Sitting at the game last night, you could tell just from the tip off that the Suns were going to beat the Knicks. They outhustled the Knicks to every rebound, and every loose ball while many Knicks stood around and watched.
The biggest loafer (no surprise) is Randle. Everyone else plays at an aggressive, fast pace, and Randle's energy only goes up when he has the ball -- which really sticks to his hand. Many times, Randle looks like he moves in slow motion and I am so tired of it. I do not understand why Thibs has two sets of rules. One for the team and one for Randle.
Also, the Knicks fell into a deep hole because Thibs game plan, which seems to allow the corners totally free while packing the middle. It didn't work last night because in the first quarter, everyone on the Suns seemed to hit their three-pointers.
Three take aways: 1. Randle should not play on defense in the last three minutes of a game. Thibs should do the old offense/defense switch if necessary, but keep his slow motion butt on the bench.
2. Quick needs more time on the court. He brings a special energy to the court. 3. Jalen Brunson is the best player the Knicks have had since Patrick.
Agree with all three points especially regarding Randle not being in game on D. But would amend to say it should be when he is either not making an effort on D or in head case mode. Thibs pulled Mitch when they were intentionally fouling him and pulled Brunson on the last play for defense. The last play was like much of the 3rd quarter. Have Randle's man set a screen to get Randle one on one with Booker. Randle was incinerated but Thibs just let it go.
more IQ is always welcome, and no disagreement on Brunson. As for the 2 sets of Randle rules, I look at him like I'd look at one of my students with an IEP (I'm not kidding) - Thibs has to make accommodations to keep from losing the kid/Julius for good. Not saying its the right idea, but that's how I view it.
Bottom line, you can’t come out at home with that kind of effort and expect a win. The whole game turned into an uphill climb. Brunson is awesome; the FO has to find the second player to take advantage of his prime years because that guy isn’t on the current roster. There’s been plenty said about Julius, and all is justified. But while it’s nice to see RJ taking more pride in his defense, I think we can sadly put to rest the early-season narrative that he’s ‘taken the leap.’ The inconsistency is who he is. He also only had two boards in a game where we were starving for rebounds. At some point, the fact that he’s a fifth-year player has to mean more than that he’s ‘only 23.’
I couldn’t agree more with your entire email. RJ is basically who RJ is and Quick needs more court time. Was at the game last night and Grimes does a whole lot of nothing on the court.
Another forgotten moment where I knew it wasn’t our night - Knicks down 11 halfway through the first half. Okogie air balls his second FT, and somehow that results in a jump ball at mid court? Okogie steals the tip and Gordon makes a layup.
Also - Knicks got burned by their game plan, especially in first half. Suns role players just didn’t miss the threes we banked on them missing.
If last night's game took place 60 games in and we were 10 or more games above .500 I'd be less concerned. You're going to have a few of those. This early on worries me a bit more. I think the Knicks identity is they out work you When it doesn't happen we can look very mediocre.
Also, it seems like the Knicks are better in the lower scoring, gritty close games than the higher scoring ones.
We can say a lot, but feeling unsettled this morning should be the general theme. Julius girl with the curl showed up last night. Nick also needed some Windex to clean the boards.
Burnt by the Suns...Are the flaws and inadequacies papered over if the ball bounces Brunson's way and they pull off a victory in OT? If the team and coaches take this lesson and correct their play, then it was a valuable defeat. Wins can hide problems. There's no hiding last night. You want every win you can get, but maybe they won't let down in their next 2 games.
Btw, does Jersey Frank get his teams up for the Garden because he's coming home or because Action Jackson chose Horny over him?
