Fiz wants to have a set lineup by the 25 game mark

[whocares1]

don't give your typical wooohhhh don't insult me response when they come after you when you insulted the person first... just giving youa headsup

Because he and others are insulting the coach. Stop blaming the coach. Stop using “Well the Net rating says” and watch the freaking game. That lineup played well because Timmy carried that lineup offensively. Does that sound like a consistent lineup? Fiz multiple times said he was happy with the starting lineup, he changed it because they weren’t performing well. Stop throwing statistics without analyzing why statistics don’t tell you the whole story.

are you related to the coach? What its to you if they insult the coach. They damn well are open to criticism and someone can call them out on it. That doesn't give you the right to insult someone else when you damn sure know he is in game threads watching the games.

Fiz is a big boy and can live with his decisions and he isn't above criticism...it comes with the job.

As far as you, you can disagree with someones post. But there is nothing more insulting then questing if you watch games. So don't get salty when people come at you for the blatant disrespect.

It’s not blatant disrespect. It’s genuine curiosity. If you’ve watched the last 3-4 games(obviously not v, OKC) you’d know why that lineup wasn’t holding up. To question Fiz’s logic based off a statistic that paints one side of a story instead of recalling the struggles in the first quarters of the last few games tells me people are too reliant on statistics. I’m not anti statistics and I believe in them, but using one stat without understanding the context behind it makes me question who’s actually watching.

It’s too early to micromanage Fiz. Fiz will be judged based on his decision making skills in tough close games that actually matter, and if a team of talented players play hard for him. This is a player’s league. Brad Stevens didn’t go from genius last season to mediocre this season. Give Fiz a chance and questioning shammgod if he watches the game is no where near the “insult” you yourself have thrown at me.

[prophet_of_rage]

so just to be clear you are saying fiz changed the lineup to lose more?

Fiz is being low key brilliant with what he's doing. Forget what he says in the media. That's just coach speak. It doesn't mean anything.

What is he creating? Competition. Everybody has to compete for their spot. Who earns it gets it. So now your young players are engaged. They don't start to feel bad about losing because they are scrapping for their chance to get it, see that coach gives them an opportunity to get it so they don't and they don't lose faith in themselves while never coming close to actually winning. So nobody feels like they are losers. Middle of the pack free agents don't feel like the Knicks are a bad place to work and the young kids don't get entitled or feel like losers because they keep being on the short end of 118-115 games which can really crush you to think hey we're not good enough or win enough of those 118-115 games that you pick up meaningless wins.

You all keep saying this is a lost season, but you all keep watching every little thing. fiz is doing one thing this year, creating an uncomfortable, competitive environment. Once the teardown is complete (all the unwanted contracts are gone (hasn't happened yet)) then he can rebuild with players who don't view him as the coach not good enough to win them close games, but the guy who supported them and gave them chances to earn it.

I think you are incorrect with this assessment. Most people in the disappointed in Fizdale camp are people who recognize there are only like 5 or 6 players that matter. So we aren't watching every little thing we are only watching the things that matter. Fiz is actually the one giving his focus to "every" player.

When have your roster won't be on the team next year you tend to focus on the players that actually will be...and those players need to build chemistry and develop a defensive mindset. Nothing more. As long as that happens it wouldn't be considered a lost season.

A lost season is starting Jarrett Jack all year and guess what like everyone expected he wasn't on the team this year. The same will be the case for a lot of these other guys...its like clockwork.

You're wrong in thinking that only 5 or 6 players matter. If only five or six players are here next year then you can't build continuity. You only have a third of a roster. So when new people come in ... who are they? What do you do with them? What does the team look like? You don't know.

How can you even play 5 or 6 players when they are young? You can't. Part of being the coach is pumping up the value of players who are free agents, making other free agents look at the Knicks as a landing spot. He can't ruin veteran values. No one would sign with the Knicks if that were the perception. Players want to have good jobs and get paid and get another contract. They are concerned about themselves, not winning one for the Knicks. Once they get to the Knicks they'll worry about winning for them, but they've got to get there first.

We're 15 games into a season where the goal is to get a high draft pick. We're doing that. We want to clear space for a free agent. We have to pump up values on contracts we don't want to keep. Once you have your team you can build your identity. We don't have a team yet. So we're using this time to give everybody a fair shake and then focus on the survivors.

[mpharris36]

Fiz is being low key brilliant with what he's doing. Forget what he says in the media. That's just coach speak. It doesn't mean anything.

