Moderators: j4remi, NoLayupRule, HerSports85, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23, Deeeez Knicks, mpharris36
thebuzzardman wrote:Knicks should just start Obi at 5 and RJ at the 4
He looked helpless against Okafor.
NoDopeOnSundays wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:Knicks should just start Obi at 5 and RJ at the 4
The floor would be spaced better but Embiid, Sabonis, Vucevic, Adebyao, Drummond, Capela and pretty much any center in the East would have historic games against Obi
thebuzzardman wrote:NoDopeOnSundays wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:Knicks should just start Obi at 5 and RJ at the 4
The floor would be spaced better but Embiid, Sabonis, Vucevic, Adebyao, Drummond, Capela and pretty much any center in the East would have historic games against Obi
What can you do? The team will be bad either way.
Lose in higher or lower scoring games. pick one.
thebuzzardman wrote:NoDopeOnSundays wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:Knicks should just start Obi at 5 and RJ at the 4
The floor would be spaced better but Embiid, Sabonis, Vucevic, Adebyao, Drummond, Capela and pretty much any center in the East would have historic games against Obi
What can you do? The team will be bad either way.
Lose in higher or lower scoring games. pick one.
Deeeez Knicks wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:NoDopeOnSundays wrote:
The floor would be spaced better but Embiid, Sabonis, Vucevic, Adebyao, Drummond, Capela and pretty much any center in the East would have historic games against Obi
What can you do? The team will be bad either way.
Lose in higher or lower scoring games. pick one.
You can do both. Start Mitch at C and mix in some small ball lineups.
NoDopeOnSundays wrote:Deeeez Knicks wrote:thebuzzardman wrote:
What can you do? The team will be bad either way.
Lose in higher or lower scoring games. pick one.
You can do both. Start Mitch at C and mix in some small ball lineups.
That hurts Obi, we're in a no win situation now cause of the draft pick being a big who plays at his best on the inside. It's like a poor man's version of the Embiid & Simmons trouble.
Deeeez Knicks wrote:What are we really getting for Mitch in a trade anyway?
NoDopeOnSundays wrote:I have to start out by saying I like Mitch and he's been a nice surprise, however a lot of people on here keep saying he could be like Gobert and whether that's true or not remains to be seen. What we do know is that right now Mitch is strictly a rim runner on offense much like Gobert, but we should be watching what's happening with Gobert as a cautionary tale. The entire scope of the series changed, not just because Jamal Murray has turned into a NBA 2k demigod, it's also because Mike Malone made the adjustment with Jokic taking more threes, he's up to 7 a game now on 49%. What that does is neutralizes Goberts defense pulling him from the hoop, and on the other end Gobert's lack of any real offensive skills or shooting kills their spacing. Gobert doesn't have any kind of offense to go at Jokic on the other end, no moves, no handle, no shooting, he literally just relies on putbacks and being set up.
Will Mitch develop into a better offensive player than Gobert? Does anyone here think he will be able to develop a consistent 3 pointer? I'm asking these questions because when Mitch starts, he will definitely put up some big numbers, which will lead to the big contract. I have reservations about that because I'm watching what's happening with Gobert, and because I've seen this movie before with DeAndre Jordan, Steven Adams, Clint Capella and Andre Drummond. I personally do not think you can have a defensive rim runner as a foundational piece of a team in todays NBA, you're better off finding a vet minimum guy to do that job like the Lakers, or a guy on a reasonable short term deal like the Clippers. If one of these rim runner types is taking up a substantial part of your cap you're not winning anything, they are fools gold during the regular season and liabilities in the playoffs when you're essentially playing 4 on 5 on offense.
I know we're not used to having young talent, and the immediate reaction is that we can't trade Mitch, but this is forward thinking and looking at where the league is going. If you told me Mitch would develop into a 35-38% three point shooter or an exceptional passer like Bam Adebayo I'd say keep him, but I can't help to think the player type he represents is a dying breed. If he is Gobert 2.0, I don't want that, because that always leads to the same place which.
Capn'O wrote:Deeeez Knicks wrote:What are we really getting for Mitch in a trade anyway?
This is kind of the rub. I was never thrilled about moving up for LaMelo or Wiseman as I'm not huge on them as prospects either. I see the intrigue but also a massive downside. A Mitch move would have to bring a significant prospect or asset back. Ironically, a move for Lonzo where we also send Rivers might make the most sense for everyone at this point. The Knicks did what they did with their roster.
Jimmit79 wrote:Yea RJ played well he was definitely the x factor
Capn'O wrote:We're the recovering meth addict older brother. And we've been clean for a few years now, thank you very much. Very uncouth to bring it up.
Jimmit79 wrote:Yea RJ played well he was definitely the x factor
Heej wrote:Mitch got way more range as a defender than the typical rim runner does. If he gets played off the floor in the playoffs it's not gonna be because he can't defend high PNR the way Gobert got exposed
Jimmit79 wrote:Yea RJ played well he was definitely the x factor
WargamesX wrote:Gobert got exposed because he and the Jazz aren’t able to guard the perimeter. Mitch can do that are his game should translate better because you can’t hunt him for a mismatch to shoot 3’s.
