NY Post: Elfrid Payton answers challenge as Knicks clip Bulls

From Peter Botte:

he cries have been incessant recently, with fans and media wondering when Knicks coach Tom Thibodeau will alter his starting lineup to insert electrifying rookie point guard Immanuel Quickley in place of Elfrid Payton.

Payton responded with his best game in several weeks Wednesday night in Chicago, helping propel the Knicks to a 107-103 win over the Bulls at United Center.

Payton posted 20 points, eight rebounds and four assists in 35 minutes — his highest playing time in seven games — and Quickley added nine points in just 13 minutes. The Knicks improved to 8-2 this year in the 10 games in which Payton has hit at least five field goals.

“I think Elfrid is a pro. I think he has a lot of pride in his game, and more importantly I think he has a lot of pride in the team,” Thibodeau said after the game. “I think the winning component is very important to him. So whatever we ask him to do, he does very unselfishly. He’s always sacrificing for the team, it’s recognized by everyone. We have a 10-man rotation, but everyone’s role is important.”

I think it’s a pretty simple proposition. When Payton is playing well, the Knicks are very hard to beat. We saw this early in the season when the Knicks were beating some really good teams and almost invariably, it was games when Payton had good games (as he had a bunch of good games early). As the stat noted, the Knicks are 1-10 in games when Payton has a bad game and 8-2 when he has a good game.

The problem, of course, is that Payton is not that good, so if your team’s win-loss record is relying on Payton to be good, well…you’re not relying om much. But hey, when it happens, the team certainly looks great.

Even with all of that, of course, the Knicks almost handed the game to the Bulls in the final minutes, with the Bulls essentially saying, “Nah, no thank you” and giving the game back to the Knicks. That was at the end, though, after the Knicks dominated the rest of the game. It reminded me a lot of that Hawks win where the Knicks practically gave that game away at the end, as well.

In an interesting bit, Thibs was asked before the game about whether he saw Mitch as being able to evolve his game like Joakim Noah, and he responded with an intriguing statement, ““Every player is different. Mitch has different strengths. The growth part of Joakim’s game was great. He started off as a defensive player, an energy guy, a guy who ran the floor well. And actually, when Derrick [Rose] got hurt, we ran the offense through him. He was an excellent passer, decision maker, very good with dribble handoffs and I think that’s a part of Mitch’s game that can grow. And so we’ll challenge him in that way.”

You know I loves me some Mitch (and he was great tonight), but I sure as heck don’t see Mitch’s passing as ever being a key part of his game. So that’s an odd response from Thibs. I like, though, that he sounds dedicated to Mitch, so maybe they’ll try to involve Mitch more into the offense going forward.

Liked it? Take a second to support Brian Cronin on Patreon!

356 thoughts to “NY Post: Elfrid Payton answers challenge as Knicks clip Bulls”

  1. You know, watching the Kings/Celtics, I almost wonder if the Kings are going to have to make a decision on Fox soon. He and Hali seem super redundant together. I think they might have to choose which one they want to be the future of their team and trade the other one. Either one should fetch a hefty price on the open market, no?

  2. A win is a win is a win, this was an ugly one.
    Watched live but couldn’t write, rewatched this morning.

    Thibs worked well on defensive schemes after the last game (no more open lanes to cutters and free men under the basket), the starters were motivated by Randle’s whipping words, and the attempted self-destruction at the end failed.

    Good game for Payton, with a really good first half (12 points, 6 Reb), CHI was the right team for his features (8-9 at the rim, 1-10 elsewhere) and he exploited it.

    Randle was good despite some twirling and hot from outside, RJ had a good second quarter (but some sloppy turnovers) and is totally unprotected by the refs, Mitch played well on defense and was a force on the boards, tipping a lot of rebounds in the hands of other Knicks, Bullock was decent.

    The second unit was a near disaster, led in this reverse performance by an abysmal Rivers (the worst part wasn’t the shot, but the turnovers and the bad defense).
    Quickley played only 13 min (to Payton 35), and for the second game in a row when used with the bench unit he forced a lot of shots and kept the ball too much. To me it looks like he was constantly trying to do something special to impress Thibs, not a good thing.
    Burks was off and he had rarely been the same after the injury, Obi started well then disappear (his iso on Satoransky was brutally bad) plus he’s often a liability on defense. Noel was the best of the bench bunch but his hands are terrible.

    Around the league madness reign supreme, Dallas won despite being better only on FTs and TOs, but alas it was enough… and don’t look at Hali’s boxscore!

    Now a weekend back-to-back of matinees awaits us, two good teams on paper with a season full of injury/Covid problems. Get ready for Payton vs Dame II and the showdown between Mitch and Bam (also Jimmy Butler in a cage match with RJ).

    Let’s go Knicks!

  3. Yeah, one of the things I’m really not loving is the whole deal with Quickley being on these units where he’s clearly the only guy who is going to be scoring. It seems like such a bad spot to put him in to, while at the same time, sure seems like it could tempt him with bad habits, as well (“Just keep on shooting, since you’re the only one who can score!”).

    Not only that, but the more that I think about it, “We can’t start Quickley, we need his scoring for the bench” is a really backwards way of looking at things (if that is how Thibs is looking at things, that is. He could have other motivations for not starting Quickley). If the bench can’t score without Quickley being there, then you need to work on that, not use a promising rookie as a stopgap in a season where eking out wins probably should not be your main priority.

    I don’t like how “What will be the best way for us to beat the Bulls on February 3rd?” seems to be the biggest motivating factor.

  4. I could I miss “Melo’s back to the Garden… and Enes too!” while previewing the weekend series?

    :-)

    IQ was more in control in the few minutes he played with some starters.
    He could help our “dangerousness” even playing off the ball with Julius and RJ playmaking, I think that’s a feature that needs to be explored.

    Also, “We have a 10-men rotation” by Thibs sound like the final death knell for Knox and Frank and it makes me a bit sad, particularly for Frank who was screwed up by the injury while playing decently at the start of the year.

  5. I will say this, though. Thibs’ commitment to defense is one thing that will not only help the Knicks beat the bulls on February 3rd, but it is something that will help the team going forward, so that part of the approach to the team I take no umbrage with at all. That’s just an amazing aspect of Thibs’ coaching that will be here throughout his time as the Knicks coach and I’m glad for it.

  6. Knicks a half-game in the lottery, Mavs three games (and four teams) in the lottery.

    All these micro-deconstructions of Quickley’s performances are just ways to rationalize Thibs’s utterly bizarre obsession with Elfrid Payton. The correct perspective on all of it is that there’s no reason to accept Thibs’s premise that IQ’s but not Payton’s should be subjected to them.

    Obi Toppin should be getting more minutes, too. He looked perfectly fine last night. This was basically a merc win and we should never be comfortable or happy with merc wins.

  7. This was basically a merc win and we should never be comfortable or happy with merc wins.

    Yes, Payton went off in the first half, but RJ scored 17 and was key to helping build the big lead that the Bulls couldn’t quite chip away at. Mitch had a ton of offensive rebounds, and Randle — who is not a mercenary, no matter how many times you insist that he is — closed things out. While most of the actual mercs like Bullock and Burks were irrelevant to the win.

  8. Quickley has his share of bad games, and it’s not just one bad game, he’s had several. Payton probably has a larger share of bad games than Quickley does, but I can see Thibodeau not being convinced that it’s time for a change yet.

  9. That last 5 minutes of the game made me want to claw my eyes out. On offense, just dudes going 1-on-1 into traffic or taking stepback/fadeaway long 2’s. Defense not great. No one should ever ask Reggie Bullock to throw a pass out of the backcourt in the last minute of a game.

    The good – Randle was really great last night, last few bricks notwithstanding. He did a very reasonable job on Markkanen, made some great passes, and was just on fire from 3. I do not imagine it is real, but he is now shooting 39.6% from 3, and these shots are just pure – it doesn’t seem like Obi where it’s a huge surprise that a 3 pointer went in (seriously, Obi has such horrible balance on his jumper). He’s averaging 22/11/6 with a TS of 58, usage of 27.5, and an assist rate of 28.3. Just having a great year. Putting these into B-R’s play index (which is behind paywall) still gives you the total # of seasons that a player reached these thresholds, and it is 6 total seasons. Really remarkable.

    More good – RJ in the 2nd and 3rd quarters was fantastic. Nice PNR game with Mitch, great takes to the basket. That eurostep in transition was art.

    The bad – I am very worried that we wasted another top 10 pick. Toppin looks bad. Or maybe not bad, but just sort of pointless out there. He can’t defend. He’s the 3rd or 4th best roll man on the team ie. never going to be the main roll threat. He can’t shoot. He can’t put the ball on the floor. He can’t post up Satoransky. What are we doing here?

    Austin Rivers – needs to play fewer minutes. For Pete’s sake, play Ntilikina who is a better defender than all these yahoos and doesn’t do as much stupid stuff.

    Reggie Bullock – if Reggie is going to have a TS south of 50, can’t handle the ball, can’t pass the ball… maybe someone else should play? He has nearly 1200 minutes played for the Knicks and his TS is 50. We may just have to accept that post-cervical spine surgery that his shot is not coming back.

  10. Quickley’s ledger is totally biased toward “bad” games because once he starts “bad” in a very small sample size, Thibodeau doesn’t give him the minutes he might use to turn the “bad” game to a good one, a la at Atlanta.

    Payton’s going bad, Thibs gives him time to try to make it less bad with no real downside because it’s bad already. Quickley’s going bad, it’s going to stay bad. Completely biased sample. One would think an NBA coach would understand this, but maybe not. Frankly, it wouldn’t be shocking if he’s doing it on purpose, subconsciously or otherwise, to justify the Payton obsession. Why does the worse player get a chance to salvage or half-salvage his shitty games, but the better player doesn’t? Makes zero sense.

    Not sure how Randle isn’t a merc. He pretty much defines the term. Here on a short term deal only because he had few if any other takers, playing for his next contract, no reason to believe the next actually good Knicks team will be using him in any role at all, much less his current role. I think I’m where the vast majority of the Knicks’ fanbase is on this one. We don’t want the Knicks winning games and blowing draft position and getting siren songed into overpaying on the back of Julius Randle. I don’t think even mainstream KB truly wants that either. Do we really want an oddball coach slow-pacing and jerry-rigging and merc-ing and Hickory High-ing this team unsustainably out of the lottery? Still say no.

  11. From BC’s writeup:

    “You know I loves me some Mitch (and he was great tonight), but I sure as heck don’t see Mitch’s passing as ever being a key part of his game. So that’s an odd response from Thibs.”

    An odd response here, and odd response there, and pretty soon if we’re paying attention we should conclude we’re dealing with an oddball coach. And we are. The Knicks are now a full 1.5 possessions slower in pace than the second-slowest team in the association. That’s oddball.

  12. Not sure how Randle isn’t a merc.

    He’s on the second year of a three year contract. He’s been easily our best player this year and a borderline All-Star. Either we keep him for next year and potentially extend him — he isn’t someone you build around, but this version of him is 100% a player you can build with — or we trade him for legit assets. A mercenary is somebody like Portis last year, or Michael Beasley back in the day — someone who is only going to be here for a season, where there is no real path to them being part of the team’s longer-term future, and where their play doesn’t in any way benefit the development of our younger players. Randle is none of those things. You don’t like his game, fine. You don’t think his game can be part of a winning team, fine. But he’s not a mercenary, and you constantly calling him that still does not make it so.

  13. I dont understand your harsh negative view of everything. It is really misplaced to me. You are failing to see any of the positives from the young players, Randle playing like an all-star or the team playing hard this year. Not everything is a “merc” win as you call it.

    You seem to watch games with alot of preconceived notions and then grasp on to anything to meet that point of view.

  14. He didn’t get a three-year contract, he got two with an option. It’s a bridge, desperation contract. And there was totally a path with Bobby Portis (who should still be a Knick) and Bobby Portis’s play absolutely helped the young players last year and would help them this year. Frank and floor spacers last year had nice lineup data.

    We’ve been through this a lot now, but you can’t really build with Julius. To build with him and not around him as we all seem to agree to happen would require him accepting a contract commensurate with that role and he’s not going to do that. (It also requires him to accept being built with rather than around and he might accept that, but the jury is very much out on it.) So the path to building with him is purely theoretical with no actual real-world application.

  15. I have a harsh negative view on jerry-rigging your way out of the lottery on the back of mercs and a primitive style you can’t really win with. We all should. No reason to apologize for it. Wide swaths of the fanbase have the very same “harsh negative view.” KB will, too, the next time the Knicks play a shitty game. KB is kind of bipolar on the whole thing. Other factions of the fanbase are more consistent.

  16. We control Randle’s rights for three years. He is outplaying that contract as of now. He’s not a mercenary by anything other than this definition that exists entirely inside your own head. When you try to argue that Bobby Portis would have been more valuable to keep around than Randle, I’m not sure what the point is of continuing to discuss any of this with you. You hate Randle and/or his game. Enjoy marinating in that hatred. You’re also wrong about his position relative to the team’s long-term goals. Have a good day.

  17. can we just stop entertaining the troll please? he constantly does this for attention…. there’s nothing interesting about this discussion….

  18. and don’t look at Hali’s boxscore!

    I honestly don’t know how you guys watch Obi lumber around the court looking like a useless turd and not get filled with the same angst as me. Every minute he plays offends me.

    Quickley doesn’t mitigate anything, because then I just think how great our backcourt would be with the two of them together.

  19. Last night wasn’t the ideal formula for a win by any stretch but comparing Randle to Portis et al. kind of tanks your credibility in any discussion of asset management

  20. Quickley doesn’t mitigate anything, because then I just think how great our backcourt would be with the two of them together.

    There is no way they would have taken Quickley if Hali had been the pick at 8. The team desperately needed a big man, especially since Randle’s improvement was not foreseeable. We were going to come out of the first round with a big and either a point guard or a wing. The Hail/Quickley backcourt would never have been a thing, and I think even the more fashionable front offices would have split positions in the same way, regardless of the order.

  21. I honestly don’t know how you guys watch Obi lumber around the court looking like a useless turd and not get filled with the same angst as me.

    There’s a Ntilikina-esque vibe where it’s not so much the lack of production (normal for rookies), but the fact that he simply looks like he doesn’t belong that does it for me. Big “little brother playing with the big kids” energy.

  22. E, all merc’d out: He didn’t get a three-year contract, he got two with an option.

    Not that it matters in the context of your (poor) argument, but Randle does have a three year contract.

    If we waive him, we do not have to pay his full salary because it’s only partially guaranteed in year 3. But there is no decision on picking up his option bc he doesn’t have one. It’s a minor distinction, but it does make a difference in how we approach him and how he’s valued in a trade.

  23. Count me in as someone who has done a 180 on Randle. I thought he was a merc last season. But its clear he’s worked on his game and become an All-Star player. I don’t know if he’ll ever thrive in a role less central than the one he’s playing but its hard to argue with some of the metrics at this point 23 games into the season. A WS/48 of .151, BPM of 4.1, and 7.8 off/on numbers are easily career bests for him. Dude is peaking across the board no matter how you want to slice it. We should develop his brand as an All-Star point forward. At best we become contenders around him and at worse he’s a future asset in a deal for a KAT type player down the line.

  24. I never said that Portis was better than Randle or anything close. The claim was made that there was no “path to Portis being part of a longer future” and I addressed the clear falsity of that. He’s playing a major role on an actually-modern and really good NBA team right now.

    Randle is in the last few months of the Knicks’ commitment to him. We can keep pretending otherwise, I guess, though it’s unclear exactly what the point of that would be. I don’t hate his game by any stretch, but it’s entirely true that you aren’t building anything with him in this role. I doubt there’s even much disagreement on KB about that.

    He is outplaying the contract, yes. So what? Whether or not he’s currently overpaid is irrelevant to anything.

  25. thenoblefacehumper: There’s a Ntilikina-esque vibe where it’s not so much the lack of production (normal for rookies), but the fact that he simply looks like he doesn’t belong that does it for me. Big “little brother playing with the big kids” energy.

    And I gave Ntilikina a pass for 2.5 years because I’m usually patient. I’ve never been so out on a prospect before.

    I want to say this is Jordan Hill 2.0 but I don’t think Obi can even reach those heights.

  26. No one is taking Julius Randle as the center of a package for a top guy. Not happening. Anything’s possible with salaries and the cap, I guess, but highly unlikely. I’d offer him up as part of a Beal package, but I’d expect the answer to be no.

    Hard to believe the distinction is being put up between a non-guaranteed third year and an optional third year. The Knicks guaranteed him two years. He’s now in the last few months of the Knicks guarantee to him. Pure factorial.

  27. I agree with E on IQ, though. Thibs puts him in lineups with Austin Rivers, Obi Toppin, and Kevin Knox stinking up the joint and then has a quick hook when he can’t carry that load with Burks.

  28. Julius’ WS/48 and on/off numbers are better than Beal’s. His 4.1 BPM compares to Beal’s 5.1 BPM. I must be missing something here in terms of why Beal is such a much better player.

  29. Alan: There is no way they would have taken Quickley if Hali had been the pick at 8. The team desperately needed a big man, especially since Randle’s improvement was not foreseeable. We were going to come out of the first round with a big and either a point guard or a wing. The Hail/Quickley backcourt would never have been a thing, and I think even the more fashionable front offices would have split positions in the same way, regardless of the order.

    There’s nothing wrong with a bit of conjecture, but I don’t think evidence supports your guess.

    For one thing, the Knicks desperately needed guards on draft night, not big men. The only guards on the roster were Dennis Smith and Frank. They had no guard play at all last season, to the point that we started Knox at the 2 and Barrett at the 1. Guards – not bigs – were the roster’s glaring weakness. That’s why after the draft they signed Rivers, Burks, Payton, and Bullock. The only big they signed was Noel.

    For another, not everyone overreacted to Julius Randle’s one bad season the way this board did. There were plenty in the media and around the league who suggested he still had good value. But most importantly, Rose, Thibs, and Perry were among the people who clearly believed in Randle. I think it’s incredibly wrong to assume they went into draft night believing that Randle was dead weight and we desperately needed a power forward.

    Finally, this team didn’t seem to draft for need. They loved 4 players: Obi, Maxey, Quickley, and Vernon Carey. They didn’t have a plan B when Maxey was gone so they took Quickley higher than anyone expected. They didn’t have a plan B when Carey was gone, so they punted. It stands to reason that if they had taken Halli at 8, they would simply taken the player they loved the most at 25, and that would still be Quickley.

  30. The “merc” debate seems to come down to semantics, but I wonder if there’s a difference between a merc and a “hold the fort” guy, to reference Bill Parcells? I’d think of a merc as more disposable guy basically on a one year deal, maybe a 1+1.

    I’d view Julius as a hold the fort guy but Payton, Rivers, Bullock, and Burks as mercs. None of those guys are probably good for tanking, but Thibs is not going to tank, so those guys get to play.

    And btw, please bench Rivers.

  31. One more point… who looks at Quickley and Halliburton and thinks they’re redundant? They look to me a perfect, complementary backcourt pairing.

