Drew: Jeremy. My good friend who I have known for like what, five years now? Crazy how time flies. I have a take for you: Even if the Knicks get the opportunity to draft either LaMelo Ball or Killian Hayes, I firmly believe that Fred VanVleet should be priority number one, barring the Pelicans deciding to not bring back Brandon Ingram. I have scatter plots, bar charts, etc. to highlight why I think VanVleet is a no-brainer, but I want to hear your thoughts on my takes before I overload this article with data visuals.

Jeremy: Half a decade, wow. And to think I knew you before you became the artist currently known as Doug. Reunited and it feels so good!

I’m a firm believer that the Knicks should continue to treat their cap space as an asset, like every team should. Just say the words “financial flexibility” and I melt. Locking into a long-term relationship when you really just want to play the field is typically an unwise decision.

Having said all that, I cannot in good conscience be against signing VanVleet. If you have the opportunity to add a smart ball handler who can play on- and off-ball, drive to the hoop, space the floor, serve as POA and perimeter defender with active hands (who led the NBA in deflections per game!) when you project to have over $40 million in cap space, you should absolutely do it. Everything has its price, but if VanVleet is an asset, then use your cap space to go get that asset.

Now please, shower me with your visuals. 

Drew: Alright, visuals time! You mentioned two very key components to VanVleet’s game: off-ball play and driving to the rim. Let’s highlight his off-ball game with a bar graph on his catch-and-shoot numbers. Those of you who read our free agent profile on Danilo Gallinari might recognize this graph:

Over the past two seasons combined, Fred VanVleet is sixth in catch-and-shoot effective field goal percentage. Look at the company he keeps: Stephen Curry, JJ Redick, and Buddy Hield! Now, shooting well in this potentially stationary play-type doesn’t make you a good off-ball player. However, in the 2018–19 and 2019–20 seasons, VanFleet was in the 94th percentile and the 90th percentile, respectively, in off-screen points per possession, per NBA Stats. Scoring off screens also encompasses catch-and-shoot, meaning we can reasonably conclude that VanVleet is elite at running off screens, setting his feet, and drilling shots. I honestly can’t remember the last time the Knicks had a player who can do this. Maybe I’m overlooking someone obvious like Steve Novak but I don’t remember him flying off screens on the regular. I guess Courtney Lee? Who knows.

In any event, let’s take a look at the driving data:

VanVleet has some interesting polar opposites. The table above is a representative sample of the top 50 players with the most total drives over the past two seasons. Of this sample, VanVleet is dead last in field goal percentage on drives (38.4) and first in pass percentage on drives (57.6). This is such a fascinating dichotomy. In terms of scoring, he is wildly inefficient on high volume, yet in terms of passing, he’s either kicking it out or dumping it well over 50% of the time. 

Let’s dig into those drive numbers a bit more. VanVleet has the sixth-best turnover percentage (11.1) and the 20th-best assist-to-turnover percentage differential (+11.0 and not on the table, sorry) of this 50-player sample. What these numbers tell me is that, despite being a high-volume, inefficient scorer on drives, VanVleet is collapsing the defense and kicking out on a theoretically moving defense without turning the ball over. With a legitimate lob threat in Mitchell Robsinson and a smart slasher in RJ Barrett, VanVleet’s play style makes far too much sense on this Knicks team.

Jeremy: Simply riveting.

Regarding his inefficiency with high-volume scoring, he doesn’t have to serve as a first option, even though he would still play on-ball frequently. The argument that VanVleet can’t be as effective as he’s been in a similar or larger role has always perplexed me, especially when you consider that he had a usage rate of 24.7% this past season, which ranked in the 79th percentile. Put secondary ball-handlers around him and let him cook in a catch-and-shoot role when he’s not driving and kicking or connecting with Robinson. 

VanVleet boasts a 3-point attempt rate of 48.5 over his last three years, which is fantastic considering he shot 39.3% from deep during that span. Imagine, for a brief and wondrous moment, VanVleet bringing the ball up and passing it off to RJ Barrett. Frank Ntilikina is standing in the strong side corner and a wing with a respectable shot is positioned on the weak side, while Robinson sets a screen at the top of the key, giving Barrett the opportunity to drive to the basket. The penetration pressures the defense to collapse, leaving Ntilikina, a 52% shooter last year from the corner, open. Yet before the defense knows it, Ntilikina swings it to a wide open VanVleet, who splashes it from the wing.

Drew, you appreciate Moreyball. Check out VanVleet’s shot chart below.

