Posted by TrueBlue:

P.J. Brown is such a Pros Pro. WOW 20pts in a half.

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by Bippity10:

The Bulls learned nothing from this series. I see them collapsing next year and winning 33 games.......Now that I think of it, that would actually a successful season.

UNLESS the Bulls make an addition of a Post player that can get them points inside, the things they've learned won't mean much, cuz they'll still lose. You can't beat balanced teams consistently with just jumpshots. They have some really good jumpshooters and some really good defense, but it's gonna take more than that. I hate the Bulls as a team, but I respect what they've done and how good of a job Pax has done. Skiles has these guys playing as hard as they possibly can, which is also what is making up some of the difference in talent level. They overachieve and I would LOVE for the Knicks to do that consistently.

The thing is, I think the Knicks are on the right path. When you look at the roster, we're going to be playing with more HUSTLE type players next year. Despite all the negative crap that some of us say about the players on this team, this team actually has some players that we will get a lot of effort from. Lee, Balkman, Collins, Jared, Q and Steph ALL PLAY HARD. Let's not LIE and EXAGGERATE to make it seem like this is a team of slackers, when it's not. Guys still have much to learn, but I like the direction we're headed in.

We wouldn't be one of the best rebounding teams in the league if we were lazy. Now there are still improvements to be made, but I like what we have so far. We still have a LOT of talent on this team and we should all be hoping that some of the guys that had down years will come back strong. If there's a deal to help improve the team without mortaging the future that's even better. The thing is that the culture around here has to change. Too often i'm reading things about this team that are so over the top that is seems like we have a bunch of Boston Celtic fans posting here. I can understand criticism, but the nasty statements and the jokes that go on are just hard to believe coming from Knick fans. is our future really so bleak that it's time to just rag on the team cuz there's no hope? That to me was what we had when layden was still here. That's NOT what we have now.

You all know that we have a nice core of youth and that we're close to cap flexibility. We have options to get better and tho the Bulls may have a few more options, we're not stuck. WHY? Cuz the things we need are easier to find. How many really good post players are there available? The Bulls are gonna be battling with other teams to get that player. How much will they have to give up to get that player? In our case we may already have a PF that can fill the role we need. The Bulls don't have ANYONE young on the roster that is like that. They MUST look to trade for or sign a guy to give them that. Yeah they have a small chance to get a high draft pick, but it's not very likely. We need shooting and if we wanted to we can get someone for very little to do that. We can also find SG's we need late in the draft. Right now DraftNet has Bellinelli, M. Williams, Afflalo, Almond, Tucker, Cook, Stuckey, Rush all looking like they'll be available when we draft.
I just don't think we're at much of a disadvantage. Right now the Bulls are better, but I don't think they'll make a huge improvement next year without some changes. Meanwhile if both teams fail to land a big addition, I think the Knicks are going to still have a chance to make a big jump in wins next year. We may still be behind them, but not by nearly as much as this year.

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by Bippity10:

The Bulls learned nothing from this series. I see them collapsing next year and winning 33 games.......Now that I think of it, that would actually a successful season.

UNLESS the Bulls make an addition of a Post player that can get them points inside, the things they've learned won't mean much, cuz they'll still lose. You can't beat balanced teams consistently with just jumpshots. They have some really good jumpshooters and some really good defense, but it's gonna take more than that. I hate the Bulls as a team, but I respect what they've done and how good of a job Pax has done. Skiles has these guys playing as hard as they possibly can, which is also what is making up some of the difference in talent level. They overachieve and I would LOVE for the Knicks to do that consistently.

The thing is, I think the Knicks are on the right path. When you look at the roster, we're going to be playing with more HUSTLE type players next year. Despite all the negative crap that some of us say about the players on this team, this team actually has some players that we will get a lot of effort from. Lee, Balkman, Collins, Jared, Q and Steph ALL PLAY HARD. Let's not LIE and EXAGGERATE to make it seem like this is a team of slackers, when it's not. Guys still have much to learn, but I like the direction we're headed in.

We wouldn't be one of the best rebounding teams in the league if we were lazy. Now there are still improvements to be made, but I like what we have so far. We still have a LOT of talent on this team and we should all be hoping that some of the guys that had down years will come back strong. If there's a deal to help improve the team without mortaging the future that's even better. The thing is that the culture around here has to change. Too often i'm reading things about this team that are so over the top that is seems like we have a bunch of Boston Celtic fans posting here. I can understand criticism, but the nasty statements and the jokes that go on are just hard to believe coming from Knick fans. is our future really so bleak that it's time to just rag on the team cuz there's no hope? That to me was what we had when layden was still here. That's NOT what we have now.

