Knicks · Kolek has no bag (page 9)

plays like shit: "Knicks FO fucked up, soneone "I" wanted plays better".
Or, Knicks considered 4 guys, 2 played better, "We still fucked up".
Some fans always get it right.

jaydh wrote:cool highlight real.

reality is, when he's on the floor our offense plays 4 on 5 where the other team always has a help defender playing off Hart

I mean the dude averaged 13.6pts, 9.6rebs, 5.9ast, 1.5stls on 52% shooting, 33% from 3, 77.6% from FT, 37.6mins per game over 77games on a 51 win team.

While those are very very strong counting stats. Lets look at his analytics.
ORTG: 125
DRTG: 112
TS%: .611
OWS: 5.4
DWS: 3.8
WS: 9.2
WS/48: .153
OBPM: 1.1
DBPM: 1.8
BPM: 2.8
VORP: 3.6
REB%: 14.6
AST%: 20.7
USG%: 15.3
TO%: 15.5

Dude had a monster season overall and greatly contributed to our seasons success given the fact that he was 3rd on the team in WS/48 and 1st in Vorp while playing the 2nd most mins(Mikal)and 2nd most games(Mikal). Also so much for the his defense wasn't good narative.

His showing against the Pacers wasn't great. Yet he averaged 12-9-6ast-1.5stls vs Pistons on 50%fg & 50% 3pt in 37mins. 14.5-8-4.5 on 46%fg 38% 3pt in 37mins vs Boston.

Apparently we need to throw all that away and past playoff heroics and trash on Hart due to the Pacers series which he had 4 out of 6 games with double digit rebounds. Smh Knick fans.

After MDA made it hot to have more 3pt shooters. Over the last 15 years teams have usually had at least one player in the starting lineup that didn't hit threes. Mostly a C or PF. This shouldn't have staggard the offense the way it did. Hart is simply being used as a surface level scapegoat for the deeper fundemental issue with last years starting lineup. Which was lack of rim protection within the starting lineup, inability to maximize OG defensively regarding matchups due to playing him at PF. Lack of effective ball movement overall for a more fluid offense. Interesting how Ihart made that aspet look better with less shooters due to his passing IQ out of the high post. While also offering strong rim protection and rebounding.

Nalod wrote:Sign him for one year or two, with a player option and he plays great:
"Knicks FO fucked up not locking him up".

plays like shit: "Knicks FO fucked up, soneone "I" wanted plays better".
Or, Knicks considered 4 guys, 2 played better, "We still fucked up".
Some fans always get it right.

Fellow Knicks fan friend made a good point about Simmons that he probably won't play much within the rotation. So with the role he would probably play you want a guy in that role to be an incredible locker room guy. That doesn't seem to be Simmons strong suite.

His play making and defensive chops within the frontcourt does have a lot of appeal though.

newyorknewyork wrote:

jaydh wrote:cool highlight real.

reality is, when he's on the floor our offense plays 4 on 5 where the other team always has a help defender playing off Hart

I mean the dude averaged 13.6pts, 9.6rebs, 5.9ast, 1.5stls on 52% shooting, 33% from 3, 77.6% from FT, 37.6mins per game over 77games on a 51 win team.

While those are very very strong counting stats. Lets look at his analytics.
ORTG: 125
DRTG: 112
TS%: .611
OWS: 5.4
DWS: 3.8
WS: 9.2
WS/48: .153
OBPM: 1.1
DBPM: 1.8
BPM: 2.8
VORP: 3.6
REB%: 14.6
AST%: 20.7
USG%: 15.3
TO%: 15.5

Dude had a monster season overall and greatly contributed to our seasons success given the fact that he was 3rd on the team in WS/48 and 1st in Vorp while playing the 2nd most mins(Mikal)and 2nd most games(Mikal). Also so much for the his defense wasn't good narative.

