For someone talking about TO's and getting beat and losing streaks they don't really see that the kid is responsible for more wins than losses!!! He wasn't even the main culprit in most of the losses during the losing streak, but he sure was the catalyst to a whole lot of wins this year. Quite simply we don't win as much without him. Since he's gotten major minutes the team is 13-9. Let's be real the Turmoil had nothing to do with Lin and now that things are resolved he can get back to helping the team win.

y2zipper wrote:I think Lin is basically above average as far as starting PG's in the NBA go. If I strolled through the list I could probably come up with 11-15 guys off the top of my head that are better than him. The guys a rookie with flaws in his game, so it's not a bad spot to be in for Lin or the Knicks by any means. It's just calling it how I see it.

We have to compare apples to apples. Are you comparing him to veterans? Rookies? Are we comparing upsides?

It's no reason why he has been overlooked

TripleThreat wrote:

SlimChin wrote:“Still a D-League player,” one of them said.

“Nothing special,” said another

Always look at motive.

What does the average NBA fan know about NBA scouts? Not much.

What does the hardcore NBA fan know about NBA scouts? First, that their ranks have been cut hard, as many teams are now sharing scouts and sharing scouting services to save money and that many teams, esp GMs like Daryl Morey, are using statistical metrics to evaluate players often without as much eyes on scouting as previously.

Tristan Thompson is not the No#4 pick in a draft 10 years ago. His perceived value came though advanced metrics for performance at the college level. Consider that any scouting in any pro sports has to gauge two specific things. What has the prospect shown he has already achieved and what has he shown could be his long term potential. A player Juwan Howard was far more valuable in the pros than he was in college. So scouts are under pressure just not for what was, but what could be.

What else do we know? During the All Star game, David Stern, when asked about Lin, pointed it out as a success story for the D-League, and that more than ever the D-League saw a massive increase in the number of scouts attending. Kobe Bryant said something scathing to the national media, that Lin was always a true gamer, a good player, but he was simply overlooked and if he was an owner, that would be inexcusable, that people would lose their jobs over missing out on an impact player that could be acquired for virtually nothing.

By succeeding, Lin has

- Created more work for existing scouts, who are already stretched thin and already overworked. Now they have to find the next "Jeremy Lin" and attend all these D league games.
- Pointed out their failure to mine quite possible the most marketable athlete in the entire world and a virtual billion dollar lottery ticket for any team who has him.
- Subtlety questions how racist scouts could or could not be in the evaluation process
- Forces owners and GMs to question their scouting departments and their efficiency and if overhauls are needed.

Lin succeeding makes their job harder, makes their job security more difficult to gauge, adds pressure, adds work and puts turmoil in the whole process. This is what Moneyball did for MLB, while Billy Beane got all the accolades, there were GMs and scouts and all kinds of people getting yelled at and screamed at and had to worry about their jobs.

By failing, Lin will

- Vindicate scouts evaluation of him in the first place
- Get owners to back off.
- Proves that the tried and true process works
- Reduce their workload and reassert their own value to their dwindling numbers
- Remove the unspoken unsettling gut check that the entire NBA might just be completely racist to Jeremy Lin

Scouts have a reason and a motive to want him to fail, but none of it is about actually mining good players for their teams. Very "Melo" like of them.

i'll buy that. and thanks for keeping it short by your standards.

soundcrib wrote:

nehemiah wrote:Caseloads is Head Scout.

Who knew Stephen A Smith was member #41?

Really? Really? Really?

mrKnickShot wrote:

y2zipper wrote:I think Lin is basically above average as far as starting PG's in the NBA go. If I strolled through the list I could probably come up with 11-15 guys off the top of my head that are better than him. The guys a rookie with flaws in his game, so it's not a bad spot to be in for Lin or the Knicks by any means. It's just calling it how I see it.

We have to compare apples to apples. Are you comparing him to veterans? Rookies? Are we comparing upsides?

