# TT + Marbury Chemistry



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

*TT + Marbury = Chemistry*

Anyone listening to the pre-game show on WFAN? Spencer Ross interviewing TT. Between highschool league, basketball camps, etc. TT and Marbury have played with and opposed to each other tons of times before. (Unlike Marbury and VH, it seems they *like* each other). When Marbury was told of the trade he called TT to welcome him and they talked for 2 hrs, mostly about their respective families and the like, cause they know each other that well.

Just my hunch, but I say give these guys a few weeks and I think we're gonna see ELECTRICITY between these two. Steph acting as a leader ain't gonna let this fail.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

tim thomas has proven nothing yet. As far as im concerned, hes useless. Id rather have DerMarr on the floor. At least he plays DEFENSE.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Well it was an inauspicious evening to say the least. 

However, remember Marbury's first two performances with us: 8 pts and 6 pts. Then 14, then 38.

Though they were underwhelming, TT did get 17 pts tonight.


----------



## Jmonty580 (Jun 20, 2003)

Tim Thomas cant compare to KVH. He is more athletic but thats it. Being athletic doesn necessarily equal winning games. This team isnt headed in the right direction now, thomas got trigger happy, and now I wouldnt even be surprised if we didnt make the playoffs. We're definetely not a contender in the east now.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

We weren't contenders before either.


----------



## Jmonty580 (Jun 20, 2003)

The way we ere playing after we got marbury we could have been contenders. We were definetely competitive. Now we have lost two in a row, and without Houston we are going to be losing alot more games. We are in deep trouble. 

Whats that I haer? Its the crowd, they're saying something. Kieth Van Horn........ Kieth Van Horn........... Kieth Van Horn, I guess most fans arent happy with this trade.


----------



## hatnlvr (Aug 14, 2003)

From what I've seen TT is not playing to his abilities. He is holding to ball to much and forcing shots. I would like to see him use his athletic abilities to get to the rim and kind of feed off of Marbury.

TT should be cutting back-door to the basket and moving without the ball. All I've seen is everyone standing around waiting for something to happen.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

It's probably hard to athletically cut to the basket when you're getting zoned.


----------



## NYCbballFan (Jun 8, 2003)

The concept of upgrading athleticism while maintaining a comparable level of talent still makes sense, but was T-Thomas the right player to trade for? He doesn't have a good history, and he's had good opportunities to step up his game. It's still early, though, and similar questions came up about trading Spree for KVH. Spree had already lost a step and trading him for a younger player made sense, but we had to wonder if KVH was the right guy, given his history.

The chemistry on the court is poor right now. It's clear that Doleac and KVH were a big part of the offense, and Tim Thomas - right now - is an uncomfortable fit. Give it a few more games. It's a new kind of team and they're figuring things out. Hopefully, T-Thomas will find the dedication to make the process work.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I want to see what happens when Houston comes back. I am having a hard time understanding how good the Knicks can be without Houston.

I am sick of Shandon Anderson playing 30 plus minutes. He is horrible.


----------



## NYCbballFan (Jun 8, 2003)

Anderson works better playing off a shooter. He was pretty good balancing KVH as a defender on one end and a slasher at the other end. Replace KVH with T-Thomas, that balance goes away and Anderson's weaknesses are exposed.


----------



## hatnlvr (Aug 14, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> It's probably hard to athletically cut to the basket when you're getting zoned.


No actually it's hard cutting to the basket when your not running the floor. He is jogging around and seems to be playing half hearted.

He's not running the floor or taking the mid range jump shots, he has relied on post up and pull jumpers from behind the arch (neither of which is his strengths).


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> He is jogging around and seems to be playing half hearted.


Sounds a lot like Tim Thomas in general. When does he play full-hearted?

It's funny, 17 and 10... and people are disappointed. But that's his scoring average. I wonder what people were expecting?

Oh wait, that's right. I remember. A player as good as Van Horn.



> I am sick of Shandon Anderson playing 30 plus minutes. He is horrible.


