Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Friday, October 31, 2014

2013-14 Game Thread: Knicks @ Kings

We pick up in the second quarter with the Knicks somehow not trailing by thirty points.

Let’s go Knicks because, well, why not?

63 comments on “2013-14 Game Thread: Knicks @ Kings

  1. coyle022

    Tomorrow should be interesting. All of a sudden they could be 2 out. Of course it’s not actually “2 games” but ATL can’t even beat the Timberwolves without Pekovic. Schedule doesn’t get any easier they get POR tomorrow night

  2. BigBlueAL

    If the Knicks wouldve won their last 2 games like they shouldve a Hawks loss tomorrow night wouldve had the Knicks alone in 8th. So freaking frustrating.

  3. DRed

    Stop. Just stop. We stink. Atlanta may well stink even worse than us. But it’s pointless to try to predict where we’ll be in the future. We just got fucked up in epic fashionby one of the worst teams in basketball. There’s like 2 teams in the NBA we should beat.

    Clyde is a national treasure. He should be on a stamp

  4. maxwell_3g

    this is an all-time League Pass screw job. shitty game and they dont even give me Clyde. I will say that the sactown announcers, while not entertaining, are extremely realistic and even-handed

  5. ptmilo

    Woodson seemed very surprised that his center, Amare Stoudemire, executed his patented fire-in-the-hole rim protection, and that his power forward, Carmelo Anthony, was not immediately available for comment.

  6. BigBlueAL

    Funny part is that all I see is McCallum and Gay driving at will and Im saying to myself why isnt Shump in the game for D?? Then I notice he is in the game. Who the hell has he been guarding this whole time??

  7. maxwell_3g

    this is bizarro JR smith night though. timely hoops and all. there is still time to come crashing to earth though

  8. ptmilo

    This might be JR’s best 3 point shooting game of all time. He is 9-12. He has been 11-18, 10-17, and 9-16. If the Knicks can hold off Sacramento here, I don’t see any reason why they can’t beat Utah next week and send at least one other game into overtime before the season ends.

  9. Brian Cronin Post author

    Even if everything had gone according to plan, the Knicks still would have only been tied in the loss column with Atlanta tomorrow after they lose to Portland. Currently, the Knicks are three games back in the loss column. That’s a lot – not even counting the fact that it likely is more like four because they have to beat Atlanta outright to pass them (due to Atlanta having a better conference record).

    That said, if Korver remains out the whole season, I guess I can see a scenario where Atlanta just loses every game. In that case, the Knicks have a chance!

  10. Brian Cronin Post author

    Put it this way, if the Hawks go 3-9 in their last 12 games (which is very possible), winning only against Boston, Milwaukee and Philadelphia, then the Knicks would still have to go 7-3 in their last ten games against the following opponents: Phoenix, Golden State, Utah, Miami, Chicago, Washington, Brooklyn twice and Toronto twice.

    I mean, it’s certainly possible, but it doesn’t seem very likely, does it? Heck, it doesn’t seem likely that the Hawks won’t win four games.

    Keep spasming, Kyle Korver’s back! Then quickly get better during the offseason because I feel mean wishing back spams on anyone!

  11. Brian Cronin Post author

    Actually, I take it back. There is a scenario where the Knicks can pass the Hawks even if they tie. If the Hawks seriously only beat Boston, Philly and Milwaukee from this point out, they will end up four games under .500 in their conference record. The Knicks are currently three games under .500 in their conference record. If the Knicks go 7-3, they will then finish with a better conference record. In that case, 6-4 would do it.

    The problem is that the Hawks obviously can defeat Detroit and Cleveland, who they also face. If they beat either of those two teams, then the Knicks would have to go 7-3 even if they did get the tiebreaker. It’s basically a really bad place foe the Knicks to be in, despite how it seems like they’re “only” two games out.

