Knicks · Frank haters can suck it (page 46)
Vmart wrote:ray of phucking sunshinefishmike wrote:martin wrote:I think Frank has solidified his role in the NBA: Not a full time rotational player but a minimum wage, 14-15th roster slot type who does spot isolation defensive work against wings. This is what he is good for, if healthyhe's good at that... always way. Still have to hide him on offense. Dude played 10mpg, over 7 games he had 12 points, 13 fouls and 6 TOs while shooting 36%He's 23... if he can become a marginal offensive player he will be in the NBA for a long time. At this point I expect him to have Patty Mills type career
Of Mitchell/Monk/Frank/Smith only Donovan turned out to be worth the pick. Lottery luck is tough sometimes
Just imagine Mitchell if drafted by the Knicks. He would have turned out as a role player.
No Randle or Fournier contracts and we are under the cap and can sign Brunson or Tyus Jones without S&T. Is Isiah still the shadow GM?
blkexec wrote:fwk00 wrote:I was told on this forum that Ntilikina was "not even good at defense".Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/Zach2Elijah/status/1525110690817662976?s=20&t=MT8YxEnYWd9SezDrtXjVNw
Click here to view the TweetJust shows you how smart this forum is.
Whenever I say losing bullock is part of our downfall this season, they called me a bullock lover. Lol. Frank is in that same category on defense. Only 6 pts but holds booker to 16%? But again this forum knows better.
Y’all better put some respect on their names.
What in the entire world are you talking about?
Ntilikina's qualifying offer with the Knicks was over 7 million dollars. His cap hold if they gave that to him would have been about 19 million dollars.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't like the FA moves the Knicks made last offseason, but you don't choke our your cap flexibility like that for Frank N.
Ntilikina walked out of his rookie deal and immediately had to sign a rarely used ( for an actual NBA player on track for a league pension) Exhibit 9 contract. How badly are you seen by the rest of the league when you can play above average wing defense in the NBA and still be young and can only garner a bargain bin/essentially "ego insulting" contract after sitting on the market until you are a Tier 6 free agent?
The people on this forum who wanted Ntilikina gone but wished him the best of luck in his next stop are actually pretty smart indeed. Dallas would not have paid Frank N that 7 million dollars. They are paying him less than the veteran's minimum because it makes him easily to dispose of if he doesn't work out.
Respect on what?
If Ntilikina wanted to be a Knicks and STAY a Knick, because for years a starting job was literally up for grabs and the entire franchise wanted him to take one and make it his own, he should have worked harder on his three point shot, fight through small injuries, actually showed some effort moving off the ball ( he did literally nothing but sulk when the ball wasn't in his hands) and actually attack the rim at some point/any point.
You don't spend 7 million on a Tier 6 guy. Frank N gives you wing defense but he literally gives you nothing else. There's nothing wrong with being a specialist, but he cost the Knicks a lottery pick, four years of coaching investment, a roster spot and the opportunity cost of that, cap space and a total of 18 million overall in salary output.
What he costs the Mavericks or any other NBA team TODAY to be a fringe end of the bench specialist is NOT what he would cost the Knicks in TOTAL INVESTMENT to be that same fringe end of the bench specialist.
Don't call the rest of the forum regulars as something stupid because you either don't see or don't care or don't understand the overall cap implications/cap managements issues in play.
No one took anything from Frank Ntilikina. His bullshit lazy uninterested play took something from him.
fishmike wrote:Vmart wrote:ray of phucking sunshinefishmike wrote:martin wrote:I think Frank has solidified his role in the NBA: Not a full time rotational player but a minimum wage, 14-15th roster slot type who does spot isolation defensive work against wings. This is what he is good for, if healthyhe's good at that... always way. Still have to hide him on offense. Dude played 10mpg, over 7 games he had 12 points, 13 fouls and 6 TOs while shooting 36%He's 23... if he can become a marginal offensive player he will be in the NBA for a long time. At this point I expect him to have Patty Mills type career
Of Mitchell/Monk/Frank/Smith only Donovan turned out to be worth the pick. Lottery luck is tough sometimes
Just imagine Mitchell if drafted by the Knicks. He would have turned out as a role player.
or, if utah drafted him he’d be an allstar?
