I took a good strong look at the spurs

Why are the so good? They have no player who scores more than 19--I guess no superstar and they are avg 104. They are great because they have tremendous floor balance--they have depth at every position and then starters get to play less minutes keeping them fresh. They have multiple quality inside guys--outside shooters--penetraters--ballahandlers. Every roster spot has meaning and is utilized--there is no wasted space and they get contribution from all. They have a plan on both ends and stick to it. They are always in the right position. They spread the floor comfortably.

Our team has over played its guys--they have NOT utilized the roster depth--they did not respond to injuries by potential removing players who are just not NBA--rautins and Mason and replaced them with guys who can give us a chance. I don't see much changing my bringing in one player and removing a bunch of our core. In fact we may get worse. I do not think this is the rioght coach--I think better coaches would have a better record with the talent on this team--and wouldve thought of a scheme how to use Randolph and Mosgov effectively--and told D walsh--hey these guys arent doing it mason etc.. lets ee if we can bring in some young hungry guys from the d league who can and give them a shot.

I don't think getting melo doe that much if we give up a lot--I think the whole team needs to be re evaluated starting with the coaching. You take away 13-1 and were 9-19--is that an acceptable number with our roster?

Paladin55 wrote:Funny thing is that at the beginning of the year I felt we had the kind of depth you were talking about, and at that time I didn't even know how good Fields would be, or how useful Williams would be.

I thought:

1) Azubuike would be in playing shape by now- 20-25+ MPG

2) Mason would be a suitable replacement until Azu got better- 15 MPG

3) Randolph would be playing 25-30 MPG.

4) Mosguv would be playing 10-20 MPG

I really believed that we had good depth on this team, and that MDA would go with a much larger rotation.

The problem is maybe we should. Heck even Rautins--is he better than Chris Quinn? Can he give me 10 minutes if Felton is that hurt? This whole thing is based WAY to much on offense and even so why is amare % down 5 felton down Gallo down etc... Can Mosgov give me 10-12 minutes effectively using his strengths--can we map out a plan for Randolph. The deal that you need to be a 3 pt shooter is tough because you lose out on players who could help other ways--like drivers interior players specialty defenders. This is not a well balanced coach--thats the problem. How can you score 125 points and lose? maybe these guys on the bench use a different way succeed--but with MDA we wont find out.

Vmart wrote:Its really not that great of a roster. A lot of inconsistent players. Chandler and Gallo are up and coming players but they are a ways away before the find some semblance of consistency. In this losing streak that has been the down fall. Chandler hasn't showed up he needs to bring it every night and quite frankly he isn't, he looks tired out there. Felton has been terrible unlike the streak where he was infallible, during this stretch he hasn't been great. Gallo has been hurt and that has taken something away but to rely on him for consistency is asking for a lot. When it is all said and done consistency is what is lacking and Melo gives the Knicks that. Amare needs that.

Im not saying Melo is not a great player--but just the way the team is---the coach is the problem. I dont see bringing in Melo changing many things. A great player can help but the way we do things--he'll be burnt out or hurt by mid season. Add in a thin roster and recipe for disaster and capped out.

Vmart wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:Funny thing is that at the beginning of the year I felt we had the kind of depth you were talking about, and at that time I didn't even know how good Fields would be, or how useful Williams would be.

I thought:

1) Azubuike would be in playing shape by now- 20-25+ MPG

2) Mason would be a suitable replacement until Azu got better- 15 MPG

3) Randolph would be playing 25-30 MPG.

4) Mosguv would be playing 10-20 MPG

I really believed that we had good depth on this team, and that MDA would go with a much larger rotation.

The problem is maybe we should. Heck even Rautins--is he better than Chris Quinn? Can he give me 10 minutes if Felton is that hurt? This whole thing is based WAY to much on offense and even so why is amare % down 5 felton down Gallo down etc... Can Mosgov give me 10-12 minutes effectively using his strengths--can we map out a plan for Randolph. The deal that you need to be a 3 pt shooter is tough because you lose out on players who could help other ways--like drivers interior players specialty defenders. This is not a well balanced coach--thats the problem. How can you score 125 points and lose? maybe these guys on the bench use a different way succeed--but with MDA we wont find out.

