nixluva wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

babyKnicks wrote:Fisher more than covers for Kidd. Amare and shump as you mention are improved. We didn't have thjr who's : point shooting more than replaced coop.

This team also has an actual offensive scheme.

Kmart was ok. His stats don't show much. That dalembart doesn't replace. And our point guard is much better with Calderone as well.

I'd say all in all the 54 wins are more comparable than to last year.

You all are crazy to think that Rasheed Wallace provided more leadership than Derek fisher will. Or Kidd's 3 point shooting are not replaced by thjr.

Also, jr smith had a horrible start to the year. He finished the season in 6th man form and the Knicks record at the end while trying to make the playoffs and narrowly kissing showed signs of the 54 win team.

We are closer to the 54 win team than last years disaster.

Great points. Also, the gm hired his coach just like on the 54 win team.

I don't know how anyone can't feel better about this current situation than even the 54 win team. The big change is as i've mentioned before the Leadership on this team!!! Phil, Fish and Jose IMO is a big change from what we had. Then you add on the roster improvements and coaching staff which IMO is light years better than what we had. From top to bottom it's a more focused and unified group and if anyone doesn't think these PJax guys don't want to win they're crazy. They are all about winning. THIS IS PHIL'S WORLD!!!! He wants to have a team that is all about team work like his old Knicks teams.

Its also a younger group- where we potentially have some solid role players who can develop into the system.

The 54 win team got off to a great start, then coasted. It over achieved, then under performed when it mattered most- in the play offs.

Bonn1997 wrote:

knickscity wrote:I really cant wait for the season to begin so the actual games can do the talking. Nothing speaks louder than the games themselves.

The games should but don't do the talking. If the team only wins 40 games, some posters here will say this season was all about adjusting to the new system. And then the Knicks will make a big off-season move and they'll give the team the next season to just adjust to that. There's always something new to adjust to!

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

knickscity wrote:I really cant wait for the season to begin so the actual games can do the talking. Nothing speaks louder than the games themselves.

The games should but don't do the talking. If the team only wins 40 games, some posters here will say this season was all about adjusting to the new system. And then the Knicks will make a big off-season move and they'll give the team the next season to just adjust to that. There's always something new to adjust to!

That was the case for the 54 win team as well. When the team won it was 'fools gold' and when the team lost the inevitable finally happened. Losing that year had nothing to do with Sheed, Kurt, Kidd, Tyson. JR, etc. breaking down and not being able to perform in the playoffs according to some.

I think talent wise this is closer to the 54 wins than 37. That run was not sustainable by that cast. The old guys ran out of steam. People say things like "another failed post season" for Melo, but again... he trusted his teammates all year, that team had great chemistry and how many shots did Kidd hit in the playoffs? What did JR shoot? How did Tyson do against Hibbert?

Finally the Knicks are looking to build a team.

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

knickscity wrote:I really cant wait for the season to begin so the actual games can do the talking. Nothing speaks louder than the games themselves.

The games should but don't do the talking. If the team only wins 40 games, some posters here will say this season was all about adjusting to the new system. And then the Knicks will make a big off-season move and they'll give the team the next season to just adjust to that. There's always something new to adjust to!

That was the case for the 54 win team as well. When the team won it was 'fools gold' and when the team lost the inevitable finally happened. Losing that year had nothing to do with Sheed, Kurt, Kidd, Tyson. JR, etc. breaking down and not being able to perform in the playoffs according to some.

the issue was whether the team we were watching during the regular season was a legitimate final four team. the first seven or eight games they looked great. the fool's gold statement has to do with seeing the regular-season team and superimposing them into a conference finals frame of reference. they did not look that way to me which is why i continuously used the statement. the one exception was that gritty win against the thunder late in the season. very inspiring.

at the time there were many others who kept asserting "a win is a win." is it really, though? i mean, the nba suffers from a diluted talent pool because of 6-8 too many teams. half the teams you play are sub-.500.

no. obviously the "win is a win" meme isn't true or we would have seen better results against the celtics and the pacers.

because it's not THAT you win but HOW you win in the regular season that allows you to forecast how they will do in the varsity season.

that season they were 13-11 against

miami 3-1
sa 2-0
indy 2-2
memph 1-1
chic 0-4
okc 1-1
gs 1-1
bos 3-1

bearing in mind some regular-season sandbagging by san antonio, miami, boston-- and that knick record could have easily been below .500

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

knickscity wrote:I really cant wait for the season to begin so the actual games can do the talking. Nothing speaks louder than the games themselves.

