Mitchell Robinson - Rim runners and the playoffs.

[Clyde_Style]

Writing the script on Mitch's future before you even get to see what Thibs and Payne and crew can do with Mitch is pointless IMO.

Not a single one of us knows what Mitch is going to be in 18-24 months. The guy is still super raw, yet super effective at what he does.

And if we do start to put solid three point shooting around Mitch then that rim running actually creates major spacing advantages. Recall how many defenses started sagging to stop Mitch from rolling to the rim and they still could stop not him from doing it or from scorring on putbacks.

When you have shooters and a threat like Mitch it spreads the defenders and keeps them guessing. That's what the right players and good coaching will do with a guy like Mitch even if his offensive range remains limited. It doesn't have to be him who is the three point threat as long as those threats are on the floor with him. It'd be nice if he can pop long, but it is not required with the right players and good schemes.

Instead of always trying to mimic the league, perhaps we should be acknowledging what a gem Mitch is and building with him in mind. He will start hitting bunnies. Maybe he'll shoot threes too. But just as important to his development will be his ability to draw defenders and make the right read on whether to make his move or pass to an open man on the weak side. I'm more concerned about his passing IQ than his jump shot really. That's why coaching will be critical before we judge his long-term potential to its fullest

I'm fairly confident in knowing what Mitch will be, I just don't see how he's any different than any number of rim rollers that have been in the league the last 15 years. He's not a better player at 21 than Andre Drummond was at the same age, and look at how that turned out for the Pistons, gave him the keys and maxed him out. He's still a rebounding monster, yet has no real place in the league now and got traded for a Microsoft Zune. The Rockets put so much shooting around Capella, and still traded him because ultimately in a playoff series good teams will switch on the screen and take their chances with a player like that trying to score against a big wing in the post.

I'm concerned about his entire offensive skillset, I've seen nothing from him that makes me think there's some versatile offensive player hiding in there. If he were a good freethrow shooter I'd be more confident about his potential to improve, but he's pretty poor from the line. I don't want to mimic the league, just the Celtics (Scoring pg, 3 big wings and a low salary center who can shoot/switch onto wings), do you think if 3 years from now that Brad Stevens wouldn't be able to gameplan someone like Mitch off the floor, assuming Mitch is a 13ppg, 14rpg type of guy.

I don't share your confidence at being able to predict so accurately his trajectory. I want to see what happens and then decide. There's time on his current dirt cheap deal and his value could increase significantly still, so I see no purpose in packaging him now. I don't even want to plan on it later. I'll leave those trade scenarios to you

but, hey, feel free to hitch a ride on the Mitch train anytime



but whatever you do, watch out for cattle crossings

Spoiler:

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Writing the script on Mitch's future before you even get to see what Thibs and Payne and crew can do with Mitch is pointless IMO.

Not a single one of us knows what Mitch is going to be in 18-24 months. The guy is still super raw, yet super effective at what he does.

And if we do start to put solid three point shooting around Mitch then that rim running actually creates major spacing advantages. Recall how many defenses started sagging to stop Mitch from rolling to the rim and they still could stop not him from doing it or from scorring on putbacks.

When you have shooters and a threat like Mitch it spreads the defenders and keeps them guessing. That's what the right players and good coaching will do with a guy like Mitch even if his offensive range remains limited. It doesn't have to be him who is the three point threat as long as those threats are on the floor with him. It'd be nice if he can pop long, but it is not required with the right players and good schemes.

Instead of always trying to mimic the league, perhaps we should be acknowledging what a gem Mitch is and building with him in mind. He will start hitting bunnies. Maybe he'll shoot threes too. But just as important to his development will be his ability to draw defenders and make the right read on whether to make his move or pass to an open man on the weak side. I'm more concerned about his passing IQ than his jump shot really. That's why coaching will be critical before we judge his long-term potential to its fullest

Yes Dude is 21 and started playing bball in highschool , no college experience...dude is a mound of very talented clay. Give him some good coaching, some direction,.. and who the hell knows how good he can be?

He's 22 now, at 22 Andre Drummond made the all-star team and averaged 17.7ppg, 16.2rpg, 1.5pg and 1.6spg. That got Andre a max contract that summer, which crippled his team.

[RHODEY]

Writing the script on Mitch's future before you even get to see what Thibs and Payne and crew can do with Mitch is pointless IMO.

