NY Post: Mitchell Robinson may be Mike Miller’s best case for his Knicks future

Interestingly, Marc Berman seems to think that Mike Miller still has a shot at this thing:

If there is a strong argument to keep interim coach Mike Miller for another season, it can be found in the growth of a certain 7-foot, alley-oop slamming, shot-blocking center from the Bayou.

Mitchell Robinson’s high-school coach, Butch Stockton, says Robinson’s improvement over the final two months of the season was a testament to how well Miller knew the Knicks center.

Stockton, the head coach of Chalmette High School (La.), remembers Miller as a new assistant coach coming to New Orleans last summer to work with Robinson, who in his second season will set the NBA record for highest field-goal percentage (74.2 percent) if the regular season doesn’t resume.

“I’ve talked to Mike several times,” Stockton told The Post from New Orleans in a phone interview. “Mike spent a lot of time in the summer working here with Mitch. Mike knows Mitch better than some of the other coaches because he spent so much time with him in the summertime. Mitch did like him. He could relate to him more for that reason, for all that time in the gym with each other.’’

As Westchester Knicks G-League coach, Miller was also the head coach of the 2018 summer league team in Las Vegas where Robinson excelled weeks after the draft. That is where the center announced himself as a steal at No. 36 overall.

It’s probably just a puff piece designed to fill space, but hey, it’s something to talk about, I guess.

Liked it? Take a second to support Brian Cronin on Patreon!

162 thoughts to “NY Post: Mitchell Robinson may be Mike Miller’s best case for his Knicks future”

  1. I think this was a puff piece as well, but with good insight. I REALLY hope Mike Miller’s ego isn’t bigger than the team. Hopefully he realizes that no team is willing to give him the top gig if we don’t. And if we don’t, I pray he’s willing to stay on as a lead assistant, which would probably mean hiring a HC that he’s familiar with and vice versa. I don’t like the idea of hiring a brand new coach and forcing an assistant on him. Especially one like Atkinson with a proven system and his own guys. I’m sure Atkinson would be willing to make a concession to have a guy like Miller on staff, but he would have to ask for Miller. So now, I kinda think Miller should be HC with a strong lead assistant, but one that’s not established. But..who though?

    Listen..he’s had some wtf moments, but overall Miller has done a fine job as the interim. The guys listen and run through walls for him. He deserves the job. At the same time, if there’s a better option- one that’s head and shoulders better than Miller for this team- then obviously you hire that guy..or woman. Atkinson has a proven track record with young teams, but maybe he’s not a better option for this team than Miller.

  2. The one thing I’m not worried about with Miller is him having a big ego. Dude doesn’t seem to be that way at all. Seems really like a no nonsense guy.

    I would be totally down to give him one or two more seasons to stay as the head coach. I also would love to retain him as an assistant coach if we hire another person. I could see him working nicely with Thibs.

    I think I made this argument before but I am warming up to the idea of Thibs. I found one article about Thibs overplaying his players in Minnesota and it was about Rose and Butler (and this was during a stretch where Teague went down as their starting PG). There was no mention of Towns or Wiggins playing too many minutes. Do people have any resources or stats about the minutes he played players in MN?

    Here is why I kind of like the idea of Thibs. First of all, The Twolves offense was much different than The Bulls and they actually were one of the higher ranked offensive teams while he was there.

    We also have Mitch and Frank, two great defensive players who are young and then RJ, who is proving to be much better on defense and is also very coachable and has that drive/personality that might make him thrive under a guy like Thibs (unlike Towns who seems content to rest on his laurels).

    Imagine if Thibs unlocked the full defensive potential of Mitch and Frank and installed a team defensive system that allowed RJ and the others to step it up as well? Maybe keep Miller on as the lead assistant coach?

    I mean, there are much worse choices than Thibs is all I’m saying. And people saying he’s a win now coach really have it kind of twisted. Just because he coached a bulls team that was a championship contender doesn’t mean he can’t be a development coach. Hell, he DEVELOPED Noah and Rose. Yes, he wore those players down eventually but they were rookies/young players when Thibs turned them into an ECF contender.

    This is all non stats but again I think RJ has the personalityto do well under a…

  3. I think we should stick with Miller until we are at least a playoff-level team. Losing grinds on coaches, especially rigid “systems” coaches like Thibs, and makes them do dumb things. D’Antoni is a perfect example. He was hired too soon and ran 7SoL with personnel not suited for it, then Jeremy Lin goes off and he “rides him like Secretariat” until he broke down. Even Hornacek ground down KP.

    If we are going to switch, go for a developmental guy like Atkinson or Monty Williams. Then when the team gets good (hopefully!), decide whether or not to make a change to a name coach based on availability.

    Now if a sure thing like Kerr or Carlisle or McMillen shakes loose, fine, go for him. But iffy retreads like Thibs, Jackson and Van Gundy should be avoided.

  4. Wiggins and Towns were #1 and #2 in the league in minutes in Thibs’ first year. So, yeah.

  5. Thibs has coached 8 years in the league. His teams have NEVER been in the top half of the league in 3pt attempt rate. In Minnesota they were 30th, 30th, and 26th.

    Taskmaster, doesn’t believe in rest, no 3s — he is not a modern coach.

  6. It’s pretty consistent that Thibs doesn’t manage minutes. Per game, in 16-17 LaVine and Wiggins averaged 37.2 minutes. Towns 37, Rubio 32.9, Dieng 32.4. In 17-18 it was a little lower, Butler 36.7, Wiggins 36.3, Towns 35.6, Gibson 33.2, Teague 33. Obviously you have some guys around the league playing big minutes regularly, LeBron Harden Lowry Lillard Westbrook ect., but Thibs minutes overall are still an outlier. I wouldn’t expect much in the way of development minutes for players that aren’t already good.

  7. Further to that, Thibs runs a 9 man rotation at all times, unless his hand is forced by injury. If you’re outside that 9 man lineup you don’t see the floor much outside garbage time. It’s anybody’s guess how he’d deal with mandates like “play Knox” but I wouldn’t expect the tiger to change his stripes at this point.

  8. Of all the reasons to hate on Thibs, isn’t the fear of running players into the ground on the Knicks kinda funny?

    1. Mitch can’t be run into the ground — he fouls too much
    2. Nobody will get playoff minutes for at least 2 years
    3. Outside of Mitch, doesn’t this presuppose the Knicks having a good player to run into the ground?

  9. Re draft analyses, I prefer The Stepien to The Ringer. My one caveat about The Stepien is that they list draft picks in consensus tiers, which is more non-committal. In 2018, they went against the chalk, with all 5 analysts ranking Luka first, had Trae and JJJ in top 3-4, and had Knox lower than many others (usually around #16). O’Connor had Luka at 3 and Knox at 9 (he did have SGA at 8, so there’s that.)

  10. The image that makes me nervous about Thibs is having him decide on a starting five and running them at 35-36 minutes a game — Elf, Bullock, RJ, Randle, and his old trusted pal Taj. All the questions we have never get answered (is Frank actually improving; can Trier actually become a professional basketball player; can Mitch be transcendent; etc.).

    I’d love a defense-first coach. Not sure Thibs is the right choice.

  11. 3. Outside of Mitch, doesn’t this presuppose the Knicks having a good player to run into the ground?

    I made that comment on the other thread re RJ.

    The issue isn’t just player health. It’s player recruitment and retention.

  12. Frank Ntilikina’s groin can’t take 36 min a night. He’d be useless after a year under Thibs. It’s not a great way to distribute minutes, especially with a lit of young guys who need burn. We barely got Trier or Iggy on the floor as is

  13. The image that makes me nervous about Thibs is having him decide on a starting five and running them at 35-36 minutes a game — Elf, Bullock, RJ, Randle, and his old trusted pal Taj.

    Something like this is certainly a possibility.

    2. Nobody will get playoff minutes for at least 2 years

    The point of this is that Thibs regular season rotations look a lot like playoff rotations and have across multiple teams. So yes, there is a high likely-hood that 5 players will be getting 32-37 minutes and 4 others will get around 20. Beyond running players into the ground, this is not a scheme centered around developing young guys. It is a ‘win now playing the vets’ scheme. Basically, the same thing the Knicks have been trying since forever, just turned up a couple notches. If Thibs really is a prime candidate that should reassure everyone that Rose is not a turning point, it’s just more of the same.

  14. I think Thibs would take us firmly from the 6th pick to the 9th or 10th pick, no question. Might even get some accidentanking when Mitch’s knees explode from playing 45+ on back to backs.

  15. The Stepien’s Gribanov had Mitch at #13 and Knox at 23. Maybe we should just pretend that Mitch was the first round pick and Knox was the second rounder, then it doesn’t feel so bad.

    In general, they were very high on Wendell Carter, who has been ok but not great so far. Seems like his 3-pt shooting hasn’t translated yet, so if that turns around he’s a fine player.

  16. Frank lovers should want Thibs. He may actually play him. A “modern” coach would have no use for him.

    And the same people who are most vocal for more minutes for Mitch are the ones who are most vocal about Thibs playing his good players too much.

  17. Hey Alsep, if you’re out there, I just read your recap on Rolling Stone.com of the latest Better Call Saul episode. Really helped bring things together for me, great job! I think this season has been superb, dare I say Breaking Bad level superb, and Bob Odenkirk and Rhea Seehorn both deserve Emmys (as you suggested)

    For those Breaking Bad fans out there, I highly recommend BCS. (And it’s pretty cool seeing characters like Gus Fring and Mike Ermantraut from BB.)

  18. I feel there’s some room between play your only good player more than 24 minutes a night and run him into the ground

  19. My experience watching when a new coach takes over mostly he plays the same guys as the old coach did. Of course there are different emphases on the plays to use and such, but they seem to agree on which players are best to win with. The only notable exception to this is when Kerr decided to go with Draymond instead of Lee (if I recall that correctly). Fizdale and Miller both decided Frank’s defense made it worth playing him. I don’t see a new coach, whoever he is, deciding differently unless he has a new point guard on the roster who is actually good.

