ESPN: Adam Silver preps NBA players for challenges ahead

Dolan is supposedly a good businessman…. This is a one in a lifetime opportunity to take on payroll from desperate small market teams into their cap space for fungible assets.

Where are the Mc Kinsey guys when we need them…….

The article says that the live gate and related income at the games is 40% of revenue. It’s remarkably hard to verify that number. That’s a lot more than I expected. If there are no spectators at games, that’s a big hit to the cap, although the players and owners could negotiate a smaller hit or average the hit over a number of years if they chose to do so.

If the cap is going to fall, by definition that means virtually all contracts negotiated under the old cap expectations are bad contracts. They were negotiated under the assumption of progressively higher salaries and caps going forward.

To understand it, we could take this all the way back to the Courtney Lee discussion. When Lee was signed, the cap projections called for a significant rise over the next few years. That made Lee’s salary at the time (and loads of other contracts negotiated that same year) look fair on a relative basis. But then the cap did not rise as fast as expected. That’s why many of those contracts eventually became more burdensome. It wasn’t that they didn’t make sense at the time they were signed. It was that the salary structure did not rise as much as expected so they eventually were too high on a relative basis.

IMO, the fair deals and bargains this year should be among free agents that will be negotiating under the assumption of difficult times for the NBA over the next couple of years. You may even be able to sign a very good player to long term contract that looks like a screaming bargain 3 years from now if prosperity returns to the NBA and the cap spikes up hard again.

The worst contracts now will be the longer term ones negotiated previously under the assumption of continued growth/prosperity and much higher cap levels going forward.

In other words, if you think CP3’s contract is bad now, it will be a lot worse if the cap falls.

So the demands for compensation for taking on these bad contracts should RISE given you are taking on something that’s way more crippling to your own team’s progress than before.

But the CBA requires them to give back salary if actual revenue falls beneath projected revenue for the season. Theres an escrow taken from every paycheck to cover this contingency. But it’s only ten percent or so.

I have to assume the NBPA and the owners sit down for extended talks on adjusting the CBA to accommodate the players and the teams. Neither side foresaw this turn of events, so I have to imagine both sides will want to adjust the CBA in different ways. They may do some sort of easing again on the cap or implement some other plan.

I think teams are worried a lot about revenue but aren’t going to make any decisions about players until they have better idea how bad it is.

You can’t decide your salary allocation until you know who is available

The issue is that there’s no trade-salary freedom. You have to match salaries. Trades now are for length of contract – not amount. Thing is, 2021-22 is the end of CP3’s contact. The last 2 years are at $41M & $44M – almost the entire amount of the buffer.

If you have enough cap space to just absorb the whole contract, or the surplus compared to what you’re sending out, you can do that.

The argument that Lee’s contract was only bad because it outpaced the cap increases is unbelievable. I honestly cannot believe that someone argues this in good faith. Holy shit.

The argument that Lee’s contract was only bad because it outpaced the cap increases is unbelievable. I honestly cannot believe that someone argues this in good faith. Holy shit.

To be clear, Strat is referring to a difference of roughly $5M in the total cap. A drop in the bucket that was barely even reported because of how inconsequential it was.

In other words, he is saying that with a $107M cap, Lee’s salary would’ve had teams tripping over each other trying to trade us a first round pick for him, but with a $102M cap his salary made him the albatross he was.

However even in the pretend world where this is somehow true, boy, it is not smart to sign contracts that completely collapse in the event that the salary cap projection is off by 4%!

Man, strat, you must be the only person on earth who thinks the Lee deal was reasonable in retrospect. I get your logic at the time, but in retrospect, there’s really no defending it. Chalk that one up as a win for the Phil detractors and let it go. He simply was never worth that money even for 2 years, let alone 4 guaranteed ones.

You can’t decide your salary allocation until you know who is available

You absolutely know who’s coming available both as UFA and RFAs. Trades are the wild cards and teams could resign someone. Or someone might just stop playing. But you can definitely look at the class and formulate a plan.

I agree with Strat about CP3’s contract. If the cap falls a lot it’s much more of a crusher. It’s hard to imagine a worthwhile deal for him in those circumstances.

It’s why I changed my mind on CP3. at $115M, instead of that $50M to deal with you have $75M using the baseline I laid out. So instead of pinning yourself into a 42-2-2-2-2 split. It becomes a 42-12-8-8-5 split. Very different.

Another thing the virus might do if it impacts the cap, is it makes teams with cap space much more competitive in the FA market and that team will score many bargains. So having cap space will be the smart move.

Here’s a “JK47 was wrong” post: I thought the Courtney Lee deal was okay at the time. It wasn’t. It just seemed less appalling compared to the Noah contract and Rose trade.

Yeah it could definitely make sense to get Chris Paul if assets are coming our way. I’ve just seen this play too many times before.

When the Bargnani and Rose trade grumblings first started, people here were mostly curious about what assets were coming our way to take on those awful contracts. Turned out we were the ones trading the assets.

So I’ll believe that we’re actually being paid to take on a bloated contract when I see it.

Idk how connected he is, but Chad Ford is saying that the Knicks will do what it takes to get LaMelo in this draft.

Edit: it’s just speculation on his part, sorry…

I like LaMelo but not enough to move mountains to get him. If they use one of the Dallas picks and maybe a future 2nd rounder, I’d cringe but withhold judgment. Maybe even throw in Knox, although that’s clearly an overpay. But beyond that, definitely not.

And I’d be fine if we passed on trading up. He’s got upside and some impressive non-scoring efficiency stats, but lots of question marks. But if he’s available when we draft, I’m taking him and not looking back. Only Wiseman offers the same level of upside at the top of the draft. I still think Wiseman’s going first when it’s all said and done, unless the Knicks pick first.

I wouldn’t trade up for LaMelo or anyone in this draft class.

Wiseman would be a dangerous guy to pass on. He’s kind of like a KP-level prospect, some definite question marks, but just his measurables give him a high floor, maybe like a Nerlens Noel. It could wind up being like passing on Mitch, only worse because he actually proved he could dominate in the NCAA and there’s no one like Doncic or Young or JJJ in this draft.

Because of revenue sharing, and the BRI being weighted toward smaller market teams, isn’t this pandemic basically going to effect every team equally, salary cap speaking? Does it really change the tune of, say, Paul to NY for assets that much?

I think it all comes to whether players will have to accept proportionally lower salaries next season. I think it’s very likely that they will, and the salary cap will reflect that, so yeah, I don’t think it will change the math much on Paul’s deal. Like, if the cap goes down by X, I think Paul’s salary will likely go down by X, as well. This is a historic situation that I don’t think the Players Association is going to be able to argue that their salaries shouldn’t be lowered. I think it’s a near certainty that the players are going to have to accept substantial paycuts. It’s just a question of how large that pay cut will be. The owners will likely argue for a 40% paycut and they’ll probably settle somewhere like 25%.

Obviously I was thinking the same thing Brian. I’m glad you’re wondering as well, makes me feel less uninformed about it! Thing is, it doesn’t work in the other direction…when the cap goes up, most salaries stay the same. The NBPA has a pretty good argument that the players salaries shouldn’t be reduced unless they are directly tied to the cap, since players with pre-existing contracts don’t benefit when it goes up, right?

Obviously I was thinking the same thing Brian. I’m glad you’re wondering as well, makes me feel less uninformed about it! Thing is, it doesn’t work in the other direction…when the cap goes up, most salaries stay the same. The NBPA has a pretty good argument that the players salaries shouldn’t be reduced unless they are directly tied to the cap, since players with pre-existing contracts don’t benefit when it goes up, right?

Oh, it’s definitely super sketchy, but with the historic nature of this situation, I think the players are just going to have to eat it. If the public doesn’t support the players during normal labor strife, can you imagine how little they would support the players for labor strife during a pandemic? It’s going to be terribly difficult to convince people of the unfairness of Chris Paul making $30 million next season instead of $40 million while Carmelo Anthony didn’t see his $24 million salary rise to $32 million when the cap went up dramatically, ya know?

We’re already seeing Major League Baseball telling the players they won’t pay them their full salaries if they play games without fans. And MLBPA has a lot stronger union than the NBAPA, so if they agree to it, then it will be hard to imagine the NBAPA won’t, too.

I don’t think that players are going to take a proportional cut and I don’t think the NBA owners are going to yield either. Money (greed) more than the virus will keep the NBA from restarting.

To summarize, it’s built into the CBA that player’s get less money if revenue falls short of expectations. That doesn’t change any player’s contractual rate of pay as far adding those salary numbers up for salary cap purposes even if the cap drops.

The NBA owners have a Force Majeure clause in the CBA that includes pandemics. They could blow the whole thing up if they really want to. Since they obviously don’t want to, the next step is to collectively bargain with the NBAPA to come up with a new arrangement for next season. Said arrangement will almost assuredly include players taking pay cuts.

>The argument that Lee’s contract was only bad because it outpaced the cap increases is unbelievable. I honestly cannot believe that someone argues this in good faith. Holy shit.<

1. Lee was a solid role player until got hurt last year and buried in our annual tanking extravaganza, but he played quite well again this year. He was even starting some games on a very good playoff team in Dallas for a great coach that used him well.

2. It's a fact that some contracts negotiated that year turned out to be bad because teams were competing for and paying players a premium in free agency based on salary projections that never materialized. A salary that was supposed be x% of the cap in years 2, 3, 4 and look reasonable wound up being more than x% and being unattractive. That was a factor.

Of course this requires that you value Lee correctly and understand that what we are seeing now is an extreme version of the same thing. The difference being both how extreme it is and that it impacts every contract and not just some that were negotiated in free agency in a single year based on assumptions from the league that were not met.

The owners do have to work with the players union, but I think it will mostly be about what needs to be in place to resume play. They also should to agree on a projected BRI to set the salary cap. If there is a lot of uncertainty in the projected BRI, they may want increase the escrow amounts above 10%. That’s a lot of figuring out to do, but it doesn’t involve much renegotiation of the CBA.

It’s worthwhile thinking about actual salary cap numbers. This year the salary cap is $109M. The league will obviously take in less than that and players and teams will share the pain of less income. Next season, BRI will certainly be down. Even if arena’s are open, there is certainly going to be an economic slump affecting attendance and people’s habits may also change and they may go to fewer live events. Given that arena’s may slowly open as the season goes on, I think it’s a fair guess that actual live gate related income will be down 40 or 50%. Given that live gate related income is 40% of BRI that means overall income will be down 16 to 20%. The cap should go down proportionally, which means it will be $87 to $92m, but be expected to go back to around $109M in the 2021 to 2022 season when things are hopefully back to normal.

That’s a huge change. It’s conceivable that the union and the owners could agree to take the average of the two seasons for both seasons which would be a cap of $98 to $100 and put in place some mechanism for the escrows and such so that player income works out after two years instead of one as the correct percentage of BRI. I like this idea upon first glance, but there would be different effects on different parties. Teams that are hoping to spend big the summer after this coming one won’t like it. Teams that might get a huge tax bill this coming season might like it. Similarly, players who are negotiating this summer would like it and those who negotiating a year later won’t. Setting a higher cap this coming year than revenues justify will hit the pocketbook of many teams and owners may not like that. On balance, it’s probably going to be hard to get an agreement to such a compromise. So there is a real chance the salary cap will be around $90m for the coming season.

Saying Courtney Lee’s contract wasn’t bad because the salary cap projection was off by 4.7% and only Phil Jackson knows the true power of Courtney Lee is one of the most hilarious things ever written here, so I for one encourage it.

Backing it up by citing 345 minutes in a season in which Lee mostly racked up DNP-CDs is like Michelangelo putting the finishing touches on the Sistine Chapel.

This, of course, requires believing that Courtney Lee’s contract would’ve been dynamite if it was just scaled down by 4.7%.

Look, fine, he was an albatross at 4/$48M, but at 4/$45.7M? Holy shit, we could’ve traded him for Kawhi. The Raptors might’ve had to throw in Siakam.

