Knicks Morning News (2023.12.19)

Huzzah! The Bot is alive again! Feel free to celebrate the Knicks win in Los Angeles.

Question that I’ve been meaning to ask for, like, 5 years now… where do people go for highlights?

The ESPN app is terrible… it’s been reduced to single-play highlights, and you have to watch a 30 second ad before a 16 second clip.

When I google search for highlights all I get is these 10 minute youtube videos that remind me of Jeremy Goodwin’s early work in Sports Night before they taught him to make choices.

What happened to the old 2 minute sportscenter highlight? That doesn’t exist anymore?

The Bot is alive again!

👏👏👏

Hubert, you have the 2 min highlights on this page, under “2023-24 Game Recaps”
https://www.nba.com/watch/featured

Thanks, Cyber.

Looks like Julius was a beast, and when he is in beast mode this team’s vibe is on a whole different level. Dare I say it’s contenderish.

I see 3 mins for Sims… did he get hurt or did Thibs wake up?

When I google search for highlights all I get is these 10 minute youtube videos that remind me of Jeremy Goodwin’s early work in Sports Night before they taught him to make choices.

But the battle, Hubert! The battle!

And Sims sprained his ankle at the start of the game and left the arena in a walking boot. Taj better get back in game shape, and fast.

I thought Rob Pelinka was supposed to be some kind of genius for surrounding LeBron and AD with a great supporting cast and putting them in contention

That cast looked like hot garbage last night (except for Reaves)

Thanks for the Sims update, Alan.

You know, the entire NBA sans Thibs has either accepted or embraced positionless basketball. Seems like we’re about to find out how far Thibs is willing to go to be the last luddite.

This was a pretty even game scoring-wise, we just got a little be extra from our role players.

Very tired this morning but glad I stayed up to watch that one. Great game!

Randle (1st half) and Brunson (second half) were both fantastic. IQ was cooking off the bench. iHart was the MVP though with his rebounding.
Defense was much better.

I guess Taj starts now? Honestly, I think we might do a little better with him starting. He may not be big or imposing but he’s savvy as shit and can help quarterback the defense. He just needs to play Sims minutes to be effective. And he can hit a corner 3. I’m glad we got him back in the fold.

Still think the move to make is to upgrade from RJ. Can’t we just call Brooklyn and offer them RJ and every pick we can throw at them?

I don’t know if Mikal would make us contenders but if we could snag him without giving up other rotation players besides RJ, we would be right on the cusp. Complete the Villanova connection.

Mikal is unrealistic.

Bojan isn’t the two-way player Mikal is but he is a realistic target and he would have a dynamic impact.

I used to think the cost would be something like Fournier, our 2024 pick, and Detroit’s Fugazi first. But I think it might require more to get it done, like Grimes or another pick (a real one, not Washington’s).

It would be like another Hart trade, essentially: high short term impact for a high price. Logically, I’d hate it because it wouldn’t make us a contender but it would make us significantly better and I sure AF would enjoy watching the result.

Mikal is unrealistic.

I know but I rarely live in a world of realism when it comes to The Knicks.

Hubs, I really enjoy watching the youtube game highlight videos that are like 10 minutes long.

When Randle looks great like he did last night and we beat the Lakers, you can talk me into trading picks for Bojan. It’s an emotion mind decision, but he fits us like a glove and is about as good a non-superstar target as you can ask for. The things he would open up for Randle and Brunson… it’s dreamy.

The NBA (to some extent unfortunately) isn’t really a place for romance, dreams, or emotion.

(At least in terms of rosters, team building, future prospects. The game itself certainly is.)

I like Bojan a lot, but I don’t know if we can survive another bad defender. We have such a precarious balance of offense and defense

I don’t think we should add anyone other than two-way players unless an inferior one-way player is going out to make room for a better one. Our perimeter defense is too shaky to be adding problems. We should be trying to solve them.

Plus Thibs would probably just wind up Fournier-ing Bojan anyway. There wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two in the year before Evan came to the Knicks (other than Evan being three years younger).

I’ve lost faith in Thibs lineup decisions. I think he’s been terrific at getting these guys to play hard almost every night, to bounce back after tough defeats and finding ways to get extra possessions that add wins, but I disagree with a lot of his lineup decisions. I also think he doesn’t treat all his players the same. He gives Randle and RJ a very long leash (sometimes undeserved) and others almost no leash at all.

The time to move on from Thibs has long passed. By declowning the place, he served his primary purpose well, but it’s now time for the next stage.

This is a resilient team. The way Brunson is playing on offense now, he’s pretty much a 1A player at this point. We not far away from having a team that can get to the conference finals if we draw well. We need to upgrade 1 wing position or get the kind of development we were hoping for in the 2nd half from one of them.

Is Kenny Lofton jr the son of the guy that used to play center field for the Cleveland Indians? (If so, his mom must be really big.)

I don’t even think you need to trade for a wing to replace RJ. Trade him for whatever you can get and start Quickley at the 2 and Hart at the 3. We still aren’t a title contender but I bet we improve the team by 5 wins.

How bad is Bojan on defense? I confess I don’t know, and I don’t find quoting all-in-one metrics to be particularly useful.

As Strat said, we already have a problem defending the perimeter. We wouldn’t be creating a new problem adding him.

He’d have to be Kemba Walker bad to offset how much improvement his shooting and playmaking would provide.

Is Kenny Lofton jr the son of the guy that used to play center field for the Cleveland Indians? (If so, his mom must be really big.)

Sadly, no

The time to move on from Thibs has long passed. By declowning the place, he served his primary purpose well, but it’s now time for the next stage.

Come on, Reese. You’ll have plenty of time to call for Thibs’ head but not after we just had two of the best wins of the season.

And FWIW this place can reclown itself really fast. I’m all for criticizing Thibs’ faults but calling for his head is a bit silly.

I like Bojan Bogdanovic quite a bit but I’m not sure he’s a good fit for us. The biggest thing about Bojan to me is that he’s most useful when he is used as more than just a spot shooter, he’s a pretty talented scorer from all over the court, but with Brunson, Randle, Barrett, Quickley etc he would be relegated to just a spot shooter. He’s a great 3 point shooter so that would be cool, but he can’t really defend wings and that is a much bigger issue, he’s not good enough in that role to compensate the defensive issues.

If we can get a guy like him for just Fournier and 1 of the bad picks, then I guess I’d be fine with it, but I think what this team needs is a more prototypical 3 and D player.

but with Brunson, Randle, Barrett, Quickley etc he would be relegated to just a spot shooter

Perhaps I am being too optimistic, but I imagine Bojan easily alpha’ing RJ, usurping his role on offense, and relegating Barrett to the 4th option role that’s occupied by Grimes and DDV.

That’s why I see the impact as so dynamic. You replace RJ with an offensive savant, and then you move RJ into the limited role he must embrace. It’s two huge wins in one move.

Let’s make RJ Barrett the one complaining about his role in the offense for once, you know?

I agree that even just replacing RJ with a better bench player could do wonders.

We’d be committing to short lineups, and we wouldn’t have a volume scorer around if both Randle and Brunson are off (except maybe Quickley), but the defense would be a lot better by adding Grimes, Quickley, or Hart to the starting lineup in RJ’s place. It also solves the minutes crunch at guard.

Starting Hart and DDV probably makes the most sense, saving Quickley’s scoring for the bench, but Grimes could also play the three.

Alternatively, we can find a big, defensive-oriented wing to replace RJ with, but that would necessitate adding draft capital.

He’s already in a limited third option role, soaking up the backwash when the first two options’ ISOs break down. He actually functions in that role very well.

Plenty of other players would bitch about it, which we’ve already seen on this very roster this very year. (And that’s not even including Fournier, who has been chafing about it for multiple years.)

Nor is there any objective reason to believe that this spring will finally be the playoff spring wherein Julius raises his TS% above .500. If people want to dream about that, fine.

I think what this team needs is a more prototypical 3 and D player.

The problem with that is we will still end up with RJ Barrett 27% USG and that’s a glass ceiling worse than shaky perimeter defense.

We need a guy who knocks RJ off his god damn perch.

The guy has to be able to literally alpha RJ. Josh Hart, Quentin Grimes, DDV can’t do that.

We need a guy who knocks RJ off his god damn perch.

We need a lead guy who doesn’t choke and lay brick in the playoffs.

that was a really fun game…

the lakers would be one of the team’s to beat if they only didn’t trade for westbrook.. it’s kind of crazy how much talent has passed through the lakers in the last 7-8 years come to think of it…

Randle absolutely had his way with the Lakers’ reserves last night, and even held his own against AD. He’s up to 25/9/5 with a 60 TS% in his last 20 games, and most importantly of course his raw on/off is +3.2 during that span.

Via the eye-test, him and Brunson are playing off each other more than they did last year and it’s benefitting them both. The sample size is far too small to care about yet, but lineups the two of them have a +2.2 net rating this year compared to a +0.4 last year despite Randle being an active saboteur for a bit there. Numerically it’s nothing more than something to watching moving forward, but has been fun to watch.

Re: Bojan, the elephant in the room is it really only makes sense to add him if he’s going to replace RJ, which not even I would support given their respective ages. We’d take a hit defensively, but replacing RJ’s high-usage, low-efficiency act with Bojan’s high-usage, high-efficiency act would do wonders for our offense.

Alas, not going to happen so I doubt we trade for him. My guess is we make a small move for center depth pretty soon, given that we’re down to…iHart, basically. Other than that it remains hard to think of a move that makes sense unless it’s for someone who vaults us into contention.

But we should still sign Big Kenny.

He’s already in a limited third option role, soaking up the backwash when the first two options’ ISOs break down. He actually functions in that role very well.