  20. I wonder if we are making too much of this “Thibs plays his players too many minutes narrative?”

    I read a pro Thibs piece that conceded he played his players a lot of minuets in games, but it also said his practices were less vigorous than for other coaches because he spends more time teaching than running scrimmages and doing hard drills.

    It’s true that Rose and Noah eventually broke down, but there’s no way of telling if that was due to minutes played in games. Rose broke down while he was still very young and big men like Noah often have knee and other issues later in their careers. It’s not like almost everyone that played for Thibs broke down.

    I’m not a huge fan of playing a lot of minutes because I think the overall data suggests reducing minutes and giving guys a night off here or there keeps them fresher for the payoffs and extends careers, but if his practices are actually easier, maybe he has a different approach that works fine.

  21. Mike Miller wasn’t even smart enough to play Mitch as many minutes as he should have.

    Yeah, but Mitch did end up third on the team in minutes. He didn’t get as many as I would like, but at least they were consistent. The thing with Thibs is would he start Mitch and give him big minutes, or bring him off the bench for less than he’s been getting? Would Frank get buried? And he’s not good but since he’s under contract, it’s probably not ideal that Knox would get benched semi-permanently.

    I read a pro Thibs piece that conceded he played his players a lot of minuets in games, but it also said his practices were less vigorous than for other coaches because he spends more time teaching than running scrimmages and doing hard drills.

    So is that better or worse for the kids you would want to develop and end up riding the pine?

  22. “So is that better or worse for the kids you would want to develop and end up riding the pine?”

    I’m sort of in the camp that thinks you should play players based on merit (or based on a specific matchup) and then towards the end of the season shift towards younger players for development once the season is lost and you are out of the playoff hunt.

    I was fine with the way Miller allocated minutes last year except for maybe for Dotson and Trier. The problem was we had a glut at the SG position. I probably would have played more small ball by moving Barrett to SF more often and using Trier and Dotson more.

    The thing I strongly object to is guys being in and out of the doghouse for no apparent reason the way Fizdale used to do it.

  23. “I feel there’s some room between play your only good player more than 24 minutes a night and run him into the ground”

    Who did he run into the ground?

    These are professional athletes that are being paid zillions of dollars to PLAY basketball. They can all play 40 mins a night unless they have underlying conditions prohibiting them. The idea that twenty year old men playing 5 extra minutes every two or three days can “run them into the ground” is pretty absurd if you think about it, and I doubt there’s very much actual evidence to support it.

    I think the bigger issue with Thibs was that he’d keep his good players on the floor at the end of games during what is typically called “garbage time”. I think Rose may have blown out his ACL in a situation like this, but it was during the playoffs, and as we know well thanks to Reggie Miller, in the playoffs there’s never a safe time to smoke a cigar.

  24. Did anyone read the deep dive into RJ Barrett’s rookie year on the Athletic? I can’t deal with signing up for it, even as a trial. If so, any good insights?

  25. This is a dumb statement. I read the studies. It is only true that good FT shooting is suggestive of some improvement. Unless you want to tell me that all great FT shooters in college become great 3-pt shooters no matter what they shot in college.

    But even if he does shoot well from 3, he’s got big problems beyond that. No off hand whatsoever and a suspect handle. Does good FT shooting overcome that too?

    This…simply untrue? Here’s the most recent study I could find, which found the r for NCAA FT%/NBA 3PT% percentile to be .7945 and the r for NCAA 3PT%/NBA 3PT% percentile to be .6756.

    It’s a straight up better predictor, not “suggestive of some improvement.” You made that up.

    You can breakdown his eye-test based strengths/weaknesses however you want (and I have no idea why you’re so hung up on his, if you parse through the “negatives” section in an incredibly brief scouting report of any prospect you’ll find stuff just like them), but you’re going to have to explain how he put up the numbers he did despite them.

  26. I can understand being skeptical of the Thibs minutes narrative because there are tons of narratives around coaches, and in general of course, that take hold without much in the way of supporting empirics.

    The thing about Thibs and minutes though is it’s a straight up fact. Again, 3/15 of NBA minutes leaders in 2016-2017 were Minnesota Timberwolves, and Butler was well on his way to making that 4. They also ranked dead-last in the NBA in 3PA. There are similar numbers for all of Bulls teams but you get the point.

    Sorry guys, this is just another one of those clearly bad ideas that some people, reasonably trying to claw out some sources of optimism, are trying to talk themselves into.

  27. ess-dog:
    Did anyone read the deep dive into RJ Barrett’s rookie year on the Athletic? I can’t deal with signing up for it, even as a trial. If so, any good insights?

    No and I also can’t stand the idea of signing up for it.

    But I’ll guess at the content:

    – RJ Barrett disappointed in his rookie year
    – Lists his college stats and HS ranking
    – Point out a few good plays or games that highlights his potential. He probably shot 40% from 3 in an arbitrary stretch of time!!
    – Blame the coaching change, Knicks management, and lack of shooters. Specifically blame Randle’s ballhogging or Frank Ntilikina’s inability to run an offense
    – Conclude by reiterating how someone with the talent and physical tools of RJ won’t be held down and he’s destined for greatness as soon as he leaves the Knicks

  28. Oh yay, the your lousy point guard prospect is worse than my lousy point guard prospect argument is back! I’ll replay my end-of-the-previous-thread note — nobody likes Haliburton? Is it the funky shot? He was .419 from three on 5.5 per game. And since (most) everyone likes FTs as an indicator, he was .822 from the line. I don’t think he’s got a super-high ceiling, but if he can get his shot off in the pros he has the makings of an above-average point guard. And you can’t teach 6’5″. I don’t know why I like him as much as I do, to be honest — maybe just my knee-jerk reaction to (La)Melo + Anthony. I’d take a dirt-bag oil and gas company over them (he does spell it differently).

  29. thenoblefacehumper: This…simply untrue? Here’s the most recent study I could find, which found the r for NCAA FT%/NBA 3PT% percentile to be .7945 and the r for NCAA 3PT%/NBA 3PT% percentile to be .6756.

    It’s a straight up better predictor, not “suggestive of some improvement.” You made that up.

    You can breakdown his eye-test based strengths/weaknesses however you want (and I have no idea why you’re so hung up on his, if you parse through the “negatives” section in an incredibly brief scouting report of any prospect you’ll find stuff just like them), but you’re going to have to explain how he put up the numbers he did despite them.

    Geez, did you actually read the study? It is loaded with caveats. Like this one:

    However, finding the average of the percentiles for college free throw percentage and college three point percentage is just as good a predictor (if not a slightly better one) as free throw percentage. Turns out, it pays to be good at both. It is important, however, to remember neither is a complete predictor of a three point percentage in the NBA.

    And that’s not even accounting for the fact that this is a statistical projection with a range of empirical outcomes. Who knows whether Hayes will fall on the low side of the combined 3-pt/FT correlation or the high side? You are making an optimistic conjecture, essentially saying that we should IGNORE Hayes’ 27% 3-pt shooting for his pre-NBA career and BANK ON him being a high% 3-pt shooter based on a caveat-laden study with a wide range of actual outcomes.

  30. No NBA player has averaged 40 minutes a game over a season this decade. Even 20 years ago about 10 or so guys would play that many minutes. The heart of his early bulls success-Deng, Rose and Noah-were all broken down and washed by their late 20s, although Rose had a nice year last season after playing 8 seasons of bad basketball. I don’t know that it’s definitely on Thibs, but it’s a bit worrisome that he went to Minnesota and started doing the same shit again.

  31. ***The thing about Thibs and minutes though is it’s a straight up fact. Again, 3/15 of NBA minutes leaders in 2016-2017 were Minnesota Timberwolves.***

    It may be a fact, but it also proves my points: A) he plays his best players the most minutes; B) it didn’t injure his players.

  32. It’s a good question about Halliburton. I read most of the Stepien review:

    https://www.thestepien.com/2020/02/14/tyrese-haliburton-scouting-report/

    He sounds like the sort of player we’d want, smart, can shoot and has good defensive positioning, but needs improvement in one on one defense. But he’s not in their tier one or two of prospects. If I had to guess why from what I read it would be because his shooting motion is odd, he’s thin physically and he’s 20. He sounds like one of those guys we talk about who maybe isn’t so young with incredible potential but who can actually play.

  33. >The thing about Thibs and minutes though is it’s a straight up fact.<

    So far no one has disputed the fact that he plays his players a lot of minutes. That is a fact.

    However, one of his former players pointed out that his practices were more focused on teaching rather than drills and scrimmages. So I guess he felt the softer practices offset the tougher game workload in terms of wear and tear. I don't know that to be a fact other than it was in an article I read that was "pro Thibs", but I can tell you that in horse racing there are trainers that do exactly that with horses. They train easier so the horse can give more when it counts.

  34. And really, tnfh, I don’t get why you keep implying that I am basing my opinion on a 10-minute review of some film and some catch phrases. I clearly have been looking very deeply into the numbers, looking at hours of film, perusing numerous scouting reports, and reading articles like the one you just referenced. If anyone is going about this in a lazy and intellectually dishonest fashion, it’s you. Just because you don’t agree with my assessment of your beloved Hayes, it doesn’t make me lazy or ill-informed. We’ve both been right and wrong on this site a million times over the years, and have agreed with each other far more often than not, and usually for the same reasons.

  35. No Better Call Saul spoilers please! Cable is dumb and it makes the rest of us cord-cutting plebs have to wait a bit.

    There is no ability for the Knicks to be a playoff team next season. Nor the season after that. Who cares if Thibs ruins some shitty young players’ careers? This team has no path to contention and not much to look forward to, except for a few more late-season wins that knock us out of the top 3. One good player under contract and the rest are journeymen or lottery scrubs.

