My concern with him is not shooting. I think his biggest issue is continuing to learn how to play a team game and set others up with his ability to create. Seems to be able to do that with Obi but needs to do so for others as well. I think he is another Maxey waiting to happen and just needs the opportunity. 13 minutes for him last night is not optimal.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Like when you post another "Trade Randle" post?

franco12 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:I wrote a post last year that chastised his play beginning of year but towards the last 1/4 of season almost thought he was one of the best players on the team. I felt between him grimes and adding Brunson ( even without rose)we would have a near game changing three point arsenal up there with any team in the league. But grimes hasn’t played( ok understandable) but through 9 full games again iq shooting 34%(25 from 3) and while he’s done other things it’s not what I envisioned. I was expecting an elite 6-7 man and he hasn’t been that . I thought he WAS our fourth guy but through 9 games. Sub par on that.
When iq and Brunson stood next to Brogdon he towered over both. Like I mentioned before we may have too many small players and some of that has shown on the D. I wonder if we are calculating a trade if IQ( who has value) might be a core piece of a trade that brings us more consistency with more size? That’s not what I had hoped for but we may have to go in another direction.

I think it's early - but I still think IQ has a future here. Agree about having to try to up-talent through some trades of 2 for 1 or similar.

Yep
Boston’s guards
Derrick white
Sam hauser
Brogdon
And smart
Had too much size for our guards
We need more quality size in backcourt
Iq prob has highest trade value
But given history once I write this iq will start shooting 60%😸

BigDaddyG wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Like when you post another "Trade Randle" post?

Different. Trade Randle is a consistent drone that's destined to become a reality. I really wasn't sure if this thread was new or the same one that was created at about this time last season.

I know you will be happy. Lol
True about thread though. Typically one per year on most players after a bad stint. But that is why we have the boards. Our KNICKS fan psych couch.

BRIGGS wrote:

franco12 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:I wrote a post last year that chastised his play beginning of year but towards the last 1/4 of season almost thought he was one of the best players on the team. I felt between him grimes and adding Brunson ( even without rose)we would have a near game changing three point arsenal up there with any team in the league. But grimes hasn’t played( ok understandable) but through 9 full games again iq shooting 34%(25 from 3) and while he’s done other things it’s not what I envisioned. I was expecting an elite 6-7 man and he hasn’t been that . I thought he WAS our fourth guy but through 9 games. Sub par on that.
When iq and Brunson stood next to Brogdon he towered over both. Like I mentioned before we may have too many small players and some of that has shown on the D. I wonder if we are calculating a trade if IQ( who has value) might be a core piece of a trade that brings us more consistency with more size? That’s not what I had hoped for but we may have to go in another direction.

I think it's early - but I still think IQ has a future here. Agree about having to try to up-talent through some trades of 2 for 1 or similar.

Yep
Boston’s guards
Derrick white
Sam hauser
Brogdon
And smart
Had too much size for our guards
We need more quality size in backcourt
Iq prob has highest trade value
But given history once I write this iq will start shooting 60%😸

I'd like to see RJ more at the 2 - certainly Cam at the 2 is the size you want.

I want to keep IQ. He is a really relatable young man. I just want him to shoot better.