CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It's a great group of fans here and the knick talk is good in my opinion. I don't care how often someone watches the Knicks but I do hate when someone praises or trashes a guy based on the box score and stats. There is too much that happens on the court during the game to evaluate guys without seeing them play.

It gets me more mad when people think their eyes are enough (since they are so smart) and don't look at the actual numbers being produced.

I disagree. Maybe some balance is needed but some here post about things they haven't seen. There is an ebb and flow to a basketball game. Not everything shows up in a box score.

You need both because some times what you see or choose to see is not the same as what others see. That's when you go to th advance stats.

And don't just cherry pick stats to suite your argument

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It's a great group of fans here and the knick talk is good in my opinion. I don't care how often someone watches the Knicks but I do hate when someone praises or trashes a guy based on the box score and stats. There is too much that happens on the court during the game to evaluate guys without seeing them play.

It gets me more mad when people think their eyes are enough (since they are so smart) and don't look at the actual numbers being produced.

I disagree. Maybe some balance is needed but some here post about things they haven't seen. There is an ebb and flow to a basketball game. Not everything shows up in a box score.

That kind of thing?

The statheads around here suck. BB is the least structured sport and involves more in game creativity on a play by play basis than any other sport... but yea... just look at the #s. Thats all that matters.

CrushAlot wrote:Its pretty basic. Watch the games. If you want to interpret numbers after you have seen guys play and they fit what you see then go there. Otherwise what you are referencing might be very different then what happened on the court in the flow of the game.

I hope you mean every single second of the games, because you cannot take seriously the opinions of someone who hasn't.

fishmike wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

fishmike wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It's a great group of fans here and the knick talk is good in my opinion. I don't care how often someone watches the Knicks but I do hate when someone praises or trashes a guy based on the box score and stats. There is too much that happens on the court during the game to evaluate guys without seeing them play.

It gets me more mad when people think their eyes are enough (since they are so smart) and don't look at the actual numbers being produced.

I disagree. Maybe some balance is needed but some here post about things they haven't seen. There is an ebb and flow to a basketball game. Not everything shows up in a box score.

you mean like when your main scorer has a bad night, shoots 3-15 but finishes the game by hitting his last three shots and people come on and say "the guy shot 6-18 and was terrible"

That kind of thing?

The statheads around here suck. BB is the least structured sport and involves more in game creativity on a play by play basis than any other sport... but yea... just look at the #s. Thats all that matters.

Its pretty basic. Watch the games. If you want to interpret numbers after you have seen guys play and they fit what you see then go there. Otherwise what you are referencing might be very different then what happened on the court in the flow of the game.

not for some... cause you know since shoene predicted the Knicks win total last year thats all they need.

But yea.. your right. I also think some simply dont understand athletic competition so look to the #s to make sense of it.

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

fishmike wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It's a great group of fans here and the knick talk is good in my opinion. I don't care how often someone watches the Knicks but I do hate when someone praises or trashes a guy based on the box score and stats. There is too much that happens on the court during the game to evaluate guys without seeing them play.

It gets me more mad when people think their eyes are enough (since they are so smart) and don't look at the actual numbers being produced.

I disagree. Maybe some balance is needed but some here post about things they haven't seen. There is an ebb and flow to a basketball game. Not everything shows up in a box score.

you mean like when your main scorer has a bad night, shoots 3-15 but finishes the game by hitting his last three shots and people come on and say "the guy shot 6-18 and was terrible"

That kind of thing?

The statheads around here suck. BB is the least structured sport and involves more in game creativity on a play by play basis than any other sport... but yea... just look at the #s. Thats all that matters.

Its pretty basic. Watch the games. If you want to interpret numbers after you have seen guys play and they fit what you see then go there. Otherwise what you are referencing might be very different then what happened on the court in the flow of the game.

we all pretty much watch the games (not like FireWoody though) and we think we have great eyes.

stats may lie in a game but in the long run, bad stats are bad.

the main issue with stats though is that it does not show positive / negative defensive contribution.

Find me a player who has bad stats and is a really good player. Very hard to find unless the guy is a big defensive contributor.

You don't need to watch the games and count THJ's rebounds to know that he is a horrible horrible rebounder. BEING DEAD LAST IN THE LEAGUE IN REBOUNDS SHOULD GIVE YOU A HINT.

People used to watch AI all the time and revel in how great he was. YES! WE WERE ALL FOOLED BY FOOLISH FLARE. HOW MANY OF US ACTUALLY IGNORED ALL THE MISSED SHOTS?

Rebounding sure gets at you doesn't it

I was looking at this statistical area

And saw our starting SF/PF is getting outrebounded

By Boston's starting PG by a lot

Let's cut the crap about the rebounding

Play to the player's strength within the system and stop

Henpecking based on prefences

F500ONE wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

fishmike wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It's a great group of fans here and the knick talk is good in my opinion. I don't care how often someone watches the Knicks but I do hate when someone praises or trashes a guy based on the box score and stats. There is too much that happens on the court during the game to evaluate guys without seeing them play.

