1) Mitch. Love the man. Can’t hit a free throw. Can’t get a free throw. He’s approaching Steve Adams territory. Without the intimidation. The thing he does well he shouldn’t have to with this team. His rebound validates a strategy of taking bad shots. His skill set preserves an offensive scheme we should not be playing. When you force Mitch off the floor, that strategy of taking dumb 18 foot fadeaways becomes a losing strategy. On a second unit of bad shooters, he raises their abilities (and should get more passes). In the first unit, he fixes problems they shouldn’t have in the first place. Akin to RJ saying his bad shots are Kobe assists. No - they are bad shots.

2) Mikal plays softer than I like. I’m not gonna change the man but I’d love to see him finish with contact. I think the problem with the league is that guys like Mikal (and I will add OG) are victims of the Dilbert effect. Moving players up in position until they lose positional size advantage. Mikal is a mismatch in our favor at SG. His long lanky frame and height advantage are great at the 2. But when you push him up to 3 he gets exposed. He can’t cover the 4. Too soft. And they don’t really take advantage of small ball - they stand around and dribble dribble. If you want to play small, get in motion. If you want to play big, Mikal is a 2. If you want to play small, you gotta move the ball and use motion. We big and soft.

3) OG. They are switching off of him at every juncture. You have a size mismatch at PF that we are disadvantaged by. He’s not shooting lights out and the tired legs theory of 4th quarter feels real. He’s getting zero calls. Like Mikal, playing a position up. But all of this is because the Pacers are getting the matchups they want. We attack OG for not being able to cover other teammates defensive weaknesses. That’s kind of BS. He isn’t a guy that creates his own shot. We have point guards for this. Teammates need to put him in a position to succeed. You can’t tell me OG doesn’t score 20 every night next to Hali. He would.

4) Hart. Heart. Listen, awe all love that Hart leaves it all on the table. Brings maximum effort. A bit of toughness. But at the end of the day most of our positional size issues begin and end with him. Not aging we have better options on the bench. Not saying what he does isn’t valuable. But if I am looking at where the mismatches start, it’s Hart. Bruce Brown has the same problem. Love the guy and his dawg attitude. But he’s out of his weight class and makes everyone else on the team fight a a higher catch weight. This is our team, but before I attack Mikal and OG, there is a 6’4 power forward that is creating positional size disadvantages. And the floor spacing advantages disappear with him on the floor.

5) KAT is playing soft. He is playing spacey. We need him punishing the Pacers in the paint. Instead he is chucking logos. I love his 3, don’t get me wrong. I love his spacing. I don’t know how we are leaving him to guard the guards without help. It’s insane. And it makes him look even worse than he actually is. A fire truck is good for a lot of things, but racing is not one of them. The guy is big and has a soft touch, you have him guarding offensive elite players. That’s just bad strategy. Or good strategy by Carlisle.

6) Brunson. Our captain. No ill words are allowed against Brunson, but he is epitomizing Becky Hammond’s. His midrange game is elite - in a 3pt world. His game is reliant on footwork and hesitation. It requires time to take advantage of miscues. It’s susceptible to help defense and elite wingspan. His defense is marginal to slightly below average. His offense makes him an even greater target on defense. Teams want him to miscue on defense and foul. His footwork protects him for the most part. His clutch nature is real, but in the waning moments of the last two games, we have missed opportunities to galvanize that legacy. People miss. I get it. And he’s the right guy to take that shot. I stand by my statement that Brunson is a phenomenal leader and scorer but this Team is better when he facilitates scoring more than dribbling. He is this team’s identity and a series like this should beg the question whether it’s enough.

7) Coach. Truth is, this team has met or exceeded expectations for this season. That’s the truth. When you replace a core to the degree we did, you change its identity. A strong coach establishes that identity across players (Phil Jackson) - or establishes identity with what he has (Coach K). Thibs identity is in flux. You can’t say they play hard nosed defense. They give up the three. Live and die by the opponents 3 point shooting. He gets maximum effort out of a minimum number of players. In a game of modern basketball, Thibs may be the last of the old class. You can’t question his devotion. Or his effort. Or his knowledge. But in a game where statistics are so much more relevant, it becomes a question of whether he is using the right math. In the playoffs, the math becomes what happens at the edges. If you have a 50% 3pt shooter, can you afford to take away the paint? If you have a team running 11 deep, can you afford to play only 7? This is the crucible that breaks coaches. Whether they have the fortitude to impose their will on the game or whether their force of will is merely a stubborness and inability to adapt in the face of overwhelming odds. These two games the Knicks got beat. You can blame the players. You can blame the coach. You can praise the Pacers. You can praise Carlisle. But losing does one thing - it raises questions - is this team enough. Do they have what it takes? And if not - what has to change?

1) Feed Mitch for an oop to start the game. Get him popping. Let them remember he isn’t just there to rebound. You can try and box him. You can try help defense. But you can’t do both. That Burner/Beast combo can be elite. Feed th Beast.

2) Burner is a master at tough shots. Let him finish possessions, but let’s see if he can get get OG and Mikal downhill first. Let’s get their bigs in foul trouble. They play weakside defense. See what happens when you go straight at them. Get Turner off the floor and much of their spacing collapses. Let Brunson find some open 3s. KAT can feed him off some dribble drives.

3) KAT got busy in the paint. He belongs there. The long ball threat is there and solid. But make them hurt in the paint. His 4th quarter made wince, cry, cheer, growl. Man, I was all over the place. But he did it.

