Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Saturday, October 25, 2014

Why Would Anyone Think Jeremy Tyler Can Save The Knicks?

Hooray the Knicks released Chris Smith to sign Jeremy Tyler! Are you excited?

BnLxY[1]

Big whoop.

Sorry if my level of excitement doesn’t match yours, but what’s the big deal? First off, how many minutes is Tyler going to get under coach Woodson? With Chandler back, there’s 30 minutes at the center spot gone (39:50 under a good night, right Mike?) Given that there are only 48 minutes a game, and that Bargnani, Martin, and Stoudemire will lap up the rest mean there’s not much for our next budding superstar.

Second even if Tyler gets some floor time, what would make anyone think he’s going to be a good player today? In 636 minutes of NBA action, Jeremy has wowwed the league with a 43.9% TS% and a 10.0 PER. Those are numbers that only Chris Smith would be jealous of.

Granted his D-League numbers were better, a 56.7% TS% and 17.0 PER. His PER is a bit misleading, though. The main area of Tyler’s contribution is his scoring, averaging 21.7 pts/36, however this comes at a horrendous turnover rate (5.0 TO/36). That number is so bad, that only 2 players in the 3 point era has ever matched it. Both players were point guards, which mean their turnover rate was partially a result of distributing the ball, unlike Tyler’s whose is a result of really shitty hands.

Chris Wilcox will save your team!

Chris WIlcox 2.0!

As for his peripherals, Tyler’s rebounding is slightly above average (10.9 reb/36) but his blocked shot rate is anemic (0.8 blk/36). So against worse competition Tyler has shot more, at the costly expense of giving the ball away. And besides the chance that he’ll be a good rebounder, his defensive numbers are poor. My guess is Tyler’s best case ceiling is Chris Wilcox.

But let’s discount my first two points to get to the third one. Let’s say that Woodson does find 20-30 minutes for Tyler, and that Jeremy is a scoring machine without the Vaseline hands. In this reality devoid world, how is playing Tyler going to help the Knicks? Is playing him at center going to make the Knicks more productive than when Tyson Chandler is on the floor? Is letting him score going to be better for the team than when Carmelo Anthony is out there? Is what the Knicks need is a scorer that doesn’t do much else? How’s he going to help their 26th ranked defense? Is he going to make a dent in their 21st ranked offense?

[If you've answered yes to any of these questions, you may be suffering from Knickerbocker Derangement Syndrome. Luckily in this new year, health insurance companies can't deny you coverage due to a pre-existing condition.]

So given all that, I just don’t see him as the answer. He’s not a good shot blocker. He’s not good with the ball. I don’t see anything that screams he’s a good defender. He’s not a floor stretcher (0-4 in both leagues from three point land) so you can’t even make that case. But you know, he’s not someone on this already putrid roster, so there’s that.

47 comments on “Why Would Anyone Think Jeremy Tyler Can Save The Knicks?

  1. yellowboy90

    Why would anyone think that anyone would think that Jeremy Tyler would save the Knicks? Is there a lot of talk about Tyler saving the day?

  2. Nick C.

    It’s just putting out info about Tyler. All I had essentially seen was he was 7′ and went to play ball in Europe as a teen. Does he look more like what Mike Woodson thinks a basketball player should look like? If he does then that’s half the battle as far as PT. I think he is already ahead of Aldrich in that respect. Be that as it may, those numbers are underwhelming to say the least.

  3. Frank

    Yeah I don’t think anyone thinks Tyler will save the Knicks, or even make a significant statistical impact. If anything, he might get a few minutes per game which might bring Tyson down from 36+ min/game to 30-32 minutes per game where he belongs.

    And re: looking at his career stats – c’mon now. He’s 22 and has barely played any NBA basketball. He played 568 minutes as a 20 year old after playing in Israel and Japan, and then another 60-odd minutes at age 21. You might be right that he turns into no better than Chris Wilcox, but Wilcox has played in the NBA for 11 seasons averaging 15/9 per 36 in ~12500 minutes and basically a league-average PER and WS/48. An interesting statistic re: Tyler is how in his last 24 D-league games he’s averaged about 4.7 offensive rebounds per 36 – which in the NBA would lead the league by fair amount (Tyson and Zach Randolph led the league last year with about 4.3 OReb/36).

