Knicks · Will the Knicks trade for an upgrade at SG? (page 2)
HofstraBBall wrote:martin wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:As some may know, I love Grimes and feel he is a big part of the Knicks future. Think he can be better than RJ and a possible All Star.
However, do think that if the Knicks feel they have a chance to compete now (They do), they will try to make a trade for a higher profile SG that they feel is better now and has a longer history of production. They may also feel their is a need to move Grimes back to the second unit. A move that would allow Grimes to get more shots and help the shooting need in the second unit. Are they also thinking they need a better PF to backup Randle? Better C to backup MR? Do not know. If the Knicks do , it increase the possibility that Obi, Deuce and Sims lose their rotation spots or that they will be traded. Not saying that is what I want to happen but just reading the room. We all know how much Thibs loves proven players.I see the Knicks definitely trading guys that Thibs has moved on from. (Rose, Cam, EF). But also looking not afraid to add a couple of youngins if they feel a considerable piece is available.
So I have to disagree with you underlying statement and the follow up one.
The Knicks want to make playoffs, but not sure that means they want to be all in on a SG just to make it further into the playoffs. It's why they kept Grimes out of Donovan trade. They want to keep him FOR the playoffs.
And the Knicks have made pathways for Grimes to start from the Summer, he just got hurt. Zero chance they want him in second unit; no way no how no sir.
Knicks kept Grimes out of DM deal because they felt Grimes is a valuable future piece. Not sure if it was because they felt he was the starting SG right now. If they did, would they have even consider giving the smaller packages they offered for DM?
Mentioned some other reasons in post above. My feeling comes form what has been rumored. Thibs liking vets in playoffs. And some possible needs that may be perceived by the FO in our second unit.
I am for not fucking with things that are working. Giving the new second unit more time to gel.
FO may be looking at it differently though if they feel they see some room for improvement if they want to be competitive in the playoffs. Hard to think they feel that is possible with Deuce and Sims in the rotation. But I know, us fans do.The feeling is that they will be trading EF, Cam and Rose. Question is for what? Win now move or for the future? Probability is with the former.
No no no. We can't fall back on incredibly unsupported "Thibs like vets" or whatnot lines, they don't play here. The Knicks just didn't draft all the kids, trade away all the vets, play all the kids, and then turn around to trade kids for vets just cause playoffs are here. No sir. They will certainly upgrade where they can but not just to because Thibs only plays vets.
Grimes is here to stay and start unless a Super star is involved to pry Grimes away.
martin wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:martin wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:As some may know, I love Grimes and feel he is a big part of the Knicks future. Think he can be better than RJ and a possible All Star.
However, do think that if the Knicks feel they have a chance to compete now (They do), they will try to make a trade for a higher profile SG that they feel is better now and has a longer history of production. They may also feel their is a need to move Grimes back to the second unit. A move that would allow Grimes to get more shots and help the shooting need in the second unit. Are they also thinking they need a better PF to backup Randle? Better C to backup MR? Do not know. If the Knicks do , it increase the possibility that Obi, Deuce and Sims lose their rotation spots or that they will be traded. Not saying that is what I want to happen but just reading the room. We all know how much Thibs loves proven players.I see the Knicks definitely trading guys that Thibs has moved on from. (Rose, Cam, EF). But also looking not afraid to add a couple of youngins if they feel a considerable piece is available.
So I have to disagree with you underlying statement and the follow up one.
The Knicks want to make playoffs, but not sure that means they want to be all in on a SG just to make it further into the playoffs. It's why they kept Grimes out of Donovan trade. They want to keep him FOR the playoffs.
And the Knicks have made pathways for Grimes to start from the Summer, he just got hurt. Zero chance they want him in second unit; no way no how no sir.
Knicks kept Grimes out of DM deal because they felt Grimes is a valuable future piece. Not sure if it was because they felt he was the starting SG right now. If they did, would they have even consider giving the smaller packages they offered for DM?
Mentioned some other reasons in post above. My feeling comes form what has been rumored. Thibs liking vets in playoffs. And some possible needs that may be perceived by the FO in our second unit.
I am for not fucking with things that are working. Giving the new second unit more time to gel.
