Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Thursday, July 31, 2014

What They’re Saying About the Knicks 11/08/05

The NY Sun’s John Hollinger:

First, Trevor Ariza has to replace Matt Barnes as the starting small forward.While Barnes is a better on-ball defender, he is just killing them offensively by shooting 40% and averaging a meager 6.7 points per game. Opponents don’t even bother guarding him, because he’s so ineffective from outside, and he lacks Ariza’s energy around the rim. Besides, Ariza is no defensive slouch; he’s averaging over two steals a game. (Barnes does, however, hold an unequivocal advantage in hairgel consumption. His ‘do has more lard than the fry station at Wendy’s.)

The NY Daily News’ Frank Isola:

“If you look at every team, the guys that play are going to be happy and the guys that don’t play are going to be unhappy,” Brown said. “There’s an excuse jar that I’ve had for my whole life: ‘I don’t know what my role is.’ ‘Just let me play my game.’ I got 100 of those things.

“The bottom line is we don’t have a rotation, we don’t know who can play. So it’s going to take time. Eventually we’re going to have an eight- or nine-man rotation and we’ll probably have nine happy guys and five that are unhappy.”

Father Knickerbocker:

The Portland TrailBlazers have been linked to the Knicks recently for various reasons. There?s the trade rumors that sometimes pop up with the names Darius Miles and Ruben Patterson and then there?s also the family factor with Stephon Marbury and younger cousin Sebastian Telfair.

Knicksonline

Crawford & Ariza need to start, according to (82games). Our team is better when they are on the floor. Funny how the youth, if given more time- with n8, JC, ariza, frye and Mo are ridiculously better than the starters.

And a first, a message board poster admitting he was wrong:

Admitting I was wrong about Channing Frye

Well I knocked the drafting of Channing at 8 with superior talents (IMO) like G. Green and D. Granger left on the board, I thought that Channing had not proven his worth in college, and that he was too soft. I know it’s early but he has already shown nme some things I was never sure he would. He isn’t half as soft as he was in college, he has some post moves, and as we all knew he could hit the mid range J all day. He attacks the boards much harder than I thoguht he did. He is a ocmpletely different player than the one that sutied up for the University of Arizona last year, that Frye didn’t want to dominate..this Frye does. I was wrong, Isiah was right. If anyone else watched him in college tell me if you’ve noted the same aggressiveness/body language/attitude changes. He’s always had the talent..he’s just seemed a bit too tentaive.

And I saved the best for last, Real GM’s Christopher Reina:

Starting Jamal Crawford in his stead will give real responsibility to a talented player that could use it and would surely cherish it. The bode of confidence would spark his play that needs a spark as he has become the lost man during the initial LB days.

The most important reason to bring Marbury off the bench is that it would make him a Ben Gordon super-sub and resuscitate his career from the brink.

7 comments on “What They’re Saying About the Knicks 11/08/05

  1. James

    Hollinger: Barnes’ shooting was awful last year, but (I say) it was arguably pretty good in the preseason. He hasn’t really taken a lot of shots this year so I’d say using his stats (especially after 3 games) is a little dubious. That said, if he keeps up his current shooting form then maybe a move to the bench is worth it. If you want upgraded scoring though, I can’t say Ariza’s outside shot is much better, I think a Marbs-Craw-Q starting lineup would be the alternative. But lets give Barnes more time.

    Knicksonline: again, using stats after 3 games?

    Frye has surpassed my hopes too.

    I think the Knicks should go after Earl Watson. I don’t know how this gets done – can’t see them eating Rose, and we can’t take back extras without waiving them. Watson lead the league in Defensive PER last year I believe?

  2. dave

    I watched a TON of Channing Frye in college. I’d say I saw 40-50% of his college games that were televised. Honestly, if you saw Frye this past season at Arizona you shouldn’t be surprised. Sometimes the “book” on a kid is a year-and-a-half to two years behind. Frye couldn’t knock the “soft” tag he picked up as freshman and sophomore when he looked like former T-Wolf Ndudi Ebi.