I’m a Knick fan - and 16 games into the season, my head’s spinning from Friday’s Miami game win to Sunday’s Phoenix game loss; and reading today’s KFS newsletter and giving credit to Julius Randle for pushing Jonathan Macri to show all his amazing communication and writing talents as Jon continues to find ways to “describe” redacted / paper plate. Thank you, Jon, for your Herculean efforts. And let’s see if Fred Katz can find out what “JR whisperer” efforts the Knicks have in place for JR’s “mental” 🙏🏻 it’s ironic we have HIM Brunson and all the other Knick fan favorites with their special talents: IQ, MR, RJ, I-Hart, Grimes, Hart, Deuce (and I admire DDV too for his contributions so far) . . . and then we have quirky Julius Randle . . . I’m sending JR love and appreciation for his talents too, and meanwhile waiting for the all important key that will unlock JR’s “mental” 💖💖💖
We still win if we could hit free throws. I desperately want us to hire a good shooting coach. Scour the Earth, find the best, pay them whatever, but stop losing games because we keep missing makeable shots.
When Jules came here, he said he wanted someone who would coach him hard. Has Thibs held up his end of the bargain? We’re not in the after-game review sessions, but it’s reeeeally not passing the eye test. Maybe Jules needs to be held more accountable earlier in games.
But we didn’t lose this have because of Jules. We lost because we missed free throws, which can be fixed with better coaching / visualization techniques / etc. We already missed out on Chip E when he left the SAS. Maybe offer Fred Vinson a Brinks truck? So frustrating- year after year we suck at shooting and no one is held accountable, it seems.
Nov 27, 2023·edited Nov 27, 2023Liked by Jonathan Macri
First of all that sucked. Quite disappointed to lose that, and if they had played even slightly below average in that 1st Q, they win the game. That said, only a handful of players can hit that GW and it not be a “fluke”, and Booker is one of them.
Now, I have 2 questions about this team moving forward. I was quite surprised to see Rj come back into the game around the 5th minute, mainly because of how dreadful he was on offense. I was even more surprised to see him become Bookers primary defender during clutch time. This is now the 2nd game in a row where Rj has been tasked with guarding the opponents “guy”, and he has done very well in both matchups (more so against Jimmy than Booker). Is it fair to say that he has worked himself into Thibs inner circle of trust (with Brunson) because of his strong start to the season and he will be out there regardless of how the game is going (for example when he doesnt have it on offense)? Or is it more because of other players struggles (Grimes) and hesitancies (Hart+shooting).
Finally, do you think that Thibs could have taken Randle out for that final defensive possession? Everyone in the building knew he was going to be brought into the action. I know the lack of size might have hurt, but switching the Booker P&R could have become a more viable option with a DDV/Hart out there instead of Randle.
a few people mentioned taking randle out for that possession. Seems like it would have been the right idea. As for RJ, yeah I think that's fair to say based on the evidence, he's in the circle of trust enough *considering the fact* (as you state) that other options don't seem as rosy right now. Will be something worth monitoring moving forward.
Starters have to play harder at BOTH ends of the court if they want to be starters. Not sure this Knick regime is willing to make that stick. But it can’t be that the second group is constantly facing a deficit. DUH
Jon - I know you are a Grimes fan, but he seems really limited to me (right now?). Defends well when centered up and hits occasional three. He just seems constrained in his movements and thinking. Part of that is the system where the off guard always seems stuck in the corner watching three other guys play - part of the reason why I am not sure IQ starting would benefit him or the team as much as it should. But part of that seems to be a lack of growth in Grimes. Hart and DVD in the same role seem to attack the backside on rebounds and just creating mayhem.
Grimes seems more static and fixed. Looks like he is thinking way too much.
Long run, this might be a good game in waking this team up to what it takes to play better teams. But Friday should have been that game. On to the next one.
Jon - this may be mailbaggy, but perhaps it’s something worthy of a newsletter deep dive.
It’s quite clear that Quickley is one of our 3 or 4 best players. I have long been a “keep quickley on the bench” guy because of how important he is to that unit. I still think that’s true, but I guess what has me rethinking it is the following: how many teams actually prioritize what their bench looks like when making their starting lineup? It really can’t be too many.
Let’s face it - Grimes is not producing. If we’re focusing on winning and not developing (which, for what it’s worth, Grimes is not in his current role), I really don’t think you lose much with Quickley’s point of attack defense over Grimes’ POA defense. From the eye test, IQ has improved in that area. If you’re REALLY that concerned about it, in certain matchups, you could even flip Hart and RJ in the starting lineup to bolster your defense.
