Hello, people! This here would be my very first post ever after frequently frequenting P&T, and seeing that I have observed several trends within the community, as well as media as a whole, I would like to add in my two cents on their situation.
I, personally, fear the growing use of irrational thought by the MSM and, admittedly, ourselves when interpreting the status of the Knicks and, namely, the play of Carmelo Anthony and Amare Stoudemire. Unfortunately, there seems to be a drifting away from objective analysis when criticizing the Knicks, which leads to an increase in generally subjective, emotionally fueled rants. This creates an environment that provokes irrational opinion forming, much like the #BlameBeltran fad, where certain players and their play (or inability to play) are unfairly criticized by sensationalized headlines and a generally negative group think against them. I, for one, am against the current "TRADE STAT AND MEBLOW" mentality that we are subjected to. And here's why:
As any statistician or sabermetrician (any Amazin' Avenue poster) would attest to, sample size means EVERYTHING. The larger a sample size is, the stronger it's data becomes, mainly due to the fact that outliers in the data pool are averaged out by long term trends. However, any thesis or argument could be proven or disproved with a small sample size, which, for the most part, features inaccurate data. That being said, the whopping 9 games of Linsanity sans our "superstars" and the 9 games with them are hardly enough data sufficient enough to formulate a concrete decision. While the arrival of our two super stars could be scapegoated for the drop of our offensive and defensive performances, it is very foolish and uninformed to do so. Very frequently I see this stat thrown around:
Defense 2/4 - 2/19 ~90 ppg*
Defense 2/20 - 3/11 ~104.4 ppg*
As much as I love my statistics, this is misleading. It insinuates that the defensive abilities of the whole team dropped as a whole due to the addition of two players, without highlighting other factors contributing this statistic. In the first set, the Knicks faced the offenses of New Jersey, Utah, Washington, LA, Minnesota, Toronto, New Orleans, and Dallas. With the exception of Dallas, as well as Los Angeles and Minnesota to a lesser extent, they faced offenses with the collective force of a soggy loaf of bread. Even a very dull butter knife can cut through a soggy loaf of bread. In reality, the Knicks' defense is better than a dull butter knife, which would explain the very good defensive performances. However, over the next five games, stiffer opposition awaited them in the likes of New Jersey, Atlanta, Miami, Cleveland, Boston, Dallas, San Antonio, Milwaukee, and Philadelphia. With the exceptions of Milwaukee, Atlanta, and New Jersey, they faced very tough offenses with very talented pieces. It seems as if everyone is discrediting the play of the opposing team in favor of placing the blame on two sub-satisfactory defensive players.Although they definitely contribute to an increase in points per game due to their lack of defensive productivity (making sure their man doesn't get the ball into the hoop behind them), they could not possibly be the only culprit behind the 14.4 point increase between these two sets.
The same can be said for the offensive side:
Offensive ppg 2/4 - 2/19 ~97.33 ppg*
Offensive ppg 2/20 - 3/11 ~100.8889 ppg*
=O. There seems to be a glitch in the matrix. STAT and Melo ruined the offense, but there seems to be a gradual increase in offensive output over their next 9 games. Let us analyze the defensive abilities of their opponents during these stretches. For the first set, they faced the rather anemic defenses of Utah, Sacramento, Toronto, and New Orleans. With the exception of Dallas, they For the second set, they faced the much more talented Miami, San Antonio, Boston, and Philadelphia teams. For the most part, the defensive abilities of their opponents greatly increased. However, the Knicks' offense proved to be more effective. Therefore, the additions of STAT and Melo to the offense made it better.
To those who greatly oppose this bold statement, think about the data present here. There is not enough data present to truly present the status of the Knicks' offense. I could admit that the offense of the Knicks has somewhat stagnated, in that there is a decrease in proper ball movement and increase in turnovers, which is more of a team issue rather than an issue that only pertains to Carmelo or Amar'e. However, this is not reflected in the data. This is, as I said earlier, an inaccurate data set that doesn't truly reflect this facet of the team's play. This inaccuracy is also present in the defensive stats. Just because a certain stat indicates one trend, the value of the stat truly determines the merit of the trend.
I hope everyone is able to take away that there cannot be any concrete statement taken from the last 9 games or the nine before them to criticize the play of Carmelo Anthony or Amare Stoudemire. Even though anyone can agree that the play of the Knicks has been poor as of late, and before that it was good, not just one or two people are to blame. I cannot blame or hate anyone on the Knicks. In fact, I love every single one of the players and staff on the current roster. Except for Dan D'antoni. Fuck that guy.
*I apologize for the use of this ambiguous stat. It provides only a blanket statement about the play of both the offense and defense. It doesn't go in depth with the strengths and weaknesses of an offense and defense on any given night, and it certainly cannot isolate or describe in full the offensive or defensive performance of either team.