This might implicate the second prong of the argument though, which is that Phil Jackson had the correct evaluation of Courtney Lee and it was actually the other 29 GMs who simply did not understand just how much low-volume, average-efficiency scoring does for a team. Nor did they understand the absolutely essential nature of average perimeter defense.

Please keep these coming. This is all-time stuff. Can we get an explainer on why Derrick Williams was actually an incredible signing, just to hold us over until the highly anticipated “Joakim Noah actually deserved more money” post comes out?

Derrick Williams was a meh signing in the context of a predictably failing overall strategy. He gave roughly $4.9 million worth of production for 1 year and then opted out and was signed by a much smarter POBO for the same money with Miami, making the dubious player option irrelevant. You can bash the deal by bringing up the opportunity cost thing, but consideration of that was never part of the overall strategy and was therefore irrelevant when evaluating the signing in retrospect. It was certainly not anywhere near as bad as either the Noah or Lee signings, so it makes little sense to bring it up in that context.

Let me paraphrase every Strat post for you:

You’re not smart. You think you are, but you’re not. See this ex-player? He thinks this opinion, which I share. That’s not why I cherry-picked it to make an anti-analytics argument that has no actual math behind it. It’s because ex-player, like me, is right, as he knows basketball and, like me, only has good opinions on basketball, which is true because he played it at a high level, which, although I have not, is similar to my expertise because I see the game clearly, unlike you. Someday you will be less young and therefore smarter. 140-point system. Phil Jackson. Frank Ntilikina. Synergy. Playing the game the right way. QED.

>Let me paraphrase every Strat post for you:<

It's more like most very serious fans that have been watching basketball closely for several decades know the qualities that win championships over and above the simplistic (have very good players that score efficiently and rebound etc…).

The same is true for the many dozens of high basketball IQ players and great coaches that have been successful in this league.

What you are looking for goes way beyond the boxscore. It includes DEFENSE, ball movement, player movement, mental toughness, experience under fire in the playoffs, scoring versatility (including post play at times), good spacing, etc…

So basically, I am saying I am in favor of what has worked in the past and generally agree with those that have been successful doing those things and not what broken simplistic models say.

I have not been successful at convincing most people here that stats in general are vital, but the models are badly broken. The game is way more complex than they can handle (sometimes the models are laughably wrong).

Truly, I am wasting my time here because I know people are dug into their positions and don't want to accept that their favorite models suck or that I might be right or that the great coaches and players might be right . But I'm locked down and have nothing better to do with the tracks closed. 🙂

Strat, not everyone here shares THCJ’s opinion of you. I agree with you on many things, but not all. I don’t agree on Courtney Lee. I’ve noticed that some players look better on some teams than others. I think Lee is looking better now because of the team and system he is on. He wasn’t a useful player for the Knicks at his salary.

strat, it’s not that Lee is a bad player, it’s that he was grossly overpaid for his role and the strategy used to sign him was faulty. In the big scheme of things, Lee was much less of a problem than Noah or Rose or Melo or Hardaway Jr. It was just adding insult to injury. There was no reason to pay him that much for that long. We bid against ourselves, as we did for all of the players named above. Phil and Mills literally had no idea how to manage the cap, how to negotiate shrewdly, and how to construct a modern offense and defense. Sure, you see elements of Tex Winter’s model in many modern offenses, including the Spurs and Warriors, but Phil’s “how’s it goink” musings on the 3 point shot were pretty damning. At the end of the day, he sucked…maybe not as bad as Isiah, but way worse than even an average POBO. And anyone who blames it on Mills only diminishes Jackson further, the buck stopped with him and he never was known as the “I just quietly do what I’m told” type.

OTOH, I agree more with you than with your main adversaries here on KP and how he was mis-utilized here and will thrive in Dallas. That trade is looking dumber by the minute. Still, it was Phil’s doing in building a terrible team around him and picking mediocre coaches and meddling with them.

When I heard Phil during one of his press conferences complain about KP taking too many 3pters I knew it was time for him to go.

I’m not worried about the NBA and the players getting an agreement about the CBA, ever since Silver has taken over the NBA and the players union have gotten along very well. MLB on the other hand I’m not as confident about. There is alot of animosity between those 2 parties right now and with their new leadership the baseball players union is weaker than it has ever been and the owners are smelling blood in the water. Plus Rob Manfred seems awful, the complete opposite of Adam Silver.

Also, what worked for teams in the 2000s would get blown the fuck out in the 2010s, so what’s your experience worth if you just keep pointing to the salad days of hand checks, midrange fadeaways and post-ups?

I found this today and it was probably posted about the same time I posted my question.

NBA Salary Cap Reportedly will be Lowered Because of Coronavirus Pandemic

And then LeBron tweets this, sending Knick Nation into a frenzy…
LeBron tweet

The Jordan Bulls, especially the second three-peat, really were more of a modern small ball team. That was almost assuredly why that team had its biggest problems with big teams. Shaq and the Magic beat the rusty Jordan Bulls in 1995 and the only Game 7s that the Bulls had during their championship runs were from the Ewing Knicks and the Smits Pacers. It would have been fascinating if the Bulls ever had to face the Olajuwon Rockets or the Robinson Spurs in the Finals.

Look at the centers the Bulls faced in their six titles:

1. Vlade Divac
2. Kevin Duckworth
3. Mark West/Oliver Miller
4. Sam Perkins
5. Greg Foster/Greg Ostertag
6. Antoine Carr/Adam Keefe/Greg Foster/Greg Ostertag (with Carr playing the clutch minutes as a very small center)

The Western Conference in the 1990s had three Hall of Fame centers, who each won multiple NBA Championships, but none of the three made it to the Finals in any of the years that the Bulls made it. Just an interesting fluke of fate (obviously, though, the Shaq Lakers were only starting to become really good during Jordan’s final year in Chicago, so perhaps they shouldn’t count, and Robinson’s second title was when he was practically a bench player. Not that the Robinson Spurs weren’t really good and might have given the Bulls problems, just keeping everything in context).

Elden Campbell is 31st in career blocks and played 106 playoff games (according to Wikipedia.) Had a pretty solid career.

Elden’s main claim to fame was being one of the few people would do a credible job of defending Shaq in the playoffs. He was that big. Which makes you wonder if the two of them together weren’t one of the biggest frontcourts in history.

I can remember him quite well from his college days. That was probably the peak of my interest in the NCAAs. Still the leading scorer in Clemson history and still the best player on the only Clemson team to win an ACC title.

He wasn’t a great pro. He goes down as a prototypical 95-05 stiff. But I wouldn’t never tell him that in person.

Yeah I’m pretty sure the Bulls would have dominated in any era. They were a pretty good team.

The thing is…guys like Kerr, Reggie Miller, Ray Allen…the 3 point shooters of those days, would have had the green light to shoot WAY more three’s today and would have had more room to operate the shoot those three’s.

Kerr, Jordan, Kukoc…all were decent to good 3 point shooters. Rodman would have been a monster small ball 5 in today’s game. I think they would have done all right.

It is amazing to me the Bulls didn;t want to just keep it together. The next season was shortened because of the lock out, so that aging Bulls team probably would have been able to do one more title for a 4peat. OF course Phil wouldn’t have gone to The Lakers then but lets say Phil was coaching both teams, I think by 2000, The Shaq Kobe Lakers would have been able to beat the Bulls. Jordan looked pretty average when he made his comeback in 2001 with the Wiz. Still a great player in 98 but by 2000, I think that team would have been done. But I think 99 they would have had a real shot to win again with the season being shorter.

Sampson and Olajuwon were twigs compared to Shaq. I was really thinking more of pure mass. Who played center next to Ewing – Cartwright? I remember him as being really skinny with one of the strangest free throw motions ever.

Ewing-Oakley-Mason definitely was pretty beeftastic.

Strat is right about that. Are you just trolling him? Imagine you watched all of Bill Russell’s games and counted all his blocks and then claimed he was good at blocking shots. Would that be eye test? By your definition since blocks weren’t in box scores when he played, it must be an eye test result. Thus it couldn’t be anything you could use to evaluate him as a player.

KnickfaninNJ:
Strat is right about that.Are you just trolling him? Imagine you watched all of Bill Russell’s games and counted all his blocks and then claimed he was good at blocking shots. Would that be eye test? By your definition since blocks weren’t in box scores when he played, it must be an eye test result. Thus it couldn’t be anything you could use to evaluate him as a player.

Great post, NJ. NahNah’s idiotic comment was actually quoting me. Imagine, I had the temerity to conclude that Killian Hayes has struggled mightily dribbling and passing with his right hand, even though that is corroborated by every notable analyst e.g Schmitz, Perlman, based on film review. Even the most ardent stats geek with half a brain would concede the point about Hayes. Now if you want to debate on how insurmountable of an issue it is, fine, we can do that without being petty and foolish. NahNah doesn’t have that capacity.

anecdotal report

Derek Jeter has five Gold Gloves. Five.

And sorry Z-man for attributing it to Strat. I’m so used to him being attacked for no stats I didn’t check the source.

i’m enjoying the last dance…i’m not that partial to the subject matter and there are way too many painful reminders about how we fared against the bulls during that time, still an interesting sports doc…

thank goodness espn has more sports stuff to go over recently – lots of talk about the new economic landscape of sports – particularly if 40% or so of the normal intake (fan attendance) is removed from the revenue stream…

i’m sure cable providers are crying about it 🙂

justin gaethje though, wow what a performance against a great opponent…khabib has a pretty solid looking coconut on top of his head, if someone can crack it though, it seems justin gaethje could be that guy…

Nick C.:
Aren’t all box score stats the result of someone’s “eye test”?

duh!

Eye test shows the significance and the exact circumstances of these numbers

What the fuck is happening to this board?

Maybe if you watched every single NBA game and made detailed observations about every single player on the floor and their heart, spunk, team spirit, chutzpah, physical condition, mojo, feel, and all that crap you’d have something. But since nobody does that, our beloved eye test more often than not is a simple way to say that players you already like are valuable. You like Frank Ntilikina, and feel like you need to praise him to make Phil Jackson seem competent? No problem! He scores well on the “plays the game the right way”-ometer, something you’d only understand if you were an eye test master, which presumably involves having watched the NBA a long ass time ago.

Or did he sell his soul to the devil….
…at the crossroads….
[Slide guitar by Jimmy Dolan plays the Hoochie coochie man]

Or, alternatively, he’s performed very poorly but there’s not much opportunity cost for the terrible and talent-barren Knicks to keep giving him playing time on the off-chance he becomes a viable long-term rotation player.

Did a Karen steal your brain?

i am totally all over this reference – you’re talking about plankton’s karen – aren’t you???

god, even old – i am still so cool…

what!!!

JK47:
Maybe if you watched every single NBA game and made detailed observations about every single player on the floor and their heart, spunk, team spirit, chutzpah, physical condition, mojo, feel, and all that crap you’d have something. But since nobody does that, our beloved eye test more often than not is a simple way to say that players you already like are valuable. You like Frank Ntilikina, and feel like you need to praise him to make Phil Jackson seem competent? No problem! He scores well on the “plays the game the right way”-ometer, something you’d only understand if you were an eye test master, which presumably involves having watched the NBA a long ass time ago.

Z-Man, quick question, is JK a troll for writing this?

Because I made this argument to you, and you called me a troll. How do you distinguish JK’s writing above and my writing in this post below?

http://knickerblogger.net/sny-com-2-trade-packages-knicks-could-use-to-land-thunder-pg-chris-paul/#comment-697377

NahNah: Z-Man, this is called an … sorry, that was reflexive.

Knew Your Nicks, this is called an appeal to authority. You are making an argument based on the authority of the management of the NYKnicks. That shit cray.

Why are all of the boomers on this board so reliant on the eye-test? What happened when you turned 50? Did a Karen steal your brain?

Not 50yet.
44 but feel like 18!
If you check the threads of the games you’ll see encouraging reports on Frank’s game from those who’ve watched the games and mocking on Frank’s historically crappy stats from those who didn’t watched them but only read the box score.
There was something lost in translation back then.
It’s called “impact”.

