Good article that accurately points out our strengths and weaknesses. But the prediction of 37nwins is too low
We are not bad, we are mediocre.
So 40-45 wins will be more accurate... but not far off.
The result is the same - not too much value for the money spent.
Fail... Fail... Fail...
I haven't heard of this system and don't know anything about. The author makes some very good points too. I think we might have a 10 win drop-off from last season but not 17.
wow,
that's a significant hit,
can't say i disagree
another "poor woe is me" preseason projection?
I'd like to see how the others are predicted. I'd say last year was a complete surprise with the knicks.
Boston I was pretty vocal about being "Cooked" and they were.
This year rests on the tender shoulder of Melo and that Bargnani is reasonably healthy. Knicks get a situation where Melo's shoulder is problematic, Bargnani is symptomatic, and Amare is not contributing I think 37 wins might be about right.
Does the system call for that? What are other teams projected to do?
Usually "Systems" over the longer term proves more accurate so while last year was not spot on, they tend to return to mean.
I do hope its wrong!
the problem is they overshot their load last year with 54,
last year it was more like a 47 win team if you want Real Talk,
but they got the fire balls
"The next step is using player projections to generate forecasts for teams. It's not quite as simple as adding up player statistics because of how players interact with each other. On offense, SCHOENE adjusts teams based on their
projected ratio of assists to field goals to attempt to account for the value of passing. There is also an adjustment based on whether players are projected to use more or fewer plays than average based on their past history to account for the trade-off between
usage and efficiency."
so this system rewards passing and efficiency as it translates to chemistry. nobody among bargnani, melo, felton, or smith excel at these aspects of the game so chemistry will be hard to come by.
the biggest flaws in the knicks were in fact low assists and a lopsided usage rate along with sub-par efficiency among the three biggest users. now we are adding a fourth. how is this going to help the team? jason kidd did wonders for the team while his legs held up but unfortunately woodson had to play him too much by chasing the carrot of more regular-season wins instead of keeping kidd fresh and discovering prigioni earlier. that said, the two-point guard lineup is just another scheme that compromises the defense.
this year we are adding another player in bargnani who only compounds the problem in terms of usage, efficiency, defense-- yet we are expecting the habits of these players to suddenly evolve into something different. yes, the projections are based on the past three seasons but can we expect leopards to change their spots?
this team could easily implode, especially without genuine leadership. who are the leaders on this team?
IronWillGiroud wrote:the problem is they overshot their load last year with 54, last year it was more like a 47 win team if you want Real Talk,
but they got the fire balls
This is just something people tell themselves to make sense of why the team lost in the 2nd round IMO. They won 54 games because they outscored their opponents 54 times. It's not like the score-keeper made mistakes in several of those wins. For a portion of the season, Jason Kidd really was hitting a huge percentage of his 3s, moving the ball great, and rebounding great. And for a portion of the year, Tyson Chandler was shooting 8 or 9 for 10 in every game and grabbing 5+ offensive rebounds. Those are legitimate portions of the season that contributed to a high win total.
And if you could rewind the clock a year and replay the season, you'd probably get a similar result: Kidd's rested body plays great early in the season but then declines as he can't handle a full season. Chandler is healthy and great for a small stretch but can't stay healthy, etc.
I didn't notice the poll. But I clicked on the 40-49 just now.
ChuckBuck wrote:dk7th wrote:"The next step is using player projections to generate forecasts for teams. It's not quite as simple as adding up player statistics because of how players interact with each other. On offense, SCHOENE adjusts teams based on their projected ratio of assists to field goals to attempt to account for the value of passing. There is also an adjustment based on whether players are projected to use more or fewer plays than average based on their past history to account for the trade-off between usage and efficiency."so this system rewards passing and efficiency as it translates to chemistry. nobody among bargnani, melo, felton, or smith excel at these aspects of the game so chemistry will be hard to come by.
the biggest flaws in the knicks were in fact low assists and a lopsided usage rate along with sub-par efficiency among the three biggest users. now we are adding a fourth. how is this going to help the team? jason kidd did wonders for the team while his legs held up but unfortunately woodson had to play him too much by chasing the carrot of more regular-season wins instead of keeping kidd fresh and discovering prigioni earlier. that said, the two-point guard lineup is just another scheme that compromises the defense.
this year we are adding another player in bargnani who only compounds the problem in terms of usage, efficiency, defense-- yet we are expecting the habits of these players to suddenly evolve into something different. yes, the projections are based on the past three seasons but can we expect leopards to change their spots?
this team could easily implode, especially without genuine leadership. who are the leaders on this team?
Did you vote?