FO may be looking at it differently though if they feel they see some room for improvement if they want to be competitive in the playoffs. Hard to think they feel that is possible with Deuce and Sims in the rotation. But I know, us fans do.The feeling is that they will be trading EF, Cam and Rose. Question is for what? Win now move or for the future? Probability is with the former.
No no no. We can't fall back on incredibly unsupported "Thibs like vets" or whatnot lines, they don't play here. The Knicks just didn't draft all the kids, trade away all the vets, play all the kids, and then turn around to trade kids for vets just cause playoffs are here. No sir. They will certainly upgrade where they can but not just to because Thibs only plays vets.
Grimes is here to stay and start unless a Super star is involved to pry Grimes away.
True. But you can't keep fat guys from the buffet. Same line in two posts! 🤣
I'm with you in terms of preference. Just have that feeling. And I was never big on "starting" being that important. As a Grimes fan, I want him where he can have the most opportunity to shine. Not happy with only 3 shots the other night.
Who do you think we will trade our undesirables for?
After the turnaround in Randle's performance, being more locked in defensively his trade value has defensively picked up. But now im conflicted, maybe keeping Randle is the right thing to do but a part of me still wants Obi to succeed as a knick. There will definitely be a big knicks name to be included in any star type trade, one of Randle or RJ will have to go to get that next star.
The latest Rumors placed OG Anunoby as someone the knicks are keeping an eye out for. Whats a better starting line up if they do get OG to the knicks:
1. Mitch, Randle, OG, Grimes and Jalen
Or
2. Mitch, Obi, RJ, OG and Jalen
BigDaddyG wrote:If Toronto is shitting the bed there's going to be a wild market for OG but I would still make a competitive offer based on how he fits with the Knicks roster.martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:I don't think you'll see an upgrade unless it's for a "star." I don't think the FO will be pressured to make a big in-season trade as long as the Knicks remain competitive. The Donovan Mitchell trade still remains kinda the standard and this FO remains conservative in terms of its valuation of assets.Is there a star SG out there that even makes sense for the Knicks, especially considering Brunson/Grimes?
I can't even come up with one reasonable name that I'd include Grimes in a trade and for which a team would give up a star SG. Cause there is no way you are keeping him out of the trade, right?
Yeah, Masai is probably gonna ask for Grimes even for a guy like OG. It's better to wait until the off season if you do those type of deals anyway.
OG would really take us to the next level, but its gotta be based around these guys:
OG for IQ/Obi/Cam (salary), better of Knicks/Dallas pick this year, Wash pick, Milw pick, Det pick, Knick 2024 FRP (thats 5 FRPS, 2 of ours and 3 acquired)
That leaves us like this:
PG Brunson
SG RJ
SF OG
PF Jules
C Mitch
Bench McBride/Grimes/Hart/Sims
reserves: Rose/Svi
who knows: Fournier
short term pipeline: some meh FRP next draft, Rokus, RJ/Mitch/McBride/Grimes/Hart/Sims all 24 or under
With Thibs here that's a 2000s Det Pistons type defense with depth and youth and future that isnt mortgaged
fishmike wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:If Toronto is shitting the bed there's going to be a wild market for OG but I would still make a competitive offer based on how he fits with the Knicks roster.martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:I don't think you'll see an upgrade unless it's for a "star." I don't think the FO will be pressured to make a big in-season trade as long as the Knicks remain competitive. The Donovan Mitchell trade still remains kinda the standard and this FO remains conservative in terms of its valuation of assets.Is there a star SG out there that even makes sense for the Knicks, especially considering Brunson/Grimes?
I can't even come up with one reasonable name that I'd include Grimes in a trade and for which a team would give up a star SG. Cause there is no way you are keeping him out of the trade, right?
Yeah, Masai is probably gonna ask for Grimes even for a guy like OG. It's better to wait until the off season if you do those type of deals anyway.
