[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Replace Thomas and BAker
Author Thread
OldFan
Posts: 21422
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
12/26/2017  9:44 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
reub wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:Give Beasley the starting 3 and play Dotson instead of Baker


Beasley sucks at the three.

Beasley stinks at 3? Than where do we classify Lance Thomas?

I'd rather play Beasley 32 min At 3

Also Ronny baker has been given non stop opportunity-- more so than many players. He's going to be 25 and is showing nothing?


Beasley has been a turnover machine, which makes him one of the least efficient high usage players in the league (97 pts per 100 possessions). The turnovers negate any scoring he brings.
Bonn - here's the deal, obviously if we had Kevin Durant sitting on the bench this is an easy decision. All of our current options are flawed: Thomas, McDermott, and Beasley. I don't know about continuing to start Thomas because he has a low turnover rate when his production is also very low. He turns the ball over so little because he's usually doing very little on the court.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I think Briggs may have a point on this one. Recently Beasley seems to respond when we have needed to rely on him the most, i.e. one of his big issues is focus. Maybe trying him in the starting lineup mitigates that a bit? I would more concerned about his negative impact on ball movement, but even there he has shown himself to be a willing passer. I hate the thought of relying on Beasley for anything, but what choice do we have at this point?

Regarding Baker, he is what he is. People expecting him to develop into more than what he already is are likely to be a little disappointed.


McDermott, Beasley, and Thomas are all flawed. Playing them each equally is probably the least bad way to get through the period with TH out.

I agree.

Until we have someone who can CONSISTENTLY play solid basketball the coach is going to be second-guessed, but he's working with what he has and I think he's done a good job.

AUTOADVERT
Panos
Posts: 27032
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2004
Member: #520
12/26/2017  10:22 AM
Lance Thomas is horrible. It may not show in the stats, but he's constantly bumbling passes and just making terrible plays. Can't even score a layup. And shooting percentage is 37%. He's this team's Jared Jeffries.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58594
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
12/26/2017  10:47 AM
Panos wrote:Lance Thomas is horrible. It may not show in the stats, but he's constantly bumbling passes and just making terrible plays. Can't even score a layup. And shooting percentage is 37%. He's this team's Jared Jeffries.

He is really bad, yes. It was a terrible use of $30 mil - probably Phil's 3rd worst contract.
Cartman718
Posts: 26008
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/12/2007
Member: #1694

12/26/2017  11:26 AM
This should not be just about replacing Thomas and Baker. This is about replacing...
Baker, Hernangomez, Lance, Noah, Sessions and to a lesser extent...
KOQ, McDermott, Beasley

The players in the first row are net negative impact players. Let's face it. For all the good games those players have, it seems like they have more bad games. And even within games sometimes its Jekyll and Hyde with them.
The players in the second row have been great fillers for picking up the scoring with THJr out. Some games successfully, some games unsuccessfully, but KOQ and McDermott give you the impression of net + rating over the season and Beasley is the very definition of Jekyll and Hyde but of late been more consistent in the net + rating (simply speaking from eye test)

Our 2 other starters Kanter and Lee have definitely picked up the scoring slack with THJr out. Both of these players would take lesser shots if THJr was in. Lee has been more aggressive in shot taking only when THJr or KP or both have been out of the game.

And for games when KP, Lee, and THJr score in double digits, I doubt if we have more than 1 or 2 losses over the season.
With all 3 starting scorers in, Jack feels the need to score only sparingly because all 3 of those scorers can create their own shot.
Defensively also, those 3 players have been consistent.

With Jack expending less energy on offense in those situations, his defense is better. Our non-guaranteed contract became the starter, not the guy Sessions that Perry/Mills thought would come in and prepare Ntilikina. I think anyone would agree that Frank has learned a lot more from Jack.

With THJr or KP out, the next man up has not been consistent. Before THJr went out, we were 1 game over 500 and that's where we are today as well. So we are who we are... a 0.5 team that has made strides with both Lee and Frank.

Lee has been very aggressive in taking his shots with THJr out and Frank's progression has come about after THJr.
So should we try Dotson at the 2 and Lee at the 3? I think Jeff tried that once or twice with results more on the negative side. Dotson could be that next man up for THJr, but he needs the confidence.