  32. If the bench can’t score without Quickley being there, then you need to work on that, not use a promising rookie as a stopgap in a season where eking out wins probably should not be your main priority.

    That’s what Burks and Rivers are supposed to be for. lol

    We are arguing the same thing. Quickley should probably be in the starting lineup, but they have to improve the quality and depth of the bench also. Burks is fine (though he shouldn’t be a stopgap PG), but I’m not a Rivers fan. IMO Rivers isn’t particularly good on either side of the ball even though he’s had some spectacular games that are making his overall stats look better than the typical performance.

    I’m also starting to lose a little patience with Bullock. He defends, but he’s not exactly lighting it up on offense or from 3. We have Frank to play defense and not exactly light it up on offense. I don’t see how Frank is not in the rotation. Unless he looks bad in practice, we should be giving him a good look now to see if he has improved at all. We aren’t getting very good play out of Rivers and Bullock anyway.

  33. E, all merc’d out: No one is taking Julius Randle as the center of a package for a top guy. Not happening. Anything’s possible with salaries and the cap, I guess, but highly unlikely. I’d offer him up as part of a Beal package, but I’d expect the answer to be no.

    Not responding to the troll, but making a point to the rest of us…

    I think All-Star Julius Randle, 2020 lottery pick Obi Toppin, and a pair of future draft picks is going to be a very good package to offer this summer (as long as Obi doesn’t completely lose his lotto shine in one season).

  34. This is getting comical.

    Randle is playing out of his mind. He came into camp in the best shape of his life. His playmaking, efficiency, and now even his 3p% are all significantly improved from last year. He’s being a good leader and defending well enough. yet people are focused on trading him.

    Do you people love losing. Is masochism contagious?

    Time will tell how much of it is sustainable (especially that 3p%), but unless there’s a better player out there available in a trade, we should be celebrating that we have a guy that’s 26 and is seemingly just starting to his grove for the Knicks.

  35. For the record, the thinking coming into the draft was that we needed at PG, a stretch PF and more shooting. Randle was seen as a good player that was suffering from the lack of space and too big a role in the offense and not a very good fit with Robinson. Management must have thought Obi could become a good stretch PF and they weren’t convinced Hali was a true PG . So they went with Obi. I don’t think they drafted Quickley to be the PG of the future. They drafted him because they thought he was very good player. They may still be looking for our PG of the future even though Quickley can handle the ball and has some PG skills.

  36. Bullock has been bad this year, and he wasn’t very good last year either. He may just be done as an NBA player. He is hitting a passable number of 3s and he’s an okay rebounder but he’s doing nothing else good out there. Frank probably would suck too but there’s really no reason to play Reggie. If you don’t want to play Frank put Quickley (or Rivers, I guess) in the starting lineup and move RJ down to 3.

  37. i just wanna say… randle did not just come into camp in the best shape of his life… he works extremely hard every offseason… this dude has been absolutely chiseled for the last at least 3 seasons…..

    he came into the league as an overrated one dimensional prospect… gets hurt on the 2nd play of his career…. puts in a couple disastrous seasons but keeps on working and making marked improvements every year…. his ballhandling has gotten real good… he’s shooting way better at the line and from 3… he’s turned into a very good isolation scorer and now he’s playing (mostly) unselfish ball….

    this type of progression is not common and it just doesn’t happen without maniacal dedication to your craft…. and you look at randle and how he’s transformed his body over the years as well as the visible improvements to his game… there’s no questioning his commitment….

  38. Randle is 23rd in the league in BPM & since he’s going to lead the league in MP, he’ll actually be more valuable than that number. Randle is a top player in the NBA.

  39. DRed:
    Bullock has been bad this year, and he wasn’t very good last year either.He may just be done as an NBA player.He is hitting a passable number of 3s and he’s an okay rebounder but he’s doing nothing else good out there.Frank probably would suck too but there’s really no reason to play Reggie.If you don’t want to play Frank put Quickley (or Rivers, I guess) in the starting lineup and move RJ down to 3.

    Frank’s career high TS% is lower than Bullock’s current TS%. Frank’s career high 3p% is .321, Bullock is currently at .342. Frank is almost certainly gone after this year, just like Bullock. I just don’t see any reason to play Frank over anyone anymore.

  40. It’s axiomatic that in the NBA you don’t want to be in the mediocre low-middle and that’s where the Knicks are, and somehow those of us who hew to the axiom — which is what makes it an axiom to begin with — are being called on to re-prove the axiom. (If not being called trolls or worse.)

    The Knicks aren’t only in the mediocre middle; they’re in the mediocre middle in the worst way, where it isn’t just the product of natural organic growth and isn’t sustainable and isn’t even the platform for additional growth. I’ll take the slings and arrows but I’m not going to waver from clear NBA truisms just because the Knicks are no longer in the hands of David Fizdale and Steve Mills. Whatever happiness is out there about all this certainly must be strong enough to survive pockets of dissent. Be happy.

  41. For the record, the thinking coming into the draft was that we needed…

    … good players, regardless of position.

    We only had three players on the roster who you could say with certainty belonged in the NBA. Two of them (Randle and Mitch) were bigs, one (RJ) was a wing.

    This team’s biggest need — FAR AND AWAY! — was a primary ballhandler. It’s second biggest need was anyone who could shoot without compromising us on defense.

    We needed everything, but literally the last thing we needed was a big who couldn’t shoot, couldn’t play defense, and played the same positions as Randle and Mitch.

    The Knicks did not draft for need, they drafted for love. It was ill-fated in the case of Obi, and it’s looking starry-eyed in the case of Quickley.

  42. The Knicks could cut Elfrid Payton and Reggie Bullock today and they’d be a better basketball team. Reggie Bullock has absolutely no business as an NBA starter.

  43. One important thing to note is that Randle does way better on box score all-in-ones (BPM, WS/48) than /- metrics (RPM, RAPM, the PIPM clone at bball index, and Darko DPM). Randle’s BPM number, like EB said, is good for 23rd in the league; his WS/48 is #47 overall. Meanwhile, his RPM is #104 overall (his ORPM is negative, which I don’t actually believe), his RAPM rank is #106 overall (slight positive in O and D RAPM), his LEBRON (PIPM clone) rating is #103 overall, and his DARKO DPM (no idea how this is calculated) is #113 overall. So we have a big spread between his box score stats, which seem to indicate that he’s anywhere from a top 20-50 player, and his /- stats, which are universal in pegging him around the top 100. I tend to think the truth has to be somewhere in the middle, just because it seems to me that BPM is severely overrating his defensive contribution and the /- stats underrate his obvious offensive contributions, but I’m open to correction here. In any case, it’s not obvious that Julius is outperforming his contract, but I don’t think any of these numbers give us good reason to think he should or shouldn’t be re-signed. We need more convincing data here.

    Edit: To add to the Frank discussion, I think it’s likely that the Frank of last year was *better* than the Bullock of this year. Reggie is so useless that his better shooting doesn’t really move the needle for us at all. And, since we have one more year of Frank, we should check, one last time, to see if anything is there. But there’s not really an argument, imo, for playing Reggie or Rivers over Frank, since Frank’s play last year was better than both of them and he we need to check for any improvement, which is more likely in Frank’s case than Rivers or Bullock’s.

  44. Silky Johnson, Fleet Admiral of the Tank Armada: So we have a big spread between his box score stats, which seem to indicate that he’s anywhere from a top 20-50 player, and his /- stats, which are universal in pegging him around the top 100.

    That’s exactly the spread you would expect if he’s the kind of player I (and some others here) have been sketching out. His efforts to generate his box score numbers take away from the whole significantly more than other players who generate similar box score numbers — several of whose efforts actually enhance the whole. We all know why this is and there’s no need to belabor it further.

    All that said, this wouldn’t be that much of an issue but for the continued presence of primarily Payton, Rivers, and Bullock, each of whom is pointless. The issue with Randle isn’t merc-dom, per se, it’s role and future state and sustainability.

  45. In 28 minutes of real action this year, part of which apparently he was playing on a bum knee, Frank has 17 points on 11 shots. Most normal coaches given the place of the organization would see if maybe that was signaling real improvement and could be built upon. It’s absurd that the guy lost his minutes because of injury and there’s really no reason at all that he should be behind Payton, Bullock, and Rivers. Whatever marginal wins over Frank those non-entities would produce are counterproductive to the Knicks’ best medium and long term interests anyway.

  46. He’s now in the last few months of the Knicks guarantee to him. Pure factorial.

    I don’t understand how this matters at all in the context of a debate about whether or not he’s a “merc.” If the Knicks want to keep for an additional year, they can (and they almost certainly will). Mitch is also in the second-to-last year of his deal, is he a merc? I mean Randle is a much more realistic part of the future than Frank Ntilikina, who if I recall correctly you badly want to receive a lot of minutes.

    Speaking of Frank, I’d have no problem with Thibs playing him over Bullock but I also have no problem with him not doing that. Thibs is trying to win as many games as possible (which I don’t like, but it’s a separate issue) and thinks even the diminished version of Bullock gives him a better chance to do that than Frank. If he’s wrong it’s definitely not by much, and neither guy is likely to be on the team next year (Frank might not even be in the NBA), so whatever.

  47. Silky Johnson, Fleet Admiral of the Tank Armada: One important thing to note is that Randle does way better on box score all-in-ones (BPM, WS/48) than /- metrics (RPM, RAPM, the PIPM clone at bball index, and Darko DPM). Randle’s BPM number, like EB said, is good for 23rd in the league; his WS/48 is #47 overall. Meanwhile, his RPM is #104 overall (his ORPM is negative, which I don’t actually believe), his RAPM rank is #106 overall (slight positive in O and D RAPM), his LEBRON (PIPM clone) rating is #103 overall, and his DARKO DPM (no idea how this is calculated) is #113 overall. So we have a big spread between his box score stats, which seem to indicate that he’s anywhere from a top 20-50 player, and his /- stats, which are universal in pegging him around the top 100. I tend to think the truth has to be somewhere in the middle, just because it seems to me that BPM is severely overrating his defensive contribution and the /- stats underrate his obvious offensive contributions, but I’m open to correction here. In any case, it’s not obvious that Julius is outperforming his contract, but I don’t think any of these numbers give us good reason to think he should or shouldn’t be re-signed. We need more convincing data here.

    So, my understanding of BPM is the number is supposed to predict longterm RAPM with the added bonus that it converges much quicker than RAPM (which takes 3+ years to converge). The advantage of BPM is the input is more consistent and not reliant on team performance. But because BPM was trained on RAPM datasets, you would expect RAPM to show a similar result to BPM if given enough time. Even leading the league, Randle’s 800+ minutes aren’t enough for RAPM to separate Randle from his mediocre team and, likely more difficult for RAPM is his large MP means few minutes to evaluate the team without him.

  48. Most normal coaches given the place of the organization would see if maybe that was signaling real improvement and could be built on.

    Any coach that makes any decision whatsoever on the basis of 28 minutes should be fired on the spot

  49. thenoblefacehumper: I don’t understand how this matters at all in the context of a debate about whether or not he’s a “merc.” If the Knicks want to keep for an additional year, they can (and they almost certainly will). Mitch is also in the second-to-last year of his deal, is he a merc? I mean Randle is a much more realistic part of the future than Frank Ntilikina, who if I recall correctly you badly want to receive a lot of minutes.

    Speaking of Frank, I’d have no problem with Thibs playing him over Bullock but I also have no problem with him not doing that. Thibs is trying to win as many games as possible (which I don’t like, but it’s a separate issue) and thinks even the diminished version of Bullock gives him a better chance to do that than Frank. If he’s wrong it’s definitely not by much, and neither guy is likely to be on the team next year (Frank might not even be in the NBA), so whatever.

    This is a reasonable way to frame it. Some flexibility in the rotation would be nice, but ultimately this team will be the ninth or tenth seed in the East regardless of who’s coming off the bench. I would like to see Frank (and Knox, I guess) play just to see if there’s any potential for upside beyond what we’ve seen, but most likely that will not be the case.

  50. I just find it utterly absurd what I see written about Obi and the 12 games he’s played at 12MPG… The players that get debated on these forums who have 3, 4, 8 years in the league and they get talked about ad nauseum yet, Obi Toppin is written off in 12 games… Its frustrating… and yes, I still want Frank to see success just as much as anyone else… just let the guy play…

  51. I just find it utterly absurd what I see written about Obi and the 12 games he’s played at 12MPG… The players that get debated on these forums who have 3, 4, 8 years in the league and they get talked about ad nauseum yet, Obi Toppin is written off in 12 games…

    We drafted Frank Ntilikina and Kevin Knox in the lottery recently so we can be excused for running a little low on patience.

    In all seriousness, I’m not “writing off” Obi in any sense that matters. I’d still play him as much as possible (in fact more than Thibs is playing him if it were up to me), do everything possible to develop his game, etc. However early returns do matter to some extent, and his are, well, no need to go into graphic detail I guess…

  52. Bullock seems to be the Lance Thomas of this iteration of the Knicks. On defense, he always seems to be giving max effort, and iirc someone cited data that suggests he is an effective defender. I guess Thibs sees him as a glue guy, ergo his current stature. As he has no future with this team, the only rationale for playing him over Frank is this amorphous glue guy value.

  53. No one is giving up on Toppin but I don’t think anyone can be faulted for being frustrated over his play or angry about his selection, especially after a night where Tyrese put up 21 points on 15 shots and a plus 13.

    Randle is basically playing the way we expected when we acquired him, with a little more passing. When that deal was signed there was some grumbling but on some level I think everyone agreed that he was young enough and had been productive enough and was close enough to a reasonable use of cap space that it was fine, especially given the opt out. We weren’t going anywhere.

    I applaud everything he is doing this year. Love his effort and love his play. That said, he’s just not a guy you want to give a max contract too. He’s not a centerpiece. He’s not a guy who will attract other good players. He isn’t a guy who pairs well with lots of different player types.

    There simply isn’t a path to a relevance with him as your best player.

    As for Frank, I’d rather watch him play than Bullock but I don’t think he’d be better.

  54. we basically have the slightly inferior version of domantas sabonis… so there is a model for a team to succeed if he’s one of your best offensive players… it’s not championship level but it will make playoff runs depending on how good your other players are…

    the problem is we don’t have another good offensive player… but that’s the challenge…. i said this when we signed him… randle isn’t one of the league’s superduper stars.. but you shouldn’t let perfect get in the way of good and randle… this version of randle is a good player…

    if you can do BETTER… then we should absolutely explore that… but i have a tough time finding a 26 yo borderline allstar that is readily available to put on our roster next year…. if we continually roll over players like this when exactly do you stop?

  55. the thing is – we need to find another player or two with a similar career arc to randle (different position and all)…

    both randle and elf were good opportunities to take a couple of years ago, just didn’t work out last year becasue of LOLknicks…

    this year elf hasn’t shown any kind of positive consistency…but, based on their play and where they were in their careers – it was a good gamble…

    maybe somewhere below 28 million a year or so – this version of julius is most definitely a keeper…as a team we just got to figure out a way to be less dependent on him for everything…

    plus, i like julius’ personality and his “bully ball” type play…

  56. No one is giving up on Toppin

    Eh, not no one. I’m giving up on Obi Toppin.

    I’m not going to tell anyone that they should give up on Obi Toppin. Y’all take your time. But I’m thin-slicing this bitch.

  57. Yeah I don’t think Randle qualifies as a merc at all because of his age, the fact that we can bring him back next year if we want and the fact that there is even a debate at all about keeping him beyond that or not.

    A merc is a one year signing.

    I personally would extend Randle if he keeps this up after this season. I get why people don’t want to do that and I wouldn’t super max him or anything. But if you can get him for another 3 or 4 years at a similar price we have him at now (and I think this is realistic) then I think its a good call. I mean, what top ceiling are people afraid we won’t reach with Randle as one of our best players? The NBA Finals?

    Lets get to 50 wins first before we worry about that. And with our draft picks coming up, we’re going to be able to add more cheap talent over the next few years…talent that can get better. Also, um Mitch and RJ and Quickley can get better too.

    The only thing is it presents a real problem with Toppin. So I get not wanting to keep Randle too. But I’d rather bite the bullet and just trade Obi (his value would still be high I imagine) if we had to do that.

    I guess I’d much rather look to improve our problem areas (Elf, Bullock) than get rid of the first legit all-star caliber player we’ve had since Melo/Chandler. Randle has stepped up and you know, he could still get a little better from here too. Especially if surrounded by better shooters. Let’s let him and RJ and Mitch (and Quickley) continue to build experience together. That is a very important part of building a good team. Have a core that gets reps together.

  58. I really like everything Julius Randle’s done this year but I think the best thing we can do is cash in on him after the season. I’m not talking about moving him for picks. I think he can be the centerpiece of a trade for the next disgruntled superstar. Like the Al Jefferson of the Kevin Garnett trade.

  59. Look, I don’t think Randle at 15 million is a bad deal. I think he’d be a dangerous guy to give a max to and thus hard to call a long term building block. I don’t think his defense is good and you have to be absolutely outstanding on offense as a power forward to deserve a max if that is the case.

    I think the Sabonis comp is a good one but he’s a little younger, a little bigger, and a little better. But he has some of the same issues. I wouldn’t be crazy about maxing him either unless you are the Pacers and can’t attract top talent anyway, making it a no brainer.

    I just think there has been some strange strawmanning lately. Saying Randle is playing very well and won’t be worth his next contract is a perfectly rational position.

  60. Frank’s career high TS% is lower than Bullock’s current TS%. Frank’s career high 3p% is .321, Bullock is currently at .342. Frank is almost certainly gone after this year, just like Bullock. I just don’t see any reason to play Frank over anyone anymore.

    I think the reasons to play Bullock are he’s a good shooter and a vet and if he plays well, an average wing who can shoot can be traded. But he’s not shooting well and he’s playing quite badly overall, so there’s no good reason for us to be playing Bullock. Since Bullock is useless, we should try something else. Frank is young enough that he can improve. Worst case scenario he’s even worse than Bullock, but it doesn’t matter because this team isn’t going anywhere this season and we’re talking one or two losses if Frank really sucks and then you give someone else a try.

  61. Early Bird: Frank’s career high TS% is lower than Bullock’s current TS%. Frank’s career high 3p% is .321, Bullock is currently at .342. Frank is almost certainly gone after this year, just like Bullock. I just don’t see any reason to play Frank over anyone anymore.

    Bullocks TS% this year is .496.

    Frank was .497 last year and he got off to a good start this year.

    Bullocks 3p% is .342 this year vs. .321 last year for Frank and Frank is 5 for 9 this year.

    Is there really that much of a difference when one is 22 and the other is 29 and has had a serious injury and may be washed up. Frank had a long offseason to work on his game. The hope was that he made further progress. If the knee is an issue and he’s looking bad in practice, that’s one thing, but I’d argue we have a good reason to take a look at Frank and no reason at all to play Bullock when he’s not contributing much more than Frank last year to begin with and is probably washed up and gone after this year anyway.