The games should but don't do the talking. If the team only wins 40 games, some posters here will say this season was all about adjusting to the new system. And then the Knicks will make a big off-season move and they'll give the team the next season to just adjust to that. There's always something new to adjust to!

That was the case for the 54 win team as well. When the team won it was 'fools gold' and when the team lost the inevitable finally happened. Losing that year had nothing to do with Sheed, Kurt, Kidd, Tyson. JR, etc. breaking down and not being able to perform in the playoffs according to some.

the issue was whether the team we were watching during the regular season was a legitimate final four team. the first seven or eight games they looked great. the fool's gold statement has to do with seeing the regular-season team and superimposing them into a conference finals frame of reference. they did not look that way to me which is why i continuously used the statement. the one exception was that gritty win against the thunder late in the season. very inspiring.

at the time there were many others who kept asserting "a win is a win." is it really, though? i mean, the nba suffers from a diluted talent pool because of 6-8 too many teams. half the teams you play are sub-.500.

no. obviously the "win is a win" meme isn't true or we would have seen better results against the celtics and the pacers.

because it's not THAT you win but HOW you win in the regular season that allows you to forecast how they will do in the varsity season.

that season they were 13-11 against

miami 3-1
sa 2-0
indy 2-2
memph 1-1
chic 0-4
okc 1-1
gs 1-1
bos 3-1

bearing in mind some regular-season sandbagging by san antonio, miami, boston-- and that knick record could have easily been below .500

I'd like to add weren't we shooting something like mid 40s in 3pt% for like 2mos?

Maybe a reason some figured this was "not sustainable" or "fools gold"

I can't recall any team shooting this for a full season

Yet alone throughout the whole playoffs[most recently Spurs?]

I distinctly remember Wade vehemently not wanting to play at the Garden

After Hurricane Sandy hit, and the Heat performance reflected such

You'd think we had the team to beat them according to the talk

They were the measuring stick of contention

If the Knick teams are similar I guess this means

We have the team to beat the Bulls and the Cavs for all East marbles

Does anyone have the webbles to go there

CrushAlot wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

knickscity wrote:I really cant wait for the season to begin so the actual games can do the talking. Nothing speaks louder than the games themselves.

The games should but don't do the talking. If the team only wins 40 games, some posters here will say this season was all about adjusting to the new system. And then the Knicks will make a big off-season move and they'll give the team the next season to just adjust to that. There's always something new to adjust to!

That was the case for the 54 win team as well. When the team won it was 'fools gold' and when the team lost the inevitable finally happened. Losing that year had nothing to do with Sheed, Kurt, Kidd, Tyson. JR, etc. breaking down and not being able to perform in the playoffs according to some.

the issue was whether the team we were watching during the regular season was a legitimate final four team. the first seven or eight games they looked great. the fool's gold statement has to do with seeing the regular-season team and superimposing them into a conference finals frame of reference. they did not look that way to me which is why i continuously used the statement. the one exception was that gritty win against the thunder late in the season. very inspiring.

at the time there were many others who kept asserting "a win is a win." is it really, though? i mean, the nba suffers from a diluted talent pool because of 6-8 too many teams. half the teams you play are sub-.500.

no. obviously the "win is a win" meme isn't true or we would have seen better results against the celtics and the pacers.

because it's not THAT you win but HOW you win in the regular season that allows you to forecast how they will do in the varsity season.

that season they were 13-11 against

miami 3-1
sa 2-0
indy 2-2
memph 1-1
chic 0-4
okc 1-1
gs 1-1
bos 3-1

bearing in mind some regular-season sandbagging by san antonio, miami, boston-- and that knick record could have easily been below .500

I'd like to add weren't we shooting something like mid 40s in 3pt% for like 2mos?