Z-man:
If you’re too dumb to figure out the difference, that’s on you. And if JK has a problem with my posts, he can speak for himself.

Don’t you work in education? That’s a super depressing attitude. You ARE Edward Rooney. Be careful with that bad knee.

And I did spot the difference. It’s called – the source. To which you employed, the ad hominem.

NahNah: Winning basketball?!?!?!?!? Well slap my ass and call me Sally.

Winning basketball?!?!?!?!?Winning basketball?!?!?!?!?

This team doesn’t win. What the EFFFF are you talking about?

His other team won during the summer….
Remember FRA-USA ?
The game with the Covid-friends-players !

Knew Your Nicks: His other team won during the summer….
Remember FRA-USA ?
The game with the Covid-friends-players !

When in doubt, go international.

Something I often remind my clients when US legal compliance is too burdensome. /s.

vincoug,

Strat didn’t want these hands

NahNah: Fair point. If you take that 97 bulls team and replace MJ with Frank, then maybe, I could see how ….

Much more than fair!
And let’s remind to all our frank-friends that:
1. The competition of the game was NBA level.
2. The importance was HUGE – A Knockout game against the team that is not permitted to lose in bball.
3. Frank erased Kemba.
4 & came up with 5 clutch points.

NahNah:
I can get you on a flight coming BACK from Chicago. Does that help?

Hi, I’m Earth. Have we met?

I don’t think so.

And if you replace Frank with Jordan on this season’s Knicks team you have 3chips in your pocket.
Got it Sally ?

***As bored as I sometimes am during this lockdown, I really don’t think I’d spend any time watching the NBA playoffs.***

Well, we don’t all have hot neighbors, so the NBA playoffs may have to do.

I’m not sure we can talk about winning basketball and the Knick’s in the same sentence, but if you ask if Frank plays winning basketball, I think his plus minus is one thing to look at. He was something like third on the team in that respect. That’s pretty good.

Let’s start working on some fundamental truths so we can skip past shitty arguments.

I heretofore propose The Ten Postulates of KB.

Postulate 7: Thou shall not quote raw plus-minus, for thy is a noisy statistic.

The rest to come.

Checkmate atheists!

Yes, the offense is more important in today’s NBA.

Yes, the defense is still important too. Please tell me all about Frank’s prolific rebounding, block, and steal rates.

Trier is like the anti-Frank. He’s as good on offense and bad on defense as Frank is good on defense and bad on offense.

For the record, I don’t think either is a good player. But I do object to it being implied that shooting efficiency is all you need to know when evaluating a player.

Just like aspects of offense take time to develop, so do aspects of defense. Frank has become an excellent FT shooter at age 21 so according to some theory his 3-pt shooting should follow. On defense, he’s showing some very advanced skills but still has lapses and some technical things to work on. It’s way too early to conclude that he’ll “probably be overseas soon.” He should be thought of as a late first in this year’s draft who got drafted too high too soon and for the wrong NBA position. Jury is still very much out on him.

And this comes from the most vocal detractor at draft time 2017. I would lobby for drafting him in the late first round now as a legit 3-and-D prospect. I doubt very much that he will be out of the league unless it’s about money. He seems to be on a Shump-ish trajectory.

I think me and Hubert are developing a bromance…

Z-man:
I think me and Hubert are developing a bromance…

haha, I was thinking the same thing.

I think Brian’s brought this up before but I have to ask, what’s a good case scenario for Ntilikina’s career? Are we spilling so much virtual ink on a guy that’s probably maxes out as a 7th man on a good team?

Almost no one still believes that he was a good pick in retrospect, now it’s all about does he have any value going forward.

But I do object to it being implied that shooting efficiency is all you need to know when evaluating a player.

Cool, no one said that or anything close to it.

Now, is it the factor that has been demonstrated to correlate most strongly with winning? Yes, and that’s not an opinion. So I’m not going to lecture anyone who takes it into account more strongly than anything else when evaluating a player. That seems eminently sensible, actually.

Is +/- completely useless?

Completely and utterly. Next Question.

Frank has become an excellent FT shooter at age 21 so according to some theory his 3-pt shooting should follow.

I’m not ready to say he’s an excellent FT shooter because he had a nice 59 attempt stretch. It’s difficult to get a gauge on his progress from the FT line because he gets there with almost comic infrequency.

Also, that’s not the theory. The theory you’re referring to is purely NCAA/overseas –> NBA based and has strong statistical backing. I have no idea if anything similar exists once a player is already in the NBA.

I don’t think his defense is worth playing him at his level of offense. But I do believe, adamantly, that his defense is worth giving him the full 4 years of his rookie contract to see if he can improve on offense.

I’ve said plenty of times: as long as we’re bad, let him try to figure it out. The actual questions come into play once he hits free agency and/or we ever start to not suck.

Are we spilling so much virtual ink on a guy that’s probably maxes out as a 7th man on a good team?

Yes. This is what I was saying earlier. If the most rosy-eyed optimists are correct, he’ll be a 15 MPG guy.

Except maybe Strat. If he’s correct he’ll be better than Kawhi Leonard.

This is what I was saying earlier. If the most rosy-eyed optimists are correct, he’ll be a 15 MPG guy.

Except maybe Strat. If he’s correct he’ll be better than Kawhi Leonard.

You say you’re not making a determination until he reaches free agency and then you say this?

I think his age 19 and 20 season didn’t tell me anything about him other than the fact that he wasn’t ready to play in the NBA. You think it entitles you to make definitive claims about his potential. This is why there are rational people in Camp Ntilikina. It doesn’t make sense to make these kinds of determinations about a 21 year international prospect.

I, and others, are not prepared to say there is no way this kid can’t be a starter on a good team. It’s too early. You, and others, want to insist the case is already closed. You’ve seen enough.

Strat aside, those are the camps.

I don’t agree that plus minus is useless (although I have no idea idea about RAPM, since the adjustments involved in generating RAPM from straight PM aren’t well described). I do agree that plus minus is very noisy, but there’s only so much noise; it’s not infinite noise. . Consider Frank and DSJ. Frank’s on/off per 100 possessions is +4.8. DSJ’s is -12.5. Does that mean Frank is a good player? No, It only indicates he is better than DSJ this season. But that is still a real result. The difference is too big to be just noise.

I agree that Frank isn’t good yet, but unlike most people here I think he was a reasonable pick for where he was drafted. He’s likely to stick around the NBA as a role player or maybe better. Even though there were better players drafted later, it’s still a reasonable outcome for where he was drafted.

Raw +/- in basketball is mostly noise. I can’t think of a more context-dependent statistic in all of sports.

I feel like it’s 1993 and I’m arguing with people about why slugging percentage and on base percentage are more important than RBIs.

JK47
Raw +/- in basketball is mostly noise. I can’t think of a more context-dependent statistic in all of sports.
I feel like it’s 1993 and I’m arguing with people about why slugging percentage and on base percentage are more important than RBIs.

For some reason BABIP for pitchers comes to mind. I always think of Tom Glavine his first season with the Mets giving up flyball double to centerfield after flyball double to centerfield after al those years with Andruw Jones and how they went out and got Mike Cameron the next season and his results improved.

You say you’re not making a determination until he reaches free agency and then you say this?

There’s no contradiction here. We might as well play him as long as we’re bad and he’s signed, but he has given us no reason to keep him in mind when it comes to roster building.

In other words, we should stop and think about how a potential free agency signing, and maybe even draft pick to some extent, fits with Mitchell Robinson.

We should not in any way, shape, or form take this into account with regards to Frank Ntilikina. Would anyone even dispute this?

To be clear, that hardly makes him unique on this roster. Some people seem to disagree though, if I’m not mistaken, so I guess it needs to be said.

I agree that Frank isn’t good yet, but unlike most people here I think he was a reasonable pick for where he was drafted.

Yeah, gotta call it a win when the 8th overall pick in a draft is 50th in WS48, 49th in BPM, and 55th in VORP, all out of 56 NBA players, in that same draft class.

I know, I know, the field of statistics is a conspiracy against Frank Ntilikina.

Imagine you could put Frank back into the draft pool, right now. Teams would have another chance to sign him to a rookie-scale contract.

Do you think he’d go in the 1st round? I don’t.

Imagine the bar for a top-10 pick being set at “I think he’ll stick around.” Jesus, our standards are low.

I think he goes in the late first round.

As I’ve said all along, Frank is a consistent 3-pt shot away from being a decent 21yo 3-and-d wing prospect. He was a horrific 18yo lottery pick, but would be a nice late round 1 flyer in this shitty draft. I get that DW thinks his D is a mirage but I’ll have to respectfully disagree with that. We’ll see.

NJ the list of good NBA PGs who came into the league unable to dribble, pass and shoot is very short. He’ll either make as a 3-n-D utility player or will be out of the league.

How about Berman writing today about how the NBA may do a play-in tourney for the 8th seed with teams 9th thru 12th getting a shot. Knicks are 12th in the East right now!!

Hubert: That may be a fair assessment of what Strat thinks, so I get where you’re coming from. But Strat isn’t emblematic of everyone in Camp Ntilikina.

Eh hem, but actually, and I hate to be THAT guy (jk lulz it’s my favorite person to be), Strat is the paradigm and very much, emblematic of Camp Ntilikina. You and the Z have become Stratalites. Those who reject/buck/deny the “statistical norm” without nary, you know, like, a sound statistical reason.

Take a look around. No quality poster on this board is touching Camp Ntilikina with a ten-foot pole. Which, in a cruel twist of irony, would be just the device, the ten-foot pole that is, that Frank would need to bring on the court to make the impact on defense to justify his offense. No, it’s not lost on me that once Frank develops that banging curry/luca step-back corner three-ball, he won’t need the pole. So the pole is temporary.

How about Berman writing today about how the NBA may do a play-in tourney for the 8th seed with teams 9th thru 12th getting a shot. Knicks are 12th in the East right now!!

It would be high-larious if that one win over the Hawks put them into the play-in tournament and then they won their way through to the title.

According to a 2019 Samford University research on the last 20 nba champions (which I’m unable to link)….
The
Conclusion
Is that…
The quality of a team’s defense heavily influences its ability to win games and championships, but certain aspects of defense are more important than others. In particular, teams hoping to win the NBA title should focus more on minimizing their opponents’ point totals and field goal percentages and less on forcing turnovers and securing defensive rebounds. Thus, a more accurate version of Bear Bryant’s quote might be “Parts of defense win championships,” at least in the context of professional basketball.

In other words:
There’s a serious possibility for D specialist Frank to go to a serious contender once he figures out how to play/strengthen his body while we sit here for other 20 years talking how to perfect the lost high art of tanking.

NahNah: The reason you changed your position on Frank is that you rely on the eye test, which is fine, but just acknowledge that point. To change your position IN FAVOR OF Frank after all of the minutes he has played in the NBA is a pure eye-tastic position. To suggest he “definitely showed some improvement” is not supported by the stats. That’s the funny part. Because you are on a stats blog. Talking about your optical receptors. And I know, it’s true that you have to be able to read this screen to participate in the conversation, so I guess everything is an eye-test. Let’s get reductive with it.

So long as what I am is nothing close to whatever the hell you are, I’m good with that.

Z-man: So long as what I am is nothing close to whatever the hell you are, I’m good with that.

Jewish?

What’s the “win curve” ?
I read it in here from time to time but don’t know exactly what it is.
Is it a team building strategy as i imagine or just a folklore legend like the monster of Loch Ness ?
Anyone ? In a few words ?

I don’t hate you or anyone else here. I just find your posting of late to be tedious and petty.

Jowles and JK47 evoke lots of colorful adjectives…tedious and petty are not among them.

Z-man:
Jowles and JK47 evoke lots of colorful adjectives…tedious and petty are not among them.

I know.
Just teasing them!