Philc1 wrote:Just think we could have extended Frank on a cheap 1 year deal instead of giving Fournier that hideous contractNo Randle or Fournier contracts and we are under the cap and can sign Brunson or Tyus Jones without S&T. Is Isiah still the shadow GM?
You make this shit up so you can be popular with some of the guys here?
TripleThreat wrote:blkexec wrote:fwk00 wrote:I was told on this forum that Ntilikina was "not even good at defense".Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/Zach2Elijah/status/1525110690817662976?s=20&t=MT8YxEnYWd9SezDrtXjVNw
Click here to view the TweetJust shows you how smart this forum is.
Whenever I say losing bullock is part of our downfall this season, they called me a bullock lover. Lol. Frank is in that same category on defense. Only 6 pts but holds booker to 16%? But again this forum knows better.
Y’all better put some respect on their names.
What in the entire world are you talking about?Ntilikina's qualifying offer with the Knicks was over 7 million dollars. His cap hold if they gave that to him would have been about 19 million dollars.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't like the FA moves the Knicks made last offseason, but you don't choke our your cap flexibility like that for Frank N.
Ntilikina walked out of his rookie deal and immediately had to sign a rarely used ( for an actual NBA player on track for a league pension) Exhibit 9 contract. How badly are you seen by the rest of the league when you can play above average wing defense in the NBA and still be young and can only garner a bargain bin/essentially "ego insulting" contract after sitting on the market until you are a Tier 6 free agent?
The people on this forum who wanted Ntilikina gone but wished him the best of luck in his next stop are actually pretty smart indeed. Dallas would not have paid Frank N that 7 million dollars. They are paying him less than the veteran's minimum because it makes him easily to dispose of if he doesn't work out.
Respect on what?
If Ntilikina wanted to be a Knicks and STAY a Knick, because for years a starting job was literally up for grabs and the entire franchise wanted him to take one and make it his own, he should have worked harder on his three point shot, fight through small injuries, actually showed some effort moving off the ball ( he did literally nothing but sulk when the ball wasn't in his hands) and actually attack the rim at some point/any point.
You don't spend 7 million on a Tier 6 guy. Frank N gives you wing defense but he literally gives you nothing else. There's nothing wrong with being a specialist, but he cost the Knicks a lottery pick, four years of coaching investment, a roster spot and the opportunity cost of that, cap space and a total of 18 million overall in salary output.
What he costs the Mavericks or any other NBA team TODAY to be a fringe end of the bench specialist is NOT what he would cost the Knicks in TOTAL INVESTMENT to be that same fringe end of the bench specialist.
Don't call the rest of the forum regulars as something stupid because you either don't see or don't care or don't understand the overall cap implications/cap managements issues in play.
No one took anything from Frank Ntilikina. His bullshit lazy uninterested play took something from him.
It would have been essentially a 1 year deal. Who cares if it’s $19 million. We’re locked into Randle the black hole for $117 million over 4 years
Philc1 wrote:Just think we could have extended Frank on a cheap 1 year deal instead of giving Fournier that hideous contractNo Randle or Fournier contracts and we are under the cap and can sign Brunson or Tyus Jones without S&T. Is Isiah still the shadow GM?
So basically the same shitty team we had before Randle? Why so one tracked? EF gave us the most threes in Knick history. Randle led us in most.
How about taking other useless pieces like Noel, Kemba and keeping Franky? That would actually bring statistical logic into your view.
Franky has and always be less than what some just can't admit. A very good spot Defender. Do agree, why not keep him on the cheap and use him against Trae? Mavs showed that to be a flaw in our management of him.
