OT: Knicks to pursue Thibs as HC

[dice]

Thibs has his positives and negatives as a coach but he would be perfect for a rebuilding team like the Knicks.

was he perfect for the wolves too? at least they had some talent. he couldn't get wiggins to care or the team to play defense, which is what he is known for. why would you think he would be good for barrett?

[musiqsoulchild]

Excellent pickup by the Knicks if it materializes. I have always loved the Knicks. And I hope this is a step in the right direction for that young squad

[Ben Wilson25]

Crap. I don’t even want the possibility of the Knicks getting a refreshed and emotionally evolved Thibs to build with.

[_txchilibowl_]

Crap. I don’t even want the possibility of the Knicks getting a refreshed and emotionally evolved Thibs to build with.

This is how I see it too. For some reason Thibs has taken on the reputation of being some kind fossilized dinosaur incapable of learning and adapting. Personally, I think he's one of the brightest minds in basketball and will succeed wherever he goes next...

[_txchilibowl_]

Thibs has his positives and negatives as a coach but he would be perfect for a rebuilding team like the Knicks.

was he perfect for the wolves too? at least they had some talent. he couldn't get wiggins to care or the team to play defense, which is what he is known for. why would you think he would be good for barrett?

Has anyone ever gotten Wiggins to care? Maybe the problem is with players like him and KAT.

Jimmy Butler thinks so at least...

[TheStig]

Could you really fault them? We traded 6 picks for the great McDermott.

huh? they traded #16, #19 and #53 for #11. pretty standard valuation trade

I'm sure he's including the 2nd rounders we had to include to dump one last contract to Orlando. This was to make room and allow for the anointed one to come to us.

Yes Sir, most were 2nds but I remember them necessary to make the deal to get rid of the guy we got from Denver.

[dice]

Thibs has his positives and negatives as a coach but he would be perfect for a rebuilding team like the Knicks.

was he perfect for the wolves too? at least they had some talent. he couldn't get wiggins to care or the team to play defense, which is what he is known for. why would you think he would be good for barrett?

Has anyone ever gotten Wiggins to care? Maybe the problem is with players like him and KAT.

Jimmy Butler thinks so at least...

what reason do you have to believe that the players on the knicks are fundamentally different in terms of willingness to be coached up by thibs?

[_txchilibowl_]

was he perfect for the wolves too? at least they had some talent. he couldn't get wiggins to care or the team to play defense, which is what he is known for. why would you think he would be good for barrett?

Has anyone ever gotten Wiggins to care? Maybe the problem is with players like him and KAT.

Jimmy Butler thinks so at least...

what reason do you have to believe that the players on the knicks are fundamentally different in terms of willingness to be coached up by thibs?

No reason....in fact I have every reason to believe they're the same if not worse. But that's a Knicks problem that they would be well advised to address. And they have that opportunity with a relatively clean payroll, unlike the Twolves who were committed by the time Thibs showed up. I say let Thibs get in there and separate the winners from the losers....

Also keep in mind that Thibs wanted to trade us Wiggins and not Lavine but was vetoed by ownership. I think he already knew what a bum Wiggins was...

[TheStig]

huh? they traded #16, #19 and #53 for #11. pretty standard valuation trade

I'm sure he's including the 2nd rounders we had to include to dump one last contract to Orlando. This was to make room and allow for the anointed one to come to us.

well, that's very disingenuous. the secondary trade you're referring to the bulls gave up #51 and #47, cleared a little cap space (itself a benefit) and also got a former late 2nd rounder who never ended up coming to play in the nba. the players taken w/ the #51 and #53 picks the bulls gave up never played in the nba either. the #47 turned into jake layman

so that's harris, nurkic and 3 mid-to-late 2nd rounders (5 picks in total) for mcdermott, a former 2nd round pick who almost certainly wasn't coming over, and a little cap space. i never liked the trade, and it certainly didn't work out for the bulls, but mcdermott has finally become an nba caliber player in indy, while harris for some reason has regressed to trash the last couple of seasons, making the trade not look as awful as it had a couple of years ago. regardless, it never had anything to do with the late draft picks

if there's a good point to make there shouldn't be any need to distort the truth

It's not a distortion. I didn't call them high lotto picks. But the Bulls were forced to take on someone when they were planning on using that cap space and sent out picks to dump him. Those are all a result of the mcdermott deal.

