Knicks Morning News (2022.12.15)

When Dave DeB punched the table, no one had any doubt that Ewing was on his way to an MVP or two and we’d be hanging banners in the rafters. Alas…

Games like last night make me all the more happy that the Spida trade fell through. Given what was realistically possible, this is the team I was hoping to see.

Some musings:

Randle is playing at a very high level overall, but especially in the first halves of games. That should not be brushed aside when he fizzles out later in games. We focus a lot on second halfs and crunch time, but he is setting a bruising tone at a very high energy level. It’s not surprising that he looked spent down the stretch and in overtime.

Mitch is Mitching…he’s “developed” mostly by “maturing” into his gifts, and the result is that he’s staying healthy and fouling less (and there are components to that). Nothing really surprising there.

RJ has improved pretty dramatically of late. I know some folks don’t want to throw out his first 15 games or so, but to me, that’s fine to do with a 22yo who is clearly still developing. Nothing he’s done in this past stretch of games seems particularly unsustainable, and if he can sustain it, he is worth his contract. He’s been a HUGE part of this winning streak.

Grimes…the shooting is really coming around (.597 TS%, still only .349 from 3). The defense will only get better. Everyone wanted him to be the opening day starter, but the foot soreness, deference to Fournier, and illusion of Cam as a productive player all set him back. I think we’re just scratching the surface with him. What a gritty performance last night!

Brunson: Team MVP by a wide margin. The epitomy of the overachieving, intelligent, lunchpail brand of basketball that Knicks lifers love.

IQ: what’s amazing about his story is that when he was drafted, it was assumed that his 3pt shooting, or at least getting to the line a la Lou Williams, was the only thing that would make him a rock-solid NBA rotation player. Yet even with a .525 TS% including 30% from 3, and a middling FTr, he is by far our most valuable bench player, based largely on great defense and a well-rounded overall game on both ends. If we trade him I’ll be fucking pissed.

Hart has been largely underwhelming. I was hoping for a guy who would be just as good as Mitch but with a slightly different skillset. But he seems soft and erratic. Still a fine backup on a value deal, but I was hoping for more.

Deuce’s emergence as the primary backup to Brunson is the most pleasant surprise of the year thus far. The two 3’s he hit last night filled me with joy. I could watch that kid play all night long, regardless of the score.

Obi, otoh has been the biggest disappointment. We can quibble about whether Thibs or Obi is more to blame. But more and more I see him as a lovable but largely expendable novelty act.

I’m probably in the minority here, but having Sims take over Obi’s PF minutes has been fine by me. Like Deuce, I just love when Sims is on the floor.

Thibs has done an excellent job of coaching this year. There are still concerns, though. The offense is bogging down into iso-ball more and more, and our pace is slowing down. But the rotation is pretty much what I hoped for going into the season, the 3pt defense has improved, and in addition to the wins there have been a bunch of competitive losses. I think this winning streak extends his tenure indefinitely. I’m more OK with that than I would have been if Fournier and Rose were still staples in the rotation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OVIO1oDJeA

Fast forward to the end to see the shot LeBron took at the end of regulation, keeping in mind that he is a 31% 3pt shooter.

And in overtime, he was even worse, as was AD.

Randle took a bad shot, and Brunson should have had the ball. But bashing an exhausted Randle based on the idea that you are always going to get a good look on a last possession, especially when the opposing team has a foul to give, is PTSD-induced. If anything, that’s on Thibs. Either you buy his explanation or you don’t. Personally, I was fine with the thought process, just not the result.

“You can use a guy like that but he is very far from ideal as franchise cornerstone.”

I don’t think anyone in the Knicks hierarchy thinks of Randle as a Franchise Cornerstone. Nor is he getting paid like one.

Neither is Brunson, who to my recollection hasn’t hit a game-winning buzzer beater in multiple opportunities.

Obviously, neither is RJ. Or potentially anyone else on the roster. (well Cam did hit that corner 3 to send the Memphis game into OT, but I digress…)

Wake me up hen we have a guy on a max contract and Randle is still taking those shots.

In 6 December games, Randle is averaging 28, 10 and 4 on 31% usage at a TS% of .617

The team is 5-1 in that stretch. In the one loss, he had 24 points on 15 shots.

He is making $23.7M this year.

BUT THAT SHOT!!!

The extension that Randle signed will be a bargain if he continues to play this way. As TNFH points out, it will not get in the way of acquiring better players in and of itself, and the fact that he’s been getting his baskets in a more team-oriented way, except in the recent stretch of games where he’s been “cooking”, this is a far rosier situation than any of the pre-season “trade him at all costs” contingent could have expected…it’s like a 100th percentile outcome of the ceiling they put on him. TNFH was one of his most fervent doubters (and he was hardly alone) and I appreciate that he is giving what I feel is a very fair assessment of his season thus far. I agree with him that he might still be hard to trade, for a bunch of reasons. But at least it’s light years removed from the worst fears so many had going in to the season.

Owen, I agree that he’s not a “bargain” in that sense, but Lopez and Portis benefit tremendously from being 5th and 6th bananas on their team. Switch them with Randle and there is no way this team is 15-13. No way.

Randle is a bargain in the sense that he is *arguably* the team’s best player (if you think it’s Brunson, fine, but the stats say that it’s at least arguable) and is playing statistically like an all-star at a less-than-half of max salary. He’s a “bargain” for a player in the role he is filling. There should be no urgency to trade him because he is giving you more than your money’s worth for the time being.

