Knicks · Fire Thibs (page 50)

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

shinmen wrote:I wonder how practices are going to find out if the rookies will be able to perform. We heard from players multiple times that the practices are tough mentally but not really physically.
Do the bench players have a different practice than the starters? If not how can Thibs assess if rookies are able to play against real competition?

Ask yourself how varsity coaches in high school have a good sense who on JV has it to come up to the varsity club or if D1 coaches know which high school kids may be able to succeed at the next level.

It's not an exact science but you get a feel. Do kids surprise you? Of course.

They have eyes. And experience.

You just don’t know how they will do until you put them out there, and give them some real PT, not just garbage time. That’s how “Linsanity” started. If the bench didn’t badly need a floor general, I’d understand the wait and see attitude. Would also understand if our starters weren’t leading the league in minutes. Kolek has been getting less PT than his peers on other teams.

Who is that You in that sentence? You or seasoned coaches who are at the top of their game as far as tracking analytics during practice and whatnot? Cause it's certainly not me.

There will always be Linsanity examples, that's the exception. You seem to frame Linsanity like it happens every year, while it is rather the unique, one-time exception.

You are advocating for a "win now only" position as a fan. Try anything and try it now, see if it sticks to the wall. That's not really a plan and that's OK.

Fans keep complaining that Thibs is a win-only coach and actually advocating for that exact opposite.

Deuce is the well documented reference here, not Linsanity. PG's typically take a long time to develop. Witness Nash and Billups.

You need to learn your position as well as the others and where they will be. It's a long process and throwing your players to the wolves is typically not the best development path.

Unless you are really not an advocate of development?

I’ve been against Thibs winning the regular season, at the expense of everything else. Like a deep playoff run. That means not having your starting unit play the most minutes in the league. It means giving the vets on the bench someone to push them, like Kolek.

So no, I’m definitely not in “win now” mode. I’m in “keep the starters from wearing out before the playoffs” mode. I’m in the camp that wants to give the best rookie PG we’ve had in years some experience before the playoffs. So he can be a contributor in a post season run.

Have to repeat that Thibs way of doing things had not gotten him past the second round in almost 15 years. Hard to listen to arguments that Thibs coaching philosophy shouldn’t be challenged. It’s gotten him some regular season awards, but little else as a head coach.

You think Thibs teams in NY and Minny had enough talent to get past the second round? Explain why you think they should have, I’m interested.

You keep repeating stuff that is very easy to figure out, take some time to figure it out.

I get that you are not entertained but that a you thing.

Thibs built that team in Minny, not Layden. Of course I expect the person who built the roster and coached it to take a big share of the blame for the lack of success.

Its been reported that Thibs has a good deal of sway over the roster in NY as well. You get the players you want, you coach them to early exists every year. Of course I put the results on Thibs. Why would he get a pass for all the early exits? Every single one?

The season Randle tore up his ankle, he was already hurt, and asked Thibs to go back in during garbage, right before the playoffs were about to begin. Aggravated his injury, needed surgery in the offseason. This is the only way he seems to know how to coach "damn the torpedos, full speed ahead". I dont find early exits very entertaining.

They say the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result. Is it so crazy to want to see Thibs change things up? Listen to his starters who are saying that they're gassed from league leading minutes. Hart used to complain if he were taken out the game, but even he's reached a point where its taking its toll, and were still a month or so from the playoffs.

That’s just some faux level bluster and a lack of knowing what happened in Minny. That’s on you. Like, just look up their history instead of blathering about.

Thibs took over a 29-53 team that had not been to the playoffs in more than a decade. Within 2 years, they are 47-35. The following year Minny moved on from Thibs.

Why is your expectation that the Minny and NY Teams should have gotten past the second rounds?

You skipped that part and did some poor redirection.

How far did they go Martin? You seem to share Thibs’s philosophy that the regular season is all that matters. I have yet to hear you acknowledge that a 14 year gap between deep runs in the playoffs, could be attributed to coaching, or roster building moves. Just a victim of circumstance.

Sorry dude, I don’t buy that. Getting to the playoffs is one thing, avoiding an early exit is another. Takes the right players, and the right strategy. Riding your starters harder than any team in the last 33 years is not what I consider a winning strategy. Will be happy to be proven wrong.

Good Luck tomorrow

Those are your thoughts, not mine.

