I think Hukporti starts in Westchester, and Skapintsev may beat out Sims. They seem to like Sims but I'm not sure why. Unless he has improved ]enough to play the 4 as well as the 5, which would be pretty shocking, I think he's kind a fun player to watch but not actually, you know, good. At least, not good at the things the Knicks need him to do.
versatile big, wont have to play the 4 on this team which hurt the Knicks last year, if he can hit the 3 at maybe a 35% clip he vould close some games over Mitch..
I think Precious could be a valuable piece vs Boston becausr of Porzingis and the abikity to switch everything..
I think Hukporti starts in Westchester, and Skapintsev may beat out Sims. They seem to like Sims but I'm not sure why.
Agree with this. In SL, Skap looked like he could be a viable backup C. Also agree that they like Sims, but he just seems to lack defensive positioning instincts. Hukporti starts out in Westchester for sure, he's quite raw.
Jeremy Cohen
@TheCohencidence
The Achiuwa signing means the Knicks have less salary to send out in any trade this summer. Want KAT? Have to add Hart or DiVincenzo to Randle AND Robinson. Want anyone making $20M+? Hart or DiVincenzo goes out. Not happening.
Normally when a player signs a 1 year deal with Bird rights they get an automatic no trade clause, he is waiving it, interrsting
they probably gave him an extra $1-$2 million to do so.
There's this idea out there on the web that the Knicks might pay Achiuwa more than he'd get on the open market to make him a more useful trade piece later on. More money on his deal means he can be traded for a more expensive player down the road. The fact that he waived his no-trade clause suggests that is the strategy.
RE: RE: RE: Fred Katz said he has waived his bird veto
Normally when a player signs a 1 year deal with Bird rights they get an automatic no trade clause, he is waiving it, interrsting
they probably gave him an extra $1-$2 million to do so.
There's this idea out there on the web that the Knicks might pay Achiuwa more than he'd get on the open market to make him a more useful trade piece later on. More money on his deal means he can be traded for a more expensive player down the road. The fact that he waived his no-trade clause suggests that is the strategy.
This front office has their shit together with cap management and how to work the system
RE: RE: RE: Fred Katz said he has waived his bird veto
There's this idea out there on the web that the Knicks might pay Achiuwa more than he'd get on the open market to make him a more useful trade piece later on. More money on his deal means he can be traded for a more expensive player down the road. The fact that he waived his no-trade clause suggests that is the strategy. [/quote]
I don't get the obsession that people have with connecting KAT to the Knicks. I makes zero sense to me. We'd have to send out Randle and other key players. Randle? Fine, I get that as he is not signed long term. However, once you start adding all these other players it makes no sense. We'll be creating more holes just to fill one and then pay him a shit ton. No thanks.
I don't get the obsession that people have with connecting KAT to the Knicks. I makes zero sense to me. We'd have to send out Randle and other key players. Randle? Fine, I get that as he is not signed long term. However, once you start adding all these other players it makes no sense. We'll be creating more holes just to fill one and then pay him a shit ton. No thanks.
Hartenstein is a good player, and he came up big the second half of last season filling in for Mitch and taking on some of the offensive load without Randle, but he’s gotten to be a bit overrated by the national media for a couple of reasons. The first being lolknicks, second being the contract which was way above market value since OKC had to convince him to leave NY.
Realistically though, is he even a top 15 center in the league? He’s a nice player but it’s not like we are losing Patrick Ewing here. Health is the big question mark, as it is with most big men, but the drop off from Hartenstein to Mitch isn’t significant, and if backup C is the one question mark on the roster then you’re in great shape.
'The dropoff from hartenstein to mitch isnt significant'
First we have to agree on what the player is. Hartenstein is significantly more valuable on the offensive end than mitch.
Better free throw shooter
Can score from 10-15, under the rim, short range, and has demonstrated a 3 point shot in his career
Skilled passer and offensive initiator. Good offensive chemistry/two-man game with brunson.
Mitch is purely a defensive force and relentless rebounder.
Could you name 14 other centers you believe to be better? Its not a loaded position in the league.
After that I'm really not sure. When you combine the rebounding, passing, floater, shot blocking and hustle I'm not sure who in the next tier is CLEARLY better.
He's in the mix with:
Turner
Gobert
Lopez
Allen
So that's 9-15 range imo.
RE: 'The dropoff from hartenstein to mitch isnt significant'
First we have to agree on what the player is. Hartenstein is significantly more valuable on the offensive end than mitch.
Better free throw shooter
Can score from 10-15, under the rim, short range, and has demonstrated a 3 point shot in his career
Skilled passer and offensive initiator. Good offensive chemistry/two-man game with brunson.
Mitch is purely a defensive force and relentless rebounder.
Could you name 14 other centers you believe to be better? Its not a loaded position in the league.
Jokic, Embiid, Davis, Bam, Sabonis, Wemby, Chet, Gobert, Porzingis, Sengun, Jarrett Allen, Lopez, Turner are all pretty clearly better players than iHart. He had an up and down year last year but DeAndre Ayton is still probably the better player
Then that brings you to guys like Claxton, Lively, Nurkic, that are probably in the same iHart tier depending on what your team needs from the position.
would take Ayton over iHart right now. The Blazers literally drafted another center in the top 10 because Ayton sucks so much.
Yeah, Ayton is a tough one to evaluate at this point. That Blazers team was a mess last year, but I wouldn't look at them drafting Clingan as any indication of what they think about Ayton moreso than him just being the best player available in a weak draft.
Ayton's counting stats were good last year, in a year that he "sucks so much" he still put up 17-11, and since free throw percentage was brought up about iHart he shot over 80% from the line. His advanced stats were the lowest of his career with only a .106 WS/48, PER of 18.9, BPM of 0.3, etc.
With that said, none of those are terrible, and it's still too early to just say Ayton stinks now. Maybe it was just an off year adjusting to a new situation.
Is a good player and definitely a top 15 center. He’s better than Ayton- by a lot.
But I do think he is replaceable for the Knicks. Lineups with Randle at the 5 is going unlock some great offense and they still be able to hold up on D. I also think they can find the next Hartenstein at some point.
Let’s not forget he was abused by Embiid and did not have a great playoffs.
Part of the reason that a good backup at center is important is
would take Ayton over iHart right now. The Blazers literally drafted another center in the top 10 because Ayton sucks so much.
Yeah, Ayton is a tough one to evaluate at this point. That Blazers team was a mess last year, but I wouldn't look at them drafting Clingan as any indication of what they think about Ayton moreso than him just being the best player available in a weak draft.
Ayton's counting stats were good last year, in a year that he "sucks so much" he still put up 17-11, and since free throw percentage was brought up about iHart he shot over 80% from the line. His advanced stats were the lowest of his career with only a .106 WS/48, PER of 18.9, BPM of 0.3, etc.
With that said, none of those are terrible, and it's still too early to just say Ayton stinks now. Maybe it was just an off year adjusting to a new situation.