What is he creating? Competition. Everybody has to compete for their spot. Who earns it gets it. So now your young players are engaged. They don't start to feel bad about losing because they are scrapping for their chance to get it, see that coach gives them an opportunity to get it so they don't and they don't lose faith in themselves while never coming close to actually winning. So nobody feels like they are losers. Middle of the pack free agents don't feel like the Knicks are a bad place to work and the young kids don't get entitled or feel like losers because they keep being on the short end of 118-115 games which can really crush you to think hey we're not good enough or win enough of those 118-115 games that you pick up meaningless wins.

You all keep saying this is a lost season, but you all keep watching every little thing. fiz is doing one thing this year, creating an uncomfortable, competitive environment. Once the teardown is complete (all the unwanted contracts are gone (hasn't happened yet)) then he can rebuild with players who don't view him as the coach not good enough to win them close games, but the guy who supported them and gave them chances to earn it.

I think you are incorrect with this assessment. Most people in the disappointed in Fizdale camp are people who recognize there are only like 5 or 6 players that matter. So we aren't watching every little thing we are only watching the things that matter. Fiz is actually the one giving his focus to "every" player.

When have your roster won't be on the team next year you tend to focus on the players that actually will be...and those players need to build chemistry and develop a defensive mindset. Nothing more. As long as that happens it wouldn't be considered a lost season.

A lost season is starting Jarrett Jack all year and guess what like everyone expected he wasn't on the team this year. The same will be the case for a lot of these other guys...its like clockwork.

You're wrong in thinking that only 5 or 6 players matter. If only five or six players are here next year then you can't build continuity. You only have a third of a roster. So when new people come in ... who are they? What do you do with them? What does the team look like? You don't know.

How can you even play 5 or 6 players when they are young? You can't. Part of being the coach is pumping up the value of players who are free agents, making other free agents look at the Knicks as a landing spot. He can't ruin veteran values. No one would sign with the Knicks if that were the perception. Players want to have good jobs and get paid and get another contract. They are concerned about themselves, not winning one for the Knicks. Once they get to the Knicks they'll worry about winning for them, but they've got to get there first.

We're 15 games into a season where the goal is to get a high draft pick. We're doing that. We want to clear space for a free agent. We have to pump up values on contracts we don't want to keep. Once you have your team you can build your identity. We don't have a team yet. So we're using this time to give everybody a fair shake and then focus on the survivors.

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

[Deeeez Knicks]

My main take away from looking at some of the numbers while backing it up with the eye test is that Mitch can be special on defense. He already is a difference maker and will only get better.

Ultimatley you want to find a balanced lineup, but if we are looking for an identity to build for the future I would embrace the defensive identity instead of trying to build a high octane offense when we don’t have the horses.

Mitch/Dot/Frank/Vonleh…add in KP eventually…this group has some defensive potential that will only get better. The advanced stats back up these lineups when you look at combinations. Can mix in Trier/Knox/Timmy for some scoring. Mitch still has to learn to stay out of foul trouble and work up to bigger minutes, but he def looks like someone that can anchor the defense.

Another stat that backs up the big difference we see:
Mitch’s DFG% against is 41.7% (Difference of -6.8).
Kanter’s DFG% against is 60.2% (Difference of +10.8)

[prophet_of_rage]

I think you are incorrect with this assessment. Most people in the disappointed in Fizdale camp are people who recognize there are only like 5 or 6 players that matter. So we aren't watching every little thing we are only watching the things that matter. Fiz is actually the one giving his focus to "every" player.

When have your roster won't be on the team next year you tend to focus on the players that actually will be...and those players need to build chemistry and develop a defensive mindset. Nothing more. As long as that happens it wouldn't be considered a lost season.

A lost season is starting Jarrett Jack all year and guess what like everyone expected he wasn't on the team this year. The same will be the case for a lot of these other guys...its like clockwork.

You're wrong in thinking that only 5 or 6 players matter. If only five or six players are here next year then you can't build continuity. You only have a third of a roster. So when new people come in ... who are they? What do you do with them? What does the team look like? You don't know.

How can you even play 5 or 6 players when they are young? You can't. Part of being the coach is pumping up the value of players who are free agents, making other free agents look at the Knicks as a landing spot. He can't ruin veteran values. No one would sign with the Knicks if that were the perception. Players want to have good jobs and get paid and get another contract. They are concerned about themselves, not winning one for the Knicks. Once they get to the Knicks they'll worry about winning for them, but they've got to get there first.

We're 15 games into a season where the goal is to get a high draft pick. We're doing that. We want to clear space for a free agent. We have to pump up values on contracts we don't want to keep. Once you have your team you can build your identity. We don't have a team yet. So we're using this time to give everybody a fair shake and then focus on the survivors.

