Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Tuesday, September 23, 2014

Knicks (Not So) 2014 Schedule

By Kurylo and Cavan

Like a sack of cheap birdseed emptied in Central Park after a snowstorm, the release of the NBA schedule marks something of a merciful offseason ritual for fans and bloggers alike. We’re all birds, you see.

We were given a tiny taster Monday afternoon when it was announced that the orange and blue would open the season at home against… the Bucks? Sure, why not! Obviously — and as always — the real meat of the season is interspersed throughout. So let’s take a gander at some of the key games and stretches of what promises to be another gut-crunching New York Knicks campaign. And remember, kids: never combine booze and antacids, unless you’re Don Nelson.

As if this needs to be stated, the following is for amusement only. Any events that should come true do not mean that the author can travel through time. That’s just silly, and totally not possibly according to the laws of physics.

10/30 Milwaukee – The Knicks blow out the Bucks, when half of their team is not allowed through the players’ entrance due to a mistaken identity. Viacheslav Kravtsov, Ersan Ilyasova, and Miroslav Raduljica join a mid-town flash-mob and decide to retire from the N.B.A. to follow their dreams.

10/31 @ Chicago – After sitting out the first game of the season against the Heat, Jalen Rose trots out to play in Derrick’s uniform. In the post-game interview, Derrick Rose deflects questions about his fear of playing against N.B.A. players given the bullseye on his back for undeservedly winning the 2011 MVP. The whole interview is done with Rose wearing Ricky Williams’ Saints Helmet. When asked if that’s his Halloween costume Rose replies, “It’s Halloween?”

11/3 Minnesota – Ricky Rubio and Pablo Prigioni spend 47 minutes stealing the ball from each other. TWolves win 1-0 when Ron Artest gets a technical for stripping off his jersey to sell his own brand of perfume titled “Fleur du Vingt-et-unième rue.”

11/10 San Antonio – After a home-and-home against the Bobcats, we’ll all be ready for an opponent that hasn’t taken to spiking its lottery-destined team’s Gatorade with straight psilocybin. The Spurs will enter the season where they always do: underrated, under-appreciated, and considerably balder. Jim is not far behind, having ripped out half his own watching Gerald Henderson drop 90 points in a little over 24 hours.

11/14 Houston – It’ll be interesting to see Howard be unhappy in yet another uniform. Lke a Japanese bride on her third arranged marriage.

11/19 @ Detroit – A sentimental event for Jim, a native of the D, and our first look at the the Pistons’ trio of Southpaw Slingers. Detroit’s floor spacing — consisting of all five players standing in the left corner screaming for the ball, spittle flying everywhere — sparks in viewers acute vertigo, dry heaves, and a sneaking suspicion that Andre Drummond was actually born during the Ford Administration.

11/20 Indiana – These two teams will roll up their sleeves & pick up where they left off in June. Also I fully expect Kenyon Martin to hand Chris Copeland this, when he first steps on the court. At which point David West will step in, menacingly, and explain that “That $#%@& is my princess, now.”

11/27 LA Clippers
– The second stand in our late November mini-road trip, and another early test, this time against a team poised to be one of the league’s offensive juggernauts. But that’s OK, because we have Carmelo Anthony, and–oh wow Blake Griffin just dunked the ball and shattered Jeremy Tyler’s teeth.

12/1 Brooklyn – Reggie Evans and Kevin Garnett take turns elbowing Carmelo Anthony in the face. It’s nice to see these two finally find someone else who takes their jobs as seriously as they do. Practices typically end with Garnett and Evans off in some dark corner of Barclays, slapping each other as hard as they can with open palms. The teams will square off again four days later.

12/25 Oklahoma City – Merry $#%@&*! Christmas, everyone! Here’s a stocking full of Russell Westbrook scowls and Kevin Durant free throw attempts! No, you can’t return them for cash. No, you cannot convert to Judaism for better presents. No, Uncle Jim can’t live in the basement.

12/27 Toronto – With Chandler, STAT, and Martin hurt, Andrea gets revenge on his old team by scoring 38 points. But the Knicks lose by double digits due to a Toronto rebounding edge of 98 to 5, although none were by Steve Novak.

12/28 @ Toronto – In the next-day rematch Coach Woodson forces Tyson Chandler onto the court, despite being injured. Chandler’s skeleton leaves his body and opens a successful cheese shop in FIDI.

1/26 Lakers – With the Lakers rebuilding, D’Antoni awkwardly kisses up to ‘Melo during the pre-game shoot around, trying to caress his hand between shots (it’s an Italian thing), and then begs Dolan for his job back in the MSG bowels immediately following the game. Dolan agrees to give Mike D. the head coaching job, under the one condition that he can “get my axe so I can play you my latest song — it’s called Locked Out of Love.” D’Antoni immediately leaves, hailing the first taxi he sees.

2/1 Heat – Ron Artest brings a sword onto the court and cuts Dwayne Wade into half. Commissioner Adam Silver, in an attempt to set some semblance of heavy-handed tone, suspends Artest for 50 games, not really understanding how many games there are in an NBA season. Miami is allowed to get out of Wade’s contract early, and the NBA hands them one player of their choice. In a four day televised event, LeBron James chooses “Kyrie Irving” as his “New Wade” and then surprises the audience by claiming “Blake Griffin” to be the “New Bosh”. Silver checks with Riley, and “Uncle Pat” approves the deal. Also the “LeBron James Mid-Season Choice” becomes a yearly ritual. Imagine Dragons signs a 10-year tender to be the show’s in-house band.

2/7 Utah – After a combined appeal from the player’s union and the NRA, the league lifts Artest’s suspension, just in time for Utah’s annual trip to MSG. Artest celebrates by hitting Enes Kanter over the head with a folding chair during the National Anthem.

2/9 @ Oklahoma – In a pivotal game, Amar’e Stoudemire decides to bear through the pain and plays the greatest 38 minutes of his professional career.

2/12 Sacramento/Poughkeepsie – Stoudemire misses the game “as a precaution.” He is only seen once more in public, to sign his contract extension in the summer of 2014.

3/30 @ Warriors – Stephen Curry scores 102 points, all on layups, breaking the NBA record for points scored in a game. Unfortunately David Lee suffers a dislocated skull walking to the bench. It’s a day-to-day injury for Lee.

4/15 @ Nets – With the Atlantic Division crown on the line, Carmelo Anthony takes matters into his own hands, tallying 43 points on 75 shots in a dramatic Bocker win. Afterwards, Melo reflects on yet another heroics-laden performance, stating, “This one was all about team — I trusted in my teammates. Has anyone seen my shoulder socket?”

4/16 Toronto – Seeing his first major minutes, Tim Hardaway Jr. scores 50 points in a meaningless game. Knick fans write it off as inconsequential and against inferior talent, and totally don’t spend the summer arguing about his potential.

140 comments on “Knicks (Not So) 2014 Schedule

  1. Mike Kurylo Post author

    Z-man:
    Re: this post, where’s jon abbey when you need him?

    Unfortunately, I banned him. I felt he too often went out of his way to bash the writers, the site, etc. in ways that was not conductive to basketball discussion. I didn’t see a way in which those types of comments would stop.

  2. SeeWhyDee77

    Good stuff lol. “Ron Artest brings a sword onto the court..”
    Hey I read this morning that Nolan Smith is a FA..are my eyes deceiving me? If not, then why isn’t he on a roster? Wouldn’t he be a nice 3rd PG for us?

  3. Mike Kurylo Post author

    SeeWhyDee77:
    Good stuff lol. “Ron Artest brings a sword onto the court..”
    Hey I read this morning that Nolan Smith is a FA..are my eyes deceiving me? If not, then why isn’t he on a roster? Wouldn’t he be a nice 3rd PG for us?

    A TS% of 43.5 and a PER of 7.5? Quite honestly if you went to any court in the city and dragged the best PG to MSG, they’d probably put up comparable numbers in the NBA.

  4. Z-man

    Mike Kurylo: Unfortunately, I banned him. I felt he too often went out of his way to bash the writers, the site, etc. in ways that was not conductive to basketball discussion. I didn’t see a way in which those types of comments would stop.

    Not completely surprising. I agree that jon would go way over the top with his criticism of the writers, deserved or not.;-) I personally try not to be harsh on the writers because I have nothing better to offer and I appreciate the bonafide attempt to combine serious discussion and humor. Except maybe for pieces like the one above.

    I feel that jon’s voice has been an important one here, especially in offering passionate dissent to the moneyball crowd. For example, he raised the notion of the “Kobe assist” here, which initially wrankled many as nonsense but turned out to be a controversioa topic elsewhere in the blogosphere.

    And I agree with his oft-stated premise that what differentiates KB from the other blogs is the intelligent (?) banter between posters. I often found the vitriolic dialogue between jon and THCJ very entertaining, moreso than the articles. jon occasionally was excessively abusive to the writers, yes, but I don’t think he had much of a following, nor did I think that his tone was any worse than that of certain posters towards other posters who dared to disagree with them.

    Unlike a heckler at a performance, jon didn’t prevent anyone from writing or from liking the writing. And there were many times when he, as much as anyone, kept the dialogue going on slow days (especially when you and some of the other long-timers would disappear for months at a time) and consistently made lots of contributions to the beloved game threads.

    Thanks, jon, you and your loose-cannon posts will be missed.

  5. thenoblefacehumper

    Mike Kurylo: Unfortunately, I banned him. I felt he too often went out of his way to bash the writers, the site, etc. in ways that was not conductive to basketball discussion. I didn’t see a way in which those types of comments would stop.

    I don’t post often at all, but I read just about every comment (and article) on the site. Obviously the decision is yours but I think you should reconsider. He does go over the top criticizing the writers, but he also adds a lot to the discussion pretty consistently. Most of my favorite conversations on here include him in some way.

  6. cgreene

    I’ve been a long time reader here and occasional commenter. I disagree with the decision to ban Jon. Although his assessments of the writers was at times harsh it was never personal and it was often right. I could see being pissed about the criticism of the game recaps which was real deadline work. But the one-off articles he criticized mostly deserved it and it doesn’t seem like tons of work goes into most of them, no more than a long researched comment anyway. He generally raised the intellectual level of the commenting discourse. He did a lot to prove many of the fallacies of the pure statistical point of view. There is a lot of sophomoric and personal, low level banter here that can tend to drag things down way more than what he did. I for one hope you reconsider this decision, Mike. For every rule we put around smart commenters like Ted Nelson and Jon Abbey it gives more of a voice to the dogrufus types… PS at least your more active participation is nice to see.

  7. flossy

    jon abbey is (was?) a caustic jerk, but I do hope this is more of a “time out” than a permanent execution. The less-than-constructive criticism of the articles notwithstanding, it’s hard to argue that he was anything but a net positive in terms of his overall contribution, and that’s coming from someone who often disagrees with him. He may not have been all sunshine and kittens, but the commenter-who-shall-remain-nameless who spent Christmas morning preemptively telling anyone who disagreed with him to drink bleach is still around, so…

  8. Z

    Whoa, Jon was banned? (How very James Dolanish).

    I agree with Z-Man (again!), and the others above here. Jon voices his opinion, nothing more, which is exactly what the comments on a fan board are for. And most of the time his opinions contributed substantially to the conversation (unlike the typical “ban candidate” that comes to the site with some bizarre agenda that pollutes the threads). Truthfully, I find what Ruruland and THCJ do here far more destructive to the conversations than anything Jon has ever done. They insult the other guests of the site, which I think is worse than insulting the writers. Because, ultimately, the writers should be here for the readers, not the other way around.

  9. Jim Cavan

    cgreene: I could see being pissed about the criticism of the game recaps which was real deadline work. But the one-off articles he criticized mostly deserved it and it doesn’t seem like tons of work goes into most of them, no more than a long researched comment anyway.