Just like THJr, KP, Lee feed off each other with Kanter to clean up the boards (lets face it with all 3 in the game, Kanter would rarely get any plays called for him).....
Dotson could be that guy that plays well with Lee and KP, but he has not been that good when thrust into the limelight.
We haven't seen the growth from him that we have seen from Frank, presumably because Perry/Mills may have been shopping Lee to incorporate a true youth movement.

So where does that leave us.... I say lets go for it and play
Frank as the starting PG
Dotson at the 2
Lee at the 3
KP Kanter up front.

That lineup has some serious potential for growth in chemistry, scoring, defense and either they all click in the next 20 games or they fall apart completely on the road and we have a good draft pick. THJr doesn't need to hurry back in either situation.

Hernangomez, **** him...he lost his chance. He's not a rookie. He got his chance and he sucked. Probably had 2 decent games all season this year and he definitely cannot start. I'd give all his mins to KOQ.

Nixluva is posting triangle screen grabs, even when nobody asks - Fishmike. LOL So are we going to reference that thread like the bible now? "The thread of Wroten Page 14 post 9" - EnySpree
Welpee
Posts: 21967
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/26/2017  11:49 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
reub wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:Give Beasley the starting 3 and play Dotson instead of Baker


Beasley sucks at the three.

Beasley stinks at 3? Than where do we classify Lance Thomas?

I'd rather play Beasley 32 min At 3

Also Ronny baker has been given non stop opportunity-- more so than many players. He's going to be 25 and is showing nothing?


Beasley has been a turnover machine, which makes him one of the least efficient high usage players in the league (97 pts per 100 possessions). The turnovers negate any scoring he brings.
Bonn - here's the deal, obviously if we had Kevin Durant sitting on the bench this is an easy decision. All of our current options are flawed: Thomas, McDermott, and Beasley. I don't know about continuing to start Thomas because he has a low turnover rate when his production is also very low. He turns the ball over so little because he's usually doing very little on the court.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I think Briggs may have a point on this one. Recently Beasley seems to respond when we have needed to rely on him the most, i.e. one of his big issues is focus. Maybe trying him in the starting lineup mitigates that a bit? I would more concerned about his negative impact on ball movement, but even there he has shown himself to be a willing passer. I hate the thought of relying on Beasley for anything, but what choice do we have at this point?

Regarding Baker, he is what he is. People expecting him to develop into more than what he already is are likely to be a little disappointed.


McDermott, Beasley, and Thomas are all flawed. Playing them each equally is probably the least bad way to get through the period with TH out.
I say continue to play McDermott as is, try starting Beasley, reduce Thomas's minutes and give them to Beasley. Take Thomas out of the regular rotation and play him as a situational player.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58594
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
12/26/2017  12:03 PM
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
reub wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:Give Beasley the starting 3 and play Dotson instead of Baker


Beasley sucks at the three.

Beasley stinks at 3? Than where do we classify Lance Thomas?

I'd rather play Beasley 32 min At 3

Also Ronny baker has been given non stop opportunity-- more so than many players. He's going to be 25 and is showing nothing?


Beasley has been a turnover machine, which makes him one of the least efficient high usage players in the league (97 pts per 100 possessions). The turnovers negate any scoring he brings.
Bonn - here's the deal, obviously if we had Kevin Durant sitting on the bench this is an easy decision. All of our current options are flawed: Thomas, McDermott, and Beasley. I don't know about continuing to start Thomas because he has a low turnover rate when his production is also very low. He turns the ball over so little because he's usually doing very little on the court.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I think Briggs may have a point on this one. Recently Beasley seems to respond when we have needed to rely on him the most, i.e. one of his big issues is focus. Maybe trying him in the starting lineup mitigates that a bit? I would more concerned about his negative impact on ball movement, but even there he has shown himself to be a willing passer. I hate the thought of relying on Beasley for anything, but what choice do we have at this point?

Regarding Baker, he is what he is. People expecting him to develop into more than what he already is are likely to be a little disappointed.


