Today is the first Monday of the month, which means we’re reminding folks that you can contribute to keep KnickerBlogger up & running! We are grateful for your support!
[Yahoo Sports] – Sun, 02 Jun 2024 14:15:03 GMT
- Stay or Go: Should the Knicks bring back Julius Randle?
- Trades the New York Knicks should consider if Julius Randle isn’t extended
- Julius Randle ‘healing up great’ and ‘excited’ about Knicks’ potential
- Julius Randle ‘would love’ to stay with Knicks long-term as uncertainty looms
- Julius Randle wants to remain with the Knicks and be part of another playoff run next season
[CBS Sports] – Mon, 03 Jun 2024 00:41:00 GMT
- Tom Thibodeau likely to extend with Knicks for at least $10 million per year, per report
- Latest NBA coaching rumors: Thibodeau extension, Jeff Van Gundy could return, Ham, Redick
- Stein’s Latest: Thibodeau, Williams, Ham, Van Gundy
- Knicks Rumors: Tom Thibodeau a ‘Virtual Certainty’ to Get New Contract at Market Rate
- Tom Thibodeau ‘Certainty’ To Sign Contract Extension Worth At Least $10M Per Season
[Sports Illustrated] – Sun, 02 Jun 2024 11:05:17 GMT
- New York Knicks Get Lower Price on Bulls Star
- Lakers News: LA Now Out on Trading for East All-Star?
- NBA Rumors: Shocking twist could gift the 76ers an All-Star for free
- Bulls News: Chicago Star ‘Motivated’ To Part Ways With Organization
- NBA Trade Rumors: Bulls’ Asking Price for Zach LaVine Has ‘Dropped Significantly’
[Sports Illustrated] – Sun, 02 Jun 2024 18:00:01 GMT
- New York Knicks Shopping Draft Picks for Star
- NBA mock draft 2024 simulator: ESPN Analytics tool for 2024
- NBA Mock Draft: Knicks Grab Help with Back-to-Back Picks
- Draft SZN’s First Knicks-Specific Big Board
- Knicks are ‘looking into trade scenarios’ to maximize contention window
[BasketNews.com] – Sun, 02 Jun 2024 07:37:16 GMT
Jalen Brunson defends Rudy Gobert, suggests alternative DPOY winner
[Sports Illustrated] – Sun, 02 Jun 2024 17:03:56 GMT
New York Knicks Voice Not Ruling Out Bigger Call
[Sports Illustrated] – Sun, 02 Jun 2024 13:00:05 GMT
Knicks Have Draft Option in Kansas Guard
[Heavy.com] – Sun, 02 Jun 2024 12:29:27 GMT
Proposed Blockbuster NBA Trade Has Knicks Land $221 Million Star for Randle
[Empire Sports Media] – Sun, 02 Jun 2024 13:48:05 GMT
Knicks acquire guard with microwave capabilities in recent free agency projection
[Heavy.com] – Mon, 03 Jun 2024 03:56:00 GMT
Josh Hart Takes Jab at Tyrese Haliburton for Celtics Sweep
101 replies on “Knicks Morning News (2024.06.03)”
Whether it’s wise or not, how a player performs in the short sample crucible of the postseason is usually a very good harbinger of how much money teams throw at him in free agency a month later.
Hartenstein’s spotty playoffs hurt us on the court but should benefit us now.
Since there’s a lot of chatter about iHart this week (and probably month), I thought I’d include this chart from a story about the finals from The Ringer (the bit was about how important KP will be). Most of the usual suspects are in there, but I found the order startling on multiple levels. Just kind of interesting.
Best Rim Defenders in Regular Season
Player FG% Allowed
Ivica Zubac 49.6%
Joel Embiid 50.9%
Walker Kessler 50.9%
Rudy Gobert 52.0%
Kristaps Porzingis 52.1%
Chet Holmgren 52.4%
Isaiah Hartenstein 52.5%
Victor Wembanyama 52.9%
Brook Lopez 53.2%
Anthony Davis 54.0%
From Macri’s newsletter:
This is probably the default position Knicks fans should have.
Count me among those who feel that losing out on iHart would not be a disaster. (Sound familiar? I said the same thing about Mitch a couple of years ago.) Finding a solid but not dominant C is one of the easiest jobs a GM has to undertake. Again, think back to the hype and panic about Mitch during his UFA period, and how in hindsight we can see that we actually had already signed a better center for half the money.
And in our current case, we already have a solid starting C in Mitch at less than half the money than the $100M iHart would wind up getting paid, and only need a backup. Of course, that’s contingent on the health of Mitch’s brittle bones, tendons and ligaments. But still!
Honestly, even though the tea leaves strongly suggest that OG is extending with the Knicks, I’d be a lot more worried about him leaving than iHart, since a) he’s better and b) we’ve already invested assets in him.
I would absolutely hate to lose iHart, but if it happens, it happens.
Small samples are always a problem, but how you do in the playoffs matters a lot. In the playoffs you are generally going to face tougher defenses and adjustments to your skillset that will expose limitations that don’t get always exposed in the regular season. I think you have to look at playoff results and subjectively decide whether the player had a tough playoffs because he was hurt, had one particular tough matchup that exposed something, was exposed more broadly, or it was just random. But imo, you can’t just ignore it because it was a small sample.
