NY Knicks 2024-25: OG And The Wildcats

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
23,320
Pittsburgh, PA
I'd said a Knicks fan should start this, but I'm going to jump the gun and just put it out there, because I think the Knicks have maybe the most fascinating offseason puzzle to put together (other than OKC). They could largely keep the band together, or disperse and reload. They could run it back (a lot more expensively) and maybe be even better, but maybe a smart GM would see that there would be structural problems with that. Do they give Brunson his max extension? Keep or trade Randle? Do they try to win the bidding for OG and Hartenstein? There's a lot of levels to their situation. Thankfully, none of them involve "will he be healthy in October", since all injuries sound like short-term issues to me.

I love this knicks team a lot and I can't wait to see what's to come. This isn't devastating, it's more like "wtf" because of the injuries and clumsiness as a result of inconsistent rotations.
Really looking forward to seeing what the Knicks do with this off season and this roster

When fully healthy, I can't help but think they'd benefit from one consolidation trade, that exchanged how deep they are in back-end starters for a strong top 6. Not sure what that would look like, beyond that fact that Bog seems the guy who Thibs is going to be the least enamored of
The Knicks Contracts page speaks pretty loudly to me.

- They have only $145M in committed salaries for 24-25, only marginally above the projected $141M cap, and well below the $172M projected tax line.
- OG has a player option for next year at $20M - he's gone unless NY is willing to put up $35M+ for 4 years. However, they can very easily get the cap space to do so.
- Randle is the team's top salary at $30.3M, one guaranteed year remaining plus a player option. Very tradeable.
- Brunson is extension-eligible, and in line for a big one. He's signed for next year at the moment, though.
- Robinson, Hart and DiVincenzo are signed long-term at quite reasonable dollars.
- The 35yo Bogdanovic is signed for next year at ~$20 if they want him, but only $2M is guaranteed, the rest is effectively a team option that expires June 29th.
- Hartenstein is a free agent. There will be plenty of interest for him.

Cutting Bogdanovic and/or trading Randle should let them keep OG if they want to. They could then use their cap space to bolster the roster and put up the 30%-max* that Brunson is probably in line for now. He's not supermax eligible (even if he opts into his 25-26 player option and waits the extra year), because he changed teams after completing his 4th year. If they drop Bogdanovic (-$18), sign OG at ~$35M (+$15) and Brunson at ~$42M (+$17), they are still only at ~$159M, without even having to dispose of Randle if they don't want to. But it might end up being a choice between Randle and Hartenstein for them, or equivalent replacement.

* I have since realized that Brunson is more in a Derrick White situation, limited to either (A) signing an extension at 140% of his 24-25 salary, plus 8% raises, or (B) playing out the year and then going to free agency, where he could get a 30% max (including from the Knicks, of course). The former amounts to 4 years / $156.5M, which is $39.1M / yr, according to Bobby Marks (I have it at $157.5 -> $39.4M / yr, but whatever). Brunson is reportedly open to it, and "doesn't care about the money" (LOL). However: 30% max for him, if the cap goes as projected, would start at a salary of $46.5M and over a 5-year full max would be $272M, $54.6M / yr. So that's a fairly large difference.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,830
It is an interesting puzzle. Cutting Bogdanovic is an easy call to me, OG is essential to them realizing their potential and that has to be their #1 priority. With the limit on what they can pay Hartenstein, he likely ends up elsewhere, which would mean the Knicks keep Randle as I don't think he'd bring back in a trade equivalent value since he's such a unique style that may not mesh with many other teams.

Where things get tricky is if a star -- PG13, say? -- expresses interest in the Knicks. To make space it'd seem Randle would be the dispensable guy in a trade to a team with lots of space. I love Randle and he's obviously a Thibs type of guy, but if the right player wants in then I'd think Julius would be the guy on the way out.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
Randle seems destined to be packaged with picks for an elite offensive upgrade, because his salary number is perfect. He also would fit pretty decently in Cleveland or LAC.
 