HofstraBBall wrote:Philc1 wrote:Just think we could have extended Frank on a cheap 1 year deal instead of giving Fournier that hideous contractNo Randle or Fournier contracts and we are under the cap and can sign Brunson or Tyus Jones without S&T. Is Isiah still the shadow GM?
So basically the same shitty team we had before Randle? Why so one tracked? EF gave us the most threes in Knick history. Randle led us in most.
How about taking other useless pieces like Noel, Kemba and keeping Franky? That would actually bring statistical logic into your view.Franky has and always be less than what some just can't admit. A very good spot Defender. Do agree, why not keep him on the cheap and use him against Trae? Mavs showed that to be a flaw in our management of him.
Yes. That's the only point. Frankie might have added a win or two to that Atlanta series just on defense alone. Okay, he was ghosted by Thibs. The by-product is that Frankie is in a better place proving conclusively that whatever he brings is *enough* to make a difference strategically.
The other by-product is that Thibs hasn't learned a thing and will ghost players who can help in the future. Thibs needs a winning team to win with. He ain't Kenny Atkinson. And that's a problem.
fwk00 wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Philc1 wrote:Just think we could have extended Frank on a cheap 1 year deal instead of giving Fournier that hideous contractNo Randle or Fournier contracts and we are under the cap and can sign Brunson or Tyus Jones without S&T. Is Isiah still the shadow GM?
So basically the same shitty team we had before Randle? Why so one tracked? EF gave us the most threes in Knick history. Randle led us in most.
How about taking other useless pieces like Noel, Kemba and keeping Franky? That would actually bring statistical logic into your view.Franky has and always be less than what some just can't admit. A very good spot Defender. Do agree, why not keep him on the cheap and use him against Trae? Mavs showed that to be a flaw in our management of him.
Yes. That's the only point. Frankie might have added a win or two to that Atlanta series just on defense alone. Okay, he was ghosted by Thibs. The by-product is that Frankie is in a better place proving conclusively that whatever he brings is *enough* to make a difference strategically.
The other by-product is that Thibs hasn't learned a thing and will ghost players who can help in the future. Thibs needs a winning team to win with. He ain't Kenny Atkinson. And that's a problem.
Think Frank is proving "conclusively" that he is just a good spot Defender. Don't know if you can say he was the difference in this series. Brunson, Dinwiddie and that guy Luka may have been.
Not to mention, the Mavs have not exactly increased Franks minutes this year. Mavs Ghosting him? Can't see how Frank fans are okay with Mavs use of Frank but are so against Thibs doing exactly the same thing? Minus using him for defensive minutes in this series.
Philc1 wrote:TripleThreat wrote:blkexec wrote:fwk00 wrote:I was told on this forum that Ntilikina was "not even good at defense".Just shows you how smart this forum is.
Whenever I say losing bullock is part of our downfall this season, they called me a bullock lover. Lol. Frank is in that same category on defense. Only 6 pts but holds booker to 16%? But again this forum knows better.
Y’all better put some respect on their names.
What in the entire world are you talking about?
Ntilikina's qualifying offer with the Knicks was over 7 million dollars. His cap hold if they gave that to him would have been about 19 million dollars.
Don't get me wrong, I didn't like the FA moves the Knicks made last offseason, but you don't choke our your cap flexibility like that for Frank N.
Ntilikina walked out of his rookie deal and immediately had to sign a rarely used ( for an actual NBA player on track for a league pension) Exhibit 9 contract. How badly are you seen by the rest of the league when you can play above average wing defense in the NBA and still be young and can only garner a bargain bin/essentially "ego insulting" contract after sitting on the market until you are a Tier 6 free agent?
The people on this forum who wanted Ntilikina gone but wished him the best of luck in his next stop are actually pretty smart indeed. Dallas would not have paid Frank N that 7 million dollars. They are paying him less than the veteran's minimum because it makes him easily to dispose of if he doesn't work out.
