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

What kind of team are we
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 8 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
COSSUCKS
Posts: 20984
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/15/2007
Member: #1569
8/7/2007  4:44 PM
Posted by TMS:

again, i'm not saying correlation equals causation, but it seems more than mere coincidence that great champions have all have shotblockers on the team... it's about team balance, which is something we do not have.

If we signed Steven Hunter would we suddenly become a contender? Those teams all had 17ppg scorers as well.
Should we hope for more shot blocking? Yes. Does that mean championships for most shot blocking teams? No.
AUTOADVERT
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
8/7/2007  4:46 PM
You have to be able to offset your weaknesses. IF you don't have perimeter defense than you NEED A SHOTBLOCKER. No questions asked. If you have shut down defenders like the Bulls had with Jordan, Pippen and Rodman and Grant etc than you don't need a shotblocker. We need to focus on one of these areas. We have so many good offensive players that there is no reason we can't package some of these guys for a shotblocker or two way player eventually. Trying to build teams strictly around offense doesn't work. Even Phoenix and Dallas eventually figured this out.
I just hope that people will like me
BigC
Posts: 22672
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/14/2004
Member: #829
8/7/2007  4:51 PM
I think more than anything we need to hit our foul line shots. We lost like 11 to 14 games just on missing our free throws in close games.
BigC's Knick blogs and Knicks highlights after every Knicks game http://fromthebaseline.com/
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
8/7/2007  4:57 PM
Posted by BigC:

I think more than anything we need to hit our foul line shots. We lost like 11 to 14 games just on missing our free throws in close games.

In theory yes. But not necessarily. When you hit foul shots it changes the game, it changes the score and it changes the way teams defend you and it changes the outcome. We do need to improve in this area, but to me the single biggest jump in wins will come on the defensive end. It's hard to quantify this because we can't just say hey we lost by 5 and missed 10 foul shots and see the definite effect. But there were dozens of games, where a stop here, a stop there, a strong defensive quarter wins the game. Improved foul shooting again will help. It may even help us win a few more games. But if you want to make a real jump to the next level you have to improve on the defensive side of the ball. It's not a little thing. It's half of the game.
I just hope that people will like me
COSSUCKS
Posts: 20984
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/15/2007
Member: #1569
8/7/2007  5:00 PM
I dont even think that our defensive FG% allowed was that bad last season

[Edited by - COSSUCKS on 08-07-2007 5:02 PM]
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
8/7/2007  5:01 PM
Are you suggesting we were a pretty good defensive team?
I just hope that people will like me
COSSUCKS
Posts: 20984
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/15/2007
Member: #1569
8/7/2007  5:03 PM
Posted by Bippity10:

Are you suggesting we were a pretty good defensive team?

I'm not suggesting that at all. I'm suggesting it may not have been as horrible as people think and that we are not that far from improving it.

Where did we rank in ppg allowed and defensive fg% allowed? was it dead last? Was it bottom 5? I dont think so.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
8/7/2007  5:04 PM
Posted by COSSUCKS:
Posted by TMS:

again, i'm not saying correlation equals causation, but it seems more than mere coincidence that great champions have all have shotblockers on the team... it's about team balance, which is something we do not have.

If we signed Steven Hunter would we suddenly become a contender? Those teams all had 17ppg scorers as well.
Should we hope for more shot blocking? Yes. Does that mean championships for most shot blocking teams? No.

Steven Hunter? the guy's a role playing scrub. i'm talking about legitimate intimidators like Zo, Camby, Big Ben, JO, Josh Smith, etc. who can log some significant minutes for this team. I think having a guy like that immediately improves this team by a wide margin. I'm not saying we can get any of those guys, but the need still exists for a real shotblocking presence on this roster, because as Bip is pointing out here, we're certainly not strong enough on perimeter defense to make up for it.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Masterplan
Posts: 21571
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/9/2002
Member: #362
8/7/2007  5:09 PM
Posted by COSSUCKS:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by COSSUCKS:
Posted by TMS:

the way i see it, we have guys that stack up to Ward (Mardy) & LJ (Q Rich) on D... the problem is we have NO ONE who can fill the defensive roles that Ewing & Camby filled... as i've said ad nauseum, this team needs a shotblocker!

right, i know... shotblocking is overrated... i guess that's why almost every team that's won an NBA championship in recent years has had a great shotblocker on the team.

Correlation does not equal causation. You could just as easily say that almost every champion had a 17ppg scorer or a 9reb per game rebounder.