McDermott, Beasley, and Thomas are all flawed. Playing them each equally is probably the least bad way to get through the period with TH out.
I say continue to play McDermott as is, try starting Beasley, reduce Thomas's minutes and give them to Beasley. Take Thomas out of the regular rotation and play him as a situational player.

McD is the least bad of the 3. Look at the #s on a per 36 min basis. Beasley gives you 22 points and has 23 shots plus turnovers. McD gives 13 points on 11 shots plus turnovers. Beasley is taking up 12 more possessions to give you 9 points.
Nalod
Posts: 55720
Alba Posts: 151
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/26/2017  12:06 PM
Its not who starts, its who finish's.
We need Beas for the second unit.
At least briggs waited 2 hours after the game.

I can see it now, Knicks lose, he locks himself in his study, releases the black smoke and we then know what needs to be done.
After each loss, we have a new plan.
Until the next day. Few college game in, then white smoke is released. New draft picks.
When we can replace players with better players. We should.

Knicks1248: 1. Dolan should be more involved! 2. Why would any knick fan want pick 8, when that spot has a history of producing marginal NBA taken. (He prefers pick 9th instead)
knicks1248
Posts: 37415
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
12/26/2017  12:53 PM
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
reub wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:Give Beasley the starting 3 and play Dotson instead of Baker


Beasley sucks at the three.

Beasley stinks at 3? Than where do we classify Lance Thomas?

I'd rather play Beasley 32 min At 3

Also Ronny baker has been given non stop opportunity-- more so than many players. He's going to be 25 and is showing nothing?


Beasley has been a turnover machine, which makes him one of the least efficient high usage players in the league (97 pts per 100 possessions). The turnovers negate any scoring he brings.
Bonn - here's the deal, obviously if we had Kevin Durant sitting on the bench this is an easy decision. All of our current options are flawed: Thomas, McDermott, and Beasley. I don't know about continuing to start Thomas because he has a low turnover rate when his production is also very low. He turns the ball over so little because he's usually doing very little on the court.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I think Briggs may have a point on this one. Recently Beasley seems to respond when we have needed to rely on him the most, i.e. one of his big issues is focus. Maybe trying him in the starting lineup mitigates that a bit? I would more concerned about his negative impact on ball movement, but even there he has shown himself to be a willing passer. I hate the thought of relying on Beasley for anything, but what choice do we have at this point?

Regarding Baker, he is what he is. People expecting him to develop into more than what he already is are likely to be a little disappointed.


McDermott, Beasley, and Thomas are all flawed. Playing them each equally is probably the least bad way to get through the period with TH out.
I say continue to play McDermott as is, try starting Beasley, reduce Thomas's minutes and give them to Beasley. Take Thomas out of the regular rotation and play him as a situational player.

I think this is what jeff was doing with bease/lance before timmy got hurt. The undeniable problem is the inconsistency in which the both play, 2 straight games lance is a menace on d and will knock a few big treys down, then disappears for 2 wks, same for bease, 2 straight games he's a menace on offence, then the next 4 games you see a large drop off in effort and brains.

ES
Welpee
Posts: 21967
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/26/2017  1:18 PM    LAST EDITED: 12/26/2017  2:36 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
reub wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:Give Beasley the starting 3 and play Dotson instead of Baker


Beasley sucks at the three.

Beasley stinks at 3? Than where do we classify Lance Thomas?

I'd rather play Beasley 32 min At 3

Also Ronny baker has been given non stop opportunity-- more so than many players. He's going to be 25 and is showing nothing?


Beasley has been a turnover machine, which makes him one of the least efficient high usage players in the league (97 pts per 100 possessions). The turnovers negate any scoring he brings.
Bonn - here's the deal, obviously if we had Kevin Durant sitting on the bench this is an easy decision. All of our current options are flawed: Thomas, McDermott, and Beasley. I don't know about continuing to start Thomas because he has a low turnover rate when his production is also very low. He turns the ball over so little because he's usually doing very little on the court.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I think Briggs may have a point on this one. Recently Beasley seems to respond when we have needed to rely on him the most, i.e. one of his big issues is focus. Maybe trying him in the starting lineup mitigates that a bit? I would more concerned about his negative impact on ball movement, but even there he has shown himself to be a willing passer. I hate the thought of relying on Beasley for anything, but what choice do we have at this point?