    How many “tons of work” would suffice for a gig that doesn’t always pay? Actually, quite a bit of work goes into them, from the researching and the editing to the writing itself. Obviously some posts are more thoroughly researched / thought out / well written than others, but let’s remember all of the writers here are doing it for the love of the game and the craft, not for a salaried pay check.

    Besides, a lot of the posts are meant to spark conversation, not come to definitive conclusions about any one topic or statistical trend. Just because the post isn’t going to win a Pulitzer doesn’t mean you can just hamfistedly insult the [unpaid] writers for what amounts to a lot more work than most might assume.

    The blessing of this site is also its curse: Because the commenter community IS so well-versed and (usually) intelligent, the writers and posts often get a lot more flak than they would on almost any other team-centric site. Point is, there’s a fine but definite line between criticizing the substance of a post or article, and going after the writers (some of whom are 18 or 19 freaking years old and busting their asses to learn how to do this often very difficult work) personally based on purely subjective criteria and flagrant, arrogant vindictiveness.

    Just my two cents.

  10. Nick C.

    Seeing Jon banned is a bit of a disappointment, even if I never met him or spoke to him and in all likelihood never will. I remember arguing with him over who was behind the Francis trade the smiling weasel or Larry Brown. In general banning seems uncool, even unenlightened. In the end it is your site and we are all just visitors who don’t even have the decency to pay.

  11. airchibundo507

    Z:
    Whoa, Jon was banned? (How very James Dolanish).

    I agree with Z-Man (again!), and the others above here. Jon voices his opinion, nothing more, which is exactly what the comments on a fan board are for. And most of the time his opinions contributed substantially to the conversation (unlike the typical “ban candidate” that comes to the site with some bizarre agenda that pollutes the threads). Truthfully, I find what Ruruland and THCJ do here far more destructive to the conversations than anything Jon has ever done. They insult the other guests of the site, which I think is worse than insulting the writers. Because, ultimately, the writers should be here for the readers, not the other way around.

    Did you just put Ruruland in the same category as THCJ? Ruru might be excessively optimistic at times but it counterbalances with the pessimism prevalent on this blog and he backs up his claims with extensive statistical research. He has also been one of the best prognosticators on this board time and time again. THCJ’s gimmick is baiting and trolling.

  12. Nick C.

    The blessing of this site is also its curse: Because the commenter community IS so well-versed and (usually) intelligent, the writers and posts often get a lot more flak than they would on almost any other team-centric site — fair or unfair. Point is, there’s a fine but definite line between criticizing the substance of a post and article, and going after the writers (some of whom are 18 or 19 freaking years old and busting their ass to learn how to do this often very difficult work) personally based on purely subjective criteria and flagrant, arrogant vindictiveness.

    Just my two cents.

    That was the only thing that was off-putting. Some of the newer writers were obviously, at least to me, kids-young adults. IIRC Jon referenced being an editor at one time at Time magazine so perhaps there was more he could have offered them than the internet version of a hurled whiskey bottle and a slammed door.

  13. Z

    airchibundo507: Did you just put Ruruland in the same category as THCJ?

    No, I didn’t. I put both of them in a category above Jon when it comes to insulting people.

  14. danvt

    +1

    airchibundo507: Did you just put Ruruland in the same category as THCJ? Ruru might be excessively optimistic at times but it counterbalances with the pessimism prevalent on this blog and he backs up his claims with extensive statistical research. He has also been one of the best prognosticators on this board time and time again. THCJ’s gimmick is baiting and trolling.

  15. Robert Silverman

    Jon was banned by Mike specifically because he got personal in his comments — towards the writers and other commenters. We don’t do as good a job as we might like moderating the board, but he was told that if he wanted to offer constructive criticism, that’s fine. He refused to stop. But insulting the site, telling people to read other blogs and being generally nasty towards the people who work here (again, for free) is just not something that should be encouraged.

  16. Mike Kurylo Post author

    Here’s my take:

    If you want to criticize an article – mistakes in logic, an incorrect fact, bad grammar, misspelling, etc. – that is acceptable. In fact I appreciate when the commenters here point out these types of flaws. Truly I think it makes this site what it is.

    However if you wish to hold a grudge against someone and frequently use any opportunity to insult them, that’s over the line. Here’s a good example:

    http://knickerblogger.net/insert-clever-title-here/#comment-444016

    jon abbey:

    heh, I resisted commenting. honestly, anything but Silverman at this point, even Frank Isola…

    Z-man
    July 24, 2013 at 8:53 pm (Edit)

    Now that’s going too far…

    Robert didn’t even write that article! That’s going out of your way to attack another person. It’s mean spirited and intentionally hateful. The only reason to post that is to goad them into a verbal internet fight. That’s the definition of trolling.

    Unfortunately it didn’t seem that Jon would stop these types of attacks. It took a long time for me to ban Jon, and I lost a night of sleep doing it. Believe me, I would love to have Jon back. But his deep seeded hatred for Robert/his writing is unwarranted. If he were willing to make amends and promise not to do these types of attacks I would let him back on. But I couldn’t go forward with Jon being a constant thorn in the site’s side, and it wasn’t fair to the authors to allow him to troll them without their being able to retaliate in fashion.

  17. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    Yes, I remember telling Z-man to drink bleach. Here was his lovely comment, nothing more than a baseless personal attack against me.

    “I wonder what your students would think if they knew that you went on record wishing a slow and painful death upon someone who had the temerity to disagree with your take on NBA basketball players, teams and stats. There is something very twisted about those posts that can’t be explained away by the “professional performance” stuff you offer. Would it matter to you if Jerry Sandusky’s former player raved about his positive influence on their lives (and flocks of them did), or if a Catholic priest was a pillar of his community to all in his parish despite being a monster in his private life?

    As someone who is responsible for screening, hiring, and evaluating educators, I can say without reservation: if I became aware that a teacher at my school was the author of the posts you made in this thread, it would raise some character concerns about that person.

    Calling someone stupid, ignorant, an a-hole, etc. is one thing. Being unable to express frustration with a nemesis on the topic of NBA basketball without resorting to crudest, vile, boundary-less invective is inexcusable for anyone professing to be learned abour anything important. Honestly, I feel sorry for you, and for the students that only know the sanitized facade you display to them when unthreatened by intelligent dissent.”

    Yes, I would still tell him to drink bleach if he compared me to a child molester again.

  18. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    airchibundo507: THCJ’s gimmick is baiting and trolling.

    My gimmick is skepticism and valuing statistics, however flawed, over the “prevailing expertise” of the NBA’s legions of old-school scouts and talent evaluators who wouldn’t know what makes a player productive if YHWH himself came down and whispered it into their ears. Points-per-game is still the #1 way to get a big contract in this league. That’s a fact. I will not bow to posters like danvt who talk nonsense about the hidden or implicit value of such garbage statistics. Sorry.

  19. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    airchibundo507: Ruru might be excessively optimistic at times but it counterbalances with the pessimism prevalent on this blog and he backs up his claims with extensive statistical research.

    I wouldn’t call him excessively optimistic. I’d describe him as a guy looking for a career in public relations, intent on spinning and interpreting to fulfill his own personal man-crushes on an overrated and overpaid basketball player.

    Pessimism is not pessimism when you end up correctly predicting the Knicks’ record.

    And let’s not forget that I agree with Wins Produced when it had the Knicks as something like a 58-24 team last year. With Kidd, Chandler and a revitalized, it was a good year to be a Knicks’ fan. We just tend to disagree on what causes the team to win or lose. This year is going to be a bitter disappointment for most of us, and I’m sure ruruland’s spin/optimism will be out in full force.

  20. ephus

    I sorry that Jon was unable to conform to the Knickerblogger level of etiquette (which is not a particularly high hurdle). From my few forays into writing articles, I know how much work goes into putting the site together. It’s a labor of love, with ZERO compensation.

    I am glad that THCJ and Ruru have managed to stay on the kosher side of the line. I would miss their rants, against each other, against me and against the world.

  21. danvt

    Most of my posts get completely ignored, even when I ask explicit questions. I mean, I get “NYT Pick” in those threads more then I get noticed here. I get it. I’m not into advanced stats. I come here to learn that stuff. I’m not worthy, truly. THJC’s style really annoys me, though, because he rarely offers anything more than a link to what someone else says. My opinions may be “conjecture” but at least it’s my own conjecture. Derisive responses like his sometimes make me think it’s not worth it to offer anything. When he argues that bunting is just stupid or that Josh Smith gets minutes because the coach is stupid, I’m offended, but I often take the bait. Sometimes I’m in the mood for an argument. I guess, ultimately, I’d rather see him flogged by Ruru, then banned though, even though he’s gone over the top more than Abbey ever did (at least that I have seen).

    Robert Silverman is an old friend of mine and I love his overly verbose style, and his incredible emotional connection to NYK. I disagree with Jon Abbey on Robert’s writing but I think Robert understands that you gotta pay your dues if you want to sing the blues. It’s a tough crowd. You’re going to get disrespected in myriad ways, especially if you’re controversial or outspoken.

    As to young writers and respecting their hard work and lack of compensation, I think it’s good to keep that in mind, but Vertsberger’s “championship window has closed” article, really pissed me off. I said as much, in a rare negative post. He gave me a sarcastic <3 when I complemented a subsequent one. I guess he remembered and held a grudge. He doesn't like me, but his favorite Knicks are Nate Robinson and Larry Hughes, so, que sera sera.

    In summation, I think banning Jon Abbey shows some very thin skin and I'll miss his contributions.

  22. thenoblefacehumper

    I think we all understand that it’s annoying to have someone constantly harping on your (unpaid) work. I just personally think the ban hammer should be reserved for the actual trolls (Vinny, etc.) who add literally nothing to the board (in fact they detract from it). Not someone like Jon who has definitely rubbed some people the wrong way, but is a positive contributor in many ways.

    Also: @WojYahooNBA
    The Knicks and 76ers are showing interest in free agent guard Chris Duhon, league sources tell Y! Sports.

    You could do a lot worse than Duhon if Felton has to miss time, IMO.

  23. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    danvt: When he argues that bunting is just stupid or that Josh Smith gets minutes because the coach is stupid, I’m offended, but I often take the bait.

    You shouldn’t be offended that your beliefs about bunting are wrong. I was once wrong about bunting too. What is silly about your attitude re: bunting is your insistence that because MLB managers still do it, there’s a good reason to do so. That good reason is probably a desire to not be ostracized by the rest of their community. The good reason almost always has nothing to do with winning baseball games. This has been the argument as to why field goals are often bad decisions in football games, and why, even in the face of enormously persuasive research that shows how and why they are usually bad decisions, coaches continue to do them. I think Wages of Wins had a post about a Malcolm Gladwell piece, taking about the social cost of risk. It’s important stuff, and neither myself, WoW, nor Gladwell invented it from nothing.

    This is the fabric of knowledge, my man. No man is an island. Having independent thought does not make your thought correct, accurate, or precise, even if it is yours. Like I say and have said and will say again, I do not believe that WP48 is a perfect stat, nor do I think it is a foolproof predictor of future success. (It needs a probability adjustment like PECOTA does, if you ask me.) It is merely better than the eyetest and better than micro-metrics that can tell us how a player fares when he takes a turn-around jump shot with 8-12 sec. left on the shot-clock with two defenders on him in a game on two days rest. My assumption is that basketball is largely a uniform game, comprised of the same types of plays over and over, and that we can somewhat accurately determine trends based on that assumption. That’s it.

  24. Jim Cavan

    For the record, I thought Jon’s internal contributions to the discourse here were usually good, occasionally excellent. Borderline indispensable, even. But if refusing to stop with the personal attacks — under the guise of “freedom of speech” or whatever — is the sword you’re willing to die on, then you probably deserve to die on that sword.