Firmly in the “losing IHart would be a disaster” camp
I don’t expect to keep him if someone offers 28 million more though
I don’t get what kind of inferences folks are trying to draw about iHart regarding his playoff performance. He was inconsistent, but also had a .642 TS% and a 14.2 OREB%. while averaging 10.2/9.5/4.3 per 36.
He had trouble guarding Joel Embiid. Like every other C in the NBA.
He had trouble with the Pacers once OG went down. Before that, in games 1 and 2, he was excellent.
It would take a really dumb GM to be spooked by his playoff performance. Like idiotic. I doubt that it would even be brought up, either in private meetings or in negotiations. No one is signing him to be a first, or second, or third, or fourth option, or to carry the team if two frontcourt stars are out.
Precisely.
No one is suggesting we let the guy walk bc he wasn’t great in the playoffs. At $16mm, who cares?
But if an opposing team is going to make a $25mm+ offer to pry someone from another team, and it could be the only move they can make this summer, they’re absolutely going to look at how he did in the playoffs.
And if you’re OKC and you look at iHart’s performance, you probably think “we wouldn’t have played this guy in crunch time” and pass.
Don’t get the iHart thing at all. The things he does well are overrated, and he has an extremely limited offensive game. Even defensively on Embiid, the difference between him and even a Mitch was readily apparent. Easily replaceable. Squandering a lottery pick to machinate to get him was a big mistake, as was conflating extending IQ with extending him.
He can’t do anything on offense so he doesn’t miss shots, which makes a certain faction salivate, and obviously Thibs loves his non-shooting rim protectors. That’s precisely the archetype that can be done without.
It would really suck to lose iHart, but going into next season with, say, Mitch and Missi wouldn’t be a disaster. We could also use Bojan’s contract to get a hasty backup replacement like Capela.
Regardless of what happens to iHart, it’s going to be hard to improve on last year’s roster. Maybe Dejounte’s gettable… Ingram isn’t good enough… pass on LaVine and Derozan… KAT’s too expensive… pass on Ayton and Grant… that leaves (potentially): Kuzma, Wiggins, Giddey, Markkanen, Dinwiddie, both Bridges, and maybe Butler. And adding Mikal or maybe Butler without losing Randle or any other core guy is probably the only move that would improve us a bit as a starting lineup move.
Obviously we can bring in some bench pieces to improve the team, but that will cost us a pick or two. Something unusual could materialize, including a trade demand, but as of now, we’re somewhat limited.
Couldn’t disagree more. IHart moves the ball well. The offense looks better with him out there. And he is a great defender.
The idea you can pick up another IHart on the waiver wire is just incorrect. We were lucky to get him and would be lucky to keep him.
ess-dog, I don’t think of it as limited, I think of it as being in a sweet spot. It’s not like we CAN’T make changes, it’s that none of them seem to be moves that would move the needle. Meaning the team we could field at full health next year, if everyone comes back, is pretty damn awesome.
I don’t think losing iHart is a total disaster, but I think it’ll make us worse. Since Thibs FINALLY heard some of us screaming to play him like Jokic Lite, he’s been an indispensable piece of the team. He’s totally bought into the system (throw yourself onto the floor after any loose balls), is a terrific rebounder and rim protector (see above), makes his bunnies, and is not someone you just replace off the center junk heap.
But that’s exactly my point. Maybe “limited” is the wrong word, but as we know: the better you get, the harder it gets to improve.
And Owen, I agree and love iHart, but Thibs could easily revert to his “traditional big” offense with Mitch, and we would still be a very good team… maybe slightly worse/less versatile/uglier, all other things being equal, but not by much.
Obviously iHart is not in the salary realm of guys like Jokic, Embiid, AD, Bam, and Gobert. Ayton is vastly overpaid. KAT really isn’t a C any more. The AAV of the rest of the most recent contracts on non-rookie scale deals:
Lopez $24M (due for a pay cut)
Capela $22.5M (due for a pay cut)
Turner $20.5M (due for a raise)
Allen $20M
Vucevic $20M
Poeltl $19.5M
Nurkic $17.5M
Z Collins $17.4M
Okongwu $15.5M
JV $15M
Stewart $15M
Mitch $15M
Gafford $13.3M
Adams $12.6M
Carter Jr. $12.5M
RWIII $12M
Holmes $11.6M
Zubac $12M
Claxton $9.6
Looney $7.5M
Plumlee $5M
Powell $4M
Looking at that list, I don’t see how iHart could possibly justify a deal at more than $20M AAV. It would strictly be a case of Presti believing that he was worth significantly overpaying due to needing to make it worth iHart’s while to leave the Knicks.
Personally, I think it would be a highly questionable move by Presti. He has a billion draft picks, including lottery picks, and locking into a guy for $25M AAV when he is likely to find a player as good or even better in the draft at a fraction of the cost seems sub-optimal on paper. However, there is little doubt that iHart would improve his chances of getting to the finals in the next couple of years, and would not significantly cut into his flexibility to make further improvements via all three routes…trades, the draft, and free agency. And beyond injury concerns, there is very little chance that iHart turns into an albatross, especially with the cap rising 10% or close every year.
Again, I seriously doubt that iHart’s playoff performance has any bearing on the conversation, beyond that if he were utterly dominant it would make it a no-brainer.
