Knicks Morning News (2014.09.12)

  • [New York Times] Japan Given Deadline to End Dispute Over Dual League (Fri, 12 Sep 2014 04:22:03 GMT)

    Japan has until the end of October to resolve a dispute between its two competing basketball leagues but there is no threat to the national team competing at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, the sport’s governing body said on Thursday.

  • [New York Times] Sports Briefing | Pro Basketball: Maya Moore Is Unanimous All-W.N.B.A. Pick (Fri, 12 Sep 2014 03:58:30 GMT)

    Minnesota Lynx forward Maya Moore was a unanimous choice for the all-W.N.B.A. first team, which also features Diana Taurasi and Brittney Griner of the Phoenix Mercury.

  • [New York Times] United States 96, Lithuania 68: Without Glamour of Dream Team, U.S. Is Again Dominating in Barcelona (Fri, 12 Sep 2014 01:51:02 GMT)

    The United States advanced to the final of basketball’s World Cup with a rout over Lithuania in Barcelona but little of the luster that Michael Jordan and company displayed there in 1992.

  • 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).

    39 thoughts to “Knicks Morning News (2014.09.12)”

    1. I’ve been watching the FIBA World Cup off and on. Some of the non US games are quite good. For the US games, I usually watch part and then give up when they get such a lead that the game is over. Other teams seem to either be unable to rebound against us, or, like Lithuania, to run out of energy, will or something in the second half and then lose the rebound battle decisively. The biggest surprise for me is the play of Klay Thompson. He looks great. I can see why GS didn’t want to trade him even to get Love, and I wasn’t expecting that.

    2. other teams seem to either be unable to rebound against Kenneth Faried and Anthony Davis*

      note that Kenneth “Role Player” Faried is a part of that amended sentence

      Kenneth “Kobe Assist-Recipient” Faried

      Kenneth “High Motor, Low Skill” Faried

      Kenneth “Seriously, Rebounding Awareness is a Talent as Much as Anything Else on a Basketball Court” Faried

    3. Kenneth “I can’t play defense” Faried

      Kenneth “I’ve had a negative net rating the past 3 years” Faried

    4. Kenneth “tournament top ten in rebounds and rebounds per minute” Faried.

      But it is true that Davis, Cousins and even Drummond are cleaning up on the boards in this tournament too. Drummond doesn’t get as many minutes, but he does great when he’s in there.

    5. “Even Drummond” like Drummond isn’t the best rebounder in forever. He leads all players with 17.6 R40M.

    6. Articles like that just infuriate me. Just the title alone: “How B/R’s New Rebounder Rating Proves Not All NBA Boards Are Created Equal”
      They come up with a metric for how many rebounds a player would have if all of their rebounds were “contested”. They give no definition for contested vs. uncontested. They say about “uncontested” rebounds: “…it shouldn’t count as much as if he’d grabbed the rebound away from other players.”
      Why not? That’s an assumption. You can’t base your metric on an assumption then say you metric proves that assumption. That there is some serious circular logic. I’m not saying this metric isn’t useful, it’s just presented in an absolutely infuriating way.

      This article has legitimately put me in a bad mood.

    7. I’m all for saying, “A player could be a better rebounding if X.” That’s okay with me. But when a player puts himself in position to rebound (like Jason Kidd did for his whole career) or a player gets consistently phenomenal assist totals over his career (like Stockton, Nash and Paul) or is consistently average (Carmelo Anthony), you have to start explaining why it’s a “bad” or “misleading” thing, which is post hoc garbage for the rurulands of the world.

      Sometimes I think that the clearly-uncontested rebounds are a bit of a “sham” when arguing value from the box score. Then I realize that all players of a certain type (say, a frontcourt player) should have about equal chance at those “freebies” and thus we should focus on how Drummond, Faried and Davis are so productive when it comes to opportunities apart from those “uncontested” rebounds. I also find the continuity in rebounding numbers from year to year a pretty strong indicator of its explanatory value, but blah, blah blah blah, blah blah 2011, blah blah blah.

    8. I agree, Kevin. For instance, the article states:

      Consider two scenarios: In the first, a player is running down the court on a fast break with his teammate trailing him. The opposition concedes the points and doesn’t hurry back. The breaker misses the layup, but his teammate—the only other person on that half of the court—tips it in.

      In the second: A rebounder goes up into the trees and fetches a missed shot, yanking it from the hands of three opponents.

      These two things are not the same, but they are treated the same.

      Well, actually, any one of the 9 other basketball players could have trailed that player on the fast break and been in position for the rebound, so why should he be penalized for being the only one who did? It has precisely the same exact value.

      What I think they’re trying to say (and failing to) is that the first kind of rebound says nothing about the rebounding skill of the player who got the rebound, whereas the second kind of rebound (in their opinion) does. But it’s a weak argument.

    9. “It has precisely the same exact value.”

      This is where I disagree, depending on the definition. It produces the same outcome, but different players affect the expected return on the investment of “crashing the boards.” E.g. Faried and Bargnani can each trail a play, but it’s more like that Faried will convert the ORB and FGA than Bargnani. So while each player may be able to trail a play, the assumption is that the player with more rebounds is either (1) more likely to crash or (2) more likely to convert a crash opportunity or (3) both (1) and (2).

