Post game : the **** mid continues...

[god shammgod]

Rose and Reddish to Lakers for Pat Beverly and Kendrick Nunn...Lakers add a protected 1st round pick.

they aint doing that. and i don't think they want to traded a protected pick because that'll mess up their chance of trading another one.

they were willing to give up a first for reddish last year according to reports (I think there was some more involved). But Beverly and Nunn have been complete duds for them.

i think last year they were thinking differently. i just don't see why they would want rose. and i don't think they're trading picks unless it's for a real difference maker. i actually think they might like fournier more but i think they want to keep the cap space open unless they're bringing in a derozan or someone like this. because supposedly kyrie is on his way unless the nets go to the finals or something and they bring him back. but that doesn't seem likely. maybe they would do a pick swap and this way they could still trade 2 picks.

[Buttah304]

does cam really have a right to complain about his playing time. He is avg 8 pts 1 reb and 1 assist per game and shooting barely 30% from 3. Its not like he's killing it.

Just think there’s a niche for him on the team to defend some of the bigger/more athletic wings out there.

His offense has been all over the place, but he was doing a decent job guarding the best starting wings on the other team. Figure a defensive coach like Thibs would be able to use him in some way.

But lets all be honest, Cam has not shown enough to be retained unless its on some real cheap deal, so they’ll likely get whatever they can for him before the deadline. He has all the physical tools and some nice moves sometimes, but his BBIQ and intensity isn’t there.

Just another reclamation project failure alongside Hezonja, DWilliams, Vonleh, DSJ, Mudiay, Beasley, Jennings, Burke, Aldrich, JTyler, etc.

I don’t know what’s more pathetic. Our lottery drafting or these reclamation projects we embark on every season.

This FO is a giant cluster F. Sure we’ve had worse but this is like putting lipstick on a damn pig.

[Clyde Frazier]

"Fun" with lineup data:

Brunson/IQ 207 min +10.3 net rating
Brunson/IQ/RJ 112 min +14.2
IQ/Obi 351 min +3.6
Cam/Obi 182 min +4.2
IQ/Cam/Obi 148 min +2.6

I wonder what our record would be if all these minutes were higher thibs... I wonder

[Zenzibar]

Watch on YouTube

[Chanel Bomber]

"Fun" with lineup data:

Brunson/IQ 207 min +10.3 net rating
Brunson/IQ/RJ 112 min +14.2
IQ/Obi 351 min +3.6
Cam/Obi 182 min +4.2
IQ/Cam/Obi 148 min +2.6

I wonder what our record would be if all these minutes were higher thibs... I wonder

The Knicks have always been good with IQ on the floor thanks to his defense and his spacing the floor (despite the low percentages).

But he's a bench player and those minutes (with Brunson, RJ) likely come against staggered line-ups, so to be taken with a grain of salt.

What the numbers suggest imo is that IQ is a difference-maker as a bench player. Extend those minutes until they come against starters and I would expect a regression. It's a mystery box until he gets to start but the percentages aren't promising.

[thebuzzardman]

A week goes by and everybody wants to move to Grimestan.

If you were nice I'll issue you a tourist visa

He still isn't shooting well, so in spite of his good play, I'm still winning!

You have to admit though that he plays actual basketball more than almost anyone else on the roster. He rarely falters in making the correct decision. Don't you agree?

Yup.

[RHODEY]

Bad news: Stuck with Thibs longer
Good news: When he's fired, it's a package deal and the entire FO (probably minus Scott Perry) and coaching staff is fired too.

Even Knick good news isn't good news

Did Bear give you permission to use their likeness?

I'm lawyered up.

[Clyde Frazier]

"Fun" with lineup data:

Brunson/IQ 207 min +10.3 net rating
Brunson/IQ/RJ 112 min +14.2
IQ/Obi 351 min +3.6
Cam/Obi 182 min +4.2
IQ/Cam/Obi 148 min +2.6

I wonder what our record would be if all these minutes were higher thibs... I wonder

The Knicks have always been good with IQ on the floor thanks to his defense and his spacing the floor (despite the low percentages).