While all true, I think he’s also shown he doesn’t have the motor (or perhaps the recovery ability) to do it consistently. I think he needs to be part of a center tandem, much like Porzingis and Horford, Gafford and Lively.
This puts me squarely in two camps: it would be a disaster to lose him, and I don’t think it makes sense for OKC to beat our offer.
For me the bigger issue in losing iHart is that it takes Mitch out of being a chip in case a star trade materialises.
In terms of play-off sample sizes, I think you kind of throw out the usual data, because the player is subject to just one or two match-ups/defensive strategies. But the performance is certainly relevant to value. Typically if it is positive (Mitch dominating the Cavs front line last year, or if iHart was able to neutralise Embiid, Jalen dominating Mitchell in the Dallas/Utah playoffs), probably less so if negative unless questions of yips surface.
When the playoff problem pops up, it’s not so much that the player was negated, but that he’s (1) negatable; and (2) demonstrably negatable.
I don’t want to have to worry about a guy and be forced to price in his playoff risk. I’m certainly not going to lose a lot of sleep if some other team wants to take that issue off my hands.
“I don’t want to have to worry about a guy and be forced to price in his playoff risk.”
WTF are you talking about? In 26 playoff games, Hartenstein has a career 1.8 BPM, a .642 TS%, and averages 9 rebounds, 3.5 assists, and 1.6 blocks per 36. This insinuation about him being some kind of bust in this year’s playoffs, or in the playoffs in general, is total garbage.
Others can get all hot and bothered about a Wages of Wins type guy with a 12 usage who scored 7.5-ish pts/36 in the ECSF and shot the ball literally 15 times in the last five playoff games in well over 30 mpg.
We’ve been through this a million times; I’m not getting all invested in a guy with no offensive game just because he doesn’t miss shots because he doesn’t or can’t take shots.
He sucked against Indiana. He’s not close to as good as Siakam or Myles Turner. He’s eminently replaceable. It was ridiculous to move a lottery pick for him, ridiculous to tie IQ to him.
Not a lot more to say about it than that. I’m moving on.
Every player in the league who is not a top-tier superstar is a “playoff risk.” The whole concept is quite frankly stupid. There are no players other than the ones who are obvious superstars who have some sort of magical “good in the playoffs” gene. Not even the immortal Dejounte Murray.
Prediction. We will resign iHart and after we do, the fact that he didn’t sign with someone else will be used as “proof” by some posters that he isn’t worth his contract.
And even the obvious superstars have their games, series and even entire playoffs where they underperform.
I don’t buy that OKC would go for I-Hart. This is a team that traded Harden to avoid paying the luxury tax back in the day. They have a bunch of players that will need to be paid soon. Spending 20m/year on a center, when they already have a star center, is just not going to happen in my view.
Now Detroit could do something silly.
Edit: if OKC wants to spend money before the Chet/J-Dub extensions, I don’t think they would do it on a non-elite, somewhat duplicative player. They’d trade for a star wing to replace Giddey.
Murray has a playoff problem. He never goes to it!
We’re a little bit spoiled by Leon Rose hitting screaming line drive doubles and epic home runs with his free agent signings. I don’t know how repeatable that is going to be going forward. It might seem easy to find good players like Hartenstein at bargain prices because we just did it, but really it’s not that easy.
It was ridiculous to move a lottery pick for him, ridiculous to tie IQ to him.
I am scratching my head to find the direct causal relationship, especially the lotto pick
It seems that if the Knicks want Hartenstein back, they can offer Mitch to OKC. He’d come at a cheaper AAV, and for less years, and would only cost them picks, which they are so rich with I don’t know why they’d waste their time with free agency at all. Yesterday somebody said OKC insiders were saying they just needed a 20 mpg guy to protect the rim. If that’s too little of a role for an Allen trade, a Mitch trade could be mutually beneficial.
Very easy path to upgrade on iHart. Without much money to spend we simply draft or sign a center who can’t be stopped.
“I am scratching my head to find the direct causal relationship, especially the lotto pick”
It’s the narrative about Leon trading out of picks to create the cap space to comfortably sign iHart and Brunson rather than creating the space in other ways. Which I’m guessing is now compounded by suggesting that Leon favored keeping the porch light on for iHart over locking up IQ at $25M. And all of this is in the context of the original sin of hiring Leon, who foolishly committed to a hybrid method of rebuilding, hired Thibs, extended Julius, traded out of drafts, overpayed for a bunch of Thibsean hustlebunnies, overpayed for OG, undervalued RJ, didn’t trade for Dejounte, yadayadayada…
So tedious. You would literally have to scratch your head right through your skull to the point of self-lobotomization in order to understand it.
Looking at that list, I don’t see how iHart could possibly justify a deal at more than $20M AAV. It would strictly be a case of Presti believing that he was worth significantly overpaying due to needing to make it worth iHart’s while to leave the Knicks.
