The exercise of comparing draft prospects has driven me nuts for years. For a time, seemingly every wing with a good vertical was the next Michael Jordan. Tall kid who can dribble? The Next Magic. White forward who can shoot? Larry Bird.

In this draft, AJ Dybantsa has been comped to Tracy McGrady and Andrew Wiggins, who are basically nothing alike. There’s a draft site out there that lists Dybantsa’s comps as McGrady and…Scottie Pippen? What?

Darryn Peterson’s NBA comp, according to this site is Devin Booker. Maybe?

Cam Boozer got Al Horford, which might make sense if Horford had been a big-time scorer with top-shelf three-point shooting.

Caleb Wilson, who could theoretically be a Wizards target in a trade down scenario, was tagged with Jermaine O’Neal and Chris Bosh, who once again were not very similar as players.

This site says comps for Darius Acuff Jr., the last player FanDuel says has a chance to be the number one pick in the draft, are Tim Hardaway and Damian Lillard, which…I guess? I mean, they’re both smaller guards, but Hardaway played more of a PG role — lower usage, more steals — and didn’t shoot as well. Lillard played in an era where more rigid roles were dying out and did more scoring along with playmaking. And he shot better than Hardaway.

Anyway, I’m a stat dork, so I modified the statistical doppelganger machine I made for NBA players and deployed it on Ye Olde Draft Analyzer (YODA), my stat-based draft prospect evaluation tool. Now, the doppelganger machine doesn’t work quite as well on draft prospects, but I’m still asking it to work with YODA and give us who they think are the top NBA comps for the five theoretical possible Wizards draft picks at number one.

AJ Dybantsa | F | BYU

Top Comp: Blake Griffin. Interesting because one of the first things that jumps off the screen is a difference — Griffin was a big-time rebounder at Oklahoma (17.3 per 40 minutes) and Dybantsa is not. But, the usage, scoring, overall efficiency, and steals are close. Both had superb verticals, as well.

Runners-Up:

• Michael Beasley — impressive college player (also grabbed many more rebounds than Dybantsa) who scored in bunches. Crashed and burned in the NBA.
• Brandon Ingram — lower usage and not as efficient or productive overall as Dybantsa, but similar scoring forward profile.

Darryn Peterson | G | Kansas

Top Comp: Kyrie Irving. Not what I was expecting. But as I eyeball the numbers, I see similar scoring (though Irving was more efficient), steals and blocks. Peterson did more rebounding. Irving did more playmaking. Both missed significant chunks of the season due to injury or health issues.

Runners-Up:

• Jalen Suggs — psychotic competitor who keeps hurting himself by attempting to make plays with complete disregard to his health and safety.
• Jalen Green — similar pattern of production

Cam Boozer | F | Duke

Top Comp: Anthony Davis. Worth mention that basically no one in the database shows up as a strong statistical comp for Boozer. He’s a unique conglomeration of hyper-efficient, high-volume scoring, plus elite rebounding. Davis was a dominating defender with similar efficiency on lower volume. He blocked lots more shots than Boozer. Boozer got more assists. Overall YODA score was pretty similar — both have grades in YODA consistent with being the number one pick in nearly any draft I’ve evaluated.

Runners-Up:

• Marvin Bagley III — This guy was so good at Duke that a number of teams had him rated ahead of Luka Doncic.
• Kevin Love — This one feels the most right. Love was accused of lacking the athleticism to be an effective NBA player. He ended up a five-time All-Star and two-time second team All-NBA. He’d likely have tallied more of each if he hadn’t played for a dumpster-fire franchise. Seriously, one season he was the only member of the Minnesota Timberwolves with an above average PPA. The Wizards should be so lucky.

Caleb Wilson | F | North Carolina

Top Comp: Kevin Love. Which doesn’t feel right at all. Except, the numbers are reasonably similar. Love was the more prolific and accurate three-point shooter, but the rebounding, assists, blocks, turnovers, fouls, scoring and overall efficiency are pretty close. Wilson generated more steals. Fascinating.

Runners-Up:

• Blake Griffin. Again. I’m starting to wonder if the doppelganger machine and YODA are just hitting ctrl+c over and over. But…when I look at the numbers, it makes some sense — Love and Griffin were fairly similar, so if a guy is similar to one, he’s similar to the other.
• Victor Wembanyama — There are some definite differences. The Machines are picking up similar usage, poor three-point shooting (Wemby shot 27.2% from deep in the season he entered the NBA Draft), rebounding, and scoring. Wemby was less efficient and higher usage, and he blocked a lot more shots. There overall YODA scores are very close — Wemby’s season in France wasn’t mind-blowingly great. He still had a score consistent with being the top pick in most drafts, as does Wilson.

Darius Acuff Jr. | G | Arkansas

Top Comp: John Wall. This makes some sense considering they were both coached by John Calipari, who’s still running the dribble drive motion system he used when Wall played for him at Kentucky. There are differences — Acuff was lots more efficient — especially from three-point range. The other stats are pretty similar — Wall had some rebounds, but assists, free throw attempts, and fouls were about the same. Wall produced more blocks and steals, as well as more turnovers. Still, it all tallies up to similar YODA scores — top 3-5 in most drafts, top pick in a few.

Runners-Up:

• Ty Lawson — Superb shooter and playmaker, who played at North Carolina. He had some quality performances in the NBA, though is career got derailed by some personal issues.
• Derrick Rose — Hmm, another Calipari guy. Have The Machines figured it out?

“Pretty unprofessional, huh?”

Wolves coach Chris Finch sat behind a table in the Target Center media room after a 115-108 Game 3 loss to the San Antonio Spurs in the Western Conference semifinals. Clearly ready to get something off his chest, he was asked about a second-half mid-court conflict with veteran NBA official Tony Brothers.

Wanting to call a timeout and reorganize his group, he felt as though Brothers disregarded his job and ignored him.

He let him know that. Brothers took exception.

Instead of a typical technical foul and a warning issued to go back to the bench, the grizzled crew chief took things a step further…quite literally.

“He clearly heard me,” Finch said when recounting the situation of asking for a timeout and getting ignored. “It almost cost us a turnover…he lost it.”

