He's a fantastic scorer but he's getting attacked every night and unless Mitch is having his way in the paint its a problem
reminds me of Isaiah Thomas... could/should be a lead scorer. Brunson is getting 20ppg on 15 FGs. Thomas was getting 28ppg on 20 FGs I think that is where Brunson should be. Especially with this group of brick layers
Right, you can hide maybe 1 good offensive player with 4 other competent defenders but Knicks always have like 2-3 bad defenders on court
He’s better than Kemba was. Knicks need to focus on adding shooting and defense around Brunson. Mitch is missed. So is grimes. They need to get grimes up to speed. And if we added d Mitchell it would have been the same issues because he doesn’t defend at all. Knicks badly need shooting. We don’t have one consistent outside shooter who can stay on the floor defensively.
fishmike wrote:reminds me of Isaiah Thomas... could/should be a lead scorer. Brunson is getting 20ppg on 15 FGs. Thomas was getting 28ppg on 20 FGs I think that is where Brunson should be. Especially with this group of brick layers
So this is really a trade Randle thread in disguise?
Because to my thinking, put the ball in Brunson's hands, remove Randle, swap in Obi who is less about creating for himself and more about creating in the flow of the offense - and you set Brunson lose to shoot/pass as much as possible.
And originally I though you meant Isiah. Looking at Isaiah, Brunson's per 100 this year better offensively than any year - but your comparison is taken and I think relevant.
Knixkik wrote:He’s better than Kemba was. Knicks need to focus on adding shooting and defense around Brunson. Mitch is missed. So is grimes. They need to get grimes up to speed. And if we added d Mitchell it would have been the same issues because he doesn’t defend at all. Knicks badly need shooting. We don’t have one consistent outside shooter who can stay on the floor defensively.
I thought it was a coaching problem!
I totally agree with you and this post isnt meant to blame Brunson, the opposite actually... I have seen enough to change his role. Make him the primary scorer, let him call his own # as much as he wants and we should be looking to get him 20-22 FG attempts per game in 34 minutes. If that sounds like a tons of shots it is. Hide him best we can on defense like Atl does with Trae and let him score it.
If he starts drawing doubles GREAT. He's a super high IQ player and he's gonna make the right read.
He is so clearly our best and only consistent offensive player we should run a every set for him until other scorers emerge as reliable. In the meantime our most EFF% scorer is getting the most FGA which sounds incredibly logical to me
fishmike wrote:Knixkik wrote:He’s better than Kemba was. Knicks need to focus on adding shooting and defense around Brunson. Mitch is missed. So is grimes. They need to get grimes up to speed. And if we added d Mitchell it would have been the same issues because he doesn’t defend at all. Knicks badly need shooting. We don’t have one consistent outside shooter who can stay on the floor defensively.
I thought it was a coaching problem!I totally agree with you and this post isnt meant to blame Brunson, the opposite actually... I have seen enough to change his role. Make him the primary scorer, let him call his own # as much as he wants and we should be looking to get him 20-22 FG attempts per game in 34 minutes. If that sounds like a tons of shots it is. Hide him best we can on defense like Atl does with Trae and let him score it.
If he starts drawing doubles GREAT. He's a super high IQ player and he's gonna make the right read.
He is so clearly our best and only consistent offensive player we should run a every set for him until other scorers emerge as reliable. In the meantime our most EFF% scorer is getting the most FGA which sounds incredibly logical to me
But that would be Obi!
And if we are talking about liabilities - it looks like RJ is the one dragging this team down.
franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:reminds me of Isaiah Thomas... could/should be a lead scorer. Brunson is getting 20ppg on 15 FGs. Thomas was getting 28ppg on 20 FGs I think that is where Brunson should be. Especially with this group of brick layers
So this is really a trade Randle thread in disguise?
Because to my thinking, put the ball in Brunson's hands, remove Randle, swap in Obi who is less about creating for himself and more about creating in the flow of the offense - and you set Brunson lose to shoot/pass as much as possible.
And originally I though you meant Isiah. Looking at Isaiah, Brunson's per 100 this year better offensively than any year - but your comparison is taken and I think relevant.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/tea...This is the team... Brunson can be a player like that for sure. Stronger frame than Thomas as well.
As for trading Randle we need a tough guy. He's the only one that plays dirty down low but if we could move on from Randle I am ready if the FO is. I just want what's best for the team. Im not attached to any of these guys at this point.
fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:reminds me of Isaiah Thomas... could/should be a lead scorer. Brunson is getting 20ppg on 15 FGs. Thomas was getting 28ppg on 20 FGs I think that is where Brunson should be. Especially with this group of brick layers
So this is really a trade Randle thread in disguise?
Because to my thinking, put the ball in Brunson's hands, remove Randle, swap in Obi who is less about creating for himself and more about creating in the flow of the offense - and you set Brunson lose to shoot/pass as much as possible.
