Knicks Morning News (2019.07.12)

  • [RotoWire]
    Marcus Morris: Signs with Knicks

    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 4:46:00 PM)

    Marcus Morris: Morris will be signing with the Knicks, Shams Charania of The Athletic reports.

    Visit RotoWire.com for more analysis on this update.

  • [Hoops Rumors] Knicks To Sign Marcus Morris
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 7:45:25 PM)

    The Knicks have agreed to a one-year, $15MM deal with Marcus Morris, Shams Charania of The Athletic reports (Twitter link). Morris had previously come to an agreement with the Spurs but chose not to honor the verbal agreement. San Antonio was planning on using its mid-level exception to sign Morris and turned its DeMarre Carroll […]

  • [NYPost] Marcus Morris set to join Knicks after Spurs deal gets pulled
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 3:44:19 PM)

    The Knicks are banking on Marcus Morris being better than his word. Just five days after Morris verbally agreed to contract terms with the Spurs, the veteran forward officially reneged on his commitment Thursday and now plans to sign a one-year, $15 million deal with the Knicks, according to multiple reports. Morris, a 29-year-old who…

  • [NYPost] Mitchell Robinson’s expanded shooting range still just tease for Knicks
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 3:16:50 PM)

    LAS VEGAS — The wait is still on. Any expansion to Mitchell Robinson’s game from his stout rookie season will have to come during preseason in October. The second-year 7-foot-1 center has talked up his offseason work on mid-range and 3-point shooting, but in his four summer league games, it never materialized. Robinson still showed…

  • [NYPost] NBA commissioner bullish on WNBA after women’s soccer success
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 12:57:01 PM)

    SUN VALLEY, Idaho — NBA Commissioner Adam Silver isn’t giving up on the WNBA. Critics have called the money-losing women’s basketball league a failure, but Silver said he’s “doubling down” on it — and pointed to the success of the US women’s soccer team as a reason. “I was welling up watching the women’s World…

  • [NYPost] Kevin Knox bracing for ‘brutal’ playing-time battle with new Knicks
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 11:40:40 AM)

    LAS VEGAS — Kevin Knox II didn’t become a national story at summer league this time, but he showed off a bulked-up frame that will make him more powerful in getting to the rim and absorbing contact. That was an issue as a rookie last season. However, Knox’s expected progression doesn’t guarantee he’ll play more…

  • [ESPN] Sources: Morris to join Knicks as Spurs move on
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 7:38:19 PM)

    After Marcus Morris reneged on a verbal agreement to sign with the Spurs, the franchise withdrew its offer and reached a two-year deal with Trey Lyles, league sources told ESPN. Morris has accepted a one-year, $15 million deal with the Knicks.

  • [SNY Knicks] Sources: Russell Westbrook viewed Knicks as a potential suitor prior to Houston trade
    (Friday, July 12, 2019 1:29:34 AM)

    We’ll never know if the Knicks were interested in trading for Russell Westbrook. They never had the chance to make an offer.

  • [SNY Knicks] Marcus Morris to join Knicks on one-year deal
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 7:48:13 PM)

    The Knicks’ pursuit of Marcus Morris has paid off.

  • [SNY Knicks] Nate Robinson talks Knicks’ free agency haul
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 8:57:28 PM)

    Nate Robinson played his first five NBA seasons with the New York Knicks.

  • [SNY Knicks] These 3 players have impressed at Knicks Summer League
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 5:47:22 PM)

    Aside from Mitchell Robinson and RJ Barrett, Jud Buechler’s Knicks squad got quality production from a number of players.

  • [SNY Knicks] With free-agent additions, Kevin Knox knows Knicks camp will be ‘brutal’
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 4:42:57 PM)

    With an influx of free agent talent joining the young Knicks’ roster, Kevin Knox knows that his playing time will be hard-fought.

  • [SNY Knicks] Sources: Knicks view landing free agents Marcus Morris and Reggie Bullock as likely
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 1:34:18 PM)

    As of Thursday morning, there was still mutual interest between the Knicks and Reggie Bullock to negotiate a new deal after a medical issue hampered their original agreement, per SNY sources.

  • [SNY Knicks] Knicks may exploit this offensive skill from RJ Barrett this season
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 1:13:17 PM)

    Knicks first-rounder RJ Barrett put together another fine performance in the penultimate Summer League game on Wednesday night, dropping 21 points with 10 boards for another double-double.

  • [NYTimes] Sources: Russell Westbrook viewed Knicks as a potential suitor prior to Houston trade
    (Friday, July 12, 2019 1:29:34 AM)

    We’ll never know if the Knicks were interested in trading for Russell Westbrook. They never had the chance to make an offer.

  • [NYTimes] Marcus Morris to join Knicks on one-year deal
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 7:48:13 PM)

    The Knicks’ pursuit of Marcus Morris has paid off.

  • [NYTimes] Nate Robinson talks Knicks’ free agency haul
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 8:57:28 PM)

    Nate Robinson played his first five NBA seasons with the New York Knicks.

  • [NYTimes] These 3 players have impressed at Knicks Summer League
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 5:47:22 PM)

    Aside from Mitchell Robinson and RJ Barrett, Jud Buechler’s Knicks squad got quality production from a number of players.

  • [NYTimes] With free-agent additions, Kevin Knox knows Knicks camp will be ‘brutal’
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 4:42:57 PM)

    With an influx of free agent talent joining the young Knicks’ roster, Kevin Knox knows that his playing time will be hard-fought.

  • [NYTimes] Sources: Knicks view landing free agents Marcus Morris and Reggie Bullock as likely
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 1:34:18 PM)

    As of Thursday morning, there was still mutual interest between the Knicks and Reggie Bullock to negotiate a new deal after a medical issue hampered their original agreement, per SNY sources.

  • [NYTimes] Knicks may exploit this offensive skill from RJ Barrett this season
    (Thursday, July 11, 2019 1:13:17 PM)

    Knicks first-rounder RJ Barrett put together another fine performance in the penultimate Summer League game on Wednesday night, dropping 21 points with 10 boards for another double-double.

  • 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).

    223 thoughts to “Knicks Morning News (2019.07.12)”

    1. I don’t like the idea of Portis starting at C with Randle at PF. But, given all the signings, that is the likely outcome. How in the hell will Fiz find minutes for MitchRob, Randle, Portis, Morris, and Gibson? I know Morris can play some 3 in a pinch, but we are not being honest with ourselves if we think he’s not primarily a stretch 4. We have 1 center. ONE. That is a recipe for disaster when it comes to MitchRob’s development. We need a RoLo or Tyson wayyyyy more than we need Portis, Gibson, and Morris collectively. As great a fit Morris is, I’m unhappy with this signing. I don’t see why we would bring Bullock in now, and I’m ok with that- Dot and Iggy need to play.

      I also wouldn’t be surprised to see Trier or Dot start the season at SG1 to give Barrett time to build his confidence with the 2nd unit and have the ball in his hands more

      @183 Totes

      If you are looking at lineup combinations that make the most sense, wouldn’t 4Randle 5Mitch and 4Gibson 5Portis make more sense? Floor spacing is great and all and I’m not saying Portis is never at the 5 with Randle, but you do need someone by the basket and if you don’t want rotations with no floor spacers out there then you are more likely to spread them out. I think the fact that none of these signings replicates Mitch’s skillset is actually a positive, to me that means they value Mitch specifically as someone who is going to be a top producer at that skill set and they are trying out complementary guys to see who works and getting their bird rights in two years if they can’t trade them for something of greater value.

    2. Reposting this which got lost in the Russ trade news

      PG-Randle
      Wing-Knox
      Wing-Morris
      PF-Portis
      C-Mitch

      let’s fucking go

    3. Totes, in today’s NBA, big C’s are not really in vogue. Portis, Morris and Randle can all play there and do an adequate job. As someone pointed out recently, Portis played 70+% of his minutes at C.

    4. I have to disagree with JK47 on the validity of this particular team-building strategy at this particular moment. It’s not how I would have done it, but it isn’t illogical given the flattened odds. The main reason we struck out on the true max players is because we were a 17-win team with little chance of being better than a fringe playoff team even with two max players. To think that tanking for another couple of years will change that is a highly questionable proposition. Why not set up a situation where you are auditioning our recent draft picks and some young FAs (for whom you have Bird rights) for possible inclusion in a core and if any of them don’t work out, no harm no foul? Why not take a flyer on some non-max vets and put a competitive product on the floor, tweaking things as you go?

      -signing Randle to a 2+1 deal was a value signing. That contract can be moved if necessary but he’s a very good young player on a fair deal of reasonable length with an out.
      -Payton makes a lot of sense as a possible starting PG going forward. Having any kind of Bird rights on him is a nice place to be.
      -All of the other deals are for guys that can be either traded or cut at the deadline without any pain for either the player or our team. That’s the beauty of overpaying for essentially one-year deals. Take Morris for example. Suppose Knox improves and he becomes unhappy with his PT. If you cut him, he gets picked up on the cheap by a contender who needs a banger (Boston? Houston?) He has now made almost as much money in one year as he would have made in 2 years in SA, and he becomes a UFA and can probably sign the SA deal again. Great for him, great for us. That goes for the other vets as well. They all made a premium by signing shorter-term deals and if they get cut, it’s a great opportunity for them.

    5. PG: Payton, DSJ, Frank
      SG: Trier, Ellington, Dotson
      SF: RJ, Knox, Iggy, Bullock
      PF: Randle, Morris, Taj
      C: Mitch, Portis

      Opening Day Rotation:
      Starters: Payton, Dotson, RJ, Randle, Mitch
      Bench: DSJ, Trier, Knox, Morris, Taj, Portis, Ellington (depending on match-ups.)

      Out of rotation: Frank, Iggy, Bullock

      most likely gone at deadline: Ellington, Bullock, Taj, Morris

    6. @2 Don’t worry, we all laugh at the DRed zingers even when we don’t say so. (After initially saying, huh??)

    7. Stratomatic: Management consists of talent evaluation, fitting pieces together coherently, & contract/valuation level decisions. The Knicks are bad at all three. says:

      Regardless of whether Randle plays C or PF, imo he supposed to teamed with a floor spacer because he does his best work inside on offense. That’s why I always thought he was the perfect complimentary piece to KP. He could bang and rebound inside, KP could provide the space for him, and KP would patrol and help defend the paint. Defensively, Mitch and Randle fit well because Robinson protects the paint. But on offense they both want to operate inside. It might work for Robinson if Randle continues hitting 3s at an attractive enough rate, but really, who wants Randle launching 3s when he’s better inside. He’ll have to improve his 3 point for that to make sense.

    8. I also feel that the quasi-bust draft picks need to be challenged to find out whether they are NBA players or not.
      -If Dotson and Trier can’t beat out Ellington and Bullock, they are not part of the plan going forward
      -If Knox and RJ can’t hold their own, cut their minutes until they can
      -DSJ is in a make it or break it situation, let’s see him go at it with Payton for PT
      -Frank is pretty much toast, but let’s see how he plays in France before passing final judgment
      -Iggy will be interesting, I could see him becoming a fan fave and earning increasing minutes as the season goes on.

    9. Stratomatic: Management consists of talent evaluation, fitting pieces together coherently, & contract/valuation level decisions. The Knicks are bad at all three. says:

      The main reason we struck out on the true max players is because we were a 17-win team with little chance of being better than a fringe playoff team even with two max players. To think that tanking for another couple of years will change that is a highly questionable proposition.

      That sounds familiar.

      I was sounding that alarm bell for quite awhile.

      Given we struck out like I expected, I don’t have much of a problem with 1 year deals or even overpays. However, we are grading on a curve. We are basically saying. “Well, he didn’t screw up anything too badly for the long term, so I’ll ignore the fact that I’m not particularly thrilled by anything he has done”.

      I’m not enamored with either the player, fit, or both when it comes to any of these signings.

      I guess I like Peyton the best of all of them because I’m not sold on DSJ and Peyton is a legitimate triple double threat when healthy. If he improves his shot, I can deal with any deficiencies on defense. I want to see more of Portis on defense. I like Randle, but am concerned about fit.

    10. strat, why do you think that Mitch “operates” inside? They don’t run any plays at all for him beyond the high PnR. He’s a weak-side threat for a ball dominant player like Randle. He won’t get in Randle’s way at all. Can you imagine how many putbacks he might get if Randle gets doubled on drives?

    11. Out of rotation: Frank, Iggy, Bullock

      So Bullock is out of the rotation as soon as they sign him? Sounds like a good move to make!

    12. Stratomatic: Management consists of talent evaluation, fitting pieces together coherently, & contract/valuation level decisions. The Knicks are bad at all three. says:

      Can you imagine how many putbacks he might get if Randle gets doubled on drives?

