Knicks · Grimes v Fournier - Is Thibbs Right to Start EF? (page 1)

CP and Hahn had a good discussion on this topic. Thibbs has said that EF is the front runner to start. While I personally want Grimes to start, I can see the logic in starting EF and having Grimes close games. What are your thoughts?

Grimes looks like he could be better but far from proven. Fourmier good 3 pointer but a poor defender. Is IQ a third choice?

Grimes has to take the starting job from the veteran. Shouldnt be made a starter based on a small sample size. Might happen if Grimes is outplaying Fournier at some point in the season. But to start the season, it should be Fournier, until Grimes proves he's a better option.

Cam baby! Let's put the hurt on the east with our D!

BRIGGS wrote:Grimes looks like he could be better but far from proven. Fourmier good 3 pointer but a poor defender. Is IQ a third choice?

Good question. Knicks were down with the shorter backcourt with Spida. If IQ makes strides this season, can Thibs really rule him out?

My full thoughts on this topic is I have no problem with EF being the front runner. All I ask for is for Grimes(barring injury) to get enough time to either prove himself a better starter or fail to do so. I don't believe in handing anyone a starting position. My exception for that would be if the team functions better overall with someone else as a starter.

The thing with EF that you have to do is treat him differently every game. Every 7 to 10 games he will have a game where he literally can't hit any shots and will end the game 0 for 10 or like 1 for 13 if you keep playing him. After the 1st half if its obvious it is going to be one of those game Thibs has to bench EF and give other players a chance. If it is a game where EF is getting torched on D sit him and give better defenders a chance. Don't just set a rotation and stick to it no matter what.

I think Fournier is too poor of a defender to start on this team, especially with another poor defender in Randle. I also don't think it makes much sense to start a vet like Fournier on a team projected to be .500 at best. Might as well see if Grimes can be anything special with more opportunities. Plus management pretty much had Grimes as untouchable in the Spida talks so why bench and limit his role?

BigDaddyG wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Grimes looks like he could be better but far from proven. Fourmier good 3 pointer but a poor defender. Is IQ a third choice?

Good question. Knicks were down with the shorter backcourt with Spida. If IQ makes strides this season, can Thibs really rule him out?

I think JVG would start IQ

gradyandrew wrote:Cam baby! Let's put the hurt on the east with our D!

I love this.

EwingsGlass wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Cam baby! Let's put the hurt on the east with our D!

I love this.

Its reasonable thought process as well. Hes the only 6-8 guy.

I reckon a better way of answering this is figuring out how to break down the wing minutes, then determining the starter question.

Here's how I'd scale minutes for now:
RJ: 35mpg
EF: 25-30mpg
Grimes: 20-25mpg (this is a bit dependent of course on the development of Quickley and what Thibs' appetite is for playing a small SG or giving Quickley minutes he'd typically slot to Rose)

I like the idea of using Grimes as a token starter and giving EF the bigger minutes - along the lines of Monty Williams of Anthony Bonner being the starters. Grimes, at least where he is today, seems like he would excel playing a role within a system (secondary ball handler, spot shooter/slasher - think "Courtney Lee") - this might be the ideal development next step for him. If he plays well, he naturally starts getting a bigger share of mins.

Whether he starts or comes off the bench, I think EF is a more proven force in the league - he's had lots of big time games and, at least going into the season, deserves more minutes. The French Jordan has a lot of things going for him in his bag of tricks. He can be a reliable presence off the bench where he can tear up 2nd units along with the rest of the bench mob.

The biggest non-story of training camp so far. Bringing back primarily the same group, no new SGs anyways. Fournier was our starter all last year, of course he's going to be the "front runner". I still think IQ wins out mid year.

In the interim, no complaints in keeping Fournier in the lineup. Fresh off the FIBA tournament where he was the man - bring a little leadership into the stating lineup that Julius and RJ aren't going to. Tap out to Captain Rose and the 2nd unit.

while Brunson and Fournier both have liabilities on defense they are both good team defender (Brunson probably an excellent team defender) and it will depend on match ups. Fournier has good size and has a physical game. He doesnt get pushed around and he's a very chippy player. Most of his defensive woes come from slow close outs and doing a better job challenging the jump shot. You live with guys getting hot on Fournier in the mid range. So it goes. Then its up to Thibs and crew to make adjustments.

I dont even like Fournier's fit here OR that signing (I shat on it last year PISSED we blew max cap space on a bunch of role players) but the disrespect to his game is silly. Grimes wasnt remotely close to Fournier who's got a complete offensive game. Grimes was a great 3&D player for like a 1/3 of a season. I love him but lets let the flowers grow a bit more before you sniff so hard all the petals go up your nose.

