He was worse than Randle in the playoffs, and he has been mostly bad this yr.

This is why our draft picks end up getting traded or not resigned, IDK if it's the pressure of playing in NY or we just that bad at drafting, but IQ is looking no better the Toney Douglas.

knicks1248 wrote:He shooting 29% in his last 10 games, 36% overall for his young NBA career.

He was worse than Randle in the playoffs, and he has been mostly bad this yr.

This is why our draft picks end up getting traded or not resigned, IDK if it's the pressure of playing in NY or we just that bad at drafting, but IQ is looking no better the Toney Douglas.

Or maybe our fan base isn’t patient with our players and want to move them if they aren’t stars in their first year and a half. But I do agree that there’s more pressure in NY and it does make it harder. Lebron said it the other day praising RJ.

wargames wrote:A second year player going through a slump isn’t end of the world news. RJ went through a slump last year and look at him now. I don’t see IQ as a finished product because he still has room to grow.

I would like to see the Knicks really consolidate so guys like IQ can get more minutes and play free. I think the tight rotation and short leash impacts his effectiveness.

knicks1248 wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:He shooting 29% in his last 10 games, 36% overall for his young NBA career.

He was worse than Randle in the playoffs, and he has been mostly bad this yr.

This is why our draft picks end up getting traded or not resigned, IDK if it's the pressure of playing in NY or we just that bad at drafting, but IQ is looking no better the Toney Douglas.

Or maybe our fan base isn’t patient with our players and want to move them if they aren’t stars in their first year and a half. But I do agree that there’s more pressure in NY and it does make it harder. Lebron said it the other day praising RJ.

The fan base are not the ones trading these players, so it has nothing to do with patience, Toney Douglas never amounted to more than a bench role player on any team.

Why draft a guy you have to reinvent his game, that just takes away from what his strengths, and prolongs his development.

We are not trying to reinvent RJ's game, he's playing the exact same way he played at DUKE, he's just getting better at it.

This goes back to why I always say draft a guy who fits, this way your not spending 3 to 4 yrs trying to turn him into something he's not, and watching him struggle.

why draft a shooter and try to turn him into a pg

Imagine the celtics spending 4 yrs trying to turn Rondo into Ray allan

Taking the best player possible has no one set meaning. There is no clear path to any draft pick success and many paths to success. Most teams have many drafts were the players dont’ pan out. We are jsut a few years back into actually using the draft than trading the picks.

IQ like many in the 1st round are not finished products. He has some elite skills and he looked great last year. Is it a mistake to add playmaking skills to his tool box? Some 50 games in look at you making a great statement in hindsight and then indicting his whole career and Knick development scheme all that has lasted Less than two whole seasons.
IF fans have no imput to what is going on it seems that your purpose is to plead to the UK that you a superior orator of all things knicks and while quick to be critical, which is your perogative.
Just know you come off as an idiot.

I doubt we are taking IQ away from his strenghts. He seemingly is having difficulty transitioning and is not hesitant to shoot. Given your penchant for not having any foresight or imagination its your opinion this will never come together because we don’t have a deep track record of developing players.

Sometimes players never pan out. Sometimes they look bad in stretches as they move closer to making marked improvement. I guess Johnny Bryant is the one to talk to. But until then we have the eyetest and 1248 to enlighten us.

SergioNYK wrote:IQ is 22 and going through a slump. It happens. He'll be fine. He's a keeper.

Its his 2nd season. He works hard. He plays hard. He looks great at times. He looks bad at other times. We will see. What 1248 is totally incapable of grasping is... well everything really. IQ may end up being a high end starter. Or maybe he's a career bench scorer on average or not very good teams. Time will tell. What's important is you keep adding these guys who work and play hard, take the time (years) to develop them and see who pops. This is how you get guys like Dejounte Murray... some of its lucky but the key is volume. Maybe its not IQ, but there's a better chance of IQ/McBride/Grimes/Reddish having a breakout player than just IQ alone. See how that math works?

OP thinks IQ is not good because Mike DAntonio doesnt develop youth. Its Knick history. Cant deny it

fishmike wrote:

SergioNYK wrote:IQ is 22 and going through a slump. It happens. He'll be fine. He's a keeper.

its such a STUPID POST because of what you just said.

Its his 2nd season. He works hard. He plays hard. He looks great at times. He looks bad at other times. We will see. What 1248 is totally incapable of grasping is... well everything really. IQ may end up being a high end starter. Or maybe he's a career bench scorer on average or not very good teams. Time will tell. What's important is you keep adding these guys who work and play hard, take the time (years) to develop them and see who pops. This is how you get guys like Dejounte Murray... some of its lucky but the key is volume. Maybe its not IQ, but there's a better chance of IQ/McBride/Grimes/Reddish having a breakout player than just IQ alone. See how that math works?

OP thinks IQ is not good because Mike DAntonio doesnt develop youth. Its Knick history. Cant deny it

Dude you sound so dumb and Naive because you said the same thing about FRANK for 4 yrs, in fact you say the same thing about every player the knicks draft, and guess what..they all got traded or let go

If you not producing consistently, you will either be traded around the league for you career, or out of the league.

You have to be consistent in order to maintain your place.

Nobody wants to fck with an inconsistent person regardless to what it is.

Your not going to take a job far away if your car runs well sometimes, your not going to to that store that only has what you want sometimes

BillTheButcher wrote:He is in a slump , IMHO the problem up and down the ORG is trying to fit a round peg into a square hole ....IQ is not a PG , he played his best as the 2 guard w/ a real PG Rose at the 1 , that is his role 6th man type that brings energy off the bench

It's perfectly fine to explore other roles or other ways to impact your team, in the beginning of your NBA career. It's the same growth for any employee out of college, entering the work force. You explore other opportunities outside of your degree, if thats the current need. Sometimes there's a fit and sometimes it's not.

IQ is a SG learning to play PG, because of team needs. Westbrook was a SG who turned PG for whatever reason at the time (probably a team need). I doubt Westbrook would be who he is today, and the money he made over his career if he didn't make that shift to PG.

My point is, IQ like most youngsters, have a few years to see how they can impact this game. Once you sign your first large contract, thats why you should know how your skills best fit the team needs. If his fit is better as an off guard, that works for me. Right now, Burks is our PG so IQ is also trying to fill that void. Rose is hurt and Deuce is not ready (I guess). So IQ has a chance to see if PG works for him. Or should he go back to being that off guard who comes in launching 3s and changing the momentum of the game with his play making.

If IQ was the answer at PG, we wouldn't be in so many trade rumors for a PG. I think the FO and Thibs understands how to best use IQ by now. This is all part of his development, which can be a different timeline for different players. IQ is very good. His current fit as a PG may not be good right now. Who knows how he will look next season.

when his role was SG or just G, if he was open he shot, and personally i liked those odds. He can play pg but it's not playing to his strengths. and even when he's SG or G it's not like he's selfish

he and Burks have both been affected by Rose's absence

martin wrote:

Chandler wrote:i mentioned in the Jazz game thread the substitute color man (forget his name) had a good point IMO. He says playing IQ at pg has hurt his decisiveness as he's looking to set up others more. I kind of agree with him

when his role was SG or just G, if he was open he shot, and personally i liked those odds. He can play pg but it's not playing to his strengths. and even when he's SG or G it's not like he's selfish

he and Burks have both been affected by Rose's absence

The whole team has suffered too because of it. And lack of production from Kemba

I agree quick is a Lou Williams type .. we need to keep him in that role