      Almost all of Mitch’s buckets are dunks off the P&R or put backs. I don’t think it’s too hard for good teams to at least limit that kind of stuff if they focus on it. It usually works better in space. Also, since they know Mitch won’t be launching anything from outside, someone is always going to be in the area to help on Randle. Maybe you are right, but I think we are reaching to think this is ideal.

    13. What Mitch does is impossible to limit without opening up something for someone else, especially Randle.

    14. Stratomatic: Management consists of talent evaluation, fitting pieces together coherently, & contract/valuation level decisions. The Knicks are bad at all three. says:

      One other thing I wanted to mention about our veteran signings is that we made a huge deal about having Courtney Lee and Noah on the books taking up space and potentially hurting the tank last year. Both would be expiring contracts this year (assuming we didn’t stretch Noah for even more space we wound up not needing smh).

      I’m not even sure either Ellington or Bullock is better than Lee as a player when healthy and I doubt either is better as a professional mentor.

      I’ve always liked Taj Gibson, but he’s another variation on Noah (at least he comes without the drugs, alcohol, and fighting ).

      https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_hint=Taj+Gibson&player_id1_select=Taj+Gibson&y1=2019&player_id1=gibsota01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Joakim+Noah&player_id2_select=Joakim+Noah&y2=2019&player_id2=noahjo01&idx=players

    15. Stratomatic: Management consists of talent evaluation, fitting pieces together coherently, & contract/valuation level decisions. The Knicks are bad at all three. says:

      What Mitch does is impossible to limit without opening up something for someone else, especially Randle.

      Mitch is not the only high flying big man in the NBA that operates almost exclusively in the P&R. Invariably, teams try to build more space around them and not hope they can make it work. Space works better.

    16. And honestly the team building philosophy makes sense because Fizdale needs to be tested and challenged. The jury is still very much out on him and he doesn’t remotely warrant another year where he can point to youth and lack of talent for his likely shortcomings.

      There’s going to be a lot of tabloid fodder this year. That “Me, Scott, and David are all in this together” stuff is great, but it’s only really true in a first honeymoon year, particularly when the first honeymoon year is a tank job. We can rest assured that if the team lays an egg this year, or if the minutes aren’t distributed well, they won’t all be in it together.

    17. Mitch is not the only high flying big man in the NBA that operates almost exclusively in the P&R.

      Mitch is the only one who has the combo of high jumping, quick second jump and nifty touch around the rim. He has a lot to improve, but there’s no-one who can play vertical on offense like he does (I mean, with his style). This explosiveness makes him impossible to limit as long as someone is able to throw him a good pass.

    18. I just don’t understand how anyone could’ve looked at the roster prior to free agency (Mitch, RJ, Knox, DSJ, Frank, Dotson, Trier, Allen) and come to the conclusion that there’s no need to be picking towards the top of the draft anymore. I mean…what? That core just won 17 games. And yet, that’s exactly what this offseason signaled. We want to take a long-shot run at the 8th seed and pick 10-14th.

      It seems like these guys learned the wrong lesson from the Nets. The reason they were a desirable destination was because of the guys they drafted, not the odd mercenary here and there.

      More importantly though, you can only make any sense whatsoever of our strategy if you assume it’s entirely based on attracting free agents. How many god damn times do we have to be spurned before we stop doing that? Maybe one day it’ll work, sure, but it’s hard for me to believe this offseason made us more desirable than if we just grabbed every available asset and tried to make the best of them anyway.

      Maybe a lot of it can be made up for if we’re active at the trade deadline, but I think a true accidentank situation would need to be happening for that to be realistic. No way these guys are moving pieces if we’re within striking range of a 4 game ritual slaughter by the Bucks.

    19. The offense should be primarily RJ or DSJ/Mitch pick and roll with the floor spread and everyone else behind the three point line. Will it be that? Doubtful.

    20. These moves for older vets seem like a pretty radical departure from Perry’s previous strategy. To me they reek of pressure from Dolan, which means the people who always post that we will never be contenders as long he is owner are looking smarter and smarter. This is very depressing.

    21. tnfh, in a sense, I agree with strat that picking at the top of the draft is neither the best nor the only way to proceed, especially with odds-flattening. Toronto did not have a single player picked in the lottery and built their team largely through smart trades. GSW had a core of mid-late lottery picks (Curry and Thompson) and a second-rounders (Draymond) and added Durant. SA hasn’t picked in the top of the lottery since forever.

      The Knicks are as bad as they are right now because they signed the wrong guys to the wrong deals (see: Lee, TH2, Noah, Lance) and drafted the wrong players in the spots they had (see: Frank, Knox, Early, TH2, Grant). Their biggest issues have been 1) cap management and 2) player evaluation. If they had signed John Collins and SGA in the last 2 drafts (and perhaps traded down in this one) they’d be in much better position than they are now even without tanking. No amount of tanking will improve our lot if we continue to evaluate players poorly.

      However, there are signs that they are becoming at least somewhat more value-oriented and cap-savvy. Signing Randle, Payton and even Portis to flyer deals is not a bad thing. Having the potential to open up 2 max slots in 2021 is not a bad thing. Hitting on second rounders is not a bad thing. These little things can add up just as fast as tanking (and the PR debacle that goes with it) and being bridesmaids in FA bonanzas forever until you luck into a superstar in the draft.

    22. These moves for older vets seem like a pretty radical departure from Perry’s previous strategy. To me they reek of pressure from Dolan, which means the people who always post that we will never be contenders as long he is owner are looking smarter and smarter. This is very depressing.

      The only other time that Perry has had even close to the main control of a team was with the Kings and the first thing he did was sign a bunch of veterans to big money pointless contracts (George Hill, Zach Randolph and Vince Carter).

    23. It seems like these guys learned the wrong lesson from the Nets. The reason they were a desirable destination was because of the guys they drafted, not the odd mercenary here and there.

      But they drafted their guys outside the lottery. Again, they were excellent at player evaluation and cap management. They made smart salary dump trades but not for lottery picks…and we have sufficient picks to pick up Leverts and Allens and RHJs. But we also need to find the DARs and Dinwiddie’s of the world (which is where guys like DSJ and Randle and Payton might come in, and less so Portis.)

    24. tnfh, in a sense, I agree with strat that picking at the top of the draft is neither the best nor the only way to proceed, especially with odds-flattening. Toronto did not have a single player picked in the lottery and built their team largely through smart trades. GSW had a core of mid-late lottery picks (Curry and Thompson) and a second-rounders (Draymond) and added Durant. SA hasn’t picked in the top of the lottery since forever.

      Kawhi Leonard and Danny Green were acquired for two guys drafted by the Raptors at #9 in different drafts, Marc Gasol was acquired for a guy drafted by the Raptors at #5 and Kyle Lowry was acquired via a top nine pick, as well. Just because no one on Toronto’s team was literally drafted with a lottery pick doesn’t mean that lottery picks weren’t still a valuable part of their team-building process.

    25. I’m not thrilled with this strategy, but it does seem to indicate that our current management would rather have a somewhat competent team to attract free agents and fans than hire an overpaid, over the hill star to attract fans; and it’s definitely the better choice of the two paths. They do seem to think they have to eventually attract a top free agent instead of building up through smaller moves, and I’m not sure they will ever be able to do that. I’m hoping their current path doesn’t preclude getting better with smaller moves.

    26. But we also need to find the DARs and Dinwiddie’s of the world (which is where guys like DSJ and Randle and Payton might come in, and less so Portis.)

      Russell was acquired in a salary dump, which this front office categorically refuses to do for some ill-advised reason.

      And Dinwiddie was signed as a young player to a cheep three-year deal, thus giving the Nets leverage to get him to sign an extension rather than him being a free agent as soon as he became good. Those are the sorts of deals that this team should be signing, not these short term big money deals that don’t even get them Bird Rights on the players (after two years, they’d get Early Bird Rights, but that’s for less money than their current salaries, so effectively meaningless). The Randle deal was perfect in that regard. The Randle deal was a good deal. The others, not so much. I’ll even give them the Payton deal, as well, as fuck, they really needed a point guard.

    27. tnfh, in a sense, I agree with strat that picking at the top of the draft is neither the best nor the only way to proceed, especially with odds-flattening. Toronto did not have a single player picked in the lottery and built their team largely through smart trades. GSW had a core of mid-late lottery picks (Curry and Thompson) and a second-rounders (Draymond) and added Durant. SA hasn’t picked in the top of the lottery since forever.

      I made a post a few weeks ago outlining how this has been exaggerated to a large extent (2/3 assets in the Kawhi deal were lottery picks), but it doesn’t matter. The Raptors’ situation was drastically different from ours. They could afford to sacrifice some value in the draft because they were actually, you know, good.

      Pre-Kawhi trade, they were consistently a 50+ win team. They weren’t a contender unless major injuries happened, but they had a non-zero chance at a championship annually. That’s an enormously different situation than the one we find ourselves in. We’re not a top 4 seed in need of some extra juice to put us over the top. We just won 17 games. There’s nothing to emulate from the strategy the Raptors went with when they were consistently winning 48-58 games a year.

    28. @24 agreed. If anything, Perry is sticking to a viable strategy. The potential problem I’m seeing is with player evaluation, not with the strategy. But he also cut bait on some guys that cynical KBers were certain that he would sign to long-term deals, like Mudiay and Hezonja. He stayed away from the dumber long-term signing given our situation (or on their face) like Kemba, Tobias, and god help us, Rozier.

    29. But we also need to find the DARs and Dinwiddie’s of the world (which is where guys like DSJ and Randle and Payton might come in, and less so Portis.)

      Yes, I agree that we should be taking on salary dumps and using roster spots on NCAA/G-League standouts like Dinwiddie instead of Wayne Ellington.

    30. I will categorically say that once a player is drafted, their draft position doesn’t matter. By this, I mean that getting DAR in a salary dump is not equivalent to getting a #2 pick, since his stock was at a low point when that deal was made. Just like us getting DSJ in the KP deal is not equivalent to a lottery pick, since he was no longer thought of in that light. I mean, if Draymond, Jokic, or Mitch was included in a trade, would you think of them as a second-round throw-in?

      Draft order only counts before they play meaningful NBA minutes, while their value is still unknown.

    31. @30 Come on, you know that signing Ellington doesn’t obviate that option. You could simply cut Ellington and sign the next Dinwiddie to a minimum deal.

      Remember that the Nets had near zero draft assets. They absolutely had to take on salary dumps to rebuild. We have sufficient draft picks…maybe not enough for your liking, but if you draft smartly, then we have plenty.

    32. +1 to Z-man
      Drafting right is the name of the game.
      Not sucking all year and drafting high.
      That’s only good for gamblers and natural born losers.

    33. And btw, the jury is still very much out on the Nets. They might make some noise for the next 3 years, but they will also be in cap hell via the corpses of DAJ and KD, and Kyrie is injury-prone. They might have been better served to ride with what they had.

    34. @30 Come on, you know that signing Ellington doesn’t obviate that option. You could simply cut Ellington and sign the next Dinwiddie to a minimum deal.

      This reminds me of the defenses of the Lee deal at the time (“Well, you could always just get rid of him later!”). If “you can just cut him later” is a defense of signing a veteran free agent, then you probably shouldn’t be signing the veteran free agent. The issue with these signings is absolutely the opportunity cost of it all. They couldn’t take on any salary dumps because they had the cap space ticketed to big money short term deals to veteran free agents. It’s not a good strategy. They couldn’t take fliers on young free agents because they were reserving a bunch of roster spots for mediocre veteran free agents on short term deals.

    35. I don’t like the Payton signing because it reeks of Hezonja last year where there were credible rumors that the front office was pressuring Fizdale to play him because it would make them look good if the uber-stiff they drafted at a previous stop somehow managed to look halfway ok (which of course he didn’t).

      I don’t really want a guy here wherein politics and agendas very well might dictate how he’s treated and how much he plays. I hate agendas and the Knicks are one of the most agenda’d organizations you’re ever going to find. I’m very fearful they’re going to be again this year because there’s going to be an old/young split on the team and varying, potentially divergent interests at play.

    36. Do I think Scott Perry is a fan of Elfrid Payton going back to being part of the team that drafted him back in the day? Yes. But I think it only goes as far as saying Perry is a fan of the guy. I don’t think he’s trying to prove he was right to want to draft him back in the day. I think he just thinks Payton is a good player. He might be wrong on that, but I don’t think it it because of that specific sort of agenda. There are GMs all the time (in various sports) who just sort of latch on to certain guys and keep trying to acquire them. Brian Cashman, for instance, wanted to acquire Dustin Ackley for years before he finally got him.

    37. Pre-Kawhi trade, they were consistently a 50+ win team. They weren’t a contender unless major injuries happened, but they had a non-zero chance at a championship annually. That’s an enormously different situation than the one we find ourselves in. We’re not a top 4 seed in need of some extra juice to put us over the top. We just won 17 games. There’s nothing to emulate from the strategy the Raptors went with when they were consistently winning 48-58 games a year.

