Knicksfan wrote:martin wrote:
And the plot thickens
Thibs looks like Bates-Diop's agent. 
Glad we're adding depth to the wing position. Long season, and post-season
BigDaddyG wrote:martin wrote:Clean wrote:Now we know why we signed those end of the bench guys even though Thibs was never going to play them. They had this figured out from last season. Only mistake was giving iHart a 2 year deal.
Wonder why they only went for 2 years without year 3 option.
I'm guessing that was on iHart. He might've decided to gamble on himself and the gamble paid off. Might also be that the Knicks thought there was no way iHart was going to get $30M a year at the end of the deal. I can say with confidence that there was no way iHart saw himself get $30M a year when he signed with us.
Isiah was not that good. Maybe we paid him the most?
Or
Gave him an opportunity. year one was not that great. He came on this year and really put it all together.
Also, OKC thought enough of him to "VanVleet Ihart with that contract!
It sucks, but not sure it could have been foreseen. If so, we'd have given him 50 over 5! Hindsight is great!
Nalod wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:martin wrote:Clean wrote:Now we know why we signed those end of the bench guys even though Thibs was never going to play them. They had this figured out from last season. Only mistake was giving iHart a 2 year deal.
Wonder why they only went for 2 years without year 3 option.
I'm guessing that was on iHart. He might've decided to gamble on himself and the gamble paid off. Might also be that the Knicks thought there was no way iHart was going to get $30M a year at the end of the deal. I can say with confidence that there was no way iHart saw himself get $30M a year when he signed with us.
Isiah was not that good. Maybe we paid him the most?
Or
Gave him an opportunity. year one was not that great. He came on this year and really put it all together.
Also, OKC thought enough of him to "VanVleet Ihart with that contract!
It sucks, but not sure it could have been foreseen. If so, we'd have given him 50 over 5! Hindsight is great!
Why do people keep saying iHart was not that good? He might not have had raw stats but he was an advance stat goldenboy. The problem with him is he did not get much time. Clipper fans knew what they had but the Clippers team starphucked and wanted a bigger name in John Wall. Clipper fans were pissed they picked Wall over him. I specifically remember reading Clipper fans telling Knicks fans on reddit how most people don't understand how good he was after signing him. After adjusting to how Thibs needs his bigs to play his advance stats held true except the shooting. His advance stats were so good a guy who called Jokic to be a star before he actually became one on NBA reddit also said iHart would be a good player based on the same advance stats he used to say it about Jokic.
Edit: found one posts
https://www.reddit.com/r/Hartenstein/com...
Clear, he was so good all he got was a two year 16mm deal from us.
You found a reddit post. Im sure there many positive things on him, and some negative. Find the positive a few years after and run with that. Did I say there was NOBODY THAT LIKED HIM? I never said he sucked. I said he was a 8mm back up for us who really took off. Should we have paid him more and longer? Of course we should have. But go back to the moment an justify it then. Maybe yes, maybe no.
Zeus was great!
Clean wrote:Nalod wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:martin wrote:Clean wrote:Now we know why we signed those end of the bench guys even though Thibs was never going to play them. They had this figured out from last season. Only mistake was giving iHart a 2 year deal.
Wonder why they only went for 2 years without year 3 option.
I'm guessing that was on iHart. He might've decided to gamble on himself and the gamble paid off. Might also be that the Knicks thought there was no way iHart was going to get $30M a year at the end of the deal. I can say with confidence that there was no way iHart saw himself get $30M a year when he signed with us.
Isiah was not that good. Maybe we paid him the most?
Or
Gave him an opportunity. year one was not that great. He came on this year and really put it all together.
Also, OKC thought enough of him to "VanVleet Ihart with that contract!
It sucks, but not sure it could have been foreseen. If so, we'd have given him 50 over 5! Hindsight is great!
Why do people keep saying iHart was not that good? He might not have had raw stats but he was an advance stat goldenboy. The problem with him is he did not get much time. Clipper fans knew what they had but the Clippers team starphucked and wanted a bigger name in John Wall. Clipper fans were pissed they picked Wall over him. I specifically remember reading Clipper fans telling Knicks fans on reddit how most people don't understand how good he was after signing him. After adjusting to how Thibs needs his bigs to play his advance stats held true except the shooting. His advance stats were so good a guy who called Jokic to be a star before he actually became one on NBA reddit also said iHart would be a good player based on the same advance stats he used to say it about Jokic.
Edit: found one posts
https://www.reddit.com/r/Hartenstein/com...
Hartenstein is a good role player he just isn’t $87 million good. Plus we still have Mitch on the roster.
Rookie wrote:GustavBahler wrote:Knicksfan wrote:martin wrote:
And the plot thickens
Thibs looks like Bates-Diop's agent.
Glad we're adding depth to the wing position. Long season, and post-season
The new Shake Milton?
We can only dream..
Seriously, I like the fact that the FO is adding more live bodies, never know how the season will play out. And maybe Bates-Diop's familiarity with Thibs (and vice versa) will pay dividends at some point during the season.
Will probably be playing in the G-league for a while, not a bad thing.McKellar too. Work on finishing strong and improving his 3pt shooting.
Clean wrote:Philc1 wrote:Hartenstein is a good role player he just isn’t $87 million good. Plus we still have Mitch on the roster.
