Knicks Morning News (2019.07.12)

Reposting this which got lost in the Russ trade news

PG-Randle
Wing-Knox
Wing-Morris
PF-Portis
C-Mitch

let’s fucking go

I have to disagree with JK47 on the validity of this particular team-building strategy at this particular moment. It’s not how I would have done it, but it isn’t illogical given the flattened odds. The main reason we struck out on the true max players is because we were a 17-win team with little chance of being better than a fringe playoff team even with two max players. To think that tanking for another couple of years will change that is a highly questionable proposition. Why not set up a situation where you are auditioning our recent draft picks and some young FAs (for whom you have Bird rights) for possible inclusion in a core and if any of them don’t work out, no harm no foul? Why not take a flyer on some non-max vets and put a competitive product on the floor, tweaking things as you go?

-signing Randle to a 2+1 deal was a value signing. That contract can be moved if necessary but he’s a very good young player on a fair deal of reasonable length with an out.
-Payton makes a lot of sense as a possible starting PG going forward. Having any kind of Bird rights on him is a nice place to be.
-All of the other deals are for guys that can be either traded or cut at the deadline without any pain for either the player or our team. That’s the beauty of overpaying for essentially one-year deals. Take Morris for example. Suppose Knox improves and he becomes unhappy with his PT. If you cut him, he gets picked up on the cheap by a contender who needs a banger (Boston? Houston?) He has now made almost as much money in one year as he would have made in 2 years in SA, and he becomes a UFA and can probably sign the SA deal again. Great for him, great for us. That goes for the other vets as well. They all made a premium by signing shorter-term deals and if they get cut, it’s a great opportunity for them.

PG: Payton, DSJ, Frank
SG: Trier, Ellington, Dotson
SF: RJ, Knox, Iggy, Bullock
PF: Randle, Morris, Taj
C: Mitch, Portis

Opening Day Rotation:
Starters: Payton, Dotson, RJ, Randle, Mitch
Bench: DSJ, Trier, Knox, Morris, Taj, Portis, Ellington (depending on match-ups.)

Out of rotation: Frank, Iggy, Bullock

most likely gone at deadline: Ellington, Bullock, Taj, Morris

Regardless of whether Randle plays C or PF, imo he supposed to teamed with a floor spacer because he does his best work inside on offense. That’s why I always thought he was the perfect complimentary piece to KP. He could bang and rebound inside, KP could provide the space for him, and KP would patrol and help defend the paint. Defensively, Mitch and Randle fit well because Robinson protects the paint. But on offense they both want to operate inside. It might work for Robinson if Randle continues hitting 3s at an attractive enough rate, but really, who wants Randle launching 3s when he’s better inside. He’ll have to improve his 3 point for that to make sense.

The main reason we struck out on the true max players is because we were a 17-win team with little chance of being better than a fringe playoff team even with two max players. To think that tanking for another couple of years will change that is a highly questionable proposition.

That sounds familiar.

I was sounding that alarm bell for quite awhile.

Given we struck out like I expected, I don’t have much of a problem with 1 year deals or even overpays. However, we are grading on a curve. We are basically saying. “Well, he didn’t screw up anything too badly for the long term, so I’ll ignore the fact that I’m not particularly thrilled by anything he has done”.

I’m not enamored with either the player, fit, or both when it comes to any of these signings.

I guess I like Peyton the best of all of them because I’m not sold on DSJ and Peyton is a legitimate triple double threat when healthy. If he improves his shot, I can deal with any deficiencies on defense. I want to see more of Portis on defense. I like Randle, but am concerned about fit.

Out of rotation: Frank, Iggy, Bullock

So Bullock is out of the rotation as soon as they sign him? Sounds like a good move to make!

What Mitch does is impossible to limit without opening up something for someone else, especially Randle.

What Mitch does is impossible to limit without opening up something for someone else, especially Randle.

Mitch is not the only high flying big man in the NBA that operates almost exclusively in the P&R. Invariably, teams try to build more space around them and not hope they can make it work. Space works better.

Mitch is not the only high flying big man in the NBA that operates almost exclusively in the P&R.

Mitch is the only one who has the combo of high jumping, quick second jump and nifty touch around the rim. He has a lot to improve, but there’s no-one who can play vertical on offense like he does (I mean, with his style). This explosiveness makes him impossible to limit as long as someone is able to throw him a good pass.

The offense should be primarily RJ or DSJ/Mitch pick and roll with the floor spread and everyone else behind the three point line. Will it be that? Doubtful.

tnfh, in a sense, I agree with strat that picking at the top of the draft is neither the best nor the only way to proceed, especially with odds-flattening. Toronto did not have a single player picked in the lottery and built their team largely through smart trades. GSW had a core of mid-late lottery picks (Curry and Thompson) and a second-rounders (Draymond) and added Durant. SA hasn’t picked in the top of the lottery since forever.

The Knicks are as bad as they are right now because they signed the wrong guys to the wrong deals (see: Lee, TH2, Noah, Lance) and drafted the wrong players in the spots they had (see: Frank, Knox, Early, TH2, Grant). Their biggest issues have been 1) cap management and 2) player evaluation. If they had signed John Collins and SGA in the last 2 drafts (and perhaps traded down in this one) they’d be in much better position than they are now even without tanking. No amount of tanking will improve our lot if we continue to evaluate players poorly.

However, there are signs that they are becoming at least somewhat more value-oriented and cap-savvy. Signing Randle, Payton and even Portis to flyer deals is not a bad thing. Having the potential to open up 2 max slots in 2021 is not a bad thing. Hitting on second rounders is not a bad thing. These little things can add up just as fast as tanking (and the PR debacle that goes with it) and being bridesmaids in FA bonanzas forever until you luck into a superstar in the draft.

It seems like these guys learned the wrong lesson from the Nets. The reason they were a desirable destination was because of the guys they drafted, not the odd mercenary here and there.

