Knicks Morning News (2016.09.16)

  • [NYDN] Lawyers say Derrick Rose did not understand meaning of consent
    (Thursday, September 15, 2016 8:04:44 PM)

    The case is scheduled to go to trial Oct. 4, the same day as the Knicks first preseason game.

  • [NYPost] Lawyers for Derrick Rose’s alleged rape victim: NBA must get involved
    (Thursday, September 15, 2016 12:01:13 PM)

    Lawyers for the woman who has accused new Knicks player Derrick Rose of raping her are demanding the NBA investigate the alleged assault, while the accuser graphically recounted her injuries from the alleged sexual assault that she claims took place in 2013. “The NBA and his team should investigate the matter. I think that’s their…

  • [SNY Knicks] Knicks unveil new Hardwood Classic uniforms
    (Thursday, September 15, 2016 1:55:56 PM)

    The Knicks unveiled their new Hardwood Classic uniforms on Thursday.

  • [SNY Knicks] Anthony ranked No. 24 on SI’s top-100 players list
    (Thursday, September 15, 2016 10:55:17 AM)

    Knicks F Carmelo Anthony was ranked No. 24 on SI.com’s top-100 NBA Players list.

  • [SNY Knicks] AP Exclusive: Accuser in Derrick Rose rape lawsuit speaks out
    (Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:00:47 AM)

    The woman who brought a lawsuit accusing NBA star Derrick Rose and two others of sexual assault is leading two drastically different lives.

  • [NYTimes] Knicks’ Preseason to Begin With Derrick Rose Under Cloud of Rape Case
    (Friday, September 16, 2016 12:54:23 AM)

    Rose, newly acquired from the Bulls for the 2016-17 season, is scheduled to be in a Los Angeles courtroom as the defendant in a lawsuit when the Knicks’ play their first preseason game Oct. 4.

  • [NYTimes] Steph Curry Hopes for Changes to LGBT Law in North Carolina
    (Friday, September 16, 2016 12:45:45 AM)

    Stephen Curry said he is disappointed to see sporting events pulled from his home state of North Carolina over a law that some say can lead to discrimination against LGBT people. And the two-time NBA MVP hopes lawmakers make changes to the so-called “bathroom bill” before more major events follow the NBA’s All-Star game and the NCAA men’s basketball tournament out the door.

  • Liked it? Take a second to support Mike Kurylo on Patreon!

    Mike Kurylo

    Mike Kurylo is the founder and editor of KnickerBlogger.net. His book on the 2012 Knicks, "We’ll Always Have Linsanity," is on sale now. Follow him on twitter (@KnickerBlogger).

    196 thoughts to “Knicks Morning News (2016.09.16)”

    1. Just wanted to put this out there again from yesterday’s thread, since no one commented on it — and it seems rather important.

      There’s pretty much one scenario where this year’s plan works out, and that’s if Paul is willing to take a big paycut and play here next year.

      But I don’t think that’s the case because of this CBA’s over-36 rule (which of course may not exist if the CBA gets reopened this summer).

      For CP3 if he signs a 5 year max contract with the Clips, his 5th season will an over-36 (or “zero) year, which means his total salary that year will get spread out equally through the first 4 years of his contract for cap purposes — so the ~$48MM he could make in year 5 actually results zero cap hit in year 5 but an extra $12MM/year in years 1-4. Because the Clips still can’t go above the max salary (35% of the cap), it means his actual $ compensation in year 1 will be $12MM less (~23.5MM rather than 35.5MM). That results in:

      Signing a 5 year max with LA would equal a total of only $140MM
      a 4 year max with LA would equal $156MM
      a year max with any other team would equal about $149MM

      So he would only be taking a $7MM paycut to leave LA on a 4 year deal.

      I’m pretty sure I’m right about this. Here’s Peachtree Hoops talking about the same thing with Paul Millsap: http://www.peachtreehoops.com/2016/7/8/11960364/millsap-s-next-contract-over-36-rule

    2. Yes, Paul will sign a four-year max next year, no matter what. I am not talking about the total contract for the paycut, I’m talking about the Knicks not having room for Paul’s max salary in their cap for next year at the moment. They carved out just enough for Westbrook (they probably would have to make one more move, but it was close enough) but then the cap projection dropped about $6 million, so they were going to have to make a more notable move to make room for Westbrook‘s max, which was noticeably lower than Paul’s max.

    3. Knicks are projected to have slightly over 28m in cap space. Pauls max starts at $35.7m assuming a $102.2m cap. They’d need to dump KOQ and say Kuz to get close to that figure which doesn’t seem that difficult.

    4. The most similar player to Chris Paul is John Stockton, and Stockton was able to rack up .200+ WS48 seasons until age 40, so sure, sign me up for Paul if he’s available.

    5. At that price!? 1/3 of the cap for one player?

      CP3 is a lot of things but he’s not John Stockton in terms of durability. It is EXTREMELY unlikely that he will be a top-3 PG at age 40, and not that likely that he will be a top-3 PG in 3 years. This is the era of the supremely athletic PG, and he’s not that.

    6. Yeah, I’ll take a 32 year old Chris Paul right now. Not only is he the best pure point guard in the NBA and easily a top 3 point guard of modern era basketball, but his demeanor is the perfect contrast to Melo’s demeanor. They’d be good cop (Melo) bad cop (CP3) in the locker room and Hornacek can play the angry police chief.

      In all seriousness, if we add CP3 to this Knicks team and can get a healthy Joakim Noah at 32, the Knicks would have the best chance of any team in the LeBron era to beat the Cavs. Of course there’s like a 3% chance that all of Chris Paul’s coming here, Noah’s staying healthy, and our beating of the Cavs actually happens, but we still should be looking to add the Point God.

    7. In a vacuum, you might be right. But this is New York Knicks basketball we’re talking about. If that contract doesn’t go to Chris Paul, it will go to some other “win now” player who is nowhere near as good as Chris Paul. It’s not like they’re going to take the Chris Paul money and actually do something smart with it. So you might as well sign Chris Paul and cross your fingers that he stays productive from ages 32-35.

    8. It’s also not hard to see the massive upside of a Chris Paul/Kristaps Porzingis pick and roll attack. That would be pretty damn difficult to contain.

    9. Chris Paul by himself would not cure the Knicks’ mamy ills. The team needs to fill all the gaps in the roster before it even thinks of getting a player that commands 1/3 of the cap.

      It seems to me, most fans criticize Dolan, but think exactly like him: let me get this superstar and we’ll magically win!

      Think about it: Chris Paul is a great player, a bona fide suoerstar. The clippers are a pretty good team, much better than the Knicks are. And yet, they have not provided Paul with the bench to make them a real contender. What makes anyone think the Knicks would be more than a perennial 45-win team with Paul and 10-12 misfits?

      The ultimate goal should be to win a ring, not live forever on the first round of the playoffs.

    10. It seems to me, most fans criticize Dolan, but think exactly like him: let me get this superstar and we’ll magically win!

      I’m one of the more vocal “true rebuild” advocates here. I’d like to build through the draft with homegrown superstars, even if it means tanking for a few years. Hell, the Knicks tank most of the time by accident anyway.

      I have also given up on that ever actually happening.

    11. If you are going to go after an aging star at least let it be a genuinely elite player like Paul. I’d be somewhat excited to watch him slowly decline given that he is a genuine great.

      Don’t see it happening though. And if it does happen I will probably express some reservations and hedge my opinion appropriately.

      And I totally agree a Zinger/Paul pnr would be fun to watch.

    12. If CP3 comes here then it’s to team that made a deep playoff run and feels he can push us over the edge. You don’t get that without good bench play.

      I know you’re trolling but you can at least figure that out by yourself Theo.

    13. We ain’t rebuilding unless we’re 5-35 in the first 40 games. Essentially it’s CP3 or Tyreke Evans, y’all.

    14. I would rather keep fishing for a Lowry/Conley/Teague level guard at their last contract price (not that they are all the same but all are top 5-15 PGs that could have been had for a reasonable price at one point.) Or keep probing for the next Reggie Williams/Patrick Beverley/Jeremy Lin/Tyler Johnson out of the D-league. Save the big bucks for replacing Melo in 2 years or maybe even Steph. Or a younger “max” player that only costs $20-25 million.

      Look, if it happened I would hope for the best as I always do, but would be holding my breath, fearful that he would get torched more and more by quicker PGs on the defensive end as those old knees aged. And I’m already on the record saying that I would not offer Rose a max contract or anything close to it no matter how well he plays this year.

    15. If Chris Paul and D’Angelo Russell both show up on Phil’s doorstep next July with signed 4 year mega-max contracts (hypothetical), which one would you want him to take?

    16. I don’t get it, why is there a false dichotomy between “TRUE REBUILD” and “WIN NOW?” I mean, you do have to be absolute garbage to make the right draft picks and then develop. For those that will say “BUT WARRIORS!” remember, they picked Curry at 7 with a 10th seed and record of .354, Klay at 11 with a .439 record, 12th seed, and Draymond at 35, with a 13 seed and .348 record. Now, that’s bad, but not 76ers bad. They also drafted Udoh at 6, Harrison Barnes at 7, Anthony Randolph at 14. Hell, they had 15 draft choices in the past 10 years.