Once again:

RJ with Brunson and Randle OFF: .527 TS%

RJ with Brunson and Randle ON: .547 TS%

RJ needs the backwash.

Thibs mentioned after the game that alot of guys on the team deserve more minutes than they’re getting. He has his set rotations but he’s shown flexibility with his closing lineups, it was good to see IQ play the entire 4th quarter last night.

Once again:

RJ with Brunson and Randle OFF: .527 TS%

RJ with Brunson and Randle ON: .547 TS%

RJ needs the backwash.

That doesn’t come close to proving what you assert it does. It’s another in what’s now a pretty long list of data misuses, beginning with the idea that a pass at a guy’s shins is a good pass if the guy winds up making a three-pointer anyway.

I get that everyone wants to get dreamy over centering things around Julius Randle’s ISOs (at least on nights after wins). I’m more of a playoffs guy. So be it.

the elephant in the room is it really only makes sense to add him if he’s going to replace RJ, which not even I would support given their respective ages

I’m going to have to ask you to explain this assumption because it seems out of left field to me.

You trade for Bojan not to eliminate RJ but to put him in his correct place.

We need a lead guy who doesn’t choke and lay brick in the playoffs.

We have a lead guy who doesn’t choke and lay brick in the playoffs. His name is Jalen Brunson.

And I would like to see a healthy version of the more evolved Julius Randle in the playoffs, rather than condemning him for how he did last spring while seriously hobbled.

Trade him for whatever you can get and start Quickley at the 2 and Hart at the 3.

most of IQ’s value is tied up in his usg… and he does even less than that playing with Brunson since he runs most of Brunson’s sets with second units…. he is probably a net negative playing in an offball role much like how RJ is….

what makes RJ useful with the starters is that it limits his usg…. i’m probably in the minority here but replacing RJ with IQ would actually make the team worse….

Interesting minutes this game:

Randle 43 (too many, but desperately needed)
Barrett 30 (still too many, but trending in the right direction…)
Brunson 36 (yup)
IQ 28 (at least)
Hart 22 (okay)
DiVo 19 (okay)
Grimes 11 (at this point, just fine)

Much more along the lines of what makes sense. Of course one has to worry about iHart at 39, which was deserving but concerning, so sure hope Taj is working the exercise bike hard…

That doesn’t come close to proving what you assert it does. It’s another in what’s now a pretty long list of data misuses, beginning with the idea that a pass at a guy’s shins is a good pass if the guy winds up making a three-pointer anyway.

What do you think it shows? Last year, one of the popular arguments was that RJ’s bad numbers were because he was playing with the bench unit and they couldn’t support him. Now, his bad numbers are because he’s playing too much with the starters?

I get that everyone wants to get dreamy over centering things around Julius Randle’s ISOs (at least on nights after wins). I’m more of a playoffs guy. So be it.

Nobody’s getting dreamy over that but what most of us recognize is that RJ is 5 years into his pro career and still sucks and removing one of the worst players on the team improves the team. Please feel free to show any evidence that RJ can make a positive influence on the team for more than a week at a time.

Trade possibilities aside, like I said at the top, the vibe around this team is on a whole ‘nother level when Randle looks like a beast.

There’s something Patrick Ewing-esque about the guy: he’s incredibly good but just a smidge not good enough, and because of that he is massively underappreciated by the fan base.

Thibs mentioned after the game that alot of guys on the team deserve more minutes than they’re getting.

A lot of guys deserve more minutes because we have a deep bench, but some deserve extra minutes more than others and right now imo he still has it wrong. #Quickley

I’m more of a playoffs guy. So be it.

Explains the quality of your off season and regular season posts. Load management.

And I would like to see a healthy version of the more evolved Julius Randle in the playoffs, rather than condemning him for how he did last spring while seriously hobbled.

It’s more than just when he was hobbled last year. He was terrible the prior year also. I give him a pass for both years because Atlanta doubled him in that series and he had no real help at that point without Brunson and didn’t know how to handle it.

That’s why recently when I’ve been pointing out some of his downsides I’ve said, “He’s less proven” in the playoffs. It could probably go either way this year.

Since he’s only about the playoffs I can imagine how much fun E would’ve been to read during all those playoff runs from 1992-2000.

most of IQ’s value is tied up in his usg… and he does even less than that playing with Brunson since he runs most of Brunson’s sets with second units…. he is probably a net negative playing in an offball role much like how RJ is….

Brunson plays 35.6 MPG; Quickley can still have all 12.4 MPG that Brunson isn’t playing. The 2nd and 3rd most common IQ lineups are him, Brunson, Randle, Hart, and Mitch/IHart and those lineups are a net 26.3 and 27.5 pts/100 better than our average. Also, in 2 man lineups IQ has played 315 minutes with each of Randle and Brunson and the team is 12.2 and 11.8 pts/100 better than average. 3 man lineups with Randle/Brunson/IQ have played 228 minutes this year and are 14.4 pts/100 better than average. 3 man lineups of RJ/Brunson/Randle are 0.2 pts/100 worse than average.

I don’t understand how keeping RJ with the starters limits his usage. RJ’s usage is 3rd on the team and 33rd in the league at 27.1.

All I have to say is thank God RJ is hitting his FTs at an excellent rate or people would be a lot more upset than they are now.

Quickley is an “impact” player.

I can’t give you a good definition for it or point to any specific stats, but when he’s on the court and playing with good energy, he changes the game on offense and is an upgrade on defense relative to some of the alternatives.

The same is true of Josh Hart and DDV. When they are playing well their energy changes games. The difference is imo Quickley is a plus on both sides.

Last year’s playoffs unfortunately soured me a bit on IQ as well. It’s not a Julius thing.

All I have to say is thank God RJ is hitting his FTs at an excellent rate or people would be a lot more upset than they are now.

Knickerblogger and RJ trutherism is a tiny, tiny sliver of the fanbase. The majority position is that people like RJ, like his moxie (and performance) and what it projects for potentially big games, but wish he was more efficient — understanding at the same time that a lot of his shot chart is impacted by his third option status, the perpetually clogged lane, and the ISO-heavy offense.

Internet opinion will always skew misleadingly toward the provocative (and to a degree the envious).

I have to say it….but Randle appears to be making adjustments based on coaching input and the way he is posting, scoring in close, etc…is a nice improvement…he still is a bit selfish on bringing the ball up and then losing it sometimes….not being aware on the offensive end to open guys, etc., but it seems like this past week or so…he is making “better” decisions and he seems more confident in his legs and ability to finish near the hoop…I hope it continues….

Ihart is a big strong guy…I think he can (if he avoids dumb fouls) go 35 minutes a game…sims and taj can split that minutes gap since Thibs won’t go small ball

These next 9-10 games should be interesting to see how this new lineup config (assuming sims is out for a bit and ihart is starting)…deals with it..though ihart is no sabonis or walton…just the enhanced ability to throw some passes at that position…puts a bit more pressure on the opponents defense..

It’s more than just when he was hobbled last year. He was terrible the prior year also. I give him a pass for both years because Atlanta doubled him in that series and he had no real help at that point without Brunson and didn’t know how to handle it.

That’s why recently when I’ve been pointing out some of his downsides I’ve said, “He’s less proven” in the playoffs. It could probably go either way this year.

Completely reasonable. Randle has been in the playoffs twice. The first time, he was completely flummoxed by Atlanta’s double-teaming of him, but he was also the entire offense for a team that was starting Elfrid Payton at PG, and then a completely gassed Derrick Rose. (And Randle and Rose’s games had already not meshed well during the regular season.) It was bad, but you live and learn, and lots of excellent players have bad playoff debuts. And last year, he was playing on a bad leg the whole time. (And still had some strong moments/halves in spite of that.)

Does this mean that a 100% healthy version of this Julius will be effective in playoff games? No. I just push back against the idea of writing him off as a playoff performer based on the sample size.

Look, I’m pulling for RJ. I hope he plays great from here on out. His FT% is up to where it should be and he’s turning the ball over less often, which has led to his mild statistical uptick.

But let’s be realistic here. His eFG+ hasn’t budged. His TS+ has ticked up a little because of the free throws. He is in year five and struggles mightily to throw the ball into the basket no matter who he is sharing the floor with.

It’s almost like a weird edgelord opinion to say that the guy is actually good. There is no way to slice the numbers to make RJ look like a good offensive player, and on the defensive end you have to put a lot of faith that he has lots of defensive value that doesn’t show up in a box score. He has Allan Houston level stocks numbers.

The amount of eye squinting and scapegoating for RJ’s crummy-to-mediocre play is embarrassing. “Backwash” is just the latest cutesy rationalization for all the bricks and shots blocked into the tenth row. His numbers are shit no matter who he plays with. Nobody is buying the excuses.

It’s almost like a weird edgelord opinion to say that the guy is actually good.

It really isn’t.

Shall I list the really good players who had a worse TS% than RJ in the playoffs last year (at high usage), or can we depend on the group as a whole to actually play it straight?

“Stocks” is stupid, a textbook case of confusing availability of descriptive data with actual description and understanding. It’s not selling beyond the base of people who can’t or won’t make this fundamental distinction.

Mikal Bridges had two stocks in four playoff games last year; Barrett had 9 in 11. Who cares?

The kid’s got moxie though! This is the kind of analysis I come here for. Dude has some David Eckstein in him. His eFG% may be small but his heart is giant!

understanding at the same time that a lot of his shot chart is impacted by his third option status

So eventually, RJ’s efficiency in lineups where he’s the highest usage player will rise and the “truthers” who believe in things like “using fewer possessions to score points” will be proved wrong, right?