Yet he has played better than Mr Money Penny Hardaway. Penny is shooting a pathetic .387 as a Knick. Penny is also averaging a paltry 1.8 apg with 1.6 tpg as a Knick. He averaged 2.9 apg and 1.2 tpg in Phoenix in fewer minutes. Shandon in comparison is averaging 1.5 and 1.5. Penny is also averaging only 1.8 more ppg than Shandon in 6 more minutes.

Maybe you should call out the popular players who have been getting minutes and sucking, instead of the the unpopular players who have been performing at their normal levels.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Pennys shooting has become a huge LIABILTY..his D is good as well as his rebounding ,but hes got to hit the Jumper..And my boy Frank Williams looks absolutely LOST


----------



## Fordy74 (May 22, 2002)

i AGREE with you Rashidi about Penny. Penny has had a rough couple of last games. Shandon has been doing his normal thing. Shandon had 10 points 5 boards and 4 assists yesterday plus his normal solid defense. Shandon just cant replace A Houston's 3 point shooting though and that problem gets deeper now without Van Horn's outside shooting, Tim Thomas while being the new guy which can make it difficult to come right in and perform he still was needed to perform right away and HASNT. Really the last two games are on TT wether that is fair or not I dont know but it falls on him. If he is talented enough to be worth what Van Horn was giving us I need to see this talent, I havent yet and Ive also seen us get blown out twice all the while looking for this talent.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I never said that Penny Hardaway was any good, he is obviously on his last legs as a player but I hope Houston comes back because I am tired of seeing Shandon Anderson throw passes out of bounds and defend horribly. I almost prefer to see Frank Williams and Starbury than Shandon or Penny. Penny is finished, but I was saying that when he was on the Suns. I was only excited because of Marbury not Penny.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> If he is talented enough to be worth what Van Horn was giving us I need to see this talent, I havent yet and Ive also seen us get blown out twice all the while looking for this talent.


In other unrelated news, Van Horn scored 23 points in his Milwuakee debut.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

I know I'm old enough to be the grandfather of some of you but the game is still the same. Put the ball in the metal ring and keep your opponents from doing it. I am hearing way to much stuff about playin' above the rim...alley oopin'....great athleticism...and all sorts of crap that is fun to watch but doesn't mean anything unless you win. I love that stuff as much as the next guy but to want players because they play above the rim and don't have much other game is just not smart. The truth is this....there aren't many MJs, Drexlers, and Dominiques ..you know guys that played off the floor and won doing it, but there are all sorts of these guys that have the hops but no stops...or any semblance of a complete game along with heart. Yes, TT has hops. Yes, he can run. But he can't defend..can't shoot..can't rebound..and has no heart..the word ***** comes to mind. I bet Thomas would love to take a mulligan on that trade.


----------



## WXHOOPS (Jan 15, 2004)

Marbury is a 20 and 8 guy that has never won. TT is garbage and never will win. Thank god he is out of Milwaukee !


----------



## Fordy74 (May 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>WXHOOPS</b>!
> Marbury is a 20 and 8 guy that has never won. TT is garbage and never will win. Thank god he is out of Milwaukee !


shudup! and give us Keith back!!


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> Sounds a lot like Tim Thomas in general. When does he play full-hearted?
> 
> It's funny, 17 and 10... and people are disappointed. But that's his scoring average. I wonder what people were expecting?


This board has gotten very depressing. I need to keep my head above water. I'm not saying that anyone who is disenchanted will be proven wrong, but I am saying there is no reason to expect things to stay *this* bad.

Perspective: of the 47 (I think it was) games VH played for the Knicks this year he scored 10 points or less in 12. That's about 1 in 4. Others have their bad games too, not singling him out, just showing that the new golden boy (VH) was not infallable.

As a Knick TT is averaging .357 FG% and .333 3pt%. His playoff averages are .460 Fg, .438 3PT. So he's obviously capable of playing better than we've seen thus far. On their careers VH and TT have very similar percentages. VH gets a few more minutes and, to his credit, puts up more shots. But Thomas need only get a little more aggressive to make up the difference.

This whole team needs to play better. T Thomas isn't the only one dropping the ball. Remember, w/o VH, Doleac, or TT we beat Detroit with scoring from essentially just Marbury, Penny, Kurt, and Othella.

And speaking of Detroit, they lost their first two with Rasheed and almost dropped another tonight, yet nobody is counting them out yet.



> Originally posted by <b>alphadog</b>!
> 
> I am hearing way to much stuff about playin' above the rim...alley oopin'....great athleticism...and all sorts of crap that is fun to watch but doesn't mean anything unless you win. I love that stuff as much as the next guy but to want players because they play above the rim and don't have much other game is just not smart.


I respect your perspective, and agree. But am I the only one who before this trade felt we were overly dependant on a perimeter game?

How many shooters did we have? I'll count Marbury (as his shooting percentages are close to Van Horn's) plus Houston, VH, KT, Doleac, Penny (he's not a great shooter, but it's his preferred means of scoring). But how many guys could run the break? Zero! And if you tell me to count Shandon, that just shows how lowly it was.

You can't just shoot, shoot, shoot, your way thru the season. I can't think of one good team that totally relies on a perimeter game. It's just too streaky and one dimentional. And ultimately TT can shoot too, so we didn't give up so much of that.


While TT doesn't have much of an inside game, but he is pretty quick, and a pretty good passer and ball handler. I think after they get some significant practices under their belt (wont happen this month) he could be a good fast-break mate with Marbury. And for all the talk about losing the ability to bust a zone, nothing beats it like transition offense.

That said, heart is exactly the element that will tip the scales of this equation. That small forward spot needs to be the second scoring option while Houston is out, and thrid when he returns. If TT doesn't get his head into the game on an ongoing basis it will be a disaster. His history is not good but he's another one who's not yet in his prime and he still has a lot to prove, so the motivation should be there. But lets keep in mind, we did trade him for VH not ron Artest. While Keith played nicely for us he's never been known as Mr Heart.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Perspective: of the 47 (I think it was) games VH played for the Knicks this year he scored 10 points or less in 12.


How many of those games was he playing hurt?



> His playoff averages are .460 Fg, .438 3PT. So he's obviously capable of playing better than we've seen thus far.


Oy. For a guy who sees little value in stats, you sure are looking at this like TT is the first player to ever hit a shot in the playoffs. Mehmet Okur shot over 40% on 3's in the postseason last year too.



> But Thomas need only get a little more aggressive to make up the difference.


But here's the catch. VH was playing more aggressive than he normally does. Which means TT has to play a lot more aggressive to make up the difference. Agression alone isn't going to magically add 6 points to his scoring average.



> And speaking of Detroit, they lost their first two with Rasheed and almost dropped another tonight, yet nobody is counting them out yet.


It could be because...

1. The Pistons had to take Sheed out at halftime of their first game, because the deal hadn't been cleared yet. They could be fined for letting him play.

2. The Knicks were blown out twice by non-playoff teams. The Pistons lost by ONE twice. Including the T'Wolves, in the game they had to take Sheed out of.

3. Larry Brown is a better coach than Lenny Wilkins, and he gave the ok on acquiring Sheed.

4. The Knicks are 2.5 games away from being out of the playoffs. The Pistons are the 3rd seed. The Pistons are 5.5 games over .500. The Knicks are 2.5 games below .500.

5. Sheed had 10 points, 11 rebounds, and 4 blocks in his last game (a win). Tim Thomas will never block 4 shots in a game, and he may not even grab double digit boards in a game this season.

6. Rasheed Wallace is a two time former all-star. Tim Thomas is a former 6th man of the year runner up.

7. The Pistons traded junk for Sheed. The Knicks traded their 2nd best player for Tim Thomas. How's that for perspective?

The VH/TT trade only works if they had gotten Sheed. And I don't think Dumars is going to let him just walk away. Dumars is a better GM than Isiah is. Even if you take away his GM ability, the odds are stacked in his favor. He can pay Sheed, Detroit is Sheed's hometown, and his team is among the best in the east. Oh, and I doubt the Detriot papers call him Rashweed.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

How many shooters did we have? I'll count Marbury (as his shooting percentages are close to Van Horn's) plus Houston, VH, KT, Doleac, Penny (he's not a great shooter, but it's his preferred means of scoring). 