Personally, I think it would be a highly questionable move by Presti. He has a billion draft picks, including lottery picks, and locking into a guy for $25M AAV when he is likely to find a player as good or even better in the draft at a fraction of the cost seems sub-optimal on paper.
one thing presti could do is offer something like 4/90 on a declining deal. if the 4th year of both deals was a player option, this would mean ihart was getting the first 3yrs at $68mm from okc vs only $52mm from us. by year 3 & 4, okc would only be paying only 12.7% and 10.9% respectively of the projected caps — this is at or below the % of nurkic/poeltl right now and not that far ahead of the projected mle in year 4.
this still comes at a an opportunity cost with respect to current cap room. but if he doesn’t see any great options this summer he could consider it, hoping that ihart’s declining deal could still be flippable a year hence in a base case should something even better pop up. i suspect that he will go for a bigger fish given that ihart does hurt the 5 out vision a bit, but i don’t agree that more than $20mm is impossible to justify.
Now i trust Leon and so i think we’ll re-sign iHart for the money we can pay him. I don’t think there’s a team that’ll go over 80M for iHart. I’d bet good money that he stays.
It actually makes more sense to offer something like 3/75 on a declining deal.
Pay iHart heavily in the next two years while Chet and Jalen are cheap, then have a very movable iHart on a one-year, $16MM deal when it comes time to pay them.
That was my concern a few months ago. I’m a little less concerned now.
Oklahoma City has 4 first round picks next year: Houston’s, Miami’s, Utah’s, and Philadelphia’s.
If I were Sam Presti, rather than make Isaiah Hartenstein rich, I would take one of those picks, package it with the 12th pick, move up and draft Donovan Clingan.
Pay iHart heavily in the next two years while Chet and Jalen are cheap, then have a very movable iHart on a one-year, $16MM deal when it comes time to pay them.
you can’t offer 3/75 and have the last year be anywhere near 16mm. max decrement is 5%.
Tapping the sign:
Has there been reporting that OKC is interested in Hartenstein or is it all people speculating because it makes sense for them to be interested?
Seems like OKC could solve their backup big problem in more creative ways than throwing a huge contract at Hartenstein. They have massive amounts of flexibility.
“Has there been reporting that OKC is interested in Hartenstein or is it all people speculating because it makes sense for them to be interested?”
Jake Fisher reported that OKC is interested.
Take a look at it numerically, forget players name/position and all our own biases for a second.
Adding an improving 26 year old player with a 3.4BPM, 4.7EPM & a WS/48 of .204 that perfectly fits void (team need) to a young and maturing 57 win team is just not fair.
In the next two years, Presti will flirt with 70 wins.
Thanks for the tip, ptmilo. When did that change? Mitch is at more than 5%.
Detroit’s the bigger risk, IMO. No one wants their free agent money, so that makes them dangerous similar to how Houston was last year when they offered FVV $40MM.
Detroit can give iHart 4/110, pair him with Duren, and suddenly have 48 minutes of rim protection. They might see that as a waste of Duren. Or they might see that as a fast path to respectability. Hard to tell.
The silver lining of that dark cloud is at least if would make the Detroit first less Fugazi. Of course we got that first round pick by giving away Jalen Williams so we could sign iHart.
“One thing presti could do is offer something like 4/90 on a declining deal.”
I don’t know if that would be enough to take iHart out of the “bet on himself in NYC” range that a 4/$72 with a player option in last year would offer. $18 of guaranteed $ would be hard to say no to, but going from NYC to OKC is a pretty big culture shift for a newlywed with a model for a wife. Maybe just wishful thinking on my part!
Need a lot more than rim protection to be an actual good team.
Thanks for the tip, ptmilo. When did that change? Mitch is at more than 5%.
it didn’t change. mitch has 8% drops because he was a re-sign eligible for 8% raises and the max increase/decrease rule is symmetric.
This is exactly why I have always advocated for the full rebuild, asset-hoarding approach to team building. They have a practically infinite window of contention and insane amounts of flexibility. The hybrid method involves a lot more threading of the needle.
Leon has done a fine job of executing the hybrid method, far better than I thought possible given his lack of experience. I’m enjoying the hell out of the Leon Rose experiment. No shade.
The OKC way is really the way to do it though.
Getting iHart was one of Leon’s best moves, and losing him would be a big setback.
We can go through the numbers: we were 8 PTS/100 better offensively with him on the floor, 3 PTS/100 better defensively with him on the floor, 3.5 BPM, 4.7 EPM (2nd on the team, 14th in the NBA), etc.
But since we have a contingent that pretends the only objective truth in the NBA is that Dejounte Murray is a superstar, I’ll just say that if you don’t think iHart is a big part of our success, your eye-test sucks.
Even at his low usage, his demonstrated ability to make plays and score from outside the restricted area opens up a ton for us offensively, hence our 127 ORTG with both him and Brunson on the floor this season. This is blatantly obvious to anyone who watches the games, sorry.
If I really need to make the case that he’s a very effective defensive player, I mean, whoever I need to make the case to is hopeless. The guy was holding down our defense in lineups as the only guy above 6’4″. What the hell are we even talking about?
So yeah, it would really suck to lose him. I wouldn’t blame Leon–the fact that the original signing was so good is what makes this a potentially big problem–but we’d be hard pressed to replace him.
I won’t say it’d be a “disaster” because 1) we have a lot of pedants around these parts and 2) it is theoretically possible to pull another rabbit out of the hat with an inexpensive signing or draft pick. But you don’t want to be forced to have to do that again!
“This is exactly why I have always advocated for the full rebuild, asset-hoarding approach to team building. They have a practically infinite window of contention and insane amounts of flexibility. The hybrid method involves a lot more threading of the needle.