So when is this going to happen? When will the .527 reach, say, .560? Surely you believe this will occur, given that he doesn’t suffer from the “backwash” effect in these lineups. Can we at least get a loose timetable as to when? A number of years, at least?

Knickerblogger and RJ trutherism is a tiny, tiny sliver of the fanbase. The majority position is that people like RJ, like his moxie (and performance) and what it projects for potentially big games, but wish he was more efficient — understanding at the same time that a lot of his shot chart is impacted by his third option status, the perpetually clogged lane, and the ISO-heavy offense.

Please, this is ridiculous. Most of the online fanbase likes RJ because we drafted him, he scores a lot of points, and they haven’t finished puberty yet. Also, “moxie”? Shit loads of terrible players have had moxie and they were still terrible. You sound like those idiot talking heads who trashed Lebron early in his career because he sometimes passed last second shots to teammates who had a better shot.

And you still haven’t explained why RJ’s numbers are worse with Brunson and/or Randle off the floor.

Last year’s playoffs unfortunately soured me a bit on IQ as well.

If I were the type to care about regular season / playoff splits (I am not), I would probably be more concerned about IQ’s than Randle’s.

Djphan, you’re my guy for deep dives. Have you seen anything in IQ’s playoff numbers to suggest there is something other than the dramatic impact of small samples?

The kid’s got moxie though!

That translates into performance.

This is the kind of analysis I come here for. Dude has some David Eckstein in him.

It’s not 2002 anymore.

Things that are not real: stocks
Things that are real: moxie

Also, in 2 man lineups IQ has played 315 minutes
Randle/Brunson/IQ have played 228 minutes this year

look lineup data can be extremely noisy… even with large samples… a lot of times brunson and randle are coming in with IQ in the beginning of second or fourth… with bench units still factoring in…. let alone IQ is playing a lot of his minutes with total bench units on both sides….

guess what was cleveland’s best performing 3man lineup over 300 minutes last season? it was mitchell…. allen… and…. cedi osman.. caris levert also features heavily in all their best 3 man lineups… and this effect is similar for 6th man gunner types on teams that rely on their usg…

that’s not to say it definitely can’t work out… but i don’t really see enough upside.. and mostly downside in trying… if IQ gets ‘enough’ minutes.. there shouldn’t be any issues whether he starts or not… this type of issue occurs with these types of players… and generally they’re better served to be a bench gunner than an actual starter…

Please, this is ridiculous.

Only from your perspective. Objectively, it’s completely normal in every way.

Things that are not real: stocks
Things that are real: moxie

Stocks are real; they’re just really stupid as a measure of overall defense.

Moxie is real, but only important insomuch as it leads to measurable performance or potential performance.

Also, “moxie”?

Yes, moxie. It’s an English word like normal and modern are English words.

I agree, I mentioned often last season that I just didn’t see Barrett ever becoming a very good player and I still don’t see it, he just doesn’t have the necessary tools. Being not fast enough to blow by big men, but also not strong and skilled enough to beatdown guards consistently is a sentence to mediocrity at the NBA level unless the guy is a great shooter or incredible with dribbling / footwork, and its safe to say he’s not. He’s not Paul Pierce and he’s never going to be.

He had the best start to a season since he was drafted, and yet he’s back to being regular RJ again, with a slight uptick in ft% which is made almost irrelevant due to the fact he gets to the line only 5 times a game anyway.

He is the guy who needs to be traded, but also the hardest one to trade away, which is a pain. I don’t think there is an easy solution to this stuff, outside of Thibs just benching him more and him magically buying into a smaller role, but it’s hard to see that happening too.

(Actually the stocks numbers were RJ 11 in 11 games, Mikal 4 in 4; the other numbers were only steals. Still doesn’t really matter.)

I couldn’t watch any of the game but I came in at the end to see RJ fouling Reaves for three shots and I had to stop myself before throw a bowling ball through the tv screen. Just beyond stupid shit.

Otherwise, great win. Amidst all the discussion of Mitch and replacing 80% of Mitch at 20% of the cost has been a wholesale underappreciation of how good I-Hart is. The guy is fully an NBA starter quality player.

Djphan, you’re my guy for deep dives. Have you seen anything in IQ’s playoff numbers to suggest there is something other than the dramatic impact of small samples?

playoffs are small samples… but it’s also the highest level of competition… you’re playing actual playoff competition for multiple games in a row so any weakness gets accentuated.. which is why stars have even more of an impact in this environment and role players become even more volatile….

you saw this with IQ… he has a terrible habit of picking up his dribble without a plan… for a guy who’s supposed to have the ball in his hand a lot… that’s a big no no.. and good defenses punish that really hard… the lakers actually took advantage of that late in the 4th last night actually which is why i thought of that… he also relies a lot on foul baiting which .. at least in the playoff games we were playing weren’t really a factor.. unless it was that foulbaiting bitch trae young…

so it is a small sample… buuuut… 5 games of playoff basketball is not the same as 5 games of regular season basketball… layne vashro actually tried to quantify this awhile back and i think it was like he weighed it 25% more… which i think is actually a bit conservative… i might actually count it close to double… especially the deeper you go…

so yea like with most things it’s a mix…

I don’t have any problem trading Barrett for an upgrade.

I agree, I mentioned often last season that I just didn’t see Barrett ever becoming a very good player and I still don’t see it, he just doesn’t have the necessary tools.

He may not be able to jump very high, or run very fast, or throw a basketball into a basket with a lot of regularity, but he has moxie and I believe there may be some gumption in there as well.

At the end of the game, they don’t add up the points you score, there are judges who calculate which team showed the most moxie, kind of like in figure skating. RJ has elite MARP (moxie above replacement player).

If he ever develops mettle or pluck, look out NBA!

JK seems to be having a swell time beating the strawmen of 2002 to death.

It’s 5:00 somewhere and somewhere somebody’s defending David Eckstein. The two constants of the universe.

there’s a lot of reasons to worry about RJ… but i actually think he’ll be fine… RJ’s free throw improvement is not small by any stretch especially with him maintaining his excellent ftr… and him getting up to 85% is actually a huge game changer for him….

it’s his 2pt fg% which is key… and it’s starting to climb back up and i imagine it will get close to .500 again…. in all it will likely amount to a small but noticeable improvement….

Moxie = Good

Hustle = Bad

You’re the one making the absurd “kid’s got moxie” argument. Which is one of the more hilarious takes I think I have ever seen here.

You’re the one making the absurd “kid’s got moxie” argument.

He does, but I don’t give a shit about it unless it translates into performance. Just like I don’t give a shit about fake hustle and hustlebunnies and have spent two seasons deriding them.

You obviously still have PTSD from the baseball Eckstein wars.

RJ has been fine this year. He was a sieve defensively for a lot of last year but looks much better this year.

He seems to be doing a better job rotating to the rim and challenging vertically, which is pretty important since Randle never does it.

RJ’s FT% could also be foreshadowing a 3P% improvement.

Which is one of the more hilarious takes I think I have ever seen here.

This in a world where Josh Hart’s “intangibles” are an actual thing ….

If we were to pull the trigger on a Bojan deal, I imagine we go:

1 Brunson
2 Barrett
3 Bojan
4 Julius
5 Mitch

But now RJ is in the limited 2 guard role that DDV plays. And we’re handing RJ’s 27% USG to an offensive savant. Kills two birds with one stone.

And does it really weaken our perimeter D? I think it remains a weakness, but doesn’t get particularly worse.

And when it’s the closing lineup and you put IQ in there instead of RJ… dude, that’s gonna be a scary team.

,,,

We should cut Sims for Nerlens Noel

RJ’s FT% could also be foreshadowing a 3P% improvement.

i was contemplating this watching these last few games…if you watch his ft motion/form now…he really focuses on keeping the elbow close in/to his head…and seems to be locked in on it..still seems he’s pushing rather than flicking but its working…when I see him shoot threes…it seems like he is somewhere between his old form and trying the free throw form and it looks ugly…more pushing the ball..usually when they teach shitty ft guys …it is not same form that translates to long distance/nonstationary shooting so…not sure if it will translate…but what do I know…

Just one thing, can we please stop conflating hustle with intangibles as if they’re the same thing? They’re absolutely not.

Hart’s hustle plays are absolutely tangible, you see every time he gets a deflection or leads a fast break or picks up a rebound in the middle of 3 guys. They are very tangible contributions that sometimes show up on the box score and sometimes doesn’t.

Now, moxie is an intangible.

If (underlined) certain players hustle more than others in certain regular season games, that advantage is long gone by playoff time — as we saw clearly last year.

You don’t win serious NBA games by “playing harder” than the other team or “outhustling” them. Maybe you do on a random February Wednesday. But who cares about that?

Moxie isn’t an intangible; it’s a personality trait. Ceterus paribus, I’d project someone who doesn’t shy away from big moments to perform better in big moments than someone who turns into a deer in the headlights or an emotional puddle of goo. But it’s not a perfect projector by any means. And moxie can be counterproductive if there isn’t anything to back it up; in fact, people with moxie and nothing behind it are infuriating.

Don’t forget swagger! RJ has swagger!

Any win against the Lakers is a great win, a win that we always dedicate to CDiggy 😀
Spoiling their banner night made this one even better.

This western swing as gone better then expected after the loss in Utah.

I really like bully-Randle.

Re: Intangibles

DDV has swagger, J-Hart (and I-Hart) has hustle, RJ has moxie, they’re all different things 😀 … and Grimes has none 😉

You don’t win serious NBA games by “playing harder” than the other team or “outhustling” them. Maybe you do on a random February Wednesday. But who cares about that?

