The apocalypse has arrived in the Eastern Conference.
Currently, the dominant boston celtics They began a forcible repression against competitors and pretenders alike. of new york knicksperhaps the only team in the East with the talent to do something about this, was embarrassed by Boston on opening night. Is there any hope?
The Knicks, who acquired both Mikal Bridges and Karl-Anthony Towns in an aggressive offseason, were sowing the seeds of a revolt against the Celtics. Their rallying cry could be heard: “Size!” shooting! Defense can be switched! ” Because they tried to drag the rest of the conference into a future that the Celtics had already found. However, it doesn't seem to move very well.
These parts take time to harden. Last season, the Knicks were a fairly talented team enhanced by chemistry and consistency. Towns & Bridge will need to address this program before it can revolutionize its popsicle stands.
But it will be a difficult road. Because on Tuesday night, the Celtics showed them that they are not some kind of political dictator, but just a math teacher, and gave the Knicks the following open-ended question as homework:
“How do you beat a team that makes 29 of 61 threes in a game?”
Answer: Not really. That's not possible. The Knicks had no chance. They shot an impressive 55 percent from the field, but it was still worse than reflected in the box score. The Celtics spent the final six minutes of the game missing 13 consecutive threes, trying to break the single-game record. The Nickses were Enlightenment philosophers who explained gravity in terms of metaphysics and friendship. The Celtics were Isaac Newton, throwing away the challenge of calculus and plain facts.
If this is a zombie apocalypse, it's not God-sent. It was sent after Joe Mazzula invented a new mathematics called “toglosophography” and discovered four new elements to synthesize the virus. But it's still science, not magic. How can the Knicks counter that?
The answer isn't “time,” but it certainly helps. But there's a difference between taking time for a team to come together and actually having the correct schematic answer. can? ideal Will this version of this team handle these Celtics? and can it be dealt with ideal What if Kristaps Porzingis returns to the Celtics?
First and foremost, they're going to have to shoot a lot of threes and give themselves a chance. The 30 shots they shot on Tuesday won't do that against the Celtics or against any opponent. One of the through lines between teams that performed well last season was the percentage of points generated from beyond the arc. The Celtics are the best at that, but there's no reason the Knicks can't be in the top 10 or even the top 5. Jalen Brunson and Karl-Anthony Towns are great shooters, and Josh Hart and OG Anunoby have made their careers as corner threes. Mikal Bridges' shot form isn't as bad as it looks.
Another thing to watch in the scoring department is free throws. Brunson banked from the charity stripe like Towns did during his career, but he hit just four combined free throws Tuesday. It's no surprise that NBA referees will put up with swipe-throughs like James Harden, and the Celtics are one of the few teams with the stamina to field an elite creator like Brunson. It is. and immaculate Towns. Thankfully, officiating is (ideally) a double-edged sword, and Jayson Tatum isn't that effective unless he can get to the line about eight times a game. Unless you're Harden-Embiid 76ersFree throws don't make the difference between winning and losing for the Knicks.
How about defense? Can the Knicks actually stop Boston from scoring in an apocalyptic amount? Probably not, but they can definitely try harder than most teams. The Knicks are an outrageously rowdy group, made up almost entirely of guys who would jump into a burning building to get a loose ball. They also have tremendous length with Anunoby and Bridges, so they are uniquely equipped to force Boston's shooters off the line. Making a well-timed cut and executing a perfect pass is much more difficult than a catch-and-shoot three, so keeping shooters locked down when you don't have the ball is worth giving up more space in the middle. there is. The Knicks will have to play recklessly, which will in turn force Boston into a different type of game.
It's not like the Celtics can only shoot threes. They erased Towns with a switch and took advantage of his lack of elite foot speed when defending pick-and-rolls. They won't be able to hide him, but the Knicks will have to accept it
New York could also let them take shots and “hope they miss,” which has worked for teams in the past, but statistically it's unlikely to work out over time. The Mavericks triple-teamed Tatum in the Finals, forcing players like Derrick White and Sam Hauser to take bold shots, and they did just that. The Knicks will have to trust the Celtics' star wing defenders and not give the ball to shooters looking for opportunities.
This may seem like a hopeless situation, but it is not. Both teams are giving it their all, and Boston is still much better healthy than New York, so the Celtics will always have the advantage. But the Knicks have a schematic route to victory that other teams don't have access to. That means shooting more threes, getting to the line, and denying shooters airspace on the catch. They have the physical profile to succeed, even if last night looked like it was going to end and they couldn't stop it.
Listen, I understand that this plan, while sound, is ridiculously flimsy. And like any other group of upstart revolutionaries, even if they open up opportunities, they remain underdogs. When a historical freight train nearly runs them over, it takes a lot of luck for them to succeed. But they have a roadmap to success that 13 other teams would risk their lives for. Will that happen? Probably not. Can you do it? absolutely.
