[news.google.com] — Saturday, June 24, 2023 4:15:00 AM
New Knick Jaylen Martin has familiar mentor in Charlie Ward New York Post
[news.google.com] — Saturday, June 24, 2023 12:19:54 AM
Knicks sign former Ossining High School basketball standout Jacob … News 12 Westchester
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 10:31:28 PM
Report: DiVincenzo garnering immense interest from Knicks NBC Sports Bay Area
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 9:47:22 PM
Liberty Take It Outside in Win Over Atlanta, Ionescu’s Return Sports Illustrated
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 8:01:00 PM
Josh Hart approaching deadline to opt out of Knicks contract New York Post
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 8:00:00 PM
Knicks ‘Receive Calls’ on Miles McBride Trade; Contract Decision … Sports Illustrated
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 6:44:31 PM
Zach LaVine makes feelings clear on New York Knicks trade following offseason rumours The Mirror
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 6:23:12 PM
Trades: Knicks Land Blazers’ Damian Lillard In Proposal NBA Analysis Network
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 6:02:00 PM
Jacob Toppin signs two-way deal with the New York Knicks WYMT
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 5:12:49 PM
Bulls’ Zach LaVine Says No To Knicks Trade? Sports Illustrated
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 5:00:26 PM
Jacob Toppin and one other two-way signing Knicks made after draft Daily Knicks
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 4:11:28 PM
Report: DiVincenzo garnering immense interest from Knicks Yahoo Sports
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 4:00:00 PM
Can the Knicks salvage the team’s relationship with Obi Toppin? New York Post
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 3:30:00 PM
2023 Knicks Summer League Schedule NBA.com
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 3:26:31 PM
Knicks could trade promising young point guard Empire Sports Media
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 3:00:52 PM
New York Knicks: Why Julius Randle is essential for the Knicks Hoops Habit
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 2:16:34 PM
Summer League Schedule: When Will Knicks Tip Off? Sports Illustrated
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 1:37:45 PM
Former Florida High basketball star signs pro contract with the New … Tallahassee Democrat
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 11:57:22 AM
The Knicks sign Jacob Toppin and Jaylen Martin to two-way deals Posting and Toasting
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 10:33:15 AM
Knicks disappoint with inactive 2023 NBA Draft AMNY
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 10:27:58 AM
Knicks Add Jacob Toppin, OTE Standout; Roster Decisions Loom? Sports Illustrated
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 10:21:38 AM
Zach LaVine Shutting Down Knicks Trade Rumors Before They Even Begin, per Report Sports Illustrated
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 10:12:00 AM
Winners and losers of 2023 NBA Draft: Rough night for the Knicks New York Post
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 9:52:09 AM
Knicks sign intriguing guard to two-way deal Empire Sports Media
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 9:36:41 AM
The Knicks can rule out landing one elite shooter this off-season Empire Sports Media
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 9:28:00 AM
Knicks sign Jacob Toppin after feud with brother Obi revealed New York Post
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 8:58:57 AM
Knicks Sign Jacob Toppin, Jaylen Martin To Draft Night Deals The Knicks Wall
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 8:16:48 AM
Knicks, Jacob Toppin agree to two-way contract to join brother Obi ClutchPoints
[news.google.com] — Friday, June 23, 2023 8:00:00 AM
Jacob Toppin Signs Two-Way Deal With New York Knicks Sports Illustrated
61 replies on “Knicks Morning News (2023.06.24)”
A possibly (key word possibly) good player falling to 20 doesn’t negate the last twenty games of the regular season or the first round series against Cleveland.
The last chunk of the regular season post Hart trade was probably the most fun and electrifying chunk of a regular season in the last decade at least. And we absolutely stomped Cleveland in the first round. Those things don’t happen if we didn’t trade for Hart. So if you enjoyed those things then you like the hart trade.
This prospect who dropped is just that. A prospect.
I saw Portland signed Antoine Davis to a 2 way. I totally forgot about him. I really wish we had grabbed him for Westchester. He would be a nice prospect to develop as a PG. The kid attacks and can shoot.
