Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Saturday, October 25, 2014

Knicks Morning News (Saturday, Oct 06 2012)

  • [New York Daily News] Without Lin, Knicks’ Chandler offers counterpoint to chemistry (Sat, 06 Oct 2012 02:23:50 GMT)
    Jeremy Lin seemed to have the magic touch last season except when it came to making Carmelo Anthony and Amar’e Stoudemire a winning combination.

  • 85 comments on “Knicks Morning News (Saturday, Oct 06 2012)

    1. johnno

      Really sorry to see that John Andareise resigned as the radio color guy. My favorite Johnny Hoops call of all time — the Knicks were getting killed by the Lakers at MSG and Kobe was torching them, mostly by waltzing down the lane totally uncontested while the Knicks watched him and the Garden crowd went wild, which was driving Andareise crazy. At one point in the third quarter, Kobe goes in for a dunk and Andareise screams, “WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE KNOCK HIM DOWN!!!!” With guys like Kurt Thomas and Rasheed Wallace on the team, I think he would have enjoyed calling games this year.

    2. er

      Jesus christo can the season start so news stories can stop talking about Lin, it’s so overdone it ain’t funny

    3. er

      Yea I am def gonna miss him….best of luck to whatever he does now

      johnno:
      Really sorry to see that John Andareise resigned as the radio color guy.My favorite Johnny Hoops call of all time — the Knicks were getting killed by the Lakers at MSG and Kobe was torching them, mostly by waltzing down the lane totally uncontested while the Knicks watched him and the Garden crowd went wild, which was driving Andareise crazy.At one point in the third quarter, Kobe goes in for a dunk and Andareise screams, “WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE KNOCK HIM DOWN!!!!”With guys like Kurt Thomas and Rasheed Wallace on the team, I think he would have enjoyed calling games this year.

    4. cgreene

      After reading Tyson Chandler’s quotes about Lin and thinking about it for a while, I actually came to the conclusion that the Knicks did the right thing. Based on a 2 or maybe 3 year window to (no I won’t say win a title) but compete at the top level of the league I truly think they are better off with PGs that are experienced and know how to run offenses. Lin would have been trying to learn on the job, would have brought excess attention w storylines about “whose team is it?” and a lack of experience and, frankly, that does matter in the playoffs. If this were about a long term build towards contention then retaining Lin would have made more sense. And it was a risk to let him go. But this is about a team in contention (or at least that thinks it’s in contention) now and, therefore, is better off with the direction they went.

    5. H20

      cgreene:
      After reading Tyson Chandler’s quotes about Lin and thinking about it for a while, I actually came to the conclusion that the Knicks did the right thing.Based on a 2 or maybe 3 year window to (no I won’t say win a title) but compete at the top level of the league I truly think they are better off with PGs that are experienced and know how to run offenses.Lin would have been trying to learn on the job, would have brought excess attention w storylines about “whose team is it?” and a lack of experience and, frankly, that does matter in the playoffs.If this were about a long term build towards contention then retaining Lin would have made more sense.And it was a risk to let him go.But this is about a team in contention (or at least that thinks it’s in contention) now and, therefore, is better off with the direction they went.

      I dont think its gonna be much of a tradeoff especially with the team becoming more slow paced and less Pg oriented, i still say its a bad decision but I can live with a Pg rotation of Kidd/Felton.

    6. Zanzibar

      H20: I dont think its gonna be much of a tradeoff especially with the team becoming more slow paced and less Pg oriented, i still say its a bad decision but I can live with a Pg rotation of Kidd/Felton.

      Yes I fear Woodson will favor a slow-paced game when I believe we should be playing more up tempo, transition ball. Felton/Amare/Melo/JR are all familiar with and have thrived in this type of offense. Also Chandler’s athleticism should allow him to get up and down the court in this type of game. We have a deep roster to keep people fresh. Sure we will have to work out our half-court offense but I think that will end up primarily being Melo/Amare ISO and post games. Maybe an Amare/Melo PnR will prove effective but since Kidd and Felton are poor long 2 shooters I’m not optimistic about a PG driven PnR being consistently reliable.

    7. d-mar

      johnno:
      Really sorry to see that John Andareise resigned as the radio color guy.My favorite Johnny Hoops call of all time — the Knicks were getting killed by the Lakers at MSG and Kobe was torching them, mostly by waltzing down the lane totally uncontested while the Knicks watched him and the Garden crowd went wild, which was driving Andareise crazy.At one point in the third quarter, Kobe goes in for a dunk and Andareise screams, “WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE KNOCK HIM DOWN!!!!”With guys like Kurt Thomas and Rasheed Wallace on the team, I think he would have enjoyed calling games this year.

      I loved Andariese in his prime, but he is way past his expiration date. It’s been painful to listen to him over the last few seasons; he has trouble putting words together and it’s cringe inducing as he stammers and stutters and basically utters nonsense.

      But good luck John, you were a great color guy for a long time.

    8. flossy

      cgreene:
      After reading Tyson Chandler’s quotes about Lin and thinking about it for a while, I actually came to the conclusion that the Knicks did the right thing.Based on a 2 or maybe 3 year window to (no I won’t say win a title) but compete at the top level of the league I truly think they are better off with PGs that are experienced and know how to run offenses.Lin would have been trying to learn on the job, would have brought excess attention w storylines about “whose team is it?” and a lack of experience and, frankly, that does matter in the playoffs.If this were about a long term build towards contention then retaining Lin would have made more sense.And it was a risk to let him go.But this is about a team in contention (or at least that thinks it’s in contention) now and, therefore, is better off with the direction they went.

      That’s ridiculous, the Knicks could have (would have, even) had Jason Kidd backing up Jeremy Lin anyway. Given Lin’s talent level, intelligence and obviously excellent work ethic I find it pretty far-fetched to imagine that given a full training camp and some veteran tutelage, he wouldn’t have been able to run the offense at least as well as Raymond Felton, a journeyman PG whose career to date exemplifies the phrase “nothing special.”

    9. jon abbey

      people seem to think that Felton is old and Lin is young. Felton is 28 and Lin is 24, not nearly as big of a gap as people seem to think.

    10. flossy

      jon abbey:
      people seem to think that Felton is old and Lin is young. Felton is 28 and Lin is 24, not nearly as big of a gap as people seem to think.

      28 with 7 seasons in the league is plenty old enough to know what you’re getting with a professional player.

    11. H20

      Zanzibar: Yes I fear Woodson will favor a slow-paced game when I believe we should be playing more up tempo, transition ball. Felton/Amare/Melo/JR are all familiar with and have thrived in this type of offense. Also Chandler’s athleticism should allow him to get up and down the court in this type of game. We have a deep roster to keep people fresh. Sure we will have to work out our half-court offense but I think that will end up primarily being Melo/Amare ISO and post games. Maybe an Amare/Melo PnR will prove effective but since Kidd and Felton are poor long 2 shooters I’m not optimistic about a PG driven PnR being consistently reliable.