Regarding Baker, he is what he is. People expecting him to develop into more than what he already is are likely to be a little disappointed.


McDermott, Beasley, and Thomas are all flawed. Playing them each equally is probably the least bad way to get through the period with TH out.
I say continue to play McDermott as is, try starting Beasley, reduce Thomas's minutes and give them to Beasley. Take Thomas out of the regular rotation and play him as a situational player.

McD is the least bad of the 3. Look at the #s on a per 36 min basis. Beasley gives you 22 points and has 23 shots plus turnovers. McD gives 13 points on 11 shots plus turnovers. Beasley is taking up 12 more possessions to give you 9 points.
Mc D is probably the most consistent. Beasley provides the biggest upside and lowest downside. I think Thomas most consistently provides the less impact. None are ideal.
BigDaddyG
Posts: 25874
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/22/2010
Member: #3049

12/26/2017  2:23 PM
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
reub wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:Give Beasley the starting 3 and play Dotson instead of Baker


Beasley sucks at the three.

Beasley stinks at 3? Than where do we classify Lance Thomas?

I'd rather play Beasley 32 min At 3

Also Ronny baker has been given non stop opportunity-- more so than many players. He's going to be 25 and is showing nothing?


Beasley has been a turnover machine, which makes him one of the least efficient high usage players in the league (97 pts per 100 possessions). The turnovers negate any scoring he brings.
Bonn - here's the deal, obviously if we had Kevin Durant sitting on the bench this is an easy decision. All of our current options are flawed: Thomas, McDermott, and Beasley. I don't know about continuing to start Thomas because he has a low turnover rate when his production is also very low. He turns the ball over so little because he's usually doing very little on the court.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I think Briggs may have a point on this one. Recently Beasley seems to respond when we have needed to rely on him the most, i.e. one of his big issues is focus. Maybe trying him in the starting lineup mitigates that a bit? I would more concerned about his negative impact on ball movement, but even there he has shown himself to be a willing passer. I hate the thought of relying on Beasley for anything, but what choice do we have at this point?

Regarding Baker, he is what he is. People expecting him to develop into more than what he already is are likely to be a little disappointed.


McDermott, Beasley, and Thomas are all flawed. Playing them each equally is probably the least bad way to get through the period with TH out.
I say continue to play McDermott as is, try starting Beasley, reduce Thomas's minutes and give them to Beasley. Take Thomas out of the regular rotation and play him as a situational player.

McD is the least bad of the 3. Look at the #s on a per 36 min basis. Beasley gives you 22 points and has 23 shots plus turnovers. McD gives 13 points on 11 shots plus turnovers. Beasley is taking up 12 more possessions to give you 9 points.
Mc D is probably the most consistent. Beasley provides the biggest upside and lowest downside. I think Thomas the most consistently provides the less impact. None are ideal.

Yeah, we have to do this by committee. I'm not as down on Lance as astarter because he gives it on defense. Overall minutes are what matter most anyway. McDermott might need to be a starter some games. Beas is just too up and down to rely on. Yeah, leave him in if he's cooking, but give him a short leash. We're overachieving because of the hustle of guys like Baker and Thomas. Beas is nice enough, but he's perfect for that KP backup role. Dotson shows potential, but I'm not ready to start him until we go on full on tank mode.
Always... always remember: Less is less. More is more. More is better and twice as much is good too. Not enough is bad, and too much is never enough except when it's just about right. - The Tick
Bonn1997
Posts: 58594
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
12/26/2017  2:38 PM
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
reub wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:Give Beasley the starting 3 and play Dotson instead of Baker


Beasley sucks at the three.

Beasley stinks at 3? Than where do we classify Lance Thomas?

I'd rather play Beasley 32 min At 3

Also Ronny baker has been given non stop opportunity-- more so than many players. He's going to be 25 and is showing nothing?


