For me any path forward includes moving Fournier out of the SL.
Which of these guys do you start and who comes off the bench at the SG/SF?
IQ, RJ, Grimes
I assume RJ has to make the cut.
Then do you move Grimes to the starting 2 and have IQ return to his microwave role which he excelled in in his first year, or do you put him in the SL at the SG position?
Panos wrote:For me any path forward includes moving Fournier out of the SL.
Which of these guys do you start and who comes off the bench at the SG/SF?
IQ, RJ, GrimesI assume RJ has to make the cut.
Then do you move Grimes to the starting 2 and have IQ return to his microwave role which he excelled in in his first year, or do you put him in the SL at the SG position?
Think this writing is already on the wall. No need for sudden changes. We needed three point shooting last year. EF came in and broke records. Don't think he gets enough credit. Yes his defense sucks. Grimes seems to be the next starting SG because of his outside shooting and has defense. Let's see if he continues his progress first though. So not see an issue with EF coming off the bench if EF struggles and Grimes continues to excel. EF off the bench allows him to be center of offense. Which may be good for him.
IQ
Grimes
RJ
Randle
Mitch
Rose
EF
Burke
Obi
Sims
HofstraBBall wrote:Panos wrote:For me any path forward includes moving Fournier out of the SL.
Which of these guys do you start and who comes off the bench at the SG/SF?
IQ, RJ, GrimesI assume RJ has to make the cut.
Then do you move Grimes to the starting 2 and have IQ return to his microwave role which he excelled in in his first year, or do you put him in the SL at the SG position?
Think this writing is already on the wall. No need for sudden changes. We needed three point shooting last year. EF came in and broke records. Don't think he gets enough credit. Yes his defense sucks. Grimes seems to be the next starting SG because of his outside shooting and has defense. Let's see if he continues his progress first though. So not see an issue with EF coming off the bench if EF struggles and Grimes continues to excel. EF off the bench allows him to be center of offense. Which may be good for him.
IQ
Grimes
RJ
Randle
Mitch
Rose
EF
Burke
Obi
Sims
You kind of missed the point of the question. The question is if EF is out of the starting line up and we get a starting level PG, do you start IQ or Grimes? (assuming we keep RJ in the lineup, which I guess is sort of a given?)
I would start IQ/RJ/Burks which takes some of the pressure off IQ by having Burks in there as well. Move EF to the bench where he should be a featured scorer in a Clarkson type role
Panos wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:Panos wrote:For me any path forward includes moving Fournier out of the SL.
Which of these guys do you start and who comes off the bench at the SG/SF?
IQ, RJ, GrimesI assume RJ has to make the cut.
Then do you move Grimes to the starting 2 and have IQ return to his microwave role which he excelled in in his first year, or do you put him in the SL at the SG position?
Think this writing is already on the wall. No need for sudden changes. We needed three point shooting last year. EF came in and broke records. Don't think he gets enough credit. Yes his defense sucks. Grimes seems to be the next starting SG because of his outside shooting and has defense. Let's see if he continues his progress first though. So not see an issue with EF coming off the bench if EF struggles and Grimes continues to excel. EF off the bench allows him to be center of offense. Which may be good for him.
IQ
Grimes
RJ
Randle
Mitch
Rose
EF
Burke
Obi
Sims
You kind of missed the point of the question. The question is if EF is out of the starting line up and we get a starting level PG, do you start IQ or Grimes? (assuming we keep RJ in the lineup, which I guess is sort of a given?)
I guess it would depend on who that PG is. Do not see IQ as a SG that spreads the floor. So I guess I would go with either EG or Grimes if you are talking Brunson or Tyus
HofstraBBall wrote:Panos wrote:For me any path forward includes moving Fournier out of the SL.
Which of these guys do you start and who comes off the bench at the SG/SF?
IQ, RJ, GrimesI assume RJ has to make the cut.
Then do you move Grimes to the starting 2 and have IQ return to his microwave role which he excelled in in his first year, or do you put him in the SL at the SG position?
Think this writing is already on the wall. No need for sudden changes. We needed three point shooting last year. EF came in and broke records. Don't think he gets enough credit. Yes his defense sucks. Grimes seems to be the next starting SG because of his outside shooting and has defense. Let's see if he continues his progress first though. So not see an issue with EF coming off the bench if EF struggles and Grimes continues to excel. EF off the bench allows him to be center of offense. Which may be good for him.
IQ
Grimes
RJ
Randle
Mitch
Rose
EF
Burke
Obi
Sims
When EF was next to Kemba, EF looked bad. It all depends which PG EF is next to. Or which SF he's next to.
I thought EF defense was better than what I saw with my own eyes. But finding a sharp shooter that plays defense has always been very rare. Those players are usually super stars or high quality starters. EF to me has the perfect game for a 6th man role, because he's more than a spot up shooter. He's a rhythm shooter who either needs a few dribble moves or off the ball moves to catch his rhythm. I usually compare him to Bullock since he left and EF came in. And Bullock is a classic catch and shoot player, which is why that worked for Randle and RJ. EF needs to dribble to get going vs Bullock who can't or refuse to dribble into his shot.
It's all about how you build your team and who's the focal point. The FO messed up with EF and Kemba. Or they messed up giving Randle that extension. But clearly the FO messed up the chemistry on this team with the off season additions / subtractions. But I still believe in the FO and I'm coming around to Thibs.