Yes, I do this crazy thing on a stats blog – I ask people to make statistics based arguments. And when people instead use an eye-test argument, I call them out for it, time and again. So, yes, it’s tiresome (i.e. tedious) having to knock down the same lame eye-test arguments. And yes, I often focus on the underlying (i.e. petty) postulates that allow you to arrive at some truly dubious conclusions, e.g. the PHIL-FRANK-STRAT triumvirate of winning, left-handed horse-racing basketball mixed in a syringe of injectable Lysol.

Ok Z-man.
Start counting Hayes dribbles with the left and with the right hand.
How much time will it take ?

And i will try to find a computer guy to emulate the 97 bulls with Frank instead of Jordan and give me the results.

Let’s do it!
After all we’re on a stats blog!

JK47: Weightlifters who want to win gold medals should focus on lifting heavier weights than their opponents.

There, I solved weightlifting

Sorry to spoil it but you can actually win gold medals in weightlifting by lifting the same or even less weights than your opponents!

In case of a tie the athlete who weights less than his opponent who lifted the same weights wins.
If the 2 athletes lifted the same weights and weight the same then the winner is the one who lifted the weights with the earlier attempt from the 3 that they have.

There are 2 moves and 3 categories that give 3 gold medals.
1 for each move and 1 for the total.
You can lift the same weights as your opponent and win the gold medal of the one move(as above) and also lift less kilos than the first athlete (who’s total is lesser than yours) of the other move but win the total (cause of strategy) and get another gold medal.

teams hoping to win the NBA title should focus more on minimizing their opponents’ point totals and field goal percentages and less on forcing turnovers and securing defensive rebounds.

How about concentrating less on stealing the ball or wait for the missed open shot and more on making the opponent take the toughest shot possible ?

From the dictionary:

Winning Basketball – The way Michael Jordan and Frank Ntilikina play the game.
;-D

NahNah: No quality poster on this board is touching Camp Ntilikina with a ten-foot pole. Which, in a cruel twist of irony, would be just the device, the ten-foot pole that is, that Frank would need to bring on the court to make the impact on defense to justify his offense.

You have severe reading comprehension issues.

This thread is giving me SARS of the brain

If you want to make the argument “consensus among scouts is that player X is underrated by statistics and has impact beyond the boxscore,” okay maybe I’ll listen to that. Maybe. Scouts break down NBA tape and spend lots of time doing it.

Some rando on the internet? Sorry, but your eye test is worthless and I will just go ahead and ignore it. Because you’re not an expert. You might think you are because you are very full of yourself, but you’re not.

To pivot from Cabin Fever: The Thread and back to basketball, Jacob Goldstein (creator of PIPM) just posted his updated draft model (which also includes how this class stacks up against others). You can find it here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/133nbtV9vtuENXfUNUWJtHAuSe0Pm2wuS0vp_mKihc4Q/edit?usp=drivesdk

Some interesting things: LaMelo at 1, which, considering that multiple models have him at #1, is forcing me to up my estimation of him. It’s possible that the models may be overrating him, in the way they overrated his brother (yes, I realize I was extremely pro-Lonzo come draft time a few years ago), but I think these things are generally fairly reliable, so I guess I wouldn’t hate a LaMelo pick. Hali at 2, Ant Man at 5, Hayes at 8, Wiseman at 10 (!) RJ Hampton being that high is surprising to me as well.

In general, the models like this draft class–not as much as the last two drafts, but also not nearly as bad as what the general consensus is (i.e. an historically weak draft). Per usual, the Knicks are very bad with lots of picks, so that’s a good thing, I guess.

John Hollinger’s list of players he’d feel good about drafting also has LaMelo at 1. He also has Edwards at number 2, acknowledging that he has a high bust probability, but also that he and LaMelo have an upside that nobody else in the draft comes close to. He actually seems highest on Okongwu, but ranks him fourth because “today’s game doesn’t value bigs as much.” He has Cole Anthony way down at 18, and suggests his upside is as a bench guy.

alsep73: He has Cole Anthony way down at 18, and suggests his upside is as a bench guy.

Early Bird: Lol, Cole Anthony at 41 right behind Kira Lewis. Guess my late first projection was still overly optimistic

Translation: It is a certainty that we are drafting Cole Anthony.

These models have to be underrating James Wiseman. He put up Zion-like numbers in his very brief college career. Sure, small sample size, but what did he do that did not seem sustainable?

Z-man:
These models have to be underrating James Wiseman. He put up Zion-like numbers in his very brief college career. Sure, small sample size, but what did he do that did not seem sustainable?

There’s probably something in the model that accounts for competition. The first two games were against awful teams. Not much can be gleaned when you literally double your opponent’s score.

Outside the model, even against the 1 good team the tallest opponent was like 6’9″.

Zion piled up stats against weaker teams too. Remember his Canada tour? And against the one good team (Oregon) he put up 14 and 12 on excellent efficiency in 22 minutes.

And you would expect that a player might take a game or two to adjust to college competition. Wiseman came in and dominated from day 1. Sure, only until day 3, but still…

If he were 6’9″ I could see the hesitation. But at 7’1″ with elite athleticism and a crazy wingspan, and a .putting up a 434 WS48 on a .760 TS and a 13.6 block% right out of the box? I don’t see how any model could objectively rate nine players in this draft above him.

alsep73: “In Wiseman’s case, despite his size he didn’t dominate the way you’d expect, especially on the glass.”

He averaged 18.6 rebounds per 40 in his 3 college games, including a 21.8% OREB% (Zion’s was 12.7). WTF is Hollinger talking about?

Wiseman played against teams that finished in the middle of the MEAC and Horizon conferences. Those are bad teams even within a bad conference.

Zion put up 28 pts against Kentucky game 1 and continued to dominate for another 32 games.

Picking Wiseman at ten, where’s he’s listed, is probably a good deal.

Deeply appreciate the link that got us talking about something that actually matters, Silky.

Here’s another model, that I tend to think has historically done well, with LaMelo at #1.

There’s probably a bit of a Lonzo-effect with regards to the scheme being set up for him to get rebounds, etc. but I would be happy to have Lonzo right now, and will be happy if we draft Ball. Z-Man will be very happy to see LaMelo at #1 via this model until he sees who’s #2 😉

These models have to be underrating James Wiseman. He put up Zion-like numbers in his very brief college career. Sure, small sample size, but what did he do that did not seem sustainable?

Wiseman’s college numbers are completely useless. South Carolina State was 11-18 in the MEAC. UIC was 18-17 in the Horizon, which is apparently an NCAA conference that exists. Oregon had a real team and, what do you know, that was Wiseman’s most pedestrian game.

As insane as it seems, the AAU numbers really do seem to have some NBA correlation. It’s one of the reasons I identified Mitch as a potential value pick prior to the 2018 draft.

Between the over saturation of bigs on the market, center being the one position we can credibly claim to have filled, and Wiseman’s projections I want nothing to do with him.

Okongwu on the other hand could be worth it depending on where we pick.

Both models identify Ramsey as a good target with the Clippers pick. Bet he moves up closer to the draft, sadly.

Wiseman, Halliburton or Obi Toppn would be fine. Obi reminds me of a young Larry Johnson with the post-up game paired with explosive dunking. If Halliburton is not the pick then they should select Kira Lewis Jr. later in the draft. Precious Achiuwa will probably be gone. Jahmi’us Ramsey has the 3 point percentage (42.6%) that you look for, but his consistency is a concern.

thenoblefacehumper: There’s probably a bit of a Lonzo-effect with regards to the scheme being set up for him to get rebounds, etc. but I would be happy to have Lonzo right now, and will be happy if we draft Ball. Z-Man will be very happy to see LaMelo at #1 via this model until he sees who’s #2 😉

I will be more excited than happy. When I watched the video of Schmitz sitting with LaMelo and analyzing his game film, I got a queasy feeling about him. Think about the fact that his brother went the traditional route via UCLA, while LaMelo got into trouble for shoplifting, was stashed away first in Lithuania and then in Australia. Based on stats, talent and measurables, he’s clearly the consensus #1 pick by these models and many scouting models. But he’s far from the sure thing that Doncic was.

I’ve made my position on Hayes clear, so will demur here. Suffice it to say, I’d be beyond disappointed if we took him anywhere in the top 10.

thenoblefacehumper: Wiseman’s college numbers are completely useless. South Carolina State was 11-18 in the MEAC. UIC was 18-17 in the Horizon, which is apparently an NCAA conference that exists. Oregon had a real team and, what do you know, that was Wiseman’s most pedestrian game.

But even his most pedestrian game was 25 points and 20 rebounds per 40 on sky-high efficiency. Sure, it’s too small of a sample to hang your hat on, but we’re talking about an elite athlete. Why would anyone suspect that the rebounding, dunking and shot-blocking won’t translate? He also has very good mechanics from the line, so there’s no reason to believe that his 70% from there was a fluke.

Sure, there’s risk. But there’s not anyone without at least as much risk to be picked above him. He’s already pretty good as is.

It’s probably 90% or better that Wiseman goes in the top 5, regardless of what we think of him or what the model says. Heck, he’s certainly a reasonable bet to go #1. Just based on his high floor alone, can’t even imagine him lasting past the top 3.

At worst, he rebounds, blocks shots, dunks and shoots FTs, maybe a Mo Bamba-level project. That’s not a terrible floor. At best, he’s a more athletic Joel Embiid.

Although I brought it up just to compare rebounding in relation to Hollinger’s quote, Zion is not really a great comparison for Wiseman. Embiid is a much better comp. Look at Embiid’s college game log. He also played his first 3 games against 2 bad and 1 good team and his stats weren’t nearly as impressive. Same for KAT and JJJ. Now sure, they could be an illusion, but it’s hard to ignore the measurables and how easily his game translated to the next level. I mean, I could see ranking guys like KAT, JJJ and even Bamba, Ayton and Bagley above him…but Okongwu?

Think about the fact that his brother went the traditional route via UCLA, while LaMelo got into trouble for shoplifting,

He didn’t. His non-prospect brother LiAngelo did.

Sure, there’s risk. But there’s not anyone without at least as much risk to be picked above him. He’s already pretty good as is.

The difference is positional scarcity. A big with risk can become near-useless very quickly (see Okafor, Jahlil). They pretty much have to be spot-on to justify a high draft pick. A guard/wing with risk has a much wider range of outcomes.

Hali’s main issue isn’t his funky shot, it’s his anemic free throw rate (only 18.4% in college! LaMelo’s is very bad at 23%, and Hayes’ is slightly below average at 31% for reference.) He checks every other box, but low ftr is a big red flag for a PG, and idk if he can play SG, where ftr is also really important (he has the height at least…)

Yeah, this is the concern with Haliburton and it also makes it hard to tell what to make of his 3PT% because the FT% sample is so tiny. Even Lonzo’s was significantly higher.

At the end of the day, the reality of this draft is such that we’re going to pick a flawed player. I can live with that flaw being Haliburton’s FTr as opposed to Cole Anthony’s…basketball playing ability.

Okafor had some very serious concerns about his interior and perimeter defense, and his overall athleticism while in college…and about his size (he was nowhere near the 7? he was billed as.). He was thought of as an offensive force based on elite low-post moves. Totally different profile than Wiseman on both ends.

I wasn’t comparing them as players, just making the general point that bigs really have to knock it out of the park to justify a big investment in them (whether it’s a high pick or a large contract).

When you look around the league, how many true bigs would you be happy with if you got them with a high pick and/or signed them to a large contract? Using a kind of “I know it when I see it” test to define “big” because height doesn’t work so well (encompasses Giannis), I see:

Definitely:
AD
KAT
Jokic
Embiid

Probably:
Gobert
Bam
Sabonis
Collins

Meh, maybe:
Mitch
Harrell
Allen

I’m probably missing some guys here and there (and didn’t really know what to do with guys who at one time would’ve made it e.g. Gasol, Love) but it’s a pretty short list.

To be clear I’m not saying we should never acquire a big ever again, I’m just saying the standard for them is very high in an era where you can get Kyle O’Quinn for the league minimum every year.