Not a single one of us knows what Mitch is going to be in 18-24 months. The guy is still super raw, yet super effective at what he does.

And if we do start to put solid three point shooting around Mitch then that rim running actually creates major spacing advantages. Recall how many defenses started sagging to stop Mitch from rolling to the rim and they still could stop not him from doing it or from scorring on putbacks.

When you have shooters and a threat like Mitch it spreads the defenders and keeps them guessing. That's what the right players and good coaching will do with a guy like Mitch even if his offensive range remains limited. It doesn't have to be him who is the three point threat as long as those threats are on the floor with him. It'd be nice if he can pop long, but it is not required with the right players and good schemes.

Instead of always trying to mimic the league, perhaps we should be acknowledging what a gem Mitch is and building with him in mind. He will start hitting bunnies. Maybe he'll shoot threes too. But just as important to his development will be his ability to draw defenders and make the right read on whether to make his move or pass to an open man on the weak side. I'm more concerned about his passing IQ than his jump shot really. That's why coaching will be critical before we judge his long-term potential to its fullest

Yes Dude is 21 and started playing bball in highschool , no college experience...dude is a mound of very talented clay. Give him some good coaching, some direction,.. and who the hell knows how good he can be?

He's 22 now, at 22 Andre Drummond made the all-star team and averaged 17.7ppg, 16.2rpg, 1.5pg and 1.6spg. That got Andre a max contract that summer, which crippled his team.

2 completely different players...

[blueNorange]

Writing the script on Mitch's future before you even get to see what Thibs and Payne and crew can do with Mitch is pointless IMO.

Not a single one of us knows what Mitch is going to be in 18-24 months. The guy is still super raw, yet super effective at what he does.

And if we do start to put solid three point shooting around Mitch then that rim running actually creates major spacing advantages. Recall how many defenses started sagging to stop Mitch from rolling to the rim and they still could stop not him from doing it or from scorring on putbacks.

When you have shooters and a threat like Mitch it spreads the defenders and keeps them guessing. That's what the right players and good coaching will do with a guy like Mitch even if his offensive range remains limited. It doesn't have to be him who is the three point threat as long as those threats are on the floor with him. It'd be nice if he can pop long, but it is not required with the right players and good schemes.

Instead of always trying to mimic the league, perhaps we should be acknowledging what a gem Mitch is and building with him in mind. He will start hitting bunnies. Maybe he'll shoot threes too. But just as important to his development will be his ability to draw defenders and make the right read on whether to make his move or pass to an open man on the weak side. I'm more concerned about his passing IQ than his jump shot really. That's why coaching will be critical before we judge his long-term potential to its fullest

Yes Dude is 21 and started playing bball in highschool , no college experience...dude is a mound of very talented clay. Give him some good coaching, some direction,.. and who the hell knows how good he can be?

He's 22 now, at 22 Andre Drummond made the all-star team and averaged 17.7ppg, 16.2rpg, 1.5pg and 1.6spg. That got Andre a max contract that summer, which crippled his team.

why are you comparing drummond's 4th season in the nba to robinson's 2nd year in the nba?

[thebuzzardman]

Once again, maybe the Rockets are the innovators that it takes the league 5 years to catch up to, in that they've discounted playing a traditional C at all

I'm sure they'd employ one if the guy could shoot 3's and they could go 5 out, but there are only a handful of 5's who stretch the floor that way

D'Antoni's dream of 5 guys, all 6'8" who can handle and shoot takes a step closer to reality

I think the Celtics version of it is even better to be honest, 3 big wings that can all create off the dribble supplemented by a scoring PG, or sometimes the backup PG who can switch onto almost anyone (Marcus Smart). They have a low paid C that can switch on multiple people and hit the three.


They are the future of the league to me, while the Rockets an early attempt, the Celtics have literally 4 guys in their lineup who can drive, shoot, create or set someone up.

First chance to respond to this in depth.

So, agreed the Celts have a good version of it.
Also, a version easier to obtain, as it doesn't include the PG needing freaky height
For the Celts version, to duplicate a version of it, a team "just" needs a big wing and play him as the stretch 4. Done.
Ah, if it was that easy

But it's a lot easier to make happen than a 5 guard or 4 guard\1 SF\PF swing man

Funny thing is, D'Antoni got all this credit for small ball lineups, initially in Phoenix (well, that was more about pace) and certainly in Houston, and he DID innovate taking a lot of 3's

Taking shots early in the clock? D'Antoni himself has stated "That's late 60's to mid 70's basketball" and that would be correct.

