Knicks Morning News (2017.09.15)

  • [ESPN] Sources: Knicks set to sign veteran PG Jack
    (Thursday, September 14, 2017 5:34:30 PM)

    Sources: Knicks set to sign veteran PG Jack

  • [NYPost] Knicks turn to ex-Nets veteran to mentor their young point guard
    (Thursday, September 14, 2017 2:35:12 PM)

    Jarrett Jack is back in New York — just on the opposite side of the East River. The former Brooklyn Nets point guard agreed to a one-year deal with the rival Knicks on Thursday afternoon. A source close to the player said the deal — which was first reported

  • [NYTimes] Jarrett Jack Set to Join Knicks on One-Year Deal
    (Friday, September 15, 2017 2:03:54 AM)

    Jack is the third point guard the Knicks have signed this summer, giving them insurance behind the unproven rookie Frank Ntilikina.

  • [NY Newsday] Knicks sign Jarrett Jack to one-year deal, source says
    (Thursday, September 14, 2017 9:15:15 PM)

    The Knicks are signing another veteran point guard to help mentor first-round pick Frank Ntilikina.

  • [SNY Knicks] Report: Knicks to finalize agreement with Jarrett Jack in coming days
    (Thursday, September 14, 2017 5:50:26 PM)

    The Knicks will finalize a one-year agreement with PG Jarrett Jack either on Friday or early in the week, reports Ian Begley of ESPN.

  • [SNY Knicks] Kristaps Porzingis 22nd on ESPN’s #NBArank
    (Thursday, September 14, 2017 1:00:36 PM)

    Knicks F Kristaps Porzingis is ranked 22nd on ESPN’s NBA player rankings.

  • [SNY Knicks] 40-year-old Stephon Marbury says he’s spoken to team about NBA comeback
    (Thursday, September 14, 2017 8:40:51 AM)

    Former Knicks PG Stephon Marbury is eyeing a return to the NBA where he hasn’t played since the 2008-09 season.

  • [NYDN] Knicks to sign ex-Nets PG Jarrett Jack to a one-year deal: report
    (Thursday, September 14, 2017 3:37:29 PM)

    The Knicks have found another veteran guard to mentor 18-year-old rookie Frank Ntilikina.

  • 47 replies on “Knicks Morning News (2017.09.15)”

    Ok folks..the only thing I can really do today due to the surgeon choppin half my thyroid off yesterday, is watch movies and post comments lol.

    Looking forward to some dope hoops convo today..

    I got to thinkin about this Jarrett Jack move. If he’s healthy, it’s gonna cause a few ripples. Baker will likely have to be a full time SG. Lee will have to be traded even more now, unless TH2 can play the SF full time. Randle will be gone. Dotson will have an uphill climb to rotation minutes mostly due to Hornacek’s affinity for Baker. I think Perry may have to find trades for Lance or Kuz and Lee somehow- and that’s not gonna be easy. And let’s not even get started on the Melo sitchew or the undrafteds with guarantees..

    Ramon Sessions and Jarret Jack are both pretty terrible options but they’re veterans who provide insight and competition for Frank Ntilikina. I guess.

    I think Jack is the starter at the beginning but Ntilikina is starting by New Year’s Day.

    I suspect the Knicks have no idea what Sessions has left in the tank after his injuries. Now they have two guys coming off injuries that they are clueless about. It would not shock me if Baker has improved his shot a little and he’s the starter until Frank is ready.

    this is incredible news for those of us who want to buy jerseys that don’t risk obsoletion every trade deadline and happen to have babies named jack

    If nothing else, you can’t look at our point guard situation and say the Knicks are targeting meaningless wins.

    PTMilo – I also hit the jackpot. Who knew naming my three year old Ntilikina would pay such dividends.

    PTMilo – I also hit the jackpot. Who knew naming my three year old Ntilikina would pay such dividends.

    haha, nice

    Also, do you plan on changing his name when Frank gets traded before his rookie contract is up?

