↓ Login/Logout ↓
Schedule/Results
↓ Roster ↓
Salaries
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Brandon Knight eighth in Rookie of the Year voting

Brandon Knight finished eighth in Rookie of the Year voting:

Rookie, Team 1st 2nd 3rd Total

Kyrie Irving, Cleveland 117 2 1 592

Ricky Rubio, Minnesota – 49 23 170

Kenneth Faried, Denver 1 30 34 129

Kawhi Leonard, San Antonio 1 9 15 47

Iman Shumpert, New York 1 7 7 33

Klay Thompson, Golden State -  5 15 30

Isaiah Thomas, Sacramento – 6 10 28

Brandon Knight, Detroit – 6 3 21

Chandler Parsons, Houston – 3 5 14

MarShon Brooks, New Jersey – 1 1 4

Kemba Walker, Charlotte – - 3 3

Josh Selby, Memphis -  – 1 1

As someone who thought Knight was a borderline All-Rookie second teamer, I think that’s most fair, if not a little generous to Knight. He showed strong promise, but this award should honor the rookies who are the best right now. Knight’s strong counting stats (total points, assists, etc.) alone don’t convince me he belongs anywhere near a Rookie of the Year ballot, considering his game is still fairly flawed.

On the bright side, it’s not definite, but Knight appears likely to make the All-Rookie second team. The All-Rookie teams are position independent, so it doesn’t matter that Knight was the sixth guard in voting.

16 Comments

  • May 15, 20122:10 pm
    by ray

    Reply

    This is the first time Knight gotten any real credit all year.

    • May 15, 20125:14 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      you kidding? look at any rookie ranking sort of articles from the year. Almost all of them will put Knight right around this range. Some higher, some lower.

  • May 15, 20122:57 pm
    by Max

    Reply

    How long has the term “counting stats” been in use?   Seems pretty recent….

    • May 15, 20125:17 pm
      by tarsier

      Reply

      Probably since fantasy became a big thing. The distinctions between counting stats, percentages, and negative counting stats are absolutely crucial to fantasy gamesmanship. Naturally, then, such terms had to enter the lexicon so we would be able to articulate these strategies.

      • May 15, 20125:39 pm
        by Max

        Reply

        Meanwhile, Knight was more owned and was played more often than nearly every player who finished ahead of him and maybe even every player single player.

        • May 15, 20125:59 pm
          by tarsier

          Reply

          Knight was typically owned. Not more than every other player, there are guys who are owned in every single league after all, but that’s not the point.

          Why exactly does it matter how much Knight was owned in fantasy? That would probably be the worst campaign for a player winning NBA hardware ever. “he totally made the difference for me in winning my fantasy league, this guy definitely deserves all-rookie first team.”

          I’m not trying to say that you are saying that. Just that it was what your message appeared to be. So what exactly was your post trying to communicate?

          • May 15, 20126:39 pm
            by Max

            I meant more than every other rookie and he was.    Other players didn’t contribute throughout the entire year as Knight did or got hurt.   I was trying to communicate the irony that the term “counting stats” is being used to undermine his accomplishments when you said the term arose due to fantasy and he was more valuable in fantasy this year than most of the players who finished ahead of him.   Also, I find using “counting stats” to undermine a person’s accomplishments a lot like the term “compiler” to discredit say Stockton or Malone.

          • May 15, 20126:43 pm
            by Dan Feldman

            Knight’s counting stats were better than most rookies’. They alone don’t convince me he belonged anywhere near a ROY ballot. I edited the post for clarity.

          • May 15, 20127:00 pm
            by tarsier

            I don’t think most people see counting stats as a negative term. I certainly didn’t. Although my best guess is that the term did arise with fantasy. It is just a convenient way to differentiate between total contribution and total contribution per opportunity cost.

            And if you think the attitude toward the concept is relatively recent, I’d like to see your argument of why Wilt didn’t win at least 8 MVPs.

          • May 15, 20129:46 pm
            by Patrick Hayes

            Counting stats don’t discredit anything. It’s just a mistake to solely look at those, and Knight is a perfect example why. He played big minutes and shot the three well, so his counting stats looked OK, but he was much less effective when he was on the court than several rookies who played fewer minutes.

            Not a knock on Knight at all. He’s still an elite prospect. But Rookie of the Year is based on who had the best season, and I would probably put Knight near the bottom of the top 10 rookies if we’re just looking at what each did this season. There are plenty of guys who had better seasons than Knight and I would still take him as the better long-term prospect. But again, this is a season award. Future projection should not be any consideration at all.

  • May 15, 20123:42 pm
    by neutes

    Reply

    way too high

  • May 15, 20126:00 pm
    by MrBlockedShot

    Reply

    Isaiah Thomas at 7th? that lower? He was the stole of the second round… Imho he should be well above Shumpert (too inconsistent) and Klay Thompson

    • May 15, 20129:43 pm
      by Patrick Hayes

      Reply

      Yeah, Thomas was this year’s Monroe in the ROY voting. Completely and unfairly overlooked.

  • May 15, 20126:28 pm
    by vic

    Reply

    just wanted to toot my own horn here- Biyombo , Kahwi, and Isaiah Thomas were my highest for the Pistons. I knew Isaiah would be one of the better pgs in last years draft. Dude barely got drafted. (picked last) He’s kind of short, but Biyombo would have meshed perfectly with him and with Monroe.                             I did undervalue faried though. Didn’t know how strong he was.

  • May 15, 201211:16 pm
    by Daye and Knight

    Reply

    When I said Faried was better than Knight some people on here didn’t take that too well…take it up with ESPN now seeing I was clearly not the only one who thought so. I can’t remember the guys who got on me for that…well doesn’t really matter. Knight will end up better than most of the people on this list but for right now he’s decent and having him at 8 is valid, especially since that’s where we drafted him.

    • May 16, 201210:11 am
      by tarsier

      Reply

      great. we all made a bunch of predictions. some of them were right, some wrong. although, i doubt you would have gotten excessive argument if you said that faried would be better than knight as a rookie. who knows who will have the better career. but faried has definitely exceeded most reasonable expectations.

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here