2009 Report Card: Jared Jeffries

It’s hard to believe that Jared Jeffries averaged a half a game’s worth of minutes (23.4 mpg) for the Knicks last year. It’s hard to blame D’Antoni because Jeffries was able to defend multiple positions, and the Knicks have been short on defenders at every position. Prior to the season start, D’Antoni wanted Jeffries to play center, but that never materialized. At some point during the season, the Knicks used the 6-11 forward to cover fast point guards. The idea worked for a short while, as Jeffries’ combination of length and quickness was able to disrupt the rhythm of smaller players. However it was short lived as eventually they just sped past him to the basket.

Other than defensive versatility, Jeffries doesn’t bring anything else to the table other than offensive rebounding (3.5 oreb/36). He doesn’t block a lot of shots or rebound well enough for a 6-11 guy. His scoring is dreadful, both in volume (8.1 pts/36) and efficiency (ts% 47.3%). By the way, if you hear rumors that Jeffries is working on his jumpshot this offseason, don’t get excited. Last year reports came in that Jeffries practicing his jumper, and he shot 26.9% on them, almost identical to the 26.7% the year before. New York could use to move Jeffries this season because it would give the team an extra $6.9M in free space next summer, but even D’Antoni’s offense can’t make Jeffries look good.

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

Grade: F

Similarity Scores:

.000 Jared Jeffries 2009 NYK 9.4 .473 .441 8.1 3.5 6.3 2.2 1.3 0.9 1.8
.067 Joel Kramer 1983 PHO 8.8 .459 .423 8.0 3.2 6.9 2.9 1.2 0.5 1.7
.077 Danny Vranes 1986 SEA 7.8 .475 .461 6.9 2.6 6.4 1.6 1.4 0.7 1.3
.096 Reggie King 1985 SEA 6.9 .477 .423 7.0 1.8 5.1 2.2 1.2 0.5 1.8
.112 Keith Askins 1995 MIA 12.3 .493 .442 9.7 3.6 8.3 1.6 1.5 0.7 1.1
.113 Eduardo Najera 2004 DAL 11.5 .483 .451 8.8 3.3 7.8 1.2 1.7 0.9 1.4
.124 Mark Madsen 2003 LAL 9.3 .458 .423 8.0 4.0 7.3 1.8 0.7 0.9 1.2
.137 Johnny Baum 1974 TOT 11.6 .480 .450 12.1 2.4 5.9 1.8 1.1 0.5 1.4
.142 Jaren Jackson 1995 PHI 8.7 .446 .397 9.8 2.5 5.9 2.7 1.3 0.7 2.4
.144 Jabari Smith 2005 NJN 8.4 .482 .422 9.2 1.6 6.2 2.1 1.4 0.8 2.2
.145 E.C. Coleman 1978 GSW 9.1 .493 .475 9.3 2.3 7.5 2.0 1.3 0.5 1.9

Looking at the year column on this list, there aren’t a lot of players of Jeffries’ mold these days. Perhaps the almighty dollar has taught youngsters that developing scoring (at least in volume) is more important than other abilities. Or perhaps this list shows us that if you’re really tall, you contribute almost nothing and still be in the NBA. The difference between Jared Jeffries and Eduardo Najera or Mark Madsen is that they were fortunate enough to play on good teams. Had the Knicks been a great team in the last 5 years, trading Jeffries probably wouldn’t be as difficult.

And I’ll end with a quote from 2002:

Question: Is there a player in the NBA right now who you can compare your game to?

Jeffries: I’d say Danny Manning, a Dirk Nowitzki-type. I’m 6-11, so there are a lot of different things I can do as far as handling the ball and shooting, passing.

Liked it? Take a second to support Mike Kurylo on Patreon!

Mike Kurylo

Mike Kurylo is the founder and editor of KnickerBlogger.net. His book on the 2012 Knicks, "We’ll Always Have Linsanity," is on sale now. Follow him on twitter (@KnickerBlogger).

99 thoughts to “2009 Report Card: Jared Jeffries”

  1. F…care to explain how this grading system works?

    he’s a defensive ‘specialist’ in an offensive minded system… where are the def. eff. #’s to support your grading?

    also, if he has no trade value at all explain Why?
    A playoff team could use him effectively as a defensive stopper, He was a favorite in Washington and his contract is expiring after this coming season.

  2. JJ got the grade he deserves. Neither he nor Curry contributed anything of value in their time on the floor. People call JJ a defensive specialist, but he is not a defensive game changer like Tashaun “X-files” Prince. (When you look at Prince do you wonder if E.T. had a girl friend in Compton? Think about it.)

    Like Al Harrington, JJ is a one trick pony. The problem is that he did not do his trick well enough to make up for the glaring holes in the rest of his game. It was defensive energy that did not translate in anything tangible. At least Al did his trick well.

    Compare JJ to who I hope will take most of his minutes, Gallanari. In terms of defensive stats Gallanari only trails JJ in rebounding rate. The difference in blocks and steals is negligible. Gallanari seems at least just as energetic on defense (active hands and feet) as JJ, but Gallanari is a waaaaaaay better shooter/scorer. Its not even close. So if a skinny, pale, 6’10ish guy has to be on the floor, I’d rather it be Gallanari.

    The “-87” for rootability was just mean. -25 is about right. Can you explain the teamwork score. I did not think he was a poor teammate. Now if you mean how he dragged the team down on offense, then a 3 is kind.

  3. In defense of Jeffries, it’s impossible to accurately gauge the defensive abilities of a player when 3 or 4 of your teammates are indifferent defenders. Defense is effective only as a team strategy. One might atone for a single poor defender, more than that and no player is going to consistently stop an NBA scorer, especially when there’s a big hole in the middle.

    That said, he’s pretty good at defending the 2 or 3, especially the jab step jumper. He doesn’t rebound, so don’t put him on the 4 or 5, which I saw far too often.

    He has improved his free throw shooting the last three years, albeit to a paltry 60%, so he is capable of growing as a player.

    I’d like to see him get comfortable on the wing in fast breaks. The few times I saw him in that situation, he seemed surprised to get the ball. It would be his best (only?) chance to score efficiently.

    I really don’t see him getting many minutes, though, barring injury.

  4. the only Knick deserving of an F grade is Curry(why isnt he in breach of contract?)

    even Marbury deserves a pass since he never played a minute due to the coach

  5. “F…care to explain how this grading system works?”

    Do I really need to justify why Jeffries deserves an F? He’s does one thing well (offensive rebound), one thing at an average rate (can defend multiple positions – although he’s not particularly good and defending any of them), and is bad at everything else. That’s like taking a test, getting your name right, the date partially right, and just making random marks on the rest of it. That’s an F in my book.

    I can’t think of a rotation-worthy NBA player that contributes less.

  6. Okay, Jared Jeffries gets an F. But Al Harrington gets a B?
    And we’re not scoring-prejudiced?

    Jeffries is a defensive specialist on a team that plays no recognizable form of team defense.
    I mean, we’re still complaining about guards going under picks rather than over…high school fundamentals.