    Sessions and Jack – ” now they have two guys coming off injuries they are clueless about”
    Sounds like a brilliant plan for the most important position on the team that they’ve been sorely lacking for oh I don’t know call it 20+ years. Some day the front office will improve, whether we’re there yet remains to be seen. So far it looks like rinse and repeat…

    At best Jack is going to be bad, but playable, like a mid tier backup. Sessions could be averagish. I’m not sure why we’re bothering with Jack unless he’s a real character guy

    Sounds like a brilliant plan for the most important position on the team that they’ve been sorely lacking for oh I don’t know call it 20+ years. Some day the front office will improve, whether we’re there yet remains to be seen. So far it looks like rinse and repeat…

    I, to this day, still can’t figure out why D’Antoni thought Marbury couldn’t thrive in his system. That practically ruined Steph. He was washed up as soon as he left shortly after putting up really good numbers as a Knick. He wouldn’t have been Nashian, but I certainly would have enjoyed Steph in that offense for a season as opposed to what we trotted out at the one during D’Antoni’s tenure- except for the short lived Linsanity

    Also, do you plan on changing his name when Frank gets traded before his rookie contract is up?

    Yes, maybe to something a little easier to say. Like Luka.

    The Mets play Reyes, Cabrera and Aoki over their young guys. The Knicks sign Sessions and Jack. Both teams are better served by losing. All of the above mentioned players suck anyway. Why are they doing this? Play the young guys, get them experience, improve draft position. Frank and Ron should play a lot of minutes. Trade Lee so Timmy can be the unquestioned 2. Let Dotson get some minutes. Maybe the Knicks have resigned themselves to the fact they can’t trade Melo and want to get the 8th seed again? That can’t be true can it? Am I taking crazy pills?

    I don’t think there’s space in the rotation for both Sessions and Jack. Baker and Frank both need to play obviously and Lee and THJ are clearly rotation players. That leaves space for one of the veteran PGs and even then, probably not a ton for of minutes unless they’re really easing Frank in, or they plan on using THJ at the 3 a lot. I’ve got no problem with taking an extra flier/locker room guy as long as that’s all it is. I’m worried the temptation to “compete” this year is going to be strong though given that it should be very difficult to fall out of the race for the 8th seed in the East.

    Jack is coming off of injuries and so is Sessions. I think the Knicks are seeing how much each has left in the tank and probably don’t intend on running both out there. Sort of a battle of washed up injury riddled mediocre PGs. May the most average win.

    The Mets don’t have enough warm bodies to send out on the field. They traded away every veteran that had any value at all– Duda, Walker, Reed, Bruce, Granderson. They are playing Nori Aoki because they literally had two healthy outfielders on the roster. They had a four-man logjam in the outfield when the season began, and two of those guys are injured and two have been traded away. I guess you could make the case that they should be giving Travis Taijeron some run, but he’s a non-prospect and he can’t play the field with any degree of competency. They’re playing all the meaningful young guys pretty much every day. They could probably be running Gavin Cecchini out at 2B every day instead of Reyes, but from what I can tell Cecchini sucks. He was horrible at AAA and hasn’t hit in the big leagues either.

    Point is, the Mets, although they’re having a miserable season, actually did the things the Knicks should have done. They traded away veterans who were useless to their future plans, even if it meant taking low-impact prospects in return. They are playing the young kids. They are generally getting their asses kicked every day. They’ll probably draft in the 5-7 range. There are no intriguing young players who are being blocked by veterans.

    PTMilo – I also hit the jackpot. Who knew naming my three year old Ntilikina would pay such dividends.

    well played. finally someone who would know their way around the little table on signing day.

    The Mets don’t have enough warm bodies to send out on the field. They traded away every veteran that had any value at all– Duda, Walker, Reed, Bruce, Granderson. They are playing Nori Aoki because they literally had two healthy outfielders on the roster. They had a four-man logjam in the outfield when the season began, and two of those guys are injured and two have been traded away. I guess you could make the case that they should be giving Travis Taijeron some run, but he’s a non-prospect and he can’t play the field with any degree of competency. They’re playing all the meaningful young guys pretty much every day. They could probably be running Gavin Cecchini out at 2B every day instead of Reyes, but from what I can tell Cecchini sucks. He was horrible at AAA and hasn’t hit in the big leagues either.

    sounds like tebow time – go muts!!!

    I just saw Woj’s tweet that the worst 3 teams will share a 14% chance for the #1 overall starting in 2019.

    Level the tanking field! Now we’ll have more teams fighting for more top (bottom) slots. What a plan!

    Rank the 4 PGs in order of what their minutes per game will be this season.

    I think it’s Frank, Baker, Sessions, Jack.

    I just saw Woj’s tweet that the worst 3 teams will share a 14% chance for the #1 overall starting in 2019.

