[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

weird stat article on Melo WSJ
Author Thread
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
1/13/2011  3:24 PM
Andrew wrote:What is the rank. I'm not sure how they ordered the list. I was looking at the wins produced number because that was what the initial article used, and the rank of the players is not determined by that number.

the Player rankings are pretty much consistent w/the "Classic Wins Produced" statline, whatever the hell that is

After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
AUTOADVERT
Andrew
Posts: 26600
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #1
USA
1/13/2011  3:32 PM
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:What is the rank. I'm not sure how they ordered the list. I was looking at the wins produced number because that was what the initial article used, and the rank of the players is not determined by that number.

the Player rankings are pretty much consistent w/the "Classic Wins Produced" statline, whatever the hell that is

But not really, because gallo has a 6+ classic wins produced and is alot lower on the list.

PURE KNICKS LOVE
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
1/13/2011  3:39 PM    LAST EDITED: 1/13/2011  3:42 PM
Andrew wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:What is the rank. I'm not sure how they ordered the list. I was looking at the wins produced number because that was what the initial article used, and the rank of the players is not determined by that number.

the Player rankings are pretty much consistent w/the "Classic Wins Produced" statline, whatever the hell that is

But not really, because gallo has a 6+ classic wins produced and is alot lower on the list.

ok, i see what you're referring to... i also see that Trevor Ariza, Lou Williams, Beno Udrih & Ersan Ilyasova have pretty much the same classic wins produced # as Gallo... should we pause to consider Gallo's value in comparison to those guys? i just don't see the relevance of this chart.

After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34057
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127

1/13/2011  5:28 PM    LAST EDITED: 1/13/2011  5:34 PM
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.

what you are suggesting is that if you can find 1 anomaly (or some anomalies) within a particular statistical way of trying to grade out players, you should throw the whole thing out, rather than trying to see if some of it pans out and should at least be considered.

there's not just 1 anomaly there dude... take a look at the list & you'll see a whole bunch of anomalies that make this chart worthless

http://arturogalletti.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/untitled37.png

check out where players like Dirk Nowitzki ranks in comparison to Troy Murphy... take a look where Amare ranks in respect to David Lee & Chris Bosh... Russell Westbrook is #66 on the list compared to Matt Barnes at #36... i can go on & on & on... this list is ridiculously skewed... i can't even believe you are using this to try & formulate any kind of conclusion whatsoever in regards to Melo's value as an NBA player... i thought u were better than that.

I'm not. I've stated about 5 times in the thread that I don't understand the stat itself.

Perhaps you can explain it to me.

The only way to come up with a statisitc and correlate it to something (the article says "using the metric "Wins Produced" that predicts how statistics correlate to winning.") that I know of is to run a linear regression.

essentially, without knowing this dude's model, it would look something like:

(y) = (b1)(x1) + (b2)(x2) + (b3)(x3) + ... + a + e

or

(wins) = (b1)(points) + (b2)(rebounding) + (b3)(blocks) ... + (unexplained) + (error)

where the "b" is the correlation, or slope of a line, between the "x" and the "y"/wins

there are a whole slew of ways to **** one of these models up. There is a ton of theory on this too, and it's called econometrics. Basically, it attempts to forecast something based upon the relationship between two variables. There are a lot of statistics to weigh in basketball, and that leaves a lot of room for error, because the less variables the better the model.

It is impossible to explain what the output of the model means without knowing how the model is constructed and what the inputs are. But what he's essentially trying to draw a line through a bunch of data points

DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27500
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
1/13/2011  5:42 PM
I like Basketball-Reference's model basically because it shows the other factors it used in the calculation. With minor variations in the formulas, I would assume that the calculations are roughly similar.

This is basketball-reference's formula for offensive Win Shares:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

You know I gonna spin wit it
GodSaveTheKnicks
Posts: 23952
Alba Posts: 21
Joined: 11/21/2006
Member: #1207
USA
1/13/2011  6:11 PM    LAST EDITED: 1/13/2011  6:15 PM
Multiple pieces on Melo in Truehoop today: http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/23871/thursday-bullets-197

He has improved his rebounding rate.

A discussion of how valid advanced statistics are in comparing NBA players would be better without immediate hostility and sarcasm on both sides.

If someone publishes an article that says Melo is or isn't something...relax and take a look before just going

OMG! This says Carmelo is worse/better than Player X. Obviously this is all just some stupid bs.

Edit:

Obviously Win Shares is not a foolproof player evaluation tool. But if it says that Lebron/Dwade/Dwight Howard are rated at a certain level and Melo is not, I'd be curious to know why. I'm sure the stat wasn't made solely to poop on Melo.

