Knicks · Pelicans on the verge of signing Galloway (page 4)
Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?
47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like. 
martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.
Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.
It's not just about health and playing better by stats though. Knicks are a balanced roster with players that compliment each other. I feel like the Knicks also have 3 "dogs" now, term used by Rose in his initial press conference. Rose, Melo on the O end and Noah on the D end. Those guys can carry you, lead you and prod others along (Melo could only do so much last year). KP will have had a full year in him, no feel out stage. Knicks have a bench this year, Gallo, DWill, Grant were not pieces that you could rely on from night-to-night or at all, Jennings makes everything much more aligned and easier (akin to what Randle magically did for our SL team the last few games). Coach is much better. And we have some wild card guys that have a bit of potential.
martin wrote:See Bonn? Roster thoughts...Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.It's not just about health and playing better by stats though. Knicks are a balanced roster with players that compliment each other. I feel like the Knicks also have 3 "dogs" now, term used by Rose in his initial press conference. Rose, Melo on the O end and Noah on the D end. Those guys can carry you, lead you and prod others along (Melo could only do so much last year). KP will have had a full year in him, no feel out stage. Knicks have a bench this year, Gallo, DWill, Grant were not pieces that you could rely on from night-to-night or at all, Jennings makes everything much more aligned and easier (akin to what Randle magically did for our SL team the last few games). Coach is much better. And we have some wild card guys that have a bit of potential.
Bonn your good with 38.5 wins? (sorry.. 38.54 to be exact. Don't want to hold you to something not accurate
)
fishmike wrote:martin wrote:See Bonn? Roster thoughts...Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.It's not just about health and playing better by stats though. Knicks are a balanced roster with players that compliment each other. I feel like the Knicks also have 3 "dogs" now, term used by Rose in his initial press conference. Rose, Melo on the O end and Noah on the D end. Those guys can carry you, lead you and prod others along (Melo could only do so much last year). KP will have had a full year in him, no feel out stage. Knicks have a bench this year, Gallo, DWill, Grant were not pieces that you could rely on from night-to-night or at all, Jennings makes everything much more aligned and easier (akin to what Randle magically did for our SL team the last few games). Coach is much better. And we have some wild card guys that have a bit of potential.
Bonn your good with 38.5 wins? (sorry.. 38.54 to be exact. Don't want to hold you to something not accurate
We'll say 39. I recognize the high upside if everything works out well, though. They could win 50+ but I think the downside is that the team is much worse than last year. I stay away from the extremes and think slightly below .500 is a middle ground prediction.
Bonn1997 wrote:OK.. opinion time!fishmike wrote:martin wrote:See Bonn? Roster thoughts...Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.It's not just about health and playing better by stats though. Knicks are a balanced roster with players that compliment each other. I feel like the Knicks also have 3 "dogs" now, term used by Rose in his initial press conference. Rose, Melo on the O end and Noah on the D end. Those guys can carry you, lead you and prod others along (Melo could only do so much last year). KP will have had a full year in him, no feel out stage. Knicks have a bench this year, Gallo, DWill, Grant were not pieces that you could rely on from night-to-night or at all, Jennings makes everything much more aligned and easier (akin to what Randle magically did for our SL team the last few games). Coach is much better. And we have some wild card guys that have a bit of potential.
Bonn your good with 38.5 wins? (sorry.. 38.54 to be exact. Don't want to hold you to something not accurate
We'll say 39. I recognize the high upside if everything works out well, though. They could win 50+ but I think the downside is that the team is much worse than last year. I stay away from the extremes and think slightly below .500 is a middle ground prediction.
So you admit the Knicks have a legit 50+ win potential. Did the team have that before the trades and FA signings? Are you saying you would prefer consistant but lower ceiling team vs. a higher ceiling but more risk?
Also keep in mind that the Knicks own their own first round picks moving forward, so while the downside may be lower there is upside in that as well
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:OK.. opinion time!fishmike wrote:martin wrote:See Bonn? Roster thoughts...Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.It's not just about health and playing better by stats though. Knicks are a balanced roster with players that compliment each other. I feel like the Knicks also have 3 "dogs" now, term used by Rose in his initial press conference. Rose, Melo on the O end and Noah on the D end. Those guys can carry you, lead you and prod others along (Melo could only do so much last year). KP will have had a full year in him, no feel out stage. Knicks have a bench this year, Gallo, DWill, Grant were not pieces that you could rely on from night-to-night or at all, Jennings makes everything much more aligned and easier (akin to what Randle magically did for our SL team the last few games). Coach is much better. And we have some wild card guys that have a bit of potential.