But they drafted their guys outside the lottery. Again, they were excellent at player evaluation and cap management. They made smart salary dump trades but not for lottery picks…and we have sufficient picks to pick up Leverts and Allens and RHJs. But we also need to find the DARs and Dinwiddie’s of the world (which is where guys like DSJ and Randle and Payton might come in, and less so Portis.)

I’m not thrilled with this strategy, but it does seem to indicate that our current management would rather have a somewhat competent team to attract free agents and fans than hire an overpaid, over the hill star to attract fans; and it’s definitely the better choice of the two paths. They do seem to think they have to eventually attract a top free agent instead of building up through smaller moves, and I’m not sure they will ever be able to do that. I’m hoping their current path doesn’t preclude getting better with smaller moves.

tnfh, in a sense, I agree with strat that picking at the top of the draft is neither the best nor the only way to proceed, especially with odds-flattening. Toronto did not have a single player picked in the lottery and built their team largely through smart trades. GSW had a core of mid-late lottery picks (Curry and Thompson) and a second-rounders (Draymond) and added Durant. SA hasn’t picked in the top of the lottery since forever.

I made a post a few weeks ago outlining how this has been exaggerated to a large extent (2/3 assets in the Kawhi deal were lottery picks), but it doesn’t matter. The Raptors’ situation was drastically different from ours. They could afford to sacrifice some value in the draft because they were actually, you know, good.

Pre-Kawhi trade, they were consistently a 50+ win team. They weren’t a contender unless major injuries happened, but they had a non-zero chance at a championship annually. That’s an enormously different situation than the one we find ourselves in. We’re not a top 4 seed in need of some extra juice to put us over the top. We just won 17 games. There’s nothing to emulate from the strategy the Raptors went with when they were consistently winning 48-58 games a year.

But we also need to find the DARs and Dinwiddie’s of the world (which is where guys like DSJ and Randle and Payton might come in, and less so Portis.)

Yes, I agree that we should be taking on salary dumps and using roster spots on NCAA/G-League standouts like Dinwiddie instead of Wayne Ellington.

Anthony Bennett where are You ?

+1 to Z-man
Drafting right is the name of the game.
Not sucking all year and drafting high.
That’s only good for gamblers and natural born losers.

@30 Come on, you know that signing Ellington doesn’t obviate that option. You could simply cut Ellington and sign the next Dinwiddie to a minimum deal.

This reminds me of the defenses of the Lee deal at the time (“Well, you could always just get rid of him later!”). If “you can just cut him later” is a defense of signing a veteran free agent, then you probably shouldn’t be signing the veteran free agent. The issue with these signings is absolutely the opportunity cost of it all. They couldn’t take on any salary dumps because they had the cap space ticketed to big money short term deals to veteran free agents. It’s not a good strategy. They couldn’t take fliers on young free agents because they were reserving a bunch of roster spots for mediocre veteran free agents on short term deals.

Do I think Scott Perry is a fan of Elfrid Payton going back to being part of the team that drafted him back in the day? Yes. But I think it only goes as far as saying Perry is a fan of the guy. I don’t think he’s trying to prove he was right to want to draft him back in the day. I think he just thinks Payton is a good player. He might be wrong on that, but I don’t think it it because of that specific sort of agenda. There are GMs all the time (in various sports) who just sort of latch on to certain guys and keep trying to acquire them. Brian Cashman, for instance, wanted to acquire Dustin Ackley for years before he finally got him.

At this point in our development, a diversified approach was the key, not only in players,but in roster building mechanics. I was okay with a few vet overpays to stabilize the roster, provide “leadership” and challenge young players, while leaving enough room to accept salary dumps and picks if available. timing was rushed as well.

But now we have a team of lots of 4-5s, some youth and some vets, mostly of equal efficiency and caliber. And no salary dumps/additional picks. You need a hierarchy on all teams, and we have none. what was payton, or bullock, or portis or ellington or morris or randle told about playing time? And what do our young players think? Fiz got a lot of ‘splainin’ to do.

If somebody came here from the future and told us in like April or something that we wouldn’t sign any top free agents, and that instead we would sign a bunch of mediocre veteran power forwards in an attempt to make a run at a low playoff seed, without making any attempt to take on bad contracts to acquire assets, nobody would have been real happy with that plan.

We’re squinting our eyes here and trying to make some sense of it, but let’s be real: it’s a shitty plan carried out by people who aren’t the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Brian, Perry was content to try to build with young guys the first 2 years. Now it feels like we are in “win now mode” for no good reason.

@42
The plan is shit.
We’re just trying to find a reasoning to swallow it.
Loyalty makes you eat shit sometimes !

Do we have any evidence that the Knicks hitting the coveted 8th-10th seed range will lead to star free agents wanting to come to MSG? Dolan will still be the owner. Great players do not want to roll the dice to play for James Dolan.

The focus should be on getting as many lotto tickets as possible and hope a few turn into studs. Or using those surplus draft picks to trade for a disgruntled star when the opportunity arises. These free agency fantasies need to die. Trying to become a mediocre team to appeal to stars is risky, stupid, and has huge opportunity costs for the future.

The Knicks will never be a hot destination as long as Dolan is here. They should be emulating the good small market teams that also can’t sign top FA’s.

I would not call what they are doing “win-now”. Maybe “competitive-now” but I dont really think they think this team is going to make some sort of playoff run.

For the most part they want to put this team in position to sign free agents in two years and they did that by signing a few young guys (Portis, Randle, Payton) to see how they pan out in that time. If they suck, they arent long term contracts.

Its not the best plan, and its a little confusing what they did. but its not a win now where they took on some aging vets on big contracts to put them over the hump.

Talent searching should never stop.
They should scout under the rocks for great players all year long and not stuck with Lance Thomases for years and sign Ellingtons and Bullocks to spend the cap anywhere possible.
Just like they found Mitch and Iggy they should find more talents on great contracts and cut the safe shitty dated moves of the past decades GMs.

The Knicks Time Machine has to be Clyde’s 70’s Rolls Royce.

@BC 38 hard agree
@BC36 hard disagree. Courtney Lee at that price for that many years was not a good deal for that kind of player at that age. A declining positive asset with future salary cap commitments is not the same as a “expiring” with the option of adding an additional year. These are quite savvy contracts if they perform well or if contenders face injuries, with little downside.

