Your 2023 Knicks..The Epitome of Mid, Boring, Overrated Asset Accumulation led by Point Randle

[Jalen Bluntson]

Will you please make up your mind

No.

You had to see that coming!

The Knicks didn't invest enough time in the draft. Period. Scouting or "tanking". They needed to come out of that RJ draft looking to play kids and live with the results. Staying with the draft until they landed an actual star level player BEFORE they fleshed out the rest of the roster. Trying to make the playoffs while rebuilding only works with a rookie contract star on the roster. They skipped a step.

Regardless of picks they missed on and players like Giannis/Jokic etc getting passed them. A lot of teams missed out on the players mentioned. They needed a cornerstone to move forward with. They didn't get one.

I don't think there's a set process for team building.

The Raptors really took off after trading for Lowry - and even they weren't expecting him to become a Hall-of-Fame point guard in his late 20s. If Randle had his head screwed on right, he might have been that player for us. There are many different ways to build.

The Knicks did miss a cornerstone in the draft. My point was that I believe talent evaluation has been a bigger issue than the lack of tanking in my opinion. They had their opportunities. Last season, 8 of the 17 players on the roster were drafted by the Knicks. That's a high number. But - and things may change in the coming years - they drafted RJ over Garland, Obi over Haliburton, IQ over Bane, Deuce over JT Thor (!!!!!!!!!!!), and having better odds or draft position would've necessarily have changed that.

You forget the part where higher odds increases the luck factor of making the right pick.

I didn't suggest it's the only way to build. Just that the Knicks were in PRIME position to build through the draft with a better shot at stars. They didn't take that approach so, now we are sitting/waiting/wishing to trade for other teams stars. That could take just as long if not longer. We are entering year 5 already.

They didn't invest enough in the draft to land a star. Be it tanking OR scouting.

[Chanel Bomber]

No.

You had to see that coming!

The Knicks didn't invest enough time in the draft. Period. Scouting or "tanking". They needed to come out of that RJ draft looking to play kids and live with the results. Staying with the draft until they landed an actual star level player BEFORE they fleshed out the rest of the roster. Trying to make the playoffs while rebuilding only works with a rookie contract star on the roster. They skipped a step.

Regardless of picks they missed on and players like Giannis/Jokic etc getting passed them. A lot of teams missed out on the players mentioned. They needed a cornerstone to move forward with. They didn't get one.

I don't think there's a set process for team building.

The Raptors really took off after trading for Lowry - and even they weren't expecting him to become a Hall-of-Fame point guard in his late 20s. If Randle had his head screwed on right, he might have been that player for us. There are many different ways to build.

The Knicks did miss a cornerstone in the draft. My point was that I believe talent evaluation has been a bigger issue than the lack of tanking in my opinion. They had their opportunities. Last season, 8 of the 17 players on the roster were drafted by the Knicks. That's a high number. But - and things may change in the coming years - they drafted RJ over Garland, Obi over Haliburton, IQ over Bane, Deuce over JT Thor (!!!!!!!!!!!), and having better odds or draft position would've necessarily have changed that.

You forget the part where higher odds increases the luck factor of making the right pick.

I didn't suggest it's the only way to build. Just that the Knicks were in PRIME position to build through the draft with a better shot at stars. They didn't take that approach so, now we are sitting/waiting/wishing to trade for other teams stars. That could take just as long if not longer. We are entering year 5 already.

They didn't invest enough in the draft to land a star. Be it tanking OR scouting.

It does on average but if your talent evaluation process is subpar you are more likely to make the wrong decision regardless of where you land in the draft.

Also, higher odds in the lottery don't really put you in a better position to draft Jokic, Giannis, Jimmy and Kawhi, players who have to a significant degree shaped today's NBA.

My counterpoint to you is that the Knicks had a shot at a star after RJ's first season in the 2020 draft. Just because they didn't tank didn't prevent them from drafting a star. I have said for years that Haliburton will be the best player from the class and he was right there for the taking at #8. Sure, had they landed at #1 or #2 they could've drafted Edwards, but similarly they might have taken Wiseman, who they were rumored to like. It's irrelevant because they could have taken Hali.

They "invested" in the draft in that they thought Obi was a star. He wasn't. Would they have been more "invested" had they picked the actual star in Haliburton at the same spot? No. The different between the two outcomes isn't strategic, it's purely about execution and decision-making.

[Jalen Bluntson]

I don't think there's a set process for team building.

The Raptors really took off after trading for Lowry - and even they weren't expecting him to become a Hall-of-Fame point guard in his late 20s. If Randle had his head screwed on right, he might have been that player for us. There are many different ways to build.

