Knicks · Is DDV showing that Grimes is expendable? (page 3)

martin wrote:Also Caruso:

Just about to be 30.

Games played by season: 37, 25, 64, 58, 41, 67.

Shooting from distance last 4 year: 36%, 32%, 40%, 33% on not really high volume.

The Knicks have the same'ish guy in Josh Hart?

You’re right about games played. That is a concern.

What I see with DDV and IQ which I dont see with Grimes are the little things. They do the little things off the ball that Grimes doesnt do enough.

Grimes used to be good at finding cutters off the dribble, rarely see that part of his game anymore. This is an unusual situation where arguably the third best SG is made starter.

You see glimpses of what Grimes is capable of. But I also see too much, too soon, when it comes to rushing Grimes into the starting lineup. The more time passes the more it looks that way to me. That may change of course.

I dont know how much time the coaching staff can or should give Grimes as a starter to find out how good he can be. When a convicing argument can be made that two better options are on the bench right now.

GustavBahler wrote:What I see with DDV and IQ which I dont see with Grimes are the little things. They do the little things off the ball that Grimes doesnt do enough.

Grimes used to be good at finding cutters off the dribble, rarely see that part of his game anymore. This is an unusual situation where arguably the third best SG is made starter.

You see glimpses of what Grimes is capable of. But I also see too much, too soon, when it comes to rushing Grimes into the starting lineup. The more time passes the more it looks that way to me. That may change of course.

I dont know how much time the coaching staff can or should give Grimes as a starter to find out how good he can be. When a convicing argument can be made that two better options are on the bench right now.

You’re right. Grimes is strictly a 3&D guy right now. And he’s defensive on-ball only. Quickley and DDV are guys who do a mix of things on and off the ball on both ends of the floor. Grimes should just focus on becoming a more consistent outside shooter and get these parts of his game down rather than worry about expanding. There’s always a role for him with what he does well. I don’t see tremendous upside but he will make a good career from his current skill set. But there will always be the ability to upgrade over him if the Knicks want to get to the next level.

the issue with "upgrading" from Grimes is there are very few two way SG's. So chances are it's going to be a trade off of more offense for defense.

OG is the one guy that's an upgrade on both ends, but he's injury prone, going to get paid a ton, and he's ultimately just a role player.

nycericanguy wrote:the issue with "upgrading" from Grimes is there are very few two way SG's. So chances are it's going to be a trade off of more offense for defense.

OG is the one guy that's an upgrade on both ends, but he's injury prone, going to get paid a ton, and he's ultimately just a role player.

You’re right about the points in terms of upgrading. OG is the logical one but you laid out the concerns. I still think the most likely “upgrade” is Donovan Mitchell, but again the concern is it changes the dynamic of the team and you lose that defensive impact. But I still think the Cavs might be faced with a trade demand and can do a lot worse than IQ (sign and trade), Grimes, and getting a ton of picks back to replace the ones they traded for him originally. Knicks would still have DDV, hart and whomever else they can get to help replace the defensive impact.

Knixkik wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:What I see with DDV and IQ which I dont see with Grimes are the little things. They do the little things off the ball that Grimes doesnt do enough.

Grimes used to be good at finding cutters off the dribble, rarely see that part of his game anymore. This is an unusual situation where arguably the third best SG is made starter.

You see glimpses of what Grimes is capable of. But I also see too much, too soon, when it comes to rushing Grimes into the starting lineup. The more time passes the more it looks that way to me. That may change of course.

I dont know how much time the coaching staff can or should give Grimes as a starter to find out how good he can be. When a convicing argument can be made that two better options are on the bench right now.

You’re right. Grimes is strictly a 3&D guy right now. And he’s defensive on-ball only. Quickley and DDV are guys who do a mix of things on and off the ball on both ends of the floor. Grimes should just focus on becoming a more consistent outside shooter and get these parts of his game down rather than worry about expanding. There’s always a role for him with what he does well. I don’t see tremendous upside but he will make a good career from his current skill set. But there will always be the ability to upgrade over him if the Knicks want to get to the next level.

If Grimes is going to keep starting, I hope he tries to show more of an expanded game. Because when his shot isnt falling, Grimes is mostly taking up space on offense.

