Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Jared Jeffries Injured

Jared Jeffries fractured his left fibula in camp yesterday and will be out 6-8 weeks.

Besides the slim hope that somehow Jeffries’ style of play would work in D’Antoni’s system, does this really matter?

It is annoying but I’m pretty sure that this does not even open up roster spot, as the 15 men on the roster include three inactive players per game – including injured players.

In other NBA news, Ben Gordon accepted a 1-year/$6.5 million contract from the Bulls. Poor Gordon – the NBA got smart at a bad time for him.

45 comments on “Jared Jeffries Injured

  1. Owen

    Poor Ben Gordon?

    The guy turned down 10 million per for six years.

    I think he should look around and ask himself whether the greater fool theory of asset valuation is one he ought to be pursuing…

  2. Brian Cronin

    Hehe…like I said, the NBA got smart at the wrong time for him.

    At the time, he probably could get an offer like that on the open market – not anymore.

  3. DS

    KB: “The Knicks could win 40 games next year? Name one team in the history of the NBA that had a 17 win improvement where the team in question’s best off season acquisition was a player of Chris Duhon’s production.”

    The Portland Trailblazer improved from 39 – 43 to 59 – 23 from the 88-89 season to the 89 – 90 season. They added Buck Williams (14 ppg 10 rpg) but subtracted Kiki Vandeweghe (14 ppg 8 rpg).

    The difference: Adelman’s coaching and offensive genius???

    The Knicks are not going to win 40 games, I just wanted to be a contrarian.

  4. Ray

    This is tradition for Jared Jeffries. Its his tradition to get injured at the beginning of the season and then work his way into shape the rest of the year. Nothing to expect but mediocrity from him.

  5. Z

    Hehe…like I said, the NBA got smart at the wrong time for him.
    At the time, he probably could get an offer like that on the open market – not anymore.

    Did the NBA get smart, or did the economy collapse?

  6. Owen

    Brian – I am not sure the NBA is getting smarter, I think Ben Gordon is getting dumber and dumber.

    This summarizes my take quite well…

    “Wow – he passed on $10 MM/year; no one gave him an offer and he passed on $9.67 MM/year; and now gives up ~$4MM/year to have free agent status. So he has to get an offer of $11MM per year or say $55 for 5 years to basically breakeven here.Anybody stupid enough to pay him that can have him. Posted by David”

  7. Anthony

    This may open up some things for Chandler though.

    Got to look at things glass half full at this point.

  8. daaarn

    Not that we’d be able to find a team stupid enough to trade for Jeffries now, but, in general, are we allowed to trade injured players? Like what exactly do the players need to pass on their physicals? That they don’t have a career-ending injury? or is this all dependent on whatever the other team wants to accept? Because at this point, whenever we are actually able to find a taker for Jeffries, I get the feeling he’ll be injured then.

  9. caleb

    You can trade players when injured – there’s no set standard for physicals; it’s up to each team to decide what risk they want to take on.

    I feel bad for JJ, but it doesn’t matter one way or the other to the Knicks. At best he’s a 9th man on a 30-win team. It’s Q’s job to lose now. (and he might). I’m guessing we see a lot of 3-guard rotations, with or without JJ. I think Chandler fans will be disappointed – D’Antoni doesn’t look like he wants to play potential, at least not until we have a chance to showcase our veteran trade bait.

    I don’t think the Knicks will approach 40 wins, but it’s not totally out of the question. They had the roster to win more than 30 last year (like they did in ’06-07), so IMO it would be more like a 8 or 9 win jump, than a 17-win jump.

    re: the Portland example, replacing Kiki with Buck Williams is a pretty big upgrade. They also had a lot of young players, still on the upswing of their careers.

  10. Italian Stallion

    I can’t imagine the Knicks winning 40 games. I’m having a tough time imagining them winning 30-35. They basically have two players that might improve the team over last year. (Chandler and Gallinari). Gallinari is hurt and may not contribute much. That leaves Chandler. Chandler may turn out to be a very good player, but he’s not going to be a franchise changer. The only other potential positive is Duhon/Marbury. Regardless of which player you think is better, they didn’t have Marbury last year. So having any PG is better than none.

    That’s really not much in the way of improvement when many other teams in East have improved by as much or more.

  11. Mike K. (KnickerBlogger)

    KB: “The Knicks could win 40 games next year? Name one team in the history of the NBA that had a 17 win improvement where the team in question’s best off season acquisition was a player of Chris Duhon’s production.”

    The Portland Trailblazer improved from 39 – 43 to 59 – 23 from the 88-89 season to the 89 – 90 season. They added Buck Williams (14 ppg 10 rpg) but subtracted Kiki Vandeweghe (14 ppg 8 rpg).

