Knicks · Find time for McBride? (page 1)

I know we have a better record 9 vs. 10 but I think team logistics are different.
Could McBride on ball defense 4 th w last game when were up 5 change the outcome? Is there 10-14 minutes we can get him when defense is crucial? We can play 3 smalls if needed- but I’m wondering for the final stretch do we unlock that part of the team consistently especially with Brunson being iffy w his foot

we already play 3 smalls... all our line ups are 3 smalls.

Hart/IQ/Grimes are all excellent defenders and better scorers than McBride. That leaves Brunson (he's not sitting to get McBride minutes) and RJ who's the closest to a SF that we have.

Briggs I hear you and I think the real question is how good is McBride and does that dictate offseason changes.

He's the 3rd PG and its hard to play him anywhere else (some SG... fine, but we have like 5 of those). So the real question is if he's really good and even better than he's shown do we just run it back or do we shake up the roster a bit to make room for him?

Quickly is going to have exceptional value this offseason. Are you willing to move IQ to upgrade another position and get McBride more time as the 6th man? Our FO may have some tough choices

I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

McBride is perfect in his role of filling in for injured guards in the rotation.

Who?

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

Depends. Not talking giving him a rotational spot. Talking when you need a boost defensively. Ie. Minny.
Lineup of Deuce, IQ, Grimes and Jhart (best defensive players) for a stint does not hurt you or does it mean anyone is giving up their spot.

I would rather see Deuce, Jhart. IQ and Grimes instead of Obi, with Ihart/MR.
Especially when you consider defensive rotations to guard the stripe is our biggest issue at times.

My point was that if you just gave up 79 points in a half (not often) it may be a good time to try something new without having to worry about "who will have to sit". Especially since it is not a long term move. That is as long as giving up 79 in a half does not become a habit.

He plays a lot like Grimes, 3&D player. If McBride had more of an offensive repetoire, Id be in favor of it.

Why would we find time for McBride? Our team defense has been amazeballs with him riding pine

Deuce is my guy and if I were Thibs I'd find even 2 minutes for him. Especially when our so-called defenders are slacking or getting cooked! Deuce will always give you 100% defensively. I know the argument will be that we've been way better going 9 deep but giving Deuce a few minutes here and there is not the same as giving someone like Fournier or Rose consistent minutes. Let Deuce close out the 1st, 2nd and 3rd quarters.

There is a logical progression here and someone has to go between Grimes, Iq and Deuce unless one thinks IQ can play the 2.
We all have our favorite and in turn others we deem expendable if we being honest as fans.

Drafting is an easy answer often but would the new player be consistant out of the box?
If not , they sit and learn or earn.

Knicks as Clyde said last night have been remarkably healthy this year. When Brunson was out Iq and Deuce stepped up nice.
I could a fun offseason but to do so hearts will be broken.

I guess everyone is going to ignore the elephant in the room? The reason why fans want to give deuce some PT is because of JBs defense.

This team is built on the offensive backs of 3 players who are below average in defense. We moved JB over to Prince so that he doesn’t get cooked by Conley. And Prince has a career game. Also Conley was still cooking.

It’s a tricky situation to be in which is why I hated the build from the beginning (RJ and Randle). Love having Mr clutch Brunson, but let’s be honest he’s a average to below defender. This puts extreme pressure on our offense. And as you have saw the last two games, we still not good enough to out score teams.

Let’s hope JB steps up on defense (once his ankle is fully healed) and RJ / Grimes increases their defensive intensity. Otherwise it’s going to be a short playoff and early vacation.

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

Depends. Not talking giving him a rotational spot. Talking when you need a boost defensively. Ie. Minny.
Lineup of Deuce, IQ, Grimes and Jhart (best defensive players) for a stint does not hurt you or does it mean anyone is giving up their spot.

I would rather see Deuce, Jhart. IQ and Grimes instead of Obi, with Ihart/MR.
Especially when you consider defensive rotations to guard the stripe is our biggest issue at times.

My point was that if you just gave up 79 points in a half (not often) it may be a good time to try something new without having to worry about "who will have to sit". Especially since it is not a long term move. That is as long as giving up 79 in a half does not become a habit.

this is the right answer... play McBride over Obi. I would do that now. Obi doesnt make us big on either side of the ball and McBride brings "it"

I means we go from playing 3 guard sets to 4 guard sets. Someone is going to have guard bigger players. I like McBride alot. I think both he and IQ are keepers. Hard to see a path for McBride to get minutes tho

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

Depends. Not talking giving him a rotational spot. Talking when you need a boost defensively. Ie. Minny.
Lineup of Deuce, IQ, Grimes and Jhart (best defensive players) for a stint does not hurt you or does it mean anyone is giving up their spot.

I would rather see Deuce, Jhart. IQ and Grimes instead of Obi, with Ihart/MR.
Especially when you consider defensive rotations to guard the stripe is our biggest issue at times.

