What about Mitch?

[8516knicks]

Mitch, is a decent back-up center in the NBA...he is NOT a starting center. When he is on the floor its a 4 on 5 offense all the time..can't make foul shots, no game in the paint unless rebound dunk or lob, fouls way too much, Hartenstein, give this team so much more..can do everything Mitch can't....glad to see Hartenstein proving that when he's on the floor..If and whenever Mitch comes back...he needs to go to the backup roll at center...LGK!!

At this moment in time, on this OG Knicks team, Ihart seems perfect. To be fair, we need to see what Mitch looks like with OG. But as of now I'm leaning Ihart - - possibly because of the strong recency bias of still being UNDEFEATED with OG!

[rajajackal]

rationally i'm ok with using mitch in a meaningful trade if we plan to pay ihart similar money. but based on what he's given us i also feel like he deserves a chance to bounce back from this injury in our uniform, even if his role changes

[3toheadmelo]

not even trying to annoy sham but i really do feel like ihart has been so much better for us lately. the fact that he has some offensive skills and can still rebound, defend at a high level is super valuable. if you have to move mitch in order to free up money to resign ihart i think you have to do it. mitch is just too injury prone to rely on anymore and i think offensively he holds us back.

[cgf]

not even trying to annoy sham but i really do feel like ihart has been so much better for us lately. the fact that he has some offensive skills and can still rebound, defend at a high level is super valuable. if you have to move mitch in order to free up money to resign ihart i think you have to do it. mitch is just too injury prone to rely on anymore and i think offensively he holds us back.

Luckily that's unlikely to be the case as we're limited in what we can offer IH to a # that shouldn't put us in the super-tax even if OG gets a 40M per deal and we flip Fournier for someone like Brogdon.

Just gotta hope IH loves being a knick and nobody offers him an insane deal that we wouldn't want to match even if we had his full bird rights.

[cgf]

rationally i'm ok with using mitch in a meaningful trade if we plan to pay ihart similar money. but based on what he's given us i also feel like he deserves a chance to bounce back from this injury in our uniform, even if his role changes

I might feel better about it if he's definitely ruled out for the season when he gets re-evaluated, but it'll still feel really dirty.

[Knicksfan1992]

Given what Hartenstein has showed so far it seems like our offense has just exploded when we were given a C who can do some stuff with the ball in his hands. It's opened up the paint for Randle a tad bit more. You can't foul Hartenstein either because he makes enough of his FT's to keep you honest and while Mitch is a better rebounder on the defensive end, he simply can't make the kinds of outlet passes Hartenstein can make that jumpstart our transition offense.

Mitch's last game was on 12/08.

The Knicks fast break points before that game was at 14 ppg. Which is respectable about league average.

Since that game the Knicks are at 16.8 fast break points per game which is top 10 in the league. An extra 2.8 easy points a game makes a real difference for an offense that generally relies on iso play.

With that being said, if Mitch had been here, then I don't think we suffer the defensive drop we had in December. That does need to be taken into account IMO. I legitimately think Mitch is an All-Defense calibre player when locked in. However Hartenstein is no slouch and when surrounded with other talented defensive players can anchor a very good defense IMO. And I think his defense, in particular, is more suited for playoff basketball. We've seen certain matchups really just take Mitch off the floor while IHart seems to deal with the Bams and the KP's of the world much more effectively.

Knowing that, I think Mitch may just be at the point where he's more useful as a trade asset for the Knicks then he is as a starter. Doesn't mean he's a bad player, just means he may be leaning to the side of surplus instead of necessity.

[Knicks Byke]

iHart is Noah 2.0

Ayton might be an interesting move however.

[Ray Williams]

I really like Mitch. He’s worked his butt off and has improved his game. He’s also been a good teammate. That said, the injuries are pilling up and it’s proving difficult to keep him on the court.

This reminds me of when we had center Bill Cartwright who suffered with a recurring broken foot. The Knicks eventually got frustrated and traded him the Bulls where the foot healed and Bill won a bunch of rings.

I don’t see IHart as the answer even though he’s doing his best out there and playing pretty well. But maybe some of you feel differently.

Do we need to make a move at the 1?

I’d love to keep both Mitch and IHart with Mitch coming off the bench to limit his minutes and keep him healthy. His injury history and now with screws in his foot makes him risky.
If we can only keep one I have to say we keep IHart, last thing we need is letting IHart walk and Mitch’s career is cut short because of his injuries.

[aggo]

look in the ihart thread someone posted salaries of all starting C and their backups.


ihart is a starter and should be paid as such. we need to move mitch in the offseason and pick up "just a guy" like mike muscala, mo bamba

[cgf]

look in the ihart thread someone posted salaries of all starting C and their backups.


ihart is a starter and should be paid as such. we need to move mitch in the offseason and pick up "just a guy" like mike muscala, mo bamba

Why do we "need to"? We can afford to give IH the max we can offer him & keep mitch without hitting the second apron unless we bring in a ton more future money. So why not enjoy having the luxury of 48 minutes of top notch center play from two guys who like sharing the job and give us different looks for different matchups?