The counting stats have always been pretty good, which is what landed him that max deal. But if you peel back the onion just a little bit he plays absolutely 0 defense and seems to just lack any sort of intensity on either end. The Suns couldn't wait to get rid of him and the Blazers already drafted his replacement which I think says a lot.
Part of the reason that a good backup at center is important is
Be was good when he was here but I guess people forget the playoffs. He sucked. He couldn't compete with Embiid at all and had one good game in Indy. I don't care about the numbers. It's about the fit. Mitch is a better fit for this squad and coach. In order for Thibs to run his defense he needs a defensive presence. We are so consumed with Mitch's weaknesses that we focus too much on the offense. How do the Knicks win? It is with good defense and rebounding. IHart couldn't provide that when it mattered. He had a hell of a run when Mitch was injured during the regular season but hurt us in the playoffs. If Mitch never came back, we do not get past Philly. We have enough offense with the guys we have now. Yes, a stretch 5 would be great. But guys like Turner don't grow on trees where they provide both defense and outside shooting. As long as we have that anchor in the middle, this team is perfectly fine. The key is getting that guy, not an offensive threat.
now that IHart is gone we're saying he wasn't a top 10 center in the league. You may like Sengun and Sabonis's offensive game better, but IHart was great for this team. His defense and his ability to run the high pick and roll were things we relied on later in the season.
There's no doubt that this team will be better with a healthy Julius, OG and adding Bridges, but I am concerned with the lack of size on the roster, especially with Mitch's inability to stay healthy.
If Thibs remains inflexible and needs to run a center out with most all lineups, I think that we're a Mitch injury away from being a worst team.
now that IHart is gone we're saying he wasn't a top 10 center in the league. You may like Sengun and Sabonis's offensive game better, but IHart was great for this team. His defense and his ability to run the high pick and roll were things we relied on later in the season.
There's no doubt that this team will be better with a healthy Julius, OG and adding Bridges, but I am concerned with the lack of size on the roster, especially with Mitch's inability to stay healthy.
If Thibs remains inflexible and needs to run a center out with most all lineups, I think that we're a Mitch injury away from being a worst team.
Has this regime not shown to be great at what they do? Are we concerned right now? Yes, but only because we need to have another body. Are we concerned that this regime will not get someome? Hell no.
The C position for the Knicks might be this simple
to beat the drum for trading for Kessler or Duren. Very different skill sets but those are the two guys that would make me feel really confident about the team top to bottom heading into the season.
to beat the drum for trading for Kessler or Duren. Very different skill sets but those are the two guys that would make me feel really confident about the team top to bottom heading into the season.
Agreed but these things take time. There is no rush right now. Everyone seems to want to have the full roster yesterday. This regime is going to do what is right for the Knicks. I think this could go to the trade deadline or even further with vet buyouts.
a top tier center but it is frustrating that instead of adding to what we already had we've taken a step back at that position. And we have limited paths to acquiring one without trading something or someone we want to keep. Even if OG or Randle can hold their own defensively guarding bigs, we're going to miss the rim protection and rebounding on both ends.
you woukd really need Mitch against to beat, but we also saw OG hold his own against Embiid last year..
The tough part with Philly this year is going to be PG because its not going to be able to just help off a tobias Harris to double Embiid and PG will make you pay from 3..
The interesting thing to watch with Philly is their hierarchy, i think all 3 can play off of each other because they can all shoot the 3 and play carch and shoot, the interesting thing will be can Maxxey run the offense where he is setting guys up..
The goal doesn't have to be to be better than every other team at the C position. The goal needs to be to have guys that don't get abused by the opponent and can allow your team to function the way it is intended. Back in the 90s, that was such a golden age for Cs yet the Bulls never had that dominant C. So, what do we need to be functional? It is really as simple as being able to play defense and rebound. Anything extra like IHart's passing was icing on the cake. Defense and rebounding are non-negotiables. If we play a team like Boston, I agree with playing small ball because Porzingis isn't going to be banging down low. He's going to hit 3s with the occasional drive to the hoop.
Mitch has seemingly regressed so far on offense that he's become borderline unplayable at the end of games IMO. The free throw shooting has gone from bad to worse. His hands suck. And he just doesn't finish around he rim like he used to. iHart mitigated all of that.
I don't think that the sky is falling or that we won't be able to acquire someone that will allow Thibs to play rotations the way he wants them. My only point is that trying to downplay the role that IHart played on this teams success, especially later in the season, is disingenuous.
I think that the roster is more talented than last season, but probably less balanced. That all can change if they trade for someone or whatever. But I think this is probably the team that they roll into the season with and try to let Thibs figure it out.
I'm really optimistic about this team for the coming season. Really interested in seeing the rotations and getting these players to gel. But knowing what we know about Thibs, the backup center is going to get minutes and Precious is a clear downgrade from IHart.
I don't think that the sky is falling or that we won't be able to acquire someone that will allow Thibs to play rotations the way he wants them. My only point is that trying to downplay the role that IHart played on this teams success, especially later in the season, is disingenuous.
I think that the roster is more talented than last season, but probably less balanced. That all can change if they trade for someone or whatever. But I think this is probably the team that they roll into the season with and try to let Thibs figure it out.
I'm really optimistic about this team for the coming season. Really interested in seeing the rotations and getting these players to gel. But knowing what we know about Thibs, the backup center is going to get minutes and Precious is a clear downgrade from IHart.
I don't disagree but all true basketball fans know that the playoffs are completely different than the regular season. In the regular season IHart was phenomenal. In the playoffs against Embiid and with the spacing and movement of Indy, he was flat out bad. Long story short, it would have been great to keep him but it isn't a crippling thing not to have him back.
I don't think that the sky is falling or that we won't be able to acquire someone that will allow Thibs to play rotations the way he wants them. My only point is that trying to downplay the role that IHart played on this teams success, especially later in the season, is disingenuous.
I think that the roster is more talented than last season, but probably less balanced. That all can change if they trade for someone or whatever. But I think this is probably the team that they roll into the season with and try to let Thibs figure it out.
I'm really optimistic about this team for the coming season. Really interested in seeing the rotations and getting these players to gel. But knowing what we know about Thibs, the backup center is going to get minutes and Precious is a clear downgrade from IHart.
iHart was awesome in his role last year, it is also a role doesn't really exist on this team anymore. The only reason Hartenstein played the role he did was because there were no better options. For as good as Hart, Divencenzo, OG are, none of them are guys you are going to rely on to take the playmaking/facilitating burden off of Brunson's shoulders. They didn't even have that in Deuce as the back up PG.
With Randle back, and guys like Bridges, Payne, and Kolek added to the rotation you have other options to facilitate the offense when Brunson is on the bench or needs someone to take the pressure off. What this team needs at the center position is someone to do the dirty work, rebounding, anchor the defense, etc. Honestly Mitch is the ideal fit, you just have to hope he is healthy come the playoffs.
to play a lot of Randle at the 5 especially to close halves and games, i think with the perimiter defense this team is going to habe you can get away with it and offensively they are going to be almost impossible to guard with the shooting and floor spacing
RE: Honestly, I don't care where people rank IHart.