His showing against the Pacers wasn't great. Yet he averaged 12-9-6ast-1.5stls vs Pistons on 50%fg & 50% 3pt in 37mins. 14.5-8-4.5 on 46%fg 38% 3pt in 37mins vs Boston.

Apparently we need to throw all that away and past playoff heroics and trash on Hart due to the Pacers series which he had 4 out of 6 games with double digit rebounds. Smh Knick fans.

After MDA made it hot to have more 3pt shooters. Over the last 15 years teams have usually had at least one player in the starting lineup that didn't hit threes. Mostly a C or PF. This shouldn't have staggard the offense the way it did. Hart is simply being used as a surface level scapegoat for the deeper fundemental issue with last years starting lineup. Which was lack of rim protection within the starting lineup, inability to maximize OG defensively regarding matchups due to playing him at PF. Lack of effective ball movement overall for a more fluid offense. Interesting how Ihart made that aspet look better with less shooters due to his passing IQ out of the high post. While also offering strong rim protection and rebounding.

Jokic had a 125 offensive rating per NBA.com, you sure Hart did too? i'll take the other #s with a grain of salt.

is it true or not that teams play off him and easily double our other players as a result? OG and Bridges play out of position because he starts. how many times does he shrug in confusion out there or just bolt down the court with the ball only to throw it away because he gets confused on what to do.. maybe its just because i watch the playoffs more than reg season but it wasn't a good look

newyorknewyork wrote:

jaydh wrote:cool highlight real.

reality is, when he's on the floor our offense plays 4 on 5 where the other team always has a help defender playing off Hart

I mean the dude averaged 13.6pts, 9.6rebs, 5.9ast, 1.5stls on 52% shooting, 33% from 3, 77.6% from FT, 37.6mins per game over 77games on a 51 win team.

While those are very very strong counting stats. Lets look at his analytics.
ORTG: 125
DRTG: 112
TS%: .611
OWS: 5.4
DWS: 3.8
WS: 9.2
WS/48: .153
OBPM: 1.1
DBPM: 1.8
BPM: 2.8
VORP: 3.6
REB%: 14.6
AST%: 20.7
USG%: 15.3
TO%: 15.5

Dude had a monster season overall and greatly contributed to our seasons success given the fact that he was 3rd on the team in WS/48 and 1st in Vorp while playing the 2nd most mins(Mikal)and 2nd most games(Mikal). Also so much for the his defense wasn't good narative.

His showing against the Pacers wasn't great. Yet he averaged 12-9-6ast-1.5stls vs Pistons on 50%fg & 50% 3pt in 37mins. 14.5-8-4.5 on 46%fg 38% 3pt in 37mins vs Boston.

Apparently we need to throw all that away and past playoff heroics and trash on Hart due to the Pacers series which he had 4 out of 6 games with double digit rebounds. Smh Knick fans.

After MDA made it hot to have more 3pt shooters. Over the last 15 years teams have usually had at least one player in the starting lineup that didn't hit threes. Mostly a C or PF. This shouldn't have staggard the offense the way it did. Hart is simply being used as a surface level scapegoat for the deeper fundemental issue with last years starting lineup. Which was lack of rim protection within the starting lineup, inability to maximize OG defensively regarding matchups due to playing him at PF. Lack of effective ball movement overall for a more fluid offense. Interesting how Ihart made that aspet look better with less shooters due to his passing IQ out of the high post. While also offering strong rim protection and rebounding.

MY eyes don't lie - Hart wasn't good last year.

He put up stats off high minutes/usage and his D was brutal ALL YEAR.

I'm pretty sure he had the worst on/off #s on entire team but can't confirm that because too lazy and incompetent myself.

If I knew Josh was a non-factor in the locker room (if we could trade him without causing an issue in the locker room) I'd trade him today for a solid defender who could handle/shoot with some size. Who I don't know.

If in fact Hart is critical to the teams chemistry (I have my doubts) and we need to keep him. New coach needs to drop his minutes significantly, get him out of the starting unit and most importantly needs to hold him accountable for stupid turn overs and poor effort defensively.

