Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Tuesday, September 30, 2014

Knicks Morning News (Tuesday, Jul 30 2013)

  • [New York Post] Brother: Metta can be ‘goon’ for Knicks (Tue, 30 Jul 2013 03:37:52 -0500)
    Daniel Artest, Metta World Peace’s brother who had a brief professional career, told The Post the Knicks were missing a certain element last season — “a goon.” He feels his brother can fill the bill.
    The Knicks got beat — and beat up — by the Pacers last May in the playoffs…

  • [New York Post] Camby joins Rockets (Tue, 30 Jul 2013 00:53:36 -0500)
    HOUSTON — Former Knick Marcus Camby signed a free-agent contract with the Rockets yesterday.
    It is the second stint for Camby in Houston after he played for the Rockets in 2012. The 39-year-old played 19 games for the Rockets that season and averaged 7.1 points, 9.3 rebounds and 1…

  • 96 comments on “Knicks Morning News (Tuesday, Jul 30 2013)

    1. SeeWhyDee77

      Ahhh..’the goon’. Poor choice of words..but we do need an Oakley (maybe Mason would be more accurate for MWP cuz he’s kinda like a new version of Mase with a better shot) type on the roster. But calling MWP a goon does him a serious disservice. After all, Malice in the Palace still hangs over his head and he recently tried to take Harden’s head off. Still, when u call him a goon, it kinda pushes the negative parts of his rep to the forefront before he does anything. I mean, wasn’t he a model citizen for the most part, ever since ‘Malice’?

    2. Hubert

      Brian Cronin:
      What shocks me is how much money is still available out there to spend. Did you know that the Grizzlies still have their entire full MLE left?!? Plus their Bi-Annual Exception! Unless, of course, they used the Bi-Annual Exception on Mike Miller. Still, the fact that they still have their entire MLE to spend puts them in a great spot to cherry pick the best of the remaining free agents and i believe it is why they’ll be able to sign Mo Williams for, like, one penny more than the Heat (who can only offer the mini-MLE).

      Memphis (with the signing of Miller, whether it’s for the min or the biannual) are right up against the luxury tax, though. My impression of them was that they were determined to not be a tax-paying team, so they likely intend to waste that exception.

      Think about that trade last year with Cleveland: they gave up a first round pick just to dump Ellington, Speights, and Selby…all of whom were expiring! It would be odd if they willingly took on that much salary this year after paying through the nose to unload it last year. I think they’re out at this point.

    3. Hubert

      Houston signed Camby again, huh? I imagine this conversation between Morey and Rockets owner Les Alexander:

      Alexander: we don’t need this guy, and he’s 39. I don’t want to sign off.

      Morey: Relax, Les. At the end of the year I can trade him to the Knicks for Tim Hardaway Jr, CJ Leslie, $3 million and 2 second round picks.

      Alexander: good point. Approved.

    4. lavor postell

      Hubert: Memphis (with the signing of Miller, whether it’s for the min or the biannual) are right up against the luxury tax, though.My impression of them was that they were determined to not be a tax-paying team, so they likely intend to waste that exception.

      Yeah I was under this same impression. Also I’ve been watching a ton of tape on THJR the past couple of weeks by perhaps illegally acquiring games online. The biggest hindrance to THJR being a solid player for us is improving his decision making on the offensive end.

      He is not a great primary creator so I hope we use him a lot like Danny Green for the Spurs, by camping him out on the weak side for spot up 3 opportunities or baseline drives and off ball cuts. Hardaway has improved his handle a lot since his freshman year, but he still definitely has room to grow in this area, particularly with his weak hand.

      Most of the inefficiency in his game stems from when he gets into isolation situations and poor decisions he makes as the ball handler in PnR situations. I’d expect a lot of that to change purely based on what his role will be with this team as opposed to his time in Ann Arbor. He was often forced into creating his own shot late in possessions as the primary wing scorer over his 3 years in school.

      In fact his freshman year, which was his most efficient, came when he isolated far less and depended more on Darius Morris to create his shots. Hardaway can create for himself off the bounce, but he’s not good enough to maintain reasonable efficiency when he’s asked to do that for an extended period of time against defenses keyed to stop him. Last year for as talented as Michigan was, Burke and THJR were the only two players capable of creating for themselves consistently. He also needs to eliminate his annoying tendency to take pull up 2′s but my hope is parking him along the arc…

    5. Hubert

      GHenman:
      Hubert and Brian,I think Aldrich is a decent player and also fairly young so he wouldn’t be a bad pick up. I believe Bargnani is going to play alot more minutes at the five than people here expect. We are paying him $11 mil or whatever and we did give up a no. 1.

      I’m afraid you may be right. I was hopeful that would never be the case, but given our backup center is likely to miss 20+ games and we don’t have a competent 3rd, yeah, we’re going to see AB at the 5.

    6. Hubert

      lavor postell, I agree with your assessment on THJ. As more time goes by, I’m a little more perplexed that we didn’t think Reggie Bullock was better suited to play the Danny Green role than THJ was.

    7. Hubert

      Think about it…

      What does THJ do better than Bullock? Handle the ball, finish around and above the rim, get out in transition. These are not Danny Green skills.

      What does Reggie Bullock do better than THJ? Make shots. That’s a Danny Green skill!

      They both seem like capable defenders.

    8. lavor postell

      Hubert:
      Think about it…

      What does THJ do better than Bullock?Handle the ball, finish around and above the rim, get out in transition.These are not Danny Green skills.

      What does Reggie Bullock do better than THJ?Make shots.That’s a Danny Green skill!

      They both seem like capable defenders.

      I tend to agree with this, but Hardaway is extremely effective in catch and shoot situations. He shot 40% from beyond the arc on catch and shoot opportunities last season so it’s not like he’s a slouch. His shooting numbers are never going to look as good as a supporting player like Bullock who was never one of the best players on UNC’s team and did most of his scoring off the ball.

      THJR may not have been the most efficient scorer in college, but his ability to create shots for himself in the half court is why Michigan was able to punch above it’s weight his freshman and sophomore years. I think what we saw against Indy last year is that you need more than guys that can hit threes against an elite defense that makes proper rotations in timely order.

      I’d probably take Bullock right now, but if Hardaway can improve his decision making, I think his ceiling is higher. Defensively I think they’re both capable of performing at the NBA level, though I think Hardaway athleticism gives him a slight edge here. Either way we’re going to find out if Woodson and the coaching staff can eliminate the warts in Hardaway’s game and make him into a valuable 3 and D guy.

    9. lavor postell

      Also I don’t have any numbers to back this up, but from watching him over the past 3 years and rewatching games over the past couple of weeks it seems to me that he shot better from further behind the arc. This may be because defenders were less inclined to be in his grill when he was shooting from 3 feet behind the arc, but it was just something interesting I thought I was able to pick up on.

    10. Hubert

      I did notice he had really good catch and shoot numbers. Given the success the Knicks had with Shumpert, whose shot was supposedly broken because reports weren’t factoring in what kind of shots he was taking.

      Hopefully this lack of activity these last few days means I won’t be subject to the “BUT THE BOX SCORE PROVES EVERYTHING” army telling me all shooting numbers are equal.

    11. Hubert

      Oops, I didn’t finish this sentence:

      Hubert:
      Given the success the Knicks had with Shumpert, whose shot was supposedly broken because reports weren’t factoring in what kind of shots he was taking,

      …I can see why they may have been tempted to go back to that well and go with the better athlete with more diverse skill set.

    12. Frank O.

      Hubert:
      I did notice he had really good catch and shoot numbers.Given the success the Knicks had with Shumpert, whose shot was supposedly broken because reports weren’t factoring in what kind of shots he was taking.

      Hopefully this lack of activity these last few days means I won’t be subject to the “BUT THE BOX SCORE PROVES EVERYTHING” army telling me all shooting numbers are equal.

      This is tantamount to throwing a dripping zebra hindquarter over your shoulder in the sub-Sahara and saying you hope you’re not jumped by a pack of hyenas…

    13. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Hubert:
      I did notice he had really good catch and shoot numbers.Given the success the Knicks had with Shumpert, whose shot was supposedly broken because reports weren’t factoring in what kind of shots he was taking.

      Hopefully this lack of activity these last few days means I won’t be subject to the “BUT THE BOX SCORE PROVES EVERYTHING” army telling me all shooting numbers are equal.

      You can be the best player in the NBA at 20-foot fadeaway jump-shots, but that doesn’t mean that taking them is a good idea.

      I get so tired of the “Player X’s value is not maximized, Player Y’s value is maximized by Player X” arguments on this site.

      The box score does not prove everything. Claiming that Shumpert COULD BE a better shooter if only he were allowed/permitted/compelled to take better shots? Yeah, of course. Why didn’t he take those shots though? Not possible that it’s because of him and his playing style, right?

    14. bidiong

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: You can be the best player in the NBA at 20-foot fadeaway jump-shots, but that doesn’t mean that taking them is a good idea.

      I get so tired of the “Player X’s value is not maximized, Player Y’s value is maximized by Player X” arguments on this site.

      The box score does not prove everything. Claiming that Shumpert COULD BE a better shooter if only he were allowed/permitted/compelled to take better shots? Yeah, of course. Why didn’t he take those shots though? Not possible that it’s because of him and his playing style, right?

      Shots are a by product of a player’s style and team dynamics. Melo in isolation gives a lot of bad shots where if it comes to him on a swing pass he has a more open shot and better conversion rate. If you have a more selective shot selection it is likely you’re efficiency will increase. That’s what Durant does.

    15. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      bidiong: Shots are a by product of a player’s style and team dynamics.Melo in isolation gives a lot of bad shots where if it comes to him on a swing pass he has amore open shot and better conversion rate.If you have a more selective shot selection it is likely you’re efficiency will increase.That’s what Durant does.

      So when Melo runs an ISO set, he’s hurting his team, since the most important thing is spacing and ball movement.

      If Durant can be selective at-will, why don’t more players do this? Is Tyson Chandler the first center in the history of the league to simply decide to “pass up” mid-range jumpers, thus nearly setting league efficiency records over the last few years?

    16. massive

      Sometimes the defense wins and you have to take bad shots. If everyone is selective and says “it’s late in the shot clock, I’m not about to take a low efficiency shot,” you have more 24 second violations, which makes defenses a lot better, offenses a lot worse, and basketball a less enjoyable sport. Having players who aren’t willing to take bad shots from time to time compromises an offense. KD has Westbrook and Tyson Chandler has Melo. Those two players’ willingness to take a bad shot helps Chandler and Durant keep their sky high efficiencies. And can we please not argue that Melo is inefficient? The knock against him now should only be that he can’t stay healthy for 82 games and that he’s a bad rebounder for the 4 spot. He’s an efficient scorer who rarely turns the ball over. He can also stand to pass more.

    17. Nick C.

      The draw back with selectivity is the shot clock. It may maximize an individual’s efficiency to pass up a suboptimal shot but it may result in a shot clock violation (see: Kidd, Jason) or someone else having to jack one up. It happens probably less than heat checks and/or head down obliviousness but it still does happen. In the end the most important thing is team efficiency. In your example Tyson taking an open ten footer with ten seconds left might be a more efficient shot than JR putting up a fade away step back as the clock expires.

    18. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Regarding the shot clock, Anthony’s shot distribution is no different from that of most of the players in the league. Check 82games if you don’t believe it.

      I mean, shit, Joel Anthony ends up taking about the same percentage of shots at the buzzer as Carmelo does. How is this statistically significant?

      I really can’t believe that people think players like Ronnie Brewer are so bad at dribbling and shooting that they could make it to the NBA and then be totally inept.

      I mean, aside from this year, the guy’s been a good shooter for the entirety of his career. Not great since Utah, but there’s some kind of weird presumption that Carmelo is the guy who deflates and everyone else benefits. I really don’t get where it comes from. The eye-test doesn’t count.

    19. DRed

      massive:
      Sometimes the defense wins and you have to take bad shots. If everyone is selective and says “it’s late in the shot clock, I’m not about to take a low efficiency shot,” you have more 24 second violations, which makes defenses a lot better, offenses a lot worse, and basketball a less enjoyable sport. Having players who aren’t willing to take bad shots from time to time compromises an offense. KD has Westbrook and Tyson Chandler has Melo. Those two players’ willingness to take a bad shot helps Chandler and Durant keep their sky high efficiencies. And can we please not argue that Melo is inefficient? The knock against him now should only be that he can’t stay healthy for 82 games and that he’s a bad rebounderfor the 4 spot. He’s an efficient scorer who rarely turns the ball over. He can also stand to pass more.

      KD took a greater % of his FGA with 4 seconds or fewer left on the shot clock than Westbrook did (and also hit the ones he took much more often). I’m sure Carmelo’s overall efficiency is hurt by taking some tough shots late in the shot clock, but I don’t think it happens to him much more than other high usage players.

    20. lavor postell

      DRed: KD took a greater % of his FGA with 4 seconds or fewer left on the shot clock than Westbrook did (and also hit the ones he took much more often).I’m sure Carmelo’s overall efficiency is hurt by taking some tough shots late in the shot clock, but I don’t think it happens to him much more than other high usage players.