  36. ***The heart of his early bulls success-Deng, Rose and Noah-were all broken down and washed by their late 20s, although Rose had a nice year last season after playing 8 seasons of bad basketball. I don’t know that it’s definitely on Thibs, but it’s a bit worrisome that he went to Minnesota and started doing the same shit again.***

    Deng played 14 seasons in the NBA. He was averaging 38 minutes a game for Vinnie del Negro before Thibs took over. He played 150 straight games at that volume for Thibs without getting injured.

    Noah was chronically injured every year for three years BEFORE Thibs came to town. He then proceeded to play full seasons for the first time in his career during the time he was being “run into the ground”.

    Rose, like Lin, played a style of basketball that was unsustainable. He was a penetrator, not a shooter, and little people driving into the paint to draw contact with giants will lead to injury eventually. It’s close to impossible to pin injury on aggregate playing time over the course of a year, but there is a lot of evidence to exonerate it.

  37. Why not just keep Miller and hire a lead assistant who’s strong on defense or creative offensively that just hasn’t been successful as a head coach? There’s a few out there who’ve been an HC before that might be willing to work with Miller. Off the top I can think of Triano, Hollins, and Bzdelik. My worry with hiring Thibs (who can coach his ass off btw) and possibly keeping Miller, is there will be no room for creativity on offense. Miller doesn’t strike me as a coach who can consistently come up with a phenomenal game plan on offense. He’s like..I dunno..Shane Battier. Jack of all trades, master of none. I mean- he’s solid in all aspects of coaching but doesn’t have one truly standout trait- unless you wanna consider development his highest quality.

    And I don’t mean that as an indictment on Miller in any way. He’s solid and steady- something this team needs. I’m just saying he’s not a phenom on either side of the ball. This is a bad comp, but it’s the first one I could think of. Kinda like how the Cowboys were structured(not the result). Garrett was kinda like the walk-around coach not mastering any one thing, but they had Kellen Moore relating to the guys on offense and adding some thump in the offense. That’s a horrible comp, I know..but that’s how they used em

  38. From Wikipedia:
    Thibodeau has never been married.
    According to a 2012 New York Times article, Thibodeau was engaged while he was in graduate school at Salem State, but called it off a month or two before the wedding.

    What more do you need?

    I’m sold on Thibs.

  39. Here is a recent article from The Stepien that captures my concerns about Hayes (and Halliburton as well, although probably to a lesser degree.) I don’t think that Hayes’ athleticism/skill package translates well to the NBA PG position, and I don’t think he will be athletic enough to guard lightning-quick 1’s or dynamic 2’s. I also think that PGs that don’t dribble or pass (much less shoot) with their off-hand are high-risk choices. Ball-handling and explosiveness rarely improve much with hard work, players either have it or don’t. You don’t have to be ambidextrous, but if you watch hours of Hayes film, he not only shoots left on all but the simplest layups, but hardly takes more than one dribble with his right hand or makes anything but a very simple pass with his right hand.

    In the article above, they refer to rebounding as an important indicator for “threshold athleticism.” Hayes averaged 3.1 rebounds per 36 last year and 3.7 overall. LaMelo averaged 8.7 per 36. That is a HUGE difference. Combine that with his greater skill as a ball-handler and passer, and his decent FT% (72%) which, by your own assumptions, would suggest at least decent 3-pt shooting at the next level, and you have a better prospect.

  40. It’s hard to justify it based on stats (apart from 3pt%) but I feel Haliburton is safer than Hayes without Hayes having a much higher ceiling. It’s just hard to see someone who is limited by athleticism and ballhandling (two things that tend to not improve) having a very high ceiling.

    I’m biased because he went to Vanderbilt, but I really really like Neismith for us. Read his Stepien profile. Lights out shooter and it’s not just catch and shoot, he shoots off motion sets really well, I think he’ll be able to get his shot off in the NBA, and his D is more than acceptable. If your looking for stats, his efficiency speaks for itself. Might have to trade up to get him with out second pick tho

    I think Haliburton and neismith would be a very good draft for us without shooting for a star (which never seems to work for us). It would address two of our biggest needs (shooting and distribution/decent PG play). A lineup of Haliburton, Neismith, RJ, Randle and Mitch is actually pretty well balanced in terms of inside/outside and shot creation/distribution, and probably wouldn’t be awful on D either. I’d be excited to watch that

  41. Zman beat me to some of my points on Hayes. I think if we get lucky in the lottery I’d also be ok with LaMelo, just hope he learns to shoot a bit

  42. I think we’re blowing this minutes thing up a bit. If load management becomes an issue, Rose can raise it with Thibs. He’s an agent, he should know it’s important.

  43. I think there are some concerns about Halliburton, but think he has a higher floor than Hayes. He shot 42.6% on 3’s in 237 attempts over two college seasons and was over 40% in both seasons. He shot 62% from 2. He averaged 6.4 rebounds and 7.0 assists per 40, with a better AST/TO ratio than Hayes. He doesn’t foul much, He upped his usage significantly without a drop-off in efficiency.

    But he has his warts too, He doesn’t get to the line at all and isn’t a dynamic athlete or ball-handler. But without further information, I’d probably go with him over Hayes.

  44. I really line Nesmith but he’s probably not going to be available unless we do something. Maybe someone trades a mid-teens pick for our late first and early second…

  45. @zman, yeah that’s what we’d do in my perfect draft. Throw Knox in if you have to lol

    OR if we get unlucky in the lottery get Nesmith with the first pick and someone like Manion with the second? That’s probably a less exciting outcome tho

  46. Knew Your Nicks:
    From Wikipedia:
    Thibodeau has never been married.
    According to a 2012 New York Times article, Thibodeau was engaged while he was in graduate school at Salem State, but called it off a month or two before the wedding.

    What more do you need?

    I’m sold on Thibs.

    I’ve been sold on Thibs before this but now I’m 1000% in on Thibs lol

  47. I prefer Haliburton to everyone in the draft. I could see switching to Wiseman or Okongwu before the draft, but everyone in this draft has warts and they’re prominent.

  48. The Athletic is great, don’t know why anybody would be so against paying for it unless you just don’t believe in paying for any content which I understand. But the Athletic is worth the money, it has a ton of content from every sport imaginable.

    The Barrett article mainly focused on how he always shared the court with either Randle or Morris and how that affected how much he had the ball and the spacing to be able to drive. It did have encouraging stats about how much he was able to get to the paint and draw fouls but he needs to be better finishing at the rim.

  49. No Better Call Saul spoilers please! Cable is dumb and it makes the rest of us cord-cutting plebs have to wait a bit.

    Sorry about that THCJ. Have you started Season 5 yet or are you still catching up?

  50. My biggest concern with Thibs and minutes isn’t running players into the ground but who he actually plays. 9 player rotation last year, who is it? I have no faith he recognizes Mitch as one of the starting five. So 5 vets getting 32+ a game, Mitch RJ and Frank (if he makes the cut) off the bench getting ~20 along with another vet. It’s possible that RJ would have started. Everybody else clocking under a hundred minutes. It’s the same shit we bitched about all season, just more of it instead of less. Does Thibs start Mitch? Maybe, depends who we sign. It’s doubling down on the same shit as before, just with a better coach. Coaching isn’t the central problem with this team.

  51. >No Better Call Saul spoilers please! Cable is dumb and it makes the rest of us cord-cutting plebs have to wait a bit.<

    I recently binge watched Breaking Bad and now I'm on to Better Call Saul. I'm in the middle of season 4. I love the show. Some of my friends like it better than Breaking Bad. I like BB better, but that's certainly not a complaint about BCS.

  52. BigBlueAL:
    The Barrett article mainly focused on how he always shared the court with either Randle or Morris and how that affected how much he had the ball and the spacing to be able to drive.It did have encouraging stats about how much he was able to get to the paint and draw fouls but he needs to be better finishing at the rim.

    And making his free throws!!

  53. That’s interesting about Thibs’ practices. Maybe that’s not so hard on the players.

  54. Sabrina Ionesco coming to the Liberty. That’s big news.

    Going to make it clear how starved for a true elite talent this town is.

  55. ***My biggest concern with Thibs and minutes isn’t running players into the ground but who he actually plays.***

    I don’t get this. Who did he glue to the bench that should have been playing? (I know, I know, Cole Aldrich should have played the 38mpg that Towns got, but who else?)

    And in his first season there he played three 21 year olds the big minutes, so it’s not like he’s married to vets.

    The antiquated offensive sets are a real concern if he’s truly unable to adapt. But the minutes argument is a logical fallacy. You can’t question his desire to win, that is his brand. He’s from the Riley, Van Gundy coaching tree. And no one here complained about those guys playing 35 year old Ewing 37 minutes a game and for good reason— his big injury was a wrist injury, even though he had two bowlingballs for knees; or 34 year old Oakley 36 minutes a game— he went on to play 37 minutes a game when he was 37 years old for a different team. Did Anthony Mason die at the age of 48 because he averaged 42 minutes a game in his thirties? Possibly. But, more likely, he’d have met the same fate playing 32 minutes a game instead.

  56. Geez, did you actually read the study? It is loaded with caveats. Like this one:

    This…does not indicate what you say it does. If anything, it’s actually a point in favor of FT%–FT% alone is pretty much identical to 3PT% combined with FT% when it comes to NBA 3PT% prediction. Yes, it is slightly better to be good at both in terms of prediction. That seems so obvious I’m surprised you even thought it was worth pointing out.

    And that’s not even accounting for the fact that this is a statistical projection with a range of empirical outcomes. Who knows whether Hayes will fall on the low side of the combined 3-pt/FT correlation or the high side? You are making an optimistic conjecture, essentially saying that we should IGNORE Hayes’ 27% 3-pt shooting for his pre-NBA career and BANK ON him being a high% 3-pt shooter based on a caveat-laden study with a wide range of actual outcomes.

