16 blocks down, 2 blocks over from "30 Rock"

I was reading this preview of one of the squadrons in the National Basketball Association. We get it, the Knicks suck. But man, sucky teams are fantasy gold, Jerry, gold! That's what I love about fantasy hoops - not every team has a LeBron or Kobe, but everyone has a gunner like Al Harrington or numbers guy like Gerald Wallace or all the guys who do stuff for Golden State. You win fantasy leagues by following the crappy teams. Last year I had 8 different Thunder players (I still don't know what to call them - Thunderers? Thunderinos? Thundi?) on my 4 teams last year, and they all had their moments (yes, even Kyle Weaver, not so much Chris Wilcox).

The point is, I get a lot more enjoyment out of the bad teams in fantasy hoops - they'll put up numbers, and if you've got some less than hardcore guys in your league, you'll get the jump on them because they don't know about the next Andris Biedrins or Francisco Garcia because they're watching Cavs-Heat for the third time this year on a Sunday on ABC (consult local listings). So today, I want to look at one of those sucky teams that can give you fantasy joy, the New York Knickerbockers. A few years ago, there was a little sitcom on NBC that was supposed to be horrible, but now is pulling in Emmy after freakin' Emmy, and not just those technical ones that no one cares about. They've got quality up and down the lineup; in my sitcom characters fantasy league, I grabbed Jack Donaghy, came right back with Tracy Jordan, grabbed Judah Friedlander's Frank in the late middle, and grabbed Grizz (but couldn't get Dot Com). Someone reached for Kenneth the Page - solid, a tad overrated. What, you're not in a sitcom fantasy league? You're missing out. With Barney Stinson, I could have my best year since '87 when I had Alex Keaton, Dan Fielding, Blanche Devereaux, Woody Boyd, Jackee, and Agnes DiPesto (yes, we had "Moonlighting" as a comedy). Anyway, back to the Knicks.

With Mike D'Antoni as the Jack Donaghy-like man in charge, the pace will be high. Only the Warriors had more possessions per game than the Knicks. But the Knicks were far enough away from being the highest scoring team in the league, so what does that mean? Rebounds and some more rebounds. If you're looking for boards in a week, keep an eye on teams that play the Knicks twice withing a fantasy week. Right now, there are 3: Charlotte in week 8, Chicago in week 17 (right after All Star break) and Philly in week 21 (which may or may not be in your playoffs depending on how you set it up). [Note: Detroit has a back-to-back with New York, but that is spread over 2 fantasy weeks.] Gerald Wallace might be nice to have in week 8; Tyson Chandler, if healthy, may be available at that time, so he could be a good FA pickup then. Any of the Bulls in their 4/5 spot roster mish-mosh is a solid play for week 17 (except for Jerome James). And someone is going to be grabbing loose balls in March for the Sixers - wouldn't it be nice if Marreese Speights or someone like him was doing it for your squad?

But back to the Knicks themselves. Rebounds are out there, and the main rebounding guy (on a sad rebounding team) was and is David Lee. After a sluggish 2-1/2 week stretch in November last season (where he went for 10.6 ppg, 5.7 rpg, and 54 FG% on 8 shots a game), he turned in a season where he posted double digits averages in scoring (16.0) and double digits in rebounding (11.7, third in the league) - I believe the kids call this a "double-double". Now me, I love Davey more than the next guy, but since he doesn't block the ball and doesn't shoot 3's like a Troy Murphy, he's kind of a tough fit on your typical roster. Lee has to be on a roster where he can amplify, like Ando on "Heroes". You don't want him on your small-ball team because his strengths are FG%, boards, and lack of TO's - things you'll be tanking for this type of team. Let's say you have pick #1 and you take Chris Paul (since he's goodish and all). Also, say your team so far is Chris Paul, Joe Johnson, and Jason Kidd (picks 1 and around 24 and 25 average draft position in Yahoo drafts). Lee is not your best choice at 48 (Lee's average pick is at 47.9). But if your team is Paul, Calderon, and Jamison, you can handle Lee at 48% since your FG% will be solid, FT% has a base, TO's not bad even with 2 top PG's, steals you'll be nice in, and you've got roster flexibility as Jamison is SF/PF and Lee is PF/C. Your team can go small or big depending on picks 49, 72, and 73. Monta Ellis at SG could give you a serious backcourt; plenty of centers go in round 5 and load up on bigs. And there's a chance that Dave could get SF eligibility like he did early last year. Of course, 24/25 is too early to get Lee, and 48/49 may be too late. He might fit better on your team if you are picking late in round 1 (and thus you probably went big Amar'e or Jefferson or even Gasol). The point is, with Lee, even though he is center-eligible, it's better for your team if he isn't in one of your center spots.