Hart defending at a high level and making good decisions with the ball --- I can live with his offensive limitations.

To me it all comes down to playing very good D and taking care of the ball --- when he does that like year 1 and 2 with us - he is a valuable bench player.

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:Sign him for one year or two, with a player option and he plays great:
"Knicks FO fucked up not locking him up".

plays like shit: "Knicks FO fucked up, soneone "I" wanted plays better".
Or, Knicks considered 4 guys, 2 played better, "We still fucked up".
Some fans always get it right.

Fellow Knicks fan friend made a good point about Simmons that he probably won't play much within the rotation. So with the role he would probably play you want a guy in that role to be an incredible locker room guy. That doesn't seem to be Simmons strong suite.

His play making and defensive chops within the frontcourt does have a lot of appeal though.

He's a tough call for me. 1) is he a good presence on the team - especially if he's on bench in street clothes much of the year? How much does his passive offensive game kill spacing?

On the other hand we know 1) he can defend 1-5 at a decent/intelligent level, 2) he can help push pace and relieve Jalen of some ball handling responsibility.

He's just a tough read -- I'd put much weight into what kind of condition Simmons is in. If he looks fully engaged in coming into season in awesome shape that could swing my vote. I tend to think he'd play more than most think simply because we have a vacuum on this team when it comes to competent ball handling, passing and offensive creativity.

jaydh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

jaydh wrote:cool highlight real.

reality is, when he's on the floor our offense plays 4 on 5 where the other team always has a help defender playing off Hart

I mean the dude averaged 13.6pts, 9.6rebs, 5.9ast, 1.5stls on 52% shooting, 33% from 3, 77.6% from FT, 37.6mins per game over 77games on a 51 win team.

While those are very very strong counting stats. Lets look at his analytics.
ORTG: 125
DRTG: 112
TS%: .611
OWS: 5.4
DWS: 3.8
WS: 9.2
WS/48: .153
OBPM: 1.1
DBPM: 1.8
BPM: 2.8
VORP: 3.6
REB%: 14.6
AST%: 20.7
USG%: 15.3
TO%: 15.5

Dude had a monster season overall and greatly contributed to our seasons success given the fact that he was 3rd on the team in WS/48 and 1st in Vorp while playing the 2nd most mins(Mikal)and 2nd most games(Mikal). Also so much for the his defense wasn't good narative.

His showing against the Pacers wasn't great. Yet he averaged 12-9-6ast-1.5stls vs Pistons on 50%fg & 50% 3pt in 37mins. 14.5-8-4.5 on 46%fg 38% 3pt in 37mins vs Boston.

Apparently we need to throw all that away and past playoff heroics and trash on Hart due to the Pacers series which he had 4 out of 6 games with double digit rebounds. Smh Knick fans.

After MDA made it hot to have more 3pt shooters. Over the last 15 years teams have usually had at least one player in the starting lineup that didn't hit threes. Mostly a C or PF. This shouldn't have staggard the offense the way it did. Hart is simply being used as a surface level scapegoat for the deeper fundemental issue with last years starting lineup. Which was lack of rim protection within the starting lineup, inability to maximize OG defensively regarding matchups due to playing him at PF. Lack of effective ball movement overall for a more fluid offense. Interesting how Ihart made that aspet look better with less shooters due to his passing IQ out of the high post. While also offering strong rim protection and rebounding.

Jokic had a 125 offensive rating per NBA.com, you sure Hart did too? i'll take the other #s with a grain of salt.

is it true or not that teams play off him and easily double our other players as a result? OG and Bridges play out of position because he starts. how many times does he shrug in confusion out there or just bolt down the court with the ball only to throw it away because he gets confused on what to do.. maybe its just because i watch the playoffs more than reg season but it wasn't a good look

He was bad and it wasn't just 1 or 2 things -- he simply had his head up his arss often and his effort was concentrated on putting up stats towards triple doubles that often were empty and influenced by high minutes/usage on the court.

