[WOJ] Knicks Extend Hart for 4/81

[Clyde_Style]

The problem I have with the team construction is that they are passing on cheaper talent (draft), while paying the premium for guys who are just decent to good. Like Hart is a nice player, but is he worth 4x as much as Caleb Martin (3 years $20 million)? Hart got outplayed by Strus who was making $1.8 million at the time, so it's already happened where someone making a fraction of what he makes outplayed him. The problem with guys like Hart & DDV is that the ceiling is pretty low and you will run into instances where there's a guy who makes 1/2 as much having a greater impact on a series.

The only way these type of deals make sense is if Hart and DDV ultimately end up as starters, where they'd have a chance to outplay their contracts. Hart has zero shot of being worth that money as a bench player, you can try and talk yourself into it, but the reality is that when you get into the playoffs there will be some random Bruce Brown type guy who is on a value deal or someone on a rookie deal that is absolutely killing your high priced role player.

We currently have 3 guys on the team who outplay their contracts, which is Grimes, Brunson and for the time being IQ. We've also painted ourselves into a corner where the guys we'd need to trade are pretty much RJ, Grimes and IQ + a boatload of picks for this mythical top 10 player. At which point they'd have to be the right fit with Brunson, because he is really the player that matters most on the team. The team build approach they're using puts a low ceiling on your team, and you need a hailmary type trade, which isn't out there.

And now Strus is making about halfway between Donte D and Hart but for another team.

Eventually decent players get paid.

Miami will likely replace his production, but not every team is Miami.

I get it. Value guys are nice but they eventually get paid. It's not a given that each team replaces them cheaply each time.

Knicks probably overreached a little to retain guys in pursuit of some stability but it happens.

Gee. I wish we could get back to 6 years ago. Those were GREAT teams.

Continuity breeds success when the talent grows up together. Starting over every year with another crop of rookies doesn't help you. At some point you have to decide if you have good players and pay them or start all over again.

And nobody thought Brunson was this good. We got a star from another team dumb enough to let him walk. One of the guys we retain could be another Brunson for us. Instead of being the Mavs and letting IQ walk, pay him and see what happens.

If a Top five player is available we've got the ability to trade and still have a solid roster to support them. That was always the play.

The advantage is you can still become a contender whether that trade happens or not. Our talent has lots of room to get better.

[Oscirus]

if haliburton was a knick, Nedleeds would be bitching about him too.

[DrCoach]

I guess I just don't see us as really any better in a meaningful way than the Pacers lets say. But they have a better chance of having a top 15 player and lower salary by $30 million or so. Neither team can make the finals, but neither team will miss the playoffs. We have better older role players like Hart vs. McConnell. But they just picked 8th in the draft and we traded our draft away.

Comparing our best players

1 - Brunson / Haliburton (push? obviously as a franchise you'd prefer Haliburton on age)
2 - Turner / Randle (Turner universally considered better, certainly in a modern NBA, better contract, a bit younger)
3 - Hield / RJ (?) (Hield does everything better than RJ and has a good contract)
4 - IQ / Bruce Brown? Push
5 - Mitch / better than any next best Pacer

My point is their 2 best players are better than ours and they are younger. You can shoot a load over the second round vs the first round but I just don't get it, if I was 17 years old or something I might GAF. I'd rather just be the Pacers.

Randle is two time all nba and All star but you say Turner is universally better?… SMH

Turner the better defender by a mile, if you're bringing All Star games to the table as proof we aren't going to get anywhere. No team in the league save those with top 5 centers would want Randle over Turner.

Heild does everything better than RJ? SMH

Besides play in New York, mean mug and sit out the last game to preserve his 20 per game what does RJ do better? I'll take anything. But I'm sure it's this year it'll happen for him.



Anything? Besides shoot a bunch of bad shots and miss RJ does absolutely nothing better than Buddy Hield, in fact he does most things at a demonstrably worse level. And now we have a PG so that excuse is gone.