Also, I know alot of people are out on a possible George trade, but I’d still do it. Warts and all. I think we can keep him healthy for 65-70 games, as he won’t have to carry a heavy load. He’s already efficient and unselfish enough to play with Brunson and Randle- and he’s still good defensively. I love RJ, but George is just a better fit as long as Randle is here. An even better fit that OG because George can go get his on his own consistently if we need him to. At some point you gotta plant a foot in the dirt and go. The price has to be right though. I wonder if RJ/Obi/Fournier/Milwaukee 1st would be enough to bring back PG and maybe Covington. I’d go for it. The 2 seed in the East could be there for the taking as we already play Boston very well, and Smart is a huge loss for them so we still match up very well with them- and that’s not to say that team won’t be really good. Also, we have to consider the Harden effect in Philly. I still expect Milwaukee to top the east unless Miami makes a big move. But again- any move for George has to be at the right price so that we can make whatever big move is necessary. IE: Giannis wanting out, we can offer Randle and picks galore if we don’t give up too much in a possible George deal- especially if Randle comes back and has another All Star season
IMO, this Hart/draft conversation is silly.
IMO, you should evaluate a trade based on what was known at the time of trade. Everyone is a genius after you get to see the draft and see how the players play.
I’ve been playing horses for close to 50 years and believe me, I’m freaking brilliant after the race is run. 😉
At the time of the trade the Knicks figured to get a pick somewhere around 20. Over the long haul, there’s an expectation of what you are likely to get when you select in that area. There is data on that (see below). That’s what’s you compare to Josh Hart, not some after the fact draft positioning and players available.
Where the team is in its rebuild and what it needs may influence whether a team prefers future value (a draft pick) over current value (a player that fills a need and makes the team better now), but all this “who fell in the draft” and “how Hart played over a small sample” is not what the focus should be. That’s an after the fact analysis.
In this case, IMO, we got more value than we gave up if you assume Cam was done in NY anyway. Hart is better than the typical player selected around 20. I base that on his overall stats and not what he did in NY. I also think Hart was a perfect fit for a team that had already bottomed out with the RJ tank and was in the process of accumulating quality players via draft, trade and free agency. The Knicks are looking for CURRENT value not a player that’s going to contribute several years from now.
Here are a couple of studies on expected draft value.
http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm
https://apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=224&p=1026&hilit=valuing+second+round+picks#p1026
Also there is not a single person here who thought we wouldn’t get the Dallas pick.
George supposedly has arthritic knees. He’s probably another Kemba, except he wants an extension on top of the fact that he’s not going to be the same player and is going to start declining. That’s an extremely hard NO for me.
This is not even something to be that upset about. We are very likely to get that pick. It will just be later. We are still going to draft an extra young player next year, trade the pick etc… People are disappointed we won’t have some young guy in camp this year to get excited about, but it’s not changing anything much. We may have 2 of them next year or we’ll have some high quality player we traded for. In fact, we may still use that pick in trade in coming weeks.
When you trade out of a draft I think the standard should be whether whatever asset(s) you got back are more valuable than the BPA.
this isn’t a reasonable standard as articulated is because it isn’t usefully defined. if you mean the player that turns out to be the best ex post it is worthless as tool unless you are evaluating a decision maker against laplace’s demon. there will always be a best possible pick ex post and that pick will always have a less than 100% chance of being the actual pick by even the best possible human drafter. if you are evaluating your incoming assets against the assumption that you draft perfectly in hindsight you are going to make poor decisions.
if you more constructively define the bpa ex ante, you cannot possibly be referring to an arbitrary or mostly arbitrary draft board. there are many smart observers with draft boards that conflict. at a pick like 23 or 20 or whatever, it is easy to find 20 different draft boards that disagree on the literal bpa. although there are exceptions to this like whitmore this year, those exceptions are often based on inside information, reducing the potential relevance of the boards for that player. there is also another issue with dropping players. it could be true that once every 200 drafts, a consensus top 3 player drops to 23 despite no inside information about injuries or character — just a massive disagreement between front offices and consensus. it would not be wise to judge a team who traded the 20th pick against the player as a 100% outcome, because there was only a .5% chance of that player being available at the time of the trade.
