Just leave em. He’s the future and the present
Get rid of frank. Grossly inconsistent 4 years later. Go find it elsewhere
Quickley's looking good today, and I like the chemistry with RJ. Still believe he has a good role as a spark plug off the bench, but wouldn't be shocked if he was able to claim the starting spot next year.
I think the team has come to terms that Frank is not a PG. Until injuries/COVID protocol made it necessary, he was being used as a secondary guard and looking good.
Before the trade, a lot of us were dreading Rose coming in taking that spot, but I think that's the best fit right now, 25 minutes starting the game and setting the tone and letting IQ do the heavy lifting in the second unit.
Welpee wrote:BRIGGS FROM 1/11/21: BRIGGS wrote:He’s way to small
And he’s not quick or fast enough to make up for it2-24 last 4 games —- just can’t live with it— it’s not good enough
BRIGGS wrote:Not sure why we took Quickley over Pritchard We needed a true pg
I know there's more than this? I'm not savy enough on UK to find them. But he was killing quickley. I was like, he's missing good shots and he was aggressive and attacking from the jump...even during his 2-24 stretch. In comparison to Frank, he's in his 4th year and just found a reliable jumper...but still doesn't know when to attack or defer. Quick, RJ, Obi, Randle, Rose....They all attack.
I rather have a player that attacks too much vs not enough. You coach them to slow down...but if someone is not accustomed to attacking the defense naturally, without any nba training....its hard to be coached up to become an attacking guard...it will look mechanical and inconsistent...but it will take some time to change into that...sometimesnever in most cases, But that's the kind of players we need to have, someone not afraid to play their game and contribute offensively and coachable. Great combo to have. We have a team that's young filled with this skill set.
I still say sign Frank long term for cheap. But use him properly. Nothing wrong with having a young unselfish defender in their mid 20s.
BRIGGS FROM 1/11/21:
BRIGGS wrote:He’s way to small
And he’s not quick or fast enough to make up for it2-24 last 4 games —- just can’t live with it— it’s not good enough
BRIGGS wrote:Not sure why we took Quickley over Pritchard We needed a true pg
[/
BRIGGS wrote:I was wrong?
...until Quickley has his next bad game and we get blown out, then we'll see a thread about how horrible he is again. These overreaction threads are pretty ridiculous.
blkexec wrote:Welpee wrote:BRIGGS FROM 1/11/21: BRIGGS wrote:He’s way to small
And he’s not quick or fast enough to make up for it2-24 last 4 games —- just can’t live with it— it’s not good enough
BRIGGS wrote:Not sure why we took Quickley over Pritchard We needed a true pg
I know there's more than this? I'm not savy enough on UK to find them. But he was killing quickley. I was like, he's missing good shots and he was aggressive and attacking from the jump...even during his 2-24 stretch. In comparison to Frank, he's in his 4th year and just found a reliable jumper...but still doesn't know when to attack or defer. Quick, RJ, Obi, Randle, Rose....They all attack.
I rather have a player that attacks too much vs not enough. You coach them to slow down...but someone not afraid to attack can not be coached up to attack more...you either have it or dont, That's the kind of players we need to have, especially when they are coachable.
I still say sign Frank long term for cheap. But use him properly.
I feel the same way about Knox. You can't coach someone to improve his motor. I can't think of one player who people questioned his motor entering the NBA who ended up solving that problem later on. There may be someone who is not immediately coming to mind, but I guarantee it's rare.
BRIGGS wrote:Just leave em. He’s the future and the present
Get rid of frank. Grossly inconsistent 4 years later. Go find it elsewhere
Why do we have to get rid of Frank for QUickley to be the starting PG? I think Frank still has value as a bench player. His ability to play 1-3 is worth a roster spot at the right price
Basketball-wise it makes sense to start IQ. His shooting meshes up very well with RJ’s bully ball and Randle’s Point Forward. But we have discussed this already.
I’m glad Thibs was obligated to start him in the second half, but still give him props for not being stubborn with Frank. I really hope we find a trade for Payton, as I think Rose, Quick and one of our G-League PGs can handle the spot.
Briggs is impressionable. Nothing wrong with it unless you start your own threads impulsively.
You beat me to the punch! I was planning on starting this thread but got too busy early on....This is not a reactionary post from me. If you’ve read any of my comments on Quickley, then you know I’ve been beating this drum for a while...Here's my take...
One of the main reasons some on this board want Quick coming off the bench is because he’s not a good playmaker. True, the 21 year old who’s in his first year does have room to improve as a playmaker. But, lets not pretend like this years version of Payton and his 3 and half assists is doing much playmaking this year. In fact, Payton calls his own number more than anyone on the team not named Randle.
I don’t buy the idea that Quick would take away shots from RJ and Randle if he was inserted into the starting lineup because his role would change. Clearly, Quick’s role with the second unit is hunt for shots as he and Burks are the main scorer’s. If you notice, the playbook seems to shrink when the second unit is in the game. But When Quick plays with Randle and RJ, the playbook opens-up a bit and we’ve seen him compliment both RJ and Randle when he has had a chance to play extended mins with the starters.
In addition, Randle is our main playmaker anyway. Quickley is probably our best catch and shoot 3 point shooter and would benefit from Randle’s playmaking. And vice versa as Quick’s presence would open up the court for both Randle and RJ. I also believe Quick’s efficiency would improve playing with better players as he wont be asked to carry the scoring load or handle the ball as much.
And for those that say we shouldn’t rush Quick and he may not be ready, I disagree. When is the last time we’ve seen a more confident Rookie. When have we ever seen Quick get rattled? When hasn’t he bounced back after a tough game? And Payton will not be the reason we secure one of the 6-10 playoff spots.
How much fun would it be to make the playoffs with 20- and 21-year-old in our starting rotation? Rose can get 20 mins a night as Quick’s back-up and more, depending. I hate the idea that a 21 year old who’s only played half a season is already being pigeon-holed as future 6th man. Instead of chasing Lowry or Ball, maybe we already have our future lead guard (I say lead guard instead of pg because the Mark Jackson’s of the world barely exist in today’s NBA). We wont know unless he’s given a shot.
Also...not only did Quick apply full court pressure and was pest on defense, not sure if anyone noticed but for a 3 minute stretch in the 4th quarter, Dort, OKC's best defender was guarding Quickley! Having the opposing teams best perimeter defender guard Quickley, certainly makes the game easier for RJ.
Stole this from another board....
RJ, Randle with IQ (116.3 OFF 104.3 DEF) +11.9 net rating
RJ, Randle with Payton (107.1 OFF 110.0 DEF) -2.9 net rating.
I see more instant offense than I see floor general. Would rather the FO try to get Lonzo in the offseason.
I think Quickley has teased PG skills, but Thibs has specific ideas of how he wants to use him on the year’s team, sharing Pg responsibilities and playing off Randle as the primary playmaker.
It’s really not that different from how GSW uses Green and Curry - clearly Thibs was influenced by his visits with Steve Kerr during his year away from coaching.
Whether he starts or comes off the bench, I think Quickley will continue to dig into more minutes and eventually get into the 30+mpg range regularly, provided he stays healthy. Notably he’s been dealing with a sore groin and we need to be a little careful with this - playing in the 2nd half is going to be prime development time for him.
I was just thinking today whether Quickley is one of favorites for 6th man of the year. Is there another non-starter with as many high impact 20+pt games as him?
I think knixix said it in another thread—- we have a new wave big 3. Why not simply go with it now?
Have you starting taking these? If so, do you have anymore? I just got done watch Cade highlights.
To me IQ definitely has the potential to be one of the better starting PGs in the league. Which is why I would be reluctant to trade for anyone else in his spot who is not an elite superstar, like the likes of Lonzo.
Knox has a lot more motor this season, he looks different, hungry, plugged in. I still think he has a chance to develop. So does Frank. Too early to give up on them. Remember, they are both no older than IQ, and it takes time. Unless you are the Lakers, that everyone wants to play for because of the cachė, you build a championship team by nurturing your own talent, and it takes time.
I would not be against an IQ-RJ-Knox-Randle-Mitch lineup next season, with Frank spelling all three backcourt spots and Obi coming in for Randle. Then you need another center, hopefully with a shot, and a microwave scorer off the bench in the Allonzo Trier mode to fill out the rotation, and you got yourselves a pretty decent team.
ESOMKnicks wrote:To me IQ definitely has the potential to be one of the better starting PGs in the league. Which is why I would be reluctant to trade for anyone else in his spot who is not an elite superstar, like the likes of Lonzo.
Knox has a lot more motor this season, he looks different, hungry, plugged in. I still think he has a chance to develop. So does Frank. Too early to give up on them. Remember, they are both no older than IQ, and it takes time. Unless you are the Lakers, that everyone wants to play for because of the cachė, you build a championship team by nurturing your own talent, and it takes time.I would not be against an IQ-RJ-Knox-Randle-Mitch lineup next season, with Frank spelling all three backcourt spots and Obi coming in for Randle. Then you need another center, hopefully with a shot, and a microwave scorer off the bench in the Allonzo Trier mode to fill out the rotation, and you got yourselves a pretty decent team.
While Lonzo isnt an elite superstar. Believe its fair to say that he's a rising star. He's also an elite defender, which Quickley isnt. Ball is bigger, can do a better job of slowing down elite PGs.
He's still getting better. Dont want to pay him elite $$$. Something competitive, that wont hit the cap too hard.
I like the idea of Quickley carving up second units.
GustavBahler wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:To me IQ definitely has the potential to be one of the better starting PGs in the league. Which is why I would be reluctant to trade for anyone else in his spot who is not an elite superstar, like the likes of Lonzo.
Knox has a lot more motor this season, he looks different, hungry, plugged in. I still think he has a chance to develop. So does Frank. Too early to give up on them. Remember, they are both no older than IQ, and it takes time. Unless you are the Lakers, that everyone wants to play for because of the cachė, you build a championship team by nurturing your own talent, and it takes time.I would not be against an IQ-RJ-Knox-Randle-Mitch lineup next season, with Frank spelling all three backcourt spots and Obi coming in for Randle. Then you need another center, hopefully with a shot, and a microwave scorer off the bench in the Allonzo Trier mode to fill out the rotation, and you got yourselves a pretty decent team.
While Lonzo isnt an elite superstar. Believe its fair to say that he's a rising star. He's also an elite defender, which Quickley isnt. Ball is bigger, can do a better job of slowing down elite PGs.
He's still getting better. Dont want to pay him elite $$$. Something competitive, that wont hit the cap too hard.
I like the idea of Quickley carving up second units.
IQ is already doing things that Lonzo was not doing in his first couple of years in the league. I think IQ will be better after 4 years in the league than Lonzo is right now, or even by the time IQ reaches the same age as Lonzo's right now.
