Knicks Morning News (2017.12.29)

@1 – Luckily, over the next several weeks, I think the Knicks will still lose a lot of games so a deliberate tank is not all that necessary. I don’t think they’ll sit KP or Frank for BS reasons but they have shown they will be conservative when they tweak something.

I’m hopeful that the decision will be made for management, that they should pursue a youth movement.

I realize I’m nitpicking at your post, but I don’t think Beasley has much trade value.

Beasley is on a min one year, but may be an important just-out-of-the-rotation piece for a playoff team like the Cavs. I’d take anything for him that isn’t a negative.

I hate it, but I just knew this would happen. The moment we wished we lost more, so that we would have realized sooner, so that we’d act earlier, that we have no reason to float on the backs of vets. If we were doing well due to KP and Frank, fine, but we’re not, and we all see it.

By the way, the introspective abilities of both Frank and KP are something I’ve never seen before. KP knew the last few games that he had to contribute something else when he struggles offensively (speaking of which, they should start calling fouls on those shot-altering touches KP keeps getting, or he should shut up and figure something out). Then last night he seemed to take less dribbles, shoot quicker, pass a lot more, and put up more effort on rebounds. Frank has been saying that he needs to attack the basket more, and he has. They both seem to be aware of their limitations and seem to be working on it.

Also, Frank and KP on defense is AMAZING. KP’s rim-protection is not spoken about nearly enough- it seems he alters or blocks every other drive to the hoop in his vicinity. And Frank just doesn’t give a damn if he gets a foul (which is bad, I guess), and will defend each play to the last (which is like a breath of an Amsterdam tulip garden in the middle of the Knicks’ collective Chinese squatting-hole of point guard defense)

When Frank starts to understand how hard he can go without fouling, he will be such a pain defensively. Right now the best guards can still get bailed out by fouls because of how eager he is and how hard he goes every possession, which is a great problem for a young guy to have. Basically what Parker said in his interview last night, having great defense coming into the league is a rare commodity (and, like he said, hope NY is patient with him).

Yeah, let’s put all of our hope on to the assumption that Perry / Mills turn into RC Buford as a new year’s resolution. I’m sure that will work!

I’m not saying try to lose, I’m saying don’t win with guys that don’t fit long-term.

The thing that hurt our turnaround was not having 2 first round picks during Phil’s administration. If we had those 2 picks, we’d be WAY further along toward building the team we are going to need to get serious. But again, we aren’t positioned badly now. We have a few good young prospects, all our 1st round picks going forward, and a few trade chips.

It’s going to be a multi year process. We have to get used to it mentally and root for the right things.

What we want is for KP, Frank, THJ, Willy etc.. to keep improving and management to not make any bad long term moves that interfere significantly with the end game in 3-5 years. Noah’s bad contract and any other iffy contracts will be gone by then. We are going ti be fine. It will just take time (and better shot selection from KP).

@9 I’ve tried to explain this to you before, and I will try again. What I wrote in my post is my personal definition of tanking. For the millionth time, and I am not advocating losing on purpose. Please either try to read harder or just ignore my posts.

@ 12 Thank jeebus for you. How hard is this concept to grasp?

I just hate this cliche idea that losing is cancer when no one can sufficiently explain why it is. The freaking Warriors had 17 losing seasons (under .500) in 20 years before the Curry team exploded. The Cavaliers were fucking terrible for 5 straight years before they got LeBron, and they didn’t acquire said “cancer”. Even the Spurs had one season at .500 and 5 under before they drafted Robinson, and I won’t even use the Sonics / Thunder as an example since they didn’t end up with a title. Even the damn Celtics sucked for 8 years after Bird / McHale and before Pierce came into his own.

There’s no indication at all that losing somehow destroys a franchise, and yet we keep having the same discussions.

The Warriors are such a freak accident of an organization where they basically hit on almost 50% of their draft picks over a 3 year timespan, and some on all-time-great players. I can’t imagine that every franchise can be so lucky. It’s obvious that for every great draft pick, you have to make great moves; for every draft of a Curry, you have to sign a Durant, etc. The Celtics, Cavs, Warriors, Spurs, all seem to make great signings that are as important as drafting well.
The key is to know where you are, and who to sign- Lee, Jack, Lance, Beasley, O’quinn, would be great if we were 7th seed without them. But I don’t think anyone thinks that.