Let's try to elevate the level of discourse in this byeetch. Please
stanleybostitch
Posts: 20731
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/7/2006
Member: #1071

1/13/2011  6:31 PM
SupremeCommander wrote:The only way to come up with a statisitc and correlate it to something (the article says "using the metric "Wins Produced" that predicts how statistics correlate to winning.") that I know of is to run a linear regression.

essentially, without knowing this dude's model, it would look something like:

(y) = (b1)(x1) + (b2)(x2) + (b3)(x3) + ... + a + e

or

(wins) = (b1)(points) + (b2)(rebounding) + (b3)(blocks) ... + (unexplained) + (error)

where the "b" is the correlation, or slope of a line, between the "x" and the "y"/wins

there are a whole slew of ways to **** one of these models up. There is a ton of theory on this too, and it's called econometrics. Basically, it attempts to forecast something based upon the relationship between two variables. There are a lot of statistics to weigh in basketball, and that leaves a lot of room for error, because the less variables the better the model.

It is impossible to explain what the output of the model means without knowing how the model is constructed and what the inputs are. But what he's essentially trying to draw a line through a bunch of data points

Thank you Nate Silver!

The new new core: Randle, RJ, IQ. Maybe Mitch. Future pick. Future trade. Future FA.
stanleybostitch
Posts: 20731
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/7/2006
Member: #1071

1/13/2011  6:34 PM
fishmike wrote:at this point what are we debating? That Melo is a great scorer? That Melo can get you a clutch bucket as well as any player in the NBA? Who here would disagree with that? I dont think anyone.

All these discussions should revolve around 2 things:
1) what is Melo's value
2) what is Melo's value to the Knicks

If you think Melo is a superstar, that is an MVP caliber player than his value is a combo of picks and prospects. Knicks have a very good young team. Chandler, Gallo and Fields have good value around the league, I have no doubt. Knicks have expiring contract in Curry/Azu and some GM will surely take a shot on AR for a pick. Now if I was getting Lebron back I would trade all those guys. But Melo isnt Lebron. He's not a point anything and he's not an all NBA defensive team player either. He's a scorer who needs 20 shots a game to be an impact player.

Thats #1

#2 is his value. Since the Knicks already excel at what he brings his value it lower to the Knicks than to the rest of the market. The Knicks finish games quite well, Amare leads the NBA in 4th qtr scoring. Knicks have also gotten big game winning shots from Chandler, Gallo and Felton numerous times. When the Knicks lose it alway because of one of two reasons: We got killed on the boards, we didnt defend well enough.

If I am going to blow up my young guys its going to have to be for a player that clearly puts the Knicks in the same category as the elite teams. Melo doesnt do that. Melo doesnt outplay Lebron. Melo doesnt lock down Paul Pierce or keep Kevin Love from getting 30 rebounds.

What can I say? Call me a homer but I believe in the Knicks young core of players to be quality and potential parts of a title caliber team. If I am going blow them all up I'm getting an elite bigman back. If I could keep either Chandler, Fields or Gallo I would trade the rest, that includes Fields/Chandler/Gallo/Douglas/AR/Mosgov/Turiaf/Azu for Andrew Bogut, because a frontline of Bogut/Amare/Gallo (or Chandler or Fields) is about the best in the NBA and can pound a team like the Heat into submission. I would like to see Mr Versatile Lebron play PF against an Amare/Bogut frontline. Please do!

My point is simple... Is Bogut clearly a better BB player than Melo? No, but with Amare/Felton already here he's a piece that makes us a title contendor, Melo doesnt. If I'm dumping these good young players I want a piece back that makes my team elite.

Great post fish, with you 1000%. Donnie, unlike our past leadership, does not starphuck - he's going by a player's value to the Knicks as they are currently constituted, not playing some real world version of NBA 2K11.

The new new core: Randle, RJ, IQ. Maybe Mitch. Future pick. Future trade. Future FA.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
1/13/2011  6:52 PM    LAST EDITED: 1/13/2011  6:53 PM
GodSaveTheKnicks wrote:Multiple pieces on Melo in Truehoop today: http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/23871/thursday-bullets-197

He has improved his rebounding rate.

A discussion of how valid advanced statistics are in comparing NBA players would be better without immediate hostility and sarcasm on both sides.

If someone publishes an article that says Melo is or isn't something...relax and take a look before just going

OMG! This says Carmelo is worse/better than Player X. Obviously this is all just some stupid bs.

Edit:

Obviously Win Shares is not a foolproof player evaluation tool. But if it says that Lebron/Dwade/Dwight Howard are rated at a certain level and Melo is not, I'd be curious to know why. I'm sure the stat wasn't made solely to poop on Melo.

i think it's pretty obvious this article was written with the intent to poop on Melo in mind... the entire premise here is to try & prove how Melo somehow doesn't help teams win games & that the Nets & Knicks might be better off without him... if that's the case, please explain to me how the Nuggets improved so dramatically after they drafted CA going from a 17 win team the year prior to 43 wins immediately after... so we're to believe that Marcus Camby & Kenyon Martin's return was the driving force in Denver all these years & Melo was just going along for the ride, is that it? where are the stats to prove that i'm wondering?... & if that's the case why did Denver let Camby get away to begin with & why aren't they looking to sign KMart to a max extension? let's see if there's a stat to explain this strange phenomenon.