    Seriously, think about it: if being allowed to personally attack individuals is more important to you than continuing to contribute in a substantive way, minus the attacks, I have a hard time seeing how future discourse is going to be irreparably damaged by that person not being here. Mike gave Jon a simple rope — don’t personally attack people who aren’t allowed to respond in kind — and he decided he’d rather hang himself with it than take it and scale back the attacks. That says something.

    Lastly, if any of you feel that the comments are getting too personal, feel free to email any of us and let us know. Like Robert said, life demands have made policing the site a little difficult, but if someone is overstepping bounds (and we know that it happens) let us know so we can address it case-by-case.

  25. cgreene

    Jim Cavan: How many “tons of work” would suffice for a gig that doesn’t always pay? Actually, quite a bit of work goes into them, from the researching and the editing to the writing itself. Obviously some posts are more thoroughly researched / thought out / well written than others, but let’s remember all of the writers here are doing it for the love of the game and the craft, not for a salaried pay check.

    Jim, fair enough that I actually don’t know how much work goes into the writing and that it is done for free should certainly water down provocative criticism. It certainly seems like many of the articles are streams of basketball consciousness similar to the comments. That said it was rare that Jon made my eyebrows arch compared to other comments here from time to time and that the bad was worth the good. It also comes off a bit as Mike protecting his own rather than letting Robert and Jon hash out their differences either publicly on the forum (where Robert rarely comments anymore) or privately (maybe this occurred without our knowledge and Jon wouldn’t relent?). Either way Knickerblogger the entity doesn’t benefit from this decision IMO.

  26. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    I think jon abbey should be unbanned, and I hate that guy.

    That said, I understand that he has been warned numerous times and has never changed his behavior.

  27. flossy

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: Yes, I would still tell him to drink bleach if he compared me to a child molester again.

    Nobody accused you of molesting children, and that much should have been obvious. He made a perfectly valid point, which is that your private/anonymous conduct (“I wonder what your students would think if they knew that you went on record wishing a slow and painful death upon someone who had the temerity to disagree with your take on NBA basketball players, teams and stats. There is something very twisted about those posts that can’t be explained away by the “professional performance” stuff you offer.”) is incredibly unbecoming and might legitimately raise some concern considering you purportedly work in a profession where you act in loco parentis. Naturally, you set about proving him right…

    It’s too bad, whatever insights you have to offer get drowned in a sea of rhetorical behavioral garbage that ranges from petty sniping to really regrettable levels of vitriol and personal attacks, all over stuff that is ultimately meaningless. Ruruland might be a bit overbearing in promoting his point of view, but at least he engages in conversation. Abbey might have been snide and rude to writers, but he’s not a rage-fueled ideologue who takes any disagreement with his beliefs as a personal attack and invitation to respond in kind.

  28. DRed

    Alas, poor Abbey! I knew him, Kurylo: a fellow
    of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy: he hath
    told me I was an idiot a thousand times; and now, how
    abhorred in my imagination it is! my gorge rims at
    it. Here hung those lips that I have told him to shut I know
    not how oft. Where be your gibes now? your
    Kobeassists? your diminshed rebounds? your attacks on the writers,
    that were wont to set the board on a roar? Not one
    now, to mock your own grinning? quite chap-fallen?
    Now get you to my ruru’s chamber, and tell him, let
    him paint an inch thick, to this favour he must
    come; make her laugh at that. Prithee, Kurylo, tell
    me one thing.

  29. johnlocke

    I agree with THCJ about unbanning Jon, not hating him that is.

    I needed a break from the torment of the Knicks playoffs on my soul, so haven’t posted on here pretty much since the season ended, but I think the benefit of having Jon on the site outweighs the cost of his sometimes caustic commentary.

    Part of the beauty of the crowd is the diversity of its participants – the guy who mostly yells compliments and at-a-boys, the caustic bitter numbers guys, the pro-Melo crowd, the anti-WP warriors.

    Attacking unpaid writers personally based on their contributions is not in the best form, but I bet if you look at all those posts, they were followed by other posters defending the writers, that post and the site. Banning someone because they don’t like the quality of the work and say so is the antithesis of a forum like this I think (unless the person is using hateful/mean-spirited/racist language to throw personal attacks). I think Jon should be unbanned as well. I obviously don’t own this site, just my two cents.

    The Honorable Cock Jowles:
    I think jon abbey should be unbanned, and I hate that guy.

    That said, I understand that he has been warned numerous times and has never changed his behavior.

  30. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    flossy: Nobody accused you of molesting children, and that much should have been obvious.

    He didn’t accuse me of molesting children, nor did I say he did. He asked me if Sandusky’s professional accolades and reviews would matter in light of his abhorrent and debased behavior in his personal life.

    I have faith enough in your reasoning skills to show you that this is totally fallacious: a false analogy. Firstly, what I do on this site is well within the scope of legal conduct. Sandusky’s homosexuality is neither illegal nor immoral; his molestation of children, however, most clearly is.

    Comparing my admittedly angry rhetoric on this site to molestation is missing that key element that would tie them together: illegality.

    Furthermore, suggesting that because of the common element, between the classroom and this website, of applied rhetoric — suggesting that because I conduct myself in one way with you all, I would conduct myself accordingly with my students and colleagues? Totally baseless. I like to have sex with Lady Jowles. It’s fun, egalitarian, and mutually respectful, and we love each other without reservation. Sometimes it gets a little wild. Would that have any bearing on my ability to conduct myself professionally at my place of employment?

  31. Mike Kurylo Post author

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: Yes, I remember telling Z-man to drink bleach.

    THJC – like Abbey you provide an interesting viewpoint. But like Abbey I’m not going to take your juvenile behavior. Telling someone to drink bleach over a an internet message board is crossing the line. I’ve let you get away with many personal attacks before, but quite honestly I’m not in the mood to keep letting it go. I’m a bit tired of all the insults that go flying around here the last few months.

    Someone makes a dumb point, feel free to say why the point is dumb. Calling the person dumb is crossing the line. Period. We can argue without going to the level of ad hominen attacks. If you can’t figure out how to make your argument without doing that, then you don’t meet the requirements to contribute here.

    That goes for everyone. Continually cross the line and you’ll be banned.

  32. Z-man

    I should point out that my comment about “Now that’s going too far..” was totally toungue-in-cheek. I thought jon’s comment was 1) very witty and funny, and 2) well within bounds of reasonable criticism. In fact, commenters on this site spew hatred for Frank Isola (not to mention Berman, The Bleacher Report, etc.) that goes far beyond what jon has said about Robert or any other writer.

    I have read almost every post written at KB since the handwringing over losing Trevor Ariza. I never got the feeling that jon had a “deep seeded hatred” (s/b deep-seated, no?) for Robert, just for Robert’s writing. I guess that, because Robert’s writing has an introspective side to it, insulting his writing is more likely to come across as personal attack. But it’s pretty thin-skinned to take his criticism personally to the point of censorship, even if directed at fledgling writers. As to the BS about not getting paid, please, if you put yourself out there in public as a writer of articles, who cares whether you get paid or not? Most of the stuff written here gets ample praise, and if there is one or two dissenting voices, even harsh ones, you should be able to deal with it.

    I also think that the word “constant” is not accurate, occasional is more like it. Go back to Robert’s last 30 articles/recaps and tell me how many times you find disparaging comments from jon in those threads.

    Look, you have the right to shape your creation as you see fit, and I respect that. That said, I would venture to guess that the majority of posters here are ambivalent about the spin-off articles, or the insessant use of tortuous literary devices in the recaps. I think the reaction to jon’s banning suggests that.

  33. Jim Cavan

    johnlocke: Attacking unpaid writers personally based on their contributions is not in the best form, but I bet if you look at all those posts, they were followed by other posters defending the writers, that post and the site. Banning someone because they don’t like the quality of the work and say so is the antithesis of a forum like this I think (unless the person is using hateful/mean-spirited/racist language to throw personal attacks). I think Jon should be unbanned as well. I obviously don’t own this site, just my two cents.

    He was telling people NOT TO READ THE SITE. Seriously, how many sites would tolerate that? If Jon Abbey wants to start his own Knicks forum, where he can engage in debate free of pesky game recaps and other posts, he can go to town. I’m sure it would be a grand community. But if you’re so stubborn that you refuse to scale back the personal attacks and replace them with actual, substantive criticism, I’m sorry, you deserve it.

    We love how the discussions here go in a million different directions. And we seriously could not care less if you read the recaps / posts / rants or not. Some people will, many others will not. That’s totally fine. But acting like a total brat, refusing to issue even the most halfhearted apology, and actively trying to get people to stop reading the content — that’s bullshit. He had plenty of opportunities to scale it all back, and he refused.

  34. Robert Silverman

    Just to reiterate what Jim said. No one was forbidding/banning Jon from being critical of the articles. All that was asked is that he do so in a manner that didn’t resort to ad hominem attacks. The worst of them have been deleted, if you’re really into going back and hunting through all of jon’s past comments.

    He was told (repeatedly) that his contributions to the site were of value; that he was an important part of this community. Even beyond criticizing the thesis of any given post, if he wanted to state that he didn’t think it was funny or went on too long or that he found the style boring, that was FINE. What he couldn’t do was tell people not to read the articles/visit the site (which he did) or call someone names because he didn’t like the piece. This is mainly because we assume the last thing anyone wants to do at Knickerblogger is get into a protracted debate about writing style/the quality of writing.

    He refused. So he was banned. I can assure you, it wasn’t an impulsive or thin-skinned response. If anyone has any problems, either w/this decision or w/another poster, tell us.

  35. cgreene

    Mike, Jim – I am unclear as to the point on the writers being unable to defend themselves in kind to the attacks. Are there some rules around this unknown to the rank and file?

  36. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    Is this a Kobe assist which I see before me,
    The rebound toward my hand? Come, let me clutch thee.
    I have thee not, and yet I see thee still.
    Art thou not, fatal FGM, sensible
    To feeling as to sight? or art thou but
    A metric of the mind, a false creation,
    Proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain?
    I see thee yet, in form as palpable
    As this which now I draw.
    Thou marshall’st me the way that I was going;
    And such an instrument I was to use.
    Mine eyes are made the fools o’ the other senses,
    Or else worth all the rest; I see thee still,
    And on thy ORB and second-opportunity shot,
    Which was not so before. There’s no such thing:
    It is the sweaty business which informs
    Thus to mine eyes.

  37. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    Mike Kurylo: THJC – like Abbey you provide an interesting viewpoint. But like Abbey I’m not going to take your juvenile behavior. Telling someone to drink bleach over a an internet message board is crossing the line. I’ve let you get away with many personal attacks before, but quite honestly I’m not in the mood to keep letting it go. I’m a bit tired of all the insults that go flying around here the last few months.

    It was a bit of a frontier situation in winter — Silverman and Cavan were largely absent from the comment section, and you were nowhere to be found. Z-man compared my behavior to Jerry Sandusky’s, and that was not acceptable to me. Had there been a moderator present, maybe that post could have been flagged before I even had a chance to respond, but like I said, it was a bit of a Western in this place.

  38. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: I have faith enough in your reasoning skills to show you that this is totally fallacious: a false analogy. Firstly, what I do on this site is well within the scope of legal conduct. Sandusky’s homosexuality is neither illegal nor immoral; his molestation of children, however, most clearly is.

    I meant I have faith enough in your reasoning skills to NOT have to show you that this is fallacious.

  39. DRed

    More substantively, I’ll miss Abbey, whom I almost never agreed with. But he couldn’t stop being a dick to the writers here, so I completely understand why he was banned. I have my own problems with some of the writing here, but it’s free, and it’s not my website, and if I had some real substantive criticisms that I thought would help, all the writers provide an email address. There were plenty of ways for Jon to address whatever it was he didn’t like, including just not reading the posts by whatever authors he didn’t enjoy.

  40. Robert Silverman

    cgreene:
    Mike, Jim – I am unclear as to the point on the writers being unable to defend themselves in kind to the attacks.Are there some rules around this unknown to the rank and file?

