Cosmic wrote:You mean to tell me that our team is so good that our lotto pick can't even play? Even when the great Jared Jeffries is out with injury?

Is Jordan Hill that bad? Even if he is why can't we take 2-3 minutes away from each of Duhon, Hughes, Lee, Al, Jeffries and give them to Jordan Hill?

I will say one problem that is noticeable is Jordan Hill's apparent lazy and disinterested demeanor. From laughing and joking on the bench to laughing and joking around during timeouts and after blowout losses. It's not a good look and maybe it's one reason he rides the pine.I should have held onto his little laughing episodes but this is all I have. Jordan Hill spends an entire timeout just staring up at the jumbotron. A couple of Knicks take quick looks at it but focus on the coach and the huddle for the most part. Not Jordan Hill. He's lost in outer space.

Someone needs to kick this kid in the ass. Herb Williams isn't cutting it.

Maybe he has the attitude on the bench because he rides the pine?

It might also just be the way he is.

We do know that he admitted coming into SL camp out of shape, and I have to wonder if he did any upper body strength work at all between SL and Pre-season.

Maybe MDA feels that Hill is not showing enough in practice to warrant more playing time.

I think that we will know a lot about Hiil's work ethic if he does not make improvements in his game and with his body strength during next year's pre-season period.

Cosmic wrote:Nix, You can still showcase the guys you want to dump AND get Jordan Hill involved. There are 240 minutes per game to dole out amongst everyone you choose to play. It's not hard to take those you want to showcase and say "Well, let's drop that from 240 to 230 and get Jordan Hill in there for 10 of them." So it's poor reasoning IMO.

ESM: Yeah, I am frustrated that a lotto pick can't get any burn - even though I recognize he's not all that good right now - which just makes me MORE frustrated to be honest.

Fish: Well, not playing isn't an excuse for not learning. If you play hard and seek to learn? You will get minutes. The attitude of "Well, I'm not playing, so who cares what's going on." Is an indictment of a poor attitude. That attitude might very well be one reason why he doesn't play. So it is something that I watch and every time I see Jordan Hill? He just acts like he doesn't care what is going on. A bit disheartening to say the least.

Bip: He has played okay when on the court. Let's not say well because on the one hand he had a few good scores - but - they were on trash players. On the other hand he got burnt a few times and fouled a few times out of desperation, again, against some trash players. So we can't really say he's looked good based on that.

Briggs: LOL!!!! Ain't it the truth!

Bocker: You got it as I did. I don't like seeing that.

Mark: This one clip doesn't illustrate the totality of his attitude. It's one of dozens that, if I had kept the footage, I would be providing to prove my point that he seems quite content to have been made a multi-millionaire by virtue of an NBA-GUARANTEED-LOTTO-PICK-CONTRACT and nothing more. This one clip is already just a drop in the bucket. The next few games as you watch them take special note of Jordan Hill as they show him from time to time. You'll see what is going on.

...Now, the bottom line is the kid is ours so he either needs to shape up or become a throw in for a trade. If he gives a crap about basketball, which is something you can question given he has only played basketball FOR THREE YEARS his entire life (Another "hey man, you're tall, here dunk this ball. Whoa! You did it, cool, you're going to play in the NBA!") I'm not impressed. He's another Eddy Curry type. He plays because he is tall and too dumb to do anything else with his life. Now, if that is going to change it obviously is not going to come from Jordan Hill himself and obviously not from the Head Coach either. It has to come from the assistant coaches. So where are they in all of this? Are they trying? Or is this kid another lost cause just happy to take home his 10M over 4 years and disappear.

Not happy with this one, fellas, and there's no reason I should be.

When you say stickball to someone in CT--they think you are talking about pick up sticks--when I first moved here they never heard of flipping baseball cards.

EMS: Five years? Okay, still it's tough not to be wary of these guys who pick the game up late in their lives. Yet I had read 3 so I guess that was wrong.

Paladin: As I said above, that's no excuse to not be paying attention and trying to learn. Some day he might be in the game in an exact same instant. That go around you want him to say to himself "Hey, I know this, I remember watching the guys do this very play one game."

Bip: Where did I change the topic? I have been talking about Jordan Hill. Both talking about how we should easily find minutes for him and talking about how his attitude, one that is out there for all to see, might be one reason he's not getting burn, because he doesn't seem to be all that serious about anything, and maybe that is how he is all the time.

TMS wrote:none of us knows how Jordan Hill does in practice... everything i've heard from teammates & coaches so far indicates he's a hard worker in practice & wants to be the best player he can be... i don't put too much into him looking up at the jumbotron during a time out.

Yeah, I mean everyone is different. Sure you would love for him to have a killer focus all the time but really, how focus can you be when you know you are not playing? That is not easy to do, especially for a young kid.