OG would really take us to the next level, but its gotta be based around these guys:
OG for IQ/Obi/Cam (salary), better of Knicks/Dallas pick this year, Wash pick, Milw pick, Det pick, Knick 2024 FRP (thats 5 FRPS, 2 of ours and 3 acquired)That leaves us like this:
PG Brunson
SG RJ
SF OG
PF Jules
C Mitch
Bench McBride/Grimes/Hart/Sims
reserves: Rose/Svi
who knows: Fournier
short term pipeline: some meh FRP next draft, Rokus, RJ/Mitch/McBride/Grimes/Hart/Sims all 24 or underWith Thibs here that's a 2000s Det Pistons type defense with depth and youth and future that isnt mortgaged
Agreed. I’m not trading Brunson, Randle, Barrett or grimes at this point. It would have to be a deal based around the other young pieces and picks. Injury history makes me hesitant.
blkexec wrote:For those complaining that grimes on took 3 shots (Hofstra) doesn’t understand team basketball. Everybody can’t do the same things and sometimes certain players have to take a back seat and contribute in other ways for the better of the team. Just think of the heat big 3 with Lebron wade and bosh. All 3 were franchise players. Bosh turned into a roll player for them to win.
What does wanting your 3pt specialist to shoot more than 3 shots have to do with being against team basketball? It actually speaks more to the lack of team basketball when Grimes only takes 3 shots.
But I'll explain it to you. Btw, I get it, you root for that blue collar role.(Deuce) Perhaps that is where your Bball experience lies. Chest passes, working hard on defense. All good. But back to team basketball and how it applies to Grimes 3 shots. Good teams/good coaches take advantage of all their players strengths. Imo, Grimes strengths are defense and shooting. Therefore "good team basketball" requires he get more than three shots. As well as our big three are playing, if we are honest, there were many opportunities for kick outs and ball sharing. Ie. "TEAM BASKETBALL"
So are you telling me that your vision, regular fan, and that of the FO should be to have Grimes, their 3pt breakout specialist shoot three shots a game? Be just a role guy in the first unit? That if Grimes takes more than 3 shots, he is somehow less of a "team player" lmao
HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:For those complaining that grimes on took 3 shots (Hofstra) doesn’t understand team basketball. Everybody can’t do the same things and sometimes certain players have to take a back seat and contribute in other ways for the better of the team. Just think of the heat big 3 with Lebron wade and bosh. All 3 were franchise players. Bosh turned into a roll player for them to win.What does wanting your 3pt specialist to shoot more than 3 shots have to do with being against team basketball? I get it, you root for that blue collar role.(Deuce) Perhaps that is where your Bball experience lies. Chest passes, working hard on defense. All good. But I have never been part of a team where the coach did not want shooters to shoot. Good "team basketball" included players/plays that got them the ball. And not once did that imply "do not play team ball". You see, good teams/good coaches take advantage of all their players strengths. Imo, Grimes strengths are defense and shooting. Therefore "good team basketball" requires he get more than three shots. As well as our big three are playing, if we are honest, there were many opportunities for kick outs and ball sharing. Ie. "TEAM BASKETBALL" But you missed that.
So are you telling me that your vision, regular fan, and that of the FO should be to have Grimes, their 3pt breakout specialist shoot three shots a game? Be just a role guy in the first unit? That if Grimes takes more than 3 shots, he is somehow less of a "team player" lmao
Youre losing this convo and my interest very fast sir. Grimes is fine. Nobody told Grimes to only shoot 3 shots. Grimes is a shooter, but there's only so many shots to go around. This team is not a perfect basketball team. Your expectations are unrealistic. Seems like your interest is more on Grimes shooting attempts and mine is more on wins. So I'm sorry but we are on two different planets and will never agree. Relax and have some tea.
And since you asked, I root for all players that wear orange and blue. (Theo Pinson was one of my favorite players and he rarely played). And BTW....Deuce and Grimes combined into 1 player was me in my prime (and now at 50). Again, since you're trying to put a label on me, I figure I help you out. Yes I'm a 80s basketball fan where blue collar players are the players I grew up watching. This is why I asked for your age. If your still wet behind the ears, I get it. It's all about how many points you put up. Thats not the case for this OG. As much as I like to shoot, I love playing defense just as much, sometimes more. And as the best player, I've had games where I only shot 3x but we won. Next game I shot 15x. And how many times did Grimes shoot today? Exactly. Relax! Enjoy the ride. Don't be a typical NYers who's impatient and quick to fix something thats not broken.
