Knicks morning news (2018.05.22) electricity electricity music notes


I spent my lunch reading up on and watching video of Sexton and he seems Mitchell-esque. Not that he (or anyone) is likely to duplicate the season Mitchell just had. Size is nearly identical. Stats are very similar. Expected to go around the same position in the draft. I’m even reading the same quotes from their college coaches saying there’s no way this guy should drop past 5.

I’m not necessarily Team Sexton, but I think Sexton and Frank as a backcourt pair is a much better fit than Young and Frank. The Young + Frank = Perfect pair idea comes basically from the idea that one can score and the other can defend. That’s hardly the makings of a great pair. It means you’re covering for one player on both sides of the ball.

Sexton is a plus defender and Frank is a very good defender. Together they have the foundation for an excellent defensive backcourt. On offense, their strengths and weaknesses dovetail perfectly. Sexton is aggressive but doesn’t create well. Frank has demonstrated good vision and passing but isn’t aggressive.

Yeah, it’s a drag that people subscribe to a Manichaean view of the universe and can’t give Phil credit for the things he got right. He got plenty wrong, but it’s symptomatic of the f’ckd up dialogue in this country that people can’t concede any ground in arguments where it’s clear there is a lot of uncertain gray area.

What I like about sports is that there’s not a lot of gray area. Basketball is a zero-sum game. You either win, or you lose. It’s not like politics, where a certain policy might create certain winners and certain losers, and it takes many years to figure out who benefited. They keep score in NBA games, which is pretty useful! You can tell exactly how you’re doing.

Phil inherited a shitty team, made it even shittier in the short term, and by the time he was done, it was just as shitty as the team he inherited, only three years had passed. He accomplished exactly fucking NOTHING. There is no gray area about Phil’s tenure. He drafted Porzingis, and yay for that. He drafted Frank, and *maybe* yay for that. But in the big picture, by the time Phil’s tenure was over this was still one of the worst franchises in the league, with little to look forward to in the short term OR long term. The most generous thing you can say about Phil’s tenure is that the team treaded water for three mediocre years, then came out of it with one promising player and one sort-of promising player. THAT’S IT.

I am not sure if we really mean the same when we talk about HISTORICALLY good. The team actually had a few players that you could call average-ish, like Tobias Harris, Reggie Bullock, etc. Besides, when we talk about NBA players, we are mostly talking at the very tail of the gaussian curve… there are many bad players which are mostly similar in skill one to another, and a few really good ones that shine. I dont think there is the concept of historically bad players that counters your historically good one (ok, Bargnani, but he wasnt on the Pistons).

And what is my anti-stats argument??? I am not against stats. Stats quantify objectively the game we like. Advanced stats do so in a way that removes unwanted effects like minutes played, pace, etc. Stats can be used to predict future perfomance. But WP48 is a numerology mumbo-jumbo that their proponents have the arrogance to say that predicts scientifically the performance of a team or a players, but is based on blantantly incorrect assumptions, is not tested against any sort of objetive experiment, and nobody dares to establish which are the limits in which its predictability is (supposedly) valid.