Leon has done a fine job of executing the hybrid method, far better than I thought possible given his lack of experience. I’m enjoying the hell out of the Leon Rose experiment. No shade.
The OKC way is really the way to do it though.”
But there are some caveats. First, Presti is Presti. Not a lot of GMs are in his elite stratosphere. Second, he had a huge head start, similar to Ainge in Utah. He was able to trade still marketable max players that had been rolled over since the Durant-Westbrook-Harden days for troves of assets. When Leon took over, he did not have the same resources.
There are quite a few teams that have tried the full-rebuild asset-hoarding approach over the past decade, with very mixed results. The leveling of draft odds has also complicated matters.
And let’s not forget, the only reason why we are not by far the greatest team in NBA history (I kid!) is because Leon has made immense fuck-ups…not drafting Jalen Johnson or Jalen Williams, or drafting IQ over Desmond Bane, or Obi over Tyrese Haliburton…or running the mercs back in 2021 with Fournier and Kemba as our top acquisitions…or using the detritus of the 19th pick on Cam Reddish. This sort of files in the face of the whole “you have to thread the needle” stuff. Much like the Pistons are making a mess of the full rebuild.
“I won’t say it’d be a “disaster” because 1) we have a lot of pedants around these parts…”
…and they always rub it it when my hyperbole looks foolish in retrospect…
“*because Leon has made immense fuck-ups*”
I hope my sarcasm here was not lost on anyone…other than the Hali whiff, none of the moves indicated rise to the level of immense fuck-up in my book, just typical minor miscalculations that many GMs make. See: Presti re: Gordon Hayward, not to be confused with the immense fuck-up of Presti re: James Harden.
Yeah, but how much moxie does he have?
it’s hysterical that the two picks that shall not be named were in fact presti’s return for alperen sengun. and of course really cementing the old “there’s a great deal of poku in a nation” theory of the thunder rebuild was the fact that a certain nullicorn cost them Quickley PLUS Jaden Mcdaniels.
Once again what began as Pagliacci’s doomsaying gradually evolves into Knickerblogger consensus as the facts become apparent:
1. iHart is REALLY good. He was probably our second most valuable player over this entire season.
2. Other teams know this.
3. Some of those other teams are asset billionaires forever and ever because they tanked for a few seasons 15 years ago (you know, the thing we can never ever do). We can literally only ever have players they don’t want.
4. iHart is GONE, because nobody passes up eight figure deltas for vibes, and because even equivalent money in NYC is worth significantly less due to taxes.
Our outlook for next season thus begins with a huge step back, losing a player who is either All-NBA caliber or merely a borderline All-Star, depending on which impact metrics you ask. In his place is one of the most flawed, negatable, and injury-prone players in the league, who can’t finish either at the rim or from the FT line.
We are lucky if the expenditure of our entire asset haul leaves us as well off as we were with iHart. That’s reality, and that’s why last year was very likely the widest our window will ever get with this core.
If we regress back to the mezzanine last year and win 44 games, this will be the reason why. I think it clarifies that our big move needs to be a run at AD or something, because we’ll have a gaping hole at C that will outweigh all our other weaknesses.
LOL, Pags. iHart is coming back.
Hartenstein is a fine player, but not an ideal fit for OKC, who seem to want to play Holmgren at the 5. If you invest $100M in Hartenstein, you kind of have to give up on the whole “Holmgren at the 5 idea” because Hartenstein would be playing there for presumably 2/3 of the minutes.
Maybe they do punt on Holmgren as the 5, I don’t know. But the ideal fit for them is a 4 who can shoot a little and also rebound.
So Randle, lol.
Detroit has Duren & Stewart. I don’t see them throwing $25M at Hartenstein. They’re stupid but idk if they’re that stupid. Spending $40M on backup C’s would be something though.
If they give iHart $25mm, they’ll be spending $30mm for Hartenstein and Duren.
If we give iHart $16mm, we’ll be spending $30mm for Hartenstein and Mitch.
(Stewart moved to PF last year; he also hit 38% of his 3s and might be developing into a decent stretch 4.)
The remarkable thing about OKC is just how little tanking they’ve actually done. They tanked back-to-back seasons from 2007-2009 and again from 2020-2022. That’s it.
The so-called “Presti Method” isn’t really tanking at all. The man just buys low and sells high over and over.
I mean, Bruce Brown and Terry Rozier each made $22 million last year. I don’t think it’s inconceivable that someone might offer iHart that amount. That’s roughly $4 million more per season than we can offer, so an extra $16 million over a 4-year contract.
Would you say no?
Maybe Dolan can find him some local paid commercials to star in or acting gigs for his wife… otherwise, Greater Detroit has plenty to offer at that salary.
The remarkable thing is just how little tanking they’ve needed to do. Tanking is the most efficient talent acquisition strategy in basketball by far, so much so that it remains so even with the flattened lottery odds. They hit on three draft picks 15 years ago and they basically never need to rely on luck again.
Hitting on high draft picks is automatically buying low, and superstar talent is inherently overpriced because it has excess value against a max salary, so selling high is virtually guaranteed. Just the return they got for Paul George, who was a retread of a retread, is enough talent to populate an entire team.