      I find it hard to believe that Melo’s efficiency wouldn’t benefit greatly from reducing his absurdly high usage from last year. Durant is a freak and may retire as the most efficient scorer in league history, but simply looking at percentages based on time left on the shot clock is not enough. I’d prefer to look at what kind of defensive coverage each guy is playing against on a possession basis. I don’t think defenses can tilt their coverage to Durant like they can to Melo because we don’t have a Westbrook.

      Do I think Melo would be as efficient as Durant if he played next to Westbrook? No, but I tend to believe it would give him more spot up opportunities and less iso-Melo sets which you would think would give him an uptick in his efficiency. Also it seemed as if Melo would grab 3-4 of his own misses every game and convert (though that could be a hugely exaggerated number). I’d like to see his percentages for the year eliminating misses that he rebounded.

    21. bidiong

      Melo is a huge usage guy. I think he played great this year and helped the team immensely. It’s not like he plays with Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh. My point is if he takes more uncontested jumpers by giving up some more difficult shots by passing to teammates and making them take them his percentages would be higher than they already are. Or maybe he’d be passing to open teammates drawing off the attention he grabs.

    22. Nick C.

      Melo played with Iverson and Billups. His best efficiency numbers were at the level of Durant’s worst post-rookie season numbers. I don’t think the “his teammates suck/are pussies” argument flies. I still don’t see how we can ignore that passed up opportunity leaving to a heave or violation in the context of the contribution to team efficiency, since the game is not won based on who had to most efficient dude on their team that night.

    23. DRed

      bidiong:
      Or maybe he’d be passing to open teammates drawing off the attention he grabs.

      too bad Carmelo didn’t pass the basketball last year.

    24. johnno

      BigBlueAL: Since Melo shooting efficiency has been a discussion again today

      I’m a simpleton — the Knicks were 7-10 without Melo in the lineup and 47-18 with him. I don’t care what he did, how he did it, whether he took too many shots, whether he “made his teammates better,” whether he slacked off on defense, whether he didn’t pass enough, whether he was a ballhog, whether he took dumb shots, etc. They won with him, lost without him. That seems pretty “efficient” to me.

    25. er

      johnno: I’m a simpleton — the Knicks were 7-10 without Melo in the lineup and 47-18 with him.I don’t care what he did, how he did it, whether he took too many shots, whether he “made his teammates better,” whether he slacked off on defense, whether he didn’t pass enough, whether he was a ballhog, whether he took dumb shots, etc.They won with him, lost without him. That seems pretty “efficient” to me.

      That would have been the 3rd best record in the lockout season lol

    26. BigBlueAL

      johnno: I’m a simpleton — the Knicks were 7-10 without Melo in the lineup and 47-18 with him.I don’t care what he did, how he did it, whether he took too many shots, whether he “made his teammates better,” whether he slacked off on defense, whether he didn’t pass enough, whether he was a ballhog, whether he took dumb shots, etc.They won with him, lost without him. That seems pretty “efficient” to me.

      I enjoy all the statistical debates on this site. I dont like to partake in them for the most part because I still dont feel totally comfortable in evaluating advanced stats in basketball and for that matter dont really trust many of them. I absolutely LOVE all the advanced and crazy stats in baseball and read them all the time. But I just cant get as worked up about it in basketball because I just dont think its that simple to evaluate individual stats in basketball compared to baseball. Not even close.

      So for me in basketball the eye test and just plain old fun factor in watching a player still holds alot of value for me. Alot of people complain about watching Melo play basketball and hate it when the team goes to way too much ISO ball but this past season has fully made me a member of the pro-Melo side. Sure he isnt as good as LeBron or Durant but shit Melo is still a helluva player. He was the focal point of the best Knicks team Ive watched and rooted for in 13 years. He has had some memorable games that left me in awe watching him. Just like Ewing wasnt as good as MJ or Olajuwon it didnt mean he wasnt a great player who was fun to watch and root for. Same goes with me for Melo.

    27. max fisher-cohen

      Melo was pretty efficient last year because he started taking a lot more threes and made them at an excellent clip. 56% TS% and only 9.3% TO% is pretty good.

      What concerns me is that so much of that efficiency rests on the fact that he made his threes at a very good clip last season. His efficiency at the rim has really fallen off, especially this past year, when he shot only 54% at the rim compared to 64% in 06/07, which to me suggests his athleticism is fading, so if he can’t sustain the three point efficiency, which wouldn’t be a surprise since he’s had two other similar 3pt shooting seasons only to fall back to earth the following year, 12-13 could be a pretty awful year for him.

      I guess you could argue the reverse too though — that injuries hindered his finishing ability and that if he gets healthy, he could sustain the shooting and combine it with rim finishing to make for a career year.

    28. Brian Cronin

      I think the Knicks’ record without Melo this year is much more indicative about who they had to replace him than anything else.

      The previous two seasons there was barely any difference between the Knicks when he played versus when he didn’t (7-4 without him and 29-26 with him in 2011-12 and 27-26 without him and 14-13 with him in 2010-11).

      I don’t think the records the past two seasons are an indictment on him but nor do I think that their record this season is a plus for him.

      I don’t even mean this as a shot at Melo. Not at all. I just don’t think a simple “7-10 without him, 47-20 with him” means too much. Better to just point out how good of a season he had overall. He had a very good season. Second team All-NBA.

    29. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      ruruland:
      thread
      ^^
      why I don’t post here anymore.

      Aw, shucks! Please come back! We need your expert analysis!

    30. Igno-Bot 3000

      I’m not sure how the conversation got derailed into another Melo argument but I wanted to make the simple observation that I’m happy the Knicks added two shot-creators in THJ and Bargnani after that was a problem last season. I definitely want to watch some Michigan games to catch THJ’s game.

      I’m still worried about several things regarding this season, but I’m more optimistic than I was a few weeks ago.

      Also, don’t know if anyone else posted this but Bobby Brown apparently killed it at the summer league game the other day: http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/69781/its-a-celebration-kevin-durant-and-another-sunday-at-the-drew-league

    31. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Igno-Bot 3000: I’m not sure how the conversation got derailed into another Melo argument but I wanted to make the simple observation that I’m happy the Knicks added two shot-creators in THJ and Bargnani after that was a problem last season. I definitely want to watch some Michigan games to catch THJ’s game.

      The problem is that Bargnani is a player in which you will be able to see his “shot creation,” but you can’t see the things he doesn’t do.