      I could see us being a solid transition team getting points off of defensive stops, possibly top 15 if we maintain the same defensive pressure we saw under Woodson. I recall in one Amare interview were he said Woodson wants them play inside-out primarily so I expect alot of Melo/Amare post ups early in the shot clock, still not sold on Brewer being our starting Sg because of his man helping off him to double Melo in the post.

    12. danvt

      Lin probably has more upside than Felton. His main problems last year were turnovers and lack of a deep jump shot. He scored efficiently and found people well, (though a lot of his assists were to Novak at the three line and he definitely benefited from Steve hitting almost half his threes during Linsanity). My worry about Lin, were he still around, would be that his shot would regress like Landry Fields’ did and he’d become an out and out liability with people doubling off him. He might, also, be fragile.

      So, I think, in Felton, we got a known quantity, and not for 25 million. We know he’s a streaky shooter, we know he runs the P&R nicely with Amar’e, we know he’s a good defender, we know he’s strong and will stay on the court.

      Overall, I think, we can be happy knowing we’re better at the point by far than we were most of last year. I don’t doubt that Lin has it in him to improve and that the Rockets are probably a better situation for him to grow up in than the soap opera Knicks. If he makes the west all star team we’ll know our owner failed us again but my impression now is that it’s probably a wash.

    13. JK47

      Ray Felton has played almost 20,000 minutes in the NBA, and he has a career .498 TS%, .454 eFG% and .067 WS/48. In his 300 playoff minutes he’s been a bit worse than that. His similarity scores list is full of guys like Aaron McKie, Gerald Henderson and Travis Best.

      He is mediocrity personified, and I think the Knicks’ guard play is going to be a real problem.

    14. danvt

      JK47: He is mediocrity personified, and I think the Knicks’ guard play is going to be a real problem.

      Certainly he’s much maligned. I’m just saying that if Lin was still here I’d be worried about him being much the same plus the circus atmosphere. I mean, everything Dolan does seems to haunt him so on some level I fully expect Lin to be our latest embarrassment, but, I like the way Ray played with Gallo and the boys for that half season. He exceeded his career norms when he was with NYK, yes? I think there’s some upside with Ray too.

    15. Z-man

      We’ll see. I’m taking the over on Felton. His stats are actually pretty good for the last 2 1/2 of the past three years, if you throw out the first half of last year when he was admittedly way out of shape. Post all-star break, he shot 44% from the field, 38% from 3, and 83% from the line. The year before, he shot 43. 35 and 80. The year before that, he shot 46, 38 and 76. So, for 2 1/2 of 3 years, he has shot roughly 44% from the field, 36.5% from 3 and 80% from the line, with a TS% of around 53% and a WS48 of around .100 and a eFG% of around .485. If you want to place a lot of creedence in his play with the very shitty Charlotte teams (until his last year there when they made the playoffs) and his fat start to a fucked up lockout year, you can do that. I think we wound up with a better than average PG at a huge bargain. More importantly, I think Woodson and most of the Knicks veterans feel the same way. And I would almost bet that Kidd feels the same way. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Grunwald consulted with Kidd in deciding to go with Felton over Lin.

      Tyson Chandler hardly seems like a stooge for Dolan. I doubt he would have said what he said if he didn’t believe that Felton was better than Lin. He could be wrong, or lying, but I personally agree with everything he said and waht danvt said in @12.

    16. flossy

      danvt: He exceeded his career norms when he was with NYK, yes?

      Well, his stats get inflated by playing in an uptempo spread pick-and-roll offense with the best PnR dive man in the NBA for a coach renowned for making PGs look good. It’s worth remembering that Chris Duhon also looked pretty good for the first few months of playing under D’Antoni, as well as acknowledging that Lin’s play for D’Antoni (as essentially a rookie) blows anything Raymond Felton has ever done out of the water, and Lin managed to adjust on the fly pretty well and had some success under Woodson too, albeit with less gaudy numbers.

      I have no problem with anyone saying that on the whole, the Knicks will at least not suffer through the Shumpert/Melo/Baron Davis/Mike Bibby/Toney Douglas “horrible PG by committee” experiment of last year. Instead, we’ll have reliably mediocre Ray Felton and rapidly declining Jason Kidd. If you prefer the latter to the former that is fine–completely reasonable. If you prefer the latter to having Jeremy Lin locked up for the next 3 years you are out of your ever loving mind, sorry.

    17. Z-man

      BTW, the biggest knock on Felton is his shooting (including finishing) and shot selection, which is why I focused on his shooting stats. Defensively, I think that Lin was a huge liability, and Felton is st least solid and often good. So you got a guy who’s possibly as good or better on O, and almost certainly better on D, at 1/2 the price (even less when luxury tax is factored in.) And PGs often take longer to develop than other positions. So Felton could possibly have more upside than a player at another position might have, especially on this talented veteran team with a HOF mentor.

      Let me ask you, flossy, what #s would Felton have to put up for you to come around on this?

    18. ruruland

      Felton last three years from 3 (including last year): 34.6%

      Felton assists per 36/48:
      13th, 8th, 23rd, 18th, 9th, 13

      He had .525 TS in New York in 2010, but a .524 TS in Denver. So it wasn’t just MDA’s offense.
      It was the opportunity to push the ball that improved his efficiency.

      Let’s also remember this. In 2010, he averaged 31.6 minutes per game in Denver. In that same time span, fellow point guard Ty Lawson averaged 31.4.

      Somehow, Felton averaged slightly more playing time than Lawson when they were on the same team. Obviously, Felton is not a better NBA point guard than Ty Lawson.

      However, he is a better passer than Lawson. There is no question about that, which is a big reason he played so much in Denver. That, along with his defense.

      Remember, Denver wanted to keep Felton. Felton wanted to be a starter. Portland was willing to trade what the board feels, and perhaps a guy who is widely regarded as perhaps the best back-up point guard in the league .

      Somehow, smart basketball people felt Raymond Felton had proven himself to be of pretty substantial value.

      Is Raymond Felton a guy you build your offense around? No, his efficiency will suffer tremendously if he’s asked to be a primary or secondary option, as he has throughout his career.

      But what if you asked him to be a third or fourth option, surrounded him with guys who can create offense, reduced his minutes, and allowed him to play to his strengths??

      Play pick and roll with two of the best rollers in the NBA, push the ball when the opportunity is there, take open 3pt shots and harrass opposing point guards.

      Melo and or Amar’e will always be on the floor with him. Jason Kidd will likely play a lot of minutes at the 2 when he’s on the court.

      Raymond Felton was not at his best in NY, he was at his best in Denver where the offense was deep and there was another pg to share the load.

    19. flossy

      If Felton can shoot the ball as efficiently as he did in his last season in Charlotte while simultaneously keeping two of the most demanding and least complimentary scoring forwards in the league happy with the number and quality of shots they’re getting, I’ll happily eat my words. I’m not holding my breath, however.

