08/26/2025 11:00:02
08/26/2025 11:00:00
08/26/2025 11:00:04
08/26/2025 10:00:23
08/26/2025 04:49:42
08/26/2025 02:04:38
08/26/2025 00:45:00
08/26/2025 00:45:45
08/25/2025 23:50:48
08/26/2025 00:16:00
Categories
Knicks Morning News (2025.08.26)
08/26/2025 11:00:02
08/26/2025 11:00:00
08/26/2025 11:00:04
08/26/2025 10:00:23
08/26/2025 04:49:42
08/26/2025 02:04:38
08/26/2025 00:45:00
08/26/2025 00:45:45
08/25/2025 23:50:48
08/26/2025 00:16:00
62 replies on “Knicks Morning News (2025.08.26)”
Can anyone sum up the consensus on KB of minute distribution as things currently stand?
I’m assuming people feel that every minute Brunson is on the bench, that KAT should be on the floor and vice versa. Each averaged 35 minutes last year and maybe those minutes could come down a bit for each both for rest and for improved defense.
Edwards III says that he thinks Yabu will be first off the bench for Mitch.
not consensus because only two people weighed in:
starters: brunson (34) bridges (32) anunoby (32) towns (33) robinson (24)
dynamic bench: hart (23) mcbride (21) clarkson (16) yabusele (15) hukporti (6) dadiet (4)
the rest: mccullar kolek beauchamp diawara
pg: brunson 34, mcbride 14
sg: bridges 22, clarkson 16, mcbride 7, dadiet 3
sf: anunoby 23, hart 14, bridges 10, dadiet 1
pf: towns 17, yabusele 13, hart 9, anunoby 9
c: robinson 24, towns 16, hukporti 6, yabusele 2
have two of anunoby robinson mcbride on the floor at all times except for of course blowout minutes thats where mccullar kolek beauchamp diawara come into play
More or less that, but I think Dadiet does garbage mop-up for at least the first half of the year and Hart gets those minutes (i.e., 27, not 23) and McBride gets more of Clarkson’s minutes (i.e., 25 or 26, not 21).
As Edwards suggested I think Huk is liable to get more playing time, but it depends on whether they rest Mitch regularly, or because of dings or real injuries. And of course whether Brown is impressed.
Yabu is a black-hole mystery to me. A bit of a rorschach test, too. I’m trying to assume nothing either way, so Doogie’s minutes are a fine guess there for now. I’m very much looking forward to finding out who the real Yabu is, along with the real Clarkson.
I know nothing about Yabusele, but he’s playing for the French team in Eurobasket and I’m going to try to watch some of the games.
There is no doubt he would be a good pickup with the vet minimum.
But I think there is reasonable doubt that picking him up with the vet minimum would make us a better team.
The only way we get him here on the vet min is to give him a large role, right? So whose minutes go down?
I would love it to be Jordan Clarkson’s, but we got Clarkson to be the second primary ballhandler on the team, and Beasley can’t do that.
Are we better if Malik Beasley takes minutes from Deuce?
Are we better if Malik Beasley takes minutes from Josh Hart?
Are we better if we go super small (and super terrible on defense) to shoehorn Malik Beasley into a lineup with Jalen Brunson, Mikal Bridges, and OG?
I think the answer to all those questions is no.
The only way it makes us better is if we turn around and trade Deuce and/or Josh for help in the front court. Which is probably a good idea, but I don’t know if that’s the plan.
I’d be shocked if Yabu plays 15 minutes a game. I think he’s penciled in for a bare minimum of 20, which you can get to easily by taking out all of the Hukporti/Dadiet stuff Doogie keeps penciling in. I see no reason either guy would play in a healthy rotation absent a blowout.
Since it seems like we’re still looking to bring in someone who would be in the rotation, I’ll hold off on minutes projections even though I previously dabbled. If, for example, we can sell Malik Beasley on New York’s strong tenant protection laws, that would make a big difference.
Every team in the league would find minutes for Malik Beasley. He provides elite spacing on sky high volume. He shot 12.1 treys per 36 and converted .416.
That plays, and that is going to help your team, I don’t care what team it is. A guy that can get off his shot like that and actually make it at a high rate is going to help you win, and I’m not gonna worry if that guy cuts into Deuce McBride or Jordan Clarkson’s minutes. More good players is better than fewer good players any way you slice it, and the only problems he would create would be the most high class sorts of problems.
