An additional point, Thibs does a lot of coaching In practice. I think the opportunity for Mitch to practice with and against Hartenstein will help in development of Mitch’s overall game. I’m sure in signing Hartenstein the Knicks evaluated what kind of practice player he is. Mitch hasn’t had the kind of 5 Hartenstein is, to practice against.
I’ve always assumed Mitch was resigned to preserve his value as an asset and not because the Knicks viewed him as part of their long term core, and that his greatest trade value would be to help clear a max salary slot somewhere down the line. I think the Knicks’ acquisition of Hartenstein, plus Thibs’ prior comments about Sims’ nascent playmaking ability, suggests he’d like his centers to be playmakers like Noah was in Chicago. My recollection is that the primary limit on Hartenstein’s playing time has been his foul rate; if Thibs could teach Mitch to cut down on his fouls I’m sure he could do the same IH.
Agree ,I’m sure Taj helped Mitch a lot. Hartenstein is a center with multiple skills. I have no knowledge of how the Knicks practice. But I imagine they work as A unit against B unit. Would Taj be playing as 5 in that scenario?
To me, at least for now, there is no question that Mitch Robinson is the starter, the real questions are can Mitch Robinson stay healthy, and stay out of foul trouble, because the jury is still out on Mitch on both accounts. All of that being said, the job is his to lose, and lose it he very well may. Thibs is 3 years in now, so the evaluation period is over, and the players who give the team the best chance to win is who is going to play, end of story.
I do not subscribe to all of this talk that Thibs needs to go. He is a very good coach, probably better than 2/3 of the league, and he is the same guy that made chicken salad out of chicken s**t two seasons ago. If the FO hadn't overrruled Thibs in free agency last year by bringing in two guys who couldn't play in his system, which was easily predictable, then Thibs would have built on the success of the prior year.
All the media likes to throw Thibs under the bus for last season, but the unwritten story is how World Wide Wes and Leon Rose sent the Celtics to the Finals last season by taking the two major defensive liabilities off their roster. Nobody writes that story, because nobody in the FO is calling up Berman or Bondy to spoon feed it to them.
Is Thibs a great coach? Probably not. Does he have his foibles? He is definately a screamer, and had they not gotten out to a good start in year 1 he probably would have lost the locker room for good, but the locker room respects him, largely because this is Randle's team, at least it is for now, and Randle knows that Thibs has taken him to a higher level. He's also done a great job nurturing RJ Barrett. The key for Thibs to take the team to the next level is for Barrett to take his game to the next level and for this to become Barret's team, to do that he needs to establish his game right out of the gate, instead of playing his way into form until January 1, as Barrett has done for each of the past 2 seasons.
Trading Randle is the obvious next step in that evolution, and the opprotunity to do that before training camp is still there. Until Dennis Schroeder signs somewhere else, I'm going to continue to believe that LeBron has him on ice, waiting for the Lakers to create cap space by moving Westbrook.
I don't know what other potential trading opprotunities the Lakers have. Utah is probably the only team that could take Westbrook in and buy him out, I'm not sure if the Pistons or Spurs have the ability to make such a move at this late juncture. I'm sure the Lakers would prefer not take in 4 years of contract in return, but for them what's the difference, they are committing to going all in to win one more while LeBron is still around and they know they are going to bottom out after. They are on the record as wanting Reddish, and to them Fournier is actually attractive because they have a hole at the 2, and LeBron doesn't believe in defense anyway.
It all comes down to what other alternatives the Lakers have other than Randle, if they are committed to moving Westbrook, but being able to bring in Randle, Fournier, Reddish, and then sign Schroeder is probably as good as they are going to be able to do.
Nice one. As I look back on the summer, I think the Hartenstein signing is pretty easily the most creative and most intriguing thing the FO did. Agree? Most of their other moves, except perhaps some of the draft night pick trades, were kind of obvious and telegraphed (move on from Kemba, get a point guard, extend RJ and Mitch, etc).
Great newsletter, as usual. Don't feel bad for not being familiar with Reddit, it's an awful place. Threads like the one you pointed out are the norm, if not worse than those. It's a place where the most mediocre people in every interest, can meet each other and argue.