Cosmic wrote:Supreme: I feel you. It's a bogus argument. It's not tough to scratch up 10-12 minutes for your lotto pick.

EMS: Five years? Okay, still it's tough not to be wary of these guys who pick the game up late in their lives. Yet I had read 3 so I guess that was wrong.

Paladin: As I said above, that's no excuse to not be paying attention and trying to learn. Some day he might be in the game in an exact same instant. That go around you want him to say to himself "Hey, I know this, I remember watching the guys do this very play one game."

Bip: Where did I change the topic? I have been talking about Jordan Hill. Both talking about how we should easily find minutes for him and talking about how his attitude, one that is out there for all to see, might be one reason he's not getting burn, because he doesn't seem to be all that serious about anything, and maybe that is how he is all the time.

I told you where you changed the subject. Your original post talked about how he was probably getting benched because of his "lazy and disinterested demeanor". I posed the possibility that you are incorrect and jumping to conclusions. I can't tell you how many times fans have complained about one of my players being "disinterested" when in fact teammates and coaches admired him for his work ethic. YOu don't now this stuff until you are in practice. I know as fans we like to take video snippets and extrapolate all types of things from them, but this isn't reality. Now, Jordan Hill very much could be benched because he has an attitude problem, or he could be benched because he's just not ready yet. From what I've heard and seen so far on the court, effort does not appear to be a problem. What we've heard from a coach and GM that have been nothing but possibly too up front with their assessments have said nothing but good things about his work ethic. So until I see or hear otherwise I personally am not going to get bent out of shape over a 12th man laughing on the bench.

Summary: 1st conversation between us was clearly about Hill either playing or not playign because he was "lazy and disinterested".

Then you changed it to:

Bip: He has played okay when on the court. Let's not say well because on the one hand he had a few good scores - but - they were on trash players. On the other hand he got burnt a few times and fouled a few times out of desperation, again, against some trash players. So we can't really say he's looked good based on that.

If you can't se ehow you changed the subject then I can't help you.

Bippity10 wrote:

Cosmic wrote:Supreme: I feel you. It's a bogus argument. It's not tough to scratch up 10-12 minutes for your lotto pick.

EMS: Five years? Okay, still it's tough not to be wary of these guys who pick the game up late in their lives. Yet I had read 3 so I guess that was wrong.

Paladin: As I said above, that's no excuse to not be paying attention and trying to learn. Some day he might be in the game in an exact same instant. That go around you want him to say to himself "Hey, I know this, I remember watching the guys do this very play one game."

Bip: Where did I change the topic? I have been talking about Jordan Hill. Both talking about how we should easily find minutes for him and talking about how his attitude, one that is out there for all to see, might be one reason he's not getting burn, because he doesn't seem to be all that serious about anything, and maybe that is how he is all the time.

I told you where you changed the subject. Your original post talked about how he was probably getting benched because of his "lazy and disinterested demeanor". I posed the possibility that you are incorrect and jumping to conclusions. I can't tell you how many times fans have complained about one of my players being "disinterested" when in fact teammates and coaches admired him for his work ethic. YOu don't now this stuff until you are in practice. I know as fans we like to take video snippets and extrapolate all types of things from them, but this isn't reality. Now, Jordan Hill very much could be benched because he has an attitude problem, or he could be benched because he's just not ready yet. From what I've heard and seen so far on the court, effort does not appear to be a problem. What we've heard from a coach and GM that have been nothing but possibly too up front with their assessments have said nothing but good things about his work ethic. So until I see or hear otherwise I personally am not going to get bent out of shape over a 12th man laughing on the bench.

Summary: 1st conversation between us was clearly about Hill either playing or not playign because he was "lazy and disinterested".

Then you changed it to:

Bip: He has played okay when on the court. Let's not say well because on the one hand he had a few good scores - but - they were on trash players. On the other hand he got burnt a few times and fouled a few times out of desperation, again, against some trash players. So we can't really say he's looked good based on that.

If you can't se ehow you changed the subject then I can't help you.

You're reaching way too far into my posts for something that isn't even there. For what reason? To blindly defend Jordan Hill's lack of success (thus far).? To what end?

I suggested MAYBE he was not getting time because MAYBE the lazy demeanor we see during games is MAYBE going on during practices MAYBE leading Mike to not feel comfortable playing him. There is no subject change here. I don't know what you're talking about, Bip, Honestly.

I am not incorrect: How am I incorrect? This is not an isolated incident this is how he conducts himself throughout games every game. It is om game film time and again. I'm not inventing it. We're watching live film of Jordan Hill acting like this. So where you're going with that I have no clue. I guess Breen, Clyde, Trautwig, and Kenny Albert, and a couple of other fans on here, are also all incorrect for pointing it out as well over time?

