martin wrote:Fire Thibs or unfollow Berman? Or both for good measure?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/NYPost_Berman/status/1640780782401626112

Before these 38 and 40 point explosions by IQ, it was a head scratcher to start a SG/SF over IQ (or Deuce) who were the only 2 healthy PGs on the roster at the time. Then once we realized, we were not very good and even making the playin (My history in the last few years might be incorrect, but thats not my point) we would've lost or got swepted. So Thibs had another chance to play IQ towards the end of the season, but instead Burks mins only increased at PG. I'm a burks fan so I don't mind him getting all the minutes, we needed his 2 way impact. But at PG? Head scratcher and why I started to lose faith in Thibs youth development (in that moment).

Fast Forward to Thibs now, he's course corrected himself and made all the necessary roster adjustments I complained about (play the yoots threads), so my complaints are now water under the bridge. But every time IQ has a great game like 40 and 9 yesterday will naturally spark up this conversation again. That comes with the territory of being a coach who's scheme is based on a 9 man rotation. I'm still against this 9 man approach (during the regular season), eventhough as a team, our record was better. But a 9 man rotation seems more like a playoff strategy to me. 10 man (or more) reduces wear and tear, so that your players will be less fatigue going into the playoffs. We have a team of over achievers, no superstars. But what do I know. I'm just a noname fan, coaching from my armchair, flicking the remote.

martin wrote:Fire Thibs or unfollow Berman? Or both for good measure?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/NYPost_Berman/status/1640780782401626112

Philc1 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:If I'm IQ's agent I'm asking for that Brunson $105M contract and starting spot. And if I'm the Knicks I'm giving it to him.

This is why we shouldn’t resign Hart unless it’s to a 2 year deal at reasonable money with a club option. We should also be looking to trade Obi for a pick next season at the deadline. IQ is worth more than both of them combined and a lot of GMs know this his value on the open market is probably $80-90 million guaranteed

Considering Randle and Brunson have friendly contracts I don't think having money invested in both IQ and Hart is that bad. But yeah I'm definitely taking advantage of Obi's 'potential' and 'youth' this offseason and trading him. It doesn't make sense to resign him long term to be a 15 mpg backup unless it's dirt cheap.

blkexec wrote:

martin wrote:Fire Thibs or unfollow Berman? Or both for good measure?

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/NYPost_Berman/status/1640780782401626112

Before these 38 and 40 point explosions by IQ, it was a head scratcher to start a SG/SF over IQ (or Deuce) who were the only 2 healthy PGs on the roster at the time. Then once we realized, we were not very good and even making the playin (My history in the last few years might be incorrect, but thats not my point) we would've lost or got swepted. So Thibs had another chance to play IQ towards the end of the season, but instead Burks mins only increased at PG. I'm a burks fan so I don't mind him getting all the minutes, we needed his 2 way impact. But at PG? Head scratcher and why I started to lose faith in Thibs youth development (in that moment).

Fast Forward to Thibs now, he's course corrected himself and made all the necessary roster adjustments I complained about (play the yoots threads), so my complaints are now water under the bridge. But every time IQ has a great game like 40 and 9 yesterday will naturally spark up this conversation again. That comes with the territory of being a coach who's scheme is based on a 9 man rotation. I'm still against this 9 man approach (during the regular season), eventhough as a team, our record was better. But a 9 man rotation seems more like a playoff strategy to me. 10 man (or more) reduces wear and tear, so that your players will be less fatigue going into the playoffs. We have a team of over achievers, no superstars. But what do I know. I'm just a noname fan, coaching from my armchair, flicking the remote.

This pretty much sums it up for me. There is not much to add.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/AnthonyMSG/status/1640809350720638976

Philc1 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:If I'm IQ's agent I'm asking for that Brunson $105M contract and starting spot. And if I'm the Knicks I'm giving it to him.

This is why we shouldn’t resign Hart unless it’s to a 2 year deal at reasonable money with a club option.