Respect on what?
If Ntilikina wanted to be a Knicks and STAY a Knick, because for years a starting job was literally up for grabs and the entire franchise wanted him to take one and make it his own, he should have worked harder on his three point shot, fight through small injuries, actually showed some effort moving off the ball ( he did literally nothing but sulk when the ball wasn't in his hands) and actually attack the rim at some point/any point.
You don't spend 7 million on a Tier 6 guy. Frank N gives you wing defense but he literally gives you nothing else. There's nothing wrong with being a specialist, but he cost the Knicks a lottery pick, four years of coaching investment, a roster spot and the opportunity cost of that, cap space and a total of 18 million overall in salary output.
What he costs the Mavericks or any other NBA team TODAY to be a fringe end of the bench specialist is NOT what he would cost the Knicks in TOTAL INVESTMENT to be that same fringe end of the bench specialist.
Don't call the rest of the forum regulars as something stupid because you either don't see or don't care or don't understand the overall cap implications/cap managements issues in play.
No one took anything from Frank Ntilikina. His bullshit lazy uninterested play took something from him.
It would have been essentially a 1 year deal. Who cares if it’s $19 million. We’re locked into Randle the black hole for $117 million over 4 years
Yes, making any sort of comparison of Frankie the Groin Knick to Julius Randle the Knick is a perfectly logical thought process. Excellent analysis on so many levels.
Philc1 wrote:It would have been essentially a 1 year deal. Who cares if it’s $19 million. We’re locked into Randle the black hole for $117 million over 4 years
There was no reason for Ntilikina to resign with the Knicks.
Thibs just won Coach Of The Year. So that means he'd get at least two more seasons as the Knicks head coach. Thibs was not playing Ntilikina and it was evident he'd never actually choose to give him minutes. It's because Frank N is a net negative player on the court and he doesn't actually do his job. His job is to do more than just play wing defense. He's got to help out in other aspects of the game.
Ntilikina's agent would tell him the truth. Go somewhere else and RESTART your Bird Rights clock. That's extremely critical for any NBA player who just had their rights, including their Full Bird Rights, renounced. Go somewhere else where you can get a fresh start and more minutes. And play for a coach who will actually give you minutes.
Consider "giving minutes" versus "earning minutes"
Frank N DID NOT EARN minutes with the Knicks. So he stopped getting them. Play better and you start to get more minutes, that's not rocket science.
Why would the Knicks resign a guy they renounced? Had they locked in that qualifying offer, that's over 7 million in cap space soaked into a player that refuses to help the Knicks win games and Thibs just doesn't like him. That's a waste of a roster spot and cap space.
The 19 million was the "cap hold" which limits FA timeline flexibility. Not his projectible salary. What are you even talking about? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Anyone here saying the Knicks should have resigned Ntilikina to a one year deal, that makes no sense at all. It makes no sense from the Knicks side, from Thibs viewpoint and from Ntilikina's long term career (what's left of it) best pathway.
Marv wrote:the squirrel video was excellentone voice of reason amid the madness
TripleThreat wrote:Philc1 wrote:It would have been essentially a 1 year deal. Who cares if it’s $19 million. We’re locked into Randle the black hole for $117 million over 4 years
There was no reason for Ntilikina to resign with the Knicks.Thibs just won Coach Of The Year. So that means he'd get at least two more seasons as the Knicks head coach. Thibs was not playing Ntilikina and it was evident he'd never actually choose to give him minutes. It's because Frank N is a net negative player on the court and he doesn't actually do his job. His job is to do more than just play wing defense. He's got to help out in other aspects of the game.
Ntilikina's agent would tell him the truth. Go somewhere else and RESTART your Bird Rights clock. That's extremely critical for any NBA player who just had their rights, including their Full Bird Rights, renounced. Go somewhere else where you can get a fresh start and more minutes. And play for a coach who will actually give you minutes.
