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

What if we need a new coach?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 5 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
9/12/2006  12:59 PM
Turnovers reflect directly on the coach.
The coach prepares the team in practice to not turn the ball over and to make the right decisions.

I say bring back LB if Zeke bombs out...right now, I see it as either LB or Zeke are right.

Currently, I'm siding with Zeke, however, if he bombs, then Larry was right.
Posted by arkrud:
Posted by TheGame:

I agree. As was said in another post, this team's defense will improve with the improvement in the offense. If the team cuts down on the turnovers, there will be fewer fast break opportunities for the opposing team and the team can get back and setup its defense. Plus, I think players like Lee, Frye, and Nate (who weree rookies last year and just learning how to play team defense at the NBA level) will be better defensive players this year.

Tunovers are a result of bad decision making. And this is nothing the couch can do about it. You need at least 2-3 intelegent players on the team. We have a set of athletic but not so bright guys (and some of them just plain idiots). Our young players are defenetely better in this respect. They need experience to show it.
My only problem is if this organization can accept to have players who are smarter that GM/Couch/Operations. If one want to hide his stuppidity he usually keeps even bigger idiots around...

all kool aid all the time.
AUTOADVERT
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
9/12/2006  1:00 PM
Steve Kerr
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.
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
9/12/2006  1:10 PM
Posted by rvhoss:

Turnovers reflect directly on the coach.
The coach prepares the team in practice to not turn the ball over and to make the right decisions.

I say bring back LB if Zeke bombs out...right now, I see it as either LB or Zeke are right.

Currently, I'm siding with Zeke, however, if he bombs, then Larry was right.
Posted by arkrud:
Posted by TheGame:

I agree. As was said in another post, this team's defense will improve with the improvement in the offense. If the team cuts down on the turnovers, there will be fewer fast break opportunities for the opposing team and the team can get back and setup its defense. Plus, I think players like Lee, Frye, and Nate (who weree rookies last year and just learning how to play team defense at the NBA level) will be better defensive players this year.

Tunovers are a result of bad decision making. And this is nothing the couch can do about it. You need at least 2-3 intelegent players on the team. We have a set of athletic but not so bright guys (and some of them just plain idiots). Our young players are defenetely better in this respect. They need experience to show it.
My only problem is if this organization can accept to have players who are smarter that GM/Couch/Operations. If one want to hide his stuppidity he usually keeps even bigger idiots around...

So guys that continually turn the ball over no matter what team they are on are just victims of bad coaching?

A coach can limit turnovers by limiting his offense. But if you have a team of guys that don't handle the ball well they aren't going to handle it well no matter who is coach. Our players need to cut down on their tunrovers. If Isiah has to go back to teaching basic fundamentals of proper chest passing and when and when not to throw passes then we are doomed. College coach's don't spend any time on this, pros definitely don't.
I just hope that people will like me
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
9/12/2006  1:26 PM
hey, nobody said it was easy, but a coaches responsibility is to teach how not to turn the ball over. No matter the age or acumen of the team.

With the drafting of players directly out of high school and/or limited college exposure, it's an added burden.

But it's still the job of the coach.

if his players suck, then his job is harder.

But that's his job.
all kool aid all the time.
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
9/12/2006  1:51 PM
Explain to me how one does that
I just hope that people will like me
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
9/12/2006  2:00 PM
The year before LB the team wasn't so bad in terms of TO's. I think that LB's forcing players to do things they aren't good at doing was a big part of the problem. The players were unsure of themselves and made too many mistakes with the ball. Its interesting to note that during the time that included the Streak TO's were down and Assists were up. The players looked more confident and comfortable playing a bit faster and more fluidly. There was more penetration and this softened up the defense and made things easier for the team on offense. We still didn't play solid D, but as was mentioned earlier we had a lot of young guys who didn't have a good handle on NBA defense. I think that can and will improve as we go along.
Ira
Posts: 24692
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/14/2001
Member: #91
9/12/2006  3:12 PM
It's not all on the coach. Curry, for example, is a turnover machine.
arkrud
Posts: 32217
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/31/2005
Member: #995
USA
9/12/2006  3:42 PM
Posted by nixluva:

The year before LB the team wasn't so bad in terms of TO's. I think that LB's forcing players to do things they aren't good at doing was a big part of the problem. The players were unsure of themselves and made too many mistakes with the ball. Its interesting to note that during the time that included the Streak TO's were down and Assists were up. The players looked more confident and comfortable playing a bit faster and more fluidly. There was more penetration and this softened up the defense and made things easier for the team on offense. We still didn't play solid D, but as was mentioned earlier we had a lot of young guys who didn't have a good handle on NBA defense. I think that can and will improve as we go along.