  62. “I really like everything Julius Randle’s done this year but I think the best thing we can do is cash in on him after the season. I’m not talking about moving him for picks. I think he can be the centerpiece of a trade for the next disgruntled superstar. Like the Al Jefferson of the Kevin Garnett trade.”

    My sentiments exactly.

  63. if you’re moving Randle to get a true star (I don’t know who that is, but let’s say it’s Bradley Beal) then that’s fine I guess. But moving him just to move him, to get off salary, to get some late first round picks, and/or to get Obi “can’t post up Satoransky” Toppin minutes — that doesn’t make any sense at all.

    what is the theoretical problem with Randle? The argument would go that he’s best suited to play center but doesn’t protect the rim. Not good enough a shooter to play with another true big that clogs the paint etc etc

    What we’ve seen so far this year (and granted we are still in small sample size theater) is that the offense does just fine — in fact, amazingly well — with Randle and a true center on the floor IF and I emphasize IF – you have shooting around them. Actually, more importantly, you have NOT Elfrid Payton around them. We’re up to 159 possessions now with Randle + Mitch and NOT Payton and the net rating is +23.6, the ORtg is 127.7, and the DRtg is 104. In 216 possessions with Randle + Noel and NOT Payton the net rating is +12 (ORtg 113 -62nd percentile) and the DRtg is 100.9 – 97th percentile).

    Sprinkle some Payton into the Randle + Mitch lineups –> -2.8 net rating, 103.9 ORtg, 106.7 DRtg
    Sprinkle some Payton into the Randle + Noel lineups –> -17.4 net rating, 108.8 ORtg, 126.2 DRtg

    It is just crazy how harmful Payton is. And we can’t even do the usual “well Quickley is playing against backups” since Quickley has been playing a ton of 4th quarter minutes.

    A big part of this is Randle is shooting a career high from 3 on a career high volume of 3s. Is that a real thing? I don’t know. He’s also shooting 7.2% better from the line than his previous career high (80.5% vs prev high which was last year at 73.3%).

    We don’t know if they figured out something mechanical with his shot (ie. more sustainable) or whether this is just some hot streak. But I would imagine the coaching staff and the FO knows.

  64. I just think there has been some strange strawmanning lately. Saying Randle is playing very well and won’t be worth his next contract is a perfectly rational position.

    Not when the season isn’t over, we have him for next year, and we don’t know what the contract is yet.

    People here (incorrectly I might add) came into the season very biased against Randle because he had a subpar year, but imo they weren’t giving due consideration to the situation he was in that caused the drop in efficiency, extra TOs, and bad plays around the basket. We have better coaching this year, he has learned. and he’s playing better, but people haven’t let go of their previous view that he’s bad and has to be traded, He’s not bad. He’s good and he doesn’t have to be traded until we see more and have a better idea of how much and how long a deal will be.

  65. at this point, i’m chalking up frank not being on the court for the knicks to fate…

    just about every chance he’s had (and there have been more than a few) has been derailed by either poor play or injury…

    if frank hadn’t busted up his knee, there’s a very good chance he’d be getting playing time right now…

    frank just hasn’t been able to stay healthy through an entire season for four years now…availability is an import ability in athletics…

  66. geo:
    the thing is – we need to find another player or two with a similar career arc to randle (different position and all)…

    BAH GAWD THAT’S BUDDY HIELD’S MUSIC

    Owen: I wouldn’t be crazy about maxing him either unless you are the Pacers and can’t attract top talent anyway, making it a no brainer.

    Uh, as if the Knicks have been able to attract top talent?

  67. Jeez, Thibs, just play Frank already. Is him playing vs. Bullock or Rivers really going to result in a bunch of losses?

    I’ve pretty much given up on Frank being a useful rotation player in the NBA, but you still have to play him and hope for the best, maybe he figures a few things out.

  68. I just think there has been some strange strawmanning lately. Saying Randle is playing very well and won’t be worth his next contract is a perfectly rational position.

    Not when this season isn’t over yet, we have him for next year, and we don’t know what the next contract will look like yet.

    Some people came into the season very biased against him because he had a subpar year. imo they weren’t giving due consideration to the situation he was in that caused the drop in efficiency, extra TOs, and bad plays around the basket. We have better coaching this year, he learned from last year. and he’s playing better. But people haven’t let go of their previous view that he’s bad and has to be traded, He’s not bad. He’s good and he doesn’t have to be traded until we see more and have a better idea of how much and how long a deal will be. Unless he can be part of deal for an even better player, we should just go with the flow and enjoy his play, enjoy winning some games, and fighting for a playoff spot. He’s 26 years old. He could actually get better.

  69. continued…

    Let’s say the FO is seeing Randle hitting 80 out of 100 3’s in practice consistently — I think I remember Steph Curry or someone saying you’ll shoot 50% of the percentage in games that you do in practice. Julius Randle who can shoot league average or better from 3 point range is a really really good player. He’s been pretty ok on defense this year, and if you have passable defense with 22/11/6 with 58% TS with the ability to shoot league average from 3 — I don’t think you give that guy away, and even if you do, you have to value him appropriately in trade.

  70. I’d be ecstatic if Randle could be cashed in for a disgruntled superstar and totally agree that that’s the right play. I’d start by offering him up as part of a package for Bradley Beal. With an asset like Randle, you have to sell high and hope some FO overlooks the obvious warts there.

  71. meanwhile how dumb is it to have an All-Star game this year.
    kudos to DeAaron Fox for calling it like it is

    (for those of you who missed it, he said: “I’m going to be brutally honest, I think it’s stupid. If we have to wear masks and do all this for a regular game, what’s the point of bringing the All-Star Game back?”)

  72. As to the next contract, we pretty much know what it’s going to look like. He’s going to ask for the max. He might even bluster about wanting the Knicks to pay him the $4M next year, rip things up, and give him the max. (Assuming that’s allowed; I’m not 100% sure.) If he plays for the third year price on his current contract, he’ll want a similar role to this year so he can try to get max money in the summer of 2022. If his role is reduced in a way that will hurt his market value in that summer, he’ll likely complain.

    I think his max is $31. He might actually get it. If he doesn’t, it’s not going to be much south of that. It almost never is with free agents and we go through the same thing every summer. Throwing out the possible scenario of him wanting a new contract THIS summer, you’re looking at something like 5/145 if he signs with the Knicks or is signed-and-traded, or 4/120 if he signs outright. He absolutely positively isn’t signing a 4 or 5 year deal for something like 21 or 22 a year. He makes that now. That’s pure fantasy. Hayward’s contract adjusted for inflation is a solid floor, and Julius will probably exceed that by quite a bit. A max is by no means out of the question.

    So we wind up where we always do when we get musing about this. You don’t want him in the only role that could justify a max; if you put him in the right role, he’s not worth anything like a max. That ain’t changing.

  73. E, all merc’d out:
    I’d be ecstatic if Randle could be cashed in for a disgruntled superstar and totally agree that that’s the right play.I’d start by offering him up as part of a package for Bradley Beal.With an asset like Randle, you have to sell high and hope some FO overlooks the obvious warts there.

    Given the trades for Holliday and Harden the past few months, what’s a package that the Knicks could offer for Beal that a) the Wizards would actually be interested in b) would put us on a > 35-win trajectory for the next half-decade?

  74. Frank: if you’re moving Randle to get a true star (I don’t know who that is, but let’s say it’s Bradley Beal)

    I definitely wouldn’t do it for Bradley Beal. I might be guilty of endowment bias, but I think I’d rather have Randle than Beal right now.

    I’m talking about when the next James Harden, Anthony Davis, Paul George level guy gets fed up and calls his shot. Like, let’s say Dame Lillard starts jonesing for MSG. Put Randle in the middle of that deal and throw an offer sheet at John Collins to replace him.

  75. … double-checked, Hayward got 4/128 last FA season. Julius isn’t putting his name on the dotted line for less than that.

  76. I don’t get the point in continually rehashing the position that Randle is representative of a doomsday scenario. I mean, it’s one signing that Mills should be given credit for…and the step-in-shit lucky Morris signing. It’s downright stupid to suggest that Randle playing as well as he is represents a bad thing. There are good choices and bad choices that can be made with regard to his future with the team.
    -There is near-unanimity on KB that signinng him to a max deal or anything close would be a bad move. But why worry about that when the one thing the current regime seems to understand well is cap management and asset valuation?
    -Most, if not all of us would prefer that he be moved either for excellent draft assets or a better player.
    -The position that Randle would not accept being less than the sole #1 option he is right now is preposterous.

    There are lots of reasons to be concerned about Thibs and his utilization of the roster and his preferences of player types. There are also reasons to question the FO’s drafting process, especially in the lottery. What I’m interested in finding out is whether Rose learns from his mistakes as a rookie POBO or whether he keeps repeating them. But Randle??!! that’s the best kind of problem to have.

  77. Strat, cmon man.

    There is no goldilocks scenario here where we end up signing Randle for just the right amount of money.

    He’s a one way player at power forward who is in line for an All Star spot. That’s a historically terrible recipe for a contract which generates any kind of surplus.

    Karl Malone made it work. Charles Barkley did too. Randle isn’t close that kind of player though.

    I also think Randle is the kind of guy who will have an early and rapid decline. But that’s just a hunch.

    I also don’t agree he would fit neatly into the role of #2 creator. Again, just a hunch, but I think the fact that he needs the ball and the focus of the offense on him so much is a mild negative.

    It’s not a problem, as Z-Man says. But it makes him someone I can’t get too worked up about.

  78. What would people be willing to trade for beal? Barrett, Toppin, Knox & 4 first rounders(2 dallas picks & 2 of our picks)? Would Washington do that trade and is Quickley, Beal, Randle & Mitch anything?

  79. One comparable player in terms of “very good player who is a) not max-worthy but will probably get overpaid and b) not a guy you want to build a team around is Demar DeRozan. In other words, Randle on a Gordon Hayward deal is still movable in a trade for a disgruntled better player. Obviously the bigger the contract, the harder it is to move him, but he’s not an albatross.

    Owen: I also think Randle is the kind of guy who will have an early and rapid decline. But that’s just a hunch.

    Really? The guy seems pretty indestructible to me…

  80. I’m not against playing Frank over Bullock, I just don’t care about Frank’s development anymore. He has exactly this year to convince us to match a RFA contract and I don’t think Knicks mgmt care to develop him another 3 years. Bullock is a better player now.

    Bullock is a vet we might be able to trade at the deadline. His 3pt shooting is down, but it’s not clear if this is the new normal or just some bad luck. It takes 750+ attempts to get a good idea of 3pt shooting ability, Bullock is still well short of that for the Knicks, including last year. If it creeps back up to .380, you can grab a pick for him even if it’s just a 2nd.

    If anything, give Frank minutes over Payton or Rivers.

  81. i don’t understand how ppl think randle is getting anything close to max…. randle got 23mm playing the type of ball he currently is…. sabonis got 4yr / 77m and vucevic got 4/100…

    there’s really no precedent in the current market to pay randle what ppl are fearing… the market has considerably cooled on offensive only frontcourt players…. the lone exception is blake griffin but he was playing considerably better than randle was when he got that contract… and if randle plays better than he currently he probably would be worth it at that point…

    but we are a long way from there….

  82. Yeah Z-Man, it’s just a hunch. But I love rugged big men and have followed a lot of them very avidly over the years, My observation is that most of them don’t age well.

    I feel the same way about small guards who get to the line a lot. Making a living in the paint and around the rim is really difficult over the long term.

    Obviously if Randle is a guy who can shoot 40% from three and 80% from the line he is in a different bucket. Maybe he is.

  83. airkent:
    What would people be willing to trade for beal? Barrett, Toppin, Knox & 4 first rounders(2 dallas picks & 2 of our picks)? Would Washington do that trade and is Quickley, Beal, Randle & Mitch anything?

    If you have to ask…

  84. airkent:
    What would people be willing to trade for beal? Barrett, Toppin, Knox & 4 first rounders(2 dallas picks & 2 of our picks)? Would Washington do that trade and is Quickley, Beal, Randle & Mitch anything?

    That’s way too much.

    There’s really no point in us trading for Beal. His optimal role is the third guy in a big 3.

  85. Hubert: Dude, that’s way too much.

    There’s really no point in us trading for Beal. His optimal role is the third guy in a big 3.

    It’s probably the type of return he’ll get though from whoever trades for him. Look at what Holliday and Harden got

  86. djphan:
    i don’t understand how ppl think randle is getting anything close to max…. randle got 23mm playing the type of ball he currently is…. sabonis got 4yr / 77m and vucevic got 4/100…

    there’s really no precedent in the current market to pay randle what ppl are fearing… the market has considerably cooled on offensive only frontcourt players…. the lone exception is blake griffin but he was playing considerably better than randle was when he got that contract… and if randle plays better than he currently he probably would be worth it at that point…

    but we are a long way from there….

    Gordon Hayward got 4/128 like two months ago. There’s no cooling of any kind whatsoever.

  87. The closest comp we’ve seen to 26 year old Randle was 26 year old David Lee.

    Not only were they both left-handed, PF/C types with questionable defensive abilities that had developed into quasi “point-forwards” that were all star candidates from bad teams, but they had/have identical .580 TS percentages.

    (Sabonis, on the other hand, is just better than Randle in every way. Also, Randle has never played on a team that has even come close to .500 whereas Sabonis, who has always played on winning teams. Putting up good numbers for a team with no other options has always proved easier than winning basketball games).

  88. airkent:
    What would people be willing to trade for beal? Barrett, Toppin, Knox & 4 first rounders(2 dallas picks & 2 of our picks)? Would Washington do that trade and is Quickley, Beal, Randle & Mitch anything?

    Nope, way too much for who we are right now.

  89. I mean 4 picks + RJ + Toppin is effectively 6 first round picks. Harden went for 4 and our picks will be better than Brooklyn’s. Is Beal better than Harden? I don’t think so.

    If we had 1 true superstar, say Kawhi Leonard, then it might make sense. But I’d still take out 2 of the picks, 3 if RJ keeps up his recent play (and only because we’d need to move his salary).

  90. I’d offer Washington Randle and the lower of the two Knicks 1s this year (which at least right now would be a lottery pick) and see what they say. They’ll probably say no at which point I’d throw in a 2022 swap. If Beal is traded, he’ll bring more than that. For the Knicks to get him, you’re probably talking Randle, a 2021 one and a 2023 one.

    That’s assuming they have any interest in Randle at all, which they might not. If they did, Randle, the lowest of the 2021s and the Dallas 2023 might get it done but even that might be light. If they’d take that package, I’d do it.

  91. https://streamable.com/0s4lux

    It still hurts.

    What would people be willing to trade for beal? Barrett, Toppin, Knox & 4 first rounders(2 dallas picks & 2 of our picks)? Would Washington do that trade and is Quickley, Beal, Randle & Mitch anything?

    That would be insane for the Knicks to do. Four first-rounders plus their best prospect for one guaranteed year of Beal, after which he will almost certainly ask for a ten-year-vet supermax (it’ll be a travesty if he’s left off the All-NBA teams this year)? Even if he demands an extension as a condition of the trade, there’s no way in hell I’m trading four firsts and Barrett for the privilege of paying Beal $250M+ to anchor a perennial 43-win team.

  92. And if you think this year is bad, just wait until Thibs gets his hands on Derrick Rose and puts him in the Elf role with IQ still on probation next year.

  93. Early Bird:
    I mean 4 picks + RJ + Toppin is effectively 6 first round picks. Harden went for 4 and our picks will be better than Brooklyn’s. Is Beal better than Harden? I don’t think so.

    If we had 1 true superstar, say Kawhi Leonard, then it might make sense. But I’d still take out 2 of the picks, 3 if RJ keeps up his recent play (and only because we’d need to move his salary).

    The Nets traded four first-round picks, four swaps, Caris LeVert, and Jarrett Allen. I’m not trying to be pedantic but it underlines how steep a Beal trade would be, and how it doesn’t make any sense for us given the position we’re in. I think we all agree it’s not worth it anyway, but it shows how far away we are from even considering something like that.

  94. Funny you bring up David Lee.

    Golden state traded for him after his last good year with us and he eventually got a ring in GS. Obviously he wasn’t the reason why but I feel like them getting Lee was a first step in them becoming a respectable team cause before that GS was garbage.

    And David Lee didn’t hurt GS from eventually getting a ring either because they draft Klay and Steph and Draymond.

    So who’s to say Randle couldn’t also be that guy for us? The bridge between the horrible Knicks and the championship Knicks. Plays a key role in some teams that are good but not great before eventually moving on. I think there is something to be said for Randle being here at least next season while Mitch, RJ, Quickley and our 2 first round picks (god I love saying that) get some experience and improve.

    Also, I think Randle is playing better than Lee. A comparison of their stats:

    Lee in 2009-2010 with The Knicks :
    20.2 ppg, 11.7 rebounds, 3.6 assists, 37.3 mpg, 1 steal, 0.5 blocks, .503 efg, took zero 3 pointers

    Randle so far this season with The Knicks
    22.6 points, 10.9 rebounds, 6 assists, 36.7 mpg, 0.8 steals, 0.2 blocks, .522 efg, .396 3 point percentage on 4 attempts per game.

    2 more points per game, way more assists (more turnovers too though). Higher shooting percentage and taking and making 3’s (although to be fair, that was really before PF’s took 3’s).

    the numbers are similar but I think Randle is better.

  95. our first rd picks are worth more than the bucks or nets since we’re probably not making deep playoff runs even with beal under the most generous of assumptions….

    the sixers would have to package 4 1sts…. so would denver…. the knicks don’t need to….

  96. swiftandabundant:
    Funny you bring up David Lee.

    Golden state traded for him after his last good year with us and he eventually got a ring in GS. Obviously he wasn’t the reason why but I feel like them getting Lee was a first step in them becoming a respectable team cause before that GS was garbage.

    And David Lee didn’t hurt GS from eventually getting a ring either because they draft Klay and Steph and Draymond.

    So who’s to say Randle couldn’t also be that guy for us? The bridge between the horrible Knicks and the championship Knicks. Plays a key role in some teams that are good but not great before eventually moving on. I think there is something to be said for Randle being here at least next season while Mitch, RJ, Quickley and our 2 first round picks (god I love saying that) get some experience and improve.

    Also, I think Randle is playing better than Lee. A comparison of their stats:

    Lee in 2009-2010 with The Knicks :
    20.2 ppg, 11.7 rebounds, 3.6 assists, 37.3 mpg, 1 steal, 0.5 blocks, .503 efg, took zero 3 pointers

    Randle so far this season with The Knicks
    22.6 points, 10.9 rebounds, 6 assists, 36.7 mpg, 0.8 steals, 0.2 blocks, .522 efg, .396 3 point percentage on 4 attempts per game.

    2 more points per game, way more assists (more turnovers too though). Higher shooting percentage and takingand making 3’s (although to be fair, that was really before PF’s took 3’s).

    the numbers are similar but I think Randle is better.

