Mitchell Robinson future DPOY watch

[KnicksGadfly]

His ORTG last night was 101.5 and his DRTG was 118.5, counting stats don't tell you how he's negatively impacting the offense. His ORTG against vs teams .500 is now at 105.7, if you removed the two Hawk games and solely went with teams over .500 he's at 100 ORTG. Either way, he dominates bad teams and becomes dead weight against good ones.

Everyone in our starting lineup has to be able to hit threes because there's a guy standing in the paint at all times on offense, which means Rudy Gobert or KAT is also standing next to him in the paint at all times to alter shots. We are dead last in the league on 2 point shots, because we are always taking mid range shots since our guys are always driving into a crowded lane.

By comparison, Rudy was 134.5 ORTG and 105.5 DRTG, he won that matchup by miles. The wolves didn't need offensive rebounding since they actually made their shots. Being the best offensive rebounding teams you're bricking.

Mitch had the best defensive rating among Knicks starters.

It's a lineup stat so the poor team defense was more than likely driven by the players he shared the court with who had a far worse defensive rating (Brunson 123.6, RJ 126.5, Grimes 129.4)

He's the reason the offense is bad, you know it and I know it. You replace him with a guy that guards the rim and spreads the floor the entire team would be better.

His ORTG against good teams is almost always in the dump and people blame it on everyone but him. You can ride that train if you want, but for someone that is a Jokic stan I know that you know a 5 just standing under the rim on offense will not cut it in the long run, and no amount of defense can make up for hurting your offense that badly. It didn't work for DeAndre Jordan and Blake who had Cp3 and Reddick flanking them why the hell would it work now.

Ayyyy, look who disappeared for a really long time and then showed up again about Mitch losing to Gobert (which he didn't really), who is ironically a guy who sits under the rim and waits to dunk the ball!

This is a textbook case of the "KnicksNext"

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Read on Twitter

against two 7 footers & Naz Reid...

His ORTG last night was 101.5 and his DRTG was 118.5, counting stats don't tell you how he's negatively impacting the offense. His ORTG against teams .500 is now at 105.7, if you removed the two Hawk games and solely went with teams over .500 he's at 100 ORTG. Either way, he dominates bad teams and becomes dead weight against good ones.

Everyone in our starting lineup has to be able to hit threes because there's a guy standing in the paint at all times on offense, which means Rudy Gobert or KAT is also standing next to him in the paint at all times to alter shots. We are dead last in the league on 2 point shots, because we are always taking mid range shots since our guys are always driving into a crowded lane.

By comparison, Rudy was 134.5 ORTG and 105.5 DRTG, he won that matchup by miles. The wolves didn't need offensive rebounding since they actually made their shots. Being the best offensive rebounding teams you're bricking.

Mitch is to NDOS what RJ is to Chanel!!!

I'm not a serial killer though.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Mitch had the best defensive rating among Knicks starters.

It's a lineup stat so the poor team defense was more than likely driven by the players he shared the court with who had a far worse defensive rating (Brunson 123.6, RJ 126.5, Grimes 129.4)

He's the reason the offense is bad, you know it and I know it. You replace him with a guy that guards the rim and spreads the floor the entire team would be better.

His ORTG against good teams is almost always in the dump and people blame it on everyone but him. You can ride that train if you want, but for someone that is a Jokic stan I know that you know a 5 just standing under the rim on offense will not cut it in the long run, and no amount of defense can make up for hurting your offense that badly. It didn't work for DeAndre Jordan and Blake who had Cp3 and Reddick flanking them why the hell would it work now.

Ayyyy, look who disappeared for a really long time and then showed up again about Mitch losing to Gobert (which he didn't really), who is ironically a guy who sits under the rim and waits to dunk the ball!

Sorry if I don't feel the need to bring up talking points beating the Wiz or Hornets. I will be here when he cripples our offense against good teams though, which we're now 3-6 against, and he has a 100 ORTG against teams over .500, not his fault though because as you know a center with no offense that shoots sub 40% from the foul line has no impact on that.


Also, Gobert may as well be David Robinson on offense compared to Mitch, he shoots 60% from the line, Mitch shoots 38%. I doubt the Wolves win anything with Gobert too.

[DOT]

His ORTG last night was 101.5 and his DRTG was 118.5, counting stats don't tell you how he's negatively impacting the offense. His ORTG against teams .500 is now at 105.7, if you removed the two Hawk games and solely went with teams over .500 he's at 100 ORTG. Either way, he dominates bad teams and becomes dead weight against good ones.

