Odds & Ends 11/9/2008

* Don’t forget there’s a game on Sunday 11/9 at 3pm against the Jazz. Jet fans without pip may want to head to their local bar and scout out the proper location to watch both games simultaneously.

* Interesting stat from the guys over at SNY’s Knicks blog

Chris Duhon
59 (TS) 52 (TOS) 5(TUS) 2(SW) 88%(PP) 71.4% (NP-un) 50% (NP-sw)
Jamal Crawford
40 (TS) 4 (TOS) 10(TUS) 26(SW) 100%(PP) 80% (NP-un) 76% (NP-sw)
Nate Robinson
42 (TS) 8(TOS) 26(TUS) 8(SW) 75%(PP) 88% (NP-un) 75% (NP-sw)

Confused? Okay allow me to explain. Chris Duhon has been screened 59 times on the ball this year- he has got over the screen 52 times. When he gets over, a “positive play” happened 88% of the time (46 out of 52). When he got under the screen, a negative play happend 71% of the time- (5 out of 7) and he doesn’t really switch much and is 50% (1-2).

Got it?

They list the stats for Duhon, Crawford and Nate, and explain what they mean. One of the things that drove me crazy in the Isiah era was how the guards almost never went over screens and that the Knicks never hedged with their big men. But in the D’Antoni era, I’ve seen more of both, guards going over the screen and big men hedging. It’s possible that for the former, having a good defender like Duhon replace a bad defender like Marbury in the lineup helps. But with the latter, the Knicks have had the same forwards (with the possible exception of Chandler playing more PF), and I’ve seen more of them stepping out to slow down penetration.

I don’t agree with every move the team makes (watching this team, I just can’t stop thinking how much Balkman would fit in), however, there is evidence the team is moving in the right direction. The proof is in the little things such as a cohesive offense, drawing up plays during timeouts, more access to the team (I like seeing the locker room speeches & the huddle microphones), and giving more effort on the defensive end. I don’t expect the team to be a defensive juggernaut (can you name a team with a worse defensive roster than New York?). But least D’Antoni has the players trying harder under their own hoop, which I haven’t seen in a long time in New York.

* Basketball Prospectus thinks that Denver got the best player in that trade (“Billups [is] the better player overall”). I do too. Of course they talk about every aspect of the deal, and it’s an all encompassing look on the trade.

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).

57 thoughts to “Odds & Ends 11/9/2008”

  1. Interesting numbers. I’ve noticed Nate fighting through more screens lately. In the past, he would get burned on those plays constantly. I specifically recall him drawing two moving screen calls on Okafor in the Charlotte game by being aggressive against the pick.

    Crawford is so bad on defense. At least Nate can rack up the steals and grab some rebounds.

  2. So theres talk of a three way trade. Gerald Wallace to GS ,Curry to the Bobcats and Harrington to NYK. Interesting.

  3. So theres talk of a three way trade. Gerald Wallace to GS ,Curry to the Bobcats and Harrington to NYK. Interesting.

    because larry brown loved eddy curry so much… I know charlotte needs frontcourt help, but one would think that they could do better with gerald wallace than just curry.

  4. Jamal Crawford going under and switching on screens so frequently is just another indicator of how much he avoids contact. Between this, the way he settles for jumpers, and his refusal to rebound, he’s just too frustrating of a player for me.

    I’m going to start paying attention to the mismatches he allows by switching.

  5. Is The NY Boo Generator on his way out?
    First time in a long time, new commentator officially named part of the team. The Knicks have know idea, the kind of break they will be getting if the boo generator is finally silenced.

    Hopefull thinking.

  6. D

    The Boo Generator is a has been. And if your not mesmerized, and you monitor his play by play remarks; Go back to the first two games if your privileged, it should be obvious that the only fans that should be chanting his name are the ones from the opposing team. Go back to the opening game blog, heat vs knicks if your interested in my play by play of the Master Boo Generator himself. Look under police clyde.

    He’s all smoke and mirrors.

  7. It’s the first half still, and Nate already has his three steals for the game.

    Poor shooting for the Knicks after a hot start. Kirilenko is giving them trouble with his length.