> But how many guys could run the break? Zero! And if you tell me to count Shandon, that just shows how lowly it was.


Uh... Van Horn? And what, Marbury didn't run the break? Marbury, Van Horn, and Shandon ran on the break. How many teams have 5 guys running the break? Just the Mavs. Can you name all these teams with players that run the break? As it stands, all they did was swap TT for VH. They marginally upgraded the break in exchange for a decline in every other facet of the game. Including defensive rebounds, which tend to lead to fast breaks.



> You can't just shoot, shoot, shoot, your way thru the season. I can't think of one good team that totally relies on a perimeter game. It's just too streaky and one dimentional. And ultimately TT can shoot too, so we didn't give up so much of that.


But that's the point. The Knicks weren't a good team, and they haven't improved any with TT, so it doesn't matter what the play style is. Further, you really must be confused as to who TT is, because he is even more perimeter dependant than VH is.

64 of VH's 283 FGs were 3pters
VH is 175-211 on FTs
49 games

49 of TT 235 FGs were 3pters
TT is 102-136 on FTs
45 games

For someone who is supposed to go to the basket alot, he sure does get fouled significantly less than VH does. We'll also ignore that VH was money at the line, while TT is average.



> and a pretty good passer and ball handler.


Do you mean Allan Houston good or Keith Van Horn good?


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Here we go, an argument for the sake of arguing.



> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> How many of those games was he playing hurt?


TT been hurt this year too. His ankle is still sore.



> Oy. For a guy who sees little value in stats, you sure are looking at this like TT is the first player to ever hit a shot in the playoffs. Mehmet Okur shot over 40% on 3's in the postseason last year too.


And your point is? Haven't you noticed, Detroit is rather high on him.

BTW, I like stats now.



> But here's the catch. VH was playing more aggressive than he normally does. Which means TT has to play a lot more aggressive to make up the difference. Agression alone isn't going to magically add 6 points to his scoring average.


I agree that VH has set a nice standard for TT. But here's another catch, there's only one bucket difference between their averages this year. They have very similar games and percentages, I absolutely believe aggression alone can "magically" add one more bucket per game to TT's average.





> It could be because...
> 
> 1. The Pistons had to take Sheed out at halftime of their first game, because the deal hadn't been cleared yet. They could be fined for letting him play.
> 
> ...


Yes all that is true. But does any of it deny the point that any team needs to make adjustments and build chemistry when adding a significant number of new players?



> 7. The Pistons traded junk for Sheed. The Knicks traded their 2nd best player for Tim Thomas. How's that for perspective?


That's good perspective, one you should keep in mind when considering the Marbury trade. Dumars did it better than Isiah and got the better deal, but we got the better player.



> The VH/TT trade only works if they had gotten Sheed. And I don't think Dumars is going to let him just walk away. Dumars is a better GM than Isiah is. Even if you take away his GM ability, the odds are stacked in his favor. He can pay Sheed, Detroit is Sheed's hometown, and his team is among the best in the east. Oh, and I doubt the Detriot papers call him Rashweed.


I agree, we lost Sheed, and he should be pivitol in the balance of power in the east. Which is why I supported us chasing him before the deadline, while you asserted VH was better. And unfortunately we do still need pieces and it will be very difficult for us to add a premium player in the off-season. This was the year of the expiring contract and we shot our load already.

I'm just not ready to declare the TT/NM trade a bust yet. We needed to add depth at the center and TT is not far off of VH's tail. It was something of a gamble but the returns aren't in yet.

I just think part of the problem is there was so much pre deadline hype about who we might get that any realistic happening pales in comparison

My last piece of perspective is that we weren't going to take the east before the trade either. People are talking like we blew our chances to go to the finals. The truth is either way we are going to have a dog fight on our hands to get past the first round. That's as true before the trade as after.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Uh... Van Horn? And what, Marbury didn't run the break? Marbury, Van Horn, and Shandon ran on the break. How many teams have 5 guys running the break?


