think ranking minutes played is substantial. He played a regular ~20 minutes per game and played the whole season (IQ would be his Knicks equivalent). Why do you think that compares to the situation Frank was in at 10 minutes per game for less than half the season?

LAC chose to play small ball against Utah, that was their game plan not an experiment, and not just the one quarter of game 6. Maybe Mann guarded Gobert (I didn't watch that game)? That's just incidental info

Over the course of the season Ty Lue played a deeper rotation which allowed him more flexibility in the playoffs, to the point where the 11th guy could step in and play big minutes in the playoffs based on matchups. Thibs did a great job all season leaning heavily on his 2 Stars. The downside was, come playoffs, there was no room to adjust.

Your point is what? No coaches experiment with end of rotation players so it was the right move to go into Game 5 with the same plan that Lost Games 3 and 4?

During the playoffs coaches tend to absolutely shorten their rotation from the normal 10-11 guys to about 8. They trust less guys, especially those that are not in the regular rotation.

Clippers have generally gone 10 deep in the rotation this playoffs.

I had previously asked you to name a player outside the norm regular season rotation who the coach experimented playing with (ie a Frank like player) and you moved the goal posts by saying TMann guarded Gobert for a quarter.

Coaches in the playoffs do not experiment with players outside of norm rotation of regular season and more so in the Knicks case this year and I completely understand it.

gradyandrew wrote:

martin wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:

martin wrote:
You’ve moved the goal posts to suit your argument.

Mann was very much part of the LAC rotation. And I don’t know why you think ranking minutes played is substantial. He played a regular ~20 minutes per game and played the whole season (IQ would be his Knicks equivalent). Why do you think that compares to the situation Frank was in at 10 minutes per game for less than half the season?

LAC chose to play small ball against Utah, that was their game plan not an experiment, and not just the one quarter of game 6. Maybe Mann guarded Gobert (I didn't watch that game)? That's just incidental info

Over the course of the season Ty Lue played a deeper rotation which allowed him more flexibility in the playoffs, to the point where the 11th guy could step in and play big minutes in the playoffs based on matchups. Thibs did a great job all season leaning heavily on his 2 Stars. The downside was, come playoffs, there was no room to adjust.

Your point is what? No coaches experiment with end of rotation players so it was the right move to go into Game 5 with the same plan that Lost Games 3 and 4?

During the playoffs coaches tend to absolutely shorten their rotation from the normal 10-11 guys to about 8. They trust less guys, especially those that are not in the regular rotation.

Clippers have generally gone 10 deep in the rotation this playoffs.

I had previously asked you to name a player outside the norm regular season rotation who the coach experimented playing with (ie a Frank like player) and you moved the goal posts by saying TMann guarded Gobert for a quarter.

Coaches in the playoffs do not experiment with players outside of norm rotation of regular season and more so in the Knicks case this year and I completely understand it.

I prefaced it with "does this count?" So a little cheeky to say I moved the goal posts. Frank played 30 games at 9 minutes because Thibs played all season with a playoff rotation. He did a great job. No major regrets about the season. It's just that it was the same situation as Thibs had in Chicago. If you overachieve in the regular season it doesn't mean much come playoffs. Hopefully the front office can get him more help this offseason,

So what's the consensus with our FAs? Burks, Rose, Bullock, Noel- are you keeping them or chasing a bigger fish?

No. You have moved the goal posts again. Frank didn't earn playing time at all and he sat. End of story.

SupremeCommander wrote:I have been thinking about this for a bit now, and I think the best offseason of my lifetime was the 1996 offseason. When We signed Houston (first time), Childs, and traded for LJ. We boldly went after two young, talented guys right out of the gate. I remember being worried because, for example, we could've went after Reggie Miller or Gary Payton instead.

This offseason, I would feel a little uneasy if we went after Devontae Graham and Kelly Oubre, for example, but I really do like the idea of adding young guys with room to grow to this group and am warming to it more and more

That was the best! Still remember exactly where I was when I first saw it in the paper.

Knicks could open a lot more space if they jettisoned all the vets in the 2021-22 off season.
Randle 20 no extension
RJ 6.6
Noah 6.4 yeah
Obi 5.1
Knox 5.8
Robinson 1.8
Quickley 2.2
Pelle 1.7
Vildoza 3.3
Three rookies 6
Renounce Frank, Burks, Noel, Taj, Bullock, Rose

Total Salary 57 million, salary cap projection 116 million, 59 million in cap space.
I feel like there are a lot of guys who will be looking for something in the 20 million range and not many teams with the space.

gradyandrew wrote:

No. You have moved the goal posts again. Frank didn't earn playing time at all and he sat. End of story.

Ipso facto. If he had earned it he would have played. I don't think there was anything political going on behind it. From what I saw of Frank's limited playing time during the season, I thought he could have helped come playoffs. Especially that Lakers game bro! Omg, he looked like terminator Kawhi, anytime the ball was near him on defense, something happened to it. And he was swishing 3s! Knicks would have won in overtime if Thibs had kept Frank in for RJ.

But whatever. Thibs did such a good job all season, the only thing to do is trust the process. So what do you think Martin? If you're Leon do you offer Frank a 6 million total 2 year deal with the second year a team option? Is there any upside left for the guy who sealed the US team's fate at the basketball world cup?

I'm asking myself why Frank didn't play with the consistency of his FIBA play. Why couldn't he produce and play for a coach who would WANT his style of play? Why didn't he bring that energy and consistency every game?

Rookies aside, Frank, Knox, and Elf seemed to be the only players that under-performed while almost every other player super exceeded their previous situations and significantly contributed. For some of the players it took about half season to figure out what Thibs wanted but they shined.

The question is: Why would Frank want to play on a 2 year, $3M per contract in a situation where it doesn't seem like he fits? And why would the FO offer up a spot when they will have 3-4 possible draft picks to engage super hungry guys wanting to prove themselves?

Theo Pinson has more roster spot value to me than Frank IMHO.

SupremeCommander wrote:I have been thinking about this for a bit now, and I think the best offseason of my lifetime was the 1996 offseason. When We signed Houston (first time), Childs, and traded for LJ. We boldly went after two young, talented guys right out of the gate. I remember being worried because, for example, we could've went after Reggie Miller or Gary Payton instead.

This offseason, I would feel a little uneasy if we went after Devontae Graham and Kelly Oubre, for example, but I really do like the idea of adding young guys with room to grow to this group and am warming to it more and more

This is where my head is as well.

I can't get excited by drafting 18 year olds who aren't iron-clad locks to be great.

The Knicks are not in that kiddie-corp stage of development anymore. Sure, draft a kid you like. But use the assets to bulk up. If the team intends to contend, bring in some young, seasoned players who will compete for starting minutes.