blkexec wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:For those complaining that grimes on took 3 shots (Hofstra) doesn’t understand team basketball. Everybody can’t do the same things and sometimes certain players have to take a back seat and contribute in other ways for the better of the team. Just think of the heat big 3 with Lebron wade and bosh. All 3 were franchise players. Bosh turned into a roll player for them to win.What does wanting your 3pt specialist to shoot more than 3 shots have to do with being against team basketball? I get it, you root for that blue collar role.(Deuce) Perhaps that is where your Bball experience lies. Chest passes, working hard on defense. All good. But I have never been part of a team where the coach did not want shooters to shoot. Good "team basketball" included players/plays that got them the ball. And not once did that imply "do not play team ball". You see, good teams/good coaches take advantage of all their players strengths. Imo, Grimes strengths are defense and shooting. Therefore "good team basketball" requires he get more than three shots. As well as our big three are playing, if we are honest, there were many opportunities for kick outs and ball sharing. Ie. "TEAM BASKETBALL" But you missed that.
So are you telling me that your vision, regular fan, and that of the FO should be to have Grimes, their 3pt breakout specialist shoot three shots a game? Be just a role guy in the first unit? That if Grimes takes more than 3 shots, he is somehow less of a "team player" lmao
Youre losing this convo and my interest very fast sir. Grimes is fine. Nobody told Grimes to only shoot 3 shots. Grimes is a shooter, but there's only so many shots to go around. This team is not a perfect basketball team. Your expectations are unrealistic. Seems like your interest is more on Grimes shooting attempts and mine is more on wins. So I'm sorry but we are on two different planets and will never agree. Relax and have some tea.
And since you asked, I root for all players that wear orange and blue. (Pinse was one of my favorite players and he rarely played). And BTW....Deuce and Grimes combined into 1 player was me in my prime (and now at 50). Again, since you're trying to put a label on me, I figure I help you out. Yes I'm a 80s basketball fan where blue collar players are the players I grew up watching. This is why I asked for your age. If your still wet behind the ears, I get it. It's all about how many points you put up. Thats not the case for this OG. As much as I like to shoot, I love playing defense just as much, sometimes more. And as the best player, I've had games where I only shot 3x but we won. Next game I shot 15x. And how many times did Grimes shoot today? Exactly. Relax! Enjoy the ride. Don't be a typical NYers who's impatient and quick to fix something thats not broken.
Losing convo? Leaving out other tangents, you said I was more concerned with Grimes number of shots vs Team bball. I mentioned how you fail to understand that Grimes getting only three shots is the result of the lack of "team play".
HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:For those complaining that grimes on took 3 shots (Hofstra) doesn’t understand team basketball. Everybody can’t do the same things and sometimes certain players have to take a back seat and contribute in other ways for the better of the team. Just think of the heat big 3 with Lebron wade and bosh. All 3 were franchise players. Bosh turned into a roll player for them to win.What does wanting your 3pt specialist to shoot more than 3 shots have to do with being against team basketball? I get it, you root for that blue collar role.(Deuce) Perhaps that is where your Bball experience lies. Chest passes, working hard on defense. All good. But I have never been part of a team where the coach did not want shooters to shoot. Good "team basketball" included players/plays that got them the ball. And not once did that imply "do not play team ball". You see, good teams/good coaches take advantage of all their players strengths. Imo, Grimes strengths are defense and shooting. Therefore "good team basketball" requires he get more than three shots. As well as our big three are playing, if we are honest, there were many opportunities for kick outs and ball sharing. Ie. "TEAM BASKETBALL" But you missed that.
So are you telling me that your vision, regular fan, and that of the FO should be to have Grimes, their 3pt breakout specialist shoot three shots a game? Be just a role guy in the first unit? That if Grimes takes more than 3 shots, he is somehow less of a "team player" lmao
Youre losing this convo and my interest very fast sir. Grimes is fine. Nobody told Grimes to only shoot 3 shots. Grimes is a shooter, but there's only so many shots to go around. This team is not a perfect basketball team. Your expectations are unrealistic. Seems like your interest is more on Grimes shooting attempts and mine is more on wins. So I'm sorry but we are on two different planets and will never agree. Relax and have some tea.
