Knicksfan wrote:martin wrote:Chandler wrote:i am going on record as saying iHart will disappoint in OKC. Not that I want that. I like the guy. But he will look more like a backup C with them and less like Joker-lite like he did with us.
I am with you.
The money would have always been there IMHO. iHart flat did not bet on himself. AOK to do that cause family first.
IMHO he could have been that guy for the Knicks in 2 years instead of a perennial backup who plays very very very well.
That’s the thing: he’s joining this team that is set with Chet as their cornerstone C. Don’t think this will work out for him in the long run, but we’ll see…
Maybe but after thinking about it he was going to be a platoon situation whether he was here or there. He probably would finish more games here than he will there but probably a 25 minute guy either way.
Knicks just can Fred Van Vleeted.
Knicksfan wrote:Clean wrote:
Can't believe people are trying to downplay his playmaking.
Not downplaying it, as it was significant. Just not buying this “sky is falling” reaction many have. We have options to sign another center and we’ll adjust to the new situation. JB and Randle are playmakers and the team will still be coached to pass the ball to the open man.
it should be downplayed. He's not going to have the ball in his hands the way he did last year because Randle will be back. IHart did a great job and really flourished but a lot of that was from opportunities that you HOPE are not there next year.
You are not running the ball through Hart in the post when Randle is on the floor and he's a high minutes guys on this team. IHart at $17mm would have been pretty good. With the way we are built we can use role players at the 5 and figure it out
martin wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:martin wrote:Honest question: Would any of you taken the $74M for 4 over the $87m for 3?I would have stayed in NY 100 out of 100 times.
Call me a miser, but I would take a $290K per year salary and live in Okla than take $185K to live in NY.
Have you lived in OKC?
No, but I live in Amsterdam. Similar sized city to OKC.
Clean wrote:
Can't believe people are trying to downplay his playmaking.
Playmaking from the center position is nice, but not essential. I think a semblance of a shot from beyond 4 feet of the basket is a lot more valuable than playmaking for a center. And I don't mean them iHart drop shots.
Front office finally figured out a way to get Thibs to play Randle at the 5 and have a five out attack!
It's the playmaking and space movement that the Knicks will miss.
ESOMKnicks wrote:martin wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:martin wrote:Honest question: Would any of you taken the $74M for 4 over the $87m for 3?I would have stayed in NY 100 out of 100 times.
Call me a miser, but I would take a $290K per year salary and live in Okla than take $185K to live in NY.
Have you lived in OKC?
No, but I live in Amsterdam. Similar sized city to OKC.
Oklahoma City, the Amsterdam of the middle of fucking nowhere America!
martin wrote:Chandler wrote:i am going on record as saying iHart will disappoint in OKC. Not that I want that. I like the guy. But he will look more like a backup C with them and less like Joker-lite like he did with us.
I am with you.
The money would have always been there IMHO. iHart flat did not bet on himself. AOK to do that cause family first.
IMHO he could have been that guy for the Knicks in 2 years instead of a perennial backup who plays very very very well.
I agree with this take - would have been nice to keep but we do great at finding gems out there.
martin wrote:Honest question: Would any of you taken the $74M for 4 over the $87m for 3?I would have stayed in NY 100 out of 100 times.
Me, 100 percent, and I guarantee anyone reading this they would do the same in his position. He can set up generational wealth per freaking quickly. He gets to be a key cog on the best regular season team in the league and a team that’s on the rise. I think once everyone puts down the koolaid they would say the same thing. If not then, maybe everyone would stop deluding themselves after they went home and talked to their wife
franco12 wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:martin wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:martin wrote:Honest question: Would any of you taken the $74M for 4 over the $87m for 3?I would have stayed in NY 100 out of 100 times.
Call me a miser, but I would take a $290K per year salary and live in Okla than take $185K to live in NY.
Have you lived in OKC?
No, but I live in Amsterdam. Similar sized city to OKC.
Oklahoma City, the Amsterdam of the middle of fucking nowhere America!
Or conversely, Amsterdam is the Oklahoma City of Europe.
SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:Honest question: Would any of you taken the $74M for 4 over the $87m for 3?I would have stayed in NY 100 out of 100 times.
Me, 100 percent, and I guarantee anyone reading this they would do the same in his position. He can set up generational wealth per freaking quickly. He gets to be a key cog on the best regular season team in the league and a team that's on the rise. I think once everyone puts down the koolaid they would say the same thing. If not then, maybe everyone would stop deluding themselves after they went home and talked to their wife
What might have kept iHart in NY was if the offer came from a cellar dweller, and not a contender. In OKC iHart gets paid with a decent shot at a ring.
martin wrote:It's the playmaking and space movement that the Knicks will miss.
Mitch creates vertical spacing that Ihart doesn't though.
Yeah this is a loss. I like Precious, but he is not a center.
Knicks will miss Ihart's size, rebounding, and passing. He fit this team perfectly.
Bridges made the Knicks take two steps forward but losing Ihart made the Knicks take a step back.
It also doesn't help that Mitch, his replacement is injury prone.
I don't have a specific name at the moment, but I would like to see the Knicks trade Mitch, Deuce, and possibly some low end draft capital on a good, durable center who has similar skill sets to Ihart.
Losing Ihart is not a move to just shrug off as no big deal. He was an important part of this team.
Teams don't think down the road too much when your trying to win now.
OKC had a hell of a season as did we.
Isiah was great and hope he succeeds. I Don't know how they plan on using him but will he disappoint?
Depends on what the goal is? Winning vs. Stats? The games will play it out, not letter grades.
The guy flat outplayed his contract and got a nice bag. He has earned it thru hard work and diligence.
Im disappointed but very happy for him. That can happen right? Sure it can.
Im sure our FO thought this through and we might not have a a clear view as to what they thinking.
Might not be this year.
The key to this all is Mitch. How is the foot? What is the prognosis of the foot holding up? What are the FO expectations for this year or beyond for him or the team. Due to HIPA I not seen his chart.
It m might be "This year will be really good, but the key is year two........."
We'll have fun. Trading Mitch does not really solve the whole equation.
Trade Randle the next thing???? We need a center. Portland just drafted its future.
Im not an Ayton kind of fan, but if he can go the way of the "Thibian" then his upside is still pretty good.
Just spitballing it out there. Nothing more.
I prefer we keep Jules and plug up the 5.
Garrett2010PSD wrote:Yeah this is a loss. I like Precious, but he is not a center.Knicks will miss Ihart's size, rebounding, and passing. He fit this team perfectly.
Bridges made the Knicks take two steps forward but losing Ihart made the Knicks take a step back.
It also doesn't help that Mitch, his replacement is injury prone.
I don't have a specific name at the moment, but I would like to see the Knicks trade Mitch, Deuce, and possibly some low end draft capital on a good, durable center who has similar skill sets to Ihart.
Losing Ihart is not a move to just shrug off as no big deal. He was an important part of this team.
I wouldnt want to trade Mitch for anything but another elite defender/rebounder. Easier to find another iHart than another Mitch. We need a backup good enough to hold the fort for those games Mitch will miss. We need Mitch for Embiid/ KP/ Jokic matchups.
SupremeCommander wrote:martin wrote:Honest question: Would any of you taken the $74M for 4 over the $87m for 3?I would have stayed in NY 100 out of 100 times.
Me, 100 percent, and I guarantee anyone reading this they would do the same in his position. He can set up generational wealth per freaking quickly. He gets to be a key cog on the best regular season team in the league and a team that's on the rise. I think once everyone puts down the koolaid they would say the same thing. If not then, maybe everyone would stop deluding themselves after they went home and talked to their wife
Everyone has a different definition of generational wealth.
Is there an official number?
nycericanguy wrote:martin wrote:It's the playmaking and space movement that the Knicks will miss.
Mitch creates vertical spacing that Ihart doesn't though.
That literally doesn't matter much though. Otherwise Mitch would be considered good offensively cause he is one of the best at the vertical stuff and it hasn't enhanced his offense.
