Knicks · How do you rate our new additions in comparison to your expectations? (page 5)
nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.
Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.
The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Bonn1997 wrote:nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.
Rose can have a positive impact on how this team plays beyond his TS%. The entire team will be impacted by HOW he actually plays the game. Having a starting PG that can be a threat to get to the rim at all times has a huge impact on a team and for this team it's a much needed talent. Not to mention simply pushing and playing faster.
A lot of what will help Rose's efficiency is Hornacek being the coach and his philosophy is to look for early offense and efficient shots. It's not just going to be up to Rose to figure it out on his own!!! Hornacek will feature Rose in the most efficient looks that is shown statistically. There are types of shots that Rose just shouldn't be taking cuz they're lowering his efficiency.
Jeff Hornacek: "Oh, yeah. We gotta get rid of that long 2. I'm not opposed to the middle jumper, in that 15- or 16-foot range. I think all but two teams that were in the playoffs, their effective field goal percentages were above 51 percent. If you can shoot 15-footers and shoot 52 percent, OK, you're beating the average. You can't totally discount those shots.""Long twos" are shots that live between mid-range area and the three point line. They are the least-efficient shots a player can take on the floor because of the value of risk of the result (two points, not three) and the low percentage of shots made. They are often a result of great defense ruining an offensive set. Coaches will tell you that the hardest part of eliminating these shots is running your offensive effectively and teaching players how to not find themselves pressed against the shot clock and having to force this type of field goal attempted. Hornacek believes it's not just about long twos, it's getting players to stop shooting low-percentage shots anywhere.
JH: "You'd be surprised how many times I ask a player, 'If I make a play for you to shoot from the free throw line, that's a great shot for you, right?' And the guy will say, 'Oh, yeah, absolutely.' And then I'll pull out the sheet and show him he only shot 34 percent last year from that spot. I don't think they understand where they shoot well from."
Hornacek clearly wants to play a more efficient style, but the question is can he teach it? He's proven he can take the Suns from the league's second-worst offense in 2012-13 to the 8th best in 2013-14, in terms of Offensive Rating, per basketball-reference.com.
mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
fishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
fishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Not arguing that there are many positives ...
Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people with experience in the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.
MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
didn't SA win the award at SLOAN for top metrics team?
GS won last year.
Cleveland under Lue were all about metrics.
This is here ... its a huge part of the game and all the top teams are heavily invested. The knicks and old school phil were definitely lagging and kind of clueless early on but going with JH was a very good sign forward. Trading for Rose and Signing Noah was a step backward though (IMHO).
There were still a number of really good off season moves that we can get excited about but we don't have to love all of them.
One thing that we can see is that JH wants to play much faster and has zero interest in slow (even) Al Jefferson type bigs.
mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
didn't SA win the award at SLOAN for top metrics team?
GS won last year.
Cleveland under Lue were all about metrics.
This is here ... its a huge part of the game and all the top teams are heavily invested. The knicks and old school phil were definitely lagging and kind of clueless early on but going with JH was a very good sign forward. Trading for Rose and Signing Noah was a step backward though (IMHO).
There were still a number of really good off season moves that we can get excited about but we don't have to love all of them.
One thing that we can see is that JH wants to play much faster and has zero interest in slow (even) Al Jefferson type bigs.
Once again RECENT with the Spurs and Warriors and in truth more teams FLOP trying it because the Spurs, Warriors and Cavs have some of the most talented players on the planet. It's much easier for those teams to win no matter what they were using. I'm not anti Metrics just making the point that it's only very recently that we are seeing teams win Titles with a heavy use of Analytics.
Also with the Cavs in the Finals they pretty much abandoned all that Metrics stuff. Love, Frye and JR were rendered nearly useless. They went back to the ISO Lebron and Kyrie, much the same as the Heat used to do with Lebron and DWade at the end of games. That ain't about metrics.
nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
didn't SA win the award at SLOAN for top metrics team?
GS won last year.
Cleveland under Lue were all about metrics.
This is here ... its a huge part of the game and all the top teams are heavily invested. The knicks and old school phil were definitely lagging and kind of clueless early on but going with JH was a very good sign forward. Trading for Rose and Signing Noah was a step backward though (IMHO).
There were still a number of really good off season moves that we can get excited about but we don't have to love all of them.
One thing that we can see is that JH wants to play much faster and has zero interest in slow (even) Al Jefferson type bigs.