    Al is a scorer in a scoring focused scheme. He does really nothing else, but score. But he’s also on a team where ball movement is essential, and he either can’t or won’t pass.

    How about they both get C minuses, recognizing they both are role players being asked to do more than they are capable?

  7. It’s Mike’s site, and I always enjoy a good spirited takedown. An “F” to me, though, implies complete and total uselessness. I think of Roberson and Wilcox in that category. Jeffries is an offensive cipher (apart from the rebounding and occasional good pass), but I do think he has value on the defensive end. And he’s always struck me as a good and selfless teammate, so not sure where the “2” for teamwork fits.

    Of course, his contract is heinous and he shouldn’t be getting anywhere near major minutes. But (again, my opinion) his uselessness/disappointment factor, such as it is, doesn’t approach the depths of Jerome James or Eddy Curry.

  8. Frank and BK:

    It’s hard not to be scoring-prejudiced when we’re talking about a “defensive specialist” who is extremely, unbelievably inefficient scorer. It doesn’t really matter how good a defender a person is if he is completely invisible on O. With that PER, the Knicks were, in effect, playing 4 on 5 with him on the floor. And for a 6’10” defensive specialist, his block and steal figures are awful. His season was awful on both ends of the floor. What’s there to defend about his play?

    The comparison to Wilcox is unfounded; Wilcox’s offense is considerably better than Jeffries’ (his career PER is over 15, which leads me to believe this season was an aberration) and his AST/36 and AST% are only slightly worse than JJ’s.

    How can one call Jeffries a selfless teammate when he’s got an AST/36 at a whopping 2.2? As he has no semblance of a jumper, why should he hog the ball to begin with?

  9. Jared Jeffries:defense :: Wedding band:music

    There’s a lot of versatility, but after 10 minutes of play you need a lot of booze to tolerate any more.

  10. Cock Jowles, no need to get contentious — we’re arguing over the margins here. Whether one believes that Jeffries is dead weight at the bottom of the cesspool, or whether some believe (like I do) that he can occasionally get his eyes above the level of the muck — it’s still the cesspool we’re talking about here. :-)

    For what it’s worth, I’ve been as dismissive of Jeffries as anyone. But perhaps my impressions softened a little because around the time the playoff chase ended in mid-March (3 weeks left in the season), both Hughes and Richardson suffered ankle sprains, and JJ was forced back in the starting lineup. I watched most of those games, and was surprised that 30+ minutes from him didn’t make my eyes bleed. In a few games, he even played a reasonable role in wins or close games.

    But with that said, I will come back to support Mike with an anecdote. I was trying to think of “rotation-worthy players that contribute less” than Jeffries, since I watched a lot of League Pass last year and saw some dreadful guys getting time. This is what I came up with off the top of my head…not a perfect or even fair comparison, but an interesting spectrum of awfulness:


  11. He is not my fab Knick but what him make the rotation this season and Mike go crazy and start a ‘ I hate Jj ‘ anti fan club!

  12. I’ m not familiar with this grading system but sure hope that an F is rock bottom grade – Jared is a scale setter, like ice with water – 0°C – you can only get up from there. He wouldn’t get 23 minutes in my hometown team(2.division- Slovenian championship!! -ok maybe that’ a bit rude)
    But when i saw him play i said to my self what the hell are the Knicks doing with their money – conspiracy theory, sabotage – that went through my mind….F is legit!!
    He’ s a nice guy though…..

  13. Ok – i exhaled and am tranquil – was blinded by his 6,4 and 6,8 million he earns – is definitively better than Madsen and Najera, other guys i don’t remember.
    His 23 minutes came out of necessity of a thin roster and asset speculation….for his standards he played ok, but i think(hope) 08/09 was the last chance he will get in a career for a mayor improvement – he blew it.
    He’ s an F – but glaciers are melting…..

  14. I agree with Frank O (mase and Cavjam) 100% on this one. There is no way that Jeffries deserves an F, on any grading scale involving the Knicks, despite his deficiencies.

    First off, on offense Jeffries does remind me of Barney Fife and I cring everytime he gets the ball near the rim. I am usually betting on the rim blocking his shot before the opponent that is no where near him. But grading him primarily on his offense is like grading Bruce Bowen on his. That is not his primary purpose.

    Jeffries is the best defender on the team — hands down. He is also an excellent team player. You always hear about his excellent work ethic and he never gives the coaching staff a problem. He does what he is asked to do and what he can do well. He has guarded the point, played a little center and some forward. He the consummate professional. The teamwork score is totally off.

    D’Antoni like Jeffries because of his length, mobility and defensive presence. He is the type of guy D’Antoni loves because he thinks defense is a mindset, not a skill set. It is not Jeffries fault that the team does not respect defense, but defensively the team looks much better with him on the floor than without him. If Gallinari is half as good as some think he is, Jeffries, Gallo, Chandler and Douglas on the floor could be very surprising together. On the Knicks, his defensive score should be the best.

    Jeffries is not my favorite player (if Hill improves, Jeffries will not be needed at all) but he is certainly better, on this sorry team, than F.

  15. I agree with those who say an “F” is too low. There is no question his offense can make one cringe. But his rootability is much better than a “1” and I would have given his performance/expectations a “3”. The year before he was injured and did almost nothing for the team. This year he worked hard, came to camp in shape, and plays hard. Maybe the rating Mike gave was based on his expectations for a typical power forward or his expectations for that salary. But Jeffries is clearly not that and also is not asked to be that by the coaching staff. Actually he more than met my expectations, because I was worried he would be like the previous year. Instead he played hard all season. And watching games, I felt Jeffries had an impact sometimes, mostly because he worked hard and hustled. To me, this made him rootable.

    Frank O. compared his grade to Harrington’s grade, which was fair. I think you could also look at Hughes’ grade. I liked Jeffries contribution to the team better than Hughes, which give him at least a “D”. I certainly felt he was better in the team concept.

  16. Regarding the Harrington comparison, Al averaged a lot of points at a good rate. Are you saying that Jeffries was the defensive equivalent? And what about the converse – was Harrington that bad defensively? (Make no mistake Jeffried was putrid on offense). If Jared was equally valuable (especially in D’Antoni’s eyes) then why did Al average 12 more minutes a game?

    Let’s face it Jeffries played 23 minutes a night because he could play multiple positions and D’Antoni could fit him when the Knicks had no one else. He could play a modicum of defense at a few spots, but if he were truly worthy in that regard – he would have seen some real time.

    Honestly I could see Jeffries getting a D, but I don’t think F is so far off.

  17. I didn’t mean to suggest that Jeffries did as well as Harrington, just that his grading standards seemed tougher. Harrington clearly did better. I am OK with a D for Jeffries.