Maybe a reason some figured this was "not sustainable" or "fools gold"

I can't recall any team shooting this for a full season

Yet alone throughout the whole playoffs[most recently Spurs?]

I distinctly remember Wade vehemently not wanting to play at the Garden

After Hurricane Sandy hit, and the Heat performance reflected such

You'd think we had the team to beat them according to the talk

They were the measuring stick of contention

If the Knick teams are similar I guess this means

We have the team to beat the Bulls and the Cavs for all East marbles

Does anyone have the webbles to go there

Can you provide me with a calendar for what part of the season good wins happen? The 16-2 run at the end of that season was meaningless because other teams were resting their guys for the playoffs. The 8-1 run to start the season was tarnished because of the hurricane. That is throwing out 27 games in an 82 game season.

I never said meaningless

Not indicative of how good some thought the team actually was

Are we built to beat the Bulls or Cavs now

Like the 54win team was built to beat the Heat or Pacers

I got em at 44 or 45

So instead of just winging it and making stuff up which is basically what Woody was doing. We have a time tested approach that is fully vetted as a system that was used by successful teams. What was Woody dong exactly? In the 54 win season he was basically riding a tiger. He wasn't in control of that success. That's why he couldn't sustain it nor tweak it properly when they had issues in the playoffs. In short Woody had no answers and his assistants SURELY didn't have anything to offer in the way of help. Compare that to what Fish has. He's gonna be able to lean on Phil and in practice and in games he's got Rambis and Cleamons. All of them including Fish have been taught by Phil for a decade. It's a major improvement in leadership.

So we have a much improved coaching staff that knows how to develop a winning team. If this team loses it won't be because of a lack of coaching. That in itself is a big deal. We'll know exactly who is worth bringing back and who should be replaced. When you can eliminate the coaching and leadership factor it makes it easier to fully judge the players. We know it won't be the system or the coaches who aren't working. On the positive side we finally have a high level of instruction and development for our players. The young guys will learn how to play REAL BASKETBALL. Bad habits will be weeded out and good habits developed.

Lastly good coaching can't replace good talent. What the good coaching does is make whatever talent you have better!!! That's what i'm looking for. I think some who are down on those of us who are positive seem to think we feel there is magic pixie dust being spread by Phil. That's not the case. Phil brings a discipline, culture and mental approach that is conducive to players becoming more professional and able to execute at a higher level. Especially players that are willing to listen. We've got some good kids. They want to be taught. Phil and Fish can handle the tougher students like JR. They've dealt with guys like him before. If he simply refuses to buy in then he'll be gone, but the team will move on with the new direction.

knicks1248 wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:There were so many off the court problems last season with Felton and his wife, Tyson and his mother, Jr and Injuries/suspension. That was 3 of our core heavy min players not focused on basketball for a long stretch of the season. I don't think the team was 37 wins solely because it was a 37 win roster.

But again at the end of the day doesn't matter what the final record of the season is. Most important thing this yr is how Melo & Jr look in the triangle.

This is is eactly my theory, lets not forget all the grumbling coming from MWP, Shumpert, beno, tyson.

what about the fact that we made off season trades to replace, cope and novak, and those same guy we brought in hardly played any, and had little to no impact at all.

So in all reality, there was a laundry list of issues of issues.

The only issue we have at this point is foucsing on the system, and identifying roles..no injuries (so far) no position battles, no coach on the hot seat, no GM's getting fired, no FA talking about opting out, no suspensions pending.

There's just one issue I'm concern about and thats the trade talk that we surely be a topic until the deadline..

Well I don't think it'll be any more an issue than it has been

Did this hurt the 2010-2011 and 2013-2014 team, who knows maybe