PG: Knicks almost lose the huge lead, Brunson goes down with an ankle injury, but they win.

[Jalen Bluntson]

Exactly, but the response will be nonsense “you’ve planted your flag” instead of accepting these truths.

They don’t care about the facts, the truth about minutes (guys not being overused based on actual minutes played) or that the injuries are mostly due to chance.

It’s not that I don’t care. It’s that you make zero sense.

The solar system was created by random chance too, but that doesn’t magically remove the existence of gravity.

Denying that Thibs increases the odds of player injury is like denying the existence of gravity. It’s just a ridiculous position and what you’re really signaling is that you’re an old-school tough guy.

Mind you, I’m a Thibs fan! I just choose to acknowledge the basic existence of reality. He’s gonna cause injuries and playoff fatigue. We know this. We’ve always know this.

before mitch got injured both players pretty much split the minutes. the current situation is not by design.

it's really you who's not making sense. is thibs managing minutes or not?

and... planting the flag? you opened the door and i responded.

Before Mitch got hurt, iHart was playing 20mpg some nights 24 at best. Then he went to 38-40mpg nightly. With a condition that is aggravated by overuse. Now he is hurting again. So there's one simple fact that points to Thibs being a madman. Why wasn't he splitting minutes with anyone else?

Jalen was out for a few games with a leg injury. Thibs plays him 80 minutes in his first two games back. More proof. Breen and Clyde begging Thibs to take Jalen out a few games ago. Hmm. Yeah. The fans here make things up.

RJ tweaking his ankle in a blow out last year is another example of lousy minutes distribution. Countless blow out games Thibs has the starters in to the end. Then the bench guys get a minute of GT? Way to go.

Precious going from 7 mpg to 42 mpg? OG playing 44mpg before he got hurt with an injury caused by overuse?. 6-7 man rotations? Playing 5 guys an entire 2nd half of a game? Hart having jumpers knee and playing 42mpg. Even HE commented about his minutes a week ago.

Anyone denying Thibs is awful at this is high. Stop looking at avgs because like everything else stats related, it doesn't come close to telling the whole story. This was just off the top of my head. He clearly doesn't use the bench enough during the regular season until everyone else gets hurt. Even then he tends to shorten the rotation instead. This cannot be denied. When players and announcers are commenting on it...there's an issue.

[Gravy]

If Precious steps on a foot tomorrow then everyone will be happy as we get to see Malachi Flynn and Jacob Toppin tear up the league.

[Chanel Bomber]

I don't have an issue with the minutes per se. It's just... why leave guys in for so long in blowouts. First off, the guys could be getting rest and would be out harms way of any freak risk. Second, it builds up the bench to work things out when Plan A is not available. An alternate model would be the Thunder. If you follow any of their blowouts, you'll see their starters are out for almost all of the 4th sometimes if they're up big. A lot of teams do this and they aren't getting "Tracy McGrady'd" right and left. Their benches learn to hold leads.

What is the cutoff for defining a blowout in your opinion?

I agree that leaving the starters in the game with a 20+ point lead and a few minutes left to play is unreasonable, and Thibs has been guilty of it. It's been one of my 2 or 3 points of criticism about his coaching.

The Randle injury for me is right at the frontier. A 17-point lead with 4:20 minutes to play against Miami is not safe, and we needed that win for morale after the series loss. But at that point a comeback was highly unlikely. I can see both sides of the argument. In hindsight, you just call timeout after the defensive rebound to pull the starters.

The injury itself, however, was a basketball injury, and not due to fatigue or anything like that.

[Deeeez Knicks]

Forget the injuries for a second. A reason the game was even close was because our team was gassed going against 10 hungry players with fresh legs.

It would have been a perfect game to play Toppin or anyone else....else what's even the point if the 4 or 5 guys left on them bench can't even get in a game against a G-league roster? 7 man rotation + Taj is not a good look

It'd be more accurate to say it was a 6 man rotation with guest appearances from Taj and Flynn

6 guys played 31+ minutes, Taj and Flynn played 25 combined

To put that into perspective, the top 6 players received 89.5% of all minutes, while the bottom 9 received only 10.5%

The proletariat bench needs to seize the means of production.

Yea, that kind of rotation catches up. Just seems so unnecessary in a game like this too.

[K_ick_God]

If Precious steps on a foot tomorrow then everyone will be happy as we get to see Malachi Flynn and Jacob Toppin tear up the league.