      So, do we have to really suck? No. We just have to KEEP OUR PICKS and DEVELOP OUR PLAYERS. Now it seems that we are kinda doing both sans Grant. Teams like the Spurs always uncover the Kawhis of the world by drafting well and keeping picks, despite winning. So maybe it’s not a dichotomy at all, or just less of one.

      And developing talent in a losing atmosphere without the Pauls, Melos, Noahs of the world is probably not going to end well (see: 6ers)

    17. When the big boys pass us up the money just goes to the Afflalos of the world, so yeah, since it apparently has to be spent because reasons, Chris Paul is the best thing to hope for.

    18. @ 20 – THIS TIMES A THOUSAND!

      Everyone acts like you have to only have lottery picks when the NBA is filled with mid to late first rounders and second rounders who are great starters and rotation players. Heck the Kings have sucked for over a decade now and usually have a pick in the top 10 and yet can’t seem to find anyone besides Cousins who is good. The Spurs find undrafted guys that turn into good players. Yes the lottery is where you are most likely to find superstars but you don’t need a team full of super stars. You need usually one super star, another all star and some great starters/role players. We can be a decent team and draft later in the first round and second round and build around KP. Also, people here completely ignore the truth that KP will be more likely to become a franchise player if he’s playing in meaningful games early in his career. Playing with a player like Melo and Noah…those dudes even if they are past their primes can teach him so much. I mean imagine a player who has Melo’s post moves and Noah’s defensive tenacity and passing ability but KP’s body. Not saying that they can magically give him all of their moves or whatever but players learn from each other.

      Also, if we have a first rounder and multiple second rounders, which we do in several of the years coming up, we could potentially make moves up in the draft. Trade our second rounders for another first rounder or trade the first rounder and one of the second rounders for a higher first round pick.

    19. Yeah, I mean, learning offensive big-man skill from Melo, and defensive from Noah—- that’s gotta be incredible for his development. And by all accounts, they are willing to teach and he is ready to listen.

    20. Deangelo Russell is still on his rookie deal so your scenario could never happen. I get what you’re trying to say though. But if it was next summer we’d probably be able to make room for them both since Russell’s “mega max” next summer would actually be the rookie deal he is currently on and we could figure out a way to shed salary to make room for both.

    21. Sounds like a rationalization but I think this is best for KP’s development too. Have a few playoff runs with the vets under his belt so he can take over when their contracts are up.

    22. We just have to KEEP OUR PICKS and DEVELOP OUR PLAYERS. Now it seems that we are kinda doing both sans Grant.

      There’s two players on the roster who were drafted by the Knicks.

    23. There’s two players on the roster who were drafted by the Knicks.

      You actually see the list of draft choices? Hardaway, Thanasis, Landry Fields, and Rautins, anyone?

      The point is making the selections and keeping the ones that are good or likely to be good. Those were bad basketball players.

    24. That is one of the all-time weirdest NBA facts.

      It really is crazy. One sign of just how crazy is to ask yourself the next best player you can say this about. Put in some minor rules like he’s got to have played at least 20K NBA minutes. I wondered about Tracy but he barely managed to avoid the distinction. Is it really possible that the answer is Shareef Abdur-Rahim??

    25. Delusions die hard, Jowles. Kevin Durant was coming, and so was Westbrook. Now it’s Paul.

      LeBron will be a candidate when he turns 37. Plenty of stars just waiting for the right moment.

      Why isn’t a simple plan of investing on young talent until we win at least 40-45 with that young talen and *then* we see who’s available in free agency? The Knicks were on that path right before anthony. If they had just waited until free agency, the result would have been very different. But Dolan and lots of fans think we can cheat our way into a ring. Oh well…

    26. If Chris Paul and D’Angelo Russell both show up on Phil’s doorstep next July with signed 4 year mega-max contracts (hypothetical), which one would you want him to take?

      Can we say D’Angelo but also hope Phil’s doorstep is Brentwood?

    27. Young talent: KP, Willy, Kuz, Holiday, Baker, Plumlee, Randle, Ndour, O’Quinn.

      Whether they were drafted by us or not makes no difference. They were all acquired by Phil on the cheap. If any of them pan out, They’re the same as Draymond, Beverley, Whiteside, etc. The Knicks are clearly a mix of young and old.

      You could probably throw Jennings into that mix, and Lance Thomas for that matter…

    28. @ 32 – Zman. Be quiet! Your list contradicts the narrative that the Knicks are only in win now mode and aren’t investing in the future! How dare you question the narrative of negative Knicks fans who know better than us simpletons who actually are optimistic about the future of this franchise. BAN HIM!

    29. Young talent: KP, Willy, Kuz, Holiday, Baker, Plumlee, Randle, Ndour, O’Quinn.

      Whether they were drafted by us or not makes no difference. They were all acquired by Phil on the cheap. If any of them pan out, They’re the same as Draymond, Beverley, Whiteside, etc. The Knicks are clearly a mix of young and old.

      The big difference is that those players are brought in as filler material because the emphasis is on “winning now” with questionable “top talent” that prevents the team from taking advantage of any real opportunities that may arise. Turning over the roster every season is not building a team. It takes longer than that to develop young players and finding which ones are keepers. That’s definitely *not* what the Knicks are doing.

    30. Delusions die hard, Jowles. Kevin Durant was coming, and so was Westbrook. Now it’s Paul.

      This is complete bullshit. Virtually everybody on this board said KD was a long shot, Russ was a long shot and accepts that CP3 is even a long shot, but that his very public and intimate friendship with Melo combined with the fact the Clippers have no shot in the West gives us a better chance than those guys. I forgot that real fans like you are able to sift through all the BS though and just deliver cold hard facts. I wish I had your fucking craptastic attitude to being a fan, where having hope or being admittedly overly optimistic is some horrible fucking thing that is the bane of humanity and needs to be erased from existence.

      The big difference is that those players are brought in as filler material because the emphasis is on “winning now” with questionable “top talent” that prevents the team from taking advantage of any real opportunities that may arise. Turning over the roster every season is not building a team. It takes longer than that to develop young players and finding which ones are keepers. That’s definitely *not* what the Knicks are doing.

      KP drafted 4th overall who Phil has called a foundational piece is filler? Hernangomez who Phil traded 2 second round picks for is filler? Holiday who Hornacek went out of his way to say was not a throw and was a deliberate target the Knicks had in the Rose trade is filler? Ndour who the team signed to SL and was the only team to do so, lost out on to guaranteed dollars from Dallas and then took the opportunity to bring him on board as soon as they had the chance is filler? O’Quinn who the team gave a 4-year contract too in order to outbid other teams for his services is filler?

      I can understand if you don’t think these guys are that good or that they’re poor use of resources, but they aren’t filler just because you say so.

    31. Theo and Jowles love putting themselves on that high horse to feel superior to the rest of us.

      -We sign veteran players players to fill out the roster: “We should be finding young unknown talent instead of washed up scrubs”.

      -We find some young unknown players: “They’re just Filler, Phil is a moron no matter what he does”.

    32. None of those players other than KP and, when he wasn’t in the doghouse, O’Quinn have ever played for the Knicks. Grant and Galloway did, if you want to go clown school add Cleanthony Early’s name. It takes a real contortionist to say they are into “young talent.” Roster turnover, yes, but continuity *which was not referenced) has not been the team’s MO.

    33. I forgot that real fans like you are able to sift through all the BS though and just deliver cold hard facts. I wish I had your fucking craptastic attitude to being a fan, where having hope or being admittedly overly optimistic is some horrible fucking thing that is the bane of humanity and needs to be erased from existence.

      Spot. On.

      And speaking of improbable hypotheticals is a big part of what we do, and saying BUT YOURE DUMB ITS SO IMPROBABLE is a big part of what the kbdouches do. It’s like they sit at parties and say, lol you’re so dumb for drinking don’t you know that in 3 hours it’s out of your system and you’re stuck with some small amount of alcohol-related toxicity, lol, look at stats. Shut up and why are you at a goddamn party anyways, man. Why are you a fan, man.

    34. Young talent: KP, Willy, Kuz, Holiday, Baker, Plumlee, Randle, Ndour, O’Quinn.

      Whether they were drafted by us or not makes no difference… The Knicks are clearly a mix of young and old

      But other than KP (and Willy I guess), none of that youth is invested in. They could all be cut tomorrow and replaced with other random young players and nobody would even care (see J Grant, c. 2016).

      Every team has some semblance of young players. The salary cap necessitates it because they are cheap. But dont confuse youth with upside.

    35. None of those players other than KP and, when he wasn’t in the doghouse, O’Quinn have ever played for the Knicks.

      What does that have to do with them simply being roster filler? Generally when you add young players to your team they haven’t played for the franchise before. That’s just how that works.