  8. it’s 4 minutes left in the game and we’re up by 10 on the Jazz. who ARE these guys in Knicks uniforms?

  9. “Zach Randolph just hit a 3. He is what we thought he would be when we got him last year.”

    I am pulling the challenge card…

    Great win, and David Lee finally emerged from his crypt in the second half, which makes me happy…

  10. I never thought I’d say this, but Z-bo looks great lately. He’s getting his points mostly on high-efficiency put-backs and post-ups. In today’s game, i can’t recall him taking more than a few outside jumpers, unless he was wide open. He was also a beast on the boards. Perhaps it’s blasphemous and a bit premature, but maybe it’s time to start thinking about him as a long-term player? I also like what i’m seeing from Duhon: good assist/turnover ratio, excellent perimeter defense, and ability to score when necessary. Even Jamal seems to be taking fewer awful shots. I’m cautiously excited for this season.

  11. I agree with Owen. Lee looked bad early on, but then he really came alive, particularly on offense. He was aggressive and drawing some fouls, just like the David Lee we’ve all grown to love.

  12. Can you please stop calling him the Boo Generator? That’s the most asinine nickname I’ve ever heard and you use it relentlessly.

    Anywayz, the Knicks looked pretty darn good today. I think that this definitely a sell-high situation for a lot of our players, particularly Randolph and Crawford. Even if they miraculously maintain such a high level of play, their contracts are still aversely affecting our long term plans.

  13. Not to downplay this win, but mind you the Jazz were without Deron Williams, so they are certainly capable of playing better. Still, I will take a record over .500 under any circumstances–even this early.

    And yes, Rich P, I agree “The Boo Generator” is rather asinine. It arouses memories of that one fellow who posted a few times during the summer crediting Walt’s occasionally lackluster announcing as the reason behind the team’s failures. Anyone else remember that one?

  14. Its amazing what having a good coach can do for a team, especially a team as bad as the Knicks have been the past few years.

    Talking about the defense, obviously they will never be a defensive team like they were under Riley and Van Gundy. BUT what is so apparent is that now at least they have an actual gameplan on D and as someone mentioned earlier, they actually go over screens, big men help out, and they actually rotate and switch properly on D which is something they NEVER did under Isiah because the players didnt have a clue on what to do.

    Give Coach D’Antoni his due, the man deserves a good deal of credit for the job he has done so far….

  15. Not to downplay this win, but mind you the Jazz were without Deron Williams, so they are certainly capable of playing better. Still, I will take a record over .500 under any circumstances–even this early.

    The Jazz were 5-0 coming into today even w/o Deron Williams.

  16. Not to downplay this win, but mind you the Jazz were without Deron Williams, so they are certainly capable of playing better. Still, I will take a record over .500 under any circumstances–even this early.
    And yes, Rich P, I agree “The Boo Generator” is rather asinine. It arouses memories of that one fellow who posted a few times during the summer crediting Walt’s occasionally lackluster announcing as the reason behind the team’s failures. Anyone else remember that one?

    #1 Yes we beat a shorthanded and tired Jazz, but they were undefeated up to now even without Deron.

    #2 It is that same crazy guy blathering on about Clyde.

  17. Not to downplay this win, but mind you the Jazz were without Deron Williams, so they are certainly capable of playing better.

    To downplay this argument, they were 5-0 without Deron Williams and beat teams like Portland and Denver. And Boozer showed up with 19 points and 17 boards, along with 17 and 18 points from Okur and Kirilenko. The Knicks got Boozer his 4th foul in the third and finished the quarter on an 11-0 run. You have to give credit where it’s due. And besides, you have to kick opponents when they’re down and get wins when they’re available.

    What you have to like about this team these days is how they’re finishing games with intensity instead of cowering and waiting for the collapse. There’s an opportunity to finish this week out undefeated – pleasant, pleasant surprise.

  18. it’s amazing that we’re getting away with things like Chandler jumping center and Crawford guarding Kirilenko for extended periods.

