Carmelo Anthony’s Memory

When I was a child, my grandfather would pick me up from school every Wednesday. We’d walk over to the local Off Track Betting office, pick up some horse racing sheets, sit in a mostly-empty bar, and pour over the data. “It’s not the horses,” my grandfather insisted “it’s the jockeys.” That was his system, the jockeys controlled how hard the beasts tried and inevitably how fast they went. A reliable horseman was worth more than a fast horse. He’d lay a few dollars down and play the daily double, which would give a higher pay-out than just a single race.

When he’d win, we’d hit a store on the way home. He might get an extra beer, or buy me a snack. I remember the time he pulled down $80 (this was the 1980s) and bought me ice cream in the middle of winter. I remember the time he won $200+, and upgraded his Johnnie Walker from red to black. There were smaller wins where we’d place a second round of bets as well.

My grandmother didn’t understand the gambling (or alcohol) but never forbid it. When he lost, she would say that money could have been better spent. But my grandfather would point to his last big win, and in his eyes win the argument. From a monetary perspective my grandma was right. My grandfather lost quite often. I remember how he’d rip up the tickets, once then twice, when he lost. He did it so often and in the same way, it was ritual. And although I didn’t calculate exactly, I’m certain that he gave away more money than he took in.

But of course my grandfather didn’t see it that way. He was a winner.

Almost lost in the talk of Carmelo Anthony wanting to play for 20 years and score 30,000 points was this gem:

That seems a long shot now and the focus is on what went wrong. Anthony said that he looks around this locker room and then at other teams, sees the talent and can’t put his finger on where it went wrong.

“Yeah, we talk – guys discuss that a lot,” he said. “We talk about that amongst ourselves. Kind of what is it? What’s happening? Especially with the talent that we have in this locker room, we still can’t figure out exactly kind of what it is. It’s hard to pinpoint it.”

Carmelo Anthony can’t figure out how the Knicks are losing. And perhaps this is just “athlete-speak” to shield themselves from the press and the public. But more likely this is true. As many people noted yesterday it’s likely the team (and Anthony’s) poor showing on defense which is the unseen factor in their loss.

However there is another just as likely reason. Much like my grandfather, calculating odds isn’t people’s strong suit.

I’m sure Carmelo looks at the box score of the Bucks game, sees his 16 points, and recalls a few of those shots. However I doubt he processes the 7 shots he missed in the same way. Much like my grandfather he’s suffering from confirmation bias: over-valuing the good and under-valuing the bad. I’m sure he remembers the shots made more than the misses. The possessions where he succeeded, and not the ones he flubbed. The defensive stops he made, and not the ones he took off.

Most certainly Anthony isn’t the only person or athlete who thinks this way. Does Porzingis recall the 8 rebounds he had, or the boards he didn’t try hard enough on and the other team recovered? Will Rose treat the Bucks game (26 points on 13-16, +4) with the same weight as the Magic game (12 points on 2-9, -23)?

If it’s hard for athletes to recal with precision the amount of good/bad possessions in a single game, how can they do it over 82 games? Over a career?

Essentially they can’t. No one can. People are notoriously bad at converting events to probabilities and conceptualizing odds when the numbers are more than a handful. Hence why statistics are so important. And while they fail in describing some things (individual defense, effect of volume scoring, etc.), they do a much better job at describing basketball than just people do. Unless of course you agree with Mark Jackson that Derrick Rose is an excellent basketball player. Heck, had my grandmother kept them for my grandfather’s gambling, she would have shut-down his “last week I won 80 dollars” argument.

Liked it? Take a second to support Mike Kurylo on Patreon!

Mike Kurylo

Mike Kurylo is the founder and editor of KnickerBlogger.net. His book on the 2012 Knicks, "We’ll Always Have Linsanity," is on sale now. Follow him on twitter (@KnickerBlogger).

83 thoughts to “Carmelo Anthony’s Memory”

  1. Brandon Jennings knew this team sucked and it was because guys played for themselves. If he figured it out, what’s to stop Melo from doing the same?

  2. I’m not so sure this is true. Maybe it is for Melo, but you always hear about professional athletes having a photographic memory for every single play that happened, exactly what they saw, etc. And especially the ones in which something bad happened.

