Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Knicks Morning News (Thursday, Oct 11 2012)

  • [New York Post] Woodson’s crew opens preseason with injuries and a peeved Smith (Thu, 11 Oct 2012 03:44:29 -0500)
    WASHINGTON â?? The Knicks’ championship ride starts tonight in the nation’s capital and they already have one unhappy player â?? J.R. Smith â?? and a lot of injuries.
    When the ancient Knicks play their preseason opener at Washington’s Verizon Center, Smith does not expect to be introduced as part of…

  • [New York Post] Mel-O: Anthony rooting for Birds (Thu, 11 Oct 2012 03:44:29 -0500)
    WASHINGTON — Say it ain’t so, Carmelo.
    Yes, Carmelo Anthony, who moved from Brooklyn to Baltimore when he was 8, admitted he is a diehard Orioles fan. He even showed his oriole-bird tattoo on his forearm to prove it.
    The Yankees and Orioles are embroiled in a battle in…

  • [New York Daily News] Knee injury breaksup Knicks’ Smitn brothers (Thu, 11 Oct 2012 01:44:03 GMT)
    J.R. Smith begrudgingly accepted Mike Woodson’s decision to keep him as the Knicks’ sixth man, saying on Wednesday that “disappointed is an understatement.â?

  • 37 comments on “Knicks Morning News (Thursday, Oct 11 2012)

    1. thenamestsam

      Amare out of tonight’s game with a minor knee issue. Sounds like no big deal. Interesting to note that Kurt Thomas will start in his stead. Fits with my theory that the Knicks are dedicated to going big and not playing Melo at the 4, although they may just not want to be unconventional in the 1st preseason game.

      Either way I couldn’t be more excited that actual basketball will be played tonight. 3 weeks to opening night!

    2. H20

      flossy:
      Nice to see JR is already bitching to the Post about not starting.

      It is just preseason, why not start Jr to see how he works with the starters?(even though Amare appears to be injured again)

    3. jon abbey

      flossy:
      Nice to see JR is already bitching to the Post about not starting.

      incoherently, at least. I read that quote a few times, and still have no idea what the hell he meant overall, the third sentence specifically, and then the fourth sentence directly contradicts the first two.

      ““I think disappointed is an understatement,’’ Smith said of his status made clear by Woodson on Tuesday. “My whole process of getting better this summer and everything I went through was to be in that starting role. It was great to be able to have put all that work in and understand what I can do and my body can withhold without starting. I think it just makes our bench even stronger.’’”

    4. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Weren’t we just talking about this?

      Courtesy those insane pseudoscientists at WoW journal:

      One simple check is to look at the correlations between

      offensive rebounds per possession and defensive efficiency (points surrendered per possession), or
      offensive rebound percentage and defensive efficiency
      And here is what you see (looking at team data from 1987-88 to 2011-12):

      correlation between ORB per possession and defensive efficiency: 0.006
      correlation between ORB percentage and defensive efficiency: 0.03

      LOL

    5. Juany8

      The Honorable Cock Jowles:
      Weren’t we just talking about this?

      Courtesy those insane pseudoscientists at WoW journal:

      One simple check is to look at the correlations between

      offensive rebounds per possession and defensive efficiency (points surrendered per possession), or
      offensive rebound percentage and defensive efficiency
      And here is what you see (looking at team data from 1987-88 to 2011-12):

      correlation between ORB per possession and defensive efficiency: 0.006
      correlation between ORB percentage and defensive efficiency: 0.03

      LOL

      Except that you assume the correlation would be exactly the same for every team. A terrible defensive team will still be a terrible defensive team, offensive rebounds or not. The question is whether not going for offensive rebounds would improve a defense for that specific team.

      Let’s take the Celtics as an example. They are an elite defensive team that will have a great defense regardless of their commitment to offensive rebounds. They are a slow team, however, especially on the wings, so it would be difficult for them to consistently get back against great fast break teams if they did go for offensive rebounds. For a super fast team like the Bulls, there is much less risk of teams beating them down the court in transition, and they have better rebounders so they have a much better chance of getting some points out of crashing the boards.

      A league wide correlation between defense and offensive rebounding yields nothing because teams have totally different philosophies and talent bases when it comes to getting offensive rebounds and playing defense. The only way to test this theory properly would be to observe if an individual team was affected on defense by changing the effort they put into offensive rebounding. Good luck making that happen lol

    6. Nick C.

      The Honorable Cock Jowles:
      Weren’t we just talking about this?