      The team drafted Hernangomez specifically because they liked his talent. They brought Ndour to SL and tried to sign him last year because they liked his talent, which they demonstrated by signing him this summer when they had the chance. Holiday was acquired in the Rose trade deliberately because according to Hornacek they liked what they saw in him. I have no idea whether these guys are going to be good, or mediocre or bad, but the Knicks seem to value them enough to acquire them.

    36. The point is the pessimistic crowd keep saying we are in full win now mode when it’s obvious we are trying to find some young players to develop and grow with KP.

      If you want to see a real win now team then take a look at the 12-13 roster.

    37. @35 – It’s public knowledge Porzingis literally fell on PJ’s lap when he set out for the playoffs but delivered the worst season in team history. So, he doesn’t get much credit for his “accidental rookie”. At least not from people willing to deal with the harsh realities that our Knicks serve season after season.

      The rest are here this year but PJ has been here 3.5 years. What happened every season? Complete roster turnover. Lopez, a solid journeman center on a decent contract promptly replaced by the more expensive corpse of Joakim Noah. Grant and Galloway promptly replaced by obcure names that only shine in the feverish fantasies of gullible fans.

      The inescapable reality is this: three years, three roster turnovers. Three terrible seasons. The upcoming one will be slightly better because it’s hard not to improve on a terrible season.

      Don’t be angry at me. I just report the news. Dolan and PJ are the ones delivering the blows.

      I’ll ask a very simple question from the “pessimistic side”: is there a legitimate reason to not be pessimistic when confronted with moves like Derrick Rose and the 4-year Noah contract?
      Over the last 15 years the “pessimists” have been proven right time and again. So why are people like you trying to silence the voices of reason? How ethical is that?

    38. So why are people like you trying to silence the voices of reason? How ethical is that?

      How many times were you banned again?

    39. @42

      Fuck off with your victim act. Never once did I suggest you need to be silenced so that again is a bullshit answer.

      And yes the pessimists have been proven right quite frequently, in fact almost always. Not sure where I suggested that wasn’t the case. I simply think the entire idea that all of us are sitting around getting ready to order Durant, Westbrook or Paul jerseys is utter nonsense when nobody is suggesting any of that is or was more than a long shot.

    40. And yes the pessimists have been proven right quite frequently, in fact almost always. Not sure where I suggested that wasn’t the case.

      Good.

      Then maybe you should listen more to the Jowles Brigade and less to the “Optimism Posse”. Why not consider the possibility that what you call “pessimism” is none other than good old-fashioned, sound, analysis?

    41. lol Robin is killing me today.
      “So, he doesn’t get much credit for his “accidental rookie””

      Who cares about credit??? The point is we have a 7’4 freak on our team and you are talking about credit?!?!?! wow.

      The big difference is that those players are brought in as filler material because the emphasis is on “winning now” with questionable “top talent” that prevents the team from taking advantage of any real opportunities that may arise. Turning over the roster every season is not building a team. It takes longer than that to develop young players and finding which ones are keepers. That’s definitely *not* what the Knicks are doing.

      This is asinine on so many levels. You mention young players all about 25 or younger and call them filler. Yet if the Spurs had these same guys your ilk would be lauding them if any of them turned into decent to good players.

      Kuz , KP, and Willy are all Spurs type players. They are more than filler, they are hope. Your ilk hate that lol. its sad. Carry on Robin.

    42. Friggin’ dichotomies. There’s no optimist vs realist clash here. People were talking about an IMPROBABLE hypothetical and then you come up with inane comments like “Delusions die hard, Jowles. Kevin Durant was coming, and so was Westbrook. Now it’s Paul.” No one said that. You’re fighting your own demons, because they ain’t out here.

      People here are trying to have a good time, and try to see some positivity in a negative situation. That does not make them unrealistic. Seeing Chris Paul as a positive asset can be argued but to rage and stomp your feet is childish.

    43. Then maybe you should listen more to the Jowles Brigade and less to the “Optimism Posse”. Why not consider the possibility that what you call “pessimism” is none other than good old-fashioned, sound, analysis?

      Pretending that a bunch of people were calling Durant, Westbrook and now Paul to the Knicks a lock or a high probability isn’t “good old-fashioned, sound, analysis”.

      Even if I’m optimistic, I’m still fairly realistic when it comes to what the Knicks will actually do. Last year I had them at just 35 wins. I think they have a chance at the playoffs this year, but I acknowledge there’s a significant downside risk with this team as well. My belief that the future isn’t totally fucked and that I’m okay with the direction of the franchise as long as we keep our picks doesn’t make me some pie in the sky WFAN caller.

    44. Young talent: KP, Willy, Kuz, Holiday, Baker, Plumlee, Randle, Ndour, O’Quinn.

      Whether they were drafted by us or not makes no difference… The Knicks are clearly a mix of young and old

      Two of those guys have played a single minute in the NBA, and only one of those two is probably a legitimate long term asset. I’m ALL for giving fliers to second round picks, undrafted guys, D-Leaguers, etc. But counting those guys as part of a serious youth pipeline is absurd. We’re basically in a position where we’re fucked if our fliers don’t work out. That’s just now how that’s supposed to work. It’s supposed to be gravy if they DO turn out, and not a problem if they don’t.

      If we took accumulating young assets seriously, Grant and Galloway would still be here. They weren’t difficult to keep. It simply would’ve involved not trading for the worst point guard in the NBA, and not replacing Galloway with a significantly older and more expensive version of himself. But Phil Jackson is simply not taking asset accumulation seriously at all. I am happy he’s taking a few fliers, but I mean, shit, we don’t even have any fucking minutes for them because of all of our “win now” guys!

      If you’re into the whole “try to make the playoffs with no shot in hell of actually doing much” thing that’s fine, just admit it. Don’t try and say Phil is actually revolutionizing the GM position, or whatever. We are seriously damaging long term prospects by trying to be good now, period.

    45. Don’t try and say Phil is actually revolutionizing the GM position, or whatever.

      Who’s saying that.

    46. Who’s saying that.

      Admittedly an exaggeration, but there are multiple people saying Phil is striking the perfect balance between trying to win now and build for the future. In reality, he isn’t doing either of those things well.

    47. Two of those guys have played a single minute in the NBA, and only one of those two is probably a legitimate long term asset. I’m ALL for giving fliers to second round picks, undrafted guys, D-Leaguers, etc. But counting those guys as part of a serious youth pipeline is absurd. We’re basically in a position where we’re fucked if our fliers don’t work out. That’s just now how that’s supposed to work. It’s supposed to be gravy if they DO turn out, and not a problem if they don’t.

      Haha. ALL OF THIS CAN BE SAID ABOUT 1st ROUND PICKS

      1) They come into the league with no experience
      2) If you miss on those you are fucked
      3) They are part of the pipeline.

    48. Two of those guys have played a single minute in the NBA

      So haven’t all drafted picks. A lot of these guys are as good as first round selections in a draft, but since they’re from abroad, go under the radar.

      But counting those guys as part of a serious youth pipeline is absurd

      They’re young, and Phil was left without any picks, so yeah, that’s what we have. What else would you do?

      If we took accumulating young assets seriously, Grant and Galloway would still be here.

      True. But Galloway wasn’t good, was just decent, and doesn’t move the needle; Grant was worse. Giving away both wasn’t like OKC and Harden, here.

      replacing Galloway with a significantly older and more expensive version of himself

      If you’re talking about Courtney Lee, he is MUCH better at everything than Galloway.

      Phil Jackson is simply not taking asset accumulation seriously at all. I am happy he’s taking a few fliers, but I mean, shit, we don’t even have any fucking minutes for them because of all of our “win now” guys!

      If you mean he’s not accumulating assets a la picks and youth with upside, you’re objectively wrong. And if you mean he’s not playing youth because of older veterans, I believe you should take that up with Rambis and Fisher. KP got his minutes, Grant ended up getting some. O’Quinn messed up as often as succeeding on the court. I dunno, I wasn’t about to play Early and Thanasis over Sasha, since there was really never a good future in the NBA for them.

    49. If you’re talking about Courtney Lee, he is MUCH better at everything than Galloway.

      Lee is a (significantly) better shooter than Langston. Galloway is a much better rebounder and playmaker, and probably better on defense too at this point. Defense is a bit murky, though, so don’t sweat it. If you want to argue Lee is a better fit with the Knicks since we added two more starters who cannot shoot for shit, you might be right. On the other hand, Lee is much older, is more expensive, and is signed for two more years. To the extent that Langston is a guy who doesn’t move the needle, so is Courtney. They’re about as productive (in different ways) but one is cheaper and more likely to improve, and that’s the one we let go for no real reason. Which is a head scratcher if Phil is trying to build a team, because in the time he’s been here he’s developed 3 players (Lance, Kyle & Porzingis) and Langston is at minimum a useful player.

    50. Courtney Lee has Finals experience. Langston Gone-away does not. Need I say more?

    51. I’d have kept Galloway. Point guard is the hardest position to cover in the league and few guys hang in there like he can.

      He rebounds like a good rebounding 2 and can handle the ball a lot better than most 2s.

      If the shooting ever improves he’s a big-time steal at 24-26.