The Knicks did miss a cornerstone in the draft. My point was that I believe talent evaluation has been a bigger issue than the lack of tanking in my opinion. They had their opportunities. Last season, 8 of the 17 players on the roster were drafted by the Knicks. That's a high number. But - and things may change in the coming years - they drafted RJ over Garland, Obi over Haliburton, IQ over Bane, Deuce over JT Thor (!!!!!!!!!!!), and having better odds or draft position would've necessarily have changed that.

You forget the part where higher odds increases the luck factor of making the right pick.

I didn't suggest it's the only way to build. Just that the Knicks were in PRIME position to build through the draft with a better shot at stars. They didn't take that approach so, now we are sitting/waiting/wishing to trade for other teams stars. That could take just as long if not longer. We are entering year 5 already.

They didn't invest enough in the draft to land a star. Be it tanking OR scouting.

It does on average but if your talent evaluation process is subpar you are more likely to make the wrong decision regardless of where you land in the draft.

Also, higher odds in the lottery don't really put you in a better position to draft Jokic, Giannis, Jimmy and Kawhi, players who have to a significant degree shaped today's NBA.

My counterpoint to you is that the Knicks had a shot at a star after RJ's first season in the 2020 draft. Just because they didn't tank didn't prevent them from drafting a star. I have said for years that Haliburton will be the best player from the class and he was right there for the taking at #8. Sure, had they landed at #1 or #2 they could've drafted Edwards, but similarly they might have taken Wiseman, who they were rumored to like. It's irrelevant because they could have taken Hali.

They "invested" in the draft in that they thought Obi was a star. He wasn't. Would they have been more "invested" had they picked the actual star in Haliburton at the same spot? No. The different between the two outcomes isn't strategic, it's purely about execution and decision-making.

If you want to keep making my point for me as if I'm missing something, continue. They didn't invest enough in the draft. Tanking OR SCOUTING. They didn't draft for need either. As you pointed out with the Hali miss and arguably the RJ draft. Garland was there. We needed a PG for 23 years. Passed on both. Also missed SGA. Other teams missed them too.

Back to the actual point. They didn't find a star ANYWHERE in the draft and built a treadmill team before doing so. Now they have to use picks to trade for a star. They didn't invest enough in the draft. They didn't get anything back on whatever they did invest in when it comes to a star player. The youth we have are trade chips moving forward as are ALL of our picks. Again, ignoring the idea of drafting a star.

[Chanel Bomber]

You forget the part where higher odds increases the luck factor of making the right pick.

I didn't suggest it's the only way to build. Just that the Knicks were in PRIME position to build through the draft with a better shot at stars. They didn't take that approach so, now we are sitting/waiting/wishing to trade for other teams stars. That could take just as long if not longer. We are entering year 5 already.

They didn't invest enough in the draft to land a star. Be it tanking OR scouting.

It does on average but if your talent evaluation process is subpar you are more likely to make the wrong decision regardless of where you land in the draft.

Also, higher odds in the lottery don't really put you in a better position to draft Jokic, Giannis, Jimmy and Kawhi, players who have to a significant degree shaped today's NBA.

My counterpoint to you is that the Knicks had a shot at a star after RJ's first season in the 2020 draft. Just because they didn't tank didn't prevent them from drafting a star. I have said for years that Haliburton will be the best player from the class and he was right there for the taking at #8. Sure, had they landed at #1 or #2 they could've drafted Edwards, but similarly they might have taken Wiseman, who they were rumored to like. It's irrelevant because they could have taken Hali.

They "invested" in the draft in that they thought Obi was a star. He wasn't. Would they have been more "invested" had they picked the actual star in Haliburton at the same spot? No. The different between the two outcomes isn't strategic, it's purely about execution and decision-making.

If you want to keep making my point for me as if I'm missing something, continue. They didn't invest enough in the draft. Tanking OR SCOUTING. They didn't draft for need either. As you pointed out with the Hali miss and arguably the RJ draft. Garland was there. We needed a PG for 23 years. Passed on both. Also missed SGA. Other teams missed them too.

Back to the actual point. They didn't find a star ANYWHERE in the draft and built a treadmill team before doing so. Now they have to use picks to trade for a star. They didn't invest enough in the draft. They didn't get anything back on whatever they did invest in when it comes to a star player. The youth we have are trade chips moving forward as are ALL of our picks. Again, ignoring the idea of drafting a star.

The Knicks didn't draft a disappointment like Obi on purpose.

They weren't ignoring the idea of drafting a star.

But they did pick the wrong player to accomplish that goal.