    He still has a ton of development to do. Jermaine O’Neal didn’t even start getting minutes until his age 23 season (ie. after being traded from Portland) and didn’t really start to blossom until the year after that — and that’s with 5 years of NBA coaching. The real question is whether Woody and the Knicks staff have any ability to develop anyone. I guess Copeland counts? Dunno, he was already 28 years old when he came so his game was pretty much set. Shump has obviously gotten worse under Woody.

  4. Totes McGoats

    I’m happy if he can box out and get us a few boards. While Tyson and Melo board well, the team pretty much sucks at Windex- ing. Too many times have STAT and Bargnani been in piss poor position to rebound, and many times Bargnani has just been shoved out of the way. While there’s not a lot of minutes available, if he proves worthy of burn- at the very least he can help out on the glass and help keep STAT-Kmart-Chandler rested. And hopefully they will be fresher come April.

  5. Nick C.

    Does anyone really think Woodson will play him other than in garbage time based on how Woodson has managed rookies and young players to date?

  6. flossy

    Way to knock down that straw man. I haven’t heard or ready anyone who thinks that Jeremy Tyler will really help, much less SAVE, the Knicks.

    That doesn’t mean we aren’t better served by employing Tyler, a 22 year-old, highly-touted prospect who a) plays a position of need and b) has at least demonstrated a few above-average facets of his game in the D-league (scoring, offensive rebounding and rebounding in general) instead of a 26 year-old that no other team would ever consider employing and who has not demonstrated a single NBA-caliber skill whatsoever in Chris Smith. It’s a matter of “some upside” vs. “no upside at all, and a whole lot of bad karma.” So it’s a no-brainer even if you don’t expect him to save anything.

    And as Frank pointed out, it is completely asinine to draw conclusions about a young player, particularly a center, on the basis of the ~600 NBA minutes he racked up across several different teams before turning 22. Clearly, the kid is not a finished product. That doesn’t mean that he’s guaranteed to improve, but it’s just stupid to say “welp he’ll never be more than Chris Wilcox so who cares,” particularly since we could have used a warm body even of Chris Wilcox’s caliber this season to sop up some minutes at the 4/5.

  7. thenamestsam

    The real question is whether Woody and the Knicks staff have any ability to develop anyone.

    This is exactly right. I don’t think anyone but the perpetually optimistic (read: deluded) Knicks fans think that Tyler is going to have any sort of immediate impact. He’s only 22 and because of his unusual path to the pros he may be even rawer than your average 22 year old. He’s one for the future so it’s not surprising that his numbers both in the NBA and in the D-League are uninspiring. He’s undeniably a bit of a project.

    The question is whether we have the right people in place to work on that project and the answer is that it’s hard to tell. Shump has obviously fallen off a cliff, but Woodson and Co. seem to have done a good job with THJ so far. Toure’ hasn’t seemed to make a ton of progress, but he has also just started to see some time, so it’s probably too soon to say. Other than that, they really haven’t had much young talent to work with, either this year or last so their record as developmental coaches is pretty incomplete. If Tyler can keep getting better I think he could help the Knicks in the future, even if he certainly isn’t going to be a savior today or tomorrow.

  8. KnickfaninNJ

    Where are all the posters who were dying to see Cole Aldrich get minutes? Tyler seems to have much more upside than Aldrich and he’s just as big, so it seems a positive to me that the Knicks called him up. If you are curious about his upside, the Times had an interesting article on him.

    Here’s the link

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/sports/basketball/jeremy-tylers-odyssey-continues-with-the-knicks.html

    As foir getting playing time, who knows. I agree it’s not obvious why Woody plays who he plays. But he played Copeland and White last year and Murry and Hardaway are getting minutes this year, so it’s not a given that a rookie won’t play

  9. Mike Kurylo Post author

    He still has a ton of development to do. Jermaine O’Neal didn’t even start getting minutes until his age 23 season (ie. after being traded from Portland) and didn’t really start to blossom until the year after that — and that’s with 5 years of NBA coaching.

    Up until the age of 21, Jermaine O’Neal had double the per-minute blocks, slightly more rebounds, a nearly 50% ts%, less turnovers, a higher PER, etc.

    Jeremy Tyler is no Jermaine O’Neal.

    And I get you’re trying not to make that comparison, but to show there’s room to grow. However a player has to show promise at a young age, and other than being really young, I don’t see where Tyler has potential.

  10. d-mar

    Unless Tyler can play point guard, he won’t have much of an impact.

    Parker vs. Udrih? TKO in the 1st quarter.

