Top 5 Questions for the '22-23 Knicks
What questions will define the season for New York?
Good morning! Say it with me now: KNICKS BASKETBALL STARTS TOMORROW.
It’s been a long time coming. It’ll be wonderful to get away from the summer of trade rumors and a preseason of quotes and get back to watching the Knicks do what they (hopefully) do best. Just one more day to go until New York kicks off their preseason vs Detroit. But first, we have a few more t’s to cross and i’s to dot before we get going.
🗣 News & Notes ✍️
🏀 It’s that time of year.
The season when all 30 teams echo some variation of the same sentiment about playing faster and getting easy baskets. It’s right up there with “I’m in the best shape of my life” as the most overused preseason platitude in basketball. Just like “five more minutes” is never just five more minutes when you’re trying to get your kids to do literally anything, teams never wind up playing as fast as they claim before the real games begin.
But even with the massive silos of salt that need to go with these league-wide promises, what we got out of Knicks camp this weekend was a welcome change from the handwringing and pearl-clutching that came from the first few days.
Not only did we get Julius Randle himself talking about playing faster and moving without the ball, but Tom Thibodeau was on the very same page:
“I like the idea of [Julius] moving more so we can get him easier baskets…Because of the strength of the club, we can use him in different ways.”
Should we be convinced? Not only did we hear Randle talk about playing faster before last season, but during the ‘21-22 campaign as well. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice…
Hopefully we won’t find out. Hearing Randle mention perhaps the biggest bugaboo Knicks fans had with him last season - trotting the ball up the court like he was en route to a colonoscopy - as an explicit no-no is a good sign. It also seems like playing with more pace is the top point of emphasis for New York’s coaching staff in camp:
In fact, the first four listed tenets (Pace/Sprint, Space, Play off the Pass and Move Without the Ball) are all seemingly aimed at curing what ailed last year’s disappointing group, if not Randle in particular. At media day we heard Julius allude to not needing to do as much playmaking this season with Brunson on the squad, so that’s another good sign. One thing to watch though: while the Knicks’ new starting point guard is certainly capable of playing fast, Jalen Brunson had one of the slower pace ratings for the Mavs last season, who themselves were the only NBA team that played slower than the Knicks.
So that’s a wait and see. Another interesting tidbit: after downplaying the effectiveness of a Toppin/Randle pairing multiple times last week, Thibodeau brought up the idea of playing five-out unprompted on Saturday, not only with Julius Randle at the five, but with - gasp! - Mitchell Robinson as well. Thibs was quick to add that Robinson simply flaring out to the corner in certain situations would be enough to help bend the defense and didn’t say Mitch would be called upon to hoist triples, but it was still interesting to hear. As for backup center Isaiah Hartenstein, Thibs sounded most excited about his ability to play-make from the top of the key as well as hit cutters with abandon.
As for the eternal struggle between the light and dark side of the force, Emperor Palpatine attempted to quell the recent rebellious Twitter uprisings with a vote of confidence in his young players:
Thibs’ line was in response to a question about the battle between Quentin Grimes (who returned to light practice on Saturday after missing a few days with a sore left foot, but was out again yesterday) and Evan Fournier (who returned to practice after briefly being “nicked up”) for the starting shooting guard spot. As of now, it still seems like the veteran’s job to lose, and more generally, that Thibodeau is far less focused on minutes totals than he is on pairing the right players together. Being able to “mix and match” starters and subs is something he feels is a strength of the team1.
For right now, Thibodeau has all the autonomy in the world to make these sorts of decisions, as Leon Rose flat out told Alan Hahn in his MSG interview 10 days ago. But according to Ian Begley, Thibs also knows that consequences may not be far behind if things don’t work out.
In Ian’s latest report for SNY, he writes that “internally – at least in some influential corners of Madison Square Garden – there is a concrete expectation that this team takes a step forward in 2022-23” and that “37 wins without a clear direction won’t be easily digested in those corners of MSG.” He adds that Leon Rose had the OK from ownership to part ways with Thibideau at least season’s All-Star break, but obviously chose not to. Marc Berman told me the same on Friday’s KFS Podcast.
