Preseason Game and PG Thread #5!!!!!!!!!!!-Knicks Vs Hornets 10/17/25 7:30Pm Est

[3toheadmelo]

If you don't want to answer the question that's fine.

I did

I didn't see a year or roster specified anywhere. My question was very simple. What specific year and roster were the Timberwolves on paper good enough to be considered a legit contender - but they failed to live up to those expectations due to Kat's poor defense playing the 5.

The reality is they never had a very good roster. Their 2nd best player was a fringe top 20-30 Jimmy Butler.

So sure, having Kat as your best player and him playing the 5 didn't work with a mediocre supporting cast.

I'm not even arguing it would/could work with Kat at the 5 with this roster. But the insinuation there is this overwhelming evidence based on a bad franchise with bad rosters not succeeding is disingenuous and agenda pushing.

I never said the Timberwolves were contenders when KAT was starting at the 5, so I don't know why you're pushing that agenda. Objectively, when KAT played at the 5 they were a bottom 10 defensive team in the league for at least 5 seasons when they shouldn't have been that bad.

Even in his last season when they reached the WCF and were contenders, any lineup they played KAT at the 5 he literally made them so much worse.

It's quite possible Minnesota feels comfortable with Towns at the five, surrounded by elite perimeter defenders—but lineups with Towns at the pivot haven't yielded the best results on defense. In Minnesota's most played lineup excluding Gobert, and Towns at the five, the Wolves gave up 122 points per 100 possessions—ranking in the 21st percentile.

Read on Twitter

So yeah, there IS overwhelming evidence that you are ignoring because you have an agenda to run and the facts don't fit your narrative. But it doesn't matter, because at the end of the day the Knicks are fully committed to starting KAT at the 4. They know his defense at the 5 is awful.

[Guano]

Its really dope that mo is looking like an nba player cause 3pac is dispointment.

[El Poochio]

Its really dope that mo is looking like an nba player cause 3pac is dispointment.

OG Lite??

[Guano]

Its really dope that mo is looking like an nba player cause 3pac is dispointment.

OG Lite??

No idea... as I missed the last game. those might be unrealistic expectations but a serviceable wing who can play solid defense, board and push the pace, and hit some 3s would be huge for us.

[kNicksGmen]

I did

I didn't see a year or roster specified anywhere. My question was very simple. What specific year and roster were the Timberwolves on paper good enough to be considered a legit contender - but they failed to live up to those expectations due to Kat's poor defense playing the 5.

The reality is they never had a very good roster. Their 2nd best player was a fringe top 20-30 Jimmy Butler.

So sure, having Kat as your best player and him playing the 5 didn't work with a mediocre supporting cast.

I'm not even arguing it would/could work with Kat at the 5 with this roster. But the insinuation there is this overwhelming evidence based on a bad franchise with bad rosters not succeeding is disingenuous and agenda pushing.

I never said the Timberwolves were contenders when KAT was starting at the 5, so I don't know why you're pushing that agenda. Objectively, when KAT played at the 5 they were a bottom 10 defensive team in the league for at least 5 seasons when they shouldn't have been that bad.

Even in his last season when they reached the WCF and were contenders, any lineup they played KAT at the 5 he literally made them so much worse.

It's quite possible Minnesota feels comfortable with Towns at the five, surrounded by elite perimeter defenders—but lineups with Towns at the pivot haven't yielded the best results on defense. In Minnesota's most played lineup excluding Gobert, and Towns at the five, the Wolves gave up 122 points per 100 possessions—ranking in the 21st percentile.

Read on Twitter

So yeah, there IS overwhelming evidence that you are ignoring because you have an agenda to run and the facts don't fit your narrative. But it doesn't matter, because at the end of the day the Knicks are fully committed to starting KAT at the 4. They know his defense at the 5 is awful.

Wut. I quoted what you said. I never said you said they were contenders. I am asking when did they have a roster that should have been a contender but the defensive failings of Kat held them back. It's a rhetorical question because they never had a quality roster - which is the point.

You can't say "the wolves tried for years with Kat at the 5 and failed" and ignore the fact the "failing" was large in part to the roster being crap.

