Allan Houston lining up for promotion in Knicks front office shakeup: source

Wow, getting dissed by Rich Cho.

Not sure what I think about Allan Houston as a GM but he sure knew how to not fill up a box score.

Just promoting Houston would be the most “meh” move possible. He’s been involved for so long already throughout all the terrible years, but I guess we don’t know how much he was a part of the terrible decisions… I guess we also can’t say if he ever did anything good, so it’s so unexciting it kinda hurts.

The Knicks FO saga is like one of those movies that starts off dark and never gets any rosier, like The House of Sand and Fog.

Z-man:
The Knicks FO saga is like one of those movies that starts off dark and never gets any rosier, like The House of Sand and Fog.

More like Requiem for a Dream!

it’s a continuation of the same incompetent management that has been in place all along, Houston is the new Mills.

Yeah, I was going to say pretty much exactly the same thing.

You have the starfucker “open for the Eagles” guy in the POBO role and the loyal lickspittle in the GM role. Should go well.

This Anthony Edwards kid is good at standing motionless on the perimeter

Wow, Seton Hall just executed a better inbounds play than I have seen from the Knicks in years. Since David Lee actually!

Also, Isola was saying on PTI that Dolan is extending an olive branch to Oak and trying to make amends….

File under, believe it when you see it…

Yeah, that Edwards line is ridiculous. 7 turnovers!

How a guy with a 52% ts% is the number one pick baffles me.

I know no one needs bigs anymore but I am definitely on record that passing on some of the tall people available in the draft like Onyewu, Carey, and maybe Wiseman is going to end up being a huge mistake.

DRed:
small sample size but I’m out on Edwards based on the 8 or 9 minutes of college basketball I watched tonight.can’t say that his team looked particularly well coached but he was pretty invisible except for a nice long 3 and some dumb turnovers.also college basketball is awful

You wanna see bad college basketball, wait till the NBA gets rid of one and done.

This democratic debate is more cringe-inducing than the last thread…

dang, wanted to catch that…who’s the “leading” candidate to date?

Wait, Strat… You think Dolan can function in a band?

lmao

I used to play guitar in a garage band about 45 years ago. All the talk about music on these treads has rekindled my interest playing. Compared to my abilities, Dolan is peak Hendrix innovating on guitar with Little Wing. That’s my latest project. I’m trying to play the intro to Little Wing. I’m a little over two weeks into it and I’m playing it about as well as Frank plays PG while he has a groin injury.

If SNL had better writers, they’d have a field day with this!

This draft class looks like if every questionable guard from the past lotteries were available, like Coby White, Garland, Sexton, Culver, Monk… but they were the only prospects everyone is talking about

Well said.

I was into Edwards when I saw him play Michigan State but that game looks like an anomaly. He’s not good an he’s going to be 18 years old on draft night. He’s got strong Frank & Knox vibes.

Funny stuff. Good bounce back thread!

that didn’t really happen…did it?

He responded to an attack with something like “countries have tried that before, it’s called communism…”

Bloomberg was awful. Warren eviscerated him.

He’s willing to spend a couple billion dollars to defeat Trump, even if he isn’t the nominee. So that’s something.

And he isn’t Donald Trump.

As for Warren, I wish we could have someone play point guard like she can debate.

“Hard to love any of these candidates, just not a strong field.”

Luckily, you have a lot of practice rooting for laundry.

Donnie Walsh: Luckily, you have a lot of practice rooting for laundry.

lol so true!

You can always stay at Knickerblogger! I care about this blog way more than I care about Jimmy Dolan’s crap sports franchise.

I know they’ll never be good but that’s the fun of it!

Brian, I get the cynicism, but you never know. Sometimes when the draft is “stacked” you wind up being almost forced to take the Fultz’s and Okafor’s of the world in the top 3. I remember how down people (including myself0 were on Jayson Tatum. There is someone in the top-10 of this draft who is going to be a very good player, maybe 2 or 3 guys. There’s also a chance that Rose is good at spotting good players later in the draft…we have a late first and an early second. If we can hit on just one of those guys, who knows?

And I doubt that we wind up with Drummond, or that he gets a long-term max deal. I don’t think the only reason he brought back basically nothing in that trade was because he was a rental. Teams have figured out that most of what he gives you is available at a much lower price.