    I’m sure some players are like what Mike described. Maybe they just happen to reside on the Knicks.

  3. Tremendous writing. I read this site almost every morning, hoping for a glimmer of improvement of the Knicks. That improvement never comes. I keep coming back though. It’s because of the writing. Thank you.

  4. Mike, I enjoyed being given the keyhole view of your interactions with your grandfather.

    But while I can recall a cutback I executed on a football field 35 years ago, and perhaps not so circumstances less outstanding, I didn’t watch video of my work, nor did I have coaches who watched video of my work.

    The ignorance of Melo claiming they can’t understand why they are so bad, in light of the talent they have, is breathtaking. It is simply a lie.
    The Knicks pore over video. They have coaches that continually walk them through defensive formations, pointing out failures to react, failures to provide weak-side support, failures to block out rebounders and collapsing shooters and the failures of sagging defenses.
    And the offenders are consistently the same.
    Melo is one of the worst defenders I have ever seen, among players considered by others to be leaders and “great.”
    Derek Rose consistently is beaten off the dribble and literally stops following the player into the paint. He often gives up on the play. You all probably recall Kwahi Leonard’s clutch three point shot. But it was his outstanding chase and block of a driving opponent that stood out most, relentlessly pursuing that player, knowing that he would need to slow his forward progress to attempt a lay up.
    Rose and Melo simply don’t make that effort.
    The Knicks fail because they don’t make the effort on defense.
    There is no mystery. They all watch the tape.

  5. There are Knick fans on P&T, Reddit, ESPN, etc. that would swear to the fact that Carmelo Anthony is one of the 10 best players in the NBA. Nevermind the fact that he’s not even the best player on this current shitty team. Why would Melo think any different?

    Somewhat related : I bet a guy like Ron Baker thinks he’s MUCH better than what he actually is (dumpster tier ) just because of the Knick fan/media hype machine.

  6. Yes but they are masters of PR and spin. Every single time Rose is on the Postgame he talks about defense. I think the problem is no one may have the stones to call them out on it. When Melo or Rose clown away double digit leads do they get pulled. When Rose throws multiple passes “to who” does he get sat like a rookie would? I see that as the problem and there is a little human nature to not want to hold oneself responsible.

  7. Beautiful piece, Mike. Thank you. This site is already one of my favorites. If we start adding psychology to our analysis – sky’s the limit.

  8. Why would Melo think any different?

    Because he actually has a competent basketball IQ? I mean, the guy is a smart dude and I don’t doubt his understanding of the game. Most fans these days are highlight real junkies who think pointz = greatness. I doubt a few of them could explain what a motion offense is.

  9. I’m not so sure this is true. Maybe it is for Melo, but you always hear about professional athletes having a photographic memory for every single play that happened, exactly what they saw, etc. And especially the ones in which something bad happened.

    It has less to do with remembering, and more with processing the data.

    When you play 100 games of blackjack, you don’t keep track of wins and losses. You count your money as you go.

    Now imagine you play 100 games but you don’t have a pile of chips in front of you. Basically when you win someone puts the winnings in a bag, and they give you a chip when it’s your turn to bet. You’d have a bad time guessing how much money you have in the end.

    Humans are just bad at that, and athlet’s are no different. Throw in the bias of remembering the good over the bad, and have complete failure to understand your shortcomings.

  10. The eye test trumps statistics because stats can be manipulated, skewed, wrong, be too small a sample, can be effected by factors such as team style and proficiency of those around you. The eye test doesn’t lie and overcomes these aforementioned factors.

  11. Reub, I guess you have hit the nail on the head. Melo’s eye test tells him the team is awesome. Those pesky statistics like points for and against and wins and losses say they suck. It must be soooo confusing.

  12. http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-0631907830831520141-4

    If you’re looking for more evidence that the Knicks are committed to running the triangle: team president Phil Jackson was teaching some Knicks guards the offense for about a half hour before an informal team workout yesterday, per league sources. It seems clear that Jackson is intent on running the triangle, as sources with knowledge of the workout told ESPN that he was hands on in instructing the offense with Knicks guards before the workout. Jeff Hornacek has acknowledged that the team has run more often triangle lately. He says he welcomes Jackson’s input, but a team president conducting a workout with players is not the norm around the NBA.