Be was good when he was here but I guess people forget the playoffs. He sucked. He couldn't compete with Embiid at all and had one good game in Indy. I don't care about the numbers. It's about the fit. Mitch is a better fit for this squad and coach. In order for Thibs to run his defense he needs a defensive presence. We are so consumed with Mitch's weaknesses that we focus too much on the offense. How do the Knicks win? It is with good defense and rebounding. IHart couldn't provide that when it mattered. He had a hell of a run when Mitch was injured during the regular season but hurt us in the playoffs. If Mitch never came back, we do not get past Philly. We have enough offense with the guys we have now. Yes, a stretch 5 would be great. But guys like Turner don't grow on trees where they provide both defense and outside shooting. As long as we have that anchor in the middle, this team is perfectly fine. The key is getting that guy, not an offensive threat.
to play a lot of Randle at the 5 especially to close halves and games, i think with the perimiter defense this team is going to habe you can get away with it and offensively they are going to be almost impossible to guard with the shooting and floor spacing
This would be my preference honestly. Julius should be able to play passably on defense with Bridges and OG on the floor guarding the perimeter.
I think that is an option based on where they are at but with his shoulder injury and OG's injury history, it is not smart to have this as a plan. Here and there? Okay. Consistency in this? No way. Thibs has never done this before and, imo, their plan is to get that 2nd C. It just doesn't have to be forced now. You basically have one shot at it and it needs to be a good shot. They aren't just junping at anything they see, hence FA. They are waiting for the right/best opportunity to present itself before they pounce.
I think that is an option based on where they are at but with his shoulder injury and OG's injury history, it is not smart to have this as a plan. Here and there? Okay. Consistency in this? No way. Thibs has never done this before and, imo, their plan is to get that 2nd C. It just doesn't have to be forced now. You basically have one shot at it and it needs to be a good shot. They aren't just junping at anything they see, hence FA. They are waiting for the right/best opportunity to present itself before they pounce.
Thibs played OG at the 4 the minute he got there with the 2nd unit and had him guarding Embiid in game 4 the entire 4th quarter..
Thibs also talked about being able to play smaller lineupz with OG, Katz has mentioned because he got injured Thibs backed off because he just wanted him to come back and be ready..
They arent playing Divo and Hart 20 minutes a game, they are going to play more and how you do that is playing OG at the 4 and Randle at the 5..
Will it be all the time? no but guarantee they close like that against a good portion of teams, can you do it against every team? no but the majority you can
RE: RE: I don't think Randle at the 5 is the plan.
I think that is an option based on where they are at but with his shoulder injury and OG's injury history, it is not smart to have this as a plan. Here and there? Okay. Consistency in this? No way. Thibs has never done this before and, imo, their plan is to get that 2nd C. It just doesn't have to be forced now. You basically have one shot at it and it needs to be a good shot. They aren't just junping at anything they see, hence FA. They are waiting for the right/best opportunity to present itself before they pounce.
Thibs played OG at the 4 the minute he got there with the 2nd unit and had him guarding Embiid in game 4 the entire 4th quarter..
Thibs also talked about being able to play smaller lineupz with OG, Katz has mentioned because he got injured Thibs backed off because he just wanted him to come back and be ready..
They arent playing Divo and Hart 20 minutes a game, they are going to play more and how you do that is playing OG at the 4 and Randle at the 5..
Will it be all the time? no but guarantee they close like that against a good portion of teams, can you do it against every team? no but the majority you can
Closing is different but that is a few minutes each game. Not a big deal. But going with Randle at the 5 and OG at the 4 when Mitch is off the court is what I am talking about.
RE: Honestly, I don't care where people rank IHart.
If Mitch never came back, we do not get past Philly.
What actually happened vs Philly:
Game 1: Mitch has a good game, plays 30 minutes. Knicks win.
Game 2: Mitch plays 18 minutes. IHart plays last seven minutes of 4Q and saves the game with a critical offensive rebound that leads to the go-ahead bucket. Then IHart saves the game again by blocking Maxey's drive. Knicks win.
Game 3: Mitch leaves in first half with injury. Knicks lose.
Game 4: Mitch doesn't play. Knicks win.
Game 5: With Knicks up by 6, Mitch commits foolish foul in last 30 seconds that results in 4 point play, allowing Sixers to send game to OT. Thibs then leaves Mitch on court for OT, but has to pull him for IHart, because Sixers are running pick and roll every play with Maxey, targeting Mitch, who is helpless to guard him. Knicks lose.
Game 6: Mitch plays 18 minutes. IHart plays last nine minutes of 4Q. Knicks win.
Bottom line: Mitch was mostly spectating for three of the Knicks' four wins and, in particular, spectating during the 4Q, when the games were being won.
This is to their credit. The center market dried up. Come the trade deadline there will be a whole set of new options. The Precious contract can now be traded with others to upgrade the backup center spot at the trade deadline. Until then...this is a hell of a team and they should be a blast to watch.
RE: RE: Honestly, I don't care where people rank IHart.
If Mitch never came back, we do not get past Philly.
What actually happened vs Philly:
Game 1: Mitch has a good game, plays 30 minutes. Knicks win.
Game 2: Mitch plays 18 minutes. IHart plays last seven minutes of 4Q and saves the game with a critical offensive rebound that leads to the go-ahead bucket. Then IHart saves the game again by blocking Maxey's drive. Knicks win.
Game 3: Mitch leaves in first half with injury. Knicks lose.
Game 4: Mitch doesn't play. Knicks win.
Game 5: With Knicks up by 6, Mitch commits foolish foul in last 30 seconds that results in 4 point play, allowing Sixers to send game to OT. Thibs then leaves Mitch on court for OT, but has to pull him for IHart, because Sixers are running pick and roll every play with Maxey, targeting Mitch, who is helpless to guard him. Knicks lose.
Game 6: Mitch plays 18 minutes. IHart plays last nine minutes of 4Q. Knicks win.
Bottom line: Mitch was mostly spectating for three of the Knicks' four wins and, in particular, spectating during the 4Q, when the games were being won.
Dude, did you watch the series?
RE: RE: RE: Honestly, I don't care where people rank IHart.
then I'd love to see what you are smoking. Embiid was destroying IHart. When Mitch came in to guard him, the games completely switched. Mitch was coming back from an injury. Did you expect him to play major minutes?
and Precious was the impact he had in the paint whether it was discouraging guys driving or him getting rebounds. If Embiid was fully healthy, I agree that Mitch wouldn't have been a great matchup. But Embiid wasn't healthy. He got healthier as the series went on. At first he was settling for jump shots but then he started to take guys down low.
You make a comment about not watching the game and then you present plus/minus with no comment on how it related to winning and losing? And who was on the court in the 4Q?
Come on. Gregg Popovich says he never even looks at +/-
anyone who says otherwise is just being a contrarian...
Mitch changed game 1, Knicks were flundering in the 1st and 3rd and Mitch came in and shut down Embiid and changed the game..