We led the playoffs in Orb% and DRTG. We got to the 2nd Rd of the playoffs—outperforming expectations—precisely because we out hustled other teams.

We led the playoffs in Orb% and DRTG.

Those aren’t the product of “hustle.”

Hustle could help with those, but the existence of hustle isn’t proven by those things. It has to be proven independently. (Just as the quality of Randle’s passing isn’t proven by how many shin-burners other players turn into actual makes.)

DDV has swagger, J-Hart (and I-Hart) has hustle, RJ has moxie, they’re all different things 😀 … and Grimes has none 😉

Grimes is the Umarell, he’s there to watch the other guys work! 😀

😉

Grimes is the Umarell, he’s there to watch the other guys work!

Lol / ouch

Moxie is nice and all, but we really need to stay focused on trading for a big wing with mojo

Renewed chatter of a Spida trade.

Those aren’t the product of “hustle.”

Sure is a weird coincidence that our hustle bunnies just happen to be good at defense and rebounding

Grimes is the Umarell, he’s there to watch the other guys work! 😀

LOL 😀 😀 😀

You don’t win serious NBA games by “playing harder” than the other team or “outhustling” them.

Exactly! You win basketball games by being cool and not giving a fuck like RJ Barrett or Cam Reddish!

Guys! Stop hustling! We aren’t going to win if we keep winning these 50/50 rebound battles and gaining extra posessions! When there’s a fast break opportunity, don’t run down as fast as you can to try and beat your man and get an easy basket! Slow down so the defense can set and you can take a contested turn around jump shot when the clock expires! Don’t you know how COOL that looks! Don’t close out on an open 3 point shooter! Getting a hand in their face won’t make a difference!

Shooting the ball right in Anthony Davis’ face all night long and getting it repeatedly rejected is the kind of moxie we need more of around here

I didn’t see the game, but I’d be taking Anthony Davis out of the lane if I was coaching and/or GMing the team. Kinda the point.

If you watched the game you’d have seen RJ take some shots IN THE LANE that had 0% chance of going in, 100% chance of getting blocked, and which resulted in layups on the other end. You know, the typical RJ Barrett hopeless kind of shot

#moxie

Sure is a weird coincidence that our hustle bunnies just happen to be good at defense and rebounding

They’re good at OREB because the center plays close to the basket and they crash the O boards more than other teams.

If you watched the game you’d have seen RJ take some shots IN THE LANE that had 0% chance of going in, 100% chance of getting blocked, and which resulted in layups on the other end. You know, the typical RJ Barrett hopeless kind of shot

Why did you capitalize IN THE LANE when responding to a suggestion that Anthony Davis be taken out of the lane?

Guess I misunderstood you.

If Anthony Davis is in the lane, shooting the ball in his face might show a lot of moxie but it also results in points for the other team. A pass might have been the less moxie-tastic move and some might even call that hustlebunnying but might have been a better play

If Anthony Davis is in the lane, shooting the ball in his face might show a lot of moxie but it also results in points for the other team.

The Anthony Davises and Timelords of the association are in the lane and in the way far too much for the drives of not only RJ Barrett but also other Knicks, almost entirely because of the (premodern, not normal) nature of the offense the Knicks run. This needs to change.

If it did, the shot and efficiency charts of many players on the team would change for the better.

(Knickerblogger actually knows this to be true, but has a thing for Mitch and an anti-thing for RJ and so it tries to shade and muddy and work around this truth. And so it goes.)

#Moneyball.

I saw something on my timeline last night that had me laughing. I read that RJ told Randle to “pass the fvcking ball” after one play. Multiple people said they saw him say it.

Just one thing, can we please stop conflating hustle with intangibles as if they’re the same thing?

Downtown Doogie approves this message.

I read that RJ told Randle to “pass the fvcking ball” after one play.

Good for him. Every other player on the team routinely thinks that. Some have even obliquely said it out loud.

E is never going to define any of these stupid ass terms in tangible ways, because those can actually be tested against real-world events and then he would have to live with being wrong on the internet.

Same reason he has never said when RJ Barrett will hit league average efficiency, same reason he never told us when the Frank Ntilikina or Cam Reddish explosions he vaguely hinted would happen would, in fact, happen, same reason he’s not going to make any kind of tangible prediction about how Julius Randle will perform in the playoffs if/when we get there.

Keeping things incomprehensibly vague allows him to maintain the Smartest Guy in the Room shtick despite being wrong about countless things over the years.

In this sense he is like Nostradamus, except the one who actually existed as opposed to the mythical version.

Wait, if Mitch is the one “clogging the lane” and tanking RJ’s efficiency, surely RJ will post career high efficiency numbers over the next few months right?! That is a tangible prediction anyone who subscribes to the “clogged lane” theory of inefficiency for RJ would make, right?

He can never really be “wrong” unless the Knicks win the title and Julius Randle is NBA Finals MVP. Anything other than that and he was “right” all along.

Brave stance. Shows a lot of moxie.

We led the playoffs in Orb% and DRTG. We got to the 2nd Rd of the playoffs—outperforming expectations—precisely because we out hustled other teams.

Orb and DRtg aren’t stand ins for hustle.

Wait, if Mitch is the one “clogging the lane” and tanking RJ’s efficiency,

All the centers are.

(And there’s no need for scare quotes around “clogging the lane.” We all know what it is.)

He can never really be “wrong”

My call on Matheson isn’t looking so great now, although I still believe in his skillset. (And he might not be the greatest fit with Hali.) He hit the rookie wall last year and has yet to recover.

I’d trade for him in a heartbeat, knowing the risk.

I didn’t see the game, but I’d be taking Anthony Davis out of the lane if I was coaching and/or GMing the team. Kinda the point.

They did get Davis out of the lane: empty calorie Randle big-boyed every non-AD defender so badly that AD either guarded him or cheated far enough over to his side to let JB start cooking. Call me when teams start have to make adjustments to guard RJ.

Who the hell is Matheson?

https://www.si.com/nba/2023/12/19/new-york-knicks-arent-real-nba-title-contenders

All the centers are.

(And there’s no need for scare quotes around “clogging the lane.” We all know what it is.)

So RJ can only be good if there’s literally no one in the lane? He can be successful as long as we play 5 out and the other team decides not to play zone? I suppose we have two options then. We can trade everyone on the team who’s not a great 3 point shooter (except for RJ) and rebuild the team around RJ’s supposed talent OR we can dump RJ for any other player in the league who can function with a big man near him.

Wait, we’re not real NBA title contenders? And here I thought everyone on the board who was not E had spent all season insisting that we’re obviously among the NBA’s elite with the roster as is. Huh. This is shocking. I’m shocked. I have to rethink so many things about life now.

Reese, I don’t get why you’re doing this today. It would be one thing if Z-Man came on here smoking his Leon Rose victory cigar telling all the haters to shove it, but nothing of the sort happened. Everyone’s been kinda cool.

Do you think me, Noble, and JK47 need to be told the Knicks aren’t championship contenders? We’re not wild-eyed optimists.

When Randle plays great like he did last night, things are fun around here. Do I know deep down that Randle is unlikely to be a beast for 5-7 consecutive weeks in the spring? Absolutely. Is that we have to think about now, though? It’s kinda nihilistic to enjoy nothing.

https://www.si.com/nba/2023/12/19/new-york-knicks-arent-real-nba-title-contenders

Wow, thank god for that article that reads like it was written by AI. I totally thought we were a title contender but now I know that we need to rebuild the team around RJ’s moxie.

wait … not to defend E here… but i distinctly remember a whole bunch of people citing our net rating a few weeks ago as gospel that we were one of the best teams in the league … already….

there’s definitely a contingent of folks here who think we’re better than we actually are…. at least after a win…

I suppose we have two options then.

Three. The other is to modernize and normalize — real English words!!! — the offense.

The article’s hot off the presses at SI and is the lead story at SI.com. That’s why I posted it. It’s newness, not its content. The response to it comes off as a bit whiny.

When Randle plays great like he did last night, things are fun around here.

The RJ trutherism really isn’t that fun in an internet sense. And then it’s defended with a lot of basketball BS and I have a natural aversion to basketball BS. Time plus basketball BS equals commentary. The timing is mostly coincidental.

Randle played well last night and is on a nice streak, no question about it.

It’s kinda nihilistic to enjoy nothing.

I enjoy Knicks basketball. There’s no nihilism.

Everyone’s been kinda cool.

That’s not really true, but I have thick skin and it’s no big deal.

wait … not to defend E here… but i distinctly remember a whole bunch of people citing our net rating a few weeks ago as gospel that we were one of the best teams in the league … already….

there’s definitely a contingent of folks here who think we’re better than we actually are…. at least after a win…

And if those guys had come on today and been like “fuck the haterz, I told you so”, I’d get it. But they didn’t. It’s largely been the cautious contingent of the board feeling excited today. And not because we’re contenders, but because we’re finally looking frisky.

It’s largely been the cautious contingent of the board feeling excited today.

Leave out the “RJ sucks, if they only replaced him with Quentin Grimes the team would win 57 games” stuff and the “anyone can create usage in the NBA” stuff and the “Julius is a great passer, look at all the 3 pointers he’s assisted on” and the “hustle is critical, look at all the offensive rebounds the team gets” stuff and the “whither do you mean by this term “clogged lane”?????” stuff and we’re good.

Leave out the “RJ sucks, he can be replaced by Quentin Grimes and the team would win 57 games” stuff

Something that literally no one has said. I did say that dumping RJ and moving Quickley and Hart to the starting lineup would probably improve the team by 5 wins despite their obvious lack of moxie. Certainly didn’t say would improve to 57 wins.