      Normally we don’t notice when someone collects a defensive rebound because that’s just what happens most often in a basketball game. Grabbing an extra 2 or 3 offensive rebounds over the course of a game is not something that we, in ~180 possessions, will note. It will, however, make a huge difference on the outcome of a game.

      You will notice how good he is at dribbling for a guy his size. You’ll see him drive baseline and dunk. You’ll see him with a decent stroke from the 3-point line. But you won’t notice when he doesn’t fight for a rebound because it’s a matter of omission, not error. That’s why he’s terrible.

    32. Igno-Bot 3000

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: The problem is that Bargnani is a player in which you will be able to see his “shot creation,” but you can’t see the things he doesn’t do.

      Normally we don’t notice when someone collects a defensive rebound because that’s just what happens most often in a basketball game. Grabbing an extra 2 or 3 offensive rebounds over the course of a game is not something that we, in ~180 possessions, will note. It will, however, make a huge difference on the outcome of a game.

      You will notice how good he is at dribbling for a guy his size. You’ll see him drive baseline and dunk. You’ll see him with a decent stroke from the 3-point line. But you won’t notice when he doesn’t fight for a rebound because it’s a matter of omission, not error. That’s why he’s terrible.

      Look, I’m not trying to defend him really. Trust me, I understand that he is a minus defender and rebounder. It was a bad trade that I’ve been trying to talk myself into for the last few weeks. So here are some arguments that I’m trying to talk myself into:

      1) The Knicks were bottom-5 last year in rebounding anyway, so I’m not sure how much his presence affects their overall game plan. From what I remember their bad rebounding is mitigated by them not turning it over, which he is very good at. If you compare him with Amare, Amare turns it over more but also rebounds more, so their production could be considered a wash. I understand that this is silly considering they would be playing the same role, but knowing that Amare’s minutes are limited and that one or both of them will be out for some point in the season, it won’t be as big of an issue as we think.

      2) For how much everyone lauded Copeland, he was an equally terrible rebounder and defender.

    33. Hubert

      Wait, that was all I had to do to stir up some traffic today? Amazing.

      THCJ I think you have spidey sense.

      Anyway…Brandon Jennings to Detroit! Knicks just fell to the 6 seed!

    34. Brian Cronin

      Wow, Detroit is a fascinating team! Jennings end up with less than $9 million per year. I love it.

      Other interesting news – Bobby Brown is officially out of the hunt for the Knicks’ third point guard job as he signed with a Chinese team.

      DeJuan Blair signed with Dallas and Austin Daye signed with Toronto.

    35. Igno-Bot 3000

      Brian Cronin:
      Wow, Detroit is a fascinating team! Jennings end up with less than $9 million per year. I love it.

      Other interesting news – Bobby Brown is officially out of the hunt for the Knicks’ third point guard job as he signed with a Chinese team.

      DeJuan Blair signed with Dallas and Austin Daye signed with Toronto. Holy shit, Toronto, how many small forwards do you need?

      Bobby has an opt-out for August 15th so he’s still available for the next two weeks

    36. Igno-Bot 3000

      I wanted to take a look at the Knicks five-man units last year to see which ones succeeded the most. I don’t have a Synergy account so this might be kind of rudimentary to some, but I figured I’d get a talk going.

      http://www.82games.com/1213/1213NYK2.HTM

      It dips into small sample size pretty quickly but I wanted to make some observations…

      1) Two of the Knicks three most successful lineups in the top ten have Melo at the 3 and Stat at the 4
      2) Swapping out Brewer for Shumpert…(#2 to #3). Their eFG plummets as does their net turnover percentage. I’d have to look at Shump’s numbers but from what I remember it did take him a while to get into his groove
      3) I thought the difference between #5 and #10 was interesting. Most of the lineups with Melo as the only “scorer” doesn’t work, but 10, with Kidd at the point instead of Felton, has a better offense (despite less close shots) and a much better net t/o percentage. Safe to say we’ll miss first-half Kidd. I will say that seeing #5 makes me feel better about losing Novak
      4) Despite Stat’s rebounding inefficiencies, the best rebounding unit had him on the floor (#4)
      5) #4 is actually really interesting and a a preview of what we’ll see this season even without Smith. Good offense, bad defense and net negative turnovers, but still a successful lineup. A high percentage of close shots, low percentage of close shots from the opponent, but still a high opponent shooting percentage…I assume we got killed at the perimeter with Melo at the 3
      6) Looking at #1…the most minutes played by far…elite offense and defense, a high rebound percentage, and not as high a net turnover percentage as I would have assumed. The obvious difference is that we have Shumpert in that role instead of Kidd. What’s interesting is that Shumpert had a higher shooting percentage and lower turnover percentage than Kidd yet the lineup with Shumpert in that role (#6) was a negative. Kidd was better at steals and…

    37. Igno-Bot 3000

      Also does anybody know how to take a page on say, basketball reference, and get it onto excel? I’d love to break this stuff down more. E-mail me if it’s easier, evanagovino@gmail.com

    38. JK47

      The Knicks were actually a very good defensive rebounding team last year– they ranked 4th in the league in defensive rebounding despite playing small lineups for much of the season. It was a team effort, as the “bigs” did a good job of boxing out and the guards did a nice job of picking up the rebounding slack.

      This year I expect the Knicks to be a worse defensive rebounding team because of Bargnani’s unfortunate presence.

    39. nicos

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: The problem is that Bargnani is a player in which you will be able to see his “shot creation,” but you can’t see the things he doesn’t do.

      Normally we don’t notice when someone collects a defensive rebound because that’s just what happens most often in a basketball game. Grabbing an extra 2 or 3 offensive rebounds over the course of a game is not something that we, in ~180 possessions, will note. It will, however, make a huge difference on the outcome of a game.

      You will notice how good he is at dribbling for a guy his size. You’ll see him drive baseline and dunk. You’ll see him with a decent stroke from the 3-point line. But you won’t notice when he doesn’t fight for a rebound because it’s a matter of omission, not error. That’s why he’s terrible.

      This from a guy who ignores literally everything that doesn’t show up in a box score?

    40. johnno

      JK47: because of Bargnani’s unfortunate presence.

      I wish that people would stop trashing Bargnani and spouting nonsense like, “He is the worst player in the NBA!” I realize that last year was a bad year but, except for last year, he’s been at least a pretty good player. Two years ago, he ranked 64th in the league in PER out of 352 players who played more than 500 minutes. Gallinari finished 82nd. I realize that a lot of people on this site don’t think much of PER as a measure of basketball worth. However, it was invented by a guy who is now an NBA GM, so I think that there’s a real good chance that he knows a whole lot more about how to judge a player than any of us do. If Bargnani had been drafted 15th instead of first, and if the Knicks had just given up two late 2nd round picks for him, I think that most people would be talking about what a great acquisition he was. I’m in the minority here, but I’m pretty confident that he’ll be a big contributor this year.