U understand if Hart is a net negative who played 37mins for 77 games and playoffs Then that means this Knicks team without him should have been a 60 win team that steam rolled right over the the chip.

I def believe Hart should come off the bench in favor of Mitch though. Makes more sense overall to the makeup of the roster. Don't need to scapegoat Hart to come to that conclusion. I could point my finger at many grievances among the Knicks players. Mikal couldn't effectively eat Tim Hardaway Jrs lunch vs the Pistons and take him off the dribble. Missed a ton of quality looks from 3. KAT disappeared completely for games and allowed smaller players to d him up effectively while struggling defensively. OG has the worst hands in the NBA. Brunson struggles defensively, holds the ball to long and didn't create for others enough. Mitch struggles to hit FTs or shoot or create offense. Deuce missed to many quality looks from 3 and doesn't create enough offense to lead a bench.

newyorknewyork wrote:I mean you guys are telling me I should disregard all the facts showing Hart was a positive contributor on a 51 win team that went to the ECC because you are in your feelings about losing to the Pacers in the playoffs.

U understand if Hart is a net negative who played 37mins for 77 games and playoffs Then that means this Knicks team without him should have been a 60 win team that steam rolled right over the the chip.

I def believe Hart should come off the bench in favor of Mitch though. Makes more sense overall to the makeup of the roster. Don't need to scapegoat Hart to come to that conclusion. I could point my finger at many grievances among the Knicks players. Mikal couldn't effectively eat Tim Hardaway Jrs lunch vs the Pistons and take him off the dribble. Missed a ton of quality looks from 3. KAT disappeared completely for games and allowed smaller players to d him up effectively while struggling defensively. OG has the worst hands in the NBA. Brunson struggles defensively, holds the ball to long and didn't create for others enough. Mitch struggles to hit FTs or shoot or create offense. Deuce missed to many quality looks from 3 and doesn't create enough offense to lead a bench.

I’m not sure how the slander on hart potentially started but nobody is denying harts impact on this team. But for me, I prefer a shooter or Mitch instead of hart, due to the 5 and out culture of basketball now. Harts game is perfect as a 6 man making moment plays on both ends, off the bench.

One game in the playoffs, forget which one. Hart took over the offense and played point forward, pushing the tempo because Brunson wouldn’t or can’t. We won that game because of his playmaking.

Too much of the offense’s stagnation is being put on Hart instead of Brunson. Who has been remarkable for NY, but doesn’t think nearly enough about getting his teammates involved. Despite what the numbers say.

Hart might fit better on the bench. But it really comes down to what Brown does with Brunson in the offense. Players like Hart and Bridges should contribute more if JB is more willing to give up the ball.

LivingLegend wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

Nalod wrote:Sign him for one year or two, with a player option and he plays great:
"Knicks FO fucked up not locking him up".

plays like shit: "Knicks FO fucked up, soneone "I" wanted plays better".
Or, Knicks considered 4 guys, 2 played better, "We still fucked up".
Some fans always get it right.

Fellow Knicks fan friend made a good point about Simmons that he probably won't play much within the rotation. So with the role he would probably play you want a guy in that role to be an incredible locker room guy. That doesn't seem to be Simmons strong suite.

His play making and defensive chops within the frontcourt does have a lot of appeal though.

He's a tough call for me. 1) is he a good presence on the team - especially if he's on bench in street clothes much of the year? How much does his passive offensive game kill spacing?

On the other hand we know 1) he can defend 1-5 at a decent/intelligent level, 2) he can help push pace and relieve Jalen of some ball handling responsibility.

He's just a tough read -- I'd put much weight into what kind of condition Simmons is in. If he looks fully engaged in coming into season in awesome shape that could swing my vote. I tend to think he'd play more than most think simply because we have a vacuum on this team when it comes to competent ball handling, passing and offensive creativity.

