NYKMentality wrote:Caseloads wrote:Tall with motor. The okc, raps, minny, way
OKC = 36-36.
Toronto = 35-37.
Minnesota = 36-37.
Na. No thank you.
I'll rather do it the New York Knicks way (42-31).
I can’t take you seriously.
You’ve essentially argued that because the Knicks have a better record today than 3 out of the 4 teams another poster named as focusing on long players (casually ignoring Mil is the best team in the league), you state that you prefer the “Knicks” way.
Meanwhile, all of the teams you name may be better than they mention and each of them give the Knicks headaches head to head.
I don’t think these 4 teams are the analytical proof or disproof of biometrics. But you’ve dumbed it down further with your win loss test.
All I am saying is that if I am choosing between two players that are otherwise similarly ranked for draft purposes, I would choose a player with better biometrics over polished play. It’s easier to get more polish than to add inches.
IQ, Toppin, McBride and Sims fit this model. RJ, Grimes are more the skill pick. So it’s not an absolute rules. I can’t predict with absolute certainty that biometrics will beat skill. So many other things come into play. Opportunity, effort, teamwork. But in a vacuum, it’s easier to add skill than inches.