Ive heard some posters making the argument that the Knicks should be patient with Grimes like they were with IQ. But IQ had a dribble drive in year one. Mostly floaters, but there was something to build on. And he's still coming off the bench.

Grimes started in year 2, and our starting SG still doesnt have a dribble drive in year 3.

Knixkik wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:What I see with DDV and IQ which I dont see with Grimes are the little things. They do the little things off the ball that Grimes doesnt do enough.

Grimes used to be good at finding cutters off the dribble, rarely see that part of his game anymore. This is an unusual situation where arguably the third best SG is made starter.

You see glimpses of what Grimes is capable of. But I also see too much, too soon, when it comes to rushing Grimes into the starting lineup. The more time passes the more it looks that way to me. That may change of course.

I dont know how much time the coaching staff can or should give Grimes as a starter to find out how good he can be. When a convicing argument can be made that two better options are on the bench right now.

You’re right. Grimes is strictly a 3&D guy right now. And he’s defensive on-ball only. Quickley and DDV are guys who do a mix of things on and off the ball on both ends of the floor. Grimes should just focus on becoming a more consistent outside shooter and get these parts of his game down rather than worry about expanding. There’s always a role for him with what he does well. I don’t see tremendous upside but he will make a good career from his current skill set. But there will always be the ability to upgrade over him if the Knicks want to get to the next level.

This is why I said from day one, grimes reminds me of a poor man Allan Houston with defense. Not as good of a shooter as houston but has more overall skills that he doesn’t use in that starting lineup.

When DDV or IQ start, they still play their same game. Grimes would show more skills on that second unit and could build up his all around game more, which is something he talks about in the off season. It’s early and I’m fine waiting and developing. DDV is signed so there’s no rush with him. If grimes develops into a more improved 3&D player, it will help this starting 5. But if grimes is focused more on all around skills and less on just shooting, then he will have these long hot and cold streaks.

I’ve learned to have patience (still working on it). We are baking and not frying. So let grimes continue to grow like RJ has and IQ.

H20 had an incredible fundamental foot work and the ability to create space off the dribble. He was silky smooth and graceful
Grimes has fast feet and quick delivery.
Other than some physical similarities I don’t see the similarities.

My take with IQ on the second units is they still want him to create which is not his strong suit quite yet. WIth the staring unit he gets put into better shooting positions. From that aspect playing with the first unit makes sense. Thus, he finishes strong with that unit. But, the goal is to get Grimes to improve. both IQ and certainly grimes are not finished players yet. IQ is closer.

Our second unit is a potent weapon. It appears we are keeping that.
Grimes ability to guard either wing player is important and he defends bigger than IQ.

I agree, Let them continue to grow.

DDV is here in the event a trade evolves with IQ perhaps.

Nalod wrote:H20 had an incredible fundamental foot work and the ability to create space off the dribble. He was silky smooth and graceful
Grimes has fast feet and quick delivery.
Other than some physical similarities I don’t see the similarities.

My take with IQ on the second units is they still want him to create which is not his strong suit quite yet. WIth the staring unit he gets put into better shooting positions. From that aspect playing with the first unit makes sense. Thus, he finishes strong with that unit. But, the goal is to get Grimes to improve. both IQ and certainly grimes are not finished players yet. IQ is closer.

Our second unit is a potent weapon. It appears we are keeping that.
Grimes ability to guard either wing player is important and he defends bigger than IQ.

I agree, Let them continue to grow.

DDV is here in the event a trade evolves with IQ perhaps.

I would add that Grimes and Houston share a reluctance to put the ball in play. Mostly spot up shooters. Grimes D was better, and of course Houston's offense was superior.

They also share what I believe to be a similar situation. They both were made starting SG when a better option was on the roster. In Houston's case Sprewell. Instead, Spree was made to play the 3, having to guard bigger players.

I would agree with you that IQ needed more seasoning, if we didnt see him avg 20pts plus a game as a starting PG and SG. If IQ needs anything IMO its more seasoning as a starter and closer.

I agree that IQ is in the second unit to punch it up, so to speak. But Grimes has been making a case that the starting SG spot needs another look.

Also correct that IQ looks like a likely candidate to be moved. Maybe for some frontcourt help. I'm skeptical that it will put us over the top, if Grimes still has no confidence in his ability to use his dribble.

