Knicks · Need to invest in an efficient offensive big next year (page 1)

Philosophically I'm not opposed to trading out Mitch for a more dynamic offensive center that can also rim protect (very few exist), but ultimately Mitch has got to hang onto the ball and finish. 70% FG% is not good enough when the only shot you take is a dunk....his ask for more touches was laughable. Mitch is an impact player, but this is an area of his game that has to get better.

BRIGGS wrote:We have good bigs per se but when u need a bucket in a tight spot our shots we take are difficult. We don’t have one low post option

Who are you replacing? With Randle, Mitch and Hartenstein, the big man minutes are pretty much taken.

VDesai wrote:Im not sure we absolutely need to. We need to have Mitch Robinson hang on to the dang ball. He dropped or got stripped after about 4-5 potential offensive rebounds and he fumbled a lot of passes that could be dunks.

Philosophically I'm not opposed to trading out Mitch for a more dynamic offensive center that can also rim protect (very few exist), but ultimately Mitch has got to hang onto the ball and finish. 70% FG% is not good enough when the only shot you take is a dunk....his ask for more touches was laughable. Mitch is an impact player, but this is an area of his game that has to get better.

V— he fumbles it because he’s not an offensive player.his hands are actually good in other facets

BRIGGS wrote:We have good bigs per se but when u need a bucket in a tight spot our shots we take are difficult. We don’t have one low post option

Probably need someone to pass it to them also.

Knixkik wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:We have good bigs per se but when u need a bucket in a tight spot our shots we take are difficult. We don’t have one low post option

Who are you replacing? With Randle, Mitch and Hartenstein, the big man minutes are pretty much taken.

Let’s see how the playoffs go before we get to far

fishmike wrote:nope... upgrade the 3. Hopefully someone with a handle AND a shot

I like that idea!

BRIGGS wrote:We have good bigs per se but when u need a bucket in a tight spot our shots we take are difficult. We don’t have one low post option

Unfortunately, they don’t make bigs like that anymore.

BRIGGS wrote:

VDesai wrote:Im not sure we absolutely need to. We need to have Mitch Robinson hang on to the dang ball. He dropped or got stripped after about 4-5 potential offensive rebounds and he fumbled a lot of passes that could be dunks.

Philosophically I'm not opposed to trading out Mitch for a more dynamic offensive center that can also rim protect (very few exist), but ultimately Mitch has got to hang onto the ball and finish. 70% FG% is not good enough when the only shot you take is a dunk....his ask for more touches was laughable. Mitch is an impact player, but this is an area of his game that has to get better.

V— he fumbles it because he’s not an offensive player.his hands are actually good in other facets

I agree with Briggs. We need a big who's comfortable on the offensive end while guard out to the 3 pt line. Mobley is the type of big you are talking about Briggs. He can guard pick and rolls. And he doesn't look lost with the ball in his hands. Now can NY handle a Mobely type player, who may be a little light in the pants and not very physical? Rasheed Wallace type is probably the perfect solution. He's comfortable in spaces near the 3pt line on offense and defense. And he was strong enough to hold his own in the paint.

Yes we can also use a SF as well. But with Mitch on the team, a smart playoff team will take advantage of him by involving him in multiple pick and roll plays. It's really not hard to game plan against the knicks. Along with putting Mitch in pick and rolls, teams will force other players to make a play by keeping the ball out of Brunsons hands and Randle as well (when he has it going).

I wonder why Thibs doesn't do the same, when teams have one player who's cooking! I feel like we wait too late to try this strategy. If Garland has it going, we are done. If Donovan Mitchell has it going, we have a chance.

blkexec wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

VDesai wrote:Im not sure we absolutely need to. We need to have Mitch Robinson hang on to the dang ball. He dropped or got stripped after about 4-5 potential offensive rebounds and he fumbled a lot of passes that could be dunks.

Philosophically I'm not opposed to trading out Mitch for a more dynamic offensive center that can also rim protect (very few exist), but ultimately Mitch has got to hang onto the ball and finish. 70% FG% is not good enough when the only shot you take is a dunk....his ask for more touches was laughable. Mitch is an impact player, but this is an area of his game that has to get better.

V— he fumbles it because he’s not an offensive player.his hands are actually good in other facets

I agree with Briggs. We need a big who's comfortable on the offensive end while guard out to the 3 pt line. Mobley is the type of big you are talking about Briggs. He can guard pick and rolls. And he doesn't look lost with the ball in his hands. Now can NY handle a Mobely type player, who may be a little light in the pants and not very physical? Rasheed Wallace type is probably the perfect solution. He's comfortable in spaces near the 3pt line on offense and defense. And he was strong enough to hold his own in the paint.

Yes we can also use a SF as well. But with Mitch on the team, a smart playoff team will take advantage of him by involving him in multiple pick and roll plays. It's really not hard to game plan against the knicks. Along with putting Mitch in pick and rolls, teams will force other players to make a play by keeping the ball out of Brunsons hands and Randle as well (when he has it going).

