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

Knicks....as currently constructed
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
metra
Posts: 20743
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/11/2003
Member: #473
7/17/2006  3:05 PM
joec, i dunno if it was your intention but that list is orderd by PPG, not MPG. The minutes are listed but it's ordered by points.

[Edited by - metra on 07-17-2006 3:06 PM]
AUTOADVERT
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
7/17/2006  3:11 PM
I think its a CLEAR shift in attitude and direction now. You can see that the players have a sense of purpose even at this early stage and this isn't even the whole playbook or the starters playing. Isiah's FA signings and trades can be questioned at times, but not his eye for talent and how he's added so many solid young players who can help this team. He's been bashed for taking a chance on guys like Jamal and Curry, but what about Frye, Lee, Nate, Butler, Balkman and Collins, who are all good fits for this team. He'll actually be able to reach the players in a way that LB never could.

Steph, Francis, Lee, Frye & Curry - jamal, QRich, Nate, Balkman & James and then let the circumstances dictate how the rest of the bench is used. I'm assuming that Bulter will not be resigned. Collins, Jalen, MO & Malik don't need a solid spot in the rotation. The old guys know what time it is. They're days are numbered and this team belongs to the young guys now.
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
7/17/2006  3:15 PM
I disagree, my feeling is the complete opposite...I feel that we will be a better team BECAUSE we didn't make any moves in the off season.

I also think that several players came into camp severely out of shape and out of character with their previous stops (can't be blamed on LB).

I think that allowing marbury to play to his strengths will enable him to win a few games on his own as well as get the players that do support him (rooks, craw, curry) more into the flow of the offense and the game and that too will contribute to more wins.

Last year was more about breaking the team down...it worked, and I'm as optimistic about this year regardless of the coach because they all had a year to really look at their games and make changes coming into this year.

More wins.

Looking at the offense being installed, the "quick" offense, it is made to benefit a younger more athletic team both offensively and defensively...more wins.

While I'm not saying the knicks will contend for a championship, I am saying we are better than teams that appeared to be better than us last year.

The milwaukee's and washingtons won't blow out to early leads like last year and basically sweep us.

The rapters, hornets and other cellar dwellers had no other distractions other than lack of talent, and they still have that.

The nets, celtics and bulls are competition and those games have been decided by coaching...so I expect the same splits as previous years.

Our goal is to steal games where last year they were straight up blow outs, and that's with a team that has had a year under it's belt, playing towards their strengths and coming into camp in better shape than last year.

IMHO, that's 15 more wins this coming year alone.

38 wins get's you in the playoffs in the east.

We catch lightning in a bottle and suddenly QRich, Crawford and Curry are playing as previously advertised, and you can add another 7 wins and the atlantic division.

The rooks and second year players morph into NBA players and we have second round of the playoffs.

While it may seem like giant leaps of faith to actually compete next year, I'm sure you will admit half the games without marbury at the end of the year were mailed in.

We get those back and fill in our needs and we are back to being a respectible team.

That's all we're saying...to believe that last year is what we have as a team when even the a poster as anti knicks and negative as ******** says we had a "rash" of injuries (justifying the lineups but not justifying our record, I like his biased use of the facts btw).

All of these observations good or bad point to the knicks being a better team next year.

all kool aid all the time.
crzymdups
Posts: 52018
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/1/2004
Member: #671
USA
7/17/2006  3:16 PM
Minutes per game ignores the healthy DNP-CD that DLee and Nate racked up. And I'm sorry, but 59 player games lost to injury does not account for 13 players starting 9 or more games. We had 42 starting lineups. There is a reason that is an all-time record, because a rotation was not set. The Pacers the year Artest, Stephen Jackson and JOneal were suspended for 75, 35, 25 games respectively didn't use anywhere near 42 lineups.

You can say Brown used the rookies more than some coaches might have, fine. but he didn't use them consistently just like he didn't use anyone else consistently.
¿ △ ?
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
7/17/2006  3:16 PM
I forgot my point...my point is that while we have the "same team as last year" on paper, this team mentally (and hopefully physically) will be COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