But Don Nelson always went for a 4+1 thing with the Bucks.
Now, I'm going to try to do this from memory, and I know I'll miss a key guy, plus there was some overlap, but: Pressy, Moncrief, Winters, Bridgeman, Buckner as the guards (again, I think someone went out, Pressy in) with various C's (maybe Bob Lanier end of his career at one point)

Run TMC was at least 3 guards

Anyway, EVERY team, forever, theoretically wants to play positionless basketball, but the number of guys talented enough to make it work doesn't exist in great enough numbers

One of the things that makes great players great - other than they just dominate their position and it's style for an era, is that they generally have attributes we ascribe to more than one position
Jordan and Pippen great SG and SF but both with also PG skills. Jordan obviously would have been great if he couldn't pass a lick
Lebron - PF size, scoring wing game, PG skills
Bird - see above; he played both SF and PF
Magic - PF size, PG skills
Giannis - C size, PG skills
Luka - SF size, SG skills, PG skills
And so on.

So, also a knock on people who say "The Knicks just need shooters!" (though I say it all the time) as the BEST idea is to collect the most players who do the most things well

But since the world and the NBA isn't perfect - it's why we have guys labeled "PG" and others "SG" - because there aren't enough guards just skilled at being complete "guards", then it matters to get players with different skills that blend with each other.
I still think teams could do worse than having bench guys who are good shooters\fundamentally sound. They tend to blend the easiest with other players.

Anyway, got a little off topic at the end.

Also, while I think Giannis is a top player in the game and a rare talent and better than Luka AT THE MOMENT, starting to wonder if he's really a #1 and not like, a super great #2 option.
As someone stated when the Bucks kept Bledsoe over Brogdan, I think the Bucks got a little cute.
I know I"ve stated before, and kind of stated up above, that teams need a creative scorer/distributor star to build around, and Giannis can surely pass and score.
But he doesn't quite seem elite enough (and he's elite,mind you) at being a 3 level threat where you can just throw just any group around him.
Like, Giannis is more Super Pippen (which is f*cking amazing) and less so Magic\LeBron\Bird\Jordan

[god shammgod]

IB4Shammgod

i didn't even read the initial post past the 1st sentence. i'm making a list. i'm checking it twice. i'm gonna find out who's nuts i'm gonna put in a vice. that's right. santa sham is gonna sh*t down your chimney when christmas comes and mitch has taken the next step on offense. i'm coming for all you motherf*ckers. ho ho ho bitches.

[god shammgod]

and one more thing. we're not trading mitch......AND YOU'LL LIKE IT!

[FlashFlood]

Unfortunately, the road through the playoffs is littered with guys like Jokic, Embiid, Gasol, Ibaka, AD, Porzingis, etc. Rudy Gobert would have been exposed eventually. I understand the questions surrounding Mitch, and whether he is a 'meta' player since the league is currently trending towards 5-out small ball. Dont get it twisted - Centers in the league are still important. Rim running is a basic skill that is required to be successful. You need a Javale Mcgee to be above the rim and making plays and I think that Mitch is at that level already.

The question is, can he develop into a threat from 3 so that he doesn't clog the lane? Can he develop an efficient post game? Does he have passing vision to play above the key? Right now he's playing about 20mpg. That's terrific value for a second rounder, but to become a championship caliber center, the Knicks need him to be able to do more.

If all he does is reduce his foul rate, sure he'll play 35mpg, maybe even put up some stats, but he'll eventually just be exposed in the playoffs. Just like Gobert.

[Deeeez Knicks]

To be fair, the Jazz would have lost this series by now without Gobert. He is putting up 16.5/10rpg in almost 39mpg and is +20 overall. This is not a series where Gobert not being able to shoot is a negative because Jokic really can't protect the paint anyway. So whether they clear Jokic out or not hasn't really mattered. They are just pretty much going after Jokic when he us under the rim and nobody is missing from 3.

I do agree with the general point though. A C that can shoot 3's is definetly a weapon. Jazz are still pretty much putting up 120ppg and both teams are scoring at will. The 3 point shooting and Guard play in that series is just crazy. These dudes arent missing and not sure it has much to do with Gobert/Jokic.