After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27500
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
1/13/2011  6:56 PM
You also have to take into consideration what I will call "curb appeal". We can determine that Melo is only a moderately efficient shooter while being a high volume shooter and other players, like Gallo have higher effective shooting percentages.

But, when deciding whether to trade guys like Gallo (currently, his statistical efficiency makes him an average player)for Melo, you need to consider that more veteran's will want to play with Melo and Amare than Amare, Gallo and Chandler. These are the guys that are willing to accept minimum contracts. So, when trading 3 for 1, you need to consider that the additional 2 players you add this coming offseason may be a player at the MLE (if it still exists) that is willing to accept less to play for a winning team or just veteran minimum contracts of the same sort of players.

Call it a "starphuch" if you will, but when we are facing teams like the Lakers, Dallas, Boston, and Miami, it will be good to have a veteran bench.

I am still voting to get a Melo trade done, but to do it in a manner that preserves assets.

You know I gonna spin wit it
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/13/2011  8:48 PM    LAST EDITED: 1/13/2011  8:48 PM
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.


There's close to 400 players in the NBA. If you're 149, not a star but you're certainly not worthless!
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
1/13/2011  8:51 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.


There's close to 400 players in the NBA. If you're 149, not a star but you're certainly not worthless!

no, not worthless... just worth LESS than 148 other guys i guess... please... i can't believe i'm actually debating this with some of y'all... if u feel that Melo can't help this team get better, knock yourselves out.

After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/13/2011  8:52 PM
EwingsGlass wrote:You also have to take into consideration what I will call "curb appeal". We can determine that Melo is only a moderately efficient shooter while being a high volume shooter and other players, like Gallo have higher effective shooting percentages.

But, when deciding whether to trade guys like Gallo (currently, his statistical efficiency makes him an average player)for Melo, you need to consider that more veteran's will want to play with Melo and Amare than Amare, Gallo and Chandler. These are the guys that are willing to accept minimum contracts. So, when trading 3 for 1, you need to consider that the additional 2 players you add this coming offseason may be a player at the MLE (if it still exists) that is willing to accept less to play for a winning team or just veteran minimum contracts of the same sort of players.

Call it a "starphuch" if you will, but when we are facing teams like the Lakers, Dallas, Boston, and Miami, it will be good to have a veteran bench.

I am still voting to get a Melo trade done, but to do it in a manner that preserves assets.


I disagree with that. If I were a veteran, I'd assume I'd never get field goal attempts on that team. And if I were looking to be a role player on a championship contending team, there are teams I'd pick up above NY.
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27500
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
1/13/2011  8:58 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:You also have to take into consideration what I will call "curb appeal". We can determine that Melo is only a moderately efficient shooter while being a high volume shooter and other players, like Gallo have higher effective shooting percentages.

But, when deciding whether to trade guys like Gallo (currently, his statistical efficiency makes him an average player)for Melo, you need to consider that more veteran's will want to play with Melo and Amare than Amare, Gallo and Chandler. These are the guys that are willing to accept minimum contracts. So, when trading 3 for 1, you need to consider that the additional 2 players you add this coming offseason may be a player at the MLE (if it still exists) that is willing to accept less to play for a winning team or just veteran minimum contracts of the same sort of players.

Call it a "starphuch" if you will, but when we are facing teams like the Lakers, Dallas, Boston, and Miami, it will be good to have a veteran bench.

I am still voting to get a Melo trade done, but to do it in a manner that preserves assets.


I disagree with that. If I were a veteran, I'd assume I'd never get field goal attempts on that team. And if I were looking to be a role player on a championship contending team, there are teams I'd pick up above NY.

While you are entitled to your opinion, there are countless examples of veterans taking less money to be part of a contending team. Look at the roster of the Heat, Lakers, Celtics etc... I highly doubt that the Knicks would be unable to convince a few good vets to shore up their roster with a team containing Amar'e, Melo, Felton and others.

You know I gonna spin wit it
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024

1/13/2011  9:03 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.


There's close to 400 players in the NBA. If you're 149, not a star but you're certainly not worthless!

Bonn, you get so lost in minutia. Try this on, there are 30 NBA teams with 5 starters each. That's 150 starters and Gallo is ranked 149. Does that stat fairly represent Gallo's value? If not, why would you apply it to Melo or anyone else?