  13. great piece Mike, I agree 100% with your point of view.

    its the “ruff rider” joke we make so many times, people still value completely subjective stuff, even when it’s completely 100% wrong, and there’s no real way to argue against people who won’t accept logical arguments.

    I’ve spent my entire academic life studying how statistics can be deceiving in economics / social analysis, and to this day I still mantain my stance… but basketball is a game, it has a specific goal that is the same every single time two teams play against each other, and because of that statistics are always going to be useful no matter what.

  14. Because he actually has a competent basketball IQ? I mean, the guy is a smart dude and I don’t doubt his understanding of the game.

    Sorry, but I disagree with this strongly.

    I think it’s virtually impossible to have a high basketball IQ these days and play the way Melo plays. The problem is close to 100% that he has a low basketball IQ. A high basketball IQ is a guy like Shane Battier. He had maybe 25% as much talent, but at his best took few poor shoots and used his stats knowledge to force players like Melo into willingly taking foolish ones and being joyful when a few went in. Shane Battier was a better basketball player than Melo and it’s not even close. On talent and skills, Melo was a million miles over him. The difference is all IQ.

  15. He had maybe 25% as much talent, but at his best took few poor shoots and used his stats knowledge to force players like Melo into willingly taking foolish ones and being joyful when a few went in.

    Melo is right around his career averages H2H vs Battier.

  16. I thought today’s piece was excellent, but I do want to comment briefly on the gambling aspect of this because I have a lot of experience when it comes to that subject (40 years worth).

    Something that most non gamblers will never understand is that the gambler feels joy when he/she analyzes a sporting event (let’s say a horse race or a basketball game) and is correct about the result. For many, the intellectual challenge of trying to figure it out and the potential joy from a win is every bit a part of the process as the money coming in and going out they use to keep score. In fact, I would say most know they are net losers financially but continue because the upside of victory is greater than the net cost in dollars.

    For many, it is no different than the cost of other hobbies that people get involved with – be it photography, playing golf, playing chess etc… The people that do these things know they will probably never make a living at it and that it will cost them money over their lifetime, but who cares. They love it.

    What separates the gambler’s activity from everyone else’s hobbies is the risk that they get so hooked they do irresponsible things and potentially ruin multiple lives. I’ve known people like that. However, I also know people that won money gambling on all sort of things over their lifetime – including basketball and horses. I am one of them. I am the rare (more like crazy) bird that works really hard at it and has to feel he has a huge edge before participating. For me, the joy does not come from being right about a game. It comes from seeing a “+ sign” at the bottom of the page for an entire year’s worth of gambling. It means I was smart enough to do something most people think is impossible. It feeds my ego and well as adding to my wallet. To be clear, I’m not some huge high roller. But I do like action.

    I hope that sheds some light on the subject.

  17. Those pesky statistics like points for and against and wins and losses say they suck.

    Keeping score and counting which team has more points at the end of the game is stupid. The NBA should change the way games are scored: they should make it so it’s like boxing, and three judges should vote on which team LOOKS better. You know, via the eye test. That’ll show those stat nerds.

  18. Melo is right around his career averages H2H vs Battier.

    I was not talking about a specific match up. There could easily be a reason (including randomness) that Melo did fine against Battier head to head. I was talking about who made a greater contribution per season to his team winning basketball games. IMO, that’s easily Battier. But few fans would agree with me because he’s not a scorer.

  19. I mean, this blog and the continued success of the New York Knicks is all the evidence you need to know the statistics dudes get everything wrong all the time and the eye-testers are always 100% right. The stats guys always say the team is gonna suck but the eye-test guys are always proven right when the Knicks turn out to be actually awesome. This happens on an astonishingly consistent basis!

  20. Sometimes I can read some really enlightened thinking on this site…

    Then I see something so stupid it leaves me just shaking my head.

  21. Even most youtube highlights are starting to piss me off now. One minute ads for some garbage app on a 4 minute video. I’d much rather look up the boxscore.

