Contrary to it's title (I would strongly argue against labeling this Knicks team "the worst team in... history" - clearly the writer is another newbie to the sports scene, and has apparently never seen a team through a rough patch, like the Yankees in the early 90's. I would also point out that the Miami Heat were even bigger disappointments this season), though, it was a pretty well written article that was surprisingly balanced at times.
It correctly pointed out two of the team's three major flaws:
They ranked dead last among 30 teams in assists, and averaged the fewest blocked shots in the stat’s 35-year history—in short, they neither shared nor cared.
Indeed, the three things the Knicks need to fix soon, if this team wants to do better than another 25-win season: a true point guard who can distribute the ball, a shot-blocking defender, and thirdly, a decent starting small forward (the Knicks' SFs, as a group, were last by almost every measure of quality).
The article did a good job of pointing out the issues that undermined the team this season - from Isiah Thomas attempting to bench Marbury after five game (the irony being that Zeke's undoing would come from somehow simultaneously losing his protege and the rest of the team), to the media that hates Isiah and the Knicks, and has no reason to be nice to them (see the specific parts that deal with the media, Frank Isola, Alan Hahn, and Marc Berman), to the lack of coaching that lead to this most damning portion of the magazine piece:
On my way out, I found a copy of the Rockets’ internal scouting report. It told all you needed to know about why these Knicks were doomed to disappoint:
Stephon Marbury: “Tends to go into or under every pick and will leave his
feet on shot fakes.”
Zach Randolph: “Doesn’t work on the defensive end of
the floor … slow in transition defense.”
Eddy Curry: “Gets lost on
defensive rotations … labors to get back. He seems to only play hard on the
offensive end of the floor.”
Jamal Crawford: “He allows dribble
penetration + doesn’t expend a lot of energy on defense.”
Anyway, the explanation and blame for the season that is practically over misses the point for Knick fans right now. We get it... the Knicks really sucked. Isiah Thomas sucked. Donnie Walsh has a mess to cleanup, doesn't he? Oh, and the media that covers the Knicks hates their guts. Cool.
Now someone answer this question: How do the Knicks get better? I assume that whatever benefits the removal of Isiah Thomas ("bring me his head on a platter") will yield will not instantly turn around the franchise, and make them a contender, right? So how does one go about doing it?
Rebuilding, as Shoals has pointed out, can be classified in various different ways. Right now, Walsh is floating the idea of fiscal fidelity, with the intention of getting under the cap by 2010, as his preferred method of rebuilding. Shoals might classify this as "nihilistic", which, as he pointed out, "ironically...accomplish(es) the least". Razing the team, and the payroll, might accomplish a great deal of nothing, much as all of Isiah Thomas' trading did.
Simmons, on the hand, would note that the getting under the salary cap has a purpose, if you are the Knicks:
"In my opinion, cap room only truly matters for the five destination teams (the Lakers, Knicks, Suns, Heat and Magic). Every time those teams create cap space, somebody big will want to sign with them. It's a built-in advantage exclusive to them." [1]
The problem is that "somebody big" wanting to sign with the Knicks doesn't necessarily equate with winning. You have to sign "somebody big" that can change the franchise, that can carry the franchise. Other teams have to settle for re-signing the best player they've drafted over the past four or five seasons, and building around that player, in the hopes that said player will be a real franchise player (an MVP). Take Indiana with Jermaine O'Neal, or Portland with Zach Randolph previously, or Memphis with Pau Gasol previously.
In each of those situations, the player was their star, and they had to sign them to contracts that would eventually handicap the franchise's ability to make moves. In two of the three cases, those players have already been traded, essentially dumped, for almost nothing in return, just so those franchises could get out from under their contracts. And you know Indy would love to dump O'Neal if they could, too.
So here's what the Knicks have to look forward to, if the scenario Walsh is selling to the media (and the fans) is actually the plan:
The Knicks will have to dump salary weight for 25 cents on the dollar to get under the cap by 2010. Fans, are you really ready for Eddy Curry being traded to Heat for Mark Blount and Smush Parker? Make sure to boo him in 2010, when Curry is a good looking starting center on a 50+ win Heat team that is a legit contender, alongside Michael Beasley, Shawn Marion, Dwyane Wade, and a point guard to be named later (perhaps one Gilbert Arenas?), while we are watching Blount backing up Jerome James, and impatiently waiting for their contracts to expire.