I'm simply comparing him to the other 29 starting point guards in the league and taking into account the small sample size and the fact that his numbers are
Inflated by D'Antoni's system. It doesn't really delve into details or take value or upside into account because I don't know what Lin's upside is and because value doesn't matter. I will say that Lin is good enough to be the starting point guard on the Knicks as they're constructed. Looking at him on paper compared to other point guards and ranking him as an individual player is a completely different analysis than discussing what he needs to be for the Knicks to win.

y2zipper wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:

y2zipper wrote:I think Lin is basically above average as far as starting PG's in the NBA go. If I strolled through the list I could probably come up with 11-15 guys off the top of my head that are better than him. The guys a rookie with flaws in his game, so it's not a bad spot to be in for Lin or the Knicks by any means. It's just calling it how I see it.

We have to compare apples to apples. Are you comparing him to veterans? Rookies? Are we comparing upsides?

I'm simply comparing him to the other 29 starting point guards in the league and taking into account the small sample size and the fact that his numbers are
Inflated by D'Antoni's system. It doesn't really delve into details or take value or upside into account because I don't know what Lin's upside is and because value doesn't matter. I will say that Lin is good enough to be the starting point guard on the Knicks as they're constructed. Looking at him on paper compared to other point guards and ranking him as an individual player is a completely different analysis than discussing what he needs to be for the Knicks to win.

Basically you are calling him a system PG like some have done. I think his numbers going forward, in any system, will prove you wrong. He is one of the top point guards in the league with those numbers.

TripleThreat wrote:In defense of scouts, Lin did not come from a major college program, he didn't offer size as a big ( which are players that are looked at much harder than the position rich point guard slot) and very little he did at Golden State stood out to anyone. He also was often competing with players on rosters who had guaranteed contracts and/or draft status.

Lin's game is also not flashy, most of the time, it just chips away at the opposition bit by bit for the entire game. He's not often going to make the spectacular play, but often he will make the right play, the heady play, over and over again. I think he will end up somewhere between Sarunas Marcilonis and Mark Price in terms of his development. Lin's style of play is SIMPLIFYING THE GAME.

To be fair, scouts are looking for the next guy who can jump out of the gym or has that gorilla wingspan or can run like a gazelle. It's what they look for because it's what teams want because it's what David Stern says he will market. And if he will market it, he will promote it and cheat for it. Stern has created a league that devalues long range shooting but over values slashing and athletic play trumping fundamentals. It doesn't matter if Blake Griffin has a complete post game or not, the kid can dunk over a car. Kids aren't stabbing each other to death for Griffin shoes because of Griffin's footwork, or if he has fundamentals, or his array of low post weapons ( which he has none), they are killing each other because he's in highlight reels.

If anything, the Lin story is also a story of how David Stern has essentially phased out the underdog factor in the NBA, because it's not predictive and what's predictive are stable ratings and revenue dollars. Lin has SUCCEEDED DESPITE David Stern's type of NBA. Stern wants prepackaged teams and contenders like OKC, Bulls and Clippers. Corporations and ad sponsors have spent a right ton on Derrick Rose, Blake Griffin and Kevin Durant and the league has decided these are the leagues current "It" personalities and those are teams that Stern has designated as winning rings in the near future to give return on the investment to those sponsors.

The Lin story is what's right about sports, but shows what is also very wrong about the NBA. It's no longer competition, it's prepackaged entertainment so mindless ghetto thugs with their wannabe rap video culture to dunk on each other and sell as much McDonalds and sneakers as they can for Stern.

Don't forget about the airbrushed hos and the entertainment value they provide!

We've established you're the RonRon guy, right? I've been out of touch for awhile, so I'm just wondering.

misterearl wrote:To Be Fair, Your Rhetoric Is Sickening

TripleThreat wrote:To be fair, scouts are looking for the next guy who can jump out of the gym or has that gorillacondor wingspan...

TripleThreat - your cultural bias, prejudiced world view and non-basketball agenda is starting to annoy me.

Fixed