4) Mikal just needs to get downhill. Stay focused at the basket. He’s got these huge long Gumby ass arms. But he goes under the basket and puts up light fadeaways instead of getting angry and imposing his will on the rim. Get him downhill and the game will sort itself out. Get him the ball while moving toward the basket, not against a set D. His game will light up.

5) OG versus Nesmith is what I am talking about in Positional Size advantage. He was like a dad playing with his kid. He called him Son and took that ball. They have positional size advantage at every position except point guard. (And despite height, Deuce has wingspan advantage). Let OG cook. Get him open in the 3. Get him in transition. Get the floor spread and let him have another Embiid moment. If they guard him with a 4 you have Beast or KAT on a mismatch. Use the advantage.

6) Hart is all heart. He does what needs to be done. Respect.

EwingsGlass wrote:What I see is a Pacers team that is consistently exposing the Knicks weaknesses on mismatches and a Knicks team that fails to capitalize on strengths.

1) Mitch. Love the man. Can’t hit a free throw. Can’t get a free throw. He’s approaching Steve Adams territory. Without the intimidation. The thing he does well he shouldn’t have to with this team. His rebound validates a strategy of taking bad shots. His skill set preserves an offensive scheme we should not be playing. When you force Mitch off the floor, that strategy of taking dumb 18 foot fadeaways becomes a losing strategy. On a second unit of bad shooters, he raises their abilities (and should get more passes). In the first unit, he fixes problems they shouldn’t have in the first place. Akin to RJ saying his bad shots are Kobe assists. No - they are bad shots.

2) Mikal plays softer than I like. I’m not gonna change the man but I’d love to see him finish with contact. I think the problem with the league is that guys like Mikal (and I will add OG) are victims of the Dilbert effect. Moving players up in position until they lose positional size advantage. Mikal is a mismatch in our favor at SG. His long lanky frame and height advantage are great at the 2. But when you push him up to 3 he gets exposed. He can’t cover the 4. Too soft. And they don’t really take advantage of small ball - they stand around and dribble dribble. If you want to play small, get in motion. If you want to play big, Mikal is a 2. If you want to play small, you gotta move the ball and use motion. We big and soft.

3) OG. They are switching off of him at every juncture. You have a size mismatch at PF that we are disadvantaged by. He’s not shooting lights out and the tired legs theory of 4th quarter feels real. He’s getting zero calls. Like Mikal, playing a position up. But all of this is because the Pacers are getting the matchups they want. We attack OG for not being able to cover other teammates defensive weaknesses. That’s kind of BS. He isn’t a guy that creates his own shot. We have point guards for this. Teammates need to put him in a position to succeed. You can’t tell me OG doesn’t score 20 every night next to Hali. He would.

4) Hart. Heart. Listen, awe all love that Hart leaves it all on the table. Brings maximum effort. A bit of toughness. But at the end of the day most of our positional size issues begin and end with him. Not aging we have better options on the bench. Not saying what he does isn’t valuable. But if I am looking at where the mismatches start, it’s Hart. Bruce Brown has the same problem. Love the guy and his dawg attitude. But he’s out of his weight class and makes everyone else on the team fight a a higher catch weight. This is our team, but before I attack Mikal and OG, there is a 6’4 power forward that is creating positional size disadvantages. And the floor spacing advantages disappear with him on the floor.

5) KAT is playing soft. He is playing spacey. We need him punishing the Pacers in the paint. Instead he is chucking logos. I love his 3, don’t get me wrong. I love his spacing. I don’t know how we are leaving him to guard the guards without help. It’s insane. And it makes him look even worse than he actually is. A fire truck is good for a lot of things, but racing is not one of them. The guy is big and has a soft touch, you have him guarding offensive elite players. That’s just bad strategy. Or good strategy by Carlisle.

6) Brunson. Our captain. No ill words are allowed against Brunson, but he is epitomizing Becky Hammond’s. His midrange game is elite - in a 3pt world. His game is reliant on footwork and hesitation. It requires time to take advantage of miscues. It’s susceptible to help defense and elite wingspan. His defense is marginal to slightly below average. His offense makes him an even greater target on defense. Teams want him to miscue on defense and foul. His footwork protects him for the most part. His clutch nature is real, but in the waning moments of the last two games, we have missed opportunities to galvanize that legacy. People miss. I get it. And he’s the right guy to take that shot. I stand by my statement that Brunson is a phenomenal leader and scorer but this Team is better when he facilitates scoring more than dribbling. He is this team’s identity and a series like this should beg the question whether it’s enough.

7) Coach. Truth is, this team has met or exceeded expectations for this season. That’s the truth. When you replace a core to the degree we did, you change its identity. A strong coach establishes that identity across players (Phil Jackson) - or establishes identity with what he has (Coach K). Thibs identity is in flux. You can’t say they play hard nosed defense. They give up the three. Live and die by the opponents 3 point shooting. He gets maximum effort out of a minimum number of players. In a game of modern basketball, Thibs may be the last of the old class. You can’t question his devotion. Or his effort. Or his knowledge. But in a game where statistics are so much more relevant, it becomes a question of whether he is using the right math. In the playoffs, the math becomes what happens at the edges. If you have a 50% 3pt shooter, can you afford to take away the paint? If you have a team running 11 deep, can you afford to play only 7? This is the crucible that breaks coaches. Whether they have the fortitude to impose their will on the game or whether their force of will is merely a stubborness and inability to adapt in the face of overwhelming odds. These two games the Knicks got beat. You can blame the players. You can blame the coach. You can praise the Pacers. You can praise Carlisle. But losing does one thing - it raises questions - is this team enough. Do they have what it takes? And if not - what has to change?

100%!!! Specially the comments about our guys playing a position up. We need another big man. And Kat needs a lot more shots in the post up.