In that sense, Mitch isn’t a bargain either. But who cares? He’s doing what the team needs at that position given the coach, roster, at a price point that doesn’t hamper the future.

I will continue to disagree with those who suggest that Randle can’t be a critical piece of a contending team, especially on his contract.At his current level of play and pay, he is much more a part of the solution than part of the problem.

“Also Z-Man, I think most pessimists expected Randle to bounce back to at least average. I certainly did. That was a consistent refrain throughout.”

Owen, that’s not how I remember it. I agree that many doubters expected a modest bounce-back to “average for him” during his Knicks tenure, which included 2 bad years and one good (but overrated) year. In othr words, that “average” was still far below any level that would justify his contract.

Furthermore, none of those doubters thought there was any kind of realistic probability that he’d be doing what he’s doing now. If they did, they wouldn’t have been so eager to dump him even if it cost a first rounder. And lots of moderates felt that way as well.

“I think Mitch is far more tradeable. We’d have to get a GM survey but Randle would be well down the list of assets coveted by other front offices. I think Brunson, Mitch, IQ would rate higher.”

Larger contracts are inherently more risky, and therefore less tradeable, than smaller ones. And Randle comes with baggage based on perceptions that would make teams to hesitant to trade for him. But in terms of production in a given role vs. salary, Randle and Brunson are in a different class than the other players. They are bargains for us, but might not be for other teams.

Z-Man – I think it sounds like Hubert and I disagree on Randle’s value. E and I do not.
“Look, I just don’t think what Randle is doing right now at all invalidates any complaints people have had about him in the past. Swap Al Horford in for him. Are we worse? Larry Nance Jr? Bobby Portis?

That’s where I am on him. I have pretty much no doubt if I were picking three players on the Knicks to start a team with on their current contracts Randle would not be one of them.”

Al Horford is making more than Randle this year. He’s on the decline and his next contract reflects that. And he’s more of an injury risk.

I am quite positive that we’d be worse off with Larry Nance Jr. or Bobby Portis in the same role.

I don’t think there’s a need to invalidate any complaints about Randle in the past. They were totally justified. He grossly underperformed, was a petulant head case, and deserved all the criticism he got.

I only disagreed that he should be dumped at rock-bottom value. And right now I very much agree with everything TNFH said above about his current value to this team and to Leon’s plan. That isn’t an endorsement of the plan, just that he is a good fit within it whether you think it’s a lousy plan or not.

And for the record, I didn’t evoke “pessimists” as a broad-brush classification of posters (and I’ve argued against those sorts of statements recently.) I was specifically referring to folks who were pessimistic about Randle, whoever they were.

Funny, THCJ. Jokic is pretty amazing. I would use “savant” over “genius” but that’s just nitpicking. He is definitely a thing unto himself.

I don’t think there’s any argument to be made that Randle did a good job on that last play. But those shots are generally very low percentage anyway, unless your name is Kevin Durant, Jayson Tatum, etc. Very few teams are going to risk a pass there, and when defenses know a given player is shooting and know when he is going to shoot it, they have an advantage. The other thing is that they have a foul to give there, so getting into your move too soon is just asking for a situation where you have to inbound the ball. As EB pointed out, Brunson missed two critical shots in similar situations for us earlier, better shots, but still misses.

The much worse decision by Randle was the prior shot where he saw an opening, went all the way to the rim, and then put up a weak shot that got blocked, triggering the fast break game-tying layup by DeRozan. THAT’S where you need to create a decent shot because the shot clock didn’t really matter. You need to give your team a chance to get set on defense, probably risking 2 FTs or a made basket, and an outside chance for a made 3, but also a good chance to play good D and get the win.

Count me in as a huge skeptic of the “you can replace a moderate efficiency high usage guy with a high efficiency low usage guy and just redistribute the shots to the team’s more efficient players” argument.

To me it’s an optical illusion. Always has been. Always will be.

Shot creation is a thing. Drawing double and triple teams is a thing. Being a threat from 3 is a thing. Nance does none of those things. He is 100% reliant on others to do them.

Last night Randle kicked out of a triple team to a wide open Grimes for a 3 twice in critical moments. Nance has probably never been triple teamed in his life. Nor does he have to worry about that, or being counted on to score 25 of his team’s points every night, because Zion Williamson, CJ McCollum, and Brandon Ingram fill that role. In 14 out of the 25 games Nance played in, he scored in single digits, including 9 times with 5 or less. Randle doesn’t ever have that luxury.

If Nance were on our team in Randle’s place, my bet is we would be in the thick of the VW chase. Same with Portis and Horford (current version.)

And the same with switching Obi’s minutes with Randle’s.

I’m not going to debate semantics with a troll. Obviously anyone who wants to engage in an honest give and take knows what is meant.

“Randle is the straw that stirs the drink apparently.”

No, he’s a high usage player with a .588 TS%. He’s going to draw a disproportional amount of help from secondary defenders. Is that controversial?

Owen, I always enjoy your posting. Your Randle indifference will be justified if he regresses, which is certainly possible. But at his current level of play, it’s a dubious proposition.

“ess-dog says:
December 15, 2022 at 22:42
Dang, we have the fewest points per possession in the league since Thibs went to the 9-man rotation. I have to give him credit for that move.”

I mean, how is that even possible with the 3 terrible defenders known as Julius Randle, RJ Barrett and Jalen Brunson being the biggest minutes-eaters in that nine-man rotation? Is every one of the other six a DPoY type?

I liked this guy at draft time…alas…

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/269695/Tyrell-Terry-Retires-Due-To-The-Anxiety-This-Sport-Has-Caused-Me