    I’ll always remember, I think it was Game 3 or 4 of the 2015 finals, when the GS offense was absolutely stuck, Curry wasn’t able to do anything, and Kerr went to a Curry-Lee PNR in the second half to reignite the offense and eventually win the game. That was an awesome moment and Lee deserved the ring just for that.

  97. Owen: Yeah Z-Man, it’s just a hunch. But I love rugged big men and have followed a lot of them very avidly over the years, My observation is that most of them don’t age well.

    I mean he’s 26. There’s not aging well and there’s breaking down before age 31. He’s not LeBron, but the guy is a brick shithouse who keeps himself in top shape. He doesn’t have an above-the-rim game…not Zach Randolph but not far from it. If anything, he seems like his body and game are built to last. Millsap is another good comp.

  98. Igno-Bot 3000: I’ll always remember, I think it was Game 3 or 4 of the 2015 finals, when the GS offense was absolutely stuck, Curry wasn’t able to do anything, and Kerr went to a Curry-Lee PNR in the second half to reignite the offense and eventually win the game. That was an awesome moment and Lee deserved the ring just for that.

    The difference was that Lee was on a reasonable deal…$13m X 4 IIRC…and was signed as a complementary player, not a #1 or #2 guy.

  99. and the point with sabonis is that yes… he’s better.. he was younger and more efficient when he got his contract and he was forced to settle on 4/77…. you’re very likely going to see randle settling for around low to mid 20mm in all likelihood…

    and yes sabonis has been on better teams… but he’s a carbon copy of what randle gives you… so it is possible to build a pretty decent team around someone like randle… we have most of thse pieces too that we are developing with plenty of bullets in the draft to figure it out too…. but i find it a tough pill to swallow to hinge hopes on a deal for damian lillard or james harden with randle as the centerpiece…. like if that’s available we should go for it but other than that what exactly is considered a better opportunity?

  100. Z-man: The difference was that Lee was on a reasonable deal…$13m X 4 IIRC…and was signed as a complementary player, not a #1 or #2 guy.

    Yeah I wasn’t saying that in reference to the contract or Randle, just thought it was a cool moment forgotten in the annals of history

  101. What would people be willing to trade for beal? Barrett, Toppin, Knox & 4 first rounders(2 dallas picks & 2 of our picks)? Would Washington do that trade and

    Yeah, that’s complete nonsense, you don’t trade RJ at this point for a 2nd level star scoring in bunches for a 5:13 team. Plus 4 firsts???

    is Quickley, Beal, Randle & Mitch anything?

    No.

  102. Igno-Bot 3000: The Nets traded four first-round picks, four swaps, Caris LeVert, and Jarrett Allen. I’m not trying to be pedantic but it underlines how steep a Beal trade would be, and how it doesn’t make any sense for us given the position we’re in. I think we all agree it’s not worth it anyway, but it shows how far away we are from even considering something like that.

    Honestly, I don’t think that’s a better value than the proposed Beal deal. At least 1 Knicks & 1 Dallas pick are significantly better than the Nets 2022 pick + Milwaukee’s 2022 pick (which might as well be 2nds), Knicks & Dallas look like lottery picks this year. The value of distant future picks gets murkier, but let’s say they’re even.

    Swaps aren’t too valuable, especially for the Nets picks who will be better than Houston at least this year and probably 2023. Besides, you’re only getting the difference in pick if it conveys at all.

    Allen got traded for one of the 1sts, so he’s getting counted twice.

    RJ today isn’t much worse than Levert who also struggles to score efficiently and projects to be much better longterm.

    Obi is still basically a 1st round pick that we know little about. I’d evaluate him to be worth more than 1 swap, possibly both.

    And of course I expect even a fat, unmotivated Harden to have a better year than Beal.

  103. Early Bird: Honestly, I don’t think that’s a better value than the proposed Beal deal. At least 1 Knicks & 1 Dallas pick are significantly better than the Nets 2022 pick + Milwaukee’s 2022 pick (which might as well be 2nds), Knicks & Dallas look like lottery picks this year. The value of distant future picks gets murkier, but let’s say they’re even.

    Swaps aren’t too valuable, especially for the Nets picks who will be better than Houston at least this year and probably 2023. Besides, you’re only getting the difference in pick if it conveys at all.

    Allen got traded for one of the 1sts, so he’s getting counted twice.

    RJ today isn’t much worse than Levert who also struggles to score efficiently and projects to be much better longterm.

    Obi is still basically a 1st round pick that we know little about. I’d evaluate him to be worth more than 1 swap, possibly both.

    And of course I expect even a fat, unmotivated Harden to have a better year than Beal.

    Yeah I’m just trying to set the table on what the starting price might look like. Take out a pick or swap or two and it’s still steep. FWIW those Nets picks + swaps after 2024 or so could look a lot better

  104. What is a $13 million dollar per year contract in 2011 comparable to today? That was 10 years ago. NBA contracts in general have gone up for people in the Randle/Lee range, right?

    I think Randle is currently on a pretty good contract salary wise. And I don’t think its unreasonable to sign him to similar money per years going forward. Maybe he’ll demand more but if its 4 years guaranteed at age 27 at 20 millionish per year, is he going to get much better on the open market?

    And I don’t think Randle, barring a big injury (which is possible for anyone) is going to break down in his late 20’s. He’s not Amare rolling into his late 20’s and early 30’s with multiple knee injuries. He did break his leg his rookie year but it wasn’t knee/ankle related and since then he’s been a bull. Dude is in REALLY good shape and his game isn’t high flying.

    Again, I see the argument for eventually trading him for a pick. But I think considering what we know he brings to the table right now and his projected output for the next 5 years, there would be far worse thing we could do than resign him at a reasonable rate. I don’t think he’s getting 30 million a year anywhere.

    As someone wise once told me, there is always a hotter girl out there that you could theoretically be with. Question is, will she go out with you? Why not settle down with Randle and see what its like to build a home and raise some kids (Quickley, RJ, Mitch and our picks) with him. We may not build a mansion but we can get a nice house in a decent neighborhood.

  105. STAT signed for 5/$100 million and Lee signed for 6/$80 million.

    So it was definitely not a max deal for Lee, but it was still pricey for the era. Remember, the Warriors were really bailed out by Curry signing that below market extension. Dude was winning back to back MVPs making, like, $11 million a year.

  106. As for Beal, every team in the NBA wants him, he’s going to cost a ton. It seems unlikely that he’d been worth that to the Knicks, but boy, he’d be the best Knick in a really long time.

  107. Some of the packages suggested for Beal made my spine chill…

    Haven’t we learn anything from the Carmelo’s trade?

    Milwaukee overpaid to keep Giannis, Clippers overpaid because Leonard wouldn’t came without PG-13, Brooklyn overpaid for the new Big-3.
    Their overpayings had focus, they put all the chips in to win immediately.

    What are we overpaying for? To be a Washington Wizards reboot with Beal at the supermax?

    We’re not in the position to trade for Beal now, let alone to overpay for him.

    Keep the path straight, develop the youngsters, pick well in the draft (as of now 4 of the first 45 picks), next year try for a playoff season on the back of the young guns, stop selling the future for an ephemeral “now”…

  108. Igno-Bot 3000: Yeah I’m just trying to set the table on what the starting price might look like. Take out a pick or swap or two and it’s still steep. FWIW those Nets picks swaps after 2024 or so could look a lot better

    Yes, but how much more is Harden worth than Beal? Harden is a perennial MVP candidate, Beal is more of a 2nd or 3rd star. How many 1sts would you have to add to a Beal for Harden trade?

    And a locked-in mid-1st plus a potential Mavs lotto pick is pretty valuable when the Nets could possibly retool by the time those later picks convey.

    Same goes for a young, talented-looking RJ (compared to picks). Right now he’s probably worth more than a 1st. I doubt the Knicks trade him for two 1sts and certainly not the Nets & Mil 2022 picks.

    I also don’t think Levert had much value for the Nets. He’s completely expendable for the Nets in a lineup with Harden, Irving, & Durant. His primary skill is passing, but you’re not willingly putting the ball in his hands at any point in a 48 minute game. The Nets also have Joe Harris whose shooting fits that lineup better.

  109. Randle, Beal, IQ, Mitch might not be that much, but I’m happy to go to war the next few years with RJ, Beal, IQ, Mitch provided I can hold on to at least a 1 every year.

    As to the other alternatives, yeah, they’re sensible but they have no real world application. There’s no path by which they’re going to hang onto the draft picks, develop the youngsters, and wait for next year to drive for the playoffs. No, this is a team that is playing Elfrid Payton, Reggie Bullock, Austin Rivers, and Alec Burks and giving an outsized role to Julius Randle in a drive to maximize current wins and maybe sneak into the playoffs. So the real choice is either … that … or it’s making a trade for someone like a Bradley Beal.

    The idea that Julius Randle is going to take a pay cut in his next contract or sign for something like 22 or 23 also has no real world application. That is not going to happen. No decision or action can sensibly be premised on it.

  110. Also, throwback to last thread. I’m jealous of everyone who lives a cooler life than me, which apparently is a lot of you.

  111. The thing about Beal is that he has a skillset that’s really easy to project on to a great team. He’s a really good both on and off ball player so it’s easy to imagine how he fits in with your best groups (where you presumably have at least one player better than him in order to be a title contender) and easy to imagine him running your second unit while your best player rests. Plus he doesn’t come with a lot of the secondary concerns (culture, playstyle, age, history of disappointing playoff performances) that dog Harden. He’s obviously not as good of a player in a vacuum but I think a lot of teams that didn’t really go for Harden might go for Beal. Can we outbid those teams? Maybe. Should we? Definitely not, given that most teams in the league are in much better positions on the win curve to chase veteran star players than us. And that’s setting aside the issue that neither he nor the team seems to be motivated at all to get him out of there.

  112. At the end of the day, all talk of Randle being a merc or centerpiece or whatever is unnecessarily premature at the moment. We don’t have to make a decision on the matter until next season’s trade deadline at the earliest. By then we should have a better idea of how close we are to success, how sustainable Randle’s current level play is, how Randle fits with our 2021 draft haul, the level of interest in Randle around the league, and what non-Randle opportunities might be available to us.

    Until then, Randle playing well serves our interests regardless of your long-term view. I’m in the camp that’s skeptical of his role as a prominent player on a contender, but am open to having my mind changed about that (hitting 40% of his threes over a full season would go a long way in that regard).

  113. Are people really still down on Randle’s defense? I thought he was outstanding last night. He learned from Monday’s game and completely shut off Markanen’s 3pt looks and several times he was switched off on Levine and he played excellent defense on him. He’s made several big plays on defense down the stretch of alot of the wins too. I don’t know what the metrics say but I’ve been very surprised and happy with Randle’s defense this season.

  114. I think Randle is solidly better than Lee in his last year here. Lee basically stopped playing defense entirely that year. He barely challenged anything- he’d turn his back on wide open shooters to get in better rebounding position. Other than occasionally not rotating out to the three point line Randle’s effort has been good. He still blows rotations more than you’d like but he’s not coasting on that end the way Lee did. And he’s been better offensively. Randle’s 14th in the league in Vorp- that’s a solid all-star not a fringe one like Lee.

    I think the problem with Randle in terms of league-wide value is that prior to this year he played a lot of of small ball center where his lack of rim protection and shaky rotations gave back whatever he gave you on offense. This year he’s played the 4 almost exclusively, hasn’t been a train wreck defensively and spaced the floor with terrific shooting. If he’s still playing this way at the end of next year he’ll get Vuc money at least and someone offering the max wouldn’t be shocking. Of course, we’re not even at the 1/3 mark of the season so much can change.

  115. Early Bird: Yes, but how much more is Harden worth than Beal? Harden is a perennial MVP candidate, Beal is more of a 2nd or 3rd star. How many 1sts would you have to add to a Beal for Harden trade?

    And a locked-in mid-1st plus a potential Mavs lotto pick is pretty valuable when the Nets could possibly retool by the time those later picks convey.

    Same goes for a young, talented-looking RJ (compared to picks). Right now he’s probably worth more than a 1st. I doubt the Knicks trade him for two 1sts and certainly not the Nets & Mil 2022 picks.

    I also don’t think Levert had much value for the Nets. He’s completely expendable for the Nets in a lineup with Harden, Irving, & Durant. His primary skill is passing, but you’re not willingly putting the ball in his hands at any point in a 48 minute game. The Nets also have Joe Harris whose shooting fits that lineup better.

    I agree that RJ is worth more than a 1st ,and that Harden is worth more than Beal. But it’s still going to be steep, look at the trade packages proposed around the league for Beal: https://sportsnaut.com/5-most-realistic-bradley-beal-trade-packages/

    The original poster’s 4 1sts + RJ seems to fall somewhere close to these

  116. Igno-Bot 3000: I agree that RJ is worth more than a 1st ,and that Harden is worth more than Beal. But it’s still going to be steep, look at the trade packages proposed around the league for Beal: https://sportsnaut.com/5-most-realistic-bradley-beal-trade-packages/

    The original poster’s 4 1sts RJ seems to fall somewhere close to these

    At least one of the most realistic proposal is irrealistic, Dallas could not trade his 2022 and 2024 first rounders because you can’t trade first rounders in consecutive years and we have their 2021 unprotected (blocking 2022) and 2023 protected with two years rolling (blocking the 2024, 2025 and 2026).

    As Windhorst recently wrote 15 teams, half of the league, could not trade picks for years due to previous trades.

  117. If you buy that our current pace represents our true talent level, that means we’re a 35-36 win team. Unless we trade for Beal with zero current contributors (which would likely require giving up every pick we possibly can to have a competitive offer), we’re not in an appropriate place on the win curve to be having this kind of discussion. That’s where it begins and ends.

  118. You can’t cite win curve for anything meaningful when the team’s head coach gives less than zero fucks about the win curve. The team is not being run as we speak in terms of anything win curve.

    There’s little to nothing about any of what’s going on now that serves as a platform for real, organic growth. The next step up from this requires an entire philosophical and personnel reboot. My impatience is that I’d rather just see the normalization now, as opposed to wasting a whole bunch more time. I fervently hope the FO thinks the same way.

    Thibs can cobble together spare parts and jerry-rig them into something not dreadful maybe better than any other coach out there, but there’s way more to all this than that.

  119. At the end of the day, all talk of Randle being a merc or centerpiece or whatever is unnecessarily premature at the moment. We don’t have to make a decision on the matter until next season’s trade deadline at the earliest.

    fucking brilliant follow up performance today guys honestly no idea how you pulled it off unless you’re all coordinating on a secret discord channel or something. okay from the top now. then put your little hand in mine…

  120. E, all merc’d out:
    You can’t cite win curve for anything meaningful when the team’s head coach gives less than zero fucks about the win curve.The team is not being run as we speak in terms of anything win curve.

    There’s little to nothing about any of what’s going on nowthat serves as a platform for real, organic growth.The next step up from this requires an entire philosophical and personnel reboot.My impatience is that I’d rather just see the normalization now, as opposed to wasting a whole bunch more time. I fervently hope the FO thinks the same way.

    Thibs can cobble together spare parts and jerry-rig them into something not dreadful maybe better than any other coach out there, but there’s way more to all this than that.

    I’m ready to throw a chair a la the American Chopper meme

  121. haha I am loving this thread

    Also, throwback to last thread. I’m jealous of everyone who lives a cooler life than me, which apparently is a lot of you.

    If it makes you feel better, I barely remember what Lana del Rey looks like naked.

  122. howdy hubie…sorry to come out of left field with this (my mind doesn’t seem to ride along too well on specific tracks) – are their specific industry sectors or commodities that you focus?

    if so, what led you to specialize on those industries or companies?

    interests or just opportunity for profit?

  123. Julius Randle shooting 40% from three is a top ten player. At 26 years old, I’d consider him a cornerstone piece for our future.

    Also, Frank and Knox are still very young. I don’t think that we should totally throw them on the scrap heap quite yet.

  124. Also, throwback to last thread. I’m jealous of everyone who lives a cooler life than me, which apparently is a lot of you.

    well the good news for you early bird, is that you may get the opportunity to try again…at some point…

  125. NetsTown:
    Julius Randle shooting 40% from three is a top ten player. At 26 years old, I’d consider him a cornerstone piece for our future.

    Also, Frank and Knox are still very young. I don’t think that we should totally throw them on the scrap heap quite yet.

    A top-ten player…in our rotation?

  126. geo: well the good news for you early bird, is that you may get the opportunity to try again…at some point…

    I mean… I’ve had my bright spots, but they’re definitely a step down from getting Miss India’s phone number or playing in a band with Scarlett Johansson. Let alone Alan getting to interview movie stars each week.

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: If it makes you feel better, I barely remember what Lana del Rey looks like naked.

    And now Jowles is trolling me, or maybe he’s not. Little would surprise me about Jowles anymore.

  127. I have no problem throwing in my unrelenting negativity with E. People here are acting like we’re a good team trying to get over the hump and we’re not. We’re under .500 and have both the 10th worst MOV and Net Rating in the league. We’ve drafted and used our cap space so poorly that we have 4 players (5 if Burks starts playing well again) that you can honestly say have an overall positive effect on the court. And because of that, only those 5 players plus maybe Obi Toppin could be considered trade assets. We’ll be able to create cap space the next couple of seasons but there’s no one hitting free agency who’s a difference maker and Randle, Mitch, and RJ will all be hitting free agency in the next couple of years.

    We’re pretty much exactly where Charlotte and Detroit have been forever and unless we absolutely nail the next draft when we should have two decent-ish picks I don’t see a realistic way to escape that fate.

  128. Look, you all know I have no issues with negativity at all, we’re Knicks fans, it comes with the territory, and at the end of the day we’re not making relevant choices for this franchise anyway so we’re just bantering here and there.

    But you can see that this board has shifted opinions as a whole I would say, even the most jaded posters who are very quick to question everything the Knicks do, and I would include myself in this group, are seeing positive signs because things have changed. We have now went through two lotteries with the new system and it’s became increasingly clear that tanking is a different beast now, the Sixers method was forcefully removed from the list of possibilities. Also, there are actual reasons to be excited, Randle’s production is moving away from small sample size to consistently good, Barrett is having his best stretch of games as a pro, Quickley is exciting and definitely showing he belongs, etc.

    There’s still so much to dislike about the Knicks, the wasted lottery picks, the bad offense, the fear Thibs will overplay the best players and they will break down, Mitch not taking taking extra step, etc etc. But I feel just refusing to move away from a total pessimist position on this team is just either stubbornness or pride at this point.

    The Knicks did not hire Thibs for a rebuild the likes of which we have been preaching on this board, but it’s also clear that he’s not the same garbage we’ve had to endure with Hornacek, Fisher, Fizdale and company. Maybe we top off as the 9th seed and the wheels fall off, but comparing to what we’ve been through, watching this team has given me more enjoyment than I’ve had in years.

  129. #The truth is in the right questions#

    Is Randle playing greater than anyone expected so far this season?

    200%

    Is Randle a player i trust ?

    No

    Is Groundhog Day a Rom Com?