So I agree EF will be good off the bench. But I'm sure thats not what he signed up for. So will he be the new problem next year, with that demotion?
While this would never happen - I would do this (assuming Randle stays, Mitch resigns and we pick up Tyus Jones this offseason).
Start
IQ
RJ
Grimes
Toppin
Mitch
Bench
T. Jones
Fournier
Reddish
Randle (6th man winner :)
Sims
Insurance
Taj
Noel
#11 pick
Kemba
Burks and Rose traded to highest bidder (eg future 2nd rounders)
Panos wrote:For me any path forward includes moving Fournier out of the SL.
Which of these guys do you start and who comes off the bench at the SG/SF?
IQ, RJ, GrimesI assume RJ has to make the cut.
Then do you move Grimes to the starting 2 and have IQ return to his microwave role which he excelled in in his first year, or do you put him in the SL at the SG position?
I think this really would require major changes. If Randle, RJ, and Robinson start the Knicks need some dead eye shooters in the lineup to space the floor. IQ makes a lot of sense in that role; he seems like the only threat as an off the bounce 3 point shooter. RJ's usage went up over the season, I'm guessing next season the Knicks will want to see him with about 30% usage before deciding whether to give him a max/ near max contract. So far RJ hasnt really shown much in the NBA that he can be a winning player.
gradyandrew wrote:Panos wrote:For me any path forward includes moving Fournier out of the SL.
Which of these guys do you start and who comes off the bench at the SG/SF?
IQ, RJ, GrimesI assume RJ has to make the cut.
Then do you move Grimes to the starting 2 and have IQ return to his microwave role which he excelled in in his first year, or do you put him in the SL at the SG position?
I think this really would require major changes. If Randle, RJ, and Robinson start the Knicks need some dead eye shooters in the lineup to space the floor. IQ makes a lot of sense in that role; he seems like the only threat as an off the bounce 3 point shooter. RJ's usage went up over the season, I'm guessing next season the Knicks will want to see him with about 30% usage before deciding whether to give him a max/ near max contract. So far RJ hasnt really shown much in the NBA that he can be a winning player.
YOu can MAYBE roll back the whole team unchanged and bring in just one player who realigns a line up and provides the chemistry for the starting lineup. Improves Randle to a more realistic role consistant with his
Salary, gives RJ room to breath and be his all star self, a PG perhaps? Next to EF who as a streaky shooter demonstrated much better play after jan with better defense and more integrated in the offense. Perhaps that alone won’t frustrate Jules whose timing got all messed up.
Kemba was a good idea with little risk. It failed to execute. It happens. Grimes was a pleasent suprise. That happens too. IQ was tasked with much and he needed time to digest and it be instinctive. My take was he was not supressed to the delight of Thibs, but evolved thru a sophmore season. One which also saw rules change that took him off the foul line.
One might say Deuce was similar as he might have demonstrated greater growth then thought. Half empty fans think might say he too was supressed. Others might revel in a growth spurt of talent enough to render considerations not thought earlier in the year.
Major change a coming? Internally or externally injected one has to hope not just change but improvement.
So many moving parts to a team that one can stagnate it where another can make it purr.
Predictive outcome? I want to be fascinated and entertained. Winning is always great, but even better when you recognize all that goes into it. I want to see Jules redeemed by his fine play. RJ grow into the potential he possesses. IQ continue to use the court to orchestrate the team. And of course Obi fly!
Does that all happen? Who knows. I don’t know if my outlook is even valid. I see the team as singular. Many fans look at the pieces and think they can be plug and play. Some players can and do. But most are part of a chemmistry. When a team comes together its a thing of beauty.
Nalod, I agree with every thing you wrote. I like the players on are team. The key thing to me was our record against the bottom of the lottery teams. If we won those games the record would have been a lot better.
Who will be the Knicks starter PG ???
Randle has been the Knicks starter PG since head coach Fizdale.
In 9 out of 10 Knicks offensive-possession Randle control the ball to become the Knicks decision-maker on offense, plus being the Knicks first scoring option on offense for 40 minutes a game .. Says Randle's the Knicks PG!
Knicks fans fell in luv with Derrick Rose when he arrive, because D.Rose performance on the court took the ball out of Randle's hands to become the Knicks first-option on offense, and decision making PG who allowed running transition and consecutive ball-movement on offensive-possession.
Next season it will be the same, Quickley fighting Randle to be the play-maker of the ball, until a healthy D.Rose leadership are back on the court.
Oh yeah .. One or two contracts must be traded in offseason of Burks, or Fournier, or RJ Barrett.
The trio of players never co-existed on the court together on either side of the court, there was no chemistry from the trio of players in the Knicks starter lineup to outscore any opponent.
Panos wrote:For me any path forward includes moving Fournier out of the SL.
Which of these guys do you start and who comes off the bench at the SG/SF?
IQ, RJ, GrimesI assume RJ has to make the cut.
Then do you move Grimes to the starting 2 and have IQ return to his microwave role which he excelled in in his first year, or do you put him in the SL at the SG position?
Yeah but Fournier’s contract is actually not that bad. There is a team option over 2 years from now
fishmike wrote:I would start IQ/RJ/Burks which takes some of the pressure off IQ by having Burks in there as well. Move EF to the bench where he should be a featured scorer in a Clarkson type role
So you want to miss the playoffs again?