Beasley has been a turnover machine, which makes him one of the least efficient high usage players in the league (97 pts per 100 possessions). The turnovers negate any scoring he brings.
Bonn - here's the deal, obviously if we had Kevin Durant sitting on the bench this is an easy decision. All of our current options are flawed: Thomas, McDermott, and Beasley. I don't know about continuing to start Thomas because he has a low turnover rate when his production is also very low. He turns the ball over so little because he's usually doing very little on the court.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I think Briggs may have a point on this one. Recently Beasley seems to respond when we have needed to rely on him the most, i.e. one of his big issues is focus. Maybe trying him in the starting lineup mitigates that a bit? I would more concerned about his negative impact on ball movement, but even there he has shown himself to be a willing passer. I hate the thought of relying on Beasley for anything, but what choice do we have at this point?

Regarding Baker, he is what he is. People expecting him to develop into more than what he already is are likely to be a little disappointed.


McDermott, Beasley, and Thomas are all flawed. Playing them each equally is probably the least bad way to get through the period with TH out.
I say continue to play McDermott as is, try starting Beasley, reduce Thomas's minutes and give them to Beasley. Take Thomas out of the regular rotation and play him as a situational player.

McD is the least bad of the 3. Look at the #s on a per 36 min basis. Beasley gives you 22 points and has 23 shots plus turnovers. McD gives 13 points on 11 shots plus turnovers. Beasley is taking up 12 more possessions to give you 9 points.
Mc D is probably the most consistent. Beasley provides the biggest upside and lowest downside. I think Thomas the most consistently provides the less impact. None are ideal.

Beasley is the highest usage player. So he'll likely have the biggest impact (whether positive or negative). He's likely the biggest upside and downside. If you give him a lot of min against NBA starters and a big role on offense, he'll have plenty of nights where his shot is off and turnovers are high, which basically kills our team. It's like a poor man's Melo. I'd rather have the more efficient player getting min and see everyone else (esp Kanter) take more shots. The difference in offensive efficiency between McD and Beasley is huge.
Welpee
Posts: 21967
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/26/2017  3:40 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Welpee wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:
reub wrote:
BRIGGS wrote:Give Beasley the starting 3 and play Dotson instead of Baker


Beasley sucks at the three.

Beasley stinks at 3? Than where do we classify Lance Thomas?

I'd rather play Beasley 32 min At 3

Also Ronny baker has been given non stop opportunity-- more so than many players. He's going to be 25 and is showing nothing?


Beasley has been a turnover machine, which makes him one of the least efficient high usage players in the league (97 pts per 100 possessions). The turnovers negate any scoring he brings.
Bonn - here's the deal, obviously if we had Kevin Durant sitting on the bench this is an easy decision. All of our current options are flawed: Thomas, McDermott, and Beasley. I don't know about continuing to start Thomas because he has a low turnover rate when his production is also very low. He turns the ball over so little because he's usually doing very little on the court.

As much as it pains me to admit this, I think Briggs may have a point on this one. Recently Beasley seems to respond when we have needed to rely on him the most, i.e. one of his big issues is focus. Maybe trying him in the starting lineup mitigates that a bit? I would more concerned about his negative impact on ball movement, but even there he has shown himself to be a willing passer. I hate the thought of relying on Beasley for anything, but what choice do we have at this point?

Regarding Baker, he is what he is. People expecting him to develop into more than what he already is are likely to be a little disappointed.


McDermott, Beasley, and Thomas are all flawed. Playing them each equally is probably the least bad way to get through the period with TH out.
I say continue to play McDermott as is, try starting Beasley, reduce Thomas's minutes and give them to Beasley. Take Thomas out of the regular rotation and play him as a situational player.

McD is the least bad of the 3. Look at the #s on a per 36 min basis. Beasley gives you 22 points and has 23 shots plus turnovers. McD gives 13 points on 11 shots plus turnovers. Beasley is taking up 12 more possessions to give you 9 points.
Mc D is probably the most consistent. Beasley provides the biggest upside and lowest downside. I think Thomas the most consistently provides the less impact. None are ideal.