    What would be the response to an ad hominem attack? That’s why it’s called trolling

  41. Jim Cavan

    cgreene: Mike, Jim – I am unclear as to the point on the writers being unable to defend themselves in kind to the attacks. Are there some rules around this unknown to the rank and file?

    We’re not allowed to attack posters, period. The few times I did, way back when, I got called out for it. I / we accept this as a legitimate rule for helping foster good community discourse.

  42. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    cgreene:
    Mike, Jim – I am unclear as to the point on the writers being unable to defend themselves in kind to the attacks.Are there some rules around this unknown to the rank and file?

    I think it’s more that they shouldn’t have to, and I understand that. jon abbey is not exactly very constructive, and his responses to queries for elucidation are usually something like, “If they paid me, I’d explain more, but I don’t have to.” If I get shit for making claims without supporting them well enough, he’s gotta be the emperor of conjecture.

  43. thenoblefacehumper

    I don’t recall him lobbying others not to read the site, but I digress. If the goal of this blog is to keep its readers satisfied, this decision is not conducive to that goal. Simple as that.

  44. Z

    Mike Kurylo:
    If you want to criticize an article – mistakes in logic, an incorrect fact, bad grammar, misspelling, etc. – that is acceptable…However if you wish to hold a grudge against someone and frequently use any opportunity to insult them, that’s over the line.

    That is a fine take, Mike, but where was it all the times when jon himself was getting insulted, continuously, by personalities far more belligerent than his own. From that aforementioned christmas day thread was this:

    THCJ: “I write over-the-top statements to jon abbey because I think he’s a mouth-breather and, honestly, I do not give one damn about his experience on this board or off it”.

    I can only assume you didn’t warn THCJ to not “hold a grudge against someone and frequently use any opportunity to insult them”, since he has never felt obligated to change his tone or his conduct at any time. So, it seems you are protecting Robert from a guy who, for a lot of us, contributes just as much to the KB experience, if not more, and has done so for a much longer time.

    But for jon, the insults weren’t personal, either when they were given or received. He responded to the X-mas insults with this:
    “heh, this position in general is kind of awesome as I’ve been accused of many things, but not being smart has never been one of them. I can take all the insults anyone can dish out.”

    I’m not sure why your writers can’t brush off a negative comment or two in a similar fashion.

    The Honorable Cock Jowles:
    I think jon abbey should be unbanned, and I hate that guy.

    And, for the record, I don’t think any of these guys, THCJ included, should be banned. They are integral parts of this site, insults and all.

  45. Mike Kurylo Post author

    Some things to note:

    1. It’s up to Jon if he wants to come back. He just needs to straighten things out with Rob and promise not to make unwarranted attacks.

    2. Jon was pretty unhappy here for a long time. He often said there was little to no value in the posts. He wished for a message board again (like it wasn’t bad enough the first time). He threatened to make a site that was better that this and take everyone with him. Maybe he’ll be content somewhere else.

    3. This site can survive without a great commenter like Jon Abbey much more than it can without a great writer like Robert Silverman. I chose the path of what I felt was right, but even if I didn’t the choice I made is best for KnickerBlogger. Without the writers, this site is, at best, a Yahoo Group. Robert wasn’t going out of his way to antagonize Jon. It was the other way around. In fact Robert went out of his way to avoid Jon. When one guy is throwing all the punches, it’s easy to know which person needs to go to detention. And again #1. Jon can come back whenever he chooses.

  46. Z-man

    THCJ, if you recall, I did not take your “bleach” comment personally and actually offered a conciliatory explanation at the time. I think flossy explained my intent rather well, but I agree that I expressed myself in a clumsy way, and that you had every right to be personally offended if you thought I was comparing your behavior to that of a child molester.

    Yet, I stand by my feelings at the time, which were that what you write, even anonymously, says something about your character, and that if I were to find out that the online alter-ego of one of my employees was on the level of your more angry, profane and offensive rants, it would raise concerns for me, no matter how wonderful they came off on the job. And it is certainly possible to be a partial or a complete a-hole without breaking any laws. As a buddy of mine used to say in reference to character, “We all have an a-hole, it only matters how big it is.”

    Anyway, I appreciate that we have been able to continue debating the Knicks and basketball despite that falling out, and sincerely hope that neither of us gets banned.

  47. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    I accepted the apology then, and I still accept it now. I apologize, too. I’m only trying to explain why I was so angry that such an accusation would be leveled.

  48. Jim Cavan

    If I can speak about the nature of some of the recaps / posts for a minute (and this is all I will say about it): As Robert said, no one is forcing you to read them. Furthermore, if you have substantive criticism to vent, feel free.

    But let me just say — without speaking for the rest of the writers here — that while we can probably get a little off-color / out on Mars sometimes, we are genuinely trying to do things differently than how other sites do them. We fully expect everyone to read the recaps at myriad other sites, from the Big Boy dailies down to the smallest blog. As you should. That’s the beauty of the internet — you can read five recaps in 20 minutes — and part of the fun of being a part of this crazy community of ours.

    We get weird; no question about that. It’s not for everybody. Mike was / has been kind enough to give some of us a forum for being weird, while still bringing some semblance of analysis and providing launching pads for deeper, more meaty discussions. We assume most of you — maybe not all of you, but most of you — watch the games. As such, we often don’t feel the need to tell you, verbatim, what “happened.” Instead, we try to lend a bit of color to what happened; to at once take it WAY TOO SERIOUSLY, and not that seriously at all. Because sports are schizophrenic like that.

    We are actively trying to strike a good balance between stats and analysis on the one hand, and rants and raves on the other — both within individual pieces and between individual posts. Because we think that’s good on its own merits, and because we think it reflects something about our actual community, which I think is absolutely one of the best out there, period. We’re not perfect, but we’re absolutely trying. Hopefully we’ll get better.

  49. Robert Silverman

    Z:

    But for jon, the insults weren’t personal…I’m not sure why your writers can’t brush off a negative comment or two in a similar fashion.

    Z: like I said, the worst comments were deleted, or perhaps you’re not recalling correctly, but hey were personal. I am fine w/criticism. Calling me a ‘useless hack’ and a ‘self-indulgent moron’ or even ‘Anyone but Silverman (on an article that I didn’t write) is crossing a line.

    And yes, to state again, we have contacted many posters about the use of ad hominem attacks. Could we do better? Without a doubt.

    To clarify — I’m not looking to be ‘protected’ or apologized to by anyone. This isn’t about me or any of the other writers. This is about trying to provide the best forum to talk about basketball. That’s why we’re all here.

    Z-Man: The fact that I bring my own experiences to the fray at times when writing about the Knicks has zero to do with my or Mike’s or Jim’s anyone’s reaction to jon. If he wanted to offer reasonable criticism, I’m open to it — from anyone for that matter. I honestly could care less what jon abbey thinks of my work. Again, this isn’t about me.

  50. johnlocke

    Sorry, but there are a good number of sites allow that to happen. Bad comparison perhaps but have you ever read any of the posts after an Ian O’Connor article on ESPN? We’re all adults and Jon is not the Pied Pier — just because he says something it doesn’t mean we’ll automatically just believe it or do it.

    To your other points, which I completely understand, I guess we don’t have full transparency into the dialogue that went back and forth with Jon. It’s up to Jon I guess as to whether he thinks he needs to apologize. Perhaps too late now, but I think you would have sent a more powerful message by allowing him to contribute and having the community shut down his personal attacks than outright banning him.

    Jim Cavan: He was telling people NOT TO READ THE SITE. Seriously, how many sites would tolerate that? If Jon Abbey wants to start his own Knicks forum, where he can engage in debate free of pesky game recaps and other posts, he can go to town. I’m sure it would be a grand community. But if you’re so stubborn that you refuse to scale back the personal attacks and replace them with actual, substantive criticism, I’m sorry, you deserve it.

    We love how the discussions here go in a million different directions. And we seriously could not care less if you read the recaps / posts / rants or not. Some people will, many others will not. That’s totally fine. But acting like a total brat, refusing to issue even the most halfhearted apology, and actively trying to get people to stop reading the content — that’s bullshit. He had plenty of opportunities to scale it all back, and he refused.

  51. flossy

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: I meant I have faith enough in your reasoning skills to NOT have to show you that this is fallacious.

    You’re missing the entire point, which is that if somebody writes something–about you or about basketball–that you disagree with or find offensive, you are entirely capable of responding with a reasoned dissent (as you just did!) rather than telling them to drink bleach. Let’s not pretend you reserve your rage only for the gravest of personal insults–hell, almost anything that doesn’t toe the Berri line seems to merit your vitriol.

  52. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    Jim Cavan: We get weird; no question about that. It’s not for everybody. Mike was / has been kind enough to give some of us a forum for being weird, while still bringing some semblance of analysis and providing launching pads for deeper, more meaty discussions.

    Don’t change a thing. I would like to see more stats stuff on this site, but that doesn’t mean that you and Bob should change your style at all. I’ve said it before: it is the best sportswriting I’ve seen on the internet. Pat Jordan-level stuff.

  53. Jim Cavan

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: I would like to see more stats stuff on this site,

    It’s what this site was founded on, a huge part of what’s made it what it is, and I think all of us would agree that we could use a little more of it. We’re definitely trying to figure out the how / who on this front.

  54. Z

    Robert Silverman: Z-man [sic], like I said, the worst comments were deleted, or perhaps you’re not recalling correctly, but hey were personal.

    They were personal to you, perhaps, but not to jon. He was called a mouth-breather and shrugged it off and went about his business. And he didn’t have the power to delete comments that were direct insults to himself, which you seem to have just admitted to doing. So, I guess all I have to say is that if you’re already deleting the comments you don’t like, what’s the point of banning him?

  55. Robert Silverman

    Z: They were personal to you, perhaps, but not to jon. He was called a mouth-breather and shrugged it off and went about his business. And he didn’t have the power to delete comments that were direct insults to himself, which you seem to have just admitted to doing. So, I guess all I have to say is that if you’re already deleting the comments you don’t like, what’s the point of banning him?

    Z, like I said, we have not done as good a job as we should of catching and deleting insults, whether directed at jon or at others. We will be doing our best to do so in the future.

    But “It wasn’t personal to him” doesn’t make any sense. It’s not that they were “Personal to me”. They were just ad hominem attacks. If you can’t see the difference, I’m not sure what to say.

    Again, to reiterate, I REALLY DON’T CARE. the worst of jon’s comments deleted because jon calling me or any writer names contributes nothing to this site, not because my fee-fees were hurt or I had a sadz. The comments were deleted b/c it brings the level down to the random, pointless insult-fest that is the comment section in some blogs. That’s why they were deleted. That’s not what we want to do here.

    He was asked to find a way to shape his criticism in a way that was productive. He refused. Why? Because he wasn’t actually offering criticism, he just wanted to fling poo and then act self-righteous when he was told he couldn’t.

  56. danvt

    OK, I get it. he was warned and specifically.

    Mike Kurylo:
    Here’s my take:

    If you want to criticize an article – mistakes in logic, an incorrect fact, bad grammar, misspelling, etc. – that is acceptable. In fact I appreciate when the commenters here point out these types of flaws. Truly I think it makes this site what it is.

    However if you wish to hold a grudge against someone and frequently use any opportunity to insult them, that’s over the line. Here’s a good example:

    http://knickerblogger.net/insert-clever-title-here/#comment-444016

    Robert didn’t even write that article! That’s going out of your way to attack another person. It’s mean spirited and intentionally hateful. The only reason to post that is to goad them into a verbal internet fight. That’s the definition of trolling.