Jace II

no rules
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
778
I'd said a Knicks fan should start this, but I'm going to jump the gun and just put it out there, because I think the Knicks have maybe the most fascinating offseason puzzle to put together (other than OKC). They could largely keep the band together, or disperse and reload. They could run it back (a lot more expensively) and maybe be even better, but maybe a smart GM would see that there would be structural problems with that. Do they give Brunson his max extension? Keep or trade Randle? Do they try to win the bidding for OG and Hartenstein? There's a lot of levels to their situation. Thankfully, none of them involve "will he be healthy in October", since all injuries sound like short-term issues to me.



The Knicks Contracts page speaks pretty loudly to me.

- They have only $145M in committed salaries for 24-25, only marginally above the projected $141M cap, and well below the $172M projected tax line.
- OG has a player option for next year at $20M - he's gone unless NY is willing to put up $35M+ for 4 years. However, they can very easily get the cap space to do so.
- Randle is the team's top salary at $30.3M, one guaranteed year remaining plus a player option. Very tradeable.
- Brunson is extension-eligible, and in line for a big one. He's signed for next year at the moment, though.
- Robinson, Hart and DiVincenzo are signed long-term at quite reasonable dollars.
- The 35yo Bogdanovic is signed for next year at ~$20 if they want him, but only $2M is guaranteed, the rest is effectively a team option that expires June 29th.
- Hartenstein is a free agent. There will be plenty of interest for him.

Cutting Bogdanovic and/or trading Randle should let them keep OG if they want to. They could then use their cap space to bolster the roster and put up the 30%-max* that Brunson is probably in line for now. He's not supermax eligible (even if he opts into his 25-26 player option and waits the extra year), because he changed teams after completing his 4th year. If they drop Bogdanovic (-$18), sign OG at ~$35M (+$15) and Brunson at ~$42M (+$17), they are still only at ~$159M, without even having to dispose of Randle if they don't want to. But it might end up being a choice between Randle and Hartenstein for them, or equivalent replacement.

* I have since realized that Brunson is more in a Derrick White situation, limited to either (A) signing an extension at 140% of his 24-25 salary, plus 8% raises, or (B) playing out the year and then going to free agency, where he could get a 30% max (including from the Knicks, of course). The former amounts to 4 years / $156.5M, which is $39.1M / yr, according to Bobby Marks (I have it at $157.5 -> $39.4M / yr, but whatever). Brunson is reportedly open to it, and "doesn't care about the money" (LOL). However: 30% max for him, if the cap goes as projected, would start at a salary of $46.5M and over a 5-year full max would be $272M, $54.6M / yr. So that's a fairly large difference.
  • They are going to try as hard as they can to get Brunson to sign the 4/$157M deal, since in today's terms that's pretty team-friendly, especially as compared to the 30% max he'd get the next offseason
  • The Knicks have OG's Bird Rights, so they don't need to cut anyone to sign him
  • I think they wanted Bogdanovic as a tradeable asset to maintain the Fornier contract slot. They'll only cut him if there's no trade interest whatsoever... and even then maybe not unless they are way over the tax, as he's usable at next trade deadline.
  • Randle (and/or Bogdanovic as salary filler) + picks is the hypothetical Paul George, Kevin Durant, etc trade offer. They'll try to avoid McBride being in this package.
  • Robinson may be trade bait as well, depending on how intense the FA market is for Hartenstein. They've been burned trying to rely on Mitch for years, but at the same time his contract is reasonable. I am the least certain about the center position, no idea what they even want to do there.
  • They have two 1st round picks that they may want to consolidate or trade 1 backward into a future year
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
  • They are going to try as hard as they can to get Brunson to sign the 4/$157M deal, since in today's terms that's pretty team-friendly, especially as compared to the 30% max he'd get the next offseason
  • The Knicks have OG's Bird Rights, so they don't need to cut anyone to sign him
  • I think they wanted Bogdanovic as a tradeable asset to maintain the Fornier contract slot. They'll only cut him if there's no trade interest whatsoever... and even then maybe not unless they are way over the tax, as he's usable at next trade deadline.
  • Randle (and/or Bogdanovic as salary filler) + picks is the hypothetical Paul George, Kevin Durant, etc trade offer. They'll try to avoid McBride being in this package.
  • Robinson may be trade bait as well, depending on how intense the FA market is for Hartenstein. They've been burned trying to rely on Mitch for years, but at the same time his contract is reasonable. I am the least certain about the center position, no idea what they even want to do there.
  • They have two 1st round picks that they may want to consolidate or trade 1 backward into a future year
Great summary. One trick with this year's 1sts is that no one really wants them.
 

