fishmike wrote:EwingsGlass wrote:Sounds about right. A little better than I expected. If you put into words what opposing FG% means, it's pretty clear that it is a function of team defense as much as individual effort. Did Hardaway really change so much as a player that he went from -4.2 DBPM with NY to -1.2 DBPM in Atlanta (before his D league stint?) That 3 point drop is the effect of Team defense. So I'll concede he has the possibility of not being a defensive liability. But the greater likelihood is that his stats back in NY will regress toward where he was before we traded him. This speaks to the concepts of building stronger franchise values before worrying about winning. Establishing a consistent approach to team defense.
I am biased against everyone in the existing management structure and particularly Mills. I'd be looking for the next Theo Epstein of the NBA rather than recycling guys who haven't had the ability to get it done.
Even if I said this price was market for SGs and threw out all my statistical belief that he will regress in NY and pour the Kool Aid on. What was the benefit of forcing the issue by adding trade kickers?
What difference is there in the franchise if I start Lee over Hardaway? Or Dotson? Or Baker?
Do you believe Hardaway is the piece that puts us over the top?
At best you are saying it was market price. There is no value add. This year we were supposed to be shopping in the bargain basement. With coupons. And govt subsidies. Instead we paid price for Air Jordan's on the street that might be knockoffs
the bold is your problem. You cant see Hardaway's positives or potential positives because of your own bias towards the guys that signed him. Kinda makes it tough to discuss no? For you Hardway was player that the Knicks foolishly let go, who blossomed in a different culture and who was having a breakout season. Now since the KNicks signed him he stinks and will most likely regress back to anything negative he showed prior. Probably best to just wait and see
Hold on.
1) Who said I have a problem? If I disagree with establishment or their underwriting its a problem? Don't be totalitarian.
2) You are blindly blessing a contract that has material terms that are outside the scope of market. Poisonous provisions. Can you separate your feelings about the player to fairly evaluate the economics and the metrics behind it? I have repeatedly stated I have nothing against THJ -- I hate the contract not the player. If you scroll back, I said the exact same thing about the no trade clause in the Melo contract. The problem with pointing out problem in Knicks' contracts is that it is too obvious --- its almost all of them (except the Jennings contract). This kind of stuff is easy to rubber stamp as a fan, but for the most valuable sports franchise in the world, you think they could bargain for themselves better. They keep poisoning their contracts with trade kickers and no trade clauses, player options... it is a repeated and demonstrated flaw in contract valuation. They have left themselves no outs. They do it repeatedly. Its in the collective brain trust called "management". I would support them cleaning house.
3) Never said THJ stinks. I said his stats show three years at approximately the same performance followed by one better year -- but that year paints him as an average player. On each statistical level, I have addressed both positives and negatives of his stats. I believe that his advanced stats as compared to other players getting similar contracts have a higher chance of regression than those others. Specifically the question presented was as compared to Otto Porter. That analysis is not dispositive. On a PER basis alone, if Melo gets moved it is relatively easy to see him outperforming his 15.2 PER, mostly because it is skewed by usage. THJ would have a lot of ability to take a lot of shots. But his 15.2 shows him as a marginal value based on PER alone. Thats an average player. Some have argued that it is the 14th highest paid SG, making it acceptable. Paying average price for an average player is not a "good" deal (that is not biased), it is filling a need. I don't see the "need" where you signed a vet to a 4 year 12mm contract a year ago. That makes one of the two wasteful. And, making that signing before moving that other contract ruins your bargaining position. Thats just bad negotiating. The Knicks have tied up 18% of their salary on 1 player that is an average player playing the same position as another contract that is 12% of the their salary cap. 30% of the cap for two marginal players playing the same position. I have nothing against these kinds of players. They are useful. But you sign them last, not first.
4) I also believe we have no need to pay average price for average players today. It does not benefit us. You would have to have high probabilities of him outperforming his 2016/2017 campaign to consider it a "value contract". I am also not the only person saying this. I think in years where it is hard to see the Knicks as "competitive" with the monster teams in Golden State, Cleveland, Boston and Houston, I think taking a value add approach to contracts is necessary. Consolidate and collect assets. Find undervalued players with high chance of progression at low contract prices. The best THJ can ever do here in NY is live up to his contract. Even then, the Knicks cannot trade him. That's bad management. They have put him in a position to fail.
5) Its not my "problem" that I think analytically but can recognize my biases. That said, my bias is substantiated in statistics and facts not prejudice. That just makes it good math. The fact that I recognize it is not a "problem" but should actually validate the analysis. I didn't stop cheering for Allan Houston when he got his contract. That was a bad contract too. I still where Houston's jersey cause he was the penultimate teammate and a role model that I respect and admire. He got PAID. Way too much given his performance and injuries. But that has nothing to do with Houston the player.
6) I wasn't so wrong about Baker last year when nearly everyone argued with me in favor of Sasha Vujacic. I'll mark this one down too. I love Baker's game. But it is not a good contract. If you were going to overpay on the front end, you should have had some team options on the back end. Good player. Dumb contract. Lance Thomas. I said bad player and bad contract. He went 7 for 7 once and everyone got on his jock. He is not a great player. He is a good multifaceted utility player. Does not get a long term contract at $7+mm. Noah, we paid full price for a reclamation contract. Fully guaranteed. That was dumb. Amare, believed in us when no one else did. Paid full price. Fully guaranteed. That was dumb. Melo -we paid full price when he had no other full price offers. That was dumb. Gave a trade kicker. Dumb. Gave a no trade clause. Dumb.
This isn't review in hindsight. I have been saying this all along as the team makes these moves. Its not hating the players. Its just bad contracts. The contracts are not justified. AND IT IS SYSTEMIC.
I have never booed a Knick player and never will. When they put on the jersey they become my guy. But I will reserve the right to question our management style.
7/13/2017 2:19 PM