Eli Eli lama sabachthani…..during the 2019 finals and the Zion draft lottery ?

I’m reasonably sure that the eventual Democratic nominee will not be offering an under-the-table pardon to an exiled cybercriminal for his false statement that the nation confirmed to have hacked his political rival did not actually do the thing that literally every intelligence agency has confirmed they did, so the choice is pretty simple to me. And the debates are nothing but a reality show in the spirit of “democratic norms.”

There’s certainly no Zion in this draft, but some of the bigs look like they’ll be damn good, especially Carey Jr and Okongwu. I know they need playmakers, but I’d rather they just take Carey than pay Drummond ridiculous money.
I guess I’d be fine with LaMelo, Wiseman, Haliburton, or maybe the French kid or the Israeli kid.
But yeah, once I move and get league pass, I might just try to get back into the Hawks instead of this never-ending clown show.

>>>If we win the lottery this year we should trade down<<<

I think it's going to be very hard to find someone who wants to trade up.

Hell if I could trade *out* of this draft I probably would. I'm sure that's what the Warriors are thinking. At least they didn't pull a San Antonio end up with the #1 pick in a Duncan/Zion kinda year.

“I congratulate Allan Houston on his promotion and the strength of his faith but I am a little curious why God couldn’t do more for his rebound rate…”

God says “it’s called basketball, not reboundball.”

“What happens with New Orleans Pelicans All-Star Brandon Ingram in restricted free agency is more divisive. Most executives believe Ingram isn’t worth a max contract, which makes his future difficult to predict. “I wonder if [Pelicans executive vice president of basketball operations David Griffin] will hardball [Ingram] and say, ‘Get an offer,’” one executive asked. “Where is he getting it from?” – via Tim Bontemps @ ESPN”

Id give Ingram a max offer to Ingram if i were the Knicks.

I mean we aren’t just going to have an organization where there isn’t some high-level executive whose role and expertise and purpose are totally opaque except that it has something to do with Jimmy liking them. So since Mills was finally forced to abdicate the position we obviously are going to be looking to fill that post. Houston is a logical fit.

Halliburton seems pretty lonzoballish, but he’s a better shooter. That’s probably not the kind of player most of us want (someone who can initiate offense and can shoot) but it’s also not a bad outcome. It’s certainly better than another guy who can’t put the ball into the basket.

>>>It would be silly to trade out of the draft only because you have no control where future 1sts will land.<<<

I wasn't thinking for future picks, but I was thinking the same thing about finding the sucker who falls in love with one of these prospects. Think Phil Jackson wanting to trade Porzingis to draft Josh Jackson.

Long shot, I know. We never find the sucker because we usually are the sucker.

(I will say, for all of Pills faults, I never felt we'd get suckered in a trade when Scott Perry was here. I think chances are we downgrade at GM.)

DRed: Halliburton seems pretty lonzoballish, but he’s a better shooter. That’s probably not the kind of player most of us want (someone who can initiate offense and can shoot) but it’s also not a bad outcome. It’s certainly better than another guy who can’t put the ball into the basket.

A shooting Lonzo Ball seems like a decent player. I’d take that in a heartbeat. Would I rather have a superstar? Yes. But unless we get a top 2 pick, that’s a good outcome in any draft. And this draft doesn’t have any clear cut superstars.

@JK47
Killian Hayes shot below 20% from 3 last year, that’s worrisome. He’s currently shooting near 40% but on barely any attempts. This is why everyone thought Derrick Williams was a phenomenal shooter, he shot a total of 90 threes in college. Hayes is at 117 and hitting 27% in his Euro career.

i hate to do this when there are so many good mj-warren analogies to be made, but i want to follow up on one quick point about the slim odds of getting a franchise-changing player with a mediocre draft pick. it’s true that the odds are very low. but in most cases for a bad team i think the cost is even lower.

one way to frame this is to look at a team like the nuggets. they got incredibly lucky getting jokic in the second round. right up there with the best 2nd rounder ever. even if tim connelly is good at drafting, we know he’s not nostradamus. remember the nuggets technically drafted both gobert and donovan mitchell for utah. they also took two players before jokic, including a european center. you can’t plan for that kind of luck. sort of.