“anyone can create usage in the NBA” stuff

Anyone can create usage if they’re just given the ball and told to do whatever they want. Michael Carter Williams had a usage of 26 and 25 his first two seasons and he sucks. Dion Waiters has a career usage of 23.5 and he’s been out of the league since he turned 28. Bargnani’s career usage was 24 and it was 26.9 his 2nd season here.

“hustle is critical, look at all the offensive rebounds the team gets”

You don’t get to criticize hustle until you define moxie.

wait … not to defend E here… but i distinctly remember a whole bunch of people citing our net rating a few weeks ago as gospel that we were one of the best teams in the league … already….

That’s the strawman you invented.

Btw, we’ve had the 4th best offense in the league since you predicted it’d be terrible.

I have to say, I don’t understand why this clogged lane means that RJ also can’t shoot from midrange or 3.

I did say that dumping RJ and moving Quickley and Hart to the starting lineup would probably improve the team by 5 wins despite their obvious lack of moxie.

Answer your question, Hubert?

This person didn’t post last year and some of this data is probably related to more minutes with Mitch at the start of the season when he claims he was less than 100%. Still interesting.

DJ
@DJAceNBA
Randle with Robinson or Hartenstein

Lineup Data:

Randle with Robinson eFG% | 48%
Randle with iHart eFG% | 55%

Randle with Robinson Rim FREQUENCY | 25%
Randle with iHart Rim FREQUENCY | 35%

Randle with Robinson Rim FG% | 57%
Randle with iHart Rim FG% | 72%

The Anthony Davises and Timelords of the association are in the lane and in the way far too much for the drives of not only RJ Barrett but also other Knicks, almost entirely because of the (premodern, not normal) nature of the offense the Knicks run.

So just pass around the perimeter and take 3’s then?

That’s the strawman you invented.

i don’t think so….

Btw, we’ve had the 4th best offense in the league since you predicted it’d be terrible.

there’s still more season to be played….

I don’t think the Knicks became contenders this week but I do think two things happened:

1. The appearance of Beast Mode Randle has – IMO – laid to bed reasonable concerns that we would have every other year Julius.

2. We beat a couple good teams for the first time this year. In the first 22 games, every outcome was chalk. It was making for a boring season. Now we’re frisky, things are a little more exciting. I can tune in Christmas day knowing there’s a nonzero chance we might beat the Bucks.

I appreciate both developments.

DJ
@DJAceNBA
Randle with Robinson or Hartenstein

Lineup Data:

Randle with Robinson eFG% | 48%
Randle with iHart eFG% | 55%

Randle with Robinson Rim FREQUENCY | 25%
Randle with iHart Rim FREQUENCY | 35%

Randle with Robinson Rim FG% | 57%
Randle with iHart Rim FG% | 72%

Mitchell Robinson OBVIOUSLY clogs the lane. It’s not even fairly debatable. To a degree it “pays for itself” because he’s around to hoover up offensive rebounds on misses that are missed in part because the driver draws his man over and Mitch has a clear path OREB.

Which is the primary Moneyball objective/trade off. The one that few if any other teams make.

I just doubt that the clog is repaid in full.

Knickerblogger will simply not abide any hint of any suggestion that Mitchell Robinson could be getting in the way of RJ Barrett’s game — and that inability really has nothing to do with basketball.

Ah, E’s trolling has finally tanked this thread entirely. Now fights are breaking out on the periphery. Great work, E.

I’ll go do stuff until every other posting isn’t his.

But before I go, just want to tip the cap to Hubert for adding ‘frisky’ to our team lexicon. Look forward to the discussion of whether it’s tangible…

I’ll go do stuff until every other posting isn’t his.

All you’d bring anyway is your utterly bizarre obsession with one Knicks player.

Bye.

In the meantime, I’m happy to talk basketball with anyone who wants to.

The Anthony Davises and Timelords of the association are in the lane and in the way far too much for the drives of not only RJ Barrett but also other Knicks, almost entirely because of the (premodern, not normal) nature of the offense the Knicks run. This needs to change.

Teams were also in the paint too much because they completely ignored RJs shooting in the playoffs.

But kudos to him for hitting wide open practice shots at a 33% clip that made a Hart-RJ pairing impossible.

Good luck to Mr. Moxie if he ever gets half as much defensive attention as Randle.

That’s the strawman you invented.

Bullshit, EB. You absolutely came on here crowing about how the team’s SRS after 8 games proved we were already contenders. It’s on the shortlist of dumbest arguments ever made with real statistics.

In the meantime, I’m happy to talk basketball with anyone who wants to.

Great. What the fuck is moxie, troll?

What the fuck is moxie, troll?

That’s not basketball. Fuck off.

But kudos to him for hitting wide open practice shots at a 33% clip that made a Hart-RJ pairing impossible.

Barrett TSing .550 in the playoffs made it impossible to pair him with Josh Hart? Seems a bit counterintuitive.

Bullshit, EB. You absolutely came on here acting like the team’s SRS after 8 games proved we were already contenders.

We were playing like contenders through the early games is not the same as predicting we will be contenders. I was contesting the doom and gloom because we had played good basketball up to that point.

There’s a difference between backward looking and forward looking statistics.

What a good early season SRS does mean is that we’re likely to at least be good even if we regress. It’s not a completely meaningless stat, even at that point, which djphan insisted on.

And I’ll again ask for a better barometer and gladly use that if it’s provided.

Mitchell Robinson OBVIOUSLY clogs the lane. It’s not even fairly debatable. To a degree it “pays for itself” because he’s around to hoover up offensive rebounds on misses that are missed in part because the driver draws his man over and Mitch has a clear path OREB.

Which is the primary Moneyball objective/trade off. The one that few if any other teams make.

I just doubt that the clog is repaid in full.

Knickerblogger will simply not abide any hint of any suggestion that Mitchell Robinson could be getting in the way of RJ Barrett’s game — and that inability really has nothing to do with basketball.

A few points/questions

1. How much spacing/passing do we gain with I-Hart relative to Mitch?

2. How many OREBs do we lose with I-Hart instead of Mitch?

3. I think the more spacing we have the better, but I’ve been making the case Mitch, Randle, and RJ are a bad combination due to the lack of spacing and that all want to get to the basket. They aren’t as bad Mitch, Randle, RJ and Payton, but it’s still not optimal. I think if we had 2 instead of 3 of those players it would improve spacing at the margin in the same way Brunson relieved some of the spacing issues by replacing Payton (over and above just being a massively better player). It’s not just RJ we are talking about. Each of them would probably be helped by more space (Brunson too).

What a good early season SRS does mean is that we’re likely to at least be good even if we regress. It’s not a completely meaningless stat, even at that point, which djphan insisted on.

I don’t think there’s anyone here who doesn’t think the Knicks are a good team. They are. I expect them to have a good SRS this year, befitting their status as a good team.

Every other player on the team routinely thinks that
I get that everyone wants to get dreamy over centering things around Julius Randle’s ISOs

Just a suggestion since you profess to being a lawyer. Don’t use the word “every” when it either is not true or you will fail to prove it is true.

Otherwise you look like a clown.

That’s not basketball. Fuck off.

C’mon, I really want to know how moxie compares to gumption, pizzazz, and the old razzle dazzle.

Mitchell Robinson OBVIOUSLY clogs the lane and this OBVIOUSLY hurts RJ Barrett,
so I’ll repeat, RJ is OBVIOUSLY about to go on a tear with Mitch out, right? This is the only logical conclusion for anyone who subscribes the Lane Clogging Theory of RJ’s bricktitude, that somehow hasn’t tanked the efficiency of Brunson.

It might just be time to be a little more honest about RJ Barrett’s game. He’s not a very good three point shooter, so you can sag off him. He’s not a great finisher because he lacks elite athleticism, and despite this will often attempt and fail to finish in heavy traffic rather than passing. Rebounding and playmaking have been disappointing as a pro. It is probably being generous to classify him as an average defensive player. He doesn’t have great length for his position. To my eye he does look like he is doing a bit better job of staying in front of his man this season.

I do think he’s a wee bit better this year. He’s making his free throws, keeping his turnovers down and I think arguably playing better on-ball defense. But nothing in that above paragraph is “trutherism.” RJ’s ceiling is not all that high. Could you get more production out of him if you provided him with better spacing? Probably. That’s a reasonable enough argument. Meanwhile we have another offensive-oriented guard on the roster who is shredding opposing defenses despite the spacing, because that player has immense skill.

There’s not a superstar in there waiting to be unlocked. There’s probably a marginally better player in there. He’s still relatively young and making incremental improvements.

do you see how this…

We were playing like contenders through the early games is not the same as predicting we will be contenders.

does not align with this…

What a good early season SRS does mean is that we’re likely to at least be good even if we regress.

someone desperate to be right tends to talk out of both sides of their mouth….

It’s not a completely meaningless stat, even at that point, which djphan insisted on.

It’s like being up 6 points after 2 minutes, i.e. about as close to meaningless as you can get.

Mitchell Robinson OBVIOUSLY clogs the lane

Are you disagreeing with this?

Since I still see the occasional reference by various posters to the lingering belief that I am E’s alt, I’d like to take this opportunity to point out that I find some of his takes far too optimistic. Specifically, I have believed since the day we drafted him that RJ will be a total bust and haven’t seen any reason to question that belief since. The guy simply excels at no aspect of basketball and the best thing we could have done was to trade him before the rest of the league realized it, but I think that ship has sailed at this point.

It sucks because when you fail at accumulating assets the way have and this is your highest pick in 30+ years, you really need to nail the pick. For all the reasons we can debate on our mezzanine status, RJ is #1 by a mile.

Could you get more production out of him if you provided him with better spacing? Probably. That’s a reasonable enough argument.