      And Felton being serviceable, which may turn out to be true, does not change the fact that the FO effectively slammed the team’s championship window shut by voluntarily surrendering the only young player on the roster with all-star upside, one who happened to play our biggest position of need.

      The arguments against Jeremy Lin, like that he was a defensive liability (he was also effectively a rookie playing for two different coaches and with a torn meniscus for some of his season, on a team that managed to be an elite defense despite his supposedly being so bad) or that he was too expensive (who cares?! His contract would have expired at the same time as all the other overpaid players on the roster!) are pure Monday-morning rationalizations by a fan base still struggling to believe what a monumentally stupid move it was to just let him walk for nothing.

      If, at any point prior to July, someone had said “by the way, I think the Knicks should just let Jeremy Lin leave for nothing and instead bring Raymond Felton back on a 4 year deal” you would have laughed ’til you cried and said that not even Dolan would ever be so stupid. The fact that it happened does not make it any less stupid. It just means that we collectively underestimated how cretinous James Dolan really is.

    20. ruruland

      Shumpert has all-star potential. I’m sure we can go over the Lin conversation as much as you want. Bring it up every day if you can.

      Here is some more tripe from those lily-livered Lin-hating bastards:

      “I can’t wait. I mean, I knew how good Ray was coming from Denver,” J.R. Smith said. “You’d always hear about playing with J-Kidd and how smart he is, but you never really understand it until you get out there. These guys are 100 percent better than what I thought. Even a 40-year-old Jason Kidd is probably better than a lot of these 22, 23, 24-year-old guys.”

      “The intensity is way up,” Chandler said. “And also there’s also calmness when we’re coming down court with the point guards getting things under control and making sure we get good shots every possession.”

    21. ruruland

      I’ve said a billion times Lin should have been re-signed. Basically, everyone does.

      But this idea that Lin was the only player capable of getting the Knicks over the top? Not as sure as I was.

      I think Lin at his best is a score-first, ball-dominating point guard. I think he wants to develop into a guy who controlls every possession.

      In that sense, keeping Lin could lead to some real diminishing returns issues that aren’t present on this roster.

      Would he be willing to accept the kind of role of Felton and Kidd have, who both understand they aren’t top options and want to create first?

      Everyone loves the idea of trying to make it work with Lin. But there were signs last year that it may not have worked.

      And to me, what some people simply looked at as Lin’s unconventional shots, I believe there could be some issues with his ability to consistently finish in the paint. A lot of his patented shots in the paint are very challenging, and he derived virtually all of his efficiency from finishing them at an extremely high rate.

      There’s reason to believe that the sample size is hiding his true efficiency in the paint area. Maybe he improves as a shooter and gets to the line even more.

      On top of that, there are a few question marks about his ball-handling and ability to consistently do what he did last year when the defense is geared to him over an entire season.

      We’ll see. It’s a risk I absolutely would have taken — a no brain proposition — because Lin does have a chance to be an all-start caliber point guard.

      But it’s far from a sure bet, and I’m not convinced that when you take away some of his strengths as an every-possession scoring pg, that he’s a better overall fit than Kidd and Felton with this particular roster.

    22. flossy

      ruruland: Here is some more tripe from those lily-livered Lin-hating bastards:

      “I can’t wait. I mean, I knew how good Ray was coming from Denver,” J.R. Smith said. “You’d always hear about playing with J-Kidd and how smart he is, but you never really understand it until you get out there. These guys are 100 percent better than what I thought. Even a 40-year-old Jason Kidd is probably better than a lot of these 22, 23, 24-year-old guys.”

      “The intensity is way up,” Chandler said. “And also there’s also calmness when we’re coming down court with the point guards getting things under control and making sure we get good shots every possession.”

      This is a joke, right? What on earth do you expect players to say to the media? “Welp, I miss Jeremy Lin but we’re making the best of it!” Have you also considered that the implicit comparison (especially in what Chandler says–I think we all know he liked playing with Lin) is to the pu-pu platter of horrific PGs who incompetently ran the offense (into the ground) every moment of every game that Jeremy Lin was’t on the floor? But I guess it’s reassuring to know that two pro PGs can run the offense in a training camp scrimmage against future Erie Bayhawks.

    23. flossy

      And as for Shumpert having all-star potential, don’t be ridiculous. I love the kid, but he’d have to *improve* as an offensive player to even get to the level of Thabo Sefolosha. There is absolutely no comparison between that kind of player and somebody whose first run of starts in the NBA were the best OF ALL TIME.

    24. ruruland

      flossy: This is a joke, right?What on earth do you expect players to say to the media?“Welp, I miss Jeremy Lin but we’re making the best of it!” Have you also considered that the implicit comparison (especially in what Chandler says–I think we all know he liked playing with Lin) is to the pu-pu platter of horrific PGs who incompetently ran the offense (into the ground) every moment of every game that Jeremy Lin was’t on the floor?But I guess it’s reassuring to know that two pro PGs can run the offense in a training camp scrimmage against future Erie Bayhawks.

      Like I said, they’re clearly being disingenuous.

    25. er

      so you think lin will be a better player than shump in 5 years? I wonder what a poll of that question would reveal

      flossy:
      And as for Shumpert having all-star potential, don’t be ridiculous.I love the kid, but he’d have to *improve* as an offensive player to even get to the level of Thabo Sefolosha.There is absolutely no comparison between that kind of player and somebody whose first run of starts in the NBA were the best OF ALL TIME.

    26. ruruland

      Iman Shumpert has the physical tools to be an all-star. Superior tools to Lin, but far less rwfined skills. There have been far less talented players who were known for defense that developed into very good shooters/offensive players. Shumpert can be better than Afflalo (look at his numbers at UCLA and Detroit) or Raja Bell, off the top of my head.

    27. er

      ruruland
      i guess the answer to your question probably depends on your view of lin more than your views on shumpert. Some ppl think lin can be a top 5 pg

      Shumpert WAS a rookie, even though the lin supports try to use this claim it was actually his second year, so lin had the benefit of at least being around the NBA game for a year. Shumpert i think will benefit greatly from playing with all these vets also, especially kidd on the offensive end

      :
      Iman Shumpert has the physical tools to be an all-star. Superior tools to Lin, but far less rwfined skills. There have been far less talented players who were known for defense that developed into very good shooters/offensive players. Shumpert can be better than Afflalo (look at his numbers at UCLA and Detroit) or Raja Bell, off the top of my head.

    28. flossy

      ruruland:
      Iman Shumpert has the physical tools to be an all-star. Superior tools to Lin, but far less rwfined skills. There have been far less talented players who were known for defense that developed into very good shooters/offensive players. Shumpert can be better than Afflalo (look at his numbers at UCLA and Detroit) or Raja Bell, off the top of my head.