      There is always something to emulate from winning management. The best management teams to emulate would be the Spurs, Raptors, Celtics, GSW, Milwaukee, etc. They all excel in the area of player evaluation. They build and maintain perennial winners out of smart draft picks in the late or outside the lottery and smart trades and FA signings. When the cap is tight, they make necessary concessions, cut bait and retool. They are always looking for good G-League and undrafted players. They win trades. It doesn’t matter whether we won 17 games last year or not. If we do the things they do, we will get better just by turning the roster over, and so long as we have cap flexibility, we can be opportunistic when the right trade comes along.

      Again, I can totally buy the argument that our guys are bad at player evaluation, and as long as that’s the case, any strategy is bound to fail. But the strategy in and of itself is fine, given the circumstances.

    38. At this point in our development, a diversified approach was the key, not only in players,but in roster building mechanics. I was okay with a few vet overpays to stabilize the roster, provide “leadership” and challenge young players, while leaving enough room to accept salary dumps and picks if available. timing was rushed as well.

      But now we have a team of lots of 4-5s, some youth and some vets, mostly of equal efficiency and caliber. And no salary dumps/additional picks. You need a hierarchy on all teams, and we have none. what was payton, or bullock, or portis or ellington or morris or randle told about playing time? And what do our young players think? Fiz got a lot of ‘splainin’ to do.

    39. I visualise our young ones after TONS of HARD WORK and HEALTH to reach the stratosphere of their potential.
      I’d love to see one day Frank playing like the best version of Nate Mc Millan.
      Trier to be a more consistent John Starks.
      Rj Barrett to be the next laid back version of JHarden and Knox to be a Scottie Pippen with a 3pt shot !
      Iggy as a Detlef/Sarunas combination and Mitch as a Gobert/ADavis kind of Center !
      Are these too much to ask ??!!

    40. If somebody came here from the future and told us in like April or something that we wouldn’t sign any top free agents, and that instead we would sign a bunch of mediocre veteran power forwards in an attempt to make a run at a low playoff seed, without making any attempt to take on bad contracts to acquire assets, nobody would have been real happy with that plan.

      We’re squinting our eyes here and trying to make some sense of it, but let’s be real: it’s a shitty plan carried out by people who aren’t the sharpest knives in the drawer.

    41. Fiz got a lot of ‘splainin’ to do.

      To be fair, talking is what Fiz does best.

    42. Brian, Perry was content to try to build with young guys the first 2 years. Now it feels like we are in “win now mode” for no good reason.

    43. This reminds me of the defenses of the Lee deal at the time (“Well, you could always just get rid of him later!”).

      Brian, how can you compare a 1+1 (team option) deal to a guaranteed 4-year overpay? If Ellington is cut at any time, there is no repercussions at all beyond this year.

      I’m not arguing that it was smart to use ALL of our cap space in this way, it clearly wasn’t. I’m merely arguing that in the grand scheme of things, it is far less consequential than overall player evaluation and cap flexibility going forward. There is not a single asset on this team that you would have to include an asset to unload. Everyone but Randle, Barrett and Iggy (and Noah, thanks Phil!) is potentially off the books next year. And most of these guys can be included in salary dump deals since they would expire next year. It’s clunkier, but very doable. I don’t get how that isn’t obvious.

    44. @42
      The plan is shit.
      We’re just trying to find a reasoning to swallow it.
      Loyalty makes you eat shit sometimes !

    45. Do we have any evidence that the Knicks hitting the coveted 8th-10th seed range will lead to star free agents wanting to come to MSG? Dolan will still be the owner. Great players do not want to roll the dice to play for James Dolan.

      The focus should be on getting as many lotto tickets as possible and hope a few turn into studs. Or using those surplus draft picks to trade for a disgruntled star when the opportunity arises. These free agency fantasies need to die. Trying to become a mediocre team to appeal to stars is risky, stupid, and has huge opportunity costs for the future.

      The Knicks will never be a hot destination as long as Dolan is here. They should be emulating the good small market teams that also can’t sign top FA’s.

    46. There is always something to emulate from winning management. The best management teams to emulate would be the Spurs, Raptors, Celtics, GSW, Milwaukee, etc. They all excel in the area of player evaluation.

      I’m talking specifically about the Raptors decision to not optimize their own draft position, i.e. not tank. They made that decision because they were a good team! Sure, people argued back and forth as to whether or not they should’ve broken that team up due to its pre-Kawhi hard ceiling, but they made the ECFs. So yeah, they had late picks and still made the most of them. That’s great, but I still don’t see how it’s analogous to our situation. We do not have a team capable of going to the ECFs, or ECSFs, or the first round. There is no reason we should be hoping to find our own Pascal Siakam late in the draft instead of picking from the select few guys everyone knows will likely be good. I mean, how can you leave our draft choice up to some combination of luck and great talent evaluation when we haven’t even proven we can win 30 games? It’s irresponsible.

    47. I would not call what they are doing “win-now”. Maybe “competitive-now” but I dont really think they think this team is going to make some sort of playoff run.

      For the most part they want to put this team in position to sign free agents in two years and they did that by signing a few young guys (Portis, Randle, Payton) to see how they pan out in that time. If they suck, they arent long term contracts.

      Its not the best plan, and its a little confusing what they did. but its not a win now where they took on some aging vets on big contracts to put them over the hump.

    48. If somebody came here from the future and told us in like April or something that we wouldn’t sign any top free agents, and that instead we would sign a bunch of mediocre veteran power forwards in an attempt to make a run at a low playoff seed, without making any attempt to take on bad contracts to acquire assets, nobody would have been real happy with that plan.

      I’d be saying that since Perry and Mills have never shown any inclination to rent cap space, it was the best of all predictable outcomes and better than anything that prior regimes would have done.

      If someone came to us from next April and told us that Elfrid Payton and Julius Randle are out-performing their contracts, and the young players have risen to the challenge and are legitimately earning minutes by outperforming their senior competition, and that we were going to have either a playoff team or a lottery pick, and in either case, tons of cap space available next year, I’d be more than okay with it.

    49. Talent searching should never stop.
      They should scout under the rocks for great players all year long and not stuck with Lance Thomases for years and sign Ellingtons and Bullocks to spend the cap anywhere possible.
      Just like they found Mitch and Iggy they should find more talents on great contracts and cut the safe shitty dated moves of the past decades GMs.

    50. Do we have any evidence that the Knicks hitting the coveted 8th-10th seed range will lead to star free agents wanting to come to MSG?

      No, we do not. Rolling this rationale out when our dumbass moves otherwise can’t be explained is just a time-honored tradition.

    51. I’d be saying that since Perry and Mills have never shown any inclination to rent cap space, it was the best of all predictable outcomes and better than anything that prior regimes would have done.

      I don’t think anyone is really arguing with that. These guys are Masai mixed with Morey when compared to Phil and Isiah. They’re still objectively mediocre-to-bad, though.

    52. @BC 38 hard agree
      @BC36 hard disagree. Courtney Lee at that price for that many years was not a good deal for that kind of player at that age. A declining positive asset with future salary cap commitments is not the same as a “expiring” with the option of adding an additional year. These are quite savvy contracts if they perform well or if contenders face injuries, with little downside.

      @ Zman I largely agree with you on this offseason and hear what you’re saying on draft position in that it matters much less once you have NBA production. However, if production is equal, draft position IS predictive of likelihood to increase production. To my mind, this difference is likely at least partially due to higher draft picks getting more run and opportunities all things being equal (especially on the low production end), but this still matters (marginally ) for trade value and for future projection.

    53. There is no reason we should be hoping to find our own Pascal Siakam late in the draft instead of picking from the select few guys everyone knows will likely be good. I mean, how can you leave our draft choice up to some combination of luck and great talent evaluation when we haven’t even proven we can win 30 games? It’s irresponsible.

      It’s also unrealistic to expect Dolan and management to not react at all to getting snubbed by all FAs (whether it was smart to sign them or not) and to continue to tank in an odds-flattened environment while your heretofore stepchild kicks your ass on both sides of the East River for the next 3 years. Another year of tanking was never an option, and pining for that is a fool’s errand. What management is doing is not perfect, but it’s so far from the worst-case scenarios (KP on a max deal, Mudiay as our PG of the future, Harris and Kemba on albatross max deals) that were being played out by you and others here that it sounds like shouting at the rain in retrospect.

    54. No, we do not. Rolling this rationale out when our dumbass moves otherwise can’t be explained is just a time-honored tradition.

      Again, if win 30 games and you draft well at the 8-10 spot, it’s way better than winning 17 games and drafting poorly at the 3-5 spot and make dumb long-term personnel. See: Sacramento, Cleveland (ignoring dumb luck LBJ window), Phoenix, Minny (old Knicks) vs. Milwaukee, Denver, Utah, Boston (new Knicks).

    55. While I don’t dislike Payton, I have to say that a GM that sticks to his (until proven otherwise) failing methods of talent evaluation raises all sorts of red flags.

      I mean, if Payton was a > .120 WS/48 player, I’d have no qualms about Perry wanting his former draftee around. But, well, Hezonja… Payton… Perry looks a good trade maker, a quite average contract dealer and a terrible talent evaluator.

    56. Elfrid Payton is a stopgap PG, he’s a guy you get when you can’t find a real PG. He’s skinny Ray Felton, except not really as good.

    57. Trier, Mitch and Iggy show that the FO is not completely dumb.
      Definitely Inconsistent but Not completely clueless.

    58. I feel like the protank crowd really hasn’t acknowledged that the math has changed because of the flattened lottery odds. And also I feel like they aren’t recognizing that this summer kind of proved that superstars are not gonna join shitty teams. So this whole idea that being a low seed playoff team or barely missing the playoffs is the worst sort of purgatory to be in…I don’t know if that theory holds sway anymore.

      Last summer Lebron joined a young Lakers team that won 30ish games and missed the playoffs. Now maybe he just wanted to be in LA, but he did pick a team that had a bevy of young, promising players. He got hurt last year but him going there made AD want to go there as well and they were able to use those young players and picks to acquire AD.

      Brooklyn clawed their way up to the 6th seed, losing in the first round. Some people here would say what is the point of doing that? But the point is that because they were a decent squad with potential, Kyrie and KD thought to themselves…if we go there, we can be a contender.

      The Clippers were the 8th seed. Many people would say that’s the worst place to be. Their pick won’t be very high! They have no superstars! But they were able to use their role players and picks to get Kawhi and Paul George. Now they’re contenders until proven otherwise.

      Superstars aren’t going to join shitty teams even if they’re the Knicks in NYC with Madison Square Garden. Hell, Melo didn’t want to join the Knicks until STAT went there and made us a fun, playoff bound team that was above 500 and then Chandler signed with us the next season cause we had STAT And Melo and made the playoffs. Now ultimately that TRIO never did much and we all know the myriad of reasons why but the point still stands. Melo wanted us because STAT showed how rocking the garden can be when the knicks are good and Chandler wanted us because we were all ready a decent team.

      Plus the odds are flattened and we have extra picks from Dallas.

    59. 61

      So far they’ve hit on one and a half Picks out of many, Mitch and maybe trier… haven’t seen Iggy play a real game yet so

    60. It’s just the same stupid mistake over and over and over and over again.

      If you’re the worst team in the league and you have a meager collection of assets, you COLLECT ASSETS. You don’t chase a #8 seed, end up finishing 11th in the conference and then drafting 10th.

      This isn’t going to work. This is going to be a shitty, mediocre team three years from now.

    61. Trier, Mitch and Iggy show that the FO is not completely dumb.

      I’d agree wholeheartedly if they didn’t draft Knox last year.

    62. @63
      One is much better than none.
      Allow me to believe they’re 3.

      @65
      Knox aint ‘dead’ yet. He almost drived well on the last SL game against some crippled Lakers…
      I still believe he can be a player IF…..

    63. The best thing long-term would actually be if the team plays like crap again this year and Dolan finally junks Mills. The Rangers go with the President-for-life model too but with the Rangers it was Glen Sather, who was really good. With the Knicks, it’s Steve Mills — who sucks.

    64. I largely agree with you on this offseason and hear what you’re saying on draft position in that it matters much less once you have NBA production.

      How in the world can you look at our roster and come to the conclusion that we have sufficient NBA production?! Are we just ignoring the whole “worst team in the league” thing? I’m pretty sure that even after the offseason, we have exactly two players under 35 who managed a BPM of 1 or higher; Randle and Mitch. In what world does that allow you to say to yourself “okay, that’s enough of picking high in the draft?”

      What management is doing is not perfect, but it’s so far from the worst-case scenarios (KP on a max deal, Mudiay as our PG of the future, Harris and Kemba on albatross max deals) that were being played out by you and others here that it sounds like shouting at the rain in retrospect.