Halliburton is backing up Brunson on Team USA

That's the advanced metric we've been waiting for. Brunson is great, but Haliburton is better now and younger. It's not close and besides Knicks homers nobody thinks otherwise.

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/nbas-top-50-players-in-2022-23-season-giannis-jokic-luka-battle-for-no-1-lebron-slips-out-of-top-10/



Besides being older and starting on the World Cup team what does Brunson do better? Because Haliburton actually passes ... Brunson shoots more. Brunson is good, Haliburton is younger and better. He's a top 20 player right now.

I said ALL STAR and TWO TIME ALL NBA

That means the coaches, fans and Sports writers dont agree with you.

RJ is better at being 6’7 , 8 years younger and a starter in the playoffs while Heild plays off the bench against bench players

Brunson shoots better and WINS Better. #twotime NCAA Champ and led avg team to 2nd rd against higher seeded team.

World cup Coach agrees wih me, thats why hes starting and i promise he will be finishing

[nedleeds]

I said ALL STAR and TWO TIME ALL NBA

That means the coaches, fans and Sports writers dont agree with you.

RJ is better at being 6’7 , 8 years younger and a starter in the playoffs while Heild plays off the bench against bench players

Brunson shoots better and WINS Better. #twotime NCAA Champ and led avg team to 2nd rd against higher seeded team.

World cup Coach agrees wih me, thats why hes starting and i promise he will be finishing

That's true. The fans do vote, you got me there. If All Star games matter why was Haliburton an All-Star and Brunson not? Seems weird.

RJ is better at playing minutes, I'll concede that.

Brunson shoots better at what? Pool? I posted their shooting numbers Haliburton has a higher true shooting, 62.4% for 59.7%. You'd have more credibility just saying he's a Knick and I like him better. I like Brunson. But he's younger, the same argument you use for RJ? Does it apply here? Or just to Knicks?

Brunson led us to the 2nd round against a slightly higher seed. We were the 5, Cleveland the 4. Then we lost to a lower seed, the 8th seed versus our 5th seed. So does that make it a worse loss?

[nedleeds]

if haliburton was a knick, Nedleeds would be bitching about him too.

I'll be bitching until we have a team with a chance to make the finals in the next 3 years. Right now, that's about 0%.

[DrCoach]

I said ALL STAR and TWO TIME ALL NBA

That means the coaches, fans and Sports writers dont agree with you.

RJ is better at being 6’7 , 8 years younger and a starter in the playoffs while Heild plays off the bench against bench players

Brunson shoots better and WINS Better. #twotime NCAA Champ and led avg team to 2nd rd against higher seeded team.

World cup Coach agrees wih me, thats why hes starting and i promise he will be finishing

That's true. The fans do vote, you got me there. If All Star games matter why was Haliburton an All-Star and Brunson not? Seems weird.

RJ is better at playing minutes, I'll concede that.

Brunson shoots better at what? Pool? I posted their shooting numbers Haliburton has a higher true shooting, 62.4% for 59.7%. You'd have more credibility just saying he's a Knick and I like him better. I like Brunson. But he's younger, the same argument you use for RJ? Does it apply here? Or just to Knicks?

Brunson led us to the 2nd round against a slightly higher seed. We were the 5, Cleveland the 4. Then we lost to a lower seed, the 8th seed versus our 5th seed. So does that make it a worse loss?

Id respect your point if you didn't cherry pick your biased arguement

[DrCoach]

if haliburton was a knick, Nedleeds would be bitching about him too.

Yeah hes one of those guys thats makes biased points in a vacuum to try and sound level headed

[nedleeds]

I said ALL STAR and TWO TIME ALL NBA

That means the coaches, fans and Sports writers dont agree with you.

RJ is better at being 6’7 , 8 years younger and a starter in the playoffs while Heild plays off the bench against bench players

Brunson shoots better and WINS Better. #twotime NCAA Champ and led avg team to 2nd rd against higher seeded team.

