Knicks haven't been a great road team(or good for that matter), but they have been playing better as the season goes on. They need to learn how to win on the road and tonight should be a good test. It's a winnable game and they should be ready to go.
Toronto and Boston lost last night so the Knicks are only .5 games behind Boston and 2.5 behind Toronto. A win tonight and they are tied for 3rd in the conference.
Courtney Lee expected to play.
I just think it's been clear since last season that he's a rotation player. His per 36 #s last year were 14.6 points, 11.8 rebounds, 3.4 assists. 2.3 blocks, .9 steals with good enough shooting and he hits FTs. Indeed, his points, rebounds, steals, and assists rates are DOWN this year. I find it baffling that he only got 764 minutes last year. Criminal even.
That said, the upticks in his blocks and shooting (and I think better defense) make him better this year. His PER, WS48, and BPM are all better.
i would be happy with 4 10 and 3 and playing with high energy in 20 to 25 minutes
lets be honest scoring wise anything the knicks get is gravy
What you'd want from Noah doesnt answer the question of whether it is reasonable to expect it. Also, he's a career 11.5 rebounds/36 mins player. There is no reason to believe that 10 in 20-25 minutes is in the offing on the downside of his career.
Quote:
mean last 5 games he's averaging over 21 minutes per game, 8 and 8 with 1 block on 57%. He's not some stud future superstar but I think we seem to forget he was a small school guy, 2nd rounder and is still only 26. Being rough around the edges shouldn't be some massive shock. He is pretty clearly a legit NBA part of a rotation and as of right now is arguably Phil's best FA signing all things considered.
I just think it's been clear since last season that he's a rotation player. His per 36 #s last year were 14.6 points, 11.8 rebounds, 3.4 assists. 2.3 blocks, .9 steals with good enough shooting and he hits FTs. Indeed, his points, rebounds, steals, and assists rates are DOWN this year. I find it baffling that he only got 764 minutes last year. Criminal even.
That said, the upticks in his blocks and shooting (and I think better defense) make him better this year. His PER, WS48, and BPM are all better.
Well not calling out anyone in particular but while there was a vocal group of people who felt he could be good (in better shape etc) there were a decent number of people open to dealing him for a 2nd rounder around draft time. He's solid, multi-skilled and compliments KP rather well. I could look stupid saying this but... I think KOQ outplays Noah over the next 3 seasons.
He's been better, but lets face it - he couldnt be much worse than the start he had. Not a fan of his. Hopefully, someone contender wants him and the Bulls can trade him.
Quote:
was talking to a bulls fan friend who was raving about Rolo after a rocky start (like last season).
He's been better, but lets face it - he couldnt be much worse than the start he had. Not a fan of his. Hopefully, someone contender wants him and the Bulls can trade him.
Bull's SB blog described his play in a recent game as "sensational per usual"
Link - ( New Window )
The best quality about him is his consistency. He doesn't have any flaws really. He's a average rebounder (good at boxing out though), good rim protector and not an incapable scorer. He's a capable passer too. But he'll never really have any of those game breaking games that even a guy like KOQ is capable of.
Quote:
In comment 13252551 Sgrcts said:
Quote:
When I don't post because you three morons complain incessantly no matter what I say, you guys still can't keep me out of your brain.
No, Rose is still pretty shitty on most advanced stats. In fact, ESPN just came out with an article wondering if Rose was the right PG for this team. Surprisingly, seems the answer is no. I didn't post it because you fanboys would take it too personally but fuck it here you go. Is Rose the right PG for the Knicks? - ( New Window )
people would not rip you if you had a shred of basketball knowledge and actually watched a game and analysed it and broke it down with your own thoughts..
stop using other peoples work to make your point, grow a set and actually make a point without stats based on your two eyes..
take last night for example his stats in the first half were nothing awesome, according to stats it was an average game but he made a ton of positive plays...
his attacking adds a dimension that this team has not had in a long time, when he attacks, even if he does not finish he is making a positive play..
last night he drovr and knew whiteside liked to try and block everything so he threw it up knowing the center would have a clear shot at a rebound. that is a positive play that does not show up..
whem he kicks it out and the guy misses a shot, it does not show up on the stat sheet, so accorsing to you it doesnt do anything but it is still a positive play and he made the right play..
stats do not tell the whole story and you cant comprehend that, you know when people will have respect for you? go back and watch a game, any gamr i dont care and actually watch it and you tell me how many bad plays and how many good plays he had
The best part of his advanced stats is that both offensive and defensive ratings are measured that all the players teammates are equally as good per minute at forcing negative plays by the offense. And offensive rating is based on role. The bigger your role in the offense is the lower your number it tends to be.
