By “more to the story,” they mean it’s more likely that this is probably part of Giannis’s investment portfolio. And that it’s unlikely than that he wants to live in a 28-unit building, on the east side of the park (although more respect to him if he does), and commute up to Tarrytown.

Sorry for the double-post; doesn’t a package around Austin Reaves (Vanderbilt, Hachimura, Vincent) for Giannis make sense for both teams? Is L.A. trying to maintain flexibility for long-term success with Luka?

I’m re-posting some of what Alecto posted, since we have a couple of days before the IST semi game, and it’s an interesting debate.

“As for Mitch, the winning point to me is what he can bring during a playoff series. Not many dudes on non-rookie deals can dominate in the playoffs, and Mitch is one. No, you can’t rely on him during the season, but that’s why he’s making so little! And why realistically he’ll continue to make a modest salary instead of a major deal. For us he’s a luxury, unnecessary for a good record during the season, but one of the best players on the floor when healthy. Personally I’d focus on making sure he is healthy when it matters without worrying about much until then. Because no one you could trade him for would have an equal impact unless they ALSO were injury prone.

TL;dr: If the team can go 53-29 without him and then have him wreck teams in the playoffs, that would be a good use of $18 million to me – especially since the options seem to be to let him walk for nothing or trade him for a mediocre player who is useful during the season but glued to the bench for the playoffs.”

First, I will take issue with the hand-waving away of Mitch’s FT issues on the basis of him only averaging 1.6 FTA per game. In the two recent games vs. the Celts and Raps, he had a combined 12 FTA in 32 minutes of play and went 3-12. The Knicks were -14 with him on the floor vs. the Celts and -6 vs. Toronto.

Second, yes, Mitch wrecked those same Celtics in the playoffs even though they tried the hack-a-mitch strategy. But who did the Celts have playing the 5? KP, who was incapacitated and Horford, who is undersized to begin with and hit the age wall. Additionally, we were -11 overall with him on the floor vs. DET and -28 vs. IIND, including -38 in pivotal games 4 and 6 (btw Mitch played 30 minutes and Myles Turner only played 21 minutes in game 6, so who was Mitch mostly dealing with at the 5? Thomas Bryant? Jarace Walker?

Good coaches with the right players will easily neutralize Mitch. They will either play 5-out or combine boxing him out with hack-a-Mitch. The more you depend on him, the more you risk him becoming an overall liability in a critical game. And that’s without him being forced to play big minutes due to a suspension or foul trouble or injury to whoever is in front of him.

And that’s if, if, if he stays healthy after a long regular season and grueling early rounds of the playoffs.

Things I am too old for:

1. Rooting for teams that don’t win championships

2. iPhone updates

donnie you just have to think of yourself as betraying the old verison

the problem with the quantity argument is that his current off the charts ineffectiveness is a call option for the opponent that gets exercised in the most important games and moments. people (not you bba, but yes, definitely you) like to whine on the game threads when opposing coaches go to mitches get stitches, but if he’s really shooting 25% he becomes unplayable for very important stretches of the games with real leverage. this acts as a ceiling on his max minutes in key games and also allows the other team to massage the matchups. even last year when things were a bit less dire he shot 5.4 FTA per 36 in the playoffs. i thought mazzulla fortunately flubbed the scratch a mitch strategy in game 2, and there were several chances to get him more than 1 fta or out of the game before he finally went to it very late to get him benched when that really shouldn’t have been their play when they were up 4 and OG was on the bench. but the worse he shoots the more of a siren song it will be.

Good coaches with the right players will easily neutralize Mitch. They will either play 5-out or combine boxing him out with hack-a-Mitch.

think this a wild overstatement. i don’t think it’s that easy to neutralize mitch with 5-out. mitch has wreaked havoc against some attempts to 5-out him with, as i believe you called it, his “orb freak show” game. admittedly this is surely something coaches will try and sometimes it will work, but time and again mitch has proven harder to gameplan than it looks. when you team box out mitch you leave orb for others or significantly slow your transition offense. i don’t think it’s that simple and i agree with silky’s main point that there is a great deal of ruin in a mitch and he will still emerge from it as having unusual playoff high end impact — sometimes — for a player at his likely salary. if you try to second spectrum the knicks performance with mitch on a opponents putting 5 out lineups on the floor they do better than you would guess.

And that’s if, if, if he stays healthy after a long regular season and grueling early rounds of the playoffs.

yes there’s no avoiding this issue.

First, “Misses Robinson” is so good that I pray no one beyond the board hears of it. Bravo! (Alas)

Second, that was my post, not Silky/Alecto/Being.

Third, why would you leave out all they other playoffs, Z-man? What about Mitch dominating Cleveland a couple years ago? No, he has not dominated every series. But he has dominated maybe half of them, which is pretty damn good for a mid-level salary, which is about what he is. The point remains: who can you get for that salary who can swing a series?

if he’s really shooting 25% he becomes unplayable for very important stretches of the games with real leverage. this acts as a ceiling on his max minutes in key games and also allows the other team to massage the matchups.

Yes, but…

He’s the 7th man.

The top 6 guys need to be able to navigate those high leverage moments. If they can’t, the issue is we have the wrong top 6, not that the 7th man can’t shoot FTs.

What problem can’t be solved by putting him in the correct role? If he comes in the game with two 2 mins left in the 1Q and plays the first 6 mins of the 2Q, and you repeat that in the 2nd half, that’s 16 minutes (minimum) of Mitch against 2nd units. It solves his conditioning problem. It solves the hack-a-Mitch problem. And it probably gives us one of the best second units in the entire NBA.

And as a bonus, when he’s kicking ass, you can keep him in the game until they foul themselves into the penalty to get him out. Thibs did that brilliantly against Boston. Then Brunson gets the last 5 minutes of every half with the opponent in the penalty.

I see no problems here. I see one of the most unique, game-changing weapons in the NBA.

The problem is if you want Mitch to be a starter and the savior of the defense. He’s not that. He’s a bench player, and a very impactful one.

And that it’s unlikely than that he wants to live in a 28-unit building,

He’s got a lot of brothers

Knicks net rating is currently 8.6, good for 3rd in the NBA, and OKC’s is literally twice that

I remember last year, there was some media sentiment of, “Every team had better go for it in the next two years, before Wemby and the Spurs dominate the league for the next decade.” At the level OKC is playing right now, feels like every other team wouldn’t be unreasonable to consider tanking.

I don’t think putting guys in a pecking order is as useful as where they are in their positional order. Mitch is either a starting C or the primary back-up C for a weak defensive and foul-prone starting C, depending on the coach. His role should be as much of a #6 as Deuce’s is, except it can’t be because of his limitations, both physically and situationally. He also happens to be our sixth highest paid player.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses User Verification plugin to reduce spam. See how your comment data is processed.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

11 replies on “Knicks Morning News (2025.12.11)”

Leave a Reply