Following a six-point loss in which the Wolves were -12 in the free-throw disparity, and a game that saw plenty of stoppages, you might think that the website you’re reading this on prequalifies this piece to be a “the refs cost the Wolves the series” soliloquy.

Not quite. Much of the Wolves’ free-throw discrepancy throughout the series came from a tentativeness in attacking the basket after saying they would be unrelenting in doing so after Game 1.

However, when themes keep coming up from multiple people who are given a microphone around the league, one thing to me remains relatively common. Including Castle himself recently, talking about selling contact and the trend in doing so around the league.

Simply put, the NBA and its officiating crews are at an inflection point on how they go about their night-to-night jobs.

As seasons keep going, tension between players, coaches, and officials keeps boiling over.

By my count, more than six coaches called out officiating specifically during the season in postgame press conferences.

That doesn’t count some of the playoff tangents we’ve had, including tenured veteran Devin Booker going out of his way after Game 2 of the Phoenix Suns’ series with Oklahoma City to call James Williams out BY NAME.

There are plenty of examples of frustration with NBA officiating. Perhaps brought to its peak when the Oklahoma City Thunder played a series against a Los Angeles Lakers team that always has millions of eyes on it and a fanbase not afraid to speak its mind, questions and tension between fans, players, coaches, and those instructed to keep the game together have reached a point where the NBA simply has two options.

1). Completely ignore the situation – The worst option. This pisses fans off more who clearly want answers to why games are so different from a flow perspective on a nightly basis

2). Address the issue with changes – I’ll talk about this soon, but I believe there are a couple of clear-cut, subtle ways in which the NBA can make the game easier on its officials while making a game already played a rapid pace more fun to watch.

So, blog boy, what issues could be smoothed over that could be the cure-all, if you know so much?

Stop Discouraging Pace

It’s truly underrated how much faster the NBA has gotten over the last 20 years.

In the 2011-12 regular season, the Sacramento Kings led the NBA with a PACE metric of 97.3 (the number of possessions a team uses per game).

This past season, the slowest team in PACE was the Boston Celtics, with a metric of…97.7.

Shots go up quicker. Teams move faster. And for some reason, games could not go any slower.

It’s simple. Refs are having a hard time making the right call with a game moving as fast as it is, and the fear of getting every call right tends to send them to the monitor more than they should. Furthermore, the amount of time spent at the monitor for simple calls like an out-of-bounds play, flagrant, or goaltend is painstaking.

Adam Silver has come out and said the NBA plans to augment this with an AI officiating system for calls like this. I’m not sure AI is necessarily the answer here, but could something similar to what the NFL has with the sky judge be implemented here? Perhaps a 10-second stoppage in play if the call is extremely questionable to hear from a sky judge, or additional official watching 2-3 different angles in Seacaucus that can call this out?

With gambling culture becoming rampant, I understand officials wearing an earpiece can be shady, but it’s better than what we have now.

Imagine games that aren’t completely smeared with reviews. Where up and down basketball is back. Go back and watch a few games from the early 2010s. The contrast to now is so unbelievably stark in a good way.

Now take that, hit the 1.5x fast forward, and get an idea of what the potential of this league could be. These players are awesome, and I don’t need 100% accuracy on out-of-bounds calls and weak flagrant calls in exchange for what could be a far more entertaining product.

We Can’t Get Rid of “Grifting”, But There Are Steps to Take

You know those fouls at the baseline that get called all the time?

Where a team has no other shot against good defense, so they drive from the elbow to the baseline, try and catch the defender at a bad angle, and completely fall backwards, hoisting the ball up in a situation where it’s surely not going to go in, but it gets called a shooting foul anyway?

It seems to happen all of the time, and more often than not, they award the out-of-control player. Finch has said it before, and my main gripe matches it. For some reason, out-of-control players are being awarded more than ever now. Fall on a fast break? Sure. Fall on a drive? You got it.

Fouls like the one I laid out could be given the rip-through treatment, as always, being a foul on the floor. There’s no intent to actually score the ball during game action with the embellishment of contact, and it’s obvious it’s a move players practice because they know it’s a cheap way to get to the line if the shot clock is breaking down.

A simple way for something like that to not get the rip through treatment? Playing through the content to show actual scoring intent.

The baseline fallaway is just one example. So many times, a defender could be in complete control while the offensive player is not, and the latter will tend to get rewarded. It might be a place that the league is at, but seeing more play-ons through marginal contact and making things like the above fouls on the floor could be ways to curb what’s happening and also prevent further stoppages.

All in all, I don’t want something like this to take away what’s shaping up to be an awesome finals, and frankly, a finals that’s being officiated extremely well with plenty of contact.

But where we’re at can’t continue to happen. It ruined the discourse of the playoffs this year, it’s slowly ruining the NBA product, and giving a bad example for youth hoopers on what to build their game around.

Is Adam Silver the right guy to figure out? I’m not sure, but man, do I sure hope he is. Basketball can’t keep getting played and talked about like this at the highest level.

Fans, players, coaches, and organizations are clearly getting tired of it. Hell, I’m sure refs are too. Now it’s time for those who run the league to show they are, too.

The Jazz are lined up to select 2nd overall in the upcoming NBA Draft, and this is a unique position for the franchise. They have finished with a losing record in only 18 of their 52 seasons in the league, and in those rare losing seasons, they are rarely subsequently blessed with a high draft selection – only 1 time in the 42 year history of the draft lottery have the Jazz jumped above their expected placement. Ever since the days of Stockton, Malone, and Sloan, the Jazz have not been bad and they have not been lucky. With this upcoming 2nd overall pick, Utah needs a star.

Famed collegiate icon, best-in-the-world level shooter, explosive athlete, and ferocious competitive fire – if I told Jazz fans we’d be picking a guy with these attributes at #2, they’d be ecstatic, regardless of whether the prospect’s first name is Darryn, AJ, or Cam. While it doesn’t seem that any of those guys check all 4 boxes, Forty-six years ago to the day Jazz fans were blessed with a player who did – Darrell Griffith, the sole #2 overall pick in the franchises history, was selected to bring winning and excitement to a team that hadn’t yet given the new home fans in Utah something to care about. Clearly, he succeeded, as his #35 jersey hanging in the Delta Center’s rafters indicate. The history of the Jazz and the 2nd pick starts and ends with Darrell Griffith, but who is he? Today, in honor of the fast approaching future and the nostalgia of the past, we’ll study Griffith’s career and diagnose whether Dr. Dunkenstein was the right pick for Utah’s sole #2 selection in the history of the franchise.