OK, exactly — then let’s start there. You’ll have to get TNFH on board, though.

Reconsider the statement that he was “shitty” in the playoffs last year (*) — he was anything but — and we have something pretty close to agreement.

(*) Probably the core tenet of “trutherism.”

If in the Miami series you had Randle performing at even 85% of regular season and you had Thibs toning down the hustlebunny obsession with Hart and Grimes, that’s an eminently winnable series and they go to the conference finals.

Ergo, you “can win” with RJ Barrett. (Another English term.) Can you improve on RJ Barrett and get even closer to a true contender (assuming he’s the inhibitor)? Of course you can.

I agree that Mitch is no threat to shoot and thus doesn’t pull opposing centers out of the paint.

I disagree that this is a unique flaw of Mitch’s, as I sent you the list of centers who have so much as taken 20 3PA and it was both short and largely populated by players who suck so much at other things they aren’t worth playing.

I particularly disagree that Mitch prevents players capable of being efficient scorers from scoring efficiently, because Brunson.

Now that we’ve established this, you can answer the question I’ll repeat for the third time: with the oppressive Mitchell Robinson gone, RJ is about to prove Lane Clogging Theory correct and post a TS% of what, exactly?

I agree that Mitch is no threat to shoot and thus doesn’t pull opposing centers out of the paint.

OK, then we agree. What’s left then is your mental block in tying this important basketball fact to its virtually certain impact on one lone single solitary Knick player. For that one, I can’t help. But at least we’ve moved the ball and found areas of agreement rather than disagreement. Always preferable.

Everyone on fire today, winning against the Lakers brings the moxie in KBers.

Julius Randle has become significantly less efficient since becoming a Knick on essentially the same usage. Jalen Brunson has become materially less efficient than his peak year in Dallas, although he’s more efficient now than his last year in Dallas. (And his usage has gone up significantly as an NYK.)

Those are the facts. Attribute cause and effect as you will.

What’s left then is your mental block in tying this important basketball fact to its virtually certain impact on one lone single solitary Knick player.

Aren’t you the one who is tying this important basketball fact on one lone player, that is RJ? I mean, the rest should also be affected by the lack of spacing.

This:

citing our net rating a few weeks ago as gospel that we were one of the best teams in the league … already….

Is not the same as either of these:

do you see how this…

We were playing like contenders through the early games is not the same as predicting we will be contenders.

does not align with this…

What a good early season SRS does mean is that we’re likely to at least be good even if we regress.

someone desperate to be right tends to talk out of both sides of their mouth….

So do I need to explain probability distributions to you or explanatory vs predictive modelling? Because you’re really struggling with one or both of these.

Forecasting the future with our current SRS gives you a probability distribution of future outcomes. We were at least above-average and potentially the next tier below Boston.

It’s not a locked in guaranteed, it was a favorable probability based on this season’s data.

I mean, the rest should also be affected by the lack of spacing.

Randle pretty clearly is. Look at strat’s data and look at his efficiency his two years before coming to the Knicks.

Brunson’s a bit more iffy since his usage has gone up so much. But he’s less efficient now than at Dallas peak.

Both would be better players with a modern open lane. So would Barrett.

But even those numbers are downstream from the easily observable fact of a non-modern mosh pit lane.

It’s like being up 6 points after 2 minutes, i.e. about as close to meaningless as you can get.

I’m sure you’re not just making that up and have evidence that it was meaningless at the time I made the claim

I’ve been too tough on Randle (other than the playoff stuff). I didn’t fully realize how good he was before coming here and he’d be closer to that with a more modern offense and lane. Let’s all hope he plays well in the playoffs.

But even those numbers are downstream from the easily observable fact of a non-modern mosh pit lane.

Modern basketball is looking at numbers to see what works and what doesn’t work.

The offense was 3rd in the league last year and is currently 10th this year.

In this thread you’ve blamed the playoff series loss on Mitch & Grimes & Hart & Randle. It’s getting pretty diluted at this point and we’ll probably have all 14 non-moxie players listed by the end of it

Barrett TSing .550 in the playoffs made it impossible to pair him with Josh Hart? Seems a bit counterintuitive.

His crappy lane clogging shooting despite being left wide open did.

And playoff average TS% was .566 btw.

EB, I don’t use the search feature here, mostly bc I’m in my 40’s and I don’t like to learn how to do new things, but I guarantee you were on here waving our early SRS in everyone’s face claiming it was proof that the Knicks had already reached the championship tier.

Now you’re asking for evidence that you were stupid to do so?

Modern basketball is looking at numbers to see what works and what doesn’t work.

The offense was 3rd in the league last year and is currently 10th this year.

That leaves out the possibility that it could be even better if constructed differently, though. I don’t think the term “works” is precise enough.

His crappy lane clogging shooting despite being left wide open did.

Strikes me as trutherism. His shooting wasn’t “crappy.”

And playoff average TS% was .566 btw.

I know.

I’ve been too tough on Randle (other than the playoff stuff). I didn’t fully realize how good he was before coming here and he’d be closer to that with a more modern offense and lane. Let’s all hope he plays well in the playoffs.

Attaboy, Reese.

You seemed to get really worked up when I suggested we need to knock RJ off his perch. Almost like you’re his agent or something. You snapped back with anti Julius stuff, and then shit went downhill fast. There was certainly an ugly element of everyone ganging up on you but only after you pee’d in the pool we were all swimming in.

I think Brunson has remained as efficient despite the lack of good spacing because he has improved his 3p% and takes more of them. His 2p% is lower for NY even though you could argue he’s a better shooter now. His 2p% should also be trending up or at least be flat with the higher usage. I think it would be higher with more space. Plus, we know Brunson is elite at creating shots with footwork. You can’t expect every player to create and make tough shots like Brunson.

No one is arguing that RJ would have a “much” better TS% with better spacing. The argument is simply all else being equal his TS% would be higher. How much is debatable. But from that point he’d looked less bad and still be young enough to inch forward.

What’s left then is your mental block in tying this important basketball fact to its virtually certain impact on one lone single solitary Knick player. For that one, I can’t help. But at least we’ve moved the ball and found areas of agreement rather than disagreement. Always preferable.

One last opportunity to actually say something interesting: Mitch is about to miss an extended period of time, so RJ will be free of his lane clogging oppression.

During this time, what is your rough estimate for RJ’s TS%?

It’s really funny that the Smartest Guy in the Room is terrified to make a prediction.

RJ will be free of his lane clogging oppression.

The other centers clog the lane, too. It’s a Tom Thibodeau production.

Let’s not end this era of good feelings.

Just because it’s hilarious…

Since the start of the 2019 season:

RJ’s TS% with Mitch OFF: .517

RJ’s TS% with Mitch ON: .521

It seems like RJ needs a clogged lane to succeed.

The other centers clog the lane, too. Nerlens Noel clogged the lane. You know this already.

Pssst: It’s not just RJ. It’s affecting Randle and Brunson, too.

Are some people arguing that the theory of better spacing leading to more efficient scoring is not true or just that it’s not true for RJ because of his unique lack of skills?

Better spacing was the idea behind having a stretch PF.

Maybe some teams are taking it too far with the idea of a stretch C, but we can see with Boston how Tatum and Brown get to the basket easier with KP and Horford drawing players out.

We still occasionally have guys sagging off RJ and Randle, paying no attention to J-Hart and little attention to Mitch other than his lob threat. That can’t be optimal for driving to the basket. What we don’t know is how to put a “number” on the cost.

In other words, we will never know how good RJ is unless he plays with Porzingis, Jokic, or Brook Lopez.

Never mind the fact that he has teammates making all-NBA teams and posting near .600 TS%es as 6’1″ combo guards in back-to-back years. Mitch unclogs the lane for them. He’s just sabotaging RJ.

Evan Fournier’s TS% and 2PT% have fallen off a cliff since becoming a Knick while still in his prime.

Mitch unclogs the lane for them.

Julius Randle’s TS% has fallen 50+ points as a Knick. His two-point percentages in the two years before he became a Knick were 575 and 564. As a Knick, his two-point percentage is 501.

Are some people arguing that the theory of better spacing leading to more efficient scoring is not true or just that it’s not true for RJ because of his unique lack of skills?

No one doubts RJ’s numbers might be better if a team were to make the befuddling decision to build its roster around him.

People are skeptical that Lane Clogging Theory accounts for all of his inefficiency, because he has multiple teammates who have managed to be efficient, and because the Knicks are not remotely unique in not employing a stretch 5.

One last opportunity to actually say something interesting: Mitch is about to miss an extended period of time, so RJ will be free of his lane clogging oppression.

During this time, what is your rough estimate for RJ’s TS%?

It’s really funny that the Smartest Guy in the Room is terrified to make a prediction.

Come on, dude. We all know Jericho Sims and Taj Gibson are the replacement centers and that we have horrible spacing.

Lane clogging is not the reason RJ is a career 34% shooter from 3 and 32% on long 2s. And I’d like to know of a single player who has ever gone from a bad shooter to a good shooter because he started playing with a stretch 5.

People are skeptical that Lane Clogging Theory accounts for all of his inefficiency,

No one has said “all.” You’re lawyering again. (I’m guilty of it, too, sometimes.)

because he has multiple teammates who have managed to be efficient,

Julius Randle is nowhere near as efficient overall or from two since he became a Knick. Jalen Brunson is kind of coming close to at least holding serve, but he has the best footwork and natural ability to avoid traffic of probably any human being on earth.

The eye test is overwhelming and so, really, is the numerical evidence.

In other words, we will never know how good RJ is unless he plays with Porzingis, Jokic, or Brook Lopez.