EwingsGlass
Posts: 27500
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
1/13/2011  9:03 PM
TMS wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.


There's close to 400 players in the NBA. If you're 149, not a star but you're certainly not worthless!

no, not worthless... just worth LESS than 148 other guys i guess... please... i can't believe i'm actually debating this with some of y'all... if u feel that Melo can't help this team get better, knock yourselves out.

By that logic, there's 150 starters in this league. I know that some bench players are better than some teams starters, but on the average, Gallo barely breaks the startng lineup on that chart.

You know I gonna spin wit it
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27500
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
1/13/2011  9:04 PM
BlueSeats wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.


There's close to 400 players in the NBA. If you're 149, not a star but you're certainly not worthless!

Bonn, you get so lost in minutia. Try this on, there are 30 NBA teams with 5 starters each. That's 150 starters and Gallo is ranked 149. Does that stat fairly represent Gallo's value? If not, why would you apply it to Melo or anyone else?

We think alike.

You know I gonna spin wit it
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024

1/13/2011  9:16 PM
EwingsGlass wrote:
BlueSeats wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.


There's close to 400 players in the NBA. If you're 149, not a star but you're certainly not worthless!

Bonn, you get so lost in minutia. Try this on, there are 30 NBA teams with 5 starters each. That's 150 starters and Gallo is ranked 149. Does that stat fairly represent Gallo's value? If not, why would you apply it to Melo or anyone else?

We think alike.

149 out of 150 of us will get it. Lets see where Bonn ranks.

Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/13/2011  9:16 PM
EwingsGlass wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
EwingsGlass wrote:You also have to take into consideration what I will call "curb appeal". We can determine that Melo is only a moderately efficient shooter while being a high volume shooter and other players, like Gallo have higher effective shooting percentages.

But, when deciding whether to trade guys like Gallo (currently, his statistical efficiency makes him an average player)for Melo, you need to consider that more veteran's will want to play with Melo and Amare than Amare, Gallo and Chandler. These are the guys that are willing to accept minimum contracts. So, when trading 3 for 1, you need to consider that the additional 2 players you add this coming offseason may be a player at the MLE (if it still exists) that is willing to accept less to play for a winning team or just veteran minimum contracts of the same sort of players.

Call it a "starphuch" if you will, but when we are facing teams like the Lakers, Dallas, Boston, and Miami, it will be good to have a veteran bench.

I am still voting to get a Melo trade done, but to do it in a manner that preserves assets.


I disagree with that. If I were a veteran, I'd assume I'd never get field goal attempts on that team. And if I were looking to be a role player on a championship contending team, there are teams I'd pick up above NY.

While you are entitled to your opinion, there are countless examples of veterans taking less money to be part of a contending team. Look at the roster of the Heat, Lakers, Celtics etc... I highly doubt that the Knicks would be unable to convince a few good vets to shore up their roster with a team containing Amar'e, Melo, Felton and others.


I think you misunderstood me. Veterans undoubtedly take pay cuts to play for winning teams sometimes. I simply argued that we wouldn't be one of those teams.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/13/2011  9:22 PM
BlueSeats wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
TMS wrote:
martin wrote:
TMS wrote:
Andrew wrote:While the statistic is not the end all for determining a players worth, don't you have to pause and think about why Melo's rating is low compared to the other players listed? Doesn't it lend some validity to the questions people have posted about whether Melo is worth the price that is being asked?

no, it really doesn't... why is Gallinari ranked #149 in that list? is it because he sucks & can't help us win ballgames? we should trade him for Zach Randolph so we can win more games, is that it?

your response to Andrew's is so out of context it doesn't make sense. what does gallo and Randolph have to do with taking pause about reading melo's stats and his price of what is being asked?

because it proves how worthless this chart really is in determining a player's value... why would you take pause to consider Melo's value based on this useless chart & not do the same for the players i mentioned? or any other player on this list for that matter? using this logic, Gallo's #149 ranking would make him pretty much worthless as an NBA player.


There's close to 400 players in the NBA. If you're 149, not a star but you're certainly not worthless!

Bonn, you get so lost in minutia. Try this on, there are 30 NBA teams with 5 starters each. That's 150 starters and Gallo is ranked 149. Does that stat fairly represent Gallo's value? If not, why would you apply it to Melo or anyone else?

Why would you ask a lost person what their opinion is? I wouldn't go to a lost person for directions to the mall!

Gallo is significantly below average for a starter in the NBA though. Does he rebound well? No. Does he create shots for his teammates well? If so, I see no statistical evidence of it. Does he block shots well? No. Does he get a good number of steals? No. The only two things he does better than the average starter are shoot from the perimeter and draw fouls. Although he has good skills in those two areas, he only utilizes those skills well enough to put up 15 PPG.

weird stat article on Melo WSJ

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy