Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Monday, October 20, 2014

2009 Report Card: Al Harrington

Historically New York has had good luck with getting malcontents from Golden State. Back in 1999, the Knicks traded for Latrell Sprewell who was suspended by the Warriors for choking Coach P.J. Carlesimo. Spre’s strong defense helped New York reach the Finals that year. Nearly 10 years later, Golden State shipped another unhappy player to Gotham. Although the 2009 Knicks weren’t nearly as successful as their 1999 squad, the team benefited from Harrington’s presence.

Like the player he was traded for, Jamal Crawford, Al Harrington’s most pronounced skill is shot creation. But unlike Crawford, Harrington actually is productive when scoring. Harrington’s true shooting percentage for the Knicks last year (55.5%) was 10 points better than Crawford’s best year in New York (54.5%) and 25 points higher than his career average with the team (52.9%). Last year he was just above his career average from three (2009: 36.2%, career: 35.9%), while attempting a career high nearly 7 per game (6.5 3pa/g, or 6.7 3pa/36). He can drive to the hoop and score from inside as well. Although not as skilled as Lee or Zach Randolph, Harrington is able to draw contact and score in traffic. Much like Eddy Curry, Harrington will continue with the ball towards the hoop no matter how many defenders follow. The difference between Harrington and Curry is that Al doesn’t bowl over defenders or lose the ball as often (2.3 to/36 to Curry’s 3.2).

Unfortunately Harrington doesn’t pass well. Many of Harrington’s passes seem to bounce off his recipient’s hands or are caught awkwardly losing momentum. I have two theories on his sharing woes. The first is that his passes are usually near the hoop with the other player close by, so that his passes are too fast for the short distance. The second is that Al passes so infrequently that his teammates don’t expect the ball to come to them. Perhaps it’s a bit of both, since the passes occur so close to the basket the receiving player is gearing up for a rebound. In any case it’s something to watch for in 2010.

As for the rest of his game, Harrington is a poor rebounder for his size and a below average defender. To put into perspective how bad Harrington’s rebounding is, David Lee nearly doubled his rebounds per minute (12.1 reb/36 to 6.4 reb/36) despite both players standing 6-9. Harrington’s blocked shot rate (0.3 blk/36) was also poor.

Overall he was and will be a good fit for Coach D’Antoni’s offense. Harrington’s multifaceted and efficient scoring was a refreshing fit, considering the person he was traded for (Jamal Crawford) and the person whose minutes he inherited (Zach Randolph). But ultimately the lacking elements of his game make him unworthy of a large contract or a starting role. He’d be a fine bench player for the mid level, but considering the Knicks’ monetary crunch for 2010 and Harrington’s current salary ($8.5M) I don’t see many scenarios that would keep Harrington in New York after this year.

Report Card (5 point scale):
Offense: 4
Defense: 2
Teamwork: 1
Rootability: 3
Performance/Expectations: 4

Grade: B

Similarity Scores:

z-Sum FLName Year Tm PER TS% eFG% PTS ORB TRB AST STL BLK TOV
.000 Al Harrington 2009 TOT 15.9 .547 .509 20.8 1.4 6.4 1.4 1.2 0.3 2.3
.040 Josh Howard 2009 DAL 17.0 .532 .488 20.3 1.3 5.7 1.8 1.2 0.6 1.9
.073 Nate Williams 1979 GSW 14.7 .542 .501 18.6 1.9 5.7 1.7 1.5 0.1 2.6
.075 Jamaal Wilkes 1982 LAL 16.5 .554 .525 21.5 1.9 4.9 1.8 1.1 0.3 2.0
.081 Keith Van Horn 2004 TOT 17.8 .564 .506 17.9 2.3 7.7 1.8 1.0 0.5 2.6
.086 Wayman Tisdale 1993 SAC 15.7 .540 .509 19.9 2.0 7.9 1.7 0.8 0.7 1.8
.092 Cedric Ceballos 1998 TOT 19.3 .560 .517 19.5 2.7 8.0 2.2 1.2 0.6 2.6
.096 Lamond Murray 2002 CLE 16.7 .534 .487 18.3 1.3 5.8 2.4 1.1 0.7 2.2
.111 Corliss Williamson 2002 DET 20.0 .567 .511 22.5 2.5 6.8 2.0 1.0 0.6 2.9
.113 Richard Jefferson 2009 MIL 15.4 .554 .487 19.7 0.7 4.6 2.4 0.8 0.2 2.0
.123 Chris Crawford 2004 ATL 15.8 .544 .495 17.0 1.7 5.2 1.3 1.1 0.6 1.6
.128 George McCloud 1996 DAL 15.9 .543 .514 18.9 1.5 4.8 2.7 1.4 0.5 2.1

35 comments on “2009 Report Card: Al Harrington

  1. BigBlueAL

    It will be VERY INTERESTING to see how many minutes he gets this season. Toward the end of last season his minutes were diminished greatly. I wonder if he even starts this season….