That's the one thing I think everyone on this board can agree on.
all kool aid all the time.
eViL
Posts: 25412
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 1/21/2004
Member: #561
USA
7/17/2006  3:35 PM 
PLAYER NAME, TEAM NAME 	GP  	MIN  	MPG
Chris Paul , NOK	78	2,808	36
Raymond Felton , CHA	80	2,405	30.1
C.Villanueva , TOR	81	2,361	29.1
Luther Head , HOU	80	2,317	29
Deron Williams , UTA	80	2,314	28.9
Andrew Bogut , MIL	82	2,354	28.7
Marvin Williams , ATL	79	1,957	24.8
Channing Frye , NYK	65	1,588	24.4
Jose Calderon , TOR	64	1,486	23.2
Danny Granger , IND	78	1,782	22.9
Ryan Gomes , BOS	61	1,386	22.7
Nate Robinson , NYK	72	1,543	21.4
S. Jasikevicius , IND	75	1,577	21
Jarrett Jack , POR	79	1,608	20.4
Salim Stoudamire , ATL	61	1,241	20.4
Joey Graham , TOR	80	1,580	19.8
Francisco Garcia , SAC	67	1,316	19.7
Bracey Wright , MIN	7	135	19.3
Johan Petro , SEA	68	1,282	18.9
Monta Ellis , GSW	49	918	18.7
Martell Webster , POR	61	1,075	17.6
Sean May , CHA	        23	398	17.3
Rashad McCants , MIN	79	1,364	17.3
David Lee , NYK	        67	1,128	16.8
Alan Anderson , CHA	36	563	15.7
Orien Greene , BOS	80	1,252	15.7
Ike Diogu , GSW	        69	1,064	15.4
Daniel Ewing , LAC	66	979	14.8
Charles Hayes , HOU	40	542	13.6
Sergei Monia , SAC-POR	26	343	13.2
Amir Johnson , DET	3	38	12.9
James Singleton , LAC	59	761	12.9
Josh Powell , DAL	37	439	11.9
Gerald Green , BOS	32	373	11.7
Will Bynum , GSW	15	165	11
Hakim Warrick , MEM	68	735	10.8
Travis Diener , ORL	23	245	10.7
Rawle Marshall , DAL	23	241	10.5
Antoine Wright , NJN	39	378	9.7
Wayne Simien , MIA	43	414	9.6
Donell Taylor , WAS	51	475	9.3
Brandon Bass , NOK	29	268	9.3
Robert Whaley , UTA	23	211	9.2
Anthony Grundy , ATL	12	108	9
CJ Miles , UTA	        23	202	8.8
Esteban Batista , ATL	57	501	8.8
Kevin Burleson , CHA	39	340	8.7
Chris Taft , GSW	17	143	8.5
Shavlik Randolph , PHI	57	486	8.5
Linas Kleiza , DEN	61	518	8.5
check out my latest hip hop project: https://soundcloud.com/michaelcro http://youtu.be/scNXshrpyZo
newyorknewyork
Posts: 30260
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #541
7/17/2006  3:47 PM
The little thing that bugs me is M.Rose got 15.5mins, And Mo Taylor got 18.1 mins. To me they should have each got 10mins or less each. And the rest of those mins could have easliy gone to Frye, Lee, Butler.

You can't tell me that Taylor put in more effort, better defense, and was a better compliment to the other players than Lee or Butler. So how does he average more mins than either of them. And M.Rose does not fit in todays NBA. But like a poster said before he is a nice locker room presence so he should get some mins. Depending on the match up only though as he is good at guarding oversized back to the basket player. What benifit does it do the team giving Taylor that 18mins a game when he isn't going to be on the team in a yr or 2. When you got some young forwards that you are trying to develop who were better than him anyway. It don't matter if Lee was the last pick in the draft. He was flat out a better player than players ahead of him other than Frye & A.Davis when he was here though there was mins at Backup Center available with Curry only getting 26mins a game and JJ being usless. And he busted his ass and played with effort and passion. Sure he isn't a perfect player and needed to get stronger. But its not like Taylor and Rose didn't have there problems either.

Jerome James shouldn't have seen the light of day until he got his stuff together. Though I can't complain about 9mins for 44games.
https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
7/17/2006  3:58 PM
if this offensive scheme can make croshere an all star, pencil in frye now.
all kool aid all the time.
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
7/17/2006  4:39 PM
Posted by nyk4ever:
Posted by EnySpree:


I like this thread because its a good way to fish out who is a fan of basketball and who is just a tabloid hog.

I'm so sick of seeing people type crap like this. We're all fans here, just becuase we all don't agree doesn't mean we're here for tabloids. I don't understand who can get off with saying that. I guess that whole charade you pulled a few weeks ago when you decided to "leave" the forum was becuase your a fan of basketball and you weren't trying to get attention?


[Edited by - nyk4ever on 07-17-2006 3:00 PM]

Yeah I guess I was trying to get attention. Got a link or any stats to prove that my track record over the last several years?