I guess its much more fun reading numbers than watching games.
Can you guys both stop talking to me? You complain when I discuss Rose but when I don't, you can't stop talking about me. And quit with the I don't watch games bullshit. I'm a partial season ticket holder and watch basically every Knicks game, have league pass,etc.
Simply because you don't understand who's advanced stats work doesn't mean they're wrong. Dep, offensive rating is absolutely not base on role. That's the dumbest shit I've ever read. Tell me more about how the bigger your role is the lower your number tends to be. That is not borne out by looking at almost any great players orating. In fact on this team, KP has a 115 Orating, Carmelo has a 110 and Rose has a 105. KP has a net +6, CRmelo 0 and Rose -8, yet Rose and KP have similar usage ratings and Carmelo has the highest. It's cool you don't like them and don't understand them, but stop trying to argue them like you do.
Anyway- let's stop railroading these threads. Stop addressing me about Rose and I'll do the same so we can just discuss Knicks overall. Deal?
I guess Dean Oliver's explanation, the man who came up with the rating and explanation, doesnt understand how advanced stats work either....haha
Dean Oliver's explanation - ( New Window )
Quote:
In a later chapter of Basketball on Paper, Oliver emphasized that Offensive Ratings shouldn't be viewed in a vacuum. Introducing a concept he called "Skill Curves", he acknowledged that a player's ORtg needed to be judged in conjunction with his Usage Rate, a measure of how big a role the player fills in his team's offense. The bigger the role, the more difficult it is to maintain a high ORtg; the smaller the role, the easier it is to be highly efficient. Because of this, Oliver stressed that a player's ORtg should primarily be compared to those of other players in a similar role.
I guess Dean Oliver's explanation, the man who came up with the rating and explanation, doesnt understand how advanced stats work either....haha Dean Oliver's explanation - ( New Window )
I'm not sure you understand what it is you're reading, because it literally does nothing to advance your point.
The higher the usage, the harder it is to keep a good orating. Therefore, if your usage is high and you don't have one..............what does that tell you about the player? Again, comparing two players on the same team with similar usage rates. KP vs Rose. Think about it, you can figure this out.
Quote:
In a later chapter of Basketball on Paper, Oliver emphasized that Offensive Ratings shouldn't be viewed in a vacuum. Introducing a concept he called "Skill Curves", he acknowledged that a player's ORtg needed to be judged in conjunction with his Usage Rate, a measure of how big a role the player fills in his team's offense. The bigger the role, the more difficult it is to maintain a high ORtg; the smaller the role, the easier it is to be highly efficient. Because of this, Oliver stressed that a player's ORtg should primarily be compared to those of other players in a similar role.
I guess Dean Oliver's explanation, the man who came up with the rating and explanation, doesnt understand how advanced stats work either....haha Dean Oliver's explanation - ( New Window )
This is my biggest issue with offensive/defensive rating. It's very skewed towards low usage big men (at least offensive rating). Guys like Tyson chandler, robin Lopez and even Cody Zeller have continuously put up some of the leagues highest offensive ratings, hovering around 120. That does not af all indicate you should look to roll out a lineup with Cody, Chandler and Lopez. Robin Lopez posts higher offensive ratings than Brook Lopez. Say what you want but that means you have to look at other factors/metrics in addition.
On the flip side, Carmelo and Kobe have had plenty of season, even in their prime, where they barely had an offensive rating above their defensive rating. That's mostly due to their insane usage %.
It's a metric that's ideally used to gauge how efficient a player is the more he uses the ball.
If you use it in that light it shows how insane guys like harden and Westbrook are playing this year. Westbrook is about to shatter historic usage % and is still putting up a 110 o rating.
Quote:
Interesting.
Quote:
In a later chapter of Basketball on Paper, Oliver emphasized that Offensive Ratings shouldn't be viewed in a vacuum. Introducing a concept he called "Skill Curves", he acknowledged that a player's ORtg needed to be judged in conjunction with his Usage Rate, a measure of how big a role the player fills in his team's offense. The bigger the role, the more difficult it is to maintain a high ORtg; the smaller the role, the easier it is to be highly efficient. Because of this, Oliver stressed that a player's ORtg should primarily be compared to those of other players in a similar role.