They dont win game 1 without Mitch that is a fact plain and simple and cant be argued..
Game 2 was a fluke win, Brunson was terrible in the 4th and the Knicks got lucky to steal one..
Game 3 Sixers got hot from 3 in the 3rd thats it and Embiid scored 50 covered by Ihart..
Game 4 OG won that game with his defense and Brunson took over offensively.
Game 5 was over and done, yes Mitch had two stupid plays at the end but the Knicks were up 6 with 30 seconds to play in large part because of Mitch's defense on Embiid..
Game 6 was Brunson taking over and OG in the 4th..
Hartenstein had abig rebound in game 2 and thats all he did, if Ihart doesnt play they still win that series, if Mitch doesnt play thr Knicks dont win that series and are maybe down 0-2 going back to Philly
anyone who says otherwise is just being a contrarian...
Mitch changed game 1, Knicks were flundering in the 1st and 3rd and Mitch came in and shut down Embiid and changed the game..
They dont win game 1 without Mitch that is a fact plain and simple and cant be argued..
Game 2 was a fluke win, Brunson was terrible in the 4th and the Knicks got lucky to steal one..
Game 3 Sixers got hot from 3 in the 3rd thats it and Embiid scored 50 covered by Ihart..
Game 4 OG won that game with his defense and Brunson took over offensively.
Game 5 was over and done, yes Mitch had two stupid plays at the end but the Knicks were up 6 with 30 seconds to play in large part because of Mitch's defense on Embiid..
Game 6 was Brunson taking over and OG in the 4th..
Hartenstein had abig rebound in game 2 and thats all he did, if Ihart doesnt play they still win that series, if Mitch doesnt play thr Knicks dont win that series and are maybe down 0-2 going back to Philly
I gave credit to Mitch for Game 1. It takes four wins to win a series and I don't see anything that contradicts what I said.
And it wasn't just his foolish play in Game 5 that was significant. He couldn't stay on the court in OT because he was being exploited. There's no rule that says the opposing team has to let Mitch play their C one-on-one.
Mitch is what we've got; I'll root for him. But it's hardly clear they couldn't have beat the Sixers without him, when they in fact did just that in Game 4, in Philly.
anyone who says otherwise is just being a contrarian...
Mitch changed game 1, Knicks were flundering in the 1st and 3rd and Mitch came in and shut down Embiid and changed the game..
They dont win game 1 without Mitch that is a fact plain and simple and cant be argued..
Game 2 was a fluke win, Brunson was terrible in the 4th and the Knicks got lucky to steal one..
Game 3 Sixers got hot from 3 in the 3rd thats it and Embiid scored 50 covered by Ihart..
Game 4 OG won that game with his defense and Brunson took over offensively.
Game 5 was over and done, yes Mitch had two stupid plays at the end but the Knicks were up 6 with 30 seconds to play in large part because of Mitch's defense on Embiid..
Game 6 was Brunson taking over and OG in the 4th..
Hartenstein had abig rebound in game 2 and thats all he did, if Ihart doesnt play they still win that series, if Mitch doesnt play thr Knicks dont win that series and are maybe down 0-2 going back to Philly
I gave credit to Mitch for Game 1. It takes four wins to win a series and I don't see anything that contradicts what I said.
And it wasn't just his foolish play in Game 5 that was significant. He couldn't stay on the court in OT because he was being exploited. There's no rule that says the opposing team has to let Mitch play their C one-on-one.
Mitch is what we've got; I'll root for him. But it's hardly clear they couldn't have beat the Sixers without him, when they in fact did just that in Game 4, in Philly.
he was fricken exhausted in game 5 playing on a broken ankle and he still was better than hartenstein..
and its funny you mention game 4 they won without Mitch, yes they did and had to go to OG guarding Embiif because Ihart was so terrible he was unplayable in the 4th..
in every game the Knicks fell down by 10 early except for game 6, funny the come back started when Ihart was taken out and Mitch was brought in...
and you can say well Ihart finished this game or that game, but the fact remains Ibart was dog crap in that series plain and simple..
Funny you dismiss plus minues simply because it goes against your agenda and we get it it is your schtick on this site to be the opposite of what everyone is saying..
But its pretty easy to see Mitch was better than Ihart in that series and the reasom he didnt play more was because after game 3 he was playing with a broken bone in his ankle because of Embiid's dirty play
When healthy
Unfortunately that's not very often
Thibs has done a fantastic job developing him
I Hart too for that matter
I bet Precious shows vast improvement,but clery our fortunes will ride with Mitch
Kinda scary when you think about it
Can Rose pull a rabbit out of hat and upgrade Center too???
I think Rose will be patient and make his move when the time comes.
to play a lot of Randle at the 5 especially to close halves and games, i think with the perimiter defense this team is going to habe you can get away with it and offensively they are going to be almost impossible to guard with the shooting and floor spacing
and you can say well Ihart finished this game or that game, but the fact remains Ibart was dog crap in that series plain and simple..
Funny you dismiss plus minues simply because it goes against your agenda and we get it it is your schtick on this site to be the opposite of what everyone is saying..
But its pretty easy to see Mitch was better than Ihart in that series and the reasom he didnt play more was because after game 3 he was playing with a broken bone in his ankle because of Embiid's dirty play
The specific point I responded to was that Knicks couldn't have gotten past Philly without Mitch. Not specifically about how well IHart played.
Most of the talk has been about defense but, when it comes to offense, spacing is a significant issue, and I know you know all about that. When you're not being contrary yourself.
to beat the drum for trading for Kessler or Duren. Very different skill sets but those are the two guys that would make me feel really confident about the team top to bottom heading into the season.
Agreed but these things take time. There is no rush right now. Everyone seems to want to have the full roster yesterday. This regime is going to do what is right for the Knicks. I think this could go to the trade deadline or even further with vet buyouts.
Totally agree that the roster doesn't need to be solved for today. I know this has been written about a ton, but I expect the Knicks to sign someone to the taxpayer MLE who will absolutely not be in the rotation purely as a human trade exception. The Precious contract is tradeable but given Mitch's injury history, it is easy to see where they need to keep Precious for depth and trade the MLE person plus draft comp for a center (Nick Richards, etc.). It would be fitting for Archy gets the payday to yet again be traded at the deadline.
The goal doesn't have to be to be better than every other team at the C position. The goal needs to be to have guys that don't get abused by the opponent and can allow your team to function the way it is intended. Back in the 90s, that was such a golden age for Cs yet the Bulls never had that dominant C. So, what do we need to be functional? It is really as simple as being able to play defense and rebound. Anything extra like IHart's passing was icing on the cake. Defense and rebounding are non-negotiables. If we play a team like Boston, I agree with playing small ball because Porzingis isn't going to be banging down low. He's going to hit 3s with the occasional drive to the hoop.
Jericho Sims shows us something. Bondy had a decent article today and apparently Sims has been more banged up than what has been known publicly.
