TripleThreat wrote:
Knickfury11 wrote:
Interesting points, but do you see Harper as a legitimate PG in this league?
The league has moved on since Nate Robinson’s heyday...I love an underdog story though.
A different take on that question is how does a team best shed a sunk cost.
DSJr and Frank N will simply never be the players that their teams drafting them hoped they could be. They are blocking minutes from auditioning other players, even if those players have a very low chance to break through.
I think you're getting caught in what's programatically called an endless loop.
When the Knicks draft a Frankie [or any eighteen year old] they aren't sink or swim draft picks (sunk cost). There is a predictable metric for the development of a young PG (and I don't care who you name in this or that draft) and its 3 - 5 years. Both Frankie and Peyton are just entering the phase of development where you can evaluate them as adults AND as investments.
DSJ is one of those exceptions to the rule because he showed so much early and regressed not because of injury or lack of talent but because he's a head case. *THAT* is a sunk cost and not easy to fix.
But the idea you suggest is that after just a few years of having invested in talent, give up on it, get it out of the way, there's a never-ending parade of newbies marching through is a recipe to NEVER develop anyone and instead hope you strike gold with the rare exception who stuns the world (a Doncic).
a.) We're the Knicks
b.) We're the Knicks
TripleThreat wrote:
Part of the reason Robert Covington broke out was because he had a regular pathway to minutes. The 76ers under Hinkie just decided to not sign stop gap veterans and proven sunk costs that would eat precious minutes. This eventually became an issue that angered agents and the league over not spending enough money on mediocre free agents and was part of the reason for his ousting. The league structure is punitive to a team like the Knicks, because it demands you sign free agents for the optics of "competing" but actual only hinder your chance to rebuild in like three different painful ways. From a systematic standpoint, a first round pick has options years in Year 3 and 4. The simple thing to do would be to change the rules where each year can only have the option picked up right before those seasons start. In that case, it's just a lot easier to cut a guy when he costs you no money, after he's proven he's not producing and only blocking minutes from a flier type.
A lot of player will fall through the cracks in this draft without the tournament, the Combine and the interview process. I say the Knicks should try to find the best UDFAs they can and try to give them minutes.
Having 6-7 players with no future on the team (Portis, Randle, Ellington, Harkless, Gibson,etc) is more punitive than just one big dead contract that rents your cap space out for picks. That one big dead contract isn't eating minutes and is not clogging up roster spots at the same rate. A big dead contract gives you other problems, it's not ideal in itself, but it's better than the alternative long term.
The Knicks need to see roster spots as a more valuable resource given their current state.
Harper only needs to give the Knicks 7 minutes a game at replacement level production to make his contract worth it to them. He likely won't break through, but it's worth it to give him a shot. Why he's not going to get a shot is more aligned to league dysfunction than what the Knicks might want to do.
I though the Mills/Perry idea of signing some of the expendable FAs wasn't such a bad idea. Bullock and Gibson worked out ok. Peyton is still a work-in-progress who might mature into a decent PG.
Our problem last year was GDed Fizdale, worst Knicks coach ever. He absolutely devolved the younger players and single-handedly destroyed any chance the FO had of fulfilling their intended goals. Awful.