Everyone in our starting lineup has to be able to hit threes because there's a guy standing in the paint at all times on offense, which means Rudy Gobert or KAT is also standing next to him in the paint at all times to alter shots. We are dead last in the league on 2 point shots, because we are always taking mid range shots since our guys are always driving into a crowded lane.

By comparison, Rudy was 134.5 ORTG and 105.5 DRTG, he won that matchup by miles. The wolves didn't need offensive rebounding since they actually made their shots. Being the best offensive rebounding teams you're bricking.

Mitch is to NDOS what RJ is to Chanel!!!

I'm not a serial killer though.

[Chanel Bomber]

His ORTG last night was 101.5 and his DRTG was 118.5, counting stats don't tell you how he's negatively impacting the offense. His ORTG against vs teams .500 is now at 105.7, if you removed the two Hawk games and solely went with teams over .500 he's at 100 ORTG. Either way, he dominates bad teams and becomes dead weight against good ones.

Everyone in our starting lineup has to be able to hit threes because there's a guy standing in the paint at all times on offense, which means Rudy Gobert or KAT is also standing next to him in the paint at all times to alter shots. We are dead last in the league on 2 point shots, because we are always taking mid range shots since our guys are always driving into a crowded lane.

By comparison, Rudy was 134.5 ORTG and 105.5 DRTG, he won that matchup by miles. The wolves didn't need offensive rebounding since they actually made their shots. Being the best offensive rebounding teams you're bricking.

Mitch had the best defensive rating among Knicks starters.

It's a lineup stat so the poor team defense was more than likely driven by the players he shared the court with who had a far worse defensive rating (Brunson 123.6, RJ 126.5, Grimes 129.4)

He's the reason the offense is bad, you know it and I know it. You replace him with a guy that guards the rim and spreads the floor the entire team would be better.

His ORTG against good teams is almost always in the dump and people blame it on everyone but him. You can ride that train if you want, but for someone that is a Jokic stan I know that you know a 5 just standing under the rim on offense will not cut it in the long run, and no amount of defense can make up for hurting your offense that badly. It didn't work for DeAndre Jordan and Blake who had Cp3 and Reddick flanking them why the hell would it work now.

No I don't know that, because I think that assessment is overly simplistic.

The Knicks' offense ranks 12th in the league anyway - it's not nearly as "bad" as you make it sound.

Of course, Mitch's offensive limitations contribute to the offense not being great, as do plenty of other factors. Factors that include the lack of spacing from the forward spots, the fact that our second and third options have a track record of being inefficient (or alternating between inefficient and average in Randle's case), or the fact that we don't have an elite high-volume 3-point shooter.

But what makes our offense function is that we take more attempts than the other teams, and this comes primarily from the fact that we're an elite offensive rebounding team, led by Mitch (along with the low turnover rate). It's the one area where our offense stands out. This matters. Of course, you can make the case that with a stretch 5 (who don't exactly grow on trees) the Knicks would have a better eFG% and/or TS%, but would the difference be significant enough to significantly outweigh the loss in offensive rebounding (and the extra possessions it provides)? I think that would be an exaggeration to confidently come to that conclusion.

Jokic is a superstar, it's completely different.

Of course Jokic, Embiid, Bam, AD are a class (and some) above Mitch. You can put KP in there too. My guy Sengun I reckon might be on his way to joining that company. Mitch is as impactful as any other center after that.

The Knicks don't have a championship roster. You can certainly make the case that having Mitch as your starting center might put a cap on your team at the ECF, but he's not holding a contender back. He's contributing to making this team reasonably successful far more than other players you've given a pass to because of a theoretical ideal that matches on paper but is far removed from reality when the games are played.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Mitch had the best defensive rating among Knicks starters.

It's a lineup stat so the poor team defense was more than likely driven by the players he shared the court with who had a far worse defensive rating (Brunson 123.6, RJ 126.5, Grimes 129.4)

He's the reason the offense is bad, you know it and I know it. You replace him with a guy that guards the rim and spreads the floor the entire team would be better.

His ORTG against good teams is almost always in the dump and people blame it on everyone but him. You can ride that train if you want, but for someone that is a Jokic stan I know that you know a 5 just standing under the rim on offense will not cut it in the long run, and no amount of defense can make up for hurting your offense that badly. It didn't work for DeAndre Jordan and Blake who had Cp3 and Reddick flanking them why the hell would it work now.

No I don't know that, because I think that assessment is overly simplistic.