However, Precious moves pretty carefully and without extra motion, which I think (out my ass) reduces injury risk.

Deuce
DD
Hart
Precious
Hartenstein

lol. Donte 50 burger coming.

[K_ick_God]

I don't have an issue with the minutes per se. It's just... why leave guys in for so long in blowouts. First off, the guys could be getting rest and would be out harms way of any freak risk. Second, it builds up the bench to work things out when Plan A is not available. An alternate model would be the Thunder. If you follow any of their blowouts, you'll see their starters are out for almost all of the 4th sometimes if they're up big. A lot of teams do this and they aren't getting "Tracy McGrady'd" right and left. Their benches learn to hold leads.

What is the cutoff for defining a blowout in your opinion?

I agree that leaving the starters in the game with a 20+ point lead and a few minutes left to play is unreasonable, and Thibs has been guilty of it. It's been one of my 2 or 3 points of criticism about his coaching.

The Randle injury for me is right at the frontier. A 17-point lead with 4:20 minutes to play against Miami is not safe, and we needed that win for morale after the series loss. But at that point a comeback was highly unlikely. I can see both sides of the argument. In hindsight, you just call timeout after the defensive rebound to pull the starters.

The injury itself, however, was a basketball injury, and not due to fatigue or anything like that.

I'd say blowing that kind of lead is maybe 10% but obviously decreases the more experienced the players. And not 10% to lose but maybe 10% to get into a 2 possession game in the last minute which is like a 20-30(?)% type thing to actually lose the game. Last night the Grizzlies went on an 18-1 run in 3 minutes. And that's with G League guys.

[Jeff Van Gully]

It’s not that I don’t care. It’s that you make zero sense.

The solar system was created by random chance too, but that doesn’t magically remove the existence of gravity.

Denying that Thibs increases the odds of player injury is like denying the existence of gravity. It’s just a ridiculous position and what you’re really signaling is that you’re an old-school tough guy.

Mind you, I’m a Thibs fan! I just choose to acknowledge the basic existence of reality. He’s gonna cause injuries and playoff fatigue. We know this. We’ve always know this.

before mitch got injured both players pretty much split the minutes. the current situation is not by design.

it's really you who's not making sense. is thibs managing minutes or not?

and... planting the flag? you opened the door and i responded.

Resorting to “but look at the minutes played” is the lowest form of hoops debate. The quality substance style and context of those minutes is what matters and what has always mattered.

I see the same people on here claiming injuries are totally random are the same people who thought player development happens regardless of coaching.

People are on here trying to defend Thibs but the only logical conclusion of your argument is that his coaching doesn’t matter. That if somehow you switched him with Fizdale, everything would be exactly the same. We’d be a 50 win team with 7 injured rotation players.

To me that’s asinine. You give the man his credit, he’s worked miracles. But you also act like an adult and acknowledge at what cost a coach achieves his success. Hopefully none of these injuries are career threatening, and everybody is healthy for a playoff run, that’s all I really care about.

i'm sorry. you are the strawman tangent king right now.

[Jeff Van Gully]

It’s not that I don’t care. It’s that you make zero sense.

The solar system was created by random chance too, but that doesn’t magically remove the existence of gravity.

Denying that Thibs increases the odds of player injury is like denying the existence of gravity. It’s just a ridiculous position and what you’re really signaling is that you’re an old-school tough guy.

Mind you, I’m a Thibs fan! I just choose to acknowledge the basic existence of reality. He’s gonna cause injuries and playoff fatigue. We know this. We’ve always know this.

before mitch got injured both players pretty much split the minutes. the current situation is not by design.

it's really you who's not making sense. is thibs managing minutes or not?

and... planting the flag? you opened the door and i responded.

Before Mitch got hurt, iHart was playing 20mpg some nights 24 at best. Then he went to 38-40mpg nightly. With a condition that is aggravated by overuse. Now he is hurting again. So there's one simple fact that points to Thibs being a madman. Why wasn't he splitting minutes with anyone else?

Jalen was out for a few games with a leg injury. Thibs plays him 80 minutes in his first two games back. More proof. Breen and Clyde begging Thibs to take Jalen out a few games ago. Hmm. Yeah. The fans here make things up.

RJ tweaking his ankle in a blow out last year is another example of lousy minutes distribution. Countless blow out games Thibs has the starters in to the end. Then the bench guys get a minute of GT? Way to go.