And since you asked, I root for all players that wear orange and blue. (Pinse was one of my favorite players and he rarely played). And BTW....Deuce and Grimes combined into 1 player was me in my prime (and now at 50). Again, since you're trying to put a label on me, I figure I help you out. Yes I'm a 80s basketball fan where blue collar players are the players I grew up watching. This is why I asked for your age. If your still wet behind the ears, I get it. It's all about how many points you put up. Thats not the case for this OG. As much as I like to shoot, I love playing defense just as much, sometimes more. And as the best player, I've had games where I only shot 3x but we won. Next game I shot 15x. And how many times did Grimes shoot today? Exactly. Relax! Enjoy the ride. Don't be a typical NYers who's impatient and quick to fix something thats not broken.
Losing convo? Leaving out other tangents, you said I was more concerned with Grimes number of shots vs Team bball. I mentioned how you fail to understand that Grimes getting only three shots is the result of the lack of "team play".
OK Gotcha.
Unless I missed something, I can't blame his 3 shots on "team play". Guess thats where we are different. Grimes is not shy on his shots. And he seems to touch the ball a lot every game. But he's not like RJ, Randle or JB right now. Thats not his roll. So if he's missing, he will do more other things like pass, drive and kick, etc...
When our top 3 guys miss a few shots (especially RJ), they just keep shooting their way out. Thats not Grimes roll right now. So he will have days with 3 attempts. But thats an anomaly, not the norm.
My take is SO WHAT. Why does it matter. What if the team fed Grimes and we lost? Grimes shoots more than 3 attempts and the knicks lose, now whats your take? These guys are not robots. The team play is not perfect. Yet we won 8 straight. If Grimes only shooting 3 shots helps us win games, don't change it.
Big three shot
Our PG had 3 dimes, RJ 0
Can you see how this relates to "Team basketball"?
Never said Grimes shots were more important than the W.
Nor is there a better forum than fan boards to talk about wrinkles to improve without bearing impatience.
HofstraBBall wrote:Grimes shot 3
Big three shot 48
Our PG had 3 dimes, RJ 0Can you see how this relates to "Team basketball"?
Never said Grimes shots were more important than the W.
Nor is there a better forum than fan boards to talk about wrinkles to improve without bearing impatience.
It's an 82 game season. Not a 1 game season. Talk to me at game 82 about Grimes shot attempts.
And yes I can see how it relates to Team basketball. I see nothing wrong with it, because it's 1 game dude. Relax.
blkexec wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:For those complaining that grimes on took 3 shots (Hofstra) doesn’t understand team basketball. Everybody can’t do the same things and sometimes certain players have to take a back seat and contribute in other ways for the better of the team. Just think of the heat big 3 with Lebron wade and bosh. All 3 were franchise players. Bosh turned into a roll player for them to win.What does wanting your 3pt specialist to shoot more than 3 shots have to do with being against team basketball? I get it, you root for that blue collar role.(Deuce) Perhaps that is where your Bball experience lies. Chest passes, working hard on defense. All good. But I have never been part of a team where the coach did not want shooters to shoot. Good "team basketball" included players/plays that got them the ball. And not once did that imply "do not play team ball". You see, good teams/good coaches take advantage of all their players strengths. Imo, Grimes strengths are defense and shooting. Therefore "good team basketball" requires he get more than three shots. As well as our big three are playing, if we are honest, there were many opportunities for kick outs and ball sharing. Ie. "TEAM BASKETBALL" But you missed that.
So are you telling me that your vision, regular fan, and that of the FO should be to have Grimes, their 3pt breakout specialist shoot three shots a game? Be just a role guy in the first unit? That if Grimes takes more than 3 shots, he is somehow less of a "team player" lmao
Youre losing this convo and my interest very fast sir. Grimes is fine. Nobody told Grimes to only shoot 3 shots. Grimes is a shooter, but there's only so many shots to go around. This team is not a perfect basketball team. Your expectations are unrealistic. Seems like your interest is more on Grimes shooting attempts and mine is more on wins. So I'm sorry but we are on two different planets and will never agree. Relax and have some tea.