Again, I'm not even arguing that Kat at the 5 is the answer. I don't have an agenda. I prefer to live in reality and look at situations without emotion or bias. I'm simply pushing back on the nonsense you propagate here all the time. In a hypothetical world the wolves could have built a stacked roster with kat at the 5, and came up short due to his defense being a major issue. The reality though, is that never happened - so the best you or I can do is make assumptions.

and if you want to use small sample sizes to promote the idea the wolves offense and defense was worse with Kat on and Rudy off, I think that speaks for itself. why not look at the entirety of last season where Kat was far and away the best on/off player on the knicks? it wasn't even close.

[3toheadmelo]

I didn't see a year or roster specified anywhere. My question was very simple. What specific year and roster were the Timberwolves on paper good enough to be considered a legit contender - but they failed to live up to those expectations due to Kat's poor defense playing the 5.

The reality is they never had a very good roster. Their 2nd best player was a fringe top 20-30 Jimmy Butler.

So sure, having Kat as your best player and him playing the 5 didn't work with a mediocre supporting cast.

I'm not even arguing it would/could work with Kat at the 5 with this roster. But the insinuation there is this overwhelming evidence based on a bad franchise with bad rosters not succeeding is disingenuous and agenda pushing.

I never said the Timberwolves were contenders when KAT was starting at the 5, so I don't know why you're pushing that agenda. Objectively, when KAT played at the 5 they were a bottom 10 defensive team in the league for at least 5 seasons when they shouldn't have been that bad.

Even in his last season when they reached the WCF and were contenders, any lineup they played KAT at the 5 he literally made them so much worse.

It's quite possible Minnesota feels comfortable with Towns at the five, surrounded by elite perimeter defenders—but lineups with Towns at the pivot haven't yielded the best results on defense. In Minnesota's most played lineup excluding Gobert, and Towns at the five, the Wolves gave up 122 points per 100 possessions—ranking in the 21st percentile.

Read on Twitter

So yeah, there IS overwhelming evidence that you are ignoring because you have an agenda to run and the facts don't fit your narrative. But it doesn't matter, because at the end of the day the Knicks are fully committed to starting KAT at the 4. They know his defense at the 5 is awful.

Wut. I quoted what you said. I never said you said they were contenders. I am asking when did they have a roster that should have been a contender but the defensive failings of Kat held them back. It's a rhetorical question because they never had a quality roster - which is the point.

You can't say "the wolves tried for years with Kat at the 5 and failed" and ignore the fact the "failing" was large in part to the roster being crap.

Again, I'm not even arguing that Kat at the 5 is the answer. I don't have an agenda. I prefer to live in reality and look at situations without emotion or bias. I'm simply pushing back on the nonsense you propagate here all the time. In a hypothetical world the wolves could have built a stacked roster with kat at the 5, and came up short due to his defense being a major issue. The reality though, is that never happened - so the best you or I can do is make assumptions.

You're literally ignoring reality. How come any lineups with him at the 5 when they were contenders didn't work then? Are you saying pairing him with defenders like Jaden McDaniels, NAW, Kyle Anderson, Ant, Conley, etc aren't good enough? Again, you have an agenda that you have to run. I already gave you the data as above. That's LITERALLY from the year they went to the WCF. Where's your data to back up your points? You're simply just blaming others for KAT being so terrible on defense when it doesn't even make sense and you have no data to rationalize your narratives. That's ignorant as hell.

[kNicksGmen]

I never said the Timberwolves were contenders when KAT was starting at the 5, so I don't know why you're pushing that agenda. Objectively, when KAT played at the 5 they were a bottom 10 defensive team in the league for at least 5 seasons when they shouldn't have been that bad.

Even in his last season when they reached the WCF and were contenders, any lineup they played KAT at the 5 he literally made them so much worse.

Read on Twitter

So yeah, there IS overwhelming evidence that you are ignoring because you have an agenda to run and the facts don't fit your narrative. But it doesn't matter, because at the end of the day the Knicks are fully committed to starting KAT at the 4. They know his defense at the 5 is awful.

Wut. I quoted what you said. I never said you said they were contenders. I am asking when did they have a roster that should have been a contender but the defensive failings of Kat held them back. It's a rhetorical question because they never had a quality roster - which is the point.

You can't say "the wolves tried for years with Kat at the 5 and failed" and ignore the fact the "failing" was large in part to the roster being crap.

Again, I'm not even arguing that Kat at the 5 is the answer. I don't have an agenda. I prefer to live in reality and look at situations without emotion or bias. I'm simply pushing back on the nonsense you propagate here all the time. In a hypothetical world the wolves could have built a stacked roster with kat at the 5, and came up short due to his defense being a major issue. The reality though, is that never happened - so the best you or I can do is make assumptions.