  11. Mike Kurylo Post author

    It’s just putting out info about Tyler. All I had essentially seen was he was 7? and went to play ball in Europe as a teen. Does he look more like what Mike Woodson thinks a basketball player should look like? If he does then that’s half the battle as far as PT. I think he is already ahead of Aldrich in that respect. Be that as it may, those numbers are underwhelming to say the least.

    And that would just mean that Woodson is a crappy evaluator of talent. It’s like that scene in Moneyball where they devalue a prospect because he has an ugly girlfriend. If Tyler looks like a basketball player and/or Woodson doesn’t, then what the heck is he using to evaluate players?

  12. Mike Kurylo Post author

    Where are all the posters who were dying to see Cole Aldrich get minutes? Tyler seems to have much more upside than Aldrich and he’s just as big, so it seems a positive to me that the Knicks called him up. If you are curious about his upside, the Times had an interesting article on him.

    Here’s the link

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/sports/basketball/jeremy-tylers-odyssey-continues-with-the-knicks.html

    Not sure what part of that article was supposed to be about his upside? That he was a bust in Israel? That he had two small stints in the NBA? His averages in the D-League? I did note that he did score well in the D-League, but at the downside of his horrific turnover rate, and non-existent shotblocking.

    Again, how is he a better prospect than Aldrich? What skills is he going to bring to New York that’ll help the Knicks?

  13. knickster

    The average Knicks fan is so desperate for a savior that even the crappiest player is magically enhanced by virtue of signing a contract with the lousy hometown team. Carmelo was much better than Lebron, Bargnani was not bad but ‘misused’ in Toronto, Chris Copeland was the key to beating Indiana, JR Smith was a real bargain before the season began, Pablo Prigione was a star in Europe before he decided to emulate Chris Duhon, Baron Davis was not finished and neither are KMart and Artest…I could go on….

  14. Mike Kurylo Post author

    That doesn’t mean that he’s guaranteed to improve, but it’s just stupid to say “welp he’ll never be more than Chris Wilcox so who cares,” particularly since we could have used a warm body even of Chris Wilcox’s caliber this season to sop up some minutes at the 4/5.

    Actually I think that’s exactly what people should say. Not every young player has unlimited potential. Tyler has shown little ability to block shots or score efficiently (turnovers, NBA efficiency) so it’s very reasonable to make assumptions about him. I think Chris Wilcox is a reasonable comparison for him, and I don’t think Wilcox would help this team much this year. This team is suffering much more on defense, something that neither Wilcox nor Tyler will help.

  15. flossy

    There’s only 13 players in the NBA (and only one center) this season scoring better than 21 pts/36 on .560 TS% or better. I’d say that portends a hell of a lot more upside than Chris Wilcox.

    And yeah, he turns it over too much and his defense needs work, which is hardly unique among young centers. You’re not telling us anything that any scouting report on Tyler doesn’t state up front. This team needs help in virtually every area, so adding a young big man who is already a good rebounder and a talented scorer cannot possibly hurt.

  16. Mike Kurylo Post author

    There’s only 13 players in the NBA (and only one center) this season scoring better than 21 pts/36 on .560 TS% or better. I’d say that portends a hell of a lot more upside than Chris Wilcox.

    And only 20 when you drop the ts% to his NBA career mark of 43.9%.

  17. flossy

    There’s only 13 players in the NBA (and only one center) this season scoring better than 21 pts/36 on .560 TS% or better. I’d say that portends a hell of a lot more upside than Chris Wilcox.

    And only 20 when you drop the ts% to his NBA career mark of 43.9%.

    Oh, I see. When his D-league stats make him look bad (turnovers, blocks), you reference those. When his D-league stats make him look good, you ignore them in favor of the numbers he’s compiled during his two tiny stints in the NBA (which, as has been pointed out, is a statistically insignificant 600 minutes prior to age 22).

    Here’s a tip: if you’re going to troll your own readers with this straw man bullshit, try to cherry pick stats in a way that doesn’t make it completely obvious that you’re arguing in bad faith.

  18. knickster

    On stats-related matters, Camby was the proud owner of the best per-minute rebound rate in the NBA the year prior to his latest job as a Knicks player….lol

  19. Nick C.

    Here’s the link

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/sports/basketball/jeremy-tylers-odyssey-continues-with-the-knicks.html

    That article doesn’t exactly paint a flattering picture of Tyler, his maturity or work ethic, even taking his age into account. As a side not dow does Sonny Vaccaro get to be credited as the person who advised him to make the move from HS to Israel and then be quoted as saying “he didn’t have the right support” or something to that effect without being called out on it?