the nuggets were also wisely opportunistic. they got our first in the melo deal which netted murray. they got a first from houston for lawson. they traded down for two first so the bulls could take mcdermott which netted nurkic and harris. they got will barton and a 1st for afflalo. what i’m trying to say here is they gave themselves room to take a lot of swings and plenty of whiffs. and whiff they did they took mudiay, traded the gobert pick for nothing, traded the mitchell pick for trey lyles, made a rough nurkic/plumlee deal. but the odds of getting a really good player on a rookie contract and long production runway start to really add up up when you collect a bunch of lottery tickets, and the opportunity cost of not filling up cap space from a veteran on a non-contender was very low. in most cases (sure, not all) that’s the way to go. if you can improve your chance of getting a top 40 player on a rookie deal from 1% to 5%, that’s way better than a 70% chance of going from 28 to 35 wins.

and it’s not just about hitting big for bad teams or even rookie production above salary, it’s about moving assets forward while you are bad instead of allowing them to expire, cont…

…in september of 1972 on z-man’s 40th birthday, the knicks bought john gianelli from houston, their second-round pick. in 1976 they traded him for bob mcadoo. when mcadoo was almost but not quite done, they flipped him to the celtics and got, in part, 3 firsts. one of those firsts was bill cartwright, who we of course later traded for a 25-year old charles oakley. and when oak was 35 we managed to deal him for a 24-yr old marcus camby in the best deal sean marks was ever involved him. had antonio mcdyess worked out the asset might still be alive today.

obviously all assets don’t move forward in time like that, most just flame out. but these little things like buying an early 2nd when available are important because the small chance of a mediocre team transferring consumption to the future is really important. and the cost is really low. this is why so many people are frustrated we have not been aggressive enough doing more of this, to say the least. taking shitty contracts, buying shitty picks, trading courtney fucking lee when they could for the best pick available (not “win the trade”). the long shots add up.

When I first became a Knicks fan in 1966 (at age 34 in pt years), it seemed that they made one brilliant move after another. In 1967 they drafted Clyde, Phil and Mike Reardon (with a 12th round pick!). The next year, they fired Dick McGuire and hired Red Holtzman. In 1968 they traded the corpse of Walt Bellamy and Howard Komives for Dave DeBusscherre, who was a top glue-guy player in his late prime at that time. In early 1971 they traded a disgruntled Cazzie Russell for Jerry Lucas, a well past-his-prime but brilliant (and perhaps original) stretch-5 (fun fact: he twice led the league in TS% in over 3,000 minutes.) Then in late 1971 they traded Mike Reardon and Dave Stallworth for Earl Monroe, who was a superstar at that time.

It’s pretty much been all downhill from there except for the Ewing pick (and even he wasn’t the best player in that draft). You would think that as I approach my 88th birthday, I would have more than the Leon Rose era to look forward to…alas…

And yet, somehow, we have people advocating for more building through free agency since that has worked so well…

Imagine if we just did salary dumps for two off seasons. Actually next year would be a great year to be a facilitator for trades and salary dumps. We’re going to use our new POBO mad relationship skillz to make Giannis come I’m sure.

Oh, we’re drafting Cole Anthony regardless of where we pick, unless LaMelo Ball is still on the board at which point it would be a coin flip. But Hayes is the future “we should have drafted that guy” guy to me right now.

I wasn’t referring to your idea Hubert. I know you can’t use all the cap space every year for asset assumption and you do have to sign some free agents. I was talking more about how some people think that getting extra draft assets isn’t viable for a rebuild. More specifically the nonsensical statements that we’ve tried that and failed when we in fact have not.

OK I’m going on the record right now. I want this guy.

In fact, I would trade up to get Ball. The best thing that happened is that he shot 20-80 from 3 in Australia. Otherwise he’d be a no-brainer #1 pick. But Z-man sez he will ABSOLUTELY be the best player in this draft.

I’m pretty excited about where the Knicks are right now. Assuming Rose comes in, hires a coach like Mark Jackson, and we have our usual bad luck in a bad draft, and then we make offers to Drummond and DeRozan…well, I can finally quit this team for good.

rama summing it all up. Throught out these decades of shit there’s always been some glimmer of hope buried in there somewhere if you just squinted. But now.. I love basketball and I enjoy KB a hell of a lot but I could do other things. It’d be kinda nice to be set free.

It looks similar to Lonzo’s to me. Starts at his face and then he flings it, all elbows.