Pre-NBA: Louisville Legend

Almost from the day he was born, Griffith was a phenom – it’s reported that he began dunking at the age of 10 by launching himself off the walls of his family garage, which his brother Michael speculates built up the leg muscles necessary to propel him 48 inches in the air at his peak. Griffith’s youthful successes (state championships in the basketball-crazed state of Kentucky, high school All-American in 1975) convinced the ABA’s Kentucky Colonels that he was the real deal, and they offered him a contract if he skipped college and went professional right away. For context, the 1975 Colonels were no joke – they featured stars Dan Issel and Artis Gilmore, and that year won the ABA championship. Instead, after a high profile recruiting period, Griffith ended up at the hometown University of Louisville.

Griffith took his time to reach the heights expected from such a dominant high school force, but once he reached his senior season, he was nigh-unstoppable at the collegiate level. Winning the Wooden award and Louisville’s first ever National Championship, Dr. Dunkenstein finished a storybook college career – home town kid who had to overcome adversity before becoming a historically great NCAA player. Steep professional expectations accompany a man this accomplished at the amateur level, so when the Jazz selected him at #2 overall in the 1980 NBA draft, they did so with the hope that this was the player to ignite a fire under Salt Lake City and lead the team to their first EVER winning season (the franchise’s record to this point was 39 wins while they were still stationed in New Orleans).

NBA: The Doctor Is In

Griffith didn’t immediately contribute to much more success on the court (24 wins in 1980 to 28 in his first season in 1981) but he wasted no time getting acclimated to the NBA. Averaging 20 points, 3.5 rebounds and 2.5 assists, Griffith narrowly won the 1981 Rookie of the Year award by a single vote over now-obscure Blazers point guard Kelvin Ransey (Basketball Reference lists Ransey’s nickname as Mrs. Butterworth which took me aback, but Ransey himself says his true nickname, Butter, was coined by Mychal Thompson because his game was “rich and thick”).

In terms of accolades, Griffith is unimpressive after his rookie year – despite 4 out of his first 5 years featuring scoring averages over 20 points per game, Griffith never earned All-Star honors. This is not due to lack of popularity among the voters, however – once the Jazz quit their losing ways (their first winning record with Griffith occurred in 1983-84), Darrell began receiving some of the most votes of Western Conference guards, placing 5th in 1984 and 4th in 1985. If he were ever to be an All-Star, it would’ve been 1985 – the Jazz had a respectable record, Griffith had his highest scoring year, and Rickey Green took a small step back so the votes for Utah guards were less dispersed. However, even though the fans were taken with him, the coaches deciding the bench were not, and he was passed up for Norm Nixon and Rolando Blackman.

Griffith still had a spot during the ‘84 and ‘85 All-Star Weekends, however – he participated in the first two NBA Slam Dunk Competitions. I’ve attached tape from his 1984 4th place finish below; watch it for Griffith, for the beautiful green Jazz jerseys, or for an interesting moment in history when the Dunk Contest featured 4 legitimate stars (Griffith, Dr. J, Dominique Wilkins, Larry Nance).

Griffith wasn’t only a dunker, as he also pioneered the three point shot during its early years in the NBA. For one glorious offseason (1985), before Larry Bird took hold of the honor, a Jazzman held the all-time three-pointers made record, after Griffith paced the league in 3PM for two straight seasons. To this day, Darrell Griffith and Mike Dunleavy Sr. are the two players in NBA history to have led the league in three-pointers made and three-point percentage – Griffith was decidedly not a one-trick pony.

However, both of those tricks suffered after Griffith’s successful 1984-85 season. Very soon before the ‘85-86 season, Griffith broke his foot during a pickup game in his hometown Louisville, and missed the entire year during his recovery. After coming back, Griffith wasn’t quite the same – he lost a few inches off of his mythical 48 inch vertical, and even more importantly, he lost efficiency. He was a part of a fun 1988-89 team (first 50 win squad in franchise history!), starting in the backcourt with a young John Stockton, but he wasn’t anywhere near the almost-All-Star of yesteryear, retiring just 2 years later at the age of 32. Still, Griffith ended his career a Jazz-lifer, and an interesting one at that; he functioned as a bridge between eras, starting his career as a key piece of Adrian Dantley teams, and ending it as a veteran presence for a young Stockton and Malone.

Post-NBA Conclusion: Once a Jazzman, Always a Jazzman

Post retirement, Griffith faded softly from the limelight. He returned to a town that named his childhood street after him (“Darrell Griffith Way, AKA Dr. Dunkenstein Way”!) and now works as an ambassador and community outreach specialist for his alma mater. Regarding the Jazz, he made a rare appearance in Salt Lake City as he presented a rookie Donovan Mitchell with his 2018 Dunk Contest trophy, a contest in which Donovan paid an electrifying tribute to Griffith by donning his jersey for one of his dunks (reportedly, one of Griffith’s ACTUAL jerseys, from the archives). Griffith acted as a mentor for Donovan before Spida was ever drafted to the Jazz, with the two of them meeting during Donovan’s time at the house that Darrell built.

While history suggests that Kevin McHale, the 3rd pick in 1980, would’ve been the right one for the Jazz, one should not use that to discredit Darrell Griffith’s legacy with the franchise. Griffith brought excitement and genuine star power to Utah’s first NBA team (even if that was never reflected with All-Star appearances), and could’ve been a key third star into the 90s if not for a series of unfortunate injuries. Even with his career falling apart, he never abandoned ship – he played every game of his professional career wearing the Jazz’s purple and green. We can all hope that the franchise’s upcoming #2 overall pick will have better luck against the injury bug and perhaps be a better defender (Griffith tried hypno-therapy as a last-ditch effort to improve on that end), but we can’t ask for much more in terms of talent and loyalty. So far, the Jazz are 1/1 on their selections at #2 – if they can get that hit rate to 2/2, the Jazz are set to begin one of the most exciting eras in franchise history.