      Again, you’re arguing that they aren’t doing the dumbest possible things. That’s true and no one is arguing that it isn’t true. It also doesn’t do much for you if one day you want to root for a team that is actually good. If you want to take solace on them getting an A on the Philsiah Thomson curve feel free, it’s still objectively a C or lower.

      I feel like the protank crowd really hasn’t acknowledged that the math has changed because of the flattened lottery odds.

      All of the examples you went on to cite were teams that got elite players because of their young cores, not their mercenary free agents. Whether they used those cores to trade for superstars (LAL, LAC) or just attracted free agents with them (BKN), there’s no analogue here to signing Bobby Portis.

      Hell, Melo didn’t want to join the Knicks until STAT went there and made us a fun, playoff bound team

      Hell yeah baby, let’s do the thing that lead to this particular team again!

    65. Steve Mills gave Ron Baker a player option. That’s maybe the funniest Knicks transaction ever. That is some absurdist comedy right there. That contract was like a Monty Python sketch.

    66. Would Hinkie even go Full Hinkie Process with these Lottery odds? I doubt it. Yes there is value in taking a short term salary dump that comes with assets. I think continued sucking could be argued to be a value add, but to me, with flattened odds, basically the equivalent of a super lotto pick in Mitch (lotto pick hit locked in at 2nd round price), and DSJ likely positive player this year and other youngs a decent shot to be positive next year or year after, tanking has more downside than its worth. Being happy about a mistake free offseason with upside might be grading on a curve, but it isn’t just a curve based on Knicks front office moves in the past, it’s based on current moves by the rest of the NBA.

    67. I feel like the protank crowd really hasn’t acknowledged that the math has changed because of the flattened lottery odds.

      I feel like you haven’t read the posts about draft position over the last six months. The #1 pick used to have a 25% chance of picking #1 and a 100% chance of picking top-4. Now it’s 14% and 100% chance picking top-5. That is still a substantial reason to lose games when you have no hope of coming close to the playoffs. That is still 100% factorial.

      The Clippers were the 8th seed. Many people would say that’s the worst place to be. Their pick won’t be very high! They have no superstars! But they were able to use their role players and picks to get Kawhi and Paul George. Now they’re contenders until proven otherwise.

      The 8 seed may be the worst place to be, but Los Angeles is not. The Clippers managed to pull off the George trade by giving up one of the biggest hauls we’ve seen in NBA history. Kawhi went to LA because… hey… where’s he from, again?

      Do you realize that there were other contenders out there that had the ability to sign him, but he chose his hometown? Do you acknowledge that confounding factor? Do you accept that he might have had non-basketball reasons to go to L.A., just as LeBron did? Because if I’m Kawhi and I’m only thinking about basketball, I’m probably staying in Toronto, the team that just won the damn championship. I see you pointing to the Clippers’ assets and roster to make your point, but have you pointed to the city in their name, yet?

      It seems to me that you’re still promoting the theory that if you create a vague air of competent management, you can trick superstars into committing to your team. How’s that goink for the other 12ish low-seed or fringe lottery teams who didn’t sign superstars during the offseason?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPu_d4SSOPk

      “Does a struggling salesman start…

    68. “Yeah, the ‘bosses’ are panicking. They’re going, ‘Ooh, cut back. Lose staff. That’s the way forward. That’ll save us money.’ Will it? Who’s to say that, y’know, hiring staff won’t save money in the long run? Does a struggling salesman start turning up on a bicycle? No, he turns up in a newer car – perception, yeah? They got to trust me – I’m taking these guys into battle, yeah? And I’m doin’ me own stapling.”

      -Steve Mills

    69. Everyone can miss me with the “so you want to all-out tank again” straw man. While I do think there’s a very convincing case for exactly that, there’s also plenty of space between all out-tanking and blowing all of your cap space on short-term veterans who might lead you to a useless, process of elimination 8th seed.

      Most people here agreed that signing Randle and then using the rest of the space to take on assets would’ve been a successful offseason, for example. We had a ton of options and chose the one that sat at the 30th percentile or so.

    70. If you step back and take a look at the big picture, the Knicks have the following:

      *6 first round draft picks in the next 4 years
      *A young, borderline star in Julius Randle
      *Young players on rookie deals
      *Veterans on short, flexible contracts

      That’s a worthwhile collection of assets. Short of optimal, but definitely good.

      People talk about the age/win curve. RJ , Mitch, & Randle fit onto that curve. So do Knox, Trier, Portis, Payton, Iggy, Dotson, DSJr, and Frank. So do our draft picks.

      The team went for vets because, in their view, they have their stars: RJ, Mitch, and Randle.

    71. If I was teaching a machine learning program to recognize emotions, yesterday and today’s thread would definitely fall into a spot on the map that was previously observed on this blog many times. But how do you call this emotion? Optimistic disappointment? Delirious denial? Falling back to earth? Holding on to love?

    72. I guess the other thing that’s frustrating is that it’s way more fun (to me at least) to watch a bad team full of kids I can at least dream on instead of watching a mediocre team of veterans that I don’t give a shit about. Great, Marcus Morris and Wayne Ellington had good games tonight, woo fucking hoo.

      This is probably not gonna be a super fun team to watch for that reason.

    73. For every Clippers success story there’s at least one Hornets, Wizards, Magic or Pistons. Winning 35 games means nothing in itself, you would think the Knicks themselves would have proven that already when we were between 25-33 wins for so many years. We were never going to bring Kawhi because we’re not in LA, period, the Clippers situation this year is unique and not replicable. It’s not a strategy we can definitely replicate.

    74. Yeah, place me firmly in the camp with the pro-tankers/cynics/naysayers/whatever. Sure ,this offseason was not Pearl Harbor, but it was also by no means Midway, either. Not even the Coral Sea.

      Sorry for the WWII naval analogies.

      It wasn’t awful, but it is a missed opportunity. More like treading water in the hopes that a friendly current takes you in the correct direction, instead of actually swimming.

    75. I’ll repeat what I said after this offseason was mostly concluded: I don’t think these guys preclude us from building a contender. It could never happen under Phil and Isiah, they quite literally made it impossible.

      These guys don’t really know what they’re doing, but they leave the door cracked slightly open for some insane luck. They’re run-of-the-mill bad, not performance art bad.

    76. Z-man’s statement “The main reason we struck out on the true max players is because we were a 17-win team with little chance of being better than a fringe playoff team even with two max players” is at the heart of what’s going on.

      We needed to suck last season, but not so badly. If Frank and Knox had been any good and showed lots of promise, we might’ve landed a stud. Why would Kyrie come here without Durant? To join that mess? No. What FA are going to look for is to pair up 2 max players and join 3-4 strong players, at least one of whom will become a max player, that are on rookie contracts.

      Mitch was a great start. Had Knox been an efficient scorer, like we hoped he would be, and Frank stayed healthy and started to show that he could be a 3-and-D guy, we would have had a shot.

      I think the plan might be to flip 2-3 of our vets, Taj & Portis as an example, for a max player like Beal, Whiteside or Drummond at the the deadline, then we might be an attractive landing place for another stud.

      I just looked at all the rosters out there, BTW, and frankly, this Knick team is not a “bottom” any longer. There are real players here. There are no A+ or even A players, but there are a lot of solid B’s.

    77. If I was teaching a machine learning program to recognize emotions, yesterday and today’s thread would definitely fall into a spot on the map that was previously observed on this blog many times. But how do you call this emotion? Optimistic disappointment? Delirious denial? Falling back to earth? Holding on to love?

      It’s a feeling that may be entirely unique to sports fans in a select number of cities that follow perpetually inept sports teams. I do not believe there’s a word for it. German probably has one.

    78. I liked the Peyton signing. It probably won’t work out, but it’s certainly worth a shot. I don’t like the Randle signing personally because I don’t think he’s that good of a player, but he sort of fills a need, he has some potential left, and it’s only 2 years so it’s not a big deal if he doesn’t work out. The other signings are all fine individually because they’re 1 year deals and some of the players are useful but in total it’s hard to do anything but shrug.

    79. I guess the other thing that’s frustrating is that it’s way more fun (to me at least) to watch a bad team full of kids I can at least dream on instead of watching a mediocre team of veterans that I don’t give a shit about.

      You need to start dreaming about 2nd round draft picks.

    80. German probably has one.

      I think you can just make shit up in German by combining a bunch of words together.

    81. Since we’re basically in full offseason mode for a few months:

      Sorry for the WWII naval analogies.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bd8_vO5zrjo

      Outstanding, simple explanation of the Battle of Midway, told from the perspective of the Japanese as their intelligence permitted. The stones on all parties involved, god damn…

    82. Everyone but Randle, Barrett and Iggy (and Noah, thanks Phil!)
      is potentially off the books next year.

      This worries me-forget free agents coming here-why would Mitch stay here? At some point we need a core of guys. This is a core of mercenaries, and it’s not even a particularly good core. And about the “trio” that Mill Perry hit on: Trier is a 6th man. Iggy is also a 6th man.

      They’re building a good bench, that’s it.

      And for the short term.

    83. Speaking of German words after we failed at landing any notable free agents the knicks were essentially in a classic zugzwang. That being said, the fact that with positive growth of some players + potential high draft picks + having an opportunity in two years for some more marquee free agents puts my mind at ease.

      BTW, I’d love it if Houston never put Harden on the floor the same time as Westbrook. Talk about ultimate load management.

      jotd: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgiDrYTdNmE

    84. We needed to suck last season, but not so badly. If Frank and Knox had been any good and showed lots of promise, we might’ve landed a stud. Why would Kyrie come here without Durant? To join that mess? No. What FA are going to look for is to pair up 2 max players and join 3-4 strong players, at least one of whom will become a max player, that are on rookie contracts.

      Kyrie and Durant pushed all the chips in on a 42-win Nets team that had to give up its best scoring player (in a career year) to sign them. Durant will not play until 2020-21 and when he does, he will be 32 years old and coming off one of the worst injuries a player can have. I don’t know how many times I have to say this — any team that wanted Durant, any player that wants to play with Durant is ignoring the stark risk of committing that much money to an over-30 player suffering a catastrophic injury like that. I don’t care that he’s a former MVP and one of the best players we’ll see in our lifetimes. He’s still aging. He’s still injured. And Kyrie chose him as his Finals-hopeful partner.

      To try to ascribe some kind of rational thought to their decision would be a fool’s errand, truly.

    85. @88
      Iggy and Trier are like finding truffles in the mountains.
      They’re not the hidden treasure of the pirates or the tomb of Alexander the Great but hey!
      They worth good money !
      And they’re not easy to be found.
      Need skills & knowledge and a good scouting dog !!

    86. another thing to keep in mind is the timing on when the one and done rule gets nixed… i don’t think this is passed yet i haven’t kept up with it… but if and when it does… there’s gonna be a lot of volatility with draft boards….

      getting a #1 pick is still probably a priority but not being able to see guys in college is gonna wreak havoc on projections…. for example rj would’ve been consensus #1 and zion would have likely slipped to #3 or even later…

      i don’t mind the idea behind this knicks strategy… i actually kind of like it… i just think you could have executed much much better… i basically only like randle.. who ranks up there with chandler as our best signing ever… and payton…. if you wanted to mix youth and competitiveness there were a lot of better ways to go about it…

      but the strategy is good.. and i think it can work out really well for us if we have at least two of the mitch.. randle… dsj.. rj group to pan out…. and there’s a possibility that all four will…. and if it does the 2020s will be the best decade we will have since the 90s…

    87. Idk I look at this Knicks team, and I’m not worried about too many wins tbh. I’d rather have stockpiled draft picks, but I’m ok giving Randle and Elfrid extended tryouts. Everyone else expires or can be cut by next year.

      Also, in defense of “the plan,” it does give the Knicks a potpourri of expiring contracts of all sizes, young players at all positions, and extra draft picks in case a star demands a trade to the Knicks. This seems to happen and we are generally unable to capitalize on it. Of course, at least a few of our players would have to get better for that to work, but it could happen…

    88. @89 I have mo idea what it means but zugzwang sounds about right. We’re in the knickerblogger zugzwang.

    89. Speaking of German words after we failed at landing any notable free agents the knicks were essentially in a classic zugzwang.

      Wait, are you the guy who claimed to be a NM and that anyone could be a master if they studied enough?

    90. BTW, the 2-year FA contracts the Knicks signed are not 1+1’s, they’re all 2nd year unguaranteed. This makes all of them potential trade assets.

    91. Again, you’re arguing that they aren’t doing the dumbest possible things. That’s true and no one is arguing that it isn’t true. It also doesn’t do much for you if one day you want to root for a team that is actually good. If you want to take solace on them getting an A on the Philsiah Thomson curve feel free, it’s still objectively a C or lower.