Your vote is "Let me see how he is....". ITs a good question.
No doubt this kid got fucked and fucked himself over and back issuses not helped by stress/pressure. Super talented but with yoot things can com easy and read he was an entitled litts shit. Got into the vortex of a Kardasian and a super max contract and this kid likley (from what I have read as I don't know him) did not work on his game. Im slightly empathic but only because he is not a bad kid, just one really not built for the adversity that came with that money and fame. The dream comes true but that always don't bring contentment or a sense of joy. Family and friends can keep you up or pull you down.
But........
If he wants to be lost in a big city and keep focused on winning and redemption from the abyss maybe we a good spot. NY can crush a man but he really is at or near bottom. Nobody expects much from him. Get injured and waived, nobody would be shocked. Put him on a contract that makes sense for both. I dont' expect him to be a star but if he can go 65 games and make life hard for Mike brown to keep him out then we should take a chance.
I would imagine Nets/Clippers staff have much to say aobut his attitude and physical condition. Perhaps his theropist can speak more to his mental state than any of us. Kid looked miserable any time I seen him play. Simmons I doubt has many guaratee roles available. ON a losing team he could get minutes to show what he got. On a winning team he has to earn his place and stay healthy. He has been a mess for 4 years now. He turns 29 like tomorrow.
I'd say the odds are not good here but if we just using our imagination a bit maybe he defies the odds and is closer to being a productive professonal NBA player again? Get in a winning groove and this kid comes in a blocks a Giannis shot, race up the court and dunk it in traffic in the Garden and just once glare down Doc?
Or in Philly, get hacked on an "and one" by Embiid while booed and naile a 3 pt play and seal a win?
Fuck it, do it again in the garden, Dude standinig over embiid while he on ground?

blkexec wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:I mean you guys are telling me I should disregard all the facts showing Hart was a positive contributor on a 51 win team that went to the ECC because you are in your feelings about losing to the Pacers in the playoffs.

U understand if Hart is a net negative who played 37mins for 77 games and playoffs Then that means this Knicks team without him should have been a 60 win team that steam rolled right over the the chip.

I def believe Hart should come off the bench in favor of Mitch though. Makes more sense overall to the makeup of the roster. Don't need to scapegoat Hart to come to that conclusion. I could point my finger at many grievances among the Knicks players. Mikal couldn't effectively eat Tim Hardaway Jrs lunch vs the Pistons and take him off the dribble. Missed a ton of quality looks from 3. KAT disappeared completely for games and allowed smaller players to d him up effectively while struggling defensively. OG has the worst hands in the NBA. Brunson struggles defensively, holds the ball to long and didn't create for others enough. Mitch struggles to hit FTs or shoot or create offense. Deuce missed to many quality looks from 3 and doesn't create enough offense to lead a bench.

I’m not sure how the slander on hart potentially started but nobody is denying harts impact on this team. But for me, I prefer a shooter or Mitch instead of hart, due to the 5 and out culture of basketball now. Harts game is perfect as a 6 man making moment plays on both ends, off the bench.

I agree. Hart was the 5th option in the starting lineup. Being the 5th option your job is to find ways to contribute and be effective without having plays called for you with low usage. With that Hart averaged 14pts 10rebs 6ast 1.5stls. He effectively causes havoc as a 5th option role player for the most part. But it may just not be ideal for the players he plays with in the starting lineup.

We need the ability to slide OG between both forward spots effectively. And need KAT paired with someone who can protect the rim effectively. 5 out in for the starting lineup isn't going to solve all problems, unless that 5th piece is of the Jaren Jackson Jr, Miles Turner, Evan Mobley, Brock Lope mold.

newyorknewyork wrote:I mean you guys are telling me I should disregard all the facts showing Hart was a positive contributor on a 51 win team that went to the ECC because you are in your feelings about losing to the Pacers in the playoffs.

It was more than the pacer series. The pistons played off hart as well. I'm just not a fan of letting an opponent's player roam because they don't care if Hart shoots...most times he's not going to.

They have their positive attributes, and you hope they outweigh the negatives.