  2. BK

    This was really fair, considering Mike’s known distaste for Al’s game. :-) Harrington, like it or not, was the closest thing to an offensive force for us (along with Nate) — pretty sad statement, I know, but he was productive.

    Just a couple of qualifications: he’s a good fit for D’Antoni’s system as a bench player, much less so as a starter (which is probably what you were saying, Mike). D’Antoni was frustrated many times at how the ball just stopped once Al got it. Related to this, the passing issue revolves around how Harrington just doesn’t pass until he has no choice. A shoot first guy like Nate can get away with this a little better with the way he generates his offense and with his athleticism, but this statement about Harrington was perfect: “Much like Eddy Curry, Harrington will continue with the ball towards the hoop no matter how many defenders follow. ” Not surprising that a bad pass is the result when Al actually decides to do so.

  3. BigBlueAL

    Hey remember Harrington said in an interview in the NY Post not too long ago that the main thing D’Antoni told him in their exit meeting was he has to get his teammates involved alot more and Harrington said his goal for the season was to average 4 to 5 assists per game while still scoring 20 ppg.

    I’ll believe once I see it….

  4. Frank O.

    I am over Harrington.
    I believe one of the reasons Harrington’s minutes were declining was his inability to score effectively late in a game. I remember a period where he simply disappeared.
    I also think he’s a gunner.
    So he is not as effective a scorer as Zach, nor can he rebound like Randolph, and he doesn’t play defense or pass well? And yet, he still needs the ball to be effective? Sounds like a recipe for a losing team.
    And while his TS% was better than Crawford’s, he wasn’t as effective a passer.
    I’m mean, given the best circumstances, he’s an effective scorer. But if he can’t do anything else, he needs to ride the bench. The Knicks have too many effective, or developing players ahead of him. If he gets 15 minutes per game, I’ll be surprised. If he is getting more, we’re in for another long season.

    By the way, I read this morning Jerry Stackhouse will be interviewing with the Knicks for the vets minimum. I don’t think this is important, I think he’s done. Just making a note of how far and wide Walsh is willing to look, rather than giving Nate what he wants.

    At some point, this will become silly. Nate and Lee have few cards to play. It’s getting close to time that they accept their fate. But if their agents can come up with sign and trades that give the Knicks value and maybe helps then shed more salary, I’m all for it.

    Say they make a sign and trade for Nate, that allows them to shed Jeffries contract for an expiring…or if they sign and trade Lee and move Curry with him, those are deals I can live with.

    But I’ve risked enough exploring Lee scenarios here…talking about letting Lee go could get one banned…:)

    Actually, Mike, all kidding aside, this is a great site. I think you were grading on a curve with Harrington. He was no better than a C because of the things I mentioned earlier.

  5. Ted Nelson

    “So he is not as effective a scorer as Zach”

    He is a more effective scorer than Zach… not sure where this comes from. More points on fewer possessions = more effective.

    “And while his TS% was better than Crawford’s, he wasn’t as effective a passer.”

    He’s also not a guard, he played almost exclusively at the 4 spot for the Knicks. I’m not trying to compare their overall games, but Shawn Marion was also a straight gunner in Phoenix.
    I don’t think he’s much better than Jamal/Randolph (contracts aside), but I also don’t think he’s much worse.

    While he may be a mediocre defender in absolute terms, that translates to really good in the context of the Knicks current roster. For all the praise Chandler’s D gets the Knicks were 2.2 points per 100 possessions worse defensively with him on the court and 1.1 points per possession better defensively with Harrington out there.

    I’m not trying to call Harrington the greatest thing since sliced bread or even very good, but I think it’s fair to say he was one of the top 3 Knicks last season and the B grade is well deserved.

  6. Z-man

    The problem with Harrington is that he is just not a heady player. He is certainly not a prototypical PF since he rebounds so poorly and defends better out high than down low. He is more of a tall SF, and at that position I think he has more potential than either Zach at PF of Jamal at SG.