As I’ve been alluding to in recent newsletters, Begley painted a fairly clear picture that Thibs needs to win games if he wants to avoid any prospective heat under his chair. Listening to his recent pressers, he seems as confident as ever in his ability to get the W’s.
Will those efforts be enough to appease the powers that be? That’s just one of five topics I’ll tackle over the next two days, starting below.
🏀 Tyler Herro, who is often compared with RJ Barrett among players taken in the 2019 NBA Draft, signed an extension last night. The four-year contract just tops RJ’s new deal, both in total money ($130 million to $120 million) and total guaranteed dollars ($120 million to $107 million). Is Herro deserving of a pact that surpasses Barrett? It’s difficult to compare two players who are very different in style and present unique components when considering both floor and ceiling outcomes, but suffice it to say that Herro’s extension will ensure that the comps between he and RJ won’t stop anytime soon.
Top 5 Questions for the '22-23 Knicks
Before we get to the questions for this season, let’s revisit the Top 5 Summer Questions that I asked way back in late April:
Question 5: Does RJ get his extension?
Answer: Yes, albeit under circumstances none of us could have predicted. I thought at the time he’d wind up with a contract that paid him $30 million in annual dollars including roughly 10 percent incentives, which is exactly where he ended up.
Question 4: Has Mitch played his last game in New York?
Answer: Nope! I predicted that he’d cost somewhere between $12 and $15 million annually, and while the eventual number hit the very top of that prediction, the fact that it’s descending in value makes it more palatable.
Question 3: How does New York clear up its roster glut?
Answer: I predicted back in April that the order of operations would be Kemba first, then Noel, then Burks or Rose. That’s pretty much how it went, although Noel and Burks were moved to the Pistons simultaneously following the Kemba salary dump. The addition of Brunson still leaves them with one or two too many guys for the rotation (depending on how you feel about Deuce), but considering where they were to enter the offseason, they did nice work here.
Question 2: Do They Trade Julius Randle?
Answer: While we never got any firm reporting on the matter, my (somewhat informed) gut feeling is that they explored the possibility and were met with crickets, at least on a deal they could live with. As of now, it seems like they’re embracing the challenge of getting Randle back to a level where he’s helping, not hurting, their efforts on the court.
Question 1: Is now the time when they acquire a Star?
Answer: It sure seems like the Knicks thought this response should have been in the affirmative. I asked the question on April 22, the Knicks and Jazz began trade discussions about eight weeks later, and continued those discussions off and on for about a month and a half after that. We know how that all ended.
OK, on to this season’s questions…
5. Does Thibs last the season (and how will he be judged)?
We know what’s at stake, and we know that the honeymoon is over.
As Ian’s report strongly implies, if the team doesn’t show progress this season, Thibs is probably out. What counts as progress? It seems pretty clear to me that this is going to go in one of three ways:
Scenario No. 1: The team has a successful season by traditional standards, and Thibs keeps his job. I hesitate to go into specifics on what would count as successful, because last season, the Pelicans went 36-46 before winning two play-in games and pushing the top-seeded Suns to six games in the first round. Charlotte, meanwhile, went 43-39 and got lambasted in the play-in for the second year in a row. But I see no scenario where objective pundits define New York’s season as a good one and Thibs is still canned afterwards, regardless of how he distributes his playing time.
Will there be something of a sliding scale on success that shifts upwards or downwards depending on the playing time and success rate of the young players? Perhaps a bit. A 42-win team in which multiple key young pieces take on significantly larger roles will probably be looked at more favorably than a 44-win team whose success is built largely on the backs of veterans.
