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

What does these 4 players have in common/ and what separates them.
Author Thread
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
10/31/2013  11:37 AM    LAST EDITED: 10/31/2013  11:42 AM
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need to build a Iverson Sixer like team around Melo and let him score 38PPG. Just get guys who defend, rebound and move the ball to Melo. Not Bargnani and Amare

he would have to take 50 shots per game to get 38 points..

the thing with guys like king is that he shot over 50% didn't need a ton of shots..

good luck with that....

It worked for iverson who was far less efficient. Not saying its the answer, but you can build a successful team that way.

CARMELO NOT IVERSON

Iverson career 42.5% fg. Melo 45.6%. Melo also better career 3pt % and free throw %. Original point was if a successful team can be put around iverson's high volume scoring it can be done with Melo.

iverson was a more dynamic player.. he played a lot in the lane for a little guy.. his ability to penetrate opened up a lot of opportunities for other players.. he also dished out close to 7 dimes a game, even though he put up a ton of shots.. Not a fan of the amount of shots he took, but I liked how he played. exciting to watch, electric, hard to guard, an opportunist on defense, almost getting 3 steals a game...

different player, different dynamic, you can't do with carmelo what you did with iverson. carmelo too limited..

I don't care what the original point was. I don't agree with it, iverson was more than just a high volume shooter.... His style of play is what allowed the sixers to build a team around him that worked somewhat....

and here is the big difference. Iverson actually played better in the playoffs than regular season... Look at his shooting % in postseason..

Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
AUTOADVERT
Knixkik
Posts: 35476
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #11
USA
10/31/2013  11:53 AM
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need to build a Iverson Sixer like team around Melo and let him score 38PPG. Just get guys who defend, rebound and move the ball to Melo. Not Bargnani and Amare

he would have to take 50 shots per game to get 38 points..

the thing with guys like king is that he shot over 50% didn't need a ton of shots..

good luck with that....

It worked for iverson who was far less efficient. Not saying its the answer, but you can build a successful team that way.

CARMELO NOT IVERSON

Iverson career 42.5% fg. Melo 45.6%. Melo also better career 3pt % and free throw %. Original point was if a successful team can be put around iverson's high volume scoring it can be done with Melo.

iverson was a more dynamic player.. he played a lot in the lane for a little guy.. his ability to penetrate opened up a lot of opportunities for other players.. he also dished out close to 7 dimes a game, even though he put up a ton of shots.. Not a fan of the amount of shots he took, but I liked how he played. exciting to watch, electric, hard to guard, an opportunist on defense, almost getting 3 steals a game...

different player, different dynamic, you can't do with carmelo what you did with iverson. carmelo too limited..

I don't care what the original point was. I don't agree with it, iverson was more than just a high volume shooter.... His style of play is what allowed the sixers to build a team around him that worked somewhat....

and here is the big difference. Iverson actually played better in the playoffs than regular season... Look at his shooting % in postseason..

Iverson shot worse in playoffs, not sure what you are talking about. He barely shot 40%. Melo has shot 42%. Other than that I agree different player, different dynamic. But same concept.

playa2
Posts: 34922
Alba Posts: 15
Joined: 5/15/2003
Member: #407

10/31/2013  12:07 PM
My point of this thread is to show players need to be able to do more without the ball in their hands. None of the four has or is doing it.

Neither of them have won a championship!

JAMES DOLAN on Isiah : He's a good friend of mine and of the organization and I will continue to solicit his views. He will always have strong ties to me and the team.
jrodmc
Posts: 32927
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 11/24/2004
Member: #805
USA
10/31/2013  1:18 PM
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need to build a Iverson Sixer like team around Melo and let him score 38PPG. Just get guys who defend, rebound and move the ball to Melo. Not Bargnani and Amare

he would have to take 50 shots per game to get 38 points..

the thing with guys like king is that he shot over 50% didn't need a ton of shots..

good luck with that....

It worked for iverson who was far less efficient. Not saying its the answer, but you can build a successful team that way.

CARMELO NOT IVERSON

Iverson career 42.5% fg. Melo 45.6%. Melo also better career 3pt % and free throw %. Original point was if a successful team can be put around iverson's high volume scoring it can be done with Melo.

iverson was a more dynamic player.. he played a lot in the lane for a little guy.. his ability to penetrate opened up a lot of opportunities for other players.. he also dished out close to 7 dimes a game, even though he put up a ton of shots.. Not a fan of the amount of shots he took, but I liked how he played. exciting to watch, electric, hard to guard, an opportunist on defense, almost getting 3 steals a game...

different player, different dynamic, you can't do with carmelo what you did with iverson. carmelo too limited..

I don't care what the original point was. I don't agree with it, iverson was more than just a high volume shooter.... His style of play is what allowed the sixers to build a team around him that worked somewhat....

and here is the big difference. Iverson actually played better in the playoffs than regular season... Look at his shooting % in postseason..

Iverson shot worse in playoffs, not sure what you are talking about. He barely shot 40%. Melo has shot 42%. Other than that I agree different player, different dynamic. But same concept.