    Level the tanking field! Now we’ll have more teams fighting for more top (bottom) slots. What a plan!

    the lakers did a great job of organizational tanking this year…

    i remember this topic coming up a few times here during the spring about how to lessen the desire for bad teams to tank…

    there were a few decent ideas put forth; but, other than balancing the draft position odds for the worst eight teams or so – what possibilities are there for getting bad teams to stop tanking?

    there were a few decent ideas put forth; but, other than balancing the draft position odds for the worst eight teams or so – what possibilities are there for getting bad teams to stop tanking?

    Zach Lowe’s wheel, but it will never happen.

    I would give the non-playoff teams equal odds, and give the first-round losers half the odds of the non-playoff teams.

    JK – agreed on most, especially with Flores and Rivera getting hurt, but Nimmo needs to be playing everyday – against lefties too – and he’s not. Ok, enough baseball… Can’t wait to see how good Frank is. Would be a game changer for us if he’s good. POTENTIAL comps for him – Derek Harper, Gary Payton, Clyde… “Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things…”

    Yeah as long as you’re trying to use the draft to level the playing field, meaning that the worst teams get the best incoming rookies and some (non-negligible) number of years of control over them, you’re going to have tanking. You can move around the numbers, shift the incentives to different parts of the curve, etc. but if bad teams get the best rookies teams are going to try to be bad. Simple as that.

    Now there’s no particular reason that has to be the way you level the playing field. I’ve never heard anyone suggest giving the worst teams additional cap space, but that’s not really fundamentally any different of an idea. It would also incentivize tanking somewhat, but maybe less as being terrible doesn’t really make you attractive to free agents. Then you could make the draft neutral like the wheel Jowles brought up, or even dissolve the draft entirely, and make all incoming rookies free agents. You could also just not worry about leveling the field and just let bad organizations be bad, but that’s probably not good for business long-term.

    The lottery has two purposes. Help bad teams improve and spread talent around the league. The point of both is to maintain and increase the fanbase/interest/revenue. So is tanking causing more revenue loss than teams sucking/being boring for years? I’m gonna say no, it’s mostly a PR problem.

    Maybe the wheel could work but considering that all draft classes aren’t created equal I don’t think it would do a better job of spreading out talent than the current system. I guess spreading out the lottery chance like that will disincentivise being the absolute worst but teams are that bad just from flat out sucking too. Recent examples include the Knicks, the Nets being rock bottom even when they had no picks..

    The Sixers created an image problem for the league by exploiting the draft mechanics over the course of years, and that’s what’s really driving this. But the Lakers tanked without causing any serious problems. There are other examples of tanking a year or two to start off a rebuild that don’t cause problems with the fan base. The only tanking ‘problem’ the league has is sustained tanking and there’s really just one example of that. I don’t see this change stopping that. The real issue they need to be able to fix is incompetent front offices but I’ll be damned if I can see any reasonable way to do that absent ditching the draft and salary cap.

    giving the worst teams additional cap space, but that’s not really fundamentally any different of an idea

    Interesting idea from the perspective of competitive balance. Perhaps adjusting luxury tax thresholds to allow overspending by teams that — ironically — were bad at managing cap space to begin with. This is all a microeconomic lab experiment, since the CBA would never be negotiated to allow certain teams to spend more money without penalty. Ownership groups would have a fit, and I’m sure there would be issues for the players as well.

    Another option would be creating a “free market” for incoming rookies but designating more money for bad teams and less for good teams. Giving, say, $6M to the Nets and $3M to the Warriors, money that vanishes if not spent. Incoming players would be given much more flexibility and would have to consider playing time and salary as factors for their first free agency. The vets would never go for it, IMO.

    There are so many ways to engineer “balance” in sports leagues, but the NBA seems to have done a pisspoor job of doing it.

    @1 – Get well soon!

    @14

    The Mets play Reyes, Cabrera and Aoki over their young guys. The Knicks sign Sessions and Jack. Both teams are better served by losing.

    And the Jets are starting a 38 year old QB (McCown) and a 31 year old RB (Forte). Does anyone else see a pattern?

    @22

    Rank the 4 PGs in order of what their minutes per game will be this season.

    What about Dotson, Randal and Jamaraz? I would’ve had the 5 kids battle it out. Sadly, this is the Knicks. I don’t understand the Jack and Sessions signings at all.

    @24

    I would give the non-playoff teams equal odds, and give the first-round losers half the odds of the non-playoff teams.