You all know that we have a nice core of youth and that we're close to cap flexibility. We have options to get better and tho the Bulls may have a few more options, we're not stuck. WHY? Cuz the things we need are easier to find. How many really good post players are there available? The Bulls are gonna be battling with other teams to get that player. How much will they have to give up to get that player? In our case we may already have a PF that can fill the role we need. The Bulls don't have ANYONE young on the roster that is like that. They MUST look to trade for or sign a guy to give them that. Yeah they have a small chance to get a high draft pick, but it's not very likely. We need shooting and if we wanted to we can get someone for very little to do that. We can also find SG's we need late in the draft. Right now DraftNet has Bellinelli, M. Williams, Afflalo, Almond, Tucker, Cook, Stuckey, Rush all looking like they'll be available when we draft.
I just don't think we're at much of a disadvantage. Right now the Bulls are better, but I don't think they'll make a huge improvement next year without some changes. Meanwhile if both teams fail to land a big addition, I think the Knicks are going to still have a chance to make a big jump in wins next year. We may still be behind them, but not by nearly as much as this year.

Posted by Caseloads:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by Caseloads:

Posted by TrueBlue:

P.J. Brown is such a Pros Pro. WOW 20pts in a half.

Yeah, he's wonderful. He beats up on guys 50 pounds and a foot shorter than him.

What?

Not What. Ward.

Posted by Bonn1997:

I think the Bulls do need a post player. I think it will be work for them to get that player. But why does that mean their future is in trouble? I'm not sure where that logic comes from.

When weighing the importance of everything on a 1 to 10 scale for importance when rebuilding, I'm convinced Nixluva does something like this:
Low post scorer: 10
versatile players: 1
perimeter shooters: 1
perimeter defenders: 1
Interior defenders: 1
Shot-blocking: 1
Passing: 1

Posted by Bippity10:

I think the Bulls do need a post player. I think it will be work for them to get that player. But why does that mean their future is in trouble? I'm not sure where that logic comes from.

In reality I could care less aobut the Bulls and where they stand. They are in good shape but whether they are or not has nothing to do with our situation. I think fans just use their situation to make themselves feel better or worse about our team. It's irrelevant. But some fans don't mind sounding silly anyway.

Nixluva, it's fine to feel good about your team. We have youth. It could mature, but why waste your time comparing us to the Bulls. Why downplay their future? If we looked like them right now, you'd be saying we were a player away from a title and reveling in it. why not just be objective and look at the situations separately. Why sound so silly? They've done a good job, now after 7 years of time wasting, maybe we can start doing a good job as well.

Posted by martin:

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by Bippity10:

I think the Bulls do need a post player. I think it will be work for them to get that player. But why does that mean their future is in trouble? I'm not sure where that logic comes from.

In reality I could care less aobut the Bulls and where they stand. They are in good shape but whether they are or not has nothing to do with our situation. I think fans just use their situation to make themselves feel better or worse about our team. It's irrelevant. But some fans don't mind sounding silly anyway.

Nixluva, it's fine to feel good about your team. We have youth. It could mature, but why waste your time comparing us to the Bulls. Why downplay their future? If we looked like them right now, you'd be saying we were a player away from a title and reveling in it. why not just be objective and look at the situations separately. Why sound so silly? They've done a good job, now after 7 years of time wasting, maybe we can start doing a good job as well.

Bip, since you are a coach, I'd be interested in knowing why you think the Bulls need to have a traditional post player. In my opinion, their offensive inconsistency is a result of the fact that neither Hinrich and Gordon are really dominant penetrators yet - the poor 3 point shooting at the 4 and 5 worsens the congestion in the paint. The pick and roll is guarded relatively easily as well because the opposing 4 is free to trap the guards - knowing well that Ben and Tyrus can't make plays from 15 feet out. Without 4s or 5s that hit from the perimeter, the defense almost always has their bigs set in the paint - making both drives and off-the-ball cuts more difficult.