LB tryed to force players to play winning basketball and they was not good at doing this...
LOL

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet
arkrud
Posts: 32217
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/31/2005
Member: #995
USA
9/12/2006  3:45 PM
Posted by arkrud:
Posted by nixluva:

The year before LB the team wasn't so bad in terms of TO's. I think that LB's forcing players to do things they aren't good at doing was a big part of the problem. The players were unsure of themselves and made too many mistakes with the ball. Its interesting to note that during the time that included the Streak TO's were down and Assists were up. The players looked more confident and comfortable playing a bit faster and more fluidly. There was more penetration and this softened up the defense and made things easier for the team on offense. We still didn't play solid D, but as was mentioned earlier we had a lot of young guys who didn't have a good handle on NBA defense. I think that can and will improve as we go along.

LB tryed to force players to play winning basketball and they was not good at doing this...
LOL

And IT will force the players to play exiting basketball... Throw it down baby!!!
And they are so good in this.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
9/12/2006  3:59 PM
And IT will force the players to play exiting basketball...

These aren't guys you can force to do anything. Best he can do is tell them they look real pretty and promise them blow/jobs if they try hard.
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
9/12/2006  4:06 PM
Posted by nixluva:

The year before LB the team wasn't so bad in terms of TO's. I think that LB's forcing players to do things they aren't good at doing was a big part of the problem. The players were unsure of themselves and made too many mistakes with the ball. Its interesting to note that during the time that included the Streak TO's were down and Assists were up. The players looked more confident and comfortable playing a bit faster and more fluidly. There was more penetration and this softened up the defense and made things easier for the team on offense. We still didn't play solid D, but as was mentioned earlier we had a lot of young guys who didn't have a good handle on NBA defense. I think that can and will improve as we go along.


nixluva: Wasn't that a completely different team?
I just hope that people will like me
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
9/12/2006  4:21 PM
Posted by Bippity10:




nixluva: Wasn't that a completely different team?

Don't let facts get in the way. lol.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
9/12/2006  4:21 PM
turnovers
Stephon Marbury career 3.15 last year 2.62(lowest in career)
Stevie Francis career 3.67 last year 3.06
Quentin Richardsoncareer 1.27 last year 1.02
Mo Taylor career 1.85 last year 1.54
Malik rose career 1.39 last year 1.11
Eddie Curry career 2.01 last year 2.49
Jamal Crawford career 1.95 last year 2.22
Jalen Rose career 1.60 last year 1.92

For the Group Career 16.89 last year 15.98(this group actually committed less turnovers than their career averages)


Five of our top 8 actually had a good year in terms of turnovers when you compare it to the rest of their carers. Stephon Marbury had a career best for turnovers. Stevie Francis cut his turnovers down significantly which followed a trend from the year before LB. Eddie Curry's jumped up from his career average but was actually lower than the season before in a Chicago uniform where he averaged 2.59 turnovers. Pretty much everyone else was right in line with their career averages with no significant dropoffs or rise in turnovers. Add in Frye, Lee and Robinson(rookies) and QWoods(like a rookie) and you have a team that did what it was supposed to do.

Now I know most people hate LB so much they have to blame him for everything. And anything that contradicts this opinion must mean that you want to bear his children. But reality is reality. We had a turnover prone team, added some rookies, slapped them together in a short period of time and then expected a coach to somehow magically make it all work in one year. In NY we blame the coach because that's easy. But the true evidence doesn't lie. If we want to lower the turnovers it will take the players taking it upon themselves just like in eveyr other sport to respect the ball, the game and understand the importance of not turning it over. The guys I mentioned above have 5-12 years experience. You can't blame these career numbers on LB. It's the players. They need to fix it. Excuses are over!!!!!!!!!


[Edited by - bippity10 on 09-12-2006 4:23 PM]

[Edited by - bippity10 on 09-12-2006 4:24 PM]

[Edited by - bippity10 on 09-12-2006 4:29 PM]
I just hope that people will like me
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
9/12/2006  4:22 PM
Posted by nyk4ever:
Posted by Bippity10:




nixluva: Wasn't that a completely different team?

Don't let facts get in the way. lol.

It only seems to be a completely different team when we are talking about how good we are going to be. But when we are blaming LB we throw that out the window.
I just hope that people will like me
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
9/12/2006  4:25 PM
Posted by Bippity10:
Posted by nyk4ever:
Posted by Bippity10:




nixluva: Wasn't that a completely different team?

Don't let facts get in the way. lol.

It only seems to be a completely different team when we are talking about how good we are going to be. But when we are blaming LB we throw that out the window.

Stop being a hater. Jerk. It's only a double standard if you're consistent in your bashing of the Knicks. It's not a double standard if you do it in the name of kool aid. Btw, Isiah is TEH God and we will win 87 games this year now that Larry "turned the team to jello" Brown is gone!!!! KOOL AID
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.
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
9/12/2006  4:31 PM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by Bippity10:
Posted by nyk4ever:
Posted by Bippity10:




nixluva: Wasn't that a completely different team?

Don't let facts get in the way. lol.

It only seems to be a completely different team when we are talking about how good we are going to be. But when we are blaming LB we throw that out the window.