I wonder why Thibs doesn't do the same, when teams have one player who's cooking! I feel like we wait too late to try this strategy. If Garland has it going, we are done. If Donovan Mitchell has it going, we have a chance.

Go get us a pick in the 20s

BRIGGS wrote:Trayce Jackson davis 6-9 245

Go get us a pick in the 20s

Pick #25 to be exact please, just for tradition's sake

BRIGGS wrote:Trayce Jackson davis 6-9 245

Go get us a pick in the 20s

Isiah Roby is only two years older than Jackson Davis. What do you think Davis provides that Roby can't? I stopped following Davis around February because I'm itching for wing depth, so I can't give you answer. Off the top of my head, I'd say Roby gives you more potential as a floor spacer. But how would you say they compare as rim runners or sporadic post threats?

BigDaddyG wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Trayce Jackson davis 6-9 245

Go get us a pick in the 20s

Isiah Roby is only two years older than Jackson Davis. What do you think Davis provides that Roby can't? I stopped following Davis around February because I'm itching for wing depth, so I can't give you answer. Off the top of my head, I'd say Roby gives you more potential as a floor spacer. But how would you say they compare as rim runners or sporadic post threats?

How many teams has Roby been cut by?
Let that inform your answer

Panos wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Trayce Jackson davis 6-9 245

Go get us a pick in the 20s

Isiah Roby is only two years older than Jackson Davis. What do you think Davis provides that Roby can't? I stopped following Davis around February because I'm itching for wing depth, so I can't give you answer. Off the top of my head, I'd say Roby gives you more potential as a floor spacer. But how would you say they compare as rim runners or sporadic post threats?

How many teams has Roby been cut by?
Let that inform your answer

fishmike wrote:

blkexec wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

VDesai wrote:Im not sure we absolutely need to. We need to have Mitch Robinson hang on to the dang ball. He dropped or got stripped after about 4-5 potential offensive rebounds and he fumbled a lot of passes that could be dunks.

Philosophically I'm not opposed to trading out Mitch for a more dynamic offensive center that can also rim protect (very few exist), but ultimately Mitch has got to hang onto the ball and finish. 70% FG% is not good enough when the only shot you take is a dunk....his ask for more touches was laughable. Mitch is an impact player, but this is an area of his game that has to get better.

V— he fumbles it because he’s not an offensive player.his hands are actually good in other facets

I agree with Briggs. We need a big who's comfortable on the offensive end while guard out to the 3 pt line. Mobley is the type of big you are talking about Briggs. He can guard pick and rolls. And he doesn't look lost with the ball in his hands. Now can NY handle a Mobely type player, who may be a little light in the pants and not very physical? Rasheed Wallace type is probably the perfect solution. He's comfortable in spaces near the 3pt line on offense and defense. And he was strong enough to hold his own in the paint.

Yes we can also use a SF as well. But with Mitch on the team, a smart playoff team will take advantage of him by involving him in multiple pick and roll plays. It's really not hard to game plan against the knicks. Along with putting Mitch in pick and rolls, teams will force other players to make a play by keeping the ball out of Brunsons hands and Randle as well (when he has it going).

I wonder why Thibs doesn't do the same, when teams have one player who's cooking! I feel like we wait too late to try this strategy. If Garland has it going, we are done. If Donovan Mitchell has it going, we have a chance.

name one

Almost every team has one. Mobley, turner type. I’m sure it will take a few mins to find some in the draft. Mitch is my guy ever since I met him in person. But he represents the old school bigs. These new bigs are KD types. They can handle the ball, have soft hands. The game has shifted. When growing up if your a 7fter you are a center. I know 6’3 guards in their 40s coached to be a forward since a child. They out there if you look hard enough.

I want to make it work with Mitch if we can because he brings a lot of rim protection. I agree Rasheed Wallace and Kevin garnet are not walking through that door right now. But there are poor man versions of the guys I mentioned. Maybe roby is that guy. Bring “that guy” off the bench, start hart at center, and use Mitch to fetch a superstar SF or SG. Brunson and Randle have expiration dates. So either we try to build a championship team around them or just hope and pray IQ, grimes and RJ become the superstars we need. I’m not holding my breath on that. This off season is the best time to start being aggressive and find another major piece to add.

I'd still be up for a possible sign and trade of Mitch for KP. Brunson knows KP's game. Much better, and more willing passer since leaving NY. A legit two way center. Staying on the court longer, but of course its a risk.

I'd make this move if Randle stays beyond this season. IDK how many years Brunson can hold up from playing his style of bball, taking all those charges.

GustavBahler wrote:Im pretty sure we could find a big that can chip in on offense, but he will probably be somewhat of a liability on defense. You have to pay two-way bigs.

I'd still be up for a possible sign and trade of Mitch for KP. Brunson knows KP's game. Much better, and more willing passer since leaving NY. A legit two way center. Staying on the court longer, but of course its a risk.

I'd make this move if Randle stays beyond this season. IDK how many years Brunson can hold up from playing his style of bball, taking all those charges.