The New York Knicks and That ABA Ish

Let’s get past the elements in which this revolves around New York, because as a Southern Midwesterner (or Midwestern Southerner, take your pick), I know most of what I know about New York from friends and various films. Though I will say the films, television, books, and radio programs do paint quite the vivid picture of a thriving metropolis! So yes, the fact that this team is primed to finally be relevant, while not dominant, is particularly culturally relevant for the city. And yes, a resurgence there does speak quite plainly to a mythos that has been held in the old barn and echoed throughout the boroughs. But let’s try and move past that to what this team could resemble.

Yes. Indeed.

Pointless. Frantic. Exhilarating ABA ish.

Let’s address some issues.

The Knicks Won’t Be Good.

This is my favorite response when you mention that the Knicks will be fun as hell to watch next season. “Yeah, but they won’t be any good.” Which is bizarre in and of itself. You know who will be good this year? The Lakers, Heat, Celtics, Magic, Bulls, and probably 1-2 Western teams which are yet to be determined. Those teams will be good. Only two, and if we’re lucky, three, will be great. The rest are just fodder for the great maw that is the NBA elite. And yeah, the Knicks, given their market, payroll, and history, should be better. But your franchise is going to have good times, bad times, and a lot of time in between. The Lakers were a first-round-exit machine in the mid-decade, for crying out loud. Yet the story goes that we’re to ignore this whole thing simply because they had cap space and failed to acquire one of three individuals who were actually planning on going to the same place for years, and despite the fact that Chris Bosh may not be considerably better than Amar’e Stoudemire, all things considered.

But all that is circumstance. Let’s get down to what this is about. Defense, and the lack thereof.

I’m not trying to abdicate the value of defense. The Knicks can not be, under any reasonable set of expectations or circumstances, an elite team, and almost all of that has to do with their lack of defense. From personnel, to system, to approach, their team is built to sufficiently ignore defense. The only reason they even acknowledge its existence is to get the ball back. Bear in mind I’m a believer that the D’Antoni Defensive Sieve is a myth. His Suns teams were far from stalwarts but nor were they the Raptors of last season. They were fine. Just not fine enough, especially not for the grotesque, misshapen, UFC-style ball that makes up the NBA playoffs. But even I can recognize that this cohesive roster is going to be abhorrent on defense. Ronny Turiaf puts in great effort. Not a good defensive element. Stoudemire’s defense has been well documented, and while I maintain he’s hyper-criticized beyond his actual shortcomings, he’s not a good defender by any stretch of the imagination. The rest of the roster is the same. Felton was never a standout defensively, even on a defensive squad like LB’s Cats. Galinari was born into D’Antoni’s defenseless womb. Anthony Randolph is described by my esteemed colleague the same way some are spoken of as rocks with mouths. All in all, the Knicks are likely to be dreadful on defense.

Who cares?

To take the sting off of it a little bit, consider the report coming out about a possible starting five of Felton-Gallinari-Randolph-Stoudemire-Turiaf. That’s a lot of size right there. Even with the waif-like wings, you’re still looking at considerable height to provide a rebounding asset, if not advantage. But if we move past defense and accept that this team is only marginally likely to make the playoffs and if they do, they are likely fodder, we have to see how bloody fun this team is apt to be. Forget the whole Warriors-Raptors concepts of the last few years, those teams were built on a system which then went out and got whatever players were affordably priced for what they were attempting (or in the Raptors case, reasonably priced with a few plastic explosive exceptions). And forget even the Suns, who were dependent on one player’s brilliance, and the other players’ ability to siphon off that player (yes, one of them is the same player who is now the lynch pin in our Madison Square Petrie Dish). This is just tall, athletic guys who can throw the round thing in the circular thing repeatedly.

It’s still a D’Antoni team, no doubt. But what’s notable is not what elements are at play in New York, but how they’re arranged. In Phoenix, he played with refinement at point guard, quickness/speed and barrage at shooting guard (Johnson/Bell/Barbosa), versatility at small forward, and some combination of perplexity and violence at power-forward and center (Stoudemire-Diaw/Marion/Thomas). In New York, he’s assembling something with a workhorse at point guard, purity and athleticism at the wings, violence at the power forward, and function at center. The question is if this is what he wants or if this is the base of the soup that he’s hoping will become something else. Hoping, for example, that Raymond Felton becomes a source of refinement at point guard? That’s not going to lead anywhere good for his liver. Hoping Randolph accepts a traditional role? Wasting his breath. Wishing Turiaf to be versatile? Reasonable but ultimately pointless. They are what they are. This isn’t to say they can’t collectively be something else, especially with a bench that’s just as full of misfit toys that can still wind their springs as any. But it does mean that any attempts to force evolution will be as useful as gluing feathers to a brontosaurus. It’ll happen in due time.

The limits of this team are fascinating, though. Not just the Suns driven by the point guard whipping to perimeter spot-ups but constant catch-go-move-throw. But floaters. Trailer threes by the busload. Offensive rebounds by the truckload (seriously, their defensive rebounding will be systemically suspect, but they’re going to get tap-backs). Pull-ups on loop.

A trade is looming, and with good reason. Donnie Walsh’s job is to win a championship, not speak to relics. But if this particular team makes it together, they’ll be something to watch. Nothing moving, or transcendent, but fun, capable, and complex. There’s nothing obvious about New York, other than the fact they won’t be winning a championship this year. They could very well win as many or fewer games as last year. They could make the 7th seed. It’s negligible, as unless they make a significant move towards Chris Paul’s toast, that’s what they are as far as the common fan is concerned. Toast. But that’s what’s great about Knicks fans. They’re not common fans.

Maybe the best way to describe this team is as a heartbreaker. Young, pristine, driving a really cool car and occasionally getting grounded for weeks on end. They won’t be together forever and when they’re blown apart, it’ll never be the same. But those moments in youth are still something to revel in while they’re around.

Growing up is painful, inevitable, and rote. Let the kids have their fun.

Oster-Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Matt Moore wrote: "Bear in mind I’m a believer that the D’Antoni Defensive Sieve is a myth. His Suns teams were far from stalwarts but nor were they the Raptors of last season. They were fine."

So, Paul, why do you say "Second of all, the D’Antoni 'no defense' thing is generally exaggerated. His Phoenix teams were just average defensive teams, not terrible defensive teams"? You're just repeating what Moore said.

"Abdicate the value of defense?" I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

"Offensive rebounds by the truckload"

A D'Antoni hallmark is that only 1 player crashes the offensive glass and everyone else gets back on defense to avoid transition buckets...

I enjoyed reading your article; however, I have to disagree with your conclusions.

I appreciate that you seem to recognize that team defense should be measured by possessions rather than per game numbers.

The Knicks, however, have much better defensive personnel than last season.

Whatever the starting frontcourt, it will surely be an improvement over last season's primary frontcourt of Lee/Harrington. Duhon was/is almost incapable of guarding PGs in today's NBA (Knicks often used Jeffries or Danilo on quicker PGs), while Felton is much quicker and is in fact a strong defensive PG who held his own on the best defense in the league last season (probably the weakest offensive starting PG in the NBA, though). A whole lot of Anthony Randolph's considerable potential lies on the defensive side of the ball. They keep last season's top defenders in Wilson Chandler + Toney Doulgas and also add another solid wing defender in Azu. Danilo is a pretty average defender... not all Europeans are total stiffs.

Last season's Knicks were the 27th best defense in the league. Awful, but there were 3 worse defenses (http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NYK/2010...). Their defensive personnel has improved considerable since then. That was a group with no shot blocker... Randolph, Turiaf, Amare, Timo Mozgov are all better shotblockers than the Knicks finished last season with. Duhon-Robinson-Lee-Harrigton-McGrady... bad-to-awful defenders that are no longer Knicks. Felton, Douglas, Chandler, Gallo, Randolph, Amare, Turiaf, Azu, Timo, Mason... Knicks might have a rotation without one bad defender (Bill Walker maybe blows that if he makes the rotation), but they're going to be a bad defensive team?

The Knicks have a long, athletic team that I think will surprise you defensively (assuming you're looking at per possession stats and not per game numbers). I don't think they'll be a good defense, necessarily, but I expect them to be around league average.

"Hoping Randolph accepts a traditional role? Wasting his breath."

This is the same coach who used Shawn Marion as his PF, Amare as his C, and also Diaw at the 5... do you really think he's going to suddenly get conventional?

This could qualify the author as a writer for a NY rag newspaper. Not even the jerks who write in NY think the Knocks could lose more games than last year. Actually, the Knicks would make an interesting team playing a zone against teams without great outside shooters. A lot of shot blockers inside. I look for 45-48 wins and maybe a first round series win. All that is if they don't get Mello. If they do, they may be better than Boston, depending on who they have to give away to get him.

You are way overstating the defense thing. First of all, you haven't even seen this team play yet, so how do you know their defense will be "abhorrent". Second of all, the D'Antoni "no defense" thing is generally exaggerated. His Phoenix teams were just average defensive teams, not terrible defensive teams. Thirdly, a team built the way D'Antoni prefers only needs a couple of good defenders and the rest just need to put in the effort. As for the individual players you mentioned, I think you're again being unfair. Felton is actually regarded as a very good defender, so I'm not sure where you got the idea that he never stood out defensively. From what I've seen, its a myth that Gallinari is some huge defensive liability. I watched every game last season, and not only does he put great effort into defense, but he actually gets way better results than people give him credit for. Any defensive problems he has had look more the result of him being a young player than they do him being a "bad" defender. Randolph is a long shot blocking monster, Chandler is an above average defender, Toney Douglas is arguably a great defender, and Stoudemire is also not nearly as bad defensively as thought. So, this new Knicks squad in fact does have the personnel to play decent D.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Good Read Via Hardwood Paroxysm To take the sting off of it a little bit, consider the report coming out about a possible starting five of Felton-Gallinari-Randolph-Stoudemire-Turiaf. That’s a lot of size right there. Even with the waif-like wings, you’re still looking at considerable height to provide a rebounding asset, if not advantage. But if we move past defense and accept that this team is only marginally likely to make the playoffs and if they do, they are likely fodder, we have to see how bloody fun this team is apt to be. Forget the whole Warriors-Raptors concepts of the last few years, those teams were built on a system which then went out and got whatever players were affordably priced for what they were attempting (or in the Raptors case, reasonably priced with a few plastic explosive exceptions). And forget even the Suns, who were dependent on one player’s brilliance, and the other players’ ability to siphon off that player (yes, one of them is the same player who is now the lynch pin in our Madison Square Petrie Dish). This is just tall, athletic guys who can throw the round thing in the circular thing repeatedly. [...]

  2. [...] any team on hardwood north of South Beach this year, though. Hardwood Paroxysm’s Matt Moore ably discusses why the D’Antoni Knicks may look, at once, completely similar and antithetical to what we [...]

  3. [...] Will they advance past the first round? Probably not. But they’ll be a helluva lot of fun to watch. Plus, you’ll get to watch this team develop over the next few [...]