    He is definitely offensively talented, but I think the Zach and Jamal comparisons are warranted…he just doesn’t make anybody else or the team significantly better. The lack of a real leader on the floor…one who is not only the team’s emotional leader but their best player…doesn’t help. Maybe if Harrington was playing on a team with Nash, KG, Kidd, etc., his flaws would not be as much of an issue and he might even modify his mindset…like he has vowed to do this season, yeah, right.

    The problem is that on this version of the Knicks, he is the veteran leader and probably thinks he is the best player. This is where a guy like Jason Kidd would have helped, although not at his asking price.

    Seems like the strategy is to build a team of young, promising players (like Sessions) and to bring in a FA next year to hand the reins to. Harrington doesn’t seem like a part of this strategy.

    BTW, Ted, referring back to our argument about Chandler, I would much rather take a chance on Chandler than Harrington. You clearly are a glass half-empty guy with Chandler. I see a very young, very athletic, and MOST importantly, very coachable prospect. You see a limited, inefficient role player who has likely topped out at age 21. I hope we can at least agree that the jury is still out.

    In Harrington, the jury has already rendered a verdict. I see a guy who is what he is and won’t change much unless a teammate with enough gravitas forces him to pass the freaking ball. If and when that happens, he will just as likely become the malcontent that he was in GS because he has no concept of team basketball and thinks he is better than he is. Case in point, he cost us 2 games for hanging on the rim in crunch time.

    BTW Mike, maybe you should add coachability to your grades, I guess it’s part of teamwork but it is perhaps more forward-looking. Further, I don’t get how a guy can get a 2 in defense and a 1 in teamwork and have an overall grade of B.

  7. Frank O.

    Ted:
    “‘So he is not as effective a scorer as Zach

    “He is a more effective scorer than Zach… not sure where this comes from. More points on fewer possessions = more effective.”

    You are correct. I reversed my numbers
    TS% eFG%
    Zach .531 .494
    Al .547 .509

    Al’s assist percentage was significantly weaker, 6.8% v. 11.5%, or 1.4 per 36 mins v. 2.1 per 36 mins, and his rebounding per 36 was far worse, 6.4 v. 10.3.
    Both are poor defenders: equally bad shot blockers, but Al has a slightly better block rate per 36.

    On the whole, though, in my opinion, Al is even more of a black hole, and is a weak rebounder for a PF. It felt a bit like the Knicks shed a flawed PF and ultimately replaced him, on the whole, with an equally flawed PF.
    If you’re about what Randolph was to the Knicks, I find it hard to give the guy a B.

    I think if you’re comparing pure stats, advanced stats, Harrington is a better player than Chandler.
    But you are playing Chandler, a two-year player, to develop him. As a 10-year veteran, Harrington is what he is.
    Only time will tell if Chandler can take advantage of his upside potential.

  8. Caleb

    I’d have graded lower, but “expectations” is a big part of these.

    Harrington gets paid less than 2/3 of what Randolph makes, so the standard is different. All things equal, I’d call Zach the better player, though. I’m not a Harrington fan at all. I do think he might have value – especially perceived value – for a contending team, come February. Hopefully we can trade his 20 ppg for a totally worthless player on the same expiring contract, plus a draft pick.

  9. Ted Nelson

    “Seems like the strategy is to build a team of young, promising players (like Sessions) and to bring in a FA next year to hand the reins to. Harrington doesn’t seem like a part of this strategy.”

    I can buy that, and wouldn’t mind if the Knicks use Harrington as a trade chip at all. As an expiring contract who can play (score at least) he might bring in a little something as Caleb suggests.

    “You clearly are a glass half-empty guy with Chandler.”

    To some extent I would just say that a lot of posters are glass totally full when it comes to Chandler and I react to that, but I don’t really object to being called half-empty on him. I certainly see the potential, but I also see how he plays right now: he’s got a ways to go and while year 2 was a good improvement from year 1 it didn’t really justify all the hype he often gets.
    I don’t think he’s topped out yet, in fact, I think he’ll almost definitely improve. It’s just a question of how much…
    Long-term I would rather look at WC than Harrington, definintely: in 5 years Harrington in likely out of the league and Chandler is likely hitting his stride. Last season, though, Harrington was a better player. It’s not like I mind having a young prospect on the team, but I would keep an eye on his trade value if I were the Knicks. It seems like Walshtoni’s high on him, which is a good sign.

    “Further, I don’t get how a guy can get a 2 in defense and a 1 in teamwork and have an overall grade of B.”

    I would say the 2 is a bit harsh. Hughes and Q got 3s and Wilson Chandler got a 4… Harrington was the Knicks best defensive option at the 4, especially with Lee at the 5 all season.
    I don’t really object to the teamwork grade, but I suppose that based on the Marion analogy it could be a 2 or something.

  10. Ted Nelson

    Frank O.,

    The big difference between Harrington and Randolph is that Harrington is a black hole who scored at a decent efficiency, while Randolph was a black hole who scored at a poor efficiency. I think that’s an important distinction for a high volume scorer. I also think Harrington is an average defender. Randolph is a very good rebounder, though. (I’m not sure D’Antoni realizes how well Marion rebounded for him and tries to force guys into the Marion role who can’t rebound.)

    Randolph played alright, at center, the short time he was in NY last season. Played well for the Clippers. Don’t get me wrong, I was glad to see him go. If you don’t consider salary too heavily, though, a B might be fair for him last season.

    Would prefer not to have either guy as one of the best players on the team, though, so I definitely see your point.

    I pretty much agree on Chandler. Generally speaking, I’m not huge on giving players minutes just so they develop. It’s not like Chandler didn’t deserve to be in the Knicks rotation last season, though, so I have no problem playing him.

  11. Thomas B.

    It agree it seems a bit odd that Al Fraggleton was awarded a “B” when his 16/25 averages to a 3.2 on the 5 point scale (64%). That looks more like a “D+” to me, but I don’t think the grade reflects the ability as much as it does the expectations. You don’t expect high assists or blocks from Harrington so you are not too upset when you don’t get them. If Al came in a scored 12 points per 40 minutes with a TS% below 50, then we have a problem. You look for effective scoring with Al and for the most part he provided it.

    Al pretty much did what you would expect of him, so he should get a “B.”

    I do disagree with the comment that Al did not score in the clutch. Do you recall those two games against the Clippers when the Knicks needed a bucket? The ball came to Al on the block, a quick spin move, a drive, and a dunk with just a few seconds left on the clock! Of course, he hung on the rim, got a tech, allowed the Clips to tie the game and we lost in overtime. But he did make the basket. That is one thing you can’t take from him, well that and doozer sticks.

  12. Ricky_J

    If Curry winds up getting any amount of time this season, Harrington’s style will mesh much better offensively than Z, rebounds notwithstanding. I’m all for anything that might contribute to Curry’s marketability over the next 6 months however marginal.

  13. ess-dog

    Harrington is easily the most frustrating player on this roster. He’s one of those players that has a bad case of IwannabelikeMikeitis which just *kills* teams… ball flow stops, and wild missed shots lead to easy transition buckets for the other team.
    Will he ever grow out of this? I highly doubt it. Randolph could at least rebound and he could actually pass in the post pretty well. Harrington just doesn’t understand the game as a team sport for whatever reason, even though he has all the physical requirements to be very good.
    Since Nate is probably leaving, he could be a good 6th man option, maybe get as many as 20 minutes a game. It’s ironic that he has the exact skills that Lee is missing from his game: post up moves and an outside shot. But Lee has all the other things missing from Al’s game: rebounding, smart ball movement, hustle…
    I think how coach D views the center position is key here. We have Darko… is he really going to start? How many minutes will Curry get if any? Do you really give HIM the keys to the car? Does Hill get minutes at center? If we sign Lee, is he the center again? I have no idea how this is going to play out. If Lee is a goner, you’ve got to figure that Al starts at pf, at least to start the season.
    We could start the season with a Sessions, Stackhouse, Gallinari, Harrington, Milicic lineup- freakin’ weird.

  14. Ted Nelson

    “Harrington is easily the most frustrating player on this roster.”

    Now there’s a tough competition…

    “I think how coach D views the center position is key here.”

    That will be interesting to see. I’m really hoping (like a lot of us, I’m sure) Curry can earn, or at least “earn” (wink, wink), some minutes to help market him. I don’t think it’s THAT big a stretch to say Curry could legitimately earn a rotation spot for D’Antoni if he can score efficiently without bogging down the offense. Among Curry’s problems under Larry Brown/Isiah/etc was that he didn’t react well to double teams, a weakness that D’Antoni might help with if Curry is in shape to get down the court in 7 seconds or less. Randolph bogged down the offense, scored inefficiently, and made a lot more money Curry and he played well enough for D’Antoni to get himself traded (of course heart health/insurance, a year off, rebounding, and getting traded to the Clippers were all in Randolph’s favor).
    I guess the ideal thing would be for Curry to start the season getting 20-30 mpg with Darko and/or Hill and/or Lee backing him up, then trade Curry and give his minutes to Darko and/or Hill. I think D’Antoni would definitely view Hill as a center.