You're literally ignoring reality. How come any lineups with him at the 5 when they were contenders didn't work then? Are you saying pairing him with defenders like Jaden McDaniels, NAW, Kyle Anderson, Ant, Conley, etc aren't good enough? Again, you have an agenda that you have to run. I already gave you the data as above. That's LITERALLY from the year they went to the WCF. Where's your data to back up your points? You're simply just blaming others for KAT being so terrible on defense when it doesn't even make sense and you have no data to rationalize your narratives. That's ignorant as hell.

The timberwolves top lineup played 207 minutes (the starting unit) - next highest minute total was 39 - which had Towns and Naz Reid (who is a bad defender). Next highest with Kat / without Gobert was 30 - which also had Naz.

The highest minute total lineup with Kat and No Gobert and no Naz Reid was a total of 11 minutes.

In fact, in the totality of the playoffs, any lineup with Kat and without Gobert or Naz was 30 total minutes.

The total minutes of Kat with no Gobert was a total of around 200 minutes. So Kat+Naz was around 170 of those.

Kat+Gobert was around 325 total minutes.


So sure, paint the picture that when Rudy sat and Kat played the 5 it was this stacked defensive lineup. When the reality is Naz Reid is a horrible defender.

[3toheadmelo]

Wut. I quoted what you said. I never said you said they were contenders. I am asking when did they have a roster that should have been a contender but the defensive failings of Kat held them back. It's a rhetorical question because they never had a quality roster - which is the point.

You can't say "the wolves tried for years with Kat at the 5 and failed" and ignore the fact the "failing" was large in part to the roster being crap.

Again, I'm not even arguing that Kat at the 5 is the answer. I don't have an agenda. I prefer to live in reality and look at situations without emotion or bias. I'm simply pushing back on the nonsense you propagate here all the time. In a hypothetical world the wolves could have built a stacked roster with kat at the 5, and came up short due to his defense being a major issue. The reality though, is that never happened - so the best you or I can do is make assumptions.

You're literally ignoring reality. How come any lineups with him at the 5 when they were contenders didn't work then? Are you saying pairing him with defenders like Jaden McDaniels, NAW, Kyle Anderson, Ant, Conley, etc aren't good enough? Again, you have an agenda that you have to run. I already gave you the data as above. That's LITERALLY from the year they went to the WCF. Where's your data to back up your points? You're simply just blaming others for KAT being so terrible on defense when it doesn't even make sense and you have no data to rationalize your narratives. That's ignorant as hell.

The timberwolves top lineup played 207 minutes - next highest minute total was 39 - which had Towns and Naz Reid (who is a bad defender). Next highest with Kat / without Gobert was 30 - which also had Naz.

The highest minute total lineup with Kat and No Gobert and no Naz Reid was a total of 11 minutes.

In fact, in the totality of the playoffs, any lineup with Kat and without Gobert or Naz was 30 total minutes.

The total minutes of Kat with no Gobert was a total of around 200 minutes. So Kat+Naz was around 170 of those.

Kat+Gobert was around 325 total minutes.


So sure, paint the picture that it was this stacked defensive lineup + Kat. When the reality is Naz Reid is a horrible defender.

Like clockwork, blaming once again another team mate. This time it's Naz reid's fault. Let's dive into this awful narrative that you continue to spew.



K. Towns - N. Alexander-Walker - N. Reid - A. Edwards - J. McDaniels -5.0 NET Rating - 39 mins

Now what happens if you use that same lineup with the super terrible Naz reid and replace KAT with Gobert. Wouldn't the god awful Naz reid hold them back despite whoever the C is? Right?

R. Gobert - N. Alexander-Walker - N. Reid - A. Edwards - J. McDaniels + 18.6 NET Rating. - 39 Mins

So the sample size is the same for both lineups, but how come Naz reid isn't holding back Gobert the same way he did KAT? Make it make sense. And imagine acting like NAW, Jaden McDaniels, Ant aren't very good defenders. Lmao.