He’s probably not going to sign here because he’s worth way more than the league minimum, based on that one skill alone. We are almost certain to end up with a player in that salary slot who is not as good and wouldn’t contribute to winning as much. It’s pretty likely that we end up with the Temu version of him in Landry Shamet.
I like Deuce as much as the next guy but him and Beasley are on different planets as shooters, at least based on what we know now. It’s not even worth getting into the numbers–Beasley takes a lot more and makes a lot more.
Also, FWIW (and I’m not sure that’s much given the small sample size), Beasley’s defensive EPM actually was a tick above average last year. Him and Brunson could definitely be exploited by good teams, but against teams capable of that we simply wouldn’t have to play them together much with all the depth we’d have.
it’s still far from clear how the beasley investigation is going to shake out. he’s still a subject of an investigation and at one point was a target. getting downgraded from target to subject is good news for the probability of facing a federal indictment, but it’s far cry from mere “witness.” being a subject typically means the government still suspects wrongdoing. of course, terry rozier is playing and seems to be cleared by the nba despite still being the subject of an ongoing federal investigation, though unlike beasley he apparently was never a named target.
I don’t think Beasley and Brunson would just get exploited by good teams; they’d get decimated, especially when you throw KAT into the equation.
Beasley is not a good defender, and one year of positive EPM just shows how worthless defensive EPM is.
Which is why we have to sell him on the strong possibility of there being a lot of Knicks fans in EDNY.
Who are we signing with that slot who is going to provide better play for us than Malik Beasley, even with fit and other personnel considered? The main options I am hearing are Ben Simmons and Landry Shamet. Ben Simmons is a spacing destroyer with a long track record of kook behavior and unplayability in the playoffs and Landry Shamet is very clearly the Malik Beasley on the clearance rack at JC Penney.
How do you fit Ben Simmons into lineups here without spacing going in the toilet? Can’t play him with Josh Hart. Can’t play him with Mitch. If you play him with Jordan Clarkson the spacing sucks then too. The other guys we are considering with a vet min slot bring even worse “fit” problems.
I don’t think being terrible at defense and terrible at rebounding are high class problems.
I don’t think you’re following me. I brought this up in response to Swifty declaring that Brunson-Beasley-Bridges-OG-KAT is “the five-out lineup of everyone’s dreams.”
Of course you sign Beasley if you can get him for the vet min. No argument there.
What I’m saying is I don’t think it propels us forward as a standalone move.
It would be like when we signed Donte. The important part of that acquisition was using him as a springboard for adding OG. But we were a mess when we had Donte, IQ, RJ, and Grimes. And I think it would be the same with Beasley, Clarkson, Deuce, and Hart.
You bring in Beasley to send Deuce and/or Hart packing, not to be the piece de resistance of a 5-out masterpiece.
Beasley’s defense and rebounding as an off-ball guard aren’t going to make or break a team. He hasn’t had much of an impact on his team’s rebounding and Detroit’s defense was actually a tick better with him on the court this past season. It’s just not a position that demands those skills.
Sure, it’s not ideal that he’s got some deficiencies in his game. He’s not 2012-2013 LeBron James. But he brings arguably the most valuable skill in the NBA to the table in a major way, and if he’s really hurting us in a playoff series we can just do what we’re currently planning on doing–not play Malik Beasley.
I think you need to run an attribution analysis on those stats.
Detroit has a 6’6′ two-way PG who is the best rebounder at his position in the game, they’ve got good rebounders at F in Ausar Thompson and Tobias Harris, and a C rotation of Duren, Stewart, and Reed.
That kind of lineup is going to survive Beasley not rebounding much better than one with Jalen Brunson, Mikal Bridges, and OG Anunoby.
And a lot of his plus minus statistics come from replacing Tim Hardaway Jr. It’s harder to improve your team if you’re displacing Josh Hart and Deuce McBride.
Agree with hubie. And JK.
1. To get Beasley we have to offer him something considerably more than the vets minimum. No point in even discussing him as a possibility otherwise.
2. Given the gambling stuff, Beasley could be signed at a great value contract, and not just for a year.
3. Plopping Beasley into our rotation would clearly help the team but sub optimally given his strengths, certain weaknesses, and the roster make up.
4. Given 2 and 3, see if there is a trade of a rotation player that frees up space to sign Beasley and gives us another player who better complements the roster with Beasley as a rotation fixture.