Jace II

no rules
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
778
One trick with this year's 1sts is that no one really wants them.
Yeah, for sure. It's more whether they want extra depth from 2 picks vs 1, or hope they can delay the assets to make them easier to include in a trade package. They definitely won't get anything good (from #24 and #25 this year), but maybe something lateral.

I'm still annoyed that Dallas benefitted from intentionally and clearly tanking out of the playoffs last year in the last game (Knicks would have picked #11, instead Dallas picked #10), getting their choice of Cason Wallace or Dereck Lively out of it. Those are 2 real rotation players.
 

The Social Chair

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 17, 2010
6,374
Randle seems destined to be packaged with picks for an elite offensive upgrade, because his salary number is perfect. He also would fit pretty decently in Cleveland or LAC.
Perfect Clipper. Get a big salary for your past performance.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,244
Garden City
  • They are going to try as hard as they can to get Brunson to sign the 4/$157M deal, since in today's terms that's pretty team-friendly, especially as compared to the 30% max he'd get the next offseason
  • The Knicks have OG's Bird Rights, so they don't need to cut anyone to sign him
  • I think they wanted Bogdanovic as a tradeable asset to maintain the Fornier contract slot. They'll only cut him if there's no trade interest whatsoever... and even then maybe not unless they are way over the tax, as he's usable at next trade deadline.
  • Randle (and/or Bogdanovic as salary filler) + picks is the hypothetical Paul George, Kevin Durant, etc trade offer. They'll try to avoid McBride being in this package.
  • Robinson may be trade bait as well, depending on how intense the FA market is for Hartenstein. They've been burned trying to rely on Mitch for years, but at the same time his contract is reasonable. I am the least certain about the center position, no idea what they even want to do there.
  • They have two 1st round picks that they may want to consolidate or trade 1 backward into a future year
This is a bingo.

Mitch Robinson is great and also greatly unreliable. Randle is a pretty controversial player, most people want to keep him in the run-it-back but healthier crowd but it should be fairly obvious once the smoke clears that OG-Brunson-Randle could be a contending trio, but if there's a chance to upgrade Randle you do it. The thing about losing Randle AND Mitch is their physicality. They just totally wear opponents down....and themselves in the process.

Thanks @InstaFace for starting this thread. My gut tells me that no matter how crazy the rumor mill is for the Knicks this off-season, Leon Rose will be comfortable with minor upgrades and only make a move if the fit is culturally perfect.

On the radar, Mikal Bridges, Derozan, Ingram. I have a great signal knicks chat going for the last few years that has a few special guests in it, including a podcaster and recognizable actor from the wire , it's been fairly unanimous that everyone really wants Bridges for the Knicks next year but nobody thinks the Nets will trade him to us.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,577
Washington
My gut tells me that no matter how crazy the rumor mill is for the Knicks this off-season, Leon Rose will be comfortable with minor upgrades and only make a move if the fit is culturally perfect.

On the radar, Mikal Bridges, Derozan, Ingram. I have a great signal knicks chat going for the last few years that has a few special guests in it, including a podcaster and recognizable actor from the wire , it's been fairly unanimous that everyone really wants Bridges for the Knicks next year but nobody thinks the Nets will trade him to us.
All of this sounds right to me. Sadly, that includes the almost nonexistent chance of getting Bridges from the Nets.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,577
Washington
I know the Jay Wright bit was a joke, but given the criticism that Thibs gets, much of it deserved, I hope the Knicks not only keep him (which I don’t think is in question), but work hard to find players that fit his style and system.

I think the whole of this team is greater than the sum of its parts and that is because of Thibs. I’m sure I’ve said this before, but after the season they just had, I‘m more sure of it: the Knicks are unlikely to get enough elite players to compete with the best teams based purely on talent, so I think staying on the current path and making tweaks based on what Thibs needs is the way to go for near future.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
72,721
I know the Jay Wright bit was a joke, but given the criticism that Thibs gets, much of it deserved, I hope the Knicks not only keep him (which I don’t think is in question), but work hard to find players that fit his style and system.