Have any favorite Griffith stories that I didn’t touch on? Sound off below!

The New York Knicks host the San Antonio Spurs tonight at Madison Square Garden in Game Four of the NBA Finals. New York leads the series 2-1. A victory would put the Knicks one win away from their first championship since 1973. A loss? That would turn this into a best-of-three series heading back to cactus country. No bueno!

The Spurs earned a 115-111 win in Game Three on Monday night, ending New York’s 13-game postseason winning streak and handing the Knicks their first loss in 46 days. Victor Wembanyama led San Antonio with 32 points, eight rebounds, six assists, and three blocks. Stephon Castle added 23 points. For New York, OG Anunoby scored 28 points on 9-of-13 shooting while Jalen Brunson matched Wemby with 32 points.

The question entering Game Four: can the Knicks rediscover their offensive identity?

Game Three was not a case of San Antonio completely overwhelming New York. The Knicks generated quality looks throughout the night and remained within striking distance until the final possession. What doomed them was stagnation. For long stretches, New York looked nothing like the team that spent the last month and a half steamrolling opponents. The ball stuck. Players stood around. The offense became predictable. They recorded just 18 assists, their second-lowest total across 99 regular-season and playoff games, while committing 13 turnovers that the Spurs converted into 21 points. (H/t Fred Katz of The Athletic.)

The Spurs deserve credit for creating those conditions. After dropping the first two games at home, San Antonio came into Madison Square Garden desperate and aggressive. Castle’s size bothered Brunson, Josh Hart, and several other Knicks all night. Wembanyama spent less time defending pick-and-roll actions, instead acting as a help defender and erasing opportunities around the rim. And the adjustments worked. Rather than forcing Wembanyama into repeated screening actions and making him defend in space, the Knicks often attacked the defense directly. That resulted in fewer driving lanes, fewer paint touches, and a greater reliance on jump shooting.

Wembanyama’s elite rim protection often forces you to make your bones beyond the arc. Sometimes those shots fall, sometimes they do not. On Monday, there was a lot of not. New York missed 10 consecutive three-pointers to open the fourth quarter. It cost them the game.

The Knicks played tight and tentative while the Spurs played loose and aggressive. New York spent much of the evening trying not to make mistakes instead of imposing its will. That showed up in the turnovers, hesitation, and an absence of the off-ball movement that has defined its postseason success.

Still, one bad night does not erase six weeks of dominant basketball. All the aforementioned issues are correctable. Protecting the basketball tops the list. The Knicks cannot afford unforced turnovers or unnecessary fouls that gift San Antonio easy points. They also need a bigger fourth-quarter impact from Karl-Anthony Towns, who was held scoreless in the final period of Game Three and attempted 15 fewer shots than Brunson overall.

The Knicks must contain Wembanyama in pick-and-roll situations. The Spurs repeatedly generated lobs and paint finishes by getting him behind New York’s defenders. The good guys have to cut off those interior passes and do more to keep the big fella away from the rim (easier said than done, I know, I know).

And Mikal Bridges needs to bounce back after recording two points in Game Three. He’ll be better tonight (could he be much worse?). Anunoby has arguably been New York’s best player in the series, and Captain Clutch continues to deliver in big moments. The Knicks are at their best, however, when all five starters contribute and their bench lends some support. Landry Shamet had his worst game in a while, making 1-of-8, and Miles McBride looks smaller than ever among the taller Spurs, averaging 3.7 points in these three games. A couple of three pointers from each would help.

ESPN.com likes New York to win at 57%. Giddy up. If our heroes move the ball, protect possessions, and return to the sharp cutting and unselfish offense that fueled their postseason run, they will have an excellent opportunity to regain control of the series. We trust in them. Knicks by 5.

Game Details

Who: New York Knicks (2-1) vs San Antonio Spurs (1-2)
Date: Wednesday, June 10, 2026
Time: 8:30 PM ET
Place: Madison Square Garden, Manhattan, NY
TV: ABC
Follow: @ptknicksblog and bsky

Game 3 of the NBA Finals wasn’t much different than Games 1 and 2: the Spurs got ahead early after a classic slow start from the Knicks, they eventually responded, then everything was once again down to the wire in crunch time with the winner being the team that made one or two more clutch shots. The difference? The location was Madison Square Garden, and the winner was the Spurs, who barely but admirably avoided falling into a 3-0 hole. I continue Fraternizing with the Enemy with with Russell Richardson, editor-in-chief of our Knicks sister site Posting and Toasting, as we discuss what the Spurs did differently to get back in the winners column and how the Knicks, who aren’t used to having to bounce back from a loss these days, will respond.

This has been an enjoyable series so far — the Fraternizing, but I guess the basketball too — so click on the links if you would like to revisit parts 1, 2 or 3.

J.R. 

So, the Spurs showed a few things last night and we now know that they can:

1. Beat NY

2. Win in MSG

3. Stay composed in an intense clutch game in the Finals. 

All of those are important, but I’d say the third is the biggest deal. First, it unlocks the other two. Second, because they’ve been shaky down the stretch in games going back to before Wemby joined the team. 

For years, the knock on San Antonio was that despite their talent, and even though they could stay with teams through three quarters, they couldn’t win games. (I call that a talent gap, but some people call it not knowing how to win — potato potahto). Then the gripe became that they could build a lead, but couldn’t hold onto it. Then they could hold onto leads but couldn’t win close games. Then they could win close regular season games but not close playoff games. Close playoff games but not close Finals games…

You can see where this is going; it’s not like it’s a particularly rare development path. What’s unusual about it is how quickly they’ve moved through these stages to the point that now it’s reasonable to wonder whether they could be the first team to come back and win The Finals after trailing 0-2 at home. I know I brought up pressure in our last conversation but it seems even more important after Game 3, because the series is for sure going back to San Antonio now, and none of the Knickerbockers are going to feel comfortable about the possibility of coming back home for Game 6 down 3-2. Which means they have to go up 3-1. Which brings us to mental toughness. 