An additional point, Thibs does a lot of coaching In practice. I think the opportunity for Mitch to practice with and against Hartenstein will help in development of Mitch’s overall game. I’m sure in signing Hartenstein the Knicks evaluated what kind of practice player he is. Mitch hasn’t had the kind of 5 Hartenstein is, to practice against.
I’ve always assumed Mitch was resigned to preserve his value as an asset and not because the Knicks viewed him as part of their long term core, and that his greatest trade value would be to help clear a max salary slot somewhere down the line. I think the Knicks’ acquisition of Hartenstein, plus Thibs’ prior comments about Sims’ nascent playmaking ability, suggests he’d like his centers to be playmakers like Noah was in Chicago. My recollection is that the primary limit on Hartenstein’s playing time has been his foul rate; if Thibs could teach Mitch to cut down on his fouls I’m sure he could do the same IH.
Agree ,I’m sure Taj helped Mitch a lot. Hartenstein is a center with multiple skills. I have no knowledge of how the Knicks practice. But I imagine they work as A unit against B unit. Would Taj be playing as 5 in that scenario?
To me, at least for now, there is no question that Mitch Robinson is the starter, the real questions are can Mitch Robinson stay healthy, and stay out of foul trouble, because the jury is still out on Mitch on both accounts. All of that being said, the job is his to lose, and lose it he very well may. Thibs is 3 years in now, so the evaluation period is over, and the players who give the team the best chance to win is who is going to play, end of story.
I do not subscribe to all of this talk that Thibs needs to go. He is a very good coach, probably better than 2/3 of the league, and he is the same guy that made chicken salad out of chicken s**t two seasons ago. If the FO hadn't overrruled Thibs in free agency last year by bringing in two guys who couldn't play in his system, which was easily predictable, then Thibs would have built on the success of the prior year.
All the media likes to throw Thibs under the bus for last season, but the unwritten story is how World Wide Wes and Leon Rose sent the Celtics to the Finals last season by taking the two major defensive liabilities off their roster. Nobody writes that story, because nobody in the FO is calling up Berman or Bondy to spoon feed it to them.
Is Thibs a great coach? Probably not. Does he have his foibles? He is definately a screamer, and had they not gotten out to a good start in year 1 he probably would have lost the locker room for good, but the locker room respects him, largely because this is Randle's team, at least it is for now, and Randle knows that Thibs has taken him to a higher level. He's also done a great job nurturing RJ Barrett. The key for Thibs to take the team to the next level is for Barrett to take his game to the next level and for this to become Barret's team, to do that he needs to establish his game right out of the gate, instead of playing his way into form until January 1, as Barrett has done for each of the past 2 seasons.
Trading Randle is the obvious next step in that evolution, and the opprotunity to do that before training camp is still there. Until Dennis Schroeder signs somewhere else, I'm going to continue to believe that LeBron has him on ice, waiting for the Lakers to create cap space by moving Westbrook.
I don't know what other potential trading opprotunities the Lakers have. Utah is probably the only team that could take Westbrook in and buy him out, I'm not sure if the Pistons or Spurs have the ability to make such a move at this late juncture. I'm sure the Lakers would prefer not take in 4 years of contract in return, but for them what's the difference, they are committing to going all in to win one more while LeBron is still around and they know they are going to bottom out after. They are on the record as wanting Reddish, and to them Fournier is actually attractive because they have a hole at the 2, and LeBron doesn't believe in defense anyway.
It all comes down to what other alternatives the Lakers have other than Randle, if they are committed to moving Westbrook, but being able to bring in Randle, Fournier, Reddish, and then sign Schroeder is probably as good as they are going to be able to do.
Nice one. As I look back on the summer, I think the Hartenstein signing is pretty easily the most creative and most intriguing thing the FO did. Agree? Most of their other moves, except perhaps some of the draft night pick trades, were kind of obvious and telegraphed (move on from Kemba, get a point guard, extend RJ and Mitch, etc).
Great newsletter, as usual. Don't feel bad for not being familiar with Reddit, it's an awful place. Threads like the one you pointed out are the norm, if not worse than those. It's a place where the most mediocre people in every interest, can meet each other and argue.