I think the whole of this team is greater than the sum of its parts and that is because of Thibs. I’m sure I’ve said this before, but after the season they just had, I‘m more sure of it: the Knicks are unlikely to get enough elite players to compete with the best teams based purely on talent, so I think staying on the current path and making tweaks based on what Thibs needs is the way to go for near future.
Yes, he will get a sizable extension soon.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
As with all fake trades, less than 1% chance of happening...

BUT I could see OKC interested in Randle, then the Knicks can package Giddey + Flotsam (Bogie) + a bunch of 1sts for Bridges.
As a neutral observer, I see benefits for all parties (as long as you feel Bridges is an upgrade from Randle)

Knicks need to move on from MRob (like the C's did on TL). Tantalizing, but he'll never last an entire season going forward. They have to bring back Hartenstein, a fantastic fit. Tillman seems like a Thibs guy, maybe they can swing that.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,577
Washington
Another thing I'm looking forward to, and assuming the Knicks can bring back both OG and Hartenstein or get better availability from Robinson: I'm curious if and how much the team can improve defensively when the core has more time to practice and play together, especially with potentially a full season of OG. We know the Knicks were pretty damn good when he was on the floor this year, but more time together working through the subtleties of Thib's defensive scheme would have to help, no?

Of course that also requires better health luck. But still fun to think about.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,244
Garden City
They are going to have to reconsider their approach to the regular season IMO. This was very much a prove-it season for this core and I don't think they let, or really had the opportunity to let, their foot off the gas at all. Minutes notwithstanding, this team treats every game like its a game 7. Next year, we have to go into it with an eye toward playoff roster management and a bit more confident that we can dial some of the physicality down at times. We won 50 games with Randle out, Mitch out, and OG out for significant stretches.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,345
They are going to have to reconsider their approach to the regular season IMO. This was very much a prove-it season for this core and I don't think they let, or really had the opportunity to let, their foot off the gas at all. Minutes notwithstanding, this team treats every game like its a game 7. Next year, we have to go into it with an eye toward playoff roster management and a bit more confident that we can dial some of the physicality down at times. We won 50 games with Randle out, Mitch out, and OG out for significant stretches.
Thibs ain’t letting that happen
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,244
Garden City
I'm not gonna get in a back and forth every time someone says "thibs plays players too hard" because that's like 75% of the posts about the knicks on the forum. So, sure. Thibs won't let anyone rest all year.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,698
Roster-wise, they need more shot-creation.

One path is simply to get healthy and bet that Brunson supported by Randle, Donte, Hart, OG, Bojan, McBride gets you there by volume. There's a buch of good offensive players there, but only one true creator who bends a defense. Still, depth and defense is a nice combo and a nice base to build from.

What I expect they will try to do is package some of the 1sts and a couple of those assets for a true second scorer. We can speculate on the names potentially out there - Mitchell, KD, Lebron (ok, not really Lebron), etc. This may be the year they can pull that off - they've got a good set of assets and the rest of the roster can support it.

To me, that is the number one question.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
Roster-wise, they need more shot-creation.

One path is simply to get healthy and bet that Brunson supported by Randle, Donte, Hart, OG, Bojan, McBride gets you there by volume. There's a buch of good offensive players there, but only one true creator who bends a defense. Still, depth and defense is a nice combo and a nice base to build from.

What I expect they will try to do is package some of the 1sts and a couple of those assets for a true second scorer. We can speculate on the names potentially out there - Mitchell, KD, Lebron (ok, not really Lebron), etc. This may be the year they can pull that off - they've got a good set of assets and the rest of the roster can support it.

To me, that is the number one question.
Yup, they need to make it happen now. The other interesting one would be Markannen: not a creator, but definitely juices the offense, and you can put a secondary ballhandler on the roster around that.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,330
I'm not gonna get in a back and forth every time someone says "thibs plays players too hard" because that's like 75% of the posts about the knicks on the forum. So, sure. Thibs won't let anyone rest all year.
It’s also a lazy narrative if you look back at the Knicks earlier in the year when they were deep and healthy playing a 9-man rotation. Most would be surprised to learn that not a single Knicks player avg more than Randle and Brunson’s 35.4 mpg this past regular season.

