Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

Knicks Morning News (Saturday, Sep 29 2012)

  • [New York Post] Wallace to sign, back up Amar’e (Sat, 29 Sep 2012 03:58:13 -0500)
    Rasheed Wallace will officially become a Knick on Monday.
    Wallace has told the Knicks he has elected to come out of retirement and join their training camp, according to an NBA source.
    The 6-foot-11 Wallace, who worked out with the Knicks over the weekend, retired two years ago after a…

  • [New York Times] Barclays Center Opens in Brooklyn (Sat, 29 Sep 2012 10:00:05 GMT)
    The Barclays Center’s grand opening was punctuated by protesters, music-goers and throngs of curious onlookers hoping to share in the excitement.

  • [New York Times] Off the Dribble: Knicks Appear Closer to Signing Rasheed Wallace (Sat, 29 Sep 2012 04:44:06 GMT)
    Rasheed Wallace, who has not played in the N.B.A. since 2010, could soon sign with the Knicks.

  • [New York Times] Off the Dribble: Remembering the Dream Team’s Remarkable Supporting Cast (Sat, 29 Sep 2012 04:42:44 GMT)
    The new documentary “The Other Dream Team” capably illustrates the narrative from the Lithuanian players, who in four years went from winning gold for their Soviet oppressors to a hair-raising bronze medal victory over what passed for a Russian team.

  • 45 comments on “Knicks Morning News (Saturday, Sep 29 2012)

    1. ruruland

      People are going to make fun of this signing, but all indications are that Sheed is physically in a very good place. Certainly — at the very least –the player he was a few years back.

      Now, no one knows how a guy responds to the rigors of a training camp or playing 3 games a week.

      However, let’s say he plays 50 or so games this season and 10-20 minutes in the playoffs depending on match-ups.

      He’s a perfect complement to Amar’e. He still should be able to shoot the three in the 35% range. He’s not as athletic as he was at 32, but he never relied on it defensively. ‘Sheed is long, strong and a VERY smart positional defender.

      Rasheed will allow Amar’e, 10 maybe 15 minutes a game where he can ostensibly play center on offense with all the space to operate and allow Sheed to take care of the dirty stuff inside.

      Naturally, a player that is a very strong man defender on both power forwards and centers, and a great weakside shot-blocker, and perhaps the only true stretch five in the NBA, will fit into any lineup.

      He’s not a good rebounder. But the Knicks have those in spades.

      And while he had a very rough year with Boston at 35, after having four very good years at the tail-end of his tenure in Detroit, he still managed close to 20 mpg on a similarly loaded front-court— and shot 35% from 3 w/ a .123 ws/48

      great signing.

      ruruland

    2. yoda4554

      Sometimes, ruru, I wonder whether you actually believe anything you write, or whether your posts are an exercise in demonstrating that you can spin anything if you try hard enough. I think I’m now, finally, convinced of the latter.

      Look, we could go point-for-point through what you wrote, but I’ll leave it at this–Michael Jordan, after spending his early thirties as pretty much the best player on the planet, took a few years off, then came back to the league at 38–and he was terrible (especially because he still thought he was as good as he ever was). Yet you argue that Rasheed Wallace, who was merely pretty good during his early thirties (and bad in his last season) is going to come back at 38 and play as if no time has passed since 2008.

    3. Z-man

      I would characterize the signing as low risk-high reward. Really, did it hurt Miami to have Juwan Howard’s useless ass on ther bench? And Rasheed is way better than Howard. At worst, he’s six more fouls to throw at LeBron, Bynum, etc. and an occasional 3-pt threat. At best, he’s an effective emergency backup if Camby or Chandler go down.

    4. flossy

      Oh come on–when you have the chance to sign a 38 year-old big man who doesn’t rebound, shoots 6 3s per 36 at a 28% clip and hasn’t played professionally in 2 years, you can’t turn that down!

      Leave it to the Knicks to sign decrepit a-holes like Rasheed Wallace and Jason Kidd to serve as “high character veterans” or what have you.

    5. Z-man

      I don’t think anyone has been touting their “character” althouth the “high” part might be apropos. And in Wallace’s case, if we were talking about anything other than roster filler, I’d be with you. Since we are all in already, might as well go all the way.