Consider "giving minutes" versus "earning minutes"
Frank N DID NOT EARN minutes with the Knicks. So he stopped getting them. Play better and you start to get more minutes, that's not rocket science.
Why would the Knicks resign a guy they renounced? Had they locked in that qualifying offer, that's over 7 million in cap space soaked into a player that refuses to help the Knicks win games and Thibs just doesn't like him. That's a waste of a roster spot and cap space.
The 19 million was the "cap hold" which limits FA timeline flexibility. Not his projectible salary. What are you even talking about? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Anyone here saying the Knicks should have resigned Ntilikina to a one year deal, that makes no sense at all. It makes no sense from the Knicks side, from Thibs viewpoint and from Ntilikina's long term career (what's left of it) best pathway.
I didn't want Ntilikina back on the Knicks for any money and Thibs was the reason.
Let me just dispel a myth you are weaving about "earning" minutes.
Players are assets just like chess pieces. Each team gets 17 to do with as they please. It's the FO's job to maximize the flexibility that the coach has to operate with.
Once you devolve into the Barney Ruble mentality of players "earning" minutes you diminish the quality of the job a coach is tasked with. A coach isn't there to pick favorites or grade athletes like a Phys. Ed teacher. They are there to win games with the assets they have. Some coaches need a chess board full of queens to win their game. In the NBA you play with the pieces you have. Maybe you hate the pieces but that's life. Don't pout, don't "teach a player a lesson", maximize the F'n assets and win. Full stop.
When Thibs' Barney Ruble stuff was being exposed by Atlanta it showed his incompetence in creatively adjusting the rotation and play calling to fit the situation. We didn't lose because Frankie and anybody else who could have helped didn't practice hard enough.
That's BS.
I'm happy for Frankie. Good on the Mavs.
fwk00 wrote:TripleThreat wrote:Philc1 wrote:It would have been essentially a 1 year deal. Who cares if it’s $19 million. We’re locked into Randle the black hole for $117 million over 4 years
There was no reason for Ntilikina to resign with the Knicks.Thibs just won Coach Of The Year. So that means he'd get at least two more seasons as the Knicks head coach. Thibs was not playing Ntilikina and it was evident he'd never actually choose to give him minutes. It's because Frank N is a net negative player on the court and he doesn't actually do his job. His job is to do more than just play wing defense. He's got to help out in other aspects of the game.
Ntilikina's agent would tell him the truth. Go somewhere else and RESTART your Bird Rights clock. That's extremely critical for any NBA player who just had their rights, including their Full Bird Rights, renounced. Go somewhere else where you can get a fresh start and more minutes. And play for a coach who will actually give you minutes.
Consider "giving minutes" versus "earning minutes"
Frank N DID NOT EARN minutes with the Knicks. So he stopped getting them. Play better and you start to get more minutes, that's not rocket science.
Why would the Knicks resign a guy they renounced? Had they locked in that qualifying offer, that's over 7 million in cap space soaked into a player that refuses to help the Knicks win games and Thibs just doesn't like him. That's a waste of a roster spot and cap space.
The 19 million was the "cap hold" which limits FA timeline flexibility. Not his projectible salary. What are you even talking about? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Anyone here saying the Knicks should have resigned Ntilikina to a one year deal, that makes no sense at all. It makes no sense from the Knicks side, from Thibs viewpoint and from Ntilikina's long term career (what's left of it) best pathway.
I didn't want Ntilikina back on the Knicks for any money and Thibs was the reason.
Let me just dispel a myth you are weaving about "earning" minutes.
Players are assets just like chess pieces. Each team gets 17 to do with as they please. It's the FO's job to maximize the flexibility that the coach has to operate with.
Once you devolve into the Barney Ruble mentality of players "earning" minutes you diminish the quality of the job a coach is tasked with. A coach isn't there to pick favorites or grade athletes like a Phys. Ed teacher. They are there to win games with the assets they have. Some coaches need a chess board full of queens to win their game. In the NBA you play with the pieces you have. Maybe you hate the pieces but that's life. Don't pout, don't "teach a player a lesson", maximize the F'n assets and win. Full stop.