    Unfortunately it didn’t seem that Jon would stop these types of attacks. It took a long time for me to ban Jon, and I lost a night of sleep doing it. Believe me, I would love to have Jon back. But his deep seeded hatred for Robert/his writing is unwarranted. If he were willing to make amends and promise not to do these types of attacks I would let him back on. But I couldn’t go forward with Jon being a constant thorn in the site’s side, and it wasn’t fair to the authors to allow him to troll them without their being able to retaliate in fashion.

  57. johnno

    Robert Silverman: This is mainly because we assume the last thing anyone wants to do at Knickerblogger is get into a protracted debate about writing style/the quality of writing.

    Or a protraced debate over whether a particular poster was abusive and should have been banned?

  58. BigBlueAL

    I guess I should give my 2 cents in this jon abbey “debate” since Ive been around a pretty long time now too, Im shocked he is banned. Compared to some of the comments and insults that have been said on this site the past few months I always found jon’s criticisms as pretty lame. Now if it got real personal during email exchanges or other personal communication with Mike or Robert then I can understand the anger towards him but this ban definitely seems like a personal thing between the staff and jon and not something the knickerblogger community asked for or needed.

    In terms of the articles and posts written here again Ive said in the past that its not my place to criticize all the new writers and their posts because lord knows I am not capable of writing anything better. But at this point I believe the commenters drive the conversation alot more than the posts do. I mean look back and most of the posts with the most comments are Morning News posts which have no analysis of anything, its just usually the 1st post of the day. Posts with news like a Knick signing or trade also gets comments going too obviously because of the topic.

    It does seem like Mike is being more active again which is great and more analysis posts are being written which is good too since for awhile there it was really just Morning News, Game thread then Recaps. But honestly regardless of what type of posts are written and who is banned Ill read and comment on this site every day because its the first Knicks blog I found back in 2008 and I loved this site ever since.

  59. BigBlueAL

    For those worrying about Duhon signing with the Knicks, Berman says Knicks have no interest in Duhon. For once in my life hope Berman is correct lol.

  60. danvt

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: You shouldn’t be offended that your beliefs about bunting are wrong.

    That comment typifies what I hate about your posts and yes it offends me to be called categorically wrong on something. Especially something where, at a minimum there’s some debate out there about it and, really you’re the one who’s probably wrong. I’m glad your sabermetric blogger confirms your bias, but I’m with Jim Leyland. Even an IMHO after that quote would humanize you.

    In the future, I’ll leave your comments alone and I’d prefer if you’d do the same.

  61. KnickfaninNJ

    Lastly, if any of you feel that the comments are getting too personal, feel free to email any of us and let us know. Like Robert said, life demands have made policing the site a little difficult, but if someone is overstepping bounds (and we know that it happens) let us know so we can address it case-by-case.

    There is no way to email any of you that I know of. If I click on your name I get directed to some twitter thing that I don’t know how to use.

  62. danvt

    Jim Cavan: We get weird; no question about that.

    It entertains the shit out of me. Just my aesthetic and NYK too. Hard to find a sports blog without a strait forward jock mentality. Keep up the good (weird) work boys.

  63. Jim Cavan

    KnickfaninNJ: There is no way to email any of you that I know of. If I click on your name I get directed to some twitter thing that I don’t know how to use.

    Fair point. There’s a “Contact Us” tab at the top of every page, so you can always use that. But jimcavan@gmail, if you’re so inclined.

  64. DRed

    danvt: That comment typifies what I hate about your posts and yes it offends me to be called categorically wrong on something.Especially something where, at a minimum there’s some debate out there about it and, really you’re the one who’s probably wrong.I’m glad your sabermetric blogger confirms your bias, but I’m with Jim Leyland.Even an IMHO after that quote would humanize you.

    In the future, I’ll leave your comments alone and I’d prefer if you’d do the same.

    There’s no debate about whether or not it’s a good idea to have your best hitter bunt with runners on 1st and 2nd with no outs in the 9th inning of a tie game. There are just a bunch of people who are wrong. That’s not to say all bunting is wrong, or that there isn’t some debate on the merits of bunting in other situations, but that’s one it which is clearly wrong to lay down a sacrifice. If you’re going to sneer at all stats based analysis, you (politely) are on the wrong blog.

  65. johnno

    DRed: There’s no debate about whether or not it’s a good idea to have your best hitter bunt with runners on 1st and 2nd with no outs in the 9th inning of a tie game.

    Sigh…doesn’t ANYONE feel like talking about Jeremy Tyler signing a 2 year deal (so the Knicks don’t get Coped when he proves the he can play) Chris Duhon, Sean May or DJ White (both of whom apparently worked out for the Knicks today)???

  66. BigBlueAL

    Saw an NBA standings prediction chart today that had the Knicks 5th in the East with a 47-35 record. THCJ thinks its too optimistic :-)

    I dont think the Knicks will match their 54 wins from last season but I still think they win at least 50. The real question is how many wins the Pacers/Bulls/Nets win too. Would be great to stay in the 2/3 seed range and not drop into the 4/5 range.

    Considering the state of the Yankees man I really cant wait until the NBA season starts. I love the NY Giants too but baseball and basketball are my 2 favorite sports by far. While football is still fun for me to watch and thankfully my first memories of football involves the 1986 Giants so I became a Giants fan instead of a Jets fan (which makes it alot easier to enjoy the NFL lol) it still is just a 1 day a week “event” for me. Much prefer the length and grid of an everyday sports season like MLB and NBA.

  67. Z

    BigBlueAL:
    this ban definitely seems like a personal thing between the staff and jon and not something the knickerblogger community asked for or needed.

    Yeah. Mike all but admitted it is a personal thing.

    Mike wrote: “This site can survive without a great commenter like Jon Abbey much more than it can without a great writer like Robert Silverman. I chose the path of what I felt was right, but even if I didn’t the choice I made is best for KnickerBlogger.”

    Sounds like somebody said “either he goes or I go”.

    Mike Kurylo: I couldn’t go forward with Jon being a constant thorn in the site’s side, and it wasn’t fair to the authors to allow him to troll them without their being able to retaliate in fashion.

    But Robert has been retaliating: he’s been deleting Jon’s posts. Which is fine. But I don’t see why the 98% of jon’s posts that aren’t attacks on Robert’s writing style need to be eliminated too.

    Jon is a brat, and he doesn’t filter his opinions, which is annoying to a lot of people. I get it. But it is ridiculously inconsistent to ban him for it.

    And, it does appear that this “feud” has been going on since Robert’s first piece. ( http://knickerblogger.net/an-open-letter-to-lebron-james/ )… A piece that jon called: “the worst piece I ever recall reading on Knickerblogger, really silly/ignorant.”

    To which Robert responded: “Geez Jon, don’t hold back. How do you really feel?”

    And now he’s been banned for it.

  68. BigBlueAL

    johnno: Sigh…doesn’t ANYONE feel like talking about Jeremy Tyler signing a 2 year deal (so the Knicks don’t get Coped when he proves the he can play) Chris Duhon, Sean May or DJ White (both of whom apparently worked out for the Knicks today)???

    From all indications Ive read the Knicks are still waiting to see if Udrih will sign with them since thats clearly their #1 option for their 3rd PG spot. If not I have a feeling Bobby Brown will sign with them since it looks like he doesnt want to stay in China and the Knicks seem to have alot of interest in him, he worked out with them again today along with the other bigs you mentioned and Lester Hudson.

  69. flossy

    DRed: There’s no debate… If you’re going to sneer at all stats based analysis, you (politely) are on the wrong blog.

    I don’t care about baseball in the slightest so I don’t have anything to add about that, but (not to speak for danvt), I think it’s pretty clear that the general tone of “you shouldn’t be offended that your beliefs about [whatever] are wrong” is the heart of the problem.

    Maybe that particular action in that particular situation has been statistically proven to be ineffective, but the value of pro basketball players the efficacy of different strategies is virtually never that cut and dried, certainly not the extent that THCJ or other Berri acolytes insist.

    The whole sequence of THCJ saying something provocative or melodramatically disagreeing with someone, that person getting offended at his tone, THCJ saying the equivalent of “don’t be offended that you’re wrong” over what is, at minimum, a difference of opinion, and the whole thing devolving into personal insults, has played out probably hundreds of times in these comment sections.

    Lots of people here have particular hobby horse they like to ride, not least of them the pathologically optimistic/sympathetic to Carmelo type(s) like ruruland. But when he treats his own opinion (or more to the point, the opinion he borrowed from Dave Berri) as settled fact or a subsitute for “all stats-based analysis” and then condescends to or berates and insults those who don’t agree… people are going think, rightly, that he’s an asshole, merits of bunting be damned.

  70. KnickfaninNJ

    johnno: Sigh…doesn’t ANYONE feel like talking about Jeremy Tyler signing a 2 year deal (so the Knicks don’t get Coped when he proves the he can play) Chris Duhon, Sean May or DJ White (both of whom apparently worked out for the Knicks today)???

    I don’t know much about Sean May or DJ White. Can anyone fill me in?

    Tyler sounds like a good pickup. I like the two year deal too. There’s a risk the Knicks don’t get much for their second year commitment, but, on the other hand after the two years the Knicks will have a lot of cap room if they want, so they wont be stuck in what they can offer like they were last year. Also, Tyler’s really young for someone who played abroad. He quit HS to play abroad!. So he has experience without being very old.

  71. BigBlueAL

    NBATV showing Game 6 of the 1981 NBA Finals between the Rockets and Celtics and the broadcast keeps flashing “Broadcasted Earlier”. Wow, I mean I know the NBA Finals were pre-recorded for awhile back then but didnt think it still happening in 1981 since Magic and Bird had been in the NBA already for 2 seasons.

  72. BigBlueAL

    KnickfaninNJ: I don’t know much about Sean May or DJ White.Can anyone fill me in?

    Tyler sounds like a good pickup.I like the two year deal too.There’s a risk the Knicks don’t get much for their second year commitment, but, on the other hand after the two years the Knicks will have a lot of cap room if they want, so they wont be stuck in what they can offer like they were last year. Also, Tyler’s really young for someone who played abroad.He quit HS to play abroad!.So he has experience without being very old.

    Sean May is another Michael Jordan lottery pick bust. DJ White has had a decent NBA career, surprised he hasnt really stuck with a team. Not a great rebounder though. Played in China most of last season before signing with the Celtics for the last couple of months of the season, surprised he didnt get more playing time with them.

  73. mokers

    I hope Jon decides to come back. However, I understand the necessity to protect volunteer writers from personal attacks and I do felt he went over the line a few times. that being said, I think there had been a string of poorly-researched articles that were good at sparking debate but were lacking the detail and research of some of the better comments on the site.

    For the game recaps, I won’t complain too much, but sometimes the writers try too hard to be funny. If you can’t be funny on a deadline, write up your thoughts and then update the post later. If you are writing a recap and are basing the reviews on the box score because you didn’t watch the game, please let us know. If a writer made a point to specifically argue one side of a debate (anthony, chandler, lin, copeland, etc) be the first to mention when you are proven wrong and refer back to your previous posts when you are proven right.

    I still think this is the best Knicks blog and I do appreciate that it embraces advanced stats.

  74. KnickfaninNJ

    I am surprised neither Sean May nor DJ White is a point guard. If Chris Duhon is our only option for 3rd point guard I am worried. A big difference between 2011-12 and 2012-2013 was that we had enough point guards to always have competent point guard play in 2013 despite injuries. Almost everybody in the NBA misses some games due to injuries. If we only have Felton and Prigioni that’s scary not because they are bad but because there are only two of them. And if we only have Felton, Prigioni and Duhon, that’s almost as scary.

  75. DRed

    flossy:

    Maybe that particular action in that particular situation has been statistically proven to be ineffective, but the value of pro basketball players the efficacy of different strategies is virtually never that cut and dried, certainly not the extent that THCJ or other Berri acolytes insist.

    The whole sequence of THCJ saying something provocative or melodramatically disagreeing with someone, that person getting offended at his tone, THCJ saying the equivalent of“don’t be offended that you’re wrong” over what is, at minimum, a difference of opinion, and the whole thing devolving into personal insults, has played out probably hundreds of times in these comment sections.

    Lots of people here have particular hobby horse they like to ride, not least of them the pathologically optimistic/sympathetic to Carmelo type(s) like ruruland.But when he treats his own opinion (or more to the point, the opinion he borrowed from Dave Berri) as settled fact or a subsitute for “all stats-based analysis” and then condescends to or berates and insults those who don’t agree… people are going think, rightly, that he’s an asshole, merits of bunting be damned.

    Sure, I generally agree with that. But to me is the same thing as saying Dave Berri’s stats are the dumbest thing ever and anyone who thinks they have merit is a joke. That may be true, but it’s not a convincing argument. Cock Jowles is far from the only person on this board who can be an asshole about his opinions. I certainly can be, although I try not to be most of the time. Obviously, cockjowles can stick up for himself, but it’s worth noting that plenty of posters take unprovoked shots at him as well. If you’re going to complain about the lack of civility here, try being more polite yourself.

  76. custer

    Anyone else check out the 5 on 5 on ESPN about best PFs? (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-PF-130807/debating-nba-power-forwards) Mostly just fluff, but I thought it was pretty funny that one of the writers thought that Kenneth Faried would be the best PF in the league in five years. I like Faried and what he does rebounding and hustling his ass off, but best in the league? C’mon.

    Jim, I know you do those sometimes (Robert I think too?)–is there any interaction between the writers or do you just submit your answers independently? Seems like it’d be better served as an actual discussion.

  77. DRed

    custer:
    Anyone else check out the 5 on 5 on ESPN about best PFs? (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-PF-130807/debating-nba-power-forwards) Mostly just fluff, but I thought it was pretty funny that one of the writers thought that Kenneth Faried would be the best PF in the league in five years. I like Faried and what he does rebounding and hustling his ass off, but best in the league? C’mon.

    Jim, I know you do those sometimes (Robert I think too?)–is there any interaction between the writers or do you just submit your answers independently? Seems like it’d be better served as an actual discussion.

    It’s also pretty funny that one of them thinks LaMarcus Aldridge is the best power forward in the league right now.

  78. DRed

    And people, Lebron James is the best power forward in the league. Not one of them picked him! I know he’s not a traditional 4, but that’s where he played last year. That question should be a no-brainer.

  79. custer

    DRed: It’s also pretty funny that one of them thinks LaMarcus Aldridge is the best power forward in the league right now.

    Haha, same guy on both counts.

  80. Jim Cavan

    custer: Jim, I know you do those sometimes (Robert I think too?)–is there any interaction between the writers or do you just submit your answers independently? Seems like it’d be better served as an actual discussion.

    Yeah, we just all do them independently for the most part — usually a pretty tight deadline. A lot of times you end up with homogeneous consensus, but sometimes it makes for a pretty fascinating cross-section of perspectives.

    Really, though, they’re meant to spark comments and controversy. Which they do, of course.

  81. DRed

    2. Who’s the most underrated power forward in the NBA?

    Levy: LeBron James.

    Yeah, no shit. You just said Kevin Love was better than him.

  82. thenamestsam

    Have to say I view banning Jon as a major loss for the site. Even as someone who like’s Robert’s writing (a lot!) I still have to disagree that losing him would be a bigger loss than Jon. Robert contributes great things to the blog pretty frequently. That’s fantastic. But Jon did it every day. Now that’s not to say that Jon is in the right here because clearly he isn’t – there’s no call for the ad hominem stuff whatsoever, but he’s not close to being the worst offender (and everyone who reads the site on a day to day basis knows it), just the offender who happens to go after the writers. In my opinion there is only one conclusion to be drawn from the fact that he’s banned while THCJ is allowed to continue to spew vitriol nearly every time he engages in a discussion with someone. Which is that this really has nothing to do with ad hominem attacks and everything to do with one guy criticizing the writing while another guy says its the best on the internet.

    Jon, if you’re reading this I hope you decide to apologize. You’re smart enough to realize that some of your comments really were unnecessary, and regardless of whether the treatment was fair or not there’s no reason for anyone to stoop to those levels. Plus I hope you do it for all of our sakes.

    Robert Silverman:

    To clarify — I’m not looking to be ‘protected’ or apologized to by anyone. This isn’t about me or any of the other writers. This is about trying to provide the best forum to talk about basketball. That’s why we’re all here.

    It seems the forum is essentially unanimous that this decision was a step in the wrong direction in terms of providing the best forum to talk about basketball. If this is truly the goal I think you should reconsider the decision, apology or not.

  83. BigBlueAL

    Jim Cavan: Yeah, we just all do them independently for the most part — usually a pretty tight deadline. A lot of times you end up with homogeneous consensus, but sometimes it makes for a pretty fascinating cross-section of perspectives.

    Really, though, they’re meant to spark comments and controversy. Which they do, of course.

    These 5-on-5 debates are fun to read. Always read them when I see a new one has been added.

  84. custer

    DRed:
    2. Who’s the most underrated power forward in the NBA?

    Levy: LeBron James.

    Yeah, no shit.You just said Kevin Love was better than him.

    Yeah that was the oddest one for me–don’t see how you can acknowledge LeBron as a PF without having him number 1.

  85. flossy

    DRed: If you’re going to complain about the lack of civility here, try being more polite yourself.

    Fair enough; I’m no saint. I’m not particularly phased by the personal insults, though they don’t exactly elevate the discourse. But I certainly don’t shed a tear for Jowles when people go after him–he’s usually earned it and then some.

  86. Jim Cavan

    custer: Yeah that was the oddest one for me–don’t see how you can acknowledge LeBron as a PF without having him number 1.

    I think Ian was talking more about the concept of LeBron at the 4 being underrated. He definitely doesn’t somehow believe Kevin Love is better than LeBron James. His whole thing is: in ten years, will we even be using these PG / SG / SF / PF / C designations?

  87. Spree8nyk8

    I’m pretty sure that Abbey hates me and doesn’t give two shits about anything I ever say.

    That being said I still think he’s one of the best posters here and he should remain part of the site. He’s a great contributor here and I have actually learned a few things from the things he writes.

    THCJ is a dick too, and everyone including him knows it. But he does contribute well to the site most of the time and I wouldn’t wanna see him banned either.

  88. thenamestsam

    DRed: Sure, I generally agree with that.But to me is the same thing as saying Dave Berri’s stats are the dumbest thing ever and anyone who thinks they have merit is a joke.That may be true, but it’s not a convincing argument.

    In his absence I’ll take up one of Jon’s hobby horses. Many people, many times have posted incredibly detailed takedowns of Berri. Thousands and thousands of words have been spilled on the topic. The fact is that the nature of the way the site is set up means that those are all lost to history within days of their posting. So sometimes “Dave Berri’s stats are the dumbest thing ever” basically has to be used as a shortcut because really nobody (not even any of us who spend hours a week yacking about the Knicks on this site) has time to type up a new 500 words about how dumb Berri is every day. Maybe having permanent threads on different topics isn’t the answer, but perhaps there could be a way to favorite comments or sticky certain ones or something. Because a lot of good stuff on topics that get discussed anew every few days is basically impossible to find in the current system.

  89. SeeWhyDee77

    Mike Kurylo: A TS% of 43.5 and a PER of 7.5? Quite honestly if you went to any court in the city and dragged the best PG to MSG, they’d probably put up comparable numbers in the NBA.

    Yea..he had a horrible beginning. Probably shouldn’t have been drafted as high as he was, but he can at least play some D and knock down open shots right? Maybe the fact he’s still young and had 1st round pedigree and he grew a lot at Duke is swaying my opinion. But we should at least kick the tires and give him a training camp invite don’t u think?

  90. custer

    Jim Cavan: Yeah, we just all do them independently for the most part — usually a pretty tight deadline. A lot of times you end up with homogeneous consensus, but sometimes it makes for a pretty fascinating cross-section of perspectives.

    Really, though, they’re meant to spark comments and controversy. Which they do, of course.

    I assumed as much, but I wish there was some thoughtful discourse on ESPN (Skip Bayless and SAS sure ain’t supplying it). A ton of smart guys/gals there–would be interesting to see what would come of an actual discussion amongst the writers.

  91. Jim Cavan

    custer: I assumed as much, but I wish there was some thoughtful discourse on ESPN (Skip Bayless and SAS sure ain’t supplying it). A ton of smart guys/gals there–would be interesting to see what would come of an actual discussion amongst the writers.

    Totally agree with you. Every now and again one of the LA / NY / BOS sites will have more in-depth roundtable discussions with various other sites or bloggers, but it’s certainly not the standard. I wish it were so.

  92. Robert Silverman

    Z: Yeah. Mike all but admitted it is a personal thing.

    Mike wrote: “This site can survive without a great commenter like Jon Abbey much more than it can without a great writer like Robert Silverman. I chose the path of what I felt was right, but even if I didn’t the choice I made is best for KnickerBlogger.”

    Sounds like somebody said “either he goes or I go”.

    But Robert has been retaliating: he’s been deleting Jon’s posts. Which is fine. But I don’t see why the 98% of jon’s posts that aren’t attacks on Robert’s writing style need to be eliminated too.

    Jon is a brat, and he doesn’t filter his opinions, which is annoying to a lot of people. I get it. But it is ridiculously inconsistent to ban him for it.

    And, it does appear that this “feud” has been going on since Robert’s first piece. ( http://knickerblogger.net/an-open-letter-to-lebron-james/ )… A piece that jon called: “the worst piece I ever recall reading on Knickerblogger, really silly/ignorant.”

    To which Robert responded: “Geez Jon, don’t hold back. How do you really feel?”

    And now he’s been banned for it.

    1. It’s not personal

    2. No one at Knickerblogger said “He goes or I go.”

    3. We were fine w/99 percent of jon’s posts. It’s jon who was unwilling to modify the 1 percent. I was not ‘retaliating’. It says very clearly that insults directed at other posters or writers aren’t allowed. That’s why they were deleted, as I’ve said repeatedly.

    4. It’s not a feud. I could care less why jon abbey thinks, as my jokey response shows.

  93. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    thenamestsam: So sometimes “Dave Berri’s stats are the dumbest thing ever” basically has to be used as a shortcut because really nobody (not even any of us who spend hours a week yacking about the Knicks on this site) has time to type up a new 500 words about how dumb Berri is every day.

    Most of the anti-Berri stuff on this site takes the form of “[player X] has a higher WP48 than [player Y]; this stat is a joke.”

    If you want to talk about the shortcomings of WP48, be my guest. I have no personal love for or vested interest in the oft-maligned box score (although I bet he’s a pretty nice dude IRL). But to dismiss the stat based on silly comparisons of perceived player value — that’s what I can’t stand on this site.

    Note that Synergy has the same kind of precision issues that box scores do (something like 30% of player rating is based on “team” plays like transition defense and the like) yet their numbers are thrown around like gospel. There is no fair discussion of Berri on this site because people like taking the outliers (like that Ben Wallace could be one of the greatest centers of all-time, Rodman one of the greatest players ever) and trying to show that the stat is flawed, even though the top 10 players in WP from 2012-13 are pretty much unanimously the first two All-NBA teams.

  94. iserp

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: Most of the anti-Berri stuff on this site takes the form of “[player X] has a higher WP48 than [player Y]; this stat is a joke.”

    I think lots of people have taken time to take down axioms Berri takes for granted, like usage and efficiency are not correlated.

    And although outliers is not the best way to disprove something, wins produced systematically produces outliers that go in the very top of their statistic. It is not that it messes some average players, and values them in the wrong order. It is that certain role players in great situations are valued like superstars every year.

    Anyway, this is not a the thread to start discussing all that, again. But since we are talking about politeness in discussions, you are dismissing -as usual- all the other posters effort to discuss about WP48 in a condescending way, and that feels bad with many of us here.