    6. jon abbey

      yoda4554:
      Sometimes, ruru, I wonder whether you actually believe anything you write, or whether your posts are an exercise in demonstrating that you can spin anything if you try hard enough.I think I’m now, finally, convinced of the latter.

      Look, we could go point-for-point through what you wrote, but I’ll leave it at this–Michael Jordan, after spending his early thirties as pretty much the best player on the planet, took a few years off, then came back to the league at 38–and he was terrible (especially because he still thought he was as good as he ever was).Yet you argue that Rasheed Wallace, who was merely pretty good during his early thirties (and bad in his last season) is going to come back at 38 and play as if no time has passed since 2008.

      A-fucking-men. On the other hand, we are positioned really well to take a serious run at the 2005 title.

    7. jon abbey

      Z-man:
      I would characterize the signing as low risk-high reward. Really, did it hurt Miami to have Juwan Howard’s useless ass on ther bench? And Rasheed is way better than Howard. At worst, he’s six more fouls to throw at LeBron, Bynum, etc. and an occasional 3-pt threat. At best, he’s an effective emergency backup if Camby or Chandler go down.

      at worst, he’s worthless on the court and a huge divisive distraction in the locker room.

    8. Z-man

      jon abbey: at worst, he’s worthless on the court and a huge divisive distraction in the locker room.

      In that case, just cut him, no worries. FWIW, I have not heard of him being a locker room distraction before, just a hothead on the court. Woodson would know, wouldn’t he?

    9. JK47

      Have the Knicks ever made a move that ruru did not love? I swear, if the Knicks signed Iverson and Marbury, ruru would be telling us how great Melo was with Iverson in the lineup and what a great spot-up shooter Marbury is.

    10. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      flossy:
      Oh come on–when you have the chance to sign a 38 year-old big man who doesn’t rebound, shoots 6 3s per 36 at a 28% clip and hasn’t played professionally in 2 years, you can’t turn that down!

      Leave it to the Knicks to sign decrepit a-holes like Rasheed Wallace and Jason Kidd to serve as “high character veterans” or what have you.

      Stop looking at numbers and start looking at tape.

    11. bockadoo

      who else could we have gotten here…kmart is not coming for the vet minimum, so what the hell. more potential upside than anything else they could have done. 10 minutes a game at the most. bfd.

    12. sidestep

      jon abbey: that it was right? :)

      abbey has always been, to put it in the most neutral terms, a Lin doubter who dismissed anyone who thought he could play as a “fanboy.”

    13. jon abbey

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: How was it right? They could have cut him after year two and saved most of that huge cap hit.

      I was joking about ruru and Lin, hence the smiley face.

      I am a Lin doubter, though, depending on the situation and what he’s asked to do (I think he’s about as good as Dragic) and I don’t think what THCJ is saying above is true. all three years of his deal are guaranteed, right? since when can you cut someone in the NBA and save a cap hit? this isn’t the NFL.

    14. jon abbey

      sidestep: abbey has always been, to put it in the most neutral terms, a Lin doubter who dismissed anyone who thought he could play as a “fanboy.”

      actually when I use the term “fanboy”, it’s generally directed at the people who followed the Knicks only because of Lin, or the people who thought his MVP-level play was actually how good he was. he’s got some skills, less than some people think and more than some other people think, but I do think he’s best when dominating the ball and I’m not sure that was a good fit with this Knicks team.

      but honestly, who cares anymore? dude is gone, and any speculation is just that.

    15. Z-man

      It’s not about upside as much as: suppose one or more of Chandler, Camby or Amare miss significant time due to injury; who can we get for the vet’s minimum that can step in and not cost us games vs. weaker teams?

      So, who’s out there right now that would sign for the vet’s minimum?

      Whoever you name, there’s no telling whether that player is better than whatever Rasheed is at this point. The guy knows how to play winning basketball. You don’t think he can hold his own against half of the kids and stiffs playing backup PF and C in this league? Why not? Let’s take a look and find out. If he stinks during preseason, cut him. If he starts making waves, cut him.

    16. ruruland

      Right, Z-man, and Yoda, he is the 12th man. The fourth big. Is it possible that he’s as of an bad NBA player as most 12th men at this point? Of course.

      Can you cut him? Of course.

