I think from day one Phil believed the right way to build a winning team was to slowly change the culture by adding young players and veterans that fit the personality type he desired and that would be willing to play his style. I think he believes (as does Mills and Perry) that part of changing the culture is trying to get better by winning trades, finding value in the draft, and making selective FA a deals – as opposed to serial tanking.

1. He cleaned house of the “suspect personalities” and in a couple of cases gave away assets just to get rid of them.

2. He tried to add core pieces, but when he couldn’t (which was practically always because we sucked) he added the best available filler he could find on short term deals and tried to keep rolling over cap space.

From where were were (missing two 1st round picks, being so bad no one wanted to play here etc..) he was handcuffed pretty badly. No doubt he made some unforced errors along the way. But had he done some of the things that would be more ideal if we were playing fantasy sports, he would have been crucified by the media and fans even worse than he was.

How many times has Reub tried coming back before this one, Brian?

Four? Five? Maybe more? Whichever number it was, it’ll be one more very soon when he tries again. I know we’re awesome and all, but it’s hard to believe that there isn’t any other place worth talking about the Knicks out there for him.

As to Afflalo, Phil actually chased him out of town by dissing him in the media.

Same with the Ron Baker deal. It’s a relatively inconsequential move no matter how it turns out, and could actually turn out positively, even if made for the wrong reasons or if bungled in negotiations given the market for him. I happened to love Ron at the time of his signing, and if you go back to the DWill signing, I hated him at the time (saying, I believe, you might as well just lit the money on fire.)

Depends on your definition of “finally.” But yes, that was him.

How many times has Reub tried coming back before this one, Brian?

I don’t disagree with you in a theoretical sense, but imo you playing a form of fantasy basketball. Hinkie was brilliant, but he also got fired for all that tanking and losing. I also wonder how their bottom line looked during that period.

But Jackson got fired in roughly the same amount of time as Hinkie anyways, right? Both lasted about three seasons (Hinkie could have lasted longer, but he was pissed that he got effectively demoted by the hiring of Jerry Colangelo).

Most General Managers end up getting fired. Might as well try to make the best moves you can while you’re here. Especially when you’re making, what, eleventy billion dollars a year, or whatever Jackson was making. I don’t think he made moves due to pressure, I think he just thought that the moves that he made were the best moves.

Is reub finally back?

Depends on your definition of “finally.” But yes, that was him.

Phil Jackson’s mescaline-addled brain

I am sure that was someone’s screen name here for a while.

“I just gotta have Joakim Noah at any cost, I mean having a center who can execute passes out of the pinch post is absolutely essential to winning in the modern NBA” -Phil Jackson’s mescaline-addled brain

I don’t disagree with you completely strato but I think you are actually taking it to a more theoretical side than Brian’s argument.

The Knicks had bad assets, pretty much no young talent and an aging, fading star that didn’t merit building a team around his 29-33 years. It was obvious that the Knicks had nothing to build upon. When the Knicks signed Afflalo and Williams we had just drafted Porzingis and the team had zero talent elsewhere. It was the ideal time to take Porzingis as a building block for the future and year everything else down.

If you’re the Hornets with 24 year old Kemba Walker or the Pacers with Paul George at that age, or even teams like the Bulls after they were left with only Butler or the Wizards with Wall + Beal, yes, you go around building your team in the best way possible around the established talent you have. Most teams in the league actually have established talent of varying skill levels, and it makes sense for them to take the approach you talk about. So no, obviously not every team should tank every time, only a few teams are actually in a hopeless situation that needs to be blown up.

The Knicks didn’t have it, and still went on making less than ideal deals to try to compete when they had a golden opportunity to start over with Porzingis and a complete clean slate (and finally picks after the Melo trade nightmare finally ended).

So while I agree with you theoretically, I think you’re ignoring context. Do you think Philadelphia would be better off today if instead of tanking they just kept Iguodala and Holiday and built around them? I’m sure not.
The fact that Hinkie got fired for eventually building the most exciting young team in the league now is much more a testament on how owners and managers are often stupid and don’t see the bigger picture than an indictment that he did something terrible.