Knicks Morning News (2015.05.12)

  • [New York Times] Cavs and Bulls Recovering, Clippers Aiming to Oust Rockets (Tue, 12 May 2015 07:33:12 GMT)

    There’s been former MVP’s winning games with dramatic buzzer-beating jumpers. There’s been injuries to stars. There’s been a coach getting questioned by his own team.

  • [New York Times] Warriors Tie Their Semifinal at 2-2, Rout Grizzlies 101-84 (Tue, 12 May 2015 05:21:06 GMT)

    MVP Stephen Curry scored 21 of his 33 points by halftime, and the Golden State Warriors snapped their two-game skid Monday night by routing the Memphis Grizzlies 101-84 to tie their Western Conference semifinal at 2-2.

  • [New York Times] Curry Spices Up Warriors in Series-Tying Win Over Grizzlies (Tue, 12 May 2015 05:20:57 GMT)

    Stephen Curry lived up to his Most Valuable Player status with 33 points as the Golden State Warriors brushed aside the Memphis Grizzlies 101-84 at FedExForum on Monday to even their Western Conference semi-final series at 2-2.

  • [New York Times] Warriors 101, Grizzlies 84: Warriors Rout the Grizzlies to Even Their Series (Tue, 12 May 2015 04:51:11 GMT)

    Behind Stephen Curry’s 33 points, Golden State unearthed its high-octane offense while figuring out a few ways to slow Memphis in Game 4 of a Western Conference semifinal series.

  • [New York Times] Hawks 106, Wizards 101: Hawks Regain Offensive Flow, and Pierce Can’t Save Wizards (Tue, 12 May 2015 03:53:41 GMT)

    Atlanta moved the ball effectively and beat Washington, which was again without the injured John Wall. Paul Pierce missed a 3-point attempt that would have tied the score late.

  • [New York Times] Teague Leads Hawks Past Wizards 106-101 to Tie Series (Tue, 12 May 2015 03:09:09 GMT)

    Finally looking a bit more like a No. 1 seed than the team that’s been so-so in the playoffs, the Atlanta Hawks beat the Washington Wizards 106-101 on Monday night behind Jeff Teague’s 26 points, including a key 3, to even their second-round series at two games apiece.

  • [New York Times] Teague Leads Hawks Over Wizards to Tie Series (Tue, 12 May 2015 02:26:56 GMT)

    Atlanta guard Jeff Teague scored 26 points as the Hawks beat the Washington Wizards 106-101 to square their Eastern Conference semi-final playoff series at 2-2 on Monday.

  • [New York Times] David Blatt Draws Scrutiny After Cavaliers’ Crucial Victory (Tue, 12 May 2015 01:25:53 GMT)

    The focus after a victory over the Chicago Bulls in Game 4 on Sunday was on two blunders Blatt, Cleveland’s coach, was perceived to have made in the waning seconds.

  • [New York Post] The eerie Ewing blueprint Lundqvist follows into Game 7 (Tue, 12 May 2015 00:03:14 -0400)

    Twenty years later, the No. 1 star at Madison Square Garden will get to take the mulligan that was never quite in the cards for his spiritual ancestor. This time…

  • 27 replies on “Knicks Morning News (2015.05.12)”

    From stratomatic in last thread:

    IMO, the key “questions” about 3 point shooting are about variance, how you get your 3s, and the differences between defenses in the regular season and playoffs. .

    Two teams play 3 games. One shoots a lot of 3s (the slightly superior offensive team) and the other doesn’t. In the first game, the 3 point shooting team shoots 35 3s, makes 18, and wins handily. In the next 2 games, the other teams defends the 3 point line better, reduces the number of 3 point attempts, and lowers their efficiency. It wins 2 tightly contested games.

    The stats will show that the 3 point shooting team had a higher TS% for the series. The problem is the volatility has them down 2 games to 1.

    That is why it would be important to add “point differential standard deviation” when quoting a team’s point differential. It is not only important by how many points you win, but also the variance.

    Point differential/ PD standard deviation should be a much better indicator of strength.

    I was thinking about this after reading the ESPN headline after the GSW Memphis game last night. It read “GSW crush Memphis” or something like that. But Memphis beating you by 8 or 10 is their equivalent of crushing you. IE, if Memphis is in control of the game and stifling you with their defense, they aren’t necessarily going to blow you out by 20 because they aren’t beating you with their offense but with the defense. GSW though are gonna blow you out if they are hitting all of their 3s.

    I still think GSW will win this series but its an amazing series because of the two different styles and philosophies.

    You guys are way off. NBA teams don’t have Sharpe ratios; the average NBA team is risk neutral. Unlike in most endeavors, when you increase your volatility by shooting a lot of threes you simultaneously increase you opponents’ volatility by an identical amount. It’s true that teams who would be gigantic favorites without shooting a lot of 3s would prefer lower variance. But in the playoffs when the gaps are much closer, even the favorite has almost no statistically significant preference. This almost surely isn’t what Phil meant but if it is he would still be wrong.

    its an amazing series because of the two different styles and philosophies.

    I don’t see this series as offense v defense at all. For as good as Memphis is on defense, Golden State was actually the #1 defensive team in the league from November all the way through April.

    The difference between the two is that Memphis has a punishing front line and the Warriors have a punishing backcourt. And because of that they have more “blowouts”. And that isn’t insignificant (and ties in with the parallel conversation re:3 pt shooting).

