Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dbn123's avatar

Kris, huzzah! That was a great piece. It put a lot into perspective including why Thibs, despite what was evident to everyone, would not start (or play 30m or more) the third best player on the Knicks. And Phil, you make a very good point, although one that I’m not sure I agree with. Thibs was never going to start Quick or play him more than 25m per game.

However, Thibs is not going to be the Knicks coach forever, in fact, he just turned 65.

While Phil’s point is quite generous and almost holy, a franchise in sports must maximize its assets if it will ever grow to be a championship-contending team. Quick might have been doomed to leave the Knicks but if Thibs played him 30m or more a night and/or started him, perhaps the Knicks would have received a lot more back in the trade.

By now, I’m sure anyone reading this can tell I loved watching Quickley play. His terrific shooting, and awesome defense were second and third to his best quality and that’s the exuberance he plays with. The happiness you can feel when he and his teammates are doing well. And the very clear unselfishness he played with.

I know I’m in the minority, at least amongst Knick fans, but I’m not so sure the Knicks made a good trade. OG is a terrific player but nowhere near a star. He will never be more than the fourth or fifth best player on a championship-type team.

Of course, he is a great defender and a pretty good 3pt shooter. But other than that, his offense is tremendously limited.

Quick on the other hand is going to be a superstar or just under in the next couple of years. I am quite sure -- that unless the Knicks win the title over the next 1-2 seasons (unlikely) Knick fans will look back and say “that’s all we could get for Quickley?”

Expand full comment
Mikep@mepressman.com's avatar

Solid Johnathan. Article by your guest outstanding.

Expand full comment
26 more comments...

No posts