  22. He says he welcomes Jackson’s input, but a team president conducting a workout with players is not the norm around the NBA.

    Well, its not normal that the GM has more rings coaching than the team’s actual coach.

  23. A conventional triangle offense is not the best offense to run in today’s NBA, sorry Phil. Even successful teams that run trianglish schemes don’t rely as much on midrange jumpers and run way more pick and rolls. We don’t have the players for a bulls/lakers offense. Who is our low usage efficient scoring shooting pg? Rose? KP is not a good playmaking big and simply would be way better utilized slipping screens and rolling every play.

  24. Scores are the essence of the competition. WP48 is not. Please don’t be obtuse about it.

  25. Horny will probably be fired in the offseason or in the beginning of next season when our team starts to suck again. He isn’t what Phil wanted. Phil wanted Phil without doing the work (Rambis?)

  26. Jerian Grant can look good with stats but real life tells you different.

  27. Is there any indication that Phil wants a pure triangle offense? The whole point of Hornacek’s entire hiring was to create a hybrid system like the one Golden State has. The problem is that our offense doesn’t execute it right because they don’t share the ball.

  28. Scores are the essence of the competition. WP48 is not. Please don’t be obtuse about it.

    WP48 does a pretty good job of measuring all the things that leads to final scores besides which players take the shots.

  29. Are European players inherently better at the triangle because of their early life exposure to similar principles in their beloved game of soccer?

  30. @33 Doesn’t WP48 change depending on one’s team, coach and supporting crew?

  31. A conventional triangle offense is not the best offense to run in today’s NBA, sorry Phil. Even successful teams that run trianglish schemes don’t rely as much on midrange jumpers and run way more pick and rolls. We don’t have the players for a bulls/lakers offense. Who is our low usage efficient scoring shooting pg? Rose? KP is not a good playmaking big and simply would be way better utilized slipping screens and rolling every play.

    I about as big a D’Antoni fan as is possible. He and the Houston Rockets are probably coming as close as possible to playing offense the most efficient way and are far outplaying their talent. However, his system has limitations. Pretty much all systems have limitations. They fail unless you have the right players. Maybe that’s why Pat Riley and Gregg Popovich are such all time great coaches. They don’t just find players to fit a single system. They mold the system to fit the players they have. They can win playing fast, slow, with two bigs, going small, going deep into bench, with great defense, with great offense etc… It just doesn’t matter. They look for great players just like anyone else, but they take the players they have and create more than the sum of the parts.

  32. @33 Doesn’t WP48 change depending on one’s team, coach and supporting crew?

    In “theory” Wins Produced shouldn’t vary that much when a payer switches teams, but the reality is that it probably changes more than advertised. It’s just hard to capture it statistically. I’m not religiously devoted to Wins Produced, BPM, PER, Win Shares, +/- or any metric. I do like aspects of Wins Produced though because I think most models overrate scoring and scoring usage. I consider scoring to be somewhat fungible. If you take out a volume scorer, the number of possessions does not change, just who takes the shots changes. So efficiency on those shots is key. I think most players have some ability to up their usage a little without much impact to their efficiency (some more than others) and good play makers help the efficiency of their teammates. So I am way more interested in scoring efficiency/play making than scoring volume. Only in more extreme cases does the Wins Produced model seem to kind of fall apart (at least in my opinion). So I typically reference that site and pay special attention to when players switch teams to see if the predicted impacts actually occur.

    For example, that model has always rated Rubio very highly compared to more popular ones. That’s one of several reasons I was so excited about a potential Rubio trade & pretty devastated when it didn’t happen. I think he would have had a huge positive impact in multiple ways. It would have been nice to see if I was right. I would have bet on it.

    Cousins is generally considered one of the best Cs in the league. Wins Produced does not rate him as highly. When Cousins was traded to New Orleans I bet against them the first few games because I felt the public was overrating the impact he was going to have on New Orleans. I was right in the games I played.

  33. So if Wins Produced changes with one’s team and teammates how is it a reliable indicator of a player’s individual talents? This is my point with these esoteric stats being taken as the gospel. They aren’t near perfect and never will be.