Precisely, this team has depth but MDA won't use it or dosen't know how to utilize it. He chalks anyone he doesn't want to play as useless and not ready to play. I'm sorry but that isn't how its suppose to be he has to find a way to utilize his bigs and needs to address the size issue this constantly play undersized has it own way of fatiguing the smaller players. Get man handled on the boards leaves a team spent and eventually you know the writing is on the wall that team mood and moral goes down with each rebound lost.

Would a good coach allow us to be made look like chumps by the Sacramento Kings at home?

here is the box score of the last game of the 6 game losing streak at the start of the season.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=301116007

mozgov started and randolph played, 11 guys in fact played.

after that game, he got nervous about his job and shortened his rotation, started playing STAT and felton an absurd amount, and we started winning.

i have no problem with benching roger mason. he is what he is at this point and he wasn't contributing. fine.

had EITHER of mozgov or randolph been developed and continued to get a few minutes every game, we would have a competent bench and a developing, young 7 footer. instead, in MDA's stubbornness, he pushed amare and felton to the brink to get a few cheap Ws in a weak stretch of the schedule.

now what? now we are playing strong teams and can't call on either of these guys. its severely dissappointing, and must be for donnie walsh as well.

martin, i don't think anybody understands (walsh, randolph/mozgov/ et al) what MDA's thinking is. you can't win with an 8-man rotation. fact. not to mention, the only two real big men we have are stoudemire (such an injury history his 100 million dollar contract wasn't insured) and turiaf (has already missed several stretches due to injury). ridiculous.

s3231 wrote:I'm pretty sure a good coach would help us beat the best team in the league....(aka win against Spurs at home)

I don't agree with every decision that Mike has made but I don't see how you can say he's done a poor job this year when he has this team sitting in the 6th seed in the East right now. We tried a large rotation at the beginning of the year and we were losing with that rotation, can you blame D'Antoni for changing it up?

People were pretty pissed when we we're 3-8 and now after being in the playoff hunt, people are still pissed. There will always be something to nitpick but overall, I think you kind of have to be content with where this team is at right now.

We had a 13-1 stretch. Other than that were 9-19 with an MVP type candidate surrounded by double digit scorers at ever position. We scored 125 points and 121 in Utah/Phoenix and lost. We got beat down by the Kings at home. This is a different team than the 13-1 run-- guys are fatigued--its a case of running the horse into the ground. A good coach makes his team better a they go along. If you can do 13-1 then you should do better than 22-20.

crzymdups wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

s3231 wrote:I'm pretty sure a good coach would help us beat the best team in the league....(aka win against Spurs at home)

I don't agree with every decision that Mike has made but I don't see how you can say he's done a poor job this year when he has this team sitting in the 6th seed in the East right now. We tried a large rotation at the beginning of the year and we were losing with that rotation, can you blame D'Antoni for changing it up?

People were pretty pissed when we we're 3-8 and now after being in the playoff hunt, people are still pissed. There will always be something to nitpick but overall, I think you kind of have to be content with where this team is at right now.

We had a 13-1 stretch. Other than that were 9-19 with an MVP type candidate surrounded by double digit scorers at ever position. We scored 125 points and 121 in Utah/Phoenix and lost. We got beat down by the Kings at home. This is a different team than the 13-1 run-- guys are fatigued--its a case of running the horse into the ground. A good coach makes his team better a they go along. If you can do 13-1 then you should do better than 22-20.

everybody knew depth was an issue and that they ended that 13-1 stretch and entered a really tough part of the schedule.

i think the melo stuff is getting to the team now. and i think it's silly to act like the knicks are going to make any roster moves before the melo one is addressed.

BigSm00th wrote:

s3231 wrote:I'm pretty sure a good coach would help us beat the best team in the league....(aka win against Spurs at home)

I don't agree with every decision that Mike has made but I don't see how you can say he's done a poor job this year when he has this team sitting in the 6th seed in the East right now. We tried a large rotation at the beginning of the year and we were losing with that rotation, can you blame D'Antoni for changing it up?

People were pretty pissed when we we're 3-8 and now after being in the playoff hunt, people are still pissed. There will always be something to nitpick but overall, I think you kind of have to be content with where this team is at right now.

we have 2 7 footers on the bench, one 24 and one 21. both have skills. neither have been developed. i blame that on MDA.