A post-up player opens up the perimeter, gets opposing bigs in foul touble, helps with offensive rebounding etc. And that is one potential solution. But, a pick and roll demon, so to speak, offers many of the same advantages - open shots as a result of the screen or trap, mismatch creation and lanes to the basket with ensuing fouls, and offensive rebounding by sequestering the opposing big on the perimeter. Moreover, while the value of a post-up big man is limited to plays run through him, a shooting big man helps to space the floor for a variety of plays. Pick and rolls also require less set-up time than post-ups - in other words, the play is available later in the shot clock. So, to me, either type of player solves a significant part of the Bull's offensive struggles.

And Nixluva, a defensively incompetent post-up player like Curry isn't solving either teams problems.

I am not sure they need a traditional post player who is completely dominant, but they need one who is not half bad.

I am trying to think of the last championship team that did NOT have a fairly decent post player and I can't.

I think it has to do with being a more balanced team than anything.

Just because many teams have done it with a post-up player doesn't it mean its the only way or even the best way to win. I know that may not be what you're suggesting. To me, however, thats the crux of the matter - that a post-up player is merely a piece, and not an essential piece, of a championship team.

In my opinion, regardless of what you think of Rasheed's ability, Detroit now rarely runs a low post offense. They use Chris in the high post or Wallace at the arc. When they misfire on offense for stretches, ironically, they rely on the pick and roll with Chauncey and Rasheed. The Suns, who also are contenders, utilize Amare almost exclusively on the pick and roll or on a face-up 15 feet out.

I agree that balance is part of the advantage of having a post-up player. Just as having a penetrating guard or a 3pt shooting center or a high-post passing power-forward add to the balance of a team. Each dimension strains the opposing defense further. From that grab bag of options, there are a number of succesful combinations depending on the abilities of your players. But none, including post-up play, are essential.

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by martin:

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by Bippity10:

I think the Bulls do need a post player. I think it will be work for them to get that player. But why does that mean their future is in trouble? I'm not sure where that logic comes from.

In reality I could care less aobut the Bulls and where they stand. They are in good shape but whether they are or not has nothing to do with our situation. I think fans just use their situation to make themselves feel better or worse about our team. It's irrelevant. But some fans don't mind sounding silly anyway.

Nixluva, it's fine to feel good about your team. We have youth. It could mature, but why waste your time comparing us to the Bulls. Why downplay their future? If we looked like them right now, you'd be saying we were a player away from a title and reveling in it. why not just be objective and look at the situations separately. Why sound so silly? They've done a good job, now after 7 years of time wasting, maybe we can start doing a good job as well.

Bip, since you are a coach, I'd be interested in knowing why you think the Bulls need to have a traditional post player. In my opinion, their offensive inconsistency is a result of the fact that neither Hinrich and Gordon are really dominant penetrators yet - the poor 3 point shooting at the 4 and 5 worsens the congestion in the paint. The pick and roll is guarded relatively easily as well because the opposing 4 is free to trap the guards - knowing well that Ben and Tyrus can't make plays from 15 feet out. Without 4s or 5s that hit from the perimeter, the defense almost always has their bigs set in the paint - making both drives and off-the-ball cuts more difficult.

A post-up player opens up the perimeter, gets opposing bigs in foul touble, helps with offensive rebounding etc. And that is one potential solution. But, a pick and roll demon, so to speak, offers many of the same advantages - open shots as a result of the screen or trap, mismatch creation and lanes to the basket with ensuing fouls, and offensive rebounding by sequestering the opposing big on the perimeter. Moreover, while the value of a post-up big man is limited to plays run through him, a shooting big man helps to space the floor for a variety of plays. Pick and rolls also require less set-up time than post-ups - in other words, the play is available later in the shot clock. So, to me, either type of player solves a significant part of the Bull's offensive struggles.

And Nixluva, a defensively incompetent post-up player like Curry isn't solving either teams problems.

I am not sure they need a traditional post player who is completely dominant, but they need one who is not half bad.

I am trying to think of the last championship team that did NOT have a fairly decent post player and I can't.

I think it has to do with being a more balanced team than anything.

Just because many teams have done it with a post-up player doesn't it mean its the only way or even the best way to win. I know that may not be what you're suggesting. To me, however, thats the crux of the matter - that a post-up player is merely a piece, and not an essential piece, of a championship team.

In my opinion, regardless of what you think of Rasheed's ability, Detroit now rarely runs a low post offense. They use Chris in the high post or Wallace at the arc. When they misfire on offense for stretches, ironically, they rely on the pick and roll with Chauncey and Rasheed. The Suns, who also are contenders, utilize Amare almost exclusively on the pick and roll or on a face-up 15 feet out.