Thibs got a franchise that hadn’t been to the playoffs in a decade, that’s the accomplishment. In year two of a flailing franchise, that’s extraordinary.

Just as with getting a Julius lead team with Noel and Elfrid in the starting lineup to the 4th seed. As a comparison, Spo can’t get Miami with Tyler Herro, Rozier, Robinson, and Bam to the 10th seed with much better overall talent and lots of playoff experience in all of them, for instance. That’s called context.

The year Minny got to the playoffs, they lost to a 65 win Houston team with prime CP3 and Harden. By your logic, Thibs should have somehow gotten past the second round at some point? With those teams?

Or did you just not understand the context of what you are trying to talk about there?

Still not understanding why you would think it’s reasonable that Thibs should have gotten to the second round with the likes of those teams. Help me understand your thinking there.

Or scrap it.

Which Minny and NY teams do you think should have gotten past the second round. Be clear by stating the years, that’ll help.

The year that the Knicks trounced Cleveland and then lost to a Miami team that was talented enough to make it to the finals or the one that started Noel and Elfrid? Or the Minny one that got to spiked by a 65 win Houston team in their first playoffs in a decade?

Some coaches are good at rebuilding a team, making them competitive in the regular season. Give them a sense of discipline. Some are good at taking a good team, and making them contenders. Over the span of Thibs career, he’s proven that he is a good rebuilding coach. But even with complete control of the roster, he hasn’t demonstrated that he can build or lead a contender.

As far as Minny, there were dust ups with players. It wasn’t just wins and losses. Thibs is starting to hear it from his starters in NY. Mainly because he doubled down on playing the starters league leading minutes. You make it all sound so reasonable that we have a starting unit that plays the most minutes in the league. No one leans on his starters more than Thibs. That’s a fact. I believe it’s a big driver of the lack of postseason success, that and the lousy 3pt D. All I hear is that Thibs can do no wrong, and his record as a head coach has nothing to do with his decision making.

fishmike wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

fishmike wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

shinmen wrote:I wonder how practices are going to find out if the rookies will be able to perform. We heard from players multiple times that the practices are tough mentally but not really physically.
Do the bench players have a different practice than the starters? If not how can Thibs assess if rookies are able to play against real competition?

Ask yourself how varsity coaches in high school have a good sense who on JV has it to come up to the varsity club or if D1 coaches know which high school kids may be able to succeed at the next level.

It's not an exact science but you get a feel. Do kids surprise you? Of course.

They have eyes. And experience.

You just don’t know how they will do until you put them out there, and give them some real PT, not just garbage time. That’s how “Linsanity” started. If the bench didn’t badly need a floor general, I’d understand the wait and see attitude. Would also understand if our starters weren’t leading the league in minutes. Kolek has been getting less PT than his peers on other teams.

Who is that You in that sentence? You or seasoned coaches who are at the top of their game as far as tracking analytics during practice and whatnot? Cause it's certainly not me.

There will always be Linsanity examples, that's the exception. You seem to frame Linsanity like it happens every year, while it is rather the unique, one-time exception.

You are advocating for a "win now only" position as a fan. Try anything and try it now, see if it sticks to the wall. That's not really a plan and that's OK.

Fans keep complaining that Thibs is a win-only coach and actually advocating for that exact opposite.

Deuce is the well documented reference here, not Linsanity. PG's typically take a long time to develop. Witness Nash and Billups.

You need to learn your position as well as the others and where they will be. It's a long process and throwing your players to the wolves is typically not the best development path.

Unless you are really not an advocate of development?

I’ve been against Thibs winning the regular season, at the expense of everything else. Like a deep playoff run. That means not having your starting unit play the most minutes in the league. It means giving the vets on the bench someone to push them, like Kolek.

So no, I’m definitely not in “win now” mode. I’m in “keep the starters from wearing out before the playoffs” mode. I’m in the camp that wants to give the best rookie PG we’ve had in years some experience before the playoffs. So he can be a contributor in a post season run.

Have to repeat that Thibs way of doing things had not gotten him past the second round in almost 15 years. Hard to listen to arguments that Thibs coaching philosophy shouldn’t be challenged. It’s gotten him some regular season awards, but little else as a head coach.

You think Thibs teams in NY and Minny had enough talent to get past the second round? Explain why you think they should have, I’m interested.

You keep repeating stuff that is very easy to figure out, take some time to figure it out.

I get that you are not entertained but that a you thing.

Thibs built that team in Minny, not Layden. Of course I expect the person who built the roster and coached it to take a big share of the blame for the lack of success.

Its been reported that Thibs has a good deal of sway over the roster in NY as well. You get the players you want, you coach them to early exists every year. Of course I put the results on Thibs. Why would he get a pass for all the early exits? Every single one?

The season Randle tore up his ankle, he was already hurt, and asked Thibs to go back in during garbage, right before the playoffs were about to begin. Aggravated his injury, needed surgery in the offseason. This is the only way he seems to know how to coach "damn the torpedos, full speed ahead". I dont find early exits very entertaining.

They say the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result. Is it so crazy to want to see Thibs change things up? Listen to his starters who are saying that they're gassed from league leading minutes. Hart used to complain if he were taken out the game, but even he's reached a point where its taking its toll, and were still a month or so from the playoffs.

and definition of blind is not being able to see the wall you are about the walk into.

Knicks starters have been among the best with the league all year. Knicks bench has been among the worst all year. You say "play the bench more" its like right... cause it would be insane not too

Why has it been 30 plus years since a starting unit played so many minutes? The last one was “Run TMC”. They couldn’t get past the second round either.

You play a good starting unit more minutes than any other team, good chance we would see similar results. Lots of winning during the regular season, not so much in the playoffs.

I really hope Thibs ends the long drought, but if he can’t, I hope the FO considers other options.

so 30 years of not winning titles? So you say we should just do the same as the other teams not winning titles? Isnt that the definition of insanity you provided? We can all play this non logical circle jerk game. It's boring.

The circle jerk I see is that Thibs can ride his players harder than anyone else. To the point where even the starters begin to complain. But you’re ok with that because Thibs can do no wrong. 30 plus years since any starting unit has played so many minutes, shows how little Thibs has worked to develop the bench. He waited a long time to give Huk a chance to supplant Sims. Kolek has been at the bottom of the league in rookie minutes. Didn’t go that route. Instead he gave his starters more work than any other starting unit in the last 33 freaking years. Forgive me for not genuflecting.

GustavBahler wrote:Some coaches are good at rebuilding a team, making them competitive in the regular season. Give them a sense of discipline. Some are good at taking a good team, and making them contenders. Over the span of Thibs career, he’s proven that he is a good rebuilding coach. But even with complete control of the roster, he hasn’t demonstrated that he can build or lead a contender.

As far as Minny, there were dust ups with players. It wasn’t just wins and losses. Thibs is starting to hear it from his starters in NY. Mainly because he doubled down on playing the starters league leading minutes. You make it all sound so reasonable that we have a starting unit that plays the most minutes in the league. No one leans on his starters more than Thibs. That’s a fact. I believe it’s a big driver of the lack of postseason success, that and the lousy 3pt D. All I hear is that Thibs can do no wrong, and his record as a head coach has nothing to do with his decision making.

As an example, no coach can take a Gleague team to the NBA playoffs. You need talent on your team to win. You are forgetting that part of the equation. When you have enough of the right ingredients, then you judge, and you should judge within that context.

And you are mixing up Spo with Thibs, it's Spo that has lost his touch, NY players have RAVED about their coach and you continue to ignore. You make up some weird stuff and then run with it to try to prove your Debbie Downer take on the team.

It's a curious look into the abyss that is looking back at you.

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Some coaches are good at rebuilding a team, making them competitive in the regular season. Give them a sense of discipline. Some are good at taking a good team, and making them contenders. Over the span of Thibs career, he’s proven that he is a good rebuilding coach. But even with complete control of the roster, he hasn’t demonstrated that he can build or lead a contender.

As far as Minny, there were dust ups with players. It wasn’t just wins and losses. Thibs is starting to hear it from his starters in NY. Mainly because he doubled down on playing the starters league leading minutes. You make it all sound so reasonable that we have a starting unit that plays the most minutes in the league. No one leans on his starters more than Thibs. That’s a fact. I believe it’s a big driver of the lack of postseason success, that and the lousy 3pt D. All I hear is that Thibs can do no wrong, and his record as a head coach has nothing to do with his decision making.

As an example, no coach can take a Gleague team to the NBA playoffs. You need talent on your team to win. You are forgetting that part of the equation. When you have enough of the right ingredients, then you judge, and you should judge within that context.

And you are mixing up Spo with Thibs, it's Spo that has lost his touch, NY players have RAVED about their coach and you continue to ignore. You make up some weird stuff and then run with it to try to prove your Debbie Downer take on the team.

It's a curious look into the abyss that is looking back at you.

Im down on ignoring the facts. Like the way Thibs uses his starters, doesnt use his bench. It never ends well. Thibs was given control over all the ingredients. At some point its fair to ask if Thibs is still the right ingredient? This post-season should tell us.

As far as "the abyss" old Gustav spent the last year there. Almost killed him. First spring-like day here. Finally walking out of it. 👍

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Some coaches are good at rebuilding a team, making them competitive in the regular season. Give them a sense of discipline. Some are good at taking a good team, and making them contenders. Over the span of Thibs career, he’s proven that he is a good rebuilding coach. But even with complete control of the roster, he hasn’t demonstrated that he can build or lead a contender.

As far as Minny, there were dust ups with players. It wasn’t just wins and losses. Thibs is starting to hear it from his starters in NY. Mainly because he doubled down on playing the starters league leading minutes. You make it all sound so reasonable that we have a starting unit that plays the most minutes in the league. No one leans on his starters more than Thibs. That’s a fact. I believe it’s a big driver of the lack of postseason success, that and the lousy 3pt D. All I hear is that Thibs can do no wrong, and his record as a head coach has nothing to do with his decision making.

As an example, no coach can take a Gleague team to the NBA playoffs. You need talent on your team to win. You are forgetting that part of the equation. When you have enough of the right ingredients, then you judge, and you should judge within that context.

And you are mixing up Spo with Thibs, it's Spo that has lost his touch, NY players have RAVED about their coach and you continue to ignore. You make up some weird stuff and then run with it to try to prove your Debbie Downer take on the team.

It's a curious look into the abyss that is looking back at you.

Im down on ignoring the facts. Like the way Thibs uses his starters, doesnt use his bench. It never ends well. Thibs was given control over all the ingredients. At some point its fair to ask if Thibs is still the right ingredient? This post-season should tell us.

As far as "the abyss" old Gustav spent the last year there. Almost killed him. First spring-like day here. Finally walking out of it. 👍

except the ones you make up... the facts based on your opinions. You hold on tight to those.

People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Kolek doesnt look like an NBA player. There's zero shot making or defense to his game. Zero. There's a reason Cam (vet min league player) is not only ahead of Kolek, but way ahead.

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Good question. Lets talk about the people I referenced in the post.

Huk:
For the summer league a lot of people were blinded by Skaps numbers. I think that was his nickname. You have to know the type of bigs that Thibs likes. No matter how good skap looked in summer league Thibs will never even allow him on the team. He like rim running defensive bigs. Obviously Thibs will make exceptions for a player as good as KAT but Skap is not KAT. So instead of looking at numbers I looked at play style. Huk checked every box. He protected the rim. He could move his feet even though he is a big man. He could pass the ball. He and Kolek had instant chemistry. He had some nice moves in the paint and finished well when Kolek passed the ball. He also did all that while looking out of game shape. Dude god tired so quick and I guess that is why he played short stints. In a few games you saw where in those short stints Huk made an impact. Some games it even translated to stats but that was not the main focus with him.

I found the summer league thread and found some of my old posts that shows how I was assessing Huk and Skap.Here are some examples of my thoughts while watching the games.

Huk:

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: Huk is the perfect backup big for Thibs to mold. I think we got a good one in him. He fits Thibs needs as a big real well.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: I like Huk way more than Skap. I love his defense. He can score in the paint. He rebounds. He can pass a bit on the inside.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: Huk grabbing those contested rebounds.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: I think Huk can work as backup big. Give Thibs some time to work his magic.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: Huk has looked pretty good to me. 4pt and 4reb in 10 minutes. I can work with that.

Click here to view the Tweet

Skap:

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: Everytime I look at the box scores skap is filling it up man.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: Skaps rebound numbers is always good but he not getting these contested rebounds in the 3rd.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: Skap has decent numbers but I was not impressed. I am sure others will feel different.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: I am getting WNBA Flashbacks with the open layup miss by skrap.

Click here to view the Tweet

WIth Kolek I will keep it short because I have stated a lot of my reasoning recently with Thibs not playing him even though we have been hit by injures. For years now we have only had 2 playmakers. Once Randle went down we only had one. Every playoff series the other team strat was to take Brunson out of the game. The reason why is because we have a team full of finishers and no one to set them up. In Kolek I saw our only other playmaker on the court. Did I think he would be an All-Star? No, but he will bring something our team has needed for years. The need for a playmaker is why I wanted Donovan Mitchell.

Kolek:

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: If he plays like this in preseason he is my backup PG at the start of the season. We have lacked someone to get the 2nd unit easy baskets for years.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: Kolek always finds the open person.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: I love how he led Toppin into driving to the hop instead of shooting a 3 with that ast. Amazing.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: his passes are so effortless.

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: I look on ast very highly in summer league. You are with a bunch of guys who don't know each other and no real system or practice.

Click here to view the Tweet

Link to the thread: https://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/top...

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Kolek doesnt look like an NBA player. There's zero shot making or defense to his game. Zero. There's a reason Cam (vet min league player) is not only ahead of Kolek, but way ahead.

0 shot making? I see you are making the same mistake people made with McBride. Kolek can shoot just fine but you are not going to be rhythm when you don't get playing time. Everyone thought Mcbride was one of the worst shooting players in the league like his stats showed. Yet whenever he played consistant minutes in the g league he is could magically shoot. Once Quick got traded and consistant minutes opened up for him he could magically shoot. This is not a video game. Most players need consistant reps to shoot well from the outside.

Clean wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Kolek doesnt look like an NBA player. There's zero shot making or defense to his game. Zero. There's a reason Cam (vet min league player) is not only ahead of Kolek, but way ahead.

0 shot making? I see you are making the same mistake people made with McBride. Kolek can shoot just fine but you are not going to be rhythm when you don't get playing time. Everyone thought Mcbride was one of the worst shooting players in the league like his stats showed. Yet whenever he played consistant minutes in the g league he is could magically shoot. Once Quick got traded and consistant minutes opened up for him he could magically shoot. This is not a video game. Most players need consistant reps to shoot well from the outside.

we have not seen that as professional. Plain and simple. McBride was monster in the gleague and a quality NBA defender. Kolek isnt shooting 40% in the gleague

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

LOL I am just catching this part becuase I was so excited to talk about what I saw in Huk and Kolek. I know you are joking but I would be a bad coach. I think I would do well as a scout though. I am just a very observant person when I am interested in the subject matter. If I was getting paid to scout and have the resources so spend a lot of time to study each player and to watch these games more than once I think I could do well. Most of my opinions like from the Summer league are just formed watching the game in real time. I would be good at scouting coaching tendencies to. Watching the Fever coach fail to see how the Aces would get A'ja open shots every time down was driving me crazy. Thank goodness she got fired.

fishmike wrote:

Clean wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Kolek doesnt look like an NBA player. There's zero shot making or defense to his game. Zero. There's a reason Cam (vet min league player) is not only ahead of Kolek, but way ahead.

0 shot making? I see you are making the same mistake people made with McBride. Kolek can shoot just fine but you are not going to be rhythm when you don't get playing time. Everyone thought Mcbride was one of the worst shooting players in the league like his stats showed. Yet whenever he played consistant minutes in the g league he is could magically shoot. Once Quick got traded and consistant minutes opened up for him he could magically shoot. This is not a video game. Most players need consistant reps to shoot well from the outside.

we have not seen that as professional. Plain and simple. McBride was monster in the gleague and a quality NBA defender. Kolek isnt shooting 40% in the gleague

Also McBride was 21 as rook. Kolek is 3 years older.

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Kolek doesnt look like an NBA player. There's zero shot making or defense to his game. Zero. There's a reason Cam (vet min league player) is not only ahead of Kolek, but way ahead.

This is not exactly fair. He's a 2nd round rookie and is only now starting to show us what he has. What we know he can do (and his top skill) is what he's showing us first. He has elite passing ability and knows how to deliver the ball in a way where shooters are confident to score.

In order to be sustainable, he has to provide the threat of offense because defenses will overplay his tendencies. He had a couple of nice drives, but he also had a couple of disastrous ones. He also needs to stick and open 3 and hit a pull up 3 against defenses that will give him space against the top. What we saw in preseason was some pretty nice 3 point shooting. What we saw at Marquette was a nice blend of 3 pt shooting and a bit of a float game. Can he bring those to the NBA level? Its what separates the Dan Dickaus from the John Stocktons.

