TPercy wrote:This fire Thibs stuff is nonsense. We are at a talent deficient compared to rest of league and would be surprised if we maintained this record. His rotations will be questionable, but we still look somwhat competitive.

I seen him be outcoached too many times for this. I seen him being a stubborn OX too many times for this.

Fire Thibs.

SergioNYK wrote:

Nalod wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:Just saying, every time over the last decade that the Knicks finished with a winning record. Mike Woodson was part of the coaching staff.

Such an underrated coach

Not really.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/coaches/woodsmi01c.html

Seems the hype from under informed fans makes him over rated now.
We all love Mike. he got canned for not being Steve Kerr and triangle centric. Nobody gave him an NBA job after.
Was he really the reason we got 4th seed or just a part of an overall good job by all?
Im not taking anything away from him, but Im not handing him sole credit either.

I am missing the part of your link that disputes that he is a good coach.

Look at the ATL progression.

Woodson was fine. NO complaints. Great guy. Did not get a head gig until Indy called him back to college.
Good for him, thats a great job BTW. He did great with a top of career Melo and a HOF retiring cast.
It was a fun season. But it ended and he was given no PG and Bargs. It was not his fault. He coached with what he had.

Agree 110! Replacing Woody and Grunwald with Phil Jackson and Fisher/Hornecek was one of the worst decisions this franchise has made! That regime deserved at least one more season, even though the Bargnani trade was awful.

You literally forget that fans were actually protesting for dolan to sell the team outside the garden. Why? The team after the 37 win season was going nowhere. Fans did not love on Woodson then. He was respected and likable but that roster was not good for him. Now, to be fair, fans were sick and tired of **** and wanted change. Grunwald was already gone by october of that season. Weird. Dolan Hired Mckinsey to come up with all kinds of weird stuff. Also Isiah was looming and the franchise was joke. Phil was an attempt to bring in a legit person and Build a culture. not defending, just have to go back to the moment and remember Phil gave fans some hope. He was less than 5 years from COACHING his last chip. Again, the man was a rockstar. Yes, he sucked as an exec. I said it 100x, good idea badly executed. We were happy Isiah, who was running the Liberty at that time was finally out of the picture.

Philc1 wrote:

TPercy wrote:This fire Thibs stuff is nonsense. We are at a talent deficient compared to rest of league

Not really. We’re about a little bit above average. My only 2 complaints with Thibs is he’s limited on the offensive side since he’s such a defensive minded coach and he overused players sometimes. He ran butler into the ground and is doing the same with RJ

Far from it.

Knicks clear bottom 5th in terms of ceiling talent, both in terms of regular season success and long term potential.

martin wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

TPercy wrote:This fire Thibs stuff is nonsense. We are at a talent deficient compared to rest of league

Not really. We’re about a little bit above average. My only 2 complaints with Thibs is he’s limited on the offensive side since he’s such a defensive minded coach and he overused players sometimes. He ran butler into the ground and is doing the same with RJ

Far from it.

Knicks clear bottom 5th in terms of ceiling talent, both in terms of regular season success and long term potential.

You think that?

Tried to find a site that might rank NBA talent - below is one that ranks based on youth - and their assessment is one I tend to think applies to our group as a whole

1-10 we've got a lot of good players- no one that is great, take over a game, take the team on his shoulders for a stretch.

EF may be benched, and his D is horrible, but he could contribute in the right setting - he is a good shooter, and holds our Knick record for most 3 pointers made.

RJ might have a limited ceiling, and isn't worth the contract he signed- but I hope he can produce and defend better than he has.

IQ might be our best talent, physically and the closest thing we have to a star player that can take over the game.

Our three headed center is great- if we could only combine them into one player. Mitch can impact the game, but clogs the offense still. I still have hope he can unlock offensive potential with Jalen.

Hart is nice, and so is Simms.

We have a lot of - I don't want to call it mediocre- but we maybe have 10 guys that would fit on most teams in a 4-8 slotting.

We don't have that clear impact talent.

Jalen might be our best player, but he is physically limited to what he can do on the court.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2022/10/13/23401647/nba-young-core-rankings-2022-23

13. New York Knicks
Wins above replacement: 70.1
Best under-25 player: RJ Barrett (24.8)
Previous rankings: 20th, 20th

No second-year player improved his long-term outlook last season more than Barrett, who displayed real offensive strides in boosting his 3-point percentage from 32 to 40 and his free throw percentage from 61 to 75. Add in a rookie surprise from Immanuel Quickley (14.9 projected WAR), whose closest rookie comp, numbers-wise, is Donovan Mitchell, and an injury return from Mitchell Robinson (11.8), and the Knicks’ future suddenly looks bright.

from last year
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2021/10/21/22737574/nba-young-core-rankings-2021-22-luka-doncic-trae-young-zion-williamson

martin wrote:

I was going to start a list of the top 3 players on each team to show where we might expect the Knicks to fall on that list.

First thing to do is agree on what constitutes talent. The Ringer starts with Milwaukee Bucks as 30th in terms of "young talent" but that obviously ignores the talent that is Giannis, Jrue, Middleton.

If talent is a mix of either young players that are no where near their ceiling and still have chance for exponential growth (say, Jaden Ivey, who statistically isn't playing well but most agree his is still in that talent running) and high end vet talent that'll help get you to deep playoffs, then I think the Knicks are towards the bottom of the heap.