That “long load” on the jump is interesting. It’s classic scout mumbo-jumbo but it does describe something that is really important. For instance, the way Mitch gets off the floor, at his height, is absolutely outstanding. He barely has to bend and he gets off the floor to his very high apex extremely quickly. His second jump is amazing also for a guy of his frame. He’s really explosive in a way that you more generally seen from rounder shorter power types like Barkley or Blake Griffin. He is super fast end to end too, like a deer.

i don’t think I would let a “long load” affect where I draft Wiseman but it’s an interesting thing to think about and try to quantify. I think even a three game sample probably means something when you are that utterly dominant. Also, he got pulled from that Oregon game for fouls but was on his way to putting up a great line in his pedestrian game. If Edwards is an acceptable risk he has to be too.

Also, a “long load” is an apt description for my Knicks fandom the last 20 years.

Derek Harper is predicting “multiple titles” for the Mavs duo of Doncic and Porzingis, and says they can co-exist, just like Magic and Kareem and Bird and McHale.

I’m predicting multiple titles for the Bucks also, I think the big 2 of Giannis and Brook Lopez will figure it out.

Early Bird:
Don’t take my skepticism of Wiseman as not wanting to draft him. I’d be okay with drafting him almost anywhere in this draft. I put him behind others because I don’t think a C has the same value it once did, plus we already have Mitch.

I get that…if anyone stood out head and shoulders relative to his position I’d agree. He just seems to have the most positional upside and the least downside of anyone at the top of this particular draft. I could see passing on him in the top 3, but not at #7. No way.

BigBlueAL: After reading Hollinger’s list I’m beginning to get intrigued by Devin Vassell. Looks like he could be a strong 3 and D SG.

We already have one…

Meaning that when you have the opportunity to draft him you pass first?

Z-man: I get that…if anyone stood out head and shoulders relative to his position I’d agree. He just seems to have the most positional upside and the least downside of anyone at the top of this particular draft. I could see passing on him in the top 3, but not at #7. No way.

Realistically, Haliburton could be available at #7 and I’d take him over Wiseman. I’d also hesitate to take Wiseman over Hayes, even though I know you don’t like Hayes. I think there’s a lot of uncertainty in a 3 game sample, even against strong competition let alone the MEACs & Horizons. Plenty of players have managed to string together a three game hot streak. To me, Wiseman’s floor is still pretty low and much more likely than playing anywhere near Embiid’s level.

re: lamelo – i’m still not sold on him despite some of these models liking him… the aussie league is something but it’s still not a good league…. and i’m a stickler for 2p fg% and it’s a big red flag here…. especially for a tall pg type…. obviously everything else in the ed weiland numbers look good so i think he’s going to be alright in a lonzo ball kind of way… he passes well and contributes elsewhere…. but scoring is likely going to be a major issue… and if you can’t score then you don’t really have good upside…. it’s the same issues as his brother…. and if he has to retool his jumpshot then it’s an even bigger risk….

re: wiseman – yes his hs numbers are not impressive and yes eybl league stats are somewhat informative… but college games trumps whatever you do in high school…. you shouldn’t throw it all away… but what he was able to do in the little time he showed was impressive…. that should be weighed more than what he did in eybl because it’s recent and it’s better comp….

re: haliburton – i like haliburton but there is real risk with that shot… pg’s do have to do a lot of shooting off the dribble and it’s not a shot that lends itself to that well…. there are also concerns about his dribble drive game…. he’s a decent prospect all in all but there’s definitely warts here as there are with everyone else in this draft…

The Honorable Cock Jowles:
Halliburton
Wiseman
Ball
Anyone but Cole Anthony
Cole Anthony

That’s my big board.

Well that cements it. Can’t wait to run out a smallball lineup of Frank, Cole, Dennis, RJ and Knox….

The Knicks need a floor spacing shooter that can make plays and defend at least adequately. I haven’t seen Haliburton play a minute of basketball, but on the basic stats, it looks like he fits the profile. I’d defer to people that have watched him play a lot to evaluate his skills (especially on defense), but a lot of the other players being mentioned clearly can’t shoot a lick. A non shooter is the last thing we need on a team with Randle. Robinson, RJ, and Frank. All 4 of those guys are better than their stats, but not in various combinations together. We need to move on from Randle (even though he’s a good ball player on the right team), move RJ to SF, add a shooter at SG, add a stretch PF, and see what develops at PG.

I do remember the Bomb Squad. I had that poster up on my wall. That is basically my first Knicks memory actually.

Here it is…

I hate so many drafting terms, like ‘athleticism’ and ‘size’ that I always like to condense the mocks to something useful and manageable in my head. I mean, you can usually condense most NBA players to a blurb (Kanter=pointz/rebounding, stat-stuffing buffoon).
What I can gather is:

1- Halliburton: Excellent passing, shooting, and penetrating, decent defender. Not ‘athletic’ so no one cares about him- I hope he falls to us so bad.
In no order:
Edwards: Great passer, good jumpshot, bad catch and shoot, mediocre shooting numbers
LaMelo: Unbelievable passer, poor shooter and defender. WTF. (he’s like that other Ball kid)
Hayes: French and small sample alert. Good passer and defender, poor shooting numbers no matter what they say. (D’Angelo Russell with better defense)
Wiseman: Excellent efficiency, Rim-running block- chasing big, ok defender.
Obi: Facilitating dunker, bad defender. Very athletic so we talk about him. Good shooting, but small sample.
Cole: Dennis Smith Jr Jr
Vassell- Excellent 3, excellent D. Should be higher, but ‘not quick,’ ‘not athletic’ bs. Sounds like a Danny Green
Okongwu- big with great around the basket efficiency and great defender. no jumpshot.

Feel free to shoot me down, because I am very far from a draft guru like some of you guys. Would love if you guys added/modified

Cole Anthony’s college numbers are so bad the Knicks almost have to draft him. It’s hard to do anything other than scream BUST!!! when you see a lottery pick who barely cleared 50% ts% and who barely rated above average per WS/48.

I know big men are easy to find in the modern NBA. But I don’t think a Cole Anthony substitute is ever going to be hard to find. In the last 30 years, Steph Curry is basically the only dynamic high usage point guard who led a title team. Maybe put Dwyane Wade in there if you want but the truth is you can usually find a cheap Derek Fisher type to fill that spot.

Drafting Cole because we haven’t had a decent young point guard in NYC in 25 years just seems like the dumbest thing we could possibly do.

Yeah, I think Halliburton is my guy too.

I almost feel like its more important for The Knicks to not draft a bust and draft a useful NBA player than it is for The Knicks to draft a superstar. Especially with this year’s draft being such a crap shoot and where we are most likely to pick in the draft. Even missing out on dudes like Donovan, Fox, Doncic, Trae Young…if we’d just picked competent NBA players instead of Frank and Knox we’d be in a much better position.

Of course you want to draft stars but not picking a bust is huge. A decent young player who is cost controlled is still a high value player.

Plus Halliburton does address some specific things we desperately need, specifically 3 point shooting and I think he would slot nicely next to RJ if we move RJ to the 3.

PS I mean the current version of Mitch. If he becomes at least as proficient on offense as, say Gobert, he’s worth the 8 figures. If he stretches it out to 3 at a 36% clip on decent value, he’s worth a max contract. But his current production is not max-level or anything close to it, considering what wins in today’s NBA.

Owen:
I know big men are easy to find in the modern NBA. But I don’t think a Cole Anthony substitute is ever going to be hard to find. In the last 30 years, Steph Curry is basically the only dynamic high usage point guard who led a title team. Maybe put Dwyane Wade in there if you want but the truth is you can usually find a cheap Derek Fisher type to fill that spot.

Tony Parker feels disrespected, and so does Chuancey Billups.

Both were pieces of great teams playing great D, but they were also unquestionably the offensive engines for those teams.

Tony Parker was a solid player but I think his career 51% ts% in the playoffs tells the story that he was more of a place-filler than people realize. Duncan was a better player offensively and of course one of the GOATs defensively. Manu was also a much better offensive player. 57.6% career playoff ts% and half a point less per 36. So too needless to say was Kawhi.

Obviously Parker still a legend. I met a guy who grew up in France and played junior pro basketball at a high level there. He said when he was 16-17 Tony Parker joined his team, aged like 13 at the time. Ran circles around everyone else.

Billups was another very good player, probably better than Parker. Put up gaudy numbers in playoffs. I love him but I don’t think he was anyone’s idea of a singular offensive superstar. Wasn’t even the leading scorer. That team didn’t need to be an offensive juggernaut with all the defensive firepower it had.

My first two hot-takes of the day:

Wiseman could be the next Joel Embid, but he could also be the next Kwame Brown.

I feel better about Haliburton after watching some tape of Shawn Marion shooting. Funky but accurate push-shots CAN be an effective NBA tool…

When was the last time a championship team was led by its center?

Anyways this team is missing so much talent that it’s gonna be best player available. I’m saying grade on a curve because getting a big that’s not Anthony Davis isn’t getting you far. Even he didn’t get his team as far as an evenly- ranked guard would. Who is worth as many dollars as Davis ? Curry? Isn’t Curry the better value? I don’t know. (I’m not shitting on AD, he’s a great player and I’d send the Melo package for him. All I’m saying is… between a big with a rank of 95, and a guard with the same rank, the guard is driving the modern NBA team much further)

wetbandit:
When was the last time a championship team was led by its center?

Anyways this team is missing so much talent that it’s gonna be best player available. I’m saying grade on a curve because getting a big that’s not Anthony Davis isn’t getting you far. Even he didn’t get his team as far as an evenly- ranked guard would. Who is worth as many dollars as Davis ? Curry? Isn’t Curry the better value? I don’t know. (I’m not shitting on AD, he’s a great player and I’d send the Melo package for him. All I’m saying is… between a big with a rank of 95, and a guard with the same rank, the guard is driving the modern NBA team much further)

This is a weird argument to have, as there have been so few championship teams of late, but it depends what you mean by “led” and “center”. Why not just say a “dominant big” who was paid a significant portion of the cap and was essential to winning?

LAL: Shaq, Gasol
SAS: Duncan
DAL: Dirk, Chandler
BOS: Garnett
GSW: Durant
MIA: Shaq, Bosh

I mean, is it a waste of cap space to pay KAT or Embiid or Gobert or Jokic (or, heh heh, KP) big money? Or to draft them as part of a championship vision? If the obvious Curry isn’t available (and he was far from obvious) then why is it more risky to invest in the center position? Is Trae Young more likely to win you a championship than Jaren Jackson Jr.?

(Just saw Owen’s post, great minds think alike!)

Jaren Jackson is a shooting 4 who hits 40% from 3 at 6 attempts a game. He’s not a good rebounder. He’s not a real center.

Is the elite rim-protecting center better than the versatile Green switchable big? Not mutually exclusive I guess.

you all are making it sound as though we may not have gotten such great value from using taj and bobby p at the 5…

At the end of the day, really good basketball players are really valuable no matter what the position. You shouldn’t chase a position in the draft. Just draft the guy with the best chance of being a really good basketball player. If it’s a tie, fine, go with the position of more perceived value.

I’m with wetbandit. Here are some bigs’ production this year (per-36 PTS/TRB/BLK rounder) and their contracts:

Ivica Zubac: 16-14-2, .642 TS%, 4/$28M

Javale McGee: 15-13-3, .655 TS%, 2/$8M

Dwight Howard: 14-14-2, .696 TS%, minimum

Dwight Powell: 13-8-1, .677. TS%, 4/$37M

Enes Kanter: 17-16-2, .594 TS%, 2/$10M

And then you have guys like KOQ and Ed Davis, who posted incredibly productive seasons recently, couldn’t parlay them into any real money, and are now riding the pine as “break in case of emergency” bigs for contenders.

Contrast this with the fact that Fred Van Vleet is staring down a max contract!