Beasley is the highest usage player. So he'll likely have the biggest impact (whether positive or negative). He's likely the biggest upside and downside. If you give him a lot of min against NBA starters and a big role on offense, he'll have plenty of nights where his shot is off and turnovers are high, which basically kills our team. It's like a poor man's Melo. I'd rather have the more efficient player getting min and see everyone else (esp Kanter) take more shots. The difference in offensive efficiency between McD and Beasley is huge.
Beasley has shown he has the ability to carry the team (upside). McD even at his best is a role player who just fits in and is pretty much already playing his optimal role. I also think it's unfair to insinuate what Beasley has done wasn't against the other team's starters. We were playing our best when we had another offensive weapon in the lineup (Hardaway) who can get his own shot. Beasley gives us a better chance of replacing that production more consistently than McD or Thomas.

And let me be clear about his, I am in no way, shape or form a Beasley fan. But he pretty much won two games for us and I don't think McD or Thomas are capable of doing what Beasley did. Now, I totally expect him to revert back to the same guy nobody in the league wanted, but I think he is getting close to earning the opportunity to give him a shot given the other options on this team.

Finestrg
Posts: 27296
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/1/2006
Member: #1069

12/26/2017  3:55 PM    LAST EDITED: 12/26/2017  3:57 PM
I agree with this. While I respect the scrappiness from both guys, I think we're better off going more with Beasley and like I've been saying, I want an obtainable upgrade at PG without breaking the bank (for now anyway) -- go get Cat Barber from the G-League and let's see if I'm right on the production he can provide. Cat Barber = a MAJOR upgrade over Baker imo, even our starter, Jack. He's fully capable of providing all the requisite facilitation Jack's been providing + so much more -- speed, breakdown ability, the ability to take over offensively.. Those two minor, no-skin-off-our back moves (if it didn't work out, we turn the page quickly), are the way to go first before we trade for Tyreke Evans or anything else brash. Up to me, Barber would've been a Knick weeks ago, and now that Beasley's been showing his worth, he needs to play more. Can't have his mins. limited at all in any way by Lance Thomas.
nyknickzingis
Posts: 22919
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/8/2015
Member: #6207

12/26/2017  4:12 PM    LAST EDITED: 12/26/2017  4:13 PM
Thomas is best served as a backup 4. He's quick for that position and can stretch the floor on offense.

With the THJ injury he is playing more time at 3.

Our usual rotation would be THJ/McDermott at the 3, and Porzingis/Thomas at the 4. I see nothing wrong there. Where we need help is the PG spot. While Jack is solid and a good vet, he is not a starter in the league. We need a starter. One that plays like Jack in regards to his veteran presence and one who passes the ball. Unlike Jack though, a threat to also score.

Trey Burke is not the answer. The right PG has to be brought in. I liked George Hill over the summer. I like Ricky Rubio. We need a player that will play off Porzingis, Kanter and Hardaway. But also be aggressive and create shots for teammates. This can be Frank, but it will be a while before Frank can do this as a starter. We need a veteran that can do it for now, in the meantime, say the next 2 years, until Frank is ready.

Interesting to see if Sacramento would be willing to deal George Hill. I think that's a really good point guard for where we are right now. He'll step aside for Frank and can even play with Frank. He can run a team. He can shoot and score when need be. He will play well off Porzingis and Kanter. Wonder what Saramento would want for him. I'd also suggest Mike Conley. but I don't want the Knicks taking on that contract.

Welpee
Posts: 21967
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/26/2017  4:14 PM
Finestrg wrote:I agree with this. While I respect the scrappiness from both guys, I think we're better off going more with Beasley and like I've been saying, I want an obtainable upgrade at PG without breaking the bank (for now anyway) -- go get Cat Barber from the G-League and let's see if I'm right on the production he can provide. Cat Barber = a MAJOR upgrade over Baker imo, even our starter, Jack. He's fully capable of providing all the requisite facilitation Jack's been providing + so much more -- speed, breakdown ability, the ability to take over offensively.. Those two minor, no-skin-off-our back moves (if it didn't work out, we turn the page quickly), are the way to go first before we trade for Tyreke Evans or anything else brash. Up to me, Barber would've been a Knick weeks ago, and now that Beasley's been showing his worth, he needs to play more. Can't have his mins. limited at all in any way by Lance Thomas.
I would prefer calling up Tre Burke.
Welpee
Posts: 21967
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/26/2017  4:22 PM    LAST EDITED: 12/26/2017  4:23 PM
nyknickzingis wrote:Thomas is best served as a backup 4. He's quick for that position and can stretch the floor on offense.