Some are more flawed than others. To the point that I don’t care how good they can be.

I’m not perfect either. I’m too handsome.

jaydh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:I mean you guys are telling me I should disregard all the facts showing Hart was a positive contributor on a 51 win team that went to the ECC because you are in your feelings about losing to the Pacers in the playoffs.

It was more than the pacer series. The pistons played off hart as well. I'm just not a fan of letting an opponent's player roam because they don't care if Hart shoots...most times he's not going to.

I agree;
But unfortunately;
It doesn’t matter where u put him;
He’s not shooting the 3……
#barz

But hart is better in a fast break system. With clarkson and deuce, hart will impact better off the bench. And it will not matter who’s playing off him.

But the starting unit runs more half court sets. That’s a problem for Josh. It’s up to Mike brown to see this and put Josh where he can succeed. Running with the second unit.

jaydh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:I mean you guys are telling me I should disregard all the facts showing Hart was a positive contributor on a 51 win team that went to the ECC because you are in your feelings about losing to the Pacers in the playoffs.

It was more than the pacer series. The pistons played off hart as well. I'm just not a fan of letting an opponent's player roam because they don't care if Hart shoots...most times he's not going to.

That's basketball, with that they leave themselves vulnerable in areas which we struggled to capitalize on forcing them to abandon. Majority of teams would have a big in paint to begin with & maybe a PF that can stretch it or vice versa. With Kat & OG we had a C & PF that could knock down threes effectively, which most teams don't have. Turner sagging off of Hart while Kat & OG stretch the paint equates to practically the same concept of spacing majroity of NBA teams have to deal with due to their C or PF not hitting threes like that. Offense was to stagnant to begin with which is why it was able to as effective as it was. Kat & Brunson had pure tunnel vision off drives. And everyone else just standing around the three point line.

In 2021 vs the Atlanta Hawks Nate McMillian hid Trey Young defensively on Reggie Bullock. Because though Bullock was a 40% three point shooter for the Knicks that season. He wasn't someone who could put the ball on the floor. So Knicks weren't able to attack Young they way they would like. Bullock averaged 8pts in 32mins with Trey Young guarding him for that playoff series even though he was a quality three point shooter...

LivingLegend wrote:

jaydh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

jaydh wrote:cool highlight real.

reality is, when he's on the floor our offense plays 4 on 5 where the other team always has a help defender playing off Hart

I mean the dude averaged 13.6pts, 9.6rebs, 5.9ast, 1.5stls on 52% shooting, 33% from 3, 77.6% from FT, 37.6mins per game over 77games on a 51 win team.

While those are very very strong counting stats. Lets look at his analytics.
ORTG: 125
DRTG: 112
TS%: .611
OWS: 5.4
DWS: 3.8
WS: 9.2
WS/48: .153
OBPM: 1.1
DBPM: 1.8
BPM: 2.8
VORP: 3.6
REB%: 14.6
AST%: 20.7
USG%: 15.3
TO%: 15.5

Dude had a monster season overall and greatly contributed to our seasons success given the fact that he was 3rd on the team in WS/48 and 1st in Vorp while playing the 2nd most mins(Mikal)and 2nd most games(Mikal). Also so much for the his defense wasn't good narative.

His showing against the Pacers wasn't great. Yet he averaged 12-9-6ast-1.5stls vs Pistons on 50%fg & 50% 3pt in 37mins. 14.5-8-4.5 on 46%fg 38% 3pt in 37mins vs Boston.

Apparently we need to throw all that away and past playoff heroics and trash on Hart due to the Pacers series which he had 4 out of 6 games with double digit rebounds. Smh Knick fans.

After MDA made it hot to have more 3pt shooters. Over the last 15 years teams have usually had at least one player in the starting lineup that didn't hit threes. Mostly a C or PF. This shouldn't have staggard the offense the way it did. Hart is simply being used as a surface level scapegoat for the deeper fundemental issue with last years starting lineup. Which was lack of rim protection within the starting lineup, inability to maximize OG defensively regarding matchups due to playing him at PF. Lack of effective ball movement overall for a more fluid offense. Interesting how Ihart made that aspet look better with less shooters due to his passing IQ out of the high post. While also offering strong rim protection and rebounding.

