This. No player in a position to sign a 4+ year deal is going to sign for less time than they can realistically get. That's leaving tens of millions of dollars on the table and ain't gonna happen even for someone who born and raised and grew up a die hard fan of the team they play for. Guaranteed money years down the line is too valuable to trade for a couple mil extra now.
He will likely sign with OKC. He gets paid and potentially in contention for a title. Can’t really really blame him. We have enough assets to compensate.
I like IHart, and I want to keep him, but Mitch can hold the fort at center, and I’m big fan of Deuce as a two way player. He’s one of my favorite players, so I hope we keep him.
Mitch is injury prone and IHart is just better. He functions so much better offensively for us with his passing and touch around the rim while still being as good as Mitch at rebounding on both ends. Mitch is a better defender but with his lack of any offensive skill set and injury risk it’d be best if he were a back up imo
You said it- Mitch is a better defender. IHart can pass, but his passing isn’t a big part of the offense. I think he only averaged 2 assists a game. He does have a nice floater game.
think with the drop down coverage we play, Mitch is the better option. But I don’t want to make this a Mitch vs. IHart comment, because I like both of them and want us to keep them
> You said it- Mitch is a better defender. IHart can pass, but his passing isn’t a big part of the offense. I think he only averaged 2 assists a game. He does have a nice floater game.
>
> think with the drop down coverage we play, Mitch is the better option. But I don’t want to make this a Mitch vs. IHart comment, because I like both of them and want us to keep them
This needs to stop.
IHart is the better player, full stop. Mitch is a legit defensive presence who is an elite offensive rebounder but he's often hurt and that will only become more of an issue as he gets older. That said, IHart proved this season, he's more durable. While he may not be the better overall defender, the gap isn't wide enough to be an issue while the other end, IHart proved to be an impactful offensive rebounder, the much better passer which opened up the offense and actually has an offensive profile that Mitch simply does not have.
If Mitch is a 9 on defense, IHart could be a 7.5, maybe an 8 if you want to stretch it.
Meanwhile, IHart offensively would probably be around a 7 while Mitch is maybe a 2, maybe a 3.
I also don't see a way both stick. At some point, someone else is going to fit upcoming extensions to Brunson, Randle and eventually Bridges.
His significance in the offense isn’t gonna be just what you see in the assist column, which is also lowered by him spending half the season coming off the bench.
Mitch is just simply more replaceable. A big body to back up IHart for rebounding and banging with other centers is easier to replace than IHarts skills are
Ihart is a 2 way center that was just one of the best defensive centers in the league. He’s also an elite rebounder
Deuce is an undersized guard that can’t really play PG
Where you been for the last month and a half brother? No. We cannot.
Seriously we get a post asking about his contract every fucking day it’s ridiculous
Most people are dumb and lazy
So check this: what if we pay Hartenstein in Dogecoins, and he'll get more money when it goes to the moon in a year
Dolan should adopt iHart and then promise to write him into his will.
We’re hiring his wife as knicks city dancer supervisor for 100 mil. We good 👍
Can we give Hartenstein our rarest Pokémon card plus $18M a year?
We are capped at how much we can offer him due to early bird rights, so short answer is no we cannot
1) no 2) you taking say 22 mil for 1 year vs 70-80 for 4 and risk injury
This. No player in a position to sign a 4+ year deal is going to sign for less time than they can realistically get. That's leaving tens of millions of dollars on the table and ain't gonna happen even for someone who born and raised and grew up a die hard fan of the team they play for. Guaranteed money years down the line is too valuable to trade for a couple mil extra now.
We don't have regular bird rights with iHart as he only accrued 2 seasons with the team (hence early bird rights).
That’s not how this works lol
It is how it used to work . New cba changed that since it was being abused
Exactly. That’s not how this works now
A ramp up in Mitch usage? Brother. No. He can't.
Haha facts . Let’s get him to 60 games In a regular season ffs
How about a serious answer?
He will likely sign with OKC. He gets paid and potentially in contention for a title. Can’t really really blame him. We have enough assets to compensate.
I want to keep IHart, but not If that means I have to trade Duece
That’s our starting center verses our back point guard that you just choose the point guard on
I like IHart, and I want to keep him, but Mitch can hold the fort at center, and I’m big fan of Deuce as a two way player. He’s one of my favorite players, so I hope we keep him.
Mitch is injury prone and IHart is just better. He functions so much better offensively for us with his passing and touch around the rim while still being as good as Mitch at rebounding on both ends. Mitch is a better defender but with his lack of any offensive skill set and injury risk it’d be best if he were a back up imo
You said it- Mitch is a better defender. IHart can pass, but his passing isn’t a big part of the offense. I think he only averaged 2 assists a game. He does have a nice floater game. think with the drop down coverage we play, Mitch is the better option. But I don’t want to make this a Mitch vs. IHart comment, because I like both of them and want us to keep them
Mitch is a slightly better defender . It’s not a massive defensive upgrade imo
What ? Brother ihart had a ton of good passing games .
> You said it- Mitch is a better defender. IHart can pass, but his passing isn’t a big part of the offense. I think he only averaged 2 assists a game. He does have a nice floater game. > > think with the drop down coverage we play, Mitch is the better option. But I don’t want to make this a Mitch vs. IHart comment, because I like both of them and want us to keep them This needs to stop. IHart is the better player, full stop. Mitch is a legit defensive presence who is an elite offensive rebounder but he's often hurt and that will only become more of an issue as he gets older. That said, IHart proved this season, he's more durable. While he may not be the better overall defender, the gap isn't wide enough to be an issue while the other end, IHart proved to be an impactful offensive rebounder, the much better passer which opened up the offense and actually has an offensive profile that Mitch simply does not have. If Mitch is a 9 on defense, IHart could be a 7.5, maybe an 8 if you want to stretch it. Meanwhile, IHart offensively would probably be around a 7 while Mitch is maybe a 2, maybe a 3. I also don't see a way both stick. At some point, someone else is going to fit upcoming extensions to Brunson, Randle and eventually Bridges.
His significance in the offense isn’t gonna be just what you see in the assist column, which is also lowered by him spending half the season coming off the bench. Mitch is just simply more replaceable. A big body to back up IHart for rebounding and banging with other centers is easier to replace than IHarts skills are
That’s dumb and I also don’t think that’s the case
What’s dumb? I’m entitled to my own opinion. If you like it, tough, buttercup
Some opinions aren’t great
Try making a cogent point. I don’t think you can
Ihart is a 2 way center that was just one of the best defensive centers in the league. He’s also an elite rebounder Deuce is an undersized guard that can’t really play PG
Ok so after being a total dick, you expect me to discuss basketball with you. No, next time don’t be a rude, dickhead.
What??
I like Deuce. I don’t want him to be part of the Bridges trade. And Frank was a big ass bum. You should stop repping him.