      The strategy is not objectively a C or lower. Maybe the player evaluation is, but not the strategy. You are basically arguing that anything less than an A+ by your standards is unacceptable (and I am interpreting your A+ strategy to be a full-out tank, only sign promising G-Leaguers and bad contracts with assets attached). Are you purposely ignoring the teams that have successfully rebooted/rebuilt without multiple full-out tank years? Or do you dismiss them as outliers that managed to do so via dumb luck? Again, when did Milwaukee, Denver, Clips or Utah go full-out tank?

      For every Clippers success story there’s at least one Hornets, Wizards, Magic or Pistons.

      And?? What about the Knicks current position reminds you of the Hornets, Wizards, Magic or Pistons? Ahh…player evaluation…that’s the common thread, isn’t it? It’s not about strategy at all, is it?

    92. @94 — it’s a chess term where you would rather pass than make any moves because anything you’d do would weaken your position.

      @95 — i’m a nobody who thoroughly enjoys the game of chess. i suppose with all the chess engines out there it is feasibly possible to prepare well and hold your own against most people — but at that point it’s just memorizing lines. I think fischer said that he hates modern chess because of this, everyone is essentially memorizing and no longer creating beautiful moves. what makes magnus carlsen so great is he’ll intentionally make bad moves to throw off his opponent.

      jotd: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVkDfnGobmI

    93. Those Japanese carriers at Midway were weirdly built pieces of shit. Google “ijn kaga funnel” if you want to see an example of interwar design before people had figured out how you should build an aircraft carrier.

    94. another thing to keep in mind is the timing on when the one and done rule gets nixed… i don’t think this is passed yet i haven’t kept up with it… but if and when it does… there’s gonna be a lot of volatility with draft boards….

      getting a #1 pick is still probably a priority but not being able to see guys in college is gonna wreak havoc on projections…. for example rj would’ve been consensus #1 and zion would have likely slipped to #3 or even later…

      100% this. The impact will go far, far beyond the first year’s rush of available names. This is going to be an enormous opportunity for teams that have competent player evaluation. And not because they’ll be able to divine whether a high schooler can actually play, but because those NCAA standouts are going to have more competition with “upside” talents to be taken early, and therefore some of them will drop well beyond where they ought to go. If you think NCAA players are hard to evaluate, wait ’til we have a couple dozen guys playing predominantly against brace-faced teenagers to assess the value of.

      I knew Zion was the consensus #1 pick after his first exhibition game, but he is an EXTREME outlier. Many teams will light picks on fire chasing “talent.” I just hope we’re not as enamored with deeply flawed players like Knox and Ntilikina moving forward. I’m still not sold on Barrett and probably will never be, but if they keep taking guys who have almost no real basketball skills to speak of, we’re going to be on a hamster wheel of trying to turn functionally-clueless 18-year-olds with 40″ verts and 84″ wingspans into NBA skill players.

    95. If you’re the worst team in the league and you have a meager collection of assets, you COLLECT ASSETS. You don’t chase a #8 seed, end up finishing 11th in the conference and then drafting 10th.

      Again, you argue that this is the most expeditious (and possibly the only) route to building a contending team when there are more examples of teams that have built contenders by other means than this way.

      I will keep beating the player evaluation drum by citing Atlanta as an example. They “correctly” (we can debate this) determined that an asset and Trae Young was worth more than Doncic alone. That’s a player evaluation thing. Now in this draft, they reached for D’Andre Hunter when they could have had Clarke and others. If Hunter turns out to be a star, smart move! If the other picks would have worked out better (as I suspect many of us here think) then dumb move! It’s about player evaluation.

      That’s why I think Perry and Mills are to be questioned. They could have traded down from #3 and possibly gotten better players than RJ, but they evaluated him to be worth not trading down. It’s the opposite of what the Celts did with Fultz vs. Tatum. At that time, everyone here hated Tatum. But they correctly evaluated him and took advantage of the Sixers and their poor player evaluation.

      The Spurs get good players year after year no matter where they draft. Other teams, like the Knicks, not so much.

    96. So zugzwang is “a situation in which the obligation to make a move in one’s turn is a serious, often decisive, disadvantage.” Perfect way to describe the bewilderment the Knicks front office personnel through the Dolan years displayed when presented with an opportunity.

      Another translation is “tight spot”. Pretty good too. Because what’s an opportunity if not a tight spot? lol

    97. No team has ever gone multi-year full-on tank. The closest is the Process Sixers and they’re now seven years in and they have a whopping two conference semi appearances to show for it. There’s no reason to believe they’re even better off than they would have been under the baseline, default “plan” of keeping Jrue, drafting well, trading well, and making good free agent signings.

      I actually think that last part is lost in the new auteur theory of sports GMing. There is a default baseline “plan” that consists of holding onto your draft picks, drafting, trading, and signing veteran free agents well. That baseline plan can win you Larry O’B’s if done right. It requires some luck, to be sure, but so what? Every “plan” does. You can’t “plan” winning the LeBron James lottery.

    98. @90 – I agree with everything that you said. And although I (and others) feel unloved by KI & KD, I really didn’t want them. I think Kyrie is cancerous and everything you say about Durant at 32 is spot-on.

      But what I was getting at is that if our “kids” really improve and we have a $43M core of :
      PG – Peyton $8M, DSmith $4M (if Elfrid keeps his hair short and DSJ is what he thinks he should be)
      SG – RJ $8M (if he looks like an all-star in the making)
      SF – Knox $4M (if he becomes respectable and gets his TS% up to 50-55%)
      PF – Randle $20 / Iggy $1M (if Randle is for real and Iggy is a sparkplug)
      C – MRob $1.5M (if doesn’t foul out daily and develops a mid-range game)

      Isn’t that something that a Durant-like player would like to join? If we add 2 max players at apx $60-$70 M in salary, the Knicks are STILL under the cap.

    99. The strategy is not objectively a C or lower. Maybe the player evaluation is, but not the strategy.

      How exactly do you suggest we separate the “strategy” from the players it gave us? I guess the “strategy” here is being defined as “sign short-term, high AAV deals with the best possible players who will accept your offer,” so which players would’ve made that a smart strategy? It’s just a pointless thing to do in general.

    100. What would a mid-season trade of Portis, Bullock, Gibson, etc. look like?

      There aren’t any contenders with the cap space to absorb those contracts without sending something back. So, at best, the Knicks trade one of these players to a team like Milwaukee for, I dunno, let’s say Tony Snell or Ilyasova (or any other similar contract that is <2 years) and a draft pick.

      How is this any better than using the available cap space this off season to take on <2 year contracts from cap-needy teams in exchange for picks? Those deals were out there (Crabbe, Iguodala, etc.), but the Knicks didn't pursue them for whatever reason. But there's still people who believe the Knicks are going to pull off some trade deadline wizardry and get a bouquet of assets for one of these mediocre vets?

      Signing these guys to later flip them at the deadline was not part of the FO's strategy when making these deals. If they wanted future assets they wouldn't have spent all their cap on the 1st day of FA.

    101. I guess the other thing that’s frustrating is that it’s way more fun (to me at least) to watch a bad team full of kids I can at least dream on instead of watching a mediocre team of veterans that I don’t give a shit about. Great, Marcus Morris and Wayne Ellington had good games tonight, woo fucking hoo.

      This is probably not gonna be a super fun team to watch for that reason.

      But the main reason that you are not going to watch a bad team full of kids you can at least dream about is that the three main kids we brought on board in the last 3 years are all extremely disappointing so far (compared with Doncic, Trae or Fox, e.g.). But there is still a pretty decent young group to be excited about: Mitch, Trier, Iggy…maybe RJ, DSJ, and yes, even Knox. Randle, Payton and Portis are hardly ancient. Frank? well…

      Of the 7 new guys, only Morris, Gibson, Ellington and Bullock (if that happens) are mediocre vets, and even the Nets and Hawks had some of those. And it’s not even certain that those guys will play over the young guys. I, for one, am not enamored with rooting for loss after loss for the hope that it improves our lottery position.

      You’re really doing your best to hold on to your “same ol’ Knicks” nightmare. Let it go.

    102. @93

      I’d rather have stockpiled draft picks, but I’m ok giving Randle and Elfrid extended tryouts.

      We have 6 first round picks in the next 4 years. That’s a start. If we get picks as part of our trade-deadline deals for the tradeable assets, that’s a good thing.

      BTW, we have to all root for Dallas to be horrible the season after next. It’ll be nice to get two high picks!

    103. But the main reason that you are not going to watch a bad team full of kids you can at least dream about is that the three main kids we brought on board in the last 3 years are all extremely disappointing so far

      Sure, but can you give me a single reason we shouldn’t have Shamorie Ponds instead of Wayne Ellington? Zach Norvell instead of Bullock? Theo Pinson instead of Bobby Portis?

      Then we could’ve entered the season with cap space to facilitate in-season trades, which often require a third team as a contract holder.

    104. How exactly do you suggest we separate the “strategy” from the players it gave us? I guess the “strategy” here is being defined as “sign short-term, high AAV deals with the best possible players who will accept your offer,” so which players would’ve made that a smart strategy? It’s just a pointless thing to do in general.

      Sort of, the strategy is get some decent players to have a watchable product on the floor and challenge the young guys, but to not sign anyone to a long term deal of any kind unless it is an absolute no-brainer. Randle and Payton were good tactical moves within that strategy. Morris and Ellington are fine. Portis is a tactical error until proven otherwise. Gibson and Bullock were definitely errors. Not saving some cap space for a rainy day was an error. But none of the errors compromise the strategy at all, and having a competitive team on the floor most nights and not being a laughing stock (record-wise) is not a bad thing.

    105. It seems to me that you’re still promoting the theory that if you create a vague air of competent management, you can trick superstars into committing to your team.

      How did the Clippers land Kawhi and George instead of the Lakers? How did the Nets land KD and Kyrie instead of the Knicks? (Though I completely agree that’s an easily foreseeable disaster) How did the Heat land Jimmy Butler? Why was Kemba willing to take less guaranteed money from Boston than Charlotte was apparently offering?

      Competent management matters.

      Mike

    106. We did tank. We got the third pick. But now there’s consensus here that RJ won’t pan out. Chris Paul was a third pick as was James Harden but R.J.? No…bust.

      We also have our starting center. A guy who’s been dominant. We’re making a roster around him. But no. Bobby Portis takes his minutes.

      We got rid of bad contracts and didn’t make new bad ones including the absence of a max Porzingis deal. But no. Where are our bad contracts for players with late lottery picks attached? Even though we have six first rounders in the next four years.

      I think we wanted the players we signed. We want to try to be competitive while still developing a young core. We want to maintain future cap space and trade flexibility. We’ve actually done most of the stuff we prayed for when we had low upside, capped out teams with no picks coming.

      I don’t know where this team fits in the standings but I’m excited to watch it unfold as opposed to last year which was just cynical bullshit.

    107. Sure, but can you give me a single reason we shouldn’t have Shamorie Ponds instead of Wayne Ellington? Zach Norvell instead of Bullock? Theo Pinson instead of Bobby Portis?

      No, those were silly signings, but that’s why I give them a B and not an A. They preferred a core of consummate professionals who had to scrape for playing time to show the young kids how it’s done, like, right now. Again, not how I would have done it, but to me, that’s more about the execution of the strategy than the strategy itself.

    108. I think we wanted the players we signed. We want to try to be competitive while still developing a young core. We want to maintain future cap space and trade flexibility. We’ve actually done most of the stuff we prayed for when we had low upside, capped out teams with no picks coming.

      Yeah, but it’s not perfect so we are doomed to suck forever.

    109. I’d call the strategy “put a competitive product on the floor while at the same time developing a young nucleus, not trading draft picks, and maintaining financial flexibility and cap space.” As a strategy, I’m fine with it.

      The future of the team really comes down to how RJ Barrett, Kevin Knox, Mitchell Robinson, Dennis Smith Jr., Frank Ntilikina, and the guys they draft in 2020 and 2021 pan out. I’m losing a bit of hope for Frank and am a bit wary of DSJ while still in a place where I wouldn’t be shocked if he breaks through. I have high hopes for all of RJ, Knox, and Mitch. I’m fine with RJ at 3 this year and Knox at 9 last year. Other than maybe the possibility of a Randle breakthrough, all the rest is short-term tactical noise.

    110. There is some logic in the strategy of bringing in some veterans to push the young players and build a system but we didn’t bring in a couple of vets. We brought in seven. That’s almost the entire rotation inked in permanent marker. Add Mitch, Barrett and one of our PGs and that’s it, done. No room for any of our other young players at all.

      This isn’t vets pushing young players to step up it’s vets pushing young players completely out of the rotation. I don’t see how Trier or Dotson or Iggy or even Knox, if the Bullock signing happens, can even crack the rotation no matter how good they are.

    111. It’s funny how we are squabbling here when we should be mocking the Rockets and Morey.

    112. Yeah, but it’s not perfect so we are doomed to suck forever.

      I’m still holding on to hope that Dolan will accidentally eventually hire a good decision-maker, like he stumbled into with Sather and the Rangers. Look at how much better Perry is than Phil by just not being all that good but not being Phil. So a good GM would still be able to work wonders if they ever get hired.