  15. DRed

    We basically have to give Curry significant minutes at center, because that’s the only way we’re going to bamboozle someone into taking him off our hands. If he can get himself up and down the court fast enough and play 30 minutes a night (an Eddy Curry sized if) he should be able to post some pretty gaudy scoring numbers and I’m pretty confident that we’d be able to dump him on someone else.

  16. Frank O.

    Thomas B.:
    “I do disagree with the comment that Al did not score in the clutch. Do you recall those two games against the Clippers when the Knicks needed a bucket? The ball came to Al on the block, a quick spin move, a drive, and a dunk with just a few seconds left on the clock! Of course, he hung on the rim, got a tech, allowed the Clips to tie the game and we lost in overtime. But he did make the basket. That is one thing you can’t take from him, well that and doozer sticks.”

    This made me laugh out load, at work. cheers

  17. Mike Kurylo Post author

    “If Curry winds up getting any amount of time this season, Harrington’s style will mesh much better offensively than Z, rebounds notwithstanding.”

    My wife could snare a few offensive rebounds against that front court.

    “It agree it seems a bit odd that Al Fraggleton was awarded a “B” when his 16/25 averages to a 3.2 on the 5 point scale (64%). That looks more like a “D+” to me”

    Expectations definitely make a percentage of this. I don’t have the same expectations from the 8th man as I do from their best players. Harrington was a part time starter, and although he contributed very little outside of scoring, he wasn’t that bad. Perhaps having visions of Jamal Crawford, Zach Randolph, and Eddy Curry scoring inefficiently made me think of Al more favorably. If you’re a one trick scoring pony, a decent TS% & a low turnover rate helps.

  18. Rashidi

    Harrington is a great sixth man, but he’s simply stretched as a starter since he’s the ultimate tweener.

    I would love for him to be backing up David Lee as I think they compliment each other rather well. It’s tough to keep him on the bench though when your alternatives at center are Eddy Curry, Darko Milicic, and Jared Jeffries.

  19. Jafa

    And now for something completely different…
    ——————–
    ESPN reports that:

    All-Star forward Rashard Lewis of the Orlando Magic has been suspended without pay for 10 games for testing positive for an elevated testosterone level, the NBA announced Thursday.

    “First and foremost I take full responsibility for the situation and accept the corresponding penalty,” Lewis said in a statement released by the league. “Toward the end of the season I took an over-the-counter supplement which at the time I did not realize included a substance banned by the NBA.

    “I apologize to Magic fans, my teammates and this organization for not doing the research that should come with good judgment.”

    The Orlando Sentinel reported that Lewis tested positive for DHEA, or dehydroepiandrosterone, a chemical compound banned by many sports leagues, including the NBA.
    ——————-
    So, here are my questions:

    Can steroids enhance the performance of a basketball player? How many times have we heard this over-the-counter excuse? Is it even valid anymore?

    Are there any current nba players you think are taking steroids?

  20. rohank

    Speaking of Al against the Clippers, didn’t we lost BOTH of those games because of his boneheaded decision to slap the backboard/hang on the rim after making a shot? I was at the 2nd game, and b/c of his play, randolph made the free throw, chandler bricked a 3 at the buzzer, and we lost in OT. ……..So I would say that Al’s “clutch” contributions are really a wash…

  21. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    There is little doubt that a substance that boosts testosterone or hGH would be beneficial to professional basketball players. Aside from the obvious mass growth, it also helps the body recover after a grueling workout (say, 40 minutes of sprinting, strafing, and jumping). The ability to recover from a training session in about 50% of the normal time is a valuable trait for any professional athlete.

    Given the length of the NBA season, I would assume that steroid and illegal substance use would be commonplace. When you take a team deep into the playoffs, you’re logging 100 games over seven months. That’s hell on a body, regardless of its superior genetic limitations.

    I don’t want to draw attention to this site (and a fair, even-minded, and well-written site it is) as a place of libel (hello, Deadspin), but some of the NBA’s superstars have the bodies — and jawlines — that would lead one to question the legitimacy of their physiques.

    Just sayin.