Jokic had a 125 offensive rating per NBA.com, you sure Hart did too? i'll take the other #s with a grain of salt.

is it true or not that teams play off him and easily double our other players as a result? OG and Bridges play out of position because he starts. how many times does he shrug in confusion out there or just bolt down the court with the ball only to throw it away because he gets confused on what to do.. maybe its just because i watch the playoffs more than reg season but it wasn't a good look

He was bad and it wasn't just 1 or 2 things -- he simply had his head up his arss often and his effort was concentrated on putting up stats towards triple doubles that often were empty and influenced by high minutes/usage on the court.

fishmike wrote:

LivingLegend wrote:

jaydh wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

jaydh wrote:cool highlight real.

reality is, when he's on the floor our offense plays 4 on 5 where the other team always has a help defender playing off Hart

I mean the dude averaged 13.6pts, 9.6rebs, 5.9ast, 1.5stls on 52% shooting, 33% from 3, 77.6% from FT, 37.6mins per game over 77games on a 51 win team.

While those are very very strong counting stats. Lets look at his analytics.
ORTG: 125
DRTG: 112
TS%: .611
OWS: 5.4
DWS: 3.8
WS: 9.2
WS/48: .153
OBPM: 1.1
DBPM: 1.8
BPM: 2.8
VORP: 3.6
REB%: 14.6
AST%: 20.7
USG%: 15.3
TO%: 15.5

Dude had a monster season overall and greatly contributed to our seasons success given the fact that he was 3rd on the team in WS/48 and 1st in Vorp while playing the 2nd most mins(Mikal)and 2nd most games(Mikal). Also so much for the his defense wasn't good narative.

His showing against the Pacers wasn't great. Yet he averaged 12-9-6ast-1.5stls vs Pistons on 50%fg & 50% 3pt in 37mins. 14.5-8-4.5 on 46%fg 38% 3pt in 37mins vs Boston.

Apparently we need to throw all that away and past playoff heroics and trash on Hart due to the Pacers series which he had 4 out of 6 games with double digit rebounds. Smh Knick fans.

After MDA made it hot to have more 3pt shooters. Over the last 15 years teams have usually had at least one player in the starting lineup that didn't hit threes. Mostly a C or PF. This shouldn't have staggard the offense the way it did. Hart is simply being used as a surface level scapegoat for the deeper fundemental issue with last years starting lineup. Which was lack of rim protection within the starting lineup, inability to maximize OG defensively regarding matchups due to playing him at PF. Lack of effective ball movement overall for a more fluid offense. Interesting how Ihart made that aspet look better with less shooters due to his passing IQ out of the high post. While also offering strong rim protection and rebounding.

Jokic had a 125 offensive rating per NBA.com, you sure Hart did too? i'll take the other #s with a grain of salt.

is it true or not that teams play off him and easily double our other players as a result? OG and Bridges play out of position because he starts. how many times does he shrug in confusion out there or just bolt down the court with the ball only to throw it away because he gets confused on what to do.. maybe its just because i watch the playoffs more than reg season but it wasn't a good look

He was bad and it wasn't just 1 or 2 things -- he simply had his head up his arss often and his effort was concentrated on putting up stats towards triple doubles that often were empty and influenced by high minutes/usage on the court.

you guys should go cuddle and talk about how bad Josh Hart is. Phucking Knick fans. Saying Josh Hart is out there collecting stats is the worst take I have heard. Just zero respect for a post like that. Just a terrible take. Nalod has better takes.

I just don't understand how breaking the alltime Knick record for triple doubles could in any view be "stat padding". BY definition, triple doubles affect multiple facets of the game. It's not like low efficiency shot chucking.