      But he was a solid contributor on the Eastern Conference champs two seasons ago — any by solid, I mean there were a few playoff games where he was great — and somehow played 36 minutes in the 7th game of the NBA finals on a team with Garnett and Perkins.

      Secondly, it’s an absolute farce, Yoda, to compare Michael Jordan’s return with Rasheed Wallace.

      The Knicks aren’t going to ask Rasheed to create post-up baskets like the Wizards asked Jordan to be their highest usage player.

      They’re going to ask Wallace to play, perhaps, 15-20 minutes every other game, stand at the three point lin, set screens, and use his length and smarts to defend.

      Wallace has played an old man’s game for a decade now. The Knicks are going to ask the old man to do old man things.

      IS he better than the vast majority of 12th men in the NBA? I mean, do I need to list them? Is he better than Jorts? Is his championship experience totally meaningless?

      Please, there’s a chance Wallace could be one of the best back of the bench players in the NBA. And if he has nothing left, there’s no risk.

      It’s laughable that people would criticize this deal.

    17. sidestep

      Paul Pierce is 34, KG 36, Camby 38. Rasheed’s age isn’t without doable precedents, but his being away for so long, have to wonder if he’s in game shape. That being said, I think both Amare and Melo basically played themselves into game shape over the course of last season. Even if Rasheed isn’t in tip top shape now, his conditioning can only improve over the length of the season.

      Whatever the specifics of Rasheed, the overall pattern is a reluctance to develop young players. Consider me naive but it was disheartening to see how readily Shump could have been traded. Instead, it’s about getting serviceable veterans so that the team is always just ‘good enough’ but not necessarily positioned for a championship run.

    18. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      I think Morey is one of the smartest guys out there, but I disagree with him on a number of his points, especially about system/style. Even the people behind Wins Produced don’t think that you should put four All-NBA centers on the floor at once. The data show that players ON AVERAGE don’t change much from system to system, coach to coach, teammates to teammates. If you want to anecdotally argue or cherry pick (as is your custom), be my guest. But it’s not going to persuade me to disregard the data. Player role and team system are NOT THAT IMPORTANT. Basketball is a relatively uniform game. Put one PG on another team and the role of the PG will not change that much. Some teams may play faster than others, and some teams may end up with more transition possessions, but the game does not change that much. We’re not talking football defense here.

    19. ruruland

      Jowles,

      It may be that our definitions of “much” are much different.

      I like to make the argument, and I bet that Morey would as well, that on average, past performance accounts for 80 percent of performance because on average, players have limited skill sets and rarely get asked to do things outside of those skill sets. (Isn’t 20 percent important? Aren’t most players roughly within 20 percent range of talent difference?)

      But that’s not true of ALL players, and some can be asked to do other things with a situation/interaction effect/team dynamic change.

      Moreover, while the average player is not going to have dramatic year-year rate change in shooting efficiency, certain team dynamics lend themselves to increased opportunities.

      Thirdly, what about the research on player synergies?

      Are all high rate rebounders worth the same on every team? If you’re willing to acknowledge that basketball cannot work with four centers, regardless of how great they are, then you are implictly acknowledging that basketball is a team game whereby performance is somewhat dicated by interaction effects.

      You respect Morey. You understand that he knows statistics. He has a staff around him, and works for an organization with some pockets.

      Do you think when he acknowledges interaction effects that he’s throwing shit against the wall? Could it be that Berri’s work is not at the cutting edge?

    20. Z-man

      In a sport where each player can have a dramatic +/- impact, the “on average” qualifier is fraught with potentially huge errors. At the end of the day, when a player is minus one standard deviation from a given expected norm, the opportunity cost can be enormous. Synergies have to be considered and player-by-player, system-by-system judgments have to be factored in. Nobody wants to hear the “he’s an outlier” excuse when a player doesn’t fit the curve. Morey seems to understand this.

      WP48 is a very useful metric, but not a replacement for other tools, including “gut feel” if it’s the right person’s guts. Furthermore, I wonder if a GM who believed as strongly as you do in the metric would hold on to “negative outliers” too long or too dearly as a result of confirmation bias.