And originally I though you meant Isiah. Looking at Isaiah, Brunson's per 100 this year better offensively than any year - but your comparison is taken and I think relevant.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/tea...This is the team... Brunson can be a player like that for sure. Stronger frame than Thomas as well.As for trading Randle we need a tough guy. He's the only one that plays dirty down low but if we could move on from Randle I am ready if the FO is. I just want what's best for the team. Im not attached to any of these guys at this point.
I agree on Randle being tough and you need that kind of player when the playoffs arrive (if you make them!) Hart is also that kind of player.
He just needs a different role on the team, I think. I mean, can we just tell Randle - we want you posting up, we want to try to get you in close to do damage - and then work with him on his exaggeration - oh, Ref - surely I have been fouled - moves where he takes himself out of the play?
martin wrote:Right, you can hide maybe 1 good offensive player with 4 other competent defenders but Knicks always have like 2-3 bad defenders on court
Well the Knicks only have 2-3 good defenders on the team. And 2 of them DNP(Mitch and Deuce). Grimes played but only 8 mins. If you count Reddish, that means we either had 1 or none of our top defenders on the floor.
This FO did a great job maneuvering up and down the draft and getting great value in return. The problem is we don't have a coach thats flexible enough to just throw any type of player at him. For Thibs to be successful, he needs certain types of vets he can lean on. Randle was perfect, with a defensive PG and defensive SG in Bullock. Burks a defensive guard off the bench. And Randle was happy being the go to guy.
If Randle is not the go to guy, he turns into a cancer. Brunson helped to slow down the cancer growth, but as the loses pile up, those whisper sweet nothings in Randles ear will be null in void. Speaking of that, what star player needs this much comfort to perform? Randle is way too sensitive for NYC. And that goes for a lot of todays NBA players.
franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:reminds me of Isaiah Thomas... could/should be a lead scorer. Brunson is getting 20ppg on 15 FGs. Thomas was getting 28ppg on 20 FGs I think that is where Brunson should be. Especially with this group of brick layers
So this is really a trade Randle thread in disguise?
Because to my thinking, put the ball in Brunson's hands, remove Randle, swap in Obi who is less about creating for himself and more about creating in the flow of the offense - and you set Brunson lose to shoot/pass as much as possible.
And originally I though you meant Isiah. Looking at Isaiah, Brunson's per 100 this year better offensively than any year - but your comparison is taken and I think relevant.
Fyi. Randle 25 on 14 shots.
Obi on defense would not make our defense better. We have a defensive coach remember. He does not like it. Bringing up Obi when convo is about defensive liabilities is like bringing up EF when talking of the same. Let's not forget Obi's defensive rebounding void for easy transition dunk.
Back to thread....
Brunson is not a guy you bring in others to cover deficiencies. Imo
He is a smaller piece to bring in around two main pieces. Reason why my complain is that if we ever do, he is not a facilitator for those better players.
But like my view on Randle, until we have a better option, he is the best we have and he brings more positives than any of our current options.
Fish bringing up defensive liability is accurate. But think we knew that going in.
Real problem for us will continue to be that we have too many number 2 or 3 options.
But around here, folks don't want to give up out young hopefuls for a true number 1.
One of the first things I posted about Brunson when he first started playing in NY, fish. Was that Brunson's D was better than billed. You responded that his defense was always known to be that good.
Given the recent dropoff. Was that an overstatement?
We knew Brunson was going to be an issue on defense. His defense is not why we are losing. RJ’s defense has been bad and Randle is slow to react to three point shooters. Without Mitch, we don’t have that rim protector that gives everyone confidence to stay on the perimeter.
GustavBahler wrote:One of the first things I posted about Brunson when he first started playing in NY, fish. Was that Brunson's D was better than billed. You responded that his defense was always known to be that good.Given the recent dropoff. Was that an overstatement?
He's a good defensive team player. Always has been. Always in the right spots. Challenges jump shots. Fights over picks/screens. He cant stop anyone tho... so you have to hide him. When Mitch was in the line up and the other guys defending well its fine. When the rest of the defense is not good Brunson is going to be the weakest link every time
Can be a part of a good team defense (high IQ)
Cant stop anyone 1-1
I've always thought you can get away with one defensive liability in a lineup. Maybe 2 if the rest of the guys are quick laterally and you have a good rim protector and scheme. But 3+ puts you at a huge disadvantage and let's be honest - nobody besides Reddish, who is inconsistent himself, has played good defense this season.
Brunson brings so much good things to the table, I'm honestly OK with him being the weak link on defense.
SergioNYK wrote:I've always thought you can get away with one defensive liability in a lineup. Maybe 2 if the rest of the guys are quick laterally and you have a good rim protector and scheme. But 3+ puts you at a huge disadvantage and let's be honest - nobody besides Reddish, who is inconsistent himself, has played good defense this season.Brunson brings so much good things to the table, I'm honestly OK with him being the weak link on defense.
100%... highest IQ player I have seen in a really long time.
Part of the point of this post is why is our best scorer trying so hard to cover on defense while sharing the ball on offense. Feature Brunson on O and hide him on D would be my next key adjustments.
Mitch/Reddish/IQ are the only ones who have looked impactful on D this year