      Nothing against Lee, who is going to improve the position considerably, but is getting paid his worth.

      Would have been really cool to have both.

    52. What I like is that we have our pick. So, if we’re good I’m happy and if we’re bad I can follow KP, Kuz and Hernangomez’ development and look forward to the lottery. That’s how it’s supposed to be. “Win Now” mode is all in mode as in give away years of picks for a shot at a deep run. It was what we did for Melo (thank god the price is finally paid). It’s what BKLYN did for Pierce and KG.

      Also, Derrick Rose’s deal is a big savings bond for next years FA period. If he’s somehow a superstar again we throw another similar number at him (don’t hold your breath). If he’s decent we find a number that fits our plans. If he stinks we let him go, or maybe there’s a team out there that wants cap space and has some talent we covet at the deadline (great but DON’T GIVE UP THE PICK).

      Knicks are getting a bit smarter. That’s not hard given their history but progress is real.

    53. Haha. ALL OF THIS CAN BE SAID ABOUT 1st ROUND PICKS

      haha fuck first round picks Mindaugus Kuzminskas 4 life amirite!!

      …seriously dude, you really think first round picks and random Euro guys have similar value to a franchise? I will repeat, I’m happy to take fliers. I don’t believe in appeals to authority when it comes to guys who are available to everyone. But fliers have to complement an actual pipeline, not make it up entirely.

      I’m glad we have all of our picks from now on (pretty much the bare minimum when it comes to organizational competence for non-contenders), but Phil has undeniably mortgaged the future. I’d like to hear one good justification for Courtney Lee at 4/$50m over galloway at 2/$10m. I’d like to hear a justification of the Rose trade that doesn’t involve a Chris Paul pipe dream. I’d like to hear a justification of the no trade clause, which very well be at the center of this whole clusterfuck.

      So haven’t all drafted picks. A lot of these guys are as good as first round selections in a draft, but since they’re from abroad, go under the radar.

      True. But Galloway wasn’t good, was just decent, and doesn’t move the needle; Grant was worse. Giving away both wasn’t like OKC and Harden, here.

      If you’re talking about Courtney Lee, he is MUCH better at everything than Galloway.

      It’s difficult to respond to subjective opinions presented as objective truths.

    54. So, if we’re good I’m happy and if we’re bad I can follow KP, Kuz and Hernangomez’ development and look forward to the lottery. That’s how it’s supposed to be.

      What if we’re mediocre, like we probably will be?

      “Win Now” mode is all in mode as in give away years of picks for a shot at a deep run. It was what we did for Melo (thank god the price is finally paid). It’s what BKLYN did for Pierce and KG.

      This isn’t what “win now” mode is, though. It’s the way the Knicks have gone about it in the past and what the Nets did, but the Warriors and Spurs keep all their picks.

    55. This isn’t what “win now” mode is, though.

      What the hell is “win now” then? The fact that the Knicks are actively trying to win?

    56. Here’s my predictions for this season: Grant plays better than Rose, Lopez plays better than Noah, Galloway plays as well as Lee, Knicks win 34 games. Bonus prediction! 8th seed in the EC playoffs has over 44 wins.

      Edit to add: Rose loses his court case badly. That one is just wishful thinking though.

    57. Here’s my predictions for this season: Grant plays better than Rose, Lopez plays better than Noah, Galloway plays as well as Lee,

      Hahahaha ok. Shocker

    58. …seriously dude, you really think first round picks and random Euro guys have similar value to a franchise? I will repeat, I’m happy to take fliers. I don’t believe in appeals to authority when it comes to guys who are available to everyone. But fliers have to complement an actual pipeline, not make it up entirely.

      You are making up a dichotomy between first round picks and Euro guys that doesn’t exist. If you have a first round draft pick that could be a Euro guy (Rubio, Hezonja, Nokic, for example) or it could not. If you don’t have a first round pick you get a random Euro guy or a random US guy instead. The random Euro guys can pan out in the same way the random US guys can. Look at Mozgov, Prigioni, and Copeland on the Knicks for example. Of course, all “Euro Guys” don’t pan out, but not all random US guys do either.

    59. @69 Exactly, the Knicks actually have a good track record of finding good Euro talent or other undrafted players. I’d be shocked if they didn’t find at least one or two rotation level players from the new guys.

    60. Its an interesting conversation to have. When the details came out I contemplated not watching this season and seeing if the team was going to re-sign him.

      On the other hand if he hits a game winner over Lebron in our opener I’m pretty sure I’m going to be cheering my ass for him.

    61. Galloway plays as well as Lee

      A few statistical tidbits about “below average” Courtney Lee:

      – The Charlotte Hornets last year were 20-8 in regular season games that Lee played in, including a 7 game win streak, their longest of the year. They were 28-26 when he joined them.

      – Lee has been 37% or better from three in each of his last six seasons. His 38.9% clip over that span is 12th in the league.

      But yeah, I’d rather have Galloway for sure.

    62. Gallo-who? Why would anyone pine over a scrub?

      Courtney Lee is a pro’s pro. Gallo is scrub’s scrub.

      Please. Enough with the Gallo nostalgia. He sucked.

    63. What the hell is “win now” then? The fact that the Knicks are actively trying to win?

      “Win now” is trading a rookie and two 2nd year players for Chris Mills; “win now” is trading a 1st and a 2nd round pick for Othella Harrington; “win now” is trading Trevor Ariza for Steve Francis; “win now” is trading players with upside for players with no upside in the name of instant gratification, of which there are dozen of other examples, which you know, so I won’t bother naming them.

    64. Win now is a relative term. The Knicks FO has engaged in some outrageous versions of it.

      I would say that signing Courtney Lee over Langston Galloway is a no-brainer. Galloway has yet to crack a TS% of .500 in 3500 NBA minutes. I don’t get where the love comes from.

      The 2013-14 team had as its young core: Cole, Shump, Toure, Earl Clark, TH2, Chris Smith, and Jeremy Tyler. They had a future with no draft picks in 2014 and 2016. Their vets included Bargnani, Amare, Kenyon Martin, Metta World Peace, and Raymond Felton.

      Rose and Noah were definitely questionable moves, but this team is so much less of a poorly constructed win-now team compared to that one that using that term to describe it is terribly misleading.

    65. I would say that signing Courtney Lee over Langston Galloway is a no-brainer. Galloway has yet to crack a TS% of .500 in 3500 NBA minutes. I don’t get where the love comes from.

      I don’t think it’s even close to a no-brainer in either direction. I would have preferred Galloway for 10/2 to Lee for 4/48 in general, and especially for a non-contender like us. Galloway has been mediocre and has obvious limitations. But he’s been okay. He’s already a better passer and rebounder than Lee and has some ball handling/transition value. I also think he’s already a better defender, and the gap will increase as Lee gets into his 30s, but that argument is harder to win. Lee is a more efficient scorer, and that edge is big enough that Lee has probably been a modestly better overall player.

      But scoring efficiency in your first 3500 minutes in the league tends to improve a bit, especially for guards. Galloway shot 27% from 16-23 feet last year; that will probably go up a little. He is only 25. If he improves his low usage efficiency just a little, which I would guess is the way to bet, he can easily be the average player that Lee has been in his prime.

      And Lee is a very low impact average player. The complete list of players in the league last year with 1500+ and under 12/3.5/2.5 per 36: 1. Courtney Lee. For a so-so team like us, I would much rather not have $25m to Lee’s 33&34 years and KP’s prime, when he will likely be below average and if so may not be tradeable, for the small, uncertain expected benefit he gives you over Galloway today. Also, you could have signed Galloway plus someone else: i.e. Trevor Booker, Seth Curry, Boban for around the money you gave Lee, without committing to pay any medicore 33/34 year old in the out years.

      I’m don’t think it’s a horrible signing and it ranks low on my disappointment with Phil as a GM, but I don’t think it’s even close to a no-brainer.

    66. What if Ron Baker or Chasson Randle can replicate Galloways production? I would have kept Galloway but this idea that Lee isn’t a clearly better 2 guard or that he’s some very difficult to replace player is amusing.

    67. What if Ron Baker or Chasson Randle can replicate Galloways production

      a bird in hand is worth two in Westchester or something

    68. Looking at Lee vs Galloway stats, Lee is better on offense and Galloway is better on defense. They are both utility-level players. Taking into account their strenghts, weaknesses, ages, salaries, contractual demands along with actual team needs, it seems Galloway is a better value and would have given the team more flexibility moving forward.

      There is also the very important issue that there is a *small* chance that Galloway could improve, while Lee is entering the decline phase of his decidedly mediocre career.

    69. What if Ron Baker or Chasson Randle can replicate Galloways production? I would have kept Galloway but this idea that Lee isn’t a clearly better 2 guard or that he’s some very difficult to replace player is amusing.

      What evidence is there that Lee is clearly better? Last year Lee posted a .080 WS48 compared to .077 from Galloway. WP48 was .114 to .092 respectively. Not to mention that Galloway’s better defense is probably not well-reflected here. There’s a good chance Lee is the slightly more productive player overall, which makes sense given that he was double the cost in salary and years, but Galloway is six years younger and looks to be improving (significant jumps in both WP and WS from year 1 to 2).