World cup Coach agrees wih me, thats why hes starting and i promise he will be finishing

That's true. The fans do vote, you got me there. If All Star games matter why was Haliburton an All-Star and Brunson not? Seems weird.

RJ is better at playing minutes, I'll concede that.

Brunson shoots better at what? Pool? I posted their shooting numbers Haliburton has a higher true shooting, 62.4% for 59.7%. You'd have more credibility just saying he's a Knick and I like him better. I like Brunson. But he's younger, the same argument you use for RJ? Does it apply here? Or just to Knicks?

Brunson led us to the 2nd round against a slightly higher seed. We were the 5, Cleveland the 4. Then we lost to a lower seed, the 8th seed versus our 5th seed. So does that make it a worse loss?

Id respect your point if you didn't cherry pick your biased arguement

You literally cite age and all star appearances for Knicks as a strength and ignore them in the counter factual. You are a cherry orchard overlord.

Age is good for RJ, no matter for Haliburton
Shooting matters for Brunson, doesn't for RJ (our shooting guard) because ... playoffs?
All Star, good for Randle, not important for Haliburton

[Chanel Bomber]

if haliburton was a knick, Nedleeds would be bitching about him too.

I'll be bitching until we have a team with a chance to make the finals in the next 3 years. Right now, that's about 0%.

It really depends on Brunson's career arc and the moves the Knicks are able to make.

As currently constructed, the Knicks have a 1% chance. But they do theoretically have some assets (though not as rich a trove most Knicks fans make it out to be) to make a deal for another difference-maker.

I think they have about a 5% chance of making the Finals within the next 3 seasons. It will take a major move.

Haliburton has superstar potential and he was the Harden trade of his generation that the Knicks needed to go hard for. They passed on a golden opportunity to acquire a star for cheap (not even mentioning the fact they passed on him in the draft). Hopefully, Brunson's trajectory makes it a lesser pill to swallow, though they could have formed arguably the best backcourt in the NBA together.

[KnicksGadfly]

if haliburton was a knick, Nedleeds would be bitching about him too.

I'll be bitching until we have a team with a chance to make the finals in the next 3 years. Right now, that's about 0%.

It really depends on Brunson's career arc and the moves the Knicks are able to make.

As currently constructed, the Knicks have a 1% chance. But they do theoretically have some assets (though not as rich a trove most Knicks fans make it out to be) to make a deal for another difference-maker.

I think they have about a 5% chance of making the Finals within the next 3 seasons. It will take a major move.

Haliburton has superstar potential and he was the Harden trade of his generation that the Knicks needed to go hard for. They passed on a golden opportunity to acquire a star for cheap (not even mentioning the fact they passed on him in the draft). Hopefully, Brunson's trajectory makes it a lesser pill to swallow, though they could have formed arguably the best backcourt in the NBA together.

Should have picked Hali instead of nepotism Obi

[Clyde_Style]

if haliburton was a knick, Nedleeds would be bitching about him too.

I'll be bitching until we have a team with a chance to make the finals in the next 3 years. Right now, that's about 0%.

It really depends on Brunson's career arc and the moves the Knicks are able to make.

As currently constructed, the Knicks have a 1% chance. But they do theoretically have some assets (though not as rich a trove most Knicks fans make it out to be) to make a deal for another difference-maker.

I think they have about a 5% chance of making the Finals within the next 3 seasons. It will take a major move.

Haliburton has superstar potential and he was the Harden trade of his generation that the Knicks needed to go hard for. They passed on a golden opportunity to acquire a star for cheap (not even mentioning the fact they passed on him in the draft). Hopefully, Brunson's trajectory makes it a lesser pill to swallow, though they could have formed arguably the best backcourt in the NBA together.

None of us and none of the paid commentators out there are very good at predicting who will make the finals.

