Knicks · interesting: it's the Pace, dummy. Woodson slows the pace down, Knicks win, become more efficient (page 1)

*When D’Antoni resigned on March 14, the Knicks had the second-fastest
pace factor in the N.B.A., at 94.2. Under Woodson, the Knicks have
slowed things down considerably. They have a pace factor of 90.8, the
league’s 12th slowest.

http://www.postingandtoasting.com/2012/3...

Knicks current rankings in the NBA during the Woodson era:

1st in defensive efficiency
4th in offensive efficiency

18th in pace

during MDA's run this season, it was:

8th-10th in defensive efficiency
23rd in offensive efficiency

2nd in pace

Several of my friends have been arguing that no NBA team wins in the playoffs playing at the pace MDA likes to play at - his teams were always 1st-3rd in pace in the league. you look at the other contenders over the past few years and they play a slower pace.

this year:

Miami - 14th in pace
Chicago - 23rd in pace
Lakers - 20th in pace
San Antonio - 13th in pace
OKC - 5th in pace
Sacramento - 2nd in pace (horrible team)

last year:
Dallas - 19th in pace
Miami - 21st in pace

Minnesota - 1st in pace (horrible team)
New York - 2nd in pace

I think of Miami as a running team, so it's interesting to see they play a halfcourt style pace and only run off turnovers. That's what the Knicks have been doing, and very effectively. They've actually been MORE effective on the fast break in the Woodson era, too.

*During their win streak the Knicks are scoring 1.4 Points Per-Fast
Break, during their losing streak they were scoring 1.1

This kind of lends creedence to the argument that MDA's style, in addition to being wrong for the roster we had, wasn't necessarily right for the playoffs, either. Yes, the Knicks are running a lot of the same plays - but they're taking their time and getting good shots on those plays, shooting late in the clock.

here's the initial article posting and toasting was quoting:

Keeping Score
Knicks Slow Down and Take Off
By JUSTIN KUBATKO
Published: March 23, 2012

Under the interim coach Mike Woodson, the Knicks’ pace has slowed and their offense has improved.

The Mike D’Antoni era ended not with a bang but a thud, with the Knicks losing the last six games he coached.

It has been the opposite for the Knicks’ interim coach, Mike Woodson. The Knicks have won five straight games under him to put themselves back in the thick of the Eastern Conference playoff race.

While a five-game sample is too small to draw any meaningful conclusions, some changes under Woodson’s leadership bear watching.

One is pace factor, which is an estimate of the number of possessions a team uses per 48 minutes. When D’Antoni resigned on March 14, the Knicks had the second-fastest pace factor in the N.B.A., at 94.2. Under Woodson, the Knicks have slowed things down considerably. They have a pace factor of 90.8, the league’s 12th slowest.

Whether the slower pace has been a significant factor is unclear, but the Knicks have certainly fared much better on offense with Woodson on the bench.

On D’Antoni’s watch, the Knicks were a below-average offensive team, averaging 101.9 points per 100 possessions, the eighth-worst rate in the N.B.A.

In fact, in their first three seasons under D’Antoni, the Knicks finished 17th, 17th and 7th in points per 100 possessions. Those figures are rather surprising given the success D’Antoni had with his high-octane offense in Phoenix.

The Knicks have been far more efficient under Woodson, to the tune of 115.8 points per 100 possessions, the league’s fourth-best rate since D’Antoni’s resignation.

Though Woodson does not have a reputation as an offensive guru, it should be noted that in 2009-10, his last season as the Atlanta Hawks’ coach, his team finished second in the N.B.A. with an average of 111.9 points per 100 possessions.

As for the Knicks’ defense, it has been phenomenal under Woodson.

Contrary to popular belief, the D’Antoni-led Knicks were not a bad defensive team this season, giving up 101.7 points per 100 possessions, the 10-stingiest mark.

Since Woodson’s ascension, the Knicks have been the N.B.A.’s top defensive team, giving up 95.3 points per 100 possessions, the best by a margin of 3 points per 100 possessions.

Although there could be many explanations for the Knicks’ recent success (including the placebo effect), an easy schedule does not appear to be one of them. With D’Antoni, the Knicks’ strength of schedule was about 1 point below average; under Woodson in the last five games, it has been about 1.3 points above average.

No matter the reason, Knicks fans are surely glad to see that this season has once again taken a turn for the better. Given the roller coaster the Knicks have been on in recent months, don’t count on this ride being over just yet.