When Thibs' Barney Ruble stuff was being exposed by Atlanta it showed his incompetence in creatively adjusting the rotation and play calling to fit the situation. We didn't lose because Frankie and anybody else who could have helped didn't practice hard enough.
That's BS.
I'm happy for Frankie. Good on the Mavs.
Your happy for Franky averaging 2 minutes more than the hell you claim he was in here? The DNP in Jazz series? He played more than 12 minutes in only ONE game of the Sun's series?
Thing with Frank fans is they have NO statistical evidence as to why the Knicks should have kept Frank. Nor do they care about the cost. Just their dreamt up visions that have been in their heads since 2017. With the new one being that a player who never proved much knows more than an experienced COY.
HofstraBBall wrote:fwk00 wrote:TripleThreat wrote:Philc1 wrote:It would have been essentially a 1 year deal. Who cares if it’s $19 million. We’re locked into Randle the black hole for $117 million over 4 years
There was no reason for Ntilikina to resign with the Knicks.Thibs just won Coach Of The Year. So that means he'd get at least two more seasons as the Knicks head coach. Thibs was not playing Ntilikina and it was evident he'd never actually choose to give him minutes. It's because Frank N is a net negative player on the court and he doesn't actually do his job. His job is to do more than just play wing defense. He's got to help out in other aspects of the game.
Ntilikina's agent would tell him the truth. Go somewhere else and RESTART your Bird Rights clock. That's extremely critical for any NBA player who just had their rights, including their Full Bird Rights, renounced. Go somewhere else where you can get a fresh start and more minutes. And play for a coach who will actually give you minutes.
Consider "giving minutes" versus "earning minutes"
Frank N DID NOT EARN minutes with the Knicks. So he stopped getting them. Play better and you start to get more minutes, that's not rocket science.
Why would the Knicks resign a guy they renounced? Had they locked in that qualifying offer, that's over 7 million in cap space soaked into a player that refuses to help the Knicks win games and Thibs just doesn't like him. That's a waste of a roster spot and cap space.
The 19 million was the "cap hold" which limits FA timeline flexibility. Not his projectible salary. What are you even talking about? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.
Anyone here saying the Knicks should have resigned Ntilikina to a one year deal, that makes no sense at all. It makes no sense from the Knicks side, from Thibs viewpoint and from Ntilikina's long term career (what's left of it) best pathway.
I didn't want Ntilikina back on the Knicks for any money and Thibs was the reason.
Let me just dispel a myth you are weaving about "earning" minutes.
Players are assets just like chess pieces. Each team gets 17 to do with as they please. It's the FO's job to maximize the flexibility that the coach has to operate with.
Once you devolve into the Barney Ruble mentality of players "earning" minutes you diminish the quality of the job a coach is tasked with. A coach isn't there to pick favorites or grade athletes like a Phys. Ed teacher. They are there to win games with the assets they have. Some coaches need a chess board full of queens to win their game. In the NBA you play with the pieces you have. Maybe you hate the pieces but that's life. Don't pout, don't "teach a player a lesson", maximize the F'n assets and win. Full stop.
When Thibs' Barney Ruble stuff was being exposed by Atlanta it showed his incompetence in creatively adjusting the rotation and play calling to fit the situation. We didn't lose because Frankie and anybody else who could have helped didn't practice hard enough.
That's BS.
I'm happy for Frankie. Good on the Mavs.
Your happy for Franky averaging 2 minutes more than the hell you claim he was in here? The DNP in Jazz series? He played more than 12 minutes in only ONE game of the Sun's series?
Thing with Frank fans is they have NO statistical evidence as to why the Knicks should have kept Frank. Nor do they care about the cost. Just their dreamt up visions that have been in their heads since 2017. With the new one being that a player who never proved much knows more than an experienced COY.