    Melo sucks as a winning ball player because I can see it with my own eyes and with the final scores. Not because of a WP48 stat.

  34. While confirmation bias is certainly a plausible element, Melo’s narcissism allows him to deny to himself that his statistically inefficient, if not harmful to winning play are a root cause of his teams’ failures. I’m sure at film sessions both here and in Denver these inadequate elements of his play were pointed out. Yet for the most part his style of play has persisted.
    Query: If Magic Johnson were president of the Knicks and he had the exact same players, do you think he would be able to convince Melo to change the way he plays?

  35. Phil Jackson has 13 championships under his belt. That’s 13 more than Jowles and DRed combined. Any instruction that he gives to the players should be loudly applauded.

  36. Hey everybody, it’s 2017 but let’s pretend like it’s 2003 and nobody knows anything at all about advanced stats.

    Whee.

  37. I got to see Ball and Leaf play last night. We all know how special Ball is (eye test) but Leaf looked really good as well. I believe that Kennard went off yesterday too. I want them all!

  38. @41 Sometimes what you know is actually what you think you know. Like when the whole world thought that the earth was flat.

    These stats are very imperfect and definitely not the gospel.

  39. The Knicks can still make it to the 55 wins you predicted with your eye test, they only need to go 29 and negative 12 the rest of the season.

  40. Did you ever think that I was just being a counterweight to all of the negativity on here?
    But to stay with the subject of individual stats, they are definitely not the gospel and especially when they change with your coach, team and teammates.

  41. howdy mike…thanks you very much for sharing that…excellent read; and, point well made…

    it’s because melo’s self evaluation is so janky that you would have hoped at some earlier point (like during his contract negotiations) that phil would have enlightened sorta young mister melo that his current playstyle would lead to exactly: bumpkis…

  42. “I got to see Ball and Leaf play last night. We all know how special Ball is (eye test) but Leaf looked really good as well. I believe that Kennard went off yesterday too. I want them all!”

    I want Giles, Hart, Allen, Og, and Mason too. This draft is so deep.

  43. I’ve spent my entire academic life studying how statistics can be deceiving in economics / social analysis, and to this day I still mantain my stance… but basketball is a game, it has a specific goal that is the same every single time two teams play against each other, and because of that statistics are always going to be useful no matter what.

    But it’s not the stats, it how people use them to deceive.

    For instance let’s say a politician said there are 94M Americans unemployed. That number is technically true, there are 94M Americans without jobs. However this number includes lots of people that aren’t looking for a job: kids in school, retirees, disabled, etc. So if it’s used in the context to show that Americans are lazy and it’s the application of that statistic that is a falsehood, not the stat itself.

    It’s like if I take my kids to a park & let them climb a 30 foot tall tree. My wife says “Honey that’s dangerous, are they safe?” and I say “I’ve never seen anyone fall out of that tree.” Technically I’m telling the truth, and my stat is 100% true. It’s that I used it in the context of her question that it becomes a lie.

    It’s never the numbers. It’s the lying people.

  44. As for the eye test, 13 years at this blog has shown that the eye test is utter crap. And if you don’t believe that, I’m not basing that on any stats I’ve collected over the years on the matter. I’m just using the eye test to evaluate.

  45. @25

    Adblock is your friend.

    Re: WP, I agree that it’s nice to see a metric that hedges towards underrating volume scoring rather than overrating it, but those positional adjustment numbers are just crazy and WP has a worse fit to the RAPM data than PER does–and PER has a pretty awful fit.

    I really only take WS BPM and VORP into consideration as far as box score stats go (VORP being more for monetary valuation than measuring productivity per se) along with a moderate amount of credence for RPM since it’s a black box based on probably the strongest productivity stat, RAPM.

    Other than that I just look at aggregate on/off numbers after an insufficient and arbitrary sample of ~30-40 games and tracking stats plus the ever present eye test. Big grains of salt go with all those though.

  46. @51 The eye test is all I need to tell me that Melo makes a team worse. Do you need more than that?