@ Zman I largely agree with you on this offseason and hear what you’re saying on draft position in that it matters much less once you have NBA production. However, if production is equal, draft position IS predictive of likelihood to increase production. To my mind, this difference is likely at least partially due to higher draft picks getting more run and opportunities all things being equal (especially on the low production end), but this still matters (marginally ) for trade value and for future projection.

No, we do not. Rolling this rationale out when our dumbass moves otherwise can’t be explained is just a time-honored tradition.

Again, if win 30 games and you draft well at the 8-10 spot, it’s way better than winning 17 games and drafting poorly at the 3-5 spot and make dumb long-term personnel. See: Sacramento, Cleveland (ignoring dumb luck LBJ window), Phoenix, Minny (old Knicks) vs. Milwaukee, Denver, Utah, Boston (new Knicks).

Elfrid Payton is a stopgap PG, he’s a guy you get when you can’t find a real PG. He’s skinny Ray Felton, except not really as good.

I feel like the protank crowd really hasn’t acknowledged that the math has changed because of the flattened lottery odds. And also I feel like they aren’t recognizing that this summer kind of proved that superstars are not gonna join shitty teams. So this whole idea that being a low seed playoff team or barely missing the playoffs is the worst sort of purgatory to be in…I don’t know if that theory holds sway anymore.

Last summer Lebron joined a young Lakers team that won 30ish games and missed the playoffs. Now maybe he just wanted to be in LA, but he did pick a team that had a bevy of young, promising players. He got hurt last year but him going there made AD want to go there as well and they were able to use those young players and picks to acquire AD.

Brooklyn clawed their way up to the 6th seed, losing in the first round. Some people here would say what is the point of doing that? But the point is that because they were a decent squad with potential, Kyrie and KD thought to themselves…if we go there, we can be a contender.

The Clippers were the 8th seed. Many people would say that’s the worst place to be. Their pick won’t be very high! They have no superstars! But they were able to use their role players and picks to get Kawhi and Paul George. Now they’re contenders until proven otherwise.

Superstars aren’t going to join shitty teams even if they’re the Knicks in NYC with Madison Square Garden. Hell, Melo didn’t want to join the Knicks until STAT went there and made us a fun, playoff bound team that was above 500 and then Chandler signed with us the next season cause we had STAT And Melo and made the playoffs. Now ultimately that TRIO never did much and we all know the myriad of reasons why but the point still stands. Melo wanted us because STAT showed how rocking the garden can be when the knicks are good and Chandler wanted us because we were all ready a decent team.

Plus the odds are flattened and we have extra picks from Dallas.

It’s just the same stupid mistake over and over and over and over again.

If you’re the worst team in the league and you have a meager collection of assets, you COLLECT ASSETS. You don’t chase a #8 seed, end up finishing 11th in the conference and then drafting 10th.

This isn’t going to work. This is going to be a shitty, mediocre team three years from now.

@63
One is much better than none.
Allow me to believe they’re 3.

@65
Knox aint ‘dead’ yet. He almost drived well on the last SL game against some crippled Lakers…
I still believe he can be a player IF…..

I largely agree with you on this offseason and hear what you’re saying on draft position in that it matters much less once you have NBA production.

How in the world can you look at our roster and come to the conclusion that we have sufficient NBA production?! Are we just ignoring the whole “worst team in the league” thing? I’m pretty sure that even after the offseason, we have exactly two players under 35 who managed a BPM of 1 or higher; Randle and Mitch. In what world does that allow you to say to yourself “okay, that’s enough of picking high in the draft?”

What management is doing is not perfect, but it’s so far from the worst-case scenarios (KP on a max deal, Mudiay as our PG of the future, Harris and Kemba on albatross max deals) that were being played out by you and others here that it sounds like shouting at the rain in retrospect.

Again, you’re arguing that they aren’t doing the dumbest possible things. That’s true and no one is arguing that it isn’t true. It also doesn’t do much for you if one day you want to root for a team that is actually good. If you want to take solace on them getting an A on the Philsiah Thomson curve feel free, it’s still objectively a C or lower.

I feel like the protank crowd really hasn’t acknowledged that the math has changed because of the flattened lottery odds.

All of the examples you went on to cite were teams that got elite players because of their young cores, not their mercenary free agents. Whether they used those cores to trade for superstars (LAL, LAC) or just attracted free agents with them (BKN), there’s no analogue here to signing Bobby Portis.

Hell, Melo didn’t want to join the Knicks until STAT went there and made us a fun, playoff bound team

Hell yeah baby, let’s do the thing that lead to this particular team again!

Would Hinkie even go Full Hinkie Process with these Lottery odds? I doubt it. Yes there is value in taking a short term salary dump that comes with assets. I think continued sucking could be argued to be a value add, but to me, with flattened odds, basically the equivalent of a super lotto pick in Mitch (lotto pick hit locked in at 2nd round price), and DSJ likely positive player this year and other youngs a decent shot to be positive next year or year after, tanking has more downside than its worth. Being happy about a mistake free offseason with upside might be grading on a curve, but it isn’t just a curve based on Knicks front office moves in the past, it’s based on current moves by the rest of the NBA.

I feel like the protank crowd really hasn’t acknowledged that the math has changed because of the flattened lottery odds.

I feel like you haven’t read the posts about draft position over the last six months. The #1 pick used to have a 25% chance of picking #1 and a 100% chance of picking top-4. Now it’s 14% and 100% chance picking top-5. That is still a substantial reason to lose games when you have no hope of coming close to the playoffs. That is still 100% factorial.

The Clippers were the 8th seed. Many people would say that’s the worst place to be. Their pick won’t be very high! They have no superstars! But they were able to use their role players and picks to get Kawhi and Paul George. Now they’re contenders until proven otherwise.

The 8 seed may be the worst place to be, but Los Angeles is not. The Clippers managed to pull off the George trade by giving up one of the biggest hauls we’ve seen in NBA history. Kawhi went to LA because… hey… where’s he from, again?

