Phil on Analytics:

Q: I hear you, but there's still this puzzling dynamic that's out there relating to you. For all the success you had, guys who worked for you don't always have the red carpet rolled out like you might think when it comes to getting jobs.

A: No. Well, the game has moved on to another level. Three-point shooting has become like the (pauses). Really the analytics people have taken it to the point of saying, 'The worst shot in the game is a 20-foot jumper, a two-point jumper that's 20 (feet).' And the best shot might be the corner three. Efficiency, OERs (offensive efficiency ratings), all these efficiency ratings are pointing to how many points per possession you generate from certain types of shots. ... But there's so much more to the game.

Q: But at your panel (at the Sloan Conference), you seemed to play it down the middle and seemed pretty receptive to all of this stuff.

A: I like the analytics. We were always on the forefront of that. I'm not going to go after that. I think that it's a really important movement. I think a lot of owners have turned the game, the general managers' jobs, over to people who are more analytic-minded than basketball hierarchy or guys who have been around the league. I mean it seems to be the pattern, and I think they speak their language because a lot of these guys are financial guys. You give them statistics — this stock has done such and such over the past three months, and this is up. This is a language that they can talk, and a statistical language that's pretty good. So I can understand that penchant. I do think that it's still about that being able to look a guy in the eyes and kind of understand that this one is going to go in the fox hole with you and this guy is going to be one of the guys who's on board with what we're doing. Yeah, he's going to be on the line when it comes to that time that's the challenge. And then the rest of the stuff kind of falls in together.

So I know that the penchant for following a lot of the things that are happening in the league is that as humans we kind of run with the pack a lot. I've been a Maverick, and that's just who I am. But I certainly follow what's going on and make a decision about what can I use and what's efficient for me and what's good for me.

You know, the offense that I instituted is not what the NBA was doing in the late '80s and early '90s, and the game has moved on by that and a lot of people like to point at the Triangle as antiquated and (say) it works well in women's basketball etc. etc. But it takes a lot of skill. And to coach skill, you have to spend a lot of time teaching skills.

The Knicks as an organization on Analytics:

But here’s the dirty little secret about the Knicks: They’re not dumb.

There are a lot of smart basketball minds who work for the team, even some that owner James Dolan hasn’t yet banished at awkward times for unclear reasons. They have mostly drafted well in the bottom half of the first round, even dating to the tenure of He Who Shall Not Be Named. They were among the first half-dozen teams to enter into a single-affiliation arrangement in the D-League, and they’ll own their own team in White Plains, N.Y., starting next season. They were an early adopter of the SportVU data-tracking camera system, and they have smart people who want to use it in smart ways. They check off a lot of the clichéd “smart team” boxes we use to lionize the Spurs and Thunder. They gave Jeremy Lin his NBA chance. There is an infrastructure here.

They have undermined that infrastructure with panicked decision-making that has mostly prioritized immediate winning and the fattening up of Creative Artists Agency clients at the expense of everything else. They are like a person who makes a lot of smart investment decisions, cashes out, and spends everything on delicious cookies.

Steve Mills:

“What people don’t realize is that Steve has always been a basketball guy,” said Craig Robinson, the men’s basketball coach at Oregon State and a former teammate of his at Princeton. “There’s no question in my mind that he knows the game, knows how to evaluate talent and knows how to network.”

Mills has his own ideas, of course. To start, he expressed a desire to incorporate more analytics into the fabric of the team. He said he believes in the power of numbers, citing the influence of Dean Oliver’s seminal book on the topic, “Basketball on Paper: Rules and Tools for Performance Analysis.”

Mills said he had been visiting last week with Allan Houston, the Knicks’ assistant general manager, when he noticed a copy of the book in Houston’s office. Seeing it reminded Mills that he had given copies to members of his staff in his first stint at the Garden. In his new role, Mills said he hoped to use advanced metrics to look at matters like lineup combinations, the length of player contracts and the efficacy of the scouting department.