Precious going from 7 mpg to 42 mpg? OG playing 44mpg before he got hurt with an injury caused by overuse?. 6-7 man rotations? Playing 5 guys an entire 2nd half of a game? Hart having jumpers knee and playing 42mpg. Even HE commented about his minutes a week ago.

Anyone denying Thibs is awful at this is high. Stop looking at avgs because like everything else stats related, it doesn't come close to telling the whole story. This was just off the top of my head. He clearly doesn't use the bench enough during the regular season until everyone else gets hurt. Even then he tends to shorten the rotation instead. This cannot be denied. When players and announcers are commenting on it...there's an issue.

it's not a simple fact. but a fair point that hartenstein may struggle with starter's minutes. i've never argued that, but thanks.

i was right there calling thibs a madman in that same game. these are not zero sum discussions. like i said, the situations matter.

precious is young and doesn't have miles or injury concerns that i know of. we literally use him to help eat innings. he's growing in an opportunity that's been presented. i don't think his minutes boost is inappropriate.

the rotations themselves are a very fair point of discussion. if the argument is that he shoud be going 10 deep or even a meaningful 9, fine. in this modern game, that's probably right.

josh hart is exhausted and needs rest. i even read an article about it. i agree with it fully. there are likely adjustments that can be made to address this. but we are also down useful/winning players. this is one of those tough stretches. prior to some of these injuries, some of which maybe can be attributed to overuse, some of which seem preposterous to (contact injuries we watched happen), hart was playing minutes that probably made more sense for him.

6-7-man rotations is one of those not real things. you can be up on your points without the hyperbole. they hurt.

and another fact remains that the mpg argument has been a real one. so to address it is not inappropriate. if the shoe doesn't fit your argument, why take it on? not talking to you then. but you have taken on an anti-thibs persona lately, so everything feels like your issue.

you can keep all the rest of that borderline personal attack if you don't agree with me you must be [x] bs. that's not productive or good faith discussion. it takes away from the validity you could have. we've discussed things like this before.

[Jeff Van Gully]

I don't have an issue with the minutes per se. It's just... why leave guys in for so long in blowouts. First off, the guys could be getting rest and would be out harms way of any freak risk. Second, it builds up the bench to work things out when Plan A is not available. An alternate model would be the Thunder. If you follow any of their blowouts, you'll see their starters are out for almost all of the 4th sometimes if they're up big. A lot of teams do this and they aren't getting "Tracy McGrady'd" right and left. Their benches learn to hold leads.

i agree with this. it seems like an area of opportunity.

[DOT]

It does really irk me that there'll be a timeout call late into a game where we're clearly winning, and the opposing coach uses that timeout to sub in his bench, meanwhile Thibs puts the starters back in and sends the bench to the scorer's table to check in at the next dead ball

It just seems so extra to me.

[Capn'O]

I don't have an issue with the minutes per se. It's just... why leave guys in for so long in blowouts. First off, the guys could be getting rest and would be out harms way of any freak risk. Second, it builds up the bench to work things out when Plan A is not available. An alternate model would be the Thunder. If you follow any of their blowouts, you'll see their starters are out for almost all of the 4th sometimes if they're up big. A lot of teams do this and they aren't getting "Tracy McGrady'd" right and left. Their benches learn to hold leads.

What is the cutoff for defining a blowout in your opinion?

I agree that leaving the starters in the game with a 20+ point lead and a few minutes left to play is unreasonable, and Thibs has been guilty of it. It's been one of my 2 or 3 points of criticism about his coaching.

The Randle injury for me is right at the frontier. A 17-point lead with 4:20 minutes to play against Miami is not safe, and we needed that win for morale after the series loss. But at that point a comeback was highly unlikely. I can see both sides of the argument. In hindsight, you just call timeout after the defensive rebound to pull the starters.

The injury itself, however, was a basketball injury, and not due to fatigue or anything like that.

It's not so much of a cutoff as an approach. Put your players in these situations frequently and they might surprise you. But you might have to sacrifice a couple of games for it. Forest/trees.

[Chanel Bomber]

I don't have an issue with the minutes per se. It's just... why leave guys in for so long in blowouts. First off, the guys could be getting rest and would be out harms way of any freak risk. Second, it builds up the bench to work things out when Plan A is not available. An alternate model would be the Thunder. If you follow any of their blowouts, you'll see their starters are out for almost all of the 4th sometimes if they're up big. A lot of teams do this and they aren't getting "Tracy McGrady'd" right and left. Their benches learn to hold leads.