Do you realize that there were other contenders out there that had the ability to sign him, but he chose his hometown? Do you acknowledge that confounding factor? Do you accept that he might have had non-basketball reasons to go to L.A., just as LeBron did? Because if I’m Kawhi and I’m only thinking about basketball, I’m probably staying in Toronto, the team that just won the damn championship. I see you pointing to the Clippers’ assets and roster to make your point, but have you pointed to the city in their name, yet?

It seems to me that you’re still promoting the theory that if you create a vague air of competent management, you can trick superstars into committing to your team. How’s that goink for the other 12ish low-seed or fringe lottery teams who didn’t sign superstars during the offseason?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPu_d4SSOPk

“Does a struggling salesman start…

Everyone can miss me with the “so you want to all-out tank again” straw man. While I do think there’s a very convincing case for exactly that, there’s also plenty of space between all out-tanking and blowing all of your cap space on short-term veterans who might lead you to a useless, process of elimination 8th seed.

Most people here agreed that signing Randle and then using the rest of the space to take on assets would’ve been a successful offseason, for example. We had a ton of options and chose the one that sat at the 30th percentile or so.

If I was teaching a machine learning program to recognize emotions, yesterday and today’s thread would definitely fall into a spot on the map that was previously observed on this blog many times. But how do you call this emotion? Optimistic disappointment? Delirious denial? Falling back to earth? Holding on to love?

For every Clippers success story there’s at least one Hornets, Wizards, Magic or Pistons. Winning 35 games means nothing in itself, you would think the Knicks themselves would have proven that already when we were between 25-33 wins for so many years. We were never going to bring Kawhi because we’re not in LA, period, the Clippers situation this year is unique and not replicable. It’s not a strategy we can definitely replicate.

I’ll repeat what I said after this offseason was mostly concluded: I don’t think these guys preclude us from building a contender. It could never happen under Phil and Isiah, they quite literally made it impossible.

These guys don’t really know what they’re doing, but they leave the door cracked slightly open for some insane luck. They’re run-of-the-mill bad, not performance art bad.

If I was teaching a machine learning program to recognize emotions, yesterday and today’s thread would definitely fall into a spot on the map that was previously observed on this blog many times. But how do you call this emotion? Optimistic disappointment? Delirious denial? Falling back to earth? Holding on to love?

It’s a feeling that may be entirely unique to sports fans in a select number of cities that follow perpetually inept sports teams. I do not believe there’s a word for it. German probably has one.

I guess the other thing that’s frustrating is that it’s way more fun (to me at least) to watch a bad team full of kids I can at least dream on instead of watching a mediocre team of veterans that I don’t give a shit about.

You need to start dreaming about 2nd round draft picks.

Since we’re basically in full offseason mode for a few months:

Sorry for the WWII naval analogies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd8_vO5zrjo

Outstanding, simple explanation of the Battle of Midway, told from the perspective of the Japanese as their intelligence permitted. The stones on all parties involved, god damn…

Everyone but Randle, Barrett and Iggy (and Noah, thanks Phil!)
is potentially off the books next year.

This worries me-forget free agents coming here-why would Mitch stay here? At some point we need a core of guys. This is a core of mercenaries, and it’s not even a particularly good core. And about the “trio” that Mill Perry hit on: Trier is a 6th man. Iggy is also a 6th man.

They’re building a good bench, that’s it.

And for the short term.

We needed to suck last season, but not so badly. If Frank and Knox had been any good and showed lots of promise, we might’ve landed a stud. Why would Kyrie come here without Durant? To join that mess? No. What FA are going to look for is to pair up 2 max players and join 3-4 strong players, at least one of whom will become a max player, that are on rookie contracts.

Kyrie and Durant pushed all the chips in on a 42-win Nets team that had to give up its best scoring player (in a career year) to sign them. Durant will not play until 2020-21 and when he does, he will be 32 years old and coming off one of the worst injuries a player can have. I don’t know how many times I have to say this — any team that wanted Durant, any player that wants to play with Durant is ignoring the stark risk of committing that much money to an over-30 player suffering a catastrophic injury like that. I don’t care that he’s a former MVP and one of the best players we’ll see in our lifetimes. He’s still aging. He’s still injured. And Kyrie chose him as his Finals-hopeful partner.

To try to ascribe some kind of rational thought to their decision would be a fool’s errand, truly.

another thing to keep in mind is the timing on when the one and done rule gets nixed… i don’t think this is passed yet i haven’t kept up with it… but if and when it does… there’s gonna be a lot of volatility with draft boards….

getting a #1 pick is still probably a priority but not being able to see guys in college is gonna wreak havoc on projections…. for example rj would’ve been consensus #1 and zion would have likely slipped to #3 or even later…

i don’t mind the idea behind this knicks strategy… i actually kind of like it… i just think you could have executed much much better… i basically only like randle.. who ranks up there with chandler as our best signing ever… and payton…. if you wanted to mix youth and competitiveness there were a lot of better ways to go about it…

but the strategy is good.. and i think it can work out really well for us if we have at least two of the mitch.. randle… dsj.. rj group to pan out…. and there’s a possibility that all four will…. and if it does the 2020s will be the best decade we will have since the 90s…

@89 I have mo idea what it means but zugzwang sounds about right. We’re in the knickerblogger zugzwang.

BTW, the 2-year FA contracts the Knicks signed are not 1+1’s, they’re all 2nd year unguaranteed. This makes all of them potential trade assets.

@94 — it’s a chess term where you would rather pass than make any moves because anything you’d do would weaken your position.