  20. KnickfaninNJ

    Again, how is he a better prospect than Aldrich? What skills is he going to bring to New York that’ll help the Knicks?

    His early career completely mismanaged his development as a basketball player, but despite this he has just as good stats as Aldrich and has shown substantial improvement in the last year (which Aldrich hasn’t) and is three years younger than Aldrich. It’s hard to tell if his current skills are better than those of Aldrich, but I think Woody will find that out in practice. Younger, on an upslope in results and apparently very athletic; to me that signifies more potential.

  21. thenamestsam

    I’m with Flossy on this one. Not only were the majority of his ~600 NBA minutes as a 20 year old whose most recent competitive action had been with the Tokyo Apache, but he piled up the vast majority of those minutes on a Golden State team that was openly tanking at the end of that year.

    Here’s a sample lineup from a game in which he played a career high 43 of those minutes:
    Starters – Chris Wright, Jeremy Tyler, Mickell Gladness, Klay Thompson (as a rookie), Charles Jenkins
    Bench – Mikki Moore, Dominic McGuire

    I just really can’t see anything that happened in those type of minutes being super relevant to whether or not Jeremy Tyler can develop into an NBA caliber player.

  22. Nick C.

    I like the signing, if for no other reason, who they cut and what that means symbolically. But I don’t see how you can’t at best see him as a question mark. The D-league was 300 minutes two years ago so that’s to be more relevant than NBA play (mainly 21 starts from late March 2102 to the end of the season with GS). Also sucking or not cutting it in Israel and Japan, while not a disqualifier is not exactly a positive. His biggest positive is height, youth and that he got paid to play basketball as a teenager. I just don’t see him getting any PT unless there is no other choice which is the only reason why Toure is playing and IIRC how Copeland got to play.

  23. Frank

    FWIW, Tyler’s rookie season #s are not so different from Tyson Chandler’s numbers as a 19 year old rookie. He actually had a much lower TOV% than Chandler. The thing that stands out of course is his shooting efficiency. If you look at the shot chart from that year in Golden State, he was taking a literally ridiculous number of jumpers:

    3.2 per 36 from 3-9 feet
    1.9 per 36 from 10-15 feet
    2.1 per 36 from 16-23 feet

    By comparison, in 2012-13, Amare took:
    2.7 per 36 from 3-9 feet
    0.76 per 36 from 10-15 feet
    1.7 per 36 from 16-23 feet

    Tyler actually shot a semi-reasonable (but clearly not great for a dude as big and athletic as him) 58.5% around the basket that year, which doesn’t seem that bad for a completely raw rookie. But his terrible efficiency was almost certainly the result of GSW trying to lose (or certainly not caring about winning), complete lack of coaching/limits, and him being just very raw and not understanding what kinds of shots he should be taking.

    I think it’s entirely possible that he turns into a rotation big eventually. Will he ever be a starter? Probably not. But he has potential.

  24. thenamestsam

    Anyone care to predict Melo’s minutes load for tonight? First game back from an injury. First game of a back-to-back and a 3 games in 4 nights. Almost definitely going to be a loss even if Melo goes full superman.

    I expect 42+ minutes.

    Also: Great post Frank. Doesn’t seem too surprising that the fact that his team was actively trying to lose the games in which he played the majority of his minutes might have impacted his numbers.

  25. Frank

    Anyone care to predict Melo’s minutes load for tonight? First game back from an injury. First game of a back-to-back and a 3 games in 4 nights. Almost definitely going to be a loss even if Melo goes full superman.

    I expect 42+ minutes.

    well given that I expect us to be down 20 going into the 4th, maybe he’ll squeak by with just 38.

  26. Frank O.

    Mike:
    I think your headline is provocative, which has gotten 23 comments or so, so I applaud the effort.
    I agree with commenters that Tyler’s impact will be limited. If anything it is an indictment of Aldrich (or at least and indication of Woodson’s lack of faith in Cole) that they brought Tyler up. It also is an indictment of Smith himself because he got virtually no minutes on a team in desperate need of 1 and 2 guard production.
    You also get a sense of desperation with the Knicks because they continue to give JR huge minutes, despite .454 TS% and .441 eFG this year. Those numbers, by the way, were put to shame by the much maligned (deservedly) volume scorer Jamal Crawford as a Knick. By the way, Shumpert’s .464 TS% and .427 eFG% also is remarkably bad.