These are almost replacement level bigs in today’s game. So if you’re spending a high pick and/or max contract on a big, he has to be a lot better than all of these guys. That’s very, very difficult. Not impossible, but you basically have to either be a generational offensive talent (KAT, Jokic), a true defensive ace (Gobert), or a combination of the two.

I mean how much better is #1 overall pick and likely future max contract recipient DeAndre Ayton than this group?

The Lakers have LeBron and AD on max salaries.(who are pretty big guys BTW) so they can’t afford to spend $ on a C. So sure, JaVale is a good bargain, as he was in GS. So is Dwight Howard. But so is Avery Bradley and Rajon Rondo.

Zubac is a nice value big on a team with Paul George and Kawhi Leonard taking up most of the cap. But so is Lou Williams and Landry Shamet.

Powell is nice value for the Mavs, where KP and soon Doncic will be taking up the majority of the cap. But he’s pretty close to $10Mil and Finney-Smith and Seth Curry are making less but holding down the guard spot.

You can cover any position with decent role players if you have stars at other positions. Including at C.

Donnie Walsh: The obvious historic model for winning is two stars: one big and one small. Now, with a changing league dynamic the big is debatable and the small is not.

Well, it depends on what you mean by “big” and “small” and who they are in relation to the cap.

Who was the “small” on the Miami Heatles? Wade? Prime Wade is easily a 3 in a small lineup in today’s game.

Who was the “big” for the Jordan Bulls? Rodman? Grant? Who was the “small?” Jordan?

Who was the “small” for the big-3 Celts?

Who was the “small” for the Magic Lakers?

Who was the “small” for the Dirk Mavs?

I mean, there’s so many ways to configure a championship team. If anything, what they have in common is greatness at multiple positions, and an anchor “savant” player. It doesn’t matter whether that player is 6’1″ Isiah or 6’3″ Steph or 6’6″ Jordan or 6’8″ LeBron or 6’10” Dirk or 7′ Duncan. You can fill in the blanks regardless of what you’re missing if you have those guys. And in nearly all cases, at least one of those guys was drafted by the championship team. And this goes for all the teams than were championship caliber but just missed.

I thought I was being annoyingly redundant but you’re missing my point. I don’t care about height here. What I’m saying is, unless you’re a HOF type center or PF, or your skills are outside the 4/5 mold, what you’re bringing these days isn’t as valuable as shooting is.
So if you show me Wiseman, and tell me he’s a superb basketball player, and I have the #1 pick, I’m thinking to myself, this guy isn’t getting me that many more wins than a replacement level center to justify the pick. I would take a Halliburton.
Now you’re also talking about big guys, like LeBron and Dirk leading their teams to championships. Their value isn’t in big man attributes. Dirk was a shooter, LeBron a facilitating freight train. Also, the NBA is a different sport now so what’s history of the point guard position got to do with anything.
Also, Wade is 6’3”.

A “small” is somebody who handles the ball, penetrates, shoots from the outside. Traditionally that was a guard. Nowadays, that person can be 6’10”, 6’11”, or even 7+’. Not sure why people are defining anything based on height anymore. The important thing is role.

I said earlier there are too many factors that go into creating a championship team. But the clear route to contention, aside from lucking into a LeBron/Freak/Jokic/Doncic/Zion type, is to try to get your best players to fill the two most important roles: “PG” and “big”, for lack of any better terms here in 2020.

Wade played bigger than the 6’4″ he is listed at in b-r, just like Durant plays smaller than the 6’10” he is listed at.

I was just watching LJ’s four-point play and man, I don’t even know how you can bitch about the continuation call. Was it an iffy call? Sure, but it’s an iffy call you see all the time. Like, the Hubert Davis foul, that was unusual (I think it was still a foul on Pippen, but it was called a lot less back then, so it was a more unusual situation). But the continuation on LJ’s shot was normal. Power forwards just don’t typically hit threes when fouled that far away from the basket (and yes, LJ as a “big man” was a bit of a oxymoron).

Bulls fans love to trot out the Hubert Davis call, but conveniently forget the ridiculous Greg Anthony blocking foul that sent Scottie Pippen to the line with 1:30 left in that game. Hubie Brown’s reaction to the call on TV mirrored every Knicks fan’s reaction.

I don’t think arguing that a top ten draft pick might just turn out to be average is a good argument. The hope is that any draft pick you make, especially one in the top 10 or 5, will turn out to be an above average player.

If that is the outlook you take, that he might just end up being average…then there is literally no point to taking any player in the draft who isn’t a sure fire star.

Brian, I think at the time it was an unusual call. But LJ’s 4 point play paved the way for iffy foul calls on continuation shots from 3…thanks LJ!

thenoblefacehumper: This is the point. Guards available for the equivalent of rookie scale deals look like Wayne Ellington or Reggie Bullock. They’re mostly terrible. The baseline for a guard/wing draft pick to return value to his team is to be better than Wayne Ellington or Reggie Bullock.

The baseline for a big draft pick to return value is to be better than McGee, KOQ, etc. It’s much, much harder. These guys are good players!

That’s one way of looking at it. Another is to look at the probability of getting an impact player in the draft based on the size of the player. Just a quick eyeballing of drafts since 2012 suggests that the majority of productive players, especially in the lottery were bigs or larger wings, and most guards were average or worse. The odds of swinging and missing on a guard in the lottery seem much higher, A team like ours can’t afford another swing and miss.

It’s true that excellent guards are scarce. But that makes finding one in the top of the draft that much harder.

That’s one way of looking at it. Another is to look at the probability of getting an impact player in the draft based on the size of the player. Just a quick eyeballing of drafts since 2012 suggests that the majority of productive players, especially in the lottery were bigs or larger wings, and most guards were average or worse.

This is a fair take. I guess it just depends on what you mean by “impact player.” Bigs in the draft are almost assuredly safer picks.

Going back to Ayton, his numbers are pretty damn solid to the point where you would think he definitely qualifies as an impact player. On the other hand, how much better is he than the guys I listed you can get for virtually free (and the list wasn’t exhaustive)?

Is he still an impact player if ~80% of his impact could’ve been easily replicated with a cheap contract, and the Suns were free to use that pick on a riskier proposition?

Another example: Vernon Carey Jr. is a stone cold lock to be more productive than a lot of guys drafted ahead of him, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he shouldn’t be picked low if teams feel they can replicate his production without using a valuable pick to attain it.

We aren’t in the Jurassic Era where Mikan, Petit, Wilt, Russell, and Kareem dominated. But their replacement is the power wing like Jordan, Kobe, Lebron, Kawhi, Durant, Giannis, and Luka. It’s not in my mind likely that the Steph Curry lite small guard who can hit threes and distribute is taking over.

To be clear, I am not saying we should specifically target small guards. I guess “big” is kind of a useless term when Giannis Antetokounmpo exists, so I’ll rephrase and say it’s probably wise to dock a player a few draft slots if he projects to derive the overwhelming majority of his value from some combination of:

-Medium usage scoring volume
-Rebounds
-High scoring efficiency
-To some extent blocks, but this is where it can get interesting because bigs who are legitimately good defenders still have tons of value and aren’t easy to find

These skills are definitely important, but it’s pretty easy to find guys with them without using a lottery pick.

Yeah, only time will tell if Curry is a harbinger of things to come or just a very unique figure in NBA history.

Jowles, you may be right but the season never actually finished and we have yet to see how that regular season success played out for the Mavs in the playoffs.

Jowles, do you think this trend will continue forever then, simply because of the math being in a team’s favor if the shoot so many 3’s and hit them at a decent clip? Or is there a counter that is coming somewhere down the line? If so, what would that counter be?

I have no fucking idea. If I knew that, I’d hope that I wouldn’t be sitting at a keyboard getting paid zero dollars to have thoughts on basketball.

I think we’re looking at what baseball is looking at: a permanent change to the way the game is played, as the rules currently exist. They had to fuck with their baseballs to get the product that they wanted. The NBA could widen the floor, which would make the corner three more difficult, which could lead to even more motion and dribble penetration.

I think the most currently-visible rule change possible is the Elam Ending, but that would just lead to games with more basketball plays, rather than the insufferable game of keepaway that close games turn into. Wouldn’t do anything to strategy. I get so frustrated with “traditionalists” on this one; the game totally transforms to a near-unwatchable product during tight games, which is the opposite of what you’d want to happen.

Yeah, I have to say, it’s depressing how obviously well the Mavs are using Porzingis compared to whatever it was the Knicks were doing.

He went from 21.1 2-pointers and 7.3 3-pointers in 2017-18 with NYK to 13.6 2-pointers and 10.9 3-pointers in 2019-20 with the Mavs.

I’m not saying he’s an offensive powerhouse now, but the change has led to a significant improvement. Of course, some of that was due to Doncic’s “gravity” — in other words, having a terrific passer/penetrator that has a legit space-the-floor system around him.

Could we have done that with Elfrid, DSJ, RJ, Allen, or anyone else? Not as well, but definitely.

The best guards and wings became more valuable as teams came to understand the value of spacing, 3 point shooting, and dribble penetration. 3 point shooting slowly improved and the extra spacing made it much easier for those same players to penetrate off the dribble. Plus, back in the old days even decapitation wasn’t necessarily a flagrant foul. Now breathing on Harden is a foul in the regular season.

The penetration used to also often come via the big man in the post who would get double teamed and then pass out to whoever was open. The value of that play still exists for certain matchups, but there aren’t many players like Kareem, Hakeem, Shaq, Wilt, McHale, Barkley etc.. that can make a good enough living down there to make it dominant part of the game anymore. So now the idea is to stretch the Cs out to the 3 point line,

Personally, I think game was massively better when there was more post play because it made for more interesting matchups and different team styles. I think the game is boring as all hell at times now. So much so I wish a Shaq or Kareem would appear and so dominate inside it would force teams to rethink the stretch 5 even if he’s getting burned a bit outside. That’s the basic problem. Even if the big man is efficient on lower volume, he’s often getting burned so badly from the outside and on the P&R, the net of the matchup is bad.

Maybe they need to change the rules. 5 seconds instead of 3 seconds or a narrower key might do the trick.

You’re saying watching Kanter dribble more is MORE entertaining? Sheesh.

So much so I wish a Shaq or Kareem would appear and so dominate inside it would force teams to rethink the stretch 5 even if he’s getting burned a bit outside.

I understand what you’re saying, but Giannis is basically Shaq with a dribble-drive. He’s almost unfair despite playing in the most competitive basketball league on earth, just as Shaq was. But he’s somehow more valuable than Shaq would be, as he is an adept passer surrounded by shooters (Shaq was a flashy-good passer, but it’s not the same at all). I just don’t think that a back-to-the-basket version of Giannis would somehow dominate more. Part of Giannis’s cheat code is that he doesn’t have to back a guy down, and he can guard literally anyone in the league (except Boban, of course). That’s hyper-valuable in today’s NBA.

Come to think of it, Boban is probably the most dominant traditional big that we’ve seen since Yao or Shaq, but on account of his enormous size and inflexibility, he’s relegated to a bench role.

And on the topic of the league changing, check this out.

Here are the top earners in 2000-01 and 2001-02.

Garnett PF/C
O’Neal C
Mourning C
Juwan Howard PF
Pippen SF
Malone PF
Rasheed Wallace PF
Mutombo C
Payton PG
Kemp PF/C
Olajuwon C
Ewing C
Robinson C

And now:

Curry PG
Westbrook PG
Paul PG
Durant SF
Harden PG
Wall PG
LeBron Point Forward
Lowry PG
Griffin (lol) PF
George SF/PF

Pretty crazy how much things have changed.

But there’s lots of league average or better guards (relative to their position) that are making low 7 figures too. And many others who are found outside the lottery, including in the 2nd round and as undrafted free agents.