the only useful definition of bpa (besides just using long term base rates of pick production), then, is something like “a weighted average of ex ante bpa who would likely be available at the time of the trade, based on probabilities extracted from a large sample of well informed observers.” of course you can argue about what “well informed” should consist of and how much of that” information” should include things like “knowing the historical base rate correlations between trait combinations (e.g. age, wingspan, league difficulty, ft% and st%).” but what it can’t consist of is your personal draft board or those of your favorite pundit.
and even that exercise is probably of only modest value. it is not obvious how good even the more effective analysts are at estimating the overall value of non top 3 draft year compared to the base rate from longer term studies of average pick values. i would agree that there are probably useful discriminations to be made here, but there is surely also overconfidence.
two years from now it will be possible to produce dozens of draft boards from smart people whose bpa at pick 20 or 23 will turn out to have had close to no lifetime value. there is no reasonable way to exclude that information from a trade post mortem if you want to make good decisions.
I agree with pt…but please don’t ask me why other than having “ex ante” “ex post” and “post mortem” contained in a single comment warrants my unwavering support.
I used to think that ptmilo was smart, but now I realize that he actually reads the The Josh Hart Trade Was Bad posts instead of scrolling over them.
There are probably a handful of managements that are better than average or that have a couple of unique insights that will allow them to outperform the long term average performance (at least until other managements catch up) by enough to get a meaningful and noticeable advantage. However, the samples are so small, it’s hard to tell who simply got lucky vs who actually had an edge. You could be one of the managements with an edge and actually wind up with worse than average results over just a few years (and vice versa).
I suspect this discussion goes all the way back to the old debates about how to rebuild. Some people prefer the draft and a draft rebuild over trades and free agency.
To those frustrated with the situation, I’d say, imagine a world where we drafted Brunson instead of Knox (to ease the pain of not drafting Bridges), developed him, and now he’s our star. We’d be in the same position with him except Dallas drafted him and developed him. We just gave him the contract he deserved.
Those Lakers are pathetic. They traded a 2027 FIRST ROUND PICK for some nobodies and one, Malik Beasley, probably won’t even be on the team next year LOL. They turned their season around and lost to the eventual champions, but was it worth it??? They could’ve had mystery player X in 2027… you know… the guy who will inevitably free-fall below their selection for reasons?!? If I was the Lakers’ GM, things would’ve gone WAY different…
Pt, I agree with pretty much everything you said, which I suppose directly contradicts what I said at least on the surface so I’ll elaborate a bit.
What I was trying to do was lay out the most exacting possible standard for evaluating such a trade, and argue that even under that ridiculous, unfair standard the Hart trade still has a very good chance of passing.
It’s impossible to evaluate these kinds of trades perfectly holistically because we don’t know exactly what was known at the time, but between the unlikelihood of losing the Dallas pick and the way the 20s range of this draft was perceived in February of 2023 I think the process behind the Hart trade was rock solid.
The conversation has gotten a bit ridiculous because now we’re talking about how Hart’s production worsened the pick, so we have to pretend it was actually the 17th pick or whatever. This is fundamentally an argument against acquiring good players–Brunson and Randle cost us Wembanyama!
Guys, this front office is trying to win games. We’ve literally all said our piece as to how we feel about that–I’m something of an evolving skeptic myself, AKA a new recruit to Team Troll. You can’t argue the Hart trade was bad because it made us better unless you’re willing to say we should trade basically every other good player on the team too.
when you trade draft picks for something or anyone… assessing the deal can be complicated but you’re going to be susceptible to a range of outcomes… sometimes those outcomes are impossible to see and unlikely but if you give up… say an unprotected pick… and you’re the best team in the league and all of a sudden all your players get hurt… you open yourself up to giving up potentially the #1 pick….
