He just needs to maintain a high 3pt% too

knickscity wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

knickscity wrote:

smackeddog wrote:Out of curiosity, if you put Melo on the thunder and Durant on the Knicks, how does each team do?

We play Miami in the ECF last season....Okc doesnt make the finals the year before.

Durant takes a back seat to an inferior player, so that player can grow into being great, which westbrook has done.

In turn that made both of them great.

I'll ask you....would melo do that?

Who would Durant take a backseat to on this Knicks team thats gonna grow into being great?

He has to take the back seat first, Westbrook wasnt the player he is now prior to the league.

in melo's i certainly dont mean allow someone to possess the ball and take more shots, but i do mean melo needs to scale back so others can scale up.

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:The thing that seems to be overstated by some here is that somehow the Knicks won't be able to score against the Pacers with a more versatile offense this year. Why in the world would that be the case? Why if the Knicks have a more versatile offense would they somehow not be able to be more effective against the Pacers D, which is good but not impregnable if you give them more motion, picks, passing and good shooting! The Knicks will have a less predictable offense now as opposed to last year where it was very easy to know what was going to happen.

Just look at the FGA's in the chart below. Looking at the playoff statistics it's easy to see how the offense deteriorated into basically Melo ISO, JR and Felton as the only guys really taking shots!!! Shump was the only other player even close to taking double digit shots and he was only taking 8 shots. This years roster should change that kind of poor balance.

PLAYER	     FGM  FGA    FG%  3PM  3PA   3P%  FTM  FTA  FT%   2PM  2PA  2P%   PPS    AFG%
Carmelo, SF  10.5 25.8	.406  1.4  4.8	.298  6.4  7.3	0.89  9.1  21.0	.431  1.116  0.43
J.R., SG     4.9  14.8	.331  1.6  6.0	.273  2.8  3.9	0.72  3.3  8.8	.371  .963   0.39
Raymond, PG  6.0  13.5	.444  0.8  2.3	.321  1.3  2.0	0.67  5.2  11.2	.470  1.043  0.47
Iman, SF     3.4  8.3	.410  1.5  3.5	.429  1.0  1.2	0.86  1.9  4.8	.397  1.120  0.50
Kenyon, PF   2.4  4.2	.580  0.0  0.0	.000  0.9  1.7	0.55  2.4  4.2	.580  1.380  0.58
Tyson, C     2.3  4.3	.538  0.0  0.0	.000  1.0  1.3	0.75  2.3  4.3	.538  1.308  0.54
Pablo, PG    1.5  3.9	.395  1.2  2.7	.433  0.2  0.4	0.50  0.3  1.2	.308  1.140  0.55
Chris, SF    1.3  3.3	.400  1.2  2.6	.478  0.2  0.2	1.00  0.1  0.7	.143  1.233  0.58
Amar'e, PF   1.3  3.3	.385  0.3  0.3	1.000 1.0  1.0	1.00  1.0  3.0	.333  1.154  0.42
Novak, SF    0.8  1.4	.538  0.4  1.0	.444  0.0  0.0	0.00  0.4  0.4	.750  1.385  0.69
Quentin, SF  0.4  1.2	.333  0.4  1.0	.400  0.0  0.0	0.00  0.0  0.2	.000  1.000  0.50
White, SG    0.5  1.0	.500  0.0  0.5	.000  0.0  0.0	0.00  0.5  0.5	1.000 1.000  0.50
Kidd, PG     0.3  2.1	.120  0.3  1.4	.176  0.2  0.2	1.00  0.0  0.7	.000  .440   0.18
Camby, C     0.3  0.3	1.000 0.0  0.0	.000  0.0  0.0	0.00  0.3  0.3	1.000 2.000  1.00
Totals	     33.3 81.0	.410  8.0  23.3	.343  14.1 18.0	.782  25.3 57.7	.438  1.09   0.46

So now you have AB and Beno adding meaningful variety to the offense. Kidd and Pablo simply didn't add anything in terms of an offensive threat. Beno can be more effective in that role. When JR was playing poorly we didn't have another option to go to. Now we should have AB as a legit #2 option so that JR isn't relied upon in the same way. MWP can give us solid D but at the same time he's not a zero on offense. That also makes a difference. We don't have a lot of 2 way players. We will be depending on Shump to take another step in his development. Shump must become a more aggressive offensive player. If not then we do have THJ. Even our bench players will have a bit more punch. CJ and Tyler are at least physically gifted players who have scoring ability. Those are significant changes.

I'll make this short....

I like Woodson and think he has done well, but do you think he can develop.....in your words a "more versatile offense"?

And I'm sorry if you really think barganani will be effective in the PLAYOFFS as a number 2...more disappointment will come.

He isnt built for the big dance.....he can barely dress himself.

This is a snippet from an article that I referenced in my post above.

Through the first four games of this season, Woodson had made me look like a fool. He has designed an almost entirely new offensive system involving a heavy dose of off-ball screening, pick-and-rolls, post-ups, dribble hand-offs, and rapid, decisive, side-to-side ball movement around the perimeter.

What Woodson has done is tailor an offense to the personnel he has, rather than try to fit that personnel into preconceived roles based on the system he had run during his tenure in Atlanta and last season in New York. The result has been the league’s best offense through this early part of the season, one that has the Knicks sitting at 4-0 as the NBA’s lone remaining undefeated team.

At the center of it all is Carmelo Anthony, who is running fewer isolations and more post-ups than at any point in his career. Felton and Pablo Prigioni are getting copious amounts of pick-and-roll opportunities with Anthony, Tyson Chandler, Kurt Thomas and Rasheed Wallace. JR Smith, Steve Novak and Kidd are coming off screens from every direction and seeing a plethora of open 3-point opportunities. Ronnie Brewer is lurking behind all the action for corner 3′s and cuts to the rim.

I think Woody started out with the right idea but injury effected his plans. We will see Woody be able to stick to his plans much better with a better roster that is young enough and deep enough to actually make it work over the course of the season. This is a MUCH better roster to start the year than we had to start last year. Go back and look at what we had to start last year and then look at the roster this year.

Yes, the offense looked superb early on, and it was mainly due to everyone buying in...not just on offense but on defense as well.

Then it stopped, and it wasnt injuries, but rather a few missed shots, and players being penalized for that and benched, so it once agin wound up going into the two heavy iso scorers.

The bottom line for me is simple...i do expect the team to have a good regular season...somewhere around 53 wins.

But i hold zero confidence that this group can win a playoff series, I do think they will regress, mainly because everyone has gotten better, and addressed their needs.

We only addressed half....we still have no one to truly help tyson, and god forbid if he gets injured again.

The Knicks did have some issues with injury and I think you're dismissing that is totally wrong. Felton's injury didn't help and led to more minutes for Kidd, tho Woody could've used Prigs a bit more than he did. In any event the Roster did in fact face health issues and players broke down too. The other problem was that we had a lot of dead weight players who didn't produce. We've replaced those players with better players.

I expect the team to be good in the regular season AND PLAYOFFS. To think this team won't be much stronger than last playoffs given the number of players we lost to injury or just breaking down is crazy. We've replaced the ancient players with guys that have much more left in the tank and some young players too. That's the mix we need to be strong. We've still got another roster spot to address the center spot, but don't forget that we have AB, STAT, Tyler MWP and KMart to start the year which we didn't have before. AB is 7-1 and he may not be the most rugged guy, but he can indeed play some C. The main thing is that we still have a chance to add another big to address that need.

We have a better PG rotation, SG's, PF's and in fact C's too if you add AB and Tyler as options. It's just flat out a better roster. This should allow Woody to maintain the plays he started off the year with last year.

newyorknewyork wrote:This is kind of off topic but kind of not. W

What makes the mid range jumper so inefficient compared to the 3pt shot. Is it because majority of 3s are spot up open looks and majority of long 2s are coming off the dribble?

Mathematically is a open spot up 15-20ft jumper still more inefficient then a open spot up 23-24ft jumper?

three factors are involved:

1)the advent of the 3-point line
2)the loosening of the rules for palming and traveling
3)the increase in height of succeeding generations of players

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

foosballnick wrote:

dk7th wrote:

fans who constantly whine that he needs more help are mirroring his blithe unawareness.
fans who constantly whine that his "supporting cast didn't step up" mirror this blithe unawareness.
fans who maintain that melo did his job but others fell short mirror this blithe unawareness.