The only assets we’ve got that have real trade value are KP, sort of Frank, and maybe Willie. If you think we need to tank then we need to sell off KP and start over. It’ll be different! Trading young players for picks instead of vets.

All the talk about tanking vs rebuilding vs winning seems kind of moot. We’re strategically boxed in because we’re not exactly asset-rich, so the only real moves the Knicks have to make are drafting a guy around #8 every year and waiting for bad contracts to come off the books. It’s like watching paint dry. This is not going to be a particularly fun or exciting rebuild the way this roster is set up, but it’s really too late to do anything else.

I just hate this cliche idea that losing is cancer when no one can sufficiently explain why it is. The freaking Warriors had 17 losing seasons (under .500) in 20 years before the Curry team exploded. The Cavaliers were fucking terrible for 5 straight years before they got LeBron, and they didn’t acquire said “cancer”. Even the Spurs had one season at .500 and 5 under before they drafted Robinson, and I won’t even use the Sonics / Thunder as an example since they didn’t end up with a title. Even the damn Celtics sucked for 8 years after Bird / McHale and before Pierce came into his own.

There’s no indication at all that losing somehow destroys a franchise, and yet we keep having the same discussions.

I don’t get it, dont you think that 17 years without a winning season is indicative that it is difficult to escape the losing cycle? And that is the Warriors, which are successful nowadays, what is your opinion on Sacramento’s record lately?

Obviously, win-now movements usually doom a franchise to said losing cycles, so I am not advocating doing such thing to “avoid losing”. But I do believe that if you only focus on tanking hard and draft, you are missing on some other ways to obtain value. So, if we are not getting a good return on Lee, I’d rather keep him and wait to the offseason, or next years deadline. If we could tank so hard to get Doncic, that would be different, but barring a season-ending injury to Porzingis (which would also be bad for the future) it would near impossible.

So, I’d say do smart trades, and good signings in FA, and not obsess so much with the draft.

So, I’d say do smart trades, and good signings in FA, and not obsess so much with the draft.

It’s kind of hard to do “smart trades” when you don’t have anything that anybody wants.
“Good signings” in FA are also rare, because you’re paying market value for the guys you are signing. You want guys who outperform their contracts, guys who give you surplus value. It is very difficult to do this via free agency.

If you’re bad, the way to get better is to stockpile assets. Stockpiling assets is another way you “win trades.” When a star player becomes available, it’s kind of nice to have things that other teams want, so you can trade for that star player. This isn’t hard, guys!

No matter what you want to call it, we should be looking for more ping-pong balls. I’ve seen what I needed to see in Ntilikina and Porzingis to know that the arrow is pointing up. What we need now are two more great draft picks. The rules are simple, don’t trade anyone under the age of 26. Everyone else is fair game. Trade Beasley. Trade Lee. Trade Thomas. Cut and stretch Noah.

BTW, Twitter rumors are flying about a Hernangomez for Mirotic trade.

It’s kind of hard to do “smart trades” when you don’t have anything that anybody wants.

Ok, dont trade then. But do not make a trade for the sake of making a trade. A good trade may come out later.

“Good signings” in FA are also rare, because you’re paying market value for the guys you are signing. You want guys who outperform their contracts, guys who give you surplus value. It is very difficult to do this via free agency.

Yes, it is, but there are players whose talents are unknown (undrafted rookies / played very few minutes / played out of position / injury comeback / …), and you can swing for the fences. Also, market value might be too expensive or a very good value depending on the player and the market situation.

If you’re bad, the way to get better is to stockpile assets. Stockpiling assets is another way you “win trades.” When a star player becomes available, it’s kind of nice to have things that other teams want, so you can trade for that star player. This isn’t hard, guys!

What part of dumping our assets to be so bad to get a draft pick equals stockpiling assets? Yes, you win a higher draft pick, but you lose on some of the assets you already had. Is it worth dumping Kanter for a pick 2 spots higher?

I can’t believe there isn’t a trade somewhere for A 43% 3 ball shooter who is at least ok defensively as an asset to a playoff team. Take the Bucks who weren’t an easy out last year vs a very good Toronto is 24th in 3’s made and 28th in attempts so I’m guessing Lee would be a good fit for them.

They have Teletovich who is an equal salary and is old and likely out for the season with knee surgery and blood clots in each lung with one extra year remaining on his contract.

