[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

The Knicks record with their top 5 players
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
4/14/2007  2:07 AM
This season, in games where Marbury, Curry, Q-Rich, Crawford and Lee all played, the Knicks record was 17-22.

In other words they still weren't very good even with all those players healthy and playing.

But I doubt that will stop the Kool-Aid drinkers from using injuries as an excuse.
If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
AUTOADVERT
nyk4ever
Posts: 41012
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
4/14/2007  2:12 AM
See Isles, the problem is, most people just want to blame injuries on the poor record instead of looking at the actual facts.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
TheGame
Posts: 26657
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
4/14/2007  2:42 AM
You have to factor in that most of those games occurred early in the season when the team was getting booed at home and still did not have a identity or firm understanding of what they were trying to do. Take a sample after the first month and a half of the season and look at the games in which the top 5 players played.
Trust the Process
VCoug
Posts: 24938
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/28/2007
Member: #1406
4/14/2007  2:44 AM
In a way the injuries were a problem. They did get worse but not because of the players that were lost, with the exception of David Lee. They got worse because Francis started getting more minutes and played like he has everywhere else and Marbury stopped distributing like he had for most of the season and started acting like Starbury again. And if there's one thing that history has shown us is that Starbury will NEVER be able to carry a team; he's just not good enough.
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
4/14/2007  2:51 AM
Posted by TheGame:

You have to factor in that most of those games occurred early in the season when the team was getting booed at home and still did not have a identity or firm understanding of what they were trying to do. Take a sample after the first month and a half of the season and look at the games in which the top 5 players played.

Why? Because it (barely) supports your intended result? The reality is that this team wasn't very good, period. At our best, we're a below .500 team, so what's the uproar about the injuries? So if everyone is healthy, we win a few extra games. Who cares? We still suck.

How about this? Let's take the Knicks during all the games that they won and project it over a season. Oh wow! 82-0. That's terrific. That means if we could just learn to not lose, we'd win every game. See why you can't just say, 'oh those games don't count'? Because, guess what? THEY DO.

[Edited by - Solace on Apr 14 2007 02:52 AM]
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
TheGame
Posts: 26657
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
4/14/2007  4:14 AM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by TheGame:

You have to factor in that most of those games occurred early in the season when the team was getting booed at home and still did not have a identity or firm understanding of what they were trying to do. Take a sample after the first month and a half of the season and look at the games in which the top 5 players played.

Why? Because it (barely) supports your intended result? The reality is that this team wasn't very good, period. At our best, we're a below .500 team, so what's the uproar about the injuries? So if everyone is healthy, we win a few extra games. Who cares? We still suck.

How about this? Let's take the Knicks during all the games that they won and project it over a season. Oh wow! 82-0. That's terrific. That means if we could just learn to not lose, we'd win every game. See why you can't just say, 'oh those games don't count'? Because, guess what? THEY DO.

[Edited by - Solace on Apr 14 2007 02:52 AM]

This thread started with Isles trying to make the point that the injuries did not matter because in games in which the top 5 players played, the team went 17-22. My point was the most of those games occurred at a time when the team had no identity and were getting booed at home, which skewed the result. IMO a fairer evaluation of what the team's record would have been without the injuries would be to take a sample starting after the rough start in the first month of the season. After that point, the team finally started to understand what IT wanted them to do. That seems like a more accurate representation of what the team can do at full strength. Obviously, the team's final record is not good, but if you are going to try to say injuries did not matter, then I think you have to take a sample of games that are not skewed.

Trust the Process
arkrud
Posts: 32217
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/31/2005
Member: #995
USA
4/14/2007  7:07 AM
Players understand what IT want to do???
You mean take as much money you can from this Cablevision morans and be cool...
Yep they did. Good for them
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
4/14/2007  7:53 AM
Posted by TheGame:
Posted by Solace:
Posted by TheGame:

You have to factor in that most of those games occurred early in the season when the team was getting booed at home and still did not have a identity or firm understanding of what they were trying to do. Take a sample after the first month and a half of the season and look at the games in which the top 5 players played.