  19. I’ve been meaning to say this for a few games, but it seems pretty clear that Crawford is the key to this team as presently constituted. he’s averaging 25 points in wins, 7.5 points in losses. Randolph, Duhon, Lee, Chandler, Nate, all of those guys are reasonably consistent, so as Jamal goes, so goes NY.

  20. I’ve been meaning to say this for a few games, but it seems pretty clear that Crawford is the key to this team as presently constituted. he’s averaging 25 points in wins, 7.5 points in losses. Randolph, Duhon, Lee, Chandler, Nate, all of those guys are reasonably consistent, so as Jamal goes, so goes NY.

    Agree for the most part, if Crawford is cold, we’re usually in trouble. But I do think Nate and Zach can pick up the slack in the scoring area.

  21. but that’s the thing, they can’t really. you’re already getting 35-45 from them most games, they can’t give you 60. Chandler can maybe help a bit most nights, but basically they need Jamal to be going well to win.

  22. Is it rude of me to make a suggestion about Knickerblogger? I know that our dues are very low, but, still, here’s a thought:

    What if we had a new thread for each game? It seems strange that conversations about each new game are buried in threads with wholly different headers.

    In previous years, lord knows it was too depressing to “feature” each game like this. But maybe this year, as a sign of optimism, we could do it. Whaddaya think?

  23. Ted Nelson,
    I think Randolph has a little John Starks in him (minus the defensive intensity). I remember Starks having terrible shooting nights and then emerging with big shots in the 4th. Zach has that same somewhat insane confidence. Jamal is like that too, minus the meanness. If these guys make some mistakes and take some bad shots but show toughness and make important shots and we win, will that make folks start to re-evaluate their “terribleness”.

    Also, these guys have been having better shooting nights. wasn’t Zach 10-15 in one game? Jamal was 10-17 tonight (I’m too lazy too look it up). I mean, when the team plays better the percentages of the individuals goes up. Duhon deserves alot of credit for the better synergy.

    I think (only possibly, because they have proven me wrong before) that the only thing truly terrible about NYK has been the coaching (and Maybe Marbury and Curry).

  24. What surprisingly nice news to come home from work to. I definitely need to watch the replay tomorrow at noon. Does anyone have a link to that site that breaks down the games on video handy?

  25. What’s been missing has been a concrete game plan. All the good coaches provide their players with reasonable and straightforward goals. For D’Antoni, it’s speed. “Look, guys– play hard and fast. You’re going to make mistakes, and that’s fine. The important thing is that you push and move the ball. These are reasonable expectations, and if you can’t follow them then you will be on the bench.”

    For Greg Popovich, it’s almost the opposite: “Be careful with the ball. Get it to our main guys on offense. On defense we have a clear game plan, and the guys who we aren’t gearing our defense towards are going to score, but that’s fine with me. I will only bench you if you deviate from our gameplan.”

    You can see it in the great coaches faces. They seem to get upset even when the score shows that they shouldn’t be, or when a play works out to their teams’ advantage but it wasn’t played according to the game plan.

    You can’t say that about Isiah, and i think it’s why you rarely see the all-star players turn into good coaches. Most of these guys succeeded because of their intensity, their focus on the game moment to moment, their focus on getting the most out of their own abilities, not out any kind of long term vision.

  26. Balkman also emerged from the crypt tonight with a very solid effort in a Denver win over a bad Memphis team.

    It’s unbelievable how this board swings to and fro, Randolph now the new hero.

    I think we should give him an extension.

    He has had two great games, after two miserable games, and I love his attitude this year. But he was 4-13 at the start of the 4th quarter with 5 turnovers.

    And he wasn’t close to the best power forward on the floor. Boozer was 7-11, 5-6, with 17 rebounds, 3 steals, and two turnovers for a Win Score of 22.5. Randolph clocked in at 11.5.

    Anyway, no raining on the parade, great to be 4-2, and great to see the G-men get a win….

  27. Dan,

    The only reason to re-evaluate their “terribleness” is if they’ve improved, because there’s plenty of evidence on plenty of teams with plenty of coaches on how good these two are (not actually terrible, but terrible 1st/2nd options on a mediocre defensive team and terrible relative to other players you could spend the money on).

