Comments on: Jermaine O’Knick?

By: Tolu

Tolu — Mon, 28 May 2007 14:23:23 +0000

I think that with or without oneal the knicks still suck.

By: peter ajetomobi

peter ajetomobi — Mon, 28 May 2007 14:07:28 +0000

jermaine for frye,francis,jeffries

By: ken

ken — Mon, 14 May 2007 22:04:12 +0000

Zeke is the worst executive of all time and with his new extension, worrying about any particular player aquisition is pointless. His ego is massive and he counters every positive contribution with a bad decision that usually stems from his inability to understand the relationship between risk and reward. Trade for JO or not, Zeke will find a way to negatively affect the team. I have no hope until he is fired.

By: Nick Shlain

Nick Shlain — Sun, 13 May 2007 17:27:32 +0000

I really like JO’s game, but i doubt we get him.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 10 May 2007 02:57:54 +0000

While I can’t speak to JO’s health – and 55 games per year is not a great number but how many of those were lost to the suspension -assuming you get comfortable with his health I like him on the Knicks (like that matters to anyone). He would be the fourth option on offense behind Curry, Marbury and Crawford (partially because Crawford shoots when he get his hands on the ball rather being a designed option) and with Q you have a balanced offense.

Marbury played inspired defense (for him) and Q is okay. Adding a real player to the mix rather than a stiff would help.

The question is what you have to give up and what Indiana would want. Marbury and Curry are untouchabe and Indy has a SF. I am assuming Bird is going to play Dunleavy and Diogu (so he the GS trade doesn’t look so bad) so a big and PG would be the focus. the salaries work (I think) but the following makes sense to me:

Frye (no role with Lee, JO, Curry, Q and JJ2)
Malik Rose (salary needed)
Francis (takes minutes from Tinsley replaces D. Armstrong)
Nate
Morris or first rounder.

ONeal
Troy Murphy (salary needed to balance trade)

Murphy and JO have 4 and 3 year deals while all the Knicks have 2-year deals (but Morris) so Indy does save some $$.

I am assuming that diogu replaces Oneal so Frye becomes backup to Diogu and the center (whose name I can’t remember). Rose becomes bench fodder/veteran presence/trade bait. Even with Francis, Pacers become younger as Armstrong is 38. The problem is that you trade your best player and don’t get a starter – but two players will become key rotation guys and one guy with upside.

Knicks get JO, Lee becomes backup PF with JO subbing in at center with Murphy providing extra depth. Clearing Frances allows Mardy to play and well Nate still belongs in the “and one” league (where even here his shot selection would still be questioned)

Of course it wont work because Larry and Isiah probably can’t get together. I think this works by the rules and helps both teams configure their talent, then again I could be a complete idiot.

By: Ted Nelson

Ted Nelson — Wed, 09 May 2007 22:28:44 +0000

Brian,

You’re right: ” I somehow don?t think NBA executives have that short a memory” was a poor choice of words. NBA exectutives often do seem to have a very short memory.
All I meant to say is that I don’t think Frye will be judged entirely on this past season. Teams saw what he is capable of his rookie year. Not that this past season doesn’t hurt his value, but I would think there must be at least a few teams who are still pretty high on Frye.

By: Owen

Owen — Wed, 09 May 2007 20:17:21 +0000

Brian – NBA Gm’s systematically overpay for scoring with little regard for shooting efficiency. The metric that correlates most closely to compensation is actually the NBA Efficiency rating, a genius metric which give equal weight to a fg attempt and a ft attemot. That is one undisputed conclusion of the WOW.

They also I think reward short term performance rather than long term performance, which is stupid, since in the NBA past performance generally is a very accurate indicator of what a player will do in the future.

By: Brian Cronin

Brian Cronin — Wed, 09 May 2007 19:27:05 +0000

For what it’s worth, I think NBA GMs really DO have that short of an attention span, which is why players get big contracts based on how well they play in the playoffs, no matter what they did for years before that.

By: Ted Nelson

Ted Nelson — Wed, 09 May 2007 16:50:25 +0000

I’m not saying that Frye is equivalent to JO: I said JO is like Frye on steroids and that Frye is like a poor man’s JO. As you point out, Murphy is probably a better comparison. However, in the context of my post, what I was trying to say is that Jermaine O’Neal would replace Frye’s major contribution (scoring and a decent mid-range shot) and do almost everything better.

“JO is kind of like Frye on steroids. Same mid range shot to complement Curry?s low-post game, better passer, much better defender, and better rebounder”

As far as trading for draft picks, you have to consider the risk involved. That #20 pick may be “dirt cheap,” but his chances of being a good NBA player are less than 50%. Even at numbers 13-15, since 2000 the list reads like this:
13
Courntey Alexander
Richard Jefferson
Marcus Haislip
Marcus Banks
Sebastian Telfair
Sean May
Thabo Sefalosha
14
Mateen Cleaves
Troy Murphy
Fred Jones
Luke Ridnour
Kris Humphries
Rashad McCants
Ronnie Brewer
15
Jason Collier
Steven Hunter
Bostan Nachbar
Reece Gaines
Al Jefferson
Antoine Wright
Cedric Simmons

Besides RJ, who else are you dying to have on your team before Frye? Maybe Al Jefferson, Troy Murphy, Luke Ridnour, or a young guy like Sefalosha, Simmons, Brewer, and much less so Wright or May. Maybe Nachbar or Steven Hunter if you don’t think Frye will bounce back. In the best case that’s about 33% of those guys who are better than Frye (and 66% who are worse).

Of course a lot of GM’s are going to feel they have the skill or the one prospect to beat the odds. Other GMs whose teams just missed or just made the playoffs might look at their odds of taking a player who can contribute immediately, and rather get Frye if he fills a need and they think he fits on their team.

Even if you look at picks 9-11, they read:
9
Joel Przybilla
Rodney White
Amare
Mike Sweetney
Andre Igoudala
Ike Diogu
Patrick O’Bryant
10
Keyon Dooling
Joe Johnson
Caron Butler
Jarvis Hayes
Luke Jackson
Andrew Bynum
Saer Sene
11
Jerome Moiso
Kedrick Brown
Jared Jeffries
Micka?l Pietrus
Andris Biedrins
Fran Vazquez
JJ Redick

That list is significantly better, but still, if we assume Frye will be a solid starter/3rd bigman on a good team I count Joel Przybilla, Rodney White, Mike Sweetney, Ike Diogu, Patrick O’Bryant, Keyon Dooling, Luke Jackson, Jerome Moiso, Kedrick Brown, Jared Jeffries, Fran Vazquez, JJ Redick, Saer Sene, and maybe Jarvis Hayes as guy who have yet to acheive that level on a sustained basis (some of them are, of course, still young). That’s roughly half, although a few of those guys will probably develop.
Then again, 2007 is supposed to be a deep draft, but 2003 was also a deep draft and 9-11 reads Sweetney, Hayes, Pietrus. Hayes has been ok, and Pietrus has come on in his 4th NBA season.

By: xduckshoex

xduckshoex — Wed, 09 May 2007 14:42:55 +0000

I never thought Frye was going to be that good. He came into the League with a pretty polished game and with little room for improvement; he doesn’t have the frame to bulk up and become a low post scorer, he doesn’t have the natural timing to be a shot blocker and rebounding is something that a rarely shows significant improvement over time, especially for a player who comes into the League at the age Frye did.

I never thought he was a future all-star but I don’t think he’s a bum either. He’s a solid NBA player who will probably have a nice long career.