      Choosing a slightly more productive and significantly more expensive 30 year old over an improving 24 year old is exactly what teams thinking single-mindedly about immediate improvement would do. If it were the, like, the Cavs making that decision, it’d be very defensible. The “best-case scenario 8th seed” Knicks? Totally fucking asinine.

    70. The Knicks best case is the ECF.

      Since can’t ever be falsified, since when it doesn’t happen they just won’t have reached their “best case”, what’s your actual prediction?

    71. Were we choosing Lee over Galloway? Pretty sure we could’ve kept both especially since we needed a starting SG and Galloway clearly wasn’t that. Lee was reported as being a top priority as FA started even when we thought Galloway was re-signing.

      The way I see it was we got the best option at starting SG(not that great a contract but whatever) and the team saw Galloway as replaceable off the bench. I don’t think it was choosing one over the other.

    72. I would have kept Galloway but this idea that Lee isn’t a clearly better 2 guard or that he’s some very difficult to replace player is amusing.

      Was Galloway difficult to replace? No, it just cost 50 million over 4 years.

      I’m not sure why you think Lee is clearly better. He’s clearly better at shooting and clearly worse at everything else.

      http://bkref.com/tiny/pDPdt

      Where’s the amusingly obvious superiority?

    73. DANG Z-Man

      you got DRed up to a 4/10, the most perturbed he’s been in years on this site

    74. Since can’t ever be falsified, since when it doesn’t happen they just won’t have reached their “best case”, what’s your actual prediction?

      In reality best case is a championship. I’m just amused at the hardliners who think the best case is an 8 seed.

      I predict a top 6 seed and at least 1 series win

    75. My feeling is that the first consideration for a shooting guard is whether he can shoot. Lee’s TS is regularly 50 points higher than Galloway, who is not all that young. Lee comes in with a good defensive rep, and his DRtg is nearly identical to Galloway’s. He also fouls far less.

      $12 mill per is like $6-7 mill a couple of years ago. That’s a very good price for a starting shooting guard who can defend his position AND consistently hits 3’s at 38%. He had the 9th best TS% of shooting guards with more that 2000 minutes last year and most guy above him are either making WAY more money (e.g Crabbe, Bazemore) or are on expiring deals (e.g Redick, Korver.)

      Shooting guard is a very thin position in the NBA right now. Many of them are grossly overpaid. Lee is a durable, consistent guy who fits in perfectly with our team. I absolutely love the signing. Guys like Galloway are literally a dime a dozen. Of shooting guards that played 2000+ minutes, his TS% ranked dead last.

    76. I think more people would give Lee the edge if he actually used his strengths. He is a good shooter who doesn’t shoot enough. If he was in the 6-8 3PAs he would be awesome.

    77. Lee can shoot, defend and rebound. He’s not a black hole like Afflalo. He makes his teams and his teammates better. Great team player!

    78. I think more people would give Lee the edge if he actually used his strengths. He is a good shooter who doesn’t shoot enough. If he was in the 6-8 3PAs he would be awesome.

      He scores 12 relatively efficient points per 36. I looked at his game logs last year and saw quite a few games w/ 12-19 points. He seemed to shoot at a decent percentage in nearly all of those games. He also has shot 48% from 2pt range for his career with no seasons below 45%.

      He definitely defers, but looks like he can score more when the situation calls for it. In other words, you can’t lay off him thinking he’s reluctant to shoot. That’s perfect for a team with Melo, Porzingis and (gulp!) Rose. Would you rather have Galloway shooting under 40% taking more shots? Or knuckleheads like JR Smith or Lance Stephenson?

      This guy is the consummate professional. He can play for my team any time. $12 Mill per is not a steal, but it is a fair price in this market.

    79. $12 Mill per is not a steal, but it is a fair price in this market.

      This is precisely the problem. Mediocre-to-bad teams shouldn’t be aiming to get better by paying the going rate for 30+ year olds. There is simply not enough cap space to sign enough of them to put together a good team, especially when you’re starting with Mega Max Melo. This is why good teams use free agency to supplement the guys they have on below market deals, not establish the core of the team. The 47 win Warriors can splurge for Iguodala (who is better than anyone we signed anyway, but that’s besides the point). The 32 win Knicks splurging for Lee and Noah? Makes no sense at all.

    80. So, Calderon sucks because he doesn’t shoot enough, but Courtney Lee, with similar USG% and and FGA/36 (with less efficiency) is a great “team player.”

      Got it.

    81. So, Calderon sucks because he doesn’t shoot enough, but Courtney Lee, with similar USG% and and FGA/36 (with less efficiency) is a great “team player.”

      Got it.

      No, Calderon sucks b/c he is probably the worst defensive guard in the league, and also the worst penetrating PG in the league. Calderon is essentially Steve Novak at the PG position, you know, the same Steve Novak that despite being maybe the best pure 3-pt shooter in the league, never played any rotation minutes since being traded from the Knicks?

      No one here has ever questioned Calderon’s ability to shoot efficiently. Not sure how this comparison makes any sense beyond being abjectly argumentative.

    82. People here specifically make the point that Calderon is terrible on OFFENSE because he only shoots when he is wide open. Yet the same people do not see this as a flaw in Lee’s game.

      I like Courtney Lee okay. I was fine with the signing. He’s a better player than Calderon all-around because of defense. I just have to chuckle at classic Knick fan myopia sometimes.

    83. Oh, I thought your comment was directed at me. Still, I would say that Calderon’s passiveness is a bit more of an issue on offense as a PG, b/c he doesn’t make up for it by piling up assists or getting to the rim, or breaking out in transition, like, say, Rondo or Rubio. He’s really a 2 now, but would be even worse defensively as a 2. Very few lineups can sustain Calderon as a positive in significant minutes.

    84. Because Calderon is a fucking point guard that can’t create for others and is probably the worst defensive point guard in the league. The only skill he has is being a great 3 point shooter at this point, but he can’t do enough of that to make up for all the other deficiencies in his game.

      Lee is a solid defensive SG who can also deliver relatively good efficiency on low usage without creating glaring structural issues like Calderon who is a PG that really can’t run an NBA offense as a starter at this point and can’t defend a traffic cone.

    85. To clarify, I agree that Lee is not a “value” contract, just a fair-market value one. I understand that paying him due to the “win now” nature of this team is a fair point to debate. I just feel strongly that given the direction of this team after the Rose and Noah signings, it made far more sense to pay him than to settle on Galloway. And like someone mentioned, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Ron Baker slips into Galloway’s profile by mid-season. The larger point is that Galloway was the worst offensive 2-guard in the league last year by TS%, and paying $5 mill per for him is ill-advised, especially in a win-now situation. I like the kid, but let him prove himself somewhere else. He had more than a fair chance to do so last year and did not take advantage of the opportunity, except financially.

    86. I think we’ve upgraded the roster this summer. Peak Noah is better than peak Rolo. Courtney Lee is better than Alflalo. DRose may not be the MVP or close anymore but will certainly have a chance to be an upgrade over Calderon. The bench seems stronger as well. We have a bit of flexibility if things don’t go as planned. Looking forward to seeing Brandon Jennings as well. I liked Galloway the way I like any prospect that we find, but, off of last year I’m excited to hand his minutes to some other guys.

    87. 5 mill per for him is ill-advised, especially in a win-now situation.

      I don’t think you understand what a win now situation is

    88. I don’t think you understand what a win now situation is

      Really, DRed? Are you that reading comprehension challenged? If you disagree, say so and explain why…I’d appreciate it. I don’t appreciate unnecessarily condescending comments like the one above. You’re better than that.

      Phil is clearly trying to win now. He wouldn’t have made the Rose, Noah, or Lee deals if that weren’t the case. What’s not to understand?

      That doesn’t mean that the team will actually win, but that’s clearly the mentality. So your dispute is with him, not with me. I’m just commenting that if that’s your mentality, paying $5 million per year to a 25 yo SG who was the worst shooter at his position in the league last year is not consistent with that philosophy. Do you really disagree with that?

      It’s also clearly less of an “all-in” win-now philosophy, as a) youth has hardly been sacrificed and b) no 1st round picks have been traded away.

    89. He scores 12 relatively efficient points per 36. I looked at his game logs last year and saw quite a few games w/ 12-19 points. He seemed to shoot at a decent percentage in nearly all of those games.
      If you looked at any player’s game logs you will see almost half the game above their average. Their efficiency in those games is very misleading, because most players (especially non superstars) are likely to take more shots and play more minutes when they start out hot. It doesn’t tell you anything about their ability to score effectively at higher usage on average.