  47. ahhhhh, now that truly is some next level analysis: using the eye test – to evaluate the eye test…

  48. With Kong: Skull Island opening today, I thought you folks might be interested in an article I wrote about the surprising animal that inspired the creation of King Kong.

    howdy brian…i know this is about to come off as well as telling someone they speak surprisingly well (what???)…but, that was a really nice and well put together article…kudos sir :-)

  49. So if Wins Produced changes with one’s team and teammates how is it a reliable indicator of a player’s individual talents? This is my point with these esoteric stats being taken as the gospel. They aren’t near perfect and never will be.

    A model does not have to be perfect for it to be useful.

    If you understand how the model works (strengths and weaknesses) and you understand basketball fairly well in general, you can use the metrics as a starting point for the analysis and go from there.

  50. It’s great when the cheerleaders pop onto this blog to complain about “all the negativity.” They act as if the Knicks aren’t on pace for 31 wins, haven’t been one of the worst teams in the league over the past 15 years, aren’t embarrassing themselves with sexual harassment lawsuits, squabbles over Twitter, and absurd free agent signings, and don’t have an owner who sold out the team to CAA so he could tour with the Eagles.

    Let’s agree that we’re all Knick fans and we all want this team to do well. But the Knicks haven’t done well, not for a long time, and continue to punish their fans on a monthly basis. Predicting great things for them is foolish and has no historical precedent. If you want to peg them for 50 wins or argue that Kuz is going to become a star, it’s a free country, but at least admit that it’s based on hope, not evidence.

  51. NYK 2004-2017

    All Stats Team
    Tyson/RoLo
    Lee/Sweetney
    Gallo/Novak
    JR Smith/Ill-Will
    Pablo/Nate

    I’d probably opt for Ariza instead of Novak, and there’d be room for Balkman & Kidd. Those additions would help defensively, as that defense might be a problem, especially at the 3/4. J.R. Smith is questionable, but the Knicks don’t really have a better option. Jamal Crawford? Landry Fields?

    If I’m going with the numbers (esp. with regards to how the numbers viewed them at the time) that’s the team. Hella-strong rebounding. Smart players at all positions, except SG. Efficient scoring all around. I think this team wins 43-50 games.

    All Eye Test Team
    Curry/J. James
    Melo/Bargnani
    Penny/Harrington
    Francis/Hughes
    D Rose/Marbury

    Derrick Rose starts at PG, because he’s an MVP. Franchise is a 3x All Star, Penny 4x, so lots’ of bling here. Heck Melo, Francis, Rose, Penny are all top 3 NBA players. Rose gets 20 PPG, Francis + Penny = 30 PPG, Curry 18 PPG, Melo 25 PPG. That’s 93 points out of the starters. Add 15 from Marbury and 12 from Al, and that’s 110 every night. Oh don’t forget that Rose driving to the hoop and Melo getting double teams gives everyone +2 PPG. So we’re like at 120. And don’t forget that Bargnani will break out.

    This team easily wins 80 games a year. Jerome James is on the team for his playoff experience. In a closely fought Finals they beat a combo team made of Warriors/Cavs, coached by Popovich, 4 games to 1.

    I guess the eye test is better. :-D

  52. This is a stats-based blog. There are plenty of other, dumber blogs to visit if you want to swap eye-test scores with other people who are stuck in the stone age. It’s like going on FanGraphs and telling all the people there that the most important attributes a baseball player can have are clutchiness and grit, and that WAR is some stupid esoteric stat and RBI’s are a more meaningful barometer.

  53. Re: WP, I agree that it’s nice to see a metric that hedges towards underrating volume scoring rather than overrating it, but those positional adjustment numbers are just crazy and WP has a worse fit to the RAPM data than PER does–and PER has a pretty awful fit.

    Some of the positions assigned are off. They could do a little better job of that. You can still make comparisons with the pre adjusted numbers and estimate.

    I’m not sure you would compare anything to RAPM. It’s just another model.

    I like this test best.

    Player A is rated at contributing 10 wins but is not highly regarded by mainstream thinking.

    Player B is rated at contributing 2 wins and is highly regarded by mainstream thinking.

    They swap teams. What happens?