The evidence is that they shouldn't have. They flogged him enough.
He was drafted by Phil's FO and was never going to be allowed to legitimize Phil's long-term vision.
We have Rose/WWW/Thibs... bon appetite.
Three presidents he played under. 4 coaches.
Unfortunate injuries when playing time opened up. Sometimes its not meant to be. Maybe another franchise it works out. Maybe not.
I don't think Thibs was unfair to him. He played well enough to earn another shot with Dallas. Might have even gotten a good report card from Thibs to Mavs FO.
WHile I don't agree with Triples assessment of him being lazy or non caring, the rest of it is solid. He came, played, did not make the grade, time to move on, get a fresh start.
He is 23. That Kidd used him was cool. That he contributed even if modestly was cool. Its a team sport. His team advanced.
Seems there was no bad blood when he left. WE all are humbled when things don't pan out.
Some prognosticated said he'd never play again in the league. He has. Curious if he gets some run vs. Steph.
HofstraBBall wrote:fwk00 wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Philc1 wrote:Just think we could have extended Frank on a cheap 1 year deal instead of giving Fournier that hideous contractNo Randle or Fournier contracts and we are under the cap and can sign Brunson or Tyus Jones without S&T. Is Isiah still the shadow GM?
So basically the same shitty team we had before Randle? Why so one tracked? EF gave us the most threes in Knick history. Randle led us in most.
How about taking other useless pieces like Noel, Kemba and keeping Franky? That would actually bring statistical logic into your view.Franky has and always be less than what some just can't admit. A very good spot Defender. Do agree, why not keep him on the cheap and use him against Trae? Mavs showed that to be a flaw in our management of him.
Yes. That's the only point. Frankie might have added a win or two to that Atlanta series just on defense alone. Okay, he was ghosted by Thibs. The by-product is that Frankie is in a better place proving conclusively that whatever he brings is *enough* to make a difference strategically.
The other by-product is that Thibs hasn't learned a thing and will ghost players who can help in the future. Thibs needs a winning team to win with. He ain't Kenny Atkinson. And that's a problem.
Think Frank is proving "conclusively" that he is just a good spot Defender. Don't know if you can say he was the difference in this series. Brunson, Dinwiddie and that guy Luka may have been.
Not to mention, the Mavs have not exactly increased Franks minutes this year. Mavs Ghosting him? Can't see how Frank fans are okay with Mavs use of Frank but are so against Thibs doing exactly the same thing? Minus using him for defensive minutes in this series.
Sorry to jump in on this discussion. But seems like the only thing Frank did wrong was get drafted at 8, which was out of his control. If Frank was drafted 38, there wouldn't be 46 pages on Frank. The point I'm making is Frank is a good player and he can play a role to help a team. But when you are drafted at 8 by a NY team itching to be relevant, itching for a PG, itching to win a chip, you will have 46 pages of Frank news and how he's trash. To me it's on Phil for selecting Frank to run his triangle, it's not Franks fault he was drafted so early. But if he was picked 38, he would be called a solid role player and only a few pages saying good luck.
Sometimes we let a players draft selection determine their NBA career. Frank is a role player (picked very high) and Knick fans was expecting starter quality in return. That doesn't mean he's not a good player and he can't help a team. Even if the Mavs played him in just a few minutes per game, thats how the Mavs value Frank. There's really nothing else to be said. OKC might start Frank or give him more minutes. Is that because Frank is better and has improved or just a reflection on OKC and how they perceive Frank and how they will use Frank.
Back to his defense, which is his real value. Frank can change a game or the momentum of a game with his defense alone (Trae was a different challenge for Frank. Trae is a problem for the entire league). Same with offensive 3pt specialist. They change the game in spurts. So far thats what Frank brings to a team, on defense. Outside of Frank being picked #8, whats wrong with Frank being a role player getting spot minutes? Why can't knick fans just be happy for him. He's not a locker room problem like KP's brother. He's a good player barely getting minutes or barely scoring for the Mavs. OK. He's still a good defender who can defend multiple positions, and help multiple teams.
