APBRmetrics

Interest in Drummond? In exchange for?

Offensive rebounding is already their greatest strength. #1 in league. Defensive rebounding is only average. Would he make a difference there? 1 and 3 yr RAPM suggests perhaps far less than you might think. If you think without checking RAPM factors.

Mike Miller goes from 6-5 to a 2-9 stretch. The future is wide open.

R. Barrett | M. Morris | E. Payton | J. Randle | M. Robinson is 2nd most used lineup (jthough just 3 minutes per game) and neutral.There are some stronger, smaller minute lineups but I'd try this one more. Some of the others too, This one has some of the better trios. Neutral is pretty good compared to the average of the rest. Don't see any minutes for it in last 3 games. Busy with Bullock and Dotson lineups.

Who replaces Morris in starting lineup? More concerned with long-term.

Barrett - Robinson is almost -10 pts / 100 poss. Can they figure that out? They better this year or stop using it in future. Don't have to play together with lineup stagger.

The core probably should be nothing. Or Payton - Randle if you insist on keeping a core. They have been almost certainly thinking Barrett- Robinson though. Will new management persist in that thinking or change?

I'd trade Barrett before Robinson but in the end I'd probably trade both.

Miller has 3 positive lineups in his most used 13 (over 20 seconds per game for season. The first 2 are No longer available after the Morris trade. The smallest and last one is an all-bench lineup. New work to be done.

Only one at about 4 minutes per game (very common). Unless there is a massive change, there won't be hardly any useful 5 man data from the season.

Front office change very clunky. On brand.

Knicks taking LaMelo Ball would be classic bozo Knicks.

Fwiw, none of the 4 lineups I suggested back in November were given a 20 most used chance. They did use the 7 best pairs slightly more times than in the 4 actual most used lineups and with my high concentrated lineup rotation that would have put them on the floor far more for perhaps more decent results. The actual most used 4 lineups got about 12 minutes per game and average around -5. The rest of actual lineups were towards twice as bad. I bet I could have beat that combo.

I would have responded to the results and modified those 4 recommended lineups to further optimize them.

In early December Zach Lowe commented on the terrible early results of Randle-Robinson. Since then they have risen to -2 overall and probably quite positive since that comment. In fact a nice enough +4.4 / 100 poss. Has Lowe recognized and re-evaluated that comment?

Lookng at pair data it arises that they should have considered Payton Ntilikina Morris Randle Robinson and Ntilikina Dotson with those other 3. Payton Ntilikina has been great... in 56 minutes of testing. Ntilikina Dotson good in 269 minutes. Most of the best pairs are in these lineups. Payton Dotson sucks in general but not bad in this lineup.

They actually tried these 2 lineups about 40 minutes total. One mildly negative, one bad. But those are not real tests. That is random brief brushing. With so many failing lineups I would have pursued these 2 quite awhile before giving up. Might still try without Morris. Payton Dotson Ntilikina. What was the testing for that trio? 0 seconds! Least used, actually used trio. 453rd. Must have been on the court for a free throw before changing. I am into 3 guard lineup testing right now. With the Knicks it is hard to argue against doing something different than what they've done.

How many of the trial ballons the Knicks initiate vs. the NY media, I dunno. But it is a weak look.

Barrett with another bad shooting night. 46% TS% for season. Almost -5 on BPM2. Mills-Perry.

What specifically is the organizing goal of the Knicks? Playoffs in 2 years? Winning a round in 4-6? Just getting to .400 as soon as possible? Title this half-century?

Crow wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 7:45 am What specifically is the organizing goal of the Knicks? Playoffs in 2 years? Winning a round in 4-6? Just getting to .400 as soon as possible? Title this half-century?

That's the problem.

I don't want to rehash history.

I'm of the view that a team can rebuild and/or improve via draft, free agency, trade, or any combination of the above. Some cities may be better off with one path over another, but NY should be able to do whatever it wants.

The key to any of those paths is the competency of the people executing the plan. You need management in place that can value players well, that understands how to fit players together to maximize the team output, and that doesn't overpay or give out contracts with a duration far in excess of the players usefulness.

The Knicks have consistently failed to bring in people that could execute any plan well, the latest being Steve Mills whose lack of basketball understanding and GMing ability destroyed both the Phil Jackson (Mills was GM) and his own attempts at a sound plan for improving the team.