I’ll be honest, there were several times last night that I felt like the Knicks were about to put the game and the series away. After the flagrant review of Castle’s ugly looking foul on Brunson, I thought you guys had it. After the challenge that turned Victor’s three into zero points, I thought you guys had it. After Jaylen’s layup cut it to, (whatever it was) I thought you would take it home. But Wemby and the boys kept believing and kept making plays and now we are where we are. And my question is, at what point did you realize Game Three was slipping away?

R.R.

One summer, I took my kids out in a four-pedal paddle boat. We struggled to fit everyone in—my oldest was already over six feet tall, my stepson and I each weighed about 200 lbs., and my third son was scared for his life. Sam had good reason to be worried. We didn’t get more than 10 feet from the dock when the boat started to noticeably move in a vertical direction. Down. We all foot-pedaled furiously back toward the dock, but slowly, ever so slowly, the SS Guppy approached and broke the waterline. Despite our frantic attempts to save ourselves, we watched the disaster unfold in slow motion as we all sank into the drink.

That was how it felt to watch the Knicks shoot 7-of-27 in the fourth quarter of Game Three.

Expecting the Knicks to win 15 straight playoff games was unrealistic. But they had not lost in 46 days, so a little irrationality was permissible.

We always assume that the bright lights and stars at MSG will rattle the opponent. Sometimes it swings the other way. In Game Three, the young Spurs were cold-blooded from the start, while the home team stumbled in the spotlight. Anyone watching on Monday with virgin eyes could not have identified which team was a squad of steady vets, trained under the cruel tutelage of Master Thibs, and which was a group of youngsters who jumped the development line.

One thing we might assume about confident vets is that they will dictate the pace of a game from tip-off. Not so with these Knickerbockers. All season long, they started games flat and played from behind after the first quarter. It was maddening. That changed through the first three rounds of the playoffs, but lately they have returned to their woeful ways. From my recap:

This was the first time they looked like the “old Knicks” since the first round. The lead guys started slow, the reserves provided a second-quarter lift while Towns and Brunson were split up, the play went stale again after halftime, and they hoped for Captain Clutch magic in the fourth. It was as if, after being away from the Garden for 19 days, they’d forgotten what a juggernaut they had become and, returning to their home court, reverted to their bad habits.

I say it often: first-quarter mistakes are just as impactful on the outcome as those in the fourth. New York started the game with two unforced errors and fell behind by seven points, putting themselves on the back foot for the rest of the game. With both teams so evenly matched and deserving of a championship, every brain fart is another nail in the coffin.

On that note, will the Knicks ever win a first quarter? They lost the first in Game One, 27-19, then 34-25 in Game Two, and 33-22 in Game Three. Playing from behind, they won the second quarter in all three contests. Great. But why must they put themselves at a disadvantage every single time? Every first quarter, they turn me into a sputtering, seething Lewis Black.

We must give them credit—the Spurs played their best game of the series. Castle was cooking (and boy, I dig that kid). Their distribution was excellent, their defense was hard-knuckled, and they were wise to keep Wemby away from KAT for long stretches. Both of these things can be true: San Antonio did an admirable job of keeping KAT out of the offense, and the Knicks did a lousy job of incorporating KAT into the offense. Brunson shot 15 more times than Towns. They could have at least split the difference!

Would you believe that Towns finished +8 and Bridges +11? I don’t, but it is true. It’s difficult to fathom because Bridges could not buy a bucket, and Shamet was worse. He crashed back to earth with 1-of-8 shooting and a -22 plus-minus. Shamet’s marksmanship has been a big part of New York’s postseason success. In his return to the Garden, ShamWow went ice cold. If he had made just one or two more threes, New York would be lining up the brooms.

If Mikal plays like that, Mike Brown knows better—he’s gotta sub in Shamet or Clarkson (OK, not Shamet this time). When Bridges is down, it seems like he doesn’t want to be on the court, which is weird for the guy with the longest active streak of consecutive games played. His foul on Wemby, when he had linked into his limbs like they were playing Twister, is the kind of stuff Bridges does when his confidence is shaken. If things are going well, Mikal is great. He has been in eight straight games now. After a few bad turns, though, he tends to ruminate, and it affects his performance. Brown has benched him in fourth quarters before. He should have last night.

Towns can get lost in his head, too. His anxiety reveals itself differently: he gets giddy and does a lot of Gorsh, can you just believe this?-type pantomiming. When that happens, it doesn’t affect his shooting per se, but it does result in forehead-slapping fouls. Which kills momentum and leads to foul trouble . . . which sends him to the bench . . . which reduces New York’s offensive options. . . . Sigh.

Josh Hart is different. He will randomly lose confidence in his shot and then play hot potato for a few games before snapping out of it. But that never affects his overall play, he’s the same maniac throughout. Brunson is mostly a killer, but if he’s getting smacked around without calls, his anger either leads to a turnover or a dagger three to win the game.

Occasionally, in late-game, high-stakes situations, OG Anunoby gets the yips at the charity stripe. It’s one of the few flaws in my favorite Knick; otherwise, he is one of the most unflappable hoopers to ever play. While his missed free throw late in the fourth was costly, his corner three redeemed him and nearly saved the game. When it came time for that last shot, we would rather that OG had taken it (“NOT BRIDGES, NO!!” I yelled), but even if it went in, a Manhattan Miracle was still needed. They were losing by four with five seconds left. (Note that if OG had made that free throw, a longball would have tied it. . . .)

Nevertheless, despite so much going wrong, I also thought the Knicks were right about to bust open the game many times. There is a lot of complaining in NY about the officiating (some warranted), but ultimately, the Knicks lost because they missed too many shots. We doubt they will misfire so badly in Game Four. From your side of the aisle, did this feel like a Spurs victory or a Knicks collapse? And what do you expect on Wednesday night?

J.R. 

It certainly didn’t feel like New York collapsed. Every team goes through dry spells, and after winning a few dozen games in a row (I honestly lost count), eventually you might have a poorly timed dry spell and drop a contest once a millennia or so. I’m just saying it’s a thing that happens, though it’s understandable if you’ve forgotten what it’s like in the interminable time since Knicks fans have had to suffer the indignity of taking an L.