    If you can find a guard who shot 84% from the line on 75+ attempts, either internationally or in the NCAA, and didn’t become a league average or above 3PT shooter in the NBA (putting aside guys with obvious sample size issues), I’ll be surprised. I have no idea if such a player(s) exists or not, but it seems incredibly rare. The correlation is really that strong.

    Anyway at this point I think we’re just annoying everyone else, so we’ll agree to disagree and one of us will have bragging rights whenever we have basketball again. For the record, you may recall that I was actually on your side when you first started advocating for LaMelo. I just prefer Hayes.

    Oh yay, the your lousy point guard prospect is worse than my lousy point guard prospect argument is back! I’ll replay my end-of-the-previous-thread note — nobody likes Haliburton?

    I was stumping for Haliburton before it was cool! Like everyone else in this draft he’s got his red flags, but I view him as having a high floor due to his diverse…

  57. And in his first season there he played three 21 year olds the big minutes, so it’s not like he’s married to vets.

    But those 21yos were actually good/had real big contracts. The Knicks have one good young player. So going with Thibs is sacrificing playing/development time for the young not very good yet players we do have in exchange for playing FAs a whole lot because as poor as they are they’re better than the kids (mostly).

    It’s more of the same shit, except this time we’re going to jettison development entirely and convince high end free agents to come here with our excellent package of failure (This Time It’s Different!™) because now we’ve got a coach that maybe they’ll respect. As if the coaching is problem.

  58. It’s not just minutes per game. Thibs also doesn’t rest guys. If they’re healthy, they’re playing 82 games. The league is realizing that load management is important, but there’s no indication that Thibs gets that. He’ll keep his best guys out there no matter what the score or situation, exposing them to injury risk and slow breakdowns.

    Hiring Thibs would be repeating the same mistake that has kept us awful for 20 years — sacrificing the future for the present. I want to make the finals, not win 52 games and get bounced in the first round because our exhausted 7-man rotation can’t hustle their way to victory anymore.

  59. If we win 52 games and lose in the 1st rd that’ll be the 2nd best season this franchise has had in the past 21 years. If hiring Thibs or any coach means we become a perennial 50 win team I’ll gladly take that every day of the week. Don’t start with the I want to win a championship not just win 50 games stuff, this fan base is not spoiled enough to complain about only winning 50 games and not a championship. Give me a stretch like we had from the 1991-92 season thru the 1999-2000 season (9 year stretch) where we made the 2nd rd of the playoffs every season plus made 4 conference finals and 2 NBA Finals.

    I mean of course I want to see the Knicks win a championship before I die but if they can put together a team that can have a run like the Riley/JVG Knicks had that would be a huge success championship or not. I just want to see a perennial playoff team again man, it’s been too fucking long dealing with all these 50 loss teams.

  60. tnfh — didn’t realize you were advocating for Haliburton early. And to be honest, I was tongue-in-cheek on the Ball/Hayes fight. I learned a lot from your back-and-forth, and enjoyed the tiff on top of that. I’ll be honest, I really don’t want either one, although I’d probably hedge to The Melo only because his brother suddenly shot 38% from three this year, making him actually valuable given his other skills. And I struggle to imagine them not being cloned by their evil father in an underground laboratory somewhere.

  61. ***The league is realizing that load management is important, but there’s no indication that Thibs gets that. ***

    Maybe Thibs gets that load management isn’t important and that the league is wrong. Isn’t that a possibility?

    Where is LeBron’s load management? The guy has averaged 38mins for his career, has played for 16 seasons, hasn’t worn down, and has had no major injuries, ever. If he averaged 32mins a game would his prime have been prolonged even farther? Would he have been less “run down” come playoff time?

    if there was an example of Thibs taking somebody with a pre-existing condition and over-working him to the detriment of the players health, that would be one thing. If he coached Kawhi this year with no restrictions and he suffered a long term injury, that would be bad. Or if he had Cuttino Mobley lead the league in minutes AFTER his physical with Dr Norman Scott, that would be negligent. But him playing healthy 20 year old men 37 mins a night and allowing them to play in back-to-backs is a very low bar to expect of a professional basketball PLAYER.

    Popovich started the whole load management thing, and I know it’s heresy to question anything Pop does, but there is no clear correlation between his load management and his team’s success. Thibs never had an expensive, top rate, injury prone veteran to coddle. You can’t assume he’d play 30 year old Duncan, Parker, and Manu 38 mins a game just because he played 21 year olds Towns, Wiggins, and LaVine that much.

    Getting worked up about his minutes allotment is just so funny, given that for every other coach all anybody does is yell at them for not playing the good players and benching the scrubs.

  62. TheOakmanCometh
    April 17, 2020 at 8:09 pm
    ***I want to make the finals, not win 52 games and get bounced in the first round because our exhausted 7-man rotation can’t hustle their way to victory anymore.***

    Cometh on, Oakman!

    I’m with BBA on this one. Don’t let the perfect get in the way of the good. Especially when there is no perfect to even wish for. There’s no great name on that list. There’s no savior out there to pray for. Just a bunch of old middle aged men with imperfect resumes. You want to make the finals, not just win 52 games? neither is happening anytime soon no matter who the coach is. Thibs has a better chance of being married in the next five years than the Knicks have at making the finals.

  63. Strong co-sign of BBA’s opinion on The Athletic. So much sports coverage is mailed-in, uninformed garbage so i don’t mind paying a small amount for pieces from writers who at least have the knowledge of the average knickerblogger poster.

    The RJ article is worth the read. One tidbit is that he only played 1/3rd of his minutes with Mitch. That’s straight up malpractice but hey malpractice is a big part of what we do here so we’re not just going to kick it to the curb.

  64. thenoblefacehumper: If you can find a guard who shot 84% from the line on 75 attempts, either internationally or in the NCAA, and didn’t become a league average or above 3PT shooter in the NBA (putting aside guys with obvious sample size issues), I’ll be surprised. I have no idea if such a player(s) exists or not, but it seems incredibly rare. The correlation is really that strong.

    Tell you what, you find me 5 guys who shot 80 % from the FT line, but shot less than 33% from 3 in their first 1 or 2 years of college combined and tell me how they did shooting 3’s in the NBA. Spoiler alert: It’s a very short list, headlined by the great Mo Williams.

    Oh wait, Hayes shot 39% on 41 attempts last year, I forgot that last 5-7 game that bumped him up from less than 33% in 90% of his games and were woefully inconsistent with the 19% he shot the previous year on way more attempts. Just like we screwed up by not drafting Brandon Jennings after his 50-point outburst early in his rookie year had everyone in Knicksland wringing their hands for a couple of weeks.

    But let’s be fair, throw out Killian’s best AND worst 3-pt shooting games and only count the middle 8 (controlling for outliers is a common practice, isn’t it?) and guess what? He at 33%! Even if you don’t control and accept your 39% as valid, it’s on a measly sample size. How could you possibly prefer him over Halliburton, who put up better stats in virtually every category and is a PROVEN 3-pt shooter?

    And as I said, Hayes has other problems. League average in 2018-19 was 35.5% If Hayes, with all his other flaws, tops out as a 37% 3-pt shooter or less, he will probably be out of the NBA within 3 years. You’re betting on him becoming a 40 % shooter. There is virtually no precedent for that.

  65. I’m not sure how the Thibs discussion turned into one about the merits of winning 52 games. Those two things have very little to do with one another.

    I guess I can summarize my Thibs thoughts like this: if the Knicks hire him, do you think it’s because after an extensive, painstaking process they came to the conclusion that he would be the best option? Or do you think it’s because he’s Tom Thibodeau: certified Big Name? Anyone being honest with themself knows the answer. How often has that approach worked out for us in the past?

  66. Tell you what, you find me 5 guys who shot 80 % from the FT line, but shot less than 33% from 3 in their first 1 or 2 years of college combined and tell me how they did shooting 3’s in the NBA. Spoiler alert: It’s a very short list, headlined by the great Mo Williams.

    Oh wait, Hayes shot 39% on 41 attempts last year, I forgot that last 5-7 game that bumped him up from less than 33% in 90% of his games and were woefully inconsistent with the 19% he shot the previous year on way more attempts. Just like we screwed up by not drafting Brandon Jennings after his 50-point outburst early in his rookie year had everyone in Knicksland wringing their hands for a couple of weeks.

    Yeah see this is just garbage, trollsy analysis. Your entire argument here is premised on the idea that the 10 game sample in which Hayes put up unambiguously exceptional numbers is too small. Okay, fair enough. In a different context though, you want to make that sample size even smaller and claim it’s perfectly representative.

    If Hayes, with all his other flaws, tops out as a 37% 3-pt shooter or less, he will probably be out of the NBA within 3 years.

    Lol

  67. Man, I love that Killian is our new Frank. This is crazy.

    Again, the issue with Thibs and the minutes is not just medical. I mean, I agree reasonable minds can disagree about the truth of it. It’s kind of like innings limits for pitchers. No one is really sure what the science is.

    I do think though that Thibs will be bad for player acquisition and retention. Not sure your modern NBA star wants to play for him.

  68. thenoblefacehumper: Yeah see this is just garbage, trollsy analysis. Your entire argument here is premised on the idea that the 10 game sample in which Hayes put up unambiguously exceptional numbers is too small. Okay, fair enough. In a different context though, you want to make that sample size even smaller and claim it’s perfectly representative.

    It’s actually you who is trying to shrink the sample. You are saying that the entire sample of 52 games is meaningless, and that only the last 10 games are important (actually the last game.) You are the one saying “Let’s call Hayes a 3-pt stud based on 51 shitty games and one good one!”

    A 10 game sample is bad enough to hang your hat on. When there is an outlier game that skews even that sample, caveat emptor.