Mills said much of his understanding of the game dated to his time at Princeton, where the culture of the basketball team had required an adjustment. Accustomed to scoring 20 points a game as a high school guard on Long Island, Mills soon realized that Coach Pete Carril’s methodical offense meant that no individual would shine above the others. The system worked, though, and that was paramount.

Mark Warkentien:

Before the previous decade, much of basketball analytics focused on player valuation metrics -- numbers that essentially ranked players from best to worst. The motivation for this was simple: Players are hugely important in basketball. My old boss in Denver, Mark Warkentien, used to talk about how "I'll give you the best coach along with a bunch of guys who play hard and play together, but I'll take LeBron James, thank you." Having a metric that summarizes a player's value in one number has been viewed as the Holy Grail, theoretically allowing decisions about personnel to be easy.

"For years, Warkentien has evaluated players with an approach he calls 'eyes-ears-numbers.'" -- Benjamin Hochman, Oct. 12, 2009

The problem with player value metrics is that there is little to validate them, meaning that no metric has established itself as clearly the best. Metrics couldn't even be fairly compared. As each new metric has been developed, it has served mostly to complement traditional scouting, a way to reality check when subjective opinions formed by watching and hearing about players were going too far astray.

Player value metrics are not the only basketball analytics, though. It was 10 years ago this week that my book "Basketball on Paper" was released. That book focused on teams first and players second. It broke down the game, dividing points into efficiency and pace, with a focus on how teams and individuals could be efficient. The Four Factors break down efficiency into shooting efficiency, rebounding percentage, turnovers per possession and getting to the line. Partly because of this perspective, there has been a more broad emphasis on shooting (and defending) layups and 3-point shots, which have the highest effective field goal percentage of any shots on the floor. This did not require my book, but it highlights the book's approach of using analysis of readily available data -- box scores and shot charts -- to suggest simple ways to influence the game.

CrushAlot wrote:Great stuff. Thanks Nix

I really hope for all of our sakes that Dolan will stay away like he did with the Rangers and just let this staff do it's job from now on.

dk7th wrote:thanks you just confirmed my deepest concern, which is that at the end of the day, jackson is more an "executive by feel" type of guy.

"I like the analytics. We were always on the forefront of that. I'm not going to go after that. I think that it's a really important movement. I think a lot of owners have turned the game, the general managers' jobs, over to people who are more analytic-minded than basketball hierarchy or guys who have been around the league. I mean it seems to be the pattern, and I think they speak their language because a lot of these guys are financial guys. You give them statistics — this stock has done such and such over the past three months, and this is up. This is a language that they can talk, and a statistical language that's pretty good. So I can understand that penchant. I do think that it's still about that being able to look a guy in the eyes and kind of understand that this one is going to go in the fox hole with you and this guy is going to be one of the guys who's on board with what we're doing. Yeah, he's going to be on the line when it comes to that time that's the challenge. And then the rest of the stuff kind of falls in together."

knicks are in deep deep trouble. has phil ever looked into melo's eyes?

I just don't see how you're take has any validity. You would have us believe that Phil is a fool and doesn't know enough about how to make a sound basketball decision. Somehow he's going to ignore all that his staff has done, ignore the consensus in the room about who the best player is and instead of taking the best possible player he'll take the wrong guy. I don't see that happening. I think that's just being too cynical.

nixluva wrote:

dk7th wrote:thanks you just confirmed my deepest concern, which is that at the end of the day, jackson is more an "executive by feel" type of guy.

"I like the analytics. We were always on the forefront of that. I'm not going to go after that. I think that it's a really important movement. I think a lot of owners have turned the game, the general managers' jobs, over to people who are more analytic-minded than basketball hierarchy or guys who have been around the league. I mean it seems to be the pattern, and I think they speak their language because a lot of these guys are financial guys. You give them statistics — this stock has done such and such over the past three months, and this is up. This is a language that they can talk, and a statistical language that's pretty good. So I can understand that penchant. I do think that it's still about that being able to look a guy in the eyes and kind of understand that this one is going to go in the fox hole with you and this guy is going to be one of the guys who's on board with what we're doing. Yeah, he's going to be on the line when it comes to that time that's the challenge. And then the rest of the stuff kind of falls in together."

knicks are in deep deep trouble. has phil ever looked into melo's eyes?