As far as starting slow goes, man, the Spurs have been there. It was such a thing that it led to the team getting upset after a loss and shaving their heads. (I sure hope I’m remembering the timing of this right. Someone correct me if I’m wrong.) To be precise, Keldon Johnson, and Wembanyama shaved their heads. There were a few other guys who trimmed their hair and some others who were threatened. Carter Bryant was told that if he blew three more dunks before the season ended that he’d have to shave his head. Instead of the ambitious dunks that he’d been missing repeatedly during games, he switched to easy two-handed shove-it-in-the-basket for a few weeks out of fear KJ wasn’t joking. 

Anyway, the first game after going bald, Wemby and the team started sprinting out of the gate and they have won first quarters, or at least the beginning of the game, like clockwork ever since. It sure is fascinating when a team flips a switch like that. Makes you wonder about how it’s done, when sometimes it takes players years to get out of some ruts. 

You said you love Castle, so I’ll admit that I’m crazy about OG. He’s the guy I’ve wanted on the Spurs ever since his name was tossed around while SA came to terms with Toronto on the Leonard/DeRozan deal. Can’t tell you how jealous I was when NY nabbed him. That said, my heart belongs to Josh Hart. I don’t know what it is about guys like him and Alex Caruso, but I can’t ignore it. Hart seems to always be in the right place at the right time making the right play precisely the way necessary to end an opponent’s run or preserve his team’s flow. Plus, he plays with so much passion and savvy and he reads exactly where weird rebounds are headed so frequently it’s infuriating. 

Anyway, thanks for the player personality breakdown, it’s helpful to understand the opposition better when I haven’t been watching them much this season and only know them by the way they play against San Antonio. I’d have never thought that about Bridges, who’s always seemed imperturbable to me. 

As for what I expect in Game 4, I’ll begin with what I don’t expect: another impeccable shooting performance from Hart and Clarkson. I also don’t expect KAT to Chet the bed again. He’s too good a player to disappear two games in a row, right? I also don’t expect Fox to go 4-14 again, no matter how bad his ankle is. I could see the Spurs continuing to get Wemby closer to the rim. So far, across the three games, his average shot distance has gone from 17 feet to 13 to 10.6. I don’t know that it’ll get lower than that, but I like SA’s chances as long as it doesn’t start going up again. I expect more great defense from both teams, and I expect a tied series heading back to Texas. 

What do you expect from G4, and who do you think will have the biggest bounce back game?

R.R.

Chet the bed. That’s so deliciously mean, I have to add that to my repertoire.

I shaved my head once, either just before or at age 21. I had applied midnight black hair dye and, while waiting for it to set, I drank too much Goldschläger (any Goldschläger is too much Goldschläger). After a while, I checked and saw that my hair had turned Smurf blue. Hammered, impatient, and disappointed, I decided to shave it all off. The next day I shambled into work, hungover and looking like I was wearing a blue skullcap. The dye had stained my scalp. My coworkers assumed I’d been in some accident. How come nobody told me that shaving one’s head is the secret to improving basketball skills? If I’d known, I would’ve gone straight to the Y to school some fools . . . with my bald, blue head . . . covered in nicks from the dull razor I had used. . . .

The Knicks don’t do anything quite as interesting when the team needs a jolt. Brunson, the team captain, calls a meeting. They air it out. They play better afterward. Since the entire Knicks organization keeps secrets tighter than the Genovese crime family, details of team meetings are never leaked. If any Knick ever shows up on the injury report with broken thumbs, rest assured he’s a rat.

You and I seem to appreciate similar qualities in hoopers. I have equal amounts of affection for Anunoby and Hart. On any given day, I’ll call either one my current favorite Knick. When Josh arrived in New York in a swap with Portland for Cam Reddish, I was unfamiliar with his game but a friend from Seattle said, “You are going to love him.” ‘Tis true. These days, I consider him a modern-day Dennis Rodman with better offensive skills. Although I’ve mentioned this in posts, no one has congratulated me for this genius comp. You watched the Worm play, I assume. Is the comparison apt?

That’s an interesting stat about Wemby inching closer and closer to the rim. I expect Mike Brown to scheme a response to that. As for who will have a bounce-back game, can I answer “the whole team”? Shamet will sink three to four threes, Bridges will get his shot count up, and KAT will log a 20-10 double-double. With their cold shooting spell snapped, I predict the Knicks to take a 3-1 lead back to Texas.

By the way, congratulations to us for not mentioning the officiating. That grenade would blow up the comments section. Oh, but look at the time! I’ve overstayed my welcome already. Good luck to you tonight (but Knicks Forever, of course).

J.R.

Congratulations, Russell, you have activated: Fraternizing with the Enemy’s, lightning round! Ready, begin!

I see your nicked-and-dyed scalp story and raise you a Wemby in the park sketching a statue on the day of the game story. 

If broken thumbs means a rat, what does a broken hand mean? 

The “Rodman, but with offense” comp is pretty apt, but I gotta go back to Alex Caruso. Both guys embody modern basketball through the lens of Wayne Gretzky, the man who skated to where the puck was going to be. Josh teleports across the court to materialize with the ball in his hands. 

No, you may not answer, “the whole team” but thanks for playing! See you on the road back to San Antonio!

Here is my latest conversation with J.R. Wilco of Pounding the Rock. On Monday night, the Knicks shooting went cold and the Spurs handed them their first loss in 13 games. Now, with New York clinging to a 2-1 lead in the NBA Finals, they must defend home court and prevent a series tie before heading backing to San Antonio. Can they do it? Read on to find out what these dashing, highly-paid basketball experts think.

Here are links if you missed part 1, part 2, and part 3.

J.R. 

So, the Spurs showed a few things last night and we now know that they can:

1. Beat NY
2. Win in MSG
3. Stay composed in an intense clutch game in the Finals. 

All of those are important, but I’d say the third is the biggest deal. First, it unlocks the other two. Second, because they’ve been shaky down the stretch in games going back to before Wemby joined the team. 