Saying the knivks have no shot cuz Larry couldn't do it is dumb. If you believe that then you are not a fan of the game. That is the flat out truth.

Talking what I can see is what I'm about. Talking trades or how to run the team is fine but crying about what a guy did before and not looking at what he did today is what is the problem.

There is so much good basketball to talk about. The change is already showing.
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
7/17/2006  4:45 PM
Posted by subzero0:

My point is this: This is the same team we had last year, except we lost a good coach (whether or not you believe he was in the right place or right time) and we added two rooks possibly at the expense of a couple of good players. See Qyntel and Butler. I understand this team will be better, really there is nowhere else to go but up. A change of coaching "scenery" is good. However, the kind of optimism I am seeing here about just how good the Knicks will be and how we are going to outplay teams now because we are quicker, stronger, better is the same kind of optimism that was here last summer before that horrible season started. Curb your enthusiasm! This team has not been vastly overhauled. The same flaws that were here last year, guess what, they're still here. Unless we make a move that will give us a different player in our starting line up, be prepared to be disappointed.

I don't think anyone is saying the knicks all of a sudden are gonna be perfect. Its still exciting knowing what the team will run on offense and defense. Its exciting to know we are gonna be on the same page for the most part. When the games count then we will know for sure. Knowing isiah he will not hesitate on the trade front once he sees what he has.
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
buddapaw
Posts: 23213
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 2/22/2006
Member: #1101
7/17/2006  4:50 PM
Posted by joec32033:

Rookies Ranked by minutes per game.

