martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:

nixluva wrote:There was nothing wrong with the D in the 1st 2 games. 2 tough defensive games by the Knicks and today one bad one. We come into this game and lay an egg. Did Mike suddenly stop coaching them for this game? Did the players simply not focus in and defend with the same energy? Did the C's just have one of those games where guys just get hot from outside? Whatever the reason, this team played 2 of the 3 playoff games with intensity on D so let's not exaggerate this one game.

'luva, if you're honest with yourself you'll admit that the defensive intensity was surprisingly good for the first two games. When that level of intensity is no longer surprising but the norm then this coach will be getting a pass on defense, but not until.

I thought Amare was a big reason in game 3 for the dropoff. I know he was hurt, but he stood around looking a balls that were like 3-5 feet away from him while Rondo sprinted, grabbed and then hit Ray for open 3s. Horrible.

I had trouble getting a solid feed for the 1st quarter, but my sense is they shut off Melo, took the wind out of our sails and pounced. And Amare was a mannequin all game.

But the point remains, why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts and "making them adjust to us" only to do a 180 for the post season? Do we really want good defensive intensity to be a surprising treat?

I'm not in the "fire D'Antoni" camp, I'm in the let him finish out his contract next year camp. D' seems to have been adjusting the system to the roster since the trade (not like he had a choice w/ Felton gone.) We're getting a sense of how this team could play d (in spite of the excuse that we don't have the defensive players for it) and I think we all like it when they do. If they pick up where they left off next year then MDA might get an extension, if not, he had his chance.

I think you answered your own question: "why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts": The Knicks have had 2 entirely different teams from start to finish, and realistically they now have a 3rd'ish team to adjust playing style to over the past 2 games now that Amare is out and TD has replaced Billups (TD can't push and he can barely do PnR).

I never understood the correlation between the offensive output - whether it be 85 points, 106.5ppg, or 110ppg - and the tact of pinning that number to defense. You either play defense or you don't, and just because you score 110 vs 85 isn't an indication of whether you are playing defense or not.

The Knicks need interior defense, and they need Amare to actually play defense and rebound, no doubt about it. I think Amare/MDA/Knicks used the excuse of both a thin front line regarding size (AR, Moz provided zero for the first half season+ while Turiaf was effective for about half games cause of injury and only 20 or so minutes when he could play) and thin in terms of offensive focus if Amare was not playing, and that all added up to Amare playing less defense so as to be on the floor more (we all know he turned to matador when getting 2 fouls in first half or 4 in second half of games).

With Melo on roster, Amare has zero excuse with the foul trouble thing. JJ/Sheldon provide some depth at the C/PF spots, although both are seriously flawed.

I am in the same boat you are with MDA. The first 2 years everyone should have known they were going to be losing efforts and you can't really get much value from watching and making a determination. This year was about getting to playoffs and Knicks still had too much turnover and 2 really ill-timed injuries during playoffs. C'est la vie.

MDA gets until about mid-season for me, especially if Melo and Amare are healthy. I am guessing Billups will be back too.

I'll ask you to consider than 9 out of the top 10 lowest scoring teams are in the playoffs, vs, 2 of the top 10 highest scoring teams.

Also consider that the 2 from the highest scoring camp are NY and Denver, both unlikely to advance.

I think it's important to be practiced at grinding out games, turning up the intensity, getting stops, executing in late game scenarios, etc.

The Knicks are not a team that can flip a switch and be in Championship form, nor is Magic Johnson walking thru the door. They need to be better practiced in playoff style ball.

If you rank team according to both Offensive and Defensive efficiency, and then total those ranks, you probably find the best teams in the league (whose rank totals are low).

So, if Chicago is 12th in Offense and #1 in Defense, their rank total is 13. San Antonio is #2 in Off and #11 in Def, also 13.

Maybe throw in some minor variable factor for # of years team has been together and "balance" of team (starters, bench, injury).

http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats/_/sort/defensiveEff/order/false

I would guess that Regular Season records prove that out pretty close.

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:

nixluva wrote:There was nothing wrong with the D in the 1st 2 games. 2 tough defensive games by the Knicks and today one bad one. We come into this game and lay an egg. Did Mike suddenly stop coaching them for this game? Did the players simply not focus in and defend with the same energy? Did the C's just have one of those games where guys just get hot from outside? Whatever the reason, this team played 2 of the 3 playoff games with intensity on D so let's not exaggerate this one game.