My point was that if you just gave up 79 points in a half (not often) it may be a good time to try something new without having to worry about "who will have to sit". Especially since it is not a long term move. That is as long as giving up 79 in a half does not become a habit.

this is the right answer... play McBride over Obi. I would do that now. Obi doesnt make us big on either side of the ball and McBride brings "it"

I means we go from playing 3 guard sets to 4 guard sets. Someone is going to have guard bigger players. I like McBride alot. I think both he and IQ are keepers. Hard to see a path for McBride to get minutes tho

I think we are on to something. Playing Deuce over Obi will make us small, but now a days, there are no post up PFs. And most solid nba teams have 4 players on the floor that can shoot threes. Plus, the little guys we have all play bigger than their size (Deuce, Hart, IQ).

But I like the idea of situational substitutions. Thats exactly how we should use Deuce. Unfortunately, we have a great coach (don't want the Thibs hives after me) who doesn't adjust on the fly. Thibs has a great pre-game plan and sticks to it. I'm sure Deuce will now be more involved the next game, because thats how Thibs adjust, from game to game.

What we need in the playoffs are IN GAME adjustments for situational rotation moves. Like if a PG is cooking JB. And the other guard is cooking Grimes. Might want to call on the Deuce Pest Control. Just change up the momentum, then bring back the starters and FINISH THEM.

blkexec wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

Depends. Not talking giving him a rotational spot. Talking when you need a boost defensively. Ie. Minny.
Lineup of Deuce, IQ, Grimes and Jhart (best defensive players) for a stint does not hurt you or does it mean anyone is giving up their spot.

I would rather see Deuce, Jhart. IQ and Grimes instead of Obi, with Ihart/MR.
Especially when you consider defensive rotations to guard the stripe is our biggest issue at times.

My point was that if you just gave up 79 points in a half (not often) it may be a good time to try something new without having to worry about "who will have to sit". Especially since it is not a long term move. That is as long as giving up 79 in a half does not become a habit.

this is the right answer... play McBride over Obi. I would do that now. Obi doesnt make us big on either side of the ball and McBride brings "it"

I means we go from playing 3 guard sets to 4 guard sets. Someone is going to have guard bigger players. I like McBride alot. I think both he and IQ are keepers. Hard to see a path for McBride to get minutes tho

I think we are on to something. Playing Deuce over Obi will make us small, but now a days, there are no post up PFs. And most solid nba teams have 4 players on the floor that can shoot threes. Plus, the little guys we have all play bigger than their size (Deuce, Hart, IQ).

But I like the idea of situational substitutions. Thats exactly how we should use Deuce. Unfortunately, we have a great coach (don't want the Thibs hives after me) who doesn't adjust on the fly. Thibs has a great pre-game plan and sticks to it. I'm sure Deuce will now be more involved the next game, because thats how Thibs adjust, from game to game.

What we need in the playoffs are IN GAME adjustments for situational rotation moves. Like if a PG is cooking JB. And the other guard is cooking Grimes. Might want to call on the Deuce Pest Control. Just change up the momentum, then bring back the starters and FINISH THEM.

everything you say I agree with, but you leave out the hard part.. which is who get's subbed. Obi I guess. None of the guards really make sense.

The real question is how good IS McBride? Good enough to make IQ expendable? IQ is my favorite player the guy I want gone the least. He's also our most valuable/coveted asset and I am pretty sure his price would fetch something either useful or good enough assets for that 2nd move

The top guys who excel at this sort of defensive assignment include guard Jose Alvarado (Pelicans), Aaron Holiday (Hawks), and Jevon Carter (Milwaukee Bucks). These are all guys who pick up their man over 50 feet from his hoop.

You might be thinking, If only the Knicks had a defensive gnat who is great at bugging a point guard deep in enemy territory.

They do. Mr. Miles “Deuce” McBride is fourth on the list.

As Mike Breen mentioned during the most recent telecast, assistant coaches have said they would love to have a guy like McBride on their roster. His defense is the primary reason why. He has a defensive rating of 115.2 this season (Statmuse.com), and as Dubin writes:

For McBride, being annoying is actually part of the point. “Nothing better than seeing a guy [who] you can mentally break and then physically wear down,” McBride said with a laugh.

It’s a good article, so go read it for the nifty graphs and deeper insight. I was pleased to see Deuce get the recognition and thanks again to Tomato Can for the tip. Now if only Deuce could get more playing time. . . .

https://www.postingandtoasting.com/2023/...

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

Depends. Not talking giving him a rotational spot. Talking when you need a boost defensively. Ie. Minny.
Lineup of Deuce, IQ, Grimes and Jhart (best defensive players) for a stint does not hurt you or does it mean anyone is giving up their spot.

I would rather see Deuce, Jhart. IQ and Grimes instead of Obi, with Ihart/MR.
Especially when you consider defensive rotations to guard the stripe is our biggest issue at times.