PLAYER NAME, TEAM NAME GP MPG PTS FGM-FGA FG% 3PM-3PA 3P% FTM-FTA FT%
1
Chris Paul , NOK
78 36.0 16.1 5.2-12.1 .430 .6-2.3 .282 5.1-6.0 .847
2
Charlie Villanueva , TOR
81 29.1 13.0 5.4-11.6 .463 .9-2.6 .327 1.4-2.0 .706
3
CHANNING FRYE, NYK
65 24.4 12.3 4.7-9.8 .477 .0-.1 .333 2.9-3.5 .825---
4
Raymond Felton , CHA
80 30.1 11.8 4.3-11.0 .391 1.2-3.4 .358 2.0-2.8 .725
5
Deron Williams , UTA
80 28.9 10.8 4.2-10.1 .421 1.1-2.7 .416 1.2-1.7 .704
6
Salim Stoudamire , ATL
61 20.4 9.6 3.3-8.0 .413 1.3-3.5 .380 1.6-1.8 .900
7
Andrew Bogut , MIL
82 28.7 9.4 3.9-7.4 .533 .0-.0 .000 1.5-2.4 .629
8
NATE ROBINSON , NYK
72 21.4 9.3 3.2-7.8 .407 .8-2.0 .397 2.1-2.8 .752---
9
Bracey Wright , MIN
7 19.3 8.9 3.0-7.3 .412 .9-2.4 .353 2.0-2.3 .875
10
Luther Head , HOU
80 29.0 8.8 3.2-7.9 .403 1.4-3.9 .361 1.1-1.5 .699
11
Marvin Williams , ATL
79 24.8 8.5 3.0-6.7 .443 .2-.7 .245 2.4-3.2 .747
12
Sean May , CHA
23 17.3 8.2 3.0-7.4 .409 .0-.2 .000 2.1-2.8 .766
13
Rashad McCants , MIN
79 17.3 7.9 3.1-6.8 .450 .8-2.3 .372 1.0-1.3 .736
14
Ryan Gomes , BOS
61 22.7 7.6 2.8-5.8 .487 .0-.1 .333 1.8-2.4 .752
15
Danny Granger , IND
78 22.9 7.5 2.8-6.1 .462 .4-1.2 .323 1.5-1.9 .777
16
Sarunas Jasikevicius , IND
75 21.0 7.3 2.3-5.7 .396 1.1-3.1 .364 1.6-1.8 .910
17
Ike Diogu , GSW
69 15.4 7.0 2.5-4.8 .524 .0-.0 .000 2.0-2.4 .810
18
Monta Ellis , GSW
49 18.7 6.8 2.7-6.5 .415 .6-1.7 .341 .9-1.2 .712
19
Amir Johnson , DET
3 12.9 6.7 2.3-3.3 .700 .7-1.0 .667 1.3-1.3 1.000
20
Joey Graham , TOR
80 19.8 6.7 2.5-5.2 .478 .4-1.1 .333 1.4-1.7 .812
21
Jarrett Jack , POR
79 20.4 6.7 2.4-5.4 .442 .3-1.0 .263 1.6-2.0 .800
22
Martell Webster , POR
61 17.6 6.6 2.3-5.7 .399 1.1-3.0 .357 1.0-1.2 .859
23
Alan Anderson , CHA
36 15.7 5.8 2.1-5.0 .414 .7-1.6 .414 .9-1.1 .805
24
Francisco Garcia , SAC
67 19.7 5.6 1.9-4.9 .400 .6-2.0 .285 1.2-1.5 .772
25
Jose Calderon , TOR
64 23.2 5.5 2.1-4.9 .423 .1-.7 .163 1.2-1.4 .848
26
Gerald Green , BOS
32 11.7 5.2 2.1-4.3 .478 .2-.6 .300 .9-1.2 .784
27
Johan Petro , SEA
68 18.9 5.2 2.2-4.4 .510 .0-.0 .000 .7-1.1 .627
28
DAVID LEE , NYK
67 16.8 5.1 2.0-3.4 .598 .0-.0 .000 1.1-1.8 .577----
29
Anthony Grundy , ATL
12 9.0 4.3 1.6-3.2 .500 .4-1.2 .333 .8-1.2 .643
30
Hakim Warrick , MEM
68 10.8 4.1 1.5-3.4 .443 .0-.0 .000 1.1-1.7 .661
31
Travis Diener , ORL
23 10.7 3.8 1.3-3.0 .420 1.1-2.5 .439 .2-.3 .833
32
Daniel Ewing , LAC
66 14.8 3.8 1.5-3.9 .380 .3-1.2 .282 .5-.7 .783
33
Charles Hayes , HOU
40 13.6 3.7 1.5-2.6 .562 .0-.0 .000 .7-1.1 .644
34
Will Bynum , GSW
15 11.0 3.6 1.4-3.5 .404 .1-.6 .222 .7-1.1 .625
35
Linas Kleiza , DEN
61 8.5 3.5 1.3-2.8 .445 .0-.2 .154 .9-1.3 .704
36
James Singleton , LAC
59 12.9 3.4 1.3-2.6 .510 .2-.3 .500 .7-.8 .780
37
CJ Miles , UTA
23 8.8 3.4 1.2-3.3 .368 .2-.9 .250 .8-1.0 .750
38
Wayne Simien , MIA
43 9.6 3.4 1.3-2.8 .483 .0-.0 .000 .7-.8 .882
39
Orien Greene , BOS
80 15.7 3.2 1.2-3.2 .395 .1-.5 .225 .6-.8 .662
40
Rawle Marshall , DAL
23 10.5 3.1 1.0-2.6 .400 .0-.1 .333 1.0-1.3 .759
41
Josh Powell , DAL
37 11.9 3.0 1.0-2.2 .457 .0-.0 .000 1.0-1.2 .800
42
Sergei Monia , SAC-POR
26 13.2 3.0 1.1-3.3 .333 .3-1.3 .265 .4-.5 .714
43
Dijon Thompson , PHX
10 4.3 2.8 1.1-2.5 .440 .4-1.1 .364 .2-.2 1.000
44
Chris Taft , GSW
17 8.5 2.8 1.4-2.2 .605 .0-.0 .000 .1-.4 .167
45
Donell Taylor , WAS
51 9.3 2.7 1.0-2.7 .390 .1-.3 .235 .6-.8 .698
46
Melvin Sanders , SAS
16 7.1 2.6 1.0-2.1 .485 .1-.2 .667 .4-.6 .700
47
Brandon Bass , NOK
29 9.3 2.3 1.0-2.4 .400 .0-.0 .000 .4-.7 .632
48
Arvydas Macijauskas , NOK
19 7.1 2.3 .7-2.2 .341 .2-.6 .250 .7-.8 .867
49
John Lucas , HOU
13 8.2 2.3 1.1-2.8 .389 .2-.7 .222 .0-.0 .000
49
Jason Maxiell , DET
26 6.1 2.3 .9-2.1 .426 .0-.0 .000 .5-1.6 .333

http://www.nba.com/statistics/player/Scoring.jsp?league=00&season=22005&conf=OVERALL&position=0&splitType=9&splitScope=GAME&qualified=N&yearsExp=0&splitDD=

[Edited by - joec32033 on 07-17-2006 2:59 PM]



So what! they deserved more! Alot more especially when the coach said it wasn't about wining it's about playing the right way what a load of garbage that was. Can anyone please tell what was our offensive or defensive strategy last season? I sure as hell didn't see it.
"Low Percentage Shots r US, these are our Knicks" "NY KNICKS the cure for basketball fanatic"
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
7/17/2006  5:37 PM
Posted by crzymdups:

Minutes per game ignores the healthy DNP-CD that DLee and Nate racked up. And I'm sorry, but 59 player games lost to injury does not account for 13 players starting 9 or more games. We had 42 starting lineups. There is a reason that is an all-time record, because a rotation was not set. The Pacers the year Artest, Stephen Jackson and JOneal were suspended for 75, 35, 25 games respectively didn't use anywhere near 42 lineups.