Why have you changed the topic from "Why can't Jordan Hill get minutes" And "Maybe he isn't getting minutes because he has a lazy and disinterested attitude and maybe that is happening in practice as well." to... chopping my post apart into "where I changed the subject" which I never did?

What are you even talking about?

In his limited action he had a couple of decent scoring opportunities but he also got torched on the other end a few times, had a couple of nice blocks, but also had a couple of ridiculous fouls as well. Overall I'd call that a mediocre showing at best.

That part of the convo was directed at his time on the court. So again where you get this "changing the subject" bit...and what you're trying to make of it I haven't a clue. As if my talking about two parts of Jordan Hill (his bench demeanor and his on-court showing) somehow invalidates what I have to say about him....

All I am doing is stating what I see of Jordan Hill and I am CERTAINLY not alone.

Cosmic wrote:

nixluva wrote:To me you can either shoot it or you can't and Hill can shoot it. His level of comp had nothing to do with him hitting those shots cuz they were the kind of open shots this offense can create and guys like Lee get all the time. Hill simply hits his at a good %. He has shown an active body at times and he surely can run the floor like a deer and finish. Like all rooks he still needs work, but his playing time has other factors beyond his readiness to contribute. If there was no Curry or Jared i'm positive that he'd be playing a lot more.

He can shoot it...albeit a bit awkward at times. You would think a kid who can block shots and hit a jump shot were what D'Antoni was looking for. Yet, I guess not.

As to Eddy and Jared, again, we've got 240 minutes to dole out here. You mean to tell me you can't take 2 minutes away from each of his 8 players and give Hill 16 minutes? Really? Come'on!!!! The excuse to showcase Jeffries/Curry does not hold water. I showed how you can do it. You take 3 minutes from Duhon. 2 from Hughes. 3 from Lee. 2 from Jeffries. There's 10 full Jordan Hill minutes and you've done nothing to inhibit showcasing Jeffries and Curry. Nothing.

But, well, whatever....there is more going on which leads me back to Jordan Hill's lackadaisical attitude. Coaches hate that and maybe THAT is why he isn't playing.

You would have thought with Jared sitting out the Celtic game that Hill was guaranteed minutes, no?

to showcase you also need to win some. And that has been too far and too few for the Knicks. So before the coaching staff can integrate a new guy, yes, you do have to make sure your other regulars are doing what they are supposed to. And then Curry just returned.

And to make things worse, Harrington, Duhon, Wilson all started shooting the ball like 25% for the first 8 games.

And then it's about combinations of players that work together. You just don't cut 2 minutes here and 3 minutes there. These are players, not robots.

TMS wrote:i have a better idea... take 20 minutes away from Fishlips & give them to Jordan Hill.

I co-sign this.

BTW- Your boy Crawful is looking Crawsome in Atlanta these days.

martin wrote:

to showcase you also need to win some. And that has been too far and too few for the Knicks. So before the coaching staff can integrate a new guy, yes, you do have to make sure your other regulars are doing what they are supposed to. And then Curry just returned.

And to make things worse, Harrington, Duhon, Wilson all started shooting the ball like 25% for the first 8 games.

And then it's about combinations of players that work together. You just don't cut 2 minutes here and 3 minutes there. These are players, not robots.

Well, yes, we need to win in order to showcase, but all the same there are GMs that eye one player and think "Hey, if I take that guy and plug him in here, in this situation, in a role I envision, he's going to be good for us, so who cares if the Knicks are 3-79!" (you know?)

As to players shooting terribly the first 8 games, well, every years it takes about 10 regular season games before most players shake the rust off. Well, we're beyond that now and the players are waking up so it's not an issue from here on out. I think scouts understand that as well when looking at players to trade for.

As to cutting minutes, well, I don't see how cutting Duhon from 46 to 44 minutes is going to hurt much. Same with the other vets who play 35+ minutes per game. 1 or 2 minutes shouldn't mean much should it? Yet, you take 5 guys and do that and you can give them to our lotto pick to get out there.

At worst what has Jordan Hill looked like? TO me even at his worst he's done what Jerome James did when he came into a game. It might not have been pretty but he changed the game for the better for us. So...I don't see the problem in doing it.

As to combinations, yep, combos are essential. Yet with the players we have we don't have many combos that work do we.

Lee-Chandler-Gallo-Hughes-Duhon is our best combo. I'd even say if you swapped Duhon for Douglas it might even be better.

Other than that every other combo is a DISASTER at best except for the occasional spurt here or there.

So, again, plugging Hill into any combo? I don't see an issue given all that is going on (the big picture if you will, from our record, to the fact we really only have one GOOD lineup that produces)

Eh, well, what can we do but watch.

But, hey, I won't be doing that until the Orlando game.