  18. JJ is certainly not a defensive specialist… look back at the game the knicks lost to portland on a roy buzzer beater- jj was put in the game to guard him and gave up about 5 feet to roy and still let him blow by- it was perhaps the most pathetic defensive play i’ve ever seen… jj can guard about 4 positions, but he can’t do any of them near decently… personally i think hes one of the worst players in the league, easy

    f is generous

  19. This will sound odd coming from me but; can’t we just take a poll and stop arguing over JJ’s F?

    What grade does JJ deserve?
    No Pass
    He was in the wrong class all year
    He played for us?
    Tuition due
    Cash for Clunker

  20. They words I’m typing right now are not worth wasting on Jeffries. I think if we could package him with Nate it would be our best offseason move possible.

  21. Knick fans arguing over whether Jeffries deserves a “D” or “F”. Ain’t the offseason great?

    rayhed, Jeffries is not as good a defender as some are making him out to be, but you misremember the final play of the Portland game. (“the most pathetic defensive play” you’ve ever seen? You didn’t watch enough of the Warriors and Knicks last season, that’s for sure).

    The Roy buzzer-beater was a team screw-up (including the coach who forgot he had a foul to give), which started most blatantly with Duhon’s teammates ignoring his call to switch. Jeffries was picked off by Oden (a battle most defenders wouldn’t win), and Lee put up pathetic resistance once Roy got in the lane.

    You can read Mike’s account of it here:


  22. He was in the wrong class all year…. I think he was supposed to play for a D3 Girls team.

  23. This is odd news:

    “On Thursday morning, point guard Troy Hudson will work out for the New York Knicks. Last week, Hudson held a work out in Las Vegas for the Oklahoma City Thunder, Memphis Grizzlies, Philadelphia 76ers, and Detroit Pistons. New York was pursuing free agent Ramon Sessions, but sources tell RealGM’s Alex Kennedy that talks have broken down because the Knicks will not offer anything more than a one year contract. Hudson has averaged 9.0 points and 3.4 over the course of his eleven-year career.”

    Maybe Nate is staying on after all?

  24. also, Kelly Dwyer pretty much sums up how I feel about Mark Jackson as a head coach:

    “Being bad at a job that only runs from Christmas until the second week in June doesn’t make you a head coaching prospect. Your TV work clearly shows you as someone who is a step or 12 behind the modern NBA, and while the odd Haywoode Workman anecdote is nice, it doesn’t mean I think you have any clue as to whether or not the Portland Trail Blazers were one of the fastest or slowest teams in the NBA last season.”

  25. Mike:

    I’m new to the advanced stats game, but I’m trying.
    Here’s some stuff I’ve been looking at:

    For the 08-09 season Al Harrington was the 8th worst in the league as far as wins produced goes, or WoW.
    From what I have learned, from your site and from the WoW site, it is a way to look at players across the board to get a sense of their affect on winning and losing, based on their varied skill sets.
    For wins produced Harrington got a -2.01, and his wins per 48 minutes was -.038.

    Only Al Thornton, Antoine Wright, Bobby Brown, Donte Greene, Andrea Bargnani, Jason Kapono, and Ricky Davis were worse.

    Jeffries doesn’t even make it into the worst 45 players. True, his WoW stats haven’t changed much in these past two years, and they are not very good, but that’s not surprising even to the naked eye.
    There are only three Knicks with above average WoW scores, Lee, Robinson and Duhon.

    I suspect your response will send me scattering to read more about advanced stats, but I’m curious to know your thinking on these numbers. It would seem that by WoW standards, Big Al, in fact, sucks as much as I think he does, and doesn’t find Jeffries as sucky as Al.

  26. JJ and Harrington are both flawed players. Harrington is a pretty skilled player who thinks he is better than he is and tries to do too much at the expense of his teammates. He does not seem to understand how to truly maximize his positive impact on a game. Jeffries is abysmal offensively and also doesn’t seem to get the most out of his athleticism and length on D, even allowing for how he gets jerked around between 4 positions in the current situation.

    It is logical to be more harsh on JJ because he was signed to a long term contract with high expectations and turned out to be an injury prone, cap-eating bust who probably costed us Balkman as much as anybody. Harrington was acquired in a lateral move with an expiring contract and with modest expectations…a no-lose situation. But in absolute terms, Jeffries’ play last year was what we’ve come to expect, and Harrington was maybe slightly above the expectations one would have for a castoff from another team.

    I would personally give Harrington a C and Jeffries a D. I don’t think Jeffries is as “unrootable” as Mike K judged him to be. He seems like a really nice guy who works hard but doesn’t seem to have the ability to improve. It’s not his fault he was offered an obscene contract by the worst GM in the league. Harrington, on the other hand, strikes me as selfish in that he still doesn’t get it after 10 years in the league, despite having the skillset necessary for success. It’s all between the ears. He’s saying the right things now, but I’ll believe it when I see it.

  27. who knew jared jeffries grade would create so much debate.

    i don’t care for al harrington. in fact he causes me to yell at the tv on near the end of the scale reserved for tim thomas (“why is he just standing in the corner again!”). but he seemed to honestly try, despite his deficiencies. and when he is hot, he is sure fun to watch (like crawford). my expectations weren’t that high when he arrived.

    however, after seeing jeffries in the past, i had no expectations at all for him, and i guess he contributed more than anyone would like at the beginning of the season. but he is so bad i felt sorry for him. there are times when he got stranded with the ball above the elbow on a botched pick and roll and seemed to be afraid or unsure what to do. what resulted was often bad.

    they are both grossly over-paid, but the Knicks signed jeffries, not harrington, which makes the contract sting so much more.

    i guess a D- would be fair.

  28. It’s hard for me to fathom calling Jeffries the best defender on the team with those steal and block numbers. He’s just not a good player. He’s being paid higher than the equivalent of the full MLE, right? That’s insane.

  29. Frank O.

    Good stuff. I’d like to say that in general Berri’s system tends to overrate rebounding and underrate volume scoring. If you don’t have good peripheral stats for your position, and you take a lot of shots (which likely means you do so inefficiently) good luck. It is one rating system which has its strengths and weaknesses, like any other.

    Another rating system, PER, has Harrington 3rd on the team (16.4), and Jared Jeffries last (9.4). According to PER, Jeffries was the 6th worst player in the NBA last year (with 1300+ minutes).

  30. Mike doesn’t PER get accused of overrating high-usage (not quite volume scoring since asists are incorporated, I think)? Is there a happy medium measure out there?

  31. The reason I went to WoW was that I felt it was one of the only rating systems out there that would permit you to compare a purely offensive person and a purely defensive person and come away with a reasonable assessment.
    WoW’s check up matches up pretty well with who are the top players in the league by perception, performance, and star power with very few anomolies.
    I think WoW even “prematurely” showed how good Rondo was before people really saw him as a very good guard. One of the guys who created WoW – I think it was Berri – even cited Rondo as an anomoly in his top tier players because he felt the data pool too shallow. And yet, the very next year Rondo was exactly what WoW was projecting him to be. He played a major role in the Celtics championship run.
    I think with the other two systems, if you score a lot of points and are relatively efficient, and do virtually nothing else, they are going to rate you relatively well.
    But I’m not sure a guy that’s only a scorer – unless you are Bernard King and putting up 30 pts. – and doesn’t do anything else well is a good player, and likely will make his team worse.
    I mean Randolph is viewed as a team killer, and he can score, albeit inefficiently, and rebounds exceptionally well. His PER is pretty damn good.
    Harrington scores relatively efficiently, but literally does nothing else well,and his PER is good, too. How can guys that make you feel like they kill your team be seen as very good. How is it that Randolph’s PER is always higher than Lee’s when Lee rebounds better, scores more efficiently, and actually tries to play defense? It’s obvious between the two who is the player one would prefer to have on their team…
    I think that is why WoW found Harrington to be so overrated in these other ratings methods.