What is the cutoff for defining a blowout in your opinion?

I agree that leaving the starters in the game with a 20+ point lead and a few minutes left to play is unreasonable, and Thibs has been guilty of it. It's been one of my 2 or 3 points of criticism about his coaching.

The Randle injury for me is right at the frontier. A 17-point lead with 4:20 minutes to play against Miami is not safe, and we needed that win for morale after the series loss. But at that point a comeback was highly unlikely. I can see both sides of the argument. In hindsight, you just call timeout after the defensive rebound to pull the starters.

The injury itself, however, was a basketball injury, and not due to fatigue or anything like that.

It's not so much of a cutoff as an approach. Put your players in these situations frequently and they might surprise you. But you might have to sacrifice a couple of games for it. Forest/trees.

Even with this approach - which is perfectly justifiable - there has to be a cutoff whereby you consider it's preferable to pull your starters and to entrust your bench, no?

I don't think the context surrounding Randle's injury was unreasonable for instance. But to me this was where you could go either way.

[K_ick_God]

On this subject, perhaps, RJ is in and out of the Raptors' lineup

[Capn'O]

What is the cutoff for defining a blowout in your opinion?

I agree that leaving the starters in the game with a 20+ point lead and a few minutes left to play is unreasonable, and Thibs has been guilty of it. It's been one of my 2 or 3 points of criticism about his coaching.

The Randle injury for me is right at the frontier. A 17-point lead with 4:20 minutes to play against Miami is not safe, and we needed that win for morale after the series loss. But at that point a comeback was highly unlikely. I can see both sides of the argument. In hindsight, you just call timeout after the defensive rebound to pull the starters.

The injury itself, however, was a basketball injury, and not due to fatigue or anything like that.

It's not so much of a cutoff as an approach. Put your players in these situations frequently and they might surprise you. But you might have to sacrifice a couple of games for it. Forest/trees.

Even with this approach - which is perfectly justifiable - there has to be a cutoff whereby you consider it's preferable to pull your starters and to entrust your bench, no?

I don't think the context surrounding Randle's injury was unreasonable for instance. But to me this was where you could go either way.

Roughly, you pull around 15-20 and maybe sub the starters back in at 5. That's what I usually see. I'm flexible on how it happens but it just doesn't happen under Thibs.

I think he's a great coach but he's an honest to God maniac.

[Chanel Bomber]

It's not so much of a cutoff as an approach. Put your players in these situations frequently and they might surprise you. But you might have to sacrifice a couple of games for it. Forest/trees.

Even with this approach - which is perfectly justifiable - there has to be a cutoff whereby you consider it's preferable to pull your starters and to entrust your bench, no?

I don't think the context surrounding Randle's injury was unreasonable for instance. But to me this was where you could go either way.

Roughly, you pull around 15-20 and maybe sub the starters back in at 5. That's what I usually see. I'm flexible on how it happens but it just doesn't happen under Thibs.

I think he's a great coach but he's an honest to God maniac.

Makes sense.

I think +15 with 3-4 minutes left and +20 with 5 minutes left should approximately be the cutoff.

There have been games where we were up 20 and he left the starters in until the 47th minute or the buzzer. I agree this is absurd. He should also read the room when the other team waves the white flag and pulls their starters in the final minutes.

I would just say - now we don't really have a bench. It's really 6 rotation players and end-of-the-bench, G-League-caliber guys. I find it muddies the conversation a bit. Nevertheless, I think it'd be wise to manage Brunson and iHart in the coming weeks, as we wait for other guys to come back. I think Thibs and the coaching staff need to accept that they'll take some losses in the short term. They shouldn't overreact to it.

[Jeff Van Gully]

It does really irk me that there'll be a timeout call late into a game where we're clearly winning, and the opposing coach uses that timeout to sub in his bench, meanwhile Thibs puts the starters back in and sends the bench to the scorer's table to check in at the next dead ball

It just seems so extra to me.

it's hella extra. every time i see it i think wtf?! they waving the white flag right now.

[Jeff Van Gully]

It's not so much of a cutoff as an approach. Put your players in these situations frequently and they might surprise you. But you might have to sacrifice a couple of games for it. Forest/trees.