Once again RECENT with the Spurs and Warriors and in truth more teams FLOP trying it because the Spurs, Warriors and Cavs have some of the most talented players on the planet. It's much easier for those teams to win no matter what they were using. I'm not anti Metrics just making the point that it's only very recently that we are seeing teams win Titles with a heavy use of Analytics.
Also with the Cavs in the Finals they pretty much abandoned all that Metrics stuff. Love, Frye and JR were rendered nearly useless. They went back to the ISO Lebron and Kyrie, much the same as the Heat used to do with Lebron and DWade at the end of games. That ain't about metrics.
they did dirty it up in the finals based on matchups but look at their overall playoffs where they were the most spread of all playoff teams.
And, its not just those three teams, how about Dallas and their ring?
But at least now, you guys won't be able to slam metrics (not you specifically) since our coach is a huge proponent. I don't have to have silly arguments with some of you old schoolers about how bad long 2's are and how shot charts are crucial. JH believes it so now many of you will finally follow him into this scary world.
mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
didn't SA win the award at SLOAN for top metrics team?
GS won last year.
Cleveland under Lue were all about metrics.
This is here ... its a huge part of the game and all the top teams are heavily invested. The knicks and old school phil were definitely lagging and kind of clueless early on but going with JH was a very good sign forward. Trading for Rose and Signing Noah was a step backward though (IMHO).
There were still a number of really good off season moves that we can get excited about but we don't have to love all of them.
One thing that we can see is that JH wants to play much faster and has zero interest in slow (even) Al Jefferson type bigs.
Once again RECENT with the Spurs and Warriors and in truth more teams FLOP trying it because the Spurs, Warriors and Cavs have some of the most talented players on the planet. It's much easier for those teams to win no matter what they were using. I'm not anti Metrics just making the point that it's only very recently that we are seeing teams win Titles with a heavy use of Analytics.
Also with the Cavs in the Finals they pretty much abandoned all that Metrics stuff. Love, Frye and JR were rendered nearly useless. They went back to the ISO Lebron and Kyrie, much the same as the Heat used to do with Lebron and DWade at the end of games. That ain't about metrics.
they did dirty it up in the finals based on matchups but look at their overall playoffs where they were the most spread of all playoff teams.
And, its not just those three teams, how about Dallas and their ring?
But at least now, you guys won't be able to slam metrics (not you specifically) since our coach is a huge proponent. I don't have to have silly arguments with some of you old schoolers about how bad long 2's are and how shot charts are crucial. JH believes it so now many of you will finally follow him into this scary world.
Is he? That's good news. It's not really an issue of being a proponent of the metrics (like Hinkie) but being able to use them more effectively than the other teams do that matters, though. If Hornacek is a big proponent of them that's a good start, though.
nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
didn't SA win the award at SLOAN for top metrics team?
GS won last year.
Cleveland under Lue were all about metrics.
This is here ... its a huge part of the game and all the top teams are heavily invested. The knicks and old school phil were definitely lagging and kind of clueless early on but going with JH was a very good sign forward. Trading for Rose and Signing Noah was a step backward though (IMHO).
There were still a number of really good off season moves that we can get excited about but we don't have to love all of them.
One thing that we can see is that JH wants to play much faster and has zero interest in slow (even) Al Jefferson type bigs.
Once again RECENT with the Spurs and Warriors and in truth more teams FLOP trying it because the Spurs, Warriors and Cavs have some of the most talented players on the planet. It's much easier for those teams to win no matter what they were using. I'm not anti Metrics just making the point that it's only very recently that we are seeing teams win Titles with a heavy use of Analytics.
Also with the Cavs in the Finals they pretty much abandoned all that Metrics stuff. Love, Frye and JR were rendered nearly useless. They went back to the ISO Lebron and Kyrie, much the same as the Heat used to do with Lebron and DWade at the end of games. That ain't about metrics.
The metrics are first used to inform player selection. So unless they got a new 12 man roster, they didn't abandon the metrics. As far as coaching in a series, there's nothing in the metrics that says a high percentage scorer shouldn't go ISO. If the player does it efficiently, he should do it as often as he can (without compromising efficiency to the point that other better shots are available).
Bonn1997 wrote:nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
didn't SA win the award at SLOAN for top metrics team?
GS won last year.
Cleveland under Lue were all about metrics.
This is here ... its a huge part of the game and all the top teams are heavily invested. The knicks and old school phil were definitely lagging and kind of clueless early on but going with JH was a very good sign forward. Trading for Rose and Signing Noah was a step backward though (IMHO).