[dice]

I'm sure he's including the 2nd rounders we had to include to dump one last contract to Orlando. This was to make room and allow for the anointed one to come to us.

well, that's very disingenuous. the secondary trade you're referring to the bulls gave up #51 and #47, cleared a little cap space (itself a benefit) and also got a former late 2nd rounder who never ended up coming to play in the nba. the players taken w/ the #51 and #53 picks the bulls gave up never played in the nba either. the #47 turned into jake layman

so that's harris, nurkic and 3 mid-to-late 2nd rounders (5 picks in total) for mcdermott, a former 2nd round pick who almost certainly wasn't coming over, and a little cap space. i never liked the trade, and it certainly didn't work out for the bulls, but mcdermott has finally become an nba caliber player in indy, while harris for some reason has regressed to trash the last couple of seasons, making the trade not look as awful as it had a couple of years ago. regardless, it never had anything to do with the late draft picks

if there's a good point to make there shouldn't be any need to distort the truth

It's not a distortion. I didn't call them high lotto picks. But the Bulls were forced to take on someone when they were planning on using that cap space and sent out picks to dump him. Those are all a result of the mcdermott deal.

first of all, it was 5 picks, not 6. and context matters. you clearly brought it up to make the trade sound even worse than it was. picks in the mid-to-late 2nd round rarely pan out. here are the relative pick values according to the results of a study:

11 1520

16 1082
19 882

47 131
51 100
53 87

#11 for all those picks is the equivalent of #11 for #14 and #17. bad, but hardly as sensationalist as "we traded 5 picks for mcdermott." the number of picks is completely irrelevant. in fact, the bulls could have traded FIFTEEN future 2nd round picks protected for 31-45 and it would be good value for the #11 pick. but if you broke the news to someone by saying "the bulls traded 15 picks for doug mcdermott" you'd get a shocked reaction

you can judge the trade on the results, which were bad, or you can judge the trade on the relative pick value, which was bad, but you can't logically COMBINE the two into one argument

[TheStig]

well, that's very disingenuous. the secondary trade you're referring to the bulls gave up #51 and #47, cleared a little cap space (itself a benefit) and also got a former late 2nd rounder who never ended up coming to play in the nba. the players taken w/ the #51 and #53 picks the bulls gave up never played in the nba either. the #47 turned into jake layman

so that's harris, nurkic and 3 mid-to-late 2nd rounders (5 picks in total) for mcdermott, a former 2nd round pick who almost certainly wasn't coming over, and a little cap space. i never liked the trade, and it certainly didn't work out for the bulls, but mcdermott has finally become an nba caliber player in indy, while harris for some reason has regressed to trash the last couple of seasons, making the trade not look as awful as it had a couple of years ago. regardless, it never had anything to do with the late draft picks

if there's a good point to make there shouldn't be any need to distort the truth

It's not a distortion. I didn't call them high lotto picks. But the Bulls were forced to take on someone when they were planning on using that cap space and sent out picks to dump him. Those are all a result of the mcdermott deal.

first of all, it was 5 picks, not 6. and context matters. you clearly brought it up to make the trade sound even worse than it was. picks in the mid-to-late 2nd round rarely pan out. here are the relative pick values according to the results of a study:

11 1520

16 1082
19 882

47 131
51 100
53 87

#11 for all those picks is the equivalent of #11 for #14 and #17. bad, but hardly as sensationalist as "we traded 5 picks for mcdermott." the number of picks is completely irrelevant. in fact, the bulls could have traded FIFTEEN future 2nd round picks protected for 31-45 and it would be good value for the #11 pick. but if you broke the news to someone by saying "the bulls traded 15 picks for doug mcdermott" you'd get a shocked reaction

you can judge the trade on the results, which were bad, or you can judge the trade on the relative pick value, which was bad, but you can't logically COMBINE the two into one argument

I don't think it was good value and it was 5 picks. Gar was in the midst of trading every 2nd he could.

