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

Jose Calderon's Offensive Boost
Author Thread
jrodmc
Posts: 32927
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 11/24/2004
Member: #805
USA
8/29/2014  8:33 AM
yellowboy90 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:^Yes

Kidd was the coach on both ends. Woodson just stood there and chewed his gum


That leaves no room for any other changes to have impacted our win total - Felton deteriorating, JR playing much worse, other guys aging, losing Copeland, Kurt, Sheed, and the league's best 3 point shooter. K-Mart played very well too. Kidd was wonderful but you guys are seriously overestimating how much any one player contributes. There just aren't enough games decided by 1, 2, or 3 points. These players that Kidd was "coaching," maybe that helped a little but it's not like they were shooting 10% better with him on than off the court.

Your right, it was more than just kidd, but when you said jose will only net us 3 more wins, you sounded crazy. Jose is just one part of the upgrade and I don't equate winning to just talent, the breakdown should always be

Talent/balance = 25%
Culture/Coaching = 25%
health = 50%

If all those ducks are in order, your ready to contend for a championship.


Well my predictions are much closer to mainstream than yours among American sportswriters. Maybe you aren't in a position to judge craziness.
You're completely ignoring the limitations of every player. Our new PG and C regularly combine for an on-off +/- of about -10. You want to say these guys are giving us ten more wins a game? Really?
I'm probably drinking Kool-aid when I say a net increase of 3 to 4. It's possible that any upgrade from Calderon is entirely outweighed by the Tyson to Dalembert downgrade.

Down grade from Tyson, in a different system maybe, in this system he would be a liability. You see in the triangle bigs need to either be able to shoot face up, or have good post moves, Tyson has nothing, all he does is dunk and tap balls out for extra possessions.

You said earlier that players were not playing up to their potential for whatever reason, (mostly health)coaching, system. Take the same +/- and use it for a players value when healthy and in a different system.

If a guys knee is hurting him and he shoots 20% because he has no lift, am i suppose to believe he'll shoot 20% when fully healthy.


You realize his replacement is Dalembert, right?


Well they were pretty comparable last year but Tyson may go back to his old self or Tyson could be breaking down who knows.

Sam does some good things but there seems to be something that coaches do not like about him because every stop he has made there has been rumblings about his game.

I say the inclusion of Cole will nullify the loss of Tyson. The rim protection between Cole and Dal should be enough to counter even old Tyson.

+1, especially since Cole and Dal don't seem to have, in no apparent order:
The Flu
Personal Problems (although Cole's inteview on Posting and Toasting about ham, is rather concerning )
Angry young man with a chip syndrome
The apparent need for taking lessons in offense at the Landry Fields Invitational Parabola Camp.

AUTOADVERT
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/29/2014  8:34 AM
yellowboy90 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:^Yes

Kidd was the coach on both ends. Woodson just stood there and chewed his gum


That leaves no room for any other changes to have impacted our win total - Felton deteriorating, JR playing much worse, other guys aging, losing Copeland, Kurt, Sheed, and the league's best 3 point shooter. K-Mart played very well too. Kidd was wonderful but you guys are seriously overestimating how much any one player contributes. There just aren't enough games decided by 1, 2, or 3 points. These players that Kidd was "coaching," maybe that helped a little but it's not like they were shooting 10% better with him on than off the court.

Your right, it was more than just kidd, but when you said jose will only net us 3 more wins, you sounded crazy. Jose is just one part of the upgrade and I don't equate winning to just talent, the breakdown should always be

Talent/balance = 25%
Culture/Coaching = 25%
health = 50%

If all those ducks are in order, your ready to contend for a championship.


Well my predictions are much closer to mainstream than yours among American sportswriters. Maybe you aren't in a position to judge craziness.
You're completely ignoring the limitations of every player. Our new PG and C regularly combine for an on-off +/- of about -10. You want to say these guys are giving us ten more wins a game? Really?
I'm probably drinking Kool-aid when I say a net increase of 3 to 4. It's possible that any upgrade from Calderon is entirely outweighed by the Tyson to Dalembert downgrade.

Down grade from Tyson, in a different system maybe, in this system he would be a liability. You see in the triangle bigs need to either be able to shoot face up, or have good post moves, Tyson has nothing, all he does is dunk and tap balls out for extra possessions.