      He’s obviously a great athlete, nobody is disputing that. His offensive production was horrible last season and he had exactly the same problems in college. Saying that if he improves, he could be better than two guys who are/were also not All-Star caliber players is not a compelling case that he has all-star potential. The NBA is lousy with super-athletic wings who will never sniff an All-Star came.

    29. Z-man

      ruruland: It’s a risk I absolutely would have taken — a no brain proposition — because Lin does have a chance to be an all-start caliber point guard.
      But it’s far from a sure bet

      This is contradictory. Is it a no-brainer or far from a sure bet? That’s my issue in a nutshell. If

      flossy: you would have laughed ’til you cried and said that not even Dolan would ever be so stupid.

      Not true. From the time I heard about the “poison pill” possibility, I was concerned that Lin might price himself off the team. I just didn’t think he’d be stupid enough to leave NY. You see, I feel that staying in NY was a no-brainer for Lin. Clearly, playing in Houston and NY were equivalent propositions for him, and that’s fine. Frankly, that factors into my thinking, as does the fact that no one with clout on the team seemed to care much that Lin was gone, and that now seems confirmed by Tyson Chandler, a high character guy.

      I feel that anyone who calls the move a no-brainer has a serious infatuation issues with Lin, and thaqt will be borne out when Lin puts up early Felton-like numbers for the next few years while getting paid like Steve Nash.

      flossy: surrendering the only young player on the roster with all-star upside, one who happened to play our biggest position of need.

      Lin does not have all-star upside. He just doesn’t. I would be willing to bet that he does not make an all-star appearance for the life of the asinine contract he signed. Seriously, does anyone really think he will be a top-3 PG in the West anytime soon? Please.

      An again, weren’t we talking about Landry Fields’ all-star upside after 50 (not 26) games? Why was not matching him a no-brainer?

    30. flossy

      Z-man: I feel that anyone who calls the move a no-brainer has a serious infatuation issues with Lin, and thaqt will be borne out when Lin puts up early Felton-like numbers for the next few years while getting paid like Steve Nash.

      He’s getting paid an average of $8 million/year, with a contract that would have been irrelevant to the team’s cap flexibility. Not only is that not Steve Nash money (it’s actually more like Raymond Felton’s last contract!), it’s totally irrelevant.

      Z-man: Lin does not have all-star upside. He just doesn’t.

      Again, he had more points and assists in his first 8-10 starts (don’t remember the exact number) than ANYONE ELSE, EVER. That’s not to say that anyone expected him to sustain that level of play over the long term. Obviously. But inferior players do not sustain runs that dominant the moment they get significant minutes. One game is a fluke. Two games is a fluke. Dropping 25-30 points game after game, long after word had gotten out, demonstrates a level of potential that is inarguably higher than most.

      Z-man: An again, weren’t we talking about Landry Fields’ all-star upside after 50 (not 26) games?

      Um, no? Speak for yourself maybe? I was skeptical of Fields from day one and never bought into the “next Hondo” horse shit but regardless, Landry Fields run of decent play was like being pleasantly surprised to find out that the junker you bought for scrap actually runs. Lin’s emergence was like finding out the junker you bought for scrap actually tops out at 200mph.

    31. flossy

      er:

      The question is really will Lin be better than Felton, but regarding Shumpert, let me put it to you this way: he needs to either dramatically improve his offensive skills or have a long talk with Ronnie Brewer about the market value of defensive specialist 2-guards.

    32. jon abbey

      this italicized page is hard to read, and hopefully someone will fix it, but two quick things:

      Jeremy Lin is never ever ever ever going to stay healthy for 82 games of 35+ minutes unless he drastically changes the way he plays.

      the pre-injury Shumpert absolutely had All-Star potential, hopefully he is the same guy once he comes back.

    33. flossy

      jon abbey: the pre-injury Shumpert absolutely had All-Star potential, hopefully he is the same guy once he comes back.

      Seriously, based on what?

    34. ruruland

      There is an abundant supply of athletic wings who don’t reach their potential? True.

      Same with pgs, unfortunately, and big men.

      The vast majority of Shumpert’s career has been played as a shot-creating point guard.

      The shift to shooting guard should dramatically improve his efficiency over time. I used Afflalo and Bell as examples of guys who started out as terrible shooters and developed into great spot-up shooters. Shumpert has superior tools to both players, obviously.

      He doesn’t need to have great efficiency to be an all-star anyway. A middling efficiency 2 guard who is one of the 3-4 best defenders in the NBA is meritworthy of an all-star appearance.

      The different between Shump and other guys who shared his incredible length and athleticism is Shump’s competitiveness.

      He may not develop into a middling–above average efficiency player, but with a shift to off-ball and continuing development of his skills, given that he’s already a lock for pt, gives him a better chance than many to reach his cieling, which is clearly that one of of the best wings in the NBA, both ends considered.

    35. ruruland

      Z-man: This is contradictory. Is it a no-brainer or far from a sure bet? That’s my issue in a nutshell. If

      Not true. From the time I heard about the “poison pill” possibility, I was concerned that Lin might price himself off the team. I just didn’t think he’d be stupid enough to leave NY. You see, I feel that staying in NY was a no-brainer for Lin. Clearly, playing in Houston and NY were equivalent propositions for him, and that’s fine. Frankly, that factors into my thinking, as does the fact that no one with clout on the team seemed to care much that Lin was gone, and that now seems confirmed by Tyson Chandler, a high character guy.

      I feel that anyone who calls the move a no-brainer has a serious infatuation issues with Lin, and thaqt will be borne out when Lin puts up early Felton-like numbers for the next few years while getting paid like Steve Nash.

      Lin does not have all-star upside. He just doesn’t. I would be willing to bet that he does not make an all-star appearance for the life of the asinine contract he signed. Seriously, does anyone really think he will be a top-3 PG in the West anytime soon? Please.

      An again, weren’t we talking about Landry Fields’ all-star upside after 50 (not 26) games? Why was not matching him a no-brainer?

      The risk of re-acquiring Lin vs letting him go for nothing was a no-brainer. Contained within the proposition of retaining Lin was the ability to move or bench him if his skills were not a proper fit with the roster.

      it wasn’t a sure-bet that he would figure it out here, but the decision to give yourslef a chance to figure that out was still a no-brainer.

    36. flossy

      ruruland: He doesn’t need to have great efficiency to be an all-star anyway. A middling efficiency 2 guard who is one of the 3-4 best defenders in the NBA is meritworthy of an all-star appearance.

      Wait, so if he improves his offense *and* his defense he might merit an all-star appearance? Hard to disagree with that, although even then a 3-and-D shooting guard does not an all-star make. Again, I really like him as a person, and I think he will get better and definitely continue to be a rotation player and someone I want on the Knicks. But his offense was horrible in college and was horrible in his rookie season (only half of which was spent at PG btw), really at this point his only + skill is on-ball iso defense. People see that he has a lot of “swag” or whatever (“competitiveness!” okay) and just assume he’s going to get a lot better.