Also, fans are you really ready for the Zach Randolph, Jared Jeffries and the #5 pick to Indiana for Jermaine O'Neal and the #14 pick (DJ Augustin) trade? I like the "tough smurf" point guard as much as the next guy, but when Augustin is getting posted up by bigger points (like Rondo), and the only people to back him up are the front line of perma-hobbled Jermaine O'Neal, Jerome James, David Lee, Randolph Morris and Mark Blount... are we going to be okay with that?
Are we cool with tanking not only 2009, but 2010, too, even though the Jazz will use our #1 pick to draft or acquire the missing piece to their team? Because without any talent to build around, and without trying to acquire any talent, we'll be starring at a team that will be hard pressed to top last year's 33 wins.
And how attractive do you think this Knick team will be in 2010 to free agents, presuming we let the expiring contracts of Malik Rose, Stephon Marbury, Jermaine O'Neal, Mark Blount, Jerome James, and Quentin Richardson expire? The Knicks roster will be their 2008 #1 pick (DJ Augustin under the proposed scenario), Jamal Crawford, Renaldo Balkman/Wilson Chandler, David Lee, Randolph Morris and a maybe a decent pick or two from the 2009 draft. Think LeBron is going to drop everything to sign with those Knicks? Or do you think maybe he'll stick with Plan A - sign with the Brooklyn Nets, or Plan B - re-sign with the Cleveland Cavs?
But don't give up hope... there's always Plan B for the Knick in 2010... they can try Chris Paul....
Note [1]: If you click on the Simmons mailbag, make sure to read Simmon's response to a reader's question, in which he breaks down the Donnie Walsh mystique by pointing out his role in the Indiana's own current salary cap mess.
Leave a comment
|
11 Comments
Comments
Seriously, what are the chances of New Orleans not signing Paul to a max deal when his rookie contract is up?
Great post, SML. If the Knicks get under the cap and fail to sign LeBron (and, let's face it, even if they're under the cap they're less likely than the Cavs to sign him), they'll unquesionably be in a worse situation in 2010 than they are now.
One more thing that you touched on above and has been largely ignored.
One area that Donnie Walsh was horrible at, and which can be as destructive as anything Isiah did, is overpaying for your own free agents. The contracts that Walsh gave out to not only O'Neal but also Austin Croshere were devastating to Indiana.
Marc R.: Yeah, Simmons noted (as I have before) that there were many poor contracts signed in Indy - O'Neal, Croshere, Tinsley (thru 2011!), Harrington, etc. It's my biggest fear right now - he'll overpay for Nate Robinson and David Lee.
My take on the Knicks situation is this: Fiscal prudence makes sense, but only as it is possible. Rather than to bet all the chips on 2010 and LeBron (who you know William Wesley has already signed over to Jay-Z - it's just meant to be that way), or, as Brian says, pray that NO doesn't re-sign Chris Paul somehow (fat chance), this is my suggested game plan: set 2011 as the year that we get under the cap, since Jeffries, Curry, Crawford, and Randolph all come off the cap that year (Q-Rich and Jerome James come off in 2010). Trade Marbury and Rose's expiring contracts for assets & longer contracts, but contracts that do exceed the 2011 threshold. You can trade Rose for Blount, for example, and in return pick up a decent 2nd rounder (the 31st pick), and maybe even another asset (Marcus Banks would be a perfect throw-in for both teams).
In the meanwhile, here are the personnel issues that need to be solved:
1. Getting a PG (those assist numbers need to improve). Marcus Banks could be worth a try, especially if the Knicks don't draft a point (Derrick Rose, OJ Mayo, etc). Mayo would be a good fit, just because of his decent defensive ability.
2. Getting a better SF - Jeffries is the most mediocre "defensive stopper" ever. Q-Rich was never known for his defense until he got here, and his offense disappeared. Maybe trading Marbury for AK47? Or Ron Artest plus another bad contract (Kenny Thomas)? Q-Rich should not get any burn, and Jeffries maybe 10 mpg, tops.
3. Get a shot blocker. The SF helps (Artest or AK47), especially since it allows Balkman and Chandler to get playing time at SG. In fact, cut back on Crawford's minutes, since he is the worst perimeter defender. Make him the 6th man. Nate can start at SG for all I care, since he at least tries on defense.