I’d love to steal IQ some extra minutes at the beginning of each half (ahem, perhaps before the other team goes on a big run and puts us way behind). A bench of Donte, Hart (or RJ), Grimes and Hartenstein is still formidable.
I hear you man, and I appreciate the approach you're taking. At the same time, I look at it less like prioritizing the bench and more like "how can we ensure we have the best lineups on the floor for all 48 minutes". It's simply the diminishing returns factor: IQ (or RJ, if you prefer) isn't as valuable as the 4th guy as he is the 1st, 2nd or 3rd, which, as of now, he almost always is. If you start him, there's no way to stagger lineups as well unless you have a VERY quick hook on one of the big 4, and then suddenly you're stealing from Peter to pay Paul because player wants to be in 3 different shifts in a half. If you want 2 of the big 4 leading the bench, but ALSO want to have all of your big 4 available to close the half, that means taking 2 of those 4 out midway through the 2nd and then re-inserting both of them at the start of the 2nd to play the entire rest of the half (and same for the 4th). Doing this means either Brunson and Randle play the entire 1st or you're going to have minutes at the end of the first with only 1 of the big 4 on the court, which right now never happens. And as an aside, if you started Quick and still prioritized everything I'm saying, a bench rotation player is probably getting seriously screwed minutes-wise - basically playing the Obi shift of 10-12 minutes a game.
Now that I've written all, I might just do a deep dive after all lol
To your last point - yes, I think what I’m saying is that I want Grimes (or Hart) to be in the Obi role (if there needs to be one). If our best lineup involves both Brunson and IQ on the court together, we have to maximize that.
Sitting at the game last night, you could tell just from the tip off that the Suns were going to beat the Knicks. They outhustled the Knicks to every rebound, and every loose ball while many Knicks stood around and watched.
The biggest loafer (no surprise) is Randle. Everyone else plays at an aggressive, fast pace, and Randle's energy only goes up when he has the ball -- which really sticks to his hand. Many times, Randle looks like he moves in slow motion and I am so tired of it. I do not understand why Thibs has two sets of rules. One for the team and one for Randle.
Also, the Knicks fell into a deep hole because Thibs game plan, which seems to allow the corners totally free while packing the middle. It didn't work last night because in the first quarter, everyone on the Suns seemed to hit their three-pointers.
Three take aways: 1. Randle should not play on defense in the last three minutes of a game. Thibs should do the old offense/defense switch if necessary, but keep his slow motion butt on the bench.
2. Quick needs more time on the court. He brings a special energy to the court. 3. Jalen Brunson is the best player the Knicks have had since Patrick.
Agree with all three points especially regarding Randle not being in game on D. But would amend to say it should be when he is either not making an effort on D or in head case mode. Thibs pulled Mitch when they were intentionally fouling him and pulled Brunson on the last play for defense. The last play was like much of the 3rd quarter. Have Randle's man set a screen to get Randle one on one with Booker. Randle was incinerated but Thibs just let it go.
more IQ is always welcome, and no disagreement on Brunson. As for the 2 sets of Randle rules, I look at him like I'd look at one of my students with an IEP (I'm not kidding) - Thibs has to make accommodations to keep from losing the kid/Julius for good. Not saying its the right idea, but that's how I view it.
Is anyone else ready to see Divo move into the starting lineup and IQ on the court for 25+ minutes every night?
Grimes would get more consistent touches on the second unit as well.
I'm for IQ starting and playing 30+.
I would like IQ in the starting lineup with 30+ minutes a game. Haven't been overly impressed with Divo.
Bottom line, you can’t come out at home with that kind of effort and expect a win. The whole game turned into an uphill climb. Brunson is awesome; the FO has to find the second player to take advantage of his prime years because that guy isn’t on the current roster. There’s been plenty said about Julius, and all is justified. But while it’s nice to see RJ taking more pride in his defense, I think we can sadly put to rest the early-season narrative that he’s ‘taken the leap.’ The inconsistency is who he is. He also only had two boards in a game where we were starving for rebounds. At some point, the fact that he’s a fifth-year player has to mean more than that he’s ‘only 23.’
