Hartenstein’s usage and passing are down this year, even in the last few weeks. Maybe Thibs starts trusting him more though(?)

OTOH, his rebounding is up and his defensive stats are closer to last year. He had a 3.1 BPM on the defensive side last year. He can probably beat out Kessler & Williams with defense alone.

We also received MIL’s future pick by trading out of this draft. So it’s a question of 1st rd pick plus Hartenstein or just Kessler.

Of course, and beyond drawing charges and crafty stuff in passing lanes and blitzes, Brunson is the weak link so everyone has to be very connected for it to work. But I can see situations like Game 1 in ATL where Thibs subs for him on a critical possession for defensive purposes…hopefully with better results than we got from Frank.

In short, I’ll take my chances with Mitch, Randle, JHart and whoever we throw out there from RJ, Grimes, IQ and Brunson depending on the situation.

How often have we closed close games with a healthy Brunson off the floor? I mean, I can see a few circumstances where an IQ/Grimes (or IQ/JHart) backcourt might have its advantages, but Brunson is just so good at generating offense out of nothing that I would be surprised to learn we’ve played more than a handful of those minute without him, if that.

And yet we are 33-27 and mostly play in close games.

We seem to have evolved a bit as well. We blew some big leads earlier in the season and seem to be doing that less now. In fact, we came from way behind in the Clips game and got done in by a missed rebound and a Batum 3 from the elbow before running out of gas in OT.

I also don’t think Randle is a bad late-game defender, where he is often matched against the opponent’s closer. He is definitely not as much to blame as RJ and Brunson. We have also played 22 games without everyone’s favorite defensive C.

In short, I’ll take my chances with Mitch, Randle, JHart and whoever we throw out there from RJ, Grimes, IQ and Brunson depending on the situation.

Katz’ article from today is chock full of anecdotes suggesting a shocking degree of competence from the New York Knicks: https://theathletic.com/4217999/2023/02/17/julius-randle-nba-knicks-3-point-shooting/

Some highlights (but read the whole thing):

“Bryant worked with Randle on becoming more decisive. Randle hesitated too much in 2021-22, Bryant said. When you have a good look, go up with it, the coach told him. He guided Randle through film sessions, pointing out times when Randle received passes and held onto the ball for seconds before making a move or dribbling into an unnecessarily long 2-pointer, basketball’s least-efficient shot.”

“Head coach Tom Thibodeau has pushed the team to adjust its shot selection, a mission that required Randle’s participation. Thibodeau commonly refers to “the value of shots,” explaining that he wants as many 3s, layups, dunks and free throws as possible. The Knicks now own one of the more analytically-friendly shot profiles. Less than five percent of their field-goal attempts this season are long 2s, the seventh-smallest rate in the NBA.”

We’ve got a long way to go, but we’ve also come a long way since our POBO was asking the Warriors how it was goink.

(*) Johnny Bryant’s advice to Julius, as quoted in the article, reminds me of something Bill Walton once said on an NBA on NBC broadcast in the 90s that I laughed at at the time, but which makes a certain degree of sense now: “It’s not how many shots you make, Marv; it’s how many you take!”