Should the New York Knicks commit to Carmelo Anthony, Phil Jackson and Derrick Rose long term? Do they need to tank or push for the playoffs?
Our NBA Insiders debate the big questions in the latest round of Knicks drama.
1. The Knicks are heading in ...
A. The right direction.
B. The wrong direction.
C. No particular direction.
Amin Elhassan, ESPN Insider: C. Don't get me wrong: There are a couple of things to feel optimistic about, starting with Kristaps Porzingis, who looks like the real deal as a franchise cornerstone.
But the construction of most of the rest of the roster doesn't seem to be done with an eye toward maximizing his abilities and capitalizing on his timeline. Instead, the Knicks are mishmash hodgepodge of guys who are past their expiry date of peak basketball performance.
For what it's worth, I don't think the Knicks structurally are an impossible fix, because whenever you have a Porzingis-level talent, the hardest part of your mission has been completed.
Chris Herring, FiveThirtyEight: C ... which, in turn, means they're headed in the wrong direction. There wasn't anything this team could have realistically done this past offseason to become a contender. Because of that, it's becoming more and more clear that the Knicks should've taken a more conservative approach and been OK with the possibility of losing, since they actually own their first-round picks going forward.
Jay Williams, ESPN analyst: C. There is seemingly no well-thought-out strategy on the part of ownership or management for long-term success. They are clearly not achieving the immediate success they led their fan base to believe was imminent. Nor have they under Jim Dolan's ownership. Period.
Bradford Doolittle, ESPN Insider: C. In a different organization, the focus would be three years down the line, when Porzingis is one of the 10 best players in the NBA. By then, through the accumulation and development of young players, the right system and talent would be in place, carefully constructed to augment Porzingis' ability.
Instead, the Knicks are what they've been for the better part of the past 40 years: an aimless collection of names. Until and unless a 21st-century executive is put in place and fully empowered, the upside will continue to be mediocrity.
Kevin Pelton, ESPN Insider: C. When you signed Courtney Lee to a four-year, $48 million contract as part of adding veterans in free agency to contend now, and then bench him midseason for undrafted rookie Ron Baker, you don't have a direction. The Knicks have made some good moves in filling out their bench, but the missteps in the starting five have outweighed those successes and left them far from contention.
2. Is Carmelo Anthony part of the problem or part of the solution?
Herring: Part of the problem. It's looking far less likely that Anthony, who turns 33 in four months, can be part of the long-term solution. His timeline doesn't mesh with that of the 21-year-old Porzingis. Short term, the Knicks would solve some problems by playing Anthony at power forward -- something they should have started doing permanently after his stellar 2012-13 season there -- and Porzingis at center.
Pelton: Part of the problem, though not particularly through any fault of his own. It's every bit Anthony's right to stay in New York if that's what he wants; that's why he got a no-trade clause. Still, the presence of an aging, offense-first star on the roster complicates the Knicks' efforts to build around Porzingis, and that makes Anthony part of the problem and not part of the solution -- unless he waives his no-trade clause.
Doolittle: Problem. Anthony has always been good enough to be a key component on a title team, but never its best player. That disconnect only grows as he gets older. His contract -- the salary, the trade kicker, the no-trade clause -- is holding the franchise hostage. Of course, he's not the one to blame for it. If a player can gain that measure of control over his destiny while making top dollar, why wouldn't he do it?
Williams: Ideally, he's part of the solution. Carmelo can absolutely be an asset going forward. He has won big on the college and international stage, but expecting him to be their leader both on and off the court is simply unrealistic and sets him up as the scapegoat.
Elhassan: A little of column A and a little of column B. I still think Melo has tangible basketball benefit that can help a team win a championship; unfortunately, the circumstances required to extract that from him will likely never happen while he is a Knick. His influence on the organization makes it impossible to reduce his role to the point where he is most effective, and the team is going to be stuck in this cycle.
Having said that, if he were to waive his no-trade clause, Melo would be part of the solution in terms of the return on value on his trade.
3. Is Phil Jackson part of the problem or part of the solution?
Pelton: Part of the problem. As I've noted, the off-court drama Jackson has brought to Madison Square Garden has overshadowed the solid minor moves he has made. The Knicks should decline their team option on the last two years of Jackson's contract as team president.
Elhassan: A little of this, and a little of that. He and his staff definitely deserve credit for drafting Porzingis, which as I mentioned earlier is really the hardest part. I also liked the Jeff Hornacek hiring, as well as additions on the margins: guys such as Mindaugas Kuzminskas, Guillermo Hernangomez, Maurice Ndour, Ron Baker. And in free agency, I liked the Lee signing this year and prior to that, Robin Lopez.