    41. Brian Cronin

      Awesome news. That’ll be a great game.

      By the way, Bill Simmons said the following about JR Smith today:

      To J.R. Smith, if only because this sounds like an exchange that could have happened about him. Poor J.R. only had to make 3s, stay out of trouble and remain sane for eight straight months on the 2012-13 Knicks and they probably would have given him $50 million this summer.

      Pretttttty sure the Knicks literally could not give JR $50 million this summer.

    42. Hubert

      It’s amazing how easily anything can devolve into a conversation about Melo’s efficiency. There we were, me & Lavor talking about Hardaway vs Bullock, and within 4 posts someone broke the Melo seal and away it went.

    43. Brian Cronin

      I wish that people would stop trashing Bargnani and spouting nonsense like, “He is the worst player in the NBA!” I realize that last year was a bad year but, except for last year, he’s been at least a pretty good player. Two years ago, he ranked 64th in the league in PER out of 352 players who played more than 500 minutes. Gallinari finished 82nd. I realize that a lot of people on this site don’t think much of PER as a measure of basketball worth. However, it was invented by a guy who is now an NBA GM, so I think that there’s a real good chance that he knows a whole lot more about how to judge a player than any of us do. If Bargnani had been drafted 15th instead of first, and if the Knicks had just given up two late 2nd round picks for him, I think that most people would be talking about what a great acquisition he was. I’m in the minority here, but I’m pretty confident that he’ll be a big contributor this year.

      “If the Knicks had given up less for him then people would have been happier.”

      Yeah, that’s it exactly.

      Instead they actually did give up two late seconds for him on top of the first round pick they traded.

      I don’t even think Bargnani is useless or anything. I don’t mind adding him. I agree that he’s worth a look as a reclamation project. They just traded too much for him. Even some of Bargs’ biggest defenders aren’t disputing that. It is sort of “Yeah, they gave up too much but…” Which is fair enough. I don’t mind that as a position. I’m certainly hopeful that he’ll turn things around!

    44. lavor postell

      Hubert:
      It’s amazing how easily anything can devolve into a conversation about Melo’s efficiency. There we were, me & Lavor talking about Hardaway vs Bullock, and within 4 posts someone broke the Melo seal and away it went.

      That escalated quickly. It would have been nice to continue that discussion rather than reignite the Melo efficiency debate.

    45. Nick C.

      Hubert:
      It’s amazing how easily anything can devolve into a conversation about Melo’s efficiency. There we were, me & Lavor talking about Hardaway vs Bullock, and within 4 posts someone broke the Melo seal and away it went.

      Didn’t you practically bait the hook and toss it in the lake by making a comment about “the box score proves everything crowd” ?

    46. johnno

      Brian Cronin: Instead they actually did give up two late seconds for him on top of the first round pick they traded.

      Let’s put what they traded in perspective – - they gave up 2 second round picks that are almost certainly going to be in the 50-60 range in the draft, which are pretty much worthless. In that range, you get the exact same type of player whom you can sign as a FA 15 minutes after the draft ends — i.e., a CJ Leslie, who is precisely the guy the Knicks would have picked if they had the 55th pick in this year’s draft. The first round pick is going to be in the 20′s unless neither the Nuggets nor the Knicks make the playoffs, which is highly unlikely. It is also highly unlikely that, if they were to pick a guy in the 20′s, he would end up being better than Bargnani. In other words, they gave up much less than the Pacers just gave up — i.e., two first round picks, last year’s and next year’s — for a guy whom they expect to be their 7th man.

    47. Hubert

      Nick C.: Didn’t you practically bait the hook and toss it in the lake by making a comment about “the box score proves everything crowd” ?

      Actually I really thought no one was around.

    48. Hubert

      My original point, though, had nothing to do with Carmelo Anthony. It was more about Iman Shumpert, and how (if) he relates to Tim Hardaway Jr. Shumpert had “a broken shot”, as we all heard. Donnie Walsh didn’t think so. And last year he became a 40%+ shooter on a 169 shot sample.

      I don’t know what his shot breakdown was in college but I know the narrative. It’s similar to Hardaway Jr’s. Hardaway Jr actually has pretty good catch and shoot numbers, too. So I was wondering how fair it might be to think his shooting might be better than anticipated. As opposed to, say, Reggie Bullock, who pretty much took one shot and nailed it consistently. I’m still shading towards wishing we had drafted Bullock.

    49. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      johnno: I realize that last year was a bad year but, except for last year, he’s been at least a pretty good player. Two years ago, he ranked 64th in the league in PER out of 352 players who played more than 500 minutes. Gallinari finished 82nd. I realize that a lot of people on this site don’t think much of PER as a measure of basketball worth. However, it was invented by a guy who is now an NBA GM, so I think that there’s a real good chance that he knows a whole lot more about how to judge a player than any of us do.

      ::slaps forehead, puts hand into blender::

    50. The Honorable Cock Jowles

      Hubert: My original point, though, had nothing to do with Carmelo Anthony. It was more about Iman Shumpert, and how (if) he relates to Tim Hardaway Jr. Shumpert had “a broken shot”, as we all heard. Donnie Walsh didn’t think so. And last year he became a 40%+ shooter on a 169 shot sample.

      Why not find a better shooter and improve him at the same rate you improved Shumpert? Why bank on the idea that you, of all people, can fix some mechanics that have been developing for decades?

    51. lavor postell

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: Why not find a better shooter and improve him at the same rate you improved Shumpert? Why bank on the idea that you, of all people, can fix some mechanics that have been developing for decades?

      Have you watched Hardaway Jr play at all? His shooting mechanics are fine it’s simply his shot selection that needs to improve which will certainly happen next year simply because of the type of shots he will receive. His sophomore year when he was asked to be the primary shot creator on the team was his least efficient year, particularly from long distance because he was shooting off the dribble a majority of the time, not his strong suit. However his three point shooting went back up to the 36-37 percent range once Burke was able to take the reins of Beilein’s offense completely this year.

      His role on the team the past 3 years certainly didn’t help the cause as his first two years he was the primary scoring option and last year he was still the only player other than Burke capable of creating for himself. This gives me hope for an uptick in his efficiency next year on the Knicks. He doesn’t figure to ever be more than the third option at any given time he’s on the floor next year and in that capacity I would bet his shot distribution aligns significantly better with his strengths.

      Do I think THJR is a surefire contributor? No, but I definitely think he has the talent to be a contributor for the Knicks in the same capacity that Danny Green is for the Spurs given some time. Also it’s worth noting that this is a very good kid, who has a good temperament and mindset for New York. He will always work hard and he is not scared of the big moments in a basketball game, which we know can often come down to role players being thrust into unfamiliar situations. He wont pass up wide open threes like Kidd to pass…

    52. Nick C.

      Hubert: Actually I really thought no one was around.

      famous last words of a man who went swimming in the ocean with a cut.

    53. Nick C.

      I don’t see why stating if someone stops taking so manyxstupid shots his percentages will go up, unless you feel such habits are ingrained and won’t change.

    54. Hubert

      johnno: In other words, they gave up much less than the Pacers just gave up — i.e., two first round picks, last year’s and next year’s — for a guy whom they expect to be their 7th man.

      This.

      A first round pick + Plumlee + Green is at least equal to a first round pick + two seconds.

      And sorry to all those who want to insist that Andrea Bargnani is the worst player to ever play basketball, but Luis Scola is a 33 year old declining PF who doesn’t hold much greater value.

      But the Pacers beat us in 6 tightly contested games so everything they do is smart and everything we do is stupid.

    55. lavor postell

      Hubert: This.

      A first round pick + Plumlee + Green is at least equal to a first round pick + two seconds.

      And sorry to all those who want to insist that Andrea Bargnani is the worst player to ever play basketball, but Luis Scola is a 33 year old declining PF who doesn’t hold much greater value.

      But the Pacers beat us in 6 tightly contested games so everything they do is smart and everything we do is stupid.

      Lmao. I love Cope, but I have a feeling he just got a nice payday from a team who’s complete identity is selling out defensively. Interested to see how long a leash Vogel gives him. Same goes with Scola and C.J. Watson. These are not guys renowned for their defensive prowess.

    56. lavor postell

      http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9520497/the-oklahoma-city-thunder-future-legacy-james-harden-trade

      I love Lowe but I can’t really get on board with this piece. OKC ownership chose to move to a smaller market so for finances now to dictate franchise altering decisions like trading a top-3 sg for a one-year Kevin Martin rental, Jeremy Lamb, Steven Adams and another pick is nonsense. How many playoff games have they sold out in the past 4 years? Did that extra revenue get re-invested into the team or just to line Clay Bennett’s pockets?

    57. Hubert

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: Why not find a better shooter and improve him at the same rate you improved Shumpert? Why bank on the idea that you, of all people, can fix some mechanics that have been developing for decades?

      But that was my question. Is something wrong with Hardaway’s mechanics? Mechanics AND shot selection comprise overall shooting numbers. Thankfully for us, Donnie Walsh made this distinction with Iman Shumpert and a dozen or so NBA teams didn’t (if that draft happens tomorrow, he’s probably a top 5 pick).

      I’m curious if the Knicks did the same homework on THJ. According to draftexpress, he shot very well on spot ups so that may indicate his mechanics are better than his overall shooting numbers indicate.

    58. johnno

      The Honorable Cock Jowles: ::slaps forehead, puts hand into blender::

      You and I have a very different way of deciding between who is “good” and who is “bad.” Yesterday, you stated that Ronnie Brewer has been a “good shooter” throughout his career. A guy who has career shooting percentages of 25% from three and 67% from the foul line is not a “good shooter.” He is an awful shooter who is at least smart enough to realize that he stinks at shooting a basketball, so he only takes layups, dunks and wide, wide open jump shots. That makes him “efficient,” but extraordinarily limited, and of not much use against a team that decides to actually guard him instead of ignoring him so that they can double team the good shooters.

    59. Z

      Hubert:

      And sorry to all those who want to insist that Andrea Bargnani is the worst player to ever play basketball, but Luis Scola is a 33 year old declining PF who doesn’t hold much greater value.

      I think most people would rather have Scola to Bargnani, all things equal. And though the trade shows a similar value, I think there may be mitigating factors. Bargnani was going to be amnestied (if a team didn’t want to actually give up assets for him). If amnestied, the Knicks were probably afraid the Nets would end up with him, and they thought it was worth a future pick to keep that from happening (remember: the media would LOVE the acquisition if the Nets got Bargnani!)

    60. Z

      Hubert:
      there we were, me & Lavor talking…

      Hubert Davis was a lot more efficient than Lavor Postell (A whole lot more!), so I’ll take his side on any efficiency debate :)

    61. lavor postell

      Z: Hubert Davis was a lot more efficient than Lavor Postell (A whole lot more!), so I’ll take his side on any efficiency debate :)

      I’m a high volume poster which creates opportunities for others to be more efficient in their posting.

    62. DRed

      Hubert: But that was my question.Is something wrong with Hardaway’s mechanics?Mechanics AND shot selection comprise overall shooting numbers.Thankfully for us, Donnie Walsh made this distinction with Iman Shumpert and a dozen or so NBA teams didn’t (if that draft happens tomorrow, he’s probably a top 5 pick).

      I’m curious if the Knicks did the same homework on THJ.According to draftexpress, he shot very well on spot ups so that may indicate his mechanics are better than his overall shooting numbers indicate.

      He shot very well on spotups last year. The season before he was awful on spotup attempts. So was there something wrong with his mechanics the season before, or is the variation just the result of fairly small sample sizes? I didn’t like the Hardaway pick, but if he is a legitimately excellent spot up shooter and we can fix his shot selection problems, he might be a good fit. He was one of the better SGs in college at not turning the ball over, so he at least fits into our ball protecting offense.

    63. lavor postell

      DRed: He shot very well on spotups last year.The season before he was awful on spotup attempts.So was there something wrong with his mechanics the season before, or is the variation just the result of fairly small sample sizes?I didn’t like the Hardaway pick, but if he is a legitimately excellent spot up shooter and we can fix his shot selection problems, he might be a good fit.He was one of the better SGs in college at not turning the ball over, so he at least fits into our ball protecting offense.

      I’d bet a lot of this has to do with his spot up opportunities his sophmore not exactly being clean looks and sample size like you mentioned. Burke wasn’t nearly as good a setup man his freshman year as Morris was the year before for Hardaway or as he was last year and Stuart Douglass logged heavy minutes as a point guard which didn’t help the cause.

      When you replace scrappy overachieving players like Douglass, Zach Novak and Evan Smotryczk with Stauskas, GR3 and McGary it opens up the floor a lot and leads to much cleaner spot up looks. He was also way better in isolation his sophomore year, because of an inordinately high percentage of makes on pull up jumpers.