    And notice that you didn’t bother to find the 5 players. Basically you are conceding that nearly all good FT shooters in college were also good 3-pt shooters in college (certainly none at 29%!), so of course there’s a strong correlation, And that lousy 3-pt shooters in college who became good 3-pt shooters in the NBA did so even if their FT% wasn’t in the 80’s…or do I have to name some of those guys for you?

    You’re the one who is trolling.

  69. Maybe Thibs gets that load management isn’t important and that the league is wrong. Isn’t that a possibility?

    Yeah I missed the memo about load management being more than a pseudoscience. I mean sure it makes sense. But don’t show me his players MPG as proof of something bad. Show me evidence that Thibs’ Bulls teams faded down the stretch of seasons, had worse records on back to backs, or wore down in 4Q’s.

    BBA & Donnie Walsh may just be bringing out the old school Knicks fan in me but they’re making great points. Riley used to kill his guys in training camp so that they could play more minutes. Maybe it’s an edge.

    The lack of 3PAs from his teams is a much bigger (and real) concern.

  70. Man, I love that Killian is our new Frank. This is crazy.

    We might as well go for the Hayes-Frank backcourt. It will at least keep us busy.

  71. It’s actually you who is trying to shrink the sample. You are saying that the entire sample of 52 games is meaningless, and that only the last 10 games are important (actually the last game.) You are the one saying “Let’s call Hayes a 3-pt stud based on 51 shitty games and one good one!”

    Nope. I am more than happy to cite Hayes’ 14/6/4/2 per-36, .540 2PT%, .840 FT% (guess you couldn’t find any answers to the question I asked) line over 1002 minutes. I know, I know, it looks much worse if you take out all the good games.

    And notice that you didn’t bother to find the 5 players. Basically you are conceding that nearly all good FT shooters in college were also good 3-pt shooters in college (certainly none at 29%!), so of course there’s a strong correlation, And that lousy 3-pt shooters in college who became good 3-pt shooters in the NBA did so even if their FT% wasn’t in the 80’s…or do I have to name some of those guys for you?

    I misread your post and thought it was just Mo Williams.

    Anyways, Kawhi Leonard shot .250 from 3 in college, but shot .744 from the line and is now Kawhi Leonard (.381 career 3PT shooter in the NBA).

    Karl-Anthony Towns barely took any 3s in college, shot .803 from the line and is now a 40%+ 3PT shooter in the NBA

    Delon Wright shot .299 from 3 in college and .814% from the line. He’s at .345 in the NBA, including .385 this season

    Alec Burks shot .313 from 3 in college, .804 from the line. He’s at .358 in the NBA.

    Donovan Mitchell shot .329 from 3 in college, .788 from the line. He’s at .355 in the NBA.

    I stopped at 5 that were all super easy to find. Let me know if you want more :)

  72. Hubert it’s not that I want Thibs because I want the 90’s Knicks reincarnated again. It’s that he is a really good basketball coach. I mean with this roster and front office it might not matter who the coach is we’re gonna suck anyway but when you think of all the rumored coach’s and actual coaches the Knicks have had lately none of them are anywhere near as accomplished as Thibs.

    Of course he has some flaws although I don’t think the minutes played stuff is really one of them. His offensive strategy and philosophy is definitely one and the way he can get along with the modern NBA player is a huge one. But he isn’t some dinosaur, he was a head coach in the NBA from 2010-2019 for God’s sake. The man is smart as hell when it comes to basketball, he isn’t a snake oil salesman like Fizdale.

    Having said all that of the rumored names I’d definitely take Atkinson over Thibs as I think we all would. But give me Thibs every day of the week over Mark Jackson, Calipari and even Mike Miller who while I appreciate the job he did after Fizdale was fired he is nowhere near the coach Thibs is.

    But unfortunately the real problems are in the front office and how they build the roster moving forward, that is much more important than whoever the head coach is next season.

  73. thenoblefacehumper:

    I stopped at 5 that were all super easy to find. Let me know if you want more :)

    You actually didn’t find 5. I set the bar at 80% purposely to make the point that nearly all great FT shooters in college are also good-to-great 3-pt shooters in college.

    -Kawhi doesn’t qualify. Ironically, he shot FTs more like LaMelo, so you’re actually making the point that LaMelo is just as likely to improve from 3 as Kawhi was. Or do you want to go into all the players who shot .74% from the line and 25% from 3 in college who didn’t become league-average 3-pt shooters?
    -Towns had a 3-pt sample size of 8. Great call!! I guess we’ll never know how he would have fared with a larger sample, but just a few months later in his first NBA season he shot 34% from a longer 3-pt line. What does that suggest would have happened if Calipari had turned him loose for 100 attempts?
    -Delon Wright meets the criteria. He is shooting .345 from 3 for his career. Even with his break-out season at age 27, he’s still below league average for his career. Wow, that’s promising for Hayes! Also, he was 23 when he was drafted and already shot well from 3 as a 22yo sophomore.
    -Donovan Mitchell also doesn’t meet the 80% criterion. Funny, though, his 3-pt shooting and FT shooting alsoimproved together from freshman to sophomore year. And he is not doing well in the league because of his 3-pt shooting, he’s 10x the athlete that Hayes is.
    -Alec Burks? Probably your best example…another league-average at best 3-pt shooter, picked over Kawhi Leonard, probably because of thinking like yours. That’s what you’re hoping for?

    You included 2 guys that didn’t meet the bar, one who met it with a pitiful sample size, and 2 who legitimately met it but topped out at or below league average 3-pt shooting bench-level players. And then smugly crowed about how easy it was to find 5, like they’re a dime a dozen. And I’m the one who’s trolling?

  74. You’re right, I can’t prove that overplaying guys leads to injuries. But it does seem likely that guys who are tired and on the floor with 2 minutes to go in a blowout in February are going to be less careful with, say, how they land after jumping.

    And if the question is, who’s right about load management: most NBA decision-makers or Tom Thibodeau, I don’t see why you would defer to Thibs. He’s got no amazing track record as a coach. What he does have is a lot of playoff injuries and early exits. He’s gotten out of the second round once and is 24-32 in the playoffs.

    Clearly he’s a good regular season coach. He keeps the pedal on the floor at all times and his teams win games they shouldn’t against opponents who are coasting. If we want to see the Knicks playing hard and winning with old school basketball, he’s our guy. I just think we’ll get to the playoffs and find that grit ‘n grind doesn’t work anymore.

    I’m sick of settling just because we’ve sucked for so long. I don’t want to settle for Thibs and his glaring weaknesses. I want a modern coach. Atkinson should be the guy.

  75. Hubert it’s not that I want Thibs because I want the 90’s Knicks reincarnated again. It’s that he is a really good basketball coach

    I got that. Didn’t mean to twist your message. I was just saying it got me thinking about how heavy minutes and 9 man rotations were an edge under Riley and could be an edge today.

    The lack of threes is my real concern with Thibs. I think Atkinson is the better choice. But I would be fine with Thibs.

  76. The issue with Thibodeau is that those Bulls teams underperformed in the playoffs vis a vis their regular season record. Granted his first season they won 62 games and made it to the conference finals, which is good, but going down in 5 to the Heat, not so much. They lost in the first round to the 76ers the next season. They let the Nets take them to seven games and then going down in 5 to the Heat the following season. The next year they lost in the first round to Washington. Somewhere in there was the Derrick Rose knee injury, which may mitigate things somewhat. I get these are the Knicks and records like that have not been seen since the last millennium, but I don’t think he is all that.

  77. I think some papers have been presented at Sloan about the benefit of resting players and limiting minutes but I didn’t read them and might not understand them. I think the data suggested you are less likely to get injured with fewer minutes (and obviously they would be smart enough to control for the fewer minutes).

    Players tend to want to play in some of the marginal situations where they are sore or hurting a bit but can play through the pain. If a guy is already hurting a little and you are sending him out there for 38 minutes or playing him on a back to back, you are probably raising the risk of an injury a little. So giving a guy a night off once in awhile or limiting his minutes probably helps as the season wears on and minor injuries start piling up.

    That said, you would think a good medical staff and coach would know what the latest data suggests and adjust their style over time “if a player needs the rest”. D’Antoni also tends to play his best players heavy minutes and he’s got Daryl Morey looking over his shoulder. I’m sure Morey knows what the data suggests. As long as it doesn’t get extreme or irresponsible it’s probably not a huge deal.

    There may be reasons to not want Thibs, but I think we are WAY over thinking this one factor relative to all he does well.

  78. I think this Hayes debate has gotten kind of silly.

    1. His overall record shooting 3s is poor.

    2. His most recent year was very good, but the sample size was very small.

    3. He’s a very good FT shooter.

    Young players tend to improve. I think assuming his final year was an indication of some improvement relative to his overall record seems reasonable. That’s especially true because his FT% also improved, However, since the sample size is small and it would represent a sudden huge leap, it’s less likely it’s an indication of a sustainable level of play. IMO, the most likely scenario is that he’s better than his overall record but not as good as his final year.

    However, there is no right or certain answer,

    That’s one reason teams have workouts. They are hoping to answer questions like these. If he comes in for a workout and is throwing up bricks for a few hours it’s going to tend to sway them differently than if he’s hitting shots from everywhere. That one workout won’t answer the question either, but it’s better than not seeing it.

    Other than that, I’ve never seen him play. It’s seems the debate about his skills goes beyond just what to expect from him as a 3 point shooter to his handle and other areas.

  79. NEWSFLASH:
    Killian Hayes played 20 games in 2019-20 for radiopharm Ulm in the Germany easycredit BB league regular season. In those games, he shot 21.8% from 3 on 12-56 shooting. When you combine that with his Eurocup stats where he shot 16-41, his total for 2019-20 in 30 games is 28-97 for 28.9%. That eliminates the sample size problem for 2019-20 and demonstrates that saying that he shot 39% from 3 this past year is cherry-picked bullshit.

