A Good Ass-Kicking
I'd rather just have the $200, thanks.
As a movie buff, I have to say that I’m damn proud of the fact that I rarely try to shoehorn my favorite scenes from my favorite films into these newsletters. I’d like to think that I reserve those references for only the most appropriate times.
Today is one such moment.
As the noise surrounding Jason Kidd’s candidacy for the New York Knicks head coaching job seems to increase by the day, I feel like I’m being given a similar choice as Pesci had walking into that pool hall. Either:
Get my ass kicked (hire Kidd)
or…
Collect $200 (hire literally anyone else)
Huh.
I mean, I really could use a good ass-kicking…after all, it’s been months since the Knicks last played basketball and I’ve nearly forgotten how much fun that was.
Even so…I think I’d like to go with the $200. That means hiring a coach with either a proven track record of success (Thibs), a sterling reputation as a modern, developmental expert (Kenny), untapped potential (any of the assistants), or has at least shown they can succeed in this market (Woody).
Alas, the more I read the tea leaves, the more it feels like I should grab an ice back and some Aspirin.
It’s not just Berman’s reporting either. That they’ve already had two interviews with Kidd (as Marc notes) is telling, and as Jeremy and I discussed on Monday’s pod, anyone who thinks this front office isn’t dreaming up ways to get in a room with Giannis a year from now is kidding themselves.
Be all that as it may, my momma always told me to stick up for myself, and thus we arrive at the topic of today’s newsletter. I wrote about Kidd a few weeks ago here, and then again for SI, just to point out the basics: Milwaukee’s defensive rating took a nose dive after Kidd’s first season with the team, he consistently failed to meet expectations, and he might not be all that great of a guy.
(In fairness on the last point, he has been married to his second wife for nearly a decade, and judging by social media postings - which, of course, never tell a lie - they have been quite happy together)
Alas, it seems my original warning signs didn’t do the trick, so let’s get a little more in depth on the man the Knicks seem to be seriously considering to guide this team:
He achieved a 100-115 record in last 215 games as Bucks coach, including the playoffs. That was the 12th worst mark in basketball over that time, and the Bucks never finished any of those seasons with a positive net rating (they had a -1.5 net rating on the date Kidd was fired)
Speaking of net ratings, here are Milwaukee’s without Antetokounmpo on the court during each of Kidd’s final three seasons, and where that figure would have ranked in the league:
The Knicks, by the by, do not have Giannis Antetokounmpo.
Meanwhile, over the rest of the ‘17-18 campaign, the Giannis off-court number skyrocketed to +0.4. In 2018-19, under coach Bud, it was +3.1 and this season it has been +4.1.
As perhaps the greatest pure point guard of his generation, you’d think Kidd would have a positive effect on others who play his position - something the Knicks would no doubt be counting on with the rookie point guard they figure to take near the top of the draft.
It’s interesting to note, then, that during Eric Bledsoe’s 35 games under Kidd, the team only managed a 108.6 offensive rating with Bledsoe on the court. After Kidd was fired and the team was handed over to Joe Prunty, that number shot up to 115.0 during the final 36 games. Over that time, Bledsoe’s assists per game increased from 4.2 to 6.0.
Much has been made of how Tom Thibodeau-coached teams don’t shoot enough threes. In Kidd’s three full seasons as Bucks head coach, according to Cleaning the Glass, Milwaukee ranked 24th, 30th, and 22nd in frequency of 3-pointers attempted. On the day he was fired in 2017-18, they were 24th.
Under Bud, they were 6th last season and currently rank 8th.
Speaking of shot frequency, during Kidd’s much celebrated 2014-15 debut in Milwaukee, he led them to a 4th-ranked defensive rating despite the Bucks allowing the fourth highest frequency of shots at the rim, the second highest frequency of 3-pointers, and the highest frequency of corner-threes in the league.
As a result of the above, they unsurprisingly had the worst location eFG% (how well opposing teams should shoot based on shot location) in the NBA, but managed to hold opponents to the 10th lowest actual eFG%. In other words, they were the luckiest defense in basketball.
But their sterling defensive rating didn’t just come because of luck; they stole the ball a ton, leading the league in turnover rate at 18.2 percent. However, teams adjusted, and although Milwaukee’s turnover rate always remained in the top ten (16.2 percent in 2015-16, 15.5 percent in 2016-17, and finally 16.0 percent when he was fired), it was never high enough to make up for the hemorrhaging in other areas.