      I don’t know if he’s going to be an elite spot up guy, but he should be able to hit around 37-38 percent from three with the ability to get too and finish around the rim.

    64. KnickfaninNJ

      Z: I think most people would rather have Scola to Bargnani, all things equal. And though the trade shows a similar value, I think there may be mitigating factors. Bargnani was going to be amnestied (if a team didn’t want to actually give up assets for him). If amnestied, the Knicks were probably afraid the Nets would end up with him, and they thought it was worth a future pick to keep that from happening (remember: the media would LOVE the acquisition if the Nets got Bargnani!)

      Reading this I thought the reason most people would rather have Scola than Bargnani is that Bargnani has a reputation as a disappointment and Scola doesn’t. Scola would have the same reputation if he had been drafted number one overall. But when I looked up stats, Scola’s were better than I expected. The main difference is that Scola is older and his stats have been declining steadily but slowly for the past five years, while Bargnani is younger but clearly affected by injuries. So it seem that different GMs have similar ideas about the trade values of players. But the GMs seem to value late first round picks a lot less than fans do. I think the GMs are right. If they could draft someone like Bargnani at #20, they’d be very happy. And I remember when the Knicks had three first round draft picks in a row one year. They got basically nothing out of their picks. So I am happy we got Bargnani for a what we did and cross my fingers that his recent season was really about injuries and not something else.

    65. Keniman Shumpwalker

      lavor postell:
      http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/229201/Knicks-Pursuing-Beno-Udrih-With-Veterans-Minimum

      I would like this move a lot. I read a piece early in the offseason, can’t remember where, that touted his proficient mid-rang game, particularly his ability to shoot off the dribble. I was high on Canaan coming into the draft specifically because of his ability to shoot off the dribble and punish teams for sagging into the paint off the PnR. While I can’t find the original article, I did find this quote from an SB Nation piece on Udrih from last season:

      “NBA.com data show that Udrih is shooting 52.3 percent on two-pointers outside the restricted area. Put another way, Udrih’s in-between game makes him a threat to score off the dribble.”

      While it’s not exactly the fully fleshed out data I was hoping to find in regards to his shooting ability off the bounce, it does bode well.

    66. flossy

      I’d much rather have Beno Udrih than Delonte West for the same money, that’s for damn sure.

    67. Z

      KnickfaninNJ: I remember when the Knicks had three first round draft picks in a row one year.They got basically nothing out of their picks.So I am happy we got Bargnani for a what we did.

      I don’t think it makes sense to say “because we didn’t draft a good player 17 years ago, we should give up on the draft”. Besides, that was a great, great draft to have 3 mid-1st round picks in. Picks 13-21 went:

      Kobe
      Peja
      Nash
      Tony Delk
      Jermaine O’Neal
      John Wallace
      Walter McCarty
      Zydrunis Ilgauskas
      Dante Jones

      So 5 out of the 9 became all-stars (34 all-star appearances combined!), and 3 of the 4 that didn’t become stars were drafted by the Knicks. (Not that it would have mattered, cause Grunfeld would have still sent Nash and O’Neal to Boston for Chris Mills:)

    68. Z

      KnickfaninNJ: I think the GMs are right. If they could draft someone like Bargnani at #20, they’d be very happy.

      If he was drafted #20, he’d be paid like a #20 pick. But Scola, for his career, has given twice the production* for half the money.

    69. KnickfaninNJ

      I agree we shouldn’t give up on the draft. I didn’t mean to imply that. I was just giving an example to support my point that sometimes you don’t get much for a first round pick. It’s not just that Wallace, McCarty, and Jones didn’t become stars. They had almost no impact on the league at all. Shump has been more productive for the Knicks than the three of them combined. On average you are doing well if you get a steady role player in the second half of the first round of the draft.

      To look at it from a statistical point of view, instead of from an example, consider this. Starting players in the NBA probably have an average career in the NBA of at least 8 years and are starters maybe on average 5 of those years. That means on average, one new player or less per team who will be a consistent starter for some NBA team enters the league each year. That’s one round of the draft Consistent starter does not necessarily mean a star, just a good role player. Stars are at most 40% of those starters if there are two starting stars per team. But I think many teams don’t have two stars, so let’s say 30%. If the draft perfectly picked players in order of future impact, the draft would pick stars at the top 30% of the first round or about in the first 10 slots or so. After that the average player should be a role player. GMs know this, so to them, getting a quality role player who could start on many teams for a draft pick around #20 is a good deal. Fans always remember the great picks and seem mostly to forget about the others, so they value a first round pick higher than this.

    70. Hubert

      I remember thinking John Wallace was going to be the x factor in game 7 against Miami that year (when half our team was suspended).

      Every time Stern gets booed mercilessly at the NBA draft when it’s held in New York, people forget where it came from. It came from those suspensions. No one ever forgot.

      (I’m 99% sure that’s true. I don’t recall him getting booed back when the draft used to rotate around the league.)

    71. KnickfaninNJ

      Z: If he was drafted #20, he’d be paid like a #20 pick. But Scola, for his career, has given twice the production* for half the money.

      You are totally correct. Scola has definitely given more bang for the buck than Bargnani and in a totally free market, I don’t think Bargnani would get paid what he’s getting now. But I ignored money in my analysis because the Knicks are so constrained by the cap they need to maximize talent within the constraints of the cap rather than get the best value for any individual salary.

    72. Hubert

      Z: If he was drafted #20, he’d be paid like a #20 pick. But Scola, for his career, has given twice the production* for half the money.

      Bang for the buck becomes increasingly irrelevant when you’re $20 million over the cap.

      At that point your moves are extremely limited, so a player’s salary isn’t really the best measure of his cost to your team.

      The question should be what other player was this summer for a 2016 1st round pick and a 2017 2nd round pick and some salary filler. (The additional 2nd round pick is worthless. It’s Oklahoma City’s 2nd round pick next year.) That’s how you equate the bang for the buck for a team $20mm over the cap for whom money is not an issue.

    73. Hubert

      KnickfaninNJ: You are totally correct.Scola has definitely given more bang for the buck than Bargnani and in a totally free market, I don’t think Bargnani would get paid what he’s getting now.But I ignored money in my analysis because the Knicks are so constrained by the cap they need to maximize talent within the constraints of the cap rather than get the best value for any individual salary.

      Oops, should’ve kept reading. You said the same thing.

    74. Z

      Hubert: Bang for the buck becomes increasingly irrelevant…

      I agree, except that it’s not just bang for buck. Don’t ignore the fact that Scola has been a far better NBA player than Bargnani.

      I think it was a nice pickup for Indiana. They got a better basketball player for the same opportunity cost.