Knicks have Brunson... and then who as their top 3 in talent? Knicks have a lot more depth than other teams but it is not concentrated and also limited. Knicks have probably top 3-5 in terms of assets/picks though.

It would be interesting to list out.

The ringer was strictly looking at young talent- so that is why the Bucks are last. I don't know what their cut off is- they included Hart for us, so it's probably 25 or 26? But it doesn't matter- because I think we agree, we're just arguing slightly different points- BUT

In basketball, you can only play five guys at a time- and if you're starting five are building a deficit and your bench digs you out, you have a -3 point differential, a path towards 33 wins and a sucky draft pick, rinse, repeat!

BigDaddyG wrote:

fishmike wrote:last year we moved from 20 to 13.... I would imagine after not adding anyone in the draft we fall back. As far as "young cores" we appear middle of the pack. Obviously we have at best fringe all star talent of the non "young-core" variety so its hard to see any argument where the Knick's "talent" is anything average to below average by NBA standards. I would see have depth but a painful lack of high end difference making talent

13. New York Knicks
Wins above replacement: 70.1
Best under-25 player: RJ Barrett (24.8)
Previous rankings: 20th, 20th

No second-year player improved his long-term outlook last season more than Barrett, who displayed real offensive strides in boosting his 3-point percentage from 32 to 40 and his free throw percentage from 61 to 75. Add in a rookie surprise from Immanuel Quickley (14.9 projected WAR), whose closest rookie comp, numbers-wise, is Donovan Mitchell, and an injury return from Mitchell Robinson (11.8), and the Knicks’ future suddenly looks bright.

from last year
https://www.theringer.com/nba/2021/10/21/22737574/nba-young-core-rankings-2021-22-luka-doncic-trae-young-zion-williamson

I'll ask this, how many players on the roster could you reasonably expect a return for a decent first-rounder right now. I don't mean in a greater package, but on their own value. I'd say RJ, but the contract. Obi? I'd say no right now. Same goes for IQ. I think Grimes will get there, but as of now, I'd say no. Cam? No because of his contract situation at the end of the season. Sim and McBride? No.

I think we could def get a first in the 20s for IQ/Obi/Grimes/IHart who all good contract situations

Back to original point tho... yeah I think most tests show this roster doesnt have a lot of talent value by any metric

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks have probably top 3-5 in terms of assets/picks though.

it get's tricky when you throw in the term asset/picks. I'd say OKC, Toronto, Toronto, NOP and the Memphis Grizzlies have better assets than the Knicks of the top. You can make a case for the Spurs and Magic. I'm not just taking the overall draft picks into account, but young players and vets.

Maybe I don't understand how you are qualifying those teams. Help me understand Toronto and Memphis having more assets/picks?

Desirable young talent. Hypothetical. Let's say Luka becomes available. I'm sure Dallas would call on the teams listed if they showed interest. Yes the Knicks have the second most draft picks, which is good. But would that really make up the difference of say, a Banchero and Wagner? Hell, I'll even throw in Bol Bol. Toronto has Barnes and OG. I'll say Siakam, in his own, has more trade value than anyone on our current roster. A few more protected first rounders ain't making up the difference. Bane and JJJ? Those younger peices are more enticing than anyone we have. I know this is all in a vacuum, and I don't believe all the players I mentioned would realistically be on the table. But you can see where I'm going. Spurs? Devin Vassel, in terms of value, is more desirable than anyone we have.

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

martin wrote:Knicks have probably top 3-5 in terms of assets/picks though.

it get's tricky when you throw in the term asset/picks. I'd say OKC, Toronto, Toronto, NOP and the Memphis Grizzlies have better assets than the Knicks of the top. You can make a case for the Spurs and Magic. I'm not just taking the overall draft picks into account, but young players and vets.

Maybe I don't understand how you are qualifying those teams. Help me understand Toronto and Memphis having more assets/picks?

Desirable young talent. Hypothetical. Let's say Luka becomes available. I'm sure Dallas would call on the teams listed if they showed interest. Yes the Knicks have the second most draft picks, which is good. But would that really make up the difference of say, a Banchero and Wagner? Hell, I'll even throw in Bol Bol. Toronto has Barnes and OG. I'll say Siakam, in his own, has more trade value than anyone on our current roster. A few more protected first rounders ain't making up the difference. Bane and JJJ? Those younger peices are more enticing than anyone we have. I know this is all in a vacuum, and I don't believe all the players I mentioned would realistically be on the table. But you can see where I'm going. Spurs? Devin Vassel, in terms of value, is more desirable than anyone we have.

OK, when I mentioned assets/picks, literally I was just meaning picks (no ****ing clue why I used word assets although maybe cap space is an asset for teams), and trying to differentiate that from young talent and then high end vet players.

I want to say unequivocally that I WAS WRONG about firing him now. Thibs still has his flaws, and we probably will transition off of Thibs at some point. Randle and RJ playing non-existent defense this year isn't helping Thibs but he has earned at least until the all-star break, showing he can mix and match and pull wins out of thin air on the second night of b2bs on the road. The team is playing for him. There are still flaws but most of the guys haven't tuned him out. Randle is an uncoachable POS so it's hard to pin that on Thibs, but THibs has OBI waiting to it's also hard not to blame Thibs when Randle is out there looking lost on D.

Lock this thread. He shouldn't be fired. Yet.