    113. We brought in seven.

      So Randle (24), Payton (25) and Portis (24) are grizzled vets pushing the young guys aside?

    114. No but Gibson (34), Ellington (31), Morris (29), and Bullock (28) are.

      I very much like the Randle and Payton signings and don’t love Portis mainly because he plays the same position as Randle but the problem isn’t any of the players specifically, though some are better than others, it’s the number of players.

    115. You’re really doing your best to hold on to your “same ol’ Knicks” nightmare. Let it go.

      Not really. This plan kinda sucks, just objectively.

      I’m sure this time the Knicks will prove my cynicism wrong and build a great team around these mediocre journeymen. I’m sure someday the strategic brilliance of this will become clear.

    116. I think it’s fair to say that it is not the same old approach as before. It’s not a good approach, but it’s a better one than the one Phil and Isiah used. The team’s not kneecapped like they were in the past. They’re not in good shape by any stretch of the imagination and I don’t think Mills and Perry are good, but the Knicks are not completely fucked like they were under Isiah and Phil.

    117. Sort of, the strategy is get some decent players to have a watchable product on the floor and challenge the young guys, but to not sign anyone to a long term deal of any kind unless it is an absolute no-brainer.

      You didn’t answer my question, though. You’re saying the strategy is all good and well but was executed badly, hence 2/7 signings being positive in your own words. I’m asking, what players were available on 1 + 1 (team option) or 2 + 1 (team option) deals that would’ve made this strategy coherent? How could it possibly have been better than, say, Randle + salary dumps + 2nd rounders/UDFAs etc. + having cap space in-season?

      I’ll listen, but I don’t think there’s a particularly good answer to the question. Players tend to be available for these kinds of deal if they’re not all that desirable. They’re much, much better than Courtney Lee esque deals but it’s very hard to see them adding value.

    118. unpopular opinion: i actually like the rockets deal. they want to win around harden. i think they looked at what toronto did and wanted to win one by any means necessary, future be damned.

      Also i’m curious to see how a stat padding player plays with a coach who inflates everyone’s stats. i’d split minutes 50/50 between westbrook and harden, rarely having them both on the floor at the same time. harden will jack threes and go to the ft line. russ will continue to get triple doubles. i also wouldn’t be surprised if westbrook’s ts% increases this year. harden won’t fatigue in the playoffs.

      jotd: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP7XuE1Fw9s

    119. I think it’s a reasonable trade only because Westbrook has far much more trade value than Paul does (he probably shouldn’t have so much trade value, but he does), so if this doesn’t work out (and I imagine it will not), Morey will be able to move Westbrook for real assets that he could not do with Paul.

    120. As an aside, I’m glad to see Chandler reunited with D’Antoni. With Harden and Westbrook likely staggering minutes, it’ll be good to know that they’ll each have a guy to lob to on every possession between Chandler and Capela.

    121. I’m sure this time the Knicks will prove my cynicism wrong and build a great team around these mediocre journeymen. I’m sure someday the strategic brilliance of this will become clear.

      Not sure if it’s the point you’re making, but IMO the knicks aren’t trying to build anything. they’re just biding time until next free agency budding. if they develop three young guys or develop two and find a jewel (randle) they’ll be able to actually make a pitch besides The Big Apple.

      jotd: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7Mtzhymj1A

    122. westbrook is younger and should be better over the next few years than cp3… harden.. westbrook.. capela should be a fine core for those years… the trick is going to be filling out the rest of the roster… and right now it’s pretty bad so there’s a real question on how good they’ll be next year…. guys like gordon and tucker who they are leaning pretty heavily on are in real danger of falling off a cliff…

      after next year they’ll have a chance to reload the role players…. so i think they should be perennial contenders if they can keep the core healthy…

    123. I appreciate the optimistic fans but it feels like a desperate act looking for real positives with this “plan”. Thankfully the Yankees resume their season today so they will keep me occupied until the NBA season starts.

    124. @125 The difference is that the veterans we brought on are just placeholders. In the past, guys to like Lee and Hardaway Junior were part of the plan for the future. The difference between signing those for older guys versus four cast off young guys is pretty marginal. The bottom line is that 11 of our 15 contracts are with players under the age of 25. None of those 11 are signed beyond two seasons. There is no damaging commitment to any player young or old.

    125. I think the point of the short contracts with the team option is that the team can choose to either not build with them or build with them. Its the flexibility that makes its a good (ish) strategy.

      Guys like Ellington and Taj aren’t going to be part of the long term but the younger players we got on the 1 and 1’s could be if they turn out to be any good. If not or if a team really needs a player at the deadline we can trade them or pick up their option for next season. If we pick up the option for next season, they expire but we’d have their bird rights, so we could go over to resign them.

      So it gives us a ton of options. And our franchise has not had a lot of options recently because of long term bad contracts.

    126. If we pick up the option for next season, they expire but we’d have their bird rights, so we could go over to resign them.

      My understanding is that we do NOT have Bird Rights on the 1+1s. Anybody know if this is true?

    127. You get Early Bird Rights after two years, but that’s effectively meaningless, since that just allows you to exceed the cap to sign them to the MLE, which is less than pretty much all of them are making (maybe not Ellington and obviously not Bullock now that he’s signing for the room). In addition, their cap holds will be higher than their previous salaries, so there is no benefit to having Early Bird Rights on any of them (except Bullock, I suppose).

    128. You get Early Bird Rights after two years, but that’s effectively meaningless, since that just allows you to exceed the cap to sign them to the MLE, which is less than pretty much all of them are making (maybe not Ellington and obviously not Bullock now that he’s signing for the room). In addition, their cap holds will be higher than their previous salaries, so there is no benefit to having Early Bird Rights on any of them (except Bullock, I suppose).

      That’s what I thought. So if Elfrid Payton turns into John Stockton or something, you get him for two years and that’s it, no Bird Rights. Which kind of severely limits the upside of those moves.

    129. @135 the odds are that only Randle and then no more than one of either Payton (more likely) or Portis (less likely) will be here on opening day 2020, probably by being . The others will either be traded before the deadline, waived after the deadline, not have their 2nd year picked up, or will be placeholders until 2021 and not re-signed. My guess is that the old guys were all aware that the team might go with the young guys at some point and that they might be waived at the deadline and could then sign with a contender.

    130. That’s what I thought. So if Elfrid Payton turns into John Stockton or something, you get him for two years and that’s it, no Bird Rights. Which kind of severely limits the upside of those moves.

      Or you can sign him to a long-term deal prior to that, right? That’s where the player evaluation part comes in. You can say, hey, we have a team option on you for $8 million next year which we will definitely exercise, but we want to offer you $ X million for 3-4 years. Then Elfrid Stockton would have to decide whether to risk another year of being underpaid or sign a guaranteed deal for more money with the Knicks in MSG (which will be rockin’ if he indeed becomes a star.) Sure, that counts against the cap, but for a star player, who cares? That’s one less guy you have to seek out in free agency.

    131. Yeah, I do agree that few of these guys will even get to the point where their Early Bird Rights would even come into play.

    132. That’s what I thought. So if Elfrid Payton turns into John Stockton or something, you get him for two years and that’s it, no Bird Rights. Which kind of severely limits the upside of those moves.

      It limits us if lots of these newly hired players turn out to be ones we want to re-sign. But if only two or three are worth re-signing, we just waive the others and then have cap room to sign the ones we want. Also, if we want a long term contract it is probably less of a cap hold than their current contract. If it turns out most of them are really good and we don’t actually have cap space to sign all of them, that would be a great problem to have.

    133. . Also, if we want a long term contract it is probably less of a cap hold than their current contract.

      Their cap holds will all be 130% of their current salaries, so they don’t save anything, cap hold wise.

    134. The others will either be traded before the deadline, waived after the deadline, not have their 2nd year picked up, or will be placeholders until 2021 and not re-signed.

      I’d bet boocoo ducats that the Knicks aren’t trading any of these guys at the deadline. All the contenders are capped out and would have to send back matching salary. And the Knicks would lose flexibility next year since most of the contracts they’d have to take back would run for a minimum of 2 years. Not many good teams with expiring contracts in the 10-15 million range. This FO clearly values cap flexibility over assets.

    135. @Z-Man
      The strategy may be a C+ or a B, but the salient question shouldn’t be “what is the comparative grade of the strategy” (whatever that means); it should be: “is this strategy not dominated by another possible strategy”? A strategy a is dominated when in no scenario would you be better off taking this strategy than taking a strategy b. Above market rate deals on vets are probably weakly dominated by collecting assets like picks/rookies scales, for a team in our position (i.e. building a good core).

      First, vets in FA are generally the worst values per dollar in the league–you end up paying for reputation/past production. Rookie scales, by contrast, are almost always more valuable per dollar than vets. So, you can reasonably expect the aav outcome to be in favor of the strategy that favors collecting rookie deals (i.e., salary dumps with picks attached). Moreover, you can expect more upside out of rookie scale guys than 2nd contract guys or long time vets, since they’re younger. So a strategy that favors collecting rookie scale deals wins in that respect as well. While we could always trade our guys at the deadline, we will usually be getting less value than we could have if we just traded a salary dumped a guy into our cap (unless that player is a star). Again, the “take every salary dump you can find” strategy dominates over “hire a team of mercenaries”, and this pattern repeats for pretty much every consideration, unless not having veteran players somehow impacts the kids development; if it does, you certainly don’t need 8 vets—you need like two. Since we’re not a particularly competitive team even with the spate of vet signings, marginal wins only hurt your outcome, so the wins gained by vets over rookies are useless in the coming timeframe, so that consideration is irrelevant. There doesn’t seem to be a scenario under which we can come out better under Perry’s strategy than under a strategy that aggressively utilizes cap space for assets.

      If so, it’s manifestly irrational to opt for Perry’s strategy, even if it’s a better strategy than “sign Joakim Noah and Derrick Rose to big money”. Even if you’re a perfect player evaluator, rookie scale contracts (and worthy subsequent mini max extensions that the perfect player evaluator would correctly make by definition) are so cost controlled that the perfect player evaluator using the rookie-scale strategy will outperform “sign a bunch of vets” strategy in aav and so over the long run. So, player evaluation isn’t the issue, it’s that the strategy is, strictly speaking, worse. What critics of perry demand isn’t optimality, it’s just a demand to not choose a strategy that is likely dominated, because choosing a strategy that is dominated by another is manifestly irrational, and good evidence of incompetence in decision making. Now if they opted for another strategy that wasn’t dominated by the rookie scale, then your response would maybe be correct (say, sign only Randle + Taj Gibson because there’s a small chance that not having vet presence impacts the development of young players–I don’t believe that, but it could be true, so it’s worth considering). But that doesn’t appear to be the case here, at least by my lights.

    136. So in the CBA FAQ’s it says that you can’t “extend” a veteran contract of less than 3 years. In the scenario I mentioned with Payton (he gets really good in year 1 and we tell him that we will exercise the team option or would be willing to sign him to a longer-term deal) would that be prohibited under the “extension” clause? Is there a moratorium of some sort that prohibits this, i.e. when you decline the team option or renounce the non-guarantee, you can’t sign the player for a year, something like that?

    137. I’d bet boocoo ducats that the Knicks aren’t trading any of these guys at the deadline. All the contenders are capped out and would have to send back matching salary. And the Knicks would lose flexibility next year since most of the contracts they’d have to take back would run for a minimum of 2 years. Not many good teams with expiring contracts in the 10-15 million range. This FO clearly values cap flexibility over assets.

      Yeah, the theoretical possibility of them trading some of these guys for assets certainly outweighs the likelihood of them actually trading any of these guys for assets. I’d put Marcus Morris, though, as the one guy who might actually get traded.

    138. I actually think the FO made some well thought out movers here for the long term.

      Their hand was forced by KP without question and they made the best out of that bad situation. They realized what a fundamental error Phil made by having a self absorbed dick like Me7o around to “mentor” KP. He taught KP the culture of me-ism. I thought Billups’ comments the other day were didactic and spot on..

      They had 72M to spend and once they saw that top guys were out of reach they pivoted to the best young player available with both good production, youth and upside (Randle) and signed him to a perfect contract. Everyone agrees on that.

      Then they decided competence and culture were more important to the growth of RJ, Mitch, DSJr, Frank, Dotson, Trier, Knox, Iggy than selling space for picks while taking a flyer on a young stretch 4/5 (Portis ) for reasonable contract.

      They addresses back up 4/5 (Gibson) and starting 3 (Morris) with league average competence on short contracts and to a lesser level in the back court (Ellington, Payton, Bullock).

      They won’t have the terrible situation where Knox was almost forced to play while getting killed and Trier because there was no one else that could put the ball in the basket. The young players will have to actually EARN minutes this season which is a good thing. If Knox/Iggy want to play they are going to have to beat out a real NBA player in Morris.