If you are saying “don’t draft a guy in the lottery whose most likely outcome is a traditional 1-way big” I agree. There has to be some special upside beyond “project” speculation. That’s certainly the case with Wiseman. I would get passing on him based on scouting reports (e.g. Stepien is lukewarm on him) and concerns about IQ. Smart basketball players are always preferable to not-so-smart ones, all else being even. You would have to be sold that Wiseman is on an elite track to prefer him over an equally talented but iffy guard prospect, say, LaMelo. But I’m not buying that if he turns out “just average” for his position, it’s any more disappointing than drafting a “just average” guard or wing in the lottery. Theis and Noel are putting up nice stats in limited roles but so is Brad Wanamaker and Jalen Brunson and Hamadou Diallo and Terrence Davis and Kendrick Nunn, etc. etc.

https://theathletic.com/1807318/2020/05/14/absolute-hell-landry-fields-on-his-mysterious-and-ill-fated-raptors-tenure/?source=user_shared_article

Sad, and somewhat scary, story about one of my all time favorite Knicks (leave me alone I was born in ’95). I’m glad he made his money and is doing well now, but this seems like an awful thing to go through.

Didn’t even know he’s now the GM of the Spurs’ G-League affiliate. Would probably be the best GM we’ve had in decades.

The Honorable Cock Jowles:
Can we all agree that the Knicks should draft BPA, regardless of whether that’s a 7’5? behemoth or a 5’11” sharpshooter?

You have my pledge, Judge Jowles.

Can we all agree that the Knicks should draft BPA, regardless of whether that’s a 7’5? behemoth or a 5’11” sharpshooter?

Depends how you define BPA. The point I’m trying to make is that a guard/wing who can put up .150 WS48 by being good at traditional guard/wing skills sure seems more valuable than a big who can put up .200+ by being good at traditional big skills.

If BPA = “will bring most value to the team” then yeah I’m on board, but if it means “most productive in a vacuum,” probably not.

thenoblefacehumper: If BPA = “will bring most value to the team” then yeah I’m on board, but if it means “most productive in a vacuum,” probably not.

That’s part of it, too. There’s still enough old-school folks out there who overvalue bigs who show at least a bit of versatility. Look at the contract Horford signed. Look at the way teams still drafted big over small in the last couple of drafts. You could probably still get valuable assets in return for Bagley III or Ayton, even though they both seem lacking in versatility. A lackluster guard/wing is a harder sell in a trade.

I mean, do you really think that Joel Embiid replacing Daniel Theis/Enes Kanter would be a wash? WS48 says yes, and also that Jokic wouldn’t make much difference.

I don’t think any of these things are true, namely because I don’t think WS48 does a good job of incorporating defense or the benefits accrued from higher scoring volume.

Having said that, if Embiid were to go down for a few games the Sixers could survive much more easily with Theis/Kanter than the Celtics could if Kemba went down and they had to replace him with a guard in the same price range as Theis/Kanter. I mean I can’t even think of a guard that fits that description…we’re in Tim Frazier land.

I don’t know exactly what to attribute it to, but I think it’s objectively true that there are a lot more productive bigs in the NBA right now than productive guards.

Milwaukee is paying $12 mill to Brook Lopez and $1mill to George Hill. Would they be better if they paid $1 mill to Nerlens Noel and $12 mill to Patrick Beverley?

They are paying $9.5M to George Hill, and that’s coming off a bad season at age 33. It’s also probably one of the better guard value contracts in the entire league (not counting rookie scales and maxes).

I also think Noel might finally get paid on his next contract.

Even if he does, it’ll be a fraction of what Fred VanVleet, who is of a similar age and objectively less productive, will get.

There’s still enough old-school folks out there who overvalue bigs who show at least a bit of versatility.

The point I’m making doesn’t apply to a lot of these guys. Bigs whose skills are limited to what you might call traditional big skills are easily available to everyone, and I would avoid Wiseman because I think this applies to him.

If you’re talking about a big who can shoot, pass, has an enormous defensive impact, etc. it’s an entirely different…

Different conversation.

I love this website, but my biggest pet peeve with it is the character counter is just slightly off.

I should add that it would be fair to say this opinion conflicts with me being somewhat high on Okongwu, but I think he has a decent chance at overcoming this phenomenon because he might be that good defensively, and I don’t think him becoming a 3PT shooter is out of the question (both the stats and scouting consensus are mixed on this).

I’d still take him below some of the guards I think he’ll be “better” than, e.g. I’d probably take Haliburton over him.

Hey, there’s still huge value in a center who defends the rim to a high level, look at Gobert.

I need some help with this-

If we say that a wing’s TS.150 is more valuable than a center’s TS.190, why is that ? How does that square with efficiency being higher the more 3s you shoot? Would a team rather feed Mitchell Robinson more than Steph Curry since he has a higher true shooting percentage, and is this more efficient?

>I understand what you’re saying, but Giannis is basically Shaq with a dribble-drive. He’s almost unfair despite playing in the most competitive basketball league on earth, just as Shaq was. >

I love Giannis as much as anyone, but a couple of teams demonstrated that if you pack the paint you can at least slow him down. That’s more or less why he’s trying to expand his game out to the 3 point line.

Zeus and Apollo couldn’t slow Shaq down in his prime if they double teamed him.

I more or less agree on everything else you said.

Before the league shifted to pace and space I was a huge D’Antoni fan. I wanted more running, 3 point shooting and P&R. But now that “everyone” is doing it, man do miss Kareem. Shaq, Hakeem, McHale etc.. I liked really good post play and inside out basketball. I’m certain it can still be done effectively, but only with very skilled big men that actually work on that instead of making 3s. Sooner or later someone will come along and change the game again.

I love Giannis as much as anyone, but a couple of teams demonstrated that if you pack the paint you can at least slow him down. That’s more or less why he’s trying to expand his game out to the 3 point line.

This is true, and especially true in this era, but for a very limited number of games. And as poorly as Giannis played over those six games (.518 TS%, in large part due to his Shaq-like 35-60 from the charity stripe), I still lay the blame more squarely on Eric Bledsoe for their series loss. 61 points on 68 FGA and 21 FTA is just unacceptable in a Conference Finals. He and Mirotic combined to shoot 11-60 from behind the arc. Keep in mind that the Bucks traded four 2nd rounders to get Mirotic midseason, and he laid an epic egg when it mattered most.

My point is that if Mirotic and Bledsoe merely shoot 33% from three, and clustered in those three close losses, maybe we’re talking about Giannis’s 40 PPG on .600 TS% in crushing the short-handed Warriors en route to his first FMVP. Obviously he gets some blame for that series, but an outsized share due to his stature.

Zeus and Apollo couldn’t slow Shaq down in his prime if they double teamed him.

Zeus and Apollo, maybe not. Duncan and Robinson? For sure.

Or maybe Malone and Stockton? Or maybe more accurately, Greg Foster and Greg Ostertag, who combined to shoot 19-29 at the C position for 41 points over those four games?

If anything, it’s proof that even a superstar can’t win shit if your role players suck. And they sucked horribly in both of those series.

You’re saying the high TS% is tempered by low field goal attempts. Isn’t that on the same continuum as the five Tyson Chandlers argument? Some say volume doesn’t affect efficiency?

Too lazy on a late Friday to do it, but ‘the whole game has changed irrevocably’ along with ‘BPA’ discussions makes me really want to go back and look at say the last five drafts for the Knicks and see what the team would look like if they had just picked whoever had the best 3-pt% on reasonable volume among, oh say, the ten or so potential draftees available to them (so if we picked 3rd, choose the best 3-pt shooter between whoever was slotted for 3rd to whoever was slotted for 13th [to avoid drafting 3rd some slow, one-dimensional shot-maker who might have actually gone 50th]). Would we be demonstratively better? I mean, it can’t be worse than 3-on-3…

Re: drafting, bottom line is, if you can’t shoot the 3 in today’s NBA, it’s like having trouble with the curve. You better make up for it, and that’s a tall order. I mean, how valuable in today’s NBA is a guard who can’t shoot the 3? They have to be elite in something else, maybe more than one thing, otherwise you’re throwing away a pick on them.

Jowles, i posted that clip the other day.

Also, great story on Fields. His collapse was always a real mystery to me. He was good in an unorthodox way when he was in New York. I certainly loved him.

He also is coming for David Lee in the Who Married Best Grand Prix.

I injected myself with Windex a couple weeks back. Still coming down from the rush.

A crazy thing for me is that I believe that there is a decent chance that the Melo trade could have been done with Fields in Gallo’s place and the Knicks didn’t want to do it. Dolan’s Razor, man, Dolan’s Razor.

The Brooklyn Nets guard is trying to put his basketball future in the hands of the masses. He has started a GoFundMewith the hope of reaching roughly $24,632,630 which “will allow the fan base to determine” the next team he plays for.

that is some really weird shit…I don’t know, maybe it’s a genius way of raising some charity money…

is dinwiddie really looking at an annual salary above 20 million…

Yeah, Landry Fields was an incredibly charming guy. He’s one of the rare examples where the hot model who married him was probably playing out of her league.

I can’t imagine how scary and frustrating that situation must’ve been for Fields. As a plus 3PT shooter, he was basically the kind of player 30 teams are constantly looking for these days. Instead he was out of the league in his 20s.

Still, I’m glad he landed very much on his feet and wouldn’t be surprised at all to see him rise through the front office ranks quickly. I hope against all odds he winds up back with us in that capacity.

I was a huge Fields fan also.

I loved that Knicks team with Gallo, Fields, Chandler etc… Even though I wasn’t in favor of signing Amare (I probably would have just kept David Lee), that was a fun team until the Melo trade.

Looking back on it now, I realize my bitterness about blowing that team up impacted my thinking about Melo as a player. He was a lot better than I gave him credit for back then. He still wouldn’t be high on the list of players I’d want on my team (even at his peak) because I like ball movement, defense, and high basketball IQs, but he was very good at his best.

3. Killian Hayes, PG/SG, Ulm
An unknown quantity for most American fans, Hayes is a French lefty who isn’t a knock-down shooter (29.4 percent from 3) but has an extremely high skill level in terms of being able to execute complex moves like step-backs, side steps and pull-ups out of pick-and-rolls. Hayes has never shot well from the perimeter and has a funky push shot, but he has a history of shooting extremely well from the free-throw line (87.6 percent). One hopes that will translate to 3s as he gets older. Although he’s big for a point guard, he can run pick-and-roll all day and make the right delivery more often than not.

Hayes is still very young — like Ball and Edwards, he won’t turn 19 until this summer — and had a good season in a decent league. Ulm played in the Eurocup, not the Euroleague, and the German League isn’t quite as good as Spain’s, but it’s not bad.

Where Hayes falls short, and it’s something I saw in person a year ago at Basketball Without Borders, is having the zip to just cook a player off the dribble from a standstill and then finish over length at the rim. He struggles to gain separation off the bounce, which is one reason he has to rely on herky-jerky start-stops, step-backs and other complex skills, and depends a lot on pull-ups rather than lay-ups. Even his close-in finishes are difficult, contested makes. Again, that’s German League athleticism, so you can see how some are concerned about what happens against far more athletic players over here.

Hayes is also extremely left-hand dominant, which is a concern of some scouts and not of some others. I tend to be in the latter camp — John Stockton had a 20-year career as an all-time great NBA point guard and took maybe four dribbles with his left hand — but I could see how overplays could become a problem for him.

I loved Landry just like everyone else here. However, I soured on him well before most here, I’d have to go back and check but I believe it was after he was totally useless in his first playoff stint. The bloom was off the rose long before he hurt his elbow. Jon Abbey and me were very down on him by year 2 and took a lot of shit for it.

I like Okongwu a lot…massive potential. Still, what I sad about the 3 above applies. Is he special enough to overcome that?

What Hollinger goes on to say is that Okongwu produced like very few freshman big men have. He is in elite company Anthony Davis, DeAndre Ayton, Cody Zeller and Towns.

So it’s potential but with a lot of data behind it.

His filter: Let’s get into the details. Since 2011-12, five major conference NCAA freshman have had a PER north of 30 and shot better than 70 percent from the line, an important indicator that they had enough skill to be something besides a ‘90s beast-ball 5 in the pros.