You do realize that it's the Analytics guys and scouts who will be providing Phil with the players and not Phil who will be doing all the scouting etc? That means that he'll be given all the info he needs about the best players and after that he'll make the final decision taking not only the metrics into account but also the intangible aspects that his great instincts and experience will bring into play. It's not this negative that you're trying to make it out to be. How can someone make such a negative evaluation of a man who has clearly been in the mix on decades of winning teams?

I just don't see how you're take has any validity. You would have us believe that Phil is a fool and doesn't know enough about how to make a sound basketball decision. Somehow he's going to ignore all that his staff has done, ignore the consensus in the room about who the best player is and instead of taking the best possible player he'll take the wrong guy. I don't see that happening. I think that's just being too cynical.

They already tried this

Hence he pulled the trigger on the Calderon deal

I think Phil may have learned some lessons here

Eye Test after analytics should have told Phil stay away

Phil didn't do as you stated above thus far

He'll probably go eye test first, then gather analytics

Then go back to eye test, then do some comparisons of like talents

Phil made 2 massive gaffing decisions using probably both

Separate of each other

What you have to stop Peddling is that Phil will get it all right because he's Phil

It's okay to take a viewpoint of reserving judgement and being cautious

Stop with the Go-Go's "Head Over Heels" nonstop posting no matter what's taking place

F500ONE wrote:

nixluva wrote:

dk7th wrote:thanks you just confirmed my deepest concern, which is that at the end of the day, jackson is more an "executive by feel" type of guy.

"I like the analytics. We were always on the forefront of that. I'm not going to go after that. I think that it's a really important movement. I think a lot of owners have turned the game, the general managers' jobs, over to people who are more analytic-minded than basketball hierarchy or guys who have been around the league. I mean it seems to be the pattern, and I think they speak their language because a lot of these guys are financial guys. You give them statistics — this stock has done such and such over the past three months, and this is up. This is a language that they can talk, and a statistical language that's pretty good. So I can understand that penchant. I do think that it's still about that being able to look a guy in the eyes and kind of understand that this one is going to go in the fox hole with you and this guy is going to be one of the guys who's on board with what we're doing. Yeah, he's going to be on the line when it comes to that time that's the challenge. And then the rest of the stuff kind of falls in together."

knicks are in deep deep trouble. has phil ever looked into melo's eyes?

You do realize that it's the Analytics guys and scouts who will be providing Phil with the players and not Phil who will be doing all the scouting etc? That means that he'll be given all the info he needs about the best players and after that he'll make the final decision taking not only the metrics into account but also the intangible aspects that his great instincts and experience will bring into play. It's not this negative that you're trying to make it out to be. How can someone make such a negative evaluation of a man who has clearly been in the mix on decades of winning teams?

I just don't see how you're take has any validity. You would have us believe that Phil is a fool and doesn't know enough about how to make a sound basketball decision. Somehow he's going to ignore all that his staff has done, ignore the consensus in the room about who the best player is and instead of taking the best possible player he'll take the wrong guy. I don't see that happening. I think that's just being too cynical.

They already tried this

Hence he pulled the trigger on the Calderon deal

I think Phil may have learned some lessons here

Eye Test after analytics should have told Phil stay away

Phil didn't do as you stated above thus far

He'll probably go eye test first, then gather analytics

Then go back to eye test, then do some comparisons of like talents

Phil made 2 massive gaffing decisions using probably both

Separate of each other

What you have to stop Peddling is that Phil will get it all right because he's Phil

It's okay to take a viewpoint of reserving judgement and being cautious

Stop with the Go-Go's "Head Over Heels" nonstop posting no matter what's taking place

We have a very capable braintrust and we have to allow them a chance to actually work. It's gonna take time to know what Phil's actual decisions will be but it's just wrong to assume he'll make bad decisions. This franchise's problem hasn't been identifying talent or finding guys in the weeds. It's been the decisions Dolan has made when he interferes with the work his scouting staff and GM have been doing.