He also threw a bit of a gem in there which is Jericho actually has the best DRTG of any center on the team at 109. He does offer a lot of a switchability that no one else has.
That said when watching him last year it was hard to get that excited about anything he was doing on the court. Hopefully he takes some strides. Link - ( New Window )
I understand wanting an upgrade, but for the most part Sims and Precious are being underrated right now. Go through most of the rosters in the league and count the teams who really have a backup center you fear using them against? (Yes, I know that there is a good chance, the backup centers will be starting about 15 to 20 games this year but that applies to nearly every team in the league as well.)
I'm not dismissing how much iHart contributed last year but I also feel you can replace him by committee instead of just one person.
Hate to be harsh but its the truth, he gets by with his athleticism but his defensive awareness is zero, he sinply doesnt understand help and positioning on defense..
If he is relied upon to play 10 to 15 minutes a game the Knicks are in trouble..
He would play 5 minutes last year to close halves when the Knicks had to watch Ihart's minutes and the Knicks would always be a negative in just 5 minutes
On Randle and the Knicks future cap.
Randle is between a rock and a hard place and seems to have less leverage going into FA with the current CBA.
Rose has done wonders managing the new Cap and has put the Knicks in a great position for the Knicks 3 year cap wise. Fred Katz article (paywall) - ( New Window )
On Randle and the Knicks future cap.
Randle is between a rock and a hard place and seems to have less leverage going into FA with the current CBA.
Rose has done wonders managing the new Cap and has put the Knicks in a great position for the Knicks 3 year cap wise. Fred Katz article (paywall) - ( New Window )
Thanks I hadn't read this. There seems to be an interesting path that involves an opt-in and extend so Randle costs less in two years but then gets a bigger bump in 3 and on when the Knicks will be pretty deep into the apron anyway after the Bridges extension.
On Randle and the Knicks future cap.
Randle is between a rock and a hard place and seems to have less leverage going into FA with the current CBA.
Rose has done wonders managing the new Cap and has put the Knicks in a great position for the Knicks 3 year cap wise. Fred Katz article (paywall) - ( New Window )
Thanks I hadn't read this. There seems to be an interesting path that involves an opt-in and extend so Randle costs less in two years but then gets a bigger bump in 3 and on when the Knicks will be pretty deep into the apron anyway after the Bridges extension.
It sounds like they won't be deep into the Apron with the new media deal and the raise in the aprons if Randle does the opt in the Knicks will have a bunch of money and movement even with the Bridges extension.
Katz talks about the lack of cap space available if Randle hits FA and there probably won't be money anywhere else and agents are telling clients to extend and not test FA because the money is not there and the CBA doesn't have the sign and trade freedom like before.
Add Randle’s player option to their 2025-26 payroll, and the Knicks are in a fabulous financial position. They would have all of their current top eight, plus those two rookies, under contract and would still be $21.5 million below the second apron. They would be $9.5 million below the first apron.
RE: Honestly, I don't care where people rank IHart.
Be was good when he was here but I guess people forget the playoffs. He sucked. He couldn't compete with Embiid at all and had one good game in Indy. I don't care about the numbers. It's about the fit. Mitch is a better fit for this squad and coach. In order for Thibs to run his defense he needs a defensive presence. We are so consumed with Mitch's weaknesses that we focus too much on the offense. How do the Knicks win? It is with good defense and rebounding. IHart couldn't provide that when it mattered. He had a hell of a run when Mitch was injured during the regular season but hurt us in the playoffs.
I don't know where the idea comes from that ihart's "fit" is in question. Of course he fit. He was outstanding here on offense and defense for the entire season. And yes, the playoffs matter. He got beat up by a league MVP and hall of fame center and we're skewing it like he got rocked by Roy Hibbert.
Mitch is an elite one-dimensional basketball player. If people forgot anything, it's that we have been begging for Mitchell Robinson to be anything more than a lob threat for years. The perfect "fit" for the knicks is Mitch's defense and ihart's offensive skillset.
You'll likely have to wait until February for that to happen.
@wojespn
Precious Achiuwa has agreed on a one-year, $6 million deal to return to the Knicks, his representative Raymond Brothers tells ESPN.
Knicks Current Roster:
PG — Brunson, McBride, Payne
SG — Bridges, DiVincenzo, Kolek
SF — Anunoby, Dadiet, Bates-Diop
PF — Randle, Hart
C — Robinson, Achiuwa, Sims, Hukporti
Knicks Current Roster:
PG — Brunson, McBride, Payne
SG — Bridges, DiVincenzo, Kolek
SF — Anunoby, Dadiet, Bates-Diop
PF — Randle, Hart
C — Robinson, Achiuwa, Sims, Hukporti
I think Precious could be a valuable piece vs Boston becausr of Porzingis and the abikity to switch everything..
Agree with this. In SL, Skap looked like he could be a viable backup C. Also agree that they like Sims, but he just seems to lack defensive positioning instincts. Hukporti starts out in Westchester for sure, he's quite raw.
BINGO.
@TheCohencidence
The Achiuwa signing means the Knicks have less salary to send out in any trade this summer. Want KAT? Have to add Hart or DiVincenzo to Randle AND Robinson. Want anyone making $20M+? Hart or DiVincenzo goes out. Not happening.
Makes a Randle extension more likely imo as well
they probably gave him an extra $1-$2 million to do so.
Quote:
Normally when a player signs a 1 year deal with Bird rights they get an automatic no trade clause, he is waiving it, interrsting
they probably gave him an extra $1-$2 million to do so.
Quote:
In comment 16564151 nygiants16 said:
Quote:
Normally when a player signs a 1 year deal with Bird rights they get an automatic no trade clause, he is waiving it, interrsting
they probably gave him an extra $1-$2 million to do so.
There's this idea out there on the web that the Knicks might pay Achiuwa more than he'd get on the open market to make him a more useful trade piece later on. More money on his deal means he can be traded for a more expensive player down the road. The fact that he waived his no-trade clause suggests that is the strategy.
This front office has their shit together with cap management and how to work the system
This generation’s Herb Williams.
I don't get the obsession that people have with connecting KAT to the Knicks. I makes zero sense to me. We'd have to send out Randle and other key players. Randle? Fine, I get that as he is not signed long term. However, once you start adding all these other players it makes no sense. We'll be creating more holes just to fill one and then pay him a shit ton. No thanks.
Quote:
Hell no to KAT.
I don't get the obsession that people have with connecting KAT to the Knicks. I makes zero sense to me. We'd have to send out Randle and other key players. Randle? Fine, I get that as he is not signed long term. However, once you start adding all these other players it makes no sense. We'll be creating more holes just to fill one and then pay him a shit ton. No thanks.
And this is me agreeing with you. Lol.
I wouldn’t trade Randle straight up for KAT.
KAT
From our playoff team:
We "traded" Hartenstein, Bojan, and Burks
We "received" Randle, Bridges, Payne
..and then have the new draft picks as well
Seems like a pretty big upgrade to me.
Just classic Knicks for clicks nonsense.