Prior to last season, nobody had us going to the 2nd round. Nobody knew how good Brunson was. And a lot still depends on how good Brunson becomes. But other players on our squad could blossom this season and carry us to the top of our division or conference. And which club is healthiest is often an unpredictable factor and our depth may play into that too.

Once you're good enough to be Top 4 in your conference you always have a shot at making the finals.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

The problem I have with the team construction is that they are passing on cheaper talent (draft), while paying the premium for guys who are just decent to good. Like Hart is a nice player, but is he worth 4x as much as Caleb Martin (3 years $20 million)? Hart got outplayed by Strus who was making $1.8 million at the time, so it's already happened where someone making a fraction of what he makes outplayed him. The problem with guys like Hart & DDV is that the ceiling is pretty low and you will run into instances where there's a guy who makes 1/2 as much having a greater impact on a series.

The only way these type of deals make sense is if Hart and DDV ultimately end up as starters, where they'd have a chance to outplay their contracts. Hart has zero shot of being worth that money as a bench player, you can try and talk yourself into it, but the reality is that when you get into the playoffs there will be some random Bruce Brown type guy who is on a value deal or someone on a rookie deal that is absolutely killing your high priced role player.

We currently have 3 guys on the team who outplay their contracts, which is Grimes, Brunson and for the time being IQ. We've also painted ourselves into a corner where the guys we'd need to trade are pretty much RJ, Grimes and IQ + a boatload of picks for this mythical top 10 player. At which point they'd have to be the right fit with Brunson, because he is really the player that matters most on the team. The team build approach they're using puts a low ceiling on your team, and you need a hailmary type trade, which isn't out there.

And now Strus is making about halfway between Donte D and Hart but for another team.

Eventually decent players get paid.

Miami will likely replace his production, but not every team is Miami.

I get it. Value guys are nice but they eventually get paid. It's not a given that each team replaces them cheaply each time.

Knicks probably overreached a little to retain guys in pursuit of some stability but it happens.

Gee. I wish we could get back to 6 years ago. Those were GREAT teams.

Yes, Strus got overpaid and will no longer be able to outplay his contract which is part of the reason Miami let him go.


You don't need to be Miami to see where the league is going either, spending money on backups is a no-no, that has been the case for years now. But the direction we're going isn't the route the good teams are taking, we're prioritizing FA signings of role players, while other better teams are prioritizing finding value guys and the draft. You spend money on starters, not guys coming off your bench.

This approach already blew up in their face once before when they handed out all those contracts to guys who immediately weren't worth the money - Kemba, F0urnier, Burks and Noel. There is always a chance now that Hart gets thoroughly outplayed by someone who makes a fraction of what he makes. Nevermind the fact we have a player who shrinks in the playoffs as part of our core in Randle.

[thebuzzardman]

if haliburton was a knick, Nedleeds would be bitching about him too.

I'll be bitching until we have a team with a chance to make the finals in the next 3 years. Right now, that's about 0%.

It really depends on Brunson's career arc and the moves the Knicks are able to make.

As currently constructed, the Knicks have a 1% chance. But they do theoretically have some assets (though not as rich a trove most Knicks fans make it out to be) to make a deal for another difference-maker.

I think they have about a 5% chance of making the Finals within the next 3 seasons. It will take a major move.

Haliburton has superstar potential and he was the Harden trade of his generation that the Knicks needed to go hard for. They passed on a golden opportunity to acquire a star for cheap (not even mentioning the fact they passed on him in the draft). Hopefully, Brunson's trajectory makes it a lesser pill to swallow, though they could have formed arguably the best backcourt in the NBA together.

The Knicks blew it on drafting Haliburton.
Who knows if they even had the capital to acquire Haliburton, in terms of what Sactown wanted.
I agree they should have tried to get in there.
Even though the Knicks f*cked up royally by not drafting Haliburton, they did get Brunson, by all objective standards an excellent player.