My point was that if you just gave up 79 points in a half (not often) it may be a good time to try something new without having to worry about "who will have to sit". Especially since it is not a long term move. That is as long as giving up 79 in a half does not become a habit.

this is the right answer... play McBride over Obi. I would do that now. Obi doesnt make us big on either side of the ball and McBride brings "it"

I means we go from playing 3 guard sets to 4 guard sets. Someone is going to have guard bigger players. I like McBride alot. I think both he and IQ are keepers. Hard to see a path for McBride to get minutes tho

Obi barely gets any minutes. He had 12 minutes last night. Hart got 29 minutes. The minutes would have to come from Hart

Philc1 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

Depends. Not talking giving him a rotational spot. Talking when you need a boost defensively. Ie. Minny.
Lineup of Deuce, IQ, Grimes and Jhart (best defensive players) for a stint does not hurt you or does it mean anyone is giving up their spot.

I would rather see Deuce, Jhart. IQ and Grimes instead of Obi, with Ihart/MR.
Especially when you consider defensive rotations to guard the stripe is our biggest issue at times.

My point was that if you just gave up 79 points in a half (not often) it may be a good time to try something new without having to worry about "who will have to sit". Especially since it is not a long term move. That is as long as giving up 79 in a half does not become a habit.

this is the right answer... play McBride over Obi. I would do that now. Obi doesnt make us big on either side of the ball and McBride brings "it"

I means we go from playing 3 guard sets to 4 guard sets. Someone is going to have guard bigger players. I like McBride alot. I think both he and IQ are keepers. Hard to see a path for McBride to get minutes tho

Obi barely gets any minutes. He had 12 minutes last night. Hart got 29 minutes. The minutes would have to come from Hart

nope... Tell me again why Obi needs to get minutes?

fishmike wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

Depends. Not talking giving him a rotational spot. Talking when you need a boost defensively. Ie. Minny.
Lineup of Deuce, IQ, Grimes and Jhart (best defensive players) for a stint does not hurt you or does it mean anyone is giving up their spot.

I would rather see Deuce, Jhart. IQ and Grimes instead of Obi, with Ihart/MR.
Especially when you consider defensive rotations to guard the stripe is our biggest issue at times.

My point was that if you just gave up 79 points in a half (not often) it may be a good time to try something new without having to worry about "who will have to sit". Especially since it is not a long term move. That is as long as giving up 79 in a half does not become a habit.

this is the right answer... play McBride over Obi. I would do that now. Obi doesnt make us big on either side of the ball and McBride brings "it"

I means we go from playing 3 guard sets to 4 guard sets. Someone is going to have guard bigger players. I like McBride alot. I think both he and IQ are keepers. Hard to see a path for McBride to get minutes tho

Obi barely gets any minutes. He had 12 minutes last night. Hart got 29 minutes. The minutes would have to come from Hart

nope... Tell me again why Obi needs to get minutes?

I agree I would play McBride over Toppin. Ultimately I think the Knicks will find a big wing or forward to replace Toppin, and Deuce will maintain his emergency role he’s in now.

Knixkik wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:

fishmike wrote:

HofstraBBall wrote:I agree. Think he should be used on occasions where we are not stopping anyone. Minny game would have been a good one. I am an advocate of trying something new if nothing is working as long as it does not involve any over the top changes or demotions. Giving Deuce a few minutes with a "Defensive" lineup, the other night, would not have affected anyone's confidence or standing. Kinda like bringing in a three point specialist if you need a three.

great idea. Now onto the implementation phase: who sits so McBride can play?

Depends. Not talking giving him a rotational spot. Talking when you need a boost defensively. Ie. Minny.
Lineup of Deuce, IQ, Grimes and Jhart (best defensive players) for a stint does not hurt you or does it mean anyone is giving up their spot.

I would rather see Deuce, Jhart. IQ and Grimes instead of Obi, with Ihart/MR.
Especially when you consider defensive rotations to guard the stripe is our biggest issue at times.

My point was that if you just gave up 79 points in a half (not often) it may be a good time to try something new without having to worry about "who will have to sit". Especially since it is not a long term move. That is as long as giving up 79 in a half does not become a habit.

this is the right answer... play McBride over Obi. I would do that now. Obi doesnt make us big on either side of the ball and McBride brings "it"

I means we go from playing 3 guard sets to 4 guard sets. Someone is going to have guard bigger players. I like McBride alot. I think both he and IQ are keepers. Hard to see a path for McBride to get minutes tho

Obi barely gets any minutes. He had 12 minutes last night. Hart got 29 minutes. The minutes would have to come from Hart

nope... Tell me again why Obi needs to get minutes?

I agree I would play McBride over Toppin. Ultimately I think the Knicks will find a big wing or forward to replace Toppin, and Deuce will maintain his emergency role he’s in now.

Team lacks perimeter defense and Deuce is the best perimeter defender in the league. But Grimes is growing on me. Grimes, Hart and IQ is why Deuce hasn't got any PT. Also old school Thibs playing his traditional lineups with a Center and a PF. If Thibs moves Randle to center, that opens up more playing opportunities for Deuce.

I'm wondering if we went to a smaller lineup sooner, that would've reduced the amount of open looks on the perimeter, and should increase our perimeter defense. Sure they would attack Randle in the paint, but when you go small, you can now put a defensive guard lineup to guard the point of attack. This would create steals and TOs and fastbreaks. Plus Randle will have even more room to shoot 3's or drive to the hole.

Since we can't guard the paint anymore, might as well go small.