From our playoff team:
We "traded" Hartenstein, Bojan, and Burks
We "received" Randle, Bridges, Payne
..and then have the new draft picks as well
Seems like a pretty big upgrade to me.
Hartenstein is a good player, and he came up big the second half of last season filling in for Mitch and taking on some of the offensive load without Randle, but he’s gotten to be a bit overrated by the national media for a couple of reasons. The first being lolknicks, second being the contract which was way above market value since OKC had to convince him to leave NY.
Realistically though, is he even a top 15 center in the league? He’s a nice player but it’s not like we are losing Patrick Ewing here. Health is the big question mark, as it is with most big men, but the drop off from Hartenstein to Mitch isn’t significant, and if backup C is the one question mark on the roster then you’re in great shape.
First we have to agree on what the player is. Hartenstein is significantly more valuable on the offensive end than mitch.
Better free throw shooter
Can score from 10-15, under the rim, short range, and has demonstrated a 3 point shot in his career
Skilled passer and offensive initiator. Good offensive chemistry/two-man game with brunson.
Mitch is purely a defensive force and relentless rebounder.
Could you name 14 other centers you believe to be better? Its not a loaded position in the league.
Bam
AD
Embiid
Jokic
Sabonis
KP
Sengun
After that I'm really not sure. When you combine the rebounding, passing, floater, shot blocking and hustle I'm not sure who in the next tier is CLEARLY better.
He's in the mix with:
Turner
Gobert
Lopez
Allen
So that's 9-15 range imo.
First we have to agree on what the player is. Hartenstein is significantly more valuable on the offensive end than mitch.
Better free throw shooter
Can score from 10-15, under the rim, short range, and has demonstrated a 3 point shot in his career
Skilled passer and offensive initiator. Good offensive chemistry/two-man game with brunson.
Mitch is purely a defensive force and relentless rebounder.
Could you name 14 other centers you believe to be better? Its not a loaded position in the league.
Jokic, Embiid, Davis, Bam, Sabonis, Wemby, Chet, Gobert, Porzingis, Sengun, Jarrett Allen, Lopez, Turner are all pretty clearly better players than iHart. He had an up and down year last year but DeAndre Ayton is still probably the better player
Then that brings you to guys like Claxton, Lively, Nurkic, that are probably in the same iHart tier depending on what your team needs from the position.
Yeah, Ayton is a tough one to evaluate at this point. That Blazers team was a mess last year, but I wouldn't look at them drafting Clingan as any indication of what they think about Ayton moreso than him just being the best player available in a weak draft.
Ayton's counting stats were good last year, in a year that he "sucks so much" he still put up 17-11, and since free throw percentage was brought up about iHart he shot over 80% from the line. His advanced stats were the lowest of his career with only a .106 WS/48, PER of 18.9, BPM of 0.3, etc.
With that said, none of those are terrible, and it's still too early to just say Ayton stinks now. Maybe it was just an off year adjusting to a new situation.
But I do think he is replaceable for the Knicks. Lineups with Randle at the 5 is going unlock some great offense and they still be able to hold up on D. I also think they can find the next Hartenstein at some point.
Let’s not forget he was abused by Embiid and did not have a great playoffs.
Quote:
would take Ayton over iHart right now. The Blazers literally drafted another center in the top 10 because Ayton sucks so much.
Yeah, Ayton is a tough one to evaluate at this point. That Blazers team was a mess last year, but I wouldn't look at them drafting Clingan as any indication of what they think about Ayton moreso than him just being the best player available in a weak draft.
Ayton's counting stats were good last year, in a year that he "sucks so much" he still put up 17-11, and since free throw percentage was brought up about iHart he shot over 80% from the line. His advanced stats were the lowest of his career with only a .106 WS/48, PER of 18.9, BPM of 0.3, etc.
With that said, none of those are terrible, and it's still too early to just say Ayton stinks now. Maybe it was just an off year adjusting to a new situation.
The counting stats have always been pretty good, which is what landed him that max deal. But if you peel back the onion just a little bit he plays absolutely 0 defense and seems to just lack any sort of intensity on either end. The Suns couldn't wait to get rid of him and the Blazers already drafted his replacement which I think says a lot.
There's no doubt that this team will be better with a healthy Julius, OG and adding Bridges, but I am concerned with the lack of size on the roster, especially with Mitch's inability to stay healthy.
If Thibs remains inflexible and needs to run a center out with most all lineups, I think that we're a Mitch injury away from being a worst team.
There's no doubt that this team will be better with a healthy Julius, OG and adding Bridges, but I am concerned with the lack of size on the roster, especially with Mitch's inability to stay healthy.
If Thibs remains inflexible and needs to run a center out with most all lineups, I think that we're a Mitch injury away from being a worst team.
Has this regime not shown to be great at what they do? Are we concerned right now? Yes, but only because we need to have another body. Are we concerned that this regime will not get someome? Hell no.
To beat Philly you're going to need Mitch.
Without taking anything away from NYK, let us not forget how injured, yet still problematic, Embiid was in the opening round this year.
For this reason alone, if I had to choose a center to keep, it's probably Mitch.
Agreed but these things take time. There is no rush right now. Everyone seems to want to have the full roster yesterday. This regime is going to do what is right for the Knicks. I think this could go to the trade deadline or even further with vet buyouts.
The tough part with Philly this year is going to be PG because its not going to be able to just help off a tobias Harris to double Embiid and PG will make you pay from 3..
The interesting thing to watch with Philly is their hierarchy, i think all 3 can play off of each other because they can all shoot the 3 and play carch and shoot, the interesting thing will be can Maxxey run the offense where he is setting guys up..
I think that the roster is more talented than last season, but probably less balanced. That all can change if they trade for someone or whatever. But I think this is probably the team that they roll into the season with and try to let Thibs figure it out.
I'm really optimistic about this team for the coming season. Really interested in seeing the rotations and getting these players to gel. But knowing what we know about Thibs, the backup center is going to get minutes and Precious is a clear downgrade from IHart.
I think that the roster is more talented than last season, but probably less balanced. That all can change if they trade for someone or whatever. But I think this is probably the team that they roll into the season with and try to let Thibs figure it out.
I'm really optimistic about this team for the coming season. Really interested in seeing the rotations and getting these players to gel. But knowing what we know about Thibs, the backup center is going to get minutes and Precious is a clear downgrade from IHart.
I don't disagree but all true basketball fans know that the playoffs are completely different than the regular season. In the regular season IHart was phenomenal. In the playoffs against Embiid and with the spacing and movement of Indy, he was flat out bad. Long story short, it would have been great to keep him but it isn't a crippling thing not to have him back.
Even vs the Pacers he really struggled
I think that the roster is more talented than last season, but probably less balanced. That all can change if they trade for someone or whatever. But I think this is probably the team that they roll into the season with and try to let Thibs figure it out.
