BRIGGS wrote:Yahoo sports on Stein

Methodology: When he was on, he looked like an NBA All-Star. But when he wasn't, I'm not sure how productive he'd even be in the D-League.

towns had many very off days too where you questioned his head yet you think that he will be the best player in the nba.

BRIGGS wrote:Yahoo sports on Stein

Methodology: When he was on, he looked like an NBA All-Star. But when he wasn't, I'm not sure how productive he'd even be in the D-League.

The trick is to give him a role where he's fully engaged all game. That's what the Triangle does. He'll be involved the entire game. Bigs can't take plays off in the Triangle and they're not ignored and just standing around watching. WCS wouldn't be hidden in our offense. He'd be involved and featured. I have no fears of WCS fading or losing concentration in our system. He'll feel more empowered than he's ever been in the Triangle. It may take some time for him to learn the footwork and passing and to gain confidence looking to score but he won't be bored or not involved in every play.

WaltLongmire wrote:Given Stein's age compared to the younger prospects, and his lack of significant improvement over 3 years at the most consistently successful team in college, you have to be careful when talking about "potential."

Bonn1997 is right about Towns- if he had stayed in college for 3 years, his stat line showed no improvement, and his coach did not expand his role on the team, he would not be the probable #1 pick in this draft.

You can hide behind the "potential" curtain if you are a one and done player, but how do you do that with someone in Stein's situation.

Kaminsky wouldn't be a late 2nd, or undrafted FA, if he had come out after his first season.

Nobody finds little known prospects like Briggs, and Kaminsky was at a major school. Anyone remember Briggs threads touting Kaminsky when he was a freshman? A sophomore? Probably not...because he only played 8MPG as a freshman, and about 10MPG as a sophomore. He improved his game each year, though, and his college success needs no description here.

If Stein had showed the same kind of improvement as Kaminsky, he would be an easy pick at 4, and maybe a top 1-3 pick, but he did not, so all you have to do is go by that old stand-by, "potential."

There are seniors I never hear of until the end of their careers. There is 375 teams in div 1 and 4000+ players. I didnt know who Kaminsky was until the 4th game of his junior year. I imagine when he is lost in the NBA by defenders he will have a few games like that--but will add the rebounds and assist.

WCS isn't a guy with no talent. He's shown flashes of offense but hasn't consistently been aggressive. It may not have been all his fault. Just go look at the UK offense and how they had WCS playing on Offense. It's not that great. Not to mention the college game has less space to begin with. The floor will be more spaced for WCS in the NBA.

codeunknown wrote:The isolated plus/minus stats that were displayed earlier in the thread depend heavily on the methodology. For example, a 4-man constant lineup normalization followed by a weighted utility (by minutes or position or otherwise) can actually skew the data further, accentuating style, coaching, sample size (as mentioned before) and mathematic modeling artifacts. Acquiring the above data for all team players in tandem to create "a plus-minus space" with iterative player assessment modulation is another way to do it. The lineups used are usually starter/bench stratified though and the value of going to these lengths is tough to say; it may not add too much. Regardless, its pretty dumb to get overly excited about these things without knowing the degree of uncertainty in the measurement, far be it the predictive value.

The "eye" test plus the stats on Stein leave me not very impressed at all as a #4 pick. Lower down 9-14ish, he would a decent pick-up from a probability standpoint, whether bust or stud.

You can't underestimate the impact that has on a team. We need to be looking to build a championship level defense. The best way to do that is to bring in a defensive anchor and build out from there. Let's remember that we still have a team to build and if you draft WCS then all your other decisions are easier to make. He's like bringing in Joakim Noah. You know you'll have a solid D and every additional quality defender you add will only make your defense stronger from there.

I'm talking about how you build a title contender. You do that with a core of great defense. You can always add scorers. Finding elite defenders who can lead to a championship level defense is much more difficult. I find it sad that I have to be the one trying to make the case for that on a Knicks forum of all places. Knicks fans that understand the importance of defense. Draft WCS and the search is over. you can add a few quality free agents to provide scoring and defense on the perimeter. Another big to rebound and score inside. It's a much simpler process if you draft WCS.

codeunknown wrote:

nixluva wrote:

codeunknown wrote:The isolated plus/minus stats that were displayed earlier in the thread depend heavily on the methodology. For example, a 4-man constant lineup normalization followed by a weighted utility (by minutes or position or otherwise) can actually skew the data further, accentuating style, coaching, sample size (as mentioned before) and mathematic modeling artifacts. Acquiring the above data for all team players in tandem to create "a plus-minus space" with iterative player assessment modulation is another way to do it. The lineups used are usually starter/bench stratified though and the value of going to these lengths is tough to say; it may not add too much. Regardless, its pretty dumb to get overly excited about these things without knowing the degree of uncertainty in the measurement, far be it the predictive value.