      Ultimately, if we want to be descriptivists, we should say, “Faried either crashes more or converts more opportunities or both, and thus produces more rebounds,” and take as secondary the consequences (whether the crash opportunities create some adverse effect afterward, which is some presumptuous shit, if you ask me). If we want to be rurulandian prescriptivists, we can say, “If Carmelo crashes the boards more, he will produce more rebounds because he is a superior athlete to Player X and Y.”

    10. You know, now that I think about this more, they don’t differentiate between offensive and defensive rebounding opportunities. This metric would seemingly punish a player for going after offensive rebounds, since offensive rebounding percentage would more than likely be significantly less than defensive rebounding percentage.

    11. whether the crash opportunities create some adverse effect afterward, which is some presumptuous shit, if you ask me

      Now that would be cool to look at. I mean, I imagine there would be significant adverse effects if you sent all 5 of your players to crash the boards, as there is no one left to play defense if you don’t get the rebound. There is likely some point of diminishing returns to crashing the offensive boards, and it’d be really cool to see that examined. That would actually be useful.

    12. Anybody gonna go down to MSG tomorrow night to see JD And The Straight Shot open for The Eagles?

      http://nypost.com/2014/09/12/jim-dolans-band-to-open-for-the-eagles-at-msg/

      That article is UNREAL. I highly recommend checking out some of the videos. They are live, in-the-studio performances, so you get to hear the soulless vocal stylings of James Dolan singing without the benefit of any turd polishing. And some of these seem to be new jams, some of them “topical” blues laments about first world problems such as Dolan’s squabbles with people like Eliot Spitzer and Bill DeBlasio. Actual lyric: “If you dare to call the mayor/taxes got your goat/well he don’t care/’cause you’re a millionaire/and he didn’t get your vote.” That’s the true essence of the blues, as far as I’m concerned– pudgy fedora-and-rolex wearing white guy billionaires complaining about the top marginal tax rate.

    13. That Trayvon Martin song will change your life. Dolan is Rodman in North Korea. And for us, he is Kim Jong-un, too.

    14. James Dolan seriously wrote a song about Trayvon Martin, people. And he’s going to sing it for people who are paying him money to watch the Eagles. Shit just got so real I don’t know what to do with myself.

    15. Kevin (and Jowles),

      Here’s an article that sheds a bit more light on the methodology used.

      http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2186472-beyond-rebounds-which-players-have-emerged-as-nbas-best-on-the-boards

      The contested rebound data comes from SportsVU:

      “By contested, we’re referring to the definition from NBA.com’s SportVU data, which explains that a contested board is a “rebound gathered where an opponent is within 3.5 feet.” Naturally, it’s more difficult to haul in a missed shot when there’s an opposing player fighting for it, and that’s the basis of this new metric.”

      It seems that advance stats are beginning to transition from extrapolation from simple box score stats to extrapolation from “advanced” video/tracker technology derived stats.

      As to Faried being lower on the list than Melo, It supports the premise that Melo could play Faried’s role better than Faried if he wanted to, but Faried could never, ever, ever fill Melo’s role as a relatively efficient ultra-high usage scorer who is a pretty good low-volume rebounder as well.

    16. “By contested, we’re referring to the definition from NBA.com’s SportVU data, which explains that a contested board is a “rebound gathered where an opponent is within 3.5 feet.” Naturally, it’s more difficult to haul in a missed shot when there’s an opposing player fighting for it, and that’s the basis of this new metric.”

      Yeah, but can we account for the difference that players experience in contested rebounds? I mean, when Carmelo is on the floor, all five opponents will mob him to prevent him from scoring, which means that he’s going to face quintuple teams and sometimes even sextuple-teaming. Crazy, right? But Chandler’s going to have someone like 3 feet away from him, but totally mobbing Carmelo and not even paying attention to Chandler (because the opponent thinks, “low-skill player, must ignore”) so his stats could be artificially inflated and Carmelo’s could be deflated.

      I mean I don’t know about you guys but it’s OBVIOUS TO ME that Carmelo is going to be fucked over by this stat because it doesn’t accurately measure what happens on the floor. It’s much harder for Carmelo to get rebounds than anyone because he’s Carmelo Anthony and everyone brings their A+ game against him. Chandler’s only maybe gotten a C+ game. The 2011 Heat thought he was so useless that they actually played Joel Anthony against him. I think they had Dwight Howard that year but were like, “Hey, we don’t need him against Chandler because all of the players will be focusing on the TRUE superstars.” So I think they benched him, but still Chandler didn’t do much of anything except have the highest ORTG in the playoffs out of any player, which was obviously a farce because he was playing Joel Anthony BECAUSE THE HEAT DIDN’T EVEN NEED TO GUARD HIM AND HE STILL COULDN’T SCORE.

      At least that’s my theory. Extrapolated.