@95 — i’m a nobody who thoroughly enjoys the game of chess. i suppose with all the chess engines out there it is feasibly possible to prepare well and hold your own against most people — but at that point it’s just memorizing lines. I think fischer said that he hates modern chess because of this, everyone is essentially memorizing and no longer creating beautiful moves. what makes magnus carlsen so great is he’ll intentionally make bad moves to throw off his opponent.

jotd: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVkDfnGobmI

another thing to keep in mind is the timing on when the one and done rule gets nixed… i don’t think this is passed yet i haven’t kept up with it… but if and when it does… there’s gonna be a lot of volatility with draft boards….

getting a #1 pick is still probably a priority but not being able to see guys in college is gonna wreak havoc on projections…. for example rj would’ve been consensus #1 and zion would have likely slipped to #3 or even later…

100% this. The impact will go far, far beyond the first year’s rush of available names. This is going to be an enormous opportunity for teams that have competent player evaluation. And not because they’ll be able to divine whether a high schooler can actually play, but because those NCAA standouts are going to have more competition with “upside” talents to be taken early, and therefore some of them will drop well beyond where they ought to go. If you think NCAA players are hard to evaluate, wait ’til we have a couple dozen guys playing predominantly against brace-faced teenagers to assess the value of.

I knew Zion was the consensus #1 pick after his first exhibition game, but he is an EXTREME outlier. Many teams will light picks on fire chasing “talent.” I just hope we’re not as enamored with deeply flawed players like Knox and Ntilikina moving forward. I’m still not sold on Barrett and probably will never be, but if they keep taking guys who have almost no real basketball skills to speak of, we’re going to be on a hamster wheel of trying to turn functionally-clueless 18-year-olds with 40″ verts and 84″ wingspans into NBA skill players.

So zugzwang is “a situation in which the obligation to make a move in one’s turn is a serious, often decisive, disadvantage.” Perfect way to describe the bewilderment the Knicks front office personnel through the Dolan years displayed when presented with an opportunity.

Another translation is “tight spot”. Pretty good too. Because what’s an opportunity if not a tight spot? lol

Z-Man, you’re en-fuego dude.

The strategy is not objectively a C or lower. Maybe the player evaluation is, but not the strategy.

How exactly do you suggest we separate the “strategy” from the players it gave us? I guess the “strategy” here is being defined as “sign short-term, high AAV deals with the best possible players who will accept your offer,” so which players would’ve made that a smart strategy? It’s just a pointless thing to do in general.

I guess the other thing that’s frustrating is that it’s way more fun (to me at least) to watch a bad team full of kids I can at least dream on instead of watching a mediocre team of veterans that I don’t give a shit about. Great, Marcus Morris and Wayne Ellington had good games tonight, woo fucking hoo.

This is probably not gonna be a super fun team to watch for that reason.

But the main reason that you are not going to watch a bad team full of kids you can at least dream about is that the three main kids we brought on board in the last 3 years are all extremely disappointing so far (compared with Doncic, Trae or Fox, e.g.). But there is still a pretty decent young group to be excited about: Mitch, Trier, Iggy…maybe RJ, DSJ, and yes, even Knox. Randle, Payton and Portis are hardly ancient. Frank? well…

Of the 7 new guys, only Morris, Gibson, Ellington and Bullock (if that happens) are mediocre vets, and even the Nets and Hawks had some of those. And it’s not even certain that those guys will play over the young guys. I, for one, am not enamored with rooting for loss after loss for the hope that it improves our lottery position.

You’re really doing your best to hold on to your “same ol’ Knicks” nightmare. Let it go.

@93

I’d rather have stockpiled draft picks, but I’m ok giving Randle and Elfrid extended tryouts.

We have 6 first round picks in the next 4 years. That’s a start. If we get picks as part of our trade-deadline deals for the tradeable assets, that’s a good thing.

BTW, we have to all root for Dallas to be horrible the season after next. It’ll be nice to get two high picks!

How exactly do you suggest we separate the “strategy” from the players it gave us? I guess the “strategy” here is being defined as “sign short-term, high AAV deals with the best possible players who will accept your offer,” so which players would’ve made that a smart strategy? It’s just a pointless thing to do in general.

Sort of, the strategy is get some decent players to have a watchable product on the floor and challenge the young guys, but to not sign anyone to a long term deal of any kind unless it is an absolute no-brainer. Randle and Payton were good tactical moves within that strategy. Morris and Ellington are fine. Portis is a tactical error until proven otherwise. Gibson and Bullock were definitely errors. Not saving some cap space for a rainy day was an error. But none of the errors compromise the strategy at all, and having a competitive team on the floor most nights and not being a laughing stock (record-wise) is not a bad thing.

We did tank. We got the third pick. But now there’s consensus here that RJ won’t pan out. Chris Paul was a third pick as was James Harden but R.J.? No…bust.

We also have our starting center. A guy who’s been dominant. We’re making a roster around him. But no. Bobby Portis takes his minutes.

We got rid of bad contracts and didn’t make new bad ones including the absence of a max Porzingis deal. But no. Where are our bad contracts for players with late lottery picks attached? Even though we have six first rounders in the next four years.

I think we wanted the players we signed. We want to try to be competitive while still developing a young core. We want to maintain future cap space and trade flexibility. We’ve actually done most of the stuff we prayed for when we had low upside, capped out teams with no picks coming.

I don’t know where this team fits in the standings but I’m excited to watch it unfold as opposed to last year which was just cynical bullshit.

I think we wanted the players we signed. We want to try to be competitive while still developing a young core. We want to maintain future cap space and trade flexibility. We’ve actually done most of the stuff we prayed for when we had low upside, capped out teams with no picks coming.

Yeah, but it’s not perfect so we are doomed to suck forever.

There is some logic in the strategy of bringing in some veterans to push the young players and build a system but we didn’t bring in a couple of vets. We brought in seven. That’s almost the entire rotation inked in permanent marker. Add Mitch, Barrett and one of our PGs and that’s it, done. No room for any of our other young players at all.

This isn’t vets pushing young players to step up it’s vets pushing young players completely out of the rotation. I don’t see how Trier or Dotson or Iggy or even Knox, if the Bullock signing happens, can even crack the rotation no matter how good they are.

Yeah, but it’s not perfect so we are doomed to suck forever.

I’m still holding on to hope that Dolan will accidentally eventually hire a good decision-maker, like he stumbled into with Sather and the Rangers. Look at how much better Perry is than Phil by just not being all that good but not being Phil. So a good GM would still be able to work wonders if they ever get hired.