If anything, not even worried about C. Mitch is fine for now and might as well see if he can develop more of an overall game. We gotta find better guards/wings. Our problem is not so much that our C can't shoot as it is that nobody else can shoot

[god shammgod]

To be fair, the Jazz would have lost this series by now without Gobert. He is putting up 16.5/10rpg in almost 39mpg and is +20 overall. This is not a series where Gobert not being able to shoot is a negative because Jokic really can't protect the paint anyway. So whether they clear Jokic out or not hasn't really mattered. They are just pretty much going after Jokic when he us under the rim and nobody is missing from 3.

I do agree with the general point though. A C that can shoot 3's is definetly a weapon. Jazz are still pretty much putting up 120ppg and both teams are scoring at will. The 3 point shooting and Guard play in that series is just crazy. These dudes arent missing and not sure it has much to do with Gobert/Jokic.

If anything, not even worried about C. Mitch is fine for now and might as well see if he can develop more of an overall game. We gotta find better guards/wings. Our problem is not so much that our C can't shoot as it is that nobody else can shoot

[Nazrmohamed]

Actually if you watch mitch in practice, he shoots 3s all the time and they look good too. But the Knicks rather play 34yr old PFs so that Mitch won't pick up his 4rth foul.

[sol537]

Mitchell needs to add a mid-range jumper, a jump hook, and a few bunny runners to his repertoire (to avoid charges). Doesn't need a post game just yet... just needs those variety of finishes off the catch so he can be a more effective roll man and not just an alley-oop or nothing guy.

[NYKnickerbocker]

I have to start out by saying I like Mitch and he's been a nice surprise, however a lot of people on here keep saying he could be like Gobert and whether that's true or not remains to be seen. What we do know is that right now Mitch is strictly a rim runner on offense much like Gobert, but we should be watching what's happening with Gobert as a cautionary tale. The entire scope of the series changed, not just because Jamal Murray has turned into a NBA 2k demigod, it's also because Mike Malone made the adjustment with Jokic taking more threes, he's up to 7 a game now on 49%. What that does is neutralizes Goberts defense pulling him from the hoop, and on the other end Gobert's lack of any real offensive skills or shooting kills their spacing. Gobert doesn't have any kind of offense to go at Jokic on the other end, no moves, no handle, no shooting, he literally just relies on putbacks and being set up.


Will Mitch develop into a better offensive player than Gobert? Does anyone here think he will be able to develop a consistent 3 pointer? I'm asking these questions because when Mitch starts, he will definitely put up some big numbers, which will lead to the big contract. I have reservations about that because I'm watching what's happening with Gobert, and because I've seen this movie before with DeAndre Jordan, Steven Adams, Clint Capella and Andre Drummond. I personally do not think you can have a defensive rim runner as a foundational piece of a team in todays NBA, you're better off finding a vet minimum guy to do that job like the Lakers, or a guy on a reasonable short term deal like the Clippers. If one of these rim runner types is taking up a substantial part of your cap you're not winning anything, they are fools gold during the regular season and liabilities in the playoffs when you're essentially playing 4 on 5 on offense.

I know we're not used to having young talent, and the immediate reaction is that we can't trade Mitch, but this is forward thinking and looking at where the league is going. If you told me Mitch would develop into a 35-38% three point shooter or an exceptional passer like Bam Adebayo I'd say keep him, but I can't help to think the player type he represents is a dying breed. If he is Gobert 2.0, I don't want that, because that always leads to the same place which.

He's better than Gobert was his age. He just broke Wilt Chamberlain record. Lets see what we got before putting any limitations on him.

67% of his shots were assisted and at the same age 67% of Gobert's shots were assisted, the number of assisted shots will up when he plays with starters, and the FG percentage will come down.

DeAndre Jordan used to be in the low 70% as well, I don't care about records in relation to Wilt when Wilt was creating for himself. This is actually why I'm worried, people pointing to things like this, I need context in how he scores and whether or not he can space the floor eventually. I don't think he will be able to.

i mean wilt didn’t set that record till the last year of his career where I can only assume he was in the offensive putback/ rim runner roll cause I wasn’t a thought back then. DeAndre came close with an all time great point guard and Mitch broke it with Elfrid Payton and point randle lol.

Don’t think there’s any need to be boxing in Mitches ceiling yet. If he doesn’t start letting it fly next season maybe.