There were still a number of really good off season moves that we can get excited about but we don't have to love all of them.
One thing that we can see is that JH wants to play much faster and has zero interest in slow (even) Al Jefferson type bigs.
Once again RECENT with the Spurs and Warriors and in truth more teams FLOP trying it because the Spurs, Warriors and Cavs have some of the most talented players on the planet. It's much easier for those teams to win no matter what they were using. I'm not anti Metrics just making the point that it's only very recently that we are seeing teams win Titles with a heavy use of Analytics.
Also with the Cavs in the Finals they pretty much abandoned all that Metrics stuff. Love, Frye and JR were rendered nearly useless. They went back to the ISO Lebron and Kyrie, much the same as the Heat used to do with Lebron and DWade at the end of games. That ain't about metrics.
The metrics are first used to inform player selection. So unless they got a new 12 man roster, they didn't abandon the metrics. As far as coaching in a series, there's nothing in the metrics that says a high percentage scorer shouldn't go ISO. If the player does it efficiently, he should do it as often as he can (without compromising efficiency to the point that other better shots are available).
They didn't have to get a new 12 man roster in order to abandon what they had been doing all along. As I said in the Finals the Cavs basically stopped playing Frye and all those highly efficient 3pt shots dried up, they were dead in the water, clinging to life and they ended up having to rely in Lebron and Kyrie. Now that's fine since you gotta do what you've gotta do.
We'll see how the Knicks actually perform next season. This team is put together with a mix of Old Fashioned Basketball insight and a bit of Metrics mixed in. Hornacek is adding his input and it's all mixing together in what I think will be a better team. IMO a lot of these Metrics guys have missed the Old School part that the Spurs use and IMO what Phil has used this summer to take into consideration all the INTANGIBLE aspects that lead to winning.
nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
didn't SA win the award at SLOAN for top metrics team?
GS won last year.
Cleveland under Lue were all about metrics.
This is here ... its a huge part of the game and all the top teams are heavily invested. The knicks and old school phil were definitely lagging and kind of clueless early on but going with JH was a very good sign forward. Trading for Rose and Signing Noah was a step backward though (IMHO).
There were still a number of really good off season moves that we can get excited about but we don't have to love all of them.
One thing that we can see is that JH wants to play much faster and has zero interest in slow (even) Al Jefferson type bigs.
Once again RECENT with the Spurs and Warriors and in truth more teams FLOP trying it because the Spurs, Warriors and Cavs have some of the most talented players on the planet. It's much easier for those teams to win no matter what they were using. I'm not anti Metrics just making the point that it's only very recently that we are seeing teams win Titles with a heavy use of Analytics.
Also with the Cavs in the Finals they pretty much abandoned all that Metrics stuff. Love, Frye and JR were rendered nearly useless. They went back to the ISO Lebron and Kyrie, much the same as the Heat used to do with Lebron and DWade at the end of games. That ain't about metrics.
The metrics are first used to inform player selection. So unless they got a new 12 man roster, they didn't abandon the metrics. As far as coaching in a series, there's nothing in the metrics that says a high percentage scorer shouldn't go ISO. If the player does it efficiently, he should do it as often as he can (without compromising efficiency to the point that other better shots are available).They didn't have to get a new 12 man roster in order to abandon what they had been doing all along. As I said in the Finals the Cavs basically stopped playing Frye and all those highly efficient 3pt shots dried up, they were dead in the water, clinging to life and they ended up having to rely in Lebron and Kyrie. Now that's fine since you gotta do what you've gotta do.
We'll see how the Knicks actually perform next season. This team is put together with a mix of Old Fashioned Basketball insight and a bit of Metrics mixed in. Hornacek is adding his input and it's all mixing together in what I think will be a better team. IMO a lot of these Metrics guys have missed the Old School part that the Spurs use and IMO what Phil has used this summer to take into consideration all the INTANGIBLE aspects that lead to winning.
That's not abandoning metrics. It's consistent with the metrics to adjust your rotations if doing so will lead to a more efficient offense. Nothing "old school" has to contradict the metrics either. Anything "old school" that produces efficient offense is worth doing.