Is Lee’s 3 ball prowess worth the low 20’s pick the Bucks are looking at?

Forward Mirza Teletovic could be sidelined until late in the season, which would put the Bucks in the market for a shooter, Gery Woelfel of Woelfel’s Press Box reports. Teletovic was diagnosed with pulmonary emboli in his lungs earlier this month. Teletovic will be sidelined for at least three more months, sources told Woelfel. Without him, Milwaukee is vulnerable on the perimeter offensively. “They just don’t have outside shooters,” a veteran advance scout told Woelfel. “I see that as their biggest weakness.’’

We could use a Knickerblogger rule where you can’t post a player you want to trade without showing a proposed trade where the salaries work. It would save sifting thru dozens of “trade Lee and Beasley and the rights to Edmund Sherrod and Andy Routins for picks / young players”.

@38

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=yb94ngv9

Add Beasley if you need a few bucks for the 20 ish pick’s salary

@38 – How’s this one?
http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ydft7e5k

Neither trade would the other teams agree too

mirotic is a nice player but i wouldn’t deal wily for him… .

I just hate this cliche idea that losing is cancer when no one can sufficiently explain why it is.

This is my view as a gambler and personal that has competed at a reasonably high level at a different sport.

1. Not everyone is the same, but when things are going badly, it can impact you negatively psychologically. The longer it lasts, the more you start expecting things to go badly and the worse it becomes. That negative frame of mind can impact your ability to improve at your craft and perform at your highest level. You have to fight it. (The reverse is also true).

2. Part of winning is coping with the inevitable pressures of competition. Not everyone handles that kind of thing the same way. Some are better than others, but the more you go through it the more seasoned you become and the more capable you will become of making the correct decisions and being able to execute physically at your peak level.

If a player/team is going to have to go through this seasoning process anyway, you don’t want to spend 2-3 years floundering around and then going through it if you can go through it quickly. All else being equal, if KP was playing with the Cavs/Warriors and had already experienced a serious playoff run and the finals, he would be a better player now. He might even be much better.

I would not trade Willy, because I believe he can be better than Kanter (and therefore, we should explore trading Kanter first). But I dont see why you say that trading him for Mirotic is win-now. This is the kind of mentality that I am referring that you miss on possibilities if you focus only on tanking. Mirotic is 26 and has a very friendly contract, that is not a “win-now” player. The real question is, is Mirotic good enough? Because his rookie year was nice, but sucked the following two. He is playing well now, but that might be a mirage because of the small sample size.

I’d trade Willy for a talented young three or PG on a team-friendly contract. Not for a very soon to be 27 year old Mirotic who is shooting threes at way above his career average. The salaries are not even close to matching, anyways.

Folks on this board seem to think that Kanter will opt out this summer. I’m confident that he won’t.

1. The league is oversaturated with centers. Very few teams need one.
2. The top of the 2018 draft is oversaturated with big men.
3. Only 7 teams project to have even $17m in cap space. Kanter’s option next year is for $19m.
4. It’s a small ball league now. After the crippling contracts to plodding centers like Noah, Mahinmi, Miles Plumlee, Dwight, Biyombo, etc, nobody is going to want to throw $19m AAV at Kanter.

I guess he could be delusional like Noel and assume that some mystery team wants to pay him big bucks, but any sane adviser should be telling him to opt in.

Is Lee’s 3 ball prowess worth the low 20’s pick the Bucks are looking at?

If the bucks could reasonably expect that to get them to the second round for the next few years, maybe. But they’re looking to improve for 3-4 years down the road, their pick is probably worth more to them.

I do like Mirotic because he’s a “modern” player– he’s a true stretch four and those guys are all the rage these days. He’s a pretty good all-around box score stuffer, and I personally feel like he has underachieved a bit relative to his talent level. I wouldn’t be surprised if he turned out to be a better player than he showed in his second and third seasons. But yeah, at his age and contract he’s not really on our timeline.

It (the pick) shouldn’t be worth more to the Bucks than Lee. Late first round picks are valuable because you have a reasonable chance of getting a player that out performs his salary. But that player is likely to be worse than Lee ( and paid less). If he eventually gets as good as Lee it will be in several years. I think the Bucks are in win now mode. A quality player who can defend and has an outside shot is more valuable for them than the pick.

