KnickDanger wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:3pt shooting.
Our last 8 games:

JB 37%
Randle 33%
Rose 33%
Grimes 28%
IQ 30%
RJ 27%
Toppin 26%
Cam 25%

Troubling. Especially our wings. Is there a case to bring back EF. Not like we have been giving up under 100 a game.

I guess Thibs does have a doghouse but it seems the more permanent occupants are veterans with questionable defense -- Kemba and EF. I'm pro-Thibs but not a big fan of doghouses though.

Cam and Grimes have been perceived as a plus. Question is has that really translated to more wins.
Do feel they are better long term than EF and that we need to see the real affect after they have them healthy for a longer stretch. And by no means am I saying EF should be back in as a starter. Just asking at what point do you let the guy who broke the Knick record for threes back in the rotation? When three point shooting seems to be struggling at the recent rate.

HofstraBBall wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:3pt shooting.
Our last 8 games:

JB 37%
Randle 33%
Rose 33%
Grimes 28%
IQ 30%
RJ 27%
Toppin 26%
Cam 25%

Troubling. Especially our wings. Is there a case to bring back EF. Not like we have been giving up under 100 a game.

I guess Thibs does have a doghouse but it seems the more permanent occupants are veterans with questionable defense -- Kemba and EF. I'm pro-Thibs but not a big fan of doghouses though.

Cam and Grimes have been perceived as a plus. Question is has that really translated to more wins.
Do feel they are better long term than EF and that we need to see the real affect after they have them healthy for a longer stretch. And by no means am I saying EF should be back in as a starter. Just asking at what point do you let the guy who broke the Knick record for threes back in the rotation? When three point shooting seems to be struggling at the recent rate.

For me, Fournier has a chance to take Reddish’s spot. Reddish is still flying under my “potential” banner, he plays solid defense, has exceptional “biometrics” with his height and length and athleticism. He is makes a lot of mistakes though. And I am not sure whether those are “rookie” mistakes that are prolonged by his lack of playing time or whether they are “him” mistakes because it’s just how he plays.

Fournier is a star shooter that makes a lot of mistakes on defense that are “him” mistakes. So far, the second unit worked well with him and the first unit works better without him. Grimes has “won” the starting job and Reddish is hanging on to the 2nd unit SF. He doesn’t have a lock on it, but I think Fournier is closer to an Austin Rivers situation than not.

Team had 18 for game. 6 in garbage time.

Randle 4 assists.
Barrett 1 assist
Grimes 1 assist.
JB 4 assists. 2 in last two minutes.

This team does not pass the ball and has trouble hitting a three.

Defense won the game!

Nalod wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:VS Cleveland.
17% from 3pt.

Randle 4 assists.
Barrett 1 assist
Grimes 1 assist.
JB 4 assists. 2 in last two minutes.

This team does not pass the ball and has trouble hitting a three.

Defense won the game!

we slowed it down and it was not pretty. But the one stat matters. A win!!!

the refs slowed it down!

EwingsGlass wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:3pt shooting.
Our last 8 games:

JB 37%
Randle 33%
Rose 33%
Grimes 28%
IQ 30%
RJ 27%
Toppin 26%
Cam 25%

Troubling. Especially our wings. Is there a case to bring back EF. Not like we have been giving up under 100 a game.

I guess Thibs does have a doghouse but it seems the more permanent occupants are veterans with questionable defense -- Kemba and EF. I'm pro-Thibs but not a big fan of doghouses though.

Cam and Grimes have been perceived as a plus. Question is has that really translated to more wins.
Do feel they are better long term than EF and that we need to see the real affect after they have them healthy for a longer stretch. And by no means am I saying EF should be back in as a starter. Just asking at what point do you let the guy who broke the Knick record for threes back in the rotation? When three point shooting seems to be struggling at the recent rate.

For me, Fournier has a chance to take Reddish’s spot. Reddish is still flying under my “potential” banner, he plays solid defense, has exceptional “biometrics” with his height and length and athleticism. He is makes a lot of mistakes though. And I am not sure whether those are “rookie” mistakes that are prolonged by his lack of playing time or whether they are “him” mistakes because it’s just how he plays.

Fournier is a star shooter that makes a lot of mistakes on defense that are “him” mistakes. So far, the second unit worked well with him and the first unit works better without him. Grimes has “won” the starting job and Reddish is hanging on to the 2nd unit SF. He doesn’t have a lock on it, but I think Fournier is closer to an Austin Rivers situation than not.

Spoken differently, you prefer to play a vet who is very poor defensively and had been struggling to do the one thing he is good at OVER the development over a young player who obviously is making mistakes but needs more playing time?

Like, why? For what benefit?

Prefer is probably too strong of a word. “Foresee” is more appropriate. Just reading tea leaves here.

I’m a pretty huge Reddish fan, but he is making some bad mistakes. I can’t tell whether they are rookie mistakes or just him. So, I don’t know if this is development or prolonged agony. In my preference, Reddish gets extended minutes and becomes an elite 3&D like I have been barking about all year.

I’m not really pro Fournier on anything, but his numbers with the second unit (small sample set) are far less condemning than his minutes in the first unit.

I’d “prefer” to break this team up and start over. It has categorical flaws that are now habitual.

I think you are getting towards the decision-making points every organization has to make. The grey area of development and team winning goals, and IMHO every organization is doing both at the same time and emphasizing one over the other depending on where you fall on the spectrum of deep playoff team to what Houston or Detroit or Spurs are doing.