But not by much. Mostly, it’s about the wins, because if they’re winning, the Garden will be rocking, and James Dolan will be happy, regardless of how much playing time the kids are getting and/or what Knicks Twitter thinks about all of it. Marc Berman told me on Friday’s pod that multiple voices within the team’s decision-making body started pushing for Thibs’ ouster at the All-Star break, but that Leon would have none of it. I was also told by someone with knowledge that Thibs’ recent antics continue to rub some people within the team the wrong way, and that even though his voice was prominent in the team’s process this summer, “friction is high” where he is concerned. But if they’re winning, the POBO will have neither the juice nor the desire to go to Dolan for permission to use the axe.
Scenario No. 2: The team isn’t an outright success, but isn’t an outright failure either, and Thibs gets relieved of his duties in the offseason. This scenario gets deeper into the “how” than the “what.” Here’s how I’d imagine it goes: New York is always within a few games of .500; Thibs sticks with the veterans for a while, but losses start to pile up; he’ll start to trend younger because he knows it will buy him time, at least until April; and when he’s finally relieved after the season, the front office will be able to go through a full hiring process. Otherwise, if they go to Johnnie Bryant midway through a season in which they’re not fully out of the play-in race and he wins at an even lower rate than Thibs, Leon’s seat would get hotter than he’d like.
Is there any way Thibodeau wins fewer than 40 games while either losing the first play-in game or missing the postseason altogether and still gets to keep his job? Perhaps, but it would probably take some key injuries to give him the benefit of the doubt, and certainly a few young players popping under his watch.
Scenario No. 3: The team falls flat on its face, and Thibs gets relieved some time between the 30 and 60-game mark. I said last week that 10 games under .500 would be the dividing line between getting fired or not, but I could see other worlds in which he’s relieved of his duties. For instance, if they’re muddling along a few games over .500 for a month or two but the tenor resembles that of last season, and then they lose something like 10 of 12 games, he’s probably out.
The question here would be whether they’d fully pivot into a tank, and if so, what would that look like? Would they shut down Brunson? Would they attempt to move Fournier before the deadline, or just sit him? How easily would they be able to flip Derrick Rose’s expiring contract?
Let’s hope we don’t have to answer any of these questions. The point is that Thibs finds himself in the uncomfortable position (for him) of having to guide a yong-ish roster with a win-now mandate. The only easy answer that makes everyone happy is if he relies on the kids in meaningful roles and they deliver. Will both of those things actually happen? At the very least, we’ll get a definitive answer pretty soon.
4. How Different Will the Roster Look by the Deadline?
When RJ Barrett signed his rookie extension, everyone celebrated the end of an unseemly blight on the franchise’s recent history. Don’t put the record books away just yet though, as a similarly ignominious mark - one that has lasted nearly as long - may also soon come to an end.
Ever since the 2000-01 season, the Knicks have trotted out an opening night starting lineup with at least two different starters from the first game of the previous year. The last time at least four opening night starters were the same in consecutive seasons was ‘99-00 and ‘00-01, when the same five of Marcus Camby, Allan Houston, Larry Johnson, Latrell Sprewell and Charlie Ward began both seasons. Since then, at least two spots (and often more) have changed out year to year.
This season, much to the chagrin of many fans, it seems like this streak will end as well, with Fournier remaining alongside RJ, Randle and Mitch in the starting five, and Jalen Brunson for Kemba Walker being the lone change. Maybe Quentin Grimes (or - gasp - Cam Reddish) ends up winning the job after all and keeps the tradition going, but that would seem to be an uphill battle at this point.
Why am I bringing this up? Because change in the NBA is inevitable, especially for this franchise. I wrote last week about all the different obvious trade candidates, and other than maybe Cam and Rose, the list starts with Mitch, Fournier and Randle.
Of the three, if you’d asked me a week ago about the order of most to least likely to go, I’d have gone Julius-Evan-Mitch, in that order. Now, I’d inverse the three, for one very simple reason: the Deandre Ayton situation in Phoenix went from bad to toxic. Never before has a player on a brand new nine-figure deal appeared so miserable, and the admission that he hasn’t spoken to his head coach since Game 7 against Dallas was a clear shot across the bow. He wants everyone to know how bad things have gotten.