But he's a bench player and those minutes (with Brunson, RJ) likely come against staggered line-ups, so to be taken with a grain of salt.

What the numbers suggest imo is that IQ is a difference-maker as a bench player. Extend those minutes until they come against starters and I would expect a regression. It's a mystery box until he gets to start but the percentages aren't promising.

Well we know he'll never give IQ a chance to start after the burks debacle last season. But if he staggered more we'd get a larger sample of these minutes against starters. Obi has been relegated to a spot up shooter and can't even crack 20 MPG yet still shows positive impact. To be clear I'm not saying we'd be exceedingly better but we've still blown games due to his stubbornness. It's maddening.

[Chanel Bomber]

"Fun" with lineup data:

Brunson/IQ 207 min +10.3 net rating
Brunson/IQ/RJ 112 min +14.2
IQ/Obi 351 min +3.6
Cam/Obi 182 min +4.2
IQ/Cam/Obi 148 min +2.6

I wonder what our record would be if all these minutes were higher thibs... I wonder

The Knicks have always been good with IQ on the floor thanks to his defense and his spacing the floor (despite the low percentages).

But he's a bench player and those minutes (with Brunson, RJ) likely come against staggered line-ups, so to be taken with a grain of salt.

What the numbers suggest imo is that IQ is a difference-maker as a bench player. Extend those minutes until they come against starters and I would expect a regression. It's a mystery box until he gets to start but the percentages aren't promising.

Well we know he'll never give IQ a chance to start after the burks debacle last season. But if he staggered more we'd get a larger sample of these minutes against starters. Obi has been relegated to a spot up shooter and can't even crack 20 MPG yet still shows positive impact. To be clear I'm not saying we'd be exceedingly better but we've still blown games due to his stubbornness. It's maddening.

I've been in favor of IQ starting at the 2 for a while but realistically both him and Obi are bench players. Excellent, impactful bench players, no question. But can they replicate their performance/impact against starters? It seems doubtful to me. It's a big step. And being a starter does require you to fit into a role more than as a bench player, where you can freelance a bit more.

Obi has been wildly (and disappointingly) ineffective as the roll man so far in his career, and he can't do much on-ball because of his limited handle. So he's a role player. A role player should be expected to space the floor in 2022, imo. He's a bit like RJ in that he's not good enough to be featured and his skill set is not one you see in most reliable role players (spacing and defense). I think the Knicks would be wise to move him if he has any value. He's fairly entertaining to watch though.

[Clyde_Style]

I would guess we're actively looking at trades for:

DRose
Cam
IQ
Hart
Toppin
Fournier

As Rhodey insinuated, DRose and Cam (also IQ) are the most likely to be easily moved for value.

That is the trade list though if anyone really wanted either Randle or RJ I think they'd listen

I'm wondering if IQ's recent strong play will make him a more valuable trade piece in their eyes or more likely to be kept. Wondering if his agent wants a trade because he knows he won't start, because I can see the value in keeping him as our sixth man.

[Clyde_Style]

The Knicks have always been good with IQ on the floor thanks to his defense and his spacing the floor (despite the low percentages).

But he's a bench player and those minutes (with Brunson, RJ) likely come against staggered line-ups, so to be taken with a grain of salt.

What the numbers suggest imo is that IQ is a difference-maker as a bench player. Extend those minutes until they come against starters and I would expect a regression. It's a mystery box until he gets to start but the percentages aren't promising.

Well we know he'll never give IQ a chance to start after the burks debacle last season. But if he staggered more we'd get a larger sample of these minutes against starters. Obi has been relegated to a spot up shooter and can't even crack 20 MPG yet still shows positive impact. To be clear I'm not saying we'd be exceedingly better but we've still blown games due to his stubbornness. It's maddening.

I've been in favor of IQ starting at the 2 for a while but realistically both him and Obi are bench players. Excellent, impactful bench players, no question. But can they replicate their performance/impact against starters? It seems doubtful to me. It's a big step. And being a starter does require you to fit into a role more than as a bench player, where you can freelance a bit more.

Obi has been wildly (and disappointingly) ineffective as the roll man so far in his career, and he can't do much on-ball because of his limited handle. So he's a role player. A role player should be expected to space the floor in 2022, imo. He's a bit like RJ in that he's not good enough to be featured and his skill set is not one you see in most reliable role players (spacing and defense). I think the Knicks would be wise to move him if he has any value. He's fairly entertaining to watch though.

You prefer IQ over Grimes to start?

[Chanel Bomber]

Well we know he'll never give IQ a chance to start after the burks debacle last season. But if he staggered more we'd get a larger sample of these minutes against starters. Obi has been relegated to a spot up shooter and can't even crack 20 MPG yet still shows positive impact. To be clear I'm not saying we'd be exceedingly better but we've still blown games due to his stubbornness. It's maddening.

I've been in favor of IQ starting at the 2 for a while but realistically both him and Obi are bench players. Excellent, impactful bench players, no question. But can they replicate their performance/impact against starters? It seems doubtful to me. It's a big step. And being a starter does require you to fit into a role more than as a bench player, where you can freelance a bit more.

Obi has been wildly (and disappointingly) ineffective as the roll man so far in his career, and he can't do much on-ball because of his limited handle. So he's a role player. A role player should be expected to space the floor in 2022, imo. He's a bit like RJ in that he's not good enough to be featured and his skill set is not one you see in most reliable role players (spacing and defense). I think the Knicks would be wise to move him if he has any value. He's fairly entertaining to watch though.

You prefer IQ over Grimes to start?

I think ideally you start both alongside Brunson. That makes you small on the wings, but they've shown more commitment on defense anyway. Not that it's going to happen. I sort of like Grimes but I don't think he's proven more than IQ has. It doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

[Clyde Frazier]

The Knicks have always been good with IQ on the floor thanks to his defense and his spacing the floor (despite the low percentages).

But he's a bench player and those minutes (with Brunson, RJ) likely come against staggered line-ups, so to be taken with a grain of salt.

What the numbers suggest imo is that IQ is a difference-maker as a bench player. Extend those minutes until they come against starters and I would expect a regression. It's a mystery box until he gets to start but the percentages aren't promising.

Well we know he'll never give IQ a chance to start after the burks debacle last season. But if he staggered more we'd get a larger sample of these minutes against starters. Obi has been relegated to a spot up shooter and can't even crack 20 MPG yet still shows positive impact. To be clear I'm not saying we'd be exceedingly better but we've still blown games due to his stubbornness. It's maddening.

I've been in favor of IQ starting at the 2 for a while but realistically both him and Obi are bench players. Excellent, impactful bench players, no question. But can they replicate their performance/impact against starters? It seems doubtful to me. It's a big step. And being a starter does require you to fit into a role more than as a bench player, where you can freelance a bit more.

Obi has been wildly (and disappointingly) ineffective as the roll man so far in his career, and he can't do much on-ball because of his limited handle. So he's a role player. A role player should be expected to space the floor in 2022, imo. He's a bit like RJ in that he's not good enough to be featured and his skill set is not one you see in most reliable role players (spacing and defense). I think the Knicks would be wise to move him if he has any value. He's fairly entertaining to watch though.

Hmm… I agree their impact would be lessened playing against starters more, but isn’t that true of all players? Unless you think they’d have negative impact which I personally don’t. Obi is in a worse situation than IQ because at least IQ has gotten some real run with the injuries in the second half of last season. Thibs is always ready to give obi the hook and I don’t think we have a clue what he can be at this point as a result.

You mention him being a disappointing roll man but the sample is diminishing in the wrong direction. He should ideally be getting a ton of P&R reps to see how effective he can be there. I think it’s important for him to be able to space the floor but he’s definitely shooting too many 3s. Doesn’t need that many to get comfortable over time. His 3PT rate is .56… that’s just wasteful.