Even if they meant to use that draft pick as a trade chip down the line, they'd have better off drafting a star.

Haliburton has become a star. Obi has not. They selected Obi because their projections were wrong, not because they weren't invested in drafting a star.

[Jalen Bluntson]

It does on average but if your talent evaluation process is subpar you are more likely to make the wrong decision regardless of where you land in the draft.

Also, higher odds in the lottery don't really put you in a better position to draft Jokic, Giannis, Jimmy and Kawhi, players who have to a significant degree shaped today's NBA.

My counterpoint to you is that the Knicks had a shot at a star after RJ's first season in the 2020 draft. Just because they didn't tank didn't prevent them from drafting a star. I have said for years that Haliburton will be the best player from the class and he was right there for the taking at #8. Sure, had they landed at #1 or #2 they could've drafted Edwards, but similarly they might have taken Wiseman, who they were rumored to like. It's irrelevant because they could have taken Hali.

They "invested" in the draft in that they thought Obi was a star. He wasn't. Would they have been more "invested" had they picked the actual star in Haliburton at the same spot? No. The different between the two outcomes isn't strategic, it's purely about execution and decision-making.

If you want to keep making my point for me as if I'm missing something, continue. They didn't invest enough in the draft. Tanking OR SCOUTING. They didn't draft for need either. As you pointed out with the Hali miss and arguably the RJ draft. Garland was there. We needed a PG for 23 years. Passed on both. Also missed SGA. Other teams missed them too.

Back to the actual point. They didn't find a star ANYWHERE in the draft and built a treadmill team before doing so. Now they have to use picks to trade for a star. They didn't invest enough in the draft. They didn't get anything back on whatever they did invest in when it comes to a star player. The youth we have are trade chips moving forward as are ALL of our picks. Again, ignoring the idea of drafting a star.

The Knicks didn't draft a disappointment like Obi on purpose.

They weren't ignoring the idea of drafting a star.

But they did pick the wrong player to accomplish that goal.

Even if they meant to use that draft pick as a trade chip down the line, they'd have better off drafting a star.

Haliburton has become a star. Obi has not. They selected Obi because their projections were wrong, not because they weren't invested in drafting a star.

If Hali was Leon's sons client....

Why keep making my point as if I am missing something?

They didn't draft a star ANYWHERE in the draft and moved forward as if they had basically. It is skipping a step. Regardless of who they picked and who they missed. That only adds to my point. It isn't a counterpoint. Now everything they did draft and every pick we have moving forward is on the block for SOMEONE ELSE'S star. Or two second round picks.

We literally just traded back in like 5 consecutive drafts! obviously exaggerating but, yeah.

[robillionaire]

This can be the post game thread for the rest of the year.

[Jose7]

This can be the post game thread for the rest of the year.

It literally was.

Knicks pre OG 17-15 literally Mid and Boring

Knicks with OG 11-2 overcoming Point randle

Cant even imagine how good this team would be without the Randle experience

[Gravy]

This team did not tank for 5-10 years to get a star so they are unwatchable with no way to improve.

So Yall will be watching the Pistons instead who are rebuilding the right way and will be contenders before we are

[FrozenEnvelope]

Anyone with a Crackbury avatar cannot be taken seriously.

[robillionaire]

This team did not tank for 5-10 years to get a star so they are unwatchable with no way to improve.

So Yall will be watching the Pistons instead who are rebuilding the right way and will be contenders before we are

Yep, this is treadmill hell. So painful to watch. I’m boycotting the team now.

[dakomish23]

The lesson here should be IT IS A LONG **** SEASON

[3eePointGoal]

Thread is aging like starbury sneakers hanging off a light pole

[Jose7]

Thread is aging like starbury sneakers hanging off a light pole

My points are still valid.

The Randle Rj thibs trio was disgusting.

The OG move was a huge move in the correct direction.

I will never be fooled by Randle.

If you think the 2023 product before the OG trade was watchable you’re lying..it was disgusting basketball sans Brunson

[Jalen Bluntson]

Thread is aging like starbury sneakers hanging off a light pole

My points are still valid.

The Randle Rj thibs trio was disgusting.

The OG move was a huge move in the correct direction.

I will never be fooled by Randle.

If you think the 2023 product before the OG trade was watchable you’re lying..it was disgusting basketball sans Brunson

Disgusting basketball? We lost the last couple before the trade, one without IQ/RJ/OG so, take that out. We were over .500 and tied for the 4 seed. What more did you want?

Since the trade we are the hottest team in the NBA. You were mailing it in before the season even started and it was a ridiculous take even up to he trade.