I'm really optimistic about this team for the coming season. Really interested in seeing the rotations and getting these players to gel. But knowing what we know about Thibs, the backup center is going to get minutes and Precious is a clear downgrade from IHart.
iHart was awesome in his role last year, it is also a role doesn't really exist on this team anymore. The only reason Hartenstein played the role he did was because there were no better options. For as good as Hart, Divencenzo, OG are, none of them are guys you are going to rely on to take the playmaking/facilitating burden off of Brunson's shoulders. They didn't even have that in Deuce as the back up PG.
With Randle back, and guys like Bridges, Payne, and Kolek added to the rotation you have other options to facilitate the offense when Brunson is on the bench or needs someone to take the pressure off. What this team needs at the center position is someone to do the dirty work, rebounding, anchor the defense, etc. Honestly Mitch is the ideal fit, you just have to hope he is healthy come the playoffs.
Great post, as usual from you. Spot on.
This would be my preference honestly. Julius should be able to play passably on defense with Bridges and OG on the floor guarding the perimeter.
Thibs played OG at the 4 the minute he got there with the 2nd unit and had him guarding Embiid in game 4 the entire 4th quarter..
Thibs also talked about being able to play smaller lineupz with OG, Katz has mentioned because he got injured Thibs backed off because he just wanted him to come back and be ready..
They arent playing Divo and Hart 20 minutes a game, they are going to play more and how you do that is playing OG at the 4 and Randle at the 5..
Will it be all the time? no but guarantee they close like that against a good portion of teams, can you do it against every team? no but the majority you can
Quote:
I think that is an option based on where they are at but with his shoulder injury and OG's injury history, it is not smart to have this as a plan. Here and there? Okay. Consistency in this? No way. Thibs has never done this before and, imo, their plan is to get that 2nd C. It just doesn't have to be forced now. You basically have one shot at it and it needs to be a good shot. They aren't just junping at anything they see, hence FA. They are waiting for the right/best opportunity to present itself before they pounce.
Thibs played OG at the 4 the minute he got there with the 2nd unit and had him guarding Embiid in game 4 the entire 4th quarter..
Thibs also talked about being able to play smaller lineupz with OG, Katz has mentioned because he got injured Thibs backed off because he just wanted him to come back and be ready..
They arent playing Divo and Hart 20 minutes a game, they are going to play more and how you do that is playing OG at the 4 and Randle at the 5..
Will it be all the time? no but guarantee they close like that against a good portion of teams, can you do it against every team? no but the majority you can
Closing is different but that is a few minutes each game. Not a big deal. But going with Randle at the 5 and OG at the 4 when Mitch is off the court is what I am talking about.
What actually happened vs Philly:
Game 1: Mitch has a good game, plays 30 minutes. Knicks win.
Game 2: Mitch plays 18 minutes. IHart plays last seven minutes of 4Q and saves the game with a critical offensive rebound that leads to the go-ahead bucket. Then IHart saves the game again by blocking Maxey's drive. Knicks win.
Game 3: Mitch leaves in first half with injury. Knicks lose.
Game 4: Mitch doesn't play. Knicks win.
Game 5: With Knicks up by 6, Mitch commits foolish foul in last 30 seconds that results in 4 point play, allowing Sixers to send game to OT. Thibs then leaves Mitch on court for OT, but has to pull him for IHart, because Sixers are running pick and roll every play with Maxey, targeting Mitch, who is helpless to guard him. Knicks lose.
Game 6: Mitch plays 18 minutes. IHart plays last nine minutes of 4Q. Knicks win.
Bottom line: Mitch was mostly spectating for three of the Knicks' four wins and, in particular, spectating during the 4Q, when the games were being won.
Quote:
If Mitch never came back, we do not get past Philly.
What actually happened vs Philly:
Game 1: Mitch has a good game, plays 30 minutes. Knicks win.
Game 2: Mitch plays 18 minutes. IHart plays last seven minutes of 4Q and saves the game with a critical offensive rebound that leads to the go-ahead bucket. Then IHart saves the game again by blocking Maxey's drive. Knicks win.
Game 3: Mitch leaves in first half with injury. Knicks lose.
Game 4: Mitch doesn't play. Knicks win.
Game 5: With Knicks up by 6, Mitch commits foolish foul in last 30 seconds that results in 4 point play, allowing Sixers to send game to OT. Thibs then leaves Mitch on court for OT, but has to pull him for IHart, because Sixers are running pick and roll every play with Maxey, targeting Mitch, who is helpless to guard him. Knicks lose.
Game 6: Mitch plays 18 minutes. IHart plays last nine minutes of 4Q. Knicks win.
Bottom line: Mitch was mostly spectating for three of the Knicks' four wins and, in particular, spectating during the 4Q, when the games were being won.
Dude, did you watch the series?
Dude, did you watch the series?
Evidently.
Mitch: +20
IHart: -13
Game 2:
Mitch: +2
IHart: +1
Game 3:
Mitch: +7
IHart: -24
Game 4:
Mitch: DNP
IHart: -4
Game 5:
Mitch: +2
IHart: -9
Game 6:
Mitch: +7
IHart: -2
Isiah just could not figure out what to do with his arms and Embiid just abused that again and again.
Isiah just could not figure out what to do with his arms and Embiid just abused that again and again.
Correct. Even Precious too.
Mitch: +20
IHart: -13
Game 2:
Mitch: +2
IHart: +1
Game 3:
Mitch: +7
IHart: -24
Game 4:
Mitch: DNP
IHart: -4
Game 5:
Mitch: +2
IHart: -9
Game 6:
Mitch: +7
IHart: -2
You make a comment about not watching the game and then you present plus/minus with no comment on how it related to winning and losing? And who was on the court in the 4Q?
Come on. Gregg Popovich says he never even looks at +/-
Come one.
Mitch changed game 1, Knicks were flundering in the 1st and 3rd and Mitch came in and shut down Embiid and changed the game..
They dont win game 1 without Mitch that is a fact plain and simple and cant be argued..
Game 2 was a fluke win, Brunson was terrible in the 4th and the Knicks got lucky to steal one..
Game 3 Sixers got hot from 3 in the 3rd thats it and Embiid scored 50 covered by Ihart..
Game 4 OG won that game with his defense and Brunson took over offensively.
Game 5 was over and done, yes Mitch had two stupid plays at the end but the Knicks were up 6 with 30 seconds to play in large part because of Mitch's defense on Embiid..
Game 6 was Brunson taking over and OG in the 4th..
Hartenstein had abig rebound in game 2 and thats all he did, if Ihart doesnt play they still win that series, if Mitch doesnt play thr Knicks dont win that series and are maybe down 0-2 going back to Philly
Mitch changed game 1, Knicks were flundering in the 1st and 3rd and Mitch came in and shut down Embiid and changed the game..
They dont win game 1 without Mitch that is a fact plain and simple and cant be argued..
Game 2 was a fluke win, Brunson was terrible in the 4th and the Knicks got lucky to steal one..
Game 3 Sixers got hot from 3 in the 3rd thats it and Embiid scored 50 covered by Ihart..
Game 4 OG won that game with his defense and Brunson took over offensively.