4. Get a big man that can block. As much as Chandler was a good pickup this year, the Knicks really need Sean Williams badly. Maybe they can get that type of player with the 31st pick. Maybe not. Maybe Randolph Morris is the answer, or even (hold your laughter) Jerome James. But the bottom line is they need a shot blocker down low. The worst shot blocking team in the history of that stat. Wow.
There's no harm in trying out guys like Jerome James, Marcus Banks, Nate Robinson at SG, etc in 2009. If these things all fail, then we still get another top pick in the draft. Hopefully it'll be another piece that can be added to the nucleus of the post-2011 Knicks.
The key is to resist the urge to trade for players with contracts that run past 2011, especially if the Knicks do become good. Unless they really turn the corner, and become a legit solid team, the urge must be resisted. Once the Knicks have a core of a playoff team, however... then all bets are off again. You have to go for it when that happens (see the Bulls this year), even if that means trading a few assets for the one player that can put you over the top, so to speak.
But that scenario, and discussion, is a long ways away....
I've been pushing for Balk at the SG since last year. Chandler would def look good next to Artest in the starting lineup and that would open the opp to use JCraw off the bench...or the starting combo guard running the PG until we find a better option.
Good breakdown. I agree with all of it.
I'd actually give Isiah another try at the head coach position and surround him with better big men coach. I've seen Aguirre's effect on Curry and DLee in the post but what is Herb's signature? If he the defensive coach? If it isn't him then who?
That person needs to go.
Assuming the HOFer Isiah is responsible for the guardplay (I consider our guards "consistent" to say the least)...who's responsible for the bigs?
Fire his ass.
QRich dropped the ball this yr. I know he's known for not making any excuses and "taking it like a man" but for his sake...he should share some of the reasons why his season sucked.
I know I'd like to know.
This is a smart analysis, man. Nice work. As you point out, this will be a horrible, worse team if it goes into full-on fire sale mode.
But that said...I have always been an advocate of nuking the team, getting under the cap, and building through the draft. I would like for the Knicks to develop a homegrown nucleus that will play together for a few years as it is prudently assessed and augmented by smarter signings of some veterans and key role players. The Brickers have to move past this mentality of signing away big names just for the sake of doing *something* (like the Jeffries deal).
I like the idea of keeping Crawford, Lee, and Curry while dumping the others to work off that cap figure. (Though I don't know if anyone else would want Randolph or Marbury.) Bring in a true shot blocker, get a more team-focused point guard, and find me an athletic wing player who will guard other swingmen. These need not be superstars, or even all-stars. That's unrealistic, first, and unnecessary, second. Just get me some actual professionals and go from there.
I agree with most of this, SML, but this site is always so poorly written. Can you put at least a little effort into eliminating all the mistakes littered throughout your posts? This shit looks like a fourth-grader wrote it.
@Justin: Yeah, I know, I know... it's a time thing, honestly. Now that Tax Day has passed, I will hopefully be able to edit and review my posts before throwing them up.
Ugh. I just spent some time at HoopsHype looking at player salaries and it is clearer and clearer to me that (1) there is no way that the Knicks are going to get under the cap until Randolph is gone, (2) nobody is going to take Randolph off our hands, and (3) there is POSITIVELY ABSOLUTELY NO WAY LeBron is going to be anywhere but in Cleveland in 2010-11.
LeBron has a player option for 2010-11 and, other than that, the Cavs have no other contracts for that year. That means that if LeBron wants to play with either one or two other all stars it will be far easier to get them to sign with Cleveland than for him to find a team with suitable talent and cap room for him. Don't you think it will be fairly easy for LeBron to talk Bosh or Chris Paul into joining him? Certainly easier than finding a team with good players and cap room. Portland is probably the only team that will have both of those assets in 2010.
I really enjoyed this article, can I copy a paragraph to a new site that I'm building? I'll add a link back to this page and credit you with being the author of course.
Basically, this guy used as many fancy words as possible to say "The Knicks suck". The best part of the article is the scouting reports.
Simmons is a clown. Before the melee, the Pacers were a championship contender. He just doesn't feel like admitting that Larry Bird is a f*** up for a GM.