Stipulate Noble as his lawyer/agent (first year’s retainer paid up front in escrow, just in case), hubie his asset manager (with appropriate checks on withdrawals), and that he spends a week with Neptune (not at a racing track) to cure his gambling problem. Voila.
This is admittedly a naive question, but why can Brook Lopez develop a 3 point shot and Ben Simmons can’t? I actually would love to understand.
I would guess that if we were to improbably sign Beasley, Deuce would get traded. I’m just not sure what kind of player we could bring back, given how small his salary is.
Okay, he doesn’t rebound well. He’s a two guard. He also sinks five three pointers per 36 minutes. Play him mostly with Mitch. Don’t play him next to all of the other worst rebounders on the team.
You wouldn’t play Ben Simmons with Josh Hart, Mitch, and Clarkson because your spacing would die a miserable death. Same thing with Beasley: simply don’t play him with all of your worst rebounders at the same time.
Bench lineups are going to have some holes in them unless you’re the 1992 Dream Team.
DS, I don’t know either person, so this is conjecture, but Ben seems to be a wildly insecure and self-doubting person whose shot seems to have been broken pretty much from the start.
People tend to forget that Brook Lopez was an offensive force for years, averaging over 20 points a game four times. He was a bucket with numerous confident moves including a good jump hook and a straight jumper from most parts of the floor. It was a pretty simple thing for him just to take a few steps back and keep doing what he was doing already.
Simmons had a career high ft% last season, the 3 ball is coming soon.*
*It’s not
Comment of the day so far
Beasley’s rebounding isn’t even bad for a two-guard. The nominal figure was low this past season and my guess is that’s because Cade soaks up so many, but his CTG DReb% percentile rankings in the previous seasons were 49, 67, 50, and 55.
I honestly view this as a nonissue, you always play two-guards alongside players who are better at them at rebounding unless they’re Josh Hart.
I’d hardly be against making some kind of trade in the unlikely event we’re able to land Beasley, but I also don’t view it as necessary. We’d simply be bringing in an outstanding shooter at a price so low we’d be free to cut him if his lawyers can’t negotiate a generous work-release schedule or something.
But Mikal & OG are not those guys.
Do you understand I’m saying that the Knicks will get crushed on the boards in a very meaningful way if they replace Josh Hart with Malik Beasley in the starting lineup? And that you’re countering by citing statistics of Beasley replacing Tim Hardaway?
tayvis swiftce yawn
“tayvis swiftce yawn”
Absolutely no. Imagine them attending Knicks games next to Spike. Taylor is a Knick fan. KC lost the Kings 40+ years ago. Stuff like that matters, look at Utah. Get someone like Josh to reel them in.
Beasley at the vet minimum is no kind of problem, rebounding or otherwise. Clarkson, Beasley, Hart, OH, and Mitch would do very, very well as a second unit. (Get OG some blow by bringing in Yabu with the first unit.)
nice reference BE…can’t believe the move took place in 1985…i remember none of that…
If Beasley were to happen, it would have to be via sign-and-trade with Detroit, no? Because he’s just not signing for the vet min.
I think the elephant in the room is that KAT eats way too much cap for what he offers. One could say the same for Hart/OG (as Hubie often does), but at KAT’s number, he has to play like a top-10 player in the league on both sides, or at the very least “competent” on defense and an unstoppable force on offense.
Now granted, one could argue that Thibs used KAT poorly last year along with some other players, and maybe he’ll live up to his contract this year… but history has shown that has yet to ever happen.
Meanwhile, KAT’s flaws put Mitch — who breaks down practically every year — in a position where we have to dump too much on his plate defensively (defend the better bigs and elite rim protection) while minimizing some of his gifts (rebounding). And we don’t really have another guy who does what Mitch can do to help lessen his load.
In exchange for KAT’s salary, we could add Beasley, a mini-Mitch (Gafford?), AND maybe even a Naz Reid type.
So yeah, that’s why we have to settle for the Shamets of the world right now, particularly since none of our draft picks (aside from Deuce) are ready for prime time.
I mean, the KAT-Brunson combo is a fair enough bet, I guess. But IMO, the math isn’t mathing for a Finals appearance. I hope I’m wrong, though!
The only way we could get him would be for the league minimum, and he’d be a bench piece who presumably wouldn’t play in lineups that would expose his worst flaws. That’s pretty much standard for bench players. Beasley was a bench player last year, one of the best in the league, finishing second in 6MOY voting. That’s pretty much what his role would be here. Not “starter replacing Josh Hart.” I don’t see anybody saying that Beasley on a vet min should be a starter. He is a kickass bench player, because he is a one man spacing machine.
If you have to start moving other pieces and get rid of good players for Beasley, that changes the equation. What I’m talking about is strictly the miracle scenario where he accepts a vet min contract because he is a distressed asset for non-basketball reasons.
“And we don’t really have another guy who does what Mitch can do to help lessen his load.”
This guy per 36: FG% .677, Reb 8.5, blocks 2.5, pts 8, TS% 654.
This guy per 36: FG% 661, Reb 12.5, blocks 2.2, pts 10.6, TS% .676.
The second guy is Mitch.
We can’t get him in a sign-and-trade because we’re over the first apron, so we’re strictly discussing the miracle scenario (and to be fair, that’s the scenario that’s been rumored). Of course the calculation changes if we start talking about sending out players and/or picks.
Landry Shamet, but much, much, much better, though admittedly more of a risk to throw games due to gambling debts, is the idea.
Friendly reminder: I was responding to “we could get Beasley in here for the vet min by offering him a role in the starting lineup so he can leverage that into a bigger deal next summer”.
Presumably he’s not going to take less money and less minutes.
Maybe take a look at Mitch’s career stats… and the first guy has played a whopping 215 minutes in the league mostly against scrubs but OKAY.
Ok so there you go. Maybe Dolan has some illegal housing/bitcoin/ad revenue under-the-table deal all worked out and ready to go? Otherwise, it’s Shamet Time.
I mean even if we were to start Beasley, it’s not like there’s an NBA rule mandating you stick with a starting lineup all game if it’s demonstrating vulnerabilities. Thibs admittedly seemed to think so but he’s no longer the coach.
KAT being one of the best rebounders in the NBA gives you a lot of flexibility here in any event. A starting lineup with him in it has a pretty high floor as far as rebounding goes.
Thanks Raven. I know we’re biased, but I think this Knicks team has some good eggs; maybe a good landing spot for him.
This. Plus part of the reason why OG and Mikal didn’t put up big rebounding numbers last season was because Hart was so damn good at rebounding the ball for his size. It’s not like we’d lose ALL the rebounds Hart grabbed as a starter. Small sample, I know, but if you look at the games Hart missed as a starter, Mikal rebounded more (and OG did too).
The improve spacing would be off the charts if you started Beasley over Hart. I’d posit that would more than make up for a few lost rebounds.
Giannis getting traded to NY at the deadline is more likely than Beasley taking the minimum in NY. He has financial trouble. He’s not in a position to take a discount to play on a contender or in NY etc… He needs every dollar he can get and I seriously doubt we are going to trade for him.
KAT’s not one of the best rebounders in the NBA. He’s a good rebounder playing next to OG and Bridges who are both weak rebounders. That’s why Thibs was so hesitant to take Hart out of the lineup and play Deuce. It was on Hart and KAT to make up for the lack of rebounding at PF and SG/SF. If we start Mitch in place of Hart, KAT’s rebounding will go down just like it did with Gobert.
Beas can shoot 3s and assault rifles, making him a double threat in NYC. That said, you can’t sell him anything right now.
Hubert is right. You can’t win a championship with Malik Beasley as yoru starter. Common sense will tell you that there are many many on and off court reasons why he played for all 30 teams in 9 years.
However, he’s way better than Deuce come playoff time. That’s how he makes us better.
what do you mean hes played for all 30 teams hes played for six
Got it, thanks. I based on my opinion on the fact that since entering the league in 2015-2016 KAT is 6th in total rebounds despite missing a lot of time, and the fact that his teams have had a higher TRB% with him on the floor literally every season of his career except his rookie year, but now that I’ve read your take I realize this is all irrelevant.
No, they’ve never been good rebounders. OG is particularly bad at the 4.
We actually might.
In 4 games without Hart, Mikal grabbed 19 total rebounds (10 in one game, 9 in the other 3)
In 2 games without Hart, OG grabbed 3 total rebounds.
These guys don’t rebound and that’s not likely to change.
I agree it’s unlikely, but when you think about it, “Malik Beasley has gotten himself in a lot of financial trouble, so he’s not going to make a bad financial decision” is not ironclad logic.
Maybe we can offer to pay Beasley in scratch-offs or let him roll dice for bonus money after every 3 he hits
We seem to have different definitions.
He’s a starting C. He’s supposed to get a lot of rebunds. Per 36 minutes he drops in the rankings relative to some other Cs and players.
He clearly benefitted signficantly last year (as I predicted here before the season) by playing next to OG who is weak at PF. Next to Gobert he was barely above 8 per game and the year before that under 10 despite being the starting C. Maybe he was a bit better when younger.
I’ll adjust my comment of “good” to “very good”, but again, imo he’s not what I would call one of the best rebounders in the league. Put him next to a real PF that can board and he’ll get around 10 rebounds per game which is all that we’d need if we had a real PF.
The only reason he would even consider signing here would be if other teams deemed him to be too risky at a salary more close to his actual value. There’s a chance he could still face discipline from the NBA even though he has ostensibly been cleared by the FBI. You’d be getting him as a distressed asset. It would involve risk. I’d do it in a second
lol
Good point.
I guess I was assuming his troubles are so public now either the NBA or at least his agent might help him out, but maybe my assumption is off base.
KAT’s a great rebounder but I don’t think he can provide a high enough floor without Hart or Mitch next to him.
Forgetting Beasley for a second, that’s why I don’t want Deuce to start.
“Malik Beasley has gotten himself in a lot of financial trouble, so he’s not going to make a bad financial decision” is not ironclad logic.”
No. And am concerned about someone who pretty obviously has a gambling addiction. Every bad financial decision he has made that we know of is getting money quickly at stupid cost.
This will help in our effort to gain the #1 seed.
This is the complication I was afraid of going into last year.
That’s why I was screaming for Hart to start at the beginning of the season. I knew KAT would rebound better at C than he did at PF next to Gobert, but OG is a weak rebounder at SF. So it was obvious he’d be “relatively weaker” at PF. OG is a both sides plus player, but that’s a weakness.
KAT is not the kind of guy that’s going to grab 14-15 boards per 36 even on a weak rebounding team. He’s going to get his 10 plus a little more. So I thought we needed Hart for rebounding (and the playmaking would also help).
As it was, KAT did about as well as we could have hoped, but Hart’s spacing issue became such a problem eventually (and the Deuce lineups looked so good) you had to at least wonder whether the spacing and POA defense from Deuce was more valuable than the rebounds. Also, it would not have shocked me if we relieved Bridges of guarding PGs and put him on the wing where he belonged, he might be able to grab an extra rebound like he did earlier in his career.
We have not solved that issue.
Mitch takes care of the defense and boards, but will hurt the spacing for Towns, Brunson and to some extent the others more than Hart.
Hart puts us back where we were which is a starting lineup that was a negative in the playoffs and not so great in the second half of the season.
Deuce starting is a mystery that Thibs would not explore, but has obvious potential rebounding issues.
We haven’t seen enough of the alternative to Hart to know what nets out best. That’s part of why Thibs is no longer here.
The perfect solution is having a legit starting PF that can defend, rebound and at least shoot 3s. He doesn’t have to be an all star caliber scorer. He just has to do what we need. Then you move OG to SF, Bridges to SG and Hart to the bench and everything is peachy.
Finding and getting that player is a problem, but it wasn’t Precious. Maybe Yabu will defend well enough to earn a shot at starting.
KAT is a defensive rebounding specialist since he tends to not guard players so much, and Mitch is a beast on the offensive boards. They work well together and there’s really no point in having Hart in the starting lineup with those dudes.
I should clarify: I don’t think any basketball player short of Dennis Rodman can provide a high enough rebounding floor sharing the court with Brunson, Bridges, OG, and someone like Deuce or Beasley. It wasn’t a knock on KAT.
KAT is a defensive rebounding specialist (3rd in the league and 2nd overall) as it is impossible for him to put up commensurate numbers on the offensive glass (11th) because his superskill at hoisting very efficient 3s keeps him >25 feet from the rim at a much greater rate than other bigs on the offensive end.
Yet he was only 94th in the league in 3pt attempts last year (4th on the Knicks).
Kind of a stupid offense that doesn’t utilize a > 40% 3 ball shooter more, eh? You aren’t arguing he didn’t spend more time behind the arc on offense than any other center other than maybe Jokic? Not a lot of offensive boards to be had from behind the arc when he is seldom used as a roller.
Towns was 9th in the league in 2pt field goal attempts.
Lots of times opponents had to respect his potential to shoot a three and guarded him closely on the perimeter which meant he coukd and did drive to the baskets. I would think the balance of twos versus threes will depend on how he is defended.