The Knicks‘ leaders at the management and ownership levels rarely speak to the media about the team, but owner James Dolan made an exception this week for a pair of podcast hosts within his organization, appearing on the Roommates Show, hosted by Jalen Brunson and Josh Hart (YouTube link).
As Stefan Bondy of The New York Post relays, Dolan expressed a willingness to be patient with the current Knicks core, making it clear that he believes continuity will be an important factor in maximizing the upside of the roster.
“We have a team that’s going to be together for a while,” Dolan said. “(President of basketball operations) Leon (Rose) has done a good job of lining up the contracts and everything else. So this isn’t our only season. We’re going to play a bunch of seasons together.
“You take a look at teams like Boston that have played together, they get to draw off of something that they built over that period of time. And for this team, that’s the challenge, really – today, going into the playoffs, etc. – is to build that inside of the team. Something we can draw on.”
The Knicks made significant changes to their roster during the 2024 offseason, sending a package heavy on future first-round picks to Brooklyn in exchange for Mikal Bridges, then completing a blockbuster deal in the fall to acquire Karl-Anthony Towns in exchange for a package headlined by Julius Randle and Donte DiVincenzo.
Entering the summer of 2025, Towns, Brunson, Hart, and OG Anunoby are all locked up for multiple seasons, and there’s hope that Bridges will sign an extension that pushes his current contract beyond its 2026 expiration date. Sizable contracts for those players will likely leave the organization operating in apron territory for the next few years, reducing New York’s ability to continue making significant major in free agency or on the trade market.
After advancing to the second round of the playoffs in each of the past two years, it will be a challenge for the Knicks to get any further than that this spring, given that it would likely mean upsetting the defending champion Celtics. However, Dolan expressed optimism about the group’s future, lauding Rose for the way he has put the roster together and indicating that the front office has his full support, along with full autonomy to continue making personnel decisions.
As Bondy notes, Dolan also admitted that the patient, hands-off approach he’s taking now hasn’t always been the management style he’s employed in the past.
“There were times when (we’ve) sort of reached for that shiny, sparkly object. ‘Maybe this is what we need.’ Especially when things weren’t going well,” he said. “‘Let’s bring in this guy and maybe he’ll turn it all around for us.’ Sometimes it’s players, sometimes it’s a coach.
“What I learned over time is that doesn’t work. It really doesn’t. You really have to do the fundamentals, the basics. You’ve got to build a team, you’ve got to build an organization. There is no waving a wand over a team and all of a sudden make it a great team. It doesn’t happen.”
Translation: “We’re already spending more than 95% of the league, I’m not spending any more.”
He has never had an issue with spending. He’s many things, being cheap isn’t one of them. Rose is being mindful of team flexibility, the bench, and Bridges upcoming extension.
Tell him ….. Sphere money lol.
aristotle — For Dolan this is the first time. Since he took over team from Daddy. That he’s had a good Team GM n coach. And he has let them run the team. He hasn’t butted in not once. For Knick fans. That’s remarkable.
Internet lol …..
I’m all for owners spending money. But the CBA repeater tax is a mother. No team can avoid it. The Knicks payroll, like GSW’s until last season, and Boston next season, only gives Dolan 1 more year of overspend, 2 max.
The same players that cost $75M tax in the first year can bring $170M tax in the second, and $300M in the third. Knicks, like the Warriors and Clips before them, and Boston this coming summer, will have to cut back, not spend more
Again bro …. Go look up his worth. Money will never be an issue. The cap yes. He will pay the tax if he believes in team. Like Warriors did for years. Knicks core is under 30. So gives him easily a 5 yr run tax or no tax. Spending money is not an issue. Maneuvering the cap could be. No one cares. We will deal with that the day it comes. Haven’t you been told many times. This is first yr for this core. Knicks are just in first year of being considered a good team. We got plenty of time lol.
lmaooo, aristotle. Again, you have no clue about the Knicks. Dolan has had his ups and major downs as an owner but one thing that has always been true is that he is more than willing to spend on the team. He’s kept sky-high payrolls his entire tenure as owner even when they had awful teams. If you are going to talk about the Knicks I beg you to please educate yourself just a little bit.
Rct, you misunderstand me. I’m not saying Dolan hasn’t spent as much as he can. I’m saying that the Knicks are deep in the luxury tax right now, and, like all teams at that level, they face a large and increasing repeater tax over coming years.
My original post was not to criticize Dolan. All owners in his position are educating fans that they aren’t free to spend as much as they’d like.
Rct, the Knicks have obligations of $196M to 9 players next season. Conservatively, that projects to at least $220M next season. That’s a massive luxury tax — not a criticism, just a reality.
link to basketball-reference.com
Exhibit number one for the aristotle does not know what he is saying files.
First time he has let basketball people run team. Without meddling in. Usually after three yrs. The media and critics are all up in arms. Hard to rebuild in NYC. Hasn’t been done since Ewing.