He rarely has any objective point when discussing Melo, although there have been a few seconds last season where he said something positive.
It's a truly endearing and interesting character trait. Something like a posting 'tic'.

fishmike
Posts: 53863
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
10/31/2013  2:11 PM
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need to build a Iverson Sixer like team around Melo and let him score 38PPG. Just get guys who defend, rebound and move the ball to Melo. Not Bargnani and Amare

he would have to take 50 shots per game to get 38 points..

the thing with guys like king is that he shot over 50% didn't need a ton of shots..

good luck with that....

It worked for iverson who was far less efficient. Not saying its the answer, but you can build a successful team that way.

CARMELO NOT IVERSON

Iverson career 42.5% fg. Melo 45.6%. Melo also better career 3pt % and free throw %. Original point was if a successful team can be put around iverson's high volume scoring it can be done with Melo.

iverson was a more dynamic player.. he played a lot in the lane for a little guy.. his ability to penetrate opened up a lot of opportunities for other players.. he also dished out close to 7 dimes a game, even though he put up a ton of shots.. Not a fan of the amount of shots he took, but I liked how he played. exciting to watch, electric, hard to guard, an opportunist on defense, almost getting 3 steals a game...

different player, different dynamic, you can't do with carmelo what you did with iverson. carmelo too limited..

I don't care what the original point was. I don't agree with it, iverson was more than just a high volume shooter.... His style of play is what allowed the sixers to build a team around him that worked somewhat....

and here is the big difference. Iverson actually played better in the playoffs than regular season... Look at his shooting % in postseason..

Iverson did very little. His success as a result of Larry Brown's great coaching those years. He took more shots than the next two guys. He never won anything. He went to one finals whoop de do. He's a chucker. He got steals because he constantly gambled and that hurt his team. He's just a quick guard who was allowed to shoot it 30 times a game. Minimal impact.

Hey.. that was easy

"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
10/31/2013  2:37 PM
fishmike wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need to build a Iverson Sixer like team around Melo and let him score 38PPG. Just get guys who defend, rebound and move the ball to Melo. Not Bargnani and Amare

he would have to take 50 shots per game to get 38 points..

the thing with guys like king is that he shot over 50% didn't need a ton of shots..

good luck with that....

It worked for iverson who was far less efficient. Not saying its the answer, but you can build a successful team that way.

CARMELO NOT IVERSON

Iverson career 42.5% fg. Melo 45.6%. Melo also better career 3pt % and free throw %. Original point was if a successful team can be put around iverson's high volume scoring it can be done with Melo.

iverson was a more dynamic player.. he played a lot in the lane for a little guy.. his ability to penetrate opened up a lot of opportunities for other players.. he also dished out close to 7 dimes a game, even though he put up a ton of shots.. Not a fan of the amount of shots he took, but I liked how he played. exciting to watch, electric, hard to guard, an opportunist on defense, almost getting 3 steals a game...

different player, different dynamic, you can't do with carmelo what you did with iverson. carmelo too limited..

I don't care what the original point was. I don't agree with it, iverson was more than just a high volume shooter.... His style of play is what allowed the sixers to build a team around him that worked somewhat....

and here is the big difference. Iverson actually played better in the playoffs than regular season... Look at his shooting % in postseason..

Iverson did very little. His success as a result of Larry Brown's great coaching those years. He took more shots than the next two guys. He never won anything. He went to one finals whoop de do. He's a chucker. He got steals because he constantly gambled and that hurt his team. He's just a quick guard who was allowed to shoot it 30 times a game. Minimal impact.

Hey.. that was easy

WHAT you say may be correct... still doesn't change that iverson was a more dynamic player, a better player than carmelo and you can't do with carmelo what you did with iverson...

yea, that was easy. glad we agree..

Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
10/31/2013  2:40 PM
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
Knixkik wrote:
tkf wrote:
gunsnewing wrote:Knicks need to build a Iverson Sixer like team around Melo and let him score 38PPG. Just get guys who defend, rebound and move the ball to Melo. Not Bargnani and Amare

he would have to take 50 shots per game to get 38 points..

the thing with guys like king is that he shot over 50% didn't need a ton of shots..

good luck with that....

It worked for iverson who was far less efficient. Not saying its the answer, but you can build a successful team that way.

CARMELO NOT IVERSON

Iverson career 42.5% fg. Melo 45.6%. Melo also better career 3pt % and free throw %. Original point was if a successful team can be put around iverson's high volume scoring it can be done with Melo.

iverson was a more dynamic player.. he played a lot in the lane for a little guy.. his ability to penetrate opened up a lot of opportunities for other players.. he also dished out close to 7 dimes a game, even though he put up a ton of shots.. Not a fan of the amount of shots he took, but I liked how he played. exciting to watch, electric, hard to guard, an opportunist on defense, almost getting 3 steals a game...

different player, different dynamic, you can't do with carmelo what you did with iverson. carmelo too limited..

I don't care what the original point was. I don't agree with it, iverson was more than just a high volume shooter.... His style of play is what allowed the sixers to build a team around him that worked somewhat....

and here is the big difference. Iverson actually played better in the playoffs than regular season... Look at his shooting % in postseason..

Iverson shot worse in playoffs, not sure what you are talking about. He barely shot 40%. Melo has shot 42%. Other than that I agree different player, different dynamic. But same concept.

accidentally looked at his per stats.. on FG%, my bad.. but statistically. he scoring, assists, more often performed better in the playoffs....

His one finals appearance that year is a testament to that...

Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
What does these 4 players have in common/ and what separates them.

©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