      Courtesy those insane pseudoscientists at WoW journal:

      One simple check is to look at the correlations between

      offensive rebounds per possession and defensive efficiency (points surrendered per possession), or
      offensive rebound percentage and defensive efficiency
      And here is what you see (looking at team data from 1987-88 to 2011-12):

      correlation between ORB per possession and defensive efficiency: 0.006
      correlation between ORB percentage and defensive efficiency: 0.03

      LOL

      Is that ORB of team X correlating with team Xs defensive efficiency (which would make no sense) or offensive rebounds (given up) as a percentage by team X which I could see having an effect on team Xs defensive efficiency if, and mainly if, a possession starts when you bring the ball up and ends only when the other team gets the ball (irrespective of # of shots)

    7. Juany8

      Also, even if it could be properly tested, the decision to crash the boards has to be optimized against the possibility of leaving the fast break open. The problem isn’t getting offensive rebounds, the problem is the cost of missing an attempt, which leaves less defenders hustling back on D. For an amazing rebounding team that also has big wings that can hustle back on D, sending bigs down to constantly crash the boards is a good idea, especially against a poor rebounding team. For a bunch of crappy offensive rebounders that have a hard time getting up and down the floor going against Miami’s fast break offense, it’s probably better just to spend all their energy running back.

      To conclude, even though offensive rebounds are always a nice thing to get, crashing the boards constantly isn’t necessarily the best strategy on a team basis. There is an opportunity cost to attempting to get rebounds, and a proper team strategy would have to take in to account the players on the team, the players on the opposing team, and the offensive philosophy of the opposing team (some teams don’t like to run period, others do nothing else). This of course means that a team might decide to get less offensive rebounds for the good of the team, something which I’m sure would make Berri’s head explode lol

    8. Nick C.

      @ Juan I wasn’t even considering the effect crashing the boards would have on getting back on defense just the immediate possession. lol

      I can’t even tell from the quote whether as Xs ORP% increases defensive efficiency increases (in correlative lockstep) or if the reverse (inverse) is the case.

    9. jon abbey

      Juany8:
      Also, even if it could be properly tested, the decision to crash the boards has to be optimized against the possibility of leaving the fast break open. The problem isn’t getting offensive rebounds, the problem is the cost of missing an attempt, which leaves less defenders hustling back on D. For an amazing rebounding team that also has big wings that can hustle back on D, sending bigs down to constantly crash the boards is a good idea, especially against a poor rebounding team. For a bunch of crappy offensive rebounders that have a hard time getting up and down the floor going against Miami’s fast break offense, it’s probably better just to spend all their energy running back.

      To conclude, even though offensive rebounds are always a nice thing to get, crashing the boards constantly isn’t necessarily the best strategy on a team basis. There is an opportunity cost to attempting to get rebounds, and a proper team strategy would have to take in to account the players on the team, the players on the opposing team, and the offensive philosophy of the opposing team (some teams don’t like to run period, others do nothing else). This of course means that a team might decide to get less offensive rebounds for the good of the team, something which I’m sure would make Berri’s head explode lol

      ha, I didn’t see this post before making my last one, but I like the overlap!!

    10. Juany8

      Nick C.:
      @ Juan I wasn’t even considering the effect crashing the boards would have on getting back on defense just the immediate possession. lol

      I can’t even tell from the quote whether as Xs ORP% increases defensive efficiency increases (in correlative lockstep) or if the reverse (inverse) is the case.

      Well the point Abbott was originally trying to make was that ORB% might correlate negatively with team defense, so as your offensive rebounds increase your defense gets worse. Berri’s counterpoint was that there was no relationship between a team’s offensive rebound rate and their defensive efficiency. Then my posts were basically trying to say so overall league relationships wouldn’t matter, while trying to actually put logic behind Abbott’s original post instead of just posting numbers lol. The answer to whether or not a team should crash the boards, like pretty much everything else in basketball, is ‘”it depends” lol

    11. BigBlueAL

      Crashing the offensive boards didnt hurt Riley’s Knick teams on the defensive end. Hell some of their best offense was having a guard just throw the ball at the rim and have Ewing/Oak/Mase get the offensive board and either get fouled or lay it in lol

    12. Juany8

      BigBlueAL:
      Crashing the offensive boards didnt hurt Riley’s Knick teams on the defensive end.Hell some of their best offense was having a guard just throw the ball at the rim and have Ewing/Oak/Mase get the offensive board and either get fouled or lay it in lol

      Yea but avoiding offensive rebounds hasn’t hurt the Celtics the past few years either. Doc Rivers is a pretty good coach, I’m sure he realizes his team won’t get the rebound enough times to make it worth committing to.

    13. BigBlueAL

      I just looked at those Riley Knick teams and the 1993 and 1994 Knicks (considered by Hollinger as probably the best defensive teams ever) were 8th and 9th in offensive reb % while being 1st in defensive efficiency, efg% allowed and defensive reb % both seasons (were also 3rd in defensive turnover % in 1994, MY GOD did that team freaking defend).

      Im not trying to disagree with you or anything btw. Ive always heard/read that the Celtics dont crash the offensive boards on purpose to help their defense. Van Gundy’s Knicks were the same way, always one of the worst (at times the worst) offensive rebounding teams which was done on purpose to be able to get back on D and defend. Just that I immediately thought of the Riley Knicks and looked them up to see if they crashed the offensive boards and for the most part they did with it obviously not affecting their defense at all. I assume it can work both ways.

