A month ago, I was sure the New York Knicks had made an irrevocable mistake with the Mikal Bridges trade. It would be remembered as the deal that forever changed the NBA trade landscape and the tragic end of the Villanova soap opera.
Buried in the sands of time is an unpublished trade retrospective that I sent out on the morning of April 25, also known as the day the Knicks started. the most dominant stretch in NBA playoff history. I don’t believe in curses or karma or anything like that, but If I did… Let’s just say it was a suspicious moment. To quote lost files:
“The problem is that Bridges is basically the sixth or seventh most important player on the team, behind Brunson, Karl-Anthony Towns, OG Anunoby, Josh Hart and maybe even Mitchell Robinson. He also makes $150 million for being a decent three-and-D forward, and it costs all of his draft capital – money and picks that could have been spent on another player.” cough cough Giannis Antetokounmpo cough cough. Sure, the Knicks don’t actually need him to take 15 shots per game, but they are paying him (and paid for him) to do it. Meanwhile, he’s practically hitting Bryce Sensabaugh-high numbers in 32 minutes instead of 23.”
None of that was wrong at the time. But Bridges, sensing a disturbance in the force, activated destruction mode and flipped every switch I had to propel the New York Knicks to their first NBA Finals appearance since 1999. His play has been he difference between the shaky Knicks team that struggled with the Atlanta Hawks and the one that hasn’t lost in a month. Sure, it would have been more embarrassing if we had published the article, but I’m exposing its existence here and now, so, uh, yeah.
It’s worth noting that I wasn’t the only one who thought the Bridges trade was a disaster. he was benched in Apriland his own teammates and coaching staff They had to defend their game publicly in March. Stephen A. Smith was arguing with Josh Hart about it. Now? I’m updating a column that suddenly “got wrong” even though I mostly stand by the original points. Our shooting culture was not designed for situations like this, where results dictate reality. They are Schrödinger Bridges, which are good or bad depending on an unknown result.
Does that erase the multiple years of evidence I relied on to claim the trade was bad for the Knicks and possibly ineffective for the Nets? No, but I also didn’t take into account one of Brian Windhorst’s most well-known NBA truisms: winning a title means never having to apologize. You do whatever it takes to get your guys because there’s a chance they can make the difference between being good and being great. Whether the player you trade for is Kevin Durant or the demon Trevor Ariza, if you win, that’s it.
Bridges has been terrible for much of his tenure with the Knicks, especially since New York negotiated a price that justified the type of play one would expect, if not a second scoring option, at least for a 2A behind Jalen Brunson and Karl-Anthony Towns. But this version of Bridges has been extremely adaptable and basically became the best player in the world in his 11-game career. They never need him to create, but he can. They never need him to score, but he can. They don’t even need him to guard the other team’s best player (OG Anunoby can handle that), but Bridges does. It took him two years to manifest, but he became exactly what the Knicks needed him to be; Questioning its “value” in retrospect now seems absolutely absurd.
How will Bridges look in the NBA Finals against a much stronger defense than the Knicks have seen thus far? Who knows, but I’ve certainly lost the right to care about how much they gave up for someone who has simply been a winning player on a championship-level team. The trade was still an overpayment, but they’d probably do it again and add some cash considerations if they knew I’d be doing this in such a bright, sky-burning finale. You do what you have to do to win; right now, that meant trading whatever was necessary for Bridges.