    The difference: Adelman’s coaching and offensive genius???

    The Knicks are not going to win 40 games, I just wanted to be a contrarian.

    Kiki played 432 minutes in ’89, 11th on the team. Buck Williams played 2801 minutes in ’90. The ’90 team also added Drazen Petrovic (967 min).

  12. DS

    OK, KB – How about the Warriors who improved 17 games from 21-61 in 2001-02 to 38- 44 in 2002-03 under an offensive specialist coach; Eric Musselman.

    Biggest addition to the rotation? A backup PG, Earl Boykins.

  13. Italian Stallion

    Personally, I think a much better coach is worth some games. Nothing else considered, there are going to be a few very close games where a single decision here or there will be the difference between winning and losing. In addition, if he’s actually a better coach and leader you would think he could get more effort and greater efficiency out of a team.

    All that said, this is a very stat orented message board. I thought the stats suggested that the coach and coaching changes are worth very little. So I’m surprised that some people here are expecting D’Antoni to make much of a difference.

  14. Thomas B.

    Personally, I think a much better coach is worth some games. Nothing else considered, there are going to be a few very close games where a single decision here or there will be the difference between winning and losing. In addition, if he’s actually a better coach and leader you would think he could get more effort and greater efficiency out of a team.
    All that said, this is a very stat orented message board. I thought the stats suggested that the coach and coaching changes are worth very little. So I’m surprised that some people here are expecting D’Antoni to make much of a difference.

    Thumbs up.

  15. Italian Stallion

    one thing I do like is that D’Antoni is thinking of Lee and evidently Jeffries as centers.

    I agree.

    I think he should try to keep our best players on the court as much as possible. We need Lee playing as many minutes as possible. If that means playing him at both C and PF, that’s fine. It’s a shame that JJ got hurt because he can play a lot of positions. D’Antoni was high on being able to use him effectively.

  16. Owen

    Jon – Do you like it because you want to see more of Lee and less of Curry? Or is there something more to this? Like a fondness for small lineups on fast paced teams?

    Ever since the Mavericks benched Dampier in that Golden State series I have had my doubts about going small, although in this case doing it with Lee is 195% the best option, as you say….

  17. jon abbey

    Jon – Do you like it because you want to see more of Lee and less of Curry? Or is there something more to this? Like a fondness for small lineups on fast paced teams?

    both, I think that that’s a creative use of the personnel that we have, and this way Jeffries won’t take minutes from our other SFs, although that’s a moot point for a couple of months anyway now that he’s hurt.

    Peter Vecsey today writes about the truth behind some of the summer’s rumors:

    http://www.nypost.com/seven/10032008/sports/knicks/clearing_air_on_zach__stephon_131916.htm

  18. Z

    “Ever since the Mavericks…”

    Man– every time I hear that word now, I think of Sarah Palin and want to barf.

    Mark Cuban should sue for defamation of his product. I may never be able to watch a Dallas game again…

  19. Z-man

    It has been a refreshing change to have reporters allowed in to all training camp sessions. It’s nice to speculate based on real info, rather than Isiah’s inane comments.

    Since the pre-camp bluster, I have not heard a single negative about Steph (despite not playing with the starting unit) or about Zach from the reporters on the scene. I know it’s early yet, but during the summer many on this site were concerned about the downer effect these guys would have on the morale of the team if they were still here for camp.

    Perhaps this is just the honeymoon period for new coach and mgmt, but I think it confirms that to keep them around until the right deal/situation comes along was good business.

    Now that Jefferies, Curry and Gallinari are set back, Lee and Zach might develop some chemistry that will, at worst, increase Zach’s trade value even before the season starts. One has to hope that Memphis’ glut at PG and hole at PF will make them desperate.

    Nobody in the press has commented on Jerome James since the first practice. I wonder if he will be in the mix on Wednesday.

  20. Mike K. (KnickerBlogger)

    OK, KB – How about the Warriors who improved 17 games from 21-61 in 2001-02 to 38- 44 in 2002-03 under an offensive specialist coach; Eric Musselman.

    Biggest addition to the rotation? A backup PG, Earl Boykins.

    Yeah you’re right. They also lost Larry Hughes but gave Gilbert Arenas a ton more minutes as well. But essentially it was the same roster. Musselman turned around the #21 ranked offense to #3 the next year.

    Nice find.

  21. Mustafa

    JJeffries is another one of Isiah Thomas’ prized pupil.
    Wizard fans were sure glad he got shipped out.