The Knicks' offense ranks 12th in the league anyway - it's not nearly as "bad" as you make it sound.

Of course, Mitch's offensive limitations contribute to the offense not being great, as do plenty of other factors. Factors that include the lack of spacing from the forward spots, the fact that our second and third options have a track record of being inefficient (or alternating between inefficient and average in Randle's case), or the fact that we don't have an elite high-volume 3-point shooter.

But what makes our offense function is that we take more attempts than the other teams, and this comes primarily from the fact that we're an elite offensive rebounding team, led by Mitch (along with the low turnover rate). It's the one area where our offense stands out. This matters. Of course, you can make the case that with a stretch 5 (who don't exactly grow on trees) the Knicks would have a better eFG% and/or TS%, but would the difference be significant enough to offset or outweigh the loss in offensive rebounding (and the extra possessions it provides)? I don't think so. I think that would be an exaggeration.

Jokic is a superstar, it's completely different.

Of course Jokic, Embiid, Bam, AD are a class (and some) above Mitch. You can put KP in there too. My guy Sengun I reckon might be on his way to joining that company. Mitch is as impactful as any other center after that.

The Knicks don't have a championship roster. You can certainly make the case that having Mitch as your starting center might put a cap on your team at the ECF, but he's not holding a contender back. He's contributing to making this team reasonably successful far more than other players you give a pass to because of a theoretical ideal that matches on paper but is far removed from reality when the games are played.

I don't care about where our offense ranks in the regular season, I know I will fall apart in the playoffs because it relies on junk. You cannot be a fan of all these different types of offensive centers and not see how negatively floor balance can be impacted by 1 guy standing in the dunkers spot every other possession, especially in the playoffs. If he had even a rudimentary passing game we'd be better, and it can not be said enough, he is shooting .385% from the line.

Also, let's keep it real, Randle would be better playing with a floor spacer of any kind, that much I can admit. They tried that stupid big to big screen last night and the Wolves just switched it because there's no real threat. If you had someone that could pass, space or score he'd have more room and less difficult finishes over defenders of the C is out of the lane.



If you agree he puts a cap on the team and he contributes to the offensive struggles what are we even talking about? My point is this will end the same way it did for DeAndre Jordan and Blake, or Embiid and Simmons who also had top regular season offenses and faltered in the playoffs. How is this any different from DeAndre Jordan and Blake, we're debating something that has been settled already. You cannot build a real contender with this type of player in the current NBA. He has the lowest ppg average among starting centers no amount of defense can overcome bad floor balance on offense, it is known.

[god shammgod]

My guy came on here and complained that because of Mitch we have to make 3s like it ain’t 2023. lol

[god shammgod]

When a guy is playing good and getting universal praise it’s not a good time to sh*t on him. When we go in on rj it’s because he sucks. lol

[NoDopeOnSundays]

My guy came on here and complained that because of Mitch we have to make 3s like it ain’t 2023. lol

No, because of Mitch we don't get driving lanes like other teams so, we are always met with a shot blocker hanging out near the rim. It puts even more pressure on us to be lights out from there as a result.

It's wild how you all could watch Ben Simmons all these years hanging out in the dunkers spot with his defender basically always being in help defense and then not see the same thing with Mitch. This applies to all rim runners, and why teams routinely go small in the playoffs to get these dudes off the floor. It's a huge reason why our offense looks like utter trash against good teams or the Heat can run the forever zone against us.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

When a guy is playing good and getting universal praise it’s not a good time to sh*t on him. When we go in on rj it’s because he sucks. lol

Read on Twitter

?t=_xtxKlhjRQtpfKitTMYEIQ&s=19


He got universal praise, so did Gobert. I **** on both of them, rim runners that can't do anything with the ball are fools gold. I couldn't careless about y'all tit for tat RJ stuff, a center like this doesn't win anymore, it's not 2004.

[god shammgod]

Our offense looks like trash because 2 of our top 3 are rj and Randle. The mavs have the 3rd best offense with a rim runner. The hawks are 6th. It’s not the factor you’re making it out to be.

[god shammgod]

Going out like Cuba gooding jr in boys n the hood. Sad.

[Chanel Bomber]

He's the reason the offense is bad, you know it and I know it. You replace him with a guy that guards the rim and spreads the floor the entire team would be better.

His ORTG against good teams is almost always in the dump and people blame it on everyone but him. You can ride that train if you want, but for someone that is a Jokic stan I know that you know a 5 just standing under the rim on offense will not cut it in the long run, and no amount of defense can make up for hurting your offense that badly. It didn't work for DeAndre Jordan and Blake who had Cp3 and Reddick flanking them why the hell would it work now.