    37. daJudge

      Aside from his shut down defensive skills (not just that I can steal the ball from you or take a charge), Shump has lot’s of offensive potential. He’s explosive and his J does not look at all like Ronnie Brewer’s shot. His form is decent, not awkward. I don’t think the comparison is valid at all, except regarding the exceptional defense from Shump. If he gets back healthy, let’s say close to 100%, no question he has all star potential. He also is tough minded. I know I’ve said this before, but he looks a bit like Michael Ray to me. It is hard for me to understand how this isn’t apparent, no dis untended Flossy.

    38. jon abbey

      some people should look at numbers less and watch basketball more. Shumpie was a huge part of any success NY had last year and should only get better. a missed shot that draws the defense and allows a teammate to get an easy follow is exactly the same result as a made shot, just as one example.

    39. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      jon abbey:
      a missed shot that draws the defense and allows a teammate to get an easy follow is exactly the same result as a made shot, just as one example.

      That is the dumbest thing I have ever read on this site. The dumbest fucking thing I’ve ever read about basketball, ever.

    40. daJudge

      I think the point is that a good shot (shot that should be taken) is a good shot whether it goes in or not. I did not see Shump take many bad shots. Many players don’t take the good shot and instead defer which disrupts the rhythm and rebounding. Yeah, so I player that draws the defense when he shoots is probably shooting a ‘good’ shot. I’m assuming the defense is not just the guy who is guarding the shooter. Why is that dumb?

    41. jon abbey

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: That is the dumbest thing I have ever read on this site. The dumbest fucking thing I’ve ever read about basketball, ever.

      awesome, plus it has the virtue of being totally true. I am pretty proud now, thanks.

    42. jon abbey

      I honestly don’t even see how someone could argue with that, let alone call it dumb, but it definitely speaks to the fundamental disconnect between stat-driven analysis and the actual sport.

    43. njasdjdh

      I think it’s hilarious that ruru consistently talks about how he feels Lin wanted to be a ball dominant PG and that’s not a good fit for this roster. I mean…a.) I love that ruru is psychic and b.) It’s almost like he has no idea that Ray Felton is going to shoot the ball…a lot. Just like he always has.

    44. Z-man

      flossy: Dropping 25-30 points game after game, long after word had gotten out, demonstrates a level of potential that is inarguably higher than most.

      Really? More than being rookie of the month 2 months in a row? More than having a WP48 over .200 for way over 30 games? More than leading the league in rebounds for a guard over the likes of Dwyane Wade et al.? Maybe you are thone of the very scant few that didn’t buy into it, but almost everyone else here and elsewhere did. And had the season ended then and Fields had the same offer sheet to match with the same luxury tax implications, and Dolan didn’t match, there would have been an outcry for the ages. For the record, I was one of the minority that said we should include Fields in the Melo trade over Gallo.

      flossy: He’s getting paid an average of $8 million/year, with a contract that would have been irrelevant to the team’s cap flexibility. Not only is that not Steve Nash money (it’s actually more like Raymond Felton’s last contract!), it’s totally irrelevant.

      Really? What would his contract have cost the Knicks over 3 years? And please, spare me the BS about Dolan never caring about luxury tax before. Lin was already geting $5 mill in the first 2 years of the contract (very generous considering his extremely limited body of work) and $15 mill in the 3rd year (plus triple that in luxury tax for up to $70 mill for 3 years.) Easy to say its a no-brainer when it’s someone else’s money. Any fiscally responsible GM/owner does not match that contract. Let me ask you, why didn’t any other team offer Lin a 4-year deal with 2 years of poison pill? Because only Morey was that desperate after fucking up and losing two PGs who are each better than Lin.

    45. flossy

      Z-man: Really? What would his contract have cost the Knicks over 3 years? And please, spare me the BS about Dolan never caring about luxury tax before. Lin was already geting $5 mill in the first 2 years of the contract (very generous considering his extremely limited body of work) and $15 mill in the 3rd year (plus triple that in luxury tax for up to $70 mill for 3 years.) Easy to say its a no-brainer when it’s someone else’s money. Any fiscally responsible GM/owner does not match that contract. Let me ask you, why didn’t any other team offer Lin a 4-year deal with 2 years of poison pill? Because only Morey was that desperate after fucking up and losing two PGs who are each better than Lin.

      It is easy to say it’s a no brainer when it’s someone else’s money, because it *is* someone else’s $ and there’s no reason for you to care!. PeAll I care about is rooting for a better basketball team. I have to laugh at Knicks fans acting like they give a shit about James Dolan’s bottom line. This is the guy who spent $126 million in payroll for a team that won 29 games, but now, when someone who has the chance to be the best Knicks PG in a generation falls out of the sky *and* the team wins a case that would allow us to actually keep him, now he throws that opportunity in the trash out of spite and you defend him. Unreal. I understand teams not wanting to match any poison pill offer–Landry Fields was vastly overpaid relative to his production. Omer Asik has never averaged more than 14mpg and Chicago already has a starting center. Jeremy Lin was going to be this franchise’s PG of the future and Dolan picked literally the first time in his entire life to be a cheapskate. It blows my mind that some Knicks fans have the perverse desire to carry water for him in this one instance. So Jeremy Lin got a pick payday? So what? What he eats don’t make you shit,…

    46. flossy

      Z-man: Really? More than being rookie of the month 2 months in a row? More than having a WP48 over .200 for way over 30 games? More than leading the league in rebounds for a guard over the likes of Dwyane Wade et al.? Maybe you are thone of the very scant few that didn’t buy into it, but almost everyone else here and elsewhere did. And had the season ended then and Fields had the same offer sheet to match with the same luxury tax implications, and Dolan didn’t match, there would have been an outcry for the ages. For the record, I was one of the minority that said we should include Fields in the Melo trade over Gallo.

      Um, yeah. More points and assists in his first 10 starts than ANY PLAYER IN HISTORY is more impressive than Landry’s 10 points and 6 boards for 2 months, or at least suggests a higher ceiling. Are you even asking this as a serious question?? If we could have traded Landry instead of Gallo I would have driven Mr. Fields to the airport myself.

    47. flossy

      jon abbey:
      some people should look at numbers less and watch basketball more.Shumpie was a huge part of any success NY had last year and should only get better. a missed shot that draws the defense and allows a teammate to get an easy follow is exactly the same result as a made shot, just as one example.

      Yeah, THCJ can be an ass, but this is an awe-inspiringly moronic statement. For the record, I watched nearly every game last year, the Knicks were not successful, though Shumpie (aww!) sure did throw up a lot of bricks. But tell me, if missed shots are so valuable (hah!) why no love for your boy Landry Fields?