For years, the knock on San Antonio was that despite their talent, and even though they could stay with teams through three quarters, they couldn’t win games. (I call that a talent gap, but some people call it not knowing how to win — potato potahto). Then the gripe became that they could build a lead, but couldn’t hold onto it. Then they could hold onto leads but couldn’t win close games. Then they could win close regular season games but not close playoff games. Close playoff games but not close Finals games…

You can see where this is going; it’s not like it’s a particularly rare development path. What’s unusual about it is how quickly they’ve moved through these stages to the point that now it’s reasonable to wonder whether they could be the first team to come back and win The Finals after trailing 0-2. I know I brought up pressure in our last conversation but it seems even more important after Game 3, because the series is for sure going back to San Antonio now, and none of the Knickerbockers are going to feel comfortable about the possibility of coming back home for Game 6 down 3-2. Which means they have to go up 3-1. Which brings us to mental toughness. 

I’ll be honest, there were several times last night that I felt like the Knicks were about to put the game and the series away. After the flagrant review of Castle’s ugly looking foul on Brunson, I thought you guys had it. After the challenge that turned Victor’s three into zero points, I thought you guys had it. After Jaylen’s layup cut it to, (whatever it was) I thought you would take it home. But Wemby and the boys kept believing and kept making plays and now we are where we are. And my question is, at what point did you realize Game Three was slipping away?

R.R.

One summer, I took my kids out in a four-pedal paddle boat. We struggled to fit everyone in—my oldest was already over six feet tall, my stepson and I each weighed about 200 lbs., and my third son was scared for his life. Sam had good reason to be worried. We didn’t get more than 10 feet from the dock when the boat started to noticeably move in a vertical direction. Down. We all foot-pedaled furiously back toward the dock, but slowly, ever so slowly, the S.S. Guppy approached the waterline. Despite our frantic attempts to save ourselves, we watched the disaster unfold in slow motion as we all sank into the drink.

That was how it felt to watch the Knicks shoot 7-of-27 in the fourth quarter of Game Three.

Expecting the Knicks to win 15 straight playoff games was unrealistic. But they had not lost in 46 days, so a little irrationality was permissible.

We always assume that the bright lights and stars at MSG will rattle the opponent. Sometimes it swings the other way. In Game Three, the young Spurs were cold-blooded from the start, while the home team stumbled in the spotlight. Anyone watching on Monday with virgin eyes could not have identified which team was a squad of steady vets, trained under the cruel tutelage of Master Thibs, and which was a group of youngsters who jumped the development line.

One thing we might assume about confident vets is that they will dictate the pace of a game from tip-off. Not so with these Knickerbockers. All season long, they started games flat and played from behind after the first quarter. It was maddening. That changed through the first three rounds of the playoffs, but lately they have returned to their woeful ways. From my recap:

This was the first time they looked like the “old Knicks” since the first round. The lead guys started slow, the reserves provided a second-quarter lift while Towns and Brunson were split up, the play went stale again after halftime, and they hoped for Captain Clutch magic in the fourth. It was as if, after being away from the Garden for 19 days, they’d forgotten what a juggernaut they had become and, returning to their home court, reverted to their bad habits.

I say it often: first-quarter mistakes are just as impactful on the outcome as those in the fourth. New York started the game with two unforced errors and fell behind by seven points, putting themselves on the back foot for the rest of the game. With both teams so evenly matched and deserving of a championship, every brainfart is another nail in the coffin.

On that note, will the Knicks ever win a first quarter? They lost the first in Game One, 27-19, then 34-25 in Game Two, and 33-22 in Game Three. Playing from behind, they won the second quarter in all three contests. Great. But why must they put themselves at a disadvantage every single time? Every first quarter, they turn me into a sputtering, seething Lewis Black.

We must give them credit—the Spurs played their best game of the series. Castle was cooking (and boy, I dig that kid). Their distribution was excellent, their defense was hard-knuckled, and they were wise to keep Wemby away from KAT for long stretches. Both of these things can be true: San Antonio did an admirable job of keeping KAT out of the offense, and the Knicks did a lousy job of incorporating KAT into the offense. Brunson shot 15 more times than Towns. They could have at least split the difference!

Would you believe that Towns finished +8 and Bridges +11? I don’t, but it is true. It’s difficult to fathom because Bridges could not buy a bucket, and Shamet was worse. He crashed back to earth with 1-of-8 shooting and a -22 plus-minus. Shamet’s marksmanship has been a big part of New York’s postseason success. In his return to the Garden, ShamWow went ice cold. If he had made just one or two more threes, New York would be lining up the brooms.

If Mikal plays like that, Mike Brown knows better—he’s gotta sub in Shamet or Clarkson (OK, not Shamet that night). When Bridges is down, it seems like he doesn’t want to be on the court, which is weird for the guy with the longest active streak of consecutive games played. His foul on Wemby, when he had linked into his limbs like they were playing Twister, is the kind of stuff Bridges does when his confidence is shaken. If things are going well, Mikal is great. He had been in ten straight games. After a few bad turns, though, he tends to ruminate, and it affects his performance. Brown has benched him in fourth quarters before. Maybe he should have last night.

Towns can get lost in his head, too. His anxiety reveals itself differently: he gets giddy and does a lot of Gorsh, can you just believe this?-type pantomiming. When that happens, it doesn’t affect his shooting per se, but it does result in forehead-slapping fouls. Which kills momentum and leads to foul trouble . . . which sends him to the bench . . . which reduces New York’s offensive options. . . . Sigh.

Josh Hart is different. He will randomly lose confidence in his shot and then play hot potato for a few games before snapping out of it. But that never affects his overall play, he’s the same maniac throughout. Brunson is mostly a killer, but if he’s getting smacked around without calls, his anger either leads to a turnover or a dagger three to win the game.

Occasionally, in late-game, high-stakes situations, OG Anunoby gets the yips at the charity stripe. It’s one of the few flaws in my favorite Knick; otherwise, he is one of the most unflappable hoopers to ever play. While his missed free throw late in the fourth was costly, his corner three redeemed him and nearly saved the game. When it came time for that last shot, we would rather that OG had taken it (“NOT BRIDGES, NO!!” I yelled), but even if it went in, a Manhattan Miracle was still needed. They were losing by four with five seconds left. (Note that if OG had made that free throw, a longball would have tied it. . . .)