Why? Because it (barely) supports your intended result? The reality is that this team wasn't very good, period. At our best, we're a below .500 team, so what's the uproar about the injuries? So if everyone is healthy, we win a few extra games. Who cares? We still suck.

How about this? Let's take the Knicks during all the games that they won and project it over a season. Oh wow! 82-0. That's terrific. That means if we could just learn to not lose, we'd win every game. See why you can't just say, 'oh those games don't count'? Because, guess what? THEY DO.

[Edited by - Solace on Apr 14 2007 02:52 AM]

This thread started with Isles trying to make the point that the injuries did not matter because in games in which the top 5 players played, the team went 17-22. My point was the most of those games occurred at a time when the team had no identity and were getting booed at home, which skewed the result. IMO a fairer evaluation of what the team's record would have been without the injuries would be to take a sample starting after the rough start in the first month of the season. After that point, the team finally started to understand what IT wanted them to do. That seems like a more accurate representation of what the team can do at full strength. Obviously, the team's final record is not good, but if you are going to try to say injuries did not matter, then I think you have to take a sample of games that are not skewed.
So we need to look at not merely when all the players were healthy but actually the best, brief stretch when they were healthy? It looks like you're fishing for anything to help your argument.
islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
4/14/2007  10:25 AM
Posted by TheGame:
Posted by Solace:
Posted by TheGame:

You have to factor in that most of those games occurred early in the season when the team was getting booed at home and still did not have a identity or firm understanding of what they were trying to do. Take a sample after the first month and a half of the season and look at the games in which the top 5 players played.

Why? Because it (barely) supports your intended result? The reality is that this team wasn't very good, period. At our best, we're a below .500 team, so what's the uproar about the injuries? So if everyone is healthy, we win a few extra games. Who cares? We still suck.

How about this? Let's take the Knicks during all the games that they won and project it over a season. Oh wow! 82-0. That's terrific. That means if we could just learn to not lose, we'd win every game. See why you can't just say, 'oh those games don't count'? Because, guess what? THEY DO.

[Edited by - Solace on Apr 14 2007 02:52 AM]

This thread started with Isles trying to make the point that the injuries did not matter because in games in which the top 5 players played, the team went 17-22. My point was the most of those games occurred at a time when the team had no identity and were getting booed at home, which skewed the result. IMO a fairer evaluation of what the team's record would have been without the injuries would be to take a sample starting after the rough start in the first month of the season. After that point, the team finally started to understand what IT wanted them to do. That seems like a more accurate representation of what the team can do at full strength. Obviously, the team's final record is not good, but if you are going to try to say injuries did not matter, then I think you have to take a sample of games that are not skewed.

Actually what would make it skewed would be if you only took a sampling from the 19-16 stretch where they played a staggering 27 of 35 games against under .500 teams, like you seem to want to do.

I didn't pick and choose games from certain stretches of the season to make the Knicks look worse, and make excuses as to why that would legitimate.

I didn't say that injuries didn't matter in terms of their final record, I'm saying that they didn't make the kind of difference that some people want to believe that it did.
If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
nykshaknbake
Posts: 22247
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/15/2003
Member: #492
4/14/2007  11:19 AM
That's just stupid. DIviding the season into time segments especially when there is an underlying reason that it should be is a reasonable thing when trying to guage progress. You and some other posters just get your jollies out of ripping on this team and anything to the contrary irritates you.
Posted by Solace:
Posted by TheGame:

You have to factor in that most of those games occurred early in the season when the team was getting booed at home and still did not have a identity or firm understanding of what they were trying to do. Take a sample after the first month and a half of the season and look at the games in which the top 5 players played.

Why? Because it (barely) supports your intended result? The reality is that this team wasn't very good, period. At our best, we're a below .500 team, so what's the uproar about the injuries? So if everyone is healthy, we win a few extra games. Who cares? We still suck.