    Memphis “blowing a team out” by 8 points isn’t a blowout because teams can score 8 points in a matter of seconds. Yesterday’s game, in which the warriors led by 25 points toward the end of the 3rd quarter would have taken 22 minutes to get back into via Zach Randolph and Marc Gasol pounding the ball through the post.

    Basically, if you live by the 3 you may die by the 3, but if Steph Curry has your life in his hands at the top of the arc, you can probably still get insurance from most major insurance companies (as long as you’re not also a smoker or motorcyclist).

    You guys are way off. NBA teams don’t have Sharpe ratios; the average NBA team is risk neutral. Unlike in most endeavors, when you increase your volatility by shooting a lot of threes you simultaneously increase you opponents’ volatility by an identical amount.

    I understand what you are saying, but I think you missed the point.

    Against some opposition in the regular season (who don’t defend the 3 well for example) you might produce outrageously positive offensive efficiency and win by huge average margins.

    Against some opposition in the regular season (who do defend the 3 well) you might have worse offensive efficiency and have more spotty results.

    The data might suggest that teams are way better off taking a lot of 3s on a NET BASIS. However, there may be a greater downside to shooting 3s specifically in the playoffs than regular season because defenses, average opposition, and reffing changes (compared to other styles).

    I think what Phil was saying is that an offense structured almost entirely around 3s (sort of like Houston) will fail in the playoffs. He thinks you need an inside/outside game to continue getting those high quality 3s in the playoffs.

    Yes but there is data on the playoffs and it absolutely does not say that. If high 3pt rates were bad for playoff success then teams with high 3pt attempt rates would on average underperform their regular season SRS in the playoffs, and they do not.

    I know, I know. Phil is only talking about a very specific unicorn offense structured “almost entirely around the three.” And only he can identify which teams he means and then only after they have lost a game or two. So don’t bother analyzing it because it is impossible to calculate the sound of one ring clapping.

    Pellies job is open. Should be interesting to see how they fuck this one up.

    It really isn’t a big deal in the long run, but yeah, the way that he actively trolls on Twitter is a pretty weird aspect of his personality.

    That’s a shame about Monty Williams. The Pelicans have one star and a lot of role players and are in the Western conference, and are also a team that has no playoff experience at all. I think they did pretty well this season to get into the playoffs and then to play Golden State competitively, even though they lost all four games. Firing Williams after that is unfortunately Sacramento like.

    It’s not just the trolling on twitter, but the childish typos too. It all seems so far below what a man of his stature should he putting out there.

    He’s probably high as fuck when he’s tweeting. And he’s like 70. I’m impressed he knows how to tweet at all.

    Yup. He gets to smoke weed and consume peyote for 12 mil a year. Must be nice 🙂

    I don’t think Monty Williams is a great coach by any means, but the real problem in Nawlins is the front office. They traded Noel AND a first rounder for Jrue Holiday (who isn’t bad but for that package I’d want, like, Kawhi Leonard or something), gave long-term expensive deals to Tyreke Evans and Eric Gordon, and drafted Austin Rivers with a lottery pick. Basically the only thing they’ve done right is draft Anthony Davis which my little sister would’ve done. Fortunately for them that alone gets you somewhat far, but I can’t see them doing big things without a major FO shakeup.

    And he probably has huge fingers and bad eyesight, which makes typing on a smartphone while high really problematic.

    I think all good player’s coaches should surround themselves with really good assistant coaches. There’s no knock on a guy to be a player’s coach. A player’s coach can be a very valuable coach. Phil Jackson and Doc Rivers are both player’s coaches (but so is Randy Wittman and Ty Corbin). But unlike them, Williams never seemed to surround himself with good enough assistants and so his key deficit as a coach kept getting highlighted, which is that he was a shitty strategic coach. Woodson had that same problem here. I really like Williams, though, so I suspect he will get another gig. At the very least, he’ll find himself as a top assistant coach, serving in much the same way that Brian Shaw excelled at for years (being the player’s coach for a strategic coach, like Shaw was with Frank Vogel).

    Here’s the thing about having a player’s coach be your lead assistant, though. You have to be confident that they’re loyal to you, because otherwise, they can fuuuuuuuuuuck you over, because they’re the ones that the players are closest to (see Larry Drew with Woodson in Atlanta). The best guys out there are loyal, though, like Alvin Gentry, Brian Shaw and Ron Adams (it is not surprising, then, that Kerr has both Gentry and Adams).

    Synergy Sports Tech ?@SynergySST 6m6 minutes ago
    Iman Shumpert is shooting a tremendous 62% (8/13) on pull-up jump shots in the playoffs.

    I-max Shumpert?

    Ask the Pringles man how well Mike Woodson learned that lesson.

    That was a bit different since D’Antoni didn’t have any part in hiring Woodson, so I can’t really blame Woody for not getting his back there. He was pretty much brought in to be the replacement coach if they decided to fire D’Antoni.

    After our talk yesterday of changing the rules to address players like Deandre Jordan, I thought you folk would appreciate my latest Basketball Legend, about how the NBA once tried out 12-foot rims to mess with George Mikan’s game (you’ll never believe the other rule change they tried out at the same time – not because it is so outrageous, exactly, but just because it would have been such a drastic rule change).

    The Zach Lowe podcast with JVG is hilarious. If they were in the same room JVG would have put the Zo lock on Zach’s ankle.

    Thanks! And yeah, I mean, I get the desire to reduce the time of the game “wasted” by players taking free throws, but boy, that sure wasn’t the solution.

    Comments are closed.