Justin Kubatko is the creator of Basketball-Reference.com, an online basketball encyclopedia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/sports...

If you want to take a 5 game sample from Woodson's tenure...you should compare it versus the 7 game win streak from when Linsanity started. Statistics don't adjust for Melo's dogging it and Stat's lack interest in Defense during MDA's tenure. The Knicks Defensive intensity and Offensive sharing are only comparable during those two stretches. Essentially, you need to back out Melo and Anthony's peformance. LOL!

crzymdups wrote:

*When D’Antoni resigned on March 14, the Knicks had the second-fastest
pace factor in the N.B.A., at 94.2. Under Woodson, the Knicks have
slowed things down considerably. They have a pace factor of 90.8, the
league’s 12th slowest.

http://www.postingandtoasting.com/2012/3...

Knicks current rankings in the NBA during the Woodson era:

1st in defensive efficiency
4th in offensive efficiency

18th in pace

during MDA's run this season, it was:

8th-10th in defensive efficiency
23rd in offensive efficiency

2nd in pace

Several of my friends have been arguing that no NBA team wins in the playoffs playing at the pace MDA likes to play at - his teams were always 1st-3rd in pace in the league. you look at the other contenders over the past few years and they play a slower pace.

this year:

Miami - 14th in pace
Chicago - 23rd in pace
Lakers - 20th in pace
San Antonio - 13th in pace
OKC - 5th in pace
Sacramento - 2nd in pace (horrible team)

last year:
Dallas - 19th in pace
Miami - 21st in pace

Minnesota - 1st in pace (horrible team)
New York - 2nd in pace

I think of Miami as a running team, so it's interesting to see they play a halfcourt style pace and only run off turnovers. That's what the Knicks have been doing, and very effectively. They've actually been MORE effective on the fast break in the Woodson era, too.

*During their win streak the Knicks are scoring 1.4 Points Per-Fast
Break, during their losing streak they were scoring 1.1

This kind of lends creedence to the argument that MDA's style, in addition to being wrong for the roster we had, wasn't necessarily right for the playoffs, either. Yes, the Knicks are running a lot of the same plays - but they're taking their time and getting good shots on those plays, shooting late in the clock.

You're wrong! MDA's style works in the NBA! Ask anyone in the Euroleague!

Wrong. 'It's the defense, dummy' would be a better title.

When you blow teams out early, what the heck is the rush?

HugeKnick4 wrote:If you want to take a 5 game sample from Woodson's tenure...you should compare it versus the 7 game win streak from when Linsanity started. Statistics don't adjust for Melo's dogging it and Stat's lack interest in Defense during MDA's tenure. The Knicks Defensive intensity and Offensive sharing are only comparable during those two stretches. Essentially, you need to back out Melo and Anthony's peformance. LOL!

In MDA's three and a half year tenure, here is his pace ranking:

08-09 - 2nd overall
09-10 - 8th overall
10-11 - 2nd overall
11-12 - 2nd overall

Woodson comes in and suddenly the Knicks are 18th overall? Yes, it's a small sample size, but it's a pretty distinct and obvious philosophy change.

Woodson's 09-10 Atlanta Hawks (last time he coached a full season) played at a pace of 27th in the league and were 3rd in offensive efficiency.

D'Antoni's Knicks ratings in offensive efficiency were:
08-09 - 17th
09-10 - 15th
10-11 - 5th
11-12 - 23rd

Fast pace does not equal efficient offense or defense.

I agree the sample size for Woodson is small, and I highly doubt the Knicks will continue to have the best defense in the league, but it is VERY interesting to me that such a basic philosophical change seems to be paying such dividends.

MDA's NYK teams had young players and no bigs.

Try again.

this terrible theory floated around here last season was that you would want more possessions with more talented personal.

Why on God's green earth would you want a less talented team to get more chances to score? Lean on your talent and make the opposition play over their heads to win.

Not surprsing that the winning teams focus heavily on execution

Interesting post, rings true to me. Fast and sloppy vs. slower and methodical. As a guitarist I think of an analogy, not sure if it's a perfect one, but here goes. When a musician is trying to learn a new, technically challenging tune or run, he must practice it and perfect it slow before attempting to play it fast. Not only hitting all right notes, in time, but doing it with the proper feel and phrasing to make it sound the way it should. Only after getting it right at a slow tempo will he be able to speed it up and keep it together. If he just keeps playing it sloppy at a fast pace, he'll wind up learning the tune sloppy, clams and all, and never own it the way he should.
In the case of the Knicks it is obvious that a more deliberate aproach is helping to shore up the fundamentals that were sorely lacking under Dantoni. I think for a coach (Dantoni) to keep running it back the same way, given consistent, basic errors that abounded and were not going away, is at best lazy/deluded wishful thinking that it will "just get better eventually", and at worst negligent and poor coaching.