The Clippers ranked 2nd in shot blocks and didnt even make the playoffs. Where were the champion Spurs ranked? 11th after the Clippers, Warriors, Pacers, Hawks, Nuggets, Lakers, and Magic. In fact they were only 1 slot above the Grizz who had the worst record in the NBA.

i didn't say you needed to be a great shotblocking team, but you can't ignore the fact that guys like Shaq, Duncan, Olajuwon, Alonzo, Big Ben & Sheed all contributed hugely to their teams' success in the postseason w/the shotblocking presence they all brought to the table... obviously, scoring wins games, but in my experience, i've noticed that most championship teams in recent years have had at least 1 great shotblocker on the team (w/the exception of the Jordan Bulls maybe)... we have none.

But you are trying to make a point via correlation and I'm showing you that correlation does not mean causation. For every champion team with a shot blocker I could show you 10 teams with shot blockers that didnt win that year. Or for every champion you can show me with a shot blocker I could show you a champion with a 17ppg scorer. Do you understand that correlation does not equal causation? The Spurs were ranked 11th in shot blocking so obviously that was not the major reason they became champions.

i don't think he's making a "correlation equals causation" case, as much as a "necessary but not sufficient" one. TMS didn't say, more shotblocking leads to more championships. he said that, among other things, championship teams have good shotblockers. the way to test that argument would be to compare teams with good shotblocking vs. teams with poor shotblocking, controlling as much as you can for other factors. it's not as revealing to compare good shotblocking teams to good shotblocking teams.

my 2 cents
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
8/7/2007  5:16 PM
If we go by stats, nothing with our team is that bad. But if you pay attention the games and see the amount of uncontested lay-ups, dunks and three pointers we give up during crucial runs and stops you would realize that we have a long way to go on the defensive end.
I just hope that people will like me
COSSUCKS
Posts: 20984
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/15/2007
Member: #1569
8/7/2007  5:29 PM
Posted by Masterplan:
Posted by COSSUCKS:
Posted by TMS:
Posted by COSSUCKS:
Posted by TMS:

the way i see it, we have guys that stack up to Ward (Mardy) & LJ (Q Rich) on D... the problem is we have NO ONE who can fill the defensive roles that Ewing & Camby filled... as i've said ad nauseum, this team needs a shotblocker!

right, i know... shotblocking is overrated... i guess that's why almost every team that's won an NBA championship in recent years has had a great shotblocker on the team.

Correlation does not equal causation. You could just as easily say that almost every champion had a 17ppg scorer or a 9reb per game rebounder.

The Clippers ranked 2nd in shot blocks and didnt even make the playoffs. Where were the champion Spurs ranked? 11th after the Clippers, Warriors, Pacers, Hawks, Nuggets, Lakers, and Magic. In fact they were only 1 slot above the Grizz who had the worst record in the NBA.

i didn't say you needed to be a great shotblocking team, but you can't ignore the fact that guys like Shaq, Duncan, Olajuwon, Alonzo, Big Ben & Sheed all contributed hugely to their teams' success in the postseason w/the shotblocking presence they all brought to the table... obviously, scoring wins games, but in my experience, i've noticed that most championship teams in recent years have had at least 1 great shotblocker on the team (w/the exception of the Jordan Bulls maybe)... we have none.

But you are trying to make a point via correlation and I'm showing you that correlation does not mean causation. For every champion team with a shot blocker I could show you 10 teams with shot blockers that didnt win that year. Or for every champion you can show me with a shot blocker I could show you a champion with a 17ppg scorer. Do you understand that correlation does not equal causation? The Spurs were ranked 11th in shot blocking so obviously that was not the major reason they became champions.

i don't think he's making a "correlation equals causation" case, as much as a "necessary but not sufficient" one. TMS didn't say, more shotblocking leads to more championships. he said that, among other things, championship teams have good shotblockers. the way to test that argument would be to compare teams with good shotblocking vs. teams with poor shotblocking, controlling as much as you can for other factors. it's not as revealing to compare good shotblocking teams to good shotblocking teams.

my 2 cents

Were the Clippers, Hawks, Pacers, and Grizz good shot blocking teams or bad ones?
Masterplan
Posts: 21571
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/9/2002
Member: #362
8/7/2007  5:47 PM
Posted by COSSUCKS:

Were the Clippers, Hawks, Pacers, and Grizz good shot blocking teams or bad ones?