Stop being a hater. Jerk. It's only a double standard if you're consistent in your bashing of the Knicks. It's not a double standard if you do it in the name of kool aid. Btw, Isiah is TEH God and we will win 87 games this year now that Larry "turned the team to jello" Brown is gone!!!! KOOL AID

KOOL-AID!
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
9/12/2006  4:37 PM
Posted by nixluva:

The year before LB the team wasn't so bad in terms of TO's. I think that LB's forcing players to do things they aren't good at doing was a big part of the problem. The players were unsure of themselves and made too many mistakes with the ball. Its interesting to note that during the time that included the Streak TO's were down and Assists were up. The players looked more confident and comfortable playing a bit faster and more fluidly. There was more penetration and this softened up the defense and made things easier for the team on offense. We still didn't play solid D, but as was mentioned earlier we had a lot of young guys who didn't have a good handle on NBA defense. I think that can and will improve as we go along.


And another thing that really bothers me. The year before our record was 33-49 and you talk about it like it was some kind of golden era of basketball. Guy, stop settling. We stunk last year. We stunk the year before. We need to use a higher standard as something to shoot for. 2004/05 should not be the style of play or the atmosphere we should be shooting for. We stunk. What is wrong with the optimists? They are really depressing me!

[Edited by - bippity10 on 09-12-2006 4:38 PM]
I just hope that people will like me
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
9/12/2006  4:43 PM
Posted by Bippity10:
Posted by nixluva:

The year before LB the team wasn't so bad in terms of TO's. I think that LB's forcing players to do things they aren't good at doing was a big part of the problem. The players were unsure of themselves and made too many mistakes with the ball. Its interesting to note that during the time that included the Streak TO's were down and Assists were up. The players looked more confident and comfortable playing a bit faster and more fluidly. There was more penetration and this softened up the defense and made things easier for the team on offense. We still didn't play solid D, but as was mentioned earlier we had a lot of young guys who didn't have a good handle on NBA defense. I think that can and will improve as we go along.


And another thing that really bothers me. The year before our record was 33-49 and you talk about it like it was some kind of golden era of basketball. Guy, stop settling. We stunk last year. We stunk the year before. We need to use a higher standard as something to shoot for. 2004/05 should not be the style of play or the atmosphere we should be shooting for. We stunk. What is wrong with the optimists? They are really depressing me!

With any luck, we could be as good as the Atlanta Hawks this year.
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
9/12/2006  5:08 PM
You know all you guys can just keep on making your snide comments and defend LB all you want, but the fact is that his way SUCKED and the team didn't do better under him, they got worse. I don't care how the lineup changed, in the end the result was that he didn't make the best use of that linuep. My main point was that had he not taking the ball out of Stephs hands, the team would've done better in terms of TO's. He was our best ball handler and decision maker and LB failed to recognize that. You don't take the ball out of his hands on a team with so few great ball handlers or decision makers. As I said during that stretch where Steph took over, both TO's went down and Assists went up. I don't care how many jokes you make you guys are on the wrong side of this argument. LB's way the team had more TO's. Taking the stats and twisting them by pointing out that certain individuals had fewer TO's doesn't change the fact that the TEAM TO's were up and Steph who should've been allowed to do what he does best. Steph was our best option at PG and good things happened when he was allowed to do his thing and play aggressively. Really all LB had to do was let Steph be who he is and teach the other players how to play off of his skills and help Steph to execute, by setting picks and presenting themselves for easy scores.

I find it funny how some teams recognize that they have to let their best players carry the action, but in NY we stifle our best players and try to take away from what they do best. Look at the freedom that Arenas is given and he helps to carry his team. In NY all we've heard is how Steph has to change his game and yet when he plays his game we have a greater chance to win as long as you have the support of good team around him, which he hasn't always had here, but finally he can have that now.

I fully expect that the guards will carry the action this year with Isiah and that the bigs will be able to feed off of this. Its the right way to play on this team. You can't depend on Curry and Frye to carry the team. They're not yet able to do that. It doesn't make sense to put that much pressure on them. If Curry was a Ewing type then so be it, but he's not. He'll be more effective as a support player. LB didn't do that. He stifled his best players and limited what they could do and that left guys who were not yet able to carry the team. But you guys go ahead and keep making jokes. I know i'll be vindicated this season and i'll be the one laughing at you doubters and haters.
4949
Posts: 29378
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/25/2006
Member: #1126
USA
9/12/2006  5:46 PM
Posted by franco12:
Posted by 4949:

I was thinking more in terms of a defensive minded coach.

And you'd be making the same mistake that IT did with his selections and not picking a coach who matched the roster.

Adding a defensive minded coach isn't going to make our players who lack defensive abilities better defenders.

As proof, I cite last season.

So..........all offense and no defense? Boy' we better score some points then!
I'll never trust this' team again.
Page 2 of 5 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
What if we need a new coach?
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