    21. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Because you are a fucking spin artist, dude. You can take any data and turn it into a pro-Carmelo, pro-bullshit interpretation. It’s tiring, and since I seem to be a (vocal) minority on this site, I don’t even waste my time.

    22. ruruland

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: Because you are a fucking spin artist, dude. You can take any data and turn it into a pro-Carmelo, pro-bullshit interpretation. It’s tiring, and since I seem to be a (vocal) minority on this site, I don’t even waste my time.

      You start fights you don’t finish.

    23. sideQuest

      ruruland:
      Jowles,

      It may be that our definitions of “much” are much different.

      I like to make the argument, and I bet that Morey would as well, that on average, past performance accounts for 80 percent of performance because on average, players have limited skill sets and rarely get asked to do things outside of those skill sets. (Isn’t 20 percent important? Aren’t most players roughly within 20 percent range of talent difference?)

      But that’s not true of ALL players, and some can be asked to do other things with a situation/interaction effect/team dynamic change.

      Moreover, while the average player is not going to have dramatic year-year rate change in shooting efficiency, certain team dynamics lend themselves to increased opportunities.

      Thirdly, what about the research on player synergies?

      Are all high rate rebounders worth the same on every team? If you’re willing to acknowledge that basketball cannot work with four centers, regardless of how great they are, then you are implictly acknowledging that basketball is a team game whereby performance is somewhat dicated by interaction effects.

      You respect Morey. You understand that he knows statistics. He has a staff around him, and works for an organization with some pockets.

      Do you think when he acknowledges interaction effects that he’s throwing shit against the wall? Could it be that Berri’s work is not at the cutting edge?

      Always with the argument from authority with you.
      And it’s very clear that your interested in arguing, not discussing. Is there anything that could be said to you to convince you that wp48 is a very useful stat, and that yes, so far for most of his career, Melo has been an about an average player?

      Just consider that question, and really consider it. Is there any argument that could actually be made to you to make you realistically…

    24. sideQuest

      accept and consider these notions? Don’t have to answer, moreso just think it could be a useful thing to think about.

    25. Juany8

      Just want to point out that it is absolutely laughable that David Berri thinks he is doing better basketball analysis than David Morey. Morey spends millions each year gathering meaningful data for his games. I would bet my life savings that Morey is not relying on linear regression and excel to come to his conclusions. It’s just sad to think people actually consider the box score scientific data….

      Furthermore, a little misconception that I see THCJ constantly parroting on this board is that the average of a set of data actually tells you anything meaningful about said data. An average is only a meaningful description of a set of data if the data is completely normally distributed. What this means is that the performance of the average player only means anything if for every Lebron (or all-NBA caliber player) getting serious minutes in the league, there is a Brian Scalabrini (or other crappy player) matching those minutes at the same time. If a few star players are having a disproportionate impact on the outcome of games (which Morey seems to think is the case) then I seriously doubt you could derive ANYTHING meaningful from comparing the stats of those elite players to that of the average player. Basically, you have to segregate your analysis by roles, the TS% of a ball dominating forward cannot be directly compared to the efficiency of a garbage bucket big man or a three point specialist. Otherwise you end up reaching the conclusion that Tyson Chandler would be a superstar even if he played defense like Amar’e…. Or that Kenneth Faried is the second best per minute player in the league despite playing worse defense than Amar’e….

    26. Juany8

      sideQuest: Always with the argument from authority with you.
      And it’s very clear that your interested in arguing, not discussing. Is there anything that could be said to you to convince you that wp48 is a very useful stat, and that yes, so far for most of his career, Melo has been an about an average player?

      Just consider that question, and really consider it. Is there any argument that could actually be made to you to make you realistically…

      I know you didn’t ask me, but there is nothing that would convince me that WP48 is any more useful than WS or even PER. They’re all basically advanced fantasy basketball, none of them make any serious effort to analyze what actually goes on in a game when reaching their conclusions. An online stat I actually have respect for is DVOA from football outsiders, which attempts to look at football games play by play to make it’s conclusions. Even then, when analyzing the game with much more effort and level of detail than Berri, they do not have half the confidence or arrogance of Berri, and they never go around acting like they’re doing scientific research…

    27. jon abbey

      yeah, Dave Berri is flat out laughable. I wish people would stop citing him, it’s a very warped view of the game, as I’ve talked about ad nauseum for years here. Landry Fields, top 10 NBA player!!

