zero24gravity wrote:I can't wrap my head around why ANYONE would want Kanter. Yes, he has some skills, but his negatives FAR outweigh the positives. Even on a horrible Knicks team he sticks out like a sore-thumb with his negative impact. That's hard to do!
Kanter is third on the Knicks in eDiff at +6.2 and one of only four players that have a positive eDiff. The team as a whole is -8.4 and the two guys ahead of him are Mitchell Robinson and Luke Kornet. He is 4th in usage and is the only player in the top 7 in usage that has a positive eDiff.
Why do I keep talking about eDiff?... because Kanter is not a negative. He is one of the few positive players the Knicks have. He is also #1 in PER, #1 in Win Shares, #3 in True Shooting %, I don't think you need me to bring up rebounding.They are not trying to sit him because he sucks. They want to sit him because he in not in their long term plans and they are trying to lose. They want lottery balls.
Don't get it twisted. I am not saying Kanter is a great player. I am saying that none of the (healthy) Knicks are great players. As sad as it may seem, Kanter may be the closest thing to a good player that the Knicks currently have.
And you ask why anyone would want him. Well, if a team can get a player averaging 14/11 on good efficiency for a player that hasn't suited up all year... why should I need to finish that thought?
A better question would be, why would anyone be OK with their team trading even an OK player for a player they will likely release with the the end goal being more "L's"? Knicks fans (like all fans of tanking teams) should be nauseous at the thought.