On the Stepien they mentioned that his misses don’t tend to be in one direction, he misses all over the place, left, right, short, long. That doesn’t seem like a real good sign that it’s going to be easy to fix.

Lonzo was pretty extremely on the left side of his head, LaMelo is more centered. His release point is low, which always looks funky…except when guys like Steph and Trae do it because it goes in so much.

Yeah I think LaMelo is a better, bigger version of Lonzo in most ways, and the shooting should at least be average. But we are such a shooting-poor team, I could see going with a guy like Edwards instead (if we get the #1).

I would kinda like to have Lonzo, so a better shooting Lonzo is fine by me. Lonzo’s issues are he’s so bad at free throws and so allergic to even taking them that he’ll never be an efficient scorer no matter what, but he’s been quite decent for the Pelicans this year… he’s their best passer, he’s smart on the court and can defend, I’m not totally out on him yet.

Edwards is intriguing but he’s certainly not a 1 so he would push RJ to the 3. And then you still need a PG.

Z-man:
Look at these highlights of Hayes and compare it to Lonzo.The first thing that jumps out at me is that he carries the ball on nearly every possession. He has a very loose handle and I don’t see him doing much NBA PG-ish stuff. I’d be pretty bummed if he’s the best we can find.

I meant compare to LaMelo obviously

Early Bird: LaMelo’s 2pt fg% is lower than Hayes and Haliburton. I’m not sure if he struggles finishing or takes too many midrange shots, either way it’s concerning. Haliburton also has to contend with defenses parking their bigs in the paint for the whole possession.

From what I’ve read LaMelo’s not great at scoring despite the POINTZ!!

Sure, it’s concerning. But if there weren’t concerns, he wouldn’t be available to anyone but the lottery winners because no one would entertain a trade for him. (see: Zion, Ja)

I just think that his size, rebounding, passing, and FT shooting mitigate the risk, and he is said to have a mature feel for the game.

kyrie out for the year

Would anyone else be cool if we just kept Miller and Perry and banked on Mills and Fizdale being the two biggest (non-Dolan) problems?

Neither of them are great but I just can’t shake the feeling that we’re going to replace both of them with someone worse. GM Allan Houston and Coach Tom Thibodeau is not an upgrade.

I’m not convinced he’s better than Porzingis, but I’d max Ingram.

As to Houston, who’s “promoting” him? The guy who’s supposed to be running basketball ops isn’t even in the house yet. Did Rose promote him? If not, then it was someone else … and that’s really not how things are supposed to be going.

Would anyone else be cool if we just kept Miller and Perry and banked on Mills and Fizdale being the two biggest problems?

I just can’t shake the feeling that we’re going to replace both of them with someone worse.

I’m totally fine with that. Maybe we can get Masai that way. Miller seems like a good coach. Perry’s pulled off some good trades.

I’d also be fine with Miller+Perry (although more Miller than Perry). I think there’s a general consensus that parlaying a halfway decent team on the rise into attracting some free agents is a reasonable plan, with most of the disagreement being around whether it’s better to achieve the first point through more of a bottoming out approach or attempt to speed it up by going for more veterans.

But really the truth is that you don’t need to do anything all that creative or clever to become a decent team. You hardly need a plan at all. 16 of 30 teams make the playoffs. The league has built in structures designed to make it cyclical. If we could just stop shooting ourselves in the foot for two seconds, we could become the 8th seed with a relatively clean balance sheet purely through gravity, particularly in the Eastern conference. For a perfect example look at Orlando. Did they do anything at all particularly right in their post-Dwight rebuild? Not really, no, but the natural tides of the league have lifted them to a few years run as the 8th seed in a weak conference with relatively clean books and a modestly interesting nice core, and if the Knicks could ever just do that little I think being the Knicks could start to be a real asset for them instead of a massive hindrance.

All that is basically to say that I would sign up for mediocre stewardship at the GM and head coach positions provided I knew it wouldn’t be worse than that. Miller doesn’t seem like anything special (although I do think we need to see what he can do with a chance to take the team through camp) but he’s not a disaster. Perry seems fine (although I have more concerns here – his work in Sac wasn’t very convincing). Should we be able to do better? In theory yes, but the last 20 years of data tells me that’s not how it’s likely to go.