Conspiracy theory of the day: Dk7th is the same dude that came up with this formula and is really a regular TV figurehead over at ESPN. He poses as a somber on this board to bring down Knicks fans' morale in an attempt to make outlandish ESPN predictions seem plausible, in effect performing constant damage control. It's brilliant!
espn should really clean house, their predictions are awful.Their so called experts are always wrong. I still see the knicks as a top 3 team in the nba with no questions.... the only reason we lost to indy was terrible officiating and injurys. This is just plain hatterade, espn has never liked ny sports. Just take a look at all the predictions in espn sports, they had the jets ranked 32 and the giants going to the super bowl... that stuff is just laughable. i read espn to get my kicks.They really should fire and hire some new people who actually know their stuff.
fitzfarm wrote:espn should really clean house, their predictions are awful.Their so called experts are always wrong. I still see the knicks as a top 3 team in the nba with no questions.... the only reason we lost to indy was terrible officiating and injurys. This is just plain hatterade, espn has never liked ny sports. Just take a look at all the predictions in espn sports, they had the jets ranked 32 and the giants going to the super bowl... that stuff is just laughable. i read espn to get my kicks.They really should fire and hire some new people who actually know their stuff.
Two comments: (a) They've been right about this team far more than almost anyone here over the past 10 years and (b) you really think they developed this schoene system several years ago just because they wanted to make the 2013 Knicks look bad? Really?
really? I didnt say they built the system to hate on the knicks. Just in general that they seem to drink the nyc hatterade. also there predictions from last year and years past have been way off .... looking at last years predictions they had us finishing 6th and we finished 2nd for the regular season... that to me equals way off in my book with phily and boston finishing ahead of us ahahahah that shit is just laughable... do your homework dog
fitzfarm wrote:really? I didnt say they built the system to hate on the knicks. Just in general that they seem to drink the nyc hatterade. also there predictions from last year and years past have been way off .... looking at last years predictions they had us finishing 6th and we finished 2nd for the regular season... that to me equals way off in my book with phily and boston finishing ahead of us ahahahah that shit is just laughable... do your homework dog
last year was off - I think they thought we'd have about 5 or 6 fewer wins. Otherwise, no, they've been remarkably accurate.
Hey guys after investigating this article I believe ESPN is saying that they expect the Knicks to win anywhere in the range of 37-45 games. It's not saying the Knicks will be 37-45. While it's still a very low ball prediction it's less horseshit ridiculous than it appeared at first glance.
Dagger wrote:Hey guys after investigating this article I believe ESPN is saying that they expect the Knicks to win anywhere in the range of 37-45 games. It's not saying the Knicks will be 37-45. While it's still a very low ball prediction it's less horseshit ridiculous than it appeared at first glance.
No it's specifically says record of 37 wins and 45 losses(7th seed in the East) by their Schoene projection system.
ChuckBuck wrote:Dagger wrote:Hey guys after investigating this article I believe ESPN is saying that they expect the Knicks to win anywhere in the range of 37-45 games. It's not saying the Knicks will be 37-45. While it's still a very low ball prediction it's less horseshit ridiculous than it appeared at first glance.
No it's specifically says record of 37 wins and 45 losses(7th seed in the East) by their Schoene projection system.
Are you sure, I don't have insider so I can't check? I just googled it and from the stuff I read I thought it was a range of potential wins. If it really is 37 by itself that is just an absurd prediction.
Here is a snippets from FAQ section of last year's basketball Prospectus to put SCHOENE in perspective.
How has SCHOENE performed?
Honestly, not great. Of the six pure statistical projec- tion systems tracked last year on the APBRmetrics message board, SCHOENE had the largest mean er- ror, pegging teams wrong by an average of 5.0 wins over the 66-game schedule. However, when I studied possible adjustments over the summer, I found noth- ing that would have improved SCHOENE’s results
over multiple previous years. So the system remains unchanged from last season, which is essentially the third incarnation of SCHOENE. (The first was used only in 2008-09. The second, rolled out for the first edition of Pro Basketball Prospectus in 2009-10, be- gan incorporating multiple years of past player per- formance.)
Historically, SCHOENE has proven more effective at pegging the direction teams are heading than their specific win total. So a different measure--which sys- tem was closest to each team’s final record--showed SCHOENE performing as effectively as any of the other systems. SCHOENE was closest to the pin on six teams; only a set of projections using regularized adjusted plus-minus as tracked by poster EvanZ did better, with seven.
The moral of the story is to temper the most extreme projections. When SCHOENE projects that the Min- nesota Timberwolves will be an elite team this year, the appropriate conclusion is that the Timberwolves are closer to contending than conventional wisdom would indicate, not that they are as good as anyone in the Western Conference.
I'm predicting mid to high 40s this year. BTW, SHOENE predicted 48 wins for the Knicks last year, which is three more wins than ESPN predicted. Both predictions were off.