However, save your keystrokes. Until the Knicks tank for 5-7 years, only draft players and then after that only compete for a championship and win, Nedleeds won't be happy with a single thing the Knicks do.

[thebuzzardman]

The problem I have with the team construction is that they are passing on cheaper talent (draft), while paying the premium for guys who are just decent to good. Like Hart is a nice player, but is he worth 4x as much as Caleb Martin (3 years $20 million)? Hart got outplayed by Strus who was making $1.8 million at the time, so it's already happened where someone making a fraction of what he makes outplayed him. The problem with guys like Hart & DDV is that the ceiling is pretty low and you will run into instances where there's a guy who makes 1/2 as much having a greater impact on a series.

The only way these type of deals make sense is if Hart and DDV ultimately end up as starters, where they'd have a chance to outplay their contracts. Hart has zero shot of being worth that money as a bench player, you can try and talk yourself into it, but the reality is that when you get into the playoffs there will be some random Bruce Brown type guy who is on a value deal or someone on a rookie deal that is absolutely killing your high priced role player.

We currently have 3 guys on the team who outplay their contracts, which is Grimes, Brunson and for the time being IQ. We've also painted ourselves into a corner where the guys we'd need to trade are pretty much RJ, Grimes and IQ + a boatload of picks for this mythical top 10 player. At which point they'd have to be the right fit with Brunson, because he is really the player that matters most on the team. The team build approach they're using puts a low ceiling on your team, and you need a hailmary type trade, which isn't out there.

And now Strus is making about halfway between Donte D and Hart but for another team.

Eventually decent players get paid.

Miami will likely replace his production, but not every team is Miami.

I get it. Value guys are nice but they eventually get paid. It's not a given that each team replaces them cheaply each time.

Knicks probably overreached a little to retain guys in pursuit of some stability but it happens.

Gee. I wish we could get back to 6 years ago. Those were GREAT teams.

Yes, Strus got overpaid and will no longer be able to outplay his contract which is part of the reason Miami let him go.


You don't need to be Miami to see where the league is going either, spending money on backups is a no-no, that has been the case for years now. But the direction we're going isn't the route the good teams are taking, we're prioritizing FA signings of role players, while other better teams are prioritizing finding value guys and the draft. You spend money on starters, not guys coming off your bench.

This approach already blew up in their face once before when they handed out all those contracts to guys who immediately weren't worth the money - Kemba, F0urnier, Burks and Noel. There is always a chance now that Hart gets thoroughly outplayed by someone who makes a fraction of what he makes. Nevermind the fact we have a player who shrinks in the playoffs as part of our core in Randle.

Hart/Donte/iShart are better players on cheaper deals than Kemba, Fournier or Noel.

Burks was solid for his price. Of course we can go over the well tread ground that when they resigned him, they should have either passed or upped the $ and done a 1+ with a team option for the 2nd year, so they could have avoided shedding picks to make room for Brunson. Oh well. That was a over a year ago.

I'm not that worried the Knicks sign FAs.
I'm pretty confident Brock Aller can figure out the trends in the league, though of course since the Knicks are a FO by committee he can get drowned out on decisions.

I figure the Knicks can pivot off this in a couple of years if the NBA turns into the NFL, with a couple of hugely paid players and nearly the rest of the players viewed a fungible JAGS. Should be great.

Hopefully they institute a hard cap while they are at it so the players can really get f*cked over but at least I'll see REAL player movement and an environment where all but the most hopelessly f*cked up teams can go from bad to good in 3 or 4 years.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

The problem I have with the team construction is that they are passing on cheaper talent (draft), while paying the premium for guys who are just decent to good. Like Hart is a nice player, but is he worth 4x as much as Caleb Martin (3 years $20 million)? Hart got outplayed by Strus who was making $1.8 million at the time, so it's already happened where someone making a fraction of what he makes outplayed him. The problem with guys like Hart & DDV is that the ceiling is pretty low and you will run into instances where there's a guy who makes 1/2 as much having a greater impact on a series.

