Knicks Morning News (2023.08.18)

There’s probably some benefit for roster continuity, but really negligible compared to roster talent and depth. And let’s be real, we aren’t talking about a team that has been together for like a decade, it’s nice that we aren’t haphazardly churning but Brunson, JHart, iHart, and DDV have been here for a hot minute. Teams like the Bucks and Hawks have as much if not more roster continuity than we do. It’s really a silly basis for making bold predictions.

What the Knicks DO have is:
-continuity in coaching: Thibs is a proven veteran coach who has a system that has been in place or a while and whose players know how to run it. Philly, Boston, Atlanta and Toronto have all changed coaches in the last couple of years and Mazzulla is still a question mark. So is Bickerstaff in CLE…he got badly outcoached in the playoffs.
-On-court leadership by a star player: Brunson is the best combination of b-ball IQ, talent, and leadership that this team has had since, I dunno, maybe ever. The Knicks are his team, and will be for the next 5-10 years. And he is all about winning, very little ego and knows exactly who he is and what he can and can’t do. That resonates throughout the organization.
-Players that complement Brunson both on and off the court: JHart and DDV are steeped in the same ego-less “whatever it takes to win” culture as Brunson, and the three of them will set an example that will make any variance from that look bad. They will make Thibs’ job that much easier. While I do see some possibilities for problems here, esp if RJ or IQ start getting marginalized, for now it should be weighed heavily as a positive.
-Depth and flexibility: The rotation is 9 deep with quality NBA players, all of whom could start (or have already started) on a contender. Then the next 2 guys off the deep bench (Deuce and Sims) are solid in their roles and should make a short-term injury to any rotation player survivable.
-Playoff experience: there is really no substitute for this. As a young team with some roster and coaching continuity, I think the experience of last year was invaluable. And DDV only adds high-level playoff experience to the mix.
-Upside: It’s probably fair to assume that Brunson, Randle, Mitch, JHart, and DDV are at least at the 90th percentile of their ability and performance. But RJ, IQ, Grimes and even iHart all have considerable room to improve, especially with the competition for playing time and in IQ and Grimes’ case, for next contracts.
-Elite rebounding: while some here (one person, mainly) think of this as a moneyball gimmick, winning the possession battle is still a key to piling up regular season wins.
-An elite closer: Jalen Brunson potentially is the best player we’ve had in that role since at least Melo, and maybe since Clyde.

Negatives:
-Lack of top-20 level talent.
-Coaching rigidity
-Poor playoff performances of Randle, IQ and Grimes, and to a degree, Mitch (he was awful vs. Miami) must be reversed
-Lack of elite perimeter shooting
-Vulnerability to elite size
-Brunson can be physically targeted on D

I think the attitude for just turned 23yo RJ is that FIBA gives him a low-stakes opportunity to put the stuff he’s working on with Drew Hanlon into real game action vs. NBA-level players under competitive pressure. There is no way to determine how any success he has in FIBA will actually translate, but successful reps under game pressure are very valuable and can’t be replicated in practice or even in preseason, so overall it’s reason for optimism.

“The biggest negative for the Knicks is that Brunson had by far the best year of his career last year and Randle probably had his best year too. For players outside that 19-22 age range, those gains usually aren’t sustainable. If both those guys even go 50% back towards their career norms (i.e. still have one of the better years of their careers), the Knicks are a ~.500 team.”

I couldn’t disagree more. Brunson is doing pretty much what he was doing in Dallas during his last two years there, particularly in games he played without without Doncic. His TS% has been stable for the last 3 years. His 3pt% was higher and his 2pt% was lower, so those should balance out even with regression to the mean. There really wasn’s a single aspect of his game that suggested a strong risk of regression.

Randle is a bit more complicated, especially coming off of ankle surgery. But his stats last season are also very much in line with his career stats when he wasn’t “the guy.” He shot essentially his career average from 3 on a career high in 3PAr. His 2PT% was pretty much in line with his “non-the guy” years. And that has been a continual refrain here at KB…he is not suited to be the guy who the offense runs through.

Obviously regression is always possible, but if anything, I would guess that the Randle-Brunson partnership has more chance of improving than it does of regressing. This past year revealed that the team is really good as is, and has some untapped potential, including in that partnership. Even the Heatles took a year to figure it out. Having a full offseason after a playoff run will give these two a chance to learn from experience and to hit the ground running.

“I think latke is correct to worry about some potential regression with Brunson only because he was, well, insanely good last year.”

That’s the thing….he really wasn’t insanely good last year. If you look carefully at his stats compared to prior years and b) compared to other players who are actually insanely good, you can easily see that.

Brunson was excellent indeed, but “insanely good” only in relation to expectations for a player on his contract and who was being put into a new and more demanding role…a . There was ample evidence that he would be excellent in that role in both his overall stats and in the small but significant sample of games (both regular season and playoff games) that he played without Doncic. Nothing in his statistical profile screams outlier other than his 3pt%, and again, his 2pt% was actually lower than his career average, so that should be a wash, especially since as you point out, he’s not dependent on being a volume 3pt shooter. His FTr is also unlikely to regress, as it’s elevated mostly due to being on ball much more than he was in Dallas. I am very confident in banking on him being pretty much who he was last year, if not better.

…