thebuzzardman wrote:Clyde_Style wrote:
Some call the guy who set the record for FG% a rim runner, but there is a massive difference between him and Noel whom you can’t count on not to bobble the ball and lose the possession. You get the ball to Mitch and roughly two-thirds of the time he is going to score. And Mitch’s ability to receive the ball in motion is vastly superior to Noel’s. He can corral balls in the air that no one else around him can and then convert it which gives our offense an efficiency boost, especially on second shots.
I find the way people view Mitch to be way too rigid. His impact on the game is magnitudes above Noel. If he stays healthy we’ll be a threat to win any playoff series.
And as far as spacing and teams collapsing on Randle, Mitch creates MORE of a requirement for defenses to hedge the basket and back off from Randle than anyone else on the team. The fact that he’s a high percentage threat at the rim spreads our offense, does not compress it like I see so many (IMO) illogically stating that Mitch’s lack of offensive range ruins our spacing. Au contraire, it defines our threat down low with such specificity that teams can’t leave Mitch alone to double someone else or else he will score at will if his teammates recognize him.
Mitch is a major weapon on offense when surrounded by a roster proficient at shooting the three which pulls defenders out of zones and prevents them from packing the paint which ultimately makes Mitch even more viable as an offensive threat.
If Mitch stays healthy we will be a significantly better team.
So many different opinions. Where to start?
So, I agree with everyone here, to one degree or another. But not everyone entirely.
Sure, as fans we should temper our expectations, but a lot of the expectations are that the Knicks record will be about the same, but the team overall is better. I think it's better. Fournier is a more well rounded guard than Bullocks. The team will have Rose for a full year (hopefully), and will also have Kemba, who is much better than Payton. Even if he plays but 60 games.
A full season of Mitch should help, if we get it.
I'm not sure the Knicks falling to the Hawks entirely falls on Capella being able to double Randles left hand, end of story. I mean, I know eras are different, but back in the day, even the somewhat offensively challenged Knicks of the Ewing era could handle Pat being constantly doubled. Again, different era play wise, inside out, way less 3's etc.
The way I see it, that strategy worked, but it worked because the Knicks basically rolled out 2.5 complete offensive threats against the Hawks. Which ties into the Hawks just having more talent overall. Which they should because they were a year further into their rebuild. You can kind of figure the Knicks made the moves THIS year akin to the moves the Hawks made last year.
I don't like the Hawks and I hate the whiff of jockriding on them I see on here, but I'd say they've been more successful in their approach. It helps that they don't turn over their FO constantly, so Knicks a bit behind the 8ball their but oh well. Maybe they'll get 5 years of continuity out of this group.
So, basically, Randle, Rose and .5 of Barrett were all around threats. Noel is limited enough to not care about - agree there, and Bullocks you can defend with anyone, as long as that player stays home on his 3 point shot. That left Rose as the sole guy dangerous enough to get into the paint/create his own shot, since RJ...still a work in progress. He's easier to neutralize.
Adding Fournier is a big deal, even if he's a "middle tier" SG. Oh, and by the way, there are types to "middle tier". Like, we could group Trent and Hield with him, and they might be better shooters (is it by that much?) but I'd MUCH rather have Fournier, with his ability to drive, but especially his ability to pass and his team oriented mindset.
Just replacing Bullocks with Fournier gives the Hawks a harder time. Gets the defense moving more often.
Now add Kemba and the Knicks get 48 minutes of good PG play, instead of 30 fatigued minutes from Rose.
Would I like a 5 to stretch the floor? Sure, but not sure it's THAT needed, and I advocated for it, like signing Baynes or Olynyk over Noel or Taj. I think the idea of trying Obi at the 5 occasionally would have merit, if not for the fact that Obi gets pushed around by brolic SF's. Still, I'd agree that sacrificing 5-7 minutes out of Mitch/Noel/Taj to give Obi rotational time at C with Randle at PF is worth exploring in the regular season, so it could be used in the playoffs.
Hopefully, with the Knicks having an easier time scoring, Thibs might be more comfortable to experiment a little with that...but I doubt it.