Bonn your good with 38.5 wins? (sorry.. 38.54 to be exact. Don't want to hold you to something not accurate
We'll say 39. I recognize the high upside if everything works out well, though. They could win 50+ but I think the downside is that the team is much worse than last year. I stay away from the extremes and think slightly below .500 is a middle ground prediction.So you admit the Knicks have a legit 50+ win potential. Did the team have that before the trades and FA signings? Are you saying you would prefer consistant but lower ceiling team vs. a higher ceiling but more risk?
Also keep in mind that the Knicks own their own first round picks moving forward, so while the downside may be lower there is upside in that as well
Legit 50? Yes, but I'd give it a very low probability. I'd prefer to be building toward a team that actually will attract the top FAs. You're right we still have our pick. But a lottery team with half it's cap spent on Melo, Noah, and Rose doesn't make sense. That's not moving us towards a roster that really could attract guys like KD, Curry, James, etc.. We'd be dependent on the lottery pick and KP becoming superstars. It's too low a probability. You can take a safer approach that gets you within a few years to a stable .600+ roster for many years and has more potential to attract legit top FAs but it requires be willing to add just 5 to 10 wins each year. Instead, we have hope of a 50 win team but a high probability of moving backwards and just hoping our lottery pick becomes a superstar. It's the hope trap. Most teams don't think of having your own draft pick as being solid insurance for a bad plan. It's risky insurance. What percentage of lottery picks become more than average starters? Not many. We're just not used to having our own picks.
Bonn1997 wrote:what % of stars go to teams without other stars? Again.. have you not paid attention to FA? The more talent the team already has the better the players that sign there.. so how does your safe approach lure Westbrook or KD? Do you show them how reliable Lopez was or show top tier FAs how good his WS/48 are? Think they care? How are you getting the top tier talent to attract more top tier talent in FA?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:OK.. opinion time!fishmike wrote:martin wrote:See Bonn? Roster thoughts...Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.It's not just about health and playing better by stats though. Knicks are a balanced roster with players that compliment each other. I feel like the Knicks also have 3 "dogs" now, term used by Rose in his initial press conference. Rose, Melo on the O end and Noah on the D end. Those guys can carry you, lead you and prod others along (Melo could only do so much last year). KP will have had a full year in him, no feel out stage. Knicks have a bench this year, Gallo, DWill, Grant were not pieces that you could rely on from night-to-night or at all, Jennings makes everything much more aligned and easier (akin to what Randle magically did for our SL team the last few games). Coach is much better. And we have some wild card guys that have a bit of potential.
Bonn your good with 38.5 wins? (sorry.. 38.54 to be exact. Don't want to hold you to something not accurate
We'll say 39. I recognize the high upside if everything works out well, though. They could win 50+ but I think the downside is that the team is much worse than last year. I stay away from the extremes and think slightly below .500 is a middle ground prediction.So you admit the Knicks have a legit 50+ win potential. Did the team have that before the trades and FA signings? Are you saying you would prefer consistant but lower ceiling team vs. a higher ceiling but more risk?
Also keep in mind that the Knicks own their own first round picks moving forward, so while the downside may be lower there is upside in that as well
Legit 50? Yes, but I'd give it a very low probability. I'd prefer to be building toward a team that actually will attract the top FAs. You're right we still have our pick. But a lottery team with half it's cap spent on Melo, Noah, and Rose doesn't make sense. That's not moving us towards a roster that really could attract guys like KD, Curry, James, etc.. We'd be dependent on the lottery pick and KP becoming superstars. It's too low a probability. You can take a safer approach that gets you within a few years to a stable .600+ roster for many years and has more potential to attract legit top FAs but it requires be willing to add just 5 to 10 wins each year. Instead, we have hope of a 50 win team but a high probability of moving backwards and just hoping our lottery pick becomes a superstar. It's the hope trap. Most teams don't think of having your own draft pick as being solid insurance for a bad plan. It's risky insurance. What percentage of lottery picks become more than average starters? Not many. We're just not used to having our own picks.