      There is no magnifying glass big enough to turn Courtney Lee into anything but what he is: An extremely low impact, average NBA player. There are literally 2 guards in the history of the NBA with 15K minutes played who averaged less than 3 assists per 36 and scored at a lower rate than Courtney Lee in their career:

      1. Trenton Hassell
      2. DeShawn Stevenson

      That’s the entire fucking list, and it’s not like he’s been Danny Ainge playing on only powerhouse teams. It doesn’t render him a shitty player but it does reduce the value of his relative efficiency; the fact that he can sometimes go off for 17 points is true about almost every low scoring player. Lee has scored 20 points or more 27 times in his entire career. Gerald Wilkins did it 177 times. He is who he is. Basically, Raja Bell. Or a modestly worse version of one my all-time favorite Knicks, Trent Tucker. Guys like that can usually keep shooting into their 50s, but their defense almost always starts to fall off in their 30s.

    90. There is no magnifying glass big enough to turn Courtney Lee into anything but what he is: An extremely low impact, average NBA player

      Which is an upgrade for the Knicks.

    91. Phil is clearly trying to win now. He wouldn’t have made the Rose, Noah, or Lee deals if that weren’t the case. What’s not to understand?

      Win what now? A championship?

    92. That’s why a third of the roster is rookies? I thought we can’t have unproven players on our win now title team?

    93. There are literally 2 guards in the history of the NBA with 15K minutes played who averaged less than 3 assists per 36 and scored at a lower rate than Courtney Lee in their career:

      1. Trenton Hassell
      2. DeShawn Stevenson

      WTF? This is cherry-picking extraordinaire. Did you happen to look at the TS% of those two guys?

      Courtney Lee is a starting-caliber 2-way player. He’s been extremely consistent and durable. He is the 9th best shooter in the league at his position and an above-average defender. To paint him as “extremely low impact” is very misleading. He doesn’t kill possessions on either end, which is more than you can say about “high-impact” SGs like DeRozan and JR Smith.

    94. Z Man , the fact that people are trying to shit on the Courtney Lee signing lets me know not to engage them. Its that simple. Hes a good locker room/on court guy. Hell make the right plays.

    95. @ 116 – Don’t worry, Z-Man. They’ll love Courtney Lee after he’s gone. While he’s here he’ll be an average player on a poor contract. If we trade him, he’ll magically turn into a great player we should have held onto. Its the MO of this board. Hate on the player while they’re here, pine for them after they’re gone.

    96. DRed, I don’t know what HE expects as far as win-now, but that’s not the argument here. Clearly he expects to win more than had he stood pat and made only low-risk moves. I don’t think he’s thinking championship. Rather, he might be thinking “let’s make some noise in the playoffs so that we are relevant and might attract even more good players via FA.” Might be bad strategy, but in any version of win-now, Courtney Lee makes a lot more sense than Langston Galloway.

    97. It was only a matter of time before Lee got the Knickerblogger treatment. I guess everyone got tired of going after Rose and Noah. No way we can ever give Phil credit for signing a good starter at a fair price and just move on. Nope, we gotta pick that apart too.

    98. Going from Galloway or a similar player to Lee will result in the Knicks winning how many more games next season? One or two?

    99. The efficiency fetishists are at it again, pretending that the made up statistic “True” shooting percentage can tell us all we need to know about a player’s productivity.

    100. When your usage is as low as Lee’s and Galloway’s the true shooting percentage says a lot. It’s a little bit different than the debates over Melo’s volume scoring.

      What made Galloway useful was his rebounding and solid individual defense, though that regressed a bit last season. I would have preferred to sign Lee and keep Galloway, but I also think there’s a fairly decent chance we can replace Galloway’s production with Randle and/or Baker.

    101. It’s hilarious the way well reasoned criticism is written off as some irrational thing exclusive to knicerblogger. Cause, you know, the past 15 years didn’t happen, or something.

    102. yeah. Because the past is the past. The past didn’t include Porzingis, who is the best Knick pick since Patrick Ewing. But yeah….The past.

    103. @ 125
      When your usage is as low as Lee’s and Galloway’s the true shooting percentage says a lot. It’s a little bit different than the debates over Melo’s volume scoring.

      I’m not a fan of posting, and haven’t done so in years, but you’re making a good point here. If you’re not shooting a ton, you better be shooting well.

      One thing I’m curious about is, when people are comparing stats for Galloway and Lee, is everybody taking into account Galloway is coming off the bench and Lee is a starter? I’m thinking there’s a difference talent-wise between having to d up a starter for 82 games playing a starters minutes, versus coming off the bench and playing against…well, bench players.

      While I’m not a fan of Rose (never really have been, but I’m not a huge fan of score first 1’s), is it conceivable that his style of play would be closer to his stint with Team USA than it would’ve been with the Bulls? Or is there a consensus that somehow these professional players can’t adjust their style of play?

    104. Why do people keep saying that Lee is Galloway’s replacement? He’s replacing Afflalo.

      I can see why Phil didn’t want to pay for an inconsistent tweener whose production might easily be replaced by the undrafted rookie Baker.

    105. Cause, you know, the past 15 years didn’t happen

      This is one of the most arrogant cop outs I’ve seen on this blog.

    106. Why do people keep saying that Lee is Galloway’s replacement? He’s replacing Afflalo.

      Probably because someone was trying to rail on Phil. So they brought up Lee’s contract and age and said “we overspent for the same production we could have gotten from Lang”

      Im guessing as to how this came up, but knowing this blog. Im 99% sure that im right.

    107. When your usage is as low as Lee’s and Galloway’s the true shooting percentage says a lot.

      Not to be obstinate here, but some might say it works the other way round. The fewer shots you take, the less important your TS% is and the less valuable it is from a sample size perspective.

      Of course, being that low usage is a reflection on your offensive game.

      I think Lee was a meh signing. Not shitting on him, he’s ok, but doesn’t do much for us in my view, especially a few years out when Kristaps is taking ownership of the Garden.

    108. Hah, Owen beat me to it.

      Low usage means you aren’t a “creative” or “versatile” scorer, but it also means that you won’t single-handedly lose basketball games with your awe-inspiring suckage. I always prefer players who can score to those who can’t, but at the usage of Lee or Galloway, it’s not going to wreck your team either way.

      This is one of the most arrogant cop outs I’ve seen on this blog.

      I love how people join this blog and act like they’ve, for the first time, encountered Knicks “fans” (or whatever) who have a realistic, historically-focused perspective on the Knicks’ failures over the last fifteen years. These same people are people who argue for Langston “Pretty Much Average” Galloway as a moderately better option than Courtney “Pretty Much Average, and Too Old for $10M/yr” Lee. So much anger directed toward people being reasonable.

      The Knicks have been among the worst franchises in professional sports since 2001, and Courtney Lee is almost certainly not improving in his thirties. That is factorial.

    109. Not to be obstinate here, but some might say it works the other way round. The fewer shots you take, the less important your TS% is and the less valuable it is from a sample size perspective.

      I don’t understand this perspective Owen. If you are only going to get open shots due to players like Rose, Melo, KP…..isn’t it more important that you hit those shots to keep the defense honest and slow the help to those 3 guys?

    110. I don’t understand this perspective Owen. If you are only going to get open shots due to players like Rose, Melo, KP…..isn’t it more important that you hit those shots to keep the defense honest and slow the help to those 3 guys?

      I don’t understand how you can think that 90%+ players in the league can’t create a shot without Carmelo Anthony, or someone very similar, on their team.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FbWaRLq8gg

      He’s not a human highlight reel, but a lot of these possessions are just standard NBA basketball. The guy can create off the dribble, generate second-chance points, put up shots over guards, make moves at the basket. Is he anything more than an average NBA player? Nah, but most guards and wings can do this. This is how they get to the NBA.

      Watch the possession at 2:18. Or the one after that, or after that. Where’s the volume scorer with the triple-team to create space for that?

    111. I don’t understand how you can think that 90%+ players in the league can’t create a shot without Carmelo Anthony, or someone very similar, on their team.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FbWaRLq8gg

      He’s not a human highlight reel, but a lot of these possessions are just standard NBA basketball. The guy can create off the dribble, generate second-chance points, put up shots over guards, make moves at the basket. Is he anything more than an average NBA player? Nah, but most guards and wings can do this. This is how they get to the NBA.

      Watch the possession at 2:18. Or the one after that, or after that. Where’s the volume scorer with the triple-team to create space for that?

      I don’t know what the hell you are even talking about in this whole post. It has nothing to do with what I posted.

    112. The point is that Lee on his low usage is efficient and a consistently very good to borderline excellent 3 point shooter. Galloway is not efficient at all and an extremely streaky 3 point shooter who demonstrated improvement from the corners last year, but widespread regression from above the break.

      I think Galloway can become more efficient overall, but I’m not sure he’ll crack more than 52-53 TS%. His decline last year after the hot start was very uninspiring.

      From a low usage starting 2 guard, who is likely going to be depended on to knockdown spot up looks, attack close outs and likely defend the better of the opponent’s starting guards I’d much rather have Lee in that role than Galloway.

    113. If you are only going to get open shots due to players like Rose, Melo, KP

      Are you serious, er? Do you even read what you post?

    114. From a low usage starting 2 guard, who is likely going to be depended on to knockdown spot up looks, attack close outs and likely defend the better of the opponent’s starting guards I’d much rather have Lee in that role than Galloway.