No one doubts RJ’s numbers might be better if a team were to make the befuddling decision to build its roster around him.

IMO both those statements are too extreme.

We aren’t going to build around RJ and we don’t need a C that can stretch beyond the 3 point line.

IMO, we still have less than ideal spacing that is probably impacting the offensive efficiency of players that like to get to the basket somewhat (amount unknown). The question is how do we address that.

I’ve been saying that the spacing culprits in the starting lineup are Mitch, RJ and Randle and the remaining two would benefit if we replaced one of them with someone that could really knock down 3s. IMO Brunson would also benefit from better spacing.

It’s tricky to do because it may involve multiple long term moves to have both better spacing and as good overall talent.

The question is how do we address that.

A new coach and a lot of Mitch as a high screen/roll rim runner with everyone else at the trifecta line. Barrett and Brunson could both be the ball guy, with some Julius mixed in.

They should have been doing this the entire time.

Just for clarity on my position, it’s possible for RJ to simultaneously be an inefficient scorer and not as bad as he looks given the Knicks have below average spacing. It’s not always black or white.

People are skeptical that Lane Clogging Theory accounts for all of his inefficiency,

Right, but I bet it accounts for a reasonable bit.

he has multiple teammates who have managed to be efficient

I think Jalen Brunson is efficient bc he has elite skills. LeBron could be efficient in our offense, too, you know? Really doesn’t prove your point.

Re: “multiple teammates”…

of the 7 non centers on our team, only Brunson and DDV are above the league average eFG%.

Of the top 7 last year only Brunson, Grimes, and hot streak hart managed to cross the threshold.

I don’t expect RJ Barrett to jump 80 points with a stretch 5, but if you’re seriously out here arguing we don’t have a spacing issue then E has gotten under your skin bc we do and everyone knows it.

“Reese, I don’t get why you’re doing this today. It would be one thing if Z-Man came on here smoking his Leon Rose victory cigar telling all the haters to shove it, but nothing of the sort happened. Everyone’s been kinda cool.”

I thought I noticed two adorable identical twins play-fighting from the balcony of my rent-free condo, although it’s hard to see through all this cigar smoke…

Yeah, but…….who the hell is Matheson?

Yeah, but…….who the hell is Matheson?

i believe he was referring to Mathurin…the dude on the pacers…

of the 7 non centers on our team, only Brunson and DDV are above the league average eFG%.

Of the top 7 last year only Brunson, Grimes, and hot streak hart managed to cross the threshold.

I don’t expect RJ Barrett to jump 80 points with a stretch 5, but if you’re seriously out here arguing we don’t have a spacing issue then E has gotten under your skin bc we do and everyone knows it.

This is all true and is one of my many complaints about Thibs. It’s also true that RJ has the lowest eFG and second lowest TS of every Knick getting regular playing time. If we implemented a different offense that improved spacing is there some reason why RJ’s shooting would improve more than anything else’s?

The idea that RJ’s numbers might improve if the Knicks had one of the very few legitimate stretch 5s in the NBA just does not tell you very much about him as a player.

If a guy needs you to get one of the 3-5 bona fide stretch 5s that exists in order to be good (no word on how good, E is keeping that to himself)…he’s probably just not good. Approximately 99% of NBA players play under circumstances that are not perfectly suited to their skillsets. The good ones make it work.

The funny thing is I’m not even all the way out on RJ one day becoming a useful player. He’s not light years away from being akin to Wiggins on the Warriors, before Wiggins turned back into a pumpkin.

But the dual ideas that we can’t possibly win with someone like Randle, but we need to move heaven and earth to construct a roster around the skillset/lack thereof of the demonstrably worse player in literally every fashion, RJ Barrett, do not make a modicum of sense taken together.

If we implemented a different offense that improved spacing is there some reason why RJ’s shooting would improve more than anything else’s?

I don’t know, it’s not my stupid argument.

I just see people playing the man instead of playing the ball, i.e. arguing with E instead of making sense.

holy cow E, what kind of drugs are you on today – I want some 😊

you should sleep well tonight after all the work you’re putting in here today…

OMG this thread is out of control…

Not sure why we aren’t talking about defense though. That is where this team has been lacking, even before the Mitch injury.

This is where our lack of length/size hurts, but we shouldn’t be this bad. This last game was an improvement (Randle and RJ both up their effort against famous counterparts), but the Lakers also weren’t shooting great.

You’d think due to our size issues, Thibs would want to play at least a little zone, but I guess that’s never happening? So, ultimately, I think we are only going to get as far as Randle and RJ want to take us with their defense.

The following can all be true at the same time:
-This team is fun as hell to root for…not as much fun as a sustained contender, but for now, we’ll take it!
-All things considered, Leon has done a really solid (but far from flawless) job in getting the team to this point via the less-than-ideal hybrid method! As with the above, we’ll take it!
-Randle is a very, very good (but not great) player on a value deal!
-RJ is a mediocre (but not horrible) player who is overpaid but is still young enough to hope for improvement to “pretty good”.
-Mitch is a very solid starting C (albeit with glaring flaws) on a very good deal. He creates some spacing issues, but also is elite at some important things.
-Thibs is a very, very good (but not great) coach. His rigidity is sometimes maddening, but winning is fun!
-Getting significantly better (i.e. to contender status) from this point is certainly possible, but will definitely require patience, prudence, and a huge dose of luck….and possibly (but not definitely) another coach!
-Jalen Brunson is the best personnel thing to happen to the Knicks since the Patrick Ewing draft, but that’s not to say that he’s perfect as much as we have not had a lot of great things happen since then!
-We should use our draft picks better than we do!
-It would suck to lose IQ!
-Josh Hart is fun, but probably an overpay!
-iHart is close enough to Mitch (and in some ways better) to not feel like the season is doomed!
-Grimes is not as good as hoped, but still good!
-DDV is really nice to have and his deal is fine!
-We could sure use a long, skilled wing or two!

Now back to your regular scheduled whining…

“i believe he was referring to Mathurin…the dude on the pacers…”

Wow. That’s not even *close* to “Matheson,” and also (as far as I know) not a Clyde-ism (which seems to make spelling player’s names incorrectly acceptable on this forum).

I mean the burden of proof is on E here, because RJ has been in the league a pretty long time and is racking up a mile long list of negative BPM seasons. BPM isn’t perfect but it’s a decent snapshot of who the good players are and once you get to five, six negative seasons in a row it’s maybe time to ask yourself some hard questions about ceiling.

The “truther” nonsense is exactly backwards. Conventional metrics say RJ ain’t that great. Empirical evidence doesn’t love him. So instead the discussion turns to “moxie.” Truther, my ass.

But the dual ideas that we can’t possibly win with someone like Randle, but we need to move heaven and earth to construct a roster around the skillset/lack thereof of the demonstrably worse player in literally every fashion, RJ Barrett, do not make a modicum of sense taken together.

I don’t read everything posted, but I don’t think anyone said exactly that. I know I haven’t.

My idea is that that combo is less then ideal on BOTH sides of the ball. So it might make sense to break it up.

Now you have to pick which one.

Randle’s positives: Solid scoring efficiency on high usage and above average rebounder for the position.

Randle’s negatives: 29 years old (shorter window), volatile emotionally, inconsistent effort on defense, too much dribbling and ball holding, less proven in playoffs, solid playmaking offset by bad TOs.

RJ positives: Seem to handle pressure well and only 23 and likely to keep inching forward.

RJ negatives: Below average efficiency, suspect defense, too much dribbling, a little too self oriented. Basically, he’s still average or below average at everything.

After typing that out I may be back to wanting to get rid of both of them. 🙂

And Colin Cowherd remarked offhand today how he and his wife happened to run into RJ in an elevator while the player was in Los Angeles. He mentioned that based on this incident Barrett “is a really nice kid,” and that even his wife (who “doesn’t care at all about sports, and didn’t know who he was”) commented in the same way.

FWIW

Reese, I find it a bit odd that you’re an RJ guy bc you usually dislike guys who are as bad at their jobs as him. Like, if RJ were a GM, he’d be Leon Rose. Driving headfirst into a shot-blocking center is RJ’s version of punting a draft pick. They both do it over and over and show no signs of ever learning. Why do you stan this guy?

But the dual ideas that we can’t possibly win with someone like Randle, but we need to move heaven and earth to construct a roster around the skillset/lack thereof of the demonstrably worse player in literally every fashion, RJ Barrett, do not make a modicum of sense taken together.

Oh, I see now — the price of admission for wondering how Julius fits or doesn’t on an actual contender is being obsessively and relentlessly negative about RJ Barrett.

And all along I thought they were separate issues.

And of course no one has ever said anything even in the same galaxy as moving heaven and earth to construct a roster around RJ Barrett. That’s a complete strawman.

Why do you stan this guy?

I don’t. I occasionally jump in when the obsession over him reaches absurdity. (Take an honest read on it sometime if the spirit moves you. There’s plenty of content.) Nothing more. Never have.

He’d be better with an open lane. He played well in last year’s playoffs. He’s a decent to good defender. He does some nice things. By the numbers he’s streaky and inefficient. He’s eminently moveable in the right package. If they traded him tomorrow in a smart trade, I wouldn’t bat an eye over it. That’s it.

Not sure why we aren’t talking about defense though. That is where this team has been lacking, even before the Mitch injury.

Our bad defense isn’t surprising. Our normal starting lineup has 1-2 positive defensive players depending on who’s starting at 2. Brunson, RJ, and Randle are all bad defensive players (and Randle barely even tries). Brunson is our best offensive player and plays the least important defensive position so that leaves RJ and Randle. Of those two, Randle has an obvious positive impact on the offensive end while RJ doesn’t. So, we’re back at my original point that the team would be better off without RJ at all.