Why can't the Knicks sigh both?

Genuinely asking?

SergioNYK wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:If I'm IQ's agent I'm asking for that Brunson $105M contract and starting spot. And if I'm the Knicks I'm giving it to him.

This is why we shouldn’t resign Hart unless it’s to a 2 year deal at reasonable money with a club option. We should also be looking to trade Obi for a pick next season at the deadline. IQ is worth more than both of them combined and a lot of GMs know this his value on the open market is probably $80-90 million guaranteed

Considering Randle and Brunson have friendly contracts I don't think having money invested in both IQ and Hart is that bad. But yeah I'm definitely taking advantage of Obi's 'potential' and 'youth' this offseason and trading him. It doesn't make sense to resign him long term to be a 15 mpg backup unless it's dirt cheap.

We’ll see what happens. If we opt of rose which we will and Hart declines his player option we would be about $13-14 mil under the projected cap next year. If I’m Hart I’d actually pick up my player option and take my chances in the open market in 2024 after a full season here. Right now Hart’s basically relying on the Knicks bidding against themselves next summer

I like cap flexibility. Just in case a superstar suddenly wants to come here

martin wrote:I view IQ as a combo guard off bench who plays more PG. For me, PG is his position. I think the Knicks view him as a PG first whose best value to the team is coming off bench with the composition of the current roster. Same with Hart, he is best coming off bench.

I don't know why others view IQ as a SG.

I've seen enough to believe that IQ can succeed at either position. Quickley has made no secret that he wants to start. I remember reading as much last season. Yes, so do 99.9 percent of the bench players in the league I imagine. But most of them arent playing like starters at PG and SG.

Would love to see Grimes get the same treatment as IQ. Thought he was rushed too quickly into the starting lineup. Im a big Grimes fan, but I cant say Ive seen a starting SG...yet. Too inconsistent.

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:I view IQ as a combo guard off bench who plays more PG. For me, PG is his position. I think the Knicks view him as a PG first whose best value to the team is coming off bench with the composition of the current roster. Same with Hart, he is best coming off bench.

I don't know why others view IQ as a SG.

I've seen enough to believe that IQ can succeed at either position. Quickley has made no secret that he wants to start. I remember reading as much last season. Yes, so do 99.9 percent of the bench players in the league I imagine. But most of them arent playing like starters at PG and SG.

Would love to see Grimes get the same treatment as IQ. Thought he was rushed too quickly into the starting lineup. Im a big Grimes fan, but I cant say Ive seen a starting SG...yet. Too inconsistent.

It's wild to me that you say stuff like that and also make statements that you see Grimes as a possible PG.

Philc1 wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:If I'm IQ's agent I'm asking for that Brunson $105M contract and starting spot. And if I'm the Knicks I'm giving it to him.

This is why we shouldn’t resign Hart unless it’s to a 2 year deal at reasonable money with a club option.

Why can't the Knicks sigh both?

Genuinely asking?

Because it would ensure we are stuck over the cap the next several years. Perry can try to salary dump players to get under like he did last year to get Brunson but that costs draft picks. Brunson has been a home run FA pickup so far but it may not work out so well next time

There is (1) over the cap, (2) under the cap by a marginal amount, or (3) under the cap by a significant amount.

(3) isn't an option. (2) is the actual scenario if you don't sign Quickley or Hart or find someway to sign them both to value deals, and the latter makes that figure less.

In my estimation, Quickley and hart ARE the types of players you target and use your cap less-than-max space under the (2) scenario. You seem to be getting tripped up over the fact they're both already on the Knicks roster.

Knicks have a three year window after this one - all of Brunson, Randle, and Mitchell expire after 2025-2026 (the cap begins to go up significantly that season) and they won't have max cap space any of the next 3 seasons.

The question is do you try to generate middling cap space for a player other than Hart or Quickley, or just commit and target your next roster upgrade via trade?