Fournier is so much more on offense than just a shooter. Looking forward to seeing how this SL works out. If RJ/Randle's EF% can go from last year's dumpster fire to something close to league average the Knicks will have a VERY good season

GustavBahler wrote:Grimes has to take the starting job from the veteran. Shouldnt be made a starter based on a small sample size. Might happen if Grimes is outplaying Fournier at some point in the season. But to start the season, it should be Fournier, until Grimes proves he's a better option.

yeah but its slow and we almost there... hey I wonder if they do start Grimes and Fournier gets mad and wants out if that could help in a Randle trade? Anyone?

fishmike wrote:while Brunson and Fournier both have liabilities on defense they are both good team defender (Brunson probably an excellent team defender) and it will depend on match ups. Fournier has good size and has a physical game. He doesnt get pushed around and he's a very chippy player. Most of his defensive woes come from slow close outs and doing a better job challenging the jump shot. You live with guys getting hot on Fournier in the mid range. So it goes. Then its up to Thibs and crew to make adjustments.

I dont even like Fournier's fit here OR that signing (I shat on it last year PISSED we blew max cap space on a bunch of role players) but the disrespect to his game is silly. Grimes wasnt remotely close to Fournier who's got a complete offensive game. Grimes was a great 3&D player for like a 1/3 of a season. I love him but lets let the flowers grow a bit more before you sniff so hard all the petals go up your nose.

Fournier is so much more on offense than just a shooter. Looking forward to seeing how this SL works out. If RJ/Randle's EF% can go from last year's dumpster fire to something close to league average the Knicks will have a VERY good season

The bold is why I prefer Grimes to start. This give Fournier the green light and the main guy to drive the offensive output of that 2nd unit. He doesn't have to over think when to give to Randle, where do I stand when Randle is going into ISO mode. Same with RJ and now Brunson. These 3 guys are good to great ISO players who play better with the ball in their hands. Mitch doesn't need the ball to impact the game. And Grimes doesn't need to dribble the air out of the ball, to setup his shot. Grimes is a nice catch and shoot guard.

Fournier, as you said fish, is a more complete offensive player who actually plays better in a bigger role instead of being confined to just a catch and shoot player. Just my opinion. But I also understand and agree you cant just bench Fournier, especially after this year he had with the 3 pt record or the salary he's making and his experience. Let Fournier lose the starting gig, but forcing him out of the starting gig.

If we start off slow multiple games, and Fournier looks off. We insert Grimes and the offense starts to pickup. Then Fournier comes back in the game with the 2nd unit and starts killing. I would think thats a sign of who fits better with who. EF and Rose and IQ will be a small lineup but they will put a lot of offensive pressure on the other bench.

GustavBahler wrote:Grimes has to take the starting job from the veteran. Shouldnt be made a starter based on a small sample size. Might happen if Grimes is outplaying Fournier at some point in the season. But to start the season, it should be Fournier, until Grimes proves he's a better option.

+1

Fan bases like to hand out Golden tickets to their hopefuls.
Excited about Grimes but EF just broke the Knicks 3pt record, has been doing this for years at a high click. Grimes has a bright future and his promotion will be and should be earned.

Fournier will get the benefit of the doubt as a veteran. Grimes can’t just be given the spot. He will have to beat Fournier for it. Have to think about the locker room too. You give the spots to who deserve it most.

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/IanBegley/status/1575539731961712640

Click here to view the Tweet

They say day to day but time is limited for him to prove himself.

BRIGGS wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Cam baby! Let's put the hurt on the east with our D!

I love this.

Its reasonable thought process as well. Hes the only 6-8 guy.

With a 7'2 wingspan and 92% career FT%. He's the kind of guy I would have drafted. Great biometrics. Great indicators. Screams of a guy just needing an opportunity to shine.

EwingsGlass wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Cam baby! Let's put the hurt on the east with our D!

I love this.

Its reasonable thought process as well. Hes the only 6-8 guy.

With a 7'2 wingspan and 92% career FT%. He's the kind of guy I would have drafted. Great biometrics. Great indicators. Screams of a guy just needing an opportunity to shine.

Great measurables do not necessarily mean a great NBA player. Cam has significant physical potential but does he also have significant work ethic, motor and desire to succeed regardless of role? I love the kid's potential and want him to succeed here as that would put the Knicks in a much better place......but it is all still a TBD.

foosballnick wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

gradyandrew wrote:Cam baby! Let's put the hurt on the east with our D!

I love this.

Its reasonable thought process as well. Hes the only 6-8 guy.

With a 7'2 wingspan and 92% career FT%. He's the kind of guy I would have drafted. Great biometrics. Great indicators. Screams of a guy just needing an opportunity to shine.

Great measurables do not necessarily mean a great NBA player. Cam has significant physical potential but does he also have significant work ethic, motor and desire to succeed regardless of role? I love the kid's potential and want him to succeed here as that would put the Knicks in a much better place......but it is all still a TBD.

Spot on, that's the key for Cam.

I'm with you, love his potential, Cam needs to step up with urgency.