Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Knicks Morning News (2014.09.04)

  • [New York Times] South American Giants Revel in World Cup Success (Thu, 04 Sep 2014 06:48:35 GMT)
    Brazil and Argentina kept alive their dreams of rekindling past glories after winning in contrasting fashion to reach the basketball World Cup last 16 with a match to spare on Wednesday.

  • [New York Times] Sports Briefing | Basketball: U.S. Remains Unbeaten at World Cup (Thu, 04 Sep 2014 05:23:06 GMT)
    Kenneth Faried stayed hot with 16 points, and the United States rolled to a 4-0 start in the Basketball World Cup with a 106-71 victory over the Dominican Republic on Wednesday in Bilbao, Spain.

  • [New York Times] Sports Briefing | Basketball: Quigley Leads Sky Into W.N.B.A. Finals (Thu, 04 Sep 2014 05:14:10 GMT)
    Allie Quigley scored 24 points and the Chicago Sky advanced to the W.N.B.A. finals with a 75-62 win over the Indiana Fever.

  • [New York Times] Sky Headed to WNBA Finals After Beating Fever (Thu, 04 Sep 2014 02:47:03 GMT)
    With a trip to the WNBA Finals on the line, Allie Quigley came through when her Chicago Sky teammates needed her the most.

  • [New York Post] Source: New Knicks assistant Brian Keefe is ‘Durant’s guy’ (Thu, 04 Sep 2014 05:06:17 -0400)
    With the Knicks officially announcing Derek Fisher's coaching staff on Wednesday, it's worth noting the relationship between new assistant Brian Keefe and Thunder superstar Kevin Durant. Durant, a free agent…

  • 21 comments on “Knicks Morning News (2014.09.04)

    1. DRed

      Zach Lowe, proving he has never watched an NBA game in his life:

      And yet, over four combined seasons in New Orleans, Dallas, and New York, Chandler emerged as perhaps the league’s first “unskilled” offensive big man who could work as a major plus on that end by doing only one thing: setting picks, rolling to the hoop, and dunking the ball.

      Rule changes that pushed an evolution toward more pick-and-rolls, ball movement, and 3-point shooting coalesced to make Chandler a massively valuable offensive player. His cuts drew defenders from all over the floor — the effect of dribble penetration without a dribble — and opened up shot-up shots, swing passes, and driving lanes. Every raw big that enters the league today gets Chandler as a comparison. DeAndre Jordan might reach peak Tyson Chandler if he continues to hone his defensive skills and manages a mid-career improvement in free throw shooting — an underrated ingredient in Chandler’s rise.

    2. GoNyGoNYGo

      3-point shooting coalesced to make Chandler a massively valuable offensive player. His cuts drew defenders from all over the floor — the effect of dribble penetration without a dribble — and opened up shot-up shots, swing passes, and driving lanes

      Was he watching the same games as us?

    3. DRed

      Zach actually watches all the games with me, Jowles and Owen in the Fortress of Offensive Rebounding and Shot Efficiency (aka my parents basement).

    4. yellowboy90

      Isn’t Adrien on the Rockets?

      Yes, So if Adrien is cut and signs a D-league deal the knicks will then have first refusal and his rights. Even if Adrien is cut by the Rockets it is unlikely he will sign a D-league deal.

    5. Cole Aldrich's Second Cousin's Best Friend's Boyfriend

      “A handy guide for coding here at Knickerblogger:”

      I tried copying and pasting what you wrote underneath but it wouldn’t work.

      Also, Zach Lowe is an idiot if he thinks that Tyson Chandler’s untaken shot attempts are not automatically low-efficiency, late-shot-clock, fadeaway-turnaround, switch-stance, left-handed, eyes-closed H-O-R-S-E shots that deflate a superior player’s stats. An idiot, I say!

    6. mokers

      Has anybody here said Chandler isn’t a major plus on the offensive end? I think the main argument with Chandler has always been that if a team takes away the high pick and roll or there is not enough spacing, he can’t do anything else on the floor. When the PnR is available, Chandler does make it deadly.

      Also from the Lowe Article (emphasis mine)

      Gobert has been so good over the summer that some Utah fans are wondering what his development might mean for Derrick Favors and Enes Kanter. Favors played a ton of center last season, and he already fits the Chandler archetype. Playing two such guys at once slaughters a team’s spacing; Gobert logged just 71 minutes with Favors last season, per NBA.com.

      He does watch the games!

      If the lane is crowded, even the best Chandlers find their core skill neutered. Drives from perimeter players peter out before the rim. The Jazz tried to create space for Gobert by playing him with Jeremy Evans, but Evans had only developed a semi-workable midrange shot last season. When Gobert would roll to the rim, he’d most often find a thicket of bodies with bad intentions

      This seems to me like Lowe was saying that Chandler (or Chandler types) cannot simply get that high percentage type whenever they want.

    7. ruruland

      Mokers is right. The anti-WP crowd (hi!) has long lauded Chandler’s impact on offense beyond his shot selection.

      I’ve repeated ad-nasuem the last two years that Chandler’s biggest impact was his screen-setting, which created spacing off and on the ball.

      In fact, the arguments Lowe makes about Chandler are largely based on the premise of interaction effects.

      Jowles and crew continue to stone me.

      IS it a reading comprehension problem? Is it like a reflex whenever Chandler’s name is mentioned?