This is why the best long-term move we could make in this era, as much as I hate to say it, is to sell high on Jalen Brunson before his prime is over.
The Presti Plan has so far resulted in 0 NBA titles over 17 years
Sam Presti’s far and away best move was trading for Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. He didn’t draft him. He traded a veteran star that did not fit his rebuild time table for a younger talent hoping that player would develop and become a key part of team long term. He wound up becoming a superstar. More power to him, but that’s more of hybrid move than draft move even though he also brought in loads of picks.
We basically did the same thing with Brunson. We maneuvered our way into a position to sign him with trades and he also developed into a star.
The Knicks have done well with free agents signings and trades.
Where the Knicks screwed up was in the lottery area of the draft. Prior management screwed up so many lottery picks, Leon had way less to work with when he took over than Presti did when he started his rebuild. If we didn’t screw up those lottery drafts, Leon could have flipped players for picks/better players or developed them.
Presti made very few mistakes in the draft. Leon’s main mistake was taking Toppin over Haliburton. Since then he’s mostly be rolling them out for a yet to be executed end game.
The irony in that is that I used to get trashed for saying you just have to be value oriented in trades and “win deals”. Granted, I made it sound easy when it’s actually very difficult, but that’s why the best basketball executives get paid so much. They evaluate prospects and players better than average and win more deals than they lose.
The Knicks’ various plans have resulted in 0 NBA titles over 50 years. Which of us is closer to winning one, now and in future? Which of us has had more resources to throw at that problem?
Presti flubbed a team with 3 surefire hall of famers before lucking out when Kawhi demanded the Clippers trade for Paul George.
You’ve repeatedly advocated against rebuilds that focus exclusively on asset hauls. Presti has not done one “hybrid” thing in the course of the entire rebuild. Every single player in their playoff rotation except Isaiah Joe was a player that the Thunder drafted.
They did a rebuild the correct way, so do not sit here and pretend this is in any way some sort of vindication of the hybrid method. This was not a “win deals” approach, this was repeatedly and exclusively investing in young talent acquired through the draft with no other component to the strategy.
They got nothing for Durant. They got close to nothing for Harden. And they used Westbrook as an expiring salary.
They’re not here bc they hit on those three guys 15 years ago.
if we didn’t screw up those lottery picks…Leon wouldn’t be the GM…
He won games! Year after year. And then he auctioned off the guys who won the games for players and picks. Other than Chet (granted a huge “other than”) all the players and picks came from paper clip trades that he made while fielding a playoff team.
Again. Every single player in their rotation except Isaiah Joe was a player that they drafted. This is maybe the most extreme “build through the draft” kind of team ever assembled.
The “hybrid” method as defined here has involved acquiring players through various methods, including veterans if they represent a good value, hence the “win deals” descriptor.
That’s not what Presti did. At every opportunity he tried to acquire draft picks. Every player they have was acquired this way!
I looked up the paper clip trail out of curiosity and it is pretty amazing, actually. It starts with one of the great heists of all time:
– Phoenix (coming off a 61 win season) trades their 2008 & 2010 first round draft picks along with Kurt Thomas to Seattle for a single 2nd round pick. How did Sarver stay in the league after that?
– They use the 2008 pick on Serge Ibaka.
– After winning 55 games in 2015-16, they sell high on Serge, trading him for Oladipo and Sabonis.
– They trade Oladipo and Sabonis for Paul George.
– They trade Paul George for SGA and 5 firsts.
Another nifty paper clip trail:
– They turned Westbrook’s expiring into Paul (when he was “toxic”) and 2 picks
– They turned Paul into Rubio and a pick
– They turned Rubio into a pick.
That’s four picks for one expiring!
The idea we could lose IHart off this team without consequence is low key one of the strangest arguments I have ever seen on this site.
I am totally baffled.
Presti did not draft SGA. He’s by far their best player.
Drafting and tanking are two different things.
IMO you can still build through the draft while you are executing a hybrid rebuild. That’s what Presti did (and frankly what Leon should have done).
The hybrid method, as I understand it, is simply rebuilding without tanking. Presti didn’t do a full hybrid, of course, because he tanked for a season to get Chet. But literally every other move was executed while the Thunder were winning between 44-49 games.
Owen, literally nobody (intelligent) said that it wouldn’t have consequences. The point is that it wouldn’t be a “disaster“.
I’m not a participant in the argument about what to call OKC’s success. But I will say that seem to have made a series of smart deals that cascaded into a lot of talent and many draft picks. The Knicks have also made a series of smart deals, although with less focus on draft picks and more on free agency. We haven’t been making smart deals as long as OKC has, but we are getting better and, I think, richer in talent. We are analogous to OKC in that our recent success is built off of a series of smart decisions. I’ll take it.
IHart had an absolutely amazing season. He’s the second best player on our team. If losing out on signing him to a hugely affordable contract isnt a disaster I dont know what is in the nba
This is how Pat Riley pulls off the hybrid, too: Herro, Bam, Jacquez, Jovic…
This is a bit of a semantic debate I guess, and I hate those. Presti executed a classic asset hoard rebuild. He traded every “win now” piece he had that had any value for future assets, namely draft picks. This was like the “true rebuild” of my dreams. I’ve been saying forever that OKC is like my wildest fantasy come true.