according to your numbers they were all above average. that doesn't refute what i said at all. clearly they are lacking some of the other "necessary but not sufficient" aspects to a championship team.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
8/7/2007  5:54 PM
it's about team balance & addressing needs that we have... no one said ALL good shotblocking teams win championships... but most championship teams DO have a good shotblocker on the roster that plays a significant role... that can't be simply discounted... if we ever want to have any serious championship aspirations, we need to either be a GREAT perimeter defending team, or have a legitimate shotblocking presence... preferably both obviously, but you can't win a championship by just trying to outscore the other teams w/potent offense w/o stressing defense on the other end... ask DAL & Phoenix & they'll tell u the same thing.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
COSSUCKS
Posts: 20984
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/15/2007
Member: #1569
8/7/2007  6:14 PM
Posted by Masterplan:
Posted by COSSUCKS:

Were the Clippers, Hawks, Pacers, and Grizz good shot blocking teams or bad ones?

according to your numbers they were all above average. that doesn't refute what i said at all. clearly they are lacking some of the other "necessary but not sufficient" aspects to a championship team.

Cant you say that 29 teams out of a 30 team league are clearly lacking something to become the champion?
COSSUCKS
Posts: 20984
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/15/2007
Member: #1569
8/7/2007  6:21 PM
Posted by TMS:

it's about team balance & addressing needs that we have... no one said ALL good shotblocking teams win championships... but most championship teams DO have a good shotblocker on the roster that plays a significant role... that can't be simply discounted... if we ever want to have any serious championship aspirations, we need to either be a GREAT perimeter defending team, or have a legitimate shotblocking presence... preferably both obviously, but you can't win a championship by just trying to outscore the other teams w/potent offense w/o stressing defense on the other end... ask DAL & Phoenix & they'll tell u the same thing.

And clearly many championships also were won by teams without a great shot blocker or as a mediocre shot blocking team.
The Bulls didnt have a great shot blocker and won 6 times. The Lakers that beat Isiah werent a great shot blocking team.
This is like saying when I look at the champions I always see a guy that scored 17ppg or above and rebounded 9rebounds a game or above. You could pick almost anything on a champion and say thats what they all have even though this one has a lot of exceptions.
The Jazz were one of the weakest shot blocking teams in the NBA last season and they were probably the 2nd best team in the playoffs.
Panos
Posts: 30713
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2004
Member: #520
8/7/2007  6:28 PM
Why do we sit here and badger each other with semantics?
What is the point? Fine Cossucks, you are 100% right keep the team the way it is.
Happy? Don't get a shotblocker. Or if we do, you shouldn't route for him to block shots.
What a ridiculous discussion...
COSSUCKS
Posts: 20984
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/15/2007
Member: #1569
8/7/2007  6:37 PM
Posted by Panos:

Why do we sit here and badger each other with semantics?
What is the point? Fine Cossucks, you are 100% right keep the team the way it is.
Happy? Don't get a shotblocker. Or if we do, you shouldn't route for him to block shots.
What a ridiculous discussion...

Panos why imply I said something I did not say?
Does it bother you so much that I mearly pointed out the facts? Since when are facts just semantics?
Panos
Posts: 30713
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2004
Member: #520
8/7/2007  6:44 PM
Posted by COSSUCKS:
Posted by Panos:

Why do we sit here and badger each other with semantics?
What is the point? Fine Cossucks, you are 100% right keep the team the way it is.
Happy? Don't get a shotblocker. Or if we do, you shouldn't route for him to block shots.
What a ridiculous discussion...

Panos why imply I said something I did not say?
Does it bother you so much that I mearly pointed out the facts? Since when are facts just semantics?

What's the fact that shot blocking is not important for a championship squad? Fine. Run with that.
Good thing. We must be championship ready. Thank God. Now I should expect to win a championship
this year, is that right? I mean what's really the point? We're not championship ready on lots
of levels, one of them being interior defense/shot blocking. If you want to say it doesn't matter,
well, we have lots of other deficiencies to fall back on.
COSSUCKS
Posts: 20984
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/15/2007
Member: #1569
8/7/2007  6:58 PM
Panos You seem very intent on implying I said things that in fact I have never said.
Panos
Posts: 30713
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2004
Member: #520
8/7/2007  6:59 PM
Did you not say that shot blocking was not important for a championship team?
Is that not your point?
Page 2 of 8 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›Last »
« Reply To Topic
What kind of team are we
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