You said earlier that players were not playing up to their potential for whatever reason, (mostly health)coaching, system. Take the same +/- and use it for a players value when healthy and in a different system.

If a guys knee is hurting him and he shoots 20% because he has no lift, am i suppose to believe he'll shoot 20% when fully healthy.


You realize his replacement is Dalembert, right?


Well they were pretty comparable last year but Tyson may go back to his old self or Tyson could be breaking down who knows.

Sam does some good things but there seems to be something that coaches do not like about him because every stop he has made there has been rumblings about his game.

I say the inclusion of Cole will nullify the loss of Tyson. The rim protection between Cole and Dal should be enough to counter even old Tyson.


Some of the stats were comparable but every year Sam's on/off #s are bad, probably reflecting the weaknesses in his game that cause him to be called a "low IQ" player and cause teams to dump him quickly.
F500ONE
Posts: 23899
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/28/2014
Member: #5844

8/29/2014  12:16 PM    LAST EDITED: 8/29/2014  12:17 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
yellowboy90 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:^Yes

Kidd was the coach on both ends. Woodson just stood there and chewed his gum


That leaves no room for any other changes to have impacted our win total - Felton deteriorating, JR playing much worse, other guys aging, losing Copeland, Kurt, Sheed, and the league's best 3 point shooter. K-Mart played very well too. Kidd was wonderful but you guys are seriously overestimating how much any one player contributes. There just aren't enough games decided by 1, 2, or 3 points. These players that Kidd was "coaching," maybe that helped a little but it's not like they were shooting 10% better with him on than off the court.

Your right, it was more than just kidd, but when you said jose will only net us 3 more wins, you sounded crazy. Jose is just one part of the upgrade and I don't equate winning to just talent, the breakdown should always be

Talent/balance = 25%
Culture/Coaching = 25%
health = 50%

If all those ducks are in order, your ready to contend for a championship.


Well my predictions are much closer to mainstream than yours among American sportswriters. Maybe you aren't in a position to judge craziness.
You're completely ignoring the limitations of every player. Our new PG and C regularly combine for an on-off +/- of about -10. You want to say these guys are giving us ten more wins a game? Really?
I'm probably drinking Kool-aid when I say a net increase of 3 to 4. It's possible that any upgrade from Calderon is entirely outweighed by the Tyson to Dalembert downgrade.

Down grade from Tyson, in a different system maybe, in this system he would be a liability. You see in the triangle bigs need to either be able to shoot face up, or have good post moves, Tyson has nothing, all he does is dunk and tap balls out for extra possessions.

You said earlier that players were not playing up to their potential for whatever reason, (mostly health)coaching, system. Take the same +/- and use it for a players value when healthy and in a different system.

If a guys knee is hurting him and he shoots 20% because he has no lift, am i suppose to believe he'll shoot 20% when fully healthy.


You realize his replacement is Dalembert, right?


Well they were pretty comparable last year but Tyson may go back to his old self or Tyson could be breaking down who knows.

Sam does some good things but there seems to be something that coaches do not like about him because every stop he has made there has been rumblings about his game.

I say the inclusion of Cole will nullify the loss of Tyson. The rim protection between Cole and Dal should be enough to counter even old Tyson.


Some of the stats were comparable but every year Sam's on/off #s are bad, probably reflecting the weaknesses in his game that cause him to be called a "low IQ" player and cause teams to dump him quickly.

When journeymen stop here

They become master craftsmen


When they leave, they go all the way back to being

Apprentices again, those are the rules


You might want to give yourself a refresher course on this

knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
8/29/2014  12:17 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
yellowboy90 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
knicks1248 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:^Yes

Kidd was the coach on both ends. Woodson just stood there and chewed his gum


That leaves no room for any other changes to have impacted our win total - Felton deteriorating, JR playing much worse, other guys aging, losing Copeland, Kurt, Sheed, and the league's best 3 point shooter. K-Mart played very well too. Kidd was wonderful but you guys are seriously overestimating how much any one player contributes. There just aren't enough games decided by 1, 2, or 3 points. These players that Kidd was "coaching," maybe that helped a little but it's not like they were shooting 10% better with him on than off the court.

Your right, it was more than just kidd, but when you said jose will only net us 3 more wins, you sounded crazy. Jose is just one part of the upgrade and I don't equate winning to just talent, the breakdown should always be

Talent/balance = 25%
Culture/Coaching = 25%
health = 50%

If all those ducks are in order, your ready to contend for a championship.