the whole strategy of giving up draft picks for ok bench vets is that you get some wins now and you give up whatever upside the draft pick would give you… and yes you open yourself up for the possibility that your other pick you’re expecting may not convey that year… and also give up the possibility that some really good prospect drops really really far that you may/may not have gotten…. sometimes you give up draft picks and there’s a litany of all stars… sometimes theres only a few good players….
that’s what happens when you give up draft picks… because all sorts of things CAN happen… you’re giving up that uncertainty and upside for the known quantity of a josh hart… and all the things that brings including his next contract….
so cam whitmore dropping… or victor wembanyama dropping inexplicably… i mean seriously tough noogies… just because you didn’t foresee that exact event happening… that’s the type of thing you open yourself up to…. you limit your upside by trading draft picks… so whatever upside that does occur with that pick you’re going to be judged against it….
It’s simpler.
1. Is Josh Hart > than the theoretical long term value of a pick in the 20ish range?
2. Did it make sense for the Knicks to trade future value with a long term expectation of X and a wider range of possibilities (the pick) for current more knowable end value (Hart)?
Just eliminate all the would have, could have, should have, after the fact information and ifs from the equation.
.
You also limit your downside.
You might draft Knox, Frank, or some other huge disappointment and get stuck playing him more than he’s worth for a few years until you can get rid of him.
You might also draft a player like RJ that’s showing enough to probably want to extend him, but have to overpay him a bit and hope he grows into the contract, otherwise you’ll have a large bad contract on your books.
here’s the problem with the draft picks are sooo risky argument…. draft well!
yes you occasionally draft duds.. that’s expected… but if you continually draft duds… that’s on you! you actually have the power to draft well! who woulda known!
and on average draft picks are much more cap efficient… they are +ev…. and yes there’s some volatility surrounding that… but if you’re supposedly a good front office some of that volatility is greatly mitigated… you don’t have to draft consistently bad duds! amazing to hear i know…
if you’re only looking at the downsides…. then yes you can justify giving up all the picks and never participating and you can fill your entire roster with josh harts…. but if you actually look at the upside… we would have even a vastly superior team composed of the stars we missed even hitting on half the draft picks we have if we drafted well….
that’s not an accident…
that’s what happens when you give up draft picks… because all sorts of things CAN happen… you’re giving up that uncertainty and upside for the known quantity of a josh hart… and all the things that brings including his next contract….
so cam whitmore dropping… or victor wembanyama dropping inexplicably… i mean seriously tough noogies… just because you didn’t foresee that exact event happening… that’s the type of thing you open yourself up to…. you limit your upside by trading draft picks… so whatever upside that does occur with that pick you’re going to be judged against it….
judged ineffectually then. the mere possibility of a jackpot lost is inadequate, lest you be criticized for not buying the winning powerball ticket. the calculus is neither mere possibilities nor ex post outcomes. it is ex ante probabilities, imperfectly estimated.
a case can certainly be made that the josh hart trade was at instantiation bad value relative to fairly estimated probabilities. but it’s not unassailable and admits no noogies.
once again I agree wholeheartedly with pt…despite not knowing what the words instantiation or noogies mean. Also like the use of the word “lest”.
You absolutely *can* argue against marginal wins for non-contenders. It’s easy to do because it makes such perfect sense, and a bunch of commentators on Knickerblogger used to do exactly that and for whatever reason now argue the exact opposite.
We were at least good enough to go to the conference finals, that’s pretty good in my book
These are my exact feelings, thanks Bernie 😀
BTW I love Josh Hart, I hate we didn’t have a fucking pick in thursday’s draft and I would do the Hart trade every day…
It’s all Mark Cuban’s fault 😀
Knicks not picking up Rose option
Thanks, Strat. That first link clearly shows that if you’re picking in the later first round, make sure it’s #24…
I agree with you, but it’s important to put this in context.
We’re in the Leon Rose era. He does things in a Leon Rose way. Clearly this is not a cat that is going to build through the draft, eschew marginal wins, and collect assets in a true rebuild style. I would have preferred to do a true rebuild, in fact I’m kind of like the president of the “Let’s Do A True Rebuild” club. At minimum I’d be the treasurer.