    My gf who LOVES rom coms fell asleep while watching it.
    “Hippies” friends of mine who hate rom coms love the movie.

  130. Quickley Randle Mitch ORtg 127

    Kyrie harden Durant ORtg 122

    Just going to leave that there.

    I just don’t understand. Even if you believe it’s a small sample thing, wouldn’t you want to see if I don’t know, the best ORTg ever might be real and play it more minutes?

  131. just to stick a pin in this whole groundhog day rom-com thing…

    it’s the early 90’s and you walk in to blockbuster in “downtown” lawton, oklahoma – i’m guessing you’re going to find the Groundhog Day VHS tape slotted somewhere around: arthur, when harry met sally and pretty woman

    i’m just saying…

  132. 2-3 weeks ago a greek Olympic Gold Medalist in sailing (Sofia Bekatorou) complained that she was raped by a member of the sailing federation 20+ years ago (a father figure for her back then as she described him).
    She found the strength to talk about it now and Greek society was firstly shocked but after the initial shock more women from sports, show business, journalism, politics are starting to talk about their sexual harassments and other toxic behaviours concerning abuse of authority.
    In the last few days all eyes are on the theatrical world where Very famous actors and directors are being charged by many women actresses for sexual harassment, masturbation in front of them, sexual proposals to get a job and other shit like these…

    Unfortunately Cool ain’t always cool on the inside…

  133. #it’s the early 90’s and you walk in to blockbuster in “downtown” lawton, oklahoma – i’m guessing you’re going to find the Groundhog Day VHS tape slotted somewhere around: arthur, when harry met sally and pretty woman…#

    Groundhog Day is as rom com as Disney’s Fantasia is animation.
    2 Classic incognito Psychedelic Potheads Choices.

  134. Exactly what Bruno said. Its been years since Ive actually looked forward to watching every Knicks game. The last few years I had to look at the NBA schedule to see what games are worth watching, now if there is a Knicks game that day I dont care what other games are on. I know Im in the minority in that I want this team to win as many games as they can and try to sneak into the playoffs, I totally understand that and admit its probably foolish thinking on my part.

    But shit its nice to be rooting for at least a decent team again and going into every game not assuming we are going to get blown out and embarrassed most nights. As an actual just basketball fan this team despite all its massive flaws is fun to root for with alot of likeable players. Yes even Payton, he may have his horrible games but like the rest of his teammates he seems like a good dude and always plays with alot of effort.

  135. Bruno Almeida: Maybe we top off as the 9th seed and the wheels fall off, but comparing to what we’ve been through, watching this team has given me more enjoyment than I’ve had in years.

    I’m with you Bruno, it’s exactly this.

  136. We had moments of enjoyable basketball in the last couple of years but the wheels always do fall off. I don’t expect anything different this year.

    To Brian’s first post of the thread, I really am wondering about Halliburton’s defense. That’s the area where doubts seem to be crystallizing. I don’t know how Fox fares in that dept either.

    Not sure what the contract conversation is on Fox but he seems to get a lot of press and his highlights are fun. I get a Schroder vibe watching him though and a definite sense the ROI on him might be low.

  137. As for the topic of the day – Good Julius – i’ll say to you that i wanted to trade him bad this summer, but now i don’t. He’s really a different player, not only is he playing at an all star level, there was a game in which he scored something like 4 pts in a half (in 2 or 3 FGA) because his teammates were scoring with efficiency, and so he kept on giving the ball and piling assists. He’s been very unselfish this year, and he cares about the team, he gets mad when we lose. I like him now and for me he’s part of our core – RJ, Randle, Mitch and Quickley.
    Of course, if you need to trade him for a superstar, well if that time comes noone is untouchable.

  138. Bruno and BBA are spot on. This is entertainment after all. Maybe I’m spoiled by ’69-70 and ’73-74 but I’m not a championship or bust kind of fan. While we can bitch and moan at a high IQ level, alas, we have no decision-making capacity and kinda have to wrangle with whatever the front office serves. If I can have an enjoyable bunch of scrubs who play hard for a team that isn’t capped out and has picks and upside, I’m light years ahead of where I was a a Knicks fan for most of this millenium.

    I would have drafted Hali, Bane and someone else, and thrown a better offer at Wood than what he got. But not trading for Westbrook or CP3 or signing Hayward to an expensive deal means something. The Ed Davis in-n-out bonanza means something. Going into the season with cap space as the FO stated that they would be willing to use that space to absorb contracts for picks means something. Holding Knox and Frank and Obi accountable means something. Drafting IQ and having him trending in social media for not nefarious reasons means something. Based on these things, the FO deserves at least some latitude.

    I’m down with the direction of the team for now, if only until the next major disaster of a transaction.

  139. The Sacramento situation has some chance of ending up like the Steph Curry / Monta Ellis decision the Warriors had to make, but they’re far more likely to keep Fox and try to trade Hali if it comes down to it. I love watching Fox play and I think he’s pretty good, but he has a bit of John Wall written on him for me, exciting small market star who isn’t a great shooter and should age poorly unless he figures it out. He progressed so much between his rookie and soph year, but since then he’s been the same player every year, and that doesn’t sound promising at all.

  140. Z-man:
    Bruno and BBA are spot on. This is entertainment after all. Maybe I’m spoiled by ’69-70 and ’73-74 but I’m not a championship or bust kind of fan. While we can bitch and moan at a high IQ level, alas, we have no decision-making capacity and kinda have to wrangle with whatever the front office serves. If I can have an enjoyable bunch of scrubs who play hard for a team that isn’t capped out and has picks and upside, I’m light years ahead of where I was a a Knicks fan for most of this millenium.

    I would have drafted Hali, Bane and someone else, and thrown a better offer at Wood than what he got. But not trading for Westbrook or CP3 or signing Hayward to an expensive deal means something. The Ed Davis in-n-out bonanza means something. Going into the season with cap space as the FO stated that they would be willing to use that space to absorb contracts for picks means something. Holding Knox and Frank and Obi accountable means something. Drafting IQ and having him trending in social media for not nefarious reasons means something. Based on these things, the FO deserves at least some latitude.

    I’m down with the direction of the team for now, if only until the next major disaster of a transaction.

    Exactly. This isn’t the same clown Fiesta we endured in the last 20 years, it’s as close to competency as we’ve been in a while. It’s not as competent as we want it to be of course, but I’ll give these guys credit for now. We still have picks, a lot of cap flexibility and some talent.

  141. ***it’s the early 90’s and you walk in to blockbuster in “downtown” lawton, oklahoma – i’m guessing you’re going to find the Groundhog Day VHS tape slotted somewhere around: arthur, when harry met sally and pretty woman…***

    Sure. But Pretty Woman is a light romance, not a romcom. It comes from the fairytale model, whereas romcoms follow the screwball comedy archetype of Frank Capra’s It Happened One Night and the lighter films of Howard Hawks.

    Groundhog Day is a romcom because it fits the formula beat for beat.

  142. This one fits beat for beat too:

    TheNobleFacehumper and Stratomatic hate each other in an anonymous online Knicks fan site> meanwhile James Dolan and Isiah Thomas make a bet that no matter how bad the team is, the franchise value of the Knicks will continue to increase exponentially > they hire a random young attorney (TNF) as gm and a random professional gambler (strat) as coach > strat demands to have players who “play the right way” but TNF gives him players that merely fit the win curve > they bicker and the team does badly > Dolan takes pleasure as MSG shares continue to rise in value, Isiah gets frustrated and tells them about the bet > realizing that they are both set up to fail they go out drinking together and share intimate secrets. They are about to kiss when some of the young Knick players show up and tell them that they heard about the bet and that they want to take down Dolan > during a montage sequence with Hot Chocolate’s I Believe in Miracles they work together to get the young players to “play the right way” > TNF trades away all the star veterans to the cross town rival, driving down the value of the Knicks > the team goes on a winning streak > Dolan loses the bet and is forced to sell> in a state of bliss strat and TNF are about to consummate their love when it is revealed that they have long hated each other online. They feel as if love has betrayed them > the Knicks winning streak comes to an end and both are fired > several weeks later strat is back at his OTB making nickel bets. He looks up and sees TNF standing in the door. He motions for him to come outside. Strat mimes “who me?”. TNF smiles. Together they leave the OTB and jump in TNF’s Miata. They kiss, put the top down, blast JD and the Straight Shot’s Fox The Knicks, and drive off into the sunset…

  143. Donnie Walsh:

    TheNobleFacehumper and Stratomatic hate each other in an anonymous online Knicks fan site> meanwhile James Dolan and Isiah Thomas make a bet that no matter how bad the team is, the franchise value of the Knicks will continue to increase exponentially > they hire a random young attorney (TNF) as gm and a random professional gambler (strat) as coach > strat demands to have players who “play the right way” but TNF gives him players that merely fit the win curve > they bicker and the team does badly > Dolan takes pleasure as MSG shares continue to rise in value, Isiah gets frustrated and tells them about the bet > realizing that they are both set up to fail they go out drinking together and share intimate secrets. They are about to kiss when some of the young Knick players show up and tell them that they heard about the bet and that they want to take down Dolan > during a montage sequence with Hot Chocolate’s I Believe in Miracles playing, they work together to get the young players to “play the right way” > TNF trades away all the star veterans to the cross town rival, driving down the value of the Knicks > the team goes on a winning streak > Dolan loses the bet and is forced to sell> in a state of bliss strat and TNF are about to consummate their love when it is revealed that they have long hated each other online. They feel as if love has betrayed them > the Knicks winning streak comes to an end and both are fired > several weeks later strat is back at his OTB making nickel bets. He looks up and sees TNF standing in the door. He motions for him to come outside. Strat mimes “who me?”. TNF smiles. Together they leave the OTB and jump in TNF’s Miata. They kiss, put the top down, blast JD and the Straight Shot’s Fox The Knicks, and drive off into the sunset…

    Inexplicable, despicable…

  144. McGowan is a really good writer, but nothing gets my blood pumping like Donnie Walsh and his lurid imagination.

    Groundhog Day is a romcom because it fits the formula beat for beat.

    Yes, it is a romcom. There is no argument to the contrary. It just happens to be a good iteration of one.

  145. Is Palm Springs technically also a romcom then? It’s basically just millenial Groundhog Day.

  146. Just want to give props to Bruno and Z-Man and say I’m with them entirely.

    Topic two: Earlier in the day Haliburton was named the Western Conference rookie of the month for games played in December and January. Sigh.

    Topic three, on GD as a rom com — a thing can be more than one thing.

  147. Also, bravo to Donnie Walsh for writing the first known Knickerblogger slashfiction. May there be many more, and may they be just as thirsty.

  148. I think we need to have a Knickerblogger watch party for Groundhog Day and then vote on if it’s a Rom-Com or not. The only Knickerblogger approved way to settle anything is to get some numbers involved.

  149. In the sequel we break up due to irreconcilable differences over Austrian economics

  150. Z-man: Based on these things, the FO deserves at least some latitude.

    Don’t forget the swap of #27 and #38 picks for #25 and #33 giving exactly ZERO assets. That was hilarious, and in a good way for a change.

  151. Z-man:
    The age difference is a bit creepy if you ask me…

    It does give Strat’s negging of thenoblefacehumper a certain grooming vibe, for sure.

  152. Also, thanks to the Hive Mind’s recommendations, I’ve been binging the Sopranos and hot damn is this a good show.

  153. cybersoze: Don’t forget the swap of #27 and #38 picks for #25 and #33 giving exactly ZERO assets. That was hilarious, and in a good way for a change.

    You can throw in the signings of Noel, Burks, and Rivers to market-value contracts at worst, and to a lesser degree, the retaining of Bullock and the re-signing Payton and Taj. Opinions on the merits of these moves can vary, but the prices paid are a welcome departure from the sins of the Steve “no one outbids me, not even me” Mills transaction machine.

  154. oh shit donnie, you done scaredt me sober…

    and yes, pretty woman/my fair lady is most definitely a romantic comedy and not light romance…

    you know, i’m not so sure there is even a light romantic comedy genre – i think you just made that up…

  155. Romcom is just a narrative structure. It says nothing about quality. Just as the 2018-19 Knicks were technically as much a basketball team as the 2016-17 Warriors were.

  156. howdy hubie…sorry to come out of left field with this (my mind doesn’t seem to ride along too well on specific tracks) – are their specific industry sectors or commodities that you focus?

    if so, what led you to specialize on those industries or companies?

    interests or just opportunity for profit?

    I used to manage bond portfolios back when there were interest rates. I got really lucky on a smart premise in 2007. That was my one big trade. Then I switched from trading to wealth management, which is basically helping people avoid taking the kinds of risks I was taking as a trader. So, no, I don’t really focus on anything other than asset allocation and diversification.

  157. d-mar:
    I sometimes forget what a great passer Draymond is

    And the Mavs’ defense is god awful

    Can Kelly Oubre Jr. make up for Andrew “Irwin Rommel” Wiggins?

  158. my last 2 cents
    If Dead Man is a western and King Crimson play rock then GDay is a romcom

  159. To be fair to the Mavs they do have a win in their past 6 games so they deserve a break

  160. The Mavs are getting smoked. They play zero defense. Just awful for them. Let’s go Warriors!

  161. Embiid with another monster performance, but not enough to beat the Dame/CJ/Nurkic-less Blazers. Who sez Melo is done?

  162. DRed:
    Dallas getting chopped up by Kelly Oubre?Certainly not how I would do it

    Definitely not something I expected when evaluating the Porzingis trade at the time, but welcome nonetheless.

  163. marechal:
    KP has regressed defensively and stagnated offensively. Not a good combo.

    He’s always been problematic at the 5, defensively. And his ability to defend in space is still limited. The dude is who most of us thought he was.

  164. asset allocation and diversification

    thanks hubie…just trying to figure out a way to get myself interested again…

    i like money, it’s a good and easy way to keep score in business…it’s useful to have personally…over the years i’ve lost interest in it…trading can be fun and interesting, trying to figure out an avenue towards getting motivated again…

  165. Z-man:
    Oh fuck, Embiid left the game with a knee injury…

    I’m surprised he’s lasted healthy this long to be honest.

  166. And the Sixers are losing to vintage Melo carrying the Blazers in Lillard’s absence… this is a crazy season for sure.

  167. Also, thanks to the Hive Mind’s recommendations, I’ve been binging the Sopranos and hot damn is this a good show.

    Mike, I hear this book about the show is useful to have while you binge.

  168. kp’s ftr has tanked and coming off a knee injury i would be pretty concerned as a mavs fan….

  169. you’re too funny al…i gotta do a bunch of correspondence stuff for work, sometimes i just get soooo sick of writing and explaining things, i just wanna come here and say goofy stuff…

    i imagine you spend a whole lot more time than i do writing, and, i can imagine you thinking sometimes before you can type another sentence – you gotta say something knick related just as a sanity check…

  170. Alan: Mike, I hear this book about the show is useful to have while you binge.

    It’s definitely on my radar! I really enjoy both you and Matt’s work so I’ll definitely pick it up at some point.

  171. so the nba and nbpa have just about worked out the all-star game…hard to imagine what player would willingly show up for that thing this year…

  172. The Knicks winning? Meh. The Knicks losing? Also, meh. Mavs losing? Hell yeah!!! Let’s fucking GO!!!

  173. The Dallas slump also makes it easier to enjoy it when we win, without the “But… Cade!” pangs.

  174. I’ve still yet to watch Sopranos from beginning to end, so I might take you up on the recommendation too, Alan. I’ll watch it at least so I can finally have an opinion when my friends start fist fighting themselves over which is better, Sopranos or The Wire.

  175. I disagree with the classification of Groundhog Day as a romcom. Its a romcon the way The Wire is just a police procedural. The genre is just a way of getting audiences to invest in the story’s larger themes the way you might sugar coat a tablet of medicine. In a certain respect, the romance is incidental to a movie that isn’t really concerned with exploring many of that genre’s tropes say like a meetcute, for example.

    So, yes, Phil desires Rita and she serves as a “prize” he wins at the end of his moral journey towards self-actualization. But his main self-journey isn’t a quest to win her love and respect – but rather to become a better human being who lives authentically in the eternal present, seizes command of moral agency and learns to appreciate his immediate lifeworld outside his egoistic wants. It’s only AFTER Phil accomplishes this task that he becomes capable of true love beyond self-indulgent narcissism and therefore capable of moving forward in life with Rita as a partner she would actually want.

    To illustrate this point further, it bears noting that Phil didn’t end up with Rita in an earlier draft of the movie’s script after he breaks his time loop and confesses his love. A final twist reveals that Rita herself also wasn’t ready for love and is trapped in a time loop of her own. This ending, which was too uncertain and complicated for mainstream American audiences to accept, underscores how the “romantic” aspect of the story is really secondary to the more important themes regarding self-discovery.

  176. ***you know, i’m not so sure there is even a light romantic comedy genre – i think you just made that up…***

    A light romance is a movie that has the setup of a romance but intentionally lacks plausible dramatic depth in the name of increasing its box office. These light romances are often confused with romcoms because they both typically indulge in makeover montages and have a boy and a girl looking coyly at each other in profile on the poster. Examples off the top of my head:

    Pretty Woman
    Breakfast at Tiffany’s
    Sleepless in Seattle
    Dirty Dancing
    Love Actually
    Cyrano de Bergerac
    Valentines Day/New Years Eve
    Moonstruck
    Working Girl
    Bridget Jones’ Diary
    Many more…

  177. I’m in camp “who gives a flying fuck if Groundhog Day fits neatly into the genre subjectively dubbed romantic comedy or not?”

  178. For the record, you’re all cowards without the courage of your convictions.

    With that out of the way. Groundhog Day is definitely not a romcom. At its base, a romcom is about two people who are missing something from their lives that they need another person to fill. In Groundhog Day, only Phil needs to be fixed; Andie McDowell is perfectly happy person on her own. The fact that it’s pretty easy to see Andie McDowell continuing to have a happy life without Phil means it’s missing one of the basic tropes of a romcom and therefore cannot be one.

    Also, like other posters have already written, the movie is really about Phil’s own journey to find peace with himself and not specifically about having a relationship with Andie McDowell.