But to say he's not an NBA player is as absurd as saying he should have been playing all year. Neither position makes sense to me.

fishmike wrote:

Clean wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Kolek doesnt look like an NBA player. There's zero shot making or defense to his game. Zero. There's a reason Cam (vet min league player) is not only ahead of Kolek, but way ahead.

0 shot making? I see you are making the same mistake people made with McBride. Kolek can shoot just fine but you are not going to be rhythm when you don't get playing time. Everyone thought Mcbride was one of the worst shooting players in the league like his stats showed. Yet whenever he played consistant minutes in the g league he is could magically shoot. Once Quick got traded and consistant minutes opened up for him he could magically shoot. This is not a video game. Most players need consistant reps to shoot well from the outside.

we have not seen that as professional. Plain and simple. McBride was monster in the gleague and a quality NBA defender. Kolek isnt shooting 40% in the gleague

I understand that is your opinion and thats fine. I would like to add Kolek has not got consistant time in the GLeague either. Bro, played in the championship game without playing in the tournament earlier this season. Dude been sitting on the bench more than anything.

fishmike wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Clean wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Kolek doesnt look like an NBA player. There's zero shot making or defense to his game. Zero. There's a reason Cam (vet min league player) is not only ahead of Kolek, but way ahead.

0 shot making? I see you are making the same mistake people made with McBride. Kolek can shoot just fine but you are not going to be rhythm when you don't get playing time. Everyone thought Mcbride was one of the worst shooting players in the league like his stats showed. Yet whenever he played consistant minutes in the g league he is could magically shoot. Once Quick got traded and consistant minutes opened up for him he could magically shoot. This is not a video game. Most players need consistant reps to shoot well from the outside.

we have not seen that as professional. Plain and simple. McBride was monster in the gleague and a quality NBA defender. Kolek isnt shooting 40% in the gleague

Also McBride was 21 as rook. Kolek is 3 years older.

and? a rookie is a rookie. Both have zero experience. I am not understanding the point you are trying to make.

Look I was just talking about the other posters arguing. I am not about to get sucked into an argument. We will just agree to disagree for now and time will tell who is right. 17 asts to 0 turnovers seem like an NBA player to me but thats OK if you disagree. I just wanted to talk about what I saw in our rookies in summer league lol.

Clean wrote:Look I was just talking about the other posters arguing. I am not about to get sucked into an argument. We will just agree to disagree for now and time will tell who is right. 17 asts to 0 turnovers seem like an NBA player to me but thats OK if you disagree. I just wanted to talk about what I saw in our rookies in summer league lol.

there's no right or wrong. Im glad you are excited about him. You and VDesai actually watch the games so it's good input. I see a fast player with a handle but it gets really thin after that and he's not a young prospect at 21. At 24 I do have some different expectations and of course there are team needs.

There's a notion around here that this kid is rotting on the bench, but he's never looked like someone who should be in this rotation. He's gonna get a bit more burn... hopefully he turns a corner.

fishmike wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Some coaches are good at rebuilding a team, making them competitive in the regular season. Give them a sense of discipline. Some are good at taking a good team, and making them contenders. Over the span of Thibs career, he’s proven that he is a good rebuilding coach. But even with complete control of the roster, he hasn’t demonstrated that he can build or lead a contender.

As far as Minny, there were dust ups with players. It wasn’t just wins and losses. Thibs is starting to hear it from his starters in NY. Mainly because he doubled down on playing the starters league leading minutes. You make it all sound so reasonable that we have a starting unit that plays the most minutes in the league. No one leans on his starters more than Thibs. That’s a fact. I believe it’s a big driver of the lack of postseason success, that and the lousy 3pt D. All I hear is that Thibs can do no wrong, and his record as a head coach has nothing to do with his decision making.

As an example, no coach can take a Gleague team to the NBA playoffs. You need talent on your team to win. You are forgetting that part of the equation. When you have enough of the right ingredients, then you judge, and you should judge within that context.

And you are mixing up Spo with Thibs, it's Spo that has lost his touch, NY players have RAVED about their coach and you continue to ignore. You make up some weird stuff and then run with it to try to prove your Debbie Downer take on the team.

It's a curious look into the abyss that is looking back at you.

Im down on ignoring the facts. Like the way Thibs uses his starters, doesnt use his bench. It never ends well. Thibs was given control over all the ingredients. At some point its fair to ask if Thibs is still the right ingredient? This post-season should tell us.

As far as "the abyss" old Gustav spent the last year there. Almost killed him. First spring-like day here. Finally walking out of it. 👍

except the ones you make up... the facts based on your opinions. You hold on tight to those.

Pot meet Kettle. You were just as gaga over Phil Jackson and Kurt Rambis.

GustavBahler wrote:

fishmike wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

martin wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Some coaches are good at rebuilding a team, making them competitive in the regular season. Give them a sense of discipline. Some are good at taking a good team, and making them contenders. Over the span of Thibs career, he’s proven that he is a good rebuilding coach. But even with complete control of the roster, he hasn’t demonstrated that he can build or lead a contender.

As far as Minny, there were dust ups with players. It wasn’t just wins and losses. Thibs is starting to hear it from his starters in NY. Mainly because he doubled down on playing the starters league leading minutes. You make it all sound so reasonable that we have a starting unit that plays the most minutes in the league. No one leans on his starters more than Thibs. That’s a fact. I believe it’s a big driver of the lack of postseason success, that and the lousy 3pt D. All I hear is that Thibs can do no wrong, and his record as a head coach has nothing to do with his decision making.

As an example, no coach can take a Gleague team to the NBA playoffs. You need talent on your team to win. You are forgetting that part of the equation. When you have enough of the right ingredients, then you judge, and you should judge within that context.

And you are mixing up Spo with Thibs, it's Spo that has lost his touch, NY players have RAVED about their coach and you continue to ignore. You make up some weird stuff and then run with it to try to prove your Debbie Downer take on the team.

It's a curious look into the abyss that is looking back at you.

Im down on ignoring the facts. Like the way Thibs uses his starters, doesnt use his bench. It never ends well. Thibs was given control over all the ingredients. At some point its fair to ask if Thibs is still the right ingredient? This post-season should tell us.

As far as "the abyss" old Gustav spent the last year there. Almost killed him. First spring-like day here. Finally walking out of it. 👍

except the ones you make up... the facts based on your opinions. You hold on tight to those.

Pot meet Kettle. You were just as gaga over Phil Jackson and Kurt Rambis.

Scott Perry is on the phone... wants to remind you to make sure everyone is giving him enough credit

Clean wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:People still arguing in here? I am just happy Huk and Kolek are finally getting their chances. I don't care what level they are playing at if you look for the right things you can see how a player can help a team if you know what the team needs. From summer league it was obvious Huk and Kolek could help this team. The one player I got totally wrong was Knox. Bro, what happened to him after summer league. I know nothing about Kevin Mccullar but getting like 3 triple doubles in the G league has to mean something. If we can get anything out of him I am happy.

How do you go about assessing if a player can help a team by their performance in SL? Especially for a mature playoff team that is going to playoffs with expectations.

I know I can't. At some point you have to admit that you should be a pro level coach and ditch your current job because NBA coaching pays a lot more.

Why didn't Deuce and IQ and whatnot perform well in their first year? Cause they had moments in the SL too. What separates IQ from Kolek?

I am genuinely interested in knowing what to look for that translates rookie SL performance into solid NBA playing time.

Kolek doesnt look like an NBA player. There's zero shot making or defense to his game. Zero. There's a reason Cam (vet min league player) is not only ahead of Kolek, but way ahead.

0 shot making? I see you are making the same mistake people made with McBride. Kolek can shoot just fine but you are not going to be rhythm when you don't get playing time. Everyone thought Mcbride was one of the worst shooting players in the league like his stats showed. Yet whenever he played consistant minutes in the g league he is could magically shoot. Once Quick got traded and consistant minutes opened up for him he could magically shoot. This is not a video game. Most players need consistant reps to shoot well from the outside.

Everyone except me.

I always knew Deuce had a solid mid range pullup. Showed it in college and G league. It was only a matter of time and minutes, to show it from 3 pt range. Deuce is also a hard worker, with higher goals and puts in the work. He's also a 2 way player, with a solid football background. So he's a grinder and a Thigs type player. He was coached in college by a Thibs type coach. McBrides development to where he's at now, was easy to predict, as long as Thibs and the roster gave him time.