But Jackson's blunders have been colossal, from hiring Derek Fisher to trading for Rose to giving Joakim Noah a massive deal to his infatuation with Kurt Rambis as a coach -- and, more disturbingly, his unwillingness to be a leader and face the fire when things are going wrong, choosing instead to make people like Melo and Hornacek shoulder that burden.
Williams: Definitely part of the problem. Although Phil is a legendary coach, he has not exhibited the energy, time or motivation to build a team in this very competitive NBA environment. It takes much more than magic to do that. It takes 100 percent commitment to all the little things. Given where he is at this stage of his life, Phil is simply not the right man for the job.
Doolittle: Problem. This is no surprise, of course. Running an NBA basketball operations department is complicated business, now more than ever. That's why you don't give the most important job in an organization to someone who has zero experience doing the work.
Herring: Jackson has been perhaps the biggest problem these past few years. He drafted Porzingis, and deserves total credit for that. But now that he probably can't move Anthony (to whom he gave a no-trade clause) or the 31-year-old Noah (who has a four-year, $72 million deal), that makes it virtually impossible to properly build the roster around Porzingis in the near future.
4. Is Derrick Rose part of the problem or part of the solution?
Doolittle: Neither, really, but more a problem than a solution. He's just a guy at this point. He may fit in with the milieu of this team -- flashy name, limited substance -- and he may even typify it. Either way, his contract is done in a few months, so you can play it out and say it was an experiment worth making. Rose only becomes a problem if the Knicks throw a high-dollar, multiyear contract at him after the season.
Williams: Rose should not be their point guard of the future. His unexcused mini-leave last week is simply more proof that he is not the type of selfless, all-in NBA veteran capable of leading any team to a title, especially one under constant media scrutiny that has been mired in mediocrity for decades.
Pelton: Part of the problem. Rose has played well offensively at times, with perhaps his best moments since his ACL injury. Nonetheless, his unreliability -- both on and off the court -- and poor defense make him a limited option at point guard. That's fine for now but would become a problem if the Knicks ponied up to re-sign him as a free agent this summer.
Elhassan: The latter. He's stuck in a delusional ideal of who he is as a player. He doesn't make anyone better on the floor, his defense is forgettable and even when left to his own devices, he's not even that great as a me-first gunner. On the other hand, playing him lots of minutes could come in handy in a tank job.
Herring: Rose, despite occasional, efficient showings like the one on Wednesday, is part of the problem too. Despite his insistence that the Knicks need to improve defensively, many of the team's struggles stem from Rose's inability to get through screens, allowing opponents to attack mismatches. Unlike the other veteran stars, though, he's in the last year of his contract and presumably won't be back next season.
5. Which is more true?
A. The Knicks should try to make the playoffs.
B. The Knicks should tank for a better pick in a strong draft.
Elhassan: B. These are the facts: Making the playoffs will likely lead to resounding defeat. This year's draft is very top-heavy and features several talented point guards, a position of need for New York. Missing the playoffs and drafting an elite PG prospect with a top-five pick would be extremely beneficial for the Knicks, especially if you are constructing the team with an eye to Porzingis' career arc.
Herring: B. But good luck doing that when you have a bunch of win-now players on the roster, and a first-year coach who's drawing public criticism from his team. It's just hard to imagine the Knicks, or Porzingis (who's injured anyway), benefiting more by finishing eighth and losing in the first round than they would by getting a high lottery pick in a deep draft. They badly need a young running mate for Porzingis to contend long term.
Williams: A. The Knicks ought to try building a winning culture immediately. There is never a guarantee that tanking will land a top-three pick or that a top pick will be a franchise builder. It's time for New York to build a winner the right way -- with intelligent and committed ownership, highly competent executives, winning coaches and motivated, team-first players all focused on doing whatever it takes to compete every night. Losing every night doesn't teach you how to win.
Pelton: A: I'm generally of the belief that teams should try for the playoffs until they're unrealistic, then start thinking about the future. While the Knicks are approaching that point, I don't think they're there yet.
Doolittle: B. Even if they got into the playoffs, what would really be the point of a first-round drubbing? It's not like this is a young roster that would benefit from postseason exposure. The Knicks should pull the plug on this mess. But they won't, and the longer they wait, the worse it's going to get.