    48. Z-man

      flossy: I have to laugh at Knicks fans acting like they give a shit about James Dolan’s bottom line. This is the guy who spent $126 million in payroll for a team that won 29 games

      I truly don’t give a shit. My point is that whether it was Dolan or any other owner, I wouldn’t be bitter about this specific move because a reasonable argument can be made that it was a fiscally responsible move.

      flossy: when someone who has the chance to be the best Knicks PG in a generation falls out of the sky *and* the team wins a case that would allow us to actually keep him, now he throws that opportunity in the trash out of spite and you defend him

      The hyperbole here is truly astounding. What chance? 10-1? 5-1? And why are you so sure it was out of spite? Why couldn’t it be that he and Grunwald just didn’t think he was worth the money? I’m not defending Dolan and hate him as much as anyone. I’m just defending this particular decision as relatively reasonable, one that I think a majority of GMs and owners would have made.

      flossy: More points and assists in his first 10 starts than ANY PLAYER IN HISTORY is more impressive than Landry’s 10 points and 6 boards for 2 months, or at least suggests a higher ceiling.

      This is where we differ. I personally saw serious flaws even in Lin’s best games…weak left hand, poor D, turnover prone, mediocre 3-pt shooting, taking an unsustainable physical beating, to name a few…that would have given me pause if I had to make the decision whether to match. You want to conclude, based on those 10 whole “magical” games, that Lin was worth a $70 mill investment, fine. I, although a fellow Dolan hater, respectfully but…

    49. ruruland

      njasdjdh: I think it’s hilarious that ruru consistently talks about how he feels Lin wanted to be a ball dominant PG and that’s not a good fit for this roster. I mean…a.) I love that ruru is psychic and b.) It’s almost like he has no idea that Ray Felton is going to shoot the ball…a lot. Just like he always has.

      That’s not what exactly what I said, is it?

      Let me rephrase for you: Lin had a tendency to look for his own shot over other options. He showed that he will force into the paint over other options. We talked about this a lot last year. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, per se, Lin is very effective as a scorer, but with Melo and Amar’e you’d prefer a point guard with a Rondo or Kidd mentality.

      Raymond Felton has had a relatively high fga/36, especially considering his low efficiency. But over the course of his career, he’s played on relatively untalented offenses.

      When he was in Denver, the most talented offense he’s played on, his fga/36 dropped to 11.1 (career 12.6 on slower, in aggregate, offenses)

      And when you compare Felton to Lin in MDA’s offense, Felton had a higher assists/36 (8.5 to 8.5), and a much lower combined fg/fta per 36 (21.7 to 17)

      Felton shot much less and passed more.

      Felton isn’t as good as Lin. He won’t score as efficiently. But he may be a better passer, and he’s far more likely to maximize Amar’e and Melo than Lin, at least the Lin we saw last year.

      My argument had always been that Lin could adapt his game. But I don’t fault a young guy in his shows trying to get his own. And he may have a natural tendency scorer.

      He has a chance to be a great assist guy given how often he’s in the paint. But he’s got a little bit of Iverson to him with blinders once he gets in there.

    50. jon abbey

      flossy: Yeah, THCJ can be an ass, but this is an awe-inspiringly moronic statement.For the record, I watched nearly every game last year, the Knicks were not successful, though Shumpie (aww!) sure did throw up a lot of bricks.But tell me, if missed shots are so valuable (hah!) why no love for your boy Landry Fields?

      yeah, that’s what I said. you guys might be less dismissive if your reading comprehension was higher.

    51. jon abbey

      damn, man, if we had sig files at this site, that would be my new one, nice to see I struck a nerve amongst people who fundamentally misunderstand this sport.

    52. ruruland

      flossy: Wait, so if he improves his offense *and* his defense he might merit an all-star appearance? Hard to disagree with that, although even then a 3-and-D shooting guard does not an all-star make. Again, I really like him as a person, and I think he will get better and definitely continue to be a rotation player and someone I want on the Knicks. But his offense was horrible in college and was horrible in his rookie season (only half of which was spent at PG btw), really at this point his only + skill is on-ball iso defense. People see that he has a lot of “swag” or whatever (“competitiveness!” okay) and just assume he’s going to get a lot better.

      Slash and finish ability is pretty damn good. Flashes of pick and roll prowess.Above-average handle for a two-guard. All of that gives him the potential to be much more than a 3-and-d two guard.

      A lot of his inefficiency is tied to all of the bad decision shots he took as a primary ballhandler.

      When the Knicks moved him to 2, his ts shot up to .520 and his 3pt .330. This is a guy who can be a really good offensive player if he continues to develop his skills and more importantly, his decision making.

      Look at how he compares:

      Afflalo’s rookie year: .494 TS, .208 3pt %

      Wade rookie year: .530 TS

      Joe Johnson first three years: .478, .472, .491 TS (.292, .366, .305 3pt %)

      Ray Allen first two years: .541, .539 TS

      Kevin Martin rookie year: .464 TS

      Rip Hamilton first three years: .482, .508, .511

      Chauncey Billups: .516, .547, .465,

      Jason Richardson: .487, .501, .504, .518 (.333, .282, .338)

      Just to name a few.

    53. Brian Cronin

      I think Shump is great, and there certainly is a chance that he will improve his shooting as he gets older (as ruruland notes, it has happened to other players), but come on, Shump was terrible on the offensive end of things last year.

      Frank posted his Synergy numbers and they’re just downright appalling…

      Overall 0.8 PPP (344th in the league)
      Isolation 0.83 PPP (67th)
      PNR BH – 0.55 PPP (171st)
      Post up – only had 4
      Spot-up – 0.87 PPP (237th)
      Off screen – 0.65
      Hand-off 0.56
      Cuts – 1.09
      Transition – 1.18 (125th)

      It wasn’t like Shump was making great drives to the basket, missing a tough shot and then his teammates were tipping them in. He was missing everything.

      Obviously, he can improve and I think that the chances are strong that he will.

      Meanwhile, his defense was so strong that he was certainly a positive for the team last year.

      But offensively, he was just plain awful.

    54. sidestep

      Also worth mentioning is something I learned today from Hollinger’s profile on Shump.
      “Shumpert’s aggressiveness had a cost too, and he has to learn how to manage risk and reward better at that end. He fouled 4.09 times per 40 minutes, a ridiculously high rate for a guard, and gave up enough openings for drives that it often offset the impact of his pressure.”
      To put that in perspective, for players with 25+ mpg:
      – the league avg all positions is 2.9 personal fouls per 40
      – the league avg for guards is 2.6 PF per 40
      – Among guards, Shump tied for second place in having the highest fouling rate among all guards. (Gerald Green also had 4.1/40, and first place goes to D.J. Kennedy with 4.7/40)

      I think that just confirms what you do see from watching games, namely his gambling for steals, aggressively reaching in on the perimeter, and, as I’ve mentioned before I think, his lack of cognizance for the level of contact that the referees for a game are allowing that night.

      Come to think of it, there really should be a new composite stat for the ratio of Steals to Personal Fouls, just like there is a stat for Assist to Turnover ratio. That would give a sense of the cost of going for steals.