VH and Shandon. Does it get any worse? I dare say, we could stand to upgrade our breaking capabiliites. You seem to have access to stats I don't know where to begin to look for, so where do we rank in the league in break points?



> But that's the point. The Knicks weren't a good team, and they haven't improved any with TT, so it doesn't matter what the play style is. Further, you really must be confused as to who TT is, because he is even more perimeter dependant than VH is.
> 
> 64 of VH's 283 FGs were 3pters
> VH is 175-211 on FTs
> ...


Was there a typo somewhere? i hate to take the wind out of your sails but you say TT is more perimeter dependant, however your numbers show VH shot .226 % 3pts to TT's .208.



> For someone who is supposed to go to the basket alot, he sure does get fouled significantly less than VH does. We'll also ignore that VH was money at the line, while TT is average.


Good point. I dug around in some stats about TT and was surprised/dissappointed at some of what I found, but some of it was surprisingly bad for VH too. For instance, did you know TT outperforms VH in crunch time scoring? Is that worth anything?

Yes, my arguments are only valid if TT can slightly alter the structure and aggression of his game. It's not guaranteed he will or wont. See the only difference between our positions is that you think because there is some writing on the wall that the book is cast in stone, and I don't. I'm willing to give this experiment more time than most, as I care most about how we perform in the playoffs, and next year when we are not burdened with a .333 start. And keep in mind about what else is written on the wall: VH softens up in the playoffs, while Thomas turns it up.


[/QUOTE]Do you mean Allan Houston good or Keith Van Horn good? [/QUOTE]

Thanks for the chuckle, i do appreciate your humor you know.

Interestingly, TT gets a better "hands" rating (a function of offensive fouls/bad passes/dribble turnovers) than either. A little better than Houston but much better than VH. Same relationships in passing stats. Just things to keep in mind before you again incorrectly assert that TT is "a decline in every other facet of the game", unless you really consider breaking, passing, ball handling, and clutch insignificant factors of the game.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> BTW, I like stats now.


Really? It wouldn't be because they fit in your favor manipulationwise, would they?



> And your point is? Haven't you noticed, Detroit is rather high on him.


Okur shoots 33% on threes in the regular season. He's only been to the playoffs once, and he's played close to the amount of games TT has. They aren't high on him because he shot 40% on 3's in the regular season, if you haven't noticed. There are many other reasons.

The bulk of TT's playoff career came the year he shot 41% on threes DURING THE REGULAR SEASON as a 6th man (Milwuakee's Conference Final run). He saw a lot of his time at PF in a high powered offense with many scoring threats (Robinson/Allen/Cassell) and thus got many open looks. He won't get open looks as a 2nd option at SF. If you'll remember, I pointed out how TT started at PF in the playoffs last year too. His quickness and shooting on the perimeter might be useful at PF, but you can't measure the points and rebounds he'll give up on the other end in his stats. TT has done nothing remarkable in the SF role. Van Horn was 20/8 as a PF, 16/7 as a SF. Remind me again what TT is as a PF and SF again?



> Which is why I supported us chasing him before the deadline, while you asserted VH was better


I asserted VH was as good as Sheed, that Sheed is very overrated. Why was I opposed to trading VH for Sheed? Because there wouldn't be a SF, and the price was too high. It was VH, and KT, if I remember correctly. Or VH, Doleac, and F-Will. The Knicks wouldn't have the assets to get Tim Thomas to play SF if they made either deal. And they won't have the assets to get Sheed now. They should have gotten Sheed first, then TT to compliment him. You don't add complimentary players before you can seal the deal with the player he's going to compliment. That's just foolish.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> and clutch insignificant factors of the game.


By clutch, I hope you are not referring to game 5 and 6 of last year's 1st round. It is truly laughable that TT was actually called "clutch" regardless of his playoff shooting percentage. He hasn't won any big games with his shooting. Van Horn has.



> VH oftens up in the playoffs, while Thomas turns it up.


Game 5 vs Pacers
Game 6 vs Celtics

I don't mean to sound like a broken record, but I've covered VH's playoff career in previous posts. Look it up.



> For instance, did you know TT outperforms VH in crunch time scoring?


Did you know that VH gets benched for defensive purposes sometimes in the 4th, and that TT is just as bad at defense? That doesn't bode well now that he's out of Milwuakee.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> Really? It wouldn't be because they fit in your favor manipulationwise, would they?


Man you're edgy! All I'm doing is preaching a wait and see approach and you've got yout hackles up and teeth bared. Take it down a notch pal, we're just talking theory here. Niether of us knows the furture, and I don't know about you, but other than a little emotional attachment I don't have a lot invested in any particular outcome. 



> Okur shoots 33% on threes in the regular season. He's only been to the playoffs once, and he's played close to the amount of games TT has. They aren't high on him because he shot 40% on 3's in the regular season, if you haven't noticed. There are many other reasons.


I really don't follow your thread of logic here. I mean really. Lets take it from the top. Why did you bring up Okur in the first place and what is your point about him?



> I pointed out how TT started at PF in the playoffs last year too. His quickness and shooting on the perimeter might be useful at PF, but you can't measure the points and rebounds he'll give up on the other end in his stats.


To some degree you can with the teams performance with them on the court or off the court:

TT:

Min 50%
Net Pts_ +47
Off_ 95.5
Def_ 93.8
Net 48 1.7
W/L 21-20 
Win% 51.2

These stats represent how the team performed while the player was on the floor.
The Net48 number shows the average +/- net points over a full game. 

VH:
Min 57%
Net Pts +10
Off 93.0
Def_ 92.7
Net48 .03
W/ L 25-22
Win% 53.2

Some of these figures are probably more suited to comparing guys on the same team, but I find the net points and Net48 numbers rather meaningful.



> They should have gotten Sheed first, then TT to compliment him. You don't add complimentary players before you can seal the deal with the player he's going to compliment. That's just foolish.


No arguments from me there. And I wouldn't have traded VH and KT for Sheed, but I would have done VH and parts, or KT and parts.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> By clutch, I hope you are not referring to game 5 and 6 of last year's 1st round. It is truly laughable that TT was actually called "clutch" regardless of his playoff shooting percentage.


Some of my stats I'm getting from 82games:

http://82games.com/03NYK11A.HTM

vs

http://www.82games.com/03MIL8A.HTM

You'll see a catagory called "crunch" and lower on the page the ball handling and passing stats.

I'm also considering career playoff stats:

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/keith_van_horn/index.html?nav=page

vs

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tim_thomas/index.html?nav=page

Over their careers TT has posted equal points on better percentages in fewer minutes. And do notice VH's reg season to post season drop off.

Again, all I'm saying is people are making it sound like we traded Bernard King for TT. VH may be better than TT but they are not radically different. I'm just suggesting everyone not dispair until we see how he fits into the team after some chemistry develops. Nazr too. He did have a season where he went 12 ppg 9rpg in 25 mins. You people just need to inhale a bit before we proclaim the ship sunk.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

You guys are really seduced by stats to make an argument. The fact is that numbers are essentially useless except as a rough tool for determining shooting accuracy. There are just far too many variables (the "human factors" such as heart, "clutchness", etc) to grade strictly numbers. First, Oak, VH's average was down because he played hurt and was also playing with a new team, coach(s), and any fool can see that he is a guy that needs to be accepted by his mates...he was and was performing at an allstar level, stats be damned. Name 5 all-arond better SFs in the league...I empahasize..all-around. You guys are obviously intelligent fans...What does your heart and your head tell you about TT? Not what you want to see but what you DO see. I see a very soft, under-achieving, non-rebounding, non-defending, mediocre shooting SF with great size and athleticism for the position...although he has shown no heart. Someone posted on the KNick board last year and said they knew his girlfriend or something like that. TT told her it was just a job...no big deal. Kmart is the guy that gave Keith his soft rep...ran him down so far he broke him. Guess what? KVH is a better rebounder than Martin and he plays further away and has much less natural ability. Its all perspective..and my gut tells me this is one loser of a trade and a player.


