Dalton Knecht has the Knicks’ attention. That gives him a possible next opportunity, and it gives Lakers fans a fresh reason to revisit his exit. It does not give us evidence that New York would have sent the Lakers a draft pick for him. I would keep those arguments separate before turning an interest report into another front-office indictment.
SNY’s Ian Begley reported Thursday, Oct. 22, that the Knicks are among the teams interested in Knecht, citing sources familiar with his market. SNY says the Lakers waived him before the regular season and that he is eligible for a two-way deal. There is no signing announcement in the report. On Friday, I am rooting for Knecht to get a fresh start. I am also keeping the imaginary second-round pick out of the Lakers’ transaction ledger.
That last part applies to my own preference. We argued that the Lakers should try to trade Knecht before cutting him. I still prefer getting something back when another team will pay. But wanting a second-round pick does not summon a buyer. The important condition in that argument was whether somebody offered one. Begley’s news does not answer that question.
Think about the buyer’s decision. Taking over an existing contract in a trade and considering a player after he becomes a free agent are different commitments. A team can like the basketball possibility while disliking the terms of a particular transaction. I would need evidence of an actual offer before accusing the Lakers of turning one down. A list of interested teams cannot do that work by itself.
For Knecht, I would put the basketball opportunity ahead of the pleasure of proving the Lakers wrong. My preferred next stop would have a coach willing to use him in repeatable actions: come off a screen, catch ready to shoot and move the ball promptly when the defender takes that shot away. That would give him a way to earn trust even before the first jumper goes in. A revenge tour sounds fun until somebody asks you to stand in the corner all night.
The Shooting Gives a Team a Reason to Look
The case for giving Knecht another chance is easy enough to understand. Basketball Reference lists him at 37.6% from three on 4.4 attempts per game as a Lakers rookie in 2024-25. He averaged 9.1 points in 19.2 minutes across 78 appearances. There was real shooting production there, enough that I would want a development plan before dismissing the player.
The next season supplies the objection. The same Basketball Reference table shows 34.2% from three on 2.1 attempts a game in 2025-26, with 4.2 points in 10.2 minutes across 54 games. Both the opportunity and the output declined. I would read those seasons together: the rookie year makes another look reasonable, while the follow-up makes immediate rotation promises difficult to justify.
I would start the evaluation with his decisions after a closeout. Suppose Knecht catches on the wing and a defender runs him off the three-point line. I want a direct next action: attack the available lane, find the teammate the help defender left or move the ball and relocate. Dribbling into a contested jumper would squander the advantage. That is the sort of possession I would ask a new coaching staff to repeat in practice, then reward when he handles it well in a game.
I also would resist grading his next stop by its first hot shooting night. If Knecht signs somewhere and makes a few threes, enjoy it for him. The test I care about is whether he can keep earning minutes when the shot is ordinary. On defense, I would watch an equally plain sequence: recognize the screen, follow the called coverage and recover to an assignment. I want a coach judging the whole possession, including whether Knecht finishes it by finding a body to box out. Those are better reasons to bring him back into a game than hoping his next jumper fixes everything.
For the Lakers, I would apply the same patience to the players they choose to use. We have already argued that JJ Redick should give his wing starters time to work through mistakes. That principle becomes especially useful when a former teammate is producing elsewhere. I don’t want the rotation changed because somebody watched a Knecht clip at halftime and got nostalgic.
There is a harder question the Lakers should have to answer over time: are the players getting those opportunities helping the team? That evaluation belongs on their own possessions. If the wings take the available shots, complete their assignments and help the offense function, the case for their minutes can stand without Knecht failing somewhere else. If they struggle, Redick should explain the basketball reason to persist or change course.
I can root for Knecht to find a useful role and still demand that the Lakers make good decisions. Neither requires pretending this report contains a rejected trade. Begley has supplied a meaningful update on where Knecht might go. Let an offer tell us the terms, let sustained playing time tell us about the fit, and make the Lakers defend the choices we can actually see.