Derrick Rose to NY

N Y K · Post #3921 » by **N Y K** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 12:07 am

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Dame_Lillard/status/747523306601930752[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/manugoat/status/747523050225143809[/tweet]

AllanHoustonFan · Post #3922 » by **AllanHoustonFan** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 12:20 am

k r i s t a p s wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/Dame_Lillard/status/747523306601930752[/tweet]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/manugoat/status/747523050225143809[/tweet]

Rose is clearly still respected amongst his peers. I'm cautiously optimistic he is gonna "breakthrough" next season.

reub · Post #3923 » by **reub** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 12:36 am

Jose7© wrote:When the stat geeks say rose over Calderon isn't a HUGE upgrade..the stat geeks need to be shunned.

Sorry. Take your saber metrics over there. Way far over there.

This is a great point. These stats are garbage. Talent and system is what matters.

trophywinner · Post #3924 » by **trophywinner** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 12:53 am

rose is posting a career high in ast next season.

StephNYKurry · Post #3925 » by **StephNYKurry** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 1:18 am

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPRG5o7ybmA[/youtube]

:55 in...

19 on the shot clock and he's at the rim after walking past some stools who were feigning resistance.

BernardKing · Post #3926 » by **BernardKing** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 2:46 am

Apologies if it's already been posted

Kendall Gill's prediction for Rose next year:
“Derrick Rose… He will be an All-Star next year.”
http://dailyknicks.com/2016/06/26/new-york-knicks-derrick-rose-game-changer/

TinmanZBoy · Post #3927 » by **TinmanZBoy** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 2:46 am

throughout his coaching career, Phil Jackson was always the lucky bastard... it seems to me he still has the luck as a GM, drafting the Porzingis.... I have a feeling Derrick Rose will break out next season, and Phil will be dubbed a genius again....

Post #3928 » by **Jeff Van Gully** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 2:50 am

StephNYKurry wrote:[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPRG5o7ybmA[/youtube]

:55 in...

19 on the shot clock and he's at the rim after walking past some stools who were feigning resistance.

he almost outran the whole basket. he accelerated like an airplane. crazy.

BBALLER4FR · Post #3929 » by **BBALLER4FR** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 2:50 am

trophywinner wrote:rose is posting a career high in ast next season.

Later Hoiberg commended the team for exploiting Robin Lopez's slow footing.

BernardKing · Post #3930 » by **BernardKing** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 2:59 am

BBALLER4FR wrote:
trophywinner wrote:rose is posting a career high in ast next season.

Later Hoiberg commended the team for exploiting Robin Lopez's slow footing.

thats brook.
robin wouldn't have been beaten down the court like that

BBALLER4FR · Post #3931 » by **BBALLER4FR** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 3:00 am

BernardKing wrote:
BBALLER4FR wrote:
trophywinner wrote:rose is posting a career high in ast next season.

Later Hoiberg commended the team for exploiting Robin Lopez's slow footing.

thats brook.
robin wouldn't have been beaten down the court like that

Shhhh. Don't tell Hoiberg. He doesn't know the difference.

TinmanZBoy · Post #3932 » by **TinmanZBoy** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:56 am

BBALLER4FR wrote:
BernardKing wrote:
BBALLER4FR wrote:
Later Hoiberg commended the team for exploiting Robin Lopez's slow footing.

thats brook.
robin wouldn't have been beaten down the court like that

Shhhh. Don't tell Hoiberg. He doesn't know the difference.

don't blame him, those twins are so hard to differentiate

DowNY · Post #3933 » by **DowNY** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 8:34 am

TinmanZBoy wrote:
BBALLER4FR wrote:
BernardKing wrote:
thats brook.
robin wouldn't have been beaten down the court like that

Shhhh. Don't tell Hoiberg. He doesn't know the difference.

don't blame him, those twins are so hard to differentiate

yeah, it seems hard to pinpoint defense & an afro

thebuzzardman · Post #3934 » by **thebuzzardman** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 12:22 pm

Jose7© wrote:When the stat geeks say rose over Calderon isn't a HUGE upgrade..the stat geeks need to be shunned.

Sorry. Take your saber metrics over there. Way far over there.

At a minimum, even if someone has to be wedded to the "stats", you have to look at "fit".

That the Knicks were screaming out for a guard with a base competence level of being able to get the rim and break down the D is obvious.

Mediocre Rose makes the Knicks much better. And Rose last year was better than mediocre.

Triple C · Post #3935 » by **Triple C** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 4:55 pm

[tweet]https://twitter.com/AlexKennedyNBA/status/747835005976588289[/tweet]

Post #3936 » by **moocow007** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 5:10 pm

ClydeRules wrote:
Jose7© wrote:When the stat geeks say rose over Calderon isn't a HUGE upgrade..the stat geeks need to be shunned.

Sorry. Take your saber metrics over there. Way far over there.