[KnixtapeH20]

Read on Twitter

as the song says.....na na....na na....hey hey hey.....goodbye motherf*cker

I see him, Cam and maybe Rose the most likely to be gone by the deadline

So Knixtape right again, Love to see it.

Team Mitch winning n grinning

[Chanel Bomber]

Well we know he'll never give IQ a chance to start after the burks debacle last season. But if he staggered more we'd get a larger sample of these minutes against starters. Obi has been relegated to a spot up shooter and can't even crack 20 MPG yet still shows positive impact. To be clear I'm not saying we'd be exceedingly better but we've still blown games due to his stubbornness. It's maddening.

I've been in favor of IQ starting at the 2 for a while but realistically both him and Obi are bench players. Excellent, impactful bench players, no question. But can they replicate their performance/impact against starters? It seems doubtful to me. It's a big step. And being a starter does require you to fit into a role more than as a bench player, where you can freelance a bit more.

Obi has been wildly (and disappointingly) ineffective as the roll man so far in his career, and he can't do much on-ball because of his limited handle. So he's a role player. A role player should be expected to space the floor in 2022, imo. He's a bit like RJ in that he's not good enough to be featured and his skill set is not one you see in most reliable role players (spacing and defense). I think the Knicks would be wise to move him if he has any value. He's fairly entertaining to watch though.

Hmm… I agree their impact would be lessened playing against starters more, but isn’t that true of all players? Unless you think they’d have negative impact which I personally don’t. Obi is in a worse situation than IQ because at least IQ has gotten some real run with the injuries in the second half of last season. Thibs is always ready to give obi the hook and I don’t think we have a clue what he can be at this point as a result.

You mention him being a disappointing roll man but the sample is diminishing in the wrong direction. He should ideally be getting a ton of P&R reps to see how effective he can be there. I think it’s important for him to be able to space the floor but he’s definitely shooting too many 3s. Doesn’t need that many to get comfortable over time. His 3PT rate is .56… that’s just wasteful.

Yes of course I agree, some regression is to be expected regardless going from the bench to the starters. I don't think Obi's skill set projects him as an impactful starter. IQ's shooting percentages are not good enough, but I'm a bit higher on him because of his defense, which gives him a baseline of competence, so to speak.

I think you're higher on Obi than me. I think the bench role is ideal for him, but I don't see starter material unless he can shoot from 3 at a high percentage. He doesn't defend, and I don't see this threat in the pick-and-roll. He's mostly efficient as a cutter and in transition. I wouldn't mind seeing what he can do as a starter in a scenario where Randle gets dumped (though good luck with that) but I wouldn't get my hopes up. I just don't know what his role is as a starter.

[KnixtapeH20]

Trading hart is small change
Hardly any relief
Gotta trade Mitch

You might want to get used to Mitch. After Brunson, he is the least likely player to be moved in a trade. It doesn't matter if you like him or not. He is not going anywhere

Well get used to sucking
Because any team building around him as a player is working backwards.
It doesn’t matter if I like him ,
He has historically been a tank commander which is why the team needs to move on .
ASAP

I'm loving this pattern of u being wrong on just about everything we discuss

Mitch
Grimes
Sims
Deuce

Claimed Isiah would overtake Mitch as a starter like it was EVER going to happen or if it actually made us a better team in any sense.

Called Grimes a G-leaguer
Called Sims a G-leaguer
Called Deuce a G-leaguer

Nooootorious! spit yo claim, talk yo ish, grab yo L cause a fit!

[Clyde_Style]

I've been in favor of IQ starting at the 2 for a while but realistically both him and Obi are bench players. Excellent, impactful bench players, no question. But can they replicate their performance/impact against starters? It seems doubtful to me. It's a big step. And being a starter does require you to fit into a role more than as a bench player, where you can freelance a bit more.

