On Josh Hart - The Problem? Not So!

(TLDR – Josh Hart is an awesome player, the Knicks need to be wiser in how they use him, and the Josh Hart discourse should be more a coaching staff deployment question than a Josh Hart flaw question.)

I should begin this by saying that Josh Hart is one of the best role players in the league. He’s one of the premier glue/hustle guys in this league. He’s good for 10-15 points, 8-12 rebounds, 5+ assists, and 2 stocks a night. He’s a transition demon. He’s also been a playoff riser for the most part. And so on. These are non-negotiable. For this basic reason, I adore Josh Hart, and even more so considering I’ve always wanted a player like that, especially when the Knicks were in the mud. Josh Hart leads the Knicks in making me flex at my TV during games.

And yet I – and I would say most sensible Knicks fans who take the middle path – find ourselves trapped between a Scylla of Knicks fans who act as if Josh Hart is the worst player in the league slandering him non-stop, and a Charybdis of Knicks fans who act like any criticism of Hart is as though to piss on Willis Reed’s grave. Absolutely detestable pair of fools. Any Hart discourse gets trapped in this quagmire; defend Hart and you somehow have outrageously low IQ, criticise Hart and you’re not a real fan.

Josh Hart is a key player for the Knicks, but not when paired with KAT (and Brunson) in the same lineup; against the very best teams and defenses, they will scheme against that and treat him as the non-(volume)shooter he is; this hurts both Hart and the Knicks. That is my thesis statement. I don’t have any statistics, ratings, data, film, analysis etc., to back this up as I type on my phone on the train, what I cannot explain with evidence I feel and so that is what I will share.

Against the very best defences – we’ve seen San Antonio and OKC recently – the Knicks are limited offensively if Josh Hart isn’t hitting threes, and even then, his hesitation to keep shooting even when he’s hitting means wastes possessions. He will, for example, drive late in the clock into traffic and nothing good will come of it; or he will pass out late in the clock and unless there is Brunson late-clock heroics, another wasted possession. On the worst nights it becomes 4-on-5 on offense for some possessions and Hart is a player who shows visibly his lack of confidence (in the same way he visibly shows when he's kicking your ass - he's the most expressive Knick).

One need not explain why wasted possessions are detrimental against the elite teams, we just had a 1 possession loss to the best team in the league. Hart does deserve acknowledgment for his rebounding in the second half; but how poor were the Knicks to open the first and third against OKC? This is precisely why. Teams are guarding Hart with a big, and when those bigs are the very elite defensive fives (Wembanyama, Chet, Hartenstein etc.) chaos ensues. This is not a new talking point, we’ve heard about it for over a year now, and to mention it is to observe what the eyes can see, not a vendetta against Hart that necessitates a tribunal on one’s fanhood. The results are depressing. Brunson, KAT etc. will always have an extra man/pair of eyes on them, and our offense looks cluttered despite having top 1% offensive talent on the floor. That is an unacceptable outcome for those moments. “Great win but man we have to start games better!”(I paraphrase) was a Thibs/Brunson favourite last Playoffs but no one addressed the elephant in the room on why the Knicks started those games poorly. Beyond whatever can be said about our defense in those games, the offense was - to repeat a word I have just used - cluttered. Though it must not be ignored, for people who think this is pure anti-Hart, that Hart was essential for many of those comeback wins. (The issue is how and when Hart is used, not Hart himself!!!).

Landry Shamet isn’t JDub (maybe he is) but note how the two runs against SAS and OKC came with him in the game for Hart, it’s a basic and easy conclusion. How on earth are teams letting Shamet attack their paint? It's rather simple. You have lineups where there is more spacing, more open looks, wider driving lanes, more passing space – what becomes open, in the words of LeBron James, is ‘Swing Swing Motherf*ck*r’.

The Knicks did not do a good job of ‘feeding KAT’ as it were; but on rewatch, many of these were coming in situations where yes, KAT had a small on him, but complicated by the defensive coverage the team (and not just KAT) face. What looks like an easy post feed may become a dangerous one if Chet, Hartenstein etc. are hanging around, waiting to help (and the other three OKC players are about to execute perfect kick-out deny position). In those situations Brunson, Mikal/OG, Alvarado, Shamet etc. can anticipate what we perhaps can’t (and even when that danger isn’t there, it becomes ingrained in one’s immediate memory). What Brunson-KAT-OG-Mikal need is a 5th player who gives them a true 5-out look – double big with Mitch is a legitimate matchup specific exception – and we all know, even if some of us deny it, its Deuce. No more ‘Deuce is too small next to Brunson’. It’s 2026. Is Cason Wallace 6 foot 9?

To repeat, none of this means Hart is anything short of one of the league’s elite role players. I don’t really care what reasons people give to the contrary, that is what he is. This is to say that the argument that Hart shouldn't start is not to argue that Hart should not play. That is foolish. What we need to do is find a window where we can maximise Hart’s minutes in moments where Brunson and KAT are playing in separate lineups; and here too Hart can take advantage of 2nd units which will be weaker in general, but defensively too. Such teams can't do the usual *guard Hart with a big* if the best offensive rebounder in the league is on the floor (and the 2 non-shooters worry with Hart-Mitch is registered, but I think quickly sidelined because of how much attention Mitch commands).

An easy solution to these problems, in my view, is to have Hart sub into the game from the bench when we sub out KAT and a wing mid-1Q, have him run with Brunson’s unit until the end of the 1Q, rest during the break, and run with KAT’s unit until the mid-2Q (if he’s cooking, he can close). The same goes for the second half. I think this staff has shown its lineup creativity enough through year 1 but this is the big litmus test in my humble opinion. It took Thibs until we were down in a Playoff series to make the lineup adjustment and my hope is Mike Brown will smell the coffee at the latest by Round 1, Game 1 (and hopefully sooner).

(I appreciate this is long, and so the TLDR at the top. We also know live in the age of Ai and so I am obliged to state that this is not ChatGPT slop, but my own thoughts, articulated in my own language!).