fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:Phil can say whatever he wants but as long as I am seeing his team shoot long midrange jumper after jumper, I am not sold on him buying into analytics

And perhaps he should have his team guard the 3.

Stop making this all about how this roster is handling things. It's nuts to look at this team as the best example of what a Phil Jackson team will look like rather than all his other teams which clearly didn't have all the issues we have with this team. You're acting like you've never seen a Phil Jackson team play before this one. It wasn't that long ago that he was coaching. 2010-11 wasn't an entirely different NBA.

I really can't believe some of you guys take on this subject. You're gonna hold Phil to task based on this transition roster and not give him a chance to actually build the team fully according to his designs? This is not the team he's going to be remembered for in NY. It was NEVER intended to be the team we always knew he was going to eventually build, once we dropped all the contracts of players we don't want this year.

Carmelo Anthony  $22,875,000
Jose Calderon    $7,402,812
JR Smith         $6,399,750
Iman Shumpert    $3,898,691 Qualifying Offer
Pablo Prigioni   $1,734,572
Tim Hardaway Jr  $1,304,520 
Cleanthony Early $845,059
                 $40,561,713

It's going to be very interesting to see what Phil does with this team moving forward. We have to have some patience tho.

You seem to just ignore that he made bad decisions and accidentally turned a .450 team into a .150 team. It would be ridiculous to say we have enough data to fully judge Phil but it's even more ridiculous to say we should just ignore all the information we have so far. It is early but so far he's been like a guy driving a snow plow that accidentally puts more snow on the road.
IMO you can't complain about people who feel using the available data is better than not using it even if it's only a little amount of data.

I'm complaining about a lack of reason being used. This team at best was only hoping to make the playoffs which wasn't going to change the point I made above in terms of the roster being remade after this season. This is and always was just a transition roster. It's stupid to use it as a means of predicting what Phil will do.

If Phil wanted to win at all costs this year he wasn't trying very hard. They clearly decided to force the team to play within the system in order to see exactly what these players would do in this system. That has exposed many players and in my opinion it's been a cleansing experience that made it crystal clear what the true nature of the team is. But here's the thing, we aren't doomed to stay in this situation. Phil will be able to clear the decks and bring in players that will be better for this franchise.

Then how come so many here thought this was a good team and definitely not a lottery-team/transition year before the season? Either it wasn't intended to be one or these individuals are really clueless.
I've never heard of a team with an intended transition year that looked like a .600+ 50 win team to its fan base at the start of the season.

Phil was expecting at least 45 wins since that is what he said it would take in order to get into the playoffs. A few of us said possibly 50 wins. No one is ever saying the Knicks were a LOCK to win that many games, so lets not try and make it sound like people thought this team couldn't fail under any circumstances. They needed good health and for everyone to fully buy in. That didn't happen.

Phil and Fish decided that they would stick with the system regardless of record and that showed that they were more concerned with development and learning the truth about the roster, than they were interested in the playoffs at all costs. Phil has let it burn rather than put the fire out with a change of style or a roster move to try and save the season. This was a transition roster and nothing more. Phil said that they had to protect their future, which in most cases means abandoning the present.

So he clearly did accidentally turn a .450 team into a .150 team. We seem to agree on that. Maybe once he saw how badly his decisions backfired, he realized there was no point in trying to squeeze out wins, but this was not the intention. It's kind of like bowling a strike in the wrong lane (the strike still counts for Dallas). I don't mean that he simply through the ball from the wrong lane but rather he missed his entire lane by so far that it went into the wrong lane.

The only question is whether it makes more sense to count the decisions he has made in our preliminary evaluations of Phil or to just say they don't count. You seem to not only think that his decisions don't count but that it's completely obvious that they shouldn't count. The smallest sample is always zero. It makes no sense to say it's smarter to look at zero of his decisions than to at least look at the ones he has made.

thats not really fair. "All his moves backfired?" Often the best moves are the ones not made, and if we do indeed get the #1 pick or a top 3 and and that player turns into a star doesnt that count? You just dont know.... who knows what deals or players were available, but they didnt want to add salary. Not hitting the panic button is a move. This is painful to watch but the reality is the Knicks are in much better position losing 60 games than winning 45. It sucks for the fans. Utterly brutal, but this is a purge. Like popping a big zit. Its gonna hurt a bit and bleed but sometimes cover up isnt whats needed.