>>I’m not convinced he’s better than Porzingis, but I’d max Ingram.<<

I'm pretty sure Ingram is not as good an all around player as a healthy Porzingis, but he's getting better at a steady clip on offense and is younger. He's also probably less likely to break down even though he's had injury issues also. If we maxed him, I don't think I'd shoot myself, but I wouldn't be celebrating either. We still have more games to see this year to see what he can do and see if he sustain his improved efficiency this year. It's certainly not a plan "A" unless he looks great down the stretch of the season.

>kyrie out for the year<

I may have been one of the few people in NY that was happy that Durant and Kyrie didn't choose the Knicks. As everyone knows, I am not a huge Kyrie fan as a player and said Boston would do just fine without his ball stopping ways. And I still think Durant's window, even assuming he comes back well and start playing close to his best ball in the second half of next season, was too short given the rest our team.

The Nets make make a serious run in the East next year, but I don't think they have enough to win it all and the window is going to start closing fast assuming both these guys even stay healthy and Kyrie doesn't fall off the flat earth.

>Ingram is substantially better on offense than Porzingis. For a person who claims you need to watch the games, you’re awfully confident in your implicit claim about Ingram’s defense. How many Pelicans games have you watched? Four?<

I said he's not the better "all around" player when KP is healthy. That includes defense.

When I've watched Ingram play over the years in LA and for the Pelicans he looked like a neutral defender to me. I didn't see anything good or terrible. That's backed up by DRPM data over the last 2 years where he's been negative. KP is definitely a solidly plus defender because of his rim protection and help defense. That's backed up by his entire career DRPM data and obvious just watching. He sometimes impacts games on defense alone,

Ingram has been terrific on offense this year, but he's also shooting 40% from 3 which is well above his average. That's why I said I'd like to see more to see of him this year to see if that is his new improved sustainable level or contains noise. Otherwise, I'm barely sure he's a net plus player let alone better than KP, who definitely IS a plus player when he's healthy.

Just for the record, Ingram's teams have been better with him off the court every single year including this one.

>Whoa, whoa, whoa — DRPM? Why are you using fake stats?<

I think it's the least terrible of the single number stats if viewed over multiple years and it at least tries to measure individual defense in a reasonable way.

The major flaw I don't like (and I'm sure there are many others) is that I think lineups matter. It's not always whether you are playing with good or bad players (which it tries to adjust for). Sometimes it's whether you are playing with the right or wrong good/bad players, in the right or wrong system, and in the right or wrong role for you. That's why I sometimes use common sense basketball principles and look at lineup data hoping to gain additional insights about why a player might be struggling. Sometimes, he's just on the court with the wrong player(s).

I still think Randle is a good offensive player. He's just in some really bad lineups in NY given his skillset being asked to do things he can't do.

USC vs Colorado on ESPN2. Okongwu on USC has been discussed here a bit as a possibility with our own pick, and I’ve been trying to conduct the Tyler Bey (Colorado) Train with one of our others.

Lol at Andre Iguodala’s -28 right now in 22 minutes in a tie game with like 40 seconds to play. Two teams I root against most: smug, lucky Riley’s Heat and idiocy rewarded Lakers.

if we had never seen steph we’d be looking at trae like he was a damn alien

Woohoo, Hawks!

I love when NBA Twitter acts like Knickberblogger whenever a controversial player (whether it be Frank, Derrick Rose, KP, Knox last year before everyone besides Z-Man gave up on him, etc.) has a good game. “Cam Reddish will be a top three player from this draft.”

I generally don’t give up on guys at age 19-22 unless:
-they are not suited for the position they are playing (e.g. Frank, although can be salvaged by switching positions)
-they have an incredibly low b-ball IQ (DSjr)
-they have a terrible attitude (Hezonja)
-they are utterly hopeless at defense (Willy)

Knox is physically capable of playing either forward position, is coachable, and has some skill. He also seems emotionally (and somewhat physically) immature. The slow motor and low IQ are major concerns, but I’m not ready to give up on him at age 20 just yet. Definitely a bad pick no matter how it turns out, though. He’s looking more like Bargnani every day.

No offense taken, just wanted to clarify why I am not out on Knox yet. Yes, his defense is terrible but he is still very , very young.

Sidebar:

I was on the fence about Succession through the first few episodes. Funny, dark, but not terribly compelling. How wrong I was. The last few episodes of Season 1 were amazing television, with the season finale being among the best episodes of TV I’ve seen. I borrow from our friend Mr. Sepinwall when I say It– Gets– Good.