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

I know we should all just wait and see, and be patient and what not, but , with players like KVH and TT you know what you're getting.

They have both been in the league for a long time, neither one of them is going to change their ways or tap into some hidden well of potential. This never happens with veterans in the league.


So instead what you can look at it is what both of them have done throughout their careers. You can look at comments from previous teammates and try to find a similarities between them. 

Finally you can look at whose on your team from two vantage points. You can see them as personalities, or as collections of abilities. 

From that view you can then decipher relatively easy who would fit well in your team and who wouldn't.


TT has accomplished less, has won less, has put up worse statistics, has recieved far harsher criticism than Van Horn.

Did Keith threaten to kick Kmart's ***? Has Keith ever been accused of making excuses for sucking? No.


Did Keith's style of game mesh better within the Knicks system? You bet it did. He was more versatile. He was a good shooter. He could switch positions and was more than happy to play on the perimeter or in the post as the oppurtunity dictated.

Has Tim Thomas ever done something like that? No, he is a whiny punk ***** who refused to enter the game because he didn't want to play the 4. He refuses to accept any role except that which he wants. 



So from pretty much every vantage point, save team chemistry ( in which TT has a lot to prove since VH meshed real well with this team) Tim Thomas is the crappier player.


Now, given Atlanta's need to clear cap space. Don't you think they would have welcomed the Expiring Doleac for the long term somewhat expensive Nazr?

OF COURSE THEY WOULD. So why give away our second pick. We got hosed in this deal. Nazr could have been ours for a lot cheaper. Tim thomas is the ****tier player.

So we got a downgrade in talent, a downgrade in chemistry, and in a lottery filled with big men we gave away all our picks.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

alphadog, I just like stats as a tool of exploration, perhaps like infrared photography, and a way to illustrate a concept. It's like taking measurements and plotting a graph. It may not prove the concept but it aids in probing and defining. But between my intuition and stats I'll take intuition.

As for the rest, you may well be right. I've laid out the best defense of the trade I can, now only time will tell. I'm not even predicting success, if I had the power to undo the trade today I probably would. But I'm arguing against dispair and I'm going to give it more time before committing to an opinion of my own.

With that said I have nothing more to add and I'll let the pessimists rule again.

Oh, a few guys I'd be happy to have play sf over Van Horn. For some it may not be their natural position but they'd be no less adept than VH:

Peja
Sprewell
Artest
Nowitzki
McGrady
Rasheed
Odom
Lebron
Carmelo
Marion
Kirilenko
Pierce
Magget


----------



## Knicksbiggestfan (Apr 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> alphadog, I just like stats as a tool of exploration, perhaps like infrared photography, and a way to illustrate a concept. It's like taking measurements and plotting a graph. It may not prove the concept but it aids in probing and defining. But between my intuition and stats I'll take intuition.
> 
> As for the rest, you may well be right. I've laid out the best defense of the trade I can, now only time will tell. I'm not even predicting success, if I had the power to undo the trade today I probably would. But I'm arguing against dispair and I'm going to give it more time before committing to an opinion of my own.
> ...


Ah Corey Maggete. I forget about him as a 3. That guy shows nothing but improvement.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