And since you asked, I root for all players that wear orange and blue. (Pinse was one of my favorite players and he rarely played). And BTW....Deuce and Grimes combined into 1 player was me in my prime (and now at 50). Again, since you're trying to put a label on me, I figure I help you out. Yes I'm a 80s basketball fan where blue collar players are the players I grew up watching. This is why I asked for your age. If your still wet behind the ears, I get it. It's all about how many points you put up. Thats not the case for this OG. As much as I like to shoot, I love playing defense just as much, sometimes more. And as the best player, I've had games where I only shot 3x but we won. Next game I shot 15x. And how many times did Grimes shoot today? Exactly. Relax! Enjoy the ride. Don't be a typical NYers who's impatient and quick to fix something thats not broken.
Losing convo? Leaving out other tangents, you said I was more concerned with Grimes number of shots vs Team bball. I mentioned how you fail to understand that Grimes getting only three shots is the result of the lack of "team play".
OK Gotcha.
Unless I missed something, I can't blame his 3 shots on "team play". Guess thats where we are different. Grimes is not shy on his shots. And he seems to touch the ball a lot every game. But he's not like RJ, Randle or JB right now. Thats not his roll. So if he's missing, he will do more other things like pass, drive and kick, etc...
When our top 3 guys miss a few shots (especially RJ), they just keep shooting their way out. Thats not Grimes roll right now. So he will have days with 3 attempts. But thats an anomaly, not the norm.
My take is SO WHAT. Why does it matter. What if the team fed Grimes and we lost? Grimes shoots more than 3 attempts and the knicks lose, now whats your take? These guys are not robots. The team play is not perfect. Yet we won 8 straight. If Grimes only shooting 3 shots helps us win games, don't change it.
Why does it matter? Why are either of us on a fan forum?
We are talking Knicks right? Talking about how they can go deep.Whats there to relax about? Like talking bball. Why I am on here. You good? Shits and giggles remember? Lol
We are just talking about how the team can be better. Which is the case if RJ,JB and Randle play good team ball. We will be better if RJ is aware of his shooters. We will be better if Randle recognizes double teams and finds Grimes early. We will be better if JB finds others more than 3 times a game.
I am happy with the current state. Love our players. Not going to knock the best streak in 30 years. But again, I want them to be elite. That's the mentality I played with and the mentality of the coaches I played for. Pointing out areas of possible improvement is far from your take that I care about shooting or Grimes more than winning. It's just a simple convo on a fan forum about things we notice.
Not big on personal facts. It's the internet and it's all talk. Also think guys that mention them are open to taking this way too seriously. And of course open to the wise ass remark. But I am over 40. Played at a decent level and my father has coached for over 32 years. Wet behind the ears is a relative term. We are all probably still there. There is always more we can learn.
HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:HofstraBBall wrote:blkexec wrote:For those complaining that grimes on took 3 shots (Hofstra) doesn’t understand team basketball. Everybody can’t do the same things and sometimes certain players have to take a back seat and contribute in other ways for the better of the team. Just think of the heat big 3 with Lebron wade and bosh. All 3 were franchise players. Bosh turned into a roll player for them to win.What does wanting your 3pt specialist to shoot more than 3 shots have to do with being against team basketball? I get it, you root for that blue collar role.(Deuce) Perhaps that is where your Bball experience lies. Chest passes, working hard on defense. All good. But I have never been part of a team where the coach did not want shooters to shoot. Good "team basketball" included players/plays that got them the ball. And not once did that imply "do not play team ball". You see, good teams/good coaches take advantage of all their players strengths. Imo, Grimes strengths are defense and shooting. Therefore "good team basketball" requires he get more than three shots. As well as our big three are playing, if we are honest, there were many opportunities for kick outs and ball sharing. Ie. "TEAM BASKETBALL" But you missed that.
So are you telling me that your vision, regular fan, and that of the FO should be to have Grimes, their 3pt breakout specialist shoot three shots a game? Be just a role guy in the first unit? That if Grimes takes more than 3 shots, he is somehow less of a "team player" lmao
Youre losing this convo and my interest very fast sir. Grimes is fine. Nobody told Grimes to only shoot 3 shots. Grimes is a shooter, but there's only so many shots to go around. This team is not a perfect basketball team. Your expectations are unrealistic. Seems like your interest is more on Grimes shooting attempts and mine is more on wins. So I'm sorry but we are on two different planets and will never agree. Relax and have some tea.