Makes me wonder what it’s like to be actors like Sarah Snoop and Matthew MacFadyen when they receive the scripts for those final two episodes — the bedroom scenes in particular — knowing that it may very well be the finest original content they ever read on-screen. The excitement, the pressure — must be an incredible feeling.

>>Let me translate that for you:

“My true love Kristaps P does fairly well in this stat therefore I like it”<<<

lol

Not really.

RPM can be very noisy for a single year or two and can't handle lineup issues, system issues, player role, young improving players, injury issues, etc.. very well. But IMO it's an OK starting point IF you look at "several years" of data. It's especially useful for individual defense because all the other models totally suck for defense. The other models are also not inclusive enough of many things that add value that aren't in the boxscore.

After that, I start getting into a more subjective analysis of the player's skills, lineup data, shot selection, system he's paying in, how the player is being used, impact of injuries on performance, age of player, and the things it can't handle.

If Trae Young learns to play defense well enough to not be a huge liability, he has a chance to be other worldly good. IMO, he can be better than Doncic because he’s a much better outside shooter than Doncic. But right now he’s an ever bigger liability on defense than Doncic and Doncic is bad enough.

I’m not a Knox fan.

I’m a very patient guy with young players. However, it’s one thing to wait for a high level young defender to develop an adequate role on offense or a guy that’s got a good offensive game to become adequate on defense. It’s another when the guy is bad on both sides. There’s no reason to throw in the towel at his age, but I’m having a tough finding a reason to think Knox is likely to become a net plus player other than he has a good attitude and seems to want to get better.

Doncic’s big advantage over Trae on defense is that he’s much bigger. He doesn’t seem like much of an individual defender but he’s big and a very good rebounder for his position so he can help the team overall in ways Trae can’t. Luka can improve his outside shot and be 5 time MVP. Trae needs to cut down on his turnovers (seems doable) and get better on defense, which he might physically be unable to do. Trae is really a spectacular offensive player-the Luka/Trae trade is still sort of logical, and it’s weird to me that Atlanta seems to get more criticism than the Suns or Sacto.

Yeah, count me among those who thought the trade was colossally stupid, like franchise-crippling stupid. Now it seems like a pretty even trade, although I probably would be happier if I’m Dallas.

Once Kyrie comes back next season, he will easily be the worst defender in the league and the Nets will mostly likely be bottom 5 in defense next season lol.

Personally, I am anxious for the offseason to get here. I would love to see a regular rotation of Mitch/Randle/RJ/Bullock/Payton/Taj/Wooten/Knox/Dot/Frank the rest of the way. With some Trier and Iggy sprinkled in. Just let em play!

I’m going to the game tonight, hopefully Payton will play, otherwise Indiana might run us out of the building.

Steve Nash was a terrible defender. He turned out ok.

Luka rebounds well for a forward. Trae is about average for a G. Luka’s rebounding probably helps his team rebound and that mitigates some of his shitty individual defense. You can play, say, a center who isn’t a great rebounder with Luka and it won’t hurt the team even if some box score stats will not be kind to that hypothetical bigman. It’s like Steph Curry mitigating his individual poor defense by getting steals. Trae doesn’t bring anything above average to the table for his teams defense. Maybe he can get better at getting steals or even rebounding-he seems like he reads the game well and he’s physically gifted in some ways.

If Doncic figures out the elusive 3PT shot, he will win an MVP sooner than later. Team success and the perception of his defense are the limiting factors beyond that. If they barely crack 50 wins, it’s going to be hard to make the case. If they win 60, he’s a shoo-in.

He takes 44% of his shots from beyond the arc and makes only 32% of them. If he improved to 37%, the Mavs would score 1.25 points more per game. In ORtg, the Mavs currently lead the #2 Rockets by 3.6 points per 100, which is more than the difference between the Rockets and the #16 Pelicans.

It’s unfathomable that Doncic is shooting that poorly from beyond the arc at that ridiculous volume and still leading the best offense in the modern era. Curry and Klay shot .414 and .411 respectively during the juggernaut 2016-17 season on a combined 1436 attempts and that squad still trails this year’s Mavs by 2 whole points per 100, a relative chasm.