I agree that balance is part of the advantage of having a post-up player. Just as having a penetrating guard or a 3pt shooting center or a high-post passing power-forward add to the balance of a team. Each dimension strains the opposing defense further. From that grab bag of options, there are a number of succesful combinations depending on the abilities of your players. But none, including post-up play, are essential.

just read that statement. The fact that many teams have won with a traditional post up big, shows you that it does work, more often than not, so although it might not be the only way to win( see Jordan) but it has been the most successful it seems. So why would you want to try and buck the trend? one that has proven true over time?

Posted by martin:

Posted by tkf:

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by martin:

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by Bippity10:

I think the Bulls do need a post player. I think it will be work for them to get that player. But why does that mean their future is in trouble? I'm not sure where that logic comes from.

In reality I could care less aobut the Bulls and where they stand. They are in good shape but whether they are or not has nothing to do with our situation. I think fans just use their situation to make themselves feel better or worse about our team. It's irrelevant. But some fans don't mind sounding silly anyway.

Nixluva, it's fine to feel good about your team. We have youth. It could mature, but why waste your time comparing us to the Bulls. Why downplay their future? If we looked like them right now, you'd be saying we were a player away from a title and reveling in it. why not just be objective and look at the situations separately. Why sound so silly? They've done a good job, now after 7 years of time wasting, maybe we can start doing a good job as well.

Bip, since you are a coach, I'd be interested in knowing why you think the Bulls need to have a traditional post player. In my opinion, their offensive inconsistency is a result of the fact that neither Hinrich and Gordon are really dominant penetrators yet - the poor 3 point shooting at the 4 and 5 worsens the congestion in the paint. The pick and roll is guarded relatively easily as well because the opposing 4 is free to trap the guards - knowing well that Ben and Tyrus can't make plays from 15 feet out. Without 4s or 5s that hit from the perimeter, the defense almost always has their bigs set in the paint - making both drives and off-the-ball cuts more difficult.

A post-up player opens up the perimeter, gets opposing bigs in foul touble, helps with offensive rebounding etc. And that is one potential solution. But, a pick and roll demon, so to speak, offers many of the same advantages - open shots as a result of the screen or trap, mismatch creation and lanes to the basket with ensuing fouls, and offensive rebounding by sequestering the opposing big on the perimeter. Moreover, while the value of a post-up big man is limited to plays run through him, a shooting big man helps to space the floor for a variety of plays. Pick and rolls also require less set-up time than post-ups - in other words, the play is available later in the shot clock. So, to me, either type of player solves a significant part of the Bull's offensive struggles.

And Nixluva, a defensively incompetent post-up player like Curry isn't solving either teams problems.

I am not sure they need a traditional post player who is completely dominant, but they need one who is not half bad.

I am trying to think of the last championship team that did NOT have a fairly decent post player and I can't.

I think it has to do with being a more balanced team than anything.

Just because many teams have done it with a post-up player doesn't it mean its the only way or even the best way to win. I know that may not be what you're suggesting. To me, however, thats the crux of the matter - that a post-up player is merely a piece, and not an essential piece, of a championship team.

In my opinion, regardless of what you think of Rasheed's ability, Detroit now rarely runs a low post offense. They use Chris in the high post or Wallace at the arc. When they misfire on offense for stretches, ironically, they rely on the pick and roll with Chauncey and Rasheed. The Suns, who also are contenders, utilize Amare almost exclusively on the pick and roll or on a face-up 15 feet out.

I agree that balance is part of the advantage of having a post-up player. Just as having a penetrating guard or a 3pt shooting center or a high-post passing power-forward add to the balance of a team. Each dimension strains the opposing defense further. From that grab bag of options, there are a number of succesful combinations depending on the abilities of your players. But none, including post-up play, are essential.

just read that statement. The fact that many teams have won with a traditional post up big, shows you that it does work, more often than not, so although it might not be the only way to win( see Jordan) but it has been the most successful it seems. So why would you want to try and buck the trend? one that has proven true over time?

Jordan and Longely were pretty good post players. I would say that they qualify.

You need a threat in the post but it doesn't have to be Shaq like. A team like the Bulls is so strong and has so much upside in many areas of the game that they can just add one player who's a respectable threat in the post and they'll improve enormously.