F500ONE wrote:

nixluva wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

nixluva wrote:

dk7th wrote:thanks you just confirmed my deepest concern, which is that at the end of the day, jackson is more an "executive by feel" type of guy.

"I like the analytics. We were always on the forefront of that. I'm not going to go after that. I think that it's a really important movement. I think a lot of owners have turned the game, the general managers' jobs, over to people who are more analytic-minded than basketball hierarchy or guys who have been around the league. I mean it seems to be the pattern, and I think they speak their language because a lot of these guys are financial guys. You give them statistics — this stock has done such and such over the past three months, and this is up. This is a language that they can talk, and a statistical language that's pretty good. So I can understand that penchant. I do think that it's still about that being able to look a guy in the eyes and kind of understand that this one is going to go in the fox hole with you and this guy is going to be one of the guys who's on board with what we're doing. Yeah, he's going to be on the line when it comes to that time that's the challenge. And then the rest of the stuff kind of falls in together."

knicks are in deep deep trouble. has phil ever looked into melo's eyes?

You do realize that it's the Analytics guys and scouts who will be providing Phil with the players and not Phil who will be doing all the scouting etc? That means that he'll be given all the info he needs about the best players and after that he'll make the final decision taking not only the metrics into account but also the intangible aspects that his great instincts and experience will bring into play. It's not this negative that you're trying to make it out to be. How can someone make such a negative evaluation of a man who has clearly been in the mix on decades of winning teams?

I just don't see how you're take has any validity. You would have us believe that Phil is a fool and doesn't know enough about how to make a sound basketball decision. Somehow he's going to ignore all that his staff has done, ignore the consensus in the room about who the best player is and instead of taking the best possible player he'll take the wrong guy. I don't see that happening. I think that's just being too cynical.

They already tried this

Hence he pulled the trigger on the Calderon deal

I think Phil may have learned some lessons here

Eye Test after analytics should have told Phil stay away

Phil didn't do as you stated above thus far

He'll probably go eye test first, then gather analytics

Then go back to eye test, then do some comparisons of like talents

Phil made 2 massive gaffing decisions using probably both

Separate of each other

What you have to stop Peddling is that Phil will get it all right because he's Phil

It's okay to take a viewpoint of reserving judgement and being cautious

Stop with the Go-Go's "Head Over Heels" nonstop posting no matter what's taking place

I've never said that Phil is infallible. In fact no GM is perfect and they all have their bad moves. Here's the thing, everyone was so sure that the Knicks weren't up on the latest in Analytics and somehow we were doomed because we weren't thinking like other top franchises. When I show that this view is incorrect now you guys are basically making up crap that you have no way of proving.

We have a very capable braintrust and we have to allow them a chance to actually work. It's gonna take time to know what Phil's actual decisions will be but it's just wrong to assume he'll make bad decisions. This franchise's problem hasn't been identifying talent or finding guys in the weeds. It's been the decisions Dolan has made when he interferes with the work his scouting staff and GM have been doing.

I will assume until he stops making series of bad decisions

And you're wrong we have been wrong in identifying the proper talent

Every team finds some talent here and there

But the great teams of braintrust find the right talent that sticks and excels above all other talent

Phil just got started and you already have him "making a series of bad decisions"?

I never said that the Knicks have identified the "proper talent" as in team building. You're making a different argument, which is what you always do. No one said anything about team building. This was just about a scouting staff that has been able to find talent even without any picks or with very low picks. Also we know that every team has some degree of luck finding talent outside of the draft or with low picks. That again wasn't the argument and doesn't take away from the Knicks having success doing it. Perhaps now with Phil in charge there will be a more cohesive philosophy that can guide the search for players so that they do Identify the proper talent for this team.