  95. BigBlueAL

    dtrickey:
    Sooooooo……how bout that 2013-2014 schedule. Pretty wild stuff.

    Someone mentioned a Larry Bird quote about the NBA schedule when he was a player (dont know if its true or not) which went something like “41 games at home, 41 on the road. Looks right to me.”

  96. BigBlueAL

    Ben Wallace was a very good player because of how great he was on defense and on the boards. But sorry no player who averaged 7 pts per 36 minutes with a .474 TS% is one of the greatest at his position.

  97. dtrickey

    Might be bucking the trend here a little, but word on the twittersphere is that we are front runners for signing Udrih. I don’t think it’s a lock but apparently we are high (if not on top)on his list despite the vet-min we can offer.

    Also tweets are swirling around that we are looking at Louis Amundson. His stats aren’t overly impressive, but as a spark off the bench I think he would be a nice addition. Plays with a lot of heart and agression.

    If we could land Udrih and Amundson I think that would nicely round out our off-season.

  98. BigBlueAL

    Best part was Berman’s 2nd tweet about Udrih today:

    “Udrih would be a very good signing, too, because Bargnani is known to only hang out with Europeans/foreign players.”

  99. mokers

    dtrickey:
    Might be bucking the trend here a little, but word on the twittersphere is that we are front runners for signing Udrih. I don’t think it’s a lock but apparently we are high (if not on top)on his list despite the vet-min we can offer.

    Also tweets are swirling around that we are looking at Louis Amundson. His stats aren’t overly impressive, but as a spark off the bench I think he would be a nice addition. Plays with a lot of heart and agression.

    If we could land Udrih and Amundson I think that would nicely round out our off-season.

    Would still prefer somebody who is more of a traditional center if Chandler needs a rest, but I guess Martin/Amundson/Tyler could do the job. However, he does get lots of rebounds, so he might be a way to augment a lineup that has Bargnani at the 5. Not a bad review:

    http://www.bourbonstreetshots.com/2013/04/26/season-in-review-lou-amundson/

  100. AvonBarksdale

    Holy shit, this was not the 100 comments i was expecting. I was really enjoying this post and now i’m kinda bummed..I didn’t like the pervasive negativity on the site and am totally against bashing the writers or writing even though i admittedly expressed some tepid displeasure with one article but it was more an attempt to be constructive and also to reiterate how “phenomenal” the other writers posts were and how amazing the writing on here usually is. I can go anywhere else for trolls and flamers and bullshit this is a place where the writing is the main attraction..no matter how many stats comments the commenters posts i really appreciate the articles…in spite of all that i’m not a fan of the ban but after a hard days work to pour your energy into this site for free and have someone bash i def. support whatever decisions are made. writing is hard it takes a toll here is a link to my blog, if it makes any one of you writers laugh then i’ve repaid .00001% of the enjoyment this site has blessed me with for like 2-3 years. hopefully jon sucks it up and comes back without further issue. http://thenoisebleed.com/2011/12/14/dmx-arrested-for-impersonating-a-waiter/

  101. danvt

    flossy: I don’t care about baseball in the slightest so I don’t have anything to add about that, but (not to speak for danvt), I think it’s pretty clear that the general tone of “you shouldn’t be offended that your beliefs about [whatever] are wrong” is the heart of the problem.

    Thanks Flossy!

  102. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    Dude, I’m saying that in earnest. You should not be offended when you are objectively wrong.

  103. danvt

    DRed: If you’re going to sneer at all stats based analysis, you (politely) are on the wrong blog.

    I don’t sneer at stats based analysis. I’m very respectful of people who also are respectful themselves (and people who aren’t, mostly too). But you are right, I think I am on the wrong blog. I’ve spent too many hours here going back and forth on this irrelevant bullshit. I either get crickets or people like you who twist my thoughts. It’s time for me to go.

  104. Brian Cronin

    I am totally down with Udrih. It’s a third string point guard, after all.

    By the way, I love how money soooo talks in the NBA. Mo Williams went to Portland to be a second point guard just because they offered $2 million more than actual good teams where he could win a title.

  105. flossy

    Brian Cronin:
    I am totally down with Udrih. It’s a third string point guard, after all.

    By the way, I love how money soooo talks in the NBA. Mo Williams went to Portland to be a second point guard just because they offered $2 million more than actual good teams where he could win a title.

    I thought for sure Mo Williams was going to hitch another ride on the LeBron train. Makes me pessimistic about Udrih–there’s got to be SOME team out there willing to offer more than the minimum, right? I know the CBA screws mid-tier veterans the most, but you’d be hard-pressed to say he’s much worse than Felton overall, who is himself signed to a pretty competitive deal.

  106. llcoolbp

    I haven’t posted since the end of the season. Obviously, I’m not as active a poster as some of you. I only starting posting here 3 years ago. I felt the need to come out of the wood works to defend Jon abbey. When I first started posting I think he got smarmy and sarcastic with me a couple of times. Eventually I realized that was just his style and humor. Being a non stats guy, I will greatly miss what he brought to the table here. I really hope he comes back into the fold. Can’t we all just get along.

  107. dtrickey

    flossy: I thought for sure Mo Williams was going to hitch another ride on the LeBron train.Makes me pessimistic about Udrih–there’s got to be SOME team out there willing to offer more than the minimum, right?I know the CBA screws mid-tier veterans the most, but you’d be hard-pressed to say he’s much worse than Felton overall, who is himself signed to a pretty competitive deal.

    Portland came out of left field for me as well for Williams. Miami was my thought for him due to the LBJ factor and the possibility of a ring.

    I might be going out on a limb here, but it could be a perception thing with Udrih as to why he might have to settle for less. His numbers are respectable, however he hasn’t played on a good team in about 5 or 6 years, as such his production goes somewhat unnoticed (e.g. in Orlando last season as a backup, don’t quote me on his numbers though). My perception is that GM’s tend to poach impact players from successful teams (e.g. Cope this year) as their impact is more notacable in terms of the W-L column. Udrih’s impact in Orlando is probably undervalued because the team just did not win with him (not that he is the sole reason as to why they were average last season).

    Like I said I might be grasping at straws with that one, but just a thought.

  108. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    dtrickey: My perception is that GM’s tend to poach impact players from successful teams (e.g. Cope this year) as their impact is more notacable in terms of the W-L column.

    I’m not sure I understand exactly what you’re saying. Are you saying that Copeland’s impact is more noticeable than, say, Anthony Davis’s — because he plays for a good team?

  109. dtrickey

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: I’m not sure I understand exactly what you’re saying. Are you saying that Copeland’s impact is more noticeable than, say, Anthony Davis’s — because he plays for a good team?

    No not quiet. Like I said I’m kind of clutching at straws. My point was more so refering to role players rather than starters. Starters who produce seem to get paid regardless of how many games they win (see John Wall).

    My point is would Copeland have been as sought after if he had identical numbers playing for the Bobcats? In my mind probably not as they were an after thought due to there record. I think the same could be said for a guy like Udrih. Played well in the limited role he had, but was probably low on the FA pecking order despite potentially being better value than some of the guys snapped up before him. I do realise that GM’s probably aren’t as short sighted (although that’s potentially debatable too) as that and there are numerous factors to consider with FA’s, but I think it’s something that may have hurt his value.

  110. thenamestsam

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: Most of the anti-Berri stuff on this site takes the form of “[player X] has a higher WP48 than [player Y]; this stat is a joke.”

    Note that Synergy has the same kind of precision issues that box scores do (something like 30% of player rating is based on “team” plays like transition defense and the like) yet their numbers are thrown around like gospel. There is no fair discussion of Berri on this site because people like taking the outliers (like that Ben Wallace could be one of the greatest centers of all-time, Rodman one of the greatest players ever) and trying to show that the stat is flawed, even though the top 10 players in WP from 2012-13 are pretty much unanimously the first two All-NBA teams.

    iserp answered this point well but I’ll follow up. Anyone who does any modeling for real will tell you that the very first thing you do when you construct the model is smell test it. Which is something you intrinsically understand because that’s exactly what pointing out something like ‘the top 10 players in WP are basically the best players’ (paraphrased obviously) is. It’s smell testing. But it’s cherry picked smell testing because what all of the absurd examples people bring up (like Brewer>Carmelo) are meant to show is that the model fails the smell test. It may pass the smell test on the top 10 guys in some years, but it dramatically fails overall. That’s a model to take back to the drawing board. It’s not a comprehensive takedown (which have also been posted), but it is a significant one.

    Also I also certainly have no love for synergy either. It’s every bit as flawed (certainly from an overall valuation standpoint). If you spent half the energy you spend backing up Berri on pointing out the flaws in synergy you’d be a much more valuable poster on this board in my opinion.

  111. thenamestsam

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: even though the top 10 players in WP from 2012-13 are pretty much unanimously the first two All-NBA teams.

    Also worth highlighting that this is a very interesting point for you to be making after you called me “the worst” poster on the board (later softened to 2nd worst after Ruru) specifically for daring to reference consensus views and all-NBA teams in a defense of Russell Westbrook. I wouldn’t think that WP matching up with all-NBA teams would hold ANY value in your book. Apparently I got it twisted somehow.

  112. Hubert

    Bradford Doolittle projected Melo to be the 10th best power forward next year. Link is insider only and I understand KB’s aversion to posting their for-pay material so I won’t. But I will say that after he trashes Melo for not rebounding or playing defense, he ends with this jewel:

    “Anthony does, without a doubt, score a lot of points. Make of that what you will.”

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9517977/nba-projecting-top-10-point-guards-warp-2013-14

    That has to be the point when NBA writers became so fucking smug that they surpassed the San Francisco intellectuals on South Park who loved the smell of their own farts:

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/104282/smuggy-san-francisco-town

  113. hotdamn

    I haven’t posted in years…but banning someone for criticizing the writing? That’s very “un-New York” of this site. Extremely thin skinned.

    It’s the internet. The realm of anonymous swipes, banter and verbal warfare. Unless he used some hate speech ala Cooper of the Eagles, I can’t see how banning Abbey doesn’t come off as un-American.

    This IS a private blog, attended to by what I feel is a solid staff of Knicks die-hards — but a little dissent never hurt anyone. Even if it’s a troubling trend of dissing the writers, why not either ignore the comments and move on with your day like most professionals do. Clearly this site is popular. I’ve been a loyal reader from the days Isiah lurked the sidelines — so I offer this rare opinion.

    The power to ban is yours, but squashing dissent is something usually reserved for dictators.

  114. The Honorable Cock Jowles

    thenamestsam: It’s not a comprehensive takedown (which have also been posted), but it is a significant one.

    Any scientist or mathematician who dismisses a model because it disagrees with his hypothesis is a bad scientist or mathematician. This attitude just makes no sense.

    1) conceive hypothesis
    2) collect data
    3) analyze trends in data
    4) draw conclusions
    5) conclusions match hypothesis? good, we’re done
    5b) conclusions do not match hypothesis? analysis wrong, hypothesis right

    This is bad science.

  115. JK47

    The power to ban is yours, but squashing dissent is something usually reserved for dictators.

    Yeah, no.

    Look, I have no beef with jon abbey, and like most of us I’m a little surprised that he’s banned. But this isn’t about “squashing dissent,” this is about thread hijacking. Abbey doesn’t like the quality of the writing, fine. He had many opportunities to express that view. But some of those threads turned into abbey making negative comments (sometimes with ad hominem attacks), getting warned, then posting again how his comment had been deleted and how The Man is holding him down and Knickerblogger is like an Iron Curtain and all of this bullshit. Don’t nobody wanna read that.

    He could have very simply just stopped attacking the writers, or better yet, STOPPED READING THE ARTICLES. Hell, I almost never read the articles on this site… I’m here for the comments. But no, he just couldn’t bear the indignity of tolerating the stylings of Robert or whatever writer he didn’t like without unleashing a torrent of snarkitude in their direction. Is it really THAT important to him, that vital to his existence, to insult the same people over and over and over again?