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:H20 had an incredible fundamental foot work and the ability to create space off the dribble. He was silky smooth and graceful
Grimes has fast feet and quick delivery.
Other than some physical similarities I don’t see the similarities.

My take with IQ on the second units is they still want him to create which is not his strong suit quite yet. WIth the staring unit he gets put into better shooting positions. From that aspect playing with the first unit makes sense. Thus, he finishes strong with that unit. But, the goal is to get Grimes to improve. both IQ and certainly grimes are not finished players yet. IQ is closer.

Our second unit is a potent weapon. It appears we are keeping that.
Grimes ability to guard either wing player is important and he defends bigger than IQ.

I agree, Let them continue to grow.

DDV is here in the event a trade evolves with IQ perhaps.

I would add that Grimes and Houston share a reluctance to put the ball in play. Mostly spot up shooters. Grimes D was better, and of course Houston's offense was superior.

They also share what I believe to be a similar situation. They both were made starting SG when a better option was on the roster. In Houston's case Sprewell. Instead, Spree was made to play the 3, having to guard bigger players.

I would agree with you that IQ needed more seasoning, if we didnt see him avg 20pts plus a game as a starting PG and SG. If IQ needs anything IMO its more seasoning as a starter and closer.

I agree that IQ is in the second unit to punch it up, so to speak. But Grimes has been making a case that the starting SG spot needs another look.

Also correct that IQ looks like a likely candidate to be moved. Maybe for some frontcourt help. I'm skeptical that it will put us over the top, if Grimes still has no confidence in his ability to use his dribble.

crazy how durable Allan was in his Career. The one 50 game season in the midst was the strike short year. Other than that he had a remarkable run. 4 years he played 82 games. one of them with Detroit. He other seasons he played 81, 78,77,....... His last two was 50 then 20 which is why we often think his durability was awful. It was not, it was expensive! 7 of his 9 years he did quite well!! Spree was here 5 of those years. The ultimate "disgruntled" star!!!!! Funny thing, he became that again when he was moved to Minny!

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:H20 had an incredible fundamental foot work and the ability to create space off the dribble. He was silky smooth and graceful
Grimes has fast feet and quick delivery.
Other than some physical similarities I don’t see the similarities.

My take with IQ on the second units is they still want him to create which is not his strong suit quite yet. WIth the staring unit he gets put into better shooting positions. From that aspect playing with the first unit makes sense. Thus, he finishes strong with that unit. But, the goal is to get Grimes to improve. both IQ and certainly grimes are not finished players yet. IQ is closer.

Our second unit is a potent weapon. It appears we are keeping that.
Grimes ability to guard either wing player is important and he defends bigger than IQ.

I agree, Let them continue to grow.

DDV is here in the event a trade evolves with IQ perhaps.

I would add that Grimes and Houston share a reluctance to put the ball in play. Mostly spot up shooters. Grimes D was better, and of course Houston's offense was superior.

They also share what I believe to be a similar situation. They both were made starting SG when a better option was on the roster. In Houston's case Sprewell. Instead, Spree was made to play the 3, having to guard bigger players.

I would agree with you that IQ needed more seasoning, if we didnt see him avg 20pts plus a game as a starting PG and SG. If IQ needs anything IMO its more seasoning as a starter and closer.

I agree that IQ is in the second unit to punch it up, so to speak. But Grimes has been making a case that the starting SG spot needs another look.

Also correct that IQ looks like a likely candidate to be moved. Maybe for some frontcourt help. I'm skeptical that it will put us over the top, if Grimes still has no confidence in his ability to use his dribble.

crazy how durable Allan was in his Career. The one 50 game season in the midst was the strike short year. Other than that he had a remarkable run. 4 years he played 82 games. one of them with Detroit. He other seasons he played 81, 78,77,....... His last two was 50 then 20 which is why we often think his durability was awful. It was not, it was expensive! 7 of his 9 years he did quite well!! Spree was here 5 of those years. The ultimate "disgruntled" star!!!!! Funny thing, he became that again when he was moved to Minny!

Feel like this board really doesn't understand the adjective "durable".

EwingsGlass wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:H20 had an incredible fundamental foot work and the ability to create space off the dribble. He was silky smooth and graceful
Grimes has fast feet and quick delivery.
Other than some physical similarities I don’t see the similarities.