MozelGovCocktail wrote:Wrong. 'It's the defense, dummy' would be a better title.

When you blow teams out early, what the heck is the rush?

The idea is that there is something very basic beneath the success on offense and defense - playing slower, taking better care of the ball, taking your time to set up shots.

Under MDA this year the Knicks were DEAD LAST in the league in turnovers - meaning, they turned the ball over MORE than ANY OTHER TEAM.

Under Woodson?

They've average 12.4 turnovers per game. That would be good for - you guessed it - BEST in the league (and best by far, too, the Sixers lead the league with 19.1 turnovers per game).

Playing slower, taking better care of the ball, getting better shots, playing straight up man to man defense.

MozelGovCocktail wrote:MDA's NYK teams had young players and no bigs.

Try again.

D'Antoni had Tyson Chandler and Amar'e Stoudemire this year and still played at the 2nd highest pace in the league.

crzymdups wrote:

MozelGovCocktail wrote:Wrong. 'It's the defense, dummy' would be a better title.

When you blow teams out early, what the heck is the rush?

The idea is that there is something very basic beneath the success on offense and defense - playing slower, taking better care of the ball, taking your time to set up shots.

Under MDA this year the Knicks were DEAD LAST in the league in turnovers - meaning, they turned the ball over MORE than ANY OTHER TEAM.

Under Woodson?

They've average 12.4 turnovers per game. That would be good for - you guessed it - BEST in the league (and best by far, too, the Sixers lead the league with 19.1 turnovers per game).

Playing slower, taking better care of the ball, getting better shots, playing straight up man to man defense.

Some people love them some Pringles no matter how much sense and facts you put in their face...

SupremeCommander wrote:this terrible theory floated around here last season was that you would want more possessions with more talented personal.

Why on God's green earth would you want a less talented team to get more chances to score? Lean on your talent and make the opposition play over their heads to win.

Not surprsing that the winning teams focus heavily on execution

Agreed. This is a JVG thing - you have good players, you trust your defense, you want fewer possessions and focus on getting them right. More possessions allows for more things to go wrong.

Which, oddly, I think is what MDA wanted - more possessions, more "organized" chaos. It almost seems like a defeatists thought process or something, "if i can get more opportunities, maybe the other team will screw up and i can pull out a win."

I'm sure this has to do more with having:

a. no real PG
b. a spastic, young PG hoisted to world fame in a fast paced offense
c. Baron Davis' circus act
d. getting back on defensive stops rather than net sinks

... than MDA's 'pace setting'. But, I'll play along.

If the team's D goes sour tonight. Will it be because Jeffries is out, or Woodson's tinkering?

Let's make a deal to hold the players 'accountable', rather than annoint Woodson the second coming of Chuck Daly...

Deal? I bet Woody likes it.

nychamp wrote:Interesting post, rings true to me. Fast and sloppy vs. slower and methodical. As a guitarist I think of an analogy, not sure if it's a perfect one, but here goes. When a musician is trying to learn a new, technically challenging tune or run, he must practice it and perfect it slow before attempting to play it fast. Not only hitting all right notes, in time, but doing it with the proper feel and phrasing to make it sound the way it should. Only after getting it right at a slow tempo will he be able to speed it up and keep it together. If he just keeps playing it sloppy at a fast pace, he'll wind up learning the tune sloppy, clams and all, and never own it the way he should.
In the case of the Knicks it is obvious that a more deliberate aproach is helping to shore up the fundamentals that were sorely lacking under Dantoni. I think for a coach (Dantoni) to keep running it back the same way, given consistent, basic errors that abounded and were not going away, is at best lazy/deluded wishful thinking that it will "just get better eventually", and at worst negligent and poor coaching.

yeah, it rings true to me, too.

i think playing fast MIGHT work, with the right personel, but i'd be curious to see if a top three team in pace had ever won it all. going back as far as 02-03, the answer is no, the champ is usually around 20th in the league in pace - obviously there's no magic number, just that the really great teams tend to play slower.

MozelGovCocktail wrote:I'm sure this has to do more with having:

a. no real PG
b. a spastic, young PG hoisted to world fame in a fast paced offense
c. Baron Davis' circus act
d. getting back on defensive stops rather than net sinks

... than MDA's 'pace setting'. But, I'll play along.