    By his junior year everytime he was matched up against a guy who was supposed to dominate him physically it never seemed to happen. Whether it was Gadzuric, Bogut, or Lawrence Roberts (remember how people used to drool at the mouth over that guy?) Frye tended to get his numbers. Arizona routinely plays one of the toughest college schedules in the country every season. I kept asking people, “who dominated Channing Frye?” and could never get a straight answer. Much of this is people’s general impatience with big men, who typically take longer to develop. (I bet Orlando wishes they’d have waited on Brendan Haywood.)

    I thought the best line on Frye came from a scout just prior to the draft. It was something like, “this kid’s never going to dominate physically, but nobody’s lining up to pick a fight with him either.” My contention has always been that what you’re getting in Frye is a more athletic version of Micheal Doleac, who’ll block the occasional shot.

  3. James

    Since people seem to be using premature stats to criticise or comment on the Knicks I thought I’d try out some.

    The Knicks (cf. last year’s Knicks) all allowing opponents to shoot 42%.

    They’re outrebounding opponents 50-44, a differential of 6. Now, before anyone screams that that’s only because of their ugly 39% shooting, they are equal 5th in defensive rebounding. Their offensive rebounding is 5 boards higher than the league average (17 vs 12), so even removing the bonus offensive boards, the Knicks are at least rebounding on a par with their opponents.

    To me it seems like the Knicks are learning a new system, but they have a solid baseline of playing pretty decent defense. Once they figure out the offense they’ll be ok. Their low assist numbers (27th, 3 assists below league average) attest to this, as do their high TO and high opp steals numbers.

    I would say that these stats suggest that the Knicks will be ok, and that we’re going through the Larry Brown teething period that everyone predicted but the NY media has conveniently found non-newsworthy.

  4. Ricky

    As usual, Hollinger’s article is solid and bastly more articulate version of the point I tried to make on The Washington thread.

    That’s why he gets paid to write about this stuff and I also get paid to write about this stuff–just don’t tell my employer.

  5. Jim K

    Marbury off the bench? A career on the brink? The guy was the only professional on the team last year,and put up terrific stats; Crawford may be “talented,” but his numbers have never been adequate for a starter. Start him if you must, but have Q-Rich come off the bench in that case; I don’t understand Brown at all when it comes to Marbury; perhaps he is too me-first for a trad point guard, but he got a mess of assists last year; Brown isn’t replacing him with a real point guard, he’s using the incompetent Crawford and super-undisciplined Robinson in Marbury’s stead, and it’s ridiculous. Marbury stands around while they make poor decisions. He may be selfish (on a lousy team, who can blame him), but he often makes good decisions, which do indeed involve him attempting to score on his own. Unlike Crawford, he often succeeds in his attempts. In the Warriors game, I saw him go to the basket on the right twice in the 3rd quarter, get a basket both times, and a foul once. He NEVER attempted the move again, despite the Warriors not showing they could stop it; he did some of his weak left-side stuff, and stood around while Crawford tried to run the team. Again, Brown has only succeeded in screwing up Marbury’s game, which was by far the most complete on the team.

  6. Matt

    From watching this team through out the first four games, it seems that the main problem is that the veterans are playing attentively offensively. Marbury, Crawford, Richardson, are all used to attacking the rim at will, and with Larry Brown, he has pulled the reigns on these guys. I think that is a big reason why the young guys have been the only bright spot this year. They are fresh out of college, and therefore are used to playing a controlled style of play, and since Brown is their first NBA coach, there minds are more malleable, and can easily fit into his system, since it is the only system that they know of. One other positive about this team is that the defense has improved, so you have to think that eventually when the players become comfortable in Brown’s system, the offense will improve as well. I also think that rebounding will be a continuing struggle throughout the year, and because of that, Curry’s minutes could be cut down, considering so far Davis, Frye, and Lee have been monsters off the glass. I also think the more this team struggles, the worse the relationship between Brown and Marbury will get.

Comments are closed.