How about this? Let's take the Knicks during all the games that they won and project it over a season. Oh wow! 82-0. That's terrific. That means if we could just learn to not lose, we'd win every game. See why you can't just say, 'oh those games don't count'? Because, guess what? THEY DO.

[Edited by - Solace on Apr 14 2007 02:52 AM]
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
4/14/2007  11:45 AM
The poor start was really bad and set us back early. But to think that the games we played at that time are representative of what this team really is, would be crazy. We started the year without the benefit of anything solid from the year before. To make matters worse Isiah didn't look to rely on the old Steph and Jamal heavy offense which was the only chemistry the team had at that point. It was more important to go in a new direction that would be even better for the team in the long haul.

I think we all saw this team continue to improve as a group as the season moved along. To come here now and make it seem like that was only a fluke is ridiculous. The poor start and the injury riddled ending aren't what this team is really about. When this team had gotten into a groove and was relatively healthy we saw that they could compete against anyone.

OldFan
Posts: 21456
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
4/14/2007  2:29 PM
This team at no time showed it could "compete with anyone". In any sport any year lousy teams will sometimes beat good teams. That doesn't really prove they are competetive with the good teams. Basketball teams play 82 games - the effort is not always going to be there. You can't really prove you are competitive with a team unless the game is important to both teams (think playoffs). If beating a good team once means you can "competitive with anyone" then every team in the league can "compete with anyone" (which makes the phrase basically meaningless.).

Isles is right. The injuries might have caused the Knicks to have a few more losses - but this team isn't and wasn't at any point in the year a good team.

I'm hopeful about what some of the young players showed but this team is nowhere close to being competitive.
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
4/14/2007  4:58 PM
Posted by nykshaknbake:

That's just stupid. DIviding the season into time segments especially when there is an underlying reason that it should be is a reasonable thing when trying to guage progress. You and some other posters just get your jollies out of ripping on this team and anything to the contrary irritates you.
Posted by Solace:
Posted by TheGame:

You have to factor in that most of those games occurred early in the season when the team was getting booed at home and still did not have a identity or firm understanding of what they were trying to do. Take a sample after the first month and a half of the season and look at the games in which the top 5 players played.

Why? Because it (barely) supports your intended result? The reality is that this team wasn't very good, period. At our best, we're a below .500 team, so what's the uproar about the injuries? So if everyone is healthy, we win a few extra games. Who cares? We still suck.

How about this? Let's take the Knicks during all the games that they won and project it over a season. Oh wow! 82-0. That's terrific. That means if we could just learn to not lose, we'd win every game. See why you can't just say, 'oh those games don't count'? Because, guess what? THEY DO.

Guys, you have excuses for every loss, every stretch of losses. The fact remains, you can talk about one variable and say the difference in the season. Lately it's injuries. Project the 17-22 over an entire season. It's a 36-46 team. A few games better than we'll win up. Oh right, but take away a stretch where we played badly. Sorry, that just doesn't make any sense. We didn't gel as a team? Bull****. We had almost the same roster from last season. The Larry Brown excuse doesn't apply because everyone was in love with Isiah and Isiah was just letting them play. Please, stop the bull**** arguments. It's pathetic. We're not a good team. You could probably find a good stretch even among Memphis where over 4 or 6 games they were .500. Who the fck cares? You can't project such small sample sizes over an entire season. It doesn't make any sense and it's complete garbage. You're setting yourself up for disappointment. If you just admit that we sucked again this season and injuries were a factor, but a small one, then we get somewhere.

[Edited by - Solace on Apr 14 2007 5:01 PM]
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
4/14/2007  5:11 PM
The problem with what you're saying is that the team was making a CONTINUAL progression of improvement. That all changed when the injuries mounted. There's a clear poor start, but after that the team kept getting better GRADUALLY. You can see exactly when that stopped and it corresponds with the injuries. We didn't have any long losing streaks or winning streaks that skewed and particular part of the season. It was just a team that started to win an increasing % of its games UNTIL the injuries of 3 key players. To me that shows me that this team was doing what we hoped it would do and that is get progressively better.

Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
4/14/2007  5:15 PM
Its pointless to argue this nixluva. Its not "what should the Knicks do to improve" but "isn't this enough reason to get rid of Isiah?" Most of these guys want to see the Knicks lose because they hate Isiah.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
4/14/2007  5:49 PM
The so-called GRADUAL improvement was highly related to the Knicks having an easier schedule the rest of the way. Again, what is it you're trying to prove? The team was getting better? What progression have you seen, other than Marbury playing like crap out of the gate and then finally playing better? Other than that, the team regressed on many levels.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
knicks1248
Posts: 42059
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #582
4/14/2007  6:27 PM
Posted by Solace:

The so-called GRADUAL improvement was highly related to the Knicks having an easier schedule the rest of the way. Again, what is it you're trying to prove? The team was getting better? What progression have you seen, other than Marbury playing like crap out of the gate and then finally playing better? Other than that, the team regressed on many levels.

Stephs adjustment to the goto guy now being Curry, the emergence of david lee as one the best rebounders in the game, crawford playing a little more under control, trying to establish a rotation, Q in and out of the line up hurt curry more then JC because of his prowness from DT. You put these things in proper pespective and you understand the fact that injuries were a huge factor no matter how you look at it.

We had a deep bench to begin with and IT still had'nt establish a rotation. We struggled out of the gate based on chemistry, and we finally got that in order 20/25 games into the season, the next 20 we were playing above .500 ball. Then the injuries started mountain and the chemistry started to become and issue again. Our young players played exceptional well at times( collins, nate, fry) BUT, ft & TO doomed us down the stetch when we had little margin of error.

ES
simrud
Posts: 23392
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/13/2003
Member: #474
USA
4/15/2007  12:55 AM
If I ever get to run anything, I'm going to hire the IT supporters as my PR team. Because I will never have to do anything right, ever.
A glimmer of hope maybe?!?
EnySpree
Posts: 44925
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
4/15/2007  1:48 AM
You guys are just miserable.

If the knicks go 82-0, there would be guys here still running the same tired doom and gloom, BS.

Realistically these knicks just came off the worst season in franchise history probably. Nobody thought they would do anything. So what is the problem?

Another thing, isiah was playing around with francis in the backcourt. The knicks didn't start winning or playing together until francis went down and craw started. Marbs didn't find his game till the end of December. The knicks were playing good ball for a big stretch before the injuries took its told. Yeah the knicks would have made the playoffs if the guys were healthy down the stretch. The knicks had Orlando and new jersey by the balls.

I'm just as pissed that the knicks are out of it too but the anger and the nasty tone you guys pound everyday is too much. Its tiresome.

I would like to flame frye and Jared more than anything. Those two players are the ones that screwed the knicks over down the stretch.
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
4/15/2007  3:46 AM
Posted by EnySpree:

Realistically these knicks just came off the worst season in franchise history probably. Nobody thought they would do anything. So what is the problem?

If nobody thought they would do anything, then why do people keep making excuses for why they did so poorly? ONE OR THE OTHER. For god sakes, you guys flip around from argument to argument more than fish out of water, whenever it suits you. If they suck, fine, they suck. Then don't use injury excuses. If they're a team that was destined to be good, then how come our injuries had almost no effect up until we had multiple main cogs injured towards the end? Why not compare apples to apples for a change? We still had Marbury and Curry, our top 2, come on now. How come they still played considerably below .500 even at full strength? Why the massive excuses for a team that had very little shot at .500 ball? Once the lovers admit those things, the haters will agree. Let's stop the fcking sugarcoating already. This is a piss poor team and Isiah only kept his job because Dolan wanted it that way... not because he earned it. PERIOD.

Evident progress is playing a style of basketball that disregards fundamentals and requires us to win on PURE athleticism, since a lot of the players have no real basketball talent. Sorry, but that just doesn't cut it and is piss poor.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
The Knicks record with their top 5 players
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy