IQ obviously won't get it but here are some nice numbers
IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.
What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Welpee wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Not saying at all he deserves rookie of the year. Just saying he was the most impactful rookie in terms on role on a winning team. You guys need to re read what I wrote. I just think his impact will be undervalued and he may not even make first team rookie.
knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
How was Edwards much better than IQ?
Yay IQ. Kid has his head on straight and I suspect will get better and better and play winning ball
Edward’s is immensely talented. I keep thinking of melo though. Will he score a lot of selfish points and be incapable of being THAT guy to win big
Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Not saying at all he deserves rookie of the year. Just saying he was the most impactful rookie in terms on role on a winning team. You guys need to re read what I wrote. I just think his impact will be undervalued and he may not even make first team rookie.
I read what you wrote and still don't see it. So if a rookie is out performed by other rookies but his team happens to win more, that means he had more impact? Based on that logic should we mention Tyrese Maxey since Philly had a better record than us?
Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Not saying at all he deserves rookie of the year. Just saying he was the most impactful rookie in terms on role on a winning team. You guys need to re read what I wrote. I just think his impact will be undervalued and he may not even make first team rookie.
I read what you wrote and still don't see it. So if a rookie is out performed by other rookies but his team happens to win more, that means he had more impact? Based on that logic should we mention Tyrese Maxey since Philly had a better record than us?
Look at most advanced stats. IQ had the most impact outside of Ball this year I think. It was ball, Haliburton and IQ. Edwards wasn’t in the picture.
don't really care about the award.. ROY is just a this season award... I don't miss THJ
what I'm beyond pumped about is we drafted the next Lou Williams
Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Not saying at all he deserves rookie of the year. Just saying he was the most impactful rookie in terms on role on a winning team. You guys need to re read what I wrote. I just think his impact will be undervalued and he may not even make first team rookie.
I read what you wrote and still don't see it. So if a rookie is out performed by other rookies but his team happens to win more, that means he had more impact? Based on that logic should we mention Tyrese Maxey since Philly had a better record than us?
Look at most advanced stats. IQ had the most impact outside of Ball this year I think. It was ball, Haliburton and IQ. Edwards wasn’t in the picture.
lol...seems like "advance stats" is always the go to card to prove what you lying eyes aren't really seeing.
Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Not saying at all he deserves rookie of the year. Just saying he was the most impactful rookie in terms on role on a winning team. You guys need to re read what I wrote. I just think his impact will be undervalued and he may not even make first team rookie.
I read what you wrote and still don't see it. So if a rookie is out performed by other rookies but his team happens to win more, that means he had more impact? Based on that logic should we mention Tyrese Maxey since Philly had a better record than us?
Look at most advanced stats. IQ had the most impact outside of Ball this year I think. It was ball, Haliburton and IQ. Edwards wasn’t in the picture.
lol...seems like "advance stats" is always the go to card to prove what you lying eyes aren't really seeing.
In this case, I think upside gets confused with performance. Do I think Haliburton or IQ have Edward's upside? No. Do I think they had more even performances throughout their rookie years? Yeah
I still think the award goes to Ball.
BigDaddyG wrote:Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Not saying at all he deserves rookie of the year. Just saying he was the most impactful rookie in terms on role on a winning team. You guys need to re read what I wrote. I just think his impact will be undervalued and he may not even make first team rookie.
I read what you wrote and still don't see it. So if a rookie is out performed by other rookies but his team happens to win more, that means he had more impact? Based on that logic should we mention Tyrese Maxey since Philly had a better record than us?
Look at most advanced stats. IQ had the most impact outside of Ball this year I think. It was ball, Haliburton and IQ. Edwards wasn’t in the picture.
lol...seems like "advance stats" is always the go to card to prove what you lying eyes aren't really seeing.
In this case, I think upside gets confused with performance. Do I think Haliburton or IQ have Edward's upside? No. Do I think they had more even performances throughout their rookie years? Yeah
I still think the award goes to Ball.
Not sure I agree with that either. If you look at pre and post all-star game numbers(roughly the halfway mark of the season) Quickley's stats dropped slightly in spite of his minutes being bumped up a little. Haliburton stayed relatively consistent. Edwards jumped from 15 ppg to 24 ppg in the second half. Honestly, I love IQ but the last thing I think of when describing Quickley's rookie year would be "even performances."
SupremeCommander wrote:don't really care about the award.. ROY is just a this season award... I don't miss THJwhat I'm beyond pumped about is we drafted the next Lou Williams
Exactly. IQ's numbers are pretty comparable to Lou's at age 21.
TPercy wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
How was Edwards much better than IQ?
Certainly had a much different role on his respective team - starting v bench - and his progression from start to end of the season was very noticeable.
martin wrote:TPercy wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
How was Edwards much better than IQ?
Certainly had a much different role on his respective team - starting v bench - and his progression from start to end of the season was very noticeable.
Yeah, and acknowledging the season Edwards had doesn't take away from what IQ did.
martin wrote:TPercy wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
How was Edwards much better than IQ?
Certainly had a much different role on his respective team - starting v bench - and his progression from start to end of the season was very noticeable.
I don’t dispute that but fact for me remains that IQ was a much more impactful player in his respective role compared to Edwards and that has to count for something. I’ll take 2nd option coming off the bench putting up efficient numbers while having the occasional big night over a mid range pull-up chucker who is one of the worst defenders in the league for his position. Edwards will very likely end up being the better player but IQ has had more impact for me.
Welpee wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Not saying at all he deserves rookie of the year. Just saying he was the most impactful rookie in terms on role on a winning team. You guys need to re read what I wrote. I just think his impact will be undervalued and he may not even make first team rookie.
I read what you wrote and still don't see it. So if a rookie is out performed by other rookies but his team happens to win more, that means he had more impact? Based on that logic should we mention Tyrese Maxey since Philly had a better record than us?
Look at most advanced stats. IQ had the most impact outside of Ball this year I think. It was ball, Haliburton and IQ. Edwards wasn’t in the picture.
lol...seems like "advance stats" is always the go to card to prove what you lying eyes aren't really seeing.
In this case, I think upside gets confused with performance. Do I think Haliburton or IQ have Edward's upside? No. Do I think they had more even performances throughout their rookie years? Yeah
I still think the award goes to Ball.
Not sure I agree with that either. If you look at pre and post all-star game numbers(roughly the halfway mark of the season) Quickley's stats dropped slightly in spite of his minutes being bumped up a little. Haliburton stayed relatively consistent. Edwards jumped from 15 ppg to 24 ppg in the second half. Honestly, I love IQ but the last thing I think of when describing Quickley's rookie year would be "even performances."
How much defense was Halliburton (or Edwards for that matter) asked to play on the worst defensive team in the NBA? I wonder if its easier or more difficult to play consistent offense when your coach is constantly on your case to put out maximum effort on D or he will get in your face? 
TPercy wrote:martin wrote:TPercy wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
How was Edwards much better than IQ?
Certainly had a much different role on his respective team - starting v bench - and his progression from start to end of the season was very noticeable.
I don’t dispute that but fact for me remains that IQ was a much more impactful player in his respective role compared to Edwards and that has to count for something. I’ll take 2nd option coming off the bench putting up efficient numbers while having the occasional big night over a mid range pull-up chucker who is one of the worst defenders in the league for his position. Edwards will very likely end up being the better player but IQ has had more impact for me.
Not for nothing but Edwards was a more efficient overall shooter than IQ if you are looking at eFG%.
They are different players who had different roles on their respective teams. I didn't watch more than the Knicks game v Minny of Edwards minutes but it seems to me that his impact on his team as a starter at the end of the year was nothing to sleep on.
Welpee wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:Knixkik wrote:Welpee wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Knixkik wrote:IQ was the most impactful rookie of the year. He was a major difference-maker on a playoff team all year. He could have played in orlando or Houston and played 30 mpg and averaged 18-20, but he was in a smaller role on a good team. Unfortunately impact typically doesn't mean much in the rookie rankings.What gets me is Barrett doesn't make a team because he was perceived as a guy getting numbers without impact. Now watch IQ get dinged because he's a high impact guy without big numbers.
Dude Ball and Edward were much better than IQ, hands down.
I believe IQ should make an all rookie team, but he's not better than those 2
Yeah, that didn't make much sense. Also don't forget Haliburton.
Not saying at all he deserves rookie of the year. Just saying he was the most impactful rookie in terms on role on a winning team. You guys need to re read what I wrote. I just think his impact will be undervalued and he may not even make first team rookie.
I read what you wrote and still don't see it. So if a rookie is out performed by other rookies but his team happens to win more, that means he had more impact? Based on that logic should we mention Tyrese Maxey since Philly had a better record than us?
Look at most advanced stats. IQ had the most impact outside of Ball this year I think. It was ball, Haliburton and IQ. Edwards wasn’t in the picture.
lol...seems like "advance stats" is always the go to card to prove what you lying eyes aren't really seeing.
In this case, I think upside gets confused with performance. Do I think Haliburton or IQ have Edward's upside? No. Do I think they had more even performances throughout their rookie years? Yeah
I still think the award goes to Ball.
Not sure I agree with that either. If you look at pre and post all-star game numbers(roughly the halfway mark of the season) Quickley's stats dropped slightly in spite of his minutes being bumped up a little. Haliburton stayed relatively consistent. Edwards jumped from 15 ppg to 24 ppg in the second half. Honestly, I love IQ but the last thing I think of when describing Quickley's rookie year would be "even performances."
IQ dropped "slightly". Edward was god awful for the first half. And I'm not even talking ppg. Efficiency was abysmal as well. That's what I mean by more even performances.