Well my predictions are much closer to mainstream than yours among American sportswriters. Maybe you aren't in a position to judge craziness.
You're completely ignoring the limitations of every player. Our new PG and C regularly combine for an on-off +/- of about -10. You want to say these guys are giving us ten more wins a game? Really?
I'm probably drinking Kool-aid when I say a net increase of 3 to 4. It's possible that any upgrade from Calderon is entirely outweighed by the Tyson to Dalembert downgrade.

Down grade from Tyson, in a different system maybe, in this system he would be a liability. You see in the triangle bigs need to either be able to shoot face up, or have good post moves, Tyson has nothing, all he does is dunk and tap balls out for extra possessions.

You said earlier that players were not playing up to their potential for whatever reason, (mostly health)coaching, system. Take the same +/- and use it for a players value when healthy and in a different system.

If a guys knee is hurting him and he shoots 20% because he has no lift, am i suppose to believe he'll shoot 20% when fully healthy.


You realize his replacement is Dalembert, right?


Well they were pretty comparable last year but Tyson may go back to his old self or Tyson could be breaking down who knows.

Sam does some good things but there seems to be something that coaches do not like about him because every stop he has made there has been rumblings about his game.

I say the inclusion of Cole will nullify the loss of Tyson. The rim protection between Cole and Dal should be enough to counter even old Tyson.


Some of the stats were comparable but every year Sam's on/off #s are bad, probably reflecting the weaknesses in his game that cause him to be called a "low IQ" player and cause teams to dump him quickly.

Were not just relying on Sam, he's a 15 to 20 minute a night player, we're playing the positon by commitie (Amare, Smith, Bargi, sam) if we had tyson, he would be a 25 to 32 minute player, and he can't play no other position, that is as one demenssional on offense as any player i have ever seen.

ES
VDesai
Posts: 36583
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
9/2/2014  2:04 PM
Very few players in the NBA are capable of putting up an assist to turnover ratio of 4 to 1 or better. I think Calderon makes us better simply by allowing us to save 2-3 possessions per game and creating 1 or 2 more easy baskets. Add to that if he shoots at that 45% 3 clip, he's scoring more too. When your baseline is Felton, its easy to imagine a player that's 30% better accross the board on the offensive side.

I think the other underrated addition is Larkin. Larkin has the ability to create turnovers and change the pace of the game with quickness/speed. He's gonna be a great contrast to Calderon and make us a harder team to defend.

Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
9/2/2014  4:27 PM    LAST EDITED: 9/2/2014  4:29 PM
Save 2 to 3 possessions? Are you talking about turnovers? He averages about 0.5 turnovers per 36 lower than Felton. He might save us one turnover every two to three games. Career-wise, he averages about 1.7 more assists per 36 than Felton though his per 36 # was actually lower than Felton's last year. There's a bigger difference in individual shooting. They actually both averaged 10.9 shots per 36 last year but Calderon made 0.7 more shots than Felton. My guess is that an offense with Calderon instead of Felton scores about 2 more points per game on average and gives up maybe 0.5 more.
Then there's the issue of how much of a downgrade it is replacing Tyson in a contract year with Aldrich and Dalembert, though.
F500ONE
Posts: 23899
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/28/2014
Member: #5844

9/2/2014  6:32 PM    LAST EDITED: 9/2/2014  6:33 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:Save 2 to 3 possessions? Are you talking about turnovers? He averages about 0.5 turnovers per 36 lower than Felton. He might save us one turnover every two to three games. Career-wise, he averages about 1.7 more assists per 36 than Felton though his per 36 # was actually lower than Felton's last year. There's a bigger difference in individual shooting. They actually both averaged 10.9 shots per 36 last year but Calderon made 0.7 more shots than Felton. My guess is that an offense with Calderon instead of Felton scores about 2 more points per game on average and gives up maybe 0.5 more.
Then there's the issue of how much of a downgrade it is replacing Tyson in a contract year with Aldrich and Dalembert, though.

I didn't know Tyson received a contract 4yrs $55mil

This proved to be the richest offer he received if true


Not happy to hear he never really felt comfortable here

It showed in many of his performances


I wonder if Tyson asked out


DALLAS – Tyson Chandler acknowledged that a "happy feeling’’ came over him this past June when he heard he was headed back to play for the Dallas Mavericks.

The Mavs acquired Raymond Felton and Chandler from the New York Knicks on June 25 for Jose Calderon, Samuel Dalembert, Shane Larkin, Wayne Ellington and a pair of 2014 second-round draft picks. It was a move which helped the Mavs hop right back into the NBA championship conversation.

Chandler was the Mavs’ starting center when they captured their only NBA title in 2011. At the time, he was the team’s emotional leader on and off the court and he helped clean up whatever defensive deficiencies his perimeter teammates encountered.

But when the 7-1 Chandler and the Mavs couldn’t agree on a new contract when he became a free agent following the 2011-’11 season, Chandler was eventually traded to the New York Knicks on Dec. 9, 2011 in a three-team trade which ultimately netted him a four-year, $55 million contract.

However, despite playing three seasons for the Knicks, Chandler’s heart apparently was always back in Dallas. Even though he only played just one season for the Mavs.

"I enjoyed my entire time with the Mavericks and it was a sad process for me and my family leaving Dallas, especially after the amazing experience and amazing run that we had,’’ Chandler said. As I left I told those guys, ‘You know, I love you and I’ll love you forever and I love everything you have done for me and did for me.’

"I understand the (NBA) business and I guess it wasn’t meant for me. But I guess it is meant for me to be back now.’’


http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/09/01/6083015/tyson-chandlers-heart-was-always.html?storylink=addthis&rh=1

RonRon
Posts: 25531
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/22/2002
Member: #246
9/2/2014  7:44 PM    LAST EDITED: 9/2/2014  7:46 PM
VDesai wrote:Very few players in the NBA are capable of putting up an assist to turnover ratio of 4 to 1 or better. I think Calderon makes us better simply by allowing us to save 2-3 possessions per game and creating 1 or 2 more easy baskets. Add to that if he shoots at that 45% 3 clip, he's scoring more too. When your baseline is Felton, its easy to imagine a player that's 30% better accross the board on the offensive side.

I think the other underrated addition is Larkin. Larkin has the ability to create turnovers and change the pace of the game with quickness/speed. He's gonna be a great contrast to Calderon and make us a harder team to defend.

While I think you need a SG that has the ability to penetrate/create/facilitate/ and handle the ball, as well as hit the wide open 3pters OFF THE BALL
The hard part is they must be above average defenders since Calderon and then hopefully CA is our weaknest links *not dig at CA, saying we need to be very talented DEFENSIVELY if we are going to be CONTENDERS"
A player like Lance Stepehnson would be ideal

While Wroten could also play the change of pace PG and some SG at times, maybe a 3 way timeshare
I agree about Larkin, I think he can ball, however, The Triangle never seemed attracted to smaller PG's that use their quickness/ability to penetrate/finish since they use the POST UP and movement on/off the ball to initiate the OFFENSE
I get the feeling that Phil Jackson would eventually look to dump Larkin and continue to add as many assets as possible while raising their value prior to the deadline up to draft day, making possible moves
While offering a vet min type contract to a Darrius Morris type of player who played with Kobe/Gasol along with some other players within PHil Jackson's regime
Even when Dantoni was there, they were running the triangle regardless, just not nearly as much, so Morris would make cents

Calderon
Wroten
Morris

not a bad 3 guard lineup that all 3 players could play SG, though both Wroten and Morris must continue to develop their 3pt shot *which they have been doing*
so you can add a PG, SG, SG/SF while preserving roster spots, with much choices to choose from

nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
9/2/2014  10:22 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:Save 2 to 3 possessions? Are you talking about turnovers? He averages about 0.5 turnovers per 36 lower than Felton. He might save us one turnover every two to three games. Career-wise, he averages about 1.7 more assists per 36 than Felton though his per 36 # was actually lower than Felton's last year. There's a bigger difference in individual shooting. They actually both averaged 10.9 shots per 36 last year but Calderon made 0.7 more shots than Felton. My guess is that an offense with Calderon instead of Felton scores about 2 more points per game on average and gives up maybe 0.5 more.
Then there's the issue of how much of a downgrade it is replacing Tyson in a contract year with Aldrich and Dalembert, though.

It's going to be interesting to see how the team does with this group of lesser centers in place of Tyson. The scheme Fish decides to implement will be interesting to see as well. It's hard to really gauge how effective this group will be not knowing more info.
Jose Calderon's Offensive Boost

©2001-2012 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