Just bask in the warm glow of all those 3-point attempts and shots in the paint!

Drew: I do love me a good Moreyball shot chart, especially one that has a small but distinct glow at the elbow. Now, I certainly don’t want VanVleet to focus on elbow jumpers. Over the past three seasons, he has taken 197 pull-up two-pointers and converted only 31.5 percent of them. That percentage leads to a little over 0.60 points per shot. With that said, in this age of Moreyball, we tend to forget that many defenses want teams to take those midrange shots when they can’t force low percentage or low volume 3-point shooters into taking a three. Knowing that VanVleet is at least somewhat willing to take that elbow jumper can help alleviate some offensive pressure in late shot clock situations. I know he’ll never be a midrange maestro like Chris Paul, but VanVleet needs to bump up that percentage before I feel totally confident in my assessment in this paragraph.

The only potential downside I see when it comes to VanVleet is the fact that he’s a smaller guard. I come from the Phil Jackson school of thought that the bigger the guard, the better; however, there are always exceptions. VanVleet is not going to be the focal point of the Knicks offense… presumably. This is why I’m not rushing to trade the farm for Donovan Mitchell (Drew’s note: this take was served piping hot before Spida dropped two 50-plus point games on the Nuggets). But that’s an entirely different article and discussion. Because the Knicks will have size on the perimeter, VanVleet being on the smaller side is totally fine. It’s not like his size affects his impact on the court.

This is a collection of all players with both a positive offensive and defensive RAPM over a three-year sample. Just look at where he is on the plot and the company he keeps. Staying in the middle suggests that he is a legitimate two-way player. That’s the type of impact the Knicks have been missing for so long when it comes to guard play. 

It’s crazy to me just how impressive the numbers are for VanVleet. We did not even get into looking at his film and I feel like the case for him is still very strong. To be fair, the film does match the numbers. He struggles finishing at the rim because of his size, but he can easily get to the rim and find the open teammate, for example. Just watch the playoffs right now or rewatch last season’s playoffs and tell me this guy isn’t legit. I dare you! 

The only other concern I can think of is that the Raptors are such a well-run, elite team that VanVleet will look bad no longer playing next to Kyle Lowry, Pascal Siakam, and the rest of that roster. It’s a fair issue to bring up. We recently saw the Knicks sign players like Tim Hardaway Jr. and Julius Randle to deals and put them in the wrong role, which in turn skewed fans’ perceptions of them as fine contributors. I guess another way to frame this would be, is Fred VanVleet a ceiling raiser or a floor raiser? 

Jeremy: VanVleet is probably a floor raiser, and I think that’s fine, depending on how deep the front office wants this rebuild to go. The reason I’m comfortable with that is because you’re still turning your cap space into an asset. You’re helping your core improve and plenty of teams could use a player like VanVleet, even at $20 million a year. You don’t sign him to trade him, but he has the skills to fit into any system. 

Your point about Hardaway Jr. and Randle is a valid one. It feels weird to say this, but is VanVleet too talented for this Knicks team? Is it too premature to lock into a lead ball handler who could be miscast when the average age of your core is, like, 21? If next year is more about development anyway, couldn’t you get more output out of signing players to one-year deals or acquiring expiring salaries? And if you’re paying VanVleet, how are you filling out the rest of your roster?

I mentioned earlier that maintaining cap space is important, and I do stand by that. I can see why the Knicks would stay away from VanVleet, with the uncertainty of the salary cap being the primary reason. But the Knicks also strike me as a team that wants to use its cap space to star fuck, which is fine, so long as you build a cohesive team if you don’t attract stars. 

I know it sounds like I’m talking myself out of VanVleet. The numbers and graphics should speak for themselves. If you have the opportunity to address a position that has lacked consistency for almost a decade (and almost a decade prior to that) you should take it. Otherwise, you’re kicking the can down the road. VanVleet isn’t the sexiest free agent (that beard tho… 😍) but he checks the most pressing boxes. You can afford to overpay for two-way play if you think it will elevate the rest of the team. Just imagine how smothering a small-ball defense of VanVleet, Ntilikina, Devin Vassell, Barrett, and Robinson would be without compromising your floor spacing. And if any of the four homegrown players can improve their shooting…?

Want to push across the open waters towards contention? You won’t need an army, you’ll need a fleet. To be more precise, you’ll need a Vleet, or as they say in Spanish, van. So let’s go, Fred. Let’s VanVleet.