No but Gibson (34), Ellington (31), Morris (29), and Bullock (28) are.

I very much like the Randle and Payton signings and don’t love Portis mainly because he plays the same position as Randle but the problem isn’t any of the players specifically, though some are better than others, it’s the number of players.

I think it’s fair to say that it is not the same old approach as before. It’s not a good approach, but it’s a better one than the one Phil and Isiah used. The team’s not kneecapped like they were in the past. They’re not in good shape by any stretch of the imagination and I don’t think Mills and Perry are good, but the Knicks are not completely fucked like they were under Isiah and Phil.

unpopular opinion: i actually like the rockets deal. they want to win around harden. i think they looked at what toronto did and wanted to win one by any means necessary, future be damned.

Also i’m curious to see how a stat padding player plays with a coach who inflates everyone’s stats. i’d split minutes 50/50 between westbrook and harden, rarely having them both on the floor at the same time. harden will jack threes and go to the ft line. russ will continue to get triple doubles. i also wouldn’t be surprised if westbrook’s ts% increases this year. harden won’t fatigue in the playoffs.

jotd: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP7XuE1Fw9s

As an aside, I’m glad to see Chandler reunited with D’Antoni. With Harden and Westbrook likely staggering minutes, it’ll be good to know that they’ll each have a guy to lob to on every possession between Chandler and Capela.

westbrook is younger and should be better over the next few years than cp3… harden.. westbrook.. capela should be a fine core for those years… the trick is going to be filling out the rest of the roster… and right now it’s pretty bad so there’s a real question on how good they’ll be next year…. guys like gordon and tucker who they are leaning pretty heavily on are in real danger of falling off a cliff…

after next year they’ll have a chance to reload the role players…. so i think they should be perennial contenders if they can keep the core healthy…

@125 The difference is that the veterans we brought on are just placeholders. In the past, guys to like Lee and Hardaway Junior were part of the plan for the future. The difference between signing those for older guys versus four cast off young guys is pretty marginal. The bottom line is that 11 of our 15 contracts are with players under the age of 25. None of those 11 are signed beyond two seasons. There is no damaging commitment to any player young or old.

If we pick up the option for next season, they expire but we’d have their bird rights, so we could go over to resign them.

My understanding is that we do NOT have Bird Rights on the 1+1s. Anybody know if this is true?

You get Early Bird Rights after two years, but that’s effectively meaningless, since that just allows you to exceed the cap to sign them to the MLE, which is less than pretty much all of them are making (maybe not Ellington and obviously not Bullock now that he’s signing for the room). In addition, their cap holds will be higher than their previous salaries, so there is no benefit to having Early Bird Rights on any of them (except Bullock, I suppose).

That’s what I thought. So if Elfrid Payton turns into John Stockton or something, you get him for two years and that’s it, no Bird Rights. Which kind of severely limits the upside of those moves.

That’s what I thought. So if Elfrid Payton turns into John Stockton or something, you get him for two years and that’s it, no Bird Rights. Which kind of severely limits the upside of those moves.

Or you can sign him to a long-term deal prior to that, right? That’s where the player evaluation part comes in. You can say, hey, we have a team option on you for $8 million next year which we will definitely exercise, but we want to offer you $ X million for 3-4 years. Then Elfrid Stockton would have to decide whether to risk another year of being underpaid or sign a guaranteed deal for more money with the Knicks in MSG (which will be rockin’ if he indeed becomes a star.) Sure, that counts against the cap, but for a star player, who cares? That’s one less guy you have to seek out in free agency.

That’s what I thought. So if Elfrid Payton turns into John Stockton or something, you get him for two years and that’s it, no Bird Rights. Which kind of severely limits the upside of those moves.

It limits us if lots of these newly hired players turn out to be ones we want to re-sign. But if only two or three are worth re-signing, we just waive the others and then have cap room to sign the ones we want. Also, if we want a long term contract it is probably less of a cap hold than their current contract. If it turns out most of them are really good and we don’t actually have cap space to sign all of them, that would be a great problem to have.

The others will either be traded before the deadline, waived after the deadline, not have their 2nd year picked up, or will be placeholders until 2021 and not re-signed.

I’d bet boocoo ducats that the Knicks aren’t trading any of these guys at the deadline. All the contenders are capped out and would have to send back matching salary. And the Knicks would lose flexibility next year since most of the contracts they’d have to take back would run for a minimum of 2 years. Not many good teams with expiring contracts in the 10-15 million range. This FO clearly values cap flexibility over assets.

So in the CBA FAQ’s it says that you can’t “extend” a veteran contract of less than 3 years. In the scenario I mentioned with Payton (he gets really good in year 1 and we tell him that we will exercise the team option or would be willing to sign him to a longer-term deal) would that be prohibited under the “extension” clause? Is there a moratorium of some sort that prohibits this, i.e. when you decline the team option or renounce the non-guarantee, you can’t sign the player for a year, something like that?

I actually think the FO made some well thought out movers here for the long term.

Their hand was forced by KP without question and they made the best out of that bad situation. They realized what a fundamental error Phil made by having a self absorbed dick like Me7o around to “mentor” KP. He taught KP the culture of me-ism. I thought Billups’ comments the other day were didactic and spot on..

They had 72M to spend and once they saw that top guys were out of reach they pivoted to the best young player available with both good production, youth and upside (Randle) and signed him to a perfect contract. Everyone agrees on that.

Then they decided competence and culture were more important to the growth of RJ, Mitch, DSJr, Frank, Dotson, Trier, Knox, Iggy than selling space for picks while taking a flyer on a young stretch 4/5 (Portis ) for reasonable contract.

They addresses back up 4/5 (Gibson) and starting 3 (Morris) with league average competence on short contracts and to a lesser level in the back court (Ellington, Payton, Bullock).

They won’t have the terrible situation where Knox was almost forced to play while getting killed and Trier because there was no one else that could put the ball in the basket. The young players will have to actually EARN minutes this season which is a good thing. If Knox/Iggy want to play they are going to have to beat out a real NBA player in Morris.