  12. Frank

    haven’t watched either of these west coast games, but good to see that Atlanta still sucks. not that it matters but it would be fun to at least have a few playoff games. If Korver is still out for a while, I think it’s likely that Atlanta loses at least 7 out of their remaining games, leaving them with 46 losses. So 7-3 does it for us, which is a very tall order. Blowing that cleveland game really might have been the death knell for this team. It actually seems pretty likely that the 2 games against Brooklyn might determine our playoff fate. Those should be some pretty hard fought games.

    Speaking of Rudy Gay — he’s a pretty good example of a guy finding the right situation and getting coached the right way resulting in a season that could not have been predicted by his previous 7+ years in the league. With Sac he is basically producing career highs in efficiency (and assist rate) – despite shooting well below his career 3 point percentage (30.9 vs. 34.2%).

    TS 57.3 vs. career 52.7
    EFG 51.4 vs. career 48.4

    (Sacramento still stinks, but Rudy by all accounts has been pretty good)

  13. Farfa

    I have the horrible feeling that Rudy Gay will be a Knick one day.

    He seems to me the perfect example of a self-centered, self-conscience lacking individual who could entice the MSG crowd for a few games before bursting in flames, leaving us saddled with a 50mln-4yrs contract. And guess what? He’ll be a free agent in 2015… when we’re going to have lots of cap space.

  14. Farfa

    It just got to me that the decision made by Dolan to veto the Lowry-for-pick trade is very Knicksy (not Bargs-knicksy, but in the general vicinity). With Lowry we would – maybe, after all there’s still Woodson at the helm – have contended for the 6th-7th seed, while bombing the Raptors ascent. Wow. To veto a trade for fear of looking dumb… and suddenly looking not so smart because of the missed trade.

    Also, let’s be honest: it’s decades since a NY pick has blossomed here in the right way. In the last 15 years, even the players who showed potential as rookies (which is to say the vast majority, even Mardy Collins and Renaldo Balkman) have become middling-to-bad players or emerged playing for other teams (or just right before we sent them elsewhere, not really leveraging the cards we were handed – Melo trade anyone?). So it’s not like we know what to do with the picks we have.

    I mean, look at this list (powered by Wikipedia):

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_Knicks_first_and_second_round_draft_picks

    Whaaaaat?

    Well, at least we drafted some smart players who went on to be successful or promising coaches. Especially the 1st round pick in 1980.

  15. DRed

    Uh, did anyone catch the game the other night where one of the worst teams in the NBA ran us off their floor? Playoffs? We talking about playoffs?

  16. swiftandabundant

    @31. I don’t know. To trade away another draft pick for a half a season rental on a guy who is playing in a contract year….to me that seems like The Knicksy move. I think Phil probably advised Dolan not to make that move or that was right before Dolan started talking to Phil when he was having his epiphany that things needed to change.

    And your argument about past Knicks draft picks is irrelevant. First, if we had held on to say David Lee, we’d all be talking about how we developed a very good player, home grown. Its not his fault that he got traded the moment he started getting good. And a lot of times draft picks, even lottery picks, don’t work out. That doesn’t mean you should still give them away. One Durant or Lebron one year makes holding on to your draft picks worth it. Its also more about the value of draft picks and guys on rookie contracts. It took Gallo and Chandler to get a guy like Melo. If we trade away those picks for half year rentals of dudes like Lowry, we are shooting ourselves in the foot. Resigning him would be expensive and probably not a good value. Wouldn’t you rather we build a real contender in 2 or 3 years than make ourselves the 3rd or 4th best team in The East this year only to lose to Miami or Indiana anyways?

  17. KnickfaninNJ

    I agree with DRed. There is no chance the Knicks make the playoffs. Of course, as a fan my heart still hopes for this, but all the actual results say we have a lousy team that’s only competitive but not better than other lousy teams in the league. That’s not a recipe for making the playoffs. The calculations above showing that we have to go 6-4 or 7-3 against good quality teams to make the playoffs just confirm this.