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:what % of stars go to teams without other stars? Again.. have you not paid attention to FA? The more talent the team already has the better the players that sign there.. so how does your safe approach lure Westbrook or KD? Do you show them how reliable Lopez was or show top tier FAs how good his WS/48 are? Think they care? How are you getting the top tier talent to attract more top tier talent in FA?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:OK.. opinion time!fishmike wrote:martin wrote:See Bonn? Roster thoughts...Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.It's not just about health and playing better by stats though. Knicks are a balanced roster with players that compliment each other. I feel like the Knicks also have 3 "dogs" now, term used by Rose in his initial press conference. Rose, Melo on the O end and Noah on the D end. Those guys can carry you, lead you and prod others along (Melo could only do so much last year). KP will have had a full year in him, no feel out stage. Knicks have a bench this year, Gallo, DWill, Grant were not pieces that you could rely on from night-to-night or at all, Jennings makes everything much more aligned and easier (akin to what Randle magically did for our SL team the last few games). Coach is much better. And we have some wild card guys that have a bit of potential.
Bonn your good with 38.5 wins? (sorry.. 38.54 to be exact. Don't want to hold you to something not accurate
We'll say 39. I recognize the high upside if everything works out well, though. They could win 50+ but I think the downside is that the team is much worse than last year. I stay away from the extremes and think slightly below .500 is a middle ground prediction.So you admit the Knicks have a legit 50+ win potential. Did the team have that before the trades and FA signings? Are you saying you would prefer consistant but lower ceiling team vs. a higher ceiling but more risk?
Also keep in mind that the Knicks own their own first round picks moving forward, so while the downside may be lower there is upside in that as well
Legit 50? Yes, but I'd give it a very low probability. I'd prefer to be building toward a team that actually will attract the top FAs. You're right we still have our pick. But a lottery team with half it's cap spent on Melo, Noah, and Rose doesn't make sense. That's not moving us towards a roster that really could attract guys like KD, Curry, James, etc.. We'd be dependent on the lottery pick and KP becoming superstars. It's too low a probability. You can take a safer approach that gets you within a few years to a stable .600+ roster for many years and has more potential to attract legit top FAs but it requires be willing to add just 5 to 10 wins each year. Instead, we have hope of a 50 win team but a high probability of moving backwards and just hoping our lottery pick becomes a superstar. It's the hope trap. Most teams don't think of having your own draft pick as being solid insurance for a bad plan. It's risky insurance. What percentage of lottery picks become more than average starters? Not many. We're just not used to having our own picks.
So you're saying KP and our lottery pick next year can't become stars? Fine, then we keep incrementally rebuilding. (How do you define star anyway? If we incrementally build towards a .700 team, our top players will be perceived as stars.) You can incrementally build and get to the point where 2nd tier FAs like Kyle Lowry want to come here, and that moves you towards the top stars. It's one approach I'd endorse. If they wanted to chase immediate winning but appeared to be using a balanced eye-ball/metric approach, I'd have more faith in it. I don't want to be taking steps backwards while having most of our cap spent on overpaid veterans and the only insurance being that we have our own pick. Every bad team has its own pick.
Bonn1997 wrote:I don't understand your first bold statement. I believe KP will be a star.fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:what % of stars go to teams without other stars? Again.. have you not paid attention to FA? The more talent the team already has the better the players that sign there.. so how does your safe approach lure Westbrook or KD? Do you show them how reliable Lopez was or show top tier FAs how good his WS/48 are? Think they care? How are you getting the top tier talent to attract more top tier talent in FA?fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:OK.. opinion time!fishmike wrote:martin wrote:See Bonn? Roster thoughts...Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:So you won't stick your balls out and make a real predictionBonn1997 wrote:martin wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:you just come up for air? Maybe you have not been watching what has happened in FA.SupremeCommander wrote:The more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. I think Galloway was a great find. It will really be hard to find another player as good as he was off the scrap heap. But do we really want to allocate $6 mil (or whatever) to him? I think thats fair but he's not really valuable anymore at that price.
Well, we don't really have anyone other than KP who is valuable at their salary.