This is a great point. These stats are garbage. Talent and system is what matters.

As someone that majored in mathematics and numbers in college, I can tell you that statistics can only tell anyone so much. Statistics has always been meant to be used as a supplement to determining the likely outcome of whatever "thing" you want to analyze and deduce, not as the end all be all. Some folks get too carried away with it. Don't trust their eyes, their brains or their guts anymore.

I'll go back to an example that I've used several thousand times already...

Years back when the Yankees had 2 top middle infield prospects coming up (Alfonso Soriano and D'Angelo Jiminez). I used to get into these ridiculous debates with folks about the two guys. Folks kept telling me that Jiminez was going to be a MUCH BETTER player in the majors than Soriano because of statistics. They would throw all sorts of statistical numbers at me as "proof positive". When I asked them if they've ever watched either guy play...if they've ever watched how quick and strong Soriano's wrists were or how much Jiminez struggled to catch up to high end stuff (you'd think that would have shown up in a stat right lol)...you know what they said? "No, I don't need to!!! The stats are all I need!!!". I almost fell out of my chair at the same time almost choking on whatever I had in my mouth at the time.

Don't get me wrong. Stats are great. But they aren't the GOAT. And some folks are treating it as that. If folks ever want to watch a great movie about this very thing, they should watch "Trouble With the Curve".

NBA Fan 1234 · Post #3937 » by **NBA Fan 1234** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 5:11 pm

Jose7© wrote:
Knickstape1214 wrote:
BugginOut wrote:Honestly, all we need Rose to do is be average and we will be a lot better than we were last year. We had the worst guard rotation in the league last year, all Rose needs to do is stay healthy and not completely fall off the map and we'll make the playoffs

Asking for Rose to be average is a high task, IMO. Asking him to be healthy in addition is unlikely IMO.

When the stat geeks say rose over Calderon isn't a HUGE upgrade..the stat geeks need to be shunned.

Sorry. Take your saber metrics over there. Way far over there.

Nope, I'll keep them here thank you very much. :thumbsup:

I don't only use stats, by the way - I watch games as well and watched 4 games from Rose this past year the night of the trade. Funny how I can get a PM from a Bulls fan saying that I'm right and there are still Knicks fans who claim that the stats lie. (Guess what? In this case, they are not- Rose was BAD last year.)

Also, Rose is an upgrade because of his attacking ability. In terms of everything else, he isn't.

Post #3938 » by **GONYK** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 5:21 pm

Knickstape1214 wrote:
Jose7© wrote:
Knickstape1214 wrote:
Asking for Rose to be average is a high task, IMO. Asking him to be healthy in addition is unlikely IMO.

When the stat geeks say rose over Calderon isn't a HUGE upgrade..the stat geeks need to be shunned.

Sorry. Take your saber metrics over there. Way far over there.

Nope, I'll keep them here thank you very much.

I don't only use stats, by the way - I watch games as well and watched 4 games from Rose this past year the night of the trade. Funny how I can get a PM from a Bulls fan saying that I'm right and there are still Knicks fans who claim that the stats lie. (Guess what? In this case, they are not- Rose was BAD last year.)

Also, Rose is an upgrade because of his attacking ability. In terms of everything else, he isn't.

The stats don't even say that Rose isn't an upgrade over Calderon. The stats say they were both awful, just to varying degrees of awfulness vs. usage.

Post #3939 » by **mpharris36** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 5:26 pm

Triple C wrote:[tweet]https://twitter.com/AlexKennedyNBA/status/747835005976588289[/tweet]

Kyle there is a good chance you are traded bro :lol:

ibraheim718 · Post #3940 » by **ibraheim718** » Tue Jun 28, 2016 5:29 pm

GONYK wrote:
Knickstape1214 wrote:
Jose7© wrote:

When the stat geeks say rose over Calderon isn't a HUGE upgrade..the stat geeks need to be shunned.

Sorry. Take your saber metrics over there. Way far over there.

Nope, I'll keep them here thank you very much.

I don't only use stats, by the way - I watch games as well and watched 4 games from Rose this past year the night of the trade. Funny how I can get a PM from a Bulls fan saying that I'm right and there are still Knicks fans who claim that the stats lie. (Guess what? In this case, they are not- Rose was BAD last year.)

Also, Rose is an upgrade because of his attacking ability. In terms of everything else, he isn't.

The stats don't even say that Rose isn't an upgrade over Calderon. The stats say they were both awful, just to varying degrees of awfulness vs. usage.

You've got a couple of problems though.. the stats don't take into account the offense the team ran (if you're judging offensive stats) and how well said players fit into it.

And you're comparing stats from a player on the bottom side of his career and a player who even though has had some major injury concerns is still right smack dab in the middle of his prime. So one can safely assume that Rose has the very real chance to be better statistically next year and Jose has the very real chance to be worse.