  22. Owen

    Re that Golden State Warriors reversal.

    One point to note. The Warriors drastically underperformed their pythagorean expectation in 01-02. They won 21 games when their pythag suggested 26 wins. They hit it squarely the next year at 38 games.
    So you could argue it was closer to a 12 game improvement than 17.

    The Knicks were right on their pythag last year of 23 wins. So, those are 5 wins we’ll actually have to pick up on the court, rather than through regression to the mean.

    Also, I would argue that Arenas for Hughes was a pretty big upgrade. That’s swapping a player who was third on the team in shots and posted a 48% ts% for a guy who took 14.4 shots per game on a 54% ts%. He posted 6.8 WP that year. I dnn’t know what Hughes’ WP number was in 01-02, but it’s not hard to imagine that the Warriors could have picked up 3-4 wins just by replacing Hughes with more effective players.

    Add in a little second year improvement from Troy Murphy, slightly better play from Antawn Jamison and Jason Richardson, and the picture gets a little clearer. But the biggest thing is definitely that regression to the expected mean of their pythagorean expectation.

  23. Italian Stallion

    I don’t know enough of the details to debate the specifics any of the teams in question, but I think randomness can certainly be a factor.

    I think looking at the Knicks is fairly straightforward.

    The pluses are:

    Duhon/Marbury – We didn’t have either last season. The little Marbury played was while he was in the middle of personal and team chaos.

    Chandler – Likely to improve

    Gallinari – ?

    D’Antoni – Team chemistry and efficiency should improve a little, but it’s hard to quantify.

    How much is that worth?

    I don’t know, but I think overall it’s not worth much more than the positives for many other teams in the east who got higher draft picks, have key players coming back from injuries, who also had subpar years, or who made big trades to improve their team.

  24. Reebok1303

    Italian Stallion, don’t forget that Lee should Finally be starting, which will also improve the team’s win-loss record. Definitely another “plus.”

  25. Brian Cronin

    I was just thinking the other day about Lee starting. If he is going to get real significant minutes in this offense, the Knicks should really just extend him now, because his numbers will improve if he plays in D’Antoni’s system regularly (pace alone will help a lot), and suddenly every team will be in love with this guy even more so than they already are, making it a much pricier option to bring him back.

  26. mase

    D’antoni has a different way of doing things. Someone pointed out he wont play guys on potential, so a lot of minutes will be cut from guys who dont make the right decisions. The difficulty is that the entire team is made up of immature players.

    on a side note, Marbury has shown up to camp ready meanwhile Curry hasn’t; what does that say about Curry’s maturity level?

  27. Thomas B.

    mase, I’m not sure what this says about Curry. I can’t say that this suprises me. Curry seems to have a fair year, bad year, fair year, bad year career path. So if history holds, this should be a fair year, which is still far from what anyone expects him to do. He isnt living up to his potential. Or perhaps we think his potential is greater than it actually is.

    Is Eddy Curry the son of Benoit Benjamin?

    “The third player taken in the 1985 NBA draft, Benjamin never became the breakout player intended for such a high draft pick.” -wikipedia

    That could easily be Curry. I just have to change three words.

    “The fourth player taken in the 2001 NBA draft, Curry never became the breakout player intended for such a high draft pick.” -wikipedia (cira 2020)

  28. Thomas B.

    Z-Man,

    Missed the practice session. Had I known this morning, I could have set the tivo. I would like to see for myself what kind of shape the players are in.
    —-
    Marbury has a new workout video for release this holiday season?
    http://www.nypost.com/seven/10062008/sports/knicks/marbury_sees_starter_in_mirror_132383.htm

    Thanks to my insed connections I have an exclusive clip:

    Stephon: “Hi this Stephon Marbury. I can help you get in the best shape of your life, and that is factorial. Okay, let’s begin. First, put on your Starbury sneakers and workout gear. This is 45 minute workout.

    Scrolling disclaimer: Starbury 1s should not be worn for more than 45 minutes at a time. If your feet begin to burn during the workout, take off the shoes and douse your feet in a chemical based flame retardant. DO NOT USE WATER!

    Stephon: “Okay lets start with an exercise of my own creation, the ego-lift. 1-2-3-4, the world best point is on the comeback. 5-6-7-8, Chris Duhon cant carry my jock strap.”

    Scrolling disclaimer: Effectiveness of ego-lift will vary depending on the size of your ego. Results not guaranteed.

  29. Thomas B.

    Quick question:

    Who is the most athletic player in the NBA?