I’m not predicting a trade involving Ayton and Mitch just yet, but looking around the league, how many other teams can a) offer Phoenix a deal that brings back a plug-and-play center, plus something else to help them and b) is actually willing to make a trade? Indiana is the obvious answer, but they’re barred from trading for Ayton for a year. Atlanta? San Antonio? Maybe Portland? There aren’t many obvious fits.
So that’s one possibility, but there are countless ones out there. Just don’t expect the roster to finish the season looking the same as when it started.
3. Which Young Players Pop?
I wish Vegas would put odds on this, but since “popping” is too vague a concept to place money on, we’ll get no such betting opportunity. Here’s how I think they’d set the lines though:
RJ Barrett -200
Immanuel Quickley -350
Obi Toppin -500
Quentin Grimes -700
Cam Reddish -1000
Deuce McBride -2500
Keep in mind that “pop” is different than pure production, in which case this is clearly everyone battling for second behind RJ. Given that caveat, I think all six players here have a real argument…
Deuce: Derrick Rose goes down with an injury and instead of running IQ at backup point, McBride sees 16-18 minutes a night guiding the best backup unit in the league.
Cam: An early injury to literally any non-center opens the door for Reddish to join the rotation. He impresses in those minutes, maybe even enough to snag a starting job from someone.
Grimes: His foot heals fast, he gets back on the court, he outplays Fournier through the rest of camp, and he steals the starting job. With the opportunity, Grimes establishes himself as one of the best young two-way wings in the sport by Christmas, and justifies the front office’s decision to hang onto him in the Mitchell talks.
Obi: He does everything he did over the last 15 games of last season while seeing at least 20 minutes a night. These odds go to better than even money if Julius Randle ever got traded or injured.
IQ: I laid out Quickley’s path to 6th Man of the Year here. Basically, he closes most games and hits a lot of big shots in the process.
RJ: Becomes the leading scorer (and a more efficient producer) on a postseason team. Easy peasy lemon squeezy, as my daughter would say.
None of these are impossible to forecast…but at the same time, it seems unlikely that all of these rookie contract payers will improve their stock between now and April. Which ones progress, which ones maintain and which ones recede will go a long way towards determining the complexion of this team moving forward. Does anyone pop to the level of making themselves untradeable? Or will it just be good enough to find themselves at the center of the next round of trade talks. And if someone stagnates, how much patience will the front office have to keep investing more minutes into their growth as the pressure mounts to show results?
At the very least, by Game 82, we need answers one way or another. Another summer spent guessing what we do or don’t have in this young core is the only outcome that has to be avoided.
Join us back here tomorrow for Part II of my top five preseason questions, plus a look at perhaps the biggest question pertaining to RJ Barrett’s fourth season.
🏀
That’s it for today! If you enjoy this newsletter and like the Mets, don’t forget to subscribe to JB’s Metropolitan, or his hockey newsletter, Isles Fix. See y’all soon! #BlackLivesMatter
There was some consternation over Thibs’ referring to Randle’s team defense as “very good” on Friday, but as Ian Begley eloquently (and politely) pointed out, it’s not Thibodeau’s style to call out his players publicly. If he did so in the preseason, before Randle has had a chance to prove himself this year, that would be far more concerning in my estimation than him trying to gloss over last season’s misgivings. What’s said behind the scenes matters far more than what gets uttered in front of a microphone anyway, IMHO.
For the betting odds, those all should be + instead of -. The way you have it written means McBride, at -2500, is the favorite to “pop.”
When there is a - in front of the number that means this is the amount of money you’d have to bet to win $100. For example -2500 means you have to bet $2500 to win $100.
A + in front of the number means this is the amount of money you win if you bet $100. So +2500 means a bet of $100 wins you $2500.
Although Ayton's contract is not near max money, this is 2022 and I don't want a Center (except for a very few and even then I'm not sure) being the highest paid player on my team. I'm happy paying Mitch half of Ayton's salary and still getting the rim protection, rim running and rebounding.