And of course no one has ever said anything even in the same galaxy as moving heaven and earth to construct a roster around RJ Barrett. That’s a complete strawman.

Great. Which stretch 5 are we targeting and how do we get him in?

i think it’s reasonable to expect that RJ on a less iso centric offense could be better… this offense doesn’t really do him any favors since he’s not a great iso player and he’s constantly put in that position… it’s also partly his fault but there are plenty of times and lineup configurations where finding quality looks is scarce and he has to create something… randle has the same issue…. they’re at their best playing off of someone else…

i dont know how this turned into an issue about spacing….. there’s spacing issues because 5 defenders are looking at one guy dribbling the basketball for 5 seconds at a time….

i dont know how this turned into an issue about spacing….. there’s spacing issues because 5 defenders are looking at one guy dribbling the basketball for 5 seconds at a time….

It’s both. The ball doesn’t move *and* the lane is clogged.

The Knicks have been 29th, 30th, 18th, and this year 27th in two-point percentage in Thibs’s tenure.

It honestly seems crazy to me to think that RJ would be anything other than what he always has been in any other situation.

That goes for every player but the idea that there is a way to unlock RJ in particular is just bonkers.

He isn’t good. Nothing is going to change that.

So we had probably our best win of the season last night and here we have a 206 comment thread with probably 10% of it devoted to the actual game.

I can’t imagine how long this thread would be if we lost – 500+ comments?

The Knicks have been 29th, 30th, 18th, and this year 27th in two-point percentage in Thibs’s tenure.

And before Thibs got here we were ranked:

28
30
17
28
28
28
14
11
8
8

Is the answer that we’re supposed to bring back Mike D’Antoni? If we did, how good would RJ be then? And how much patience would MDA have with a slow player that can’t shoot from 3?

Has anyone ever considered that RJ is a primary reason for our lack of spacing?

RJ misses lots of wide-open looks. He gets no steals. He’s not particularly dynamic in transition. He is not particularly good at posting up. He’s precisely the guy you give an extra couple of feet to because you are better off letting him get off a mildly contested 3 or long 2 than letting him get a shoulder past you.

It’s pretty rich to paint him as some kind of innocent victim. Randle and Brunson seem to do just fine in spite of the detrimental effect that RJ has on spacing.

Randle and Brunson seem to do just fine in spite of the detrimental effect that RJ has on spacing.

We’ve been through this at length, but Randle is nowhere near as efficient as he was in the two years before he got here. He’s not efficient anyway; his Knick TS% is 550, sub-100 TS+.

Knick TS%+:

99
90
100
95.

Funny how Thibs is suffocating our 2pt offense while we keep outplaying better 2pt shooting teams with one or more max players on their rosters and coaches who run modern offenses.

Funny how Thibs is suffocating our 2pt offense while we keep outplaying better 2pt shooting teams with one or more max players on their rosters and coaches who run modern offenses.

But we don’t do that. I mean, since pretty much the entire league shoots better from 2 then yeah they beat those teams sometimes … but they don’t really “outplay” (whatever that means) the better teams that much.

Thibs is clearly suffocating the offense. The evidence is overwhelming as is the eye test.

How much of those shitty TS%s are due to RJ and his 27% usage? (A fuckton, to any non-agenda-driven or just plain ignorant poster.)

How much of those shitty TS%s are due to RJ and his 27% usage?

Very little. Probably next to none.

The clogged lane on the other hand ….

Nice how the obvious clogged lane issues have been morphed into an RJ issue. But there’s no obsession here and I’m stanning.

Pull the other one.

We’ve been through this at length, but Randle is nowhere near as efficient as he was in the two years before he got here. He’s not efficient anyway; his Knick TS% is 550, sub-100 TS+.

Knick TS%+:

99
90
100
95.

What does any of this have to do with RJ being significantly worse?

What does any of this have to do with RJ being significantly worse?

It has literally nothing to do with RJ Barrett, which is why it’s always so weird and incongruent and off-putting when the obsessives and truthers bring RJ Barrett into everything.

In terms of Randle, it means he hasn’t really been efficient as a Knick. Due in large part to the clogged lane and primitive offense.

E’s shtick has become so freaking tiresome.

Is it worse than mine? Should E and I have a dance-off to see whose schtick is more annoying? 🙂

“It has literally nothing to do with RJ Barrett”

Even an inveterate trolling a-hole like Hubert can see that you are stanning for RJ harder than anyone has ever stanned for anyone on this site (he toned it down because he has a special place in his heart for you, which exposed how much of a hypocrite he really is because if it was me who was spouting this unadulterated bullshit he’d be far less polite about it.)

Jalen Brunson’s two-point percentage his last two years in Dallas:

578
545

First two years in New York:

519
483

He’s not immune.

This entire offense is premised on basket-hanging centers and board crashers regaining enough possessions and put-backs to make up for the relative bricklaying from inside the arc it forseeably causes. It’s time to move on.

“He’s not immune….”

…from playing with a lane-clogger like RJ…

In other news, Ja’s return is….interesting!

…very interesting!

“It’s time to move on…”

…from RJ so that we can free him up, just like Obi was freed up and is now a great player…

Unlike RJ, Brunson can shoot 3’s. Which is why he thrives here. RJ’s entire skill set consists of driving to the basket. Now, you might say that he’s disproportionally hurt by our scheme, considering that’s his bread and butter. You might say he’s not a good fit for this system. Totally reasonable.

And you might also say that he is a one trick pony who lacks versatility, and isn’t even that great at the trick.

“Unlike RJ, Brunson can shoot 3’s…”

….and mid-ranges, and floaters, and layups…

fify

Live footage of Z-Man entering the chat:

https://youtu.be/xYrJEi0J6qw?si=o950pesqarLRucjG

Live footage of Hubert entering the chat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hwWO3NzS2g

Ja. Morant.

What about Zion with the 13 pt 3 reb masterpiece?

Zion is chubs. I’ll take the under on his knees and ankles holding up for any reasonable amount of time

Can you imagine the KB banter if we had “lucked into” Zion? Especially if Thibs was hired?

Of course, our resident genius E would be trolling off all the reazons why Zion is limited by Thibs, Mitch, or Julius, or anyone but Zion.

hubie and z-man you two are way too damn funny, and having way too much fun without me…

do me do me, i wanna be next…

i still love the ganja khan reference z-man, that was all-time…

That was a hell of a half from Ja. Wow

What a weird day on this blog. I came here for some measured discussion on how the Knicks could get to the final 4 or better ie a Bojan trade and it devolved into E word vomit. Yuck.

Also count me in as someone who thinks that I Hart might be the better fit and maybe Mitch is the trade bait. And it’s not just because I do print work for his mom.

The Knicks just lack good passing and he’s a good passer from the high post. Pretty simple.

Is it worse than mine? Should E and I have a dance-off to see whose schtick is more annoying? 🙂

you don’t have a schtick at all doogie…neither does E, although he’s extremally intentional…

if we was all clones that would get pretty boring pretty fast…

was thinking about raven and our very much resurgent all-nba’er julius and their complex relationship…

right is right raven, you might as well just go with this flow, put pride aside and gets to moving to julius’ new theme music 🙂

What’s really stoopid is that a-holes who don’t even stay up for classic west coast wins have the temerity to pollute the afterglow blog with not only negativity, but perverse self-serving…to quote my brother cgreene…word vomit. To the point where they are bickering about whose drivel is the least drivelish. Shame on them.

I wonder if there’s a part-time lawyer/full time pro bono blogger in Atlanta who spends his days arguing that De’Andre Hunter should be given the keys to the franchise and Young and Murray should get out of his way…

I know this isn’t Hawkerblogger, but…….

“I wonder if there’s a part-time lawyer/full time pro bono blogger in Atlanta who spends his days arguing that De’Andre Hunter should be given the keys to the franchise and Young and Murray should get out of his way…”

Naah, they jumped ship when John Collins was traded for peanuts…

“do me do me, i wanna be next…”

Are you related to Bob Love, aka Butter Bean? Enjoy the music…

(ps if anyone thinks i’m being too hard on poor hubie, he said he skips all my posts so it’s all good.)

loved it z-man, and to ride along with an earlier comment:

To the point where they are bickering about whose drivel is the least drivelish. Shame on them.

Brick Top: Listen, you fucking fringe, if I throw a dog a bone, I don’t want to know if it tastes good or not. You stop me again whilst I’m walking, and I’ll cut your fucking Jacobs off.

Someone please jump in with data but RJ feels like a Kobe assist type of guy that Thibs is deliberately deploying. Wonder what the percentage of his misses we offensive rebound and put back for either two or kick out for a wide open three? Seen some data over the summer that a significant amount of Brunson’s missed floater shots were rebounded by Mitch. Strange way of creating offense but nonetheless effective.

Our offense has been fine. Our defensive rotations (both due to focus & effort) and drop coverage against stretch 5s (Lopez & KP) have been atrocious.

Beating Brooklyn is like eating a dry-aged porterhouse for mental health.

Fun game between Boston and GS. The C’s are so deep it may not matter but I don’t really trust Tatum and especially Brown as closers. Brown might be the most overrated player in the league.

What’s really stoopid is that a-holes who don’t even stay up for classic west coast wins have the temerity to pollute the afterglow blog with not only negativity, but perverse self-serving

Someone has to do the work to pay the taxes to support your Social Security, Z.

Glad someone brought up the Kobe assists so the board could be spared me bringing it up. Kind of weird in 2023 to have an offense so primitive that it on-purpose depends on the Kobe assist, but here we are.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

250 replies on “Knicks Morning News (2023.12.19)”