franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
I'll be honest, I liked what Cam Payne brought for the price, but he calls his number a bit too much for his capabilities. I think I like both Kolek and Delon better behind JB, to help get others involved more. Delon Wright provided a steady hand and scrappy defense and gave room for Mikal and OG to shine. Cam's running down and quick 3's drive me a little crazy.
Panos wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
I'll be honest, I liked what Cam Payne brought for the price, but he calls his number a bit too much for his capabilities. I think I like both Kolek and Delon better behind JB, to help get others involved more. Delon Wright provided a steady hand and scrappy defense and gave room for Mikal and OG to shine. Cam's running down and quick 3's drive me a little crazy.
I love how quickly Cam gets the ball across the half court line. It's maddening how long JB takes like every possession, 8.2 seconds just to get started with the offense.
And yes, Cam has the quickest trigger on his shot.
Panos wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
I'll be honest, I liked what Cam Payne brought for the price, but he calls his number a bit too much for his capabilities. I think I like both Kolek and Delon better behind JB, to help get others involved more. Delon Wright provided a steady hand and scrappy defense and gave room for Mikal and OG to shine. Cam's running down and quick 3's drive me a little crazy.
Cam Payne is what you get when you need to plug a roster hole and you spent all your chips already. I have no problem with the approach. We spent on KAT/Bridges/OG and it if takes a year to build up the bench so be it.
SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Shamet is as good as you can get for that price point. 28 years old. Plays hard. 38% career shooter from 3. He looked GREAT in the preseason before hurting his shoulder.
There seems to be an assumption from Franco that the right mix of players on the roster exists to win every game, it's just a case of Thibs not being able to find the right combo.
martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
fishmike wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Shamet is as good as you can get for that price point. 28 years old. Plays hard. 38% career shooter from 3. He looked GREAT in the preseason before hurting his shoulder.There seems to be an assumption from Franco that the right mix of players on the roster exists to win every game, it's just a case of Thibs not being able to find the right combo.
Not at all. I'm simply arguing the same thing others have, that Thibs over plays guys.
I'm totally willing to accept the argument that maybe Thibs sticking with Shamet is going to pay off and we'll be able to depend on him to help during the playoffs.
But, just as likely is he will score under 10 points in the 4 games that Boston is going to take to wipe the floor with us!
franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Shamet is as good as you can get for that price point. 28 years old. Plays hard. 38% career shooter from 3. He looked GREAT in the preseason before hurting his shoulder.There seems to be an assumption from Franco that the right mix of players on the roster exists to win every game, it's just a case of Thibs not being able to find the right combo.
Not at all. I'm simply arguing the same thing others have, that Thibs over plays guys.
I'm totally willing to accept the argument that maybe Thibs sticking with Shamet is going to pay off and we'll be able to depend on him to help during the playoffs.
But, just as likely is he will score under 10 points in the 4 games that Boston is going to take to wipe the floor with us!
except there is never an argument... all the data shows it's the right thing to do. They are having career years, finishing strong and part of the best starting 5 in the league. Somehow for some reason this must be wrong, but you or the minutes police never come up with a reason why. I mean Gustav said Kolek could be Jeremy Lin but Thibs has him stuck. It's amazing the the unicorns Thibs refuses to play (spoiler! its cause they are not good)
Do Josh/OG/Mikal look tired?
franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
Kolek has played in 38 games this year.
franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
Couple things and I think you are misunderstanding me.
I tend to think NBA players can learn how to swim by being tossed into the deep end.
Shamet has been horrible, and if you went back in time, removed him from the roster, and hypnotized Thibs to play Dadiet, would our situation be worse? Or might we have gotten Dadiet to develop by trial by fire?
franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
Couple things and I think you are misunderstanding me.
I tend to think NBA players can learn how to swim by being tossed into the deep end.
Shamet has been horrible, and if you went back in time, removed him from the roster, and hypnotized Thibs to play Dadiet, would our situation be worse? Or might we have gotten Dadiet to develop by trial by fire?
literally dude you are not "saying" anything
fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
Couple things and I think you are misunderstanding me.
I tend to think NBA players can learn how to swim by being tossed into the deep end.
Shamet has been horrible, and if you went back in time, removed him from the roster, and hypnotized Thibs to play Dadiet, would our situation be worse? Or might we have gotten Dadiet to develop by trial by fire?
literally dude you are not "saying" anything
sorry - a thought experiment. Too much nuance for your brain?
franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
Couple things and I think you are misunderstanding me.
I tend to think NBA players can learn how to swim by being tossed into the deep end.
Shamet has been horrible, and if you went back in time, removed him from the roster, and hypnotized Thibs to play Dadiet, would our situation be worse? Or might we have gotten Dadiet to develop by trial by fire?
No they usually do not, especially when they are not ready physically. It’s why you rarely see rookies in playoff lineups. You aren’t really operating in reality land, just hope and pray that something sticks to the wall with a side of Shamet to distract from the real guts of it.