You can say Brown used the rookies more than some coaches might have, fine. but he didn't use them consistently just like he didn't use anyone else consistently.

Pacers point is right on.
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
EnySpree
Posts: 44919
Alba Posts: 138
Joined: 4/18/2003
Member: #397
7/17/2006  7:03 PM
Yeah joe. What is the point of posting the rookie minutes from last year? Ryan gomes was on the Boston bench the whole year then all of a sudden got big minutes the last 2 months. So what does his minutes say about him?

Charlie was in the dog house a little while too. Marvin had a very mediocre rookie season why did he get more minutes than frye?

Anyway I don't see the point.
Subscribe to my Podcast https://youtube.com/c/DiehardknicksPodcast https://twitter.com/DiehardknicksPC https://instagram.com/diehardknickspodcast
bigbeast
Posts: 22333
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 12/21/2005
Member: #1060
7/17/2006  11:16 PM
NYK4ever- your argument about Lee only getting certain minutes due to the fact that he was picked 30 is a little far-fetched. Lee injected the game with far more positive energy than Mo T and MRose combined.

Ontop of that, weren't you the same person arguing that Frye shouldn't be made the starter just beacuse he was picked 7th? If this is your stance, it shouldn't matter where a player was picked.
"Man, who knows with this team." Aguirre.
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
7/17/2006  11:52 PM
The same logic that says "yeah Balkman is a nice player, but if anything we picked him too early" should also say "yeah the rooks got comparable PT to other top PT-getting rookies, but if anything they should have gotten more."

This is especially true in the case of Frye and Lee. A proper comparison with other rookie MPG should take into account (1) the rookies' overall quality of play, and (2) the relative value of each rookie to his team (how much better/worse he was than other players on his team who played the same position). Frye and Lee both brought tangible, much needed results to the court last season, certainly far outpacing anything that could be offered by Malik/Mo/Q/etc.

By the way, the list joe provided is 06 rookies sorted by PPG, not MPG.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
7/18/2006  12:11 AM
Posted by bigbeast:

NYK4ever- your argument about Lee only getting certain minutes due to the fact that he was picked 30 is a little far-fetched. Lee injected the game with far more positive energy than Mo T and MRose combined.

Ontop of that, weren't you the same person arguing that Frye shouldn't be made the starter just beacuse he was picked 7th? If this is your stance, it shouldn't matter where a player was picked.

How is it far-fetched. It's a testament to the fact that most coaches think alike and most believe that rookies MUST earn their minutes, no matter how good they are and not just be handed minutes. The more you work for what you get, the better it will make you.

I don't get your second point. It's not my argument that Frye should start becuase he was picked 7th, Holfresh kept bringing that up, not me. My whole point is that you should work to be a starter, not just be handed anything because your labeled as "potential." Remember Harold Miner? If he was coming out this year into the draft and the Knicks got him, many people on this board would want him to be the starting 2guard this instant if it were up to them because he has potential. Potential doesn't win you basketball games.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
joec32033
Posts: 30632
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
7/18/2006  5:44 AM
Posted by EnySpree:

Yeah joe. What is the point of posting the rookie minutes from last year? Ryan gomes was on the Boston bench the whole year then all of a sudden got big minutes the last 2 months. So what does his minutes say about him?

Charlie was in the dog house a little while too. Marvin had a very mediocre rookie season why did he get more minutes than frye?

Anyway I don't see the point.

Um...I may have misread, but the conversation turned to being about the minutes the rooks played last year. About Gomes, it says it took him a while to earn his minutes say it took him a while to earn his PT. And Charlie still got a lot of minutes and Marvin played on a developing team who picked him 2nd overall and touted him as a saviour.

BTW-Evil, thanks for reposting the list....I coulda swore it was sorted by MPG.
~You can't run from who you are.~
Page 2 of 2 ‹ Previous 1  2 
« Reply To Topic
Knicks....as currently constructed
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