I couldn’t agree more with your entire email. RJ is basically who RJ is and Quick needs more court time. Was at the game last night and Grimes does a whole lot of nothing on the court.
Another forgotten moment where I knew it wasn’t our night - Knicks down 11 halfway through the first half. Okogie air balls his second FT, and somehow that results in a jump ball at mid court? Okogie steals the tip and Gordon makes a layup.
Also - Knicks got burned by their game plan, especially in first half. Suns role players just didn’t miss the threes we banked on them missing.
great call here
If last night's game took place 60 games in and we were 10 or more games above .500 I'd be less concerned. You're going to have a few of those. This early on worries me a bit more. I think the Knicks identity is they out work you When it doesn't happen we can look very mediocre.
Also, it seems like the Knicks are better in the lower scoring, gritty close games than the higher scoring ones.
Make the damn FT's
We can say a lot, but feeling unsettled this morning should be the general theme. Julius girl with the curl showed up last night. Nick also needed some Windex to clean the boards.
Knicks
Burnt by the Suns...Are the flaws and inadequacies papered over if the ball bounces Brunson's way and they pull off a victory in OT? If the team and coaches take this lesson and correct their play, then it was a valuable defeat. Wins can hide problems. There's no hiding last night. You want every win you can get, but maybe they won't let down in their next 2 games.
Btw, does Jersey Frank get his teams up for the Garden because he's coming home or because Action Jackson chose Horny over him?
def the latter lol
I’m a Knick fan - and 16 games into the season, my head’s spinning from Friday’s Miami game win to Sunday’s Phoenix game loss; and reading today’s KFS newsletter and giving credit to Julius Randle for pushing Jonathan Macri to show all his amazing communication and writing talents as Jon continues to find ways to “describe” redacted / paper plate. Thank you, Jon, for your Herculean efforts. And let’s see if Fred Katz can find out what “JR whisperer” efforts the Knicks have in place for JR’s “mental” 🙏🏻 it’s ironic we have HIM Brunson and all the other Knick fan favorites with their special talents: IQ, MR, RJ, I-Hart, Grimes, Hart, Deuce (and I admire DDV too for his contributions so far) . . . and then we have quirky Julius Randle . . . I’m sending JR love and appreciation for his talents too, and meanwhile waiting for the all important key that will unlock JR’s “mental” 💖💖💖
I owe JR a gift, clearly!
We still win if we could hit free throws. I desperately want us to hire a good shooting coach. Scour the Earth, find the best, pay them whatever, but stop losing games because we keep missing makeable shots.
When Jules came here, he said he wanted someone who would coach him hard. Has Thibs held up his end of the bargain? We’re not in the after-game review sessions, but it’s reeeeally not passing the eye test. Maybe Jules needs to be held more accountable earlier in games.
But we didn’t lose this have because of Jules. We lost because we missed free throws, which can be fixed with better coaching / visualization techniques / etc. We already missed out on Chip E when he left the SAS. Maybe offer Fred Vinson a Brinks truck? So frustrating- year after year we suck at shooting and no one is held accountable, it seems.
I'm all in on being the East IST wildcard 😅 Is it too much to call the Hornets game a MUST WIN?
In all honesty, making the knockout round would be pretty freaking fun.
First of all that sucked. Quite disappointed to lose that, and if they had played even slightly below average in that 1st Q, they win the game. That said, only a handful of players can hit that GW and it not be a “fluke”, and Booker is one of them.
Now, I have 2 questions about this team moving forward. I was quite surprised to see Rj come back into the game around the 5th minute, mainly because of how dreadful he was on offense. I was even more surprised to see him become Bookers primary defender during clutch time. This is now the 2nd game in a row where Rj has been tasked with guarding the opponents “guy”, and he has done very well in both matchups (more so against Jimmy than Booker). Is it fair to say that he has worked himself into Thibs inner circle of trust (with Brunson) because of his strong start to the season and he will be out there regardless of how the game is going (for example when he doesnt have it on offense)? Or is it more because of other players struggles (Grimes) and hesitancies (Hart+shooting).