I’ve been saying this since the day I got here. Nobody believes me. Its why this regime and team is important. And important to see them thru. Never knew Rose. He and Thibs have totally rebuilt and redone whole franchise in 4yrs n counting. Very impressive.
I’m all for owners spending money. But the CBA repeater tax is a mother. The Knicks payroll, like GSW’s until last season, and Boston next season, only gives Dolan 1 more year of overspend, 2 max.
The same players that cost $75M tax in the first year can bring $170M tax in the second, and $300M in the third. Knicks, like the Warriors and Clips before them, and Boston this coming summer, will have to cut back, not spend more.
Dolan isn’t saying anything new, other he’s signed on to the plan (which most would have assumed). Rose & Co. indicated this all summer. It’s a 4 year undertaking designed to track Brunson’s prime. The impetus was Brunson’s extension. The only guys they were looking to add this summer were Brunson’s contemporaries who were either contracturally controlled or a short distance from it for a 4 year period. Not at all ambiguous. Honestly, even if they said nothing, it’s obvious.
Dolan hasn’t had a coach, players, GM on same page. Since the Riley days. And he was a kid then just tagging along with his dad.
He wasn’t even a kid tagging along. His Dad (Cablevision) didn’t take control of the NYK until after Riley left. Paramount (not Cablevision) owned the NYK when Riley was there. It was their call not to deal with Riley’s girly-man nonsense.
But YES, Dolan has never had a FO he could trust. Although one could say that’s because he never hired one that he could trust. Truth is he’s wanted “out” of being an “involved” owner of the NYK when he hired Jackson. But Jackson didn’t want the job, just the salary, so he had to fire him. Mills was just a lazy hire by Dolan, but at 17-65 he had to fire him.
I knew Rose was different because he was a life long associate and friend of Dolan (the relationship between CAA and MSG is decades old and deeper than the NYK and deeper than sports). He’s too big a deal in the sports and entertainment world for Dolan to dump him without him getting a full chance to succeed.
i guess time will tell
DXC, thanks, that’s exactly my point. The Knicks are executing an aggressive, specific plan that was set last year, and they won’t stray from it.
The challenge that wealthy NBA owners face is that many fans don’t understand why CBA the repeater tax prevents them from spending more.
Al, you’re missing the basics of the repeater tax. (There are explainers on this site, or read what DXC explains, below. It doesn’t matter how wealthy Dolan/Sphere are because of the way the tax works. And they already are on a trajectory where they have spent the max.
I’ll try to explain with an example. The Knicks total revenue is about $625M/yr, (per Fortune Magazine). They’re profitable so long as their total player obligations (contracts + tax) is less than $325M/year. The Knicks contracts next year will total about $225M. That leaves about $100M for the luxury tax to remain profitable. That’s close to what the Knicks are paying this year. Like DXC says, below, they are on their max trajectory already.
The repeater tax, effectively, causes a team’s tax penalty to double every year, which is why teams don’t do it for more than 2 years, 3 max. The Warriors reaches almost $380M tax to the league and the Clippers not much less. If they’d gone another year, the doubling effect would have put them deeply into the red. The taxes could have gone to $600M in the following No ownership group, no matter how wealthy, will pay more in taxes than their revenues.
That’s what Dolan is talking about.
The repeater doesnt increase once your in it. You lose a lot of flexibility and can only sign min players. The problem is going deeper and deeper into the tax where the tax itself before the repeater penalty gets worse the further in you are. The only upside is the cap is raising by 15M+ per season now so when your guys are already maxed and you can only sign mins you cant raise payroll faster than its going up unless you have a rookie scale player to sign big. The other upside of the new CBA is that the bands where the tax increases scale up with the tax raises as opposed to the last CBA where they increased every 5M. The Warriors wouldnt have had double if they had given Klay a big extension and traded CP3 for a 30M player they would have been about the same as the previous year.
Chap – everything you say is true as far as the specifics. I’m trying to explain in 3 sentences to some folks that mistakenly believe that owners can spend an unlimited amount because they have deep pockets. They can’t because taxes escalate.
@Ari – You’re off, though, because you’re NOT accounting for the new CBA in your analysis. The entire point of the rules of the new CBA is to prevent high payroll teams from increasing payroll past a certain point, essentially the Second Apron.
NYK won’t have any significant tax issues maintaining this roster for 4 years. Certainly not next year, and likely not for the final 2 of the 4 years (even if there is a repeater tax in years 3 and 4). Actually, I’m sure Dolan and the FO would love the right to pay more taxes than they’ll end up paying if it entitled them to add to the payroll. This year the NYK are right below the Second Apron (and pay about 36 mm in tax, de minimis), and that’s where they’ll be next year as well. They do have 196 mm on the books, but its for 10 guys, and the Second Apron will increase by 11 mm more than that, to 207 mm. So, that makes 207 mm the NYK cap in 2025-26 (and there is no repeater tax, so the tax is still around 36 mm). After that, if they keep the same group together (or guys who make no more), and all the “caps” and “aprons” increase 10%, it will likely be around the same.
