Discussion about this post

User's avatar
theredyankee's avatar

Don’t give up on that Dallas pick conveying just yet. The league office has a long history of sticking it to Mark Cuban and his big mouth, even before they sent DWade to the FT line 80 times in game 5 of the Finals against Dallas. And we all know the league has a long history with shenanigans surrounding with the drawing of the draft lottery.

I’m not banking on it, but just don’t be surprised if one of the play in losers manage to catapult into the top of the lottery, and for the Dallas pick to fall to 11 and convey, which would be the preferred outcome for the league. It sends the message, we don’t mind if you tank the last week, but try not to make it obvious, and they’d get to send the message on the down low, without any additional headlines.

Expand full comment
Peter From NH's avatar

"When Brunson, Randle and Barrett have been on the court together this season, New York has given up 122.4 points per 100 possessions - in the 6th percentile of all five-man groupings league-wide according to Cleaning the Glass." So the obvious question is why not substitute Hart for Barrett with the 1s?

I know I am biased (I don't see a lot of the good that others see (want to see?) in RJ), but I really don't see what RJ adds when the Randle/Brunson iso machine is in full swing. If anything, his presence is greatly reducing Quentin Grimes touches/shots without replacing those opportunities with an efficient scoring option. And that ignores defense.

Frankly, there is part of me that hates saddling IQ with RJ as a prime option, but there is something to picking your poison in making these decisions.

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts