martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sny_knicks/status/1575555075774234624

This happened because Knicks twitter went at the Media for always wanting access but never challenging Thibs when he throws out BS numbers. Today one of them threw the real numbers in his face that contradict what he was saying for the longest and now its not longer about numbers but watching the games and picking and choosing which game the numbers count. I don't know if this is the full context of the video but if it is then this might be a problem again the whole season.

Edit: I also think the person who caused this was Tommy Beer. SO while some of you like to make fun of his stat picking he is the only media member to ask real follow up questions. You have to give him credit for that.

Obi and Randle played 101 minutes together last year. It's an incredibly small sample size.

Are these the numbers that are thrown in Thib's face? The fact that they were a +8 in those minutes? https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/traditional?slug=traditional&GroupQuantity=2&TeamID=1610612752&PerMode=Totals

For me, this whole thing is all very stupid.

Neither Obi or Randle are good defenders. Neither is a good help defender. Neither shot very well from deep last year.

Let's play them together? Does this even make sense when you take a step back?

I get the want to see Obi get more playing time but putting those 2 on the court at the same time doesn't even get past the smell test for me.

The perfect thing you said is that it is an incredibly small sample size. That is Thibs fault and was my main problem with him last year. He would rather stick with something that we all know is not working than try something different. I am not even fighting for this lineup change and saying it will work. I am saying try something new rather than the same trash lineups that failed all year. Thibs said many times that the numbers show it does not work. Well if they have a positive net rating that is a good thing no matter how small the sample is. The reporter asked him what numbers he was using. Notice he never answered that question. The reason for that is because he was never using any numbers. It was a way to ignore the topic because reporters never ask good follow up questions. Thibs had a preseason last year to try different combinations of players to see what works. He did not do that and picked a rotation and stuck to it like it was the regular season. That is a microcosm of how he treated the whole year until post all star break.

Do you think it's good to play one of either Obi or Randle out of position? Do you think either is a good defender or help defender?

One of those 2 now has to play an entirely different position, ie learn where to be and how to do the 5 in that rotation.

Do you think that's a good path forward?

When you have a small ball rotation that seems to suck, you don't just play it for funsies.

Again, you are missing the entire point. You are stuck on Randle and Obi. I am using that topic as a way to point at Thibs major flaw. His inability to try something new. Us not knowing if they can work together when other team play small ball is a huge problem. How can anyone know how they will do if Thibs almost never tries it. Wouldn't they also have to build chemistry since they never play with each other? You said it was a small sample size. Do you not think they need time to figure out what their roles would be when playing with each other? That could mean they might get even better with more time.

There was a point last year when our starting 5 was like bottom 5 lineups in the league and they plays one of the highest minutes together. Do you not see a problem with that? We kept playing that instead of trying new stuff when it was obvious that group did not work. There is a reason why in another thread I said I will be paying attention to how Thibs treats preseason this year. If he does like last year where all the vets play heavy minutes in the same static rotation he will use during the season then we are in for more of the same as last year. If he actually uses preseason to experiment with different lineups then he might actually be open to change and actually finding out the best combination of players.

I’ll use your own words, feel free to answer any of my questions.

Clean wrote:Notice he never answered that question.

I did answer your questions.

"How can anyone know how they will do if Thibs almost never tries it." = I have no clue because Thibs does not give us much to go off of. Will that lineup work vs every team? probably not. Can if work against teams who go small vs us? maybe but we have no idea because they are almost never play with each other or even given enough time to figure out their roles when they do play with each other.

Just because I don't single out a question and directly answer it right after separating it does not mean I never answered your question.

I am sure Thibs thinks the same btw

Trying new stuff just to see if it works in this NBA rotation context is not good strategy.

You don’t throw stiff against a wall just to see if it sticks

While that logic generally sounds correct, I don’t think it’s supported by actual practice. I think teams generally do mix it up a bit to see what works. Try and create mismatches.

https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/advanced?Season=2021-22&dir=D&slug=advanced&sort=MIN

If you look at the attached 5 Man lineups, the only 5 man lineups that played MORE than our two 5 man starting lineups were teams that were actually good. I think you need to make changes and see what works.

More practically, after Kemba is removed, instead of giving any of our other PGs a shot, we just name Burks starting PG? After other injuries, instead of giving young players a shot we just play existing players longer?

I think the role of analytics in sports is to remove emotional bias specifically of people entrenched with the team.

I like Thibs second half of his answer. The “because I watch the games” tells me I’m getting an emotional response. It implies no one else analyzing this watches the game. His a second half that a few blowouts may skew the results is the correct answer.

EwingsGlass wrote:

Clean wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/TheKnicksWall/status/1575540320250785792

He accidentally put the #1 priority in the #7 slot. If that’s his priority list in order of importance we are look at the #5-8 pick this year.

We don’t know if its a priority list or the weightings to each of them.
I do like the photo with Randle looking at Thibs…….”what, this list all about me and and only me?”
Thibs: “Look at it Jules, look at it”!
Randle:”no coach, not going to look at it!”

EwingsGlass wrote:

Nalod wrote:

EwingsGlass wrote:

Clean wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/TheKnicksWall/status/1575540320250785792

He accidentally put the #1 priority in the #7 slot. If that’s his priority list in order of importance we are look at the #5-8 pick this year.

We don’t know if its a priority list or the weightings to each of them.
I do like the photo with Randle looking at Thibs…….”what, this list all about me and and only me?”
Thibs: “Look at it Jules, look at it”!
Randle:”no coach, not going to look at it!”

It could just be chronological order.

1. Pace: “Frank is not here and Brunson/EF/IQ/Rose/RJ bring it up unless rebounded”
If coach wants it faster, Randle will be coached as such.
2. Space: we have a back court that can shoot. Bench can shoot. WE need Randle to up it a bit. RJ keep improving. Need proof of him, look at his splits in StatMuse by month. Great way to look at stats. And yes, Randle gets assists!
3. Play off the pass. 4. move without the ball. That EF makes plays and catches and shoots makes him valuable. Grimes will improve over time but to appreciate EF is to appreciate his skill. He and Randle got better over time last season. Early Randle was frustrated with EF not making the cuts right and he had to hold the ball longer. JJ Reddick career was based on his ability Post college to get open and he had a great long wealth infused career from it. EF to a lessor extent but very good. HartStein brings a passing 5 to the table. This should be fun!
5. Attack the rim. 6. Offensive execution.
7. Value Shot……..Curious to learn more about this. I suppose each coach and system has a different meaning?
8. teams that succeed on the O-boards do well. Still get have to get back on defense!

EwingsGlass wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sny_knicks/status/1575555075774234624

This happened because Knicks twitter went at the Media for always wanting access but never challenging Thibs when he throws out BS numbers. Today one of them threw the real numbers in his face that contradict what he was saying for the longest and now its not longer about numbers but watching the games and picking and choosing which game the numbers count. I don't know if this is the full context of the video but if it is then this might be a problem again the whole season.

Edit: I also think the person who caused this was Tommy Beer. SO while some of you like to make fun of his stat picking he is the only media member to ask real follow up questions. You have to give him credit for that.

Obi and Randle played 101 minutes together last year. It's an incredibly small sample size.

Are these the numbers that are thrown in Thib's face? The fact that they were a +8 in those minutes? https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/traditional?slug=traditional&GroupQuantity=2&TeamID=1610612752&PerMode=Totals

For me, this whole thing is all very stupid.

Neither Obi or Randle are good defenders. Neither is a good help defender. Neither shot very well from deep last year.

Let's play them together? Does this even make sense when you take a step back?

I get the want to see Obi get more playing time but putting those 2 on the court at the same time doesn't even get past the smell test for me.

The perfect thing you said is that it is an incredibly small sample size. That is Thibs fault and was my main problem with him last year. He would rather stick with something that we all know is not working than try something different. I am not even fighting for this lineup change and saying it will work. I am saying try something new rather than the same trash lineups that failed all year. Thibs said many times that the numbers show it does not work. Well if they have a positive net rating that is a good thing no matter how small the sample is. The reporter asked him what numbers he was using. Notice he never answered that question. The reason for that is because he was never using any numbers. It was a way to ignore the topic because reporters never ask good follow up questions. Thibs had a preseason last year to try different combinations of players to see what works. He did not do that and picked a rotation and stuck to it like it was the regular season. That is a microcosm of how he treated the whole year until post all star break.

Do you think it's good to play one of either Obi or Randle out of position? Do you think either is a good defender or help defender?

One of those 2 now has to play an entirely different position, ie learn where to be and how to do the 5 in that rotation.

Do you think that's a good path forward?

When you have a small ball rotation that seems to suck, you don't just play it for funsies.

Again, you are missing the entire point. You are stuck on Randle and Obi. I am using that topic as a way to point at Thibs major flaw. His inability to try something new. Us not knowing if they can work together when other team play small ball is a huge problem. How can anyone know how they will do if Thibs almost never tries it. Wouldn't they also have to build chemistry since they never play with each other? You said it was a small sample size. Do you not think they need time to figure out what their roles would be when playing with each other? That could mean they might get even better with more time.

There was a point last year when our starting 5 was like bottom 5 lineups in the league and they plays one of the highest minutes together. Do you not see a problem with that? We kept playing that instead of trying new stuff when it was obvious that group did not work. There is a reason why in another thread I said I will be paying attention to how Thibs treats preseason this year. If he does like last year where all the vets play heavy minutes in the same static rotation he will use during the season then we are in for more of the same as last year. If he actually uses preseason to experiment with different lineups then he might actually be open to change and actually finding out the best combination of players.

I’ll use your own words, feel free to answer any of my questions.

Clean wrote:Notice he never answered that question.

I did answer your questions.

"How can anyone know how they will do if Thibs almost never tries it." = I have no clue because Thibs does not give us much to go off of. Will that lineup work vs every team? probably not. Can if work against teams who go small vs us? maybe but we have no idea because they are almost never play with each other or even given enough time to figure out their roles when they do play with each other.

Just because I don't single out a question and directly answer it right after separating it does not mean I never answered your question.

I am sure Thibs thinks the same btw

Trying new stuff just to see if it works in this NBA rotation context is not good strategy.

You don’t throw stiff against a wall just to see if it sticks

While that logic generally sounds correct, I don’t think it’s supported by actual practice. I think teams generally do mix it up a bit to see what works. Try and create mismatches.

https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/advanced?Season=2021-22&dir=D&slug=advanced&sort=MIN

If you look at the attached 5 Man lineups, the only 5 man lineups that played MORE than our two 5 man starting lineups were teams that were actually good. I think you need to make changes and see what works.

More practically, after Kemba is removed, instead of giving any of our other PGs a shot, we just name Burks starting PG? After other injuries, instead of giving young players a shot we just play existing players longer?

I think the role of analytics in sports is to remove emotional bias specifically of people entrenched with the team.

I like Thibs second half of his answer. The “because I watch the games” tells me I’m getting an emotional response. It implies no one else analyzing this watches the game. His a second half that a few blowouts may skew the results is the correct answer.

Tommy Beer wrote a lot of words for this article. Here is his key sentencea: "Nonetheless, Thibodeau's answer made sense. Randle and Obi only played a total of 104 minutes together. It's difficult to put too much stock - one way or the other - in a limited sample size."

BTW, I've read 2 articles now regarding the minutes Obi and Randle played together linking to the same NBA stats URL, one said 104 minutes and the other said 107 minutes and NBA lists 101 minutes. Attention to details matter when you are trying to make a point.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/TommyBeer/status/1575650583700451328

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/IanBegley/status/1575878543925338112

Rebound. Defend. Make 3pointers at a respectable mark. Don't make obvious mistakes.

He is almost there.

EwingsGlass wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

martin wrote:

Clean wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sny_knicks/status/1575555075774234624

This happened because Knicks twitter went at the Media for always wanting access but never challenging Thibs when he throws out BS numbers. Today one of them threw the real numbers in his face that contradict what he was saying for the longest and now its not longer about numbers but watching the games and picking and choosing which game the numbers count. I don't know if this is the full context of the video but if it is then this might be a problem again the whole season.

Edit: I also think the person who caused this was Tommy Beer. SO while some of you like to make fun of his stat picking he is the only media member to ask real follow up questions. You have to give him credit for that.

Obi and Randle played 101 minutes together last year. It's an incredibly small sample size.

Are these the numbers that are thrown in Thib's face? The fact that they were a +8 in those minutes? https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/traditional?slug=traditional&GroupQuantity=2&TeamID=1610612752&PerMode=Totals

For me, this whole thing is all very stupid.

Neither Obi or Randle are good defenders. Neither is a good help defender. Neither shot very well from deep last year.

Let's play them together? Does this even make sense when you take a step back?

I get the want to see Obi get more playing time but putting those 2 on the court at the same time doesn't even get past the smell test for me.

The perfect thing you said is that it is an incredibly small sample size. That is Thibs fault and was my main problem with him last year. He would rather stick with something that we all know is not working than try something different. I am not even fighting for this lineup change and saying it will work. I am saying try something new rather than the same trash lineups that failed all year. Thibs said many times that the numbers show it does not work. Well if they have a positive net rating that is a good thing no matter how small the sample is. The reporter asked him what numbers he was using. Notice he never answered that question. The reason for that is because he was never using any numbers. It was a way to ignore the topic because reporters never ask good follow up questions. Thibs had a preseason last year to try different combinations of players to see what works. He did not do that and picked a rotation and stuck to it like it was the regular season. That is a microcosm of how he treated the whole year until post all star break.