    Most of the time there are so many moving parts, rookies and young players etc… is tough to isolate impacts, but certain key injuries and trades make excellent test cases. Those are the ones I focus on. I’m pretty convinced that Wins Produced is very good, except in the extreme usage cases.

    There is a reason I hated the Knicks off season and was very tempted to bet the under. The only thing that stopped me was the risk of a breakout season by KP. That didn’t happen. So we more or less got the results we should have expected. I think almost everyone at Wins Produced was screaming to bet the under on NY.

  54. I don’t know what you guys are arguing about. This year’s Knicks team stinks both via advanced stats and the eye test!
    :-)

  55. @61 from my admittedly limited understanding I hear that RAPM is the gold standard of publicly available productivity metrics (and the way the math works seems good, again according to my admittedly limited understanding) and so you ought to compare box score stats to see how they fit with RAPM data, which captures what’s in its sample the best but doesn’t say much wrt things out of sample

    Box score stats are probably less accurate but useful for different purposes (they have larger sample sizes, are more explanatory so long as the priors like positional adjustment aren’t silly, and are able to compare players between eras because RAPM only has a 14 year sample of on/off tracking to build off of.)

  56. @50

    I agree Mike, that’s what I was trying to say.

    statistics can be made to be deceiving, but it’s obviously the person’s fault and not the number’s fault.

    in the case of basketball, they are always going to be better than the eye test except for a few outliers and lucky guesses.

  57. Fox with 20/4/3 today. He made some jump shots and attacked the rim. He’s a very active PG with lightning speed. If he can make those shots consistently he’ll be a great pick.

  58. When it comes to draft prospects, I only know what I read here because I don’t follow college basketball or read scouting reports. That said, I still get an impression about them, because many of them scream “points”. I want two way players, either ones who play smart basketball or ones who play good defense. Reub, Fox sounds like a fun player to watch, but is he a two way player?

    Overall, the most intriguing player is Nytikilina. He has defense and is so young, it screams potential. That said, Exum had potential too, but, after some years in the NBA, he is not looking like a soon to be star.

  59. @66 Yes, Fox is a 2 way player. He’s better at defense than offense, tenacious. To me his shooting is his only question mark.

    Grayson Allen looking good again. I hope his bad reputation allows us an opportunity to draft him in the 2nd round but I doubt it.

    And Justin Jackson is no slouch.

    Jayson Tatum looks terrible tonight.

  60. The box score is all well and good but it doesn’t tell you that Miles Bridges hugged his coach. That coach, by the way, is Tom Izzo. If you follow Big Ten basketball, you already know Izzo is notoriously unhuggable.

  61. @66
    Fox is probably the best defensive guard in this draft, with only Ntilikina having more upside. I see a good outcome for him as a rich man’s Pat Beverly.

    Justin is good but kind of chucking and Grayson is annoying. Meeks is the real star this game. Grayson will probably go into the second unless he has a great tournament. I can see the Spurs drafting him and totally rebuild his attitude and him turning into JJ Redick 2.0.

  62. Jackson was absolutely brutal in the second half

  63. Yes Wolves! Huge for the tank. I’ll have to tape the nba TV replay. Looks like it must have been a good finish. How about Ricky lighting it up since the trade deadline? Classic.

  64. The point guards we haven’t gotten have been so much better than what we did get. First we didn’t get Lowry, now Rubio. Not to mention just missing out on Curry in the draft. It’s so frustrating

  65. Jonathan Isaac stinking out the joint in the ACC Tournament tonight.

    Good, his stock will lower.

  66. Of course, Sacramento blew another double digit 4th quarter lead. They are so fucking tanking.

  67. I just watched Markkanen and he is a top 7 player in this draft. He may not be what we need but he’s a force. Nowitzki-like.
    I can see him being picked ahead of Isaac, Tatum, Bridges and possibly Jackson.
    Ball was bad tonight btw.

  68. how many ex Knicks on Cleveland roster now contributing? is it the player or the coach?
    is it the assistant coaches? Larry Drew or Mike Brown > Rambis, you bet
    and they watch tape, maybe Knicks should hire Spoelstra as their tape guy

Comments are closed.