And … near the trade deadline i’m assuming some playoff team could use a playoff tested 3/4 like Morris and maybe Payton and Portis will have developed some trade value while the young players behind them push for PT.

Kinda like making chicken salad out of chicken shit…..

I only wish the had fired Fizdale and brought in a teacher like Blatt. As we found out as much as he licked LeBron’s balls, that didn’t translate into any players being in a rush to play for him, nor out all black management team.

I’d bet boocoo ducats that the Knicks aren’t trading any of these guys at the deadline. All the contenders are capped out and would have to send back matching salary.

Portland has Bazemore and is a prime candidate. Toronto has Ibaka and Gasol. Orlando DJ Auginstin.
Denver has Milsap and Plumlee. OKC Andre Robertson……

No one knows today who will want to do what at the deadline, but there will be a bunch of teams looking to improve…..

I’m inclined to agree with Z-man, though with the caveat that Ben R gave. A few facts seem clear:

1) They prize flexibility.
2) The lottery odds have significantly altered the efficacy of tanking.
3) They feel that NYK are not a destination without winning more.

Now, you can say “signing a few vets for marginal wins is stupid,” but we just saw KD, long rumored to be going to the Knicks, change his mind and go to the Nets. The Knicks and Nets are both effectively in NY, where he wanted to be, but one team is decent, one not – so their seeming belief that they need to win in order to attract top FA seems valid.

Taking those facts into consideration, I believe that all their moves are focused at maximizing their chances should the opportunity arise. They want a team that wins, no matter how those wins are acquired, and are less focused on developing young players (who will need to fight for their chance) than on creating an environment they believe will be appealing to top FAs – the next of whom is AD.

The Nets actually patiently built up a stable of assets, and then they were desirable to free agents. They didn’t go out and sign a bunch of mediocre vets to 1+1 deals and then attract free agents.

I hope this shit all works out. I really hope these dudes sign some superstar marquee free agent a year or two from now. Because if not this is going to be the rebuild to nowhere. Adding one young guy via the 9th pick in the draft every year is not really the best way to do it, and Piston-izing yourself by sending out a roster full of journeymen is a dead end.

This is not a great day to be Alan Dershowitz

HAHAHA I was about to say– if you happen to get all of your political analysis from Dershowitz, might want to start looking elsewhere.

@153 carlsen is great for many reasons, but one of them — which i represented quite poorly — is that he’ll play inaccuracies early on to take his opponents out of theory and into playing chess.

i usually do a lot of chess watching on youtube. this one guy agadmator does a great job walking through classical and modern games.

jotd: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3GVd4DFFPA

Their cap holds will all be 130% of their current salaries, so they don’t save anything, cap hold wise.

Sorry, Brian, I mis typed. I meant that if we wanted a long term contract with one of them the annual cost should be a lot less than what we pay under the current contract. (Unless they super perform, which would be a nice problem to have). So then the cap hold becomes the new annual salary, which should actually free up a little cap space.

Morris is our 3rd best PF yet he is absolutely going to expect to start and play 30+ minutes. That’s why he’s going to play the 3 where he is a defensive liability.

I’m sure he is a worse defensive liability compared to Knox..

Morris is the best small forward on this roster by a parsec…. I mean c’mon….. one guy was literally the worst player in the league last season and the other was about league average

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_hint=Kevin+Knox&player_id1_select=Kevin+Knox&player_id1=knoxke01&y1=2019&player_id2_hint=Marcus+Morris&player_id2_select=Marcus+Morris&y2=2019&player_id2=morrima03&idx=players

Maybe I’m wrong about our front office but cutting bait or benching a vet that you just signed to a big contract is different than doing it to a player that has been here a while and isn’t part of the future plans, especially if it’s a player from a previous regime. It would look really bad to start the season with one or two of our “big” acquisitions stuck on the bench unhappy about playing time.

It’s kind of hard to believe Dershowitz can even give his legal opinions considering he has Donald Trump’s balls in his mouth most of the time

It seems obvious to me that another year of tanking would have been the optimal move but if Perry did that he’d be out of a job by January. If we don’t improve he’s probably still fired by March. Seems like he’s trying the thread a very thin needle – better enough to keep his job, not so much better it screws the team over. It’d be nice if he were better at player evaluation but he’s not horrible, and it seems like he’s done a good job given the constraints of Dolan’s imbecility. There’s only 30 GM jobs in the NBA, I don’t begrudge him trying to keep it. We’re hobbled until Dolan is no longer in control.

LOL. for 50 years Dershowitz was a favorite of the left as a civil libertaian / classical liberal. But then he made the fatal mistake of thinking even Trumphitler has rights, and bam, he’s out of the club. His lifelong work meaningless because he strayed from the progressive plantation.

Defending the “rights” (to materially profit off his presidency? to attack the free press from the bully pulpit? to install his fucking kids as de facto diplomats?) of a would-be authoritarian makes one a fucking asshole

Having some decent players eating minutes means that guys like Knox and RJ can ease into more limited and productive roles rather than being force-fed minutes and sucking so bad that they have no value. (see: Frank). I’m not suggesting that this will definitely happen, but it’s a reasonable possibility.

I’m a principles over principals person, like I think Dersh is. Even orange poopy heads and lying hags (talk about nepotism and using your position to enrich yourself!) have the right to due process and free speech and to not be subject to phony warrants.

Dershowitz was never “an icon of the left”–he was always just a dumb piece of shit who, inexplicably, got a professorship at Harvard (maybe it was because he was on OJ’s defense team…) He advocated for torture in the wake of 9/11, and is one of the biggest defenders of Israeli war crimes in American public discourse. This was all before he got some weird hard-on for Donald Trump’s supposed legal rights (even though his business dealings and dealings with Russia clearly merit an investigation and likely charges on the basis of the emoluments clause and obstructing justice, respectively). He’s a ‘civil libertarian’ in the same way I’m an award-winning author–which is to say, not at all.