The survivors are not clear. You don't know which of your five or six guys who matter are here post trade deadline. The capholds don't have to be renounced until you have a commitment from your free agent, which isn't guaranteed. If nobody takes the Knicks money you're bringing some of these guys back if you can. Nothing is set in stone.

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

We don't know who is coming and who will be back. You don't have to renounce until you have some backdoor commitments.

[mpharris36]

You're wrong in thinking that only 5 or 6 players matter. If only five or six players are here next year then you can't build continuity. You only have a third of a roster. So when new people come in ... who are they? What do you do with them? What does the team look like? You don't know.

How can you even play 5 or 6 players when they are young? You can't. Part of being the coach is pumping up the value of players who are free agents, making other free agents look at the Knicks as a landing spot. He can't ruin veteran values. No one would sign with the Knicks if that were the perception. Players want to have good jobs and get paid and get another contract. They are concerned about themselves, not winning one for the Knicks. Once they get to the Knicks they'll worry about winning for them, but they've got to get there first.

We're 15 games into a season where the goal is to get a high draft pick. We're doing that. We want to clear space for a free agent. We have to pump up values on contracts we don't want to keep. Once you have your team you can build your identity. We don't have a team yet. So we're using this time to give everybody a fair shake and then focus on the survivors.

The survivors are not clear. You don't know which of your five or six guys who matter are here post trade deadline. The capholds don't have to be renounced until you have a commitment from your free agent, which isn't guaranteed. If nobody takes the Knicks money you're bringing some of these guys back if you can. Nothing is set in stone.

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

We don't know who is coming and who will be back. You don't have to renounce until you have some backdoor commitments.

of course we don't know exactly...however you can do some deductive reasoning. There a few guys guaranteed back. There more guys with less certain futures...

[cuyankees]

You're wrong in thinking that only 5 or 6 players matter. If only five or six players are here next year then you can't build continuity. You only have a third of a roster. So when new people come in ... who are they? What do you do with them? What does the team look like? You don't know.

How can you even play 5 or 6 players when they are young? You can't. Part of being the coach is pumping up the value of players who are free agents, making other free agents look at the Knicks as a landing spot. He can't ruin veteran values. No one would sign with the Knicks if that were the perception. Players want to have good jobs and get paid and get another contract. They are concerned about themselves, not winning one for the Knicks. Once they get to the Knicks they'll worry about winning for them, but they've got to get there first.

We're 15 games into a season where the goal is to get a high draft pick. We're doing that. We want to clear space for a free agent. We have to pump up values on contracts we don't want to keep. Once you have your team you can build your identity. We don't have a team yet. So we're using this time to give everybody a fair shake and then focus on the survivors.

The survivors are not clear. You don't know which of your five or six guys who matter are here post trade deadline. The capholds don't have to be renounced until you have a commitment from your free agent, which isn't guaranteed. If nobody takes the Knicks money you're bringing some of these guys back if you can. Nothing is set in stone.

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

We don't know who is coming and who will be back. You don't have to renounce until you have some backdoor commitments.

So had thought the same thing, then got corrected, then researched it and kept it to myself bc it's fun to see pretend know-it-alls spew (kt aside bc he does know it all) nonsense and most importantly certain mods get bent out of shape when correcting them due to their sense of entitlement and aloofness.

Free agency starts, you have 6-7 days to get verbal commitments, you can get a verbal commitment wout using a backdoor or hand signals or burner phones. FAs are officially signed after that verbal commitment time period and teams are renouncing rights during those days after the official start of FA so in theory all of the players on the Knicks have a future bc if Pills strikes out they don't renounce anyone.

[vallen]

Read on Twitter

I dont think its worth reading into.
This doesn't seem like he is saying anything at all.
He would "ideally" like to get it setup by 25 games but is "open to tweaking it."

Thread should have ended here. But reading into things is what keeps most of these fans here going.

[Jeff Van Gully]

I think you are incorrect with this assessment. Most people in the disappointed in Fizdale camp are people who recognize there are only like 5 or 6 players that matter. So we aren't watching every little thing we are only watching the things that matter. Fiz is actually the one giving his focus to "every" player.

When have your roster won't be on the team next year you tend to focus on the players that actually will be...and those players need to build chemistry and develop a defensive mindset. Nothing more. As long as that happens it wouldn't be considered a lost season.

A lost season is starting Jarrett Jack all year and guess what like everyone expected he wasn't on the team this year. The same will be the case for a lot of these other guys...its like clockwork.

You're wrong in thinking that only 5 or 6 players matter. If only five or six players are here next year then you can't build continuity. You only have a third of a roster. So when new people come in ... who are they? What do you do with them? What does the team look like? You don't know.