Based upon reading your posts in this thread and elsewhere it has become clearer to me that you think you know more about basketball, basketball statistics, why (you think at least) Melo is not in top shape because of his heredity.......than anyone else on this board who may disagree with any or part of your views. Makes it very difficult to reason with you in any way.

Assuming Melo is the best player on the Knicks (even with his shortcomings)......those who claim he needs more help are not mirroring his "blithe" unawareness....so much as they are recognizing that the Knicks, although better than previous seasons, fell short and needed more talent as Melo is NOT Lebron and can NOT do it by himself.

What Melo's supporting cast did not do in the playoffs....especially against Indiana can be viewed in the statistics you claim to know more than most here. This has nothing to do with blithe unawareness....and I suspect you are just using that term in this case to be overly dramatic.

Not sure how many people are claiming that Melo adequately did his job against Indy, except for a very very tiny percentage of posters. What some are claiming is that he was injured, and this perhaps led to a drop in performance. They are also pointing to other players such as Tyson, looking for explanations of the drop as well.

It appears that you conveniently either make up stuff, or put thoughts in people's minds in order to seek an argumentative point to make.

i know plenty about basketball-- should i pretend otherwise? and i am only too happy to admit when i am ignorant. i also like mathematics and if i find them useful in support of what my eyes see and what my understanding of X is then i will use them. you cited TS% and demonstrated a faulty understanding of this statistic. this is not a "gotcha" game with me but if you don't understand the material it is not wise to criticize it or those who use that material. a simple "my bad" will suffice and we can move on-- unlike this post you have written here, which seems like a personal attack or indictment of my presence here.

all that aside, the regular season is about experimentation and development. training camp doesn't give enough sound data and pre-season is too short. teams don't ever have a chance to really work on cohesion between regular-season games so the better coaches and players will work on stuff in the games themselves if they know what's good for the overall state of the team come playoff time. woodson was reluctant and impatient and worse still he was unwilling to mold carmelo anthony... so far as that is even possible.

so instead we get glorious scoring titles at the expense of any real team cohesion... and without cohesion the level of resilience plummets in the face of genuine challenges.

the knicks got second seed but went about getting that second seed foolishly, squandering an opportunity to work tirelessly on what made them so good the first 7 games of the 12-13 season. lets see if they can get it right this season.

Not questioning your basketball knowledge but I did wonder if you watched games or just posted based on box scores for a long time. I know you posted in some game threads later in the spring but my impression of your initial insights was that they were all based on box scores and not what was seen on the court during the games.

i have not owned a laptop until very recently. the desktop does not face the tv. making comments during games means i take my eyes off the tv screen and miss something, leading to my rewinding and drawing out the process, which becomes tedious. i posted in threads by borrowing a laptop in the spring to assuage those who took me to task for not commenting in game threads, delegitimizing my contributions in their eyes. i look at box scores after the games to back up the impressions i get while watching the games.

nixluva wrote:Come on TKF. You really are going overboard in your negative opinion of the Knicks new roster. Beno is a PG who is good at running PnP/PnR plays and is a good mid range shooter. Bargnani is a good offensive player who can do just about everything you want offensively. Just adding those 2 to the mix makes this team stronger than it was last year. It's basically fixing the weak part of the Knicks offense from last year. When the teams was going strong Kidd was still on fresh legs and the team was flowing much better offensively. Yes the team did make heavy use of the ISO play, but it also got a ton of wide open 3pt shots. But more importantly the offense was much more verstile.

Here's an excellent article from early last season with video that really breaks down how good the offense was when we had everything working as it should.
http://hoopchalk.com/2012/11/13/mike-woodson-and-the-surprisingly-innovative-knicks-offense/

note the crisp ball movement and motion

NOW with the additions we have in Beno and AB there will be other options so that we don't have to rely so heavily on just ISO or 3pt plays. This will help to keep defenses off balance when we can throw different plays at them. We'll have a higher level of skill as well as physical ability on the floor.