    That the Knicks moved to bring up Tyler at a point when they so desperately need a competent PG seems ill timed, although I’m quite certain one should have little to do with the other. Smith had no business being with the Knicks and Tyler before his injury likely would have made the team.

    But with Chandler, Stat and Bargs and Martin ahead of Aldrich and Tyler, you probably will only see, Tyler very little, if at all.
    Meanwhile, so long as the Knicks guards put up an eFG% collectively of .470 and a PER of 11 on 27 points v opponents eFG% .489 and PER of 18 on 45 points per game, this will be a losing team that may have trouble beating the 23 wins they got in 2007 under Isiah or under Brown in 2005.

    And don’t expect Ray to return in basketball shape; I guarantee he’s not dieting.

  27. Frank

    btw in light of this discussion about how useful Tyler’s previous NBA stats are in predicting its future — does anyone that has the time and ability to do this sort of analysis think it’d be useful to look at each player’s career in, say, 4 year blocks (or by 4 year blocks of age) and see how predictive each season’s stats are for the next season? My guess is that after age 21-22 they are very accurate up into about the age 30 range, and are less useful on either side of the age 22-30 range. Or if this has been done somewhere already, please link–

  28. Frank

    Sounds to me like he’ll fit right in.

    lol. It’s seriously sad that our team basically has only guys who have zero conscience about shooting (JR, Melo, Bargnani, THJ) or guys that basically refuse to shoot (Prigs, Shump, Tyson).

  29. Frank O.

    I can’t see why the Knicks would do such a thing.
    Stat is off the books in 2014-2015. Kobe would add $25 million to Knicks payroll in 2015-2016 at age 37 and essentially be a name…
    Come to think of it, it’s exactly the kind of move Dolan would make.

  30. Frank O.

    It’s seriously sad that our team basically has only guys who have zero conscience about shooting (JR, Melo, Bargnani, THJ) or guys that basically refuse to shoot (Prigs, Shump, Tyson).

    The 2013-2014 Knicks is one of the lowest IQ basketball teams I have ever seen.

  31. JK47

    Wake me up when they fire Woodson.

    Seriously, this team is not gonna win jack playing the way they play, with the constant stupid ass switching. The roster is full of lousy defensive players who have no clue what they’re doing, trying to follow an incoherent defensive system designed by an idiot. That is not a recipe for any kind of sustained success. It is a recipe for generating hilarious GIFs, but that’s about it.

    On a good team Bargnani would be getting DNP-CDs every single night.

  32. d-mar

    Remember that epic comeback win over the Spurs in San Antonio last season? Seems like 10 years ago.

  33. The Ghost of Ted Nelson

    What skills is he going to bring to New York that’ll help the Knicks?

    What the Knicks need more than anything right now is players with upside, so in that regard a 22 year old big man help a lot.

    That said, Tyler looks like a financially burdened-man’s Jackie Butler, and I’ll be surprised if he even has the same impact that Butler had on this franchise.

    But he’s an upgrade on Chris Smith, and about a zillion other guys the Knicks could be taking flyers on, so it’s progress in the right direction.

  34. ephus

    Ridiculous idea: Kobe for Stat. We assume the 3rd year of his albatross. Any takers?

    It’s impossible.

    1. Kobe cannot be traded until May 2014 because his extension was longer than permitted under an extend and trade.

    2. Kobe has a complete “no trade” clause, so he would have to approve the move. If he got into a showdown with Jim Buss, Buss would fold.

    As Coach Dale said to the town of Hickory, “This is your team.”

  35. Frank

    Very sad realization while talking with Spurs blogger on twitter–

    Total 2013-14 salary of Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, and Kawhi Leonard = $32.25MM
    Total 2013-14 salary of Amare Stoudemire and Andrea Bargnana = $33.54MM

  36. nicos

    On Tyler’s turnovers: in summer league almost all of his turnovers came in one of two ways- traveling due to poor footwork (his go-to move is a drop step but when that didn’t work he had no counter and tended to shuffle his feet) or from bringing the ball down to his waist and bending over to gather himself after grabbing offensive boards. Both those things are very correctable though I doubt he gets them fixed this year. You want someone with terrible hands then Cole Aldritch is your guy- career turnover rate of over 22!
    While I think the chances that Tyler helps at all this year are really slim, I do think his potential ceiling is better than Chris Wilcox- he’s a legit 6’10” 260 and he looks like he could still add a fair amount of muscle. He’s not an otherworldly Amar’e/Kemp type athlete but he’s quick, runs the floor well and is pretty coordinated for his size. He also shot the mid-range well in summer league. He also played like a guy who knew he was running out of chances which bodes well for a guy whose effort/attitude has been questioned. To me he’s the Knicks draft pick for next year so I’m happy they signed him- I think it’s 50/50 as to whether or not he can become a regular rotation guy but there’s also a decent chance- say 20%- that he can become a very good player in this league and given the dearth of young talent on the team that makes him a risk worth taking,

  37. johnno

    Where did this weird notion that Woodson refuses to play young guys come from? He hasn’t exactly been coaching a team that’s loaded with young stars but he’s given a lot of minutes to the very few young guys that he does have. He continues to play Shumpert 25+ minutes a night despite the fact that, on merit, Shumpert deserves to be glued to the bench except during complete blowouts (after all, he has shot 31% from the field over his last 15 games). He’s also had Hardaway in the rotation right from the start of the season. He’s even started to give minutes to Toure Murray. I haven’t seen any hesitancy on his part to give playing time to young players who actually deserve to play. With regard to Tyler, I agree with everyone who says that there’s a 50-50 chance that he’ll be a contributor and I think that, if he shows that he’s got some talent, Woodson will find him minutes.

  38. Mike Kurylo Post author

    Oh, I see. When his D-league stats make him look bad (turnovers, blocks), you reference those. When his D-league stats make him look good, you ignore them in favor of the numbers he’s compiled during his two tiny stints in the NBA (which, as has been pointed out, is a statistically insignificant 600 minutes prior to age 22).

    Here’s a tip: if you’re going to troll your own readers with this straw man bullshit, try to cherry pick stats in a way that doesn’t make it completely obvious that you’re arguing in bad faith.

    Wait I’m cherry picking stats? Which is the proper stat set to use when evaluating how a player will perform in the NBA:
    A. 636 minutes in the NBA
    B. 477 minutes in the D-League.

    Finally you may want to save words like “troll” and “bullshit” for where it actually applies. There’s no point to being uncivil over something this minor.

  39. Jack Bauer

    Very uplifting review. Thanks I feel so much more optimistic about their performance going forward now that Tyler is on board. Actually I’m pretty sure they will continue to suck in an epically bad way for the foreseeable future…….. Fire Woodson and consider blowing it all up and starting over.

  40. Mike Kurylo Post author

    he has just as good stats as Aldrich

    You keep saying this. I don’t think you know what this means. His stats aren’t as good as Aldrich. Again Cole has a high shooting efficiency at the NBA and a tremendous amount of blocked shots at both levels.

    I just really can’t see anything that happened in those type of minutes being super relevant to whether or not Jeremy Tyler can develop into an NBA caliber player.

    I just don’t buy this. Was the coaching staff telling Tyler not to block shots or rebound? Were they saying it would be good for his career if he had a low shooting percentage? Wouldn’t a player that has been on the fringe of the NBA want to play great to show he can stick in this league?

    I can understand if the argument is that he improved in the D-League, and that’s why his numbers are better. But to simply throw out the NBA stats he compiled (in a greater amount of minutes) because they don’t fit your narrative is the definition of cherry picking. They are both relevant, and it remains to be seen which is true. But even his D-League numbers don’t impress me because of that ridiculous turnover rate and poor shot blocking.

  41. Mike Kurylo Post author

    FWIW, Tyler’s rookie season #s are not so different from Tyson Chandler’s numbers as a 19 year old rookie. He actually had a much lower TOV% than Chandler.

    This isn’t true. Tyson had double the blocked shots per minute, a 10%+ advantage in TS%, 1 extra rebound, and 0.9 pf/36.

    Look it up: http://bkref.com/tiny/P1SGv

  42. DRed

    This isn’t true. Tyson had double the blocked shots per minute, a 10%+ advantage in TS%, 1 extra rebound, and 0.9 pf/36.

    Also MP: Tyson 3998, Tyler 636

    Good players play more.
    [drops keyboard and walks offstage]

  43. Brian Cronin

    I don’t think it’s very nice to give ruru shit when he’s not here. If he’s here, sure, argue away, but it doesn’t seem fair to pick on a guy when he’s absent.

  44. KnickfaninNJ

    I paid more attentiontohis recent d-league stats than his nba stats because they are much more recent. But I was only making a case that he had potential, not that he is good already. His youth and recent progress suggest that to me

Comments are closed.