Game 5 was over and done, yes Mitch had two stupid plays at the end but the Knicks were up 6 with 30 seconds to play in large part because of Mitch's defense on Embiid..
Game 6 was Brunson taking over and OG in the 4th..
Hartenstein had abig rebound in game 2 and thats all he did, if Ihart doesnt play they still win that series, if Mitch doesnt play thr Knicks dont win that series and are maybe down 0-2 going back to Philly
I gave credit to Mitch for Game 1. It takes four wins to win a series and I don't see anything that contradicts what I said.
And it wasn't just his foolish play in Game 5 that was significant. He couldn't stay on the court in OT because he was being exploited. There's no rule that says the opposing team has to let Mitch play their C one-on-one.
Mitch is what we've got; I'll root for him. But it's hardly clear they couldn't have beat the Sixers without him, when they in fact did just that in Game 4, in Philly.
Quote:
anyone who says otherwise is just being a contrarian...
Mitch changed game 1, Knicks were flundering in the 1st and 3rd and Mitch came in and shut down Embiid and changed the game..
They dont win game 1 without Mitch that is a fact plain and simple and cant be argued..
Game 2 was a fluke win, Brunson was terrible in the 4th and the Knicks got lucky to steal one..
Game 3 Sixers got hot from 3 in the 3rd thats it and Embiid scored 50 covered by Ihart..
Game 4 OG won that game with his defense and Brunson took over offensively.
Game 5 was over and done, yes Mitch had two stupid plays at the end but the Knicks were up 6 with 30 seconds to play in large part because of Mitch's defense on Embiid..
Game 6 was Brunson taking over and OG in the 4th..
Hartenstein had abig rebound in game 2 and thats all he did, if Ihart doesnt play they still win that series, if Mitch doesnt play thr Knicks dont win that series and are maybe down 0-2 going back to Philly
I gave credit to Mitch for Game 1. It takes four wins to win a series and I don't see anything that contradicts what I said.
And it wasn't just his foolish play in Game 5 that was significant. He couldn't stay on the court in OT because he was being exploited. There's no rule that says the opposing team has to let Mitch play their C one-on-one.
Mitch is what we've got; I'll root for him. But it's hardly clear they couldn't have beat the Sixers without him, when they in fact did just that in Game 4, in Philly.
he was fricken exhausted in game 5 playing on a broken ankle and he still was better than hartenstein..
and its funny you mention game 4 they won without Mitch, yes they did and had to go to OG guarding Embiif because Ihart was so terrible he was unplayable in the 4th..
in every game the Knicks fell down by 10 early except for game 6, funny the come back started when Ihart was taken out and Mitch was brought in...
Funny you dismiss plus minues simply because it goes against your agenda and we get it it is your schtick on this site to be the opposite of what everyone is saying..
But its pretty easy to see Mitch was better than Ihart in that series and the reasom he didnt play more was because after game 3 he was playing with a broken bone in his ankle because of Embiid's dirty play
Unfortunately that's not very often
Thibs has done a fantastic job developing him
I Hart too for that matter
I bet Precious shows vast improvement,but clery our fortunes will ride with Mitch
Kinda scary when you think about it
Can Rose pull a rabbit out of hat and upgrade Center too???
That would be interesting.
C: Mitch, Randle
PF: Randle, OG
SF: OG, Hart
SG: Mikal, DDV
PG: JB, Deuce
Or some variation thereof.
An 8 man rotation, Thibs would love that. :-)
Funny you dismiss plus minues simply because it goes against your agenda and we get it it is your schtick on this site to be the opposite of what everyone is saying..
But its pretty easy to see Mitch was better than Ihart in that series and the reasom he didnt play more was because after game 3 he was playing with a broken bone in his ankle because of Embiid's dirty play
The specific point I responded to was that Knicks couldn't have gotten past Philly without Mitch. Not specifically about how well IHart played.
Most of the talk has been about defense but, when it comes to offense, spacing is a significant issue, and I know you know all about that. When you're not being contrary yourself.
Quote:
to beat the drum for trading for Kessler or Duren. Very different skill sets but those are the two guys that would make me feel really confident about the team top to bottom heading into the season.
Agreed but these things take time. There is no rush right now. Everyone seems to want to have the full roster yesterday. This regime is going to do what is right for the Knicks. I think this could go to the trade deadline or even further with vet buyouts.
Exactly.
+1
Gotta stay healthy too.
He also threw a bit of a gem in there which is Jericho actually has the best DRTG of any center on the team at 109. He does offer a lot of a switchability that no one else has.
That said when watching him last year it was hard to get that excited about anything he was doing on the court. Hopefully he takes some strides.
Link - ( New Window )
I'm not dismissing how much iHart contributed last year but I also feel you can replace him by committee instead of just one person.
If he is relied upon to play 10 to 15 minutes a game the Knicks are in trouble..
He would play 5 minutes last year to close halves when the Knicks had to watch Ihart's minutes and the Knicks would always be a negative in just 5 minutes
Randle is between a rock and a hard place and seems to have less leverage going into FA with the current CBA.
Rose has done wonders managing the new Cap and has put the Knicks in a great position for the Knicks 3 year cap wise.
Fred Katz article (paywall) - ( New Window )
Randle is between a rock and a hard place and seems to have less leverage going into FA with the current CBA.
Rose has done wonders managing the new Cap and has put the Knicks in a great position for the Knicks 3 year cap wise. Fred Katz article (paywall) - ( New Window )
Thanks I hadn't read this. There seems to be an interesting path that involves an opt-in and extend so Randle costs less in two years but then gets a bigger bump in 3 and on when the Knicks will be pretty deep into the apron anyway after the Bridges extension.
Quote:
On Randle and the Knicks future cap.
Randle is between a rock and a hard place and seems to have less leverage going into FA with the current CBA.
Rose has done wonders managing the new Cap and has put the Knicks in a great position for the Knicks 3 year cap wise. Fred Katz article (paywall) - ( New Window )
Thanks I hadn't read this. There seems to be an interesting path that involves an opt-in and extend so Randle costs less in two years but then gets a bigger bump in 3 and on when the Knicks will be pretty deep into the apron anyway after the Bridges extension.
It sounds like they won't be deep into the Apron with the new media deal and the raise in the aprons if Randle does the opt in the Knicks will have a bunch of money and movement even with the Bridges extension.
Katz talks about the lack of cap space available if Randle hits FA and there probably won't be money anywhere else and agents are telling clients to extend and not test FA because the money is not there and the CBA doesn't have the sign and trade freedom like before.
I don't know where the idea comes from that ihart's "fit" is in question. Of course he fit. He was outstanding here on offense and defense for the entire season. And yes, the playoffs matter. He got beat up by a league MVP and hall of fame center and we're skewing it like he got rocked by Roy Hibbert.
Mitch is an elite one-dimensional basketball player. If people forgot anything, it's that we have been begging for Mitchell Robinson to be anything more than a lob threat for years. The perfect "fit" for the knicks is Mitch's defense and ihart's offensive skillset.