Which gets us back to defensive shot frequency. Here’s where the Bucks ranked in each subsequent season in frequency of shots given up at the rim, from the corners, and from deep:
Rim: Last in ‘15-16, 28th in ‘16-17, last at time of firing in ‘17-18
Corners: 28th, 20th, 20th
3-pointers: 27th, 20th, 9th
Oops.
Save for the incremental improvement in above-the-break 3-pointers allowed, Kidd never made the requisite adjustments to counter the adjustments other teams made in response to his trapping style. This was despite having maybe the NBA chess board’s ultimate Queen piece in the presumptive DPOY, Giannis Antetokounmpo.
As a result, Bucks games more or less turned into a layup line. That any coach could possibly think it was a sustainable plan to give up more shots at the rim than any team in basketball and live to tell about it is either hubris, ignorance, stupidity, or some combination thereof.
I mean, even Fizdale was wise enough to realize you couldn’t win with schemes that allowed the likes of this:
That’s a play from the first quarter of a Pacers game in January of 2018. Milwaukee ended up down 37-16 by the end of the first quarter to a team that was barely over .500. The coaching change happened a few weeks later.
Jason Kidd is not a great coach.
There’s no data for that last bullet point. Felt like overkill.
I originally had “Jason Kidd is not a good coach,” but even with all of the above, I don’t feel comfortable making such a claim. After all, you don’t get the best player in the sport to swear by you if you’re terrible at every aspect of your job.
And Kidd isn’t terrible at every aspect of his job. You don’t guide a 15-win team to a 26-win improvement in your first year without getting some things right.
(Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank you.)
But that first year is what bought him two and a half more, and in the subsequent time, there was no indication that Kidd made his teams appreciably better than they otherwise would have been without him. If anything, there’s ample evidence that the opposite is true.
I don’t pretend that this is an easy choice for the Knicks new front office. Giannis Antetokounmpo, more than any other human in the league, will dictate championships for the foreseeable future. Wherever he signs next will have an over/under of 1.5 rings over the course of his next contract, minimum.
What is, say, a 75 percent chance of getting in a room with that dude a year from now worth to an organization? What about a 50/50 shot? How about a 25 percent chance, but with a different coach, those odds go down to five, or zero? Part of the problem is that we don’t even know where Kidd gets them. If Rich Paul couldn’t even deliver KD into a room with the Knicks brass a year ago, are we really sure Kidd can do any better?
And what is the value of a meeting? Meetings happen because decisions aren’t pre-ordained, and because Giannis hasn’t made up his mind, there’s no telling what the value of such a meeting might be. And meeting haven’t exactly been New York’s friend in the past. Then again, they’ve never been run by the guys who used to be on the other side of the table.
Then of course there is the question of how much more of a risk Kidd poses, purely as a coach, than someone like Thibs or Atkinson. Is he 10 percent worse? 20 percent? Where would the drop off come? In development? Wins and losses? How would the perception of the organization fare? And amongst which sectors of the league would it fluctuate?
Finally, there is the fact that some stars don’t always want the best coach, but rather the coach that allows them to shine while also giving them a chance to win. There are more LeBron Jameses, Kyrie Irvings and Kevin Durants than there are Steph Curries and Tim Duncans. The Knicks certainly fancy themselves as being in the hunt for alpha dogs who desire the grand stage all to themselves, but as they just found out the hard way, it’s all dust in the wind without first proving competence.
These are the myriad sliding scales that the Knicks must navigate to play the game they are now engaged in with Leon Rose and Worldwide Wes at the helm. Of course it should be as simple as “hire the best guy (or gal!) for the job” but when is life ever simple.
Maybe this choice will be. But I doubt it. But the Knicks better know what they’re getting themselves into if they think this is a risk worth taking.
The Bucks, after all, had the best player in the league to fall back on.
New York has no such luxury.
New Podcast!
ICYMI, I’m the cohost of a brand new general NBA pod that debuted last week. This week, Adam and I had the pleasure of talking to one of the best athletes in the world, Asmir Begovic, on his return to play in Italy as the goalkeeper for AC Milan plus his thoughts on the NBA’s return. As a guy with a lot of friends in and around the NBA, including Steve Nash and Nikola Jokic, this convo was a blast.
And inevitably, we talk some Knicks before the end. Here’s the link…enjoy!
Tweet of the Day
That’s it for today…see everyone later this week! #BlackLivesMatter