Do you think it's good to play one of either Obi or Randle out of position? Do you think either is a good defender or help defender?

One of those 2 now has to play an entirely different position, ie learn where to be and how to do the 5 in that rotation.

Do you think that's a good path forward?

When you have a small ball rotation that seems to suck, you don't just play it for funsies.

Again, you are missing the entire point. You are stuck on Randle and Obi. I am using that topic as a way to point at Thibs major flaw. His inability to try something new. Us not knowing if they can work together when other team play small ball is a huge problem. How can anyone know how they will do if Thibs almost never tries it. Wouldn't they also have to build chemistry since they never play with each other? You said it was a small sample size. Do you not think they need time to figure out what their roles would be when playing with each other? That could mean they might get even better with more time.

There was a point last year when our starting 5 was like bottom 5 lineups in the league and they plays one of the highest minutes together. Do you not see a problem with that? We kept playing that instead of trying new stuff when it was obvious that group did not work. There is a reason why in another thread I said I will be paying attention to how Thibs treats preseason this year. If he does like last year where all the vets play heavy minutes in the same static rotation he will use during the season then we are in for more of the same as last year. If he actually uses preseason to experiment with different lineups then he might actually be open to change and actually finding out the best combination of players.

I’ll use your own words, feel free to answer any of my questions.

Clean wrote:Notice he never answered that question.

I did answer your questions.

"How can anyone know how they will do if Thibs almost never tries it." = I have no clue because Thibs does not give us much to go off of. Will that lineup work vs every team? probably not. Can if work against teams who go small vs us? maybe but we have no idea because they are almost never play with each other or even given enough time to figure out their roles when they do play with each other.

Just because I don't single out a question and directly answer it right after separating it does not mean I never answered your question.

I am sure Thibs thinks the same btw

Trying new stuff just to see if it works in this NBA rotation context is not good strategy.

You don’t throw stiff against a wall just to see if it sticks

While that logic generally sounds correct, I don’t think it’s supported by actual practice. I think teams generally do mix it up a bit to see what works. Try and create mismatches.

https://www.nba.com/stats/lineups/advanced?Season=2021-22&dir=D&slug=advanced&sort=MIN

If you look at the attached 5 Man lineups, the only 5 man lineups that played MORE than our two 5 man starting lineups were teams that were actually good. I think you need to make changes and see what works.

More practically, after Kemba is removed, instead of giving any of our other PGs a shot, we just name Burks starting PG? After other injuries, instead of giving young players a shot we just play existing players longer?

I think the role of analytics in sports is to remove emotional bias specifically of people entrenched with the team.

I like Thibs second half of his answer. The “because I watch the games” tells me I’m getting an emotional response. It implies no one else analyzing this watches the game. His a second half that a few blowouts may skew the results is the correct answer.

Without diving deep into it, I think you can read the stats you listed in several different ways.

The top 5 lineup are from some of the better teams, so maybe keeping guys together is a good thing? Quite frankly, the top 15 lineup are dominated by teams that did better (and maybe avoided COVID enough), so maybe that suggests that keeping guys together is a better thing?

The top 10-15 lineups are a variety of very good teams, very bad teams, and some medium teams... so maybe the stats themselves don't show us very much to draw conclusions from?

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:This is how you call out Tommy Beer and his particularly stupid line of questions to Thibs without mentioning his name:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/IanBegley/status/1575878543925338112

Knicks were a very good defensive team last year. Even after the Kemba start we ended 6th in opponent EFG% and 9th in opponent ppg/100 which are really the #s that say the most.

This is why I am surprised to see so many Knick fans predict similar totals to what we had last year. We got very little from Rose last year, when he got hurt Quickly was AWFUL in the middle of the season and obviously the Burks/Kemba play at PG was not good. Coming back with the same defense (likely improved) and a better IQ, healthier Rose and Brunson should have us with a pretty strong squad

There was also Barrett’s slow start to the season.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/benritholtznba/status/1575503372471439360

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/nba_newyork/status/1575917756775813120

Nalod wrote:Brunson has winner DNA. High School and College. Its there. That he has gotten to this level is quite an achievement. He does not look like a NBA player.
He will need time to adapt and grow into this. Most fans will freak the **** out after 20 games. Im man we have threads planning on how to deal with it already!

Was trying to think of the recent UFA signings in the last 2-3 years for players in the mid 20s range across the NBA.

Has there been better?