By the way, there’s still a big “Curry” stain on the slate with a 6’11″ string bean on the side… haha

W/r/t Crawford/Randolph – whether or not their skills were replaced by the players on the current roster, I think that of greater importance was shedding as many players as possible from the previous regime. Psychologically, it was necessary to instill the belief that things would be different from the Bush…er, I mean…Isiah Thomas years (Sorry. I tend to conflate the two). Cap ramifications notwithstanding, both for the team and their fans, the slate needed to be wiped clean.

You’re right that the Knicks effectively made a two for one trade (especially after sending Tim Thomas for Larry Hughes). Of course, I would say there’s no doubt that the cap space is worth it. However, you’re being irrationally pessimistic on Harrington and optimistic on Crawford/Randolph.

4 of the Knicks 6 early wins came against Charlotte (who started the season 3 and 9), Washington, Memphis, and OKC… A 5th against the Jazz w/o Deron. So, it’s convenient to say that Crawford and Randolph were great in D’Antoni’s system, but that overlooks the fact that the Knicks had a soft opening schedule. They beat Washington, Charlotte, and Memphis again last season without Crawford or Randolph.

“zach was lights out for d’antoni and crawford was solid enough”

Zach had a TS% of .517, while Jamal put up .571 in his 11 games. I would say Jamal was lights out, and Randolph was solid enough. Jamal had already cooled off in his last two games with the Knicks, though.

“if anything harrington/gallo/chandler is the same player at this point…like it or not crawford/zach were the mainstay of the offense”

Crawford/Randolph played in 13.41% of the Knicks’ games last season (18.75% of their wins), I would hardly call them the mainstays of the offense. Certainly they were for 11 games, but there were those other 71 games too.

Harrington is definitely a comparable scorer to either Crawford or Randolph. A better scorer than either, I would say, though clearly an inferior rebounder than Randolph and passer than Crawford by a wide margin. I would say that Harrington is a decent defender, and better than either of those two (at least during their Knicks tenures).

Last season Chandler had a usage rate of 20.5 and a TS% of .515 compared to Harrington’s 26 and .555. Maybe Chandler improves, but I think it’s too early to call them the same player. Outside of scoring and shot blocking they are pretty similar, but they are both primarily scorers so that’s an important category.
We don’t even know what Gallinari can and can’t do yet, but his game doesn’t look too similar to Harrington’s.

They were both top 10 defensive teams. So were the Heat. The Magic weren’t even in the top 20 offensively; although, the Pistons were #12 on O and the Heat 15th. If the Rockets make the playoffs this season (Barkley called them the worst team in the West last night, I tend to agree with Silverman personally) it will also be due primarily to defense.

In a league where scoring is put at such a premium, the “Money-Ball” approach is to build around defense. It takes better scouting, but less money.
This is the real value of advanced stats, in my opinion. It’s a whole way of thinking about the game… Looking at the game in terms of possessions, and realizing that there are two equally important sides of the ball.

If we can manage that, I’d be ecstatic.

harrington is timthomas improved…i dont see the Zach comparasion…zach is a big who can shoot out to 20 ft

“I’ll give a little on Crawford, probably the best on the team at creating his own shot, but man, how many 5 for 18 nights were there? ”

d’antoni’s system allowed crawford to go 5-18 and not suffer a loss…we didnt replace either of those 2 players production

anyone who thinks we win more than 32 games is crazy