The only way these type of deals make sense is if Hart and DDV ultimately end up as starters, where they'd have a chance to outplay their contracts. Hart has zero shot of being worth that money as a bench player, you can try and talk yourself into it, but the reality is that when you get into the playoffs there will be some random Bruce Brown type guy who is on a value deal or someone on a rookie deal that is absolutely killing your high priced role player.

We currently have 3 guys on the team who outplay their contracts, which is Grimes, Brunson and for the time being IQ. We've also painted ourselves into a corner where the guys we'd need to trade are pretty much RJ, Grimes and IQ + a boatload of picks for this mythical top 10 player. At which point they'd have to be the right fit with Brunson, because he is really the player that matters most on the team. The team build approach they're using puts a low ceiling on your team, and you need a hailmary type trade, which isn't out there.

And now Strus is making about halfway between Donte D and Hart but for another team.

Eventually decent players get paid.

Miami will likely replace his production, but not every team is Miami.

I get it. Value guys are nice but they eventually get paid. It's not a given that each team replaces them cheaply each time.

Knicks probably overreached a little to retain guys in pursuit of some stability but it happens.

Gee. I wish we could get back to 6 years ago. Those were GREAT teams.

Continuity breeds success when the talent grows up together. Starting over every year with another crop of rookies doesn't help you. At some point you have to decide if you have good players and pay them or start all over again.

And nobody thought Brunson was this good. We got a star from another team dumb enough to let him walk. One of the guys we retain could be another Brunson for us. Instead of being the Mavs and letting IQ walk, pay him and see what happens.

If a Top five player is available we've got the ability to trade and still have a solid roster to support them. That was always the play.

The advantage is you can still become a contender whether that trade happens or not. Our talent has lots of room to get better.

Continuity is great if you're a contender, we're not that. We're a team that still needs high level talent, and just plugging away praying someone asks for a trade here isn't a sound approach, especially not when other teams can put together better trade packages. We're in a race against time here, which is Brunson's extension, once he gets that building the team becomes even more difficult.

The most logical thing to do with IQ is to trade him for someone else that is young that fits a more pressing need on our team. Just signing him and seeing what happens is how you end up with a guy making starter money on your bench while not producing like a starter. Just signing him and seeing what happens is what the Warriors did with Jordan Poole, sometimes that can backfire. There is no future in which he starts with a healthy Brunson on the team, if Brunson is hurt sure he starts, but then we're **** either way because IQ can't attack a defense like Jalen can.

[thebuzzardman]

And now Strus is making about halfway between Donte D and Hart but for another team.

Eventually decent players get paid.

Miami will likely replace his production, but not every team is Miami.

I get it. Value guys are nice but they eventually get paid. It's not a given that each team replaces them cheaply each time.

Knicks probably overreached a little to retain guys in pursuit of some stability but it happens.

Gee. I wish we could get back to 6 years ago. Those were GREAT teams.

Continuity breeds success when the talent grows up together. Starting over every year with another crop of rookies doesn't help you. At some point you have to decide if you have good players and pay them or start all over again.

And nobody thought Brunson was this good. We got a star from another team dumb enough to let him walk. One of the guys we retain could be another Brunson for us. Instead of being the Mavs and letting IQ walk, pay him and see what happens.

If a Top five player is available we've got the ability to trade and still have a solid roster to support them. That was always the play.

The advantage is you can still become a contender whether that trade happens or not. Our talent has lots of room to get better.

Continuity is great if you're a contender, we're not that. We're a team that still needs high level talent, and just plugging away praying someone asks for a trade here isn't a sound approach, especially not when other teams can put together better trade packages. We're in a race against time here, which is Brunson's extension, once he gets that building the team becomes even more difficult.