Half the guys on that list can't stuff a stat sheet like VH. I guess it all depends on what your team needs, but Spree?.....please. Another example...if you need only a dead eye shooter then Peja's your guy. But if you need some physical presence, low post scoring, and board work out of your SF as well then VH would be a better fit. Not saying he's better, but he IS a better all around guy. If you need a defensive stopper who is tough and can hit the J, then Artest would be your guy. IMO, VH was the perfect piece for this team. He could get out on the break and finish...was a VERY good offensive rebounder and put back guy, excellent long range shooter capable of carrying a team, good at taking big guys and smalls off the dribble, decent passer and under-rated shot blocker off the ball. I think this will all be very clear that regardless how TT turns out, VH was a much better fit here. It appears that the crux of this was IT's desire to rid himself of any Layden guys that might have turned out to be good moves.BTW, I do respect yoour opinions as well as most of the others but I just can't seem to see the sunshine at this point.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>son of oakley</b>!
> 
> Again, all I'm saying is people are making it sound like we traded Bernard King for TT. VH may be better than TT but they are not radically different. I'm just suggesting everyone not dispair until we see how he fits into the team after some chemistry develops. Nazr too. He did have a season where he went 12 ppg 9rpg in 25 mins. You people just need to inhale a bit before we proclaim the ship sunk.


That's good advice Oak, I tried inhaling like you said and I'm starting to feel a little bit better.

And that rebounding, running and having a forward who can play with his back to the basket is starting to look like an interesting concept.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Looks like the cat is out of the bag, clone.


----------



## dcrono3 (Jan 6, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>alphadog</b>!
> You guys are really seduced by stats to make an argument. The fact is that numbers are essentially useless except as a rough tool for determining shooting accuracy. There are just far too many variables (the "human factors" such as heart, "clutchness", etc) to grade strictly numbers. First, Oak, VH's average was down because he played hurt and was also playing with a new team, coach(s), and any fool can see that he is a guy that needs to be accepted by his mates...he was and was performing at an allstar level, stats be damned. Name 5 all-arond better SFs in the league...I empahasize..all-around. You guys are obviously intelligent fans...What does your heart and your head tell you about TT? Not what you want to see but what you DO see. I see a very soft, under-achieving, non-rebounding, non-defending, mediocre shooting SF with great size and athleticism for the position...although he has shown no heart. Someone posted on the KNick board last year and said they knew his girlfriend or something like that. TT told her it was just a job...no big deal. Kmart is the guy that gave Keith his soft rep...ran him down so far he broke him. Guess what? KVH is a better rebounder than Martin and he plays further away and has much less natural ability. Its all perspective..and my gut tells me this is one loser of a trade and a player.


I agree that stats are probably not the best way to compare players, especially on this board. There are just too many variables, like a players role on the team for instance. People are always going to find some stats that support their own argument and will ignore other stats that are against their arguments. This happens so often on this board its not funny anymore, because people just bring out their old stats again and argue that their stats are better, while failing to say why the other stats are irrelavant. 

It was Van Horn's first season as a Knicks, but last year, when it was his first year with the Sixers, he played better than the previous season with the Nets. Maybe the new team factor isn't that important for Van Horn? I don't know,, but it's something to think about.

Yeah, TT hasn't played with much heart before. I just hope that playing near his hometown will make him play harder to not embarress himself in front of people he knew.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Oh, a few guys I'd be happy to have play sf over Van Horn. For some it may not be their natural position but they'd be no less adept than VH:
> 
> Peja
> Sprewell
> ...


You forgot all-star starting SF Vince Carter. And you'd probably take Kobe Bryant, Jalen Rose, Antawn Jamison, Jamal Mashburn, Jerry Stackhouse, Michael Finley, Antoine Walker, Rip Hamilton, Jason Richardson, Al Harrington, Toni Kukoc, Kevin Garnett, Richard Jefferson, Rashard Lewis, Grant Hill, Bonzi Wells, Ronald Dupree, Ime Udoka, Nicholoz Tskitishvili, Charles Smith, Matt Barnes, and Eric Montross over him too.

But regardless, the list of SFs I'd rather have playing over Tim Thomas is even longer.


----------



## nycson (Nov 21, 2003)

Were you being sarcastic about Eric Montross and Grant Hill?


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Montross yes. Hill no.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

I was also dead serious about Ime Udoka.


----------



## Joluis (Apr 25, 2003)

Let me just say That the deal wasn't TT for KVH, WE also recieved a very decent center in that deal. We have to get Houston back & get more games under our belt before we can assess anything. Plus We already have a KVH anyway....... Allan Houston.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Allan Houston is averaging 7 rebounds?


----------