With the THJ injury he is playing more time at 3.

Our usual rotation would be THJ/McDermott at the 3, and Porzingis/Thomas at the 4. I see nothing wrong there. Where we need help is the PG spot. While Jack is solid and a good vet, he is not a starter in the league. We need a starter. One that plays like Jack in regards to his veteran presence and one who passes the ball. Unlike Jack though, a threat to also score.

Trey Burke is not the answer. The right PG has to be brought in. I liked George Hill over the summer. I like Ricky Rubio. We need a player that will play off Porzingis, Kanter and Hardaway. But also be aggressive and create shots for teammates. This can be Frank, but it will be a while before Frank can do this as a starter. We need a veteran that can do it for now, in the meantime, say the next 2 years, until Frank is ready.

Interesting to see if Sacramento would be willing to deal George Hill. I think that's a really good point guard for where we are right now. He'll step aside for Frank and can even play with Frank. He can run a team. He can shoot and score when need be. He will play well off Porzingis and Kanter. Wonder what Saramento would want for him. I'd also suggest Mike Conley. but I don't want the Knicks taking on that contract.

Who are you trading from the Knicks for Hill for the salaries to match up who the Kings would want? Noah? No way! Kanter? No way (on our end)!
nyknickzingis
Posts: 22919
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/8/2015
Member: #6207

12/26/2017  4:37 PM
Welpee wrote:
nyknickzingis wrote:Thomas is best served as a backup 4. He's quick for that position and can stretch the floor on offense.

With the THJ injury he is playing more time at 3.

Our usual rotation would be THJ/McDermott at the 3, and Porzingis/Thomas at the 4. I see nothing wrong there. Where we need help is the PG spot. While Jack is solid and a good vet, he is not a starter in the league. We need a starter. One that plays like Jack in regards to his veteran presence and one who passes the ball. Unlike Jack though, a threat to also score.

Trey Burke is not the answer. The right PG has to be brought in. I liked George Hill over the summer. I like Ricky Rubio. We need a player that will play off Porzingis, Kanter and Hardaway. But also be aggressive and create shots for teammates. This can be Frank, but it will be a while before Frank can do this as a starter. We need a veteran that can do it for now, in the meantime, say the next 2 years, until Frank is ready.

Interesting to see if Sacramento would be willing to deal George Hill. I think that's a really good point guard for where we are right now. He'll step aside for Frank and can even play with Frank. He can run a team. He can shoot and score when need be. He will play well off Porzingis and Kanter. Wonder what Saramento would want for him. I'd also suggest Mike Conley. but I don't want the Knicks taking on that contract.

Who are you trading from the Knicks for Hill for the salaries to match up who the Kings would want? Noah? No way! Kanter? No way (on our end)!

Didn't have an idea to be honest, just threw his name out there.

To make a deal work, surely Lance Thomas would have to be in the deal, as would Baker. Perhaps O'Quinn as well. 3 rotation players out, probably too much, but I think we could make a deal if we really wanted to.

Kanter/Noah/Willy
KP/Beasley
THJ/McDermott
Lee/THJ
Hill/Frank

EnySpree
Posts: 44729
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397

12/26/2017  4:37 PM    LAST EDITED: 12/26/2017  4:39 PM
All practical answers point to calling up Trey Burke.....


Watching Baker blow easy layups, turn down open jumpers and clank the ones he shot is tough to deal with. He needs to go back to the d league. Swap him out for Burke. Burke is not blowing layups and open jumpers.

Guys care too much about individual players.... we want to develop guys but either you can play or not. Baker can't score. He's had all the developing you can get. He's really good when everyone else is rolling, but terrible when he needs to do something with the ball.