    I don’t know why Basketball-reference.com doesn’t have stats for these games, or why typical draft sites don’t include them. If they were in a legit league in legit games during the same season, they should count.

  80. Stratomatic: Frequently wrong, but never in doubt: I think this Hayes debate has gotten kind of silly.

    Maybe overly snarky, but why would discussing the merits of drafting a polarizing pick be silly? Isn’t that what we do here?

    Stratomatic: Frequently wrong, but never in doubt: 2. His most recent year was very good, but the sample size was very small.

    Not actually true. His most recent 1/3 of a year was good, largely based on one outlier game. The other 2/3 of the games during the most recent year corroborate your first observation.

    Stratomatic: Frequently wrong, but never in doubt: That’s one reason teams have workouts.

    Agreed. And draft combine measurements. Any info helps.

    Anyway, I regret that the conversation devolved into a pissing contest. Putting any snark aside, my point is that he’d be a great pick in the 20’s or later, maybe in the teens in this weak draft. That’s probably where Donovan Mitchell or Alec Burks or Delon Wright would have gone if they came out as freshman. It was only because they improved both their FT shooting AND 3-pt shooting significantly as sophomores that their draft stock went up. There’s just not enough to go on with Hayes yet. Halliburton, for example, is a vastly more proven commodity. LaMelo is iffy too, and the sample size is also tiny. But his size, 2-way handle, court vision, rebounding, and assist to turnover numbers really jump out, his FT% is reasonably good, and he is ranked in the top-3 by most pundits, especially the ones who saw Doncic as #1 and had Knox outside the lottery.

  81. So in today’s NY Post, Berman discusses how the Knicks might try and acquire Donovan Mitchell. And he actually wrote this:

    “”But the Knicks have a lot of assets to throw at Utah, so it’s not inconceivable to build a suitable package of Barrett, their 2020 lottery pick and a one of the two future first-rounders they acquired from Dallas in the Kristaps Porzingis trade.”

    I mean, I never thought much of Berman, but this is some primo slop. If the Knicks made that deal, fans would burn MSG to the ground.

  82. When did Donovan Mitchell become so highly rated? I know he has a cool nickname and I know he is a good young player but is he a great player or likely to be?

    The idea of him being a back up the truck kind of guy is pretty surprising to me and probably shows how out of touch I am with the NBA.

  83. Hayes averaged 17 pts 8 asts 2 stls per 36 this year in ~800 min between the BBL and EuroCup. His passing is at an elite level, above Haliburton’s despite being 2 years younger. Few 18 years olds can do that. LaMelo can, but is atrocious scoring and playing defense.

    Even without Hayes’s 3pt shooting, which was never a selling point for me, Hayes has put up numbers that have been excellent. Hayes has been excellent on 2pt fg%, which suggests he could be reasonably efficient without a 3pt shot while still being young enough to improve his 3pt shooting.

  84. >Maybe overly snarky, but why would discussing the merits of drafting a polarizing pick be silly?

    Isn’t that what we do here?<

    What I mean by my comment was that both of you are digging in really hard on your position, but the answer is almost unknowable. It's not like we are comparing 2 seasoned pros with years of experience. We are debating the small sample of a young player in an unknown stage of development playing competition we don't have a very good line on. It's kind of tough for me to have a strong opinion.

    I lean more towards your position because you've made the case that even if he turns out to be a pretty good 3p shooter he still has a lot of flaws. I don't see how I would be happy drafting someone like that top 5-8. If he did turn out to be a bad/mediocre 3 point shooter, he could be a bust unless someone can convince me he's a Frank level defender and I could live with trying to develop his other hand and skills.

  85. And then smugly crowed about how easy it was to find 5, like they’re a dime a dozen. And I’m the one who’s trolling?

    Fresh 5 that all fit your completely arbitrary, nonsensical criteria: Brent Barry, Nate Robinson, Myles Turner, Mike Muscala, Mo Williams.

    Of course, if you lower the FT% threshold to 75% (seriously 80% is ridiculously high) you get a whole new slew of names that torpedo your whole point.

  86. Donovan Mitchell is young enough to make another leap in production. He’s worth a significant risk to me, though I’m not going all in on him. Ideally we give up this year’s first since the draft sucks.

    If Frank or RJ ever become able to run the point consistently, Mitchell fits in really well next to either one.

  87. Why is Utah trading Donovan Mitchell?

    I think a lot of Knicks fans would be ecstatic if we made that deal. Mitchell is a 23 year old all star.

  88. thenoblefacehumper: Fresh 5 that all fit your completely arbitrary, nonsensical criteria: Brent Barry, Nate Robinson, Myles Turner, Mike Muscala, Mo Williams.

    Of course, if you lower the FT% threshold to 75% (seriously 80% is ridiculously high) you get a whole new slew of names that torpedo your whole pedantic point.

  89. Anyway NCAA/international FT% being more predictive of NBA 3PT% than 3PT% itself is one of the most well-established and empirically demonstrated aspects of the otherwise relatively opaque NBA translation guessing game so I don’t really feel the need to argue about it any further.

    Hayes will likely be my #1, but I’d be very happy with Ball, Haliburton, or Okongwu as well (I’m assuming we’re in the 6-10 range).

    My wish list for the Clippers’ pick:
    Tyler Bey
    Paul Reed
    Kira Lewis Jr.
    Patrick Williams

    My wish list with the Charlotte pick:
    Devon Dotson
    Carlos Alocen
    Mason Jones
    Skylar Mays
    Trevelin Queen

  90. >When did Donovan Mitchell become so highly rated? I know he has a cool nickname and I know he is a good young player but is he a great player or likely to be?<

    I'm in the middle on this one.

    I think he's better than WS/48 suggests, but not as good as his "star" reputation.

    That said, I wouldn't mind having him in the backcourt with Frank if the price was right. He's also probably going to keep getting better. Berman's price just seems way too steep.

  91. Why is Utah trading Donovan Mitchell?

    I think a lot of Knicks fans would be ecstatic if we made that deal. Mitchell is a 23 year old all star.

    Wait D Red you’re serious?? RJ, this years first and a Dallas pick for Donovan Mitchell? Wow.

  92. Mitchell is a great find late in the lottery on a rookie-scale contract when you already employ a perennial DPOY candidate.

    I have a feeling his reputation would change quite quickly with a max-contract, on a team that gutted their asset chest for him.

  93. In theory you could build your DRose/Melo offensive focal point around Donovant Mitchell.

    Frank/Mitchell/Bullock(???)/???/Mitch is a player or two away from a really strong defensive unit. We probably top out at 55ish wins and may struggle to compete for a championship without another star, but that’s a hell of a lot better than we’ve had.

    Still not sure I’m giving up RJ and 2 firsts. Even understanding the Dallas pick will be end of 1st rd, this years 1st isn’t worth its price tag, and RJ was terrible, ideally we’d get something else back too.

  94. I’m saying I think a lot of knicks fans would be excited by that deal. People think Mitchell is a budding superstar.

  95. thenoblefacehumper: Fresh 5 that all fit your completely arbitrary, nonsensical criteria: Brent Barry, Nate Robinson, Myles Turner, Mike Muscala, Mo Williams.

    Of course, if you lower the FT% threshold to 75% (seriously 80% is ridiculously high) you get a whole new slew of names that torpedo your whole point.

    Barry was a 4-year college players who would not have been drafted if their shooting didn’t improve dramatically in college.
    Muscala, Nate and Turner are all at or around league average 3-pt shooters.
    Only Barry and Mo became reliable 3-pt shooters, and only Turner was ever worth being a lottery pick.

    Of the 10 guys you named so far, only 2 were significantly above league average for a 3-pt shooter, and most showed evidence of improvement before being trusted as a draft pick.

  96. So I had a dream last night..

    The Cavs traded Love and a 2022 1st to the Dubs for Wiggins and this year’s 1st. That then allowed the Knicks to scoop up one of either Garland or Sexton on the cheap, thus allowing them to truly draft BPA without worrying about positional need so much- meaning not pressing for a PG at wherever we land in the lottery.

    Then I woke up lol. Short of something like that happening, I’m ok with doing what we have to do to land a combo of either Toppin/Haliburton, Cole Anthony/Nesmith, or Maxey/Jalen Smith. I don’t necessarily think those combos are ideal, but that’s a serious influx of young talent to add to the core. I’m with the shits lol

  97. I dunno..Sexton and Garland don’t fit together anyway IMO, and depending on where the Dub’s pick lands, I figure they’d go for backcourt help since Wiseman won’t be available if the pick isn’t #1

    A guy can dream dammit lol

  98. “I’m saying I think a lot of knicks fans would be excited by that deal. People think Mitchell is a budding superstar.”

    If it could be done for this years unprotected lottery pick and Barrett I’d do it in a second. I’d try to get Tony Bradley to back up MR.

    Utah is owned by a family with not uber deep pockets and is looking at a very good player and minor borderline all-star and Maxing him for eternity

    If Barrett didn’t have a big rep from Duke I don’t know how anyone thinks he has a substantially better future than Iggy. I mean Barrett wasn’t thrust into a good situation but he can’t shoot an ounce. And nothing argues he will get substantially better. I’d be happy to swap him out with a pick in a draft that no one thinks a star is lurking in even @#1

    I’d think the pitch to UFA’s moving forward would be simplified… Maybe AD sees himself playing the 4 next to MR and Mitchell for the next 5 years rather than an aging Lebron and a bunch of minimum contract players with no draft choices moving forward.

    Jesus… plz give me 2 – 23 yr old borderline all stars to build around…..

  99. bobneptune: I’d think the pitch to UFA’s moving forward would be simplified… Maybe AD sees himself playing the 4 next to MR and Mitchell for the next 5 years rather than an aging Lebron and a bunch of minimum contract players with no draft choices moving forward.