Nevertheless, despite so much going wrong, I also thought the Knicks were right about to bust open the game many times. There is a lot of complaining in NY about the officiating (some warranted), but ultimately, the Knicks lost because they missed too many shots. We doubt they will misfire so badly in Game Four. From your side of the aisle, did this feel like a Spurs victory or a Knicks collapse? And what do you expect on Wednesday night?

J.R. 

It certainly didn’t feel like New York collapsed. Every team goes through dry spells, and after winning a few dozen games in a row (I honestly lost count), eventually you might have a poorly timed dry spell and drop a contest once a millennia or so. I’m just saying it’s a thing that happens, though it’s understandable if you’ve forgotten what it’s like in the interminable time since Knicks fans have had to suffer the indignity of taking an L.

As far as starting slow goes, man, the Spurs have been there. It was such a thing that it led to the team getting upset after a loss and shaving their heads. (I sure hope I’m remembering the timing of this right. Someone correct me if I’m wrong.) To be precise, Keldon Johnson, and Wembanyama shaved their heads. There were a few other guys who trimmed their hair and some others who were threatened. Carter Bryant was told that if he blew three more dunks before the season ended that he’d have to shave his head. Instead of the ambitious dunks that he’d been missing repeatedly during games, he switched to easy two-handed shove-it-in-the-basket for a few weeks out of fear KJ wasn’t joking. 

Anyway, the first game after going bald, Wemby and the team started sprinting out of the gate and they have won first quarters, or at least the beginning of the game, like clockwork ever since. It sure is fascinating when a team flips a switch like that. Makes you wonder about how it’s done, when sometimes it takes players years to get out of some ruts. 

You said you love Castle, so I’ll admit that I’m crazy about OG. He’s the guy I’ve wanted on the Spurs ever since his name was tossed around while SA came to terms with Toronto on the Leonard/DeRozan deal. Can’t tell you how jealous I was when NY nabbed him. That said, my heart belongs to Josh. Hart. I don’t know what it is about guys like him and Alex Caruso, but I can’t ignore it. Hart seems to always be in the right place at the right time making the right play precisely the way necessary to end an opponent’s run or preserve his team’s flow. Plus, he plays with so much passion and savvy and he reads exactly where weird rebounds are headed so frequently it’s infuriating. 

Anyway, thanks for the player personality breakdown, it’s helpful to understand the opposition better when I haven’t been watching them much this season and only know them by the way they play against San Antonio. I’d have never thought that about Bridges, who’s always seemed imperturbable to me. 

As for what I expect in Game 4, I’ll begin with what I don’t expect: another impeccable shooting performance from Hart and Clarkson. I also don’t expect KAT to Chet the bed again. He’s too good a player to disappear two games in a row, right? I also don’t expect Fox to go 4-14 again, no matter how bad his ankle is. I could see the Spurs continuing to get Wemby closer to the rim. So far, across the three games, his average shot distance has gone from 17 feet to 13 to 10.6. I don’t know that it’ll get lower than that, but I like SA’s chances as long as it doesn’t start going up again. I expect more great defense from both teams, and I expect a tied series heading back to Texas. 

What do you expect from G4, and who do you think will have the biggest bounce back game?

R.R.

Chet the bed. That’s so deliciously mean, I must add that to my repertoire.

I shaved my head once, either just before or at age 21. I had applied midnight black hair dye and, while waiting for it to set, I drank too much Goldschläger (any Goldschläger is too much Goldschläger). After a while, I checked and saw that my hair had turned Smurf blue. Hammered, impatient, and disappointed, I decided to shave it all off. The next day I shambled into work, hungover and looking like I was wearing a blue skullcap. The dye had stained my scalp. My coworkers assumed I’d been in some accident. How come nobody told me that shaving one’s head is the secret to improving basketball skills? If I’d known, I would’ve gone straight to the Y to school some fools . . . with my bald, blue head . . . covered in nicks from a dull razor. . . .

The Knicks don’t do anything quite as interesting when the team needs a jolt. Brunson, the team captain, convenes a meeting. They air it out. They play better afterward. Since the entire Knicks organization keeps secrets tighter than the Genovese crime family, details of team meetings are never leaked. If any Knick ever shows up on the injury report with broken thumbs, rest assured he’s a rat.

You and I seem to appreciate similar qualities in hoopers. I have equal amounts of affection for Anunoby and Hart. On any given day, I’ll call either one my current favorite Knick. When Josh arrived in New York in a swap with Portland for Cam Reddish, I was unfamiliar with his game but a friend from Seattle said, “You are going to love him.” ‘Tis true. These days, I consider him a modern-day Dennis Rodman with better offensive skills. Although I’ve mentioned this in posts, no one has congratulated me for this genius comp. You watched the Worm play, I assume. Is the comparison apt?

That’s an interesting stat about Wemby inching closer and closer to the rim. I expect Mike Brown to scheme a response to that. As for who will have a bounce-back game, can I answer “the whole team”? Shamet will sink three to four threes, Bridges will get his shot count up, and KAT will log a 20-10 double-double. With their cold shooting spell snapped, I predict the Knicks to take a 3-1 lead back to Texas.

By the way, congratulations to us for not discussing the officiating. That grenade would blow up the comments section. Oh, but look at the time! I’ve overstayed my welcome already. Good luck to you tonight (but Knicks Forever, of course).

J.R.

Congratulations, Russell, you have activated: Fraternizing with the Enemy’s, lightning round! Ready, begin!

I see your nicked-and-dyed scalp story and raise you a Wemby in the park sketching a statue on the day of the game story. 

If broken thumbs means a rat, what does a broken hand mean? 

The “Rodman, but with offense” comp is pretty apt, but I gotta go back to Alex Caruso. Both guys embody modern basketball through the lens of Wayne Gretzky, the man who skated to where the puck was going to be. Josh teleports across the court to materialize with the ball in his hands. 

No, you may not answer, “the whole team” but thanks for playing! See you on the road back to San Antonio!