You know why I'm here....
Paris907
Posts: 21140
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/4/2015
Member: #6099
USA
12/26/2017  6:25 PM
Cartman718 wrote:This should not be just about replacing Thomas and Baker. This is about replacing...
Baker, Hernangomez, Lance, Noah, Sessions and to a lesser extent...
KOQ, McDermott, Beasley

The players in the first row are net negative impact players. Let's face it. For all the good games those players have, it seems like they have more bad games. And even within games sometimes its Jekyll and Hyde with them.
The players in the second row have been great fillers for picking up the scoring with THJr out. Some games successfully, some games unsuccessfully, but KOQ and McDermott give you the impression of net + rating over the season and Beasley is the very definition of Jekyll and Hyde but of late been more consistent in the net + rating (simply speaking from eye test)

Our 2 other starters Kanter and Lee have definitely picked up the scoring slack with THJr out. Both of these players would take lesser shots if THJr was in. Lee has been more aggressive in shot taking only when THJr or KP or both have been out of the game.

And for games when KP, Lee, and THJr score in double digits, I doubt if we have more than 1 or 2 losses over the season.
With all 3 starting scorers in, Jack feels the need to score only sparingly because all 3 of those scorers can create their own shot.
Defensively also, those 3 players have been consistent.

With Jack expending less energy on offense in those situations, his defense is better. Our non-guaranteed contract became the starter, not the guy Sessions that Perry/Mills thought would come in and prepare Ntilikina. I think anyone would agree that Frank has learned a lot more from Jack.

With THJr or KP out, the next man up has not been consistent. Before THJr went out, we were 1 game over 500 and that's where we are today as well. So we are who we are... a 0.5 team that has made strides with both Lee and Frank.

Lee has been very aggressive in taking his shots with THJr out and Frank's progression has come about after THJr.
So should we try Dotson at the 2 and Lee at the 3? I think Jeff tried that once or twice with results more on the negative side. Dotson could be that next man up for THJr, but he needs the confidence.

Just like THJr, KP, Lee feed off each other with Kanter to clean up the boards (lets face it with all 3 in the game, Kanter would rarely get any plays called for him).....
Dotson could be that guy that plays well with Lee and KP, but he has not been that good when thrust into the limelight.
We haven't seen the growth from him that we have seen from Frank, presumably because Perry/Mills may have been shopping Lee to incorporate a true youth movement.

So where does that leave us.... I say lets go for it and play
Frank as the starting PG
Dotson at the 2
Lee at the 3
KP Kanter up front.

That lineup has some serious potential for growth in chemistry, scoring, defense and either they all click in the next 20 games or they fall apart completely on the road and we have a good draft pick. THJr doesn't need to hurry back in either situation.

Hernangomez, **** him...he lost his chance. He's not a rookie. He got his chance and he sucked. Probably had 2 decent games all season this year and he definitely cannot start. I'd give all his mins to KOQ.

I agree with most of the above yet on Feb 3, when an extended road trip has concluded, with or without THJr, I see a .400 team and that’s above what most anticipated. Perry has his hands full.

CrushAlot
Posts: 56822
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
12/26/2017  8:28 PM
Welpee wrote:
Finestrg wrote:I agree with this. While I respect the scrappiness from both guys, I think we're better off going more with Beasley and like I've been saying, I want an obtainable upgrade at PG without breaking the bank (for now anyway) -- go get Cat Barber from the G-League and let's see if I'm right on the production he can provide. Cat Barber = a MAJOR upgrade over Baker imo, even our starter, Jack. He's fully capable of providing all the requisite facilitation Jack's been providing + so much more -- speed, breakdown ability, the ability to take over offensively.. Those two minor, no-skin-off-our back moves (if it didn't work out, we turn the page quickly), are the way to go first before we trade for Tyreke Evans or anything else brash. Up to me, Barber would've been a Knick weeks ago, and now that Beasley's been showing his worth, he needs to play more. Can't have his mins. limited at all in any way by Lance Thomas.
I would prefer calling up Tre Burke.
I haven't watched the d league much this year. Barber looked great last summer against the Knicks. Was Burke on the squad at that point? I like Barber but there is something to be said about bringing up your own guy. Either way, it would not be a huge risk to give one of those guys some run with the big club. Not sure who the Knicks waive though. Sessions?
You playTrey Burke... Wally Szcerbiak
Replace Thomas and BAker

©2001-2012 ultimateknicks.com All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.