No I don't know that, because I think that assessment is overly simplistic.

The Knicks' offense ranks 12th in the league anyway - it's not nearly as "bad" as you make it sound.

Of course, Mitch's offensive limitations contribute to the offense not being great, as do plenty of other factors. Factors that include the lack of spacing from the forward spots, the fact that our second and third options have a track record of being inefficient (or alternating between inefficient and average in Randle's case), or the fact that we don't have an elite high-volume 3-point shooter.

But what makes our offense function is that we take more attempts than the other teams, and this comes primarily from the fact that we're an elite offensive rebounding team, led by Mitch (along with the low turnover rate). It's the one area where our offense stands out. This matters. Of course, you can make the case that with a stretch 5 (who don't exactly grow on trees) the Knicks would have a better eFG% and/or TS%, but would the difference be significant enough to offset or outweigh the loss in offensive rebounding (and the extra possessions it provides)? I don't think so. I think that would be an exaggeration.

Jokic is a superstar, it's completely different.

Of course Jokic, Embiid, Bam, AD are a class (and some) above Mitch. You can put KP in there too. My guy Sengun I reckon might be on his way to joining that company. Mitch is as impactful as any other center after that.

The Knicks don't have a championship roster. You can certainly make the case that having Mitch as your starting center might put a cap on your team at the ECF, but he's not holding a contender back. He's contributing to making this team reasonably successful far more than other players you give a pass to because of a theoretical ideal that matches on paper but is far removed from reality when the games are played.

I don't care about where our offense ranks in the regular season, I know I will fall apart in the playoffs because it relies on junk. You cannot be a fan of all these different types of offensive centers and not see how negatively floor balance can be impacted by 1 guy standing in the dunkers spot every other possession, especially in the playoffs. If he had even a rudimentary passing game we'd be better, and it can not be said enough, he is shooting .385% from the line.

Also, let's keep it real, Randle would be better playing with a floor spacer of any kind, that much I can admit. They tried that stupid big to big screen last night and the Wolves just switched it because there's no real threat. If you had someone that could pass, space or score he'd have more room and less difficult finishes over defenders of the C is out of the lane.



If you agree he puts a cap on the team and he contributes to the offensive struggles what are we even talking about? My point is this will end the same way it did for DeAndre Jordan and Blake, or Embiid and Simmons who also had top regular season offenses and faltered in the playoffs. How is this any different from DeAndre Jordan and Blake, we're debating something that has been settled already. You cannot build a real contender with this type of player in the current NBA. He has the lowest ppg average among starting centers no amount of defense can overcome bad floor balance on offense, it is known.

Of course we'd better if he were better than he is. You can say that about damn near every player on the team.

The only Knick with a scoring efficiency higher than league-average in the playoffs was Brunson at 58.9%. Everyone else was below average. Yes, Mitch's limitations hurt the Knicks offense in the playoffs, but so did the team's inability to make shots across the roster. And those that did at a semi-respectable (though below-average) rate hurt the team severely on the other end. Randle remarkably managed to do both.

A lot of things went into the Clippers failures in the playoffs. DeAndre Jordan was a damn good player for a couple of years, before his defense fell off overnight.

On aggregate, Mitch provides a lot of value for a team that is short on talent and that needs to win games unconventionally.

And I think your last sentence shows how much you undervalue defense. It's half the game.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Our offense looks like trash because 2 of our top 3 are rj and Randle. The mavs have the 3rd best offense with a rim runner. The hawks are 6th. It’s not the factor you’re making it out to be.

Their rim runners are actually used in the PNR, because when they get the ball on the roll or lob fouling them isn't a prolonged turnover.

Capella - .645
Lively - .636
Mitch - .385


Neither team is winning anything either

[god shammgod]

If Mitch was a top 5 player at his position we’d be better. What a revelation.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Going out like Cuba gooding jr in boys n the hood. Sad.

He lived, meanwhile you going out like old boy selling burgers in Menace.

[god shammgod]

This is just me talking but if rj was a top 5 player at his position we might be better too lol

[NoDopeOnSundays]

If Mitch was a top 5 player at his position we’d be better. What a revelation.

Is he better than Sengun? I await your answer.


Got you before the edit too, I am victorious, you don't even think he's top 5 at his position

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Of course we'd better if he were better than he is.

I won.

Got sham saying Mitch isn't top 5, and got you saying we'd be better. It's over.

[NoDopeOnSundays]