The "eye" test plus the stats on Stein leave me not very impressed at all as a #4 pick. Lower down 9-14ish, he would a decent pick-up from a probability standpoint, whether bust or stud.

Dude you can come up with all the counter arguments you like but in the end WCS comes up as a big time Prospect. A legit 7'er with ELITE length, quickness and athletic ability is no small thing. What he does for your defense is exactly what teams need now. He's a big who can defend PnR and still get back to the rim. He's so quick and big that he's never really too far from the basket and he's a willing help defender. The man just understands how to play TEAM DEFENSE at a high level.

You can't underestimate the impact that has on a team. We need to be looking to build a championship level defense. The best way to do that is to bring in a defensive anchor and build out from there. Let's remember that we still have a team to build and if you draft WCS then all your other decisions are easier to make. He's like bringing in Joakim Noah. You know you'll have a solid D and every additional quality defender you add will only make your defense stronger from there.

I'm talking about how you build a title contender. You do that with a core of great defense. You can always add scorers. Finding elite defenders who can lead to a championship level defense is much more difficult. I find it sad that I have to be the one trying to make the case for that on a Knicks forum of all places. Knicks fans that understand the importance of defense. Draft WCS and the search is over. you can add a few quality free agents to provide scoring and defense on the perimeter. Another big to rebound and score inside. It's a much simpler process if you draft WCS.

As I've told you before, I find your posts entertaining but a waste of time from a quality standpoint. You get repetitive and throw fits when people counter your gestalt. I'm not interested. If you want to have a quality discussion that goes beyond I want this and you want that, we can give it a try, but there's a poor track record in this thread so far.

The Knicks had the 28th ranked defense last year. How do you suppose that adding another player that is mostly about scoring will make any difference? The Knicks are so bad defensively that they need a Major influx of defensive talent. This team needs a great defensive anchor and that's what WCS brings to the table. You put him in the mix and you instantly have a much better defense.

By building the team based on defense they can make a more significant improvement next year. Phil can then target players that are solid 2 way players to round out the roster. You have players like DeMarre Carroll, Danny Green, Wesley Matthews, Patrick Beverly or Draymond Green and Kris Middleton (tho they are both less likely). He can go after another big who can score in the post and rebound. You would have a team that could defend the paint, PnR and 3pt line much more effectively than they do now.

BRIGGS wrote:

nixluva wrote:

codeunknown wrote:The isolated plus/minus stats that were displayed earlier in the thread depend heavily on the methodology. For example, a 4-man constant lineup normalization followed by a weighted utility (by minutes or position or otherwise) can actually skew the data further, accentuating style, coaching, sample size (as mentioned before) and mathematic modeling artifacts. Acquiring the above data for all team players in tandem to create "a plus-minus space" with iterative player assessment modulation is another way to do it. The lineups used are usually starter/bench stratified though and the value of going to these lengths is tough to say; it may not add too much. Regardless, its pretty dumb to get overly excited about these things without knowing the degree of uncertainty in the measurement, far be it the predictive value.

The "eye" test plus the stats on Stein leave me not very impressed at all as a #4 pick. Lower down 9-14ish, he would a decent pick-up from a probability standpoint, whether bust or stud.

Dude you can come up with all the counter arguments you like but in the end WCS comes up as a big time Prospect. A legit 7'er with ELITE length, quickness and athletic ability is no small thing. What he does for your defense is exactly what teams need now. He's a big who can defend PnR and still get back to the rim. He's so quick and big that he's never really too far from the basket and he's a willing help defender. The man just understands how to play TEAM DEFENSE at a high level.

You can't underestimate the impact that has on a team. We need to be looking to build a championship level defense. The best way to do that is to bring in a defensive anchor and build out from there. Let's remember that we still have a team to build and if you draft WCS then all your other decisions are easier to make. He's like bringing in Joakim Noah. You know you'll have a solid D and every additional quality defender you add will only make your defense stronger from there.