    That said, I hope he comes back.

  116. llcoolbp

    hotdamn:
    I haven’t posted in years…but banning someone for criticizing the writing? That’s very “un-New York” of this site. Extremely thin skinned.

    It’s the internet. The realm of anonymous swipes, banter and verbal warfare. Unless he used some hate speech ala Cooper of the Eagles, I can’t see how banning Abbey doesn’t come off as un-American.

    This IS a private blog, attended to by what I feel is a solid staff of Knicks die-hards — but a little dissent never hurt anyone. Even if it’s a troubling trend of dissing the writers, why not either ignore the comments and move on with your day like most professionals do. Clearly this site is popular. I’ve been a loyal reader from the days Isiah lurked the sidelines — so I offer this rare opinion.

    The power to ban is yours, but squashing dissent is something usually reserved for dictators.

    +1

    Well stated!

  117. JK47

    Yeah, Synergy is some bullshit. I am VERY skeptical about Synergy numbers, because they seem to involve an awful lot of subjectivity.

    It was like it was invented just so ruruland could twist it around to make whichever player he wants to be awesome seem awesome.

    Okay, ruru, I’m going to tell you now that I’m just ribbing you a bit. No need for a 1,999 word reply.

  118. nicos

    I’m skeptical of Synergy’s defensive numbers other than iso and maybe post numbers- almost every play involves help defense somewhere along the way. I do think the offensive numbers are very useful- there’s not much subjectivity involved- it’s just charting shots. Maybe you have some instances like say Amar’e catching the ball 15 feet out with his back to the basket and turning and facing up- is that a post up or an iso play? But for the most part it seems really straight forward. Ignoring the offensive numbers because the transition defense numbers are sketchy seems crazy to me.

  119. nyk8806

    Abbey is a self-confessed misanthrope. He obviously has social issues, so it’s not surprising that he wasn’t able to conform to convention here either. I feel bad for the guy because most likely he just can’t help himself, and I agree that his commentary will be missed for the most part, but such is life–you gotta play by the rules. No free pass just because you’re “special.” This isn’t censorship. Knickerblogger remains a vibrant community–people come and go. The ball keeps spinning.

  120. MJG1789

    I also would like to voice my support for Jon Abbey. Nobody reads this site for the fucking recaps, I skip them as well. It’s the different views of the posters that make this site an interesting read.

  121. thenoblefacehumper

    MJG1789:
    I also would like to voice my support for Jon Abbey. Nobody reads this site for the fucking recaps, I skip them as well. It’s the different views of the posters that make this site an interesting read.

    Let the record show I’m an Abbey supporter as well, but this is NOT true. The recaps are generally very good, and I’m willing to bet that’s the prevailing opinion of most viewers of the site. Again, the problem is the ban hammer should be for people who come here with the sole intention of making it less pleasant for everyone (missing you, Vinny. Just kidding!). Not people who may have a wholly unnecessary mean streak, but contribute a ton to the discussion and community.

  122. ephus

    Three points:

    1. By all that is holy, no Chris Duhon please. If he was a halfway effective backup PG, Orlando gets out of the first round in the 2012 playoffs.

    2. I have a 45 win bet with THCJ for this season. Loser must limit comments in the first round playoff recaps to “+1″ of the winners comments. Great reason to care about the outcome of late January games.

    3. In the words of Abraham Lincoln (Bill & Ted’s version), “Be excellent to each other.”

  123. iserp

    The Honorable Cock Jowles: Any scientist or mathematician who dismisses a model because it disagrees with his hypothesis is a bad scientist or mathematician. This attitude just makes no sense.

    1) conceive hypothesis
    2) collect data
    3) analyze trends in data
    4) draw conclusions
    5) conclusions match hypothesis? good, we’re done
    5b) conclusions do not match hypothesis? analysis wrong, hypothesis right

    This is bad science.

    I don’t want to hijack the thread, but well, that’s the problem with WP48, it is not scientific in any way. Its proponents lack criticism, and don’t do any test. The only test they do is against W-L record at the end of the year, and they don’t even beat some writers that predict based on “eye test” (there are hundreds of writers that do predictions, so you can expect some of them beating WP48 by pure randomness, but some of them beat WP48 year to year). But even if WP48 matched well W-L for teams, it is an underconstrained system, 29 data points for over 150 players. You have a continous of different solutions to make that work, and most of them will be wrong. It is Brewer > Melo wrong? most likely, and until WP48 does some effort to constrain more the system, you have to take it with a grain of salt.

    OTOH, “eye test”, PPG, PER, and other metrics, as bad as they are, have tried to make more tests on the individual level, and care writing about it. They look at what happens when i substitute X player with Y player, with different levels of accuracy. So, when they say that Melo > Brewer, it is more credible for me that what WP48 has to say. I don’t think Melo > Brewer is an absolute statement, but it is the best we’ve got. I often have lauded Hollinger to know the limitations of PER and use it accordingly, and usually, he is one of the best predicting W-L of teams. I think Berri should act in the same…

  124. iserp

    I want to repeat for emphasis:

    Even if WP48 matched well W-L for teams, it is an underconstrained system, 29 data points for over 150 players.

  125. David Taggart

    My worthless two peneth…
    This site was at its best when the focus was more statistical. I for one love the writing on here. For amateurs, however well educated, the quality and the time dedicated to their craft should be commended. It is understandable that with such a commitment their is inevitably a slightly defensive stance. Let me just say that some of the post game recaps have physically made me laugh and the freedom afforded to the writers by the blogosphere rather than paid journalism is a positive thing.
    As for Jon Abbey, he was an antagonist and it is really up to the moderators and creators of this great blog to do as they wish. However if he has to go then so does THCJ. His vitriolic criticism and petulance really undermine the blog and are one of the reasons I read less and less. The others being, of is the offseason and I really should dedicate my time to something more constructive than chewing the fat! I came here to humbly to learn and have learnt from him also but his contributions have become less and less constructive and informative because of their lack of respect for others. So often have his posts have crossed the line of trolling.
    It is incredibly arrogant to believe that your own opinion is more valid or correct than almost anyone else especially those who have spent a lifetime evaluating NBA talent. The eye test is extremely unreliable and I don’t want to get into a debate about that but there are variables current statistical assimilation, that is available to the wider public, just cannot account for. It is clear to me that current stat centric front offices are using far more advanced analysis than we are aware of and egotistical criticism of their actions because plan A1 could not be executed is a little tiresome. THCJ please just be more humble and considerate. I for one, given the restrictions and remit he has had thrust upon him, think that glen Grunewald has done a great job. My non extreme opinion.

  126. rrude

    I don’t post often but do read. Generally, anything I say on the internet I hold to the standard of whether or not I would say it to someone’s face. The power of this standard isn’t just whether or not some hyperbolic/disrespectful thing one says might lead to blows in a face to face conversation. A reason we are more inhibited in real life as opposed to when we hide behind computer screens is empathy. I feel like it’s all to easy to insult someone from your armchair, but if you are sitting around a table with someone, you put yourself in their place and think twice about having a go at them.

    If the issue is ‘saying what you really think’…well, for some of you that’s just sad. But I challenge this anyway. The thoughts in your head aren’t necessarily what you really think. It’s bouncing them off other people that helps you revise and refine your thinking. For those who are capable of self-criticism. Again, just because you think it at home doesn’t mean you’d repeat in the marketplace. And hopefully not because you are a sociopath who’s god at wearing masks.

    I read some of the articles. I read some of the posters. I tend to ignore the one-note, narcissicists in favor of those who speak with more of a fan’s voice. I can relate to that. But that’s the point, we are all free to read or not read, respond or not respond. Responding to certain posters just encourages more of their bad behavior. If I don’t get much from an article, I shrug and move on.

    At the end of the day, a site like this, sports in general, are supposed to be fun. If you are here for another reason, or if your idea of fun is abusing others, you should consider moving on.

  127. Hubert

    Mike Kurylo:
    Here’s a good example:

    http://knickerblogger.net/insert-clever-title-here/#comment-444016

    Robert didn’t even write that article! That’s going out of your way to attack another person. It’s mean spirited and intentionally hateful. The only reason to post that is to goad them into a verbal internet fight. That’s the definition of trolling.

    I always considered the fact that you let readers take harmless (or so I thought) jibes at you like that to be a strength of the site. From a reader’s perspective, which I hope you will consider, you’ve let some less experienced writers come in this year and they haven’t always been great. And sometimes they exacerbate the problem by being belligerent in the comments section. (A good example is here: http://knickerblogger.net/has-the-win-now-window-already-closed/). It has been frustrating and I get that it’s free and we can go elsewhere but you should understand there is disappointment in any consumer (and despite not paying $ we spend our time here) when they expect a higher level and get a lower one. Sometimes Jon expressed that bluntly and without tact, but many times he was speaking for a lot of us. I appreciated the fact that KB allowed that criticism and I was disappointed to learn today that you considered it personal attacks and banned a poster over it.

    Just my $0.02. I hope you will reconsider your position. I feel like it serves the writers at the expense of the readers. The truth is, you DO allow personal attacks on this blog, you’re just drawing the line under Rob & the new writers.

  128. Hubert

    Nick C.: IIRC Jon referenced being an editor at one time at Time magazine so perhaps there was more he could have offered them than the internet version of a hurled whiskey bottle and a slammed door.

    A hurled whiskey bottle and a slammed door is often the best thing for a young professional in any field.

  129. Jim Cavan

    Hubert: I always considered the fact that you let readers take harmless (or so I thought) jibes at you like that to be a strength of the site. From a reader’s perspective, which I hope you will consider, you’ve let some less experienced writers come in this year and they haven’t always been great.

    This is the last thing I will say about this, but there’s a difference between bashing Robert and me — two guys in their 30s — and taking some 18 or 19 year old kid to the woodshed. Abbey consistently did both. Now, I don’t KNOW whether Abbey knew that Vertsberger was 18 or not, but even if he didn’t and he suddenly became privy to that fact, it wouldn’t have mattered. He would’ve talked the same shit.

    Certain writers entail certain costs and benefits. With younger ones, you’re dealing with inexperience, but you also get guys with some time on their hands — and David has used that time to bust his ass churning out content. With “older” guys — guys with families and jobs — the quality might be more consistent, but they often don’t have the endless hours to churn out foolproof, well-researched pieces.

    If Abbey — or the others that agree with him — truly think that the posts are worthless, that the comments are the site’s bread and butter, and no one pays attention to anything else, then…. why say anything at all? Why hurl insults if you’re convinced that the content is shit and everyone is just ignoring anyway? There’s a serious disconnect here. If you care enough to go out of your way to bash the writers, clearly you’re doing it for a reason beyond strengthening the comments section. You’re making it personal. And that’s bullshit.

    If you’re coming for the comments and the comments only, great. If you’re coming for the posts and recaps only, great. If you’re coming for both, even better. But telling people to NOT read the content?…

  130. Jim Cavan

    That’s bullshit. I think it’s great that Mike is giving young writers a chance to hone their craft on a well-respected blog. Now, there are obviously caveats attendant to having that opportunity: 1) You will be criticized; and 2) You have to put in the work. David — and others — have absolutely put in the work, and speaking as someone who’s edited his stuff, he’s getting better every day. That doesn’t mean he should be immune to criticism; by all means, tell him where he’s wrong, where he needs to improve, etc. That’s totally fine. But getting personal, calling it “terrible,” “worthless,” or whatever — that’s crossing a line. It’s petty. It’s pathetic. And it has no place here. We’re not Bleacher Report, or ESPN. Just because you’re free to speak your mind doesn’t mean there are never consequences for that speech.

    That’s all I got. Hopefully it makes some semblance of sense.

Comments are closed.