      And … near the trade deadline i’m assuming some playoff team could use a playoff tested 3/4 like Morris and maybe Payton and Portis will have developed some trade value while the young players behind them push for PT.

      Kinda like making chicken salad out of chicken shit…..

      I only wish the had fired Fizdale and brought in a teacher like Blatt. As we found out as much as he licked LeBron’s balls, that didn’t translate into any players being in a rush to play for him, nor out all black management team.

    139. So in the CBA FAQ’s it says that you can’t “extend” a veteran contract of less than 3 years. In the scenario I mentioned with Payton (he gets really good in year 1 and we tell him that we will exercise the team option or would be willing to sign him to a longer-term deal) would that be prohibited under the “extension” clause? Is there a moratorium of some sort that prohibits this, i.e. when you decline the team option or renounce the non-guarantee, you can’t sign the player for a year, something like that?

      You can’t extend a contract unless you would have full Bird Rights to the player before the extension would begin. So the Knicks could extend Randle’s contract in the future by doing that scenario you mentioned (guaranteeing the third year and then extending him beyond the third year), but not Payton.

    140. I’d bet boocoo ducats that the Knicks aren’t trading any of these guys at the deadline. All the contenders are capped out and would have to send back matching salary.

      Portland has Bazemore and is a prime candidate. Toronto has Ibaka and Gasol. Orlando DJ Auginstin.
      Denver has Milsap and Plumlee. OKC Andre Robertson……

      No one knows today who will want to do what at the deadline, but there will be a bunch of teams looking to improve…..

    141. I’m inclined to agree with Z-man, though with the caveat that Ben R gave. A few facts seem clear:

      1) They prize flexibility.
      2) The lottery odds have significantly altered the efficacy of tanking.
      3) They feel that NYK are not a destination without winning more.

      Now, you can say “signing a few vets for marginal wins is stupid,” but we just saw KD, long rumored to be going to the Knicks, change his mind and go to the Nets. The Knicks and Nets are both effectively in NY, where he wanted to be, but one team is decent, one not – so their seeming belief that they need to win in order to attract top FA seems valid.

      Taking those facts into consideration, I believe that all their moves are focused at maximizing their chances should the opportunity arise. They want a team that wins, no matter how those wins are acquired, and are less focused on developing young players (who will need to fight for their chance) than on creating an environment they believe will be appealing to top FAs – the next of whom is AD.

    142. Silky, great post and I’m not disagreeing with the premise that there was a BETTER path available. I’m only disagreeing with the degree to which the current path is inferior to the preferred path. I think the difference is rather marginal, while others seem to think that it is debilitating. As I see it, the eight rookie-scale/near minimum guys and Randle are the guts of the team, and the other guys are placeholders who add some short-term value to a heavily-damaged brand. In the case where you are bereft of assets (e.g Nets) or didn’t just trade away your most valuable asset in years for several assets and cap space (as we did with KP to the delight of many) and then whiff on the top-tier FAs with that cap space, it is more palatable for an unthreatened FO to take on shitty contracts and assets and to tank yet another year. These guys chose to put some guys who may not be stars, or assets, or part of the future on the floor to change the perception of the team for a year while keeping cap flexibility for when marquee free agents become available again, with an outside chance that something good might happen in the trade market before then.

    143. The Nets actually patiently built up a stable of assets, and then they were desirable to free agents. They didn’t go out and sign a bunch of mediocre vets to 1+1 deals and then attract free agents.

      I hope this shit all works out. I really hope these dudes sign some superstar marquee free agent a year or two from now. Because if not this is going to be the rebuild to nowhere. Adding one young guy via the 9th pick in the draft every year is not really the best way to do it, and Piston-izing yourself by sending out a roster full of journeymen is a dead end.

    144. @95 — i’m a nobody who thoroughly enjoys the game of chess. i suppose with all the chess engines out there it is feasibly possible to prepare well and hold your own against most people — but at that point it’s just memorizing lines. I think fischer said that he hates modern chess because of this, everyone is essentially memorizing and no longer creating beautiful moves.

      Yes, Fischer did say that, and he wasn’t wrong. I was referring to a former (short-lived) poster who claimed that anyone could become an NM with study, which is a ridiculous claim. First, because memorization without understanding moves is nearly impossible, and second, because as soon as you break out of theory, the game opens up and becomes about calculation and intuition. (See: that little “compulsive learner” douche from the Wall Street Journal’s YouTube video, where he claims he will try to beat Carlsen through a memorization algorithm. Total horseshit. It wouldn’t happen if Carlsen played blindfolded, or played 1000 games, or even spotted him a knight.)

      Of course, this happens far less often than it used to, but there is no NM alive who is simply a memorization machine. Everyone >2000 has intense understanding of tactics and positional play, independent of theory. If they didn’t, you’d have guys rated 2000 in classical and 1200 in blitz, where openings are far more varied and ?! moves are more easily finessed. It simply doesn’t happen.

      what makes magnus carlsen so great is he’ll intentionally make bad moves to throw off his opponent.

      I am a pretty serious adult chess player and I’ve never heard of Magnus making a bad move; what makes Carlsen great, in my reading, is that he plays like Stockfish during the most abstract of endgames. Link?

    145. The Nets also just fucked themselves for the next 4 years by lurching at megamax guys just to make a big splash and signing DAJ to a guaranteed 4-year deal. By the time Durant is ready to play, they will have to pay Harris and LeVert. In 3 years, their short reign as kings of the NY turf will come to a crashing halt.

    146. HAHAHA I was about to say– if you happen to get all of your political analysis from Dershowitz, might want to start looking elsewhere.

    147. Does anyone remember what happened last year when we sent Kanter, deservedly, to the bench? He started whining and it was in the news every day. We just signed 7 Kanters. We just signed 7 players with the implicit guarantee that they will be in the rotation some of whom absolutely expect to start and get major minutes. Does anyone think Morris will go quietly to the bench if he gets beat out in training camp by Knox or Iggy? Will Portis accept not playing while Robinson gets 30 minutes a game? How about Randle if we decide to go with Morris or Portis or Knox at the 4?

      The idea of bringing in vets to stabilize the team so bad players don’t have to play 35+ minutes is sound but we brought in an entirely new rotation. I cannot make a realistic rotation that sees Trier or Knox much less Dotson or Iggy get playing time on opening day.

      At this point, we have to play Morris out of position at the 3 just to get all our new signings minutes. We created a logjam with mediocre players for no reason.

    148. @153 carlsen is great for many reasons, but one of them — which i represented quite poorly — is that he’ll play inaccuracies early on to take his opponents out of theory and into playing chess.

      i usually do a lot of chess watching on youtube. this one guy agadmator does a great job walking through classical and modern games.

      jotd: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3GVd4DFFPA

    149. Does anyone remember what happened last year when we sent Kanter, deservedly, to the bench? He started whining and it was in the news every day. We just signed 7 Kanters. We just signed 7 players with the implicit guarantee that they will be in the rotation some of whom absolutely expect to start and get major minutes. Does anyone think Morris will go quietly to the bench if he gets beat out in training camp by Knox or Iggy? Will Portis accept not playing while Robinson gets 30 minutes a game? How about Randle if we decide to go with Morris or Portis or Knox at the 4?

      The idea of bringing in vets to stabilize the team so bad players don’t have to play 35+ minutes is sound but we brought in an entirely new rotation. I cannot make a realistic rotation that sees Trier or Knox much less Dotson or Iggy get playing time on opening day.

      At this point, we have to play Morris out of position at the 3 just to get all our new signings minutes. We created a logjam with mediocre players for no reason.

      Yes, I remember it well. We cut him after the deadline and never thought about him again. And given that we traded our best prospect essentially for whining, I doubt that anyone who whines will be around long. OTOH, guys like Knox, RJ, Iggy, Frank, etc. will actually have to earn playing time instead of it being gifted to them, and may actually have to work on their games in the G-League. Trier and Mitch have already earned playing time, but Trier can be benched if he plays as selfishly as he did last year and Mitch can continue to foul his way on to the bench all he wants to, or not.

    150. Their cap holds will all be 130% of their current salaries, so they don’t save anything, cap hold wise.

      Sorry, Brian, I mis typed. I meant that if we wanted a long term contract with one of them the annual cost should be a lot less than what we pay under the current contract. (Unless they super perform, which would be a nice problem to have). So then the cap hold becomes the new annual salary, which should actually free up a little cap space.

    151. Z-Man – You actually think our front office is going to okay with Fizdale burying a couple of their prize signings on the bench while they hear drama from the press and that player’s agent? Just so he can play Trier or Dotson or Knox?

      Morris is our 3rd best PF yet he is absolutely going to expect to start and play 30+ minutes. That’s why he’s going to play the 3 where he is a defensive liability. This offseason started out okay with the Randle contract and then quickly became a joke. Our team is a mess right now. Yes, there is no longterm damage but if the bar is “only screw us over one season at a time” I would argue the bar is too low.

    152. Morris is our 3rd best PF yet he is absolutely going to expect to start and play 30+ minutes. That’s why he’s going to play the 3 where he is a defensive liability.

      I’m sure he is a worse defensive liability compared to Knox..

      Morris is the best small forward on this roster by a parsec…. I mean c’mon….. one guy was literally the worst player in the league last season and the other was about league average

      https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_hint=Kevin+Knox&player_id1_select=Kevin+Knox&player_id1=knoxke01&y1=2019&player_id2_hint=Marcus+Morris&player_id2_select=Marcus+Morris&y2=2019&player_id2=morrima03&idx=players

    153. Ben R, your comments sound like they are Knick’s PTSD driven. Of course Fizdale could play undeserving vets over young guys because he didn’t the front office to complain or the vet to whine. But he didn’t do that with Kanter. And the front office has shown a willingness to cut bait and waive a player when they have to. If they do cut a vet who’s not playing much, then we get our cap space back at the end of the year. So maybe we have to wait and see.

    154. Maybe I’m wrong about our front office but cutting bait or benching a vet that you just signed to a big contract is different than doing it to a player that has been here a while and isn’t part of the future plans, especially if it’s a player from a previous regime. It would look really bad to start the season with one or two of our “big” acquisitions stuck on the bench unhappy about playing time.

    155. HAHAHA I was about to say– if you happen to get all of your political analysis from Dershowitz, might want to start looking elsewhere.

      I don’t know many people who go to Dershowitz for political opinion (any???) but I’m guessing his legal opinions have been pretty well regarded for 50 years…

    156. It’s kind of hard to believe Dershowitz can even give his legal opinions considering he has Donald Trump’s balls in his mouth most of the time

    157. It seems obvious to me that another year of tanking would have been the optimal move but if Perry did that he’d be out of a job by January. If we don’t improve he’s probably still fired by March. Seems like he’s trying the thread a very thin needle – better enough to keep his job, not so much better it screws the team over. It’d be nice if he were better at player evaluation but he’s not horrible, and it seems like he’s done a good job given the constraints of Dolan’s imbecility. There’s only 30 GM jobs in the NBA, I don’t begrudge him trying to keep it. We’re hobbled until Dolan is no longer in control.

    158. LOL @ somebody defending this front office and mocking Morey.

      He who laughs last…

    159. LOL. for 50 years Dershowitz was a favorite of the left as a civil libertaian / classical liberal. But then he made the fatal mistake of thinking even Trumphitler has rights, and bam, he’s out of the club. His lifelong work meaningless because he strayed from the progressive plantation.

    160. Last year, the FO committed fully to the tank and executed it perfectly. Along the way, they ditched their prime asset for picks and young players, and dredged two definite rotation-level players and possible stars on a contender with a 2nd round pick (Mitch definitely, Trier possibly.) By the standards of the crowd here, those were colossal achievements and a clear break from past regimes. And while the braintrust here was apoplectic when they traded the great WHG for 2 second rounders, it now looks like a brilliant move.

      Things didn’t work out as they had hoped in free agency, so they punted. They picked up a reasonably priced future piece in Randle, a PG flier in Payton, and some guys to challenge the youngsters. The Portis, Gibson, Ellington and Bullock signings never made sense to me, but considering the alternatives that were discussed (Locking up Mudiay? Long-term deal to Rozier?? sheesh!) I’m willing to look the other way. At least we have an easy path to instant cap space next year in whatever denomination we need and the year after that, and a harder but possible path to either cap space or a trade for a disgruntled star on a long-term deal this year.

    161. Defending the “rights” (to materially profit off his presidency? to attack the free press from the bully pulpit? to install his fucking kids as de facto diplomats?) of a would-be authoritarian makes one a fucking asshole

    162. Maybe I’m wrong about our front office but cutting bait or benching a vet that you just signed to a big contract is different than doing it to a player that has been here a while and isn’t part of the future plans, especially if it’s a player from a previous regime. It would look really bad to start the season with one or two of our “big” acquisitions stuck on the bench unhappy about playing time.