Trial by fire is not a method of development unless you have the right opportunity; typically that’s a physically mature player with elite talent in a well defined role that he and team are both ready for. A playoff team that needs to gel and learn how to work together is not it.
martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
Couple things and I think you are misunderstanding me.
I tend to think NBA players can learn how to swim by being tossed into the deep end.
Shamet has been horrible, and if you went back in time, removed him from the roster, and hypnotized Thibs to play Dadiet, would our situation be worse? Or might we have gotten Dadiet to develop by trial by fire?
No they usually do not, especially when they are not ready physically. It’s why you rarely see rookies in playoff lineups. You aren’t really operating in reality land, just hope and pray that something sticks to the wall with a side of Shamet to distract from the real guts of it.
Trial by fire is not a method of development unless you have the right opportunity; typically that’s a physically mature player with elite talent in a well defined role that he and team are both ready for. A playoff team that needs to gel and learn how to work together is not it.
Like Ryan Dunn on Denver? with 47 wins. Ryan Dunn 67 games, 18.1 minutes at age 22.
Or Jaylen Wells - 74 games for Memphis 25 minutes and age 21.
Why is it that Thibs can do no wrong.
The record is outstanding, but he is not perfect.
If we can't offer criticism, I guess it's just Trumpland for us!
franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
Couple things and I think you are misunderstanding me.
I tend to think NBA players can learn how to swim by being tossed into the deep end.
Shamet has been horrible, and if you went back in time, removed him from the roster, and hypnotized Thibs to play Dadiet, would our situation be worse? Or might we have gotten Dadiet to develop by trial by fire?
No they usually do not, especially when they are not ready physically. It’s why you rarely see rookies in playoff lineups. You aren’t really operating in reality land, just hope and pray that something sticks to the wall with a side of Shamet to distract from the real guts of it.
Trial by fire is not a method of development unless you have the right opportunity; typically that’s a physically mature player with elite talent in a well defined role that he and team are both ready for. A playoff team that needs to gel and learn how to work together is not it.
Like Ryan Dunn on Denver? with 47 wins. Ryan Dunn 67 games, 18.1 minutes at age 22.
Or Jaylen Wells - 74 games for Memphis 25 minutes and age 21.
Why is it that Thibs can do no wrong.
The record is outstanding, but he is not perfect.
If we can't offer criticism, I guess it's just Trumpland for us!
Dadiet is near youngest in league and not physically the same as someone like Dunn. Why you think they should be treated similarly? Dunn has like 1 thing going for him that he was ready to do.
Dadiet is 19. He is not yet dominating the GLeague. Why do you think scrap minutes are better when the rest of the rotation is also trying to learn how to work?
I’m not saying Thibs could do no wrong, you are. I’m saying there are better options and other things to consider and you have promptly ignored them. Why?
Did the same route negatively affect Deuce or did he clean up what he needed to do to ultimately succeed?
Thibs literally has nothing to do with what I am saying.
For $3mm per year, I can't think of a player who is more capable of changing the tide of the game as Cam Payne. He isn't gonna do it every night, but its league min salary. Cam can change the pace, hit some 3's and change momentum and he's done it a lot. I don't think we could have expected anymore from a league min player.
I think with Shamet its not about should we have played Dadiet. If you recall Thibs gave Dadiet minutes early in the year. Dadiet just isn't ready for the NBA right now and that was part of the calculus of drafting him. Not a big deal. He signed below slot, he's 19. We have time with him. We took him because we were willing to gamble on upside knowing he may not contribute right away. We got a more NBA ready guy later in McCullar.
The Shamet decision was really Shamet vs. Warren. We may have chosen wrong. That said no one else signed Warren. But Warren's issue was staying healthy and he did for the whole GLeague season. We may have been better off with Warren, but we could only afford one. Instead we went with Ryan for a 2 way and then Shamet once he was healthy. If we signed Warren, there was no way to afford Shamet till that March 1 date, and he probably would have signed elsewhere.
martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
Couple things and I think you are misunderstanding me.
I tend to think NBA players can learn how to swim by being tossed into the deep end.
Shamet has been horrible, and if you went back in time, removed him from the roster, and hypnotized Thibs to play Dadiet, would our situation be worse? Or might we have gotten Dadiet to develop by trial by fire?
No they usually do not, especially when they are not ready physically. It’s why you rarely see rookies in playoff lineups. You aren’t really operating in reality land, just hope and pray that something sticks to the wall with a side of Shamet to distract from the real guts of it.
Trial by fire is not a method of development unless you have the right opportunity; typically that’s a physically mature player with elite talent in a well defined role that he and team are both ready for. A playoff team that needs to gel and learn how to work together is not it.
Like Ryan Dunn on Denver? with 47 wins. Ryan Dunn 67 games, 18.1 minutes at age 22.
Or Jaylen Wells - 74 games for Memphis 25 minutes and age 21.
Why is it that Thibs can do no wrong.
The record is outstanding, but he is not perfect.
If we can't offer criticism, I guess it's just Trumpland for us!