Everyone is focusing on later in the year and the playoffs when the options on the bench were Achiuwa, Jericho Sims, Shake Milton and DaQuan Jeffries when winning the game that night was all that mattered with the days offs in the schedule.
 
Last edited:

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,482
It’s also a lazy narrative if you look back at the Knicks earlier in the year when they were deep and healthy playing a 9-man rotation. Most would be surprised to learn that not a single Knicks player avg more than Randle and Brunson’s 35.4 mpg this past regular season.

Everyone is focusing on later in the year and the playoffs when the options on the bench were Achiuwa, Jericho Sims, Shake Milton and DaQuan Jeffries when winning the game that night was all that mattered with the days offs in the schedule.
I’ve posted this about Thibs before, and it’s mostly driven by the insane commentary this postseason that “Thibs minutes” had made his players MORE conditioned for the postseason. It’s debatable that he caused his players to get hurt; it’s another thing altogether to claim that they’re better because they play 40 minutes a night.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,330
I’ve posted this about Thibs before, and it’s mostly driven by the insane commentary this postseason that “Thibs minutes” had made his players MORE conditioned for the postseason. It’s debatable that he caused his players to get hurt; it’s another thing altogether to claim that they’re better because they play 40 minutes a night.
Is your position that the Knicks have not appeared to be the better conditioned team in the 4Q these entire playoffs despite starters minutes sometimes being deep into the 40’s?
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,577
Washington
Find guys that practice and play the style Thibs wants to play and he'll play them and the minutes will get sorted. I think if this team is healthy they're already close to that. In addition to keeping some key pieces they already have, can they find a scorer who fits? I damn sure hope so.
 
Last edited:

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,698
Yup, they need to make it happen now. The other interesting one would be Markannen: not a creator, but definitely juices the offense, and you can put a secondary ballhandler on the roster around that.
Markannen is an interesting call out, though not the steregocypical Thibs type. The other thing with him - I just can't believe OKC would get outbid for him if realistically available he's such a perfect fit there. But you never know
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
Markannen is an interesting call out, though not the steregocypical Thibs type. The other thing with him - I just can't believe OKC would get outbid for him if realistically available he's such a perfect fit there. But you never know
Agree strongly wrt fit in OKC. However, Lauri only has one year left on his deal. Will he re-sign there? Getting guys to re-sign in NYC is a lot easier, and I have to imagine it's particularly attractive to international guys.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,698
Totally fair.

Best I could say is that, as Presti, Markennen being international and not having asked out of Utah makes him a less bad possibility to re-sign in OKC than almost any similar talent I can think ok.

of course, that all really says he should be prioritizing guys signed for longer, as you imply
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,330
Markannen is an interesting call out, though not the steregocypical Thibs type. The other thing with him - I just can't believe OKC would get outbid for him if realistically available he's such a perfect fit there. But you never know
Look at the Knicks braintrust…Leon Rose, William Wesley, etc. They have built a NYC-type of team, a Thibs-type of team that has been formulated on “fit.” I don’t think Markannen is even on their radar as he doesn’t fit with their culture. That’s how I see it.

One more thing on the Knicks conditioning/minutes thing bc I can’t get enough of this and it’s so simply to connect the dots. If people don’t believe conditioning matters in the playoffs and that ramping up minutes and conditioning leading into the playoffs than you don’t believe in Mazzulla, who has spoken of this in the past but hasn’t had the opportunity (thankfully?) to do this since we were winning by 30 every night. Since Mazzulla is by definition an extension of Brad Stevens philosophy than you aren’t believing in him either.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,330
What is the evidence they are?
Aside from saying it was obvious to anyone watching the game who understands what fatigue looks like….they came from behind in the 4Q of all 4 Sixer wins, and I believe from behind in all of the Pacers games until they ran out of bodies.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,482
Aside from saying it was obvious to anyone watching the game who understands what fatigue looks like….they came from behind in the 4Q of all 4 Sixer wins, and I believe from behind in all of the Pacers games until they ran out of bodies.
So in the game 5 overtime loss to the Sixers, by your logic, the Knicks were not better conditioned? Game three vs. Pacers they were worse conditioned? Game six, where they drew dead even the second half, they were worse conditioned? The other games they were outscored in the fourth quarter?

