Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by misterearl:

bobs3304 - Randolph does not play the same game eddy Curry does. I don't understand why people continue to parrot mis-informaion based on some stereotype.

Zach has range to 15 feet. That is not Eddy Curry's game.

Check out Zach's stats on 82games.com. Zach barely hits 40% of his jump shots. http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR12A.HTM We could have just kept Frye if we wanted that. The only time where Zach is truly an effective player is in close to the basket with the ball in his hands and without thinking about possibly passing the ball. Sound like another player on the team?

Bonn, you are an idiot.

We got frye, plus 10 boards a game and an additional low post presence.

We also got rid of francis.

again, we just received a 20-10 player who played in the wild wild west. that is an achievement in itself. he is coming east to play for OUR team and people are complaining. randolph is a scorer and he does demand the ball to be effective just like curry. however, randolph scores in a variety of ways in which curry doesn't. he can hit the face up jumper. the fact that both will see less double coverage will definately help their effectiveness. i can understand if people have beef with the interior defense or randolph's past, but what he actually brings to the offensive end will make us more potent.

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by martin:

Posted by misterearl:

Martin - I've watched Randlph play effectively facing the basket.

At Portland he received the ball at the top of the key on occassion. Eddy does not generally catch the pill from too far out.

I'm jus' sayin'

both players need the ball in their hands to be effective and we know that Eddy is kinda useless without it.

Actually Randolph didn't have the ball in his hands that much last year and still managed to put up 23 ppg and 10 boards. I am with a wait and see attitude because I was with people screaming how Ewing and Larry Johnson couldn't exist together. And how Johnson played no defense with the Hornets. The rest they say is history.

good post. that is a perfect example, even though both had to change their games because of injury and age. but it worked.

I think it will be somewhere in between. Having Randolph and Curry on the floor together isn't an ideal combo, but it's workable.

Posted by babyKnicks:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by misterearl:

bobs3304 - Randolph does not play the same game eddy Curry does. I don't understand why people continue to parrot mis-informaion based on some stereotype.

Zach has range to 15 feet. That is not Eddy Curry's game.

Check out Zach's stats on 82games.com. Zach barely hits 40% of his jump shots. http://www.82games.com/0607/06POR12A.HTM We could have just kept Frye if we wanted that. The only time where Zach is truly an effective player is in close to the basket with the ball in his hands and without thinking about possibly passing the ball. Sound like another player on the team?

Bonn, you are an idiot.

We got frye, plus 10 boards a game and an additional low post presence.

We also got rid of francis.

BONN stop throwing that stat around like some misinformed troller - %42 That's better than FRYE (39%) and Lee (29%)

http://www.82games.com/0607/06NYK10A.HTM
http://www.82games.com/0607/06NYK11A.HTM

Posted by nixluva:

Amazing how we could actually add one of only 5 guys who avg'd 20-10 to the team and yet that isn't gonna help us to win! ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Just look at it this way, we will NEVER be without a force down low in a game. How many teams can do that? We have so much power on this team right now that we'll be able to pound teams into submission. The won't have enough fouls to give against us. Meanwhile our perimeter guys will have a much easier time getting their shots off now.

All this crap about both guys doing the same thing is crazy. On this team we needed a PF and so we got one. A GOOD ONE! Now all of a sudden it's a problem. Defensively we're no worse off than we were with Frye, but on offense we're MUCH stronger. For an offensive team that is gonna be important. You have to be what you are. Like Phx and Wash, we're an offensive team and we'll have to win with our strength. Some teams in the NFL are dominant run teams and even tho teams know this they still can't stop it. That's what we're like. We're a power team. Isiah just took us even further in that direction. Inside play and rebounding is our thing. Soon we'll also be able to hit the 3pt shot more efficiently.

Like always I agree with you.

Zach brings everything the knicks needed Mr. Mouthpiece to do. That alone is an upgrade.

Go knick, nixluva!

I've never heard of someone call 41% shooting good. That makes no sense. If a team shot 41% for the season, they'd win less than 30 games unless they had a top 5 defender at every position. As for the Frye stat, I thought he did most of his damage in the paint his rookie year and moving him out of the paint this year was what killed his game.