      Other factors are age, salary, contract length and whether the Knicks are looking for those extra few role players to carry them from a 50-win Conf. Semifinalist to a 55-win 7-game Finals series contender. He’s older and more expensive, and the Knicks are going to be lucky to sniff the playoffs with or without him.

      We’re not debating Towns vs. Anthony Bennett, here. There’s no right answer, except that at this very moment, Lee is probably a better player and Galloway is probably a better value.

    115. Are you serious, er? Do you even read what you post?

      Right….so getting open shots means you cant create? I never said anything of the sort. But Lee is the 4th option on in the starting line up. That’s all I was saying. You just took your opportunity to bash Melo. Do you not watch NBA basketball. There are players whose role it is to hit open shots. That’s all I was saying. I never said anything else. You took my comment and ran with it to your own twisted place.

    116. For this particular team, Lee is a far, far better fit than Galloway. This Knicks team has a lot of low eFG% players on it. The Knicks needed Langston Galloway’s .459 eFG% like they needed a hole in the head. Lee can at least throw the ball in the basket, and that is a commodity that is in serious short supply on this roster.

      Lee and Lance Thomas are the only two players on the roster who cracked a .500 eFG% last year, and nobody else was even very close. By the way, .500 is the league average eFG%, Lance Thomas was exactly at .500 and Lee was at .518. The other 13 guys on the roster were either below average in eFG% or not playing in the NBA last year.

    117. But of course Lee is actually replacing Arron Afflalo, and Lee is a small but clear upgrade over that guy. And Lee has a reasonably decent chance of being a serviceable bench player even during the back end of his contract. So yay.

    118. Low usage means you aren’t a “creative” or “versatile” scorer, but it also means that you won’t single-handedly lose basketball games with your awe-inspiring suckage. I always prefer players who can score to those who can’t, but at the usage of Lee or Galloway, it’s not going to wreck your team either way.

      This sounds like an argument that makes sense, but I don’t really think it holds water.

      Look at the Memphis-GS series last year, when Kerr played 5 defenders on 4 Grizzlies and let Tony Allen do whatever he wanted. As soon as that happened, that series was over.

      Anthony Roberson might have had some nice moments, but in game 6 and 7, his complete inability to make GS pay for completely ignoring him on offense (and also Klay’s ridiculous shooting) led to GS improbably winning the series.

      So yes – when you have a low-usage poor shooting perimeter player, you CAN ruin a series or a game all on your own without even shooting the ball if the other team respects you so little that they can play 5-on-4 against everyone else.

      I really like Langston Galloway and rooted hard for him while he was here. But he really just can’t shoot. He can’t take people off the dribble and get into the paint. He can’t finish inside 10 feet. And he’s a below-average 3 point shooter.

    119. I love how people join this blog and act like they’ve, for the first time, encountered Knicks “fans” (or whatever) who have a realistic, historically-focused perspective on the Knicks’ failures over the last fifteen years.

      The problem is some people here think pessimism is synonymous with being reasonable or realistic. We get it, the Knicks have sucked. That doesn’t mean the optimists are always going to be wrong and the pessimists are infallible fortune tellers.

      Its not like we’re predicting finals appearances every year. At the most I’ve seen predictions for a 1st round playoff win. That’s seems well within reason.

    120. Because they both don’t shoot a lot, the difference in scoring between Langston and Lee is pretty minimal. Less than a point per game. So do the extra rebounds and assists you get with Langston get the Knicks an extra point?

    121. That doesn’t mean the optimists are always going to be wrong and the pessimists are infallible fortune tellers.

      Literally no one on this board thought the Knicks would be anything less than a 50-win team in 2012-13. This board was hopping with justified “optimism.” It also happened to be reasonable.

    122. Im gonna go with my eye test. I’ve watched Courtney Lee play. He’s better than Galloway. He hits open shots, defends well, is fairly athletic (can run the fast break, finish at the rim) and he doesn’t fuck up a lot. Not that Galloway did. I liked Galloway. But with the guard from Chicago coming over in the Rose deal he was less needed as they are comparable players.

      Rose, Lee, Jennings, Holiday>Calderon, Affalo, Galloway, Grant

      My opinion of course but I think we upgraded the backcourt and that upgrade will be good for an extra 6 to 10 wins depending on health and chemistry. If Zinger improving can get us 3 or 4 more wins and Hornaceck can get us 3 or 4 more wins with better coaching we’re in business. I’m looking for a 6th seed and a playoff round victory. Get Zinger some experience and get the younger bench guys some experience too. Winning games and going to the playoffs while drafting players will be fun for us.

    123. Lee isn’t replacing Galloway.

      Can Ron Baker or Chasson Randle replace Galloway’s production is the relevant question.

    124. Galloway was 5th on the team in minutes. If either Ron Baker or Chasson Randle are 5th on the Knicks in minutes something has gone extremely right or extremely wrong.

    125. I should probably include Holiday in that list as well. We’ll be replacing Galloway’s minutes between Holiday, Randle and Baker.

    126. This is one of the most arrogant cop outs I’ve seen on this blog.

      And what exactly am I using this as a “cop out” to? You think the Jackson era has been so stellar the only material I can dig up to criticize is in the past? My point is that optimism in the face of blatantly bad decision making isn’t a virtue, and we should know that due to our shitty experiences in the past. I’m not criticizing Phil Jackson because he works for the Knicks. I criticize him because, independent of working for the Knicks, he has thus far sucked as a GM.

    127. The only guard who played more minutes than Galloway was Afflalo. We’re not replacing his production with 3 guys who aren’t getting off the bench if things are going the way Phil is hoping. He’s been replaced by some combination of Rose, Lee and Jennings.

    128. That doesn’t mean the optimists are always going to be wrong and the pessimists are infallible fortune tellers.

      See, the problem is that the Knicks keep making the same kind of mistakes the pessimists are always complaining about. If you saw this team try to do a real, non half-assed rebuild and start collecting young players on value contracts, you’d see a lot less complaining. As it stands the Knicks are not pursuing a strategy that is going to lead to lasting, durable contention. They are investing in the decline phase of Carmelo Anthony and Joakim Noah, and part of that “win now” strategy is a hope and a prayer that Derrick Rose can stay healthy and productive.

      Maybe it’ll work out this time though! But probably not.

    129. The only guard who played more minutes than Galloway was Afflalo. We’re not replacing his production with 3 guys who aren’t getting off the bench if things are going the way Phil is hoping. He’s been replaced by some combination of Rose, Lee and Jennings.

      Lee is replacing Afflalo. Jennings replaces Grant and Galloway whenever he got PG minutes by himself which wasn’t frequent. Holiday, Randle, Baker will replace Galloway and maybe Sasha’s minutes. Phil can hope for whatever he wants, but it’s inevitable that some of the minutes that need to be replaced will go to that trio and my bet would be on either Holiday or Baker, both of whom Hornacek seems high on.

    130. Baker and Randle are pretty huge question marks to me. There’s a very good chance that neither of them turn out to be viable NBA rotation players. Kudos to Phil if either of those guys pans out, but those guys are longshot, lottery ticket players.

    131. It comes down to this; Lee is probably a slightly better overall player than Galloway right now. The numbers bear this out, and no one is denying it. It’s a question of value and team direction. Galloway is 24, entering his third year during which a lot of players improve, and cost 2/$10m. Lee is 30, at an age/stage of his career where any real improvement would be pretty damn surprising, and cost 4/$50m.

      For a team looking to squeeze every last win out of its roster, Lee is a perfectly fine choice (for those arguing it isn’t a dichotomy, well, Phil jettisoned one and brought in the other). For a team looking to accumulate assets and maintain flexibility for the future, Galloway is the obvious choice. In order to justify signing Lee and letting Galloway go, you have to justify the Knicks operating like the former. Why oh why should they be doing that right now, resident “real fans”?

    132. Galloway signed a 1+1 with a player option. I can only imagine how bullish everybody would be about that if the Knicks handed him that contract.

    133. I personally probably would’ve said something along the lines of “I wish we locked him up for longer, but it’s good to have him back and especially at this price.” True outrage.

    134. The numbers bear this out, and no one is denying it. It’s a question of value and team direction. Galloway is 24, entering his third year during which a lot of players improve, and cost 2/$10m.

      I personally probably would’ve said something along the lines of “I wish we locked him up for longer, but it’s good to have him back and especially at this price.” True outrage.

      So that was your reaction when we signed 24 year old Derrick Williams to that exact type contract?

    135. If my memory is correct I do not believe the could could have offered Gallo a 2 yr deal with an opt out. Bottom line is that Phil did not think he was worth 5-6m because it was reported that they wanted him at $3m. Maybe if Phil was in a win now mode he would have given Gallo more or maybe he or Hornacek did not feel like he was worth it regardless of if they were in a win now mode or not.

      With the health issues surrounding Rose and Jennings I would have kept Gallo especially when Holiday and the other guys are question marks.

    136. why are we resigning Lou Amundsen again. He’s ok as a vet locker room guy but isn’t that was Joakim Noah is here for? For Pete’s sake, we have like 4 total guards on this roster. Phil – that 15th spot has to go to a POINT GUARD.