This doesn't make any sense. They were barely above .500 in the playoffs. If you want to say they're better conditioned then Joel Embiid, I'll grant you that, but so is the rest of the league - it has nothing to do with how much Thibs does or doesn't rest his players. What is the evidence that this rotation ensures these guys are in better shape?

You're throwing out an unfalsifiable statement, and then casting aside any evidence to the contrary with "they ran out of guys, so..." So I'm supposed to believe that 40+ minutes a night is the only way to get players into playoff shape, but ab strains and hamstrings strains have nothing to do with overuse. Sure, okay.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
The falsifiable statement is that they were competitive late in games they won and games they lost. That seems pretty clear from their playoff run as a whole?
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,830
Roster-wise, they need more shot-creation.

One path is simply to get healthy and bet that Brunson supported by Randle, Donte, Hart, OG, Bojan, McBride gets you there by volume. There's a buch of good offensive players there, but only one true creator who bends a defense. Still, depth and defense is a nice combo and a nice base to build from.

What I expect they will try to do is package some of the 1sts and a couple of those assets for a true second scorer. We can speculate on the names potentially out there - Mitchell, KD, Lebron (ok, not really Lebron), etc. This may be the year they can pull that off - they've got a good set of assets and the rest of the roster can support it.

To me, that is the number one question.
Doesn't a healthy Randle count as a 2nd scorer? Randle has his faults...pounds the ball into the ground and not terribly efficient, but he does score and he does it by creating his own shot. I think there could be an upgrade, but if I'm in Rose's shoes I'd pretty much run it back -- do my best to re-sign OG and hopefully Hartenstein, the latter is unlikely so might have to find a replacement as Robinson's minutes should be limited. But I don't see that the Knicks need some sort of huge signing.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,482
The falsifiable statement is that they were competitive late in games they won and games they lost. That seems pretty clear from their playoff run as a whole?
But how is that specifically evidence of superior conditioning rather than talent or coaching or matchups? Does an Indy blowout = inferior conditioning?
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
But how is that specifically evidence of superior conditioning rather than talent or coaching or matchups? Does an Indy blowout = inferior conditioning?
Think it just shows that they were conditioned well to play extremely long minutes without much falloff in play. Indy didn't blow them out late until game 7, when they ran out of humanoids to farm.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,698
Doesn't a healthy Randle count as a 2nd scorer? Randle has his faults...pounds the ball into the ground and not terribly efficient, but he does score and he does it by creating his own shot. I think there could be an upgrade, but if I'm in Rose's shoes I'd pretty much run it back -- do my best to re-sign OG and hopefully Hartenstein, the latter is unlikely so might have to find a replacement as Robinson's minutes should be limited. But I don't see that the Knicks need some sort of huge signing.
To me, he’s a bad do of a second scorer—in part because of lower efficiency but primarily because he’s an on-ball guy you optimally don’t play as much with your star. Useful player and scorer, but not really a great fit on knicks
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,330
But how is that specifically evidence of superior conditioning rather than talent or coaching or matchups? Does an Indy blowout = inferior conditioning?
You’re asking for the type of evidence that doesn’t exist unless you strap a CO2 test on the players but that’s ok as we have other information to come to the similar conclusion. Unfortunately you’ve dismissed the idea that better conditioning is gained by a higher level of work/training as well as our Head Coach and GM’s position on ramping up minutes leading into the playoffs for conditioning purposes. Not to mention this being the core philosophy of fitness in general.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,482
You’re asking for the type of evidence that doesn’t exist unless you strap a CO2 test on the players but that’s ok as we have other information to come to the similar conclusion. Unfortunately you’ve dismissed the idea that better conditioning is gained by a higher level of work/training as well as our Head Coach and GM’s position on ramping up minutes leading into the playoffs for conditioning purposes. Not to mention this being the core philosophy of fitness in general.
So why not play your starters 48 minutes every night so that they’re the best conditioned they could possibly be to play 48 minutes every night in the playoffs?
 