Now, we know he willfully associated with a known pedophile, and even received one of the famous massages. I, for one, am glad to see him squirm on social media and in court. Nice job trying to score political points against some straw man though!

BUT WHAT ABOUT SLAVERY, AM I RIGHT

THE REPUBLICANS ENDED SLAVERY

THE DEMOCRATS DID SLAVERY

BREITBART.COM IS MY HOMEPAGE

NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION

TO ME, FREE SPEECH IS NOT WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING GOOD AND YOU PURPOSELY WRITE SOMETHING BAD

TO ME, THAT’S VERY DANGEROUS SPEECH

Well… you got 4 out of 7 correct…. When the facts are on your side…. pound the facts. When the law is on your side….. pound the law. And when neither is on your side…. pound the table. Jowles is in primo “pound the table” mode…..

Dershowitz was never “an icon of the left”–he was always just a dumb piece of shit who, inexplicably, got a professorship at Harvard (maybe it was because he was on OJ’s defense team…)

The lols keep on coming. Pretty soon we are going to be informed he clerked under Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scolia.

It’s funny that BREITBART!!!11!! is now the favorite pejorative of the left. It used to be RUSHLIMBAUGH!!!111!!! Then FOXNEWS!!!!!!1111!!!
It just kills leftists when they don’t have a 100% monopoly on the news. Come on you tolerant souls who love yourself some equality. You have every network, even the Comedy channel, except for Fox News. You have Hollywood and academia on lockdown. You have almost every major newspaper. Why does it eat at you so much that right wingers have a couple of places to get their red meat.

I am deeply intolerant of lies told as truths

Someday I’m gonna buy Z-man a drink and it’s going to be a great moment for this board

Two parts Lagavulin 16, one part Great Value

How come you guys are only worked up over Epstein now that the situation involves Dershowitz? If I missed the posts ridiculing Menendez and Slick Willy, among other people who are on your team, I apologize.

Anthony Bennett back to the big leagues!

Man, how did Perry not get him to sign a 1+1?

As long as they’re in separate glasses…

Speaking of which, I was in Montauk with my better half this week, and after a nice seaside dinner we went for a drink at a local bar. I asked if they had any single malts and the novice bartender shrugged and showed me a bottle of Lagavulin 8 (which I actually prefer to the 16, go figure!). I ordered one on the rocks. She took out a tumbler, put a couple of ice cubes in it and filled it to the brim with the good stuff. By far the most fortuitous pour I ever got, probably a $40 drink that cost me $14. The guy sitting next to me happened to own a bar in Yonkers quipped “Buddy, you just hit the jackpot!” I damn well wanted to sneak in a second one but the missus wasn’t having it.

I’m not defending Dershowitz for his pedo island visits. I’m saying this pedo island thing has been known for years, and Sick Willy is a frequent flyer on Pedo Air, and until today I don’t recall you commenting about it. If you don’t see how partisan you’re being, I can’t help you.

Probably because they didn’t really care about Repub vs Demo nonsense, so they just gave the news from a neutral perspective.

There’s an affidavit with specific allegations against Dershowitz, and his response was weird and humiliating.

When this happens to Bill Clinton, you can have your day of schadenfreude.

We can’t trade any of these signings until December, right? So say we then trade Portis, Taj and Payton for him. That leaves 2.5 years of that insane contract, but he might be an appealing expiring in year 3. So for 1.5 years it might be worth it?

It just kills leftists when they don’t have a 100% monopoly on the news. Come on you tolerant souls who love yourself some equality. You have every network, even the Comedy channel, except for Fox News. You have Hollywood and academia on lockdown. You have almost every major newspaper. Why does it eat at you so much that right wingers have a couple of places to get their red meat.

You know what’s funny about when people say shit like this. They never step back and say, “why is it that most of the “smart” people lean that way?”

Nah they think it’s a conspiracy,when it’s actually informative

It reminds me of the concept of “virtue-signaling,” because no one can actually be, you know, virtuous. It’s so alien to some folks that they assume anyone being virtuous is just “virtue-signalling.” Similarly, any interest in sexual wrongdoings MUST be politically motivated.

For me, it’s pretty simple. What side are the white supremacists/neo-Nazis and neo-robber-barons on? Please sign me up on the opposite team.

@210

An eminently reasonable take, but somehow a semi-hot one in this political climate, apparently.

Also, wow, that good of a pour for 14? Pinch me.

@209 you do know that Bill Clinton is hated by progressives right? I’m not sure why you keep bringing him up like hes some sort of deity. Me myself I’m not a Republican or a Democrat.i think they are both evil and are corporate shills.

The difference in the 2 parties is that Republicans are better politicians and Democrats are pussies ( and I dont mean it in an anti female way.) They just are weak.

That’s why the establishment cant stand AOC and Ayanna Pressley and the likes. They operate like Republicans

and is one of the biggest defenders of Israeli war crimes in American public discourse.

And there we have it. Those dastardly Jooooz just won’t sit still and stfu while they’re bombed! The bastards!

Ugh. I’m an Israeli Jew and some of the things my country does are indefensible. I used to be an activist and saw them with my own eyes. I’d say having a right wing libertarian attack the American left as “jooooz” haters is the worst, but our prime minister’s son is routinely publishing anti-semitic neo-nazi shit to attack the left here, and at least one of his father’s proclamations over the past few years stared as the headline of The Daily Stormer, so there’s an even deeper bottom.

Also, characterizing Dershowitz as an “icon of the left” is laughable.

I was at Six Flags out here all day with the fam. What I miss?

@215 yea so there is the disconnect with some.

Your beliefs in self ownership and liberty do not coincide with a successful society. The 2 can not jive.

This is why we are were we are. People in this country want to have business that makes money, but dont want to help to pay for the roads that can safely get consumers to their places of business.

The shit is mind blowing to me

Neither MSNBC nor Fox News is even close to “the truth.”

Keeping people perpetually agitated is big business now and essentially *is* the media business. The media business is clicks and the sober, reasoned truth doesn’t get many clicks.