'luva, if you're honest with yourself you'll admit that the defensive intensity was surprisingly good for the first two games. When that level of intensity is no longer surprising but the norm then this coach will be getting a pass on defense, but not until.

I thought Amare was a big reason in game 3 for the dropoff. I know he was hurt, but he stood around looking a balls that were like 3-5 feet away from him while Rondo sprinted, grabbed and then hit Ray for open 3s. Horrible.

I had trouble getting a solid feed for the 1st quarter, but my sense is they shut off Melo, took the wind out of our sails and pounced. And Amare was a mannequin all game.

But the point remains, why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts and "making them adjust to us" only to do a 180 for the post season? Do we really want good defensive intensity to be a surprising treat?

I'm not in the "fire D'Antoni" camp, I'm in the let him finish out his contract next year camp. D' seems to have been adjusting the system to the roster since the trade (not like he had a choice w/ Felton gone.) We're getting a sense of how this team could play d (in spite of the excuse that we don't have the defensive players for it) and I think we all like it when they do. If they pick up where they left off next year then MDA might get an extension, if not, he had his chance.

I think you answered your own question: "why style the regular season on scoring 110 pts": The Knicks have had 2 entirely different teams from start to finish, and realistically they now have a 3rd'ish team to adjust playing style to over the past 2 games now that Amare is out and TD has replaced Billups (TD can't push and he can barely do PnR).

I never understood the correlation between the offensive output - whether it be 85 points, 106.5ppg, or 110ppg - and the tact of pinning that number to defense. You either play defense or you don't, and just because you score 110 vs 85 isn't an indication of whether you are playing defense or not.

The Knicks need interior defense, and they need Amare to actually play defense and rebound, no doubt about it. I think Amare/MDA/Knicks used the excuse of both a thin front line regarding size (AR, Moz provided zero for the first half season+ while Turiaf was effective for about half games cause of injury and only 20 or so minutes when he could play) and thin in terms of offensive focus if Amare was not playing, and that all added up to Amare playing less defense so as to be on the floor more (we all know he turned to matador when getting 2 fouls in first half or 4 in second half of games).

With Melo on roster, Amare has zero excuse with the foul trouble thing. JJ/Sheldon provide some depth at the C/PF spots, although both are seriously flawed.

I am in the same boat you are with MDA. The first 2 years everyone should have known they were going to be losing efforts and you can't really get much value from watching and making a determination. This year was about getting to playoffs and Knicks still had too much turnover and 2 really ill-timed injuries during playoffs. C'est la vie.

MDA gets until about mid-season for me, especially if Melo and Amare are healthy. I am guessing Billups will be back too.

I'll ask you to consider than 9 out of the top 10 lowest scoring teams are in the playoffs, vs, 2 of the top 10 highest scoring teams.

Also consider that the 2 from the highest scoring camp are NY and Denver, both unlikely to advance.

I think it's important to be practiced at grinding out games, turning up the intensity, getting stops, executing in late game scenarios, etc.

The Knicks are not a team that can flip a switch and be in Championship form, nor is Magic Johnson walking thru the door. They need to be better practiced in playoff style ball.

And I'll counter with efficiency numbers, as long as your efficiency number - both defensively and offensively - are good, you tend to make playoffs and do well.

RK	TEAM		PACE	OFF EFF	DEF EFF
1	Denver		97.9	109.5	104.8
2	San Antonio	94.6	109.4	102.8
3	Miami		93.2	109.3	100.7
4	Oklahoma City	95.3	108.6	104
5	New York	98.1	108.3	106.9
6	Houston		96.9	108	106.2
7	LA Lakers	93.4	107.9	101.3
8	Dallas		93.4	107.6	102.3
9	Phoenix		96.8	107	107.4
10	Orlando		93.5	105.7	99.1
11	Portland	90.5	105.6	104.2
12	Chicago		92.9	105.5	97.4

These efficiency rankings can get pretty esoteric. Each listing seems to use it's own definition of efficiency. Here's another ranking:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/teamstats/11/1/eff/7-1

I don't know about you but I don't glean much from it. Here's the top 10:

Denver
Oaklahoma
Houston
San Antonio
NY
LA
Dallas
Phoenix
Mia
Golden State

It's a hodgepodge. NY is at #5 and Boston #14. Chicago with the best record in the league is at 11.