    28. Bruno Almeida

      Juany8:
      Just want to point out that it is absolutely laughable that David Berri thinks he is doing better basketball analysis than David Morey. Morey spends millions each year gathering meaningful data for his games. I would bet my life savings that Morey is not relying on linear regression and excel to come to his conclusions. It’s just sad to think people actually consider the box score scientific data….

      oh, that makes a lot of sense, specially because Morey’s teams have been FANTASTIC since he started in Houston, right… hmm, no.

      and about ruruland, he’s one of the reasons I haven’t posted here anymore in a long time, it’s just incredibly tiresome to see someone defending 95% of the moves this team has made in the last 2 years and look at the “awesome” results we got from them.

      and when we crash out of the playoffs again this season with this fantastic and top 3 or whatever team, it will be the same tiresome speech again about one million extra factors that are pure unluck.

    29. massive

      The only move people can really complain about is the Nash/Felton/Lin debacle. If the Knicks kept Lin, I bet most people here would be excited for this season. If the Knicks added Steve Nash (which we would have done if Toronto and LA didn’t step in), everyone would project the Knicks to have a legitimate shot at being the 2nd team to beat Miami in a playoff series since LeBron got here. I don’t see how anybody can have much of a gripe with the Kidd, Camby, Brewer, Novak, Smith, and Wallace signings. I think all of them were solid-great moves, with the Sheed signing being one of those low risk moves (like the Baron Davis signing that came in handy at points during the season).

      I just wish the Knicks would sign Tracy McGrady and Josh Howard so we could have the best 2005 team to never play a minute. I wish we could have had Kidd, McGrady, Howard, Wallace, and Camby back then. But in these new uniforms.

    30. Juany8

      Bruno Almeida: oh, that makes a lot of sense, specially because Morey’s teams have been FANTASTIC since he started in Houston, right… hmm, no.

      and about ruruland, he’s one of the reasons I haven’t posted here anymore in a long time, it’s just incredibly tiresome to see someone defending 95% of the moves this team has made in the last 2 years and look at the “awesome” results we got from them.

      and when we crash out of the playoffs again this season with this fantastic and top 3 or whatever team, it will be the same tiresome speech again about one million extra factors that are pure unluck.

      How many teams have competed for the playoffs after simply losing their franchise player? Morey didn’t tank like a lot of other teams do, is it his fault the current system rewards either incompetence or location more than anything else? Hell, he even made a great move and got Pau Gasol for Kevin Martin and Luis Scola. It was a brilliant trade that was freaking veoted by the commissioner. I suppose that was a terrible move on his part too….

    31. Bruno Almeida

      Juany8: How many teams have competed for the playoffs after simply losing their franchise player? Morey didn’t tank like a lot of other teams do, is it his fault the current system rewards either incompetence or location more than anything else? Hell, he even made a great move and got Pau Gasol for Kevin Martin and Luis Scola. It was a brilliant trade that was freaking veoted by the commissioner. I suppose that was a terrible move on his part too….

      it was a brilliant move, and Houston has stayed pretty competitive for all the terrible stuff that happened to them, but to treat Morey like he’s some kind of genious is not real imo.

      he has more than his fair share of mistakes also, and of all the 1 billion young, presumably high potential players he got, how many panned out? Lowry and Dragic? and those two are pretty debatable and are no longer with the Rockets, getting Morey pretty much nothing in return other than a protected 1st rounder from Toronto.

      and after all those moves, Houston is still terrible 3 years after T-Mac left, will start the year with a Lin / Martin / Parsons / Patterson / Asik lineup, and if the rookies don’t pan out immediately, they’ll suck again.

      I like Morey too, but I can’t see how he’s “brilliant” or above criticism like some people think.

    32. jon abbey

      that was very similar to what people were saying about Billy Beane, until out of nowhere he has a team with 14 rookies competing for the AL title.

    33. Bruno Almeida

      jon abbey:
      that was very similar to what people were saying about Billy Beane, until out of nowhere he has a team with 14 rookies competing for the AL title.

      baseball and basketball are completely different in that sense, there is a lot more variation in player’s performance in baseball than in basketball, it seems to me.

    Comments are closed.