    No way anyone opts out this year with the NBA salary cap getting crunched. Things would need to be really bad there for that to happen

  100. The salary cap for next year will be based on expected revenue for next year not on the revenue for this season. Given the unusual circumstances now it’s probably going to be negotiated between the union and the league. If the cap went down a lot many on both sides would be hurt. And the expected revenues for next season could be ok. So I don’t see them agreeing on a large drop in the cap.

  101. Team needs shooting.

    I’d be down with Halliburton with the lotto pick and Bey with the Clippers pick. When those guys throw the ball at the basket it sometimes goes in.

  102. Anybody like Kira Lewis as a guy to trade up into the teens for? Decent TS%, 3PT%, FT%, steals and rebounds, turns it over too much but lightning quick, good penetrator. He and Halliburton might make a nice combo.

  103. in 99 Alan Houston shot 48% from 3 and took only 3 attempts a game. It’s interesting to think how much of a better player he would have been if anyone understood you should shoot lots of 3s back then.

  104. As bad as RJ was this year, I think he has a solid Rudy Gay or DeRozan future ahead of him. He definitely needs to slide down to sf as he’s only going to get stronger, and we need to put shooters around him (and get rid of post ball hogs like Randle).

    Getting a guy like Toppin could open up the floor for him, or a guy like Haliburton, who can shoot and guard perimeter guards, would help.

    Re: Mitchell, I just think we’re way too early in the team-building process to do that trade. I know it’s been said here like, 1000s of times, but Rose has to be patient and collect a team FULL of plus players – that means 6-7 definitively good, young guys, not Mitch and a maybe or two.

    That means great drafting and a savvy trade or two for guys other teams have given up on. THEN you can trade for that final star piece if you’re unable to draft one.

    And sure, keep a handful of vets like Taj around, but no Portis contracts please. Everyone knew that guy’s ceiling was journeyman tough guy. In other words, they STILL need a good front office!

  105. I really don’t want to trade Barrett or young guys for Mitchell if we have to add in picks to do so, even though I like Mitchell. I’d really like to trade Randall. It’s not that he’s bad, but he doesn’t fit well. There’s no way to trade him for Mitchell because the Jazz don’t have a high salaried unused player to send back. So how about Randall, Gibson and the Clippers pick for Gobert? The Jazz get more scoring, a usable center, and lose a player they may consider disruptive. We get a very good center and a more coherent team. This works in the trade machine.

  106. Does anyone like Cole Anthony?

    I never watched him play, but he was inefficient in college. I don’t see the case for him at all.

  107. >I really don’t want to trade Barrett or young guys for Mitchell if we have to add in picks to do so, even though I like Mitchell. I’d really like to trade Randall. It’s not that he’s bad, but he doesn’t fit well. <

    I like Mitchell also, but I'm not convinced Barrett can't become a better player eventually. He's way younger and was in a terrible situation last year in NY given his current skill set. I'm close to certain he would have looked better on a real NBA team with some spacing to take advantage of his best current NBA skill, which is getting to the rim.

    The thing that blows my mind about this group is that a lot of people are on board for rebuilding almost exclusively via tanking and drafting, but some of the same people are willing or ready to move on from kids that are 5-6 years away from their peak unless the kid is a top 5 prospect in the league as a rookie. Not everyone can be or has to be Zion or Morant to think you'll have a very good player eventually. You sometimes have to wait 3-5 years to see what you have.

  108. I agree with you. I don’t want to trade the young guys. I’m not sure why you quoted me in your post.

  109. Stick with our high character talented youngsters till they prove that they suck or till they become ‘crooked’.
    That’s my opinion.

    Create a high character young coherent core.

  110. So how about Randall, Gibson and the Clippers pick for Gobert?

    If Leon Rose has the power of hypnosis, he may as well abuse it a little more than this right?

  111. Does anyone like Cole Anthony?

    His parents

    DRed:
    fyi, MSG is running some games from 1999 today.Game 5 Miami is on at 4.

    Definitely remember everything about where I was and what I was doing for this game.

  112. It might be a facile comparison but to me Cole Anthony has the same poor body control and lack of fluidity as the son of his dad’s contemporary, Austin Rivers. When he gets near the bucket he just flings the ball up there.

    The eye test matches the crummy box score results in my opinion. He’s not a smooth looking operator at all.

  113. Ha! That’s funny Hubert.

    That stat about Houston would be crazy but I don’t think he ever shot 48% from three. Shot 48% from 2 one year.

    He should have shot a ton more threes though…

  114. >I agree with you. I don’t want to trade the young guys. I’m not sure why you quoted me in your post.<

    I was just letting you know I agree with you. :-)

  115. Allan Houston’s career high in 3pt% was 43%, for his entire career he shot 40% on only 4 attempts per game. He was an 86% career FT shooter (lead the league one season at 92%) but only attempted 3.6 FT per game.

    He shot 49% from 2pt range twice in his career (46% for his career). Considering how few 3pt and FT he took its pretty remarkable as a SG with fairly high usage he had a career TS% of just below 55% which during his era was above average. If he played in today’s NBA and took more 3pters he would’ve probably had a TS% close to 60%.

  116. It’s funny, it looks like John Starks was a bit of an innovator. First guy to crack 600 threes in the NBA. He did it in 94-5 and shot 100 more than anyone had ever shot in a season before (although some guy named Louie Dampier was hoisting them in the ABA in the late 60s). He only shot 35.5% from three for a 52.6% ts%, below what he would have his next two seasons shooting fewer threes.

    George McCloud blew past him the next year with 678 attempts which is actually more than three of Steph Curry’s five league leading attempt totals. That surprised me. He shot 38% though and Curry was, well, higher.

  117. Remember in 1994-95 the 3pt line was shortened and everyone started jacking up 3pters. The 3pt line was moved back to normal before the 1997-98 season. Before the current 3pt explosion all the single season records were set during those 3 years with the shorter 3pt line.

  118. ” First guy to crack 600 threes in the NBA. He did it in 94-5 and shot 100 more than anyone had ever shot in a season before (although some guy named Louie Dampier was hoisting them in the ABA in the late 60s).”

    That guy Louie Dampier (HOF player) was a pretty terrific player. He teamed up with Dan Issel and Artis Gilmore to make the core of an excellent team. Issel and Gilmore made a pretty formidable 4/5 combination.

    In the early 70’s the Kentucky colonels, The DrJ/Paultz/Kenon/Taylor/Williamson Nets and the George McGinness/Mel Daniels/Roger Brown Pacers were pretty terrific teams that were fun to watch and could give the best of the NBA a run for their money.

  119. One of the things that made me laugh about Miami game 5 is it was notable that the Knicks had scored over 90 twice against the Heat in the series.

  120. I am very ready for this Jordan documentary. Had no idea it was going to be from contemporaneous all-access footage.

  121. I’d really like to trade Randall. It’s not that he’s bad, but he doesn’t fit well.

    Somehow I think Randall’s fit with Mitch will be just as good as Gobert’s fit with Mitch.

    some of the same people are willing or ready to move on from kids that are 5-6 years away from their peak

    Ideally we’ll be picking up some of these kinds of players after their first contract but.. I think you’re probably right about the perils of drafting youth because when it takes too long to pan out you’re probably looking at a journeyman at best anyway and you’ve probably got to pay them market value on their second contract to see any benefit. You might as well just get that player in free agency. Of course the Knicks have been trying and failing at that for quite some time, haha.

  122. What would the Knicks need to add to an offer of Knox plus both of this year’s 1sts, unprotected, to get Mitchell? Would that plus next year’s Dallas pick get it done? I would consider that. Do we like anyone out of this draft? Perhaps top 2 or 3 protection on our pick this year, plus the Clippers and Dallas pick.

  123. The Honorable Cock Jowles:
    I am very ready for this Jordan documentary. Had no idea it was going to be from contemporaneous all-access footage.

    Man, I went to so many NYK-CHI games during his prime….some good, mostly gutwrenching. Watching anything related to him always brings on a sense of trauma.

  124. Grocer:
    What would the Knicks need to add to an offer of Knox plus both of this year’s 1sts, unprotected, to get Mitchell?Would that plus next year’s Dallas pick get it done?I would consider that.Do we like anyone out of this draft?Perhaps top 2 or 3 protection on our pick this year, plus the Clippers and Dallas pick.

    I don’t think it’s worth it. Mitchell is a dynamic player, but it’s not like he’s Anthony Davis or anything. If you’re drafting in the top -8, there is a reasonable chance that a player as good or better than Mitchell will be available, and a better than reasonable chance that a player almost as good as Mitchell will be there. With the lower picks, you can get players to replace guys like Portis, Ellington and Gibson. I’d rather stand pat and give Knox, Frank and RJ another year to show something, tank again if necessary, and either pick a proven shooter like Halliburton or trade down (or up) for a guy like Nesmith. Maybe keep a couple of Dotson, Harkless, trier. Maybe keep Bullock and/or Payton. Maybe think about a FA like Wood. Donovan Mitchell is not a guy I blow our wad of draft pick on, and certainly don’t give up RJ or Mitch for.

  125. One thing I liked about watching Halliburton’s film is how comfortable he seems shooting from beyond the NBA arc. He’s got like Trae Young range, shooting consistently over 40% on good volume with lots of 25-footers mixed in.

  126. Hey Z, agree completely with your Mitchell take. And agree on Haliburton (but one L, not the evil corporation). Trying to decide if I’d rather have him on the team shooting threes from deep or have him on another team so I can watch Mitch jump from below the freethrow line to block that funky shot. I suppose there’s a bigger upside to having him on the team…

  127. Calling in live from NYC. Been living here with my wife and two kids in a 1 bedroom apartment. And honestly (aside from all the death around me), it’s been some of the best time of my life. My kids are 2 and 4, so getting all this time with them is truly magical.