    55. ruruland

      sidestep:
      Also worth mentioning is something I learned today from Hollinger’s profile on Shump.
      “Shumpert’s aggressiveness had a cost too, and he has to learn how to manage risk and reward better at that end. He fouled 4.09 times per 40 minutes, a ridiculously high rate for a guard, and gave up enough openings for drives that it often offset the impact of his pressure.”
      To put that in perspective, for players with 25+ mpg:
      – the league avg all positions is 2.9 personal fouls per 40
      – the league avg for guards is 2.6 PF per 40
      – Among guards, Shump tied for second place in having the highest fouling rate among all guards. (Gerald Green also had 4.1/40, and first place goes to D.J. Kennedy with 4.7/40)

      I think that just confirms what you do see from watching games, namely his gambling for steals, aggressively reaching in on the perimeter, and, as I’ve mentioned before I think, his lack of cognizance for the level of contact that the referees for a game are allowing that night.

      Come to think of it, there really should be a new composite stat for the ratio of Steals to Personal Fouls, just like there is a stat for Assist to Turnover ratio. That would give a sense of the cost of going for steals.

      good post. But I think there are ancillary benefits to over-aggressive man defense(not over-aggression in passing lane)

    56. ruruland

      Brian Cronin:
      I think Shump is great, and there certainly is a chance that he will improve his shooting as he gets older (as ruruland notes, it has happened to other players), but come on, Shump was terrible on the offensive end of things last year.

      Frank posted his Synergy numbers and they’re just downright appalling…

      Overall 0.8 PPP (344th in the league)
      Isolation 0.83 PPP (67th)
      PNR BH – 0.55 PPP (171st)
      Post up – only had 4
      Spot-up – 0.87 PPP (237th)
      Off screen – 0.65
      Hand-off 0.56
      Cuts – 1.09
      Transition – 1.18 (125th)

      It wasn’t like Shump was making great drives to the basket, missing a tough shot and then his teammates were tipping them in.

      idk, Shump had a lot of missed dunks and layups last year that just looked strange. Some of it was injury.

      His jumper at times was atrocious and he didn’t finish at the rim as he should, but I highly doubt the latter is a long-term issue and he should improve his shooting.

      A lot of wings like Shump drop out of the league because they don’t play defense well enough to earn playing time. They never get the 3-5 years needed to develop offensively.

      But if you actually look at poor shooting defensive specialist, or super-athletic wings that kept their careers alive, a lot of them became good-excellent shooters.

      I’d live to whip up that list. But shooting is something I think the vast majority of nba players can improve upon to a certain extent, until they reach a percentage cieling mostly dictated by mechanics.

      My point is that Shump has the chance to not just improve as shooter like those other guys, but has handle and quick-twitch to be much better overall.

    57. er

      sorry to sidetrack but i just realized that the celtics top 3 players are a combined 96 yrs old (pierce 34 Rondo 26 Garnett 36) and the Knicks are 88 yrs old (melo 28 ,stat 30 in november, chandler 30) and we are the team being called old

    58. Brian Cronin

      I think Shump will improve, as well. He shot better in the second half than he did in the first half, which is good (although, in a not-so-good sign, he was a good deal worse in April than he was in March). And yes, I also have to figure that some of those really weird missed dunks and missed layups won’t be as frequent as he gets older. I’m all for forecasting better things for Shump. I’ve agreed in the past on the general “Shump has All-Star potential” point, as I believe he does. I just think that we have to allow that his first year in the NBA was terrible, offense-wise. It doesn’t mean he won’t be good going forward, just that what we saw in year one was not good.

    59. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      jon abbey: yeah, that’s what I said. you guys might be less dismissive if your reading comprehension was higher.

      Typical jon abbey bullshit. You’re trying to argue that a made show = a missed shot where another player gets the ORB and puts it back. That is so fucking unbelievably dumb. Maybe my reading comprehension could stand some work, but at least I don’t have a totally asinine understanding of basketball. Really, the single dumbest comment I’ve ever heard or seen about basketball.

    60. Z-man

      Well, in both cases, the PPP would be 2.0. Which is why I have a problem with Dean Oliver’s definition of “possession.” Using my definition (which is consistent with the NBA rule book’s definition) the first scenario would have a PPP of 2.0 and the second one would be 1.0. So Oliver would say that they were statistically equivalent.

    61. flossy

      Brian Cronin:
      I think Shump will improve, as well. He shot better in the second half than he did in the first half, which is good (although, in a not-so-good sign, he was a good deal worse in April than he was in March). And yes, I also have to figure that some of those really weird missed dunks and missed layups won’t be as frequent as he gets older. I’m all for forecasting better things for Shump. I’ve agreed in the past on the general “Shump has All-Star potential” point, as I believe he does. I just think that we have to allow that his first year in the NBA was terrible, offense-wise. It doesn’t mean he won’t be good going forward, just that what we saw in year one was not good.

      Yeah. His first year was horrible offensively and his defense, while excellent in some circumstances, was overrated overall. I guess people are getting hung up on the definition of “potential.” Is it possible that Iman Shumpert improves enough to merit All-Star selection? Yes. He is a hard worker and very athletic. But so many people on this board take it as a given that he will improve and understate how dramatically he would have to improve in order to get there, that they basically end up asserting that it is probable that Shumpert is a future all-star. Which is ridiculous. You can’t define a player’s ceiling and then take it as a given that he’ll reach it, just because you like his attitude. We’re talking about a horrible offensive player (in college and so far, in the pros) who is recovering from a major knee injury. As a Knicks fan I certainly hope he gets there and if he recovers from his injury I expect him to improve on his rookie season. That is not the same thing as being an all-star caliber SG.

    62. jon abbey

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: Typical jon abbey bullshit. You’re trying to argue that a made show = a missed shot where another player gets the ORB and puts it back. That is so fucking unbelievably dumb. Maybe my reading comprehension could stand some work, but at least I don’t have a totally asinine understanding of basketball. Really, the single dumbest comment I’ve ever heard or seen about basketball.

      again, fantastic. I totally stand by the unarguable truth of that statement, it’s the exact same end result, and I’m very proud of myself for figuring out a statement that could so easily poke holes in your hallucinatory world of adjacent-basketball.

    63. jon abbey

      the reason the Shumpert discussion is entirely silly both ways is that his knee injury changes everything.

      man, we need the season to start.

    64. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Z-man:
      Well, in both cases, the PPP would be 2.0. Which is why I have a problem with Dean Oliver’s definition of “possession.” Using my definition (which is consistent with the NBA rule book’s definition) the first scenario would have a PPP of 2.0 and the second one would be 1.0. So Oliver would say that they were statistically equivalent.

      Right, but abbey is claiming that the value of the shot is the same; essentially, Shumpert is “able” to take shots that are “easier” for his teammates to “clean up” on. So he should get credit for a wild lay-up that “draws defenders” that Chandler puts back… which is absolutely ridiculous.