[Jeff Van Gully]

If Wiseman somehow drops to us, you take him, and trade Mitch play them together, and make wiseman hustle on defense.

[prophet_of_rage]

When I was saying I'd love to see Mitch with a 3 I was junped on. It would make him an elite player. For now he just needs 2 post moves and a mid ranhe jumper.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Yes Dude is 21 and started playing bball in highschool , no college experience...dude is a mound of very talented clay. Give him some good coaching, some direction,.. and who the hell knows how good he can be?

He's 22 now, at 22 Andre Drummond made the all-star team and averaged 17.7ppg, 16.2rpg, 1.5pg and 1.6spg. That got Andre a max contract that summer, which crippled his team.

why are you comparing drummond's 4th season in the nba to robinson's 2nd year in the nba?

Because Drummond was 22, Mitch is going into next season at 22, if you want to compare seasons at 20-21 we can, but then we run into the issue that Drummond was already a fulltime starter his 2nd year in the league.

2 completely different players...

How though? They play a similar game, Drummond lives off the pick and roll & putbacks, their numbers from the same ages are very similar right down to the how many of their shots are assisted.

[SmoothLefty21]

Gobert's biggest problem is that he's a lumbering big man with limited agility. Despite his accolades he's always had a glaring weakness as a defender and it's easy to exploit it with the right matchup. Steven Adams is similar, though a bit more agile. Drummond is just a terrible all-around defender.

While Gobert is a x2 DPOY, Mitch has the makings to be a better defender in today's game in terms of style, not necessarily accolades or even impact. It's the same issue I always brought up with KP, especially during his time here when he was adamant about only playing the 4. He was never agile enough to guard stretch fours.

Not that I watch an enormous amount of Jazz games but I don't ever recall seeing Gobert sequences where he makes 2-3 plays out on the perimeter in a single possession: running a shooter off the line, recovering/rotating to make another play or two. He doesn't fly all over the court like Mitch can. Mitch should be more switchable, granted most teams use drop coverage for their big in today's PnR.

For the record, I do agree that Mitch's ceiling is a high-end role player because that's what shot-blocking/run-running big men are.

[Context]

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Watch on YouTube

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

https://nypost.com/2018/06/23/high-school-coach-sheds-light-on-enigma-of-knicks-second-pick/

https://nypost.com/2018/07/31/skys-the-limit-for-mitchell-robinson-trainer/

https://clutchpoints.com/mitchell-robinson-is-a-burgeoning-defensive-demigod/

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2823005-2018-drafts-most-mysterious-prospect-could-be-a-cornerstone-for-knicks

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

In a double-double performance (14 points, 12 rebounds), Robinson also collected three blocks as his rim protecting continues to be on display. And with them, Robinson recorded his 29th straight game with a block, breaking Knicks legend Patrick Ewing's franchise rookie record.

Oh, that's not all. Those three blocks moved Robinson's season total to 135, which also breaks Kristaps Porzingis' record for most blocks in a rookie season. While it's great to see the second-rounder rewriting the Knicks' record books, it isn't the ultimate goal for Robinson.

https://www.sny.tv/articles/mitchell-robinson-rewrote-knicks-block-records-on-wednesday-night

https://www.newsbreak.com/news/1347935235215/mitchell-robinson-never-heard-of-nba-legend-praising-his-game

https://nypost.com/2019/03/02/the-brash-goal-driving-mitchell-robinsons-knicks-emergence/

[Gravy]

I still like Mitch but those are valid points about the way the NBA is trending, which tend to get ignored when some want to build an entire team that cant score.

There no way to predict player development. We get too optimistic and expect all our draft picks to reach their ceiling, but most players stay more or less the same as they are at 22 years old instead of suddenly turning into all-stars. Chances are Mitch will be closer to Javalee Mgee/Deandre than acquire the skills to turn into AD-lite. Our recent history is filled with 22 year olds who never made a huge jump; Mudiay, Burke, Hezonia, Iman, THJ, Hernangomez, Vonleh, Kornet, Baker, Galloway so why is our current crop all going to make it?

[Context]

The key with Mitch is development... I expect Thibs and his staff to get the Mitch train -back on the track...

And Ive said this a million times- you give me 20,000 shots and if you can listen and absorb coaching- I will make you a shooter...
Mitch can develop a three - he just needs the in game and off court practice...