Macri’s Missives will be a weekly column published on The Strickland every Thursday, where Jonathan Macri has a candid email exchange with a guest. Think of it almost like a written podcast. For the first installment: The Strickland’s own Shwinnypooh. Enjoy!

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 12:55 PM Jonathan Macri wrote:

Hey [expletive deleted]!

First of all, congrats on the new website. It wouldn't have happened without your unique brand of pissing people off and giving once-in-a-blue-moon correct basketball takes. Your parents must be very proud.

So this is the first of these weekly email columns I want to try out, and I couldn't think of a better person to kick things off with than you, mostly because we argue a ton, but I think at our respective cores, we have a lot more in common when it comes to how we think about the NBA than we let on.

Agree? Disagree? Feel free to call me names in your reply... it'll make me feel right at home.

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 2:16 PM Shwinnypooh wrote:

Hey, fuckface!

First off, I gotta say that I really do respect how you managed to pass the buck to me to get this conversation going. I respect the hustle, Jon. My brand has never been stronger, the new website is great, I've never had an incorrect basketball take and my parents are almost definitely not proud.

As far as how much we have in common, I'd say we muse on a lot of the same things, but often come down on opposite sides. For example, you hate RJ Barrett's guts, and I think he can still be pretty damn good! 

Just kidding, but we do go back-and-forth quite a bit, and it tends to be related to NBA media coverage of the Knicks. Often times it's specifically about how much the optics really do impact this sad sack of an NBA team and its ability to improve. It still feels like a rather big deal that Worldwide Wes actually chose to take an official role with the Knicks instead of just operating as a shadow advisor, that Kenny Payne left a great gig at Kentucky (the opposite of the Knicks in the college basketball universe), that a number of highly-respected NBA head coaching candidates interviewed for the job, etc.

We tend to make a big deal about things when the Knicks miss out on their primary targets. Be it LeBron, Kerr, Durant, and so on — when they don't get the guys they want it becomes about Dolan and the negative optics that are truly constant with this team. I understand the reason for boiling it down to that degree, but sometimes it feels like a convenient boogeyman to blame it on, rather than an honest appraisal of the situation. 

Where I think we most often disagree is I'm of the belief that whatever issues Dolan being Dolan causes for the organization, they're not directly the cause for why the team has struggled to land the biggest fish, whereas you feel it's a central component. Is that fair to say?

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 3:09 PM Jonathan Macri wrote:

Shwin, my entire career, in bloggerdom and otherwise, has come down to passing the buck. Don't you notice that I end most of my newsletters with a series of questions? People think it's me being open minded. Nope! Just passing the old buck. 

But I did it here knowing you would pick it up and run with it, and you did, right in a direction I'm happy with. After all, what more could people possibly want to read about as this new site debuts than James L. Dolan.

I've lost track of how many shitty analogies I've used for Dolan and the Knicks’ problems over the years, but there's always room for one more:

My wife, as you know, is pregnant. As such, I've given in to her every wish of late, and most recently that involves binging Sex & the City together. Is it secretly my favorite show ever? And have I already seen all the episodes a half dozen or so times? That's for me to worry about. Anyway... Dolan and the Knicks are like Carrie and Big. Carrie, if you're unfamiliar, is somewhat high maintenance. She wants things perfect, and when something isn't perfect, even a small thing, it can lead to her self-sabotaging a relationship to the point that it blows up in her face. 

And Big, well... Big is, for lack of a better word, your typical guy, which is to say he's kind of an asshole. An asshole with some spectacular qualities, sure... he's handsome, witty, loaded, has a driver and is a good lay, but he wants what he wants, when he wants it — and if things start to go the way he doesn't want, he's going to become a real prick, really fast.

These two, as you might imagine, aren't the best match. That's not to say they aren't happy together sometimes. When things are going well, and both are giving the other what they want (and not doing something the other doesn't want), things are amazing. Picture of happiness. It just rarely stays this way, because the other shoe is never far from dropping.

Which one is Dolan and which one is the Knicks in this analogy? I haven't the foggiest fucking clue. What I do know is that James Dolan — someone with media sensitivity issues, a generally short temper and no patience for what he perceives to be failures under his watch — owns a team that is covered more closely than any in basketball, in a market where everyone is looking to get a leg up with some original coverage, and where if shit isn't great, you're hearing about it early, often, and with the dial turned to 11.

If he owned, say, the Timberwolves, would things be as bad? Probably not. I know for a fact he has people that work in the Garden who have felt his wrath and still defend him, because they understand his issues and feel the ire comes from a place of genuinely wanting to win. But I also know there is a real fear factor around the league about working for him because of his lack of patience. Say what you want about Fizdale, but the November 10 postgame presser — which I'm told was the ultimatum for Scott and Steve that came with not firing Fiz on the spot — was a terrible look around the NBA. Competent people are afraid to come work for you when they fear that such a thing could happen to them, and competent people already working for you are afraid to go out on a limb and make bold decisions because they're afraid of what might happen if those decisions go poorly.

But then again, if you hire people who are great at their jobs, maybe Big and Carrie can just coexist blissfully.

We just haven't seen it all that much.

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 4:28 PM Shwinnypooh wrote:

Yeah, look, I'm not ever going to argue working with Dolan is easy, or that he's a “good owner” (although what that actually means, I'm not quite sure). Your analogy, as somebody who has never watched a single second of that show, makes sense. And I'm sure there are people around the league — good, qualified people — who see the various things Dolan does and want no piece of “The Mecca.”

It makes life harder for the Knicks, and thus for us as fans, because it reduces the odds of the Knicks getting their shit together and ever making me happy. However, for me — and I don't know any-fucking-body I could call a source, so this is just my reading of tea leaves — I'm less convinced that list of people who would absolutely not want to call MSG home so long as Dolan's the owner is far smaller and less prestigious than is often made out to be.