The most logical thing to do with IQ is to trade him for someone else that is young that fits a more pressing need on our team. Just signing him and seeing what happens is how you end up with a guy making starter money on your bench while not producing like a starter. Just signing him and seeing what happens is what the Warriors did with Jordan Poole, sometimes that can backfire. There is no future in which he starts with a healthy Brunson on the team, if Brunson is hurt sure he starts, but then we're **** either way because IQ can't attack a defense like Jalen can.

I'm all for trading IQ.
They can trade RJ while they are it.

[Oscirus]

haliburtons in no way able to take over a game like brunson can. If we drafted haliburton, we would have been wasting his talent here just like oobi

[nedleeds]

I'll be bitching until we have a team with a chance to make the finals in the next 3 years. Right now, that's about 0%.

It really depends on Brunson's career arc and the moves the Knicks are able to make.

As currently constructed, the Knicks have a 1% chance. But they do theoretically have some assets (though not as rich a trove most Knicks fans make it out to be) to make a deal for another difference-maker.

I think they have about a 5% chance of making the Finals within the next 3 seasons. It will take a major move.

Haliburton has superstar potential and he was the Harden trade of his generation that the Knicks needed to go hard for. They passed on a golden opportunity to acquire a star for cheap (not even mentioning the fact they passed on him in the draft). Hopefully, Brunson's trajectory makes it a lesser pill to swallow, though they could have formed arguably the best backcourt in the NBA together.

The Knicks blew it on drafting Haliburton.
Who knows if they even had the capital to acquire Haliburton, in terms of what Sactown wanted.
I agree they should have tried to get in there.
Even though the Knicks f*cked up royally by not drafting Haliburton, they did get Brunson, by all objective standards an excellent player.

However, save your keystrokes. Until the Knicks tank for 5-7 years, only draft players and then after that only compete for a championship and win, Nedleeds won't be happy with a single thing the Knicks do.

Firing CAA might get a smile out of me, but yeah I'm not happy until we're back in the Finals.

[DrCoach]

That's true. The fans do vote, you got me there. If All Star games matter why was Haliburton an All-Star and Brunson not? Seems weird.

RJ is better at playing minutes, I'll concede that.

Brunson shoots better at what? Pool? I posted their shooting numbers Haliburton has a higher true shooting, 62.4% for 59.7%. You'd have more credibility just saying he's a Knick and I like him better. I like Brunson. But he's younger, the same argument you use for RJ? Does it apply here? Or just to Knicks?

Brunson led us to the 2nd round against a slightly higher seed. We were the 5, Cleveland the 4. Then we lost to a lower seed, the 8th seed versus our 5th seed. So does that make it a worse loss?

Id respect your point if you didn't cherry pick your biased arguement

You literally cite age and all star appearances for Knicks as a strength and ignore them in the counter factual. You are a cherry orchard overlord.

Age is good for RJ, no matter for Haliburton
Shooting matters for Brunson, doesn't for RJ (our shooting guard) because ... playoffs?
All Star, good for Randle, not important for Haliburton

Even your retort is full of cherries

Randle is a multiple AS AND Multiple All NBA as a comparison to TURNER whom you stated everyone thinks is better.

USA Coach has Brunson starting over Haliburton, Haliburton has done NOTHiNG in the playoffs

Brunson has TWO NCAA chips and is a winner

Thats why he is the captain

[nedleeds]

Id respect your point if you didn't cherry pick your biased arguement

You literally cite age and all star appearances for Knicks as a strength and ignore them in the counter factual. You are a cherry orchard overlord.

Age is good for RJ, no matter for Haliburton
Shooting matters for Brunson, doesn't for RJ (our shooting guard) because ... playoffs?
All Star, good for Randle, not important for Haliburton

Even your retort is full of cherries

Randle is a multiple AS AND Multiple All NBA as a comparison to TURNER whom you stated everyone thinks is better.

USA Coach has Brunson starting over Haliburton, Haliburton has done NOTHiNG in the playoffs

Brunson has TWO NCAA chips and is a winner

Thats why he is the captain

I forgot about the NCAA titles also. You're right.