Obi has been wildly (and disappointingly) ineffective as the roll man so far in his career, and he can't do much on-ball because of his limited handle. So he's a role player. A role player should be expected to space the floor in 2022, imo. He's a bit like RJ in that he's not good enough to be featured and his skill set is not one you see in most reliable role players (spacing and defense). I think the Knicks would be wise to move him if he has any value. He's fairly entertaining to watch though.

You prefer IQ over Grimes to start?

I think ideally you start both alongside Brunson. That makes you small on the wings, but they've shown more commitment on defense anyway. Not that it's going to happen. I sort of like Grimes but I don't think he's proven more than IQ has. It doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

Oh not what I expected. So you'd bring RJ off the bench to do that. Well it certainly would be a better defensive first unit with both of them. If you could get Randle to play like he did two years ago Brunson would be the only weak link defensively.

As a Grimestan I think he'll end up better in the long run, but I think IQ is playing pretty well lately. The issue for all of them is their long ball. Nobody on the squad is particularly good from deep this year. YET. I think both Grimes and IQ can improve their 3% over the course of the season. I'd like to see Deuce achieve that too if he's going to get minutes now.

[god shammgod]

power rankings this week - knicks at 21st

https://www.nba.com/news/power-rankings-2022-23-week-8

The Knicks actually have a starting lineup that’s been solid, outscoring opponents by 7.9 points per 100 possessions (and scoring 119.8 per 100) over the eight games that it has started together. Coach Tom Thibodeau must love Quentin Grimes’ defense, because he played the second-year guard more than 40 minutes on Sunday, even though Grimes shot 2-for-8 with four turnovers. The Knicks have allowed just 105.4 points per 100 possessions in 161 minutes with Grimes and Robinson on the floor together, including (small sample size alert) just 32 points on 51 defensive possessions (63 per 100) with those two on the floor without Jalen Brunson.

[Capn'O]

I would guess we're actively looking at trades for:

DRose
Cam
IQ
Hart
Toppin
Fournier

As Rhodey insinuated, DRose and Cam (also IQ) are the most likely to be easily moved for value.

That is the trade list though if anyone really wanted either Randle or RJ I think they'd listen

I'm wondering if IQ's recent strong play will make him a more valuable trade piece in their eyes or more likely to be kept. Wondering if his agent wants a trade because he knows he won't start, because I can see the value in keeping him as our sixth man.

The "listen" list should be everyone except Brunson and maybe Grimes.

[Chanel Bomber]

You prefer IQ over Grimes to start?

I think ideally you start both alongside Brunson. That makes you small on the wings, but they've shown more commitment on defense anyway. Not that it's going to happen. I sort of like Grimes but I don't think he's proven more than IQ has. It doesn't really matter at the end of the day.

Oh not what I expected. So you'd bring RJ off the bench to do that. Well it certainly would be a better defensive first unit with both of them. If you could get Randle to play like he did two years ago Brunson would be the only weak link defensively.

As a Grimestan I think he'll end up better in the long run, but I think IQ is playing pretty well lately. The issue for all of them is their long ball. Nobody on the squad is particularly good from deep this year. YET. I think both Grimes and IQ can improve their 3% over the course of the season. I'd like to see Deuce achieve that too if he's going to get minutes now.

Yes I would do that because - while they're not hitting jumpshots either - at least they are playing defense. And with Brunson in the line-up, the team doesn't need an aggressive driver playing alongside him, especially since the efficiency doesn't justify it.

The Knicks have been horrible from 3, including Grimes and IQ. I'm a bit worried about Grimes because his FT% - traditionally a pretty strong predictor for 3-point shooting - has always been mediocre. With IQ, the FT% is there, and he clearly can hit pull-up 3s, but the C&S numbers are worrying (26.6% this year, 32.7% last year, but 46.7% as a rookie). They suggest an off-ball role might not be best for him, and is he good enough to be an on-ball player as a starter? I don't think so at this stage.

Of all our young players, Grimes probably fits a starter's archetype the most. But if he can't hit his 3s, that point is moot. We just have too many flawed players at the end of the day.