What I am convinced of is Dolan has absolutely fucked up picking various head honchos to lead the Knicks' front office. Have I talked myself into all of them? Yeah, for sure. Have I stuck my head in the sand and ignored plenty of troubling evidence of incompetence during their tenures? Guilty as charged. Doesn't really matter, because at the end of it all, it's pretty clear I was wrong to do so!

But what if Dolan picks the right people for once? If that happens, will his impatience and quick temper hold back the team, or, as has happened with the Rangers previously, will he be content to sign checks and let ’em cook? I'd bet on it being the latter, and that's why I'm always optimistic when there's a new front office regime put in place. Speaking of which, the Knicks have installed a new front office under Leon Rose.

Are there reasons for optimism just five months into his tenure? I'm hesitant to call anything he's done a success, but at the very least his approach thus far inspires some confidence. Yes, Steve Mills and Scott Perry's early days together also were received well by the fans as outside executives were brought in, but it certainly seems Rose, on paper, has plucked higher caliber front office executives. More importantly, all the early smoke signals coming out of the Garden seem to indicate he isn't done building out an analytics and development staff, and that the Knicks plan on investing heavily in filling out their coaching staff as well.

If Rose gets these hires right, and the team starts, you know, developing their own talent and growing together in a sustainable way, I don't believe Dolan's allegedly unique stinkiness as an owner and person would stop any high profile player from wanting to join up. Hell, the recent comments from Kemba suggest Dolan's stink isn't even as much of a consideration for free agents as is often suggested! Maybe the Dolan stink ain't even that much of a turn-off to begin with!

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 6:12 PM Jonathan Macri wrote:

AGREE: The list of people who would never want anything to do with Dolan/the Knicks is FAR shorter than it gets made out to be (that's also me just reading tea leaves).

ALSO AGREE: Dolan's worst enemy has been himself as a hirer (and more importantly, continued truster of the wrong people, which is what makes the whole "he flies off the handle!" stuff ironic... yes, he does, but no, it's not at the right folks).

MOST AGREE: If ever there was someone who could play Dolan like a fiddle and know when and how to handle him, it's Leon.

And, if I may: Steve Mills is, I genuinely believe, a good and kind man. But he is a good and kind man who maybe shouldn't have been running a basketball team. Separating out the failures of the Phil and Perry regimes from Mills is sadly impossible, so when we're talking stink, I'm not sure the flies surrounding the franchise for the last several years are purely buzzing around the owner's box.

See! We do agree! I guess my only remaining fear would be what happens if a year goes by — let's say, after Rose does as we all hope, doesn't rush things, and the team wins 28-32 games looking for more competent and coherent than they have for the last few years — and Dolan starts to get antsy? Is it fair to have this fear? I'm honestly not sure of the answer.

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 7:22 PM Shwinnypooh wrote:

Generally speaking, Dolan's impatience seems to come later on in his front offices’ tenures, and quite often it's in year three. I'm not too worried about Dolan short circuiting a promising rebuild after year one. What I do worry about is whether he or Rose would have the gumption and foresight to stick with a rebuild trending in the right way after year two, or whether that ever-insatiable desire to win now, even if it's the dumbest move to make, would kick in then.

So, I guess I’m scared too, but on a very different timeline!

Where I come down on it, though, is that every top executive the Knicks would employ will need to take a big risk at some point. That's just part of the job. Scared money don't make no money. 

What hasn't happened is any of the risks the Knicks have made paying off. Even more problematic has been the all-in, starry nature of the risks and a lack of contingency planning. The Knicks haven't ever really built a foundation from which a move for the summit makes any sense. You can't climb Everest in one fucking day.

I'm not a complete idiot. I know Jim Dolan didn't hire a power agent like Leon Rose, and a master of whispers like William Wesley, to just do a five-year small market rebuild. The man is in the entertainment business, and he wants stars to put on that marquee outside the Garden. I'm positive that if I know this, Rose and Wesley know this. It's not exactly a secret, nor even totally misguided. This is a star-driven league. You don't win without ’em. Usually you need a few.

That end goal isn't misguided. It's the reality of how the game works. However, there's a way to do that intelligently, sustainably even, without emptying the cupboard and mortgaging the future in that endeavor. That's what smart management should understand. Even if the endgame is to sign and trade for stars, you're not going to get that done without successfully developing your own players and upping their value on the court, and consequently as assets in trade.

Everybody wants to starfuck. You just have to be smart about how you do it. If Leon gets that, then we might actually have a chance to get those starry names Dolan so desperately wants wearing orange and blue.

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 8:49 AM Jonathan Macri wrote:

I think your timeline is more than fair.

I also think I have to hand it to you: your Everest analogy beats my S&TC one (barely, but still). It's probably the best way to boil down what has ailed them. Go down the list of the last 15 years... the Eddy Curry trade, Walsh dumping Z-Bo and Crawford two weeks into his first season on the job (when their value was lowest and way earlier than he needed to), the Melo trade, signing Joakim Noah, the THJ offer sheet, the KP trade... whatever anyone thinks of of any of these moves, "patient" wouldn't describe a single one.

The way you put the preferred way of moving forward — swing big, but at the right pitch, and not before you've had time to sufficiently wear down the opposing pitcher over a few innings — is spot on. If we can get just two straight years of patience (a lot to ask around here, I know), I have to think we'll be in a position by then to make a big move, if we haven't made one (correctly, and not rushed) already.

Good talk, Shwin. I'm sure things will go exactly as we've laid out here!

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 8:52 AM Shwinnypooh wrote:

Me too! Very excited to talk myself into why there's a reason to be hopeful about the new front office's vision in March 2023!