It’s not just the pick, though. It’s also paying for the last two years of Lee’s contract, which no team thinks will look pretty.

And their timeline isn’t just the next two years. They’ve got time for a 20 pick to mature.

Is Derrick Williams seriously already out of the NBA? Gotta give it to Lance Thomas, he lasted longer in the NBA than a #2 pick from just six years ago!

NBAdraft.net had his player comparison as Michael Beasley. Very similar in how dominant they were in college and how pisspoor they translated to the pros, despite high-athleticism styles. I will never forget Derrick Williams’s putback slam in the Sweet Sixteen.

NBAdraft.net had his player comparison as Michael Beasley. Very similar in how dominant they were in college and how pisspoor they translated to the pros, despite high-athleticism styles. I will never forget Derrick Williams’s putback slam in the Sweet Sixteen.

Man, if ever there was a thread that we’d like to bronze in retrospect, it would have been the 2011 NBA Draft Thread. We were all really on point in that thread. Like, as a whole. Not like one of those “Oh, see what this guy said back then.” We were all on point on that draft thread. Impressive stuff.

“Beyond that, even if the salaries match, most teams are not stupid. They are not going to take an older guy and give up a young guy of similar quality….”

This is such a frustrating thread of strawman arguments – so many alone in this thread, but this takes the cake. Let’s all resolve to make a better effort in the new year to respond to what people say instead of to the voices in your head.

I’ll type real slow this time. I’m not saying you’re going to get much for Lee, O’Oquin and the Bease types.
I’m saying that the act of getting rid of them alone benefits us for the future as such:
1) it allows us to play the kids so we know what we have in them so that if
a) the kids play great and we win, great!!!
or
b) if the kids suck we know that sooner AND get a higher draft pick.

Yes, I am saying I’d rather win 20-25 games with the kids playing then win 30-35 with Lee, O’Quinn and the Bease playing, because that does nothing for the future.

you think they will plan to take three years to get good?

I think they’re probably making the playoffs as constructed, and I can only assume that their FO is looking at GS and saying ‘we can’t get good enough to beat them.’ And looking at what’s happened to teams that traded their first round picks. I suspect the NBA as whole is going to value picks more than in the past for the next few years.

Perry and Mills have already said they’re open to trades, and said what they’re looking to get back. The league isn’t exactly knocking the door down.

Grocer, not every franchise thinks that not bearing Golden State makes them a failure. If Milwaukee thought a trade would get them to the finals but they would lose there, no question they would do it.

Man, if ever there was a thread that we’d like to bronze in retrospect, it would have been the 2011 NBA Draft Thread. We were all really on point in that thread. Like, as a whole. Not like one of those “Oh, see what this guy said back then.” We were all on point on that draft thread. Impressive stuff.

Is that the one where I made liberal use of caps lock to express my disgust? I’m so sorry.

http://www.knickerblogger.net/d-day-2011-who-will-the-knicks-choose/

IMO, this is a reasonable way to look at Lee.

1. Lee is a good 2-way player on a fair contract.
2. Lee is 32 and doesn’t fit with the rebuild timeline.
3. Lee is likely to be equally productive for the next 2 years given he’s having a peak year this year and players seem to be lasting longer with modern training. At worst, there will mild slippage.

To give up a young player or draft pick for Lee, you need to be compensated in quality.

You can give up a pick in the range where teams can generally expect the player to be mildly inferior to Lee along with a trash player on a 1 year contract to match salaries. Then you are taking on extra salary for a couple of years for a 32 year old, but giving up slightly less quality short and long term.

You can give up a young player on a similar contract that’s not as good as Lee now, but has enough upside to match him without exceeding him. You are gaining short term, but not losing much if anything long term.

So what is the range of pick where a team can expect to get a player that will eventually be mildly inferior to Lee? Is that good enough?

Are you willing to take a younger player for Lee if his upside is mildly less than Lee?

Would you rather just roll with Lee and when his contract is over gain the cap space and move on?

Mozgov netted Denver two 1s.

That’s the kind of robbery we have to wait for. 🙂

Omg the Faried draft was in 2011!!??
Man time flies. I was at that draft in Newark and everyone was hoping Faried would be the pick. I also recall:
Jan Veselys gf kiss, there being a debate between kyrie and brevin knight, kawhi Leonard’s giant hands being a big topic, and being ok with the shumpert pick.