It gets me more mad when people think their eyes are enough (since they are so smart) and don't look at the actual numbers being produced.

I disagree. Maybe some balance is needed but some here post about things they haven't seen. There is an ebb and flow to a basketball game. Not everything shows up in a box score.

you mean like when your main scorer has a bad night, shoots 3-15 but finishes the game by hitting his last three shots and people come on and say "the guy shot 6-18 and was terrible"

That kind of thing?

The statheads around here suck. BB is the least structured sport and involves more in game creativity on a play by play basis than any other sport... but yea... just look at the #s. Thats all that matters.

Its pretty basic. Watch the games. If you want to interpret numbers after you have seen guys play and they fit what you see then go there. Otherwise what you are referencing might be very different then what happened on the court in the flow of the game.

we all pretty much watch the games (not like FireWoody though) and we think we have great eyes.

stats may lie in a game but in the long run, bad stats are bad.

the main issue with stats though is that it does not show positive / negative defensive contribution.

Find me a player who has bad stats and is a really good player. Very hard to find unless the guy is a big defensive contributor.

You don't need to watch the games and count THJ's rebounds to know that he is a horrible horrible rebounder. BEING DEAD LAST IN THE LEAGUE IN REBOUNDS SHOULD GIVE YOU A HINT.

People used to watch AI all the time and revel in how great he was. YES! WE WERE ALL FOOLED BY FOOLISH FLARE. HOW MANY OF US ACTUALLY IGNORED ALL THE MISSED SHOTS?

Rebounding sure gets at you doesn't it

I was looking at this statistical area

And saw our starting SF/PF is getting outrebounded

By Boston's starting PG by a lot

Let's cut the crap about the rebounding

Play to the player's strength within the system and stop

Henpecking based on prefences

huh????

maybe the formatting is just confusing the crap out of me.

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

fishmike wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It's a great group of fans here and the knick talk is good in my opinion. I don't care how often someone watches the Knicks but I do hate when someone praises or trashes a guy based on the box score and stats. There is too much that happens on the court during the game to evaluate guys without seeing them play.

It gets me more mad when people think their eyes are enough (since they are so smart) and don't look at the actual numbers being produced.

I disagree. Maybe some balance is needed but some here post about things they haven't seen. There is an ebb and flow to a basketball game. Not everything shows up in a box score.

you mean like when your main scorer has a bad night, shoots 3-15 but finishes the game by hitting his last three shots and people come on and say "the guy shot 6-18 and was terrible"

That kind of thing?

The statheads around here suck. BB is the least structured sport and involves more in game creativity on a play by play basis than any other sport... but yea... just look at the #s. Thats all that matters.

Its pretty basic. Watch the games. If you want to interpret numbers after you have seen guys play and they fit what you see then go there. Otherwise what you are referencing might be very different then what happened on the court in the flow of the game.

we all pretty much watch the games (not like FireWoody though) and we think we have great eyes.

stats may lie in a game but in the long run, bad stats are bad.

the main issue with stats though is that it does not show positive / negative defensive contribution.

Find me a player who has bad stats and is a really good player. Very hard to find unless the guy is a big defensive contributor.

You don't need to watch the games and count THJ's rebounds to know that he is a horrible horrible rebounder. BEING DEAD LAST IN THE LEAGUE IN REBOUNDS SHOULD GIVE YOU A HINT.

People used to watch AI all the time and revel in how great he was. YES! WE WERE ALL FOOLED BY FOOLISH FLARE. HOW MANY OF US ACTUALLY IGNORED ALL THE MISSED SHOTS?

Not true. For instance there is a big stats guy here that has posted he will watch the knicks when they are worth his time. I think he watches more games now but he is a harsh critic of some players. Just one example. I know there are others.

In Dk's defense you can watch the Knicks for a half and get a sense of their underlying shortcomings. Sure there are times when they actually look and play like a team but its far and few in between. Just look at the record and previous records

But let me help you...what youre trying to say is...if you are a Fairweather fan....then leave. If you only show up when the knicks are winning and hide when they are loosing. Theres more ways to see whos real knick fans and whos the front runners. My guess is take a look at the number of messages and when uk fans signed on. You will see 90 percent are active die hard fans. But when youve been beaten and batered for years like an old marriage couple....your love tends to decrease. But never goes away. Old school knick fans have a pass. Its the new bees that need to put in time to prove their fan worthiness.

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

fishmike wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It's a great group of fans here and the knick talk is good in my opinion. I don't care how often someone watches the Knicks but I do hate when someone praises or trashes a guy based on the box score and stats. There is too much that happens on the court during the game to evaluate guys without seeing them play.