      Big contract? If a journeyman vet is ok with a 1+1 team option deal, he is delusional if he considers that anything bud a disposable contract, and his agent should be fired if he allowed his client to be deluded into thinking otherwise. And if they are waived and hook up with contenders on minimum deals, they have the best of both worlds.

    163. Having some decent players eating minutes means that guys like Knox and RJ can ease into more limited and productive roles rather than being force-fed minutes and sucking so bad that they have no value. (see: Frank). I’m not suggesting that this will definitely happen, but it’s a reasonable possibility.

    164. Defending the “rights” (to materially profit off his presidency? to attack the free press from the bully pulpit? to install his fucking kids as de facto diplomats?) of a would-be authoritarian makes one a fucking asshole

      This is some prime funny stuff. An Icon of the left is now a fucking asshole because his learned opinion which he voices doesn’t jibe with your sensibilities. Tsk…. Tks!

      And who, pray tell is the would be authoritarian of which you speak??? Obama who invented the “cages” for children on the border, or FDR who actually interned US citizens????

      OR Al Gore’s daddy who filibustered the Civil Rights Act or the “Conscious of the Senate and Grand Dragon Robert Byrd????

    165. I’m a principles over principals person, like I think Dersh is. Even orange poopy heads and lying hags (talk about nepotism and using your position to enrich yourself!) have the right to due process and free speech and to not be subject to phony warrants.

    166. Z, if they had stopped at Randle, Portis, Taj and Elfrid I think most would be OK with it. It’s Bullock, Ellington and Morris that make no sense considering all the young wings we have. If the Knicks fight for the 8th seed with Smith, The Hair, RJ, Trier, Dotson, Knox, Randle, Mitch, Portis and Taj getting most of the minutes, that’s fine.

    167. Dershowitz was never “an icon of the left”–he was always just a dumb piece of shit who, inexplicably, got a professorship at Harvard (maybe it was because he was on OJ’s defense team…) He advocated for torture in the wake of 9/11, and is one of the biggest defenders of Israeli war crimes in American public discourse. This was all before he got some weird hard-on for Donald Trump’s supposed legal rights (even though his business dealings and dealings with Russia clearly merit an investigation and likely charges on the basis of the emoluments clause and obstructing justice, respectively). He’s a ‘civil libertarian’ in the same way I’m an award-winning author–which is to say, not at all.

      Now, we know he willfully associated with a known pedophile, and even received one of the famous massages. I, for one, am glad to see him squirm on social media and in court. Nice job trying to score political points against some straw man though!

    168. And who, pray tell is the would be authoritarian of which you speak??? Obama who invented the “cages” for children on the border, or FDR who actually interned US citizens????

      BUT WHAT ABOUT SLAVERY, AM I RIGHT

      THE REPUBLICANS ENDED SLAVERY

      THE DEMOCRATS DID SLAVERY

      BREITBART.COM IS MY HOMEPAGE

      NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION

      TO ME, FREE SPEECH IS NOT WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING GOOD AND YOU PURPOSELY WRITE SOMETHING BAD

      TO ME, THAT’S VERY DANGEROUS SPEECH

    169. BUT WHAT ABOUT SLAVERY, AM I RIGHT

      THE REPUBLICANS ENDED SLAVERY

      THE DEMOCRATS DID SLAVERY

      BREITBART.COM IS MY HOMEPAGE

      NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION

      TO ME, FREE SPEECH IS NOT WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING GOOD AND YOU PURPOSELY WRITE SOMETHING BAD

      TO ME, THAT’S VERY DANGEROUS SPEECH

      Well… you got 4 out of 7 correct…. When the facts are on your side…. pound the facts. When the law is on your side….. pound the law. And when neither is on your side…. pound the table. Jowles is in primo “pound the table” mode…..

    170. Back to Breitbart, those clouds aren’t gonna yell at themselves

    171. Dershowitz was never “an icon of the left”–he was always just a dumb piece of shit who, inexplicably, got a professorship at Harvard (maybe it was because he was on OJ’s defense team…)

      The lols keep on coming. Pretty soon we are going to be informed he clerked under Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scolia.

    172. Back to Breitbart, those clouds aren’t gonna yell at themselves

      Jowles clerked at the “poisoning the well” school of august debating……

    173. It’s funny that BREITBART!!!11!! is now the favorite pejorative of the left. It used to be RUSHLIMBAUGH!!!111!!! Then FOXNEWS!!!!!!1111!!!
      It just kills leftists when they don’t have a 100% monopoly on the news. Come on you tolerant souls who love yourself some equality. You have every network, even the Comedy channel, except for Fox News. You have Hollywood and academia on lockdown. You have almost every major newspaper. Why does it eat at you so much that right wingers have a couple of places to get their red meat.

    174. and is one of the biggest defenders of Israeli war crimes in American public discourse.

      And there we have it. Those dastardly Jooooz just won’t sit still and stfu while they’re bombed! The bastards!

    175. It’s funny how Fox News is the most watched news outlet but they and their fans don’t include themselves in discussions about “the media.”

    176. Someday I’m gonna buy Z-man a drink and it’s going to be a great moment for this board

    177. Boy some people here really love Alan Dershowitz.

      He “only got massages in his underwear” at the pedo palace. Sounds legit.

    178. How come you guys are only worked up over Epstein now that the situation involves Dershowitz? If I missed the posts ridiculing Menendez and Slick Willy, among other people who are on your team, I apologize.

    179. I include Fox News when I talk about the media. They’re no different than CNN or MSNBC, other than which of the 2 major parties they cheerlead for.
      For somebody like me, there is no TV news station worth watching.

    180. Anthony Bennett back to the big leagues!

      Man, how did Perry not get him to sign a 1+1?

    181. Has Bill Clinton come out with a statement that he “only got a massage in his underwear?” I must have missed that. Because that’s what Dershowitz is telling us today with a straight face.

      Dershowitz’ statement today in his TV interview was one of the sleaziest things I have ever seen.

    182. As long as they’re in separate glasses…

      Speaking of which, I was in Montauk with my better half this week, and after a nice seaside dinner we went for a drink at a local bar. I asked if they had any single malts and the novice bartender shrugged and showed me a bottle of Lagavulin 8 (which I actually prefer to the 16, go figure!). I ordered one on the rocks. She took out a tumbler, put a couple of ice cubes in it and filled it to the brim with the good stuff. By far the most fortuitous pour I ever got, probably a $40 drink that cost me $14. The guy sitting next to me happened to own a bar in Yonkers quipped “Buddy, you just hit the jackpot!” I damn well wanted to sneak in a second one but the missus wasn’t having it.

    183. Weirdly, for a short time it seemed to me that the most legit straight reporting on TV was Al-Jazeera…

    184. I’m not defending Dershowitz for his pedo island visits. I’m saying this pedo island thing has been known for years, and Sick Willy is a frequent flyer on Pedo Air, and until today I don’t recall you commenting about it. If you don’t see how partisan you’re being, I can’t help you.

    185. Probably because they didn’t really care about Repub vs Demo nonsense, so they just gave the news from a neutral perspective.

    186. Is there a price at which taking on CP3 makes sense?

      Oh definitely. No doubt about it. But I think Presti won’t give up assets to get rid of him. He can just let him expire, if need be. So someone would have to trade for him, not take him along with assets.

    187. There’s an affidavit with specific allegations against Dershowitz, and his response was weird and humiliating.

      When this happens to Bill Clinton, you can have your day of schadenfreude.

    188. Bish I don’t even have cable, but if you think MSNBC and Fox News represent equidistantly from the truth you are a straight-up, unadulterated moron

    189. We can’t trade any of these signings until December, right? So say we then trade Portis, Taj and Payton for him. That leaves 2.5 years of that insane contract, but he might be an appealing expiring in year 3. So for 1.5 years it might be worth it?

    190. Yes, MSNBC and Fox News are the exact same nonsense. You can’t see it because MSNBC is on your team. I know exactly what position each network will take on any issue, and I know exactly what anybody on each network will say.

      I know I’m right because I get the exact same reaction from Democrats and Republicans when I equate the 2 propaganda outlets.

    191. It just kills leftists when they don’t have a 100% monopoly on the news. Come on you tolerant souls who love yourself some equality. You have every network, even the Comedy channel, except for Fox News. You have Hollywood and academia on lockdown. You have almost every major newspaper. Why does it eat at you so much that right wingers have a couple of places to get their red meat.

      You know what’s funny about when people say shit like this. They never step back and say, “why is it that most of the “smart” people lean that way?”

      Nah they think it’s a conspiracy,when it’s actually informative

    192. @198

      Dude, get real. No one here would hesitate to criticize anyone of any party accused of the shit these people are accused of. Dersch was in the news today, that’s it.

      It seems a common rebuttal from the Right: Obama started it! You didn’t complain about Sick Willy! Etc. Except we do, and we did. It’s one reason the Right is so successful in comparison: the Left sees nuance and contradiction; the Right sees what Fox tells them to see. It’s a lot easier to rally behind someone when you completely ignore the facts.

    193. It reminds me of the concept of “virtue-signaling,” because no one can actually be, you know, virtuous. It’s so alien to some folks that they assume anyone being virtuous is just “virtue-signalling.” Similarly, any interest in sexual wrongdoings MUST be politically motivated.

    194. It seems a common rebuttal from the Left: Bush started it! You didn’t complain about Reagan! Etc. Except we do, and we did. It’s one reason the Left is so successful in comparison: the Right sees nuance and contradiction; the Left sees what the NYT tells them to see. It’s a lot easier to rally behind someone when you completely ignore the facts.

      See how easy this is. Both sides are the same and you can’t see it.

      “Dersch was in the news today, that’s it.”

      He was in your news. Earlier this week on a libertarian site I saw pics of Bill getting a massage on pedo island I’m curious if that made it on MSNBC or CNN?

    195. For me, it’s pretty simple. What side are the white supremacists/neo-Nazis and neo-robber-barons on? Please sign me up on the opposite team.

    196. I don’t think people change all that much, only the playing field changes. Yesterday’s abolitionists and states-rights advocates are today’s liberals and conservatives. Usually, history falls on the side of civil rights advocates. See: Joseph McCarthy

    197. @210

      An eminently reasonable take, but somehow a semi-hot one in this political climate, apparently.

      Also, wow, that good of a pour for 14? Pinch me.

    198. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/It%27s_Even_Worse_Than_It_Looks

      Halfway through on a friend’s recommendation. Articulates the “both sides bad” fallacy in great detail.

      GOP: “an insurgent outlier–ideologically extreme; contemptuous of the inherited social and economic policy regime; scornful of compromise; unpersuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition”

    199. @209 you do know that Bill Clinton is hated by progressives right? I’m not sure why you keep bringing him up like hes some sort of deity. Me myself I’m not a Republican or a Democrat.i think they are both evil and are corporate shills.

      The difference in the 2 parties is that Republicans are better politicians and Democrats are pussies ( and I dont mean it in an anti female way.) They just are weak.

      That’s why the establishment cant stand AOC and Ayanna Pressley and the likes. They operate like Republicans

    200. Both sides are bad in terms of being authoritarian statists, but based on my beliefs in self ownership and liberty, the Dems are getting worse by the day, as there doesn’t seem to be any part of my life that the Feds shouldn’t have a say in in their view, and everything from daycare to college should be “free”.

    201. and is one of the biggest defenders of Israeli war crimes in American public discourse.

      And there we have it. Those dastardly Jooooz just won’t sit still and stfu while they’re bombed! The bastards!

      Ugh. I’m an Israeli Jew and some of the things my country does are indefensible. I used to be an activist and saw them with my own eyes. I’d say having a right wing libertarian attack the American left as “jooooz” haters is the worst, but our prime minister’s son is routinely publishing anti-semitic neo-nazi shit to attack the left here, and at least one of his father’s proclamations over the past few years stared as the headline of The Daily Stormer, so there’s an even deeper bottom.

      Also, characterizing Dershowitz as an “icon of the left” is laughable.

    202. @215 yea so there is the disconnect with some.

      Your beliefs in self ownership and liberty do not coincide with a successful society. The 2 can not jive.

      This is why we are were we are. People in this country want to have business that makes money, but dont want to help to pay for the roads that can safely get consumers to their places of business.

      The shit is mind blowing to me

    203. i know life isn’t as simple as: fuck politics…but, no doubt that is some messy and distasteful shit, neccessary evil I imagine…definitely puts a dent in the whole “humanity” part of the human experience…

      what happened at angel’s stadium saturday was pretty special…true halo stuff going on there last night…

    204. Neither MSNBC nor Fox News is even close to “the truth.”

      Keeping people perpetually agitated is big business now and essentially *is* the media business. The media business is clicks and the sober, reasoned truth doesn’t get many clicks.

    205. everything from daycare to college should be “free”.

      Yep we’re saying no to free tuition!

    Comments are closed.