Jace II

no rules
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
778
Aside from saying it was obvious to anyone watching the game who understands what fatigue looks like….they came from behind in the 4Q of all 4 Sixer wins, and I believe from behind in all of the Pacers games until they ran out of bodies.
I don't really disagree with this, but I also think it's no different than any other success trying to reverse justify itself via explanations that aren't really scientific or causal. "It's because we do things differently here". I thought it was mostly silly but ultimately they had to say something to the press that wasn't "yeah we're eventually going to run out of gas".

Thibs could stand to play some guys more, I think he should have given Alec Burks 10-12 min a game in the playoffs much earlier on. But it's Alec Burks we're talking about here, he wasn't going to swing anything major. The earlier injuries that caused Thibs to start to heavily overlean on core guys didn't have anything to do with fatigue:

- Randle shoulder dislocation on a freak collision play in his 32nd minute of a random game
- Mitch Robinson playing on a surgically repaired ankle that Embiid subsequently yanked on
- Bogdanovic foot tangled up with Batum on a loose ball in his 1st minute of play

They also traded 2 rotation guys in Quickley and Barrett for 1 less reliable one in OG. A solid improvement in terms of roster but made them more brittle, obviously.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,244
Garden City
There is some very obvious shit that people can't agree on because they're not talking about the same things.

a) The more you build endurance, the more endurance you have. If you're running 10Ks and your opponent is running 15Ks, then the endurance levels are different. Period. End of story.
b) Endurance is only a factor of how much energy you have to continue playing at the same levels. It should be fair to say that having more energy and potentially, playing when you're less tired means you are less likely to have a fatigue related injury.
c) However, if you're a marathon runner and have the endurance to run a marathon, you still can't run 4 marathons a week for several months. You will get hurt.
d) Basketball is so physical that I think the Knicks injuries are not actually fatigue related because they were conditioned for the minutes but they were related to the fact that more minutes = more chances to get hurt. Josh Hart pulled his ab muscle on a stretched out jump for a rebound a few minutes into game 6 after 2.5 days of rest coming off multiple games with <40 minutes. Was that just an injury waiting to happen because of his minutes in the sixers series or is it just basketball is nuts? If you're pretending to know, you're a dumb dumb.
 

Jace II

no rules
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
778
c) However, if you're a marathon runner and have the endurance to run a marathon, you still can't run 4 marathons a week for several months. You will get hurt.
I am forced to note that this is not necessarily true. It may partially be a semi-rare thing that only certain people can do (like playing in the NBA...), but running 25+ miles a day for extended periods (months) has certainly been done. The example off the top of my head:

https://www.deseret.com/2011/5/10/20190727/dean-karnazes-run-across-america-ends-in-victory/

Extreme ultramarathoners can have prep routines that include well over 100 miles of running per week (for months).

Not sure how this adds to the conversation except to say that some people do build insane endurance. Basketball is so incredibly different in its demands from distance running that I'm not sure how much the comparison applies though. Marathon runners don't do much rapid lateral cutting or colliding with other bodies.
 

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
1,350
Herndon, VA
I am forced to note that this is not necessarily true. It may partially be a semi-rare thing that only certain people can do (like playing in the NBA...), but running 25+ miles a day for extended periods (months) has certainly been done. The example off the top of my head:

https://www.deseret.com/2011/5/10/20190727/dean-karnazes-run-across-america-ends-in-victory/

Extreme ultramarathoners can have prep routines that include well over 100 miles of running per week (for months).

Not sure how this adds to the conversation except to say that some people do build insane endurance. Basketball is so incredibly different in its demands from distance running that I'm not sure how much the comparison applies though. Marathon runners don't do much rapid lateral cutting or colliding with other bodies.
Thanks for reminding me of the guy who won the 2018 Boston Marathon.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/sports/yuki-kawauchi-marathon.html
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
Any word on possible Knicks moves this summer? It feels like they are one piece away from a title-level roster, and Randle would be great matching salary for such a piece....