  22. madgrinch

    i realize al played reasonably well but for the season i find it hard to believe he was as good for the knicks as crawford.

    in d’antoni’s offense crawford really cut down on his 1 on 1 play and let the offense find him shots…he had a TS% of .571 at the time of the trade a good bit more efficient than when al was letting them go.

    also crawford despite his poor field goal % generally helped his team shoot more efficiently, in his last full season as a knick the knicks had an efg% of .483 when he was on the court to .445 when he wasn’t..

    through no fault of harrington his arrival is probably the cause of why the knicks season went south so fast in the 2nd half of the season, when crawford (and to a lesser extent collins) were dealt it left a huge void at guard , which burnt out duhon the only real pg on the roster and once the bottom fell out of duhon the season was .

  23. GAx

    Apparently the substance that got Rashard in trouble isn’t even that bad and is barely effective at its supposed ill/beneficial effects. This wasn’t a case of a pockmarked behind in my mind, though I guess it’ll hurry VC’s integration into that lineup. Time for Pietrus to gain some minutes eh?

  24. Thomas B.

    “Speaking of Al against the Clippers, didn’t we lost BOTH of those games because of his boneheaded decision to slap the backboard/hang on the rim after making a shot?”

    Oh yes. But that is what makes it so clutch. In two games with the Knicks needing a bucket to tie or go ahead, Al did just the right thing. He used his speed and size to finish at the rim against a team without a shot blocker on the floor. Crawford would have just thrown up an off-balance-fade-away-jumper. Al didn’t settle for that. He made the clutch basket. How could he have hung on the rim in the NY game, or pull on the rim and slap the backboard in the LA game unless he made the basket first.

    Yes, he is dumb but he was still clutch…twice.

    BTW, I am kidding here. Those rim hanging stunts were the dumbest and second dumbest thing I’ve seen a Knick do since Greg Anthony fought Kevin Johnson in the ugliest shirt this side of the 70’s.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIvyj2KVyG4

  25. Caleb

    off-topic, Chad Ford has a pretty good roundup of which teams have cap space next summer. Still a lot of questions about where the cap will fall. I’m not quite buying the league projections, but times are tough, no doubt.
    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=CapSpace2010-090807

    The Knicks could spend as big as anyone besides the Nets and Heat, but it would require letting Lee and Nate walk… and becoming a bottom-5 team in the process. Even then there would only be room for one max FA, not two.

    We could maybe sign Lee and still have enough for one big FA. But not if we also sign Sessions.

    Of course we might find a taker for Curry or Jeffries. Right?!?

    Lots of variables.

  26. d-mar

    For what it’s worth, LeBron announced today that he’s “keeping his options open” and will not sign an extension with the Cavs. I still think he stays in Cleveland, but it gives us desperate Knicks fans some shred of hope to cling to anyway.

  27. mase

    just curious but who do u think wins a 7 game series?

    Team A
    Duhon
    Hughes
    Harrington
    Lee
    Jeffries/ curry

    Vs
    Team B
    Nate
    Chandler
    Gallo
    Milicic
    Hill/ Douglas

  28. sj12

    Team B probably wins because of Nate’s ability to create. Team A doesn’t really have any one who can create their own shot other than Harrington (sometimes). But, it’s a little hard to tell because Team B has so many unknowns. Will Hill, Douglas, and Gall be effective? Although, I guess it doesn’t really matter cause they’re all on our team anyways.

  29. cav0011

    I think Team B would win in 5. What does team A has really ineffective outside shooting and other then Lee a bunch of players that are going to have a hard time staying in the NBA (might be a little harsh). The only reason I think Team A will win a single game is Nate will be lazy on D and lee and duhon will eat them alive with the P n’ R.

  30. mase

    i think most people would pick team B. I guess my point is that we are an improved team already and should exceed 32 wins.
    ideally it would look like this come starting day:

    Nate/duhon/douglas
    Chandler/hughes
    Gallo/harrington
    Lee/JJ
    Milicic/Hill/curry

    If we add Sessions(and he fits the offense as expected) we are probably a playoff team..

  31. BK

    mase, replace Hughes with Gallo and forget Curry on Team A. You then have D’Antoni’s type of team with 3 tall wing players (4 if you want to be generous and Lee improves his outside shot). Of course, the team would have it a bit rough on D and on the boards against bigger teams, but it would be fun to watch.

    More realistically, Hill may crack the starting lineup if he can shake off the rust and rough spots shown in league play. I don’t have much faith in Darko or Eddy as starters with the limited information we have.

Comments are closed.