    They’re hot on this 3 game winning streak, and yes they’re the Knicks’ primary offensive options so when they’re hot the Knicks will be competitive. But it’s not like they haven’t had 3 and maybe even 10, 20 game stretches like this in the past. Long-term, what kind of a team do you have with Crawford/Randolph eating $27 million in cap space if you don’t have an All-NBA player on the roster with them or an excellent defensive team? As much as 1st round playoff exits are an improvement over lottery seasons without the picks to show for it, I’m hoping for a little more.

    I’d personally rather have better, more consistent scorers who bring it every minute of every game… that’s just me.

    I certainly hope the Knicks can keep finding ways to win, and with SA minus Manu and Parker, Memphis, and OKC (combined record of 5-13)coming up things are looking good this week. However, despite playing a soft schedule to date the Knicks are 19th in the NBA in both offensive and defensive efficiency. I am hoping that the soft early schedule will help them get their collective confidence up and let them get used to D’Antoni’s system on both sides of the ball before going up against some tougher teams. I certainly think the 8 seed is a possibility, who knows how things develop from here though…

  28. As inefficient and occasionally horrible as Zach is, I can’t remember another interior player who is less athletic than he is still manage to grab a ton of offensive rebounds and finish around the rim. I really didn’t have a problem at all with his game yesterday — a few outside jumpers but I think D’Antoni encourages them to shoot when they’re wide open. I think Zach is a pretty good outside shooter when uncontested so my feeling is that he should at least occasionally take those shots to keep the defense from sagging off all the time.

    Re: the need for Jamal to go off for us to win — I actually think we have 2 “x” factors — Jamal for sure, but also Nate. When he is hot (as we saw in the 2nd quarter the other day) he can drop 20 in a quarter without breaking a sweat. Hopefully between the 2 of them, 1 is hot and can carry us through the doldrums.

    Loving Duhon by the way… I was lukewarm about the pickup at first but he really is playing well and not making many mistakes.

    Great win — I originally predicted 36 wins and possibly an 8 seed — after seeing them play this week (very small sample size) I’ll inch it up to an upside of 41-41 and a 7 seed. But I think the playoffs are definitely within sniffing distance!

  29. “I actually think we have 2 “x” factors — Jamal for sure, but also Nate. When he is hot (as we saw in the 2nd quarter the other day) he can drop 20 in a quarter without breaking a sweat. Hopefully between the 2 of them, 1 is hot and can carry us through the doldrums.”

    but even in that game, he didn’t score at all in the second half. Nate is much more consistent, 16 PPG so far in wins, 13 PPG in losses. Jamal is the swing factor, night in and night out, IMO.

  30. I’ve been meaning to say this for a few games, but it seems pretty clear that Crawford is the key to this team as presently constituted. he’s averaging 25 points in wins, 7.5 points in losses. Randolph, Duhon, Lee, Chandler, Nate, all of those guys are reasonably consistent, so as Jamal goes, so goes NY.

    You cant look at the points in losses look at the shot attempts .As I said said two weeks ago the problem i saw was Qrich trying to become uber scorer instead of jack of all trades role player. At the start of game the ball was swinging Qrich’s way and he was never passing and jamal never got going offensively. Well now Q is focused more on rebounding,passing,defending, and taking the occasional shot and the team is much better off for it.

    Hahn reported that D’antoni was mad jamal only attempted 6 shots. I think he essentially cut Q’s minutes to get him to realize he needed to start passing the ball more.

    Just checked the stats and jamal is shooting 45% from behind the arc and from the field. In the losses he took 11 and 6 shots respectively for the entire game.

    I expected as much from everyone though with Marbury being around but I have been impressed with the amount of energy they have come out with teams expect them to chuck threes like the Suns but they really have capability to bang,attack and get to the line as well. When jefferies return we will have more length and should be able to generate even more turnovers

  31. Hard to get excited about the Knicks yet.

    Crawford is inconsistent.
    Chandler is inconsistent.
    Lee, so far, is a lesser player than he has been.
    Nate is pretty good. But what we see now is probably what we’ll get.
    Zach played terribly last night, in general, but he saved himself with his offensive boards. He’s a much harder worker than I think people have given him credit for.
    Duhon is very steady, something the Knicks desperately needed.
    Q isn’t a starter in this league, in my view.

    Williams was out and Boozer had to sit after his fourth foul, which basically guts Utah.

    One thing, however, jumped out at me with Boozer.
    This uptempo offense is going to be a problem for guys like Boozer and other big, power forwards and centers against the Knicks. Expect to see some of these big, lumbering guys to get into foul trouble. Watch Tim Duncan. If he gets into foul trouble, there may be a theme developing that could benefit the Knicks and get them into the 40-win – relative – stratosphere.

  32. Someone raised the issue above about signing Zach to an extension. I’m assuming he was joking, but it got me thinking – is there a reasonable price for Zach’s services that wouldn’t kill the cap situation?

    Most posters have been very critical of Zbo, present company included. However there is a good deal of print out there that says Zach is a very friendly, easy going guy, that cares about winning. Last season was a disaster in almost every way so it may be a mistake to use that as the litmus test.

    Assuming that Zach’s off-court issues and rep for being a bad influence kill his market value for the foreseeable future, is there a price that would be “worth it” to resign Zach (the MLE, for example)?

  33. Someone raised the issue above about signing Zach to an extension. I’m assuming he was joking, but it got me thinking – is there a reasonable price for Zach’s services that wouldn’t kill the cap situation?
    Most posters have been very critical of Zbo, present company included. However there is a good deal of print out there that says Zach is a very friendly, easy going guy, that cares about winning. Last season was a disaster in almost every way so it may be a mistake to use that as the litmus test.
    Assuming that Zach’s off-court issues and rep for being a bad influence kill his market value for the foreseeable future, is there a price that would be “worth it” to resign Zach (the MLE, for example)?

    I don’t think Zach would sign for the MLE — truth is, his market value is way above that, justified or not. I think Walsh was smart in not trading Zach for less than nothing — certainly his trade value right now is already higher than it was preseason, and we get a good look as to what he would do in D’Antoni’s system and whether he might be worth signing or keeping. The great thing about playing on a team that’s not a laughingstock anymore — everyone’s trade value goes up.

  34. Zach Randolph:

    1) one reason I don’t pay much attention to hoops stats is that I think they can be pretty misleading, yet people tend to defer to them as truth. for instance, in yesterday’s game, three of Z-Bo’s missed shots were rebounded by him and converted, so in reality he was 9-17 from the field, not 9-20.

    2) that being said, while he has been pretty solid so far and I do think this team would largely collapse without him around, anyone talking about signing him to an extension is out of their mind.

  35. Zach Randolph:

    1) one reason I don’t pay much attention to hoops stats is that I think they can be pretty misleading, yet people tend to defer to them as truth. for instance, in yesterday’s game, three of Z-Bo’s missed shots were rebounded by him and converted, so in reality he was 9-17 from the field, not 9-20.

    Z-Bo’s already gets credit for those plays – as offensive rebounds and the made shot. There’s a reason these things aren’t kept track that way. If you wanted to calculate things as such, you’re missing a stat that’s very vital in your calculation – turnovers. Randolph had 5 of them. So by your calculations, he would be 9-22. But then again turnovers are much worse than missed shots (since a team can still recover a missed shot), so you would probably want to give them a multiplier. But then again not all turnovers are the same – the one that goes out of bounds is less damaging than the one that leads to an easy transition bucket. And then you have to think about point guards who are more turnover prone because they handle the ball more. So if you start calculating shooting percentages in this manner, you’re going to end up with skewed numbers. It’s a very slippery slope.

    It’s best to keep track of things as they are, because over the course of the season they’ll even out. Every forward in the league will grab a few of their own misses and put them back in. And when we use TS%/eFG% we are comparing it to other players that operate under the same conditions. So there’s no misrepresentation.

    However your intuition is right in one sense. When we calculate possessions, Randolph’s play would be one single possession. That is an offensive rebound extends a possession – so the Knicks offensive efficiency isn’t tied into Randolph’s miss. But rather that they scored at the end of their possession.

  36. Of course I was joking about an extension…

    Randolph is worth the MLE certainly. Using the WOW method, he was worth 11.2 million last year. He would be a bargain at 6 million, but at his current salary he doesn’t represent value.

    You win in the NBA by employing players who generate a large surplus of wins above their contract value. I think in a good year Zach could sort of justify his salary, i.e. if everyone were paid like him your team would win 42 games. But I don’t see Zach ever being grossly underpaid for what he produces. That’s the kind of player you need to be a championship contender in the NBA, someone who is worth a lot more than he is being paid.

  37. I actually would not even want Zach at the MLE. He is an inefficient scorer who tends to hold the ball too long on the perimeter, and is a poor defender.

    His good rebounding ability does not make up for that. I can see Zach as a valuable 3rd big man off the bench, where his inefficiency can be managed and his defensive shortcomings can be covered up but he consideres himself a starter and would not be happy with 20 minutes a game so therefore I do not want him on my team at any price.

    I have prefered his game tis season to last because he is not as much of a vacuum and he seems to be trying harder on defense, but he is still a black hole and still a poor defender. As for his stats they are very very similar.

    07-08 per 36:
    19.5 pts, 11.4 rebs, 2.2 asts, 3.0 tos, 51.3% TS%
    08-09 per 36:
    21.7 pts, 12.6 rebs, 1.8 asts, 2.6 tos, 51.5% TS%

    His slight bump in scoring and rebounding can be explained by our increased pace so for all intensive purposes he is the same player we all hated last year.

  38. Anyone interested in this?

    The Nuggets have waived Antonio McDyess, one week after they obtained him from Detroit along with Chauncey Billups and Cheikh Samb in a swap for Allen Iverson.

    I actually wouldn’t mind a second go-round with McDyess — although I’m sure he has a sour taste in his mouth from the 1st time. I think his defensive abilities and ability to shoot from up to 18 feet would make him a good fit here…

  39. “I actually would not even want Zach at the MLE. He is an inefficient scorer who tends to hold the ball too long on the perimeter, and is a poor defender.

    His good rebounding ability does not make up for that. I can see Zach as a valuable 3rd big man off the bench, where his inefficiency can be managed and his defensive shortcomings can be covered up but he consideres himself a starter and would not be happy with 20 minutes a game so therefore I do not want him on my team at any price.”

    Your kidding right? Signing Z-bo to the MLE would be a coup. Players who average the same number of rebounds as him, see Tyson Chandler, Samuel Dalembert and Reggie Evans, make at least the MLE. Granted, he cannot defend as well as they do, but his scoring is far superior to them.

    Second, he may have a history of inefficient scoring but has shown a trend of improving through better shot selection. Instead of dribbling the ball off his foot and taking a wild three, he is taking quick open shots from 18 feet and in. Also, he is doing an excellent job drawing fouls when he catches the ball in the post with good position; he shoots 80% from the FT line which means we can keep him in at the end of games, not like Shaq or D-Howard. Contrary to last season, he is not holding the ball and is making much quicker decisions. This is not 3rd string big man material.

    If you made this statement last season I would 100% agree, but this season he is responding to D’Antoni and playing more within his abilities. I agree with abbey that extending him is not realistic, but I am enjoying the contributions he has made thus far.

  40. The Knicks are strictly a rebuilding team, so McDyess doesn’t make much sense. D’antoni has even said he’ll play Gallinari once he’s healthy enough even if it costs the team wins in the short term.

    Also, we’re finally breaking free of the Isiah Thomas era — why would we want to relive the Scott Layden days now? Just looking at McDyess brings back a flood of painful memories.