Bonn1997 wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:fishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:where would you have spent the Noah money? And you don't get to keep Lee if Noah is gone also. Tell me the guysfishmike wrote:mreinman wrote:I would to! Phil would be a fool to not factor and process every piece of data available. He's added 3 players (and spent our one chance in many to land a star pick) from the Spanish league, looked hard at two kids from Witchita... lots of patterns in Phil's moves so the tea leaves say he's got a few favoritesfishmike wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Bonn.. this is where the stat guys really look like they just don't get it. Do you really treat Rose's stats as static figures transferable from one environment to another? Like yea... since he did that last year with the Bulls its obviously going to be the same this year with the Knicks.nixluva wrote:mreinman wrote:nixluva wrote:shinmen wrote:nixluva wrote:fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:Phil has gone all in by sacrificing what? Grant and Lopez and Calderon? Those are the player you are holding against Phil's "ALL IN?"fishmike wrote:franco12 wrote:So you think a 40 win roster is going to entice Westbrook? Cmon man... you are just not watching the NBA or paying attention.crzymdups wrote:mreinman wrote:fishmike wrote:mreinman, dk... who are the guys Phil should have targeted that would have improved your offseason grades?for starters, don't make the rose trade. undo that and we are in B territory.
Rose begat Noah, Noah begat CLee.
Our off-season would be Brandon Jennings anddddd... what else?
If we got Jennings, kept Lopez and perhaps kept D Williams & maybe still added Courtney Lee - to me, that might have been the kind of incremental improvement we needed, get to 40 wins+/- and then add a late lottery/Mid 1st round pick to the mix for the following year, and then maybe be in play for Westbrook.
And then the play off drive starts then.
But, hey, we're just keyboard GMs.
However I have a simple retort, and I asked Bonn this in another thread and he ducked it. If you believe in incremental improvement I have a very simple question. Knicks win 41 games with this roster next year. Based on your expectation that is a successful correct?
I am probably naive to think before these moves we had a shot at Westbrook. I'd like to think if we had a solid foundation with parts that were in place playing a system, and improving- that and max dollars might be enough.
But I'm not a swing for the fences thinker, not with our franchise as it stands with the base of talent.
That is why to answer your question - if the Knicks win 41 games with this roster, no, I don't judge that successful. It needs to be better. Phil has gone all in (minus future draft picks, at this stage) and gambled in a big way, turning over the roster for what, the 5th or 6th time in the last 5/6 years?
He's signed Noah & Lee to big money. Melo, Noah & Lee together take up 55% of our cap. I just think that is unbalanced and creates issues down the line when these players at the wrong side of their athletic careers start to inevitably break down.
To me, with the moves Phil has made, he better win more than 41 games and they better make the play offs.
Based on the talent and resources we had, I felt we weren't anywhere close to being able to be in a win now position.
And worse, this franchise has been stuck in the dump because our owner has had a win now at any and all cost mentality.
Look, I like Phil and I like that he has pushed Dolan out of the picture. I just don't like I see what appears to be a repeat of past sins.
On paper, this squad looks improved. But we've thought and said that before.
I am sorry man, but that doesn't hold any water to with at all. I mean you are literally saying if we traded Lopez, Grant and Jose well we better be good! As far as the roster turnover who are the guys you lament losing? We didn't add win now players. Willy is signed for 4 years (rookie). Kuz is signed for 2 years (26 year old 4x all star in EU). Jennings and Rose are rentals with an option to buy and Rose/Jennings/Lee/Holiday replaces Jose/Langston/Grant/Afflalo.
Sorry I need you to better explain what was sacrificed for this team to be excluded from your incremental is good plan.
You are right.. the roster has been flipped 3x. Its a rebuild. First time was a cleanse and the last two both times the team got better. Much better.
Exactly. People seem not to quite understand. The PLAN is to WIN. They aren't just gonna be patient with bad players. The entire point of Free Agency is to try and get better QUICKLY!!! Boston adds KG and Allen both at older ages.Champion 2007-08 Celtics
Rk Player Age ▾ G GS MP
1 Paul Pierce 30 80 80 2874
2 Ray Allen 32 73 73 2624
3 Kevin Garnett 31 71 71 2328
4 Rajon Rondo 21 77 77 2306
5 Kendrick Perkins 23 78 78 1912
6 James Posey 31 74 2 1821
7 Eddie House 29 78 2 1480
8 Tony Allen 26 75 11 1373
9 Brian Scalabrine 29 48 9 512
10 Leon Powe 24 56 5 809
11 Glen Davis 22 69 1 940
12 Sam Cassell 38 17 1 299
13 P.J. Brown 38 18 0 209
14 Scot Pollard 32 22 0 173This isn't some wild and unprecedented approach. Phil has himself had teams with a similar structure and age ratio MANY times in his career.
My only reservation is Rose. I fear if he plays good for us, he gets a max contract, the following year the team has potentially 3 injury prone big contracts on the roster for 3 to 4 years. It would set us back 3 years before we can hope to be respectable again.
It's entirely possible that Rose's luck could change and he has a nice stretch of years without another major injury. Gotta see how he looks. Like I said, he hasn't really had much WEAR and TEAR the last 4 years. You have to actually play games to get that. In a weird way his legs could be very fresh next year. Also I don't foresee Rose logging too heavy a workload in the regular season. The key is to get him to the post season strong and health. Horny has enough depth to keep Rose's minutes down.yes. It is entirely possible, however its improbable (as bonn has tried to explain).
We're talking about 2 different things. I think it's highly probable that Rose will have a better season in terms of his shooting efficiency next year. As for his being able to stay healthy that is another issue. As long as we're only talking about minor bumps and bruises then that's OK. We just don't want another major issue requiring surgery and significant time missed. Rose had the face surgery but not another knee surgery so that's good news. Anyone can get smashed in the face and break a bone. That has nothing to do with his knees.
Is it highly probable that he'll do better next year than he did during his best stretch of last year (those few months you highlighted where his TS% was .515)? We need better than that. If he's just going to be a high volume .515 TS player, I'd rather have kept Rolo and used the Noah money elsewhere. And if he's going to be worse than .515... I don't even want to think about that.The reason Mr Eyeball Phil Jackson is in charge and paid so much is to mesh skill sets into a unit where the unit is greater than the sum of its parts. That's what makes a team great. I'm assuming you have heard that expression before? Or do you dismiss it in atheist fashion as something that can be disproven statistically?
mr. eyeballs hired mr. stats_and_eyballs :-)
Then we agree. I'm not sure what your argument is. I wrote an *if...then* statement, not a guarantee, about his efficiency next year.
We went through this. I listed the role players I would have targeted. That said, this is not the roster I would have constructed and I'd never be in this situation unless I got called to take over today for Phil. I also don't have time to go through every piece of data. Realistically, my first move wouldn't be to sign a particular player. It would be to hire the best people from the top metrics departments (Spurs, Warriors, etc.) that I could lure over.
Well the Knicks have Hornacek and a staff of people that are well versed in Metrics, but more than that they have a bunch of good old fashioned WINNERS that know what the F they're doing. Phil, Gaines, Warkentien, Mills etc. It's not always readily apparent just how hard it is to build a winning team in this league but it's not easy. Much harder to build a Finals team.MOST of the teams we've watched winning Titles have not been because of Metrics. Only very recently have we seen a team built on Metrics actually win Titles. Most of the guys running teams who are most prominent for Metrics have failed to build a lasting winner or reach the Finals. There's obviously more to it than the numbers.
This wasn't the greatest path to building a team but under the circumstances it's not terrible either. There much closer to having something than they were. You build a team and see what it can do and then you hope to build on top of that success. From 17 wins to 32 and hopefully much more than that next season. That's all you can do. Just think about that. 17-32 and in year 3 we have a chance to do some damage. That's not a bad outcome at all, no matter what method you used. What do you think the Sixers will do this year after all the time they've spent on that team built by a Metrics Master?
76ers formally hire Sam Hinkiehttp://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/927535...
May 14, 2013
Associated PressPHILADELPHIA -- Sam Hinkie wants the 76ers to use the Moneyball-type of thinking popularized in baseball to build a championship team in Philadelphia.
Hinkie can crunch the numbers using any formula he'd like -- he'd find the Sixers were pretty awful this season.
But that's why Hinkie was hired away from Houston, to build the 34-win Sixers into title contenders, not just by using traditional player statistics like rebounds and points, but through alternative -- and complex -- ways of calculating a player's value that often clash with old-school, front-office thinking.
Considered an innovator in the Rockets' cutting edge analytic efforts, the Sixers named Hinkie team president and general manager on Tuesday.
"I'm just trying to use information to make decisions," Hinkie said. "I think some people move along quickly and others don't. That's OK."
Hinkie replaced president Rod Thorn, who moved into a consulting role, and GM Tony DiLeo, fired after one year on the job and 23 years total in the front office.
Hinkie spent the last eight years in Houston and was the executive vice president of basketball operations for the Rockets. A year after he was passed over for the GM job, Hinkie was the top choice this time by owner Joshua Harris to oversee the rebuilding of this beleaguered franchise.