My take with IQ on the second units is they still want him to create which is not his strong suit quite yet. WIth the staring unit he gets put into better shooting positions. From that aspect playing with the first unit makes sense. Thus, he finishes strong with that unit. But, the goal is to get Grimes to improve. both IQ and certainly grimes are not finished players yet. IQ is closer.

Our second unit is a potent weapon. It appears we are keeping that.
Grimes ability to guard either wing player is important and he defends bigger than IQ.

I agree, Let them continue to grow.

DDV is here in the event a trade evolves with IQ perhaps.

I would add that Grimes and Houston share a reluctance to put the ball in play. Mostly spot up shooters. Grimes D was better, and of course Houston's offense was superior.

They also share what I believe to be a similar situation. They both were made starting SG when a better option was on the roster. In Houston's case Sprewell. Instead, Spree was made to play the 3, having to guard bigger players.

I would agree with you that IQ needed more seasoning, if we didnt see him avg 20pts plus a game as a starting PG and SG. If IQ needs anything IMO its more seasoning as a starter and closer.

I agree that IQ is in the second unit to punch it up, so to speak. But Grimes has been making a case that the starting SG spot needs another look.

Also correct that IQ looks like a likely candidate to be moved. Maybe for some frontcourt help. I'm skeptical that it will put us over the top, if Grimes still has no confidence in his ability to use his dribble.

crazy how durable Allan was in his Career. The one 50 game season in the midst was the strike short year. Other than that he had a remarkable run. 4 years he played 82 games. one of them with Detroit. He other seasons he played 81, 78,77,....... His last two was 50 then 20 which is why we often think his durability was awful. It was not, it was expensive! 7 of his 9 years he did quite well!! Spree was here 5 of those years. The ultimate "disgruntled" star!!!!! Funny thing, he became that again when he was moved to Minny!

Feel like this board really doesn't understand the adjective "durable".

This board? I believe it goes beyond this board. Durability was an underrated measurement.

In today's game where managing minutes is the new thing. Keeps players healthy while increasing their longevity. Whether that true or not is a separate debate.

These guys are walking millionaires so their health becomes a much higher priority, which includes preventative maintenance, which means the days of playing all 82 games will become a thing of the past.

Players are now taking off not because of durability, but preventative maintenance (especially back to back games).

A label players like Kat (with low durability) can hide under which helps his value (Kat has been solid so far btw). And listening to Wolves feed, Kat and Rudy have special plays and offensive sets that allows them the space they need to operate and impact the game. That subtle changes in the offense is why they are on a nice winning streak at home. Not sure if Kat or the Wolves want to entertain those trade rumors anymore, until someone give's them an offer they can't refuse.

blkexec wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:H20 had an incredible fundamental foot work and the ability to create space off the dribble. He was silky smooth and graceful
Grimes has fast feet and quick delivery.
Other than some physical similarities I don’t see the similarities.

My take with IQ on the second units is they still want him to create which is not his strong suit quite yet. WIth the staring unit he gets put into better shooting positions. From that aspect playing with the first unit makes sense. Thus, he finishes strong with that unit. But, the goal is to get Grimes to improve. both IQ and certainly grimes are not finished players yet. IQ is closer.

Our second unit is a potent weapon. It appears we are keeping that.
Grimes ability to guard either wing player is important and he defends bigger than IQ.

I agree, Let them continue to grow.

DDV is here in the event a trade evolves with IQ perhaps.

I would add that Grimes and Houston share a reluctance to put the ball in play. Mostly spot up shooters. Grimes D was better, and of course Houston's offense was superior.

They also share what I believe to be a similar situation. They both were made starting SG when a better option was on the roster. In Houston's case Sprewell. Instead, Spree was made to play the 3, having to guard bigger players.

I would agree with you that IQ needed more seasoning, if we didnt see him avg 20pts plus a game as a starting PG and SG. If IQ needs anything IMO its more seasoning as a starter and closer.

I agree that IQ is in the second unit to punch it up, so to speak. But Grimes has been making a case that the starting SG spot needs another look.