    75. KnickfaninNJ

      Whether we should have traded for Scola than Bargnani is a completely different question than if the Knicks and Indiana both paid a reasonable price for the two players. I think the fits for each team might be good the way it went down. Indiana needed help anywhere off the bench. NY needed a scorer who stretch the offense, but probably didn’t need interior play as much (especially since they ended up signing Kmart). Scola has been better in the past but is older than Bargnani by a lot, so it’s a close call.

    76. DRed

      Z: I agree, except that it’s not just bang for buck. Don’t ignore the fact that Scola has been a far better NBA player than Bargnani.

      I think it was a nice pickup for Indiana. They got a better basketball player for the same opportunity cost.

      Being a far better than Bargnani is a pretty low bar-I think Indy overpaid for a still decent Scola, but they probably could have gotten something better for what they gave up.

    77. flossy

      Hubert: Bang for the buck becomes increasingly irrelevant when you’re $20 million over the cap.

      Just want to point out that, in case there was any doubt that the whole Jeremy Lin contract negotiation fiasco was a personal vendetta on Dolan’s part, I think Barngnani will cost the team approximately one zillion dollars when you factor in luxury tax on top of his $12m/year.

    78. Hubert

      Z:Don’t ignore the fact that Scola has been a far better NBA player than Bargnani.

      It was a nice pickup for Indiana. The fact that he was better than Bargnani prior to 2011 is irrelevant now. He is in serious decline, and the only thing he is likely to do better than Bargnani next year is rebound.

    79. Z

      Hubert: He is in serious decline

      How do you figure that? The only aspect that has declined is his shooting%. Everything else is either on par with career average or higher (career high assist%, steal%, FT%). In fact, he actually played better last year than he did in 2011/12 by every metric. Plus, he played every game last year and the year before (and has only missed 6 games his entire career!), so there’s that.

    80. nicos

      Hubert: It was a nice pickup for Indiana.The fact that he was better than Bargnani prior to 2011 is irrelevant now.He is in serious decline, and the only thing he is likely to do better than Bargnani next year is rebound.

      Not to mention he’s actually a good deal worse than Bargnani defensively- at least Barg’s is a perfectly competent man defender, Scola is just plain bad all the way around.

    81. Eternal OptiKnist

      None of you are factoring into your analysis how much Scola looks like Russell Brand which is a key driver of his value.

    82. Eternal OptiKnist

      I, for one, like the Bargniani trade. I wasnt nuts about giving up a 1st rounder but i really think this guy is going to be a good fit. Do you remember how shocked we all were at how good Melo was able to drill the three in D’antoni’s offense when he arrived? A system can make all the difference and Bargs is already a proven commodity from distance he just had an f-ed up year and played only 31 injury-laden games. He claims to be 100% healthy and he’s training with his national squad right now. I’ll bet a burger at Clyde’s Wine & Dine that he hits 39% from distance this year. He’ll get 6 rebounds which is annoying, but for our offensive team and coach, he’ll do his job.

    83. DRed

      Eternal OptiKnist:
      I, for one, like the Bargniani trade.I wasnt nuts about giving up a 1st rounder but i really think this guy is going to be a good fit.Do you remember how shocked we all were at how good Melo was able to drill the three in D’antoni’s offense when he arrived?A system can make all the difference and Bargs is already a proven commodity from distance he just had an f-ed up year and played only 31 injury-laden games.He claims to be 100% healthy and he’s training with his national squad right now.I’ll bet a burger at Clyde’s Wine & Dine that he hits 39% from distance this year.He’ll get 6 rebounds which is annoying, but for our offensive team and coach, he’ll do his job.

      Bargnani’s 3% last 3 seasons: 34, 29, 31
      Novak’s 3% last 3 seasons: 54 (in very limited minutes), 47, 41
      Copeland last season: 41

      So let’s hope I’m buying you a burger and Clyde’s Wine & Dine this time next year. It’s possible-Bargs hit 40% 5 years ago, but if we’re expecting him to replace Cope and Novak’s outside shooting we picked up the wrong player.

    84. Eternal OptiKnist

      DRed: Bargnani’s 3% last 3 seasons: 34, 29, 31
      Novak’s 3% last 3 seasons: 54 (in very limited minutes), 47, 41
      Copeland last season: 41

      So let’s hope I’m buying you a burger and Clyde’s Wine & Dine this time next year.It’s possible-Bargs hit 40% 5 years ago, but if we’re expecting him to replace Cope and Novak’s outside shooting we picked up the wrong player.

      And melo shot 27, 35, 37, 32, 33..then he hits NY and bam..43. Ur telling me a 7-foot gifted shooter in a new situation that is designed to maximize his particular strength can’t hit 39? Especially playing alongside a player that requires a double team? Forget not that he’s still 28. I’m not saying he’s going the average 10 rebs…just that he’ll shoot it well. Alright dRed, its a bet!

    85. cgreene

      @92 exactly. the NBA is littered w stories of players getting better based on situations. in fact i would argue in no other sport is that so pronounced. why is that so hard to understand? the has shown that he absolutely can shoot.

    86. Brian Cronin

      Interesting piece of info in Bill Simmons’ latest column. If a team does not hit the salary floor (which is $38 million) then they have to take the difference between their actual salary and $38 million (let’s say their payroll is only $33 million, so it would be $5 million) and then divide that by how many players they have on their roster and just give it to each player on the roster as a bonus. That’s hilarious.

    87. slovene knick

      Udrih is my compatriot and is a schmuck…
      If I could pick first Slovene to play for the Knicks, Beno would never make it past summer league team.

      But to be honest he’s what Felton is not and he can play: very good mid-range shooter off the dribble, good left layup, decent 3 point %….could be ok for what Knicks need.A backup PG. Just as Keniman wrote @72.

      Knicks are safe to ride him to the ground (instead of doing that to Felton/Prigioni) in regular season so we don’t have to rely on his low character – shaky head and body, no heart soft defense in the playoffs. Let him play heavy minutes but don’t fall in love with him.

      Beno played hard in his contract year so maybe he has another push in him.But a schmuck in my book…if it goes between him and Delonte I’m for Delonte for national and knick-fanish reasons.
      FU Beno for not playing at our home European championships.

      I’ll report on how Bargnani is doing with team Italia in september.

      Write more people! It’s so slow & love to read Knicks.

    88. Z

      Brian Cronin: If a team does not hit the salary floor (which is $38 million)

      Brian– not sure if this is a typo, or if Simmons is just plain wrong, but the floor is 90% of the cap, so $53,000,000 in the NBA this year.

    Comments are closed.