At some point Mitch could become unhappy as the backup or IH could start earning so much that keeping an expensive backup became untenable, but we can cross that bridge when we get to it. For now spending less than 30M on the best center tandem in the NBA is totally fine.

We have folks on here wanting Ayton, who is worse than either of our centers and earns more than they will combine to make next season if IH stays a knick.

[Tron Carter]

Precious for Drummond?

Did you watch Drummond during our Bulls game? That guy stinks

[cgf]

Precious for Drummond?

Did you watch Drummond during our Bulls game? That guy stinks

Yeah Drummond I can say with certainty is fools gold. He can help a team beat up on bad teams with no size in the regular season. But I'd trust Sims or Achiuwa more against a playoff team.

[Jeffrey]

Precious for Drummond?

Did you watch Drummond during our Bulls game? That guy stinks

Yeah Drummond I can say with certainty is fools gold. He can help a team beat up on bad teams with no size in the regular season. But I'd trust Sims or Achiuwa more against a playoff team.

I'm for Drummond if you're asking him to play 15 mins a game. He can gobble up rebounds like nothing. Precious for Drummond is not a bad trade. Chicago gets young and see if Precious fits with them long term and we get a legit backup center.

Obviously, this all depends on Mitch coming back which I doubt.

[cgf]

Did you watch Drummond during our Bulls game? That guy stinks

Yeah Drummond I can say with certainty is fools gold. He can help a team beat up on bad teams with no size in the regular season. But I'd trust Sims or Achiuwa more against a playoff team.

I'm for Drummond if you're asking him to play 15 mins a game. He can gobble up rebounds like nothing. Precious for Drummond is not a bad trade. Chicago gets young and see if Precious fits with them long term and we get a legit backup center.

Obviously, this all depends on Mitch coming back which I doubt.

Nah man. Even in a part time role he can only play against bad teams when he's the only big man on the court. Any decent team just destroys him at the rim whether they have size to throw at him or not.

Him grabbing the rebound on 1 out of every 3 possessions doesn't mean s*** if the other two possessions are dunks or made-layups, ya know?

The dude is fools gold. He has no place on a good team because he's only useful in very specific matchups against bad teams and we are better off giving Sims another run or hoping Thibs can get through to Precious.

[The KnicksFix]

Ihart is a much, much better fit for the offense. On defense he is locked in. Averaging every night 16-19 boards, 2-3 blocks and 2-3 steals. You have to keep him instead

[DOT]

Ihart is a much, much better fit for the offense. On defense he is locked in. Averaging every night 16-19 boards, 2-3 blocks and 2-3 steals. You have to keep him instead

As a starter, he's averaging 11 boards, 1.7 steals and 1.6 blocks

You do understand how averages work, right?

[Moose]

For this season and next you can do this trade:

Mitch
Grimes
Fournier
Picks

for

Capela
Murray

Then you resign iHart (who is currently 25 years old) and keep Capela for another year (has 1 more year after this season at age 30) or trade him in a different deal. And in the next season or two you look to add a young big through the draft or elsewhere to play with iHart.

[cgf]

For this season and next you can do this trade:

Mitch
Grimes
Fournier
Picks

for

Capela
Murray

Then you resign iHart (who is currently 25 years old) and keep Capela for another year (has 1 more year after this season at age 30) or trade him in a different deal. And in the next season or two you look to add a young big through the draft or elsewhere to play with iHart.

Or we could not, keep Mitch & Grimes, and use Fournier's contract + picks on something else

[The KnicksFix]

Ihart is a much, much better fit for the offense. On defense he is locked in. Averaging every night 16-19 boards, 2-3 blocks and 2-3 steals. You have to keep him instead

As a starter, he's averaging 11 boards, 1.7 steals and 1.6 blocks

You do understand how averages work, right?

True, but you do understand that our offensive rating has jumped from 10th to 1st and our defensive rating went from 20th to 1st with him and OG, right?
Him on the offensive side allows us another passer and scorer in the post, I love Mitch but he didn’t give us that.
You do understand the offense has been unlocked, and he’s part of the reason why, right ?

[DOT]

Ihart is a much, much better fit for the offense. On defense he is locked in. Averaging every night 16-19 boards, 2-3 blocks and 2-3 steals. You have to keep him instead

As a starter, he's averaging 11 boards, 1.7 steals and 1.6 blocks

You do understand how averages work, right?

True, but you do understand that our offensive rating has jumped from 10th to 1st and our defensive rating went from 20th to 1st with him and OG, right?
Him on the offensive side allows us another passer and scorer in the post, I love Mitch but he didn’t give us that.
You do understand the offense has been unlocked, and he’s part of the reason why, right ?

What's that got to do with you lying about his rebound, steal, and block numbers?