For whatever it’s worth, Dallas is 4th in rebounding in the league and the Hawks are 26th, so I’m willing to bet the rebounds Young is not getting aren’t simply getting rebounded by someone else. I can’t understand why rebounding is so disrespected as a skill that affects the game positively towards winning.

It was the same shit with Westbrook, now were seeing it everywhere with Luka. They’re getting those rebounds and initiating offense, that’s inherently valuable in it’s own right already. It puts the ball in the hands of your best player, he can initiate transition opportunities, there’s a lot of value in that. Maybe Doncic rebounds better simply because he’s taller, but that’s also an edge he has over Young, being taller and stronger. It’s a real thing.

I tried some search terms and found this gem:

http://knickerblogger.net/new-york-knicks-100-boston-celtics-128-game-recap/#comment-640328

Yikes! I was wrong. Young is Steph Curry with even less muscle.

But this might be what you’re looking for:

http://knickerblogger.net/new-york-knicks-100-boston-celtics-128-game-recap/#comment-640342

Can’t find anything substantial though, which is par for the course re: THCJ archives.

In Steph’s best year, he was a 50-45-90 guy at a 32.6 usg% with 5.7 rebs per 36 and a league-leading 2.3 steals per game. He led the league with a .669 TS%. That’s mind-blowing.

That’s crazy, cause that’s Tyson Chandler territory. In 2012-13 Tyson Chandler helped the Knicks by leading the league with a .671 TS%.

Trae isn’t a particularly bad rebounder, he’s just not good. I’m saying he-unlike Steph or Luka-isn’t doing things that help team defense (keep the opposition off the glass, generate turnovers) to mitigate his poor individual defense.

There is no player in the league as bad at defense as Luka is good on offense.

Yeah, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I don’t care if players that are this good on offense don’t play defense. Obviously you’d rather have Giannis or peak LeBron who can do both, but there’s plenty of ways to mitigate having one bad defender, especially when he guarantees you a good offense by himself. While I agree Curry was better at defende than most people give him credit, the Warriors still generally hid him on the worst offensive player of the other team, mostly because they could (Klay, Iguodala and Green could all defend anyone), but also because no team has 4 offensive threats on the court all the time to punish that.

I’m very intrigued to see what Trae looks like once they get him some real teammates. So far in his career he hasn’t really been able to drive particularly efficient team offense the way Luka has (despite his wizardry the Hawks are 27th in offense overall; almost 12 points/100 possessions worse than the Mavs overall number) but a huge part of that is obviously the surrounding talent – the Hawks are a truly mind-boggling 13.6 pts per 100 possessions worse when Trae is off the floor. I don’t think I ever remember seeing a number like that before. His defense is obviously awful, but he’d for sure be a lot more hide-able on a team that had a decent defender to be found…anywhere. To have a roster without any good defensive players that also can’t do a single thing offensively without Trae seems not great.

All this talk of Trae v Doncic and how dumb the Suns, Kings, and Grizzlies were is going to be funny when Michael Porter Jr emerges as the best player in that draft and he and Jokic win multiple titles together.

We could have had Michael Porter Jr sit and get healthy last year. Instead we took Kevin Knox.

Yeah, Porter Jr. is coming along really nice for the Nuggets, the question is just if his body will ever hold up playing starting minutes for a full season. He seems like a very smart offensive player, efficient, has all the tools to be an impact player.

I was a proponent for drafting Michael Porter Jr because I had faith that a year of NBA strength and conditioning would restore him and felt his rehab timeline fit with our win curve. Imagine if we were adding Michael Porter Jr in with RJ Barrett and Mitchell Robinson, two more 1st round picks, and two picks next year?

Michael Porter Jr, Shai Gilgeous Alexander, Mikal Bridges, and Miles Bridges were all available. We took Kevin Knox.

The Glass Half Rebuilt: Michael Porter Jr, Shai Gilgeous Alexander, Mikal Bridges, and Miles Bridges were all available. We took Kevin Knox.

I’m pretty glad we passed on Miles, he projected poorly and may actually be worse than Knox. He was the other one I didn’t want, which means he was likely our second choice.

To put in perspective, pretty sure Miles was the guy Knox destroyed in the 3v3 game. So at least that game saved us from Miles.

Markieff Morris being a buyout guy really highlights how lucky we got with Marcus. Jokes/irony aside, there’s really not much of a difference between the two production-wise