Dadiet is near youngest in league and not physically the same as someone like Dunn. Why you think they should be treated similarly? Dunn has like 1 thing going for him that he was ready to do.
Dadiet is 19. He is not yet dominating the GLeague. Why do you think scrap minutes are better when the rest of the rotation is also trying to learn how to work?
By
I’m not saying Thibs could do no wrong, you are. I’m saying there are better options and other things to consider and you have promptly ignored them. Why?
Did the same route negatively affect Deuce or did he clean up what he needed to do to ultimately succeed?
Thibs literally has nothing to do with what I am saying.
How can we tell about Deuce? We would have to run an experiment involving a multi-verse where in one, Duece is tossed out day 1.
Zaccharie Risacher is 19 and playing big minutes.
I am not arguing Thibs should have played Dadiet - my point is Shamet has been pretty rough and Dadiet could have produced similar production with the upside that maybe he reaches his peak development sooner. Again, you learn by doing not watching.
franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:martin wrote:franco12 wrote:SergioNYK wrote:franco12 wrote:fishmike wrote:Knicks are wildly different with a real bench. Mitch/Precious/Sham/Kolek held it down and did some things.
Don't forget Wright.
And it took injuries, some, to force Thibs hand to actually play Kolek.
Where was Kolek supposed to play? Payne has played very role in his role and you cannot play them together. Kolek over Shamet wouldn't work either cause we need someone off the bench who can shoot and defend some wings. I don't get where and over who you want Kolek to play. He's a second round rookie. His time will come.
Yes. Everything you said is true. I'm not saying Kolek should be averaging 20 minutes a night or that he should have played every game.
But, we've had our shares of blowouts or games where the starters have struggled running the offense. It would not have been terrible for Kolek to have gotten a wee bit more time until now.
And honestly, outside of a few games, Shamet has been a disaster. Would Dadiet have been that much worse?
At what cost? Dadiet seems to be doing just fine putting in the GLeague work.
Cost? I mean, who knows, maybe if Dadiet had gotten all the minutes Shamet got, he would be better right now than Shamet - that is a mighty low bar.
I don't believe that, but I look at other teams and they play guys big minutes who are as young as Dadiet.
Didn't we talk about Ryan Dunn? I mean, Denver picked him 3 spots after Dadiet and he has played 67 games, playing 18 mins per. He is putting up better #s than Shamet- again, super low bar.
And are you talking about lost victories? Because again, we've had our share of stinkers and the starters are all playing high 30 minutes, up to 40.
You really don't want to develop young players, right? Your idea is to have Dadiet ready for garbage time? That's how you envision development? We are talking about 3+ games over the past 2 months that may or may not coincide with a GLeague opportunity? To play upwards of 5-10 garbage minutes?
Cause that's the reality, right? You do understand that?
Do you think that is worthwhile or makes sense?
Couple things and I think you are misunderstanding me.
I tend to think NBA players can learn how to swim by being tossed into the deep end.
Shamet has been horrible, and if you went back in time, removed him from the roster, and hypnotized Thibs to play Dadiet, would our situation be worse? Or might we have gotten Dadiet to develop by trial by fire?
No they usually do not, especially when they are not ready physically. It’s why you rarely see rookies in playoff lineups. You aren’t really operating in reality land, just hope and pray that something sticks to the wall with a side of Shamet to distract from the real guts of it.
Trial by fire is not a method of development unless you have the right opportunity; typically that’s a physically mature player with elite talent in a well defined role that he and team are both ready for. A playoff team that needs to gel and learn how to work together is not it.
Like Ryan Dunn on Denver? with 47 wins. Ryan Dunn 67 games, 18.1 minutes at age 22.
Or Jaylen Wells - 74 games for Memphis 25 minutes and age 21.
Why is it that Thibs can do no wrong.
The record is outstanding, but he is not perfect.
If we can't offer criticism, I guess it's just Trumpland for us!
Dadiet is near youngest in league and not physically the same as someone like Dunn. Why you think they should be treated similarly? Dunn has like 1 thing going for him that he was ready to do.
Dadiet is 19. He is not yet dominating the GLeague. Why do you think scrap minutes are better when the rest of the rotation is also trying to learn how to work?
By
I’m not saying Thibs could do no wrong, you are. I’m saying there are better options and other things to consider and you have promptly ignored them. Why?
Did the same route negatively affect Deuce or did he clean up what he needed to do to ultimately succeed?
Thibs literally has nothing to do with what I am saying.
How can we tell about Deuce? We would have to run an experiment involving a multi-verse where in one, Duece is tossed out day 1.
Zaccharie Risacher is 19 and playing big minutes.
I am not arguing Thibs should have played Dadiet - my point is Shamet has been pretty rough and Dadiet could have produced similar production with the upside that maybe he reaches his peak development sooner. Again, you learn by doing not watching.
yeah lets use the #1 pick on a sub .500 team as an example. There's some nuances for ya
I think Franco's thought experiment is making us all a bit dumber