I totally agree.
His advanced stats were interesting. If you were looking to find a player with OffReb%. Ast %, +/-, solid eFG, good blocks, BoxOuts, iHart is kind of your guy. One might argue that NYK center's stats are also deflated by their role, so that to pick off a NYK center, you might expect an increase in "money stats". I think his willingness to pass out of the post is the big money stat that will make or break him in OKC. Will be interesting to see how they use him.
EwingsGlass wrote:Clean wrote:Philc1 wrote:Hartenstein is a good role player he just isn’t $87 million good. Plus we still have Mitch on the roster.
I totally agree.
His advanced stats were interesting. If you were looking to find a player with OffReb%. Ast %, +/-, solid eFG, good blocks, BoxOuts, iHart is kind of your guy. One might argue that NYK center's stats are also deflated by their role, so that to pick off a NYK center, you might expect an increase in "money stats". I think his willingness to pass out of the post is the big money stat that will make or break him in OKC. Will be interesting to see how they use him.
For me, iHart has already and always showed the post passing with NY. General health and 3point shooting will be iHart's next development steps. Polishes those 2 and he is an OKC lifer or very very rich at his next destination afterwards.
Vibes are gonna be so good next year
At the same time that you really have no absolute control over the development of a player, you also cannot miss this badly with other, multiple, incredible options right after your pick.
For me, that's just past the point of bad luck and quickly into the territory of colossal failure.
This is the kind of thing that sets teams back by years IMHO. Invest heavily in draft; relationships with players, other FO's; and development plans within your team dynamic. Those are the things that are not salary cap cost prohibitive and do it wisely.
martin wrote:At the same time that you really have no absolute control over the development of a player, you also cannot miss this badly with other, multiple, incredible options right after your pick.For me, that's just past the point of bad luck and quickly into the territory of colossal failure.
This is the kind of thing that sets teams back by years IMHO. Invest heavily in draft; relationships with players, other FO's; and development plans within your team dynamic. Those are the things that are not salary cap cost prohibitive and do it wisely.
His college season didn't warrant him being taken over Mikal, Miles, SGA or Porter Jr(granted this was purely do to injury concern). So it had to be based purely on perceived potential off workouts and not actual game film.
6'9, 7'ft wing span and had a FG% of 44%. That was always a red flag for me going into that draft. Per 40mins he averaged 19.7pts 6.7rebs, 1.8ast, 1stl, 2.8tos and shot 34% from 3.
There wasn't anything about his game that was a staple. Wasn't an high end shooter, rebounder, defender, playmaker.
Mikal seemed lower ceiling type, but you knew his staple would be 3 & D. SGA's film he looked like the game just came easy and natural to him. Real smooth looking game in college. Miles was the most proven producer.
newyorknewyork wrote:martin wrote:At the same time that you really have no absolute control over the development of a player, you also cannot miss this badly with other, multiple, incredible options right after your pick.For me, that's just past the point of bad luck and quickly into the territory of colossal failure.
This is the kind of thing that sets teams back by years IMHO. Invest heavily in draft; relationships with players, other FO's; and development plans within your team dynamic. Those are the things that are not salary cap cost prohibitive and do it wisely.
His college season didn't warrant him being taken over Mikal, Miles, SGA or Porter Jr(granted this was purely do to injury concern). So it had to be based purely on perceived potential off workouts and not actual game film.
6'9, 7'ft wing span and had a FG% of 44%. That was always a red flag for me going into that draft. Per 40mins he averaged 19.7pts 6.7rebs, 1.8ast, 1stl, 2.8tos and shot 34% from 3.
There wasn't anything about his game that was a staple. Wasn't an high end shooter, rebounder, defender, playmaker.
Mikal seemed lower ceiling type, but you knew his staple would be 3 & D. SGA's film he looked like the game just came easy and natural to him. Real smooth looking game in college. Miles was the most proven producer.
I would say that the current FO learned the same Obi lesson very quickly.
Mikal is moving this guy to the bench. He shot 40% from 3 for the season and averaged 18ppg on 42% shooting from downtown as a starter for 35mpg while playing pretty good defense.
This is straight bonkers.
A few teams wiffed on that draft! Bagley? Bamba?
Had no idea he was there. He always keeps a low profile.
martin wrote:At the same time that you really have no absolute control over the development of a player, you also cannot miss this badly with other, multiple, incredible options right after your pick.For me, that's just past the point of bad luck and quickly into the territory of colossal failure.
This is the kind of thing that sets teams back by years IMHO. Invest heavily in draft; relationships with players, other FO's; and development plans within your team dynamic. Those are the things that are not salary cap cost prohibitive and do it wisely.
The Knox pick was driven by the FO wanting to keep Fizdale happy. He was a hot commodity at the time. A young coach who was courted by several teams, and chose the Knicks.
https://nypost.com/2018/06/24/david-fizd...
Tarrytown is now Fort Knox because Fizdale fell in love with his three-on-three workout versus Miles Bridges in an empty Westchester gym 15 days ago. Fizdale lobbied brass to overlook Mikal Bridges’ ability in the clutch and leadership on the biggest stages the past three seasons on two NCAA-title-winning title teams