I guess Dean Oliver's explanation, the man who came up with the rating and explanation, doesnt understand how advanced stats work either....haha Dean Oliver's explanation - ( New Window )
I'm not sure you understand what it is you're reading, because it literally does nothing to advance your point.
The higher the usage, the harder it is to keep a good orating. Therefore, if your usage is high and you don't have one..............what does that tell you about the player? Again, comparing two players on the same team with similar usage rates. KP vs Rose. Think about it, you can figure this out.
If your asking me who is better between KP and Rose based on their usage ratings.... of course its KP. I dont think anyone is disagreeing.
I'll try to be civil here. There are parts of the game, which include Rose's, that arent measured by advanced stats. Look at last night, before getting hurt - he was getting to the basket quite easily, but missed shots because Whiteside helpside was looming. However by missing the shot it gave offensive rebounding opportunities. 8 missed shots by Rose last night, 6 of them were rebounded for scores by the Knicks. So his ability to get into the lane and get shots up, gave oppotunities for the knicks to score.
No one ever said Rose will be an all star. No one ever said Rose will lead to you a title. But he has made the Knicks a better team. His play has improved over the year. So while he may not be lighting it up in the advance stat world - he has made the knicks a better team and not at the expense of Porz, which was your main reason for watching this year.
Porz is going to get a lot of opportunities because of rose's ability to drive.
Pfft.... talk about being late to the party.
this is exactly what i am saying, stats do not always tell the whole story, yet sg only uses stats and refuses to take anyones opinion based on their eyes..
it is why i challenfed him to watch a game and actually go play by play and mark down positive and negative plays and it will show the positive impact that rose is having
Link - ( New Window )
If the Knicks let Jennings and rose walk they will be at $76M which I think is around $35M-ish in cap space. With rose (at around the rumored $25M I believe) there would be about $10M in space, which at that point I don't think would get you anyone of note and would probably be best to just go over the cap to resign Jennings (which I believe they would be able to).
At this point, I'm warming up the idea of a 3 year extension (id prefer 1-2 year but that's really unlikely. It seems this is the most likely outcome barring any injuries/dropoff in play from Rose. In the outside chance the Clippers have another shitty end to the season (like being bounced from the first round) and having Blake and CP3 leave, I'd certainly forego signing rose to sign Chris Paul.
Another PG I really like is jrue holiday. Nothing against Rose but I think he's become fairly under appreciated (mostly due to injuries). No really apparent flaws to his game, but NO most likely gives a similar deal to him to keep him around.
Ha- let me know if you want to read that article.
One wonders whether he's being frozen out in the losses or if those are the games where his shot is not falling anyway. Maybe the stat isnt that KP needs more usage so much as so goes KP's shot goes the Knicks.
Quote:
One wonders whether he's being frozen out in the losses or if those are the games where his shot is not falling anyway. Maybe the stat isnt that KP needs more usage so much as so goes KP's shot goes the Knicks.
I think it's skewed in that when KP is hot, they seem to make a concerted effort to get him the ball. When he's struggling, he becomes a secondary option. Isn't that probably true for any team with multiple scoring options? There can be no doubt that they win when he plays well. According to bask.-ref.com, the Knicks are 7-2 in his 9 best games with a pair of close losses.
Also being 0-4 when he plays less than 30 minutes is a silly stat. They were blown out in ALL 4 of those games... playing him 30+ minutes wouldn't make sense.
How can that first stat be right if the Knicks have only lost 9 games? Wouldn't the total number of losses in both 7-3 and 3-7 amount to 10? :groans:
Haha I'd read some of the above posts, believe there was some sort of "agreement" made lol.
OTOH, if we beat them it will be a massive confidence booster.
OTOH, if we beat them it will be a massive confidence booster.
Even Frank Isola thinks this is a schedule loss after traveling last night and 3 games in 4 nights. If they win or even keep it close, that's great. If they get their doors blown off, oh well, just move on to the WC trip.
Quote:
We all know what happens when he scores 15 or more points...
Haha I'd read some of the above posts, believe there was some sort of "agreement" made lol.
Oh, I wasn't referencing Sgcrts at all. I think it was one of the Knicks beat writers who mentioned that stat a few weeks ago. Those guys are the worst. It's a shame Herring left for 538.
stephen a still mad phil made him look stupid with the kp pick?
Got him in every fan duel team I started.
Quote:
lets hope jennings can have a good game
Got him in every fan duel team I started.
i did the same thing for draft kings