We'll see. In the past you've always thought our teams would be a lot better than they were. What matters is whether Phil's spending buys a good team, not whether his spending is on par with other teams that have made mistakes this offseason. I'll wait til the actual models come out but this looks like a .470 team to me.
are you a robot incapable of just using your eyes and making a judgment? Thanks for bringing your thoughts to the table. Let us know what the models tell you and enough data to actually say something.As for me thinking the Knicks would be a lot better than they were that is not really true. I did think they would win 45 last season. They were what? 22-22 and trending upward. Melo got hurt and they tailspinned. Lance went out shortly after and that sir was the season. I suppose your models predicted that? Cmon man.
It makes more sense to use the eyeball test and metrics rather than only one. You're behind the thinking of every successful NBA team if you don't think evaluations should incorporate the metrics.But he didn't say that, mostly he just said stop being such a robot and take your balls out and make a gut guess.
I did make a guess. I reserve the right to adjust the guess when new information comes out. I'm the only here who's even made a tentative prediction as far as I can tell. You ready to take your balls out?47 wins, just to fuck with you and match your .470. Already stated in another thread that I thought Cavs were a first tier team and then there was a dropoff to the next, which would include TOR, BOS, IND, NY. All based on the plus health of Rose, Noah.
What type of stat dude comes up with 47%? It's either 46% or 48% depending on how many wins you like.
oh 47 is also my real prediction
Fair enough. That's a legit possibility but most of our key players would have to play better and/or be healthier than they were in recent seasons.It's not just about health and playing better by stats though. Knicks are a balanced roster with players that compliment each other. I feel like the Knicks also have 3 "dogs" now, term used by Rose in his initial press conference. Rose, Melo on the O end and Noah on the D end. Those guys can carry you, lead you and prod others along (Melo could only do so much last year). KP will have had a full year in him, no feel out stage. Knicks have a bench this year, Gallo, DWill, Grant were not pieces that you could rely on from night-to-night or at all, Jennings makes everything much more aligned and easier (akin to what Randle magically did for our SL team the last few games). Coach is much better. And we have some wild card guys that have a bit of potential.
Bonn your good with 38.5 wins? (sorry.. 38.54 to be exact. Don't want to hold you to something not accurate
We'll say 39. I recognize the high upside if everything works out well, though. They could win 50+ but I think the downside is that the team is much worse than last year. I stay away from the extremes and think slightly below .500 is a middle ground prediction.So you admit the Knicks have a legit 50+ win potential. Did the team have that before the trades and FA signings? Are you saying you would prefer consistant but lower ceiling team vs. a higher ceiling but more risk?
Also keep in mind that the Knicks own their own first round picks moving forward, so while the downside may be lower there is upside in that as well
Legit 50? Yes, but I'd give it a very low probability. I'd prefer to be building toward a team that actually will attract the top FAs. You're right we still have our pick. But a lottery team with half it's cap spent on Melo, Noah, and Rose doesn't make sense. That's not moving us towards a roster that really could attract guys like KD, Curry, James, etc.. We'd be dependent on the lottery pick and KP becoming superstars. It's too low a probability. You can take a safer approach that gets you within a few years to a stable .600+ roster for many years and has more potential to attract legit top FAs but it requires be willing to add just 5 to 10 wins each year. Instead, we have hope of a 50 win team but a high probability of moving backwards and just hoping our lottery pick becomes a superstar. It's the hope trap. Most teams don't think of having your own draft pick as being solid insurance for a bad plan. It's risky insurance. What percentage of lottery picks become more than average starters? Not many. We're just not used to having our own picks.
So you're saying KP and our lottery pick next year can't become stars? Fine, then we keep incrementally rebuilding. (How do you define star anyway? If we incrementally build towards a .700 team, our top players will be perceived as stars.) You can incrementally build and get to the point where 2nd tier FAs like Kyle Lowry want to come here, and that moves you towards the top stars. It's one approach I'd endorse. If they wanted to chase immediate winning but appeared to be using a balanced eye-ball/metric approach, I'd have more faith in it. I don't want to be taking steps backwards while having most of our cap spent on overpaid veterans and the only insurance being that we have our own pick. Every bad team has its own pick.
The second bolded statement is the same problem I have with all your posts. You say you don't like the approach, but offer no alternatives. We should sign better players, have a better approach... OK so who are the guys? I am open to a better approach also, so what is it?
Scratch the Rose trade and the Noah signing... what is Bonn's plan for enough incremental improvement to lure top talent?