    Btw, PER tends to favor high use scorers, which maybe is how it should be because the object of the game is to score more points than the other guy. But I still think that scoring can be done well by a lot of people. The team that wins championships is the team that has the ability to get stops, and for that, you need strong, well rounded defenders. It’s just that there are not many systems that know how to account for that as a performance measure. What I like about WoW is Berri tries to address that.

    And it fit my argument about Harrington’s and Jeffries relative worth..;)

  32. I like this Report cards and different opinions about them: they inspire abstract numbers to have emotions….

    I have a proposal – let’s rate or give a grade to our Knicks as a team : Easiest way: 30 teams/ 5 grades / 6 teams each grade/; A= LAL, ORL, CLE….., B…, and a big F for SAC, OKL,MEM…. Since the Knicks were nr.8 from bottom up, grade small D is what they get according to the system…..

    If i rate a player on an A teem I give him a factor 1, if a B team then 0,9….. if a F team then 0,6( I dont think it’s fair to an individual to ponder him too much with team success. Linear for an F team it would mean factor 0,2 -All the Knicks with an F – 1, 0.8, 0.6…0.2)

    You have the best(one, two or three) players on the team and it goes down to the worst….On a five point scale it would mean that a basketball god gets 25 points.

    If we translate this to the Knicks and JJ we get – Mike’ s 8 points x 0,7 = 5,6 = F. 8 points on a linear scale are a D-

    But this means also that no Knick could get better than a good C(17,5 points) even if he was a basketball god…….but with a BBall god – then the Knicks would be an A team :)

  33. Frank O.,

    PER and WOW are opposites on scoring volume. PER overvalues scoring volume and WOW penalizes you for shooting even if you score. Hollinger’s logic on PER was that a guy who scores 20 points/36 (or whatever) plays a more valuable offensive role than a low volume scorer. Berri’s logic is that possessions are valuable and a FGA (without an offensive rebound) ends a possession. Just different philosophies, in the end I think that by taking somewhat extreme views both miss the boat.

    WOW makes little effort to quantify defense, other than causing TOs and rebounds (also included in PER). Causing TOs does not equal defense. Some players might accumulate a lot of steals, for example, by overplaying the ball and end up getting burned on a lot of plays where they don’t come up with the steal. A major criticism of WOW is it’s emphasis on rebounding: a player of a certain height who plays close to the basket is just going to come up with a baseline number of rebounds regardless of his skill (call it the Eddy Curry line). Some people would also argue that Jeffries gets a lot of offensive rebounds because he’s just standing around unguarded most of the time on offense.

    You raise some interesting points, but I would still say that Harrington was the more valuable player last season for the Knicks. He’s not much worse than Jeffries defensively (which I think is the key… if Jeffries were a stopper and Harrington a bum I might agree with you, but that’s just not the case). They’re pretty equivalent rebounders (Harrington is a much better defensive rebounder, while Jeffries is a very offensive rebounder). Their steals numbers are very close, but Jeffries blocks more shots. Their assist-rates are close with Jeffries having an edge, but Jeffries is far more TO prone (TO-rate of 10.7 vs. 17.2). The edge in scoring is obvious: low-volume/low-efficiency vs. high-volume/medium efficiency.

    At the same time as I think it’s justified to call Harrington more valuable, I think people underrate Jeffries offensively. Make no mistake, he’s not a good offensive player. He is a strong offensive rebounder, though, and fairly intelligent.
    In the right situation (like Washington while he was there) he can be a rotation guy. Whether or not NYK are the right situation he might get plenty of minutes next season since trading him for an expiring contract would be key.

  34. “A major criticism of WOW is it’s emphasis on rebounding: a player of a certain height who plays close to the basket is just going to come up with a baseline number of rebounds regardless of his skill (call it the Eddy Curry line).”

    I should have also mentioned the position adjustments, which take care of this to some extent and measure rebounds more by skill. All I wanted to say is that rebounds do not equal man defense. Basically, WOW only uses box score stats and does not even attempt to quantify man defense. Although, TOs caused (stls and blks) and rebounds are often proxies for good defense.

  35. TDM beat me to the article on Curry. Bah! Humbug.

    Anyway, I am not drinking the Curry flavored Kool-Aid this year. Even if he shows up to camp at 305 pounds, he is just a lighter version of the frustrating player. In fact if all they can mention is his weight, then I am even more concerned. Has anyone said that Curry’s foot work is improving? How about his ability to pass out of double coverage, or singlecoverage for that matter? Has he learned to box out, block a shot, make a post move without an offensive foul call? He may get lighter, he may play 30 minutes but to what end? Can anyone expect that we will get much out of Eddy Curry. At this point in his career is there any reason to think he can still be a productive player?

    At best he can be good enough to trade, which I guess is a very good thing.

  36. According to PER Bruce Bowen was also one of the league’s worst players.

    Jeffries sucks, but an F?

    Curry’s season is F worthy.
    Marbury’s season is F worthy.
    Jerome James’ career is F worthy.

    Jeffries actually performed above our expectations for him.

    I wouldn’t give him any less than a D.

  37. Update!

    The Clips have traded for Rasual Butler a.k.a. “The Casual Butler.” Maybe they have soured on Sessions as well?

  38. Jared Jeffries was the best defender on the 2008-2009 New York Knicks.

    And Dave Brown was the best quarterback on the 1995 New York Giants.

  39. Thomas B. – apologies for scooping you. Ha.

    If Curry is able to regain even a fraction of his form from 06/07, I think Walsh will be able to trade Curry. That could be a big ‘if’ however.


    It appear that with the Clips trading for Butler, Sessions is running out of options. He may want to accept a short-term deal with the Knicks with the hope of starting next season, padding his stats and raising his value hopefully in time for the economy to turn around.

  40. Can you imagine Sessions and Robinson running the fastbreak? It would be a blur.

    Can you imagine Curry trying to run with them? It would be a miracle.

  41. I saw on ESPN.com Chad Ford has a new piece about the knicks future but “insider only”. Does anyone know what he says in the article?

  42. sj12

    He basically summarizes what Walsh has done with the knicks to date and then breaks down the future as such:

    1. get a superstar free agent in 2010 – highly unlikely
    2. get a tier 2 star in 2010 – very unlikely
    3. keep our crap team and pray for something in 2011

    Sadly, I tend to agree.