  41. Mike,

    Z-Bo’s already gets credit for those plays – as offensive rebounds and the made shot. There’s a reason these things aren’t kept track that way. If you wanted to calculate things as such, you’re missing a stat that’s very vital in your calculation – turnovers. Randolph had 5 of them. So by your calculations, he would be 9-22. But then again turnovers are much worse than missed shots (since a team can still recover a missed shot), so you would probably want to give them a multiplier. But then again not all turnovers are the same – the one that goes out of bounds is less damaging than the one that leads to an easy transition bucket. And then you have to think about point guards who are more turnover prone because they handle the ball more. So if you start calculating shooting percentages in this manner, you’re going to end up with skewed numbers. It’s a very slippery slope.

    yes, that’s all true, good points.

    It’s best to keep track of things as they are, because over the course of the season they’ll even out. Every forward in the league will grab a few of their own misses and put them back in. And when we use TS%/eFG% we are comparing it to other players that operate under the same conditions. So there’s no misrepresentation.

    this I disagree with, some players’ styles are more conducive to this than others, and I don’t see why they necessarily even out over the course of a season.

    However your intuition is right in one sense. When we calculate possessions, Randolph’s play would be one single possession. That is an offensive rebound extends a possession – so the Knicks offensive efficiency isn’t tied into Randolph’s miss. But rather that they scored at the end of their possession.

    right, that was what I meant, sorry for my sloppy phrasing.

  42. Interesting quote from Newsday:

    “It’s unbelievable. The guy can’t jump at all,” D’Antoni said with a laugh. “I don’t even think he played particularly well, but he’s 25 and 14 … and you’ve got to give him credit. I told him at one point, I had to remind him that we were in the white shirts, not the blue shirts. He kept hitting the blue guys.”

  43. o_boogie – Randolph is not taking better shots. It just looks that way. His TS% this year is almost identical to last year. It looks like Randolph is being smarter with the ball and it looks like he is passing more but in reality he is shooting with exactly the same inefficiency as last season and actually averaging less assists. I admit he is not disrupting the offense as much with lots of dribbling but his efficiency has not improved at all over last year.

    Randolph is a low efficiency scorer and D’Antoni’s offense has not seemed to change that. He is what he is and I want none of it on my team.

    jon abbey – Randolph gets penalized statistically for his miss but then gets rewarded statistically for his offensive rebound so when looking at his stats you do not need to take note of whose shot he offensively rebounded because whether it is his or someone else’s it helps the team equally.

  44. Damn you C-wod, beat me to the punch and ruined my shot at being keen.

    What a quote. Rather refreshing to have such a blunt, straightforward voice present.

  45. “Randolph is not taking better shots. It just looks that way. His TS% this year is almost identical to last year. It looks like Randolph is being smarter with the ball and it looks like he is passing more but in reality he is shooting with exactly the same inefficiency as last season and actually averaging less assists.”

    How can he be “not taking better shots” and “being smarter with the ball”? There is a BIG difference between good shot selection and hitting shots. Yes, his FG and TS and eFG and whatever all indicate he is not shooting well, but he is taking good shots and staying within the system. Everyone has bad shooting nights and 6 games is not a strong indication if this trend will continue, but his shot selection has been much improved. I can live with that.

  46. o_boogie – I said that it looks like he is being smarter and that it looks like he is taking better shots, not that he actually is.

    He is almost exactly in line with both last years stats so I cannot blame bad shooting or a small sample. If he was way off his averages then I would say we might need a bigger sample but he has not had any incredibly horrible games or incredibly dominant games. I think if you randomly took six games from last year you would have about the same ratio of good games and bad games.

    I do not see a positive trend that would make me think he is about to post better numbers. He is shooting the same amount of jumpers, (57% of his shots this year, 59% of his shots last year) and he is going to the free throw line at an almost identical rate (One free throw for every 3.3 shots this year, one free throw for every 3.7 shots last year). In fact I would say it is almost eerie how similar his numbers are this year compared to last considering it is a new system, and such a small sample.

    The only positive I can say about him is he seems to be trying harder on defense (still not good but better than last year) and he is holding the ball less, therefore disrupting the offensive flow less, but there is no statistical evidence that he is taking better shots or that his efficiency is about to improve.

Comments are closed.