I think you are missing the point.. beno is really no better than felton when you look at each player historically. felton actually was good in the pick and roll as he found chandler for a lot of lobs and finished at the rim... the problem is, no matter how good he was at that the ball still found its way back to sticky fingers... iso ball...

Do you really think that woodson is going to turn the offense over to beno and bargnani.. not saying beno is a bad player, but he isn't going to take the knicks to another level.. that is what the knicks need... he will basically be another pretty average PG who subs for another pretty average PG.... just my honest opinion.... we are not getting a game changer or difference maker here.. he and bargnani are not going to be the difference makers playing teams like the heat, pacers or bulls.

I am not saying the knicks are not capable of good ball for stretches, and that is no surprise, the knicks are a solid team... but not great... the great teams can maintain proper play throughout, yes there are times they get off track, but they quickly get back on, they have good habits. the knicks have too many players with bad habits and styles of play that are not conducive to long term success.. especially playoff success...

listen if beno was that good he would not be traded from team to team signing vet min deals.. he is a solid player.. probably better than prigs.. slightly and even with felton. Beno is not an option that is going to make woodson take the ball out of carmelo's hands.. now way in hell.. now a Billups of 4 years ago? most likely... beno? NO!

raven wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

raven wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:This is kind of off topic but kind of not. W

What makes the mid range jumper so inefficient compared to the 3pt shot. Is it because majority of 3s are spot up open looks and majority of long 2s are coming off the dribble?

Mathematically is a open spot up 15-20ft jumper still more inefficient then a open spot up 23-24ft jumper?

The long two is a troubling shot for two basic reasons: 1) league-wide these shots only go in 37% of the time, which is a low value for a measly two-point attempt, especially considering that the league shoots 35% from beyond the 3-point line, which is just a step or two away (and those shots are worth 50% more points). 2) Those frequent misses are rebounded by the defensive team 78% of the time, which is among the highest percentages anywhere on the court; even missed 3′s provoke more offensive rebounds (23.6%) than missed long twos (22%). In other words, when you shoot a long two, your risk-reward ratio is too high.

http://courtvisionanalytics.com/the-long-two-and-josh-smith/

And remember that if your % is 40% from 3, you would need a 60% from 2 to match that (because 3s well, are worth 3pts)... And for long jumpers, this is out of reach from most nba players except some games when they catch fire. This also is the reason why Melo became a much better scorer when he started shooting so many 3s with such a high %.

Thanks!

Still y is the long 2 only 2% higher though? They are also counting all long 2s which majority come off the dribble. What's the % of spot up long 2s compared to spot up long 3s?

I don't have the specific stats you ask for, but it really doesn't matter. The fact is a long 2 is neither a shot at the rim or a 3pointer, which means it basically sucks. A shot at the rim is a better % shot and is a chance to get Fts. An uncontested 3er is easier to score than most contested 2s and is worth 3pts.

So each time you take a long 2, it's either a shot at the rim or a 3er you don't take, which is great either way for the opposing team.

Think about this, you have a P&R situation with a duncan in his prime. Would you rather see him go to the basket or take a long 2?
You have Lebron with the ball in his hands, would you rather see him pass to Ray Allen for a corner 3, go hard at the rim or take a long 2?

Shooting mid range jumpers is a great skill to have in a sense that it can transform bad situations into good ones (when you score), but it's not reliable in the long run statistically speaking to carry you play after play.

I understand the logic behind y 3s and close 2s are better. I was just wondering why the shot was missed so much by NBA players and if the %s increased drastically if was a open spot up shot compared to off the dribble.

dk7th wrote:

misterearl wrote:American Playground Kids

Is this the same as urban playground kids?

You also don't consider the value of team play. The Euros are schooled to play much better team BB than American playground kids. So we have Prigs, Beno and Bargs. Gallo also when we had him demonstrated this. They all have high BB IQ which also counts a lot. They know how to play BB correctly and that provides more wins.

Markji - enough. The code words are staggering in their ignorance. Was Magic Johnson an American Playground kid? What about Tiny Archibald? Guy Rogers? This is so patently ignorant that Lenny Wilkens would slap the sh#t out of anyone who dared to say something this stupid.

He attended Boys High in Brooklyn.

Mark Jackson was a product of an "American" playground.

What is your problem?

come on man. the american system is a conveyor belt and utterly corrupt. if you can stomach it, read rhoden's 40 million dollar slaves. just a horrifically bad writer but his point about exploitation and the metaphor of the conveyor belt rings true.

at least in europe they are transparent, paying kids to play in semi-pro and pro clubs, with the advantage of being properly coached in basketball fundamentals all along the way by those not interested in a piece of the action but winning. they are treated like students of the game not commodities.

the skill level in the nba has plummeted. you're an old-timer. you owe it to yourself to read walt frazier's The Game Within the Game.

NBA has the worst player development in all of pro sports. I have been encouraged by the progression of the NBDL lately though. IMO they should open up the draft to 3 rounds and roster spots to 20 with the 5 extra spots for players signed to you to play for your NBDL team.

College ball also needs to imitate the NBA meaning 4 quarters and 24second shot clocks.

newyorknewyork wrote:

raven wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:

raven wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:This is kind of off topic but kind of not. W

What makes the mid range jumper so inefficient compared to the 3pt shot. Is it because majority of 3s are spot up open looks and majority of long 2s are coming off the dribble?

Mathematically is a open spot up 15-20ft jumper still more inefficient then a open spot up 23-24ft jumper?

The long two is a troubling shot for two basic reasons: 1) league-wide these shots only go in 37% of the time, which is a low value for a measly two-point attempt, especially considering that the league shoots 35% from beyond the 3-point line, which is just a step or two away (and those shots are worth 50% more points). 2) Those frequent misses are rebounded by the defensive team 78% of the time, which is among the highest percentages anywhere on the court; even missed 3′s provoke more offensive rebounds (23.6%) than missed long twos (22%). In other words, when you shoot a long two, your risk-reward ratio is too high.

http://courtvisionanalytics.com/the-long-two-and-josh-smith/

And remember that if your % is 40% from 3, you would need a 60% from 2 to match that (because 3s well, are worth 3pts)... And for long jumpers, this is out of reach from most nba players except some games when they catch fire. This also is the reason why Melo became a much better scorer when he started shooting so many 3s with such a high %.

Thanks!

Still y is the long 2 only 2% higher though? They are also counting all long 2s which majority come off the dribble. What's the % of spot up long 2s compared to spot up long 3s?

I don't have the specific stats you ask for, but it really doesn't matter. The fact is a long 2 is neither a shot at the rim or a 3pointer, which means it basically sucks. A shot at the rim is a better % shot and is a chance to get Fts. An uncontested 3er is easier to score than most contested 2s and is worth 3pts.

So each time you take a long 2, it's either a shot at the rim or a 3er you don't take, which is great either way for the opposing team.

Think about this, you have a P&R situation with a duncan in his prime. Would you rather see him go to the basket or take a long 2?
You have Lebron with the ball in his hands, would you rather see him pass to Ray Allen for a corner 3, go hard at the rim or take a long 2?

Shooting mid range jumpers is a great skill to have in a sense that it can transform bad situations into good ones (when you score), but it's not reliable in the long run statistically speaking to carry you play after play.

I understand the logic behind y 3s and close 2s are better. I was just wondering why the shot was missed so much by NBA players and if the %s increased drastically if was a open spot up shot compared to off the dribble.

Players just don't work on the mid range shot. There are some who do and they get really good at it. It's very tough shot because it requires a level of touch and adjustment that many players don't have the talent to do. If you practice it all the time like the floater in the lane you can get VERY accurate with it. PG's that have perfected the floater can hit it for high percentage. The same is true of the mid range pull up jumper. Beno is good at it and so is AB. Some don't want to give any credit for it, but it's an underused skill. It's a shot that isn't defended due to the schemes that teams often employ. They'll give that shot up rather than allow a layup or 3pt shot. Lebron worked on his and he used it to beat the Pacers. It's not something you want to make a steady diet for everyone on your team but if you have players that specialize in it, then it can be a weapon. Elton Brand made his career off that mid range jumper. STAT was great at it in his 1st year with the Knicks, but seems to have lost the touch on it. Udonis Haslem has mastered it and so has Brandon Bass. KG hits those jumpers for a good % too. It's not a completely lost art.