And since you asked, I root for all players that wear orange and blue. (Pinse was one of my favorite players and he rarely played). And BTW....Deuce and Grimes combined into 1 player was me in my prime (and now at 50). Again, since you're trying to put a label on me, I figure I help you out. Yes I'm a 80s basketball fan where blue collar players are the players I grew up watching. This is why I asked for your age. If your still wet behind the ears, I get it. It's all about how many points you put up. Thats not the case for this OG. As much as I like to shoot, I love playing defense just as much, sometimes more. And as the best player, I've had games where I only shot 3x but we won. Next game I shot 15x. And how many times did Grimes shoot today? Exactly. Relax! Enjoy the ride. Don't be a typical NYers who's impatient and quick to fix something thats not broken.
Losing convo? Leaving out other tangents, you said I was more concerned with Grimes number of shots vs Team bball. I mentioned how you fail to understand that Grimes getting only three shots is the result of the lack of "team play".
OK Gotcha.
Unless I missed something, I can't blame his 3 shots on "team play". Guess thats where we are different. Grimes is not shy on his shots. And he seems to touch the ball a lot every game. But he's not like RJ, Randle or JB right now. Thats not his roll. So if he's missing, he will do more other things like pass, drive and kick, etc...
When our top 3 guys miss a few shots (especially RJ), they just keep shooting their way out. Thats not Grimes roll right now. So he will have days with 3 attempts. But thats an anomaly, not the norm.
My take is SO WHAT. Why does it matter. What if the team fed Grimes and we lost? Grimes shoots more than 3 attempts and the knicks lose, now whats your take? These guys are not robots. The team play is not perfect. Yet we won 8 straight. If Grimes only shooting 3 shots helps us win games, don't change it.
Why does it matter? Why are either of us on a fan forum?
We are talking Knicks right? Talking about how they can go deep.Whats there to relax about? Like talking bball. Why I am on here. You good? Lol
We are just talking about how the team can be better. Which is the case if RJ,JB and Randle play good team ball. We will be better if RJ is aware of his shooters. We will be better if Randle recognizes double teams and finds Grimes early. We will be better if JB finds others more than 3 times a game.
I am happy with the current state. Love our players. Not going to knock the best streak in 30 years. But again, I want them to be elite. That's the mentality I played with and the mentality of the coaches I played for. Pointing out areas of possible improvement is far from your take that I care about shooting or Grimes more than winning. It's just a simple convo on a fan forum about things we notice.
Not big on personal facts. Think guys that mention them are open to taking this way too seriously. And of course open to the wise ass remark. But I am over 40. Played at a high level and my father has coached for over 32 years. Wet behind the ears is a relative term. We are all probably still there. There is always more we can learn.
I'm saying why does it matter he shot 3x in one game?
I've played, coached, etc...Doesn't mean we have to see the game the same or have the same experiences.
I've had guys come to me several times when I played and said, man if they pass you the ball more or why don't you shoot more. 3 titles later, those questions stopped coming.
Sometimes (and I'm guilty of this) we over analyze to a fault. We try to fix every think and sometimes those things get ironed out. Plus we sucked for so long, the last thing I will try to do if fix it after 8 games now. The fixing part was last year and the beginning of this year. Thats more than 8 games of fixing. Now that we have the right recipe, sometimes you have to take a step back and relax. But I hear you. Thibs needs to clean shave. Randle needs to go right more. RJ needs to pick his head up. I can go on and on and on, in the direction you are trying to go. But I've been there and I've learned. I used to be the same way, but I've learned not to over analyze and in person, try not to micro manage. 3 attempts vs how many shots his man made? How many assist or hockey assist did he get. There are so many things that contribute to a win, outside of Grimes one game of 3 attempts.
If you want to talk about how to make this team close to perfect, go ahead. It's an open forum. And just like you made your point, I made a counter by saying, SO WHAT he only shot 3x. Thats an easy fix. Especially for Grimes who's a natural shooter. But can you fix Wins?
Basketball is not as simple as people think. Sometimes a little tweek like making RJ aware that Grimes is open when you drive, might throw RJ's entire game off. Sometimes you have to let players roll through mistakes, because this team needs an aggressive RJ and not an RJ thats over thinking.