The point of the thread was to expose the truth about the franchise and Phil in terms of how they look for talent. Turns out the Knicks are in fact very much in step with the league in regards to analytics. None of you guys are commenting on that but rather finding some other negative angle to bring up just to continue your argument.

F500ONE wrote:

nixluva wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

nixluva wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

nixluva wrote:

dk7th wrote:thanks you just confirmed my deepest concern, which is that at the end of the day, jackson is more an "executive by feel" type of guy.

"I like the analytics. We were always on the forefront of that. I'm not going to go after that. I think that it's a really important movement. I think a lot of owners have turned the game, the general managers' jobs, over to people who are more analytic-minded than basketball hierarchy or guys who have been around the league. I mean it seems to be the pattern, and I think they speak their language because a lot of these guys are financial guys. You give them statistics — this stock has done such and such over the past three months, and this is up. This is a language that they can talk, and a statistical language that's pretty good. So I can understand that penchant. I do think that it's still about that being able to look a guy in the eyes and kind of understand that this one is going to go in the fox hole with you and this guy is going to be one of the guys who's on board with what we're doing. Yeah, he's going to be on the line when it comes to that time that's the challenge. And then the rest of the stuff kind of falls in together."

knicks are in deep deep trouble. has phil ever looked into melo's eyes?

You do realize that it's the Analytics guys and scouts who will be providing Phil with the players and not Phil who will be doing all the scouting etc? That means that he'll be given all the info he needs about the best players and after that he'll make the final decision taking not only the metrics into account but also the intangible aspects that his great instincts and experience will bring into play. It's not this negative that you're trying to make it out to be. How can someone make such a negative evaluation of a man who has clearly been in the mix on decades of winning teams?

I just don't see how you're take has any validity. You would have us believe that Phil is a fool and doesn't know enough about how to make a sound basketball decision. Somehow he's going to ignore all that his staff has done, ignore the consensus in the room about who the best player is and instead of taking the best possible player he'll take the wrong guy. I don't see that happening. I think that's just being too cynical.

They already tried this

Hence he pulled the trigger on the Calderon deal

I think Phil may have learned some lessons here

Eye Test after analytics should have told Phil stay away

Phil didn't do as you stated above thus far

He'll probably go eye test first, then gather analytics

Then go back to eye test, then do some comparisons of like talents

Phil made 2 massive gaffing decisions using probably both

Separate of each other

What you have to stop Peddling is that Phil will get it all right because he's Phil

It's okay to take a viewpoint of reserving judgement and being cautious

Stop with the Go-Go's "Head Over Heels" nonstop posting no matter what's taking place

I've never said that Phil is infallible. In fact no GM is perfect and they all have their bad moves. Here's the thing, everyone was so sure that the Knicks weren't up on the latest in Analytics and somehow we were doomed because we weren't thinking like other top franchises. When I show that this view is incorrect now you guys are basically making up crap that you have no way of proving.

We have a very capable braintrust and we have to allow them a chance to actually work. It's gonna take time to know what Phil's actual decisions will be but it's just wrong to assume he'll make bad decisions. This franchise's problem hasn't been identifying talent or finding guys in the weeds. It's been the decisions Dolan has made when he interferes with the work his scouting staff and GM have been doing.

I will assume until he stops making series of bad decisions

And you're wrong we have been wrong in identifying the proper talent

Every team finds some talent here and there

But the great teams of braintrust find the right talent that sticks and excels above all other talent

Phil just got started and you already have him "making a series of bad decisions"?