I'm talking about how you build a title contender. You do that with a core of great defense. You can always add scorers. Finding elite defenders who can lead to a championship level defense is much more difficult. I find it sad that I have to be the one trying to make the case for that on a Knicks forum of all places. Knicks fans that understand the importance of defense. Draft WCS and the search is over. you can add a few quality free agents to provide scoring and defense on the perimeter. Another big to rebound and score inside. It's a much simpler process if you draft WCS.

nixluva you keep saying hes an elite level player

Can you tell me about his passing ability? His ballhandling ability? Why he seems to be very indecisive with the ball in his hands? Why his in game jumpshot form changes on nearly every attempt? In his 3 year career he has 127 turnovers and 90 assists--for a negative ratio--for a guy who does not score or even touch the ball that much.

Lets get one thing straight, the reason you draft WCS is to build your team based on defense. If you want a great offensive player then you aren't going to be looking at WCS. I don't think the Knicks biggest need is another offensive weapon. Phil should build this team with a great defensive player at the core. Offense will come, but you must build a team based on defense.

Very few players if any would come to the Knicks knowing all the fundamentals needed to execute in the Triangle. Teams at the lower levels don't teach these things anymore. This is understood going into the draft. You seem to have a problem realizing that all of these flaws are things you can fix with coaching and a system where his role is more clearly defined. We won't be in any rush and WCS will be allowed time to master the fundamentals.

The Triangle is all about teaching your players the fundamentals of spacing, footwork and passing. WCS would learn how to make the proper pass and where to look for his teammates who are cutting and moving into his sight lines. It's the very core of the offense. WCS has never been that involved in an offensive game plan. It may take time for him to master these things but he will learn and grow as a player. They didn't run an offense like the Triangle at UK.

shinmen wrote:Most people say WCS hasn't improved much during his college days. Innocent question. Maybe he did improve but on the defensive end, which does not translate on the statsheet.
Anyway, none of the rookies will be highly effective their first year (event KAT) because they are rookies. I do believe we should draft WCS because he would help tremendously on defense in one or two years. Deandre Jordan is one of the less gifted scorer in the league but he manages to score 11.5 ppg. Where as WCS is nowhere as athletic as Deandre, I think he could give the knicks 10/13 ppg with dunks/putbacks, jumper and FT.

I wouldn't mind Mudiay instead because from what i've seen, he could be a good two way player.

How do you measure athleticism? Deandre can't do the things Stein can on thr defensive end. For what it is worth, we don't even know how much better Stein can become due to how Calipari used him in college.

With his wide receiver agility skills and length, he's able to make up ground and change direction faster than most. There's no stat for that. Stein is one of the only players you can't measure individual stats to see his value. But you can measure team defense and his ability to be an anchor, without worring about filling the stat sheet. You rarely find an unselfish 7 footer, willing to sacrifice his individual stats to help a teams defense, in a trillion dollar industry driven by money....More stats, more money.....Just ask Melo about that. We need more players oposite of Melo.....Offensive and defensive players that elevates a team. Melo elevates himself....Thats why he has a huge contract on the worst team.

In todays stat driven world, it's VERY HARD to see Stein's value. But we have a GM who played the same position and was a roll player. So if anybody understands WCS value, it's Phil Jackson. The million dollar question is how do you compare him to other players that do fill up the stat sheet. Thats an alghorhym I haven't figured out yet.

Winslow is a similar player at 6'6.....He can also fill up the stat sheet. But he's not a rim protector. And lock down defenders don't exist anymore. For example, Igudola (sp?) is as close to a lockdown defender we have in the NBA.....Lebron is averaging 40 pts against him. And almost always gets a triple double against GS. So lock down defenders are becoming overrated with todays hand check rules and bad calls.

Rim protection and help defenders are always high value, underrated skills to have on any team, regardless of the multiple NBA rule changes. Stein fits this skill set and he actually enjoy's this role. This is why I compare him to Denis Rodman....Junk Yard Dog.....Stein is a 7 foot version of them. No he's not a rebounder like Rodman (eventhough he could be later on).....What makes him similar is his willingness to sacrifice individual stats and play a defensive team role, regardless of stats, if thats what he needs to do to win. His unselfishness to be a help defender and guard the best players. His unselfishness to guard Melo's man, if thats what it takes to win. He loves this role.....Thats rare in todays offensive driven stat / money league.

Weather you value that or not, it's a different story....But clearly Phil values that and Stein fits that example. On top of that, he actually has offensive potential. He's a candidate at 4....along with 7 other guys or trade scenarios.

mreinman wrote:tristan thompson is a max money player and he has zero offensive game.

stein is all world offense compared to tristan

TT has less than zero game....it's terrible to watch him air ball a 2 foot hook shot. But thats another case where stats may not always show his value. And he's terrible guarding PnR.....His only true skill is offensive rebounds. I wouldn't say he's a max guy, but more power to him! I hope he gets his money, just not from us.