    I reverse the way we give out balls and have the lottery teams odds increase in REVERSE order. Sucking means you get a worse pick. The team that tries the hardest, has the best shot at the #1. So missing the playoffs by a game might result in a #1 pick.

    Even if the draft order were totally random bad teams would have reasons to tank. I can’t believe the league/media spends so much time on this total non-problem

    I reverse the way we give out balls and have the lottery teams odds increase in REVERSE order. Sucking means you get a worse pick. The team that tries the hardest, has the best shot at the #1. So missing the playoffs by a game might result in a #1 pick.

    Haha, nah. That makes no sense.

    Tanking is great for the league except for the fact that fans get worked up when they hear the term. The tanking teams act as farm teams for young players, giving them exposure and minutes against NBA talent. Long term, this improves the talent level of the league. Vet talent gets a lot cheaper because tankers don’t invest in vets and are willing to trade vets for peanuts or take on bad contracts to facilitate the improvement of top teams. As a result, the best teams end up with more talent, making the playoffs more exciting and talent packed.

    What tanking needs is to be embraced and rebranded. What I’d do is have all non playoff teams play in a single elimination two game tourney in groups of 4. Worst four teams play. Next four. last two sets of four. The winner of each tourney picks at the top of their group of four. Then the other three pick in order of record. You could further disincentive resting guys by limiting the rosters for these tourneys to players who played a minimum number of games.

    Now you’ve associated rebuilding with something positive and exciting, and all the sudden my bet would be the concerns about tanking would go away.

    You could even cut a couple games from the season and still increase revenue with this strategy.

    Mets: Terry Collins has long had a fetish for starting really bad veterans over younger guys, thus Aoki starts pretty much everyday while Nimmo is benched vs. lefties. Nimmo’s one of the few bright spots this month for the Mets, so he needs to start pretty much everyday. He did not start the first two games of the Cubs series. Really silly considering how late in the season it is.

    Jets: the team is so bad what does it matter? The season just started. Actually, they are probably trying to generate some trade value for Forte, which is likely a waste of time. He won’t be playing much in a few weeks, and they don’t have a talented young back that he’s stealing time from. McGown really needs to start for a few games before they throw anyone else out there with the bad OL and receivers that they have now. Maybe let the OL and receivers try to improve from bad to (hopefully) mediocre before getting Hackenberg or Petty killed out there.

    I’m guessing that Jack is just insurance against an injury and maybe a favor to an agent who can’t get a bad player a deal. I’d be surprised if both Jack and Sessions make the team unless Ron or Frank gets hurt.

    Tanking is great for the league except for the fact that fans get worked up when they hear the term. The tanking teams act as farm teams for young players, giving them exposure and minutes against NBA talent. Long term, this improves the talent level of the league. Vet talent gets a lot cheaper because tankers don’t invest in vets and are willing to trade vets for peanuts or take on bad contracts to facilitate the improvement of top teams. As a result, the best teams end up with more talent, making the playoffs more exciting and talent packed.

    I see how you got there, but it implies that the objective of fielding competitive games during the regular season is less fundamentally important than developing players that have other avenues of development (practice, summer league, offseason workouts, NBDL).

    There are no other ways to make regular season games marketable or valuable to the league than having a strong, deep competitive field. There are many ways to develop talent aside from in-game performance.

    If the NBA furthers the policies that result in “young” teams being routinely worked by “veteran” teams in the name of player development, the NBA, in essence, becomes its own farm system. This is as bad as outcomes get, considering that the league has a number of policies that exist for the sole reason of competitiveness. There’s a reason that the NBDL has such poor player compensation: no one cares.

    cont.

    Another option would be creating a “free market” for incoming rookies but designating more money for bad teams and less for good teams. Giving, say, $6M to the Nets and $3M to the Warriors, money that vanishes if not spent. Incoming players would be given much more flexibility and would have to consider playing time and salary as factors for their first free agency. The vets would never go for it, IMO.

    Agree that there’s no chance of it ever happening, but this has been my preferred solution for a long time. I don’t even think you’d need to allocate higher amounts to worse teams really if you just let teams use their regular cap space (with maybe a yearly “rookie exception” worth a low 1st round pick type salary.