  179. the biggest issue with kp tonight was his defense. he looks like he needs the hit the clutch before he can shift gears recently. yes, i know, this is probably to be expected given how damyean dotson missed a summer of practice two years ago. kp as a tetherball pole defender isn’t quite as good a fit with doncic.

    donnie walsh i am onto your forrest gump but culturally snobby shtick. you frequent an obscure and sparsely populated blog devoted to a team so awful its members resort to alternating the sad smile pep talk role to ensure group wellness, yet you say you haven’t watched an actual basketball game since johnny newman dropped 34 on the celts 5 months before black monday. i know, i know, you have no idea what black monday is but did briefly play in a jazz band with an ex julliard guy named greenspan who was always muttering about portfolio insurance, which you assumed was his dog’s name or something. you have had too many femme fatale run ins to enumerate, but none really left a mark as they seemed to know surprisingly little about running extremely long distances. and now you have never really understood this whole groundhog day movie but oh look here you did gin up this sterling piece of fan fiction transmuting it to dark alleys of internecine knickerblogger lore.

    enough with the long game, just fucking get to the part where you sold walt the clyde barrow fedora

  180. yet you say you haven’t watched an actual basketball game since johnny newman dropped 34 on the celts 5 months before black monday.

    yeah, what the heck is that all about donnie, don’t you feel committed in the very least to our community suffering…it’s supposed to be a shared experience – why are you not sharing the pain and angst of watching knick games with us???

    you seem to be getting off way too easy my friend…watch the games man, it’s only fair…

  181. For the record, you’re all cowards without the courage of your convictions.

    i live for reading sentences like this…the only better is getting the opportunity to say it out loud to a large group of people…that’s joy…

    Groundhog Day is definitely not a romcom. At its base, a romcom is about two people who are missing something from their lives that they need another person to fill. In Groundhog Day, only Phil needs to be fixed; Andie McDowell is perfectly happy person on her own. The fact that it’s pretty easy to see Andie McDowell continuing to have a happy life without Phil means it’s missing one of the basic tropes of a romcom and therefore cannot be one.

    very solid argument there…you’ve changed my mind a bit towards it’s common classification…

  182. I’d love to see Netflix tackle a Leftovers-inspired Groundhog Day series that extends the time loop dilemma beyond Phil to characters inhabiting the town of present-day Punxsutawney. Alan should talk to his Hollywood buddies and make it happen. Just remember where you read the idea first and that an entire season should deal with Ned Ryerson getting stuck in town after coming back to sell insurance.

  183. Jesus, I am sorry I ever looked up why Ben Simmons is trending on Twitter.

    Don’t do it. Just. Don’t.

  184. i got one for you ras, since groundhog day we’ve had a few similar themed movies (actually, i can only think of one: edge of tomorrow, i’m sure there are more though)…

    however, prior to groundhog day – was there another movie that used the repetitive day theme?

  185. geo:
    i got one for you ras, since groundhog day we’ve had a few similar themed movies (actually, i can only think of one: edge of tomorrow, i’m sure there are more though)…

    however, prior to groundhog day – was there another movie that used the repetitive day theme?

    Yes. In fact, the fiction writer Richard A. Lupoff sued Colombia Pictures because he felt they ripped off his 1973 short story 12:01 PM which was adapted to a pretty successful short film three years earlier.

  186. Russian Doll was a very good time loop show (and definitely not a rom-com like GHD totally is). Alan, do you know if they’re ever going to do a second season?

  187. geo:
    i got one for you ras, since groundhog day we’ve had a few similar themed movies (actually, i can only think of one: edge of tomorrow, i’m sure there are more though)…

    however, prior to groundhog day – was there another movie that used the repetitive day theme?

    There was a Japanese anime film, Urusei Yatsura 2: Beautiful Dreamer, that used a time loop in 1984. Mamoru Oshii directed the film and later became famous for directing the original Ghost in the Shell movie (circling back around, which seems appropriate given the discussion, Scarlett Johansson starred in the American live-action remake).

    As a complete coincidence, I watched Beautiful Dreamer about a week ago before we started talking about Groundhog Day.

    Avalon is another Mamoru Oshii film that’s worth checking out. It’s live action for those not interested in cartoons. Of course, the Ghost in the Shell sequel was nominated for the Palme d’Or so maybe worth checking out some of his animation anyways.

  188. geo:
    i got one for you ras, since groundhog day we’ve had a few similar themed movies (actually, i can only think of one: edge of tomorrow, i’m sure there are more though)…

    however, prior to groundhog day – was there another movie that used the repetitive day theme?

    X-Files and Supernatural both did Groundhog Day episodes and I think there’s another show that’s just on the tip of my tongue.

  189. Ras is doing a perfectly good job explaining why GDay is not a rom-com, but I wanted to relay why the conversation is important to me.

    Calling it a “rom-com” is implicitly condescending; it makes the work less than it is. I’m particularly sensitive to it because I’ve been seeing it for decades in my professional life; it’s a way men typically talk about art made about what are perceived as more feminine themes – love, family, etc. A few months ago we had a thread about great literary novels, and every single writer mentioned, starting with David Foster Wallace, was male. Is it because men are better writers? No, it’s because of the cultural bias toward the male genius trope. For example, Virginia Woolf is a much better writer than James Joyce, but Joyce was ostentatious enough to make the work ABOUT his genius, whereas Woolf used hers to explore what it meant to be human. Her novels are much more capacious and searching, whereas Joyce is almost puerile once you get past the experiments with language. Yet Joyce is heralded as the summit of 20th century letters. I didn’t weigh in because it was nice to see people talking about (mostly) great writing on a bball blog, but it was kind of amazing.

    So it bugs me when people want to diminish actual art with reductive labels such as “rom-com.” Genre, like rom-com, seeks to comfort. Art seeks to confront. A movie with someone repeatedly trying to kill themselves because of the meaninglessness of the universe is pretty fucking confrontational – but because it is woven into a movie where the lead does end up with a beautiful woman, it must be genre. Really? That’s what you got out of it?

    The amazing thing about Groundhog Day is that it DOES arrive at a reassuring ending. But the way it gets there is extraordinary. The girl is incidental; the movie is about enlightenment. Having the object he desired be a woman made it an easier sell. It also made it less pretentious, which is why so many here underrate it.

  190. X-Files and Supernatural both did Groundhog Day episodes and I think there’s another show that’s just on the tip of my tongue.

    Star Trek: TNG?

  191. Dubliners was pretty great as I recall- hard to dismiss even if you’re not a fan of Ulysses or FW. But I get the point.

  192. Primer is another movie dealing with time loops. I’ve only seen bits and pieces, but it seems like a really interesting, unique movie because they’re purposely looping.

    Donnie Darko implies some sort of time loop.

    mother! has a time loop.

    Of course, these are all after Groundhog Day.

  193. ***So it bugs me when people want to diminish actual art with reductive labels such as “rom-com.”***

    You’re confusing “RomCom”, a formula, with “ChickFlick”, a reductive label.

  194. ***donnie walsh i am onto you…sparsely populated blog…haven’t watched an actual basketball game since johnny newman dropped 34 on the celts 5 months before black monday….you have had too many femme fatale run ins to enumerate…running extremely long distances…***

    Impressive post, especially given that you just played a whole 10 minutes tonight backing up an injured Joel Embiid.

  195. Rama, I get your point, but I think you’re doing exactly what you’re accusing others of doing — condescending toward romantic comedies as lesser forms of art. I think there are some brilliant romantic comedies, a number of which goes deeply into various ideas that have nothing to do with the romance that overlays the plot (religion, caste, death, etc.). As I said earlier, a thing can be more than one thing. GDay is a rom com. It’s also just a flat-out comedic piece of genius. It’s also a scream into the abyss. It’s a few other things as well (I’ve heard it described as a feminist punch, since it takes Phil however many years of hard work just to get to the level that the Andy character is already at). That’s why it’s such a beloved piece of cinema.

    You’re right that the term rom com is sometimes used to belittle the form. But misogyny is what it is. If the definition of rom com is only something that can have Kate Hudson or Jennifer Aniston, then I’m off the mark and will shut up. But I’ve never viewed the term that way.

  196. I think it’s definitely a discussion that should be had, it’s a lexicon that we end up learning through our lives and we never really think about it. I don’t really think it was the case here as it was mostly playful, and I think while there’s obviously a fine line, playing with the stereotypes can be helpful to deconstruct them in a more organic way. In this sense, discussing whether Groundhog Day is a romantic comedy is, in its own way, questioning the very nature of what we perceive as rom com etc.

    I tend to make sure I keep paying attention to this kind of stuff (and older posters will remember I took particular exception to people saying Porzingis played like a “p*ssy” because it’s the same thought process working here) and it’s always an important aspect to remember.

  197. Identity is the vanishing point of resemblance. I am not Gilles Deleuze. We’re both men. Categories are useful when you need to group like things and obscure important differences when the particulars matter. They’re invented for a purpose, not real things that matter apart from that function of chunking the overwhelming variety of experience into manageable bits.

    If I’m not this guy and don’t need to put boxes in bins for customers to browse, or this gal and don’t need a term that coveys a plot pattern to readers like this guy, then thinking of GHD in terms of a genre only serves to gloss over everything that’s fun or moving about it in favor of a tiny set of boring attributes.

    Absent a practical need, the precise boundaries or aptness of a category only serves to standardize what rom-com means, not what Groundhog Day is. Depending on what I need to do – It’s a story. It’s a movie. It’s this or that kind of movie. It’s a particular set of experiences I had watching a flickering rectangle on long series of bus rides. Fun threads like this rescue it from stable categorization.

    As alternative categories go, I’m with those that like the idea of grouping GHD with other stories that try to illustrate or provoke enlightenment. It could be a modern addition to the yogavasistha sutra, a compendium of stories told to prince Rama to tear away the veil of maya. Oldies but goodies. Trippy entertaining tales designed to undermine the cognitive tricks we learn to hold our picture of the world together. Much like the poems of Wallace Stevens who wrote that Identity is the vanishing point of resemblance.

  198. I wish I was Gilles Deleuze, because then my PhD thesis would have been written already and I wouldn’t be in this struggle lol

  199. Identity is the vanishing point of resemblance.

    whoa, it is way too late to digest that…I’m gonna have to circle back on that tomorrow…

  200. ah rama, again it being late, but, had to go check my bookshelves:

    a bunch of anne rice, and that’s pretty much it…oh, and I just finished the hunger game ladies’ books…

    interesting point…I don’t know though that it simply says something about me, or larger society…

  201. I know, it’s for the money, but this year all All-Star Game is one of the stupidest, greedy, petty decision ever.
    Adam Silver must be ashamed and Michele Roberts too.

  202. Speaking of Bonny and Clyde and Harold Ramis and enlightenment and brushes with celebrated women… For a while in the ’80s I lived in a small maids’ room off the kitchen of an apartment that took up the whole 25th floor of the south tower of the El Dorado building on Central Park West – where the Ghostbusters roof scene was shot. The owners were a very nice couple who had a big flotation tank in one of the rooms and did lots of ketamine and PCP and MDMA and led new age workshops teaching people to channel dolphins, angels, and avatars of Quetzalcoatl.

    I was working nearby in a halfway house for people with psychotic spectrum disorders. In other words, I worked with people who suffered greatly from hearing voices and believing they were someone else and came home to people paying good money and taking random potshots at their central nervous system in order to hear voices and become someone else. I was very involved with hallucinogens myself and was volunteering in John Antrobus’ research labs on dreams and other research labs on hypnosis and studying theater with Richard Schechner. It was a fun time.

    Faye Dunaway lived on another floor in the El Dorado and we sometimes rode the elevator together. I often dressed like the young massively self-absorbed would be conceptual artist that I thought I wanted to become at the time – long hair in a braid, beret, sleeveless t-shirt, pinstriped vest, skinny leather tie. It was worse than it sounds. Yet Faye looks at me in the elevator one day and says “I really like the way you look in that outfit”, or something to that effect.

    I became insufferable for several days. No matter the topic, I’d smoothly work into the conversation something like: “Faye Dunaway finds me attractive. I just thought you might be interested in that fact.”

  203. rama is cautiously optimistic: Star Trek: TNG?

    Wouldn’t surprise me if they did one but I never watched Star Trek so I’m definitely not thinking of that. Honestly, it might be a cartoon.

    geo:
    ah rama, again it being late, but, had to go check my bookshelves:

    a bunch of anne rice, and that’s pretty much it…oh, and I just finished the hunger game ladies’ books…

    interesting point…I don’t know though that it simply says something about me, or larger society…

    If you’re looking for female authors I’d highly recommend Mary Doria Russell, who mostly writes historical fiction but also some sci-fi; NK Jemisin, who is a fantasy/weird fiction author; Madeline Miller, who reinterprets Greek myths; and Susanna Clarke, who writes fantasy but very elevated fantasy compared to standard fantasy.

    Outside of the genre sphere, Yaa Gyasi and Tayari Jones are pretty great.

    @Unreason

    Now you’re just making stuff up.

  204. OMG, I forgot a couple of authors. Donna Tartt, who’s most famous for The Goldfinch but I think The Secret History is even better and Elena Ferrante who’s an Italian writer who’s works are very female driven and who’s Neopolitan series was a pretty major literary sensation the last several years.

  205. nicos:
    Russian Doll was a very good time loop show (and definitely not a rom-com like GHD totally is). Alan, do you know if they’re ever going to do a second season?

    Yes. They renewed it pretty quickly, and then I think the pandemic delayed production on season 2.

  206. Revisiting yesterday’s discussion of when/if to trade Randle, Macri on his podcast today suggested there are only three teams this season who could both take on Randle’s contract and would want to: Golden State, Boston, and Charlotte. But none of them really have the motherlode of assets we would want. (Wiggins would almost certainly be part of a GSW trade, for instance.) So unless a Mystery Team calls Leon Rose with a Godfather offer, we may be better off just hanging onto E’s favorite player of all time at least through this season, and then see what’s what.

  207. Alan:
    Revisiting yesterday’s discussion of when/if to trade Randle, Macri on his podcast today suggested there are only three teams this season who could both take on Randle’s contract and would want to: Golden State, Boston, and Charlotte. But none of them really have the motherlode of assets we would want. (Wiggins would almost certainly be part of a GSW trade, for instance.) So unless a Mystery Team calls Leon Rose with a Godfather offer, we may be better off just hanging onto E’s favorite player of all time at least through this season, and then see what’s what.

    I don’t need a motherlode of assets to trade Randle. He’s a good not great player and I don’t think his skills are particularly scalable.

  208. Strat loves Mises. TNFH is a Hayek guy.

    I’m not so sure I love Mises so much as I hate Keynes. I’m basically just in favor of sound money and the limitations that puts on incompetents and crooks in government and on Wall St.

    Sound money creates a choice.

    If you want to spend more you have raise taxes and risk getting thrown out of office.

    If you want to engage in speculative activity you have to risk bankruptcy because the Fed is not going to bail you out.

    With that comes some other risks and downsides that have to be dealt with in other ways, but right now the world is in a debt and monetary mess from which there is no easy escape and that’s because of decades of progressively less sound money.

  209. Not a motherlode, but we’d need a first and a goodish young player. I’d love for Boston to send us Time Lord, Payton Pritchard, a first and a second for Randle but it isn’t gonna happen (and anyway I don’t even know if such a trade would garner much appreciation around here)

  210. I like Hubert’s idea for Randle better. Try to flip him for an actual star. No motherlode is forthcoming, or anything close.

  211. Dallas is a mess at this point.

    Doncic is still in terrible shape. He can’t defend anyone, KP looks unwilling to risk injury by banging or mixing it up inside on either side of the ball, and going from Seth Curry to Josh Richardson in an effort to upgrade the defense just downgraded the offense and did nothing for the defense.

    They’ve been missing a lot of key pieces all season and are just finally getting healthy and in shape, but some of this is on Doncic. He’s the #1 player and a supposed MVP candidate. He showed up in terrible condition and has taken a step backwards on both sides of the ball (and he was already a negative on defense). If he’s serious about being a top 5 superstar, he has to get in much better shape and move the damn ball instead of playing 1 on 5.

    Bad news for them is good news for us, but now I’m more in favor of trying to use that pick as an asset in a trade instead of guessing and whiffing on another potential lottery pick.

  212. If you’re looking for a good contemporary lady writer you should check out Hillary Mantel’s Thomas Cromwell books (or really any of her stuff)

  213. There once was a legal case in which a man had tattooed his will onto the back of a woman. The man, woman, and another witness had been stranded at sea following a shipwreck. The man, about to die, asks the woman if she would consent to the tattoo. She agrees. The process is undertaken with a needle made of fishbone & cuttlefish ink. The man signs his will & the signature is presumably witnessed by the necessary 2 people–the woman receiving the tattoo and the other witness. (On the topic of great literature, Melville authors a scene in Moby Dick in which Ishmael writes a will prior to a storm that only Queequeg witnesses and would have been invalid under prevailing English law).

    Anyways, upon returning to civilization the court is puzzled. Can a tattoo be a will? By law a will must be on parchment. The court resolves this query by accepting the gruesome argument that, if detached and dried skin would make excellent parchment!

    A second puzzle appears. The court is stumped again by the question of whether a will should be allowed to testify as a witness. In the courts view it’s absurd that a will can speak! After all the woman was just deemed parchment and parchment certainly cannot speak. The court philosophizes on the matter: her skin is separable from her faculties generating speech and the capacity of thought, although one certainly doesn’t want to attempt the separation in practice. The court seems convinced this would be an easy case if only the skin were detached and they could point to two different objects, one the will and the second the woman, that way they could physically place the tattoo in evidence and the woman at the stand.

    Of course this philosophical conundrum is no conundrum at all. If one simply recognizes that a thing can belong to multiple categories, the puzzle dissolves before us. The woman is will and witness. Groundhog Day is rom-com and art on enlightenment akin to nirvana following endless cycles of reincarnation.

  214. E, all merc’d out: I like Hubert’s idea for Randle better. Try to flip him for an actual star. No motherlode is forthcoming, or anything close.

    I think everyone would be in favor of trading him as part of a deal that upgraded the team, but that’s easier said than done. You have to be patient.

    The point I’ve been making is that most people here came into the season thinking we should trade an overrated overpaid inefficient turnover prone Randle. My view was that some of the problem last year was coaching, some spacing and some fit. So he should really be viewed as the player we signed the year before and not as the player we saw last year. But he’s been better than that. At a certain point you have to adjust your thinking. He’s already good, getting better, and he’s only 26. He’s not a #1 option player, but it’s rarely a good idea to throw 2nd and 3rd options away on some wild goose chase for the motherload in the draft unless you want rebuild for another decade.

  215. Rama, I get your point, but I think you’re doing exactly what you’re accusing others of doing — condescending toward romantic comedies as lesser forms of art.

    I’m not, because they are explicitly aiming to be lesser works of art: they are literally formulaic. The idea is to deliver exactly what the audience wants, but with a little twist to keep it fresh. As I wrote, genre seeks to comfort – and there’s nothing wrong with that! I watch plenty of movies purely for comfort. But art seeks to confront, to challenge. Real artists strive not to repeat themselves. Genre makers seek to grow their audiences explicitly by repeating the same story with just enough change so that people feel satisfied and not bored.

    If someone writes a really great Hallmark movie, it still isn’t art, because Hallmark wouldn’t have let it on the air if it didn’t meet the criteria of the formula. By writing to formula they are consciously limiting the potential of the work. So that movie would just be a well-executed version of the formula – which, again, is totally fine! I do not look down on the (mostly) women who watch the Hallmark channel, just as I don’t look down on the (mostly) men who read Jack Reacher novels. But I do make the distinction about the work, because those distinctions are intentional – just as the decisions made with GDay were also intentional, and were about subversion, not about conforming to formula.

  216. Early Bird – Furious Applause Gif

    “Can’t believe we haven’t talked about Payton’s burner account yet.”