Finally, do you think that Thibs could have taken Randle out for that final defensive possession? Everyone in the building knew he was going to be brought into the action. I know the lack of size might have hurt, but switching the Booker P&R could have become a more viable option with a DDV/Hart out there instead of Randle.
a few people mentioned taking randle out for that possession. Seems like it would have been the right idea. As for RJ, yeah I think that's fair to say based on the evidence, he's in the circle of trust enough *considering the fact* (as you state) that other options don't seem as rosy right now. Will be something worth monitoring moving forward.
Starters have to play harder at BOTH ends of the court if they want to be starters. Not sure this Knick regime is willing to make that stick. But it can’t be that the second group is constantly facing a deficit. DUH
Jon - I know you are a Grimes fan, but he seems really limited to me (right now?). Defends well when centered up and hits occasional three. He just seems constrained in his movements and thinking. Part of that is the system where the off guard always seems stuck in the corner watching three other guys play - part of the reason why I am not sure IQ starting would benefit him or the team as much as it should. But part of that seems to be a lack of growth in Grimes. Hart and DVD in the same role seem to attack the backside on rebounds and just creating mayhem.
Grimes seems more static and fixed. Looks like he is thinking way too much.
Long run, this might be a good game in waking this team up to what it takes to play better teams. But Friday should have been that game. On to the next one.
touched on the grimes thing today Peter. We're getting to the point of needing to look at this more closely.
Jon - this may be mailbaggy, but perhaps it’s something worthy of a newsletter deep dive.
It’s quite clear that Quickley is one of our 3 or 4 best players. I have long been a “keep quickley on the bench” guy because of how important he is to that unit. I still think that’s true, but I guess what has me rethinking it is the following: how many teams actually prioritize what their bench looks like when making their starting lineup? It really can’t be too many.
Let’s face it - Grimes is not producing. If we’re focusing on winning and not developing (which, for what it’s worth, Grimes is not in his current role), I really don’t think you lose much with Quickley’s point of attack defense over Grimes’ POA defense. From the eye test, IQ has improved in that area. If you’re REALLY that concerned about it, in certain matchups, you could even flip Hart and RJ in the starting lineup to bolster your defense.
I’d love to steal IQ some extra minutes at the beginning of each half (ahem, perhaps before the other team goes on a big run and puts us way behind). A bench of Donte, Hart (or RJ), Grimes and Hartenstein is still formidable.
I hear you man, and I appreciate the approach you're taking. At the same time, I look at it less like prioritizing the bench and more like "how can we ensure we have the best lineups on the floor for all 48 minutes". It's simply the diminishing returns factor: IQ (or RJ, if you prefer) isn't as valuable as the 4th guy as he is the 1st, 2nd or 3rd, which, as of now, he almost always is. If you start him, there's no way to stagger lineups as well unless you have a VERY quick hook on one of the big 4, and then suddenly you're stealing from Peter to pay Paul because player wants to be in 3 different shifts in a half. If you want 2 of the big 4 leading the bench, but ALSO want to have all of your big 4 available to close the half, that means taking 2 of those 4 out midway through the 2nd and then re-inserting both of them at the start of the 2nd to play the entire rest of the half (and same for the 4th). Doing this means either Brunson and Randle play the entire 1st or you're going to have minutes at the end of the first with only 1 of the big 4 on the court, which right now never happens. And as an aside, if you started Quick and still prioritized everything I'm saying, a bench rotation player is probably getting seriously screwed minutes-wise - basically playing the Obi shift of 10-12 minutes a game.
Now that I've written all, I might just do a deep dive after all lol
Haha.
To your last point - yes, I think what I’m saying is that I want Grimes (or Hart) to be in the Obi role (if there needs to be one). If our best lineup involves both Brunson and IQ on the court together, we have to maximize that.
Going to really dig into this to see what it would look like