Have a highly productive game
Follow it with 5 consecutive stinkers
Get injured
Seriously – anyone else remember how often we went through that lather-rinse-repeat routine with him for 4 years?
blkexec wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:fwk00 wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Philc1 wrote:Just think we could have extended Frank on a cheap 1 year deal instead of giving Fournier that hideous contractNo Randle or Fournier contracts and we are under the cap and can sign Brunson or Tyus Jones without S&T. Is Isiah still the shadow GM?
So basically the same shitty team we had before Randle? Why so one tracked? EF gave us the most threes in Knick history. Randle led us in most.
How about taking other useless pieces like Noel, Kemba and keeping Franky? That would actually bring statistical logic into your view.Franky has and always be less than what some just can't admit. A very good spot Defender. Do agree, why not keep him on the cheap and use him against Trae? Mavs showed that to be a flaw in our management of him.
Yes. That's the only point. Frankie might have added a win or two to that Atlanta series just on defense alone. Okay, he was ghosted by Thibs. The by-product is that Frankie is in a better place proving conclusively that whatever he brings is *enough* to make a difference strategically.
The other by-product is that Thibs hasn't learned a thing and will ghost players who can help in the future. Thibs needs a winning team to win with. He ain't Kenny Atkinson. And that's a problem.
Think Frank is proving "conclusively" that he is just a good spot Defender. Don't know if you can say he was the difference in this series. Brunson, Dinwiddie and that guy Luka may have been.
Not to mention, the Mavs have not exactly increased Franks minutes this year. Mavs Ghosting him? Can't see how Frank fans are okay with Mavs use of Frank but are so against Thibs doing exactly the same thing? Minus using him for defensive minutes in this series.
Sorry to jump in on this discussion. But seems like the only thing Frank did wrong was get drafted at 8, which was out of his control. If Frank was drafted 38, there wouldn't be 46 pages on Frank. The point I'm making is Frank is a good player and he can play a role to help a team. But when you are drafted at 8 by a NY team itching to be relevant, itching for a PG, itching to win a chip, you will have 46 pages of Frank news and how he's trash. To me it's on Phil for selecting Frank to run his triangle, it's not Franks fault he was drafted so early. But if he was picked 38, he would be called a solid role player and only a few pages saying good luck.
Sometimes we let a players draft selection determine their NBA career. Frank is a role player (picked very high) and Knick fans was expecting starter quality in return. That doesn't mean he's not a good player and he can't help a team. Even if the Mavs played him in just a few minutes per game, thats how the Mavs value Frank. There's really nothing else to be said. OKC might start Frank or give him more minutes. Is that because Frank is better and has improved or just a reflection on OKC and how they perceive Frank and how they will use Frank.
Back to his defense, which is his real value. Frank can change a game or the momentum of a game with his defense alone (Trae was a different challenge for Frank. Trae is a problem for the entire league). Same with offensive 3pt specialist. They change the game in spurts. So far thats what Frank brings to a team, on defense. Outside of Frank being picked #8, whats wrong with Frank being a role player getting spot minutes? Why can't knick fans just be happy for him. He's not a locker room problem like KP's brother. He's a good player barely getting minutes or barely scoring for the Mavs. OK. He's still a good defender who can defend multiple positions, and help multiple teams.
Agree with just about everything you said. My posts have been consistent about Frank. Frank is a solid defensive role player. He should not have been a lotto pick and was only picked by Phil because he fit the Triangle. Shortsighted thinking. He did not deserve to be resigned as his CAP hold did not meet his production. He had ample chance to put together more than the occasional good game to earn more minutes. He is still a good bench player to have for league minimum and to stop a high scoring player. Funny how I said the same thing 5 years ago but Frank fans have claimed he was more.