It gets me more mad when people think their eyes are enough (since they are so smart) and don't look at the actual numbers being produced.

I disagree. Maybe some balance is needed but some here post about things they haven't seen. There is an ebb and flow to a basketball game. Not everything shows up in a box score.

you mean like when your main scorer has a bad night, shoots 3-15 but finishes the game by hitting his last three shots and people come on and say "the guy shot 6-18 and was terrible"

That kind of thing?

The statheads around here suck. BB is the least structured sport and involves more in game creativity on a play by play basis than any other sport... but yea... just look at the #s. Thats all that matters.

Its pretty basic. Watch the games. If you want to interpret numbers after you have seen guys play and they fit what you see then go there. Otherwise what you are referencing might be very different then what happened on the court in the flow of the game.

we all pretty much watch the games (not like FireWoody though) and we think we have great eyes.

stats may lie in a game but in the long run, bad stats are bad.

the main issue with stats though is that it does not show positive / negative defensive contribution.

Find me a player who has bad stats and is a really good player. Very hard to find unless the guy is a big defensive contributor.

You don't need to watch the games and count THJ's rebounds to know that he is a horrible horrible rebounder. BEING DEAD LAST IN THE LEAGUE IN REBOUNDS SHOULD GIVE YOU A HINT.

People used to watch AI all the time and revel in how great he was. YES! WE WERE ALL FOOLED BY FOOLISH FLARE. HOW MANY OF US ACTUALLY IGNORED ALL THE MISSED SHOTS?

Not true. For instance there is a big stats guy here that has posted he will watch the knicks when they are worth his time. I think he watches more games now but he is a harsh critic of some players. Just one example. I know there are others.

and how many dopes (who watch the games ... every minute/second perhaps) say dumb things like "Do you know how many points he scored/scores?"

The numbers are like coin flips. Short term anomalies perhaps but in the long run ...

Minimally watch the games or quantify your analysis by saying you haven't but the numbers appear this way. There is no stat for Shump's dunk the other night other than pts and field goal percentage but plays like that are momentum changers. I just don't see stats fitting basketball like they do other sports and I think using them without watching the games doesn't paint an accurate picture.

A dunk can be a momentum changer in a game. However, with a large "sample size" a dunk will not make much of a difference.

Name me a player who has weak stats that you think does not paint a true picture and we can discuss/dissect further.

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

fishmike wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:It's a great group of fans here and the knick talk is good in my opinion. I don't care how often someone watches the Knicks but I do hate when someone praises or trashes a guy based on the box score and stats. There is too much that happens on the court during the game to evaluate guys without seeing them play.

It gets me more mad when people think their eyes are enough (since they are so smart) and don't look at the actual numbers being produced.

I disagree. Maybe some balance is needed but some here post about things they haven't seen. There is an ebb and flow to a basketball game. Not everything shows up in a box score.

you mean like when your main scorer has a bad night, shoots 3-15 but finishes the game by hitting his last three shots and people come on and say "the guy shot 6-18 and was terrible"

That kind of thing?

The statheads around here suck. BB is the least structured sport and involves more in game creativity on a play by play basis than any other sport... but yea... just look at the #s. Thats all that matters.

Its pretty basic. Watch the games. If you want to interpret numbers after you have seen guys play and they fit what you see then go there. Otherwise what you are referencing might be very different then what happened on the court in the flow of the game.

we all pretty much watch the games (not like FireWoody though) and we think we have great eyes.

stats may lie in a game but in the long run, bad stats are bad.

the main issue with stats though is that it does not show positive / negative defensive contribution.

Find me a player who has bad stats and is a really good player. Very hard to find unless the guy is a big defensive contributor.

You don't need to watch the games and count THJ's rebounds to know that he is a horrible horrible rebounder. BEING DEAD LAST IN THE LEAGUE IN REBOUNDS SHOULD GIVE YOU A HINT.

People used to watch AI all the time and revel in how great he was. YES! WE WERE ALL FOOLED BY FOOLISH FLARE. HOW MANY OF US ACTUALLY IGNORED ALL THE MISSED SHOTS?

Not true. For instance there is a big stats guy here that has posted he will watch the knicks when they are worth his time. I think he watches more games now but he is a harsh critic of some players. Just one example. I know there are others.

and how many dopes (who watch the games ... every minute/second perhaps) say dumb things like "Do you know how many points he scored/scores?"

The numbers are like coin flips. Short term anomalies perhaps but in the long run ...

Minimally watch the games or quantify your analysis by saying you haven't but the numbers appear this way. There is no stat for Shump's dunk the other night other than pts and field goal percentage but plays like that are momentum changers. I just don't see stats fitting basketball like they do other sports and I think using them without watching the games doesn't paint an accurate picture.