  43. sj12, here’s one word to describe it: depressing.

    he basically says the game plan of getting way under the cap in 2010 is blown up because the cap is down and they cannot get rid of curry and jj. he goes on to say that the “young core” of gallo, chandler, lee, nate is going to become just gallo and chandler because he doesnt want to sign lee or nate to long term deals so they will play for 1 year deals and be gone because we have to renounce their bird rights to get their cap holds off the books for 2010. so the options are by some miracle get rid of curry/jj and get 18M further under OR sign lee (and i say sessions over nate) to longer deals and build a young core that MAY lure lebron but will also get you way under the cap for 2011 when curry/jj are gone.

    he is actually quite right here… and (thank you Mike K for continuing to do the analysis on last year’s team) but it makes for much better conversation than al harrington vs jarred jeffries grading scale.

    donnie is in a TOUGH spot here. we bank on lebron or wade and dont sign lee or sessions with no ’10 pick we could be TERRIBLE for 5 more years…

    and btw amongst my knicks friends, i am the optimist.

  44. Oh yeah, because Chad Ford is NEVER wrong. How do you indicate sarcasm in type face?
    A long long time ago, in a post far far away…

    Before Randolph and Crawford were traded I remember posting that the Knicks should just find a way to hold out until Crawford, Curry, Randolph, and JJ come off the books in July 2011. That way you could lock up Lee and Nate and still have a good amount of cap space in 2011. Not a terrible year for free agents barring contract extensions. A list can be found here:

    If James does not opt out this summer, or sign an extension, he would be unrestricted in 2011, ditto Wade and Bosh but thats a pipe dream I’m sure. But there are some decent players on the list. Walsh sure is putting a lot of eggs in the July 2010 basket.

    So what do you think? Sign Lee and Robinson then take your shot in 2011 or go for broke in 2010?

  45. The Ford article doesn’t say anything radical, but outlines how depressing the situation has become with the cap shrinking the way it is. Effectively says: stay the course, keep head above water until 2011 when Jeffries/Curry come off the books.

    In this kind of environment, certain non-moves really hurt — not getting the #5 pick so that we could land Rubio, not trading Jeffries at the deadline last year, etc. Donnie’s done a fine job shedding some deadweight, but building a substantial core has been much tougher.

  46. Sign Lee and Sessions. Try and make the deals so that they go down in 2010 and then up.

    We are at $26M against a $51M cap (estimate)

    Sign Lee at $8M and Sessions at $3.5M for that year. Try like hell to get rid of JJ.

    Hope for LeBron in ’10 and TELL him we will have room for more in 2011 and beyond.

    That way you lock up the young core and pray like hell for the star.

  47. Sounds like Milwaukee wants to do a sign and trade with the Clips for Sessions. Can’t blame them, the Clips have more assets.


    This offseason isn’t exactly energizing the fan base thus far. I know it’s all about 2010, but geez, I’m starting to think we might… REALLY suck next year… and with no draft pick to show for it.

    Our rookies don’t look ready to contribute.
    Our vets are just playing to be able to stay in the league.
    And half or our actual “prospects” are pissed off and unsigned.

    Someone throw me a rainbow life preserver please!

  48. So fragile are we all???

    There is so much that still could happen, it is mind-boggling.
    A. The knicks could sign lee to a long term contract at roughly $8m
    B. The knicks could sign lee for 1 year and then renounce
    c. The knicks could sign and trade lee, plus either jeffries or curry…
    d. The knicks could get nate for a lot less than he wants, and nate will sign because apparently he really wants to be a knicks player.
    e. The knicks could let nate go and get sessions for long term or short term.
    f. The knicks could use nate in a sign and trade and land a decent guard and possibly shed a contract.
    The possibilities are endless, and then walsh has this cap saving thing he spoke of whereby he is able to clear cap space.

    Also, I’m not sure we are going to suck that bad. I think galinari is going to be a star. But who am I? :)
    And if they don’t get either lee or nate or session,and they sign some adequate guard to back duhon, who had a damn good season last year, they will have a lot of cap space.
    And then the economy could…could turn and the cap projection could be bogus.

    So, so, so much could happen,and much of it could happen within the next few weeks.

    I trust that Walsh has the patience to make smart moves. So far, he hasn’t acted rashly.
    No wonder Isiah had so much trouble. There is just immense pressure to do “something.” But sometimes the best thing to do is wait and see.

  49. It’s getting tough to be patient when I read that we’re working out Troy Hudson. What are we now, the Salvation Army? I wouldn’t even buy this guy lunch at McDonald’s…off the Dollar Menu. Are we just trying to find something funny to watch in order to pass the time, or what? Somebody needs a hobby…

  50. “I trust that Walsh has the patience to make smart moves. So far, he hasn’t acted rashly.
    No wonder Isiah had so much trouble. There is just immense pressure to do “something.” But sometimes the best thing to do is wait and see.”

    One thing we definitely dont have to worry about is Donnie Walsh not having patience.

  51. Frank O. – I wouldn’t say that WOW has “very few anomalies.” In fact it rated David Lee higher than Kobe Bryant. One thing to note about one number value player stats – they all have flaws. Most notably is that none can reliably rank defense, even +/-. No single stat can say whether one player is better than another. I tend to think of PER/WOW as a starting point for the discussion, not the conclusion.

    I’ll say this about the pair, look at the totality of their stats (per minute, efficiency, similarity scores) and judge for yourself how you feel about them statistically.


  52. Frank, I’m trying not to be contentious again, but we could have had Lawson and Blair and we got Hill and Douglas. I’m not quite on the Donny Ship yet.

  53. I agree with Frank O., there’s so many things that could happen in the next few weeks, and we need to see it play out before we act French and surrender prematurely. For one thing, I think the 2010 cap is still a moving target, and with the economy showing signs of improvement, it may change again. (I would think Stern would lean towards keeping it higher if it helped the Knicks, but that’s just a theory.) I still have confidence in Donnie (we all know AI would be a Knick right now if Isaiah was still here) and it is way too early to judge draft picks. And if Chad Ford is predicting doom and gloom for the Knicks, that’s a reason to celebrate based on his track record.

  54. Zut alors!

    Thanks for talking me down guys. I’m not so much down on Donnie – I think he’s done at the least and average to above-average job so far. We all had our favorites, but I think we did ok in the draft considering how it played out (I don’t believe we were ever getting that trade for the #5 pick, the T-Wolves gave more talent.) Hill was ranked 5-10 so I think it’s a pretty good pick and Douglas seems to have promise even though we spent a lot to pick him.
    I like that Walsh is being patient and leaving no stone unturned (earning his paycheck.)
    What bums me out is the reality of how little value our players have around the league and how we are being somewhat used as leverage (a desperate suitor) by free agents this year. I don’t doubt Donnie’s trying, but our group of duds, combined with the bad market where no one wants to take on $$$ is making it impossible to improve this year, much less, stay as good as last year.