Bonn1997 wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:Phil can say whatever he wants but as long as I am seeing his team shoot long midrange jumper after jumper, I am not sold on him buying into analytics

And perhaps he should have his team guard the 3.

Stop making this all about how this roster is handling things. It's nuts to look at this team as the best example of what a Phil Jackson team will look like rather than all his other teams which clearly didn't have all the issues we have with this team. You're acting like you've never seen a Phil Jackson team play before this one. It wasn't that long ago that he was coaching. 2010-11 wasn't an entirely different NBA.

I really can't believe some of you guys take on this subject. You're gonna hold Phil to task based on this transition roster and not give him a chance to actually build the team fully according to his designs? This is not the team he's going to be remembered for in NY. It was NEVER intended to be the team we always knew he was going to eventually build, once we dropped all the contracts of players we don't want this year.

Carmelo Anthony  $22,875,000
Jose Calderon    $7,402,812
JR Smith         $6,399,750
Iman Shumpert    $3,898,691 Qualifying Offer
Pablo Prigioni   $1,734,572
Tim Hardaway Jr  $1,304,520 
Cleanthony Early $845,059
                 $40,561,713

It's going to be very interesting to see what Phil does with this team moving forward. We have to have some patience tho.

You seem to just ignore that he made bad decisions and accidentally turned a .450 team into a .150 team. It would be ridiculous to say we have enough data to fully judge Phil but it's even more ridiculous to say we should just ignore all the information we have so far. It is early but so far he's been like a guy driving a snow plow that accidentally puts more snow on the road.
IMO you can't complain about people who feel using the available data is better than not using it even if it's only a little amount of data.

I'm complaining about a lack of reason being used. This team at best was only hoping to make the playoffs which wasn't going to change the point I made above in terms of the roster being remade after this season. This is and always was just a transition roster. It's stupid to use it as a means of predicting what Phil will do.

If Phil wanted to win at all costs this year he wasn't trying very hard. They clearly decided to force the team to play within the system in order to see exactly what these players would do in this system. That has exposed many players and in my opinion it's been a cleansing experience that made it crystal clear what the true nature of the team is. But here's the thing, we aren't doomed to stay in this situation. Phil will be able to clear the decks and bring in players that will be better for this franchise.

Then how come so many here thought this was a good team and definitely not a lottery-team/transition year before the season? Either it wasn't intended to be one or these individuals are really clueless.
I've never heard of a team with an intended transition year that looked like a .600+ 50 win team to its fan base at the start of the season.

Phil was expecting at least 45 wins since that is what he said it would take in order to get into the playoffs. A few of us said possibly 50 wins. No one is ever saying the Knicks were a LOCK to win that many games, so lets not try and make it sound like people thought this team couldn't fail under any circumstances. They needed good health and for everyone to fully buy in. That didn't happen.

Phil and Fish decided that they would stick with the system regardless of record and that showed that they were more concerned with development and learning the truth about the roster, than they were interested in the playoffs at all costs. Phil has let it burn rather than put the fire out with a change of style or a roster move to try and save the season. This was a transition roster and nothing more. Phil said that they had to protect their future, which in most cases means abandoning the present.

So he clearly did accidentally turn a .450 team into a .150 team. We seem to agree on that. Maybe once he saw how badly his decisions backfired, he realized there was no point in trying to squeeze out wins, but this was not the intention. It's kind of like bowling a strike in the wrong lane (the strike still counts for Dallas). I don't mean that he simply through the ball from the wrong lane but rather he missed his entire lane by so far that it went into the wrong lane.

The only question is whether it makes more sense to count the decisions he has made in our preliminary evaluations of Phil or to just say they don't count. You seem to not only think that his decisions don't count but that it's completely obvious that they shouldn't count. The smallest sample is always zero. It makes no sense to say it's smarter to look at zero of his decisions than to at least look at the ones he has made.

thats not really fair. "All his moves backfired?" Often the best moves are the ones not made, and if we do indeed get the #1 pick or a top 3 and and that player turns into a star doesnt that count? You just dont know.... who knows what deals or players were available, but they didnt want to add salary. Not hitting the panic button is a move. This is painful to watch but the reality is the Knicks are in much better position losing 60 games than winning 45. It sucks for the fans. Utterly brutal, but this is a purge. Like popping a big zit. Its gonna hurt a bit and bleed but sometimes cover up isnt whats needed.