Right now my top players to consider in the top 7 are, in no particular order: Okongwu, Haliburton, LaMelo, Edwards, Wiseman, Toppin, Precious. I’m not completely out on Okoro, Cole or Killian, and still looking carefully at Lewis, Nesmith, Vassell and others. but would be fine with any of the top 7. Lamelo, Haliburton and Okongwu are probably my top 3, although Wiseman and Edwards would excite me if we took them there. Precious and Toppin would only be 6 and 7 in my rankings.

On this day in 1999 Allan Houston hit the game winning shot to beat the Heat in Game 5. I remember when that shot went in running around my house screaming like crazy. When was the last game winning shot a Knick has made that was exciting, the 2 buzzer beaters JR Smith hit during the 2012-13 season? If not that season then definitely the season before when Lin hit the game winner in Toronto.

The Good News: There will almost certainly be an impact player still in the draft no matter where we pick
The Bad News: We’re going to draft Cole Anthony over all of them

Dolan’s Razor sez that Cole Anthony will be, to our collective relief, drafted a slot before our pick, and turn into a perennial all-star.

The Honorable Cock Jowles:
Dolan’s Razor sez that Cole Anthony will be, to our collective relief, drafted a slot before our pick, and turn into a perennial all-star.

Nah, Cole Anthony will suck for the Knicks, like we expect. But they would’ve drafted Haliburton who gets drafted one spot earlier and goes on to be Steph Curry 2.0.

Every other team would have been happy to let Haliburton fall to the Knicks until the Knicks started raving about Haliburton’s shot during a private workout.

On the other hand, Cole Anthony will kill his 3 v 3 workout.

Charlie Rosen with some truth bombs about how Melo refused to play in the triangle and poisoned KP’s thinking on the subject. KP liked the triangle. He even made one favorable public comment about it (which was reported at the time), and Melo privately went off on him (also reported later) and continued the mutiny.

Melo’s resume includes refusing to listen to George Karl, Mike D’Antoni, and Phil Jackson. lol

How many rings and COY awards does it take for a guy to listen to the coach and at least try what he’s saying?

Wow, Charley Rosen must think any GM who would give Carmelo Anthony the largest contract in the NBA is a huge dumbass!

You can’t have your PJ cake and eat it too. Either Phil takes the L for not getting through to Melo, or Phil takes the L for the MMM contract.

You gotta admit, Phil had no reason to believe Melo was going to play the same way in his 12th season as he did in his first 11. He was totally blindsided.

Charlie Rosen:Phil Jackson::Sean Hannity:Donald Trump

This, with the exception that no one on Earth gives a shit what Charley Rosen says while that’s tragically not the case with Hannity 🙁

***everyone associated with Phil has said in hindsight that signing Melo was a mistake***

Yeah, we’ll everybody here said it with foresight. And in-the-moment-sight. Hell, even ruruland knew the contract was a bad idea at the time. But Phil and his great basketball mind had “everyone associated” with him believing in his genius. Until it wasn’t genius. Oof.

***How an intelligent guy like Strat can continue to sugar-coat the big, steaming pile of shit that was the Phil era is mind-boggling.***

I have a feeling that if everybody here said Phil was great, he’d argue Phil was garbage.

***When Phil was hired, most of us felt that there was at least hope that his “great basketball mind” would be great enough to know his own limitations.***

For me, the hope with Phil Jackson coming in was that his “genius” (ie, his rings) would make Dolan sit back and allow for a proper rebuild. He was supposed to tell Dolan “we can’t build around Carmelo, we need to let him go”, but instead he MMMed him, and the mythical rebuild was over before it even began.

Nothing says “great basketball mind” more than trying to build a championship team around the decline phase of the 2010’s answer to Mark Aguirre because you believe your outdated pet offensive system is going to turn him into an elite player. That takes the kind of infinite hippie wisdom that’s hard for a regular layperson to understand and takes many years of observing horse racing before you can comprehend the brilliance of it.

To be fair Melo had only played about eleven billion minutes in the NBA before Phil took the job so there was no way to really know whether he had the talent or temperament to be a truly great player.

The funny part is Melo’s 2 best seasons of his career with the Knicks occurred partly because he embraced shooting alot more 3pters which is something D’Antoni encouraged Melo to do when he first got to NY.

Remember when ruruland insisted that he would take a discount? Ahahahahahahhahahah

You have to give him credit, though, that he didn’t try to say that the, what, $2 million Melo took off the deal in year 2 did not count as the discount he was talking about.

One thing I remember thinking at the time of the MMM was that unlike the Amare signing, Melo would retain significant trade value for the life of his contract, if only based on perception…at least, enough that we wouldn’t have to use assets to unload him. At least that part turned out okay…you might say that we fleeced Presti on that one, right?

I think it’s fair to say that Rose has inherited the single most healthy situation for rebuilding of any GM since Isiah…surplus draft picks, no albatross contracts, oodles of potential cap space, a couple of interesting young pieces…

It isn’t possible that he could fuck this opportunity up more than his long list of predecessors going back to the ’70s would have, is it?

https://twitter.com/nyknicks/status/1262110643663978496?s=20

Today in 1995 Ewing hits the game-winner vs Indiana to win Game 5 and keep the series alive. Of course alot of fans are commenting that too bad he couldn’t do the same at the end of Game 7. People probably don’t remember that Ewing could barely move around that series, his left leg has a long sleeve on it cause his calf was bothering him. He struggled that series, including this game before hitting this shot. But check out what he did in Games 6 and 7: 25 and 15 with 2 blks and 3 asts on 9 for 15 shooting, 29 and 14 with 4 blks and 5 asts on 12 for 23 shooting. He did struggle from the FT line shooting a combined 12 for 19 but yeah when it mattered most even at less than 100% Ewing showed up like he always did. This narrative of him not being clutch is so annoying.

Geo, your comments above are borderline offensive. Please don’t say that Phil brought in high character players. Two of those players had serious sexual assault allegations against them.

Didn’t some other guy say that he played badly because NY was too lit for him?

Ewing’s 94 Game 7 against Pacers was tremendous. 24 pts, 22 rbs, 7 ast and 5 blocks and the go ahead putback which is forever etched in my memory.

CaptainB:
Ewing’s 94 Game 7 against Pacers was tremendous. 24 pts, 22 rbs, 7 ast and 5 blocks and the go ahead putback which is forever etched in my memory.

Yeah my thing is though he hit so many big shots in the playoffs people dont remember. Heck I didnt even remember them until I rewatched those games.

In 1992 he hits the shot that sends Game 3 vs Detroit into OT the Knicks win. Game 1 vs the Bulls might be his best game ever including hitting a shot with under a minute left that basically is the game winner. In 1993 he hits game winning shots vs Indiana in Game 1 and in OT vs Charlotte in Game 2. 1994 he hits what wouldve been the game winner in Game 3 vs NJ but they hit 2 FTs to steal the game right after. The famous Kukoc game winner was preceded by not just Ewing hitting the shot that tied the game but he scored I believe the last 6 pts in a row to tie that game. This is not even considering what he did with a mediocre Knicks team in the 1990 playoffs, almost single-handedly leading the comeback from down 0-2. The one game they won vs the eventual champion Pistons in the 2nd rd Ewing scored his playoff career high 45.

Even as a broken down old man in 2000 we all remember the dunk at the end of Game 7 but he hit the shot that sent Game 3 into OT before Anthony Carter hit that illegal game winner. I mean look what old man Ewing did in Game 5 1999 and Game 7 2000 vs Alonzo Mourning: 22 and 11, 20 and 10. I will always be Ewing’s biggest supporter and I won’t apologize for that lol.

you’re just soooooooo overly sensitive and dramatic na na…kind of like jae crowder…bet you’re also a big hair flipper…

well, at least peyote phil actually vocalized the need to improve the character of the team…at the time that was a different perspective to hear from the front office…

I was happy to see robin lopez, kyle o’quinn, and courtney lee join the team…

rose and noah were big disappointments, but, yeah, can’t win em all…most of the other folks have been good citizens since becoming knicks, including dot…I was really happy to see how things worked out with michael beasely, I was expecting the worse…

Anyone parse through the Athletic piece on How Much Frank Ntilikina Can Make?

That should be good for a 500+ comment post.

Maybe he shouldn’t have investigated so hard. No puppet!

Any updates on the draft/lottery dates? Is everything still in limbo?

Hard not to like this guy as our pick after watching this…

Mitch is extremely physically coordinated and has good hand-eye coordination. There’s really nothing clumsy about him. He could become a more versatile player. It’s all between the ears for him. He’s pretty goofy and immature. One thing I sense in him is that he sees basketball as just a game and plays with great joy…seems like pressure doesn’t build up in him. Maybe that’s a good thing, but I’d like to see him get more mature and serious.

>>Where is the indignation from the MSM?<<<

The media is some combination of the most incompetent and corrupt institution in the country.

If you watch CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, FOX, OANN or read the Washington Post, NY Times, LA Times, etc.. and think you are informed you should go into the bathroom right now, look in the mirror, stare at yourself, and repeat these words over and over, "I am one naive dumb fuck".

There's literally only one way to have any chance of knowing what is really going on. You have to research primary source documents and info on your own.

All these guys in the media are lying sacks of shit bought and paid for political parties, the IC, corporate interests, or they are advancing personal politics. They are mostly horrible human beings with no interest in unspun facts or informing the public. The earth should swallow them all whole.

Stratomatic: Frequently wrong, but never in doubt:
The media is some combination of the most incompetent and corrupt institution in the country.

All these guys in the media are lying sacks of shit bought and paid for […].They are mostly horrible human beings with no interest in unspun facts or informing the public.The earth should swallow them all whole.

Except for Charley Rosen when he is reporting on Phil. And then, the media is ok.

Stratomatic: Frequently wrong, but never in doubt: All these guys in the media are lying sacks of shit bought and paid for political parties, the IC, corporate interests, or they are advancing personal politics. They are mostly horrible human beings with no interest in unspun facts or informing the public. The earth should swallow them all whole.

This is about as offensive of a post as I’ve ever read here. Even if there is bias in the media on all sides of a factual event, it varies considerably from reporter to reporter, from outlet to outlet. Your virulent take is the same rational that the dictators of the world spout to abolish the free press in their domain. I have had many dealings with numerous reporters in personal and professional life, and judging by your persona here, nearly every one of them is a better person than you could ever hope to be.

And to be fair, I feel the same way about those who paint all law enforcement officers or lawyers or doctors or educators, or their profession, with a broad brush. It’s a patently ignorant thing to do, and you should be ashamed of yourself for using the language that you did above.

Z-Man

The truth is the truth even when it’s insulting.

I don’t care which side of the political spectrum we are talking about. Both side are horrible (I should say “all” instead of both because I read some foreign and non mainstrem sources also) . Journalists are supposed to report facts and leave the spin, opinions, personal views, political agendas etc… to the editorial pages.

We don’t get anything even remotely close to that anymore.

On any news story on which I have done serious personal research, actually read primary source documents, and developed some level of expertise, it has been close to impossible to find anyone that’s giving a balanced unspun view of reality.

By definition that means they are either incompetent, willful liars, or so woefully unaware of their own extreme bias as to make them unsuited for the job. To listen to and read information from people like that and presume that you are being informed is a combination of naivety and ignorance that’s much more dangerous to the country than me telling the truth about them.

“NahNah
May 18, 2020 at 2:41 pm
Z-Man, great post and take down of Strat.”

Patting the Greek Chorus on the back is a big part of what the Greek Chorus does here…… Are you still in middle school, nahnah?

“Bobby N’s response to birtherism is to point to McCain and Romney, two of the whitest white men to ever walk the face of God’s white planet. I think the point may have eluded him.”

Sorry pal… in our system even OJ gets a fair trail and adjudication of the facts and law. YOU raised the point of birtherism and I merely pointed to “case law”.

How’s that search goink?

“My search is goinking pretty well actually. I am a NY attorney with almost a decade of immigration rights advocacy. ”

No…. I meant you birther search on me……..