IQ is a great example. Someone told him, he needs to develop more PG skills. Now fans want to trade him because he's not hitting his shots. Sometimes you have to take a player as he is, and slow help him evolve or trade him. We don't have a team of superstars. We have roll players trying to play past their ceiling. So with this team my approach is different, vs if we had a different set of players who are not as volatile. IQ should've first perfected his 6 man role, then see how he can become a PG. He was a scorer all through college, and thats what he knows best. Glas he's going back to that role.
So we just see the game different right now. I used to be just like you, so I understand your point. Sorry you can't see mine. And thats ok with me.
And to you first question, yes I'm good. We won 8 straight. What am I upset about? I'm very good right now. Trying not to get too high or too low. (Sorry for the typos, but it's getting late)
martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:I don't think you'll see an upgrade unless it's for a "star." I don't think the FO will be pressured to make a big in-season trade as long as the Knicks remain competitive. The Donovan Mitchell trade still remains kinda the standard and this FO remains conservative in terms of its valuation of assets.Is there a star SG out there that even makes sense for the Knicks, especially considering Brunson/Grimes?
I can't even come up with one reasonable name that I'd include Grimes in a trade and for which a team would give up a star SG. Cause there is no way you are keeping him out of the trade, right?
Jesus man, had me cracking up. Beal might be available since it looks like Washington is again going nowhere but we agree because if his contract an age, he's not a good fit. That's why I look at Rozier. Thibs likes his type of strong combo guard. He's not an all star, but he's close, something like 75% of Donovan Mitchell for half the price. He's the same.age as Randle and on a reasonable contract.
The rotation gets clogged with him JB and IQ, so for now, like any deal- I don't pull the trigger.
gradyandrew wrote:Is Zach LaVine a possibility? I know there would be other players involved but would you swap out one of RJ or Grimes for LaVine? I can't imagine LaVine only shooting 3 times in a game.
We just got an extended glimpse of Lavine. If he's not the same guy who can easily create his shot from anywhere on the court, then he doesn't help. He doesn't play D and while he's improved a bit as a playmaker, he doesn't offer anything else but elite scoring. And he can't do that right now.
gradyandrew wrote:martin wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:I don't think you'll see an upgrade unless it's for a "star." I don't think the FO will be pressured to make a big in-season trade as long as the Knicks remain competitive. The Donovan Mitchell trade still remains kinda the standard and this FO remains conservative in terms of its valuation of assets.Is there a star SG out there that even makes sense for the Knicks, especially considering Brunson/Grimes?
I can't even come up with one reasonable name that I'd include Grimes in a trade and for which a team would give up a star SG. Cause there is no way you are keeping him out of the trade, right?
Jesus man, had me cracking up. Beal might be available since it looks like Washington is again going nowhere but we agree because if his contract an age, he's not a good fit. That's why I look at Rozier. Thibs likes his type of strong combo guard. He's not an all star, but he's close, something like 75% of Donovan Mitchell for half the price. He's the same.age as Randle and on a reasonable contract.
The rotation gets clogged with him JB and IQ, so for now, like any deal- I don't pull the trigger.
In reality land guys like Beal, Rozier, and Lavine make zero sense to even mention. Like wasted typing time. I don't even know why you'd bring them up.
Grimes’ shooting, defense – and overall health – are big factors in the Knicks’ eight-game winning streak.Forty-eight players have logged at least 250 minutes since the start of New York’s winning streak. No player has a better plus/minus than Grimes (+112) in that span, per NBA.com.
If you go back a little further to when the Knicks reinserted Grimes into the starting lineup, the numbers are just as impressive.
Grimes re-entered the starting lineup Nov. 21 against the Oklahoma City Thunder. Sixty-eight players have played 10 games in that span and averaged at least 30 minutes in those games. Grimes and Zion Williamson have the best net rating among that group (+9.1).
Again, none of this would surprise Thibodeau.
“Last year, he showed us how good he was defensively. So I think he’ll only get better and better as he gains more knowledge, becomes more familiar with each guy,” Thibodeau said earlier this month. “He studies and he’s just got a knack for it, he’s got a tenacity about him. He’s a big multiple effort guy. Great intensity all the time.”
Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/IanBegley/status/1605554865001766913?s=20&t=6O4y3cjrUr0qKjszwcQbaQ
Click here to view the Tweet