Or maybe his draft choice is as bad as his off-season decisions. No one knows, and I've been pretty clear that it's early still. Sure you could accidentally miss your entire bowling lane in the first couple of frames, learn from it, and then do great. Maybe it's such a great learning experience that you're better off than someone who just had a couple of spares in those early frames. All we have now are the gutters that went into the wrong lane and the hope that it could get better.

nixluva wrote:Obviously i'm betting on Phil to get the pick right and to make the smart move in Free Agency. I think the Knicks scouting and player personnel staff will have all of the metrics, video and live scouting needed to make smart decisions. Minus Dolan's interference I think they will be successful. Last summer we weren't adding front line talent and this summer the idea is to target a few players who will be starters for this team's future.

I think with Larkin he likely feels that he has a cheaper option in Galloway so why lock himself into Larkin. He can let Larkin prove his worth this year and if he loses him, no real big loss, given that every year decent backup guards reveal themselves. We also got Early and Thanasis out of this so there's that to consider as well.

freeskier wrote:great post, thanks. would have liked some links with the excerpts also. This TruVue stuff is pretty fascinating. Lots of amazing stats coming out of the system, I wish the data was publicly available.

Really interesting that Phil defends the 20 ft 2pointer. TNT has been hating on that all year. Can someone explain why the long 2 is good (frequent?) in the triangle?

more discussion starters, less haikus. that's my UK motto for 2015 anyway.

Sorry about the lack of links. I usually do include links.

With regard to the midrange shot and the triangle, Phil isn't saying that it's the most efficient offense to just go nuts with midrange shots. He has had teams with bigs who can score effectively inside and in the midrange. That I feel is why despite the tons of midrange shots it never really was a problem for his teams.

Lakers:
2010-11  6th Offensive Efficiency - 6th Defensive Efficiency
2009-10  11th - 4th   Finals
2008-09  3rd  - 6th   Finals
2007-08  3rd  - 5th   Finals
2006-07  7th  - 24th
2005-06  8th  - 15th  
2003-04  6th  - 8th   Finals
2002-03  4th  - 19th  
2001-02  2nd  - 7th   Finals
2000-01  2nd  - 21st  Finals
1999-00  5th  - 1st   Finals

My guess is that Phil very much wants to get back to having a legit Post presence again and a team that can really defend. Phil likes size and I can see him targeting players with size from here on.

CrushAlot wrote:Phil seems to target guys with huge wingspans for their height. Cole, Acy, Galloway and Thanasis all have wingspans at least 6 inches more than their height.

mreinman wrote:

freeskier wrote:great post, thanks. would have liked some links with the excerpts also. This TruVue stuff is pretty fascinating. Lots of amazing stats coming out of the system, I wish the data was publicly available.

Really interesting that Phil defends the 20 ft 2pointer. TNT has been hating on that all year. Can someone explain why the long 2 is good (frequent?) in the triangle?

more discussion starters, less haikus. that's my UK motto for 2015 anyway.

that shot is important because it makes the Jason Smith signing seem less stupid

As explained yesterday while it probably doesn't make sense

To shoot this shot in terms of reaping what is sown analytically

It's more than likely the open shot provided within the system

You'd think professional NBA players could hit this shot with more consistency

mreinman wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

mreinman wrote:

freeskier wrote:great post, thanks. would have liked some links with the excerpts also. This TruVue stuff is pretty fascinating. Lots of amazing stats coming out of the system, I wish the data was publicly available.

Really interesting that Phil defends the 20 ft 2pointer. TNT has been hating on that all year. Can someone explain why the long 2 is good (frequent?) in the triangle?

more discussion starters, less haikus. that's my UK motto for 2015 anyway.

that shot is important because it makes the Jason Smith signing seem less stupid

As explained yesterday while it probably doesn't make sense

To shoot this shot in terms of reaping what is sown analytically

It's more than likely the open shot provided within the system

You'd think professional NBA players could hit this shot with more consistency

they hit it with less consistency because its not one that should/is practiced ad nauseam since its roi is weak at best.

there is a reason why the Houston Rockets (and other analytically driven teams) does/do not take them.

Professional athletes should hit open shots

Much the same guys like Blake Griffin and Dwight Howard

Should know how to shoot free throws

An open shot is an open shot