    We did 1300 comments up

    I would probably have to plead guilty as charged to liking male authors more, though it’s not intentional. I did have a Jeannette Winterston period. Great writer with a crazy childhood.

    Also, Wolf Hall is amazing. Takes some work but more than worth the effort.

  217. Groundhog Day was a fun movie about not so nice guy that experiences the same day over and over (for no reason I could ever figure out) and after being both frustrated by it and trying to use it to his advantage to bed a woman, falls in love with her and slowly becomes a much better person.

    The key word in that description is FUN.

  218. I love that Groundhog Day doesn’t try to explain why he’s in that repeating situation. Is it just the snowstorm? Is the town in some weird alternate universe? It just happens. Not explaining why it happens to me makes the moral and message of the movie stronger because its kind of what all of us go through in life. We might live a different day every day but we go through the same routines, reactions, and behaviors and these hold us back so often. We have to make the choice to make changes in our lives and stick with them and only then are we able to grow as people.

    I used to smoke cigarettes a lot. For like 15 years…from the time I was in high school till my early 30’s. I would try to quit and it would never stick. Eventually, it was just me actively deciding not to do it again and then adding exercise to my daily routine. But it was the mental decision more than anything that allowed me to make that change and stick with it.

    We go through life on autopilot so often and rarely question why we react to things the way we do.

  219. If you’re looking for female authors I’d highly recommend Mary Doria Russell, who mostly writes historical fiction but also some sci-fi; NK Jemisin, who is a fantasy/weird fiction author; Madeline Miller, who reinterprets Greek myths; and Susanna Clarke, who writes fantasy but very elevated fantasy compared to standard fantasy.

    Outside of the genre sphere, Yaa Gyasi and Tayari Jones are pretty great.

    Not terribly impressed by Jones, but hard yes on the others. And Mantel, of course. Helen DeWitt’s LAST SAMURAI, if you’re into brilliance. Jeannette Winterson, Sarah Waters. Donna Tartt, definitely. Toni Morrison, obviously. It’s not like there’s a shortage!

  220. rama is cautiously optimistic: I’m not, because they are explicitly aiming to be lesser works of art: they are literally formulaic. The idea is to deliver exactly what the audience wants, but with a little twist to keep it fresh. As I wrote, genre seeks to comfort – and there’s nothing wrong with that! I watch plenty of movies purely for comfort. But art seeks to confront, to challenge. Real artists strive not to repeat themselves. Genre makers seek to grow their audiences explicitly by repeating the same story with just enough change so that people feel satisfied and not bored.

    I think a large portion of the subversiveness within the art of Groundhog Day is precisely that it’s conveyed in a formulaic vehicle acceptable to mass audiences. It challenges the audience with new ideas and challenges critics, audiences, and Hollywood studios who foist the same complacent rom-coms onto the screen year-after-year.

  221. I used to smoke cigarettes a lot. For like 15 years…from the time I was in high school till my early 30’s. I would try to quit and it would never stick.

    You should have been hanging out with Unreason and Faye Dunaway in the El Dorado….

  222. I said at some point before the season when we were discussing MVP candidates that everyone was assuming linear improvement for Luka when that’s rarely how it goes for young players. He completely blew up last year to a frankly pretty unprecedented degree for a player of his age and experience and it’s totally normal to have a consolidation year or two after that where it looks like you’re plateauing for a time. It’s very important to remind yourself that despite already being an established NBA superstar he’s still a 21 year-old; it’s extremely plausible that we’re still 7 or 8 years (!!!!) away from his peak as a player. Lebron also had a huge breakout in year 2 but didn’t become MVP until year 6.

    Did anybody else hear last night during the pregame when Shaq said the Mavs need to “get somebody just as good as Luka but a little better, like Bradley Beal or Russell Westbrook”? I died.

  223. Deefense, it would be insane to trade the Dallas pick at this point.

    Just because we messed up the Knox and Frank picks doesn’t mean we’re doomed to mess up another lottery pick. I mean, looking at RJ now, I would think he wasn’t a messed up pick. And Toppin…well, who knows. I actually think he looks pretty decent out there in limited minutes because he sets screens, makes good passes, etc. But Randle coming on does present a problem.

    But we could seriously have a top 5 pick with that Dallas pick this year (and maybe another top 10 pick with ours). This is a stacked draft. The chance to add two cost controlled rookies in the top 15 of the draft in a loaded draft to complement a core of Randle, RJ, Quickley and Mitch? I think trading that for a star at this point would be beyond foolish.

  224. Does anyone think Shaq improved that show? Can’t stand him and he also managed to ruin Charles Barkley for me too. I know it’s been 11 years but I still feel that way.

  225. I think trading that for a star at this point would be beyond foolish.

    Totally agree. As Z-man said, the best thing about this FO is that they haven’t done any short-sighted win-now trades or signings. They avoided all the obvious mistakes we were concerned about. Trading away what is likely to be a high draft pick in a loaded draft when we aren’t near to contending would be the height of dumb.

  226. Deefense, it would be insane to trade the Dallas pick at this point.

    Before it’s all said and done I don’t think that pick is going to be a good enough to land us the type of player we need to really move the chain forward on this team. We can revisit that in a few weeks. Maybe Dallas will continue their death spiral, KP, will get hurt etc.. but I think they are going to turn it around, play better, and make a run for the playoffs as soon as they are all healthy and in shape.

    We need all star caliber talent on this team and not another potentially good role player several years from now.

    Since the pick will probably have more value that expected I think it can potentially be combined with other assets as part of something bigger that does land us a very good player. If not, so be it. But I’d way rather make a play for a very good player in a bigger move than draft in the lower teens. I would be also happy combining it with our own pick to move up in the draft for the right player. I just don’t want to draft in the teens, wind up with some mediocre role player that’s 3-5 years away from his prime. That’s mercs are for.

  227. Randle and the Dallas 2021 definitely starts a potential package for Beal nicely. Just like you want to offer up Julius when he’s going well, you want to offer up the Dallas 2021 when it’s 3.5 games and four teams into the lottery rather than wait too, too long only to find it slip out of the lottery.

  228. Yes, we can take the easy cop out and say that Groundhog Day is both a romantic comedy and a film on existentialist self-rediscovery. And there are wonderful films that I would categorize as both, the quintessence of which is Wim Wenders’ 1987 masterpiece, Wings of Desire. But the problem with the rom com analysis is that it signals a missing of the movie’s actual point. If you carefully consider the film, there is very little that is actually romantic about it until the end when Phil and Rita actually fall in love. Phil behaves deplorably to her and their co-worker before his purgatory loop and then spends a good portion of the film trying to bed her as a conquest to pass the time eternally returning to the same day. We learn very little about Rita beyond Phil’s gaze. She’s mostly an object because the protagonist himself sees her as one throughout most of the film until his enlightenment. So, as a romance, Groundhog Day really isn’t that good because that’s just not the point of conflict driving a narrative where Phil is simultaneously both the movie’s primary antagonist and protagonist. And you can see that in how the film resolves itself. Had Phil and Rita not fallen in love and decided to live in Puxatawney his arc would still have been resolved because his journey of self-rediscovery and enlightnement is complete. He didn’t need Rita achieve the goal and move forward. She’s sort of an afterthought who ends up pursuing him.

  229. It’s been awhile with Groundhog Day for me, but I always just interpreted it as saying we can find beauty and meaning and reinvention and redemption even in the midst of life’s default banality.

  230. Owen: Does anyone think Shaq improved that show? Can’t stand him and he also managed to ruin Charles Barkley for me too. I know it’s been 11 years but I still feel that way.
      

    At first I didn’t like him. Now he doesn’t bother me as much. IMO, the real problem with that show is that they are using 3 players that understand the nuances of the game really well they but don’t work hard enough watching all the games and keeping up with all the players. So they often says things that are wrong about a specific player. They treat it like an easy paycheck. What they really need on that show is a high level coach that’s still actively trying to get another gig so he’s staying on top of everything, watching all the film, and bringing more accurate and specific insights to the table.

  231. Deeefense: What they really need on that show is a high level coach that’s still actively trying to get another gig so he’s staying on top of everything, watching all the film, and bringing more accurate and specific insights to the table.

      

    David Fizdale is available.

  232. Considering what we would likely have to give up, Bradley Beal post trade would do for us exactly what he’s doing for the Wiz. Is anyone here excited by that? A $35mill AAV no-D chucker who gets you into the bottom of the playoffs at best? What exactly does he do for our team beyond what Randle is doing right now? And by the time you build even a 40-win team around him, he’s up for a mega-max extension. Fuck that.

    The premise that DAL will recover and make the playoffs is irrelevant. Even if it’s true, franchise-changing players are potentially available all through the teens. We’ll have two shots at one of those guys, maybe two. The key for now is to sit tight and to identify and sign the Christian Wood types until the time is right to land the big fish. Now is definitely not that time, anyone with half a brain should be able to see that.

  233. I disagree with that outlook about what we need.

    Of course we need a star. But is Beal or Lavine or whatever that’s available really the star we need right now?

    The way I see it is quite simple. RJ, Mitch, and Quickley are part of the core. Randle is part of it too but we should be open to trading him for the right offer. But right now lets say he is part of the future. If you’re looking at a starting 5 that’s:

    Quickley
    RJ
    ???
    Randle
    Mitch

    Right now our team is a fringe playoff team that plays good defense. The problem is guard play and shooting. We want to upgrade from Elf, Bullock, Rivers and Burks. Those are the immediate places where we want to improve our roster. Quickley could be better off the ball and RJ can potentially play the 3, so we have some flexibility with the draft. We can go PG, SG or SF and move Quickley and RJ.

    We have a chance to add 2 picks in the top 20 at least in a good draft that has top level talent and is also supposed to be pretty deep. There is a chance those 2 picks could be in the top 10 and there is even the chance one or both of them could be in the top 5. Even if we just draft “role players” I think we have a really good chance to upgrade from Elf, Rivers, Bullocks, Burks and that, along with the natural improvement from RJ, Quickley and Mitch, would make us clearly a playoff team with a lot of super young pieces that can continue to improve.

    After that we still have our 2022 first, two 2023 first and a boatload of second round picks, not to mention all of our first after that in 2024, etc.

    Sure, we’ve whiffed on some picks recently with Frank, Knox, and potentially Obi. But we’ve also hit on some picks with RJ, Mitch and Quickley. Literally our last 6 picks (not counting Iggy, etc), we’ve hit on half of them.

    So two first round picks in the top 20, maybe top 15 or top 10…you gotta think we can hit on at least one of them with a really really solid player that we will control.

    In my opinion, the time for us to make a move with a big trade, free agent signing, etc…would be after this draft, next season or beyond.

  234. rama is cautiously optimistic: As I wrote, genre seeks to comfort – and there’s nothing wrong with that! I watch plenty of movies purely for comfort. But art seeks to confront, to challenge. Real artists strive not to repeat themselves. Genre makers seek to grow their audiences explicitly by repeating the same story with just enough change so that people feel satisfied and not bored.

    I don’t get this. All of the great arts masters repeat themselves within a genre. Truly great individual works of art simply transcend the mortal constraints that lay people invent to describe and classify their works.

  235. “In my opinion, the time for us to make a move with a big trade, free agent signing, etc…would be after this draft, next season or beyond.”

    Agreed. That is unless we get a standout offer for Randle.

  236. sign the Christian Wood types

    Forget Frank over Donovan or SGA or any Bridges over Knox, just this last year we could have signed Wood and drafted Hali. Argh!

    We’re still in a good position, but…argh!

  237. Considering what we would likely have to give up, Bradley Beal post trade would do for us exactly what he’s doing for the Wiz. Is anyone here excited by that? A $35mill AAV no-D chucker who gets you into the bottom of the playoffs at best? What exactly does he do for our team beyond what Randle is doing right now? And by the time you build even a 40-win team around him, he’s up for a mega-max extension. Fuck that

    This is why I wouldn’t trade anything for Beal. He’s a good player, and he would make sense for a lot of teams in the NBA, but not as one as bad as we are. Optimistically we’re like 2 years away from trading for a Beal type player.

  238. I don’t think anyone on the roster is untouchable. If you could flip RJ for Beal straight up, or with some 2nd round picks or a protected first, I’d be outraged if the FO didn’t jump on that. Even a package of any or all of those 3 should be on the table for the right player, but Beal is not that guy. But that said, clearly that package is not going to get Beal, so why even bother? Haven’t we learned anything from the original Melo trade?

  239. Ntilakilla:
    Wood isn’t the most durable guy in the league though.

    Wood sprained his ankle…that’s the most common injury in basketball. I don’t know if that raises durability issues.

  240. Z-man: Considering what we would likely have to give up, Bradley Beal post trade would do for us exactly what he’s doing for the Wiz. Is anyone here excited by that? A $35mill AAV no-D chucker who gets you into the bottom of the playoffs at best?

    franchise-changing players are potentially available all through the teens. We’ll have two shots at one of those guys, maybe two. The key for now is to sit tight and to identify and sign the Christian Wood types until the time is right to land the big fish. Now is definitely not that time, anyone with half a brain should be able to see that.
      

    IMO, the thing we want to avoid is giving up assets for a player at the tail end of his all star level play. If the guy can play at an all star level for the duration of a fair contract, you get him.

    Beal is a very good player. He’s not a plus defender, but he can defend when he’s in the mood. He’s mostly not in the mood on that crap team (LOL), but he’s capable. It would depend on the price. I don’t mind giving up picks, but if you are adding in talent and picks we are nowhere.

    Levine is a hard “no” for me. He can’t defend at all and is not a very high level talent on offense either.

    Franchise changing players are available in the 2nd round also, but the draft is a game of probabilities. You are unlikely to get an all star caliber talent in the mid to late teens. You can sign or draft all star caliber talent using assets you’ve accumulated, players you have, and your own picks any time one is available. There a few of them available every season, but you can’t be a dreg team and get one. That has been our problem for a long time. They won’t even go on a first date with us, let alone get into a relationship. That’s what current management and coaching is trying to change by competing & making us more attractive. They want star players to consider us in trades and FA. Patience.

  241. He didn’t miss the entire 2017-18 season, he played 1500 minutes of basketball in the G-league. Wood didn’t play much in the NBA because teams didn’t want him to play, not because he was hurt.

  242. I’m not in favor of a Beal trade unless Washington is basically giving him away. Any realistic trade would be at best a lateral move and, more likely, probably hurts the team long term considering the kind of assets we’d have to give up and our spot on the win curve.

  243. Which is another thing about Wood – he was bounced out of the league despite being a very productive player.

    I don’t regret passing up on a guy with those character issues.

  244. Haven’t we learned anything from the original Melo trade?

    The problem with the Melo trade wasn’t Melo. It was that we gutted the team and overpaid by so much it was going to be a long rebuild and not give us any kind of reasonable window to compete while he was still productive and close to his peak. Then he got hurt and closed it shut on whatever he had left in the tank. (not to mention it was a dumb skill fit with Amare whose window was even shorter)

    No one is saying it has to be Beal, that we should gut the team for him or a trade has to be done now. The idea is to improve the team when we have opportunities. However, in the end we need all star caliber talent, not role players. And the best way to get all star talent is via trade and free agency once you’ve already tanked yourself into a couple of good players and added a few others and are likely to start drafting in the teens.

    If you ask me right now our best asset to include as a player in a trade is Mitch because we have a pretty good defensive substitute and Mitch is not making any progress into a more complete two way player like we hoped. I’m trusting Thibs and Paine on his development and knowing what the upside actually is.

  245. No one really understands the Christian Wood situation but he was extremely productive in trace minutes when he came into the league, dominated in the G-League, and then was extremely productive this year with heavy minutes until suffering a gruesome ankle injury last night.

    Also a guy who Shaq quite famously had never heard of until he dropped 27 and 15 on national television.

    Also, he is better than Julius Randle.

  246. Bradley Beal pre-season was 15th on SI’s list and is heading for virtually certain all-NBA status. He’s a 27 year old superstar and the Knicks have nothing close to that. We have to at some point get out of the habit of condescending to the idea that the Knicks are too good or pristine for players like him. Julius Randle isn’t even close to as good; they’re different classes of players entirely. (“Entirely” in bold, all caps, with stars and glitter and glows around it.)

    (Which is why the Wiz aren’t going to want Randle back, most likely, but that’s a bit beside the current point.)

  247. Deeefense: Franchise changing players are available in the 2nd round also, but the draft is a game of probabilities. You are unlikely to get an all star caliber talent in the mid to late teens. You can sign or draft all star caliber talent using assets you’ve accumulated, players you have, and your own picks any time one is available. There a few of them available every season, but you can’t be a dreg team and get one. That has been our problem for a long time.

    Nets, Bucks, Nuggets, Jazz, Heat, and Raptors all built winners by drafting well in lower spots and being patient and opportunistic. The Nets are probably the worst example as they have decimated their future flexibility for a very short championship window, which I guess is worth it when you are the 2nd banana in a town. Same is true for the Clips although their path has been different.

    Sure, there’s probability involved, but I will raise the card-counting analogy again. Good FOs know how to lower the odds by shrewd analysis. This has been the failing of our FO more than any other…we do the opposite of card-counting and decrease our odds through voodoo draft theories. Picking Knox and Frank against any intelligent analytical evidence set the cause back at least a couple of years, not draft position per se. Obi is looking like another missed opportunity.

    So if anything, the argument should be “Hey, we’re very bad at drafting, so might as well trade those picks before we fuck them up.” I see that as an absurd way to proceed, and would rather bank on them learning from the rookie mistake they made with Obi. But the odds are that the Dallas pick will be top-16 and the Knicks pick will be top-10. There will surely be high-floor players there, and a puncher’s chance at a franchise player. I’m good with those odds.

  248. E, all merc’d out:
    Bradley Beal pre-season was 15th on SI’s list and is heading for virtually certain all-NBA status.He’s a 27 year old superstar and the Knicks have nothing close to that.We have to at some point get out of the habit of condescending to the idea that the Knicks are too good or pristine for players like him.Julius Randle isn’t even close to as good; they’re different classes of players entirely. (“Entirely” in bold, all caps, with stars and glitter and glows around it.)

    (Which is why the Wiz aren’t going to want Randle back, most likely, but that’s a bit beside the current point.)

    This is a ridiculous post. It’s not Beal vs. Randle. It’s Beal vs. Randle and the assets it would take to get it done. Who the fuck is saying “The Knicks are too good or too pristine for players like him?” Stop making shit up.

  249. Bradley Beal pre-season was 15th on SI’s list

    The arbitrary rankings of naked punditry? Not persuasive evidence on Knickerblogger.

    Which is another thing about Wood – he was bounced out of the league despite being a very productive player.

    I don’t regret passing up on a guy with those character issues.

    Do you have any sources for his alleged character issues? I mean, Jeremy Lin bounced around the league before he broke out here. Seth Curry was an NBDL player for years before finding a place on a contender, even though he had come from Duke and was known to come from a high-character family: zero character issues. NBA franchises are largely dreadful at evaluating talent.

  250. “(One of) (t)he problem(s) with the Melo trade was(__) Melo”

    Brian, can we set up track changes for cleaner edits?