It has long ceased being interesting or even relevant talking about which is the appropriate path to take. We’re on the hybrid path, for better or worse. So, you’re correct about the marginal wins, I’m with you there. The problem is that debate is just no longer germane. It’s like discussing the new Taylor Swift album and lamenting that it’s not a very good Norwegian Black Metal album.
The only meaningful way to discuss Leon Rose is to discuss whether he is successfully implementing the hybrid strategy. He is clearly not even attempting the True Rebuild strategy in which you eschew marginal wins.
We’re never going to know what the T-Swizz black metal album is going to sound like. There’s not really any point in lamenting it’s lack of existence.
and why is that bad value? ev is not just calculated by only including all the ‘fair and mostly’ probable events.. this is how election twitter critiques election polling… oh these bad polls are outliers they don’t count… yes they do! expected value is calculated by ALL the events… even the outlier and low probability ones… in fact a large part of ev for draft picks are derived from these low probability events when you hit big on a jokic or giannis…. or it could be as simple as a rajon rondo…
that’s why it ALL counts…
let’s take the other shoe… just like how if josh hart turned into lebron and became mvp… wouldn’t leon rose win executive of the year and all the accolades? or would it not count because it was so improbable? would it not have counted if josh hart led us to the nba championship? does mike brown not deserve coach of the year because getting the kings to a top seed was so improbable?
no! that’s ridiculous! so why is the reverse not true?
Hart player option also tonight for whatever that’s worth
I just spent 20 minutes of my life that I’ll never get back interspersing various of Sprain’s lyrics with those off of Midnights. It kind of works…
Begley theorizes that the DRose option decision means we don’t have any trades on the front burner, as he’s have been a useful salary to send out.
Also, we might still bring him back at a lower number. I’d personally like to be done with his time on this roster.
Definitely. Put him on the staff if his veteran leadership is so valuable
Random Saturday Afternoon Shit Department, from The Ringer:
“Later in the night, Kris Murray was selected no. 23 by the Trail Blazers, allowing him to join his identical twin, Keegan Murray, the no. 4 pick in last year’s draft. There are now six sets of identical twins in the NBA—the Thompsons, the Murrays, Marcus and Markieff Morris, Brook and Robin Lopez, Caleb and Cody Martin, and Julian and Justin Champagnie—meaning roughly 2 percent of NBA players are identical twins.”
Which you’d think was really weird, but the internet says 3-4% of births are identical twins… So yet another eye-test failure. But I did like the author’s stupid hypothesis:
‘If you had an older sibling, you probably lost a lot of driveway basketball games and got discouraged. If you had a younger sibling, winning was too easy, and it didn’t test your skills. But playing game after game against a literal genetic copy of yourself, working and striving to find ways to outperform someone who is the same as you in every way? That’s apparently how you build a future star.’
Seems like it’s not a good theory since we’re below the general population. Like we should have more than 3-4% if twins made each other appreciably better, right?
Though 3-4% of births might mean 1.5-2% of the population since there’s 2 of them, maybe slightly lower because of triplets+ and fraternal twins.
Or is the ratio of siblings to twins off? That seems kinda right.
Also, it’s crazy to me that Markieff Morris and Robin Lopez are even still in the league. They’re not that old, but they also weren’t ever that good. Robin started more seasons than I remember but Markieff only started a few for pretty bad teams. I forgot both played on the same 2012 Phoenix team.
that’s kinda neat combining object value, probable results together with a lost opportunity cost…
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db80.htm
Some weird stats on twins from the CDC
Has this gem: “an epidemic of multiple pregnancies”
Maybe this affects likelihood of twins making it to the NBA plus the difference in financial burden for twins versus the staggered births of siblings.
It’s still cool to have so many twins.
Just co-signing what JK said.
It was infuriating when we refused to tannk and missed the playoffs and were abjectly terrible. This is a different situation.
It’s not the path I would have chosen but Leon has executed pretty well.
Just anecdotally, almost all the friends and neighbors I know who have had twins over the last 20 years were doing IVF.
@Alan, got a question for you if you’re up for it.
I find that 90% of the shows I love are on FX/Hulu. Are they just better at making shows or am I just precisely their target demographic?
EB, FX is just better at making shows. (Some very good Hulu originals are made by Hulu, but the best stuff — The Bear, Reservation Dogs, What We Do in the Shadows, Atlanta — tends to be from the FX development team.)
Was going to mention that, Alan. With average age of first marriage going from 20 and 22 in the 1950s to 28 and 30 in 2020 (women and men), lots more coupled are trying to have children in their 30s and even 40s. So more fertility drug use, which increases the likelihood of multiple birthing. Hence the “epidemic.”
I started rewatching What We Do and it’s the only show that makes me laugh out loud every episode and it’s me keeling over.
I’d throw The Great and Only Murders in the Building on there too but maybe that’s me spending too much time on Hulu
BTW, Jersey was listed as one of the states where twin birth has doubled
Speaking of siblings, I love the signal it sends to Obi that they drafted his brother. Maybe everyone is getting their job back. I’d love for the drama this season to be that an unextended Obi is tearing it up. Better still. Take DRose’s number and apply it to keeping Hart, Obi and IQ. Fuck draft picks. Keep it boring Leon. Top 8 NBA is not bullshit
I didn’t realize this until now, but the Chicago Bulls also had no picks going into the draft but managed to trade into the draft for pick number 35. It’s not exactly defined what they gave up but it is described as multiple future second round picks. That is expensive. And even if NY was willing to match the number of picks traded, a NY second rounder is probably not worth as much as a Chicago one (it’s likely to be lower) so we might have had to offer three such picks or more to get a single second round pick. That is just not worth it. If that was the cost of a useful pick the Knicks were right to stay out of it.
saw a picture of Wemby with some old Spurs and he is almost a full head taller than david robinson
and why is that bad value? ev is not just calculated by only including all the ‘fair and mostly’ probable events.. this is how election twitter critiques election polling… oh these bad polls are outliers they don’t count… yes they do! expected value is calculated by ALL the events… even the outlier and low probability ones… in fact a large part of ev for draft picks are derived from these low probability events when you hit big on a jokic or giannis…. or it could be as simple as a rajon rondo…
that’s why it ALL counts…
yes of course it all counts. the tiny chance of striking oil matters. the chance of hitting all six numbers matters. probabilities, imperfectly estimated. ex ante.
the josh hart news seems positive. obviously if he decides to opt-in and extend the gross overpay risk is gone and you get him at a deal capped at 140% of ~the mid-level plus next year near the mid level.
this is pretty impressive
https://twitter.com/wickedcoy/status/1672686063247138818?s=46
It’s funny, ptmilo weighs in saying pretty much exactly what Z-man and strat have been saying for years and the rebuttals are sooooo much more measured. Go figure…
What’s the Josh Hart news?
Knicks and hart agreed to extend the deadline for his opt-in choice, which everyone is taking to mean that they’re negotiating an opt-in and extend deal.
I don’t see Amen forgetting any defensive assignments….
He was highly personable on draft night.
you have no control over lottery outcomes… you HAVE control over draft outcomes… you’re not buying lottery tickets and getting random numbers (outside of draft order)… there’s no alpha in a lottery game…
the draft is also a zero sum game where your choices either make you or your opponents better off… and you do have control over that even though you do not have ABSOLUTE control… but you have WAY more than you do in a lottery game… that’s a crucial difference….
which is why if hart turned into lebron we’d be going over how much of a genius mr leon rose was… if hart led us to the championship he’d be mr smarty pants wouldn’t he? or you really telling me with a straight face we judge everyone based on probable outcomes and we’d be totally measured in our assessment in that situation?
you can have whatever standard that you want but gm’s are not graded on their ability vs some outside observer…. in fact most leaders/decision makers are not graded against an arbitrary consensus… they are graded against their competition….