They have not signed a single free agent in this process, nor have they made a single trade for a veteran other than end of bench flotsam. This was a full bore youth movement. What Leon has done with the Knicks is a more textbook example of a hybrid approach. Again we’re talking about the definitions of words here.
Well, your fantasy life is your fantasy life, but you should throw a championship in there and maybe some hotties imho
Maybe some of those surplus picks could be traded for a date with Jennifer Lawrence
1. Hybrid method as defined by ME includes drafting players, trading players for picks, trading picks for players, trading up or down in the draft, rolling picks out, signing free agents, making player trades and taking on bad contracts for picks.
It means EVERYTHING is on the table when you are looking for value and trying to build the team, but of course it must done logically depending on where the team is at that point in time.
It’s an effort to accelerate the rebuild process relative to a more strict draft rebuild that takes years to accumulate players, years to develop them and can potentially include some bad luck that turns it into a 10 year process.
2. The most important player and the only reason OKC is where they are right now was the trade for Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. Otherwise they would be loaded with picks and have some young talent but they would only be mid stream in their rebuild. The deal also included picks because SGA wasn’t anywhere near the player George was at that time. Then he got massively better.
You can give Presti credit for recognizing that he had to start over, that SGA was going to get a lot better (or maybe he just got lucky) and for winning the deal, but it was a trade for young talent that accelerated the process.
I’m not trying to be semantic I just always thought the two aspects of the hybrid method were competing and rebuilding.
I didn’t see drafting or asset hoarding as a defining characteristic. Morey is asset hoarding without tanking. The Knicks tanked without asset hoarding.
And Presti hoarded assets like a MF while competing almost every year, so that struck me as hybrid.
Strat, there’s a special kind of pettiness going on here. You were far more correct than those who disparaged Leon for foregoing a correct (ah-ah-ah-Bullshit!) rebuild.
What has been proven beyond doubt in the last decade is that the “there is only one ‘correct’ way to rebuild” truthers have been exposed. I mean, if Leon’s hybrid method would have included all of the transactions he made, plus avoiding unforced errors like drafting Hali and not running it back in 2021, the Knicks would be just as well situated as the Thunder. Even better if you discount the clever non-tank trades Presti made.
Seriously, JK, you should just take the L and shut the fuck up.
If Presti was running the Knicks he’d have more options for rebuilding because it’s NY not OKC. IMO he would probably try to accelerate the rebuild by also looking for value in free agency and the trade market.
Don’t confuse his genius at trading and drafting with meaning he would rebuild the same exact way in every market. In NY he’d likely be doing things differently and be better at than Rose has been.
“Don’t confuse his genius at trading and drafting with meaning he would rebuild the same exact way in every market. In NY he’d likely be doing things differently and be better at than Rose has been.”
Ya think?
Leon’s inexperience has definitely been an obstacle. He has had fuck-ups. Even so, he has us in a great position relative to the full rebuild teams.
Thanks Z-Man
I’m not criticizing anyone here or gloating in any way. You can build a winner by accumulating picks and rebuilding mostly via draft. I’ll even admit there’s a certain appeal to having a young mostly home grown team like OKC. I’m just trying to clarify my own position on rebuilding and how it’s possible to accelerate the process over a more exclusive draft rebuild.
IMO, it mostly comes down to competence and not that one approach is more likely to be successful than the other. IMO Presti would be successful running things like Riley and Riley would be successful running things like Presti but because of their personal preferences and markets, they do things differently. Both are very smart successful guys.
“I’m not criticizing anyone here or gloating in any way.”
No need for doubletalk. You have every right to criticize and gloat, on this very specific issue. Your takes on Phil were laughably dumb, and you deservedly took heat and derision for them. But on this issue you are nearly 100% correct, or at least far closer to correct than your detractors are, and it’s petty for them not to admit it.
Strat’s brilliant basketball philosophy boils down to “do good things and not bad things.”
Tremendous fucking insight. I guess I need to “take the L” in the face of this incredible wisdom. Who knew, all along, that Strat actually favored a rebuild through the draft strategy all along! That falls under the “do good things” strategy thus it counts as “hybrid.”
Got it. Chastened by the experience.
Nah, you’re just being petty and thin-skinned by dismissively watering down what Strat has actually said, in the face of overwhelming evidence that you were dead wrong from the get-go.
Right, I’m so petty and thin-skinned that I say on almost a daily basis “wow Leon did way better with the hybrid method than I thought he could.” Very happy to have been wrong about that, actually. Not the least bit shy about saying it. I’d be upset if Leon got fired, because he’s doing a fine job! As I said earlier in this thread, no shade at all.
You, on the other hand, are the type of cat to let petty grievances go, right? A truly magnanimous fellow like. That’s very obvious to everybody. No grudge-holder, that Z-Man.
I think a key distinction between a full rebuild and the hybrid method is that in a full rebuild you expect to be bad for a period of time so that you can draft young talent and set yourself up for the future while in the hybrid method you try and accumulate talent and be as competitive as possible at the same time. OKC did get good mostly through the draft, but a was competitive at the same time because of their great trade results. This makes them a confusing case that we argue about.
“Right, I’m so petty and thin-skinned that I say on almost a daily basis “wow Leon did way better with the hybrid method than I thought he could.” Very happy to have been wrong about that, actually. Not the least bit shy about saying it. I’d be upset if Leon got fired, because he’s doing a fine job! As I said earlier in this thread, no shade at all.”