Does it have to happen during a game, or can it happen in practice. How was Williams "developed" to the point MDA felt confident enough to play him in actual games?

BigSm00th wrote:

s3231 wrote:I'm pretty sure a good coach would help us beat the best team in the league....(aka win against Spurs at home)

I don't agree with every decision that Mike has made but I don't see how you can say he's done a poor job this year when he has this team sitting in the 6th seed in the East right now. We tried a large rotation at the beginning of the year and we were losing with that rotation, can you blame D'Antoni for changing it up?

People were pretty pissed when we we're 3-8 and now after being in the playoff hunt, people are still pissed. There will always be something to nitpick but overall, I think you kind of have to be content with where this team is at right now.

we have 2 7 footers on the bench, one 24 and one 21. both have skills. neither have been developed. i blame that on MDA.

And if we were 17-25 instead of 22-20, guess what, D'Antoni gets the blame too.

Again, the goal is to make the playoffs this season and if these players aren't ready to contribute, there is nothing wrong with developing them slowly through practice/coaching/etc. What is wrong with allowing these players to earn their minutes?

D'Antoni didn't play Jordan Hill or Tony Douglas early last season because neither was ready to play. Then when both players should they could contribute, Mike put both of them into the rotation. It's not like the guy has an agenda here, he is trying to win games.

CrushAlot wrote:

s3231 wrote:

BigSm00th wrote:

s3231 wrote:I'm pretty sure a good coach would help us beat the best team in the league....(aka win against Spurs at home)

I don't agree with every decision that Mike has made but I don't see how you can say he's done a poor job this year when he has this team sitting in the 6th seed in the East right now. We tried a large rotation at the beginning of the year and we were losing with that rotation, can you blame D'Antoni for changing it up?

People were pretty pissed when we we're 3-8 and now after being in the playoff hunt, people are still pissed. There will always be something to nitpick but overall, I think you kind of have to be content with where this team is at right now.

we have 2 7 footers on the bench, one 24 and one 21. both have skills. neither have been developed. i blame that on MDA.

And if we were 17-25 instead of 22-20, guess what, D'Antoni gets the blame too.

Again, the goal is to make the playoffs this season and if these players aren't ready to contribute, there is nothing wrong with developing them slowly through practice/coaching/etc. What is wrong with allowing these players to earn their minutes?

D'Antoni didn't play Jordan Hill or Tony Douglas early last season because neither was ready to play. Then when both players should they could contribute, Mike put both of them into the rotation. It's not like the guy has an agenda here, he is trying to win games.

Hill never made it into the rotation in NY, Adelman put him into the rotation. Douglas didn't get to play regular minutes until there was 19 games left. Douglas's suddenly getting minutes coincided with Walsh traveling with the team on the Texas road trip to evaluate players and the coaching staff. Not playing those guys last year on a team competing for nothing all season was one of D'Antoni's biggest mistakes in my opinion.

these examples just prove d'antoni's stubbornness! how about him benching nate for like 2 months, was that for the good of the team or some petty disagreement? he didn't play darko and he's giving the t'wolves 10 pts/5 reb/2 blk and quality minutes.

how many NBA teams only play 8 players? not many. you just have to play 10 ppl, play the best 10 guys not the best 8. how is mozgov playing 5-10 minutes a game and getting acclimated going to make the knicks 17-25.

regarding this quote:
"Again, the goal is to make the playoffs this season and if these players aren't ready to contribute, there is nothing wrong with developing them slowly through practice/coaching/etc. What is wrong with allowing these players to earn their minutes?"

the issue isn't talent or tools with mozgov and randolph. both have a "deer in headlights" look at play very uncomfortably. you have to make an educated guess on which one is closer and give him minutes, there is no reason these guys wouldn't contribute.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/gamelog?playerId=3455&year=2010

look at this guy's games last year when he was healthy! you cannot tell me randolph lacks the ability to play, he hasn't been given a chance. he played a handful of games in the beginning when EVERYONE was uncomfortable and they were losing and they he got benched -- for good. inexcusable and inexplicable.