    137. So that was your reaction when we signed 24 year old Derrick Williams to that exact type contract?

      No, because those are two different players. WS does give Williams a slight lead through age 24, but WP says Galloway was rather significantly better. I’m also not sure exactly how the development curve operates with regards to age v.s. years in the league, but it stands to reason Galloway could improve in his third season and that was a hard sell for Williams in his fifth. Galloway also has clear standout skills, despite his deficiencies, and that was simply untrue of Williams.

    138. why are we resigning Lou Amundsen again. He’s ok as a vet locker room guy but isn’t that was Joakim Noah is here for? For Pete’s sake, we have like 4 total guards on this roster. Phil – that 15th spot has to go to a POINT GUARD.

      So are the dudes who are obviously going to replicate Galloway’s production actually going to, you know, make the roster?

    139. Somebody help me out here. Why the infatuation with Langston? Sure, he was a decent bench player, but he did fall off after mid-season. He wasn’t dominant off the bench like some 6th man of the year candidate. I’m genuinely curious.

    140. I think Galloway is more of a figurehead for “homegrown young cheap contract players who may (or may not) improve in the future.”

    141. That’s a pretty good reason. Thanks. But, wouldn’t that apply to Baker, Randle, etc after this season? Especially if they make the team?

    142. What Nick said. I also think it was nice that Galloway sometime showed up on lists of good defenders. Seemed like a solid citizen and hard worker on the court. And obviously he was a lot younger than Lee.

      While I think everyone on Team Gallo honestly thinks he would have had a higher ROI than Lee, he was also mildly talismanic for a while because he got off to an obscenely hot start and because his name was really fun to say when he hit his occasional three.

      Some, I am not naming names, put him on almost the same pedestal as I once put David Lee, minus the morning waffles.

      In the grand scheme, it’s not a huge deal, but it’s yet another sign that Phil isn’t the second coming of Theo Epstein….

    143. So that was your reaction when we signed 24 year old Derrick Williams to that exact type contract?

      It was hard to get excited for Williams because, as a super high draft pick, he couldn’t find a place on the talent starved Kings. On the other hand, Galloway, un-drafted, rose above his station to be a useful player. So I understand, as fans, the reaction to one vs the other.

      That said, if you’re worried about which player is better, Lee or Galloway, it’s ultimately moot because neither are very good. (We gots bigger problems.)

    144. I don’t know why you want to burn a roster spot on a 34-year old veteran who only got on the floor for 200 minutes on a 32-win team, and who played like dog shit in those 200 minutes.

    145. @172. I…was with you until you mentioned Theo Epstein. However, reminding me of ’04 has not only invalidated your opinion, but has subsequently ruined the last day of my vacation.

    146. For those of you who aren’t paying attention to the real issues, Anthony Davis and Giannis Antetokounmpo are both set to become free agents in 2021. You, me, KP, AD, the Greek Freak, and a championship. Remember where you heard it first.

    147. kevin5318 said: I can see why Phil didn’t want to pay for an inconsistent tweener whose production might easily be replaced by the undrafted rookie Baker.

      but your same logic could be applied to Lee and with a little work, applied to apply to Noah and Rose. The crux of your point is that there’s no point gambling on a player who doesn’t get you much in a best case. Galloway’s size and lack of playmaking limit his upside to weak starter or bench player most likely. But what is Lee’s upside? What is Noah’s upside? What is Rose’s? Even if you say small picture they’re higher, big picture, they probably are even lower than Galloway’s.

    148. But what is Lee’s upside? What is Noah’s upside? What is Rose’s? Even if you say small picture they’re higher, big picture, they probably are even lower than Galloway’s.

      This is laughable. We have seen Noah and Rose’s upside. If they can get to 80% of that it would shit on anything Galloway can dream of. Also Lee isn’t an upside player. He’s a consistent player, which is EXACTLY what you want from a role player

    149. What is Noah’s upside? What is Rose’s?

      That really IS laughable. One won MVP of the NBA, the other could have won it (finished Top 5).

      Rose isn’t going to be back there again, but Noah very well could.

    150. Joe Noah is my guy and he’s easily a top 5 center in the NBA when healthy, but he isn’t going to be an MVP candidate anytime soon.

      He will be the MVP of the Knicks, though. Unless Porzingis turns into Dirk Camby overnight, Noah is hands down our best player.

    151. Noah is hands down our best player.

      Nah. It’s still Melo then KP. Noah will not have a big role like he did in Chi early years. I see him more as a 25-32 min a game player to preserve him. He will only get over 30 mins in dire situations

      lol it’s so chic to say any non Melo player is “hands down” the best player.

    152. Wow, I’ve been away and people are still working the false dichotomies here. Tribalism runs deep.

      And Noah is absolutely our best player and probably a great vocal team leader (vs Melo’s mellow team leadership) with an elite defensive mentality. It’s really undeniable.

      Lee at his price is below market value. For a high-efficiency, low-volume, defensive player. Someone you lot like to salivate for.

      And Phil DID offer Galloway a deal. I think it was 3-4M, which was his valuation, and NOP offered 6M with a player option. We may have crucified Phil if he made that deal and Galloway stunk. I also don’t think there was a choice between Lee and Galloway, they were two separate decisions, and I don’t think this debate makes sense.

    153. Meanwhile Derrick Rose and his legal team continue to argue he couldn’t have possibly raped someone who puts sex stuff on Instagram.

    154. lol

      define average salary in the current market

      Well, here are some basic numbers for you, per b-ref:

      Average salary: $5.67M
      Median salary: $2.96M
      Courtney Lee: $11.24M

      There are 514 players under contract. Of those, Courtney Lee is owed the 45th most money in the league. He will be #91 in yearly salary this upcoming season.

      Here are Courtney Lee’s rankings in some of the “advanced stats,” out of the 470-some players who qualified for the MPG leaderboard:

      WS48 #255
      BPM #196
      VORP #137
      WP48 idk but he’s basically the definition of average according to WP48

      (On a side note, Carmelo is still #9 in the league in salary this year despite the crazy money being thrown around, and is #8 next season before any new FA signings. Still an expensive deal.)

    155. If Noah is healthy and not physically shot he’s probably going to be the most productive player on the team. I think that’s the best way to phrase it.

    156. We’re not debating Towns vs. Anthony Bennett, here. There’s no right answer, except that at this very moment, Lee is probably a better player and Galloway is probably a better value.

      Nicely put.

    157. Signing Lou Amundson to a fully guaranteed contract is slap your face in disbelief levels of moronic

    158. Average salary: $5.67M
      Median salary: $2.96M
      Courtney Lee: $11.24M

      The $5.67 mil average salary doesn’t count for the current market. It’s about 8.2% of the old cap, so adjusted for the rise in the cap this year and next average salary should look more like $8.4 million. So Lee is above average, but not drastically so. And he got the same exact same salary as Eric Gordon, who is also rather average seeming in talent, so the market was there to justify Lee’s contract. Still, though, it’s hard to get too excited for Lee. (He feels like the Chris Childs of the 1996 overhaul, with Rose as Larry Johnson and Noah as Allen Houston).

    159. The $5.67 mil average salary doesn’t count for the current market. It’s about 8.2% of the old cap, so adjusted for the rise in the cap this year and next average salary should look more like $8.4 million. So Lee is above average, but not drastically so. And he got the same exact same salary as Eric Gordon, who is also rather average seeming in talent, so the market was there to justify Lee’s contract. Still, though, it’s hard to get too excited for Lee. (He feels like the Chris Childs of the 1996 overhaul, with Rose as Larry Johnson and Noah as Allen Houston).

      I admit that average salary doesn’t really help much other than to show how willing NBA front offices are to sign and re-sign players over the cap. We should be able to find average salary by multiplying the cap by thirty, then dividing by the total number of players in the league. Anything over that needs to be judged according to situational criteria, like how Cleveland and Golden State should be spending as much as they can, while the Sixers should be doing just enough to hit the salary floor.

      I’d be interested to see what the distribution of salaries looks like, especially against WP and WS totals. We know what the median is, but we don’t really see whether production totals (e.g. WP or VORP) operate on the same curve. Maybe I’ll tinker with excel tomorrow, if I can get data organized enough to do it.

    160. I think you hit it on the head when you said “veteran”. Lee should be compared to all other veteran starting SGs, i.e. anyone not on a rookie deal.

      As I argued before, it’s a very thin position and most good teams are either overpaying or got lucky with a rookie deal starter who eventually will get overpaid. Think Bazemore and Fournier.

      Or they have someone who isn’t very good and probably won’t get much better. Like Galloway.

      Lee is not glamorous. He doesn’t rebound or assist on baskets much, but he defends reasonably well and is a lock to shoot 37%+ from 3 and 45% from the field.

      He will be overpaid in years 3-4 but will, as someone said, still be at least a useful bench player. He’s a high-character guy by all accounts. I think that after the garbage we’ve been running out at the SG position for the last 15 years, we’re really gonna like him.

    Comments are closed.