    8. Z-man

      “Also, Zach Lowe is an idiot if he thinks that Tyson Chandler’s untaken shot attempts are not automatically low-efficiency, late-shot-clock, fadeaway-turnaround, switch-stance, left-handed, eyes-closed H-O-R-S-E shots that deflate a superior player’s stats. An idiot, I say!”

      Yeah, pretty much.

    9. GoNyGoNYGo

      @6 Brian Cronin – Thanks for the handy-dandy guide.

      @9

      Has anybody here said Chandler isn’t a major plus on the offensive end?

      Me.
      Anyone that thinks Chandler is anything more than a fair offensive player is giving him way too much credit. His value on offense is to set picks, roll to the basket for a stuff or back-tap rebound. He tried to develop a mini jumper but that disappeared pretty fast.

    10. JK47

      If the Knicks gave both Cole Aldrich and Jeff Adrien 36 minutes per game, they’d win what, like 60 games? Jeff Adrien had a higher WP48 than Anthony Davis and Cole Aldrich’s WP48 was up in Kevin Durant territory.

    11. Brian Cronin

      I tried copying and pasting what you wrote underneath but it wouldn’t work.

      It’s because it is an image file. If you write it out in an actual comment, it would automatically code. So you can’t write “use <>” because the < will disappear (as it just did here). So I did it as an image file so it wouldn’t code.

    12. Cole Aldrich's Second Cousin's Best Friend's Boyfriend

      I was kidding, Brian. Sorry. Still playing the heel.

      (And being right that Tyson Chandler was a huge positive on offense during his peak years.)

      I think the main argument with Chandler has always been that if a team takes away the high pick and roll or there is not enough spacing, he can’t do anything else on the floor.

      And it’s pretty clear that he can rebound like a mother fucker. So yeah, he’s limited, just like that dude on the USA team with the long hair and “high motor.”

    13. DRed

      I’ve repeated ad-nasuem the last two years that Chandler’s biggest impact was his screen-setting, which created spacing off and on the ball.

      Repeating something that is wrong doesn’t make it right. Yes, Tyson sets good screens. But at his best, he was also really good at dunking the ball, getting fouled, and getting offensive rebounds. Those abilities create space, because if you don’t pay attention to Tyson on defense he dunks the ball, which is a very good shot. Some defenses were able to limit that by forcing Ray Felton to take mid range jump shots, but it’s not Tyson’s fault that Ray Felton sucks and couldn’t take advantage of the space created by Tyson.

    14. lavor postell

      This whole argument is a strawman.

      The only point consistently made about Chandler is that he is great at what he does offensively, but that it is impossible to up his attempts because his offensive skill set is limited. Thus other players need to take shots.

      If you want to debate Melo isn’t efficient enough on that kind of volume that’s fine it’s a fair argument to make. Nobody (even Ruruland) is arguing however that Chandler is some kind of scrub that provides no value offensively. It’s just that you can’t expect to run a bunch of plays for Chandler and those shots needs to elsewhere. That’s a limitation and a reality, but considering everything else peak Chandler provides it’s not a huge drawback at all.

      And it’s pretty clear that he can rebound like a mother fucker. So yeah, he’s limited, just like that dude on the USA team with the long hair and “high motor.”

      Except Chandler in his peak was also an elite defender that posted great net rating numbers. Faried has been a net negative player for the past 3 seasons despite playing on a couple of deep 50+ win Denver teams. It’s incredible how much worse Denver’s defense has been with Faried on the floor versus off of it.

    15. Owen

      Faried isn’t great defensively. I am prepared to believe that, having watched him play a lot. I think that he could improve, that the rest of the defense in Denver was putrid, and that his skills otherwise are outstanding. He looks prepared to dominate the garbage bucket category for the next five years. To me, he is the kind of player you want on your team somewhere and I still regret us not drafting him. So much fun to watch too.

      Re Chandler, I can’t bring myself to wade back into another low-usage high efficiency debate. It never goes anywhere and Tyson has gone somewhere.

      I am not sure who I will enjoy watching more in a Knicks uniform than I have Tyson the last three years. Could be a while….

      But wait, there is Country Cole….

    16. DRed

      Chandler isn’t going to shoot 50 percent on a jumper, but say he shoots 35%. The value, as you mention, isn’t in the shot itself. It’s in the 4-5 times a game the shot, or the threat of the shot has to be defended.

      The one point Jowles is capable of making on this is the opportunity cost of putting Chandler further away from the rim on an offensive rebound opportunity.

      I would argue, however, that the percentage of time Chandlers jumper provides rim opportunities for teammates is greater then the percentage of time an offensive rebound is gathered and consequently converted into points.

      Basketball teams will also do better, on average, when they can penetrate into an open lane then they would having their center battle the opposing center for an offensive rebound.

      We had this argument – literally – for years. Were you around during the great “Tyson is a paint clogger” days?

    17. lavor postell

      Re Chandler, I can’t bring myself to wade back into another low-usage high efficiency debate. It never goes anywhere and Tyson has gone somewhere. Not sure who I will enjoy watching more than I have Tyson the last three years.

      It’s not a worthwhile debate in any context and one I’ve been guilt of getting in to. Chandler is a very good player and could help every single team in the league, when he’s healthy and motivated.

    Comments are closed.