[kNicksGmen]

You're literally ignoring reality. How come any lineups with him at the 5 when they were contenders didn't work then? Are you saying pairing him with defenders like Jaden McDaniels, NAW, Kyle Anderson, Ant, Conley, etc aren't good enough? Again, you have an agenda that you have to run. I already gave you the data as above. That's LITERALLY from the year they went to the WCF. Where's your data to back up your points? You're simply just blaming others for KAT being so terrible on defense when it doesn't even make sense and you have no data to rationalize your narratives. That's ignorant as hell.

The timberwolves top lineup played 207 minutes - next highest minute total was 39 - which had Towns and Naz Reid (who is a bad defender). Next highest with Kat / without Gobert was 30 - which also had Naz.

The highest minute total lineup with Kat and No Gobert and no Naz Reid was a total of 11 minutes.

In fact, in the totality of the playoffs, any lineup with Kat and without Gobert or Naz was 30 total minutes.

The total minutes of Kat with no Gobert was a total of around 200 minutes. So Kat+Naz was around 170 of those.

Kat+Gobert was around 325 total minutes.


So sure, paint the picture that it was this stacked defensive lineup + Kat. When the reality is Naz Reid is a horrible defender.

Like clockwork, blaming once again another team mate. This time it's Naz reid's fault. Let's dive into this awful narrative that you continue to spew.



K. Towns - N. Alexander-Walker - N. Reid - A. Edwards - J. McDaniels -5.0 NET Rating - 39 mins

Now what happens if you use that same lineup with the super terrible Naz reid and replace KAT with Gobert. Wouldn't the god awful Naz reid hold them back despite whoever the C is? Right?

R. Gobert - N. Alexander-Walker - N. Reid - A. Edwards - J. McDaniels + 18.6 NET Rating. - 39 Mins

So the sample size is the same for both lineups, but how come Naz reid isn't holding back Gobert the same way he did KAT? Make it make sense. And imagine acting like NAW, Jaden McDaniels, Ant aren't very good defenders. Lmao.

you can't be serious. the proper comp would be Gobert + Kat to Gobert + Naz. Not Kat+Naz to Gobert+Naz.

You cannot be taken seriously. You're comparing having 2 poor defenders at the 4/5 to a poor defender at the 4 with a generationally great defensive anchor 5. get a grip.

the only other fair comp (although a dumb one) would be if there was substantial minutes of a lineup with Kat at the 5 with no Naz, compared to a lineup with Naz at the 5 (with no gobert obviously)

your whole argument was "Kat at the 5 surrounded by elite defenders didn't work" - ignoring that it never happened. then you're comparing it to a lineup with Naz reid as the only weak defender

[3toheadmelo]

The timberwolves top lineup played 207 minutes - next highest minute total was 39 - which had Towns and Naz Reid (who is a bad defender). Next highest with Kat / without Gobert was 30 - which also had Naz.

The highest minute total lineup with Kat and No Gobert and no Naz Reid was a total of 11 minutes.

In fact, in the totality of the playoffs, any lineup with Kat and without Gobert or Naz was 30 total minutes.

The total minutes of Kat with no Gobert was a total of around 200 minutes. So Kat+Naz was around 170 of those.

Kat+Gobert was around 325 total minutes.


So sure, paint the picture that it was this stacked defensive lineup + Kat. When the reality is Naz Reid is a horrible defender.

Like clockwork, blaming once again another team mate. This time it's Naz reid's fault. Let's dive into this awful narrative that you continue to spew.



K. Towns - N. Alexander-Walker - N. Reid - A. Edwards - J. McDaniels -5.0 NET Rating - 39 mins

Now what happens if you use that same lineup with the super terrible Naz reid and replace KAT with Gobert. Wouldn't the god awful Naz reid hold them back despite whoever the C is? Right?

R. Gobert - N. Alexander-Walker - N. Reid - A. Edwards - J. McDaniels + 18.6 NET Rating. - 39 Mins

So the sample size is the same for both lineups, but how come Naz reid isn't holding back Gobert the same way he did KAT? Make it make sense. And imagine acting like NAW, Jaden McDaniels, Ant aren't very good defenders. Lmao.

you can't be serious. the proper comp would be Gobert + Kat to Gobert + Naz. Not Kat+Naz to Gobert+Naz.

You cannot be taken seriously. You're comparing having 2 poor defenders at the 4/5 to a poor defender at the 4 with a generationally great defensive anchor 5. get a grip.

the only other fair comp (although a dumb one) would be if there was substantial minutes of a lineup with Kat at the 5 with no Naz, compared to a lineup with Naz at the 5 (with no gobert obviously)

your whole argument was "Kat at the 5 surrounded by elite defenders didn't work" - ignoring that it never happened. then you're comparing it to a lineup with Naz reid as the only weak defender

Blaming Naz for everything is nasty work. So let me get this straight. Every single year when the Timberwolves had a bottom 10 defense with KAT it was all of his team mates fault. And now even on a contending team it wasn't KAT's fault either, it was Naz Reid's. Got it.

Good thing the Knicks players and coaches disagree with you completely. But let me guess, they must have agendas too right? Not a serious person.

Players and coaches from the New York Knicks weren't thrilled with Karl-Anthony Towns' "defensive habits" across the 2024-25 NBA season, according to The Athletic's James L. Edwards III and Fred Katz.

"Too often, Towns executed incorrect coverages without communicating why he did it," Edwards and Katz said. "After it became a theme, players worried Towns didn't grasp the importance of the matter.

"The ability to constructively critique became a point of emphasis."

[kNicksGmen]

Like clockwork, blaming once again another team mate. This time it's Naz reid's fault. Let's dive into this awful narrative that you continue to spew.



K. Towns - N. Alexander-Walker - N. Reid - A. Edwards - J. McDaniels -5.0 NET Rating - 39 mins

Now what happens if you use that same lineup with the super terrible Naz reid and replace KAT with Gobert. Wouldn't the god awful Naz reid hold them back despite whoever the C is? Right?

R. Gobert - N. Alexander-Walker - N. Reid - A. Edwards - J. McDaniels + 18.6 NET Rating. - 39 Mins

So the sample size is the same for both lineups, but how come Naz reid isn't holding back Gobert the same way he did KAT? Make it make sense. And imagine acting like NAW, Jaden McDaniels, Ant aren't very good defenders. Lmao.

you can't be serious. the proper comp would be Gobert + Kat to Gobert + Naz. Not Kat+Naz to Gobert+Naz.

You cannot be taken seriously. You're comparing having 2 poor defenders at the 4/5 to a poor defender at the 4 with a generationally great defensive anchor 5. get a grip.

the only other fair comp (although a dumb one) would be if there was substantial minutes of a lineup with Kat at the 5 with no Naz, compared to a lineup with Naz at the 5 (with no gobert obviously)

your whole argument was "Kat at the 5 surrounded by elite defenders didn't work" - ignoring that it never happened. then you're comparing it to a lineup with Naz reid as the only weak defender

Blaming Naz for everything is nasty work. So let me get this straight. Every single year when the Timberwolves had a bottom 10 defense with KAT it was all of his team mates fault. And now even on a contending team it wasn't KAT's fault either, it was Naz Reid's. Got it.

Good thing the Knicks players and coaches disagree with you completely. But let me guess, they must have agendas too right? Not a serious person.

Players and coaches from the New York Knicks weren't thrilled with Karl-Anthony Towns' "defensive habits" across the 2024-25 NBA season, according to The Athletic's James L. Edwards III and Fred Katz.

"Too often, Towns executed incorrect coverages without communicating why he did it," Edwards and Katz said. "After it became a theme, players worried Towns didn't grasp the importance of the matter.

"The ability to constructively critique became a point of emphasis."

I never said Naz Reid was terrible or it was all his fault. But rather he is a poor defender - as is Kat - therefore a pairing of poor defenders at the 4/5 is not an ideal lineup. Would be no different than thinking Randle + Kat would work (or Randle+Naz for that matter). You insinuated that Kat had great defenders around him on the wolves - which is true other than Naz - and those are the "Gobert off the court" numbers you are using as an argument against him. If the wolves didn't have Naz and there were significant minutes of Kat at the 5 with 4 plus defenders, then you could look at that as evidence - but it never happened.

The 21/22 wolves were 14th in defense with Kat at the 5. Next season they had Gobert - and Kat missed most of the season - and they finished 13th.

I'm not arguing for Kat at the 5, or that he can anchor a top 10 defense - especially not for the knicks with Brunson playing 30+ minutes. I'm simply disputing the narrative you keep pushing - which is there is all of this evidence that Kat at the 5 can't work in any shape or form - based on his years on the wolves. When again, as I asked in the beginning - point out the year the wolves should have been a top defense or a potential contender if you replaced Kat with a league average defensive center. Those teams/rosters were simply void of talent.