Even with this approach - which is perfectly justifiable - there has to be a cutoff whereby you consider it's preferable to pull your starters and to entrust your bench, no?

I don't think the context surrounding Randle's injury was unreasonable for instance. But to me this was where you could go either way.

Roughly, you pull around 15-20 and maybe sub the starters back in at 5. That's what I usually see. I'm flexible on how it happens but it just doesn't happen under Thibs.

I think he's a great coach but he's an honest to God maniac.

i would love to see a 4th quarter where the starters/heavy minutes guys don't go back in. was hoping for last night to be one of those nights. but nobody was really able to stave off that memphis run. a few more minutes of the bench and we might have lost. unfortunately, that coincided with brunson taking an unfortunate contact injury.

[Buttah304]

On this subject, perhaps, RJ is in and out of the Raptors' lineup

Sorry thought you were talking about IQs finishing and mid range jumper

[Jalen Bluntson]

before mitch got injured both players pretty much split the minutes. the current situation is not by design.

it's really you who's not making sense. is thibs managing minutes or not?

and... planting the flag? you opened the door and i responded.

Before Mitch got hurt, iHart was playing 20mpg some nights 24 at best. Then he went to 38-40mpg nightly. With a condition that is aggravated by overuse. Now he is hurting again. So there's one simple fact that points to Thibs being a madman. Why wasn't he splitting minutes with anyone else?

Jalen was out for a few games with a leg injury. Thibs plays him 80 minutes in his first two games back. More proof. Breen and Clyde begging Thibs to take Jalen out a few games ago. Hmm. Yeah. The fans here make things up.

RJ tweaking his ankle in a blow out last year is another example of lousy minutes distribution. Countless blow out games Thibs has the starters in to the end. Then the bench guys get a minute of GT? Way to go.

Precious going from 7 mpg to 42 mpg? OG playing 44mpg before he got hurt with an injury caused by overuse?. 6-7 man rotations? Playing 5 guys an entire 2nd half of a game? Hart having jumpers knee and playing 42mpg. Even HE commented about his minutes a week ago.

Anyone denying Thibs is awful at this is high. Stop looking at avgs because like everything else stats related, it doesn't come close to telling the whole story. This was just off the top of my head. He clearly doesn't use the bench enough during the regular season until everyone else gets hurt. Even then he tends to shorten the rotation instead. This cannot be denied. When players and announcers are commenting on it...there's an issue.

it's not a simple fact. but a fair point that hartenstein may struggle with starter's minutes. i've never argued that, but thanks.

i was right there calling thibs a madman in that same game. these are not zero sum discussions. like i said, the situations matter.

precious is young and doesn't have miles or injury concerns that i know of. we literally use him to help eat innings. he's growing in an opportunity that's been presented. i don't think his minutes boost is inappropriate.

the rotations themselves are a very fair point of discussion. if the argument is that he shoud be going 10 deep or even a meaningful 9, fine. in this modern game, that's probably right.

josh hart is exhausted and needs rest. i even read an article about it. i agree with it fully. there are likely adjustments that can be made to address this. but we are also down useful/winning players. this is one of those tough stretches. prior to some of these injuries, some of which maybe can be attributed to overuse, some of which seem preposterous to (contact injuries we watched happen), hart was playing minutes that probably made more sense for him.

6-7-man rotations is one of those not real things. you can be up on your points without the hyperbole. they hurt.

and another fact remains that the mpg argument has been a real one. so to address it is not inappropriate. if the shoe doesn't fit your argument, why take it on? not talking to you then. but you have taken on an anti-thibs persona lately, so everything feels like your issue.

you can keep all the rest of that borderline personal attack if you don't agree with me you must be [x] bs. that's not productive or good faith discussion. it takes away from the validity you could have. we've discussed things like this before.

Oh...right. 7 man rotation. Not six. Point made though.

What's wrong with being high? Sensitive much? Personal attack? Please calm down. I don't wanna get banned!!! j/k obviously but really?

You basically do agree with me though and this has been my biggest complaint with him. I give him his credit that what we do is ugly but gets results. Doesn't mean I can't have complaints. Some extremely valid and others more emotional bursts. That's a message board. That's a fan.

What are you, high?

[Guano]

Delusional players. How dare they.

Thibs' reputation was invented by Knicks forum fans looking for a scapegoat to why seven of their nine rotation players are injured.

tbf who wants to hang out with a grumpy old white guy that hates women and loves work.