    I say Nate Robinson is the most athletic player in the NBA. He has a freaky vertical, he is strong, quick, and has great endurance. He also played two sports in college, the other being football. Furthermore, he played the position that requires the greatest amount of athletic ability, that being cornerback. I dont think there is any other player in the NBA that can make that claim.

  30. Reebok1303

    The Knicks practice is being replayed right now from 3:30 – 5:30 on NBATV is anyone can can catch it.

  31. Owen

    “Who is the most athletic player in the NBA?”

    It’s a definitional thing and pretty much completely subjective. Who is the strongest man in the world. Do you do it on a pound for pound basis, on an absolute basis? Do you do it relative to a mean for your height? It’s pretty arbitrary.

    If I had to, I would try to define it as deviation from the mean on a number of “measurables”, including speed, height, strength, wingspan, stamina, leaping ability, quickness, agility, coordination, and resistance to injury.

    And I think in my book it would be pretty simple. Dwight Howard.

    The guy is 6’11 with a 40 inch vertical leap, huge, incredibly quick, explosive, massively strong, and hasn’t missed a game in his first four years. That’s an unusual package.

    There is a good discussion somewhat related to this topic at the WOW, see this link…

    http://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/11/20/the-short-supply-of-tall-people/

    At the end of the day though, there are a lot different players you can make an argument for. And also, a great deal of what makes a great basketball player is between the ears.

  32. Thomas B.

    Dwight Howard is in the mix. But Nate has better speed and is likely just as strong (pound for pound). Athletic should be defined as a combination of speed, strength, agility, and explosiveness. Height, or size for that matter, should have no bearing here. Now, that does not mean I draft Nate ahead of Howard. In the NBA size rules. But on just pure athletic ability, it has little bearing.

    I guess we could look at the results from the rookie compounds and see how Nate did vs Howard. Of course, Howard is much stronger now than he was coming into the draft.

    Yeah, it is totally subjective. That is what makes it fun.

  33. Owen

    “Height, or size for that matter, should have no bearing here. Now, that does not mean I draft Nate ahead of Howard. In the NBA size rules. But on just pure athletic ability, it has little bearing.”

    Well, if you define height away, that changes the conversation. But you can’t really have any argument about NBA athleticism without discussing height, or without reference to doing the tasks involved in playing basketball.

    Nate is faster than Dwight, fine. But think about it. You have one player with a vertical of 43 inches who is 5’7. You have another who is 6’11, 270 pounds, who can put a sticker on the backboard more than 12 and half feet above the floor. Who is more athletic? I don’t know. But I know who is more unusual.

  34. Hooped Up

    The Jared Jeffries injury will be great for Wilson Chandler. He’s athletic enough to keep up in D’Antoni’s system and is mad explosive!

  35. jon abbey

    “You have one player with a vertical of 43 inches who is 5?7. You have another who is 6?11, 270 pounds, who can put a sticker on the backboard more than 12 and half feet above the floor. Who is more athletic? I don’t know. But I know who is more unusual.”

    I don’t think you really do, both of them are pretty unprecedented at their height. Spud Webb could jump like that, but he wasn’t anywhere near as strong.

    but I might still have to vote Shawn Marion.

  36. Owen

    Well, I looked through Draft Express. Nate had the second best vertical in the database and was second in standing vert. He was third in 3-4 court sprints. And he was the top rated athlete across all measures for his year and probably for all the players in the database.

    So, I think I probably stand corrected. I don’t know. Hard to say. I think it’s easier for a short person to be fast and jump high. I have no biomechanical argument for that, but it feels right when I say it. They are both great athletes. And clearly, looking through the list of top five athletes in the draft, it takes a lot more than measurables to succeed.

  37. cavjam

    Re vertical – I got a dog who can jump more than twice his height; still can’t use his left, still has a mediocre shooting percentage.

    Re speed – gotta love a guy who beats everyone downcourt in a four-on-two break to get his shot blocked from behind.

    Maybe basic math skills are a better indicator of basketball value.

  38. Owen

    Don’t know, but D’Antoni likes Nate….

    “I’m really surprised with him and how good he is,” D’Antoni said of the five-foot-nine guard after the team broke training camp at Skidmore College on Saturday. “He can play a lot of systems, but I do think that the way we want to play an open court, that will benefit him as much or more than anybody.

    “He’s just – he is athletic as can be. He’s scary athletic, and fast.”

  39. Z-man

    Hand-eye coordination is a big part of overall athleticism. So is ability to be all-star level at skill multiple sports solely based on thie athleticism package. I think of guys like Jim Brown, Deion Sanders, Bo Jackson. Nate is not in their class, but more like them than, say, Dwight Howard.

Comments are closed.