    Frank’s list:

    A. The knicks could sign lee to a long term contract at roughly $8m
    — why would he do this when he wants 10-12 mil? 5% chance.

    B. The knicks could sign lee for 1 year and then renounce
    — I’m not sure what the Bird’s rights is all about, but more teams will have $$$ in 2010, and those that don’t get those top 3 might be willing to spend on Lee. But this is likely as a hold out helps nobody… 50% chance.

    c. The knicks could sign and trade lee, plus either jeffries or curry…
    — really doubtful. It will be hard to find a trade partner to pay Lee the 10 mil he wants, and then they are going to take Curry or Jeffries too? Not this year. A sign and trade of Lee alone is possible, but the trades thrown out so far (Webster and Blake?) are awful. S&T alone: 40% chance, S&T with Abbott or Costello: 5% chance.

    d. The knicks could get nate for a lot less than he wants, and nate will sign because apparently he really wants to be a knicks player.
    — Who knows if they even want Nate back? Yes an affordable deal with Nate would be great, but you’ve got to figure he’s worth 5 mil a year. And that doesn’t make us better, just less worse. Nate returning: 60% chance, S&T: 30% chance.

    e. The knicks could let nate go and get sessions for long term or short term.
    — also looking less likely. The Clips have better trade bait for a S&T if they are still interested which it sounds like they are. If they’re not, we can’t do a short term (you must offer a RFA at least 2 years) because the Bucks would match that. It would need to be at least a 4-5 year deal, which I would like, but would Sessions take under 4 mil a year? Doesn’t sound like it. Signing Sessions: 30% chance.
    f. The knicks could use nate in a sign and trade and land a decent guard and possibly shed a contract.
    — again, no one’s taking a player that we are arguing if he should get a D or an F for last year’s play. Last year’s trade offer from the Kings was Nate and Jeffries as a straight salary dump. This was tough call, but ultimately, I don’t think that Donnie wanted to lose Nate and get zero assets in return. Perhaps they will revisit that, but the Kings now have Evans, so maybe there’s less interest in Nate now. The odds of this could go up during the season when teams give up and maybe want Nate as a box office draw. Jeffries/Nate S&T: 40% chance.

    So as you see, we definitely suck. The hope is that Gallo, Chandler, Hill and Douglas all become amazing players during the course of the year. And that would be fun to root for if bums like Harrington, Hughes, Darko, Curry and Jeffries weren’t stealing their minutes. I hope we get Lee and Nate back, but truthfully they are a good team’s fourth to seventh best player. I suppose this was destined to be a slow off-season thanks to Zeke’s foolishness and the current economy. I just hope our young guys show enough promise to entice free agents next year…

  55. Do you think all this time since Sessions first came up has cost them their chance of signing him, b/c the Clippers hadn’t been mentioned as a S&T until recently? Its not a big deal I mean we’ll be crappy next year w/ or w/o him and the only way anyone comes here on 10 or 11 is if they have a hard on for NYC not for anything basketball related.

  56. Just for fun today, I started to play around with numbers to see what Jeffries would have to do to get a TS of .50% or better or an eFG of .50% or so.
    The bottom line, it’s not realistic to think he could ever get there in either category.
    He simply can’t get there without a good 3pt shot and a higher shooting percentage in close, and, in the case of TS, shooting at least 20 percent better from the line. (yes, I actually spent time calculating TS and eFG…)

    But there are some things one can do to improve him fairly radically on the defensive end, in theory.

    1. Stop using him to defend guards. Guards keep him on the perimeter, which reduces his ability to play a role on the defensive boards. Defensive boards are probably more valuable than him trying to contain a guard that often can’t be contained. And he may be more effective against penetrating guards if he can come from elsewhere as a healping shot blocker.
    2. Stop using him to guard centers. He’s not strong or thick enough to handle centers. He gets pushed around too much, gets boxed out too easily, and is probably more effective defensively from the weak side (ala Camby) than when a center has his fat ass slapping Jeffries around. He’d probably have more blocks, and more defensive rebounds.
    3. Let him guard small forwards and sometimes power forwards. His quickness would make him an effective defender on the wings, possibly increasing his steals because SFs and PFs, generally, aren’t as effective in ball handling as guards and aren’t as likely to over-power him physically. In this role, he is in a better position for defensive rebounds, and weak side defense (blocked shots) against overpowering centers or PFs.

    I am surmising that by narrowing down his defensive responsibilities to a role that most reasonable players would expect (playing one or maybe two positions) his defensive numbers would improve significantly.
    I think his relative versatility has been a curse for him.

  57. I truly learned more about [mis]managing a basketball team from Isaiah Thomas’s tenure and specifically its aftermath than anything else. At the time it was easy to talk yourself into most of his moves “Curry over Sweetney? Sure. Jared Jeffries? Why not–what’s another $5mm flyer which might add some sorely needed defense.” Years later and these are the bane of the team. The remote prospect of dumping them will determine the team’s fate for another half decade or so.

    How many times has the word ‘depressing’ been used in this post?

  58. Haven’t actually read the Chad Ford article, but sounds identical to what we’ve all been discussing for months.

    “So, so, so much could happen,and much of it could happen within the next few weeks.”

    Agree with Frank O. there. Every GM in a rebuilding situation has some tough decisions to make… some make the right ones and others don’t. Donnie will continue to make his, whether we like them or not. In the end we can either praise him or bemoan his tenure… we’ll have to see.
    To say that he’s stuck doing anything (hoping his young guys produce, pursuing 2010 free agents, etc.), though, is ludicrous. I’m sure he’ll continue to evaluate opportunities as they appear, he can’t make magic happen. Although, hopefully it will appear that he has in hindsight.

    While it’s great to land the #1 pick or a big time FA, a lot of unheralded moves and bone headed decisions from other teams generally contribute to building any successful team. These moves will only become obvious to us in hindsight, whatever our initial views on them.

    Cap flexibility means a lot more than luring a big time free agent in 2010. Next time a Pau Gasol or Kevin Garnett comes on the trade market, the Knicks could be a player with cap space and reasonable contracts. They can also build through unheralded deals and Sessions type FA signings.

  59. “3:04 p.m., August 13, 2009.
    “Ted Nelson agreed with something I wrote about the Knicks.”

    Got it down on paper now, man.

    And your are right about cap flexibility.

  60. Ricky_J,

    An interesting part of the point you make is the hidden cost of acquiring any player: opportunity cost. In the simplest sense, just having any particular player on your roster means there’s someone else out there you don’t have. (In the JJ/Curry case some random guy you could pick up for the minimum really might be better, so this is significant.) When you factor the salary cap in, opportunity cost becomes more complicated and more important.

    Frank O.,

    According to 82games (http://www.82games.com/0809/08NYK9.HTM), Jeffries played mostly at the 2 or 3 last season. Not sure how they determine position (offensively or defensively). You may have a case for more minutes at the 4: his numbers were best there, though it was in limited minutes.
    Barring a move or an effort to showcase him, he’ll probably have his best chance for minutes at the 2.

  61. Which means Jeffries could have a big year on the O boards because he’s going to be way bigger than the opposite 2 and he’s not going to have anyone in his face. He might also get to the line more, but he needs to improve on his abysmal 61% charity shooting. He simply won’t be able to dribble the ball at all because of the TO issue.
    Of course, if the SOB could finish better around the basket he probably could score a lot of junk points at the 2.
    But his defensive stats will suffer at the 2. He’ll be away from the basket often, so D boards will suffer, and it will be tougher to steal from a 2, although he could pressure more. And while he may get some blocks on a 2, I think he would be better as a weakside defender.

    Most of all, he needs to leave the nice guy shit off the court. A guy with his athleticism should play with more aggression.
    Thanks for the stats.

  62. 82games is incorrect in this instance. They are not actually watching the player on the court and determining his position, they are slotting him in with pre-determined position knowledge.

    Here are Jeffries’ top 10 lineups

    1 Duhon-Jeffries-Chandler-Harrington-Lee
    2 Duhon-Richardson-Jeffries-Chandler-Lee
    3 Duhon-Richardson-Jeffries-Harrington-Lee
    4 Robinson-Duhon-Jeffries-Harrington-Lee
    5 Robinson-Jeffries-Chandler-Harrington-Lee
    6 Robinson-Duhon-Jeffries-Chandler-Lee
    7 Duhon-Hughes-Jeffries-Harrington-Lee
    8 Robinson-Duhon-Richardson-Jeffries-Harrington
    9 Duhon-Jeffries-Chandler-Thomas-Harrington
    10 Duhon-Jeffries-Chandler-Thomas-Lee

    We all know Chandler was the SG anytime Jeffries was listed there. I don’t understand why they seem to think Chandler was was the PF over Jeffries in small-ball lineups. Hell, they even have Al Harrington over him at center in some of these.

    Thus, 82games defensive stats are no good because they aren’t even being accurately recorded relative to the man he was guarding. Other players are getting credit for his defense and vice versa.

  63. What if everything goes wrong, and I do mean everything. A thought just crept into my mind, one that fills me with dread and sickness.

    What if, sometime in may 2010, we all hear the words: “And the second pick in the 2010 draft goes to the Sacremento Kings, which means the first pick goes to the Utah Jazz. Congratulations to Kevin O’Connor and the Utah Jazz.”

    Fourth tier ESPN talking head: “So Kevin, any plans for the first pick. John Wall had an amazing season. Derrick Favors and Ed Davis can fill that hole at forward. What are you going to do?”

    O’Connor: “Well the great thing about having the first pick is you you have the first pick. We will explore every option and do what is best for our team.”

    Oh God, I feel sick.

  64. Only in the Garden of the past decade would Q have been thought to be effective and a leader.
    It is a testament to how bad this team has been that Q’s greatest use is to round out the dollars of a trade. Because it certainly isn’t because his fat ass is any good anymore.
    He represents the failings of this team; Q was a Knicks ‘ leader and for every other team in the NBA he is “other considerations,” or something like that.
    Sad really.

    What’s remarkable too is that he was once thought to be one of the Knicks best defenders. He never registered better than 1 steal per 36, or .3 blocks per 36 as a Knicks player.

    And even in his big stat year at Phoenix, where everyone was saying he was a very good 3pt shooter, it appears to me volume made up for accuracy. He had 38 percent FG%, 35 percent 3pt FG%, his TS% .52 and eFG% at roughly .50. But he made 631 attempts at 3 pt, which I think led the league.

    So, being new to advanced stats, am I correct is saying his TS and eFG weren’t uterly horrible because he took a high volume of 3 pt shots…because his shooting percentage was piss poor in general? We have killed guys like Crawford for shooting in the 40-42% range and 35-36% from 3pt.
    And his TS and eFG were .55 and .48 last year.

  65. Another classic doom and gloom piece in the NY Post today, only this time it’s Kerber not Berman. Headline: “Heat guard not thinking Knicks, Nets in 2010” So when they asked him about coming to NY or NJ in 2010, he answered “I’m only thinking about them when we play them” Wow, what a shocking answer, I would have expected “Yeah, NY is number 1 on my list, in fact, I’ve already had several discussions with their GM. My attitude is, f– the Heat”

    I guess when you have nothing to write about, you spin stuff to get people to read your BS.

  66. Sorry, left out the name of the Heat guard in my post, it’s D Wade, although you probably figured that out.

  67. Ok, so if the Clips get Sessions and want to start him, maybe we can do either Curry and Duhon or Curry and Nate for Baron Davis? I know, I know, his contract is huge and he had a sucky year, but that was under Dunleavy and I’m pretty sure they are dying to get rid of him and they’d probably prefer to send him east.
    I think BD would be gangbusters in D’Antoni’s system running the show, and you still have room for LeBron and Lee. Maybe you even play LeBron at the 2? So you’d have BD, Bron, Gallo, Lee and Hill hopefully….

    Slow work day.

  68. Thomas B.,

    I’ve thought about that exact scenario so many times it’s ridiculous. If you want to laugh and cry and vomit, take this little trip down memory lane… The year was 2004, Alicia Keys was topping the charts, a bright-eyed GM had just taken over the New York Knickerbockers..



  69. BD would be great in D’Antoni’s system if healthy. But at 12M a year for 4 years for a guy with a history of injuries and mailing it in when his team is losing? I think I’d pass.

    I think Sessions interest in the Clips is bogus. His agent is using the Clips to drive up NY’s offer. Aside from Mardy, the Clips are loaded with guards. And the Clips will always be the second best team in LA. Moreover, their owner, Donald Sterling, is the westcoast version of Jade Salmon. In NY, Sessions would likely start, or at minimum, get substantial minutes.

    That said, if the Clips are healthy next year, they could surprise a lot of people. BD, Gordon, Thornton, Griff/Jordan, Camby/Kaman is a solid starting 5. The only real need is depth at SF to spell Thornton. If the Knicks could resign N8 and package him to the Clips with Jeffries for Camby and Telfair, I’d do that deal.

  70. Baron would be an Isiah kinda move, see Francis, Steve, Marbury, Stephon. He’s buned his bridges everywhere he went, it would be a big step backwards for the organization even if it allows the excision of Curry.

  71. Back in the Isiah days I probably would say something like “For the love of God, don’t even talk about a Baron Davis trade! Isiah might be reading this message board!” But I trust Walsh not to even consider wrecking the team for another ten years by acquiring for an aging 37% shooter with health issues and a massive contract coming off a disastrous year. So go wild.

  72. It would probably take moving Curry AND Jeffries or one of them and a bringing back an unprotected 2010 1st for me to even consider Baron Davis. Or maybe Camby or at least DeAndre Jordan. So, I wouldn’t write Davis off completely, but I would most likely be against it.

    “he only real need is depth at SF to spell Thornton.”

    Like Rasual Butler, for example? By the way, I find Thornton utterly useless as an NBA player. The best thing I can say about him is that he doesn’t turn the ball over: a less productive, older Wilson Chandler. On that team (and most others) I think Butler should earn more minutes.