the only reason this ‘consensus’ standard is relevant is because it’s used quite often when measuring BAD gm’s… if you cannot outperform chad ford you are pretty bad! if you cannot outperform some dudes doing it in their spare time.. that’s pretty bad! if you’re a fund manager and cannot outperform the s&p index then why should i invest with you than some etf…
just look at the pelicans… they’ve had what would be considered decent drafts the last 4 years with a shitload of picks and while they have some ok players… there’s been some major disappointments and unless there’s some breakthroughs they’re stuck in neutral….
and if that happens maybe you can call that bad luck… but are those consensus draft grades going to save david griffin’s job? if you were a fan are you going to care about that? no… of course not… process absolutely matters but a good process should eventually lead to good results.. and that’s why it matters…. and that’s what you’re being judged on no matter how improbable things seemed at the time because the consensus gets things wrong all the time! you’re job is to be better than the consenus!
again it’s a free country… but i do not believe for a second that’s the standard anyone truly has in this situation if it were anything else.. you absolutely judge everyone based on their results… and maybe in certain isolated incidents you might excuse certain things.. but eventually those outcomes need to be delivered… i can speculate why that’s the case here but that’s a different discussion….
Thanks. That definitely seems to imply that. I agree, it is good news.
This extension makes about the same sense as the Russian coup today
Let see: the two sides, need more time because they just figured it all out tonight and agreed on an extension but wanted to take a 5 days to write up a standard copy and paste NBA contract, proof read it and then sign it. Give me a break please.
it seems, most world “news” i hear here 😛
truly, if their ever was the definition of: believe half what you hear and less of what you see – that situation would be it…
so what happened – did “we” pay off the wagner guy or something?
I suspect they are debating the terms of the extension. There is nothing automatic about them
My theory is that the regular Russian Army, which was clearly feuding with Prigozhin, tried to assassinate him and he took action because of it.
good discussion today by some smart folks on the nature of reality – and, whether it’s better to be lucky or good…spoiler alert – luck/good fortune almost always wins…admittedly though, harder to sustain than skill…
it was nice, lost track of the exact day a few times last week…i can’t tell you how happy that made me feel…
you were right z-man, my awareness of the calendar is starting to simply reflect family stuff…
been doing a whole bunch of digging in on the whole lack of paleolithic civilizations (sans the Anatolians)…it makes more sense to me now…
to be honest, i always thought a coastal community could grow towards achieving civilization just with primary maritime food resources…
civilization just doesn’t seem to work without domesticated grains and agriculture…nope, hasn’t ever happened it seems…
so putin couldn’t control prigozhin…
obama had an interesting comment reference the submersible incident and the struggle of others around the world…got me curious enough to do a quick search on current armed conflicts around the world…
one interesting society/culture thing i’ve come across, but need to dig in deeper – it may be that a predominance of patriarchal rule/governance – may be a more recent development of the last few millennia…
So moving on, it was posted in RealGM that our old friend Landry Fields has a mandate to get ATL out of the luxury tax. That might make Dejounte available for the right return. OTOH, it seems that Schlenck was opposed to paying the price for Murray and that’s why he ultimately moved on from the Hawks, while Fields was in favor of the deal. So maybe Fields wouldn’t want to lose face by selling low on Murray. But it does seem like the Hawks are a team we should be looking to work with.
I don’t know, Z-Man, it’s nice that Atlanta is considering trades, but from where I sit they have nothing the Knicks would want. Dejounte is a decent basketball player, but is he demonstrably better than Grimes/IQ at the two? I mean yes, at the moment, but down the line? He’s a shitty three-point shooter, and he disappears a lot. You can’t replace RJ with him, he’s not big enough to play the three. A straight-up flip for RJ maybe, but even then I’m not sure it makes us better, it’s just a different set of problems.
And since we probably couldn’t get him without giving up many other assets, just seems like trading for trading’s sake, which always struck me as insanity. Fun mental exercise, just don’t do it in real life.