  251. And the best way to get all star talent is via trade and free agency once you’ve already tanked yourself into a couple of good players and added a few others and are likely to start drafting in the teens.

    Has strat just been slowly adopting the consensus KB strategy and is only now comfortable enough to admit it?

  252. SI’s rankings are in their way more persuasive evidence than KB and that’s kind of the condescension I described. As to Z-man’s question, the list is endless. Start with CP3 and go from there. It’s starting up again with Bradley Beal. The suggestion is basically “stop being negative, we want to win games,” and then when something is offered up to win more games, that’s rejected, too.

  253. I don’t want to win more games if it means trading young talent and future picks for Bradley Beal. He isn’t that good and we wouldn’t be good if we got him.

    The Knicks direction is fine right now. We have some young talent, we have some valuable draft picks, we have a clean cap sheet.

    If the Knicks FO actually is above average, and there are reasons to hope that is true, we might actually be turning a corner here.

    Trading for Bradley Beal would be turning a full 180.

  254. SI’s rankings are in their way more persuasive evidence than KB

    oh, well I’m convinced now

    He isn’t that good and we wouldn’t be good if we got him.

    I disagree that he’s not that good. He’s a supernova of an offensive player right now. The problem is that I doubt he can keep this up for the duration of any extension he signs. Betting on him to improve from here is even worse. Paying at peak is a bad strategy.

    But I do agree that he wouldn’t turn this team into a contender alone. He’d improve the offense considerably, but I think we top out as a 45-48 win team as it stands. And capped out, of course.

  255. The problem isn’t the Knick FO, it’s the fact that the head coach engenders zero confidence in either his ability or propensity to properly evaluate and deploy young players. That’s his history entirely, and he’s obviously continuing it this year. That reality has to be taken into account in realistic next steps. Tyrese Haliburton would be on probation behind Elfrid Payton right now, just like Immanuel Quickley is. That doesn’t really scream “let’s hold on to our lottery picks and just slowly rebuild.”

  256. My argument would be that Beal isn’t actually a superstar. He’s good but not that much better than Randle (though it’s easier to see how Beal would fit next to another star). Beal is the player you bring in to Milwaukee, Dallas, or Toronto to put an already good team (or what should be a good team) over the top not the guy a bad team (which is what we are!!!) should be bringing in to build around.

    As an aside, Beal is a guy the Bucks should have targeted, not fucking Jrue Holiday.

  257. As an aside, Beal is a guy the Bucks should have targeted, not fucking Jrue Holiday.

    i was about to say the bucks would have been much better off with resigning malcom brogdon, just looking at a stat comparison of jrue and malcom though the difference in their play doesn’t seem that great…

  258. I can see an argument that Beal is a slightly better fit with Giannis but the idea he is a lot better than Holliday, or better at all frankly, reeks of yay pointz.

    I mean, am I crazy? Is Bradley Beal really a guy you could ever see in the NBA stratosphere?

  259. IIRC Holiday rates very, very highly in RAPM, like a top 10 player between 2017 and 2020 or something like that. And the Bucks have an EWL of 16-5 right now with an SRS over 8, so it’s not like they’ve lost a step. Eric Bledsoe maybe single-handedly took the last two postseasons from Giannis, and I think there’s a solid chance they whoop the depleted Warriors in 2019. (Less optimistic to face down a healthy LeBron & AD combo, but that’s the case for literally every team in the league.) They’re beyond all-in, but I think the Holiday trade looks far worse with more readily available metrics.

  260. E, Rose, Noah, Deng and Butler were all young players under Thibs.

    RJ and Mitch are literally getting some of the most minutes on this team. Quickley has been averaging like 25 a game except there is a shorter leash on him when he’s not playing well…which is how it should be for a late first round pick. And Randle…the merc…he’s 26.

    I’m just not really sure who you’re talking about when you go on and on about young players not getting minutes. Frank? Well he was getting minutes until he got hurt. He can NEVER stay healthy. The second he starts to improve, boom, knee injury, out a month and then it starts all over and that’s been his story for his entire NBA career.

    Knox? Well, he was getting minutes too but then he stopped hitting shots. And he just isn’t that good. Period. Its weird that everyone agrees that Knox and Frank were horrible picks yet its somehow some crime that Thibs chooses to play better players over them. I mean, at this point what ceiling are we keeping those two from reaching?

    Obi is the one guy I can see you having a valid point with but no one saw Randle going to this level and Randle is 26 and we have control over him next season, so of course they’re gonna play him. That’s more on the FO for drafting him than it is on Thibs for not playing him. Also, he was hurt too. IF he hadn’t gotten hurt, who knows how many minutes he’d be putting up each night.

    Thibs has the team playing defense and RJ, Mitch and Quickley all playing major minutes and contributing to wins. Those three youngsters are our best young players. The other ones so far aren’t really showing any reason to warrant more PT.

  261. “Except there’s a shorter leash on him when he’s not playing well …..” That shorter leash is exactly what I mean. There is no short leash on Austin Rivers or Elfrid Payton or Reggie Bullock.
    And Frank, yeah — he’s shown no interest in developing Frank in the least and has played merc stiffs over him instead, and took away his minutes because of injury.

    If you want to go back to his GM days, he turned Kris Dunn, Zach LaVine, and the draft pick that became Lauri Markkanen into Dario Saric and Robert Covington. The atmosphere he set up was rebelled against by Karl-Anthony Towns (*), most likely because of Thibs’s favoritism toward Jimmy Butler.

    I guess we’ll just agree to disagree, but there’s nothing about Thibs that gives me any confidence with young draft picks. He has a long record, and he’s doing it again this year. I have zero confidence in him in that regard. His sweet spot is cobbling something together that can make spare parts play a bit better than expectations or a lesser coach would have them play in the regular season and he’s doing that well this year. He wasn’t even that great a playoff coach in his heyday.

    (*) SLAM magazine: “Karl-Anthony Towns says the way former Timberwolves head coach and president of basketball operations Tom Thibodeau treated young players is a “disrespect and a slap in the face to their development.””

  262. The Honorable Cock Jowles: IIRC Holiday rates very, very highly in RAPM, like a top 10 player between 2017 and 2020 or something like that.

    RAPM LOVES Holiday. #3 in that timespan. Better than Durant, Lebron, Harden, Kawhi, etc.

    RAPM seems to favor PGs based on the top list.

  263. Owen:
    I can see an argument that Beal is a slightly better fit with Giannis but the idea he is a lot better than Holliday, or better at all frankly, reeks of yay pointz.

    I mean, am I crazy? Is Bradley Beal really a guy you could ever see in the NBA stratosphere?

    Between his age and shooting I just think Beal is a way better fit than Holiday. And I think Holiday is a bit overrated.

  264. We need all star caliber talent on this team and not another potentially good role player several years from now.

    True, it’s impossible to find anyone good with late first round picks. I mean just look at the absolute bum the Knicks just drafted at #25. The Dallas pick this year will almost certainly be higher than that, but still, no chance it lands us a good player. Might as well trade it for Rudy Gay or something.

    Re: Beal, if he is actually put on the market the competition for him will be cutthroat. I would say the bare minimum we could get him for is RJ, Knox, and three unprotected firsts (whichever picks are better between ours and Dallas’ in those years).

    Now tell me how good the remaining team, which would be without future three first-rounders assuming this conservative estimate is correct, looks. I think 48 wins is a stretch and they’d be closer to the 40-42 range.

  265. An yes, Karl Anthony Towns. The superstar who only got to the playoffs once when he was coached by Thibs and had Butler as his teammate but was such a diva because he didn’t want to play defense that he drove them both off the team and now is THE MAN on a team with a 235 win percentage.

    Thibs ain’t the GM. So bringing that up is pointless.

    Thibs ain’t the reason Frank missed a month with a knee injury.

    It sounds like you’re just a secret Frank fan and most of your angst comes from that.

    Frank is not part of our core future. The best case scenario for him coming into this season was he proved to be a decent bench piece. Maybe Thibs should give him another chance but so what if he doesn’t? Dude has had plenty of chances with The Knicks and any time he’s shown even a hint of progress, its followed by an injury. I mean, if you were thibs wouldn’t you be wary of taking away minutes from some productive vets only to have him get hurt again in a few weeks and now you gotta change up your rotations again?

  266. Thibs plays all the young guys who should play. It’s honestly been the most pleasantly surprising aspect of his tenure in my opinion. Barrett and Mitch are starters who get starters’ minutes, Quickley plays a ton and usually closes games, and Obi gets all the minutes it’s tolerable to give someone who looks like he belongs in China. The other “young guys” have proven they suck.

    (*) SLAM magazine: “Karl-Anthony Towns says the way former Timberwolves head coach and president of basketball operations Tom Thibodeau treated young players is a “disrespect and a slap in the face to their development.””

    So Thibs will need to be fired before we execute my “sign Zach LaVine and trade for KAT in the summer of 2022” plan. Got it.

  267. Yeah I feel kind of relieved not to have given that contract to Trevor Bauer. Get Odorizzi to eat some innings, maybe bring in Jackie Bradley and Justin Turner on a short deal to play 3B.

  268. E, Rose, Noah, Deng and Butler were all young players under Thibs.

    Noah and Deng played their first seasons for Thibs at 25 and Butler, age 23, started 2012-13 as an end-of-rotation player and became Thibs’ mule (once inexplicably playing 50 minutes in an end-of-regular-season contest against the Knicks) when Rip Hamilton got hurt for six weeks. Remember also that Rose was injured for the whole season, too. Butler only played because of injury circumstances.

    Trevor Bauer: climate change denier, birther, 9/11 truther, Dodger.

  269. Yeah, I don’t care what KAT said about Thibs. Honestly. He’s one player. Just because he puts up numbers and was the number one pick people act like he’s a star. He isn’t. He’s the Demarcus Cousins of the Gen Z NBA. A talented guy who could be one of the core guys on a good team if he ever gave a shit on defense. But he doesn’t so his team sucks. I mean, I thought teaming up with rising superstar Russell, his best friend, was going to unlock the KAT we all know exists. But its the same ole same ole. Sounds like disrespecting the youngsters to him means demanding excellence from them and not accepting it when they slack off.

  270. So we’re reduced to rationalizing the Knicks’ head coach’s utter inability to reach and complete alienation of one of the NBA’s young superstars. Why we’d want to do that is a complete mystery. KAT’s quote and impression are terrifying and the whole thing imploded so badly that even Butler wanted to get out at first opportunity.

    And I guess we’re also now KB condescending to the idea of Karl-Anthony Towns. Pretty soon we’ll be down to “the only players the Knicks should ever give up assets for are LeBron James, Anthony Davis, and Kawhi Leonard” (*) — and soon even LeBron will age out.

    (*) And of course … big huge massive Friday afternoon smile … Brandon Clarke.

  271. The “demanding excellence” rationalization sounds a whole hella lot the old dictum of “if everyone you see is an asshole … “

  272. If I’m Thibs, “Karl-Anthony Towns didn’t meet my lofty standards, but Elfrid Payton does” isn’t exactly something I’d want to go to bat with.

    Now what will probably be the last word on Frank and there really isn’t even much substance to it. Objectively, here’s what happened. Frank finally got a chance for two games and played pretty well. He got injured. Thibs took him out of the rotation because of that injury. Rationalize it, explain it, justify it, do whatever you will with it, whatever — that’s what happened. It’s a virtual axiom of sports, honored entirely in the breach, that players don’t lose jobs or minutes because of injury — and they absolutely, positively don’t lose jobs and minutes because of injury to the likes of Austin Rivers and Reggie Bullock. It’s just extremely poor man management. This could never have been happened and it would still be quite sensible to be terrified of young talent in Thibs’s hands, but it did happen. One more for the ledger.

    The point of all this isn’t really to bash Thibs as much as it is to set rational expectations of how this team should be built and planned. If you want to slowly build through asset accumulation and young draft picks, Thibs simply isn’t your guy. That means you have to go to Plan B. Thibs could be your guy for a Plan B. He isn’t your guy for Plan A. I doubt he’d even stick around to see Plan A through and he’d likely sabotage it to try to get his way in any event.

  273. I mean, I thought teaming up with rising superstar Russell, his best friend, was going to unlock the KAT we all know exists. But its the same ole same ole.

    They have played 114 minutes together

  274. Trying this again since I have a comment in moderation for some reason: Karl-Anthony Towns and De’Angelo Russell have played a grand total of 114 minutes together, and if firing Thibs were a condition of getting the former to come here I would happily star in a film written and directed by Donnie Walsh if that’s what it took to make that happen.

  275. thenoblefacehumper:
    Trying this again since I have a comment in moderation for some reason: Karl-Anthony Towns and De’Angelo Russell have played a grand total of 114 minutes together, and if firing Thibs were a condition of getting the former to come here I would happily star in a film written and directed by Donnie Walsh if that’s what it took to make that happen.

    Don’t tempt us . . . The Knickerblogger hive mind probably has enough collective juice to fund Donnie’s Kickstarter.

  276. Thibs is a grinder and a worker who got passed over more than he probably should have (*) and it’s absolutely plain as day that he identifies and bonds with other grinders and workers and strivers and doesn’t identify and bond with talented people he doesn’t think grind and work enough (Hi, KAT!!). It’s so obvious that he should just get a tat sloganed on his chest and get it over with.

    The grinder goes internally ballistic at talented people who they perceive as able to get by without “grinding.” That’s Thibs, without question.

    (*) Most likely because he’s horrific in the art of managing up, which I expect to manifest itself yet again sometime in roughly two years. Maybe less. Hopefully, the roster won’t have been totally nuked by then. Can you get better at that in your early 60s? I’m still a ways away from that, but I’d say it’s not inconceivable. Unlikely, not impossible. I’ve certainly been around the block long enough to know you have to be able to manage up, no matter how talented you are. (And I guess long enough to realize that Thibs is obviously pretty bad at it.)

  277. Pretty sure E is Elfrid Payton’s burner account. Reverse psychology.

  278. Thibs used our trash and cooked us a comfort food.
    Let’s not shoot him for not serving us caviar and lobsters!
    His rotations change slower than a sleuth but at least starting RJ and Mitch from day one and giving them all the time they need to show us their stuff is promising.
    Imagine this team with 5 mercenary starters.
    I’d be the first to throw him a rock.

  279. I just simmed the lottery on Tankathon and the Knicks got the #1 and #4 picks on the first try.

    Therefore this is what is actually going to happen

  280. JK47:
    I just simmed the lottery on Tankathon and the Knicks got the #1 and #4 picks on the first try.

    Therefore this is what is actually going to happen

    Only if we hire David Griffin as GM

  281. Considering KAT has never come close to the playoffs without thibs and is now the man on a team with a 235 winning percentage, I’ll take the coach who prefers grinders over lazy talented players who underperform.

    Obviously the best combo is a super talented player who is also a grinder like lebron, Kobe, Duncan, etc. those are the guys who win rings. But if I don’t have one of those dudes on my team, give me the grinders every day. The grinders can be the role players that support the superstar and win it all.

  282. KAT’s played 4 games this year so it might be a little unfair to blame Minnesota’s record on him.

  283. I really don’t mind when I’m loathed by the most-loathed poster on the board

  284. Apparently we are closely monitoring Oladipo? That would probably be a dumb trade but according to the trade machine we can just straight up swap Knox for Oladipo thanks to our cap space. Amusingly, the trade machine claims that trade doesn’t affect the winning percentage of either team.

  285. The best coaches and leaders can manage all personality types, not just their own. Actually, the best coaches and leaders are able to figure out when they’re favoring the personality type with which they most closely identify, and adjust and adapt.

  286. E, all merc’d out:
    The best coaches and leaders can manage all personality types, not just their own.Actually, the best coaches and leaders are able to figure out when they’re favoring the personality type with which they most closely identify, and adjust and adapt.

    Yeah, I was especially impressed by the way Pop managed Kawhi’s personality.

  287. If the best nba coach can lose his best silent 2way player then even Kendall Jenner can lose a player or two from time to time

  288. Adebayo has taken and made 11 FT in the first 15 minutes of the Heat game. Crazy.

  289. The Honorable Cock Jowles:
    Bargnani vibes

    Seriously, KP should pay copyrights to Bargnani for the last sequence on that video – the “contested” 3. Bargnani had it patented, right here: https://twitter.com/igzrap/status/953782507945779200?s=20

    And since we haven’t celebrated Bargs enough lately:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_f5Xg2rAJQ

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07DjA1g6Ngg

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aigHOwL_EM0

    And the chef d’oeuvre:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7b5wHb6htM

    Bless Clyde, trying to make sense of it.

  290. DRed:
    Pass first James Harden is a trip

    He’s been very pleasing to watch, aesthetically, which is not something I expected to say of James Harden.

  291. Did he do it again?

    Edit: nope

    Why is Bradley Beal making me look bad? I take everything back.

  292. LaMelo is the real deal talent-wise. Kid is a savant…doesn’t look like anything bothers him. The only question is whether he has the maturity, leadership and drive to be a winner.

  293. I’m having a tough time getting used to the clippers in those colors, I keep thinking they’re the spurs, especially when kawhi is out there…

  294. Why are we projected to pick 3 and the Dallas pick as mid first? Isn’t it our own pick should be late mid as we are in playoff contention while Dallas should be in lottery as it seems they’ll not make the playoff this year.
    Our team next year will look good.

  295. Heavencent- I am not sure how ESPN does it but they probably build it off preseason projections of season performance. We were supposed to be bad.

  296. Guys – i have found something positive for my entire family (Wife and 3 kids) that has come out of Knicks fandom. Here’s the flowchart:

    1) Become Knicks fan
    2) bang head on wall out of frustration
    3) look for others to share in frustration
    4) fall ass backward into Knickerblogger
    5) read Mike Vorkunov writing stuff on Knickerblogger before he becomes Important Beat Writer
    6) realize “alsep” and “Alan” = Important Entertainment Writer
    7) decide to listen to Important Beat Writer and Important Entertainment Writer do a podcast
    8) for some reason decide to listen all the way to the end after they’ve stopped talking about the Knicks
    9) learn about a show called Bluey which is a kids show – I can’t stand watching kids shows
    10) For some reason turn on Bluey out of desperation of something to do with my kids
    11) Whole family now addicted to Bluey

    Truly amazing – all thanks to the Knicks!
    (And thanks for the recommendation Alan!)

  297. Frank, if the rest of my career is just about me convinceing people to watch Bluey, it will be worth it.

  298. oh man. jowles will never know lana del rey as intimately as i’ve come to know luna girl. that fucking show. on the other hand one of my kid’s cutest moments came when he wasn’t really doing coherent phrases yet and on the way to the park suddenly grabbed the push rod of his little blue truck and started wobble sprinting while screaming SUPER GEKKO MUSCLES

  299. Z-man:
    What’s with the 1PM starts on both Sat and Sun?

    so us folks on the left coast have something to watch with our brunch….I think on super bowl sunday the nba tries to have the games not conflict with the game on sunday..

Comments are closed.