This is true of most teams (though not all). The payroll problem is no longer about a big tax bill, but the operation restrictions that prevent a big tax bill, since they also prevent increasing the payroll past the Second Apron, subject to only a few exceptions. These aren’t applicable in big $$ to the NYK as to the current group or the permitted adds in light of the current group.
DXC – right, and there still more mitigating factors other than the CBA. But the fact is that the Knicks will be deep in the luxury tax regardless, esp when they resign Bridges.
As I say, I’m trying to explain in 3 sentences to some folks that mistakenly believe that owners can spend an unlimited amount because they have deep pockets. They can’t because taxes escalate.
Generally, that’s certainly true. Owners can’t just ignore the luxury tax after a certain point. Fan notions that it’s just money and their owner is rich and thus doesn’t care is not reality, never has been and never will be.
But there is an overriding (not just mitigating) truth that you didn’t mention or consider. Namely, that the new CBA makes the tax level that no owner will go to (sanely) next to impossible to get to anyway. For that reason and others (namely the fixed nature of the NYK payroll over the next 4 years, and the fixed 10% increases in all apron levels for the next two years), your conclusion about the NYK (they can’t keep this team together without prohibitive tax) is simply WRONG.
The NYK most likely pay the tax they’re anticipating, which isn’t very deep into the tax (nobody considers being between the aprons deep in the tax), and that’s certain to be the case if all they are doing it maintaining the current roster or equivalent fixed salaries. Bridges is the only core guy who’s salary is not already fixed for the next 3 years, and he’s fixed for next year, and can’t get more than a 40% (10 mm) raise in year 3 of the 4 year period. That’s worst case, and there will still be ways to stay below the second apron or exceed it more maybe one year.
DXC, we’re in agreement on pretty much everything, but I absolutely did not say that the Knicks core could not be kept together. I believe that Knicks ownership has a plan and is committed to keeping this core together.
What I *am* saying is that further cost-cutting across the non-core is almost certainly in store in future years. Look at what the Warriors, Clippers, Suns, and other teams with multiple max contracts have done historically: with each passing year, the big contracts become a greater portion of the obligation than the smaller ones, so teams have proportionally more in minimum contracts and rookie deals. Part of that is (sometimes) because teams don’t have access to the MLE anymore. And, part of it is because teams have carefully budgeted to extend a core player in the future, which usually involves a much larger annual increase (as is expected with Mikal Bridges). And, part of it is because the CBA schedules for max deals enables teams to, proportionally, backload to the later end of a long-term deal.
So, when a team commits to preserving an expensive core, it must progressively cut more elsewhere each year. “Super teams” typically get less deep over time, barring the emergence of draft talent.
That is just a symptom of the fact that over a certain point you can only sign mins. Some of your players will inevitably leave since they may want something other than money like an opportunity to start. Other times you just wont value them at the price someone else is offering. So its just a factor of being in the tax that you only end up getting mins, and thats even more so now with the new CBA where you can only really push past the second apron by resigning a bird rights FA to a big raise. Most of the teams you mentioned didnt make cost saving moves historically. This winter they all seemed to choose it as a strategy because they all tried to make big swings that would keep them in the tax and when those didnt happen they pivoted to the plan B for bringing in talent. I dont think either the Ws or Clips are wishing they had CP/Klay or PG over what they got instead. I would argue that both moves werent cost cutting in nature it was just the best path to a competitive roster available.
Its not that they are intentionally cutting mid level guys, its that they cant acquire them in the first place and the types of players available to them are ones you wouldnt bump up usually or if they really pop you dont have bird rights on. Once your in the tax the bottom 2/3 of your roster gets attritioned over a few years.
Chap, sorry, I accidentally posted my response to this below,where you’ll prolly miss it.
Chapman, I’m seeing this differently. First, you seem to be overlooking the critical 2nd point that I mention above about keeping a core together, as I say:
“…teams have carefully budgeted to extend a core player in the future, which usually involves a much larger annual increase (as is expected with Mikal Bridges).”
What this means is that you have to account for more than the CURRENT contracts of the core players because, in almost all cases, the team has a multi-year plan that assumes at least one core player will be given a huge raise. For example, the Knicks are clearly counting on having to give Mykal Bridges a ~$20M/yr raise and, the Warriors, according to Lakob and Myers, are expecting to give ~$25M/yr raise to Kuminga. Clearly, both teams are planning to make room by paying other players on their rosters less. But the teams will defer the choice of which players to try to keep until the last moment/season they can.
Some of the money used to sign Kuminga will come from the increase on the salary cap, and some will come from the non-minimum deals that Looney, GP2, and Buddy Hield are on. When Tatum’s big deal kicks in after this season, everybody in Boston knows it will force them to lose some of their current (very deep bench. Similarly, next summer, when the Knicks sign their 4th core player, Bridges, there will be pressure on “mid” contracts for Hart, Robinson, Achiuwa, etc.
I don’t know about the Clippers, but I do know that the Warriors didn’t consider Klay part of their future “core”.