Also correct that IQ looks like a likely candidate to be moved. Maybe for some frontcourt help. I'm skeptical that it will put us over the top, if Grimes still has no confidence in his ability to use his dribble.

crazy how durable Allan was in his Career. The one 50 game season in the midst was the strike short year. Other than that he had a remarkable run. 4 years he played 82 games. one of them with Detroit. He other seasons he played 81, 78,77,....... His last two was 50 then 20 which is why we often think his durability was awful. It was not, it was expensive! 7 of his 9 years he did quite well!! Spree was here 5 of those years. The ultimate "disgruntled" star!!!!! Funny thing, he became that again when he was moved to Minny!

Feel like this board really doesn't understand the adjective "durable".

This board? I believe it goes beyond this board. Durability was an underrated measurement stat.

In today's game where managing minutes is the new thing. Keeps players healthy while increasing their longevity. Whether that true or not is a separate debate.

These guys are walking millionaires so their health becomes a much higher priority, which includes preventative maintenance, which means the days of playing all 82 games will become a thing of the past.

Players are now taking off not because of durability, but preventative maintenance (especially back to back games).

A label players like Kat (with low durability) can hide under which helps his value (Kat has been solid so far btw). And listening to Wolves feed, Kat and Rudy have special plays and offensive sets that allows them the space they need to operate and impact the game. That subtle changes in the offense is why they are on a nice winning streak at home. Not sure if Kat or the Wolves want to entertain those trade rumors anymore, until someone give's them an offer they can't refuse.

Grimes 1 of 4 last night.
That's your starting SG.
He needs to take s seat for a while.

Panos wrote:Grimes 1 of 4 last night.
That's your starting SG.
He needs to take s seat for a while.

minus 20.

I know going against Butler will do that. I haven't watched all of the game yet.

Grimes is a nice player - might be better off playing with IQ- who on any other team would be starting.

IQ should be getting 35 minutes. We should get a forward for the rotation instead of one of DDV or Grimes. Get a bench forward and play either Grimes or DDV unless match ups dictate otherwise

Panos wrote:Grimes 1 of 4 last night.
That's your starting SG.
He needs to take s seat for a while.

Sure looks that way. I joked about Deuce playing like "Frank:Part Deux" because of his lack of aggression. But McBride came back with a handle.

I hate to say it, because Ive been a big fan of Grimes. But he's the Knick right now who reminds me the most of Frank. With a better 3pt shot. Still too timid on offense going on his third season. Not good enough to start.

Thoughts on Grimes, Fournier and picks for Jerami grant ? He’s a big wing who has become an elite 3pt shooter. Too old for Portland but only 29. Can start at SF (RJ slides to SG) but can play some backup PF as well. Makes us better right ? He’s like 80% of Anunoby.

I wouldn’t be in a rush to move him.

Moving him to the bench will open up his offense and maybe get some urgency into his offense. Thibs puts guys in their roles. Obi last year just hung out on the 3 point line, IHart wasn’t getting his touches last year to pass the ball, etc.

Grimes needs to realize he can take people off the dribble at will and create.

DDV is better for the starters because he’s constantly moving and is a willing passer so he prevents stagnation.

But, Grimes you need Vs Miami / Boston / Bucks

Knixkik wrote:Thoughts on Grimes, Fournier and picks for Jerami grant ? He’s a big wing who has become an elite 3pt shooter. Too old for Portland but only 29. Can start at SF (RJ slides to SG) but can play some backup PF as well. Makes us better right ? He’s like 80% of Anunoby.

I would do this in a heartbeat, but I doubt Portland would. They might well get a better deal from other teams. He's their leading scorer right now.

You might have to include IQ to make it work for them. I don't know if that would need to be IQ & Grimes- but would it matter?

I know Fish had flagged Grant as a great player for us to target. He would help a lot.

Can’t move grimes to the bench because it would impact player morale. You can simply leave him as a starter and increase DDVs minutes behind him as needed. Right now Grimes is an eyesore in the lineup though for sure. He’s not interested in shooting and is a good but not yet great defender to become a mainstay regardless of the offense. I continue to think that is the position in our lineup to upgrade, either by a star like Mitchell or a more traditional 3&D like Casuro to upgrade slightly. If the Knicks can’t add a star player, they can continue to maintain a good offense built around Brunson, Randle, Barrett, Quickley, and Mitch’s offensive rebounding, but move for a guy like Caruso and become a top 3 defensive team in the entire league.