Hinkie must now hire a coach after Doug Collins resigned following three seasons. Collins and Thorn are officially consultants for the team, but are now in the background of a major reconstruction project that Harris, Hinkie and a new coach will tackle.
The Sixers have a short list of coaching candidates but have not interviewed anyone.
In looking for a coach, Hinkie said all philosophies would be blended into a successful organization, not just analytics.
"I think it's all too-often overstated about how analytically minded a head coach needs to be," Hinkie said. "I think every head coach in the NBA is analytically minded. I think they all want to win. I think more and more, as they meet organizations that have really invested in this, they say this is helpful."
didn't SA win the award at SLOAN for top metrics team?
GS won last year.
Cleveland under Lue were all about metrics.
This is here ... its a huge part of the game and all the top teams are heavily invested. The knicks and old school phil were definitely lagging and kind of clueless early on but going with JH was a very good sign forward. Trading for Rose and Signing Noah was a step backward though (IMHO).
There were still a number of really good off season moves that we can get excited about but we don't have to love all of them.
One thing that we can see is that JH wants to play much faster and has zero interest in slow (even) Al Jefferson type bigs.
Once again RECENT with the Spurs and Warriors and in truth more teams FLOP trying it because the Spurs, Warriors and Cavs have some of the most talented players on the planet. It's much easier for those teams to win no matter what they were using. I'm not anti Metrics just making the point that it's only very recently that we are seeing teams win Titles with a heavy use of Analytics.
Also with the Cavs in the Finals they pretty much abandoned all that Metrics stuff. Love, Frye and JR were rendered nearly useless. They went back to the ISO Lebron and Kyrie, much the same as the Heat used to do with Lebron and DWade at the end of games. That ain't about metrics.
The metrics are first used to inform player selection. So unless they got a new 12 man roster, they didn't abandon the metrics. As far as coaching in a series, there's nothing in the metrics that says a high percentage scorer shouldn't go ISO. If the player does it efficiently, he should do it as often as he can (without compromising efficiency to the point that other better shots are available).They didn't have to get a new 12 man roster in order to abandon what they had been doing all along. As I said in the Finals the Cavs basically stopped playing Frye and all those highly efficient 3pt shots dried up, they were dead in the water, clinging to life and they ended up having to rely in Lebron and Kyrie. Now that's fine since you gotta do what you've gotta do.
We'll see how the Knicks actually perform next season. This team is put together with a mix of Old Fashioned Basketball insight and a bit of Metrics mixed in. Hornacek is adding his input and it's all mixing together in what I think will be a better team. IMO a lot of these Metrics guys have missed the Old School part that the Spurs use and IMO what Phil has used this summer to take into consideration all the INTANGIBLE aspects that lead to winning.
That's not abandoning metrics. It's consistent with the metrics to adjust your rotations if doing so will lead to a more efficient offense. Nothing "old school" has to contradict the metrics either. Anything "old school" that produces efficient offense is worth doing.
Of Course efficiency is good. That's not a news flash. That said NO ONE is actually trying to increase their amount of ISO ball as if that was the goal of the Cavs. They RESORTED to that because the Warriors took away their up to that series highly efficient scheme. The Cavs weren't more efficient on offense. They did play great defense but in terms of their offense it wasn't more efficient in the Warriors series.
FG% 3P% FT% PTS TRB AST STL BLK
Pistons Series .461 .413 .731 103.5 41.0 22.0 5.8 2.5
Hawks Series .461 .507 .655 112.0 45.8 25.8 8.0 4.0
Raptors Series .497 .389 .764 105.8 42.5 21.5 7.2 4.2
Warriors Series .456 .329 .725 100.4 43.9 18.0 9.3 5.4
Now back to the Knicks. I think there is a better connection between the Metrics guys in the Front Office and now the new coach Hornacek. It goes all the way up the chain to Mills, who is a Metrics guy but Phil is not a big user of it. However, his staff has guys that are big believers and they report to him which players the team should go after and why. It looks like Hornacek has had a positive impact on the team and the final decisions that Phil has made this summer. Basically he's supporting what his staff and coach are asking him to do. That to me is good news. It's a good mix of strengths from both angles.
Young additions are not NBA ready as expected.
The veterans can play and are what they are at this point of their NBA carrier.
I think we did not overpay for anything.
Every peace have a purpose and some possible upside along with downsize risk.
I think it is a good transitional roster to get through Melo time.
But Phil has more work to do to build a contender foundation.