    People worry that all the good young guys would go to the already good teams, but teams competing to be good would naturally use what little cap space they have on productive veterans (see how they already trade picks for vets). Rebuilding teams on the other hand would gladly allocate big chunks of their cap to young guys. Young guys get paid more fairly relative to older players and there’s no reason to “tank” under the system (although if anything bad teams might be even worse as a fully rebuilding team could potentially have basically no veterans with their entire cap dumped into first contract players).

    What tanking needs is to be embraced and rebranded. What I’d do is have all non playoff teams play in a single elimination two game tourney in groups of 4. Worst four teams play. Next four. last two sets of four. The winner of each tourney picks at the top of their group of four. Then the other three pick in order of record. You could further disincentive resting guys by limiting the rosters for these tourneys to players who played a minimum number of games.

    The problem here is that the players and the franchises that employ them are not incentivized by the same thing. Do you think players are going to compete their very hardest to ensure that their front offices are able to draft BPA and possibly replace them? Knowing how often top lottery picks receive large contract extensions (warranted or not), do you think players are going to willingly go out there for their employer to draft higher? You’d have to compensate the players with cash in a sort of “participation trophy” sort of way, and even then, it’s a bunch of losers (franchises) out there to win a consolation prize. It just doesn’t make sense.

    I think that every position should have some randomness to avoid what happened with GSW and the Harrison Barnes pick.

    I would take the position of each team, add a random number between 1 and 10 and use that for a new order (ties favor the team with less wins). This way, every position has some randomness, and avoids tanking for certain pick protections.

    I really like the lottery wheel. I think tanking is toxic for a fan base, people angry at their players for doing what they are supposed to do. Teams that fight hard for an unlikely place in the playoffs make great stories, but however are damned by the system. I would get rid of it, there is already the salary cap to level the field, perhaps make it a stronger cap.

    I really like the lottery wheel.

    a lottery wheel – or – have a set rotating wheel?

    now this is serious out of the box thinking – my favorite solution…the anti-playoffs playoffs…

    What I’d do is have all non playoff teams play in a single elimination two game tourney in groups of 4. Worst four teams play. Next four. last two sets of four. The winner of each tourney picks at the top of their group of four. Then the other three pick in order of record. You could further disincentive resting guys by limiting the rosters for these tourneys to players who played a minimum number of games.

    But the anti-playoffs playoffs would incentivize fringe playoff teams to tank, while giving bottom-feeders very little means to get out of that situation.

    EDIT: who wants to get swept by the warriors, when you would have the best chance at Luka Doncic? All while having a team that is good enough to reach the playoffs.

    With the four team playoffs for draft seeds, the team fifth from last in the league would have huge incentive to tank into being the fourth worst team so that they would be the best team in a four team playoff for the number one draft choice.

    Haha, nah. That makes no sense.

    @32 – Yes it does, but it places less weight on making the bad team better than on tank-avoidance.

    It actually encourages teams to compete for the draft pick in a positive way. Play hard, get a good pick or end up in the playoffs. There are 14 lottery picks. It still guarantees the worst team that it will get a top-14 pick. In fact, I would say that a team should get the a number of ping-pong balls equal to the number of wins they gave + 20. The +20 evens it out for the worst teams and prevents an 0-82 team from getting zero balls. Note that if you just used total wins from last year the worst of the lottery teams (the Nets) would have a 4.52% chance of the top pick and the best lottery team (the Heat) would have a 9.28 % chance of the top pick. If you add 20, the percentages change to Nets: 5.99% and Heat: 8.08%.

    Forgetting the odds for a moment, it means that a win = a ping pong ball. Fans will be rooting for ping pong balls.

    @41 – But I see your point.

    One thing that’s not getting enough consideration is that there are financial incentives to MAKE the playoffs. I’m not going to say I know how it all works, but if you make the playoffs you play in extra home games, are on TV, get more merchandise sales etc.. So if you are somewhere between the 15th and 18th best team (or thereabouts) and you are still in the playoff hunt, you probably aren’t going to tank away an extra pile of money for only a marginally better pick in the middle. You will play hard until you are eliminated in the last week or two. The real tanking problem is near the top (or bottom depending on your view). If you are out of contention early in the season, that gives you an opportunity to tank A LOT of games to try to get into the upper lottery where the real stars can be found. It’s that upper lottery area that is the priority to be improved.

    there are financial incentives to MAKE the playoffs.

    Yeah, $2,000,000 guaranteed revenue per home game incentivizes winning more than a small percent chance of drafting a 19 year old incentivizes losing.

    Comments are closed.