Don’t we want guys who are outplaying their contracts, guys like Lee who has been our mvp this season?
Anyway,Just cuz we value him doesn’t mean everyone else does

And for those saying a couple of spots in the draft don’t matter, we missed Steph Curry and Kawhi by a total of 3 draft slots.

That’s hilarious. I don’t even have to say why.

@81

And people are confident that the guy who brought Hardaway back will lead the “smart trades, value signings” movement! I’m so confident.

Why is Ramon Sessions on this team?!!?

By the way, other teams can just sign Trey Burke if they feel like. The Wolves just lost Jeff Teague for a bit. Why not just bring the guy up?

It’s time to bring Trey Burke up and give him a whirl. The only reason for a delay would be if Sessions has a really good relationship with Frank in practice and we don’t know about it.

Bruno Almeida: My argument is that there’s nothing inherently “cancerous” or destructive about losing; what’s destructive and cancerous is bad management, bad players, bad ownership, bad drafting, bad signings.

Anyone who is anti -tank is either naive or feigning ignorance. Every summer, every team’s front office decides how much they want to lose. Few if any front offices ever say, “let’s do everything we can to maximize our wins this season,” so that means every team is intentionally losing to some degree from the front office perspective. So if you’re anti-tanking, are what is your cutoff point? Isn’t it arbitrary?

My take is when you aren’t a good team, you fill your roster with players who have the potential to help you fit more talent under the cap than other teams. Sometimes that’s with draft picks. Sometimes free agency with young undrafted players or former 2nd rounders whose teams didn’t have space for them. Over time, your team will begin to win organically, and if you continue to use the tools available to you to add sustainable talent at a discount price, you will be able to stay good for the long term. Like the Spurs since the Duncan tank season, you won’t have to tank.

But to do otherwise whether it’s by keeping veterans around who only have short term value or by signing or trading for them is to artificially inflate your win total… You win 35 games instead of 28. This increase in wins has no bearing on your long term outlook, and if it becomes a pattern, it will prevent you from ever escaping from mediocrity no matter how lucky you are in the draft. This isn’t just a matter of worsening your pick. It’s a matter of missing out on the opportunity to find players like Kawhi Leonard or Danny Green or Manu or Parker. You trade those seemingly token young pieces or second rounders or waste that end of bench roster spot, and you have one less chance of hitting it big, and if it’s habitual, you miss too many chances for even great luck to save you.

I mean just look at teams like the Pelicans who lucked into Davis or the Kings with Cousins. Both found more than they had any right to expect from draft picks and yet still haven’t escaped mediocrity. The Pelicans actually did it twice, the first time with Chris Paul.

Bulls, Mavs, Suns and Nets all won. The stealth tank is more of a thing every day.

The Bulls are just fascinating, aren’t they? They just seem to be doing it with smoke and mirrors. Well, Mirotic, smoke and mirrors, at least.

Tonight, though, Markkanen and Grant also had it going on. A double-double for Jerian Grant!

Kris Dunn didn’t even play!

Every summer, every team’s front office decides how much they want to lose. Few if any front offices ever say, “let’s do everything we can to maximize our wins this season,” so that means every team is intentionally losing to some degree from the front office perspective. So if you’re anti-tanking, are what is your cutoff point?

Every “competent” management assesses the talent on their team both as individuals and overall and knows approximately where they fit in the pecking order. They know if they are a serious contender, playoff contender, likely lottery candidate, likely early lottery candidate. Their strategy will vary depending on where they expect to finish and how far into their development they are. But they also think about the financial aspects of running the business, keeping players and agents happy (especially veterans), making their franchise attractive to free agents and potential trade candidates, being patient when it comes to trades so that they get good value if they move an attractive player or pick, and building positive culture where people are working hard, trying to get better, and learning to win.

There may be some purposeful losing at the end of season disguised as injuries. The vets will “get it” and sit out a few games to help some kids that don’t deserve the minutes. But during the year teams are trying to win to the best of their ability even if that ability is limited. It’s part of the development of young players that are learning from vets that have been through it and part of making your franchise more valuable and attractive.

This is not fantasy sports.

This is a real business with real people looking out for jobs, careers, and subject to the same ups and downs depending on the environment they work in.

No one is saying we can’t make some moves to get younger that could cost us a few games this year. They just better ADD LONG TERM VALUE!