    On to basketball. I would like to weigh in on the Z-Man v TNFH debate. I have long said Z-Man is a troll. He was the first one to call out Frank being terrible, so i give him that. Otherwise, giant fart. TNFH is a legit intellectually beast (even though he’s only 22 and has never even seen pat ewing play). TNFH is just stupidly smart. Z-Man, you should really check yourself before you start throwing out garbage statistical analysis at this kid. He’s been crushing you for like two weeks now. For the love of god, you are starting to sound like Strat, and that is the heaviest insult i can throw around on this board.

  128. NahNahNahWeAreGoingTheOtherWay:

    On to basketball. I would like to weigh in on the Z-Man v TNFH debate. I have long said Z-Man is a troll. He was the first one to call out Frank being terrible, so i give him that. Otherwise, giant fart. TNFH is a legit intellectually beast (even though he’s only 22 and has never even seen pat ewing play). TNFH is just stupidly smart. Z-Man, you should really check yourself before you start throwing out garbage statistical analysis at this kid. He’s been crushing you for like two weeks now. For the love of god, you are starting to sound like Strat, and that is the heaviest insult i can throw around on this board.

    lol, whatever. I agree that tnfh is smart. He and I have been largely in agreement, for example, he was with me from the beginning on Frank, although have diverged on that somewhat lately, I’m cautiously optimistic about him. He has been wrong on lots of things, especially inn regard to the draft. Was it a giant fart in 2015 when I wanted to draft Porzingis and he preferred Justise Winslow? Not to mention that he wanted to buy a draft pick to select the great Dakari Johnson. Mostly, we’ve been In agreement. 2018 and 2019 neither of us liked Knox and we were both lukewarm at best on RJ. We were both thrilled to get Mitch.

    This year, we vehemently disagree on Hayes and also (less so) on LaMelo, which is ok, should be fun finding out who is right down the road.

    Now, you calling me a troll, THAT is dumb. I probably go at it too hard with some folks here from time to time, and I’ve been wrong my share of times, but in hindsight I think my record is pretty good on drafting and player evaluation, and am mostly in agreement with the guys i would guess that you consider to be smart. Don’t get where the personal attack came from.

  129. hindsight is a limited metric for success when you are arguing about statistical probabilities. lots of stuff can look good in hindsight merely because the unlikely outlier case became a reality. easy to understand example. if i win the NY lottery and become a millionaire, i could not then argue that i am a financial wizard just because my bet paid off. my decision to play the lottery was always a shitty decision (whether or not it paid off), and the fact that i won says nothing about my ability to make good decisions in the future (on a going forward basis).

    just because TNFH was wrong on a few draft picks doesn’t necessarily mean that his methods are flawed. your methods, however, are deeply flawed.

  130. Yeah when I was 20 I was wrong about Dakari Johnson (nice thing about whiffing on a bought pick is it doesn’t really matter) but I was right about Delon Wright and Fred VanVleet.

    Sorry, needed to defend the honor of my college sophomore self.

  131. NahNahNahWeAreGoingTheOtherWay: just because TNFH was wrong on a few draft picks doesn’t necessarily mean that his methods are flawed. your methods, however, are deeply flawed.

    So I get it, every time I’m right it’s just dumb luck and every time tnfh is wrong it’s just a statistical anomaly. OK.

    At the beginning of our argument, tnfh suggested that the French and German leagues were superior to the NCAA. I sited a study that refuted that broadly-held assumption. Was that method wrong? And Eurocup was equal to high-level NCAA play, but the sample size is tiny. I had a problem with saying he was legit 39% from 3 because of an outlier game skewing the small sample. Regardless of the future implications, it turns out that when his other 20 games were added in for 2019-20, I was right.

    We can quibble about the relationship between FT shooting and future 3-pt shooting. I’m dubious of aspects the study that tnfh cited and its methodology, and the way he’s employing it to support a case for drafting Hayes #1 (which is what he would do.) Are there guys who had good FT%s and shot terribly from 3, then didn’t improve their soph year and beyond and were never drafted because of it? If not, doesn’t that skew the sample? If a guy wasn’t drafted until AFTER his 3-pt shooting improved, does that skew the sample?

    I also said that with Hayes’ athleticism and skill issues (seriously, which PG in the NBA ever had every scouting report say something like “he hardly ever dribbles or passes with his right hand”?, projecting him as most likely a league-average 3-pt shooter based on expected improvement from his current suckitude is not good enough reason in and of itself to merit a top-10 draft slot? Is he the next Nik Stauskas? Or Jerian Grant? Or Cameron Payne? Or maybe even a good consolation prize like Mo Williams…is that worth the gamble?

  132. The United Nations has asked for a global cease fire during the pandemic. In that spirit, I’m asking Z-man and TNFH to cease hostilities and end their “5 days of Hayes” conflagration.

  133. thenoblefacehumper: Yeah when I was 20 I was wrong about Dakari Johnson (nice thing about whiffing on a bought pick is it doesn’t really matter) but I was right about Delon Wright and Fred VanVleet.

    Sorry, needed to defend the honor of my college sophomore self.

    You whiffed MAJORLY on Winslow, and that was the most consequential pick for the Knicks in the last decade.

    Here was your ppreference list in 2017:
    1. Ball
    2. Isaac
    3. Fultz
    4. Z. Collins
    5. Smith
    6. Fox
    7. Josh Jackson
    8. Anunoby
    9. Mitchell
    10. Tatum
    11. Hart
    12. Tony Bradley
    13. Leaf
    14. Ntilikina
    15. Monk
    16. Kennard
    17. Ike Anigbou
    18. Markkanen
    19. J. Collins
    20. Justin Jackson

    …and you made the following comment when we drafted Frank: “Passing on Smith is dumb as hell.”

    It’s all good, but at the very least, you should be a bit more humble about your drafting prowess. And Nahnahnah, pull the bug out of your ass.

  134. I don’t think it’s worth it. Mitchell is a dynamic player, but it’s not like he’s Anthony Davis or anything. If you’re drafting in the top -8, there is a reasonable chance that a player as good or better than Mitchell will be available, and a better than reasonable chance that a player almost as good as Mitchell will be there.

    In a normal draft sure, but this one appears to be incredi-bad. The specific chances of a Mitchell level player coming out of the top 8 seem to be lower than normal, and the chances the Knicks draft that player so low it’s not worth thinking about. Right now that pick is worth more than it will be once the ping pong balls drop. And sure, we could use the later picks to grab useful role players, except you know. Knicks. So it’d be holding onto the chance that you luck into another Mitch. Seems like a long shot.

  135. Huh, I’m actually alright with that board. When I first saw you posted it I thought it’d be much worse. If the Knicks abided by it we’d have Zach Collins, who looks pretty good, instead of Ntilikina.

  136. You whiffed MAJORLY on Winslow, and that was the most consequential pick for the Knicks in the last decade.

    He’s right, TNFH. You ruined the Knicks. You’re fired.

    Oh wait, this is just a blog.

    I once wanted the Knicks to draft Malik Monk. My mother still loves me.

  137. I still can’t believe the Knicks passed on Ron Artest to draft Frederick Weiss. I also thought John Wallace was a steal with the 18th pick of the draft….

  138. As has been mentioned I never saw Patrick Ewing play basketball live, so I’m hoping this Jordan doc provides me with the necessary amount of resentment towards the man. There’s such a funny divide between pre/post ‘90s Knicks fans when it comes to Jordan.

  139. Whoa, now you’re saying that you’re glad that Zach Collins would have been your pick because other teams dumbly picked Tatum, Fox, and Markkanen. Or are you saying that you’re glad you would have picked Zach over Mitchell and Collins? And would you really have picked Zach? Because at that exact moment you said, “Passing on Smith was dumb as hell.” I’m wondering why didn’t you say “Passing on Zach was dumb as hell.” And so what if you preferred Josh Jackson to Jayson Tatum, anyone could have made that mistake…except Danny Ainge.

  140. (Quote) I still can’t believe the Knicks passed on Ron Artest to draft Frederick Weiss. I also thought John Wallace was a steal with the 18th pick of the draft…(Quote)
    Same here. Artest was such an obvious pick. Wallace was Melo before Melo for Syracuse fans. That was a helluva NCAA run. The finish to the Georgia game was awesome.

  141. Hubert: He’s right, TNFH. You ruined the Knicks. You’re fired.

    Oh wait, this is just a blog.

    I once wanted the Knicks to draft Malik Monk. My mother still loves me.

      

    This coming from a guy who call me a racist because I referred to Miller as a gym rat. Glad your mother loves you though!

    BTW Monk shot .822 from the FT line in college in 1200+ minutes. He’ll be lighting it up from 3 any day now!

  142. Z-Man can’t you just let enough be enough on this one? I enjoy reading both of your takes but at this point it’s getting a little ridiculous. You don’t have to relentlessly prosecute every single point people disagree with you on.

  143. Sorry, Mike, I was pretty much done before NahNahNah added in his two cents. Would you have let that go?

  144. Z-man:
    Sorry, Mike, I was pretty much done before NahNahNah added in his two cents. Would you have let that go?

    Can you maybe let it go by 2024 or are you going to bring it up incessantly like everything else forever and ever?

  145. Hubert: Can you maybe let it go by 2024 or are you going to bring it up incessantly like everything else forever and ever?

    I rarely bring up Frank to gloat unless someone gets delusional or snarky. Pretty much hit that one on the head though. And had similar arguments at the time with some pretty “smart” people, some of whom nastily dismissed me for making a judgment based on watching 10 minutes of film and made the same arguments about “grown men, better league, yadayada.” Ntilakilla (ras) was the nastiest and most persistent antagonist.

    As I said, most longtime posters have been right and wrong a million times, especially about the draft. No one should be too high and mighty about it. But in 2024 if we drafted Hayes and he sucks, and I have a similar concern about another Euro wunderkind, you can count on me bringing it up. If I’m wrong about him and he proves to be legit #1 pick material, I’ll eat crow as I have many times.

Comments are closed.