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 01-07-2007 12:49 AM]

Just as a comparison to the other 4 players (all PF's) jump shot efficiency who averaged over 20-10 in the NBA:

Duncan .437
Garnett .434
Bosh .410
Boozer .395

And compared to some other big name PF's

Nowitzki .513
Brand .470 (interesting)
J. O'Neal .372
D. Howard .317

Posted by PresIke:

Just as a comparison to the other 4 players (all PF's) jump shot efficiency who averaged over 20-10 in the NBA:

Duncan .437
Garnett .434
Bosh .410
Boozer .395

And compared to some other big name PF's

Nowitzki .513
Brand .470 (interesting)
J. O'Neal .372
D. Howard .317

This is really an irrelevant stat. These players effeciency stems from their ability to take a LOT of high % shots and make them. these guys shooting jumpshots usually means the play is a bail out. Zach Randolph is NOT being brought in to shoot jumpshots.

Bonn, it's not that he shot .417 from the floor overall (which is for those who care to not falsely represent numbers is rounded up to 42% not 41% as you have repeatedly stated. Did you read what was written? That number is in reference to his jump shooting efficiency ONLY, which compared to other PF's is a good %. This is not using your own subjective analysis, but actual numbers to prove it. Zach shot 47% (.467) from the floor overall. You are also wrong about Frye in the '05-06 season. In his rookie year Frye took 64% of his shots from the outside. You're studying a psychology graduate degree? You must be learning quantitative methods? Don't you think that empirical data from statistical analysis has some value?
http://www.82games.com/0506/05NYK18A.HTM

Anyway, to address BRIGGS point Zach took 59% of his shots from the outside and 4%1 inside, while a guy like KG took 77% of his shots as jumpers. This is a very small sample for comparison, and one might feel willing to interpret this and then compare Duncan's much more balanced shot selection as an example of the difference between big time PF's who help their teams win and those that do not. The problem is I think other contributing factors could also be at play that are not specifically related to the player himself. It would be interesting to see if the way in which PF's take and the efficiency in which they make their shots has any effect on the outcome of games or not.

Posted by BRIGGS:

Posted by PresIke:

Bonn, it's not that he shot .417 from the floor overall (which is for those who care to not falsely represent numbers is rounded up to 42% not 41% as you have repeatedly stated. Did you read what was written? That number is in reference to his jump shooting efficiency ONLY, which compared to other PF's is a good %. This is not using your own subjective analysis, but actual numbers to prove it. Zach shot 47% (.467) from the floor overall. You are also wrong about Frye in the '05-06 season. In his rookie year Frye took 64% of his shots from the outside. You're studying a psychology graduate degree? You must be learning quantitative methods? Don't you think that empirical data from statistical analysis has some value?
http://www.82games.com/0506/05NYK18A.HTM

Anyway, to address BRIGGS point Zach took 59% of his shots from the outside and 4%1 inside, while a guy like KG took 77% of his shots as jumpers. This is a very small sample for comparison, and one might feel willing to interpret this and then compare Duncan's much more balanced shot selection as an example of the difference between big time PF's who help their teams win and those that do not. The problem is I think other contributing factors could also be at play that are not specifically related to the player himself. It would be interesting to see if the way in which PF's take and the efficiency in which they make their shots has any effect on the outcome of games or not.

Then you made my point. If Zach is shooting 60% of his shots @ 41% and 46 overall--that means he's shooting in the mid 50s from a higher effeciency range. So what we WANT to do with Zach is CUT that jump shooting number down--perhaps as low as 30% and make sure the other 70 are of the low post scenario. Just like getting EC more FGA's--just do the #s and math--simply
you want zach to stay closer to the basket and give up those 4-5 shots
to eddy

The team will best be served mathematically by EC having the opportunity to put up 25% more FGa's and Zach redistrubting his shot selection to 30% jumpers 70% post. All we need now is Magic Johnson to get the whole thing to work out swell.

That's where you do indeed need a floor general to tell guys where to set up on half court plays. Collins did a good job at Temple positioning his teammates. I hope he gets the chance.