[DuckIII]

I hope he gets it and does well. It will be interesting to monitor regardless.

[dice]

It's not a distortion. I didn't call them high lotto picks. But the Bulls were forced to take on someone when they were planning on using that cap space and sent out picks to dump him. Those are all a result of the mcdermott deal.

first of all, it was 5 picks, not 6. and context matters. you clearly brought it up to make the trade sound even worse than it was. picks in the mid-to-late 2nd round rarely pan out. here are the relative pick values according to the results of a study:

11 1520

16 1082
19 882

47 131
51 100
53 87

#11 for all those picks is the equivalent of #11 for #14 and #17. bad, but hardly as sensationalist as "we traded 5 picks for mcdermott." the number of picks is completely irrelevant. in fact, the bulls could have traded FIFTEEN future 2nd round picks protected for 31-45 and it would be good value for the #11 pick. but if you broke the news to someone by saying "the bulls traded 15 picks for doug mcdermott" you'd get a shocked reaction

you can judge the trade on the results, which were bad, or you can judge the trade on the relative pick value, which was bad, but you can't logically COMBINE the two into one argument

I don't think it was good value and it was 5 picks.

we agree

Gar was in the midst of trading every 2nd he could.

well, he did acquire 3 second rounders for deng just months earlier. they've drafted bairstow, zipser and gafford in the 2nd round in the interim and sold the jordan bell pick

[MrFortune3]

was he perfect for the wolves too? at least they had some talent. he couldn't get wiggins to care or the team to play defense, which is what he is known for. why would you think he would be good for barrett?

Has anyone ever gotten Wiggins to care? Maybe the problem is with players like him and KAT.

Jimmy Butler thinks so at least...

what reason do you have to believe that the players on the knicks are fundamentally different in terms of willingness to be coached up by thibs?

In fairness, Minnesota had 2 former #1 OA picks who felt themselves way too much.

The Knicks only have Barrett as a extremely high round pick who seen as having a bright future. Knox and Mtilikina have both struggled to adjust to the NBA. Robinson is good but was a 2nd rounder.

Thibs would come in much more humble and with no FO role, the players would be in theory more humble in taking to his coaching.

[dougthonus]

what reason do you have to believe that the players on the knicks are fundamentally different in terms of willingness to be coached up by thibs?

If KAT and Wiggins fundamentally refused to care then they're probably outliers and most players are probably fundamentally different.

Beyond that, RJ might literally be the only guy on the team that's in for any length of time, so even if everyone on their roster is trash in terms of caring it won't matter much because the roster will almost completely turn over in a year.

[SHO'NUFF]

This will end up bad.

[The Evidence]

He has more defensive pieces in NY than he had in Min...

Which is ironic because he was the GM in Minnesota

Maybe they can become a Miami Heat North.

IsolaBombs gonna be litty.

[Southpaw]

Good for Thibs and the Knicks. For all of Thib's issue, he's still one of the better coaches in the league and I feel like he's an underrated offensive coach. He adapted the offense to his personnel when he was here, from Rose to Jo to the little PGs like Nate and DJ. I love me some Thibs.

It'd be interesting to watch if Thibs lands in NY. Robinson, Barret and Ntilikina would be a good foundation for his defense, as long as the players buy in.

[XxMisterFreakXx]

Good for them but imo I never really saw Thibs as a good coach overrated by so many people.

His style of playing his team into the ground and playing them 40 min a game is outdated. If I remember correctly he was on the list of coaches that players didn't want to play for.

[Leslie Forman]

The Knicks roster is astonishingly bad. That is an absolute, 100%, you're-gonna-get-fired-within-two-years job.

If I was a guy like Atkinson who still had a pretty solid reputation and could easily get a better job over the next couple of years, I would seriously just not even bother interviewing. Thibs obviously doesn't really have that choice. Even then, I would not take the job if I were him unless I got a LOT of guaranteed money.