If the team's D goes sour tonight. Will it be because Jeffries is out, or Woodson's tinkering?

Let's make a deal to hold the players 'accountable', rather than annoint Woodson the second coming of Chuck Daly...

Deal? I bet Woody likes it.

i believe the players should be held accountable. but i also believe that if there is a guy forcing the pace on the bench, he should be held accountable, too.

the good coaches play slower basketball over the past ten years. they turn the ball over less and win championships.

speedball makes for good ratings and high scores and not much else.

in case you didn't realize, jeremy lin is playing better under woodson than he did the last ten games for d'antoni. the scoring and dishing are still there and the turnovers are way down.

crzymdups wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:this terrible theory floated around here last season was that you would want more possessions with more talented personal.

Why on God's green earth would you want a less talented team to get more chances to score? Lean on your talent and make the opposition play over their heads to win.

Not surprsing that the winning teams focus heavily on execution

Agreed. This is a JVG thing - you have good players, you trust your defense, you want fewer possessions and focus on getting them right. More possessions allows for more things to go wrong.

Which, oddly, I think is what MDA wanted - more possessions, more "organized" chaos. It almost seems like a defeatists thought process or something, "if i can get more opportunities, maybe the other team will screw up and i can pull out a win."

well said.

this is simple statisitics. control your variance/standard deviation/volatility and you will be more consistent in your results. those results will more often than not favor you if you have superior talent

MozelGovCocktail wrote:I'm sure this has to do more with having:

a. no real PG
b. a spastic, young PG hoisted to world fame in a fast paced offense
c. Baron Davis' circus act
d. getting back on defensive stops rather than net sinks

... than MDA's 'pace setting'. But, I'll play along.

If the team's D goes sour tonight. Will it be because Jeffries is out, or Woodson's tinkering?

Let's make a deal to hold the players 'accountable', rather than annoint Woodson the second coming of Chuck Daly...

Deal? I bet Woody likes it.

Baron Davis is among your top reasons why the Knicks were underachieving? Seriously?

What you call 'forcing the pace' can easily be interpreted as 'requiring effort'.

Jeremy Lin is playing good under Woodson because he is a good player giving 100 percent, as he was under MDA.

Can you say the same for everyone else?

crzymdups wrote:

MozelGovCocktail wrote:I'm sure this has to do more with having:

a. no real PG
b. a spastic, young PG hoisted to world fame in a fast paced offense
c. Baron Davis' circus act
d. getting back on defensive stops rather than net sinks

... than MDA's 'pace setting'. But, I'll play along.

If the team's D goes sour tonight. Will it be because Jeffries is out, or Woodson's tinkering?

Let's make a deal to hold the players 'accountable', rather than annoint Woodson the second coming of Chuck Daly...

Deal? I bet Woody likes it.

i believe the players should be held accountable. but i also believe that if there is a guy forcing the pace on the bench, he should be held accountable, too.

the good coaches play slower basketball over the past ten years. they turn the ball over less and win championships.

speedball makes for good ratings and high scores and not much else.

in case you didn't realize, jeremy lin is playing better under woodson than he did the last ten games for d'antoni. the scoring and dishing are still there and the turnovers are way down.

No. 'pace' is a terribly flawed measure of the game. It is determined by offensive/defensive efficiency.

Not the other way around.

nychamp wrote:

MozelGovCocktail wrote:I'm sure this has to do more with having:

a. no real PG
b. a spastic, young PG hoisted to world fame in a fast paced offense
c. Baron Davis' circus act
d. getting back on defensive stops rather than net sinks

... than MDA's 'pace setting'. But, I'll play along.

If the team's D goes sour tonight. Will it be because Jeffries is out, or Woodson's tinkering?

Let's make a deal to hold the players 'accountable', rather than annoint Woodson the second coming of Chuck Daly...

Deal? I bet Woody likes it.

Baron Davis is among your top reasons why the Knicks were underachieving? Seriously?

MozelGovCocktail wrote:What you call 'forcing the pace' can easily be interpreted as 'requiring effort'.

Jeremy Lin is playing good under Woodson because he is a good player giving 100 percent, as he was under MDA.

Can you say the same for everyone else?

no. forcing the pace means forcing the team to play faster.

pace means speed, not effort.

pace does not equal effort and it certainly doesn't equal efficiency.

jeremy lin will have a longer and better career playing actual winning basketball.