I never said that the Knicks have identified the "proper talent" as in team building. You're making a different argument, which is what you always do. No one said anything about team building. This was just about a scouting staff that has been able to find talent even without any picks or with very low picks. Also we know that every team has some degree of luck finding talent outside of the draft or with low picks. That again wasn't the argument and doesn't take away from the Knicks having success doing it. Perhaps now with Phil in charge there will be a more cohesive philosophy that can guide the search for players so that they do Identify the proper talent for this team.

The point of the thread was to expose the truth about the franchise and Phil in terms of how they look for talent. Turns out the Knicks are in fact very much in step with the league in regards to analytics. None of you guys are commenting on that but rather finding some other negative angle to bring up just to continue your argument.

The point of collecting talent doesn't automatically

Garnish a Bouquet of Roses, all teams do this

Minnesota, Utah, Detroit, Philly have identified talented players

But are they the right ones and do they fit

I could care less if we're using analytics or not

I think often times sabermetricians get in the way of logical decisions

I wasn't of the sort to refute we're behind the times

But if those same dorks were the ones telling Phil that Calderon is the goods

Or that Bargnani can be deadly here or there

Then back to the drawing board we go with the proper process to make better informed decisions

yes, logical decisions....

you can't take full advantage of a pass-first point guard in the triangle. it's a bad fit and his facilitating and orchestrating, such as it is, is squandered. and then there's the abominable defense. you'd think that tyson would not be sacrificed for the sake of culture change. another bad decision. how many years did he get signed for? 4?

my view is to seek out defense-first players if no genuine two-way players are available. what is phil jackson doing to that end?

Bonn1997 wrote:I like the color red. I don't want a GM/president who likes the analytics. I want one who has a masterful understanding of them. Phil's moves don't make it seem like he cares much about or thoroughly understands the metrics.

It is a problem. Phil made the classic mistake of only bringing his ego to a gunfight.

It's clear that the rest of the staff is heavily making use of Analytics and they are the ones bringing their scouting reports and info to Phil. Phil isn't scouting all these players in Europe and college himself. You guys are misrepresenting how Phil is likely to be doing things. He's not doing all of that by himself and is properly letting his staff do their jobs. He's in the executive role and will set the overarching Philosophy and direction of the franchise and make the final decisions but his scouting staff is doing all of the research work based on his directives for what the team needs. It's a team process and we'll see how they work together from here on.

We haven't seen the full results yet so it's impossible to fully judge anything. We still have a TON of moves to be made this year. It really could be a lot of change when you think of how many players will have to be replaced. There will need to be a lot of change to fulfill Phil's designs for the team. Complaining about how this roster is failing is understandable but to just rag on Phil's future moves before he's made them is just too much. Let the man at least finish executing his plan first.

nixluva wrote:This thread is the true test of the pessimistic nature of some on this forum. Here it is that guys were calling for the Knicks to make use of Analytics and some assuming the Knicks weren't doing so at all. Then proof is provided that the team does in fact have a strong presence of front office people who are heavily into metrics and such. Still you guys find a way to dismiss and denigrate the team for doing just what you asked that they should do. It's not just one guy but everyone in the organization that are doing this. It's totally hypocritical.

It's clear that the rest of the staff is heavily making use of Analytics and they are the ones bringing their scouting reports and info to Phil. Phil isn't scouting all these players in Europe and college himself. You guys are misrepresenting how Phil is likely to be doing things. He's not doing all of that by himself and is properly letting his staff do their jobs. He's in the executive role and will set the overarching Philosophy and direction of the franchise and make the final decisions but his scouting staff is doing all of the research work based on his directives for what the team needs. It's a team process and we'll see how they work together from here on.

We haven't seen the full results yet so it's impossible to fully judge anything. We still have a TON of moves to be made this year. It really could be a lot of change when you think of how many players will have to be replaced. There will need to be a lot of change to fulfill Phil's designs for the team. Complaining about how this roster is failing is understandable but to just rag on Phil's future moves before he's made them is just too much. Let the man at least finish executing his plan first.

Mainly because he is doing this HIS way. The league has advanced far beyond Phil.