  18. DRed

    Its not his fault that he got traded the moment he started getting good.

    *lights Owen signal*

  19. Farfa

    @33

    I think I did not explain my point correctly. I would completely agree with you if at the time there had been a coherent plan. What I mean is that the reports (and I know we shouldn’t give too much credit to any “source”, but still) said that Dolan vetoed the trade because he was scared to be seen again as a dumb owner… But to me it seems that is the wrong reason to veto the trade. If (big if with Dolan) he had a plan, the front office wouldn’t even consider the trade in first place, because as you said it’d just been a rental, with high risk of overpaying Lowry in 2014. But if he had no plan (which seems very likely at the time, given that the only plan right now is: Phil, come here and save us! We signed Earl Clark and Shannon-friggin-Brown at the deadline, not some young cheap D-Leaguer to see if we could find gold in the scrap heap), then shoot for the moon dammit, for once this is a good player! If the past 15 seasons taught us something, you’re not building anything upon that pick (by sheer incompetence, not because picks aren’t valuable). And, if he had a plan, we wouldn’t be still leaning on Woody to lead this team to the playoffs, so either you keep Woodson and tell him to give way more chances to Murry, Tyler, and whatever D-League player we could have signed/called up, or you fire Woodson and chase the playoffs. Too many losses are on him.

    So my reasoning was that it was very Knicksy to make the wrong choice for the wrong reason in this wrong season. In the future, I believe that having that pick could prove beneficial, and in that sense I’m happy we didn’t make the trade. I just keep on getting baffled by every single decision not named Phil made this year by Dolan.

    PS: thanks for the reply. I’m kinda new to this board and I take your reply as a welcome to a fellow Knicks fan from overseas (Italy)!

    PPS: I’m not sold on David Lee. Great offensive player, but you need a really great coach to hide his monumental defensive breakdowns.

  20. DRed

    I’m convinced that Shannon Brown is purely on the team as Phil’s mole in the locker room. I have no evidence to back this up, but I’m positive I’m right.

  21. Farfa

    Let’s hope so. Shannon Brown has a much better purpose as a mole than as a basketball player, at this point in his career.

  22. iyasin

    @39 word. do we really want to get embarrassed? hasn’t it been enough this year? Also i think if the knicks make the playoffs this year, a lot (not us obviously) but a lot of knicks fans will be like great we made the playoffs! everything is ok! and thats not a mentality that people need to have with this team at all. If they make the playoffs, a lot of people will forget the trials and tribulations that have come with this season and the knicks will get off easy

  23. er

    Did the Knicks get off easy when they got swept by the Celtics or waxed by the Heat? I’m not sure what you are talking about.

    I think Knicks pacers will go 6 or 7 just like last year

  24. Will the Thrill

    I think Knicks pacers will go 6 or 7 just like last year

    I think Knicks Lakers would go 6 or 7 games hahah and we may not be on the winning end.

  25. thenoblefacehumper

    I think Knicks pacers will go 6 or 7 just like last year

    You do realize we recently lost to two teams the Sixers could beat, right (Kyrie-less Cavs and Gasol-less Lakers)?

  26. DRed

    Doors anyone think we would have won last night if Thomas had been able to play? I don’t. Listen, it would be fun if we could get to the playoffs. But we’re pretty bad. We’ve got to be realistic.

  27. Brian Cronin Post author

    I think the Knicks get at least a game against Indiana if they face them. I just don’t think that they’re going to get there.

  28. max fisher-cohen

    @farfa

    Here are the first round picks the Knicks have kept through their entire first season since Dolan took over:

    2000 draft: NONE
    2001 draft: NONE
    2002 draft: Frank Williams, 25th overall (their 7th pick, Nene, was swapped for Denver’s)
    2003 draft: Michael Sweetney, 9th overall
    2004 draft: NONE (traded in Marbury trade)
    2005 draft: Channing Frye, 8th overall; Nate Robinson, 21st overall
    2006 draft: Renaldo Balkman, 20th overall (swapped with Chicago from Curry trade)
    2007 draft: Wilson Chandler, 23rd overall (swapped with Chicago from Curry trade)
    2008 draft: Danilo Gallinari, 6th overall
    2009 draft: NONE (traded Jordan Hill about four months into the season)
    2010 draft: NONE (traded in Marbury trade)
    2011 draft: Iman Shumpert, 21st overall
    2012 draft: NONE
    2013 draft: Tim Hardaway Jr., 24th overall

    Redraft all of the drafts in which the Knicks actually kept their pick, and the Knicks come out at least average.

    Here’s what the Knicks suck at:

    1) Keeping their picks
    2) Recognizing when it’s time to rebuild and commit to tanking

    Quickly, here are the pick #s Chicago has had in the same time frame:

    20, 30, 16, 26, 1, 9, 2, 16, 3, 7, 2, 4, 2, 4, 7

    And here’s NY:

    24, 21, 6, 23, 20, 8, 21, 9, 25

    Total picks for CHI: 15
    Total picks for NY: 9

    Now if we value each pick by subtracting the draft slot from 31, we get these point totals:

    CHI: 316 points
    NY: 122 points

    So Chicago has more than double the points, and that doesn’t even account for the fact that higher picks are worth a whole lot more than lower ones. Would you trade the 15th and 16th pick in a draft for the #1 overall? Hell yeah you would.

    So that’s the problem. It’s not that NY is cursed at developing players. It’s that NY doesn’t put itself in the position to get real talent.

  29. Donnie Walsh

    I think Knicks pacers will go 6 or 7 just like last year I think Knicks pacers will go 6 or 7 just like last year

    Let me guess: you’re one of the folks that think the Knicks would have beaten the Heat if they’d met in the ECF last year?

  30. Donnie Walsh

    2006 draft: Renaldo Balkman, 20th overall (swapped with Chicago from Curry trade)

    Nice list, MFC, but the Balkman pick wasn’t chicago’s. It came via the Jalen Rose trade.

  31. er

    Let me guess: you’re one of the folks that think the Knicks would have beaten the Heat if they’d met in the ECF last year?

    Jesus. I didn’t even say that they would win the series. Nay Sayers are so quick to get their panties in a bunch.

    I’m just comparing teams right now. The Knicks are playing better than the pacers right now. And they can’t score. So you won’t see games like the laker game where they go bonkers from three. The Knicks would have won the season series if it weren’t for a stupid play by shumpert. But nah just go on just be a fucking pessimist for shits and giggles

  32. DRed

    Being pessimistic about our chances against a team that’s 22 games ahead of us and has home court advantage is called being realistic. We could take them to six or seven and beyond, but it’s not likely.

  33. er

    I just gave my opinion. I said I think. I never said book it. Pacers look avg to me right now, and if the Knicks get rolling they can beat anyone

  34. Donnie Walsh

    But nah just go on just be a fucking pessimist for shits and giggles

    You’re right. The Knicks have done nothing to warrant pessimism. They haven’t been a text-book example of what not to do in order to win basketball games.

    (Or, more likely, those people spending time and money on this team are doing it for “shits and giggles”, no?)

  35. flossy

    I dunno, I think the Knicks could take the Pacers to six games, at least. The Knicks are fuckin’ weird. What team loses seven in a row and then turns around and wins eight in a row, and then turns around and loses to two of the worst teams in the league? I don’t think grabbing two wins off the Pacers would be that crazy, but there’s no way we’d win the series.

  36. BigBlueAL

    To reiterate a point I made yesterday, if the Knicks wouldve won vs the Cavs and Lakers they would be 32-40 right now compared to the Hawks at 31-40. SO FREAKING ANNOYING.

    Also I know its easy to say the Knicks suck and they cant beat anybody but they did just win 8 in a row with most of them being blowouts plus wins at Minnesota and vs the Pacers so not exactly all vs tomato cans. And yes Id much rather see them make the playoffs and get swept by the Pacers rather than miss the playoffs. Call me a masochist if you want lol.

  37. DRed

    If by some miracle we do get to the playoffs, we could certainly take the pacers to six. I think we’d have a better chance of taking the pavers to six than making the playoffs

  38. Brian Cronin Post author

    If by some miracle we do get to the playoffs, we could certainly take the pacers to six. I think we’d have a better chance of taking the pavers to six than making the playoffs

    Yeah, that’s my position, as well. I think they could definitely take Pacers to six. I just don’t think that they’ll get there. I hope I’m wrong!

  39. Donnie Walsh

    I think they could definitely take Pacers to six.

    Why?? This team, should they reach the playoffs by default, has sweep written all over them. A terrible record at home. A terrible record overall. A terrible record against bad teams. Because they beat the Pacers, in a game that meant nothing to them, at home? Beating the Pacers means more than losing to the Cavs and Lakers? How?

  40. BigBlueAL

    The Knicks this season have wins at Brooklyn, Charlotte, Atlanta, Dallas, Minnesota and San Antonio. They have home wins vs Indiana, Miami, Chicago, Charlotte, Atlanta and Phoenix.

    We can play this game all night. Are losses against bad teams more relevant than wins vs the Pacers and Heat at home or winning at San Antonio?? I dunno. Their overall record is most important which is why we all know the Knicks are not a good team but shit you have to give the fans who still have some hope something to cling on to.

  41. ptmilo

    Of course the Knicks could take the Pacers to 6. Do you know how much worse you have to be than your opponent to not even have a legitimate chance to force 6 games? Even if you are a 4-1 dog on the road and a 3-1 dog at home in any given playoff game, you still have a 35-40% of doing better than losing the series in 4 or 5 games. And those are bigger single game odds than Vegas gives the Pacers over the Knicks when they play during the year, such as a week ago. Still, even if the Knicks are a coin flip to take the series 6 or better (including the small chance of winning in 4 or 5), which seems about fair, they would probably still be 5-1 dogs to win the series. This may all seem less relevant at 11:20pm EST tomorrow when Bledsoe and Dragic have outscored the Knicks at the half.

  42. BigBlueAL

    In 2008 the 37 win Hawks (coached by Mike Woodson!!) as the 8th seed took the 66 win eventual champion Celtics to 7 games in the 1st round. Enough said.

  43. Farfa

    @46:

    Here’s what the Knicks suck at:

    1) Keeping their picks
    2) Recognizing when it’s time to rebuild and commit to tanking

    Yes, you’re right. But what I was trying to say it that the Knicks are even worse at using/developing the picks they keep (you can do a lot better than what the Knicks did in choosing/developing rookies, as Chicago shows. They chose Noah at 10th, Gibson at 22th, and Butler at 21st and they brought them along thanks to a wonderful coach. Do you see us doing that? Maybe with Phil, but when they didn’t trade for Lowry there was no Phil around) and that in not trading a pick for Lowry because he didn’t want to look dumb, Dolan achieved exactly that (if that is true it would mean that he went against trading the pick not for basketball reasons but for PR reasons. You don’t make decisions for PR reasons if you want to win – see: Kupchak, Mitch – Bryant, Kobe). It was just another incoherent decision in a season full of them.

    I look forward to the day when this team keeps its picks and even more to the day when they know what to do with them.

  44. max fisher-cohen

    I think you’re right that we aren’t GREAT at developing picks, but I put most of it up to my two points. Yeah CHI drafted Gibson and Butler late, but they also wasted high lottery picks on players like Chris Mihm, Eddy Curry, Ben Gordon, Jay Williams, and Marcus Fizer (ugh!). It’s more on the fact that CHI keeps and acquires picks that they have hits than that they know what they’re doing on the draft/development side. Of course, once you havea good team, it becomes a lot easier to develop players.

Comments are closed.