    65. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Z-man:
      Well, in both cases, the PPP would be 2.0. Which is why I have a problem with Dean Oliver’s definition of “possession.” Using my definition (which is consistent with the NBA rule book’s definition) the first scenario would have a PPP of 2.0 and the second one would be 1.0. So Oliver would say that they were statistically equivalent.

      Do offensive rebounds count as official extra possessions? I didn’t think they did.

      And they are equivalent in on-court value, but that’s accepting the assumption that a player can significantly influence his teammates’ ability to collect offensive rebounds. And because the data is so consistent w/r/t ORB, there’s absolutely no evidence for that claim.

    66. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      ^^^ To clarify: the claim that somehow Shumpert’s style of play makes it easier for his teammates to convert putbacks. So you’d much rather have a player who can actually make the shots rather than the player who makes fewer shots but, anecdotally, “helps” his teammates get position for putbacks.

      P.S. Pretty much every guard in the league can draw defenders by driving and penetrating. Hell, I watched a clip of Faried driving from the top of the key, and that’s a guy who has a “limited” offensive game. That’s why they’re in the NBA.

    67. Z-man

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: Do offensive rebounds count as official extra possessions? I didn’t think they did

      Statistically, they don’t. A while ago, I voiced my disagreement with this. My feeling is that when a team shoots the ball, they are giving up posession for the chance to score points, and that an offensive rebound should start a new possession. I actually sent this qualm to Dean Oliver and was pleasantly surprised that he responded very thoughtfully, though somewhat dismissively. Essentially, he claimed that 1. “possession” is not sufficiently defined in the rule book to override the statistician’s right to establish an alternative (i.e. more useful) definition; 2. It is more useful to define “possession” in a way that virtually equalizes them in a typical game and 3. I should feel free to try to change people’s minds and/or create and defend an alternate model, but the horse has long been out of the barn.

      So, essentially, a team that misses 19 consecutive shots and gets nineteen consecutive offensive rebounds and finally converts is just as offensively efficient as a team that makes the first shot; both would have a PPP of 2 points per possession. I feel that this distorts offensive efficiency, and that a more accurate way of looking at it would be to say that the first team was fantastic at creating possessions but lousy at shooting. I also think that statistical definitions should match official rule book definitions. Rebounding should be considered a “null” loose ball state, neither offense nor defense. That’s why there are loose ball fouls and why the shot clock (also called the possession clock) resets on an offensive rebound. That would complicate statistical analysis, and many argue that you don’t officially lose possession until another team gains it.

    68. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Still, the four factors (eFG%, ORB%, TOV%, and FTM/FGA) can tell us (and predict) a great deal about team wins, so the possession thing really isn’t all that important on the team level. Individually, though, yes, I agree.

    69. Z-man

      In MY statistical world, I would easily refute what jon is saying by indicating that taking a missed shot ends a possession unsuccessfully and therefore decreases offensive efficiency. Under the current assumption, a missed shot is equivalent to a very high-risk pass, what jon says is correct to the degree that WHEN Shump’s misses are put back in, they are just as offensively efficient as making the original shot. If he is saying that Shump’s misses are more likely to be put back than someone else’s, he loses me as well.

    70. Z-man

      Interesting concept, though. If a particular player shoots at a TS% of, say, .520 but his shots are statistically more likely to result in offensive rebounds and putbacks, is he more efficient than a guy that shoots a TS% of .540 but a higher % of his misses result in fast breaks and very efficient scoring attempts for the other team?

    71. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Z-man:
      Interesting concept, though. If a particular player shoots at a TS% of, say, .520 but his shots are statistically more likely to result in offensive rebounds and putbacks, is he more efficient than a guy that shoots a TS% of .540 but a higher % of his misses result in fast breaks and very efficient scoring attempts for the other team?

      Absolutely he is. But there’s so much noise in trying to assess whether a player CAN do that in the first place, then trying to figure out if an individual player DOES do that, how can we even discuss this?

      My attitude has been repeated ad nauseum, but I don’t care: because individual statistics remain relatively constant from year to year, I think that the safest course of action for roster-building is to pick the players with the best individual statistics with a degree of “team-building” to ensure that you don’t have four point-forwards on the floor at once. The idea that Shumpert is good because someone believes that his drives (which account for only a fraction of his possessions) make it easier (relative to other players’ drives) for his teammates to crash the boards? Absolute drivel.

      I guarantee that if you put together a team of +.600 TS% shooters, even if they suffer from diminishing returns or “situational effects” like late-shot-clock chucks and “shot creation” inefficiency, you’ll have a team that leads the league in offensive efficiency. Stats are flawed, but jon abbey’s baseless assumptions would field a much shittier team.

    72. flossy

      All you need to know about Jon Abbey’s crackpot theory/trolling is that he rips Landry Fields to shreds for being unable to shoot yet praises “Shumpie” for missing shots so his teammates can rebound the misses and put them back.

    73. jon abbey

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: Right, but abbey is claiming that the value of the shot is the same; essentially, Shumpert is “able” to take shots that are “easier” for his teammates to “clean up” on. So he should get credit for a wild lay-up that “draws defenders” that Chandler puts back… which is absolutely ridiculous.

      no, I’m saying the value of the possession is the same, and that it’s sometimes impossible to disentangle individual contributions to the team result. another example is turnovers, which are always attributed to one player but in many cases shouldn’t be (or are often attributed to the wrong player).

    74. jon abbey

      flossy:
      All you need to know about Jon Abbey’s crackpot theory/trolling is that he rips Landry Fields to shreds for being unable to shoot yet praises “Shumpie” for missing shots so his teammates can rebound the misses and put them back.

      I ripped Fields for contributing absolutely nothing positive, whereas the Berri brigade praised him for his inaction.

      the other part, it depends on the possession, people seem to read what they want to, but sometimes a missed shot can be overall beneficial to a team. whether or not your tiny cranium is capable of processing that is a different matter.

    75. jon abbey

      seriously, this is the statement that you guys have your panties all in a bunch over? how can someone even argue that this isn’t a hundred percent true?

      “a missed shot that draws the defense and allows a teammate to get an easy follow is exactly the same result as a made shot, just as one example.”

      EXACTLY IDENTICAL (except a few seconds more go off the game clock). not any missed shot, A MISSED SHOT THAT DRAWS THE DEFENSE AND ALLOWS A TEAMMATE TO GET AN EASY FOLLOW.

      hilarious, wow…

    76. jon abbey

      so what you two doofuses are mocking is essentially “0+2=2″. fantastic, I couldn’t even make this up.

    77. flossy

      No, the idea that this is a halfway reasonable defense of Iman Shumpert’s shitty scoring efficiency is what’s laughable.

    78. jon abbey

      flossy:
      No, the idea that this is a halfway reasonable defense of Iman Shumpert’s shitty scoring efficiency is what’s laughable.

      hehe, it was just one sentence. again, reading comprehension:

      “JUST AS ONE EXAMPLE”

    Comments are closed.