    14. Brian Cronin

      incoherently, at least. I read that quote a few times, and still have no idea what the hell he meant overall, the third sentence specifically, and then the fourth sentence directly contradicts the first two.

      ““I think disappointed is an understatement,’’ Smith said of his status made clear by Woodson on Tuesday. “My whole process of getting better this summer and everything I went through was to be in that starting role. It was great to be able to have put all that work in and understand what I can do and my body can withhold without starting. I think it just makes our bench even stronger.’’”

      While yeah, that did not make much sense, I don’t mind JR being upset about not starting. The problem only comes if he lets it affect his game (and I’m not saying that it won’t, as it very well might). Hopefully he doesn’t let it get in his head.

    15. Gideon Zaga

      Yep his Jekyll and hyde personality on the court also in mid season form. Btw where is everybody

    16. EB

      BigBlueAL: I just looked at those Riley Knick teams and the 1993 and 1994 Knicks (considered by Hollinger as probably the best defensive teams ever) were 8th and 9th in offensive reb % while being 1st in defensive efficiency, efg% allowed and defensive reb % both seasons (were also 3rd in defensive turnover % in 1994, MY GOD did that team freaking defend).

      They were significantly better at defensive rebounding though than they were at offensive rebounding. This just shows that they were very good at rebounding.

    17. Z-man

      Hi All, been watching but my kids were hoggin’ the computer! Observations:
      Melo is ready
      Chandler is Chandler
      Kidd looks young and like the consummate pro
      JR wild but strokin’
      Felton in shape but looks raw next to Kidd
      Thompson is very raw
      Thomas looks very servicable and young!
      Novakaine is what he was
      Prig feeling his way
      Shurna not ready
      Sims not ready
      Copeland is a tweener but intriguing

    18. SeeWhyDee77

      Z-man:
      Hi All, been watching but my kids were hoggin’ the computer! Observations:
      Melo is ready
      Chandler is Chandler
      Kidd looks young and like the consummate pro
      JR wild but strokin’
      Felton in shape but looks raw next to Kidd
      Thompson is very raw
      Thomas looks very servicable and young!
      Novakaine is what he was
      Prig feeling his way
      Shurna not ready
      Sims not ready
      Copeland is a tweener but intriguing

      Yea..Prigs looks a little lost and maybe nervous. I like his game. He just needs to have confidence in what he does.

    19. d-mar

      I have to say, preseason hoops is pretty tedious to watch when there aren’t any draft picks to check out.

    20. Z-man

      Celts will be a much better test. Clearly, our starters (or best players) would murder Washington.

      Already, you can see that Kidd is light years ahead of Felton. Hopefully, some of that will rub off.

    21. Juany8

      Gotta say, the offense looks good. Not in terms of making buckets, but in terms of moving the ball around and getting great looks. Jason Kidd and Melo in particular look nice, and Felton looks to be in good shape. I’ve said before that the best PG this Knicks team could have possibly gotten was the Jason Kidd who was the third best player on the Dallas team just 2 years ago. Hopefully, last year he suffered more than some other people because of the lockout (Dallas in general seemed not to care much half the year) if Jason Kidd can come back and be a good floor general to complement a Melo-centric offense, this year just got a lot more exciting.

    22. Will the Thrill

      Smith still in love with the long 2, but looks really good today. I don’t think I am seeing what you guys are seeing in Kidd. Felton has passed well and shot crappy (no surprise there).

    23. Will the Thrill

      Chandler just drew a double team in the post… maybe THCJ was right about all NBA players being able to draw attention from defenses.

    24. H20

      Brian Cronin:
      I think Felton just needs more game time. I believe he’ll improve the more game time he gets with the offense.

      Prigioni also looked much better as the game progressed, he might take awhile to learn the NBA game but the Pg skills are there.

    25. ruruland

      Juany8: Gotta say, the offense looks good. Not in terms of making buckets, but in terms of moving the ball around and getting great looks. Jason Kidd and Melo in particular look nice, and Felton looks to be in good shape. I’ve said before that the best PG this Knicks team could have possibly gotten was the Jason Kidd who was the third best player on the Dallas team just 2 years ago. Hopefully, last year he suffered more than some other people because of the lockout (Dallas in general seemed not to care much half the year) if Jason Kidd can come back and be a good floor general to complement a Melo-centric offense, this year just got a lot more exciting.

      Right. If you actually go back and watch Jason Kidd from last year it’s pretty clear he was pretty much doing all of the things he did the year prior, it’s just that the Mavericks shot much worse from the field.

      THCJ, don’t bother with a response here, there was a significant difference in team shooting percentage that had an impact on Kidd’as passing numbers.

      I get that I’ve been dismissed as a Pollyanna around here, but it’s going to get a lot better, and it already looks well ahead of the really good teams I’ve been able to get an up-front view of.

    Comments are closed.