It's wild to me to see coaches (and obviously Thibs) labeled as a win-now only coach. It's stupid. Every organization has a dev process to it while also knowing how much they have to do to win games. Every team SAYS they want to win as many games as possible and win every game they are about to undertake but have a realistic view on the wins part. You don't see teams hire one type of coaches (maybe full of assistants emphasizing dev) and then dumping them once the team reaches a maturity of a solid playoff team. Obviously team do lean one way or another and it's fluid.

In this scenario, we have Cam and Fournier. Cam is at the end of his contract and the Knicks need more information about what type of player he is; Fournier is a known player, he ain't changing. Maybe he could bring some spacing to that second unit but who cares in the bigger picture of things cause Cam is more important in figuring out if he fits long term.

For me, right now, it's a no-brainer as to why they are sitting Fournier.

martin wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

martin wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:3pt shooting.
Our last 8 games:

JB 37%
Randle 33%
Rose 33%
Grimes 28%
IQ 30%
RJ 27%
Toppin 26%
Cam 25%

Troubling. Especially our wings. Is there a case to bring back EF. Not like we have been giving up under 100 a game.

I guess Thibs does have a doghouse but it seems the more permanent occupants are veterans with questionable defense -- Kemba and EF. I'm pro-Thibs but not a big fan of doghouses though.

Cam and Grimes have been perceived as a plus. Question is has that really translated to more wins.
Do feel they are better long term than EF and that we need to see the real affect after they have them healthy for a longer stretch. And by no means am I saying EF should be back in as a starter. Just asking at what point do you let the guy who broke the Knick record for threes back in the rotation? When three point shooting seems to be struggling at the recent rate.

For me, Fournier has a chance to take Reddish’s spot. Reddish is still flying under my “potential” banner, he plays solid defense, has exceptional “biometrics” with his height and length and athleticism. He is makes a lot of mistakes though. And I am not sure whether those are “rookie” mistakes that are prolonged by his lack of playing time or whether they are “him” mistakes because it’s just how he plays.

Fournier is a star shooter that makes a lot of mistakes on defense that are “him” mistakes. So far, the second unit worked well with him and the first unit works better without him. Grimes has “won” the starting job and Reddish is hanging on to the 2nd unit SF. He doesn’t have a lock on it, but I think Fournier is closer to an Austin Rivers situation than not.

Spoken differently, you prefer to play a vet who is very poor defensively and had been struggling to do the one thing he is good at OVER the development over a young player who obviously is making mistakes but needs more playing time?

Like, why? For what benefit?

Prefer is probably too strong of a word. “Foresee” is more appropriate. Just reading tea leaves here.

I’m a pretty huge Reddish fan, but he is making some bad mistakes. I can’t tell whether they are rookie mistakes or just him. So, I don’t know if this is development or prolonged agony. In my preference, Reddish gets extended minutes and becomes an elite 3&D like I have been barking about all year.

I’m not really pro Fournier on anything, but his numbers with the second unit (small sample set) are far less condemning than his minutes in the first unit.

I’d “prefer” to break this team up and start over. It has categorical flaws that are now habitual.

I think you are getting towards the decision-making points every organization has to make. The grey area of development and team winning goals, and IMHO every organization is doing both at the same time and emphasizing one over the other depending on where you fall on the spectrum of deep playoff team to what Houston or Detroit or Spurs are doing.

It's wild to me to see coaches (and obviously Thibs) labeled as a win-now only coach. It's stupid. Every organization has a dev process to it while also knowing how much they have to do to win games. Every team SAYS they want to win as many games as possible and win every game they are about to undertake but have a realistic view on the wins part. You don't see teams hire one type of coaches (maybe full of assistants emphasizing dev) and then dumping them once the team reaches a maturity of a solid playoff team. Obviously team do lean one way or another and it's fluid.

In this scenario, we have Cam and Fournier. Cam is at the end of his contract and the Knicks need more information about what type of player he is; Fournier is a known player, he ain't changing. Maybe he could bring some spacing to that second unit but who cares in the bigger picture of things cause Cam is more important in figuring out if he fits long term.

For me, right now, it's a no-brainer as to why they are sitting Fournier.

Agree figuring Cam out is more important.
But how many more games is that? I mean, he is not new to the league. Apparently, Thibs may have seen enough?

Some numbers. In last month.
Knicks with Cam logging zero minutes are 2 and 2.
With him logging more than 20 minutes, they are 3-4.
Shooting during starts. 40% FG , 26% from 3pt. Combined -16 for all starts.

Reason for question of when do you give EF some minutes. Unless there has already been a decision to move Rose and EF by deadline. Which may make sense.

Nalod wrote:

RJ, 21 year old avg 20pts and looked great last year. seriously, we "patient best fans in the most famous arena" already to dump him after 20 so games? Really"?

I don't necessarily want to dump him. But I do want him to be reined in a bit. He doesn't need to lead the team in minutes and shots when he's been shooting putrid.
Pass the ****ing ball, RJ. Let the game come to you. It's been painful to watch him force plays and play with no conscience.

martin wrote:some positive defensive numbers

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/FredKatz/status/1600899564667650048

Every good team needs "glue guys" that do the things that go unnoticed. Grimes, Simms, IQ, Deuce, Cam seem to be those type.

HofstraBBall wrote:Knicks are outscoring opponents by 38.2 pts per 100 possessions when the lineup of
Randle
Quickley
Grimes
Robinson
McBride plays

My sense is when Randle is out there with those guys, they cover for him, but also get him to give a little bit extra on the d side.

That is an unreal number!