How can you even play 5 or 6 players when they are young? You can't. Part of being the coach is pumping up the value of players who are free agents, making other free agents look at the Knicks as a landing spot. He can't ruin veteran values. No one would sign with the Knicks if that were the perception. Players want to have good jobs and get paid and get another contract. They are concerned about themselves, not winning one for the Knicks. Once they get to the Knicks they'll worry about winning for them, but they've got to get there first.

We're 15 games into a season where the goal is to get a high draft pick. We're doing that. We want to clear space for a free agent. We have to pump up values on contracts we don't want to keep. Once you have your team you can build your identity. We don't have a team yet. So we're using this time to give everybody a fair shake and then focus on the survivors.

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

there's still a balancing act and professionalism that come with that.

you can't just DNP-CD enes kanter because you don't think you're going to retain him. until management changes your personnel, you have to work with what you've got. hornacek faced a similar challenge.

[GONYK]

The survivors are not clear. You don't know which of your five or six guys who matter are here post trade deadline. The capholds don't have to be renounced until you have a commitment from your free agent, which isn't guaranteed. If nobody takes the Knicks money you're bringing some of these guys back if you can. Nothing is set in stone.

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

We don't know who is coming and who will be back. You don't have to renounce until you have some backdoor commitments.

So had thought the same thing, then got corrected, then researched it and kept it to myself bc it's fun to see pretend know-it-alls spew (kt aside bc he does know it all) nonsense and most importantly certain mods get bent out of shape when correcting them due to their sense of entitlement and aloofness.

Free agency starts, you have 6-7 days to get verbal commitments, you can get a verbal commitment wout using a backdoor or hand signals or burner phones. FAs are officially signed after that verbal commitment time period and teams are renouncing rights during those days after the official start of FA so in theory all of the players on the Knicks have a future bc if Pills strikes out they don't renounce anyone.

In theory? Yes.

In actuality, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of bringing back the same roster.

[GONYK]

You're wrong in thinking that only 5 or 6 players matter. If only five or six players are here next year then you can't build continuity. You only have a third of a roster. So when new people come in ... who are they? What do you do with them? What does the team look like? You don't know.

How can you even play 5 or 6 players when they are young? You can't. Part of being the coach is pumping up the value of players who are free agents, making other free agents look at the Knicks as a landing spot. He can't ruin veteran values. No one would sign with the Knicks if that were the perception. Players want to have good jobs and get paid and get another contract. They are concerned about themselves, not winning one for the Knicks. Once they get to the Knicks they'll worry about winning for them, but they've got to get there first.

We're 15 games into a season where the goal is to get a high draft pick. We're doing that. We want to clear space for a free agent. We have to pump up values on contracts we don't want to keep. Once you have your team you can build your identity. We don't have a team yet. So we're using this time to give everybody a fair shake and then focus on the survivors.

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

there's still a balancing act and professionalism that come with that.

you can't just DNP-CD enes kanter because you don't think you're going to retain him. until management changes your personnel, you have to work with what you've got. hornacek faced a similar challenge.

That's why you cut him.

[Deeeez Knicks]

Kanter's cap hold is around $30mil. Either way he should be renounced right away because even our worst GMs of past would think it would be insane to resign him for that much.

but yeah, just cut him now and get it over with...Unleash Kornet!

[cuyankees]

Because he and others are insulting the coach. Stop blaming the coach. Stop using “Well the Net rating says” and watch the freaking game. That lineup played well because Timmy carried that lineup offensively. Does that sound like a consistent lineup? Fiz multiple times said he was happy with the starting lineup, he changed it because they weren’t performing well. Stop throwing statistics without analyzing why statistics don’t tell you the whole story.

are you related to the coach? What its to you if they insult the coach. They damn well are open to criticism and someone can call them out on it. That doesn't give you the right to insult someone else when you damn sure know he is in game threads watching the games.

Fiz is a big boy and can live with his decisions and he isn't above criticism...it comes with the job.

As far as you, you can disagree with someones post. But there is nothing more insulting then questing if you watch games. So don't get salty when people come at you for the blatant disrespect.

It’s not blatant disrespect. It’s genuine curiosity. If you’ve watched the last 3-4 games(obviously not v, OKC) you’d know why that lineup wasn’t holding up. To question Fiz’s logic based off a statistic that paints one side of a story instead of recalling the struggles in the first quarters of the last few games tells me people are too reliant on statistics. I’m not anti statistics and I believe in them, but using one stat without understanding the context behind it makes me question who’s actually watching.