    The greatest part of that article (or saddest depending on your mood) is remembering that the deal was billed as a great deal for the Knicks.

  73. Jeez, how many draft picks and/or slots did Isiah throw away for the garbage he brought here during his stint as GM? Mind-boggling…

  74. I cant talk Knicks these days until Donnie gets some deals done. THE most boring offseason we’ve had in a long time. Im disgusted.

  75. Whenever jeffries was on the court I knew their lead was going to double. He couldnt score a bucket for his life. Chris Dudley would school him 1 on 1. Hes our SF-PF version our recently traded and beloved Jerome James. Overpaid, playoff wonders who had never performed.

  76. Frank,

    Bowen never posted good steal/block numbers, that’s not what makes a player a good defender.

    Q’s mythological defensive rep stems from one game he had against LeBron James about three years ago, before LeBron made 50 point triple doubles his regular NY production.

  77. By the way, I’m nowhere near as high on Ramon Sessions as the rest of you. Haven’t we learned that putting up numbers on a lottery team ain’t the same as putting them up on a winning team?

    Sessions shot a very meager 52-150 (.346) from mid-range this year, to go with his putrid 6-34 (.176) showing from 3pt range. He is basically Chris Duhon minus the jumpshot.

    The Knicks would be much better off trying to lockup David Lee long-term than sign a mediocre talent like Sessions. No star free agent (much less two of them) is going to want to come to a barren team. The team haggling with David Lee and Nate Robinson is sending a message to the rest of the league that players can play their hearts out and actually want to play for the team and then get disrespected when its time for contract renewal.

    In short, no star in the league will choose to play with Ramon Sessions, Wilson Chandler, Danilo Gallinari, Jordan Hill, Toney Douglas, Jared Jeffries, and Eddy Curry. The Nets have just as much cap space and a core of Devin Harris, Brook Lopez, Courtney Lee, and Yi Jianlian.

    If I were David Lee or Nate Robinson I’d take a year off and play in Europe. They’d get bids above the MLE in 2010, and it would really stick it to the team as they would be utterly screwed without them, what with the team’s severe depth issues and no 2010 lottery pick.

  78. Also regarding Baron Davis, love him or hate him he’s a better player than anyone on the Knicks and the team would be lucky if a player of his caliber even decided to sign with them. And by caliber, I mean the Knicks will be lucky if 31 year old declining all-stars want to sign with them. Knicks are gonna be picking from the Tracy McGrady’s of the basketball world, not the young upstarts, because the young upstarts aren’t going to want to waste their entire primes waiting for the team to get competitive.

  79. Thank you! Rashidi to the rescue. And Ted, Curry, Jeffries and a 1st? For Baron? I know you’re a homer, but some semblance of reality please. Baron would be a better option than Sessions for sure. Or the corpse of J. Kidd. I agree our priority at this point should be to resign Nate and Lee. The problem with Lee is that he’s not very tradable if you give him 10 mil a year. You want these guys to be moveable in the future in case there is a trade demand somewhere. Nate at 6.5 and Lee at 9 is fair. And like I’ve said before, you just have to pray our youngsters become great… at least one of them, so we will be appealing to the good free agents. Plus, point guard is one position where age is usually a good thing. Billiups, Kidd, Nash, Fisher, Alston…

  80. Rashidi, while I agree with much of your last post, the idea of playing for one year in Europe isn’t a great one due to injury concerns and adjusting to a different style of game. I think Lee would be a great Euro player, but what happens if he goes down with a knee or back injury? These players are looking for long-term, guaranteed contracts so that they don’t have to worry about if they’ll have a job next fall.

  81. Rashidi,

    The team is definitely sending a message to the rest of the league: the Knicks will no longer overpay for everything.

    I’m also not as high on Sessions as most here, but his game is substantially different than Duhons. Not a shooter or defender, but a much better playmaker.

    The Knicks don’t have to sign Baron Davis since he has a huge contract with 4 years left on it. Hard to say he’s a better value than someone the Knicks could find in the D-League or certainly Europe after the way he played last season.

    If Lee and/or Robinson go to Europe they remain RFAs with the Knicks next offseason… Unless they can get far more money to play there, then it doesn’t help them much.


    I said get a first from the Clippers, not give them one.

    “Baron would be a better option than Sessions for sure. Or the corpse of J. Kidd.”

    The big difference in both cases in salary flexibility. If the Knicks had actually gotten Kidd at the MLE for 2 seasons either he helps them or he doesn’t help them and he’s very tradable (not for much value, but very tradable nonetheless) at the deadline. Sessions at $4 mill is already a solid value, if he improves it could be a great value.
    By the way, Baron Davis isn’t that good. His career TS% is .502… As someone pointed out earlier he has a history of injuries and sulking when his team is losing… If D’Antoni hands him 100% control of the offense like Don Nelson did it could work out for the Knicks, huge risk though. No cap flexibility whatsoever if it doesn’t work out VERY well.

    “The problem with Lee is that he’s not very tradable if you give him 10 mil a year.”

    And Baron Davis is tradable??? The difference between 9 and 10 mill is negligible in terms of trade value, but the difference between 8 and 12 is not.

  82. I got that they’d give us the 1st rounder, Ted, it came out wrong in the typing. While I do think Baron can become an effective point guard again, I don’t want to belabor the point because he’s not my ideal choice for our point guard….
    I just think if you find “the guy” that you want at a position, overpaying a bit isn’t the worst thing in the world… if you are trading dead weight for him. Maybe a 4 mil a year Sessions is the best that we can find right now… I just don’t see a lot of options for us at point guard in the future. You either need to buy low on someone or draft a point guard (which for some reason, we didn’t do with our #8 pick.)
    We don’t want to look at Ray Felton?

  83. I think Davis can regain his form, but it’s a risk at this age especially given his history of injuries and mailing it in on losing teams.
    A separate point is that he was never that great a player to begin with, but excels only when he controls the offense. An aging borderline All-Star PG with attitude questions who needs to control the offense to be effective… didn’t we just get rid of that headache?

    Another point is that I don’t share a lot of peoples’ obsession with the PG position. I’m all for getting the best player at PG you can, but a PG is no more valuable than any other position.

    The idea with Sessions would obviously be that he should be expected to improve given his age and glaring weakness as a shooter. A risk, but I would say a much safer one than hoping Baron Davis posts a respectable TS%, especially given their salaries.

    I would not be particularly excited about Felton. He’s a passable NBA player. Strong defender, but doesn’t do much of anything particularly well offensively.

  84. Rashidi,
    I don’t think it’s accurate to say that Walsh is disrespecting Nate and Lee. Especially with Lee who has been very public and very specific about his asking price. What’s disrespectful in a business negotiation to basically say, “you’re asking for $12,000,000 and I think your services are worth $8,000,000.”

    It’s not like Walsh is in the press bad-mouthing either of them. (Like Larry Brown made a habit of doing).

Comments are closed.