The next Knick dude is Al Harrington. You have to give a tip of the hat to Messrs. D'Antoni and Nelson, as he would be much much much less of a player if he were not center eligible. Let's look at what he is from last year: 20.1 ppg, 2.3 3pg, 79.3 FT at 4 attempts per game. Also, his 1.2 spg is rather handy. The knocks on him, using last years numbers, are 43.9 FG% (on 16.6 attempts per game), 6.2 rpg, 2.2 topg, and 0.3 bpg, all of which are very un-center-like. In fact, those numbers are very Ben Gordon-like, and it's kind of tough to win consistently when you have Ben Gordon. But if Al's your center, you are going pure small ball for 6-3/5-4 type wins. Sure, you say you want to go small-ball, guy who drafts Troy Murphy in round 3 (or Vishnu help you, round 2), but you can still backdoor into rebounds because he was, like, 2nd in the league per game. If Al's one of your 2 centers (standard 12 team, 13 player, 2 centers play league), maybe Il Mago your other C, you are dead on straight small ball, punting boards, blocks, and FG%, maybe even TO's. You're going to need steals to pull this off, but if you have a guard like Paul or Wade, you are wasting Paul's FG% base and Wade's FG% and blocks bases. Here's a few small-ball possibilities you can have where you would take Harrington.

Middle of first round - you take Kobe, Durant, or Granger
Middle of second round - you take a PG without a great FG% - Billups, Kidd, or Arenas
Middle of third round - you take an SG/SF who can hit threes or steal - Wallace or Jamison

or

End of first round - you take Deron Williams or Brandon Roy
Beginning of second round - you take one of the above PG's
End of third round - Wallace or Jamison or a scorer w/o a great FG% - Vince Carter or Kevin Martin.

Harrington is not a bad fit on either one of those teams, but if you are fumbling through your draft and Harrington is the highest player left on you hastily arranged pre-draft rankings, taking him is a sure way to screw up your team.

Third on the list of Knicks you can use is Wilson Chandler. He got the 1 three per game (1.3), but was knocking on the door of the 1-1-1 club by coming up a hair shy in blocks (0.9) and steals (0.9). He's SG/SF eligible in Yahoo!, so he can be a solid addition in your big-ball or small-ball or balanced team. He got 33 minutes per game last year, and since the roster is not particularly deep, he should get near those minutes again. FG percentage is a killer at around 43% for his short career; anything approaching 45 would greatly improve his value, since he puts up a decent amount per game. Chandler's value improves when he is joined with other 1-1-1 guys, like a Durant or Wade or Granger led team and/or one with Shawn Marion. If he's a guard in your lineup, he's got a great rebound rate and a nice asset to a big ball team. With the Knicks having the most 4-game weeks of any team in the association (same as New Orleans, 13), guys who can fill up the hustle categories these weeks have an added benefit. He's going to be a good value pick in the middle of the draft - I'm looking at round 6, but not earlier.

Another guy you could consider drafting in the starter portion of your draft (top 10 rounds x 12 teams = top 120) is Nate Robinson, KryptoNate. He'll shoot 3's, steal it, score a decent amount, you know, all point guardy stuff except the real point guardy stuff, passing the ball. He's going to shoot about 14 or 15 times a night, so if he's on your team, you better be able to handle it. He's a nice guy to have on your team if you've got scorers and need to fill some other categories; you'll probably need a guy like Chris Anderson or Ronny Turiaf as well.

Chris Duhon is the last Knick you can feel decent about drafting, if only because you're in the bench part of your draft. Like a lot of Knicks, he'll make less than 45% of his shots, but at least he's passing it to other guys who will make less than 45% of their shots. He'll make a few 3's (though this one still grinds my gears). Again, with NYK having all those 4-game weeks, he won't be a bad guy to have on your bench to plug in at the right time.

The rest of the team has chances to be fantasy valuable. Danilo Gallinari had some brief flashes when his wasn't hurt with his neck and/or his back. If he's healthy, there's your source for bench 3's. Toney Douglas could be a backcourt defensive specialist - with PT, he could be a poor man's Mario Chalmers. Hey, look, it's Jared Jeffries. And I'm rooting for Larry Hughes have a few good games, just for someone to pick him up then proceed to throw out some 2-11's with no 3's and no steals. Maybe he'll be relevant again so this website starts back up.

And for pure entertainment value (as in not on my team but fun to look at crappy box scores entertainment), Darko Milicic and Eddy Curry are out there, ready to be picked up.

So you see, the Knicks are a crappy team, but they provide a lot of fantasy-ness, more so, I think, than a good to great team like the Cavaliers. I'll look at some more crappy teams up until the season start. Next, the Indiana Pacers.