Meanwhile, you give D'Antoni just half a season more while he's got us playing at #5. Clearly he deserves better with such a high measure, if that's such a relevant statistic, no?

BlueSeats wrote:These efficiency rankings can get pretty esoteric. Each listing seems to use it's own definition of efficiency. Here's another ranking:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/teamstats/11/1/eff/7-1

I don't know about you but I don't glean much from it. Here's the top 10:

Denver
Oaklahoma
Houston
San Antonio
NY
LA
Dallas
Phoenix
Mia
Golden State

It's a hodgepodge. NY is at #5 and Boston #14. Chicago with the best record in the league is at 11.

Meanwhile, you give D'Antoni just half a season more while he's got us playing at #5. Clearly he deserves better with such a high measure, if that's such a relevant statistic, no?

I literally have no idea what that stat you are showing is, and there is zero explanation of what it comprises. I have heard of Off Eff and Def Eff (generally points per 100 possessions - so it takes into consideration pace), but your link just shows "Efficiency" with zero explanation for what it is measuring, they might as well call it their Alba rating.

You are correlating my half season gauge and trying to tie it to a statistic somehow and which is CLEARLY different than what I posted? I'd just like to see the coach with a cohesive unit for a measurable duration. I think what you just said is that because MDA's team is ranking 5th at something, clearly I should/would give him more time. Is that how you came up with your half season? Not me.

martin wrote:

BlueSeats wrote:These efficiency rankings can get pretty esoteric. Each listing seems to use it's own definition of efficiency. Here's another ranking:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/teamstats/11/1/eff/7-1

I don't know about you but I don't glean much from it. Here's the top 10:

Denver
Oaklahoma
Houston
San Antonio
NY
LA
Dallas
Phoenix
Mia
Golden State

It's a hodgepodge. NY is at #5 and Boston #14. Chicago with the best record in the league is at 11.

Meanwhile, you give D'Antoni just half a season more while he's got us playing at #5. Clearly he deserves better with such a high measure, if that's such a relevant statistic, no?

I literally have no idea what that stat you are showing is, and there is zero explanation of what it comprises. I have heard of Off Eff and Def Eff (generally points per 100 possessions - so it takes into consideration pace), but your link just shows "Efficiency" with zero explanation for what it is measuring, they might as well call it their Alba rating.

You are correlating my half season gauge and trying to tie it to a statistic somehow and which is CLEARLY different than what I posted? I'd just like to see the coach with a cohesive unit for a measurable duration. I think what you just said is that because MDA's team is ranking 5th at something, clearly I should/would give him more time. Is that how you came up with your half season? Not me.

You brought up efficiency, not me. And NY is ranked at 5 on the list you posted as well. Forgive me for thinking you valued something you seemed to be ascribing value to.

Juice wrote:

nixluva wrote:I'm tired of the constant change. I want to see this team build some chemistry and upgrade the roster with certain things already in place.

Same was said before the trade. Fans wanted to see the homegrown talent mature and stop making deadline trades. The one thing that has remained constant(coach) with the same mediocre ho-hum results. Get us a different guy on the bench and the confidence in the players should remain right? You still believe in Amar'e and Melo right?

Some change is warranted! We upgraded with Melo and now we're set at SF and PF. We've now got to upgrade the other key spots @ center and PG. The coach is the least of our Problems. We could've won the 1st 2 games with a fully healthy roster or a bit of luck.

Improve the roster around STAT and MELO. Then worry about coach b

If anything this experience has shown this team the level of effort you need to win. This was a stiff challenge and except for one game the team was up for it. Mike has done a good job.

nixluva wrote:In this series and even the end of the regular season Mike was getting results. His overall record includes some great reg season and playoff runs. I dont expect him to fail if we can make some needed improvements. This should be one of the top teams next year.

If anything this experience has shown this team the level of effort you need to win. This was a stiff challenge and except for one game the team was up for it. Mike has done a good job.

No this series has been an example of who we've been all season Pre Melo/With Melo. What has Melo/Amar'e/D'AnToni learned about this series, they didn't know before considering you and many others want 60% of the roster turned over next year? Those 3 have been to CF. Think about what you post sometimes.