    17. Wow, that’s quite a reaction, considering I (nor the BR guys) made any argument that Melo’s contested rebounds were any more or less contested than Chandler’s, Faried’s or anyone else’s. It merely implies that given the same set of circumstances (an opposing player within 3.5 feet of him in a rebounding situation) Melo comes away with the rebound at a higher percentage than Faried. Drummond fares much better than either in this regard.

    18. My anger is more how the metric is presented, rather than the metric itself. It’s useful, but I think it has a major flaw, in that it doesn’t differentiate between offensive rebounding opportunities and defensive rebounding opportunities. That really would unfairly penalize guys who contest for many offensive rebounds.

    19. Kevin, I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Are you suggesting that “contested” offensive rebounds are harder to get than “contested” defensive rebounds because of player proximity to the basket (defensive player has inside position far more often, and 100% of the time on FTs.) If yes, I get the concern, but don’t think that’s the point of the metric.

      The counter-concern is that it suggests that players who are responsible for taking volume perimeter shots, e.g. Melo, would be unfairly penalized if offensive rebounds were weighted because he doesn’t play a role that puts him in ideal offensive rebounding position. A player like Faried has more freedom to battle for good rebounding position.

      My criticism (in trying to be fair to Faried) is that “energy” players are penalized for being so quick to the ball that no one is within 3.5 feet of them a greater % of the time. So if Melo was in Faried’s role, he would do just as well on contested rebounds, but would not have as many uncontested rebound opportunities.

    20. “So if Melo was in Faried’s role, he would do just as well on contested rebounds, but would not have as many uncontested rebound opportunities.”

      Knickerblogger, where we spare no opportunity to ride Carmelo Anthony’s jock!

      Seriously, you think Melo would be as good a rebounder if he played the “Kenneth Faried” role? He can’t even jump that high anymore.

    21. Regardless, the whole “Carmelo could do that if he wanted to” thing on this site has worn out its welcome. Just like ruruland escaped to the wilds of Idaho, so should the prevailing wisdom about Melo’s alleged greatness.

    22. More importantly, who is the player that is 3.5 feet from the basket and comes away with a rebound the least? (If it’s not Bargnani, the metric is worthless!)

      (…unless Bargnani has never actually been 3.5 feet from the basket in his life, which I suppose is possible…)

    23. Jowles, that’s it?? Faried jumps higher than Melo and is therefore the better rebounder??

      Charles Oakley and Wes Unseld were big-time rebounders who barely left the ground. Charles Barkley was hardly a fitness fanatic or gifted leaper. Moses Malone, anyone?

      So might it possibly be true that Melo is better at blocking out, or has better instincts, or hands, or quicker on his feet in small spaces, or the other things that go into rebounding beyond vertical leaping?

      I got a chuckle about you comment about KBers riding Melo’s jock, considering that you’ve been sniffing Faried’s crotch since before he was drafted. Any stat suggesting that he’s not a perennial MVP candidate is enough to drive you in to a frenzy of dismissive sarcasm.

    24. @29 Man is that weak. You are totally missing the point. Melo wasn’t even in the top 25 on this list. It isn’t about Melo being great. It’s about Faried being grossly overrated, and soon to be grossly overpaid.

    25. Are we really saying that if Melo just did what Faried did he’d average 15.1 rebounds per 48? Because I can use nothing but the eye test and still determine that’s not true.

    26. Well, we’ll never know. For one thing, Faried hasn’t figured out a way to get a coach to play him even 36 mpg, despite his gaudy stats and amazing conditioning. Maybe this year will be different.

      There has also been a marked decline in his OReb% since his rookie year, and a similar uptick in his usage%. Could these be related? (same thing happened to Kevin Love, btw, only his TS% went up with higher usage, while Faried’s went down.)

      As to DReb%, last year, Melo’s was 19.4%, Faried’s was 22.2%, for a difference of 1.5 DRebs per 100 possessions. Is that such a huge gulf?

    27. Back before I was a fully grown adult with a life and a job, I used to hang out a lot with a buddy of mine, take bong rips and play hour upon hour of NBA Live. We’d make custom all-time great teams, and spend all kinds of time adjusting the ratings of our various digital players.

      My friend was the biggest Michael Jordan fan of all time, and would always insist on making Jordan’s rebounding rating 99, because Jordan got like 18 rebounds in a playoff game one time and that “proved” that Jordan could be an all-time great rebounder “if he wanted to.” I wondered aloud why Michael Jordan wouldn’t want to just go get the damn rebounds and average more than 10 per game if he was so great at rebounding, but I never really got a straight answer.

      By this “logic” I guess you could say Carmelo Anthony “could do the Faried role” just as well as Faried. If of course you had taken several bong rips just prior.

    28. Young Barkley was an explosive athlete who could jump out of the gym. He was an absolute wrecking ball as a physical specimen. And all while being fat. Barkley was a phenomenon.

      As for Melo, he’s a good rebounder who isn’t in position enough, a terrific passer who doesn’t dish enough, and incredible open shot maker who takes too many contested shots. That’s why he’s a good, not great player.

    Comments are closed.