It’s too early to micromanage Fiz. Fiz will be judged based on his decision making skills in tough close games that actually matter, and if a team of talented players play hard for him. This is a player’s league. Brad Stevens didn’t go from genius last season to mediocre this season. Give Fiz a chance and questioning shammgod if he watches the game is no where near the “insult” you yourself have thrown at me.

Irony:
The supposed most respected posters on this forum, mods, are self proclaimed armchair analysts that rely soley on analytics, but it's obvious they've never played/coached or any function at any organized bball level.

[cuyankees]

We don't know who is coming and who will be back. You don't have to renounce until you have some backdoor commitments.

So had thought the same thing, then got corrected, then researched it and kept it to myself bc it's fun to see pretend know-it-alls spew (kt aside bc he does know it all) nonsense and most importantly certain mods get bent out of shape when correcting them due to their sense of entitlement and aloofness.

Free agency starts, you have 6-7 days to get verbal commitments, you can get a verbal commitment wout using a backdoor or hand signals or burner phones. FAs are officially signed after that verbal commitment time period and teams are renouncing rights during those days after the official start of FA so in theory all of the players on the Knicks have a future bc if Pills strikes out they don't renounce anyone.

In theory? Yes.

In actuality, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of bringing back the same roster.

If Pills makes the decision to cut bait, then obvi not same roster, but it isn't a forced hand for a max slot like most have thought.

FA starts, verbal agreement, renounce rights, then officially sign on dotted line days later so can have cake & eat it too. There's a rhyme & reason for "developing" every single player on the roster regardless of contract status.

[mpharris36]

just like every played on a 1 year contract last year...right....

[GONYK]

So had thought the same thing, then got corrected, then researched it and kept it to myself bc it's fun to see pretend know-it-alls spew (kt aside bc he does know it all) nonsense and most importantly certain mods get bent out of shape when correcting them due to their sense of entitlement and aloofness.

Free agency starts, you have 6-7 days to get verbal commitments, you can get a verbal commitment wout using a backdoor or hand signals or burner phones. FAs are officially signed after that verbal commitment time period and teams are renouncing rights during those days after the official start of FA so in theory all of the players on the Knicks have a future bc if Pills strikes out they don't renounce anyone.

In theory? Yes.

In actuality, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of bringing back the same roster.

If Pills makes the decision to cut bait, then obvi not same roster, but it isn't a forced hand for a max slot like most have thought.

FA starts, verbal agreement, renounce rights, then officially sign on dotted line days later so can have cake & eat it too. There's a rhyme & reason for "developing" every single player on the roster regardless of contract status.

The only reason would be that our management has no plan and don't know what they want to do 5 minutes from now.

If you're positing that they might want to bring back a 25 win team if they don't sign anyone, then you don't really think highly of them.

[Capn'O]

Irony:
The supposed most respected posters on this forum, mods, are self proclaimed armchair analysts that rely soley on analytics, but it's obvious they've never played/coached or any function at any organized bball level.

Another good way to gain respect on these forums and generally in life is not to be demeaning to nearly everyone you encounter, as you have with all the accounts you've made thus far. Food for thought.

[prophet_of_rage]

The survivors are not clear. You don't know which of your five or six guys who matter are here post trade deadline. The capholds don't have to be renounced until you have a commitment from your free agent, which isn't guaranteed. If nobody takes the Knicks money you're bringing some of these guys back if you can. Nothing is set in stone.

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

We don't know who is coming and who will be back. You don't have to renounce until you have some backdoor commitments.

So had thought the same thing, then got corrected, then researched it and kept it to myself bc it's fun to see pretend know-it-alls spew (kt aside bc he does know it all) nonsense and most importantly certain mods get bent out of shape when correcting them due to their sense of entitlement and aloofness.

Free agency starts, you have 6-7 days to get verbal commitments, you can get a verbal commitment wout using a backdoor or hand signals or burner phones. FAs are officially signed after that verbal commitment time period and teams are renouncing rights during those days after the official start of FA so in theory all of the players on the Knicks have a future bc if Pills strikes out they don't renounce anyone.

Shhh ...

[mpharris36]

Shhh ...

you really want to be linked with that dude?

[Jeff Van Gully]

the survivors are already clear cut for the most part because we want space for a free agent. It's just the way it works. You can't keep there cap holds on the roster is you want that free agent space. Hence why there will be major roster turnover next year.

there's still a balancing act and professionalism that come with that.

you can't just DNP-CD enes kanter because you don't think you're going to retain him. until management changes your personnel, you have to work with what you've got. hornacek faced a similar challenge.

That's why you cut him.

before the trade deadline? he has value.