But that isn’t the point, is it? Out of one side of your mouth, you say that you were wrong, and out of the other you say that “well, I was still right that the “full” rebuild (whatever that is) is the “correct” method.
In that defense, you say ridiculous things like “Every single player in their rotation except Isaiah Joe was a player that they drafted…” conveniently forgetting that the single player that actually makes them a contender is SGA.
And again, you were at the front of the line in criticizing Leon’s decision-making, whether in the draft, in signing mercs, in extending RJ, etc. Yet despite those mistakes, we are at the point where you are sort of admitting you were wrong; yet you still feel compelled to be dismissive of the guy who has been 100X more right than you all along.
And of course, by calling you out on that, I must have some sort of grudge or whatever. There’s always something, isn’t there?
And PS, I’m not a big fan of Strat and his takes on Phil, Frank, the media, or politics. I have called him out many times on those things.
Pace yourself, Z-Man, it’s only Monday. Save some vitriol for the rest of the week.
“Pace yourself, Z-Man, it’s only Monday. Save some vitriol for the rest of the week.”
Just defending the resident punching bag from some bullies. That’s kind of what I do!
Lol, by saying his takes were “laughably dumb” and that he “deservedly took heat and derision for them”? Did I get that right?
That was indeed an error on my part about SGA— they did indeed trade for him after his rookie season, so sure, you can count that as a “hybrid” move. My bad on that. Although, y’know… once again, they were trading a veteran “win now” piece for a very young player on a rookie contract plus a boatload of draft picks. Still an “asset hoard” kind of move even if they did not indeed draft SGA.
Is that the “right way” to rebuild? Well, judge for yourself. I’d personally trade our situation for OKC’s, as they have more young and controllable talent, more future assets and what appears to me to be a higher floor and ceiling than us. They should be contenders essentially forever. YMMV. I like our team too.
And honestly I quite like Strat and agree with him more than I disagree. His takes, other than a few blind spots, are reasonable. It’s just a bit rich for me for him to claim that he’s vindicated by OKC’s success because they got where they are by “winning deals.” That’s how EVERY team gets better. You don’t get to retroactively apply that standard to every team that is good. OKC did an asset hoard and rode it to glory. There are no Josh Hart type trades in their trajectory, no free agent signings. If what they did is the “hybrid” method then there is no such thing as a rebuild.
You defend what deserves defending. You call out what deserves calling out. What I admire most about strat is that he is one resilient mfer who rarely responds in kind to those who insult and belittle him, including me. In this particular case, I think he needs to be defended. In others, not so much!
ess-dog is right, I apologize for any excessive vitriol, even though I stand by the points behind it.
“I’d personally trade our situation for OKC’s”
And that’s the rub, isn’t it? Doesn’t this really boils down to “I’d personally trade Leon for Presti!”? If so, guess what? No one here disagrees with that! Not even Strat!
The larger and more enduring disagreement is strictly about methodology, not execution. You stated above in no uncertain terms that the “full” rebuild is the “correct” method. There are some semantical interpretations in what “full” and “correct” mean, but taken at face value, a full rebuild involves foregoing winning for one or more seasons in order to improve draft position, renting out cap space, and hoarding assets until one’s position on the win curve merits bolder moves, barring obvious opportunistic moves. Is that not what you essentially mean, beyond the obvious “win transactions” platitude that applies to all methods?
Strat’s position has always been that a great GM can make a variety of strategies work equally well, perhaps even better than abject tanking, i.e. that it’s less about the strategy and more about the execution. (feel free to correct me on this, Strat.) His position seems to have been proven out with the Knicks since Leon’s hiring, given Leon’s rookie mistakes and (according to detractors) bumbling of some situations. In other words, if Presti was constrained to Leon’s methodology, isn’t it imaginable that we’d be even better off than we are?. Maybe we have Hali instead of Brunson (which objectively seems like a wash, and that in and of itself balances out Leon’s big “hybrid” coup!) but we would also have made better draft picks at the positions we drafted, plus fewer trade outs, no 2021 merc run-back, etc. (Although maybe he dumps Randle, whiffs on iHart, Hart, and OG…who knows?)
And that’s the point…there really isn’t a “correct” method at all, is there? Whatever one wants to think about OKC’s situation vs. the Knicks, there are lots of examples of non-Presti “full” rebuilds that have not left the Knicks and their novice POBO in the dust (see: Sixers, Magic, Cavs, Rockets, Kings), or that have actually gone sideways (see: Pelicans, Pistons, Hornets, Blazers, Suns.) Then there are teams that have largely gone hybrid but benefitted from opportunism and luck (Mavs, Heat, Raptors) or “full” rebuild team that seemed to hit home runs but have been cursed by bad luck (Grizz, Nets.)
So at this point, I don’t see how there can still be any strong opinions regarding which methodology is “correct” beyond some marginal probability.
Z-man is unhinged
With defenders like these, who needs bullies? : )
Anyway, Presti v Rose discussion aside — JK, you think it’s worth catching Tedeschi Trucks band at the Greek this weekend? Little Feat is opening, apparently Bill Payne is not only still alive but still in the band. I’m on the fence.
I going on the 11th here in phx to see them…