TPercy wrote:I really like Phil's assessment on almost everyone.

I really like Phil's assessment on almost everyone too.

knicks1248 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Still think he's to soft on fisher, but then again, he's a young coach so you gotta expect it.

He didn't seemed to make any of the previous players a priority, lance and Lou were there for the taken. He talked about becoming quicker, yet we only added J grant in terms of speed.

I also question why he believed it was better to let fisher learn primarily on his own, but thats phil

He's mentoring Fish, but not undermining Fish's authority with the players. Phil being a coach knows that's not a good thing. It's not like Phil wasn't in constant communication with Fish and the coaches. He just didn't interfere directly with the players. He wasn't saying that he wasn't giving advice to Fish or communicating with him.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/FredKerber/status/542014419711324163

Dude you can say the same exact thing i say, and have a totally different impact, it's a matter of personality and effectiveness, and they way we come across. So phil can have a very productive conversation with his coaching staff every 10 minutes, that doesn't mean they can relay it the way he would, especially with no recent success or history.

Lets face it, who you rather coaching your kids, phil or fisher

Why do you suppose, Phil had Fisher on his list after Kerr? You think Phil didn't spend a long time thinking about who could relate to the player and had the kind of leadership and basketball mind to be a good coach? You think Phil might have noticed how Fisher was a vocal leader in the locker room and on the court all those years? You seem to think you have a better handle on what kind of coach Fisher is than Phil, which I don't believe you do.

Of course Fisher is gonna have to learn a lot of things, but Phil knew this. Phil said that he wanted a young open mind and someone he could mold and mentor. He's talking to fisher on a regular basis and i'm sure Phil is getting feedback from Rambis and Cleamons, as well as players. If there was a serious issue I'm sure Phil wouldn't let it go unaddressed. Phil is happy with Fisher and you aren't. Guess who's opinion I trust more???

knicks1248 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Still think he's to soft on fisher, but then again, he's a young coach so you gotta expect it.

He didn't seemed to make any of the previous players a priority, lance and Lou were there for the taken. He talked about becoming quicker, yet we only added J grant in terms of speed.

I also question why he believed it was better to let fisher learn primarily on his own, but thats phil

He's mentoring Fish, but not undermining Fish's authority with the players. Phil being a coach knows that's not a good thing. It's not like Phil wasn't in constant communication with Fish and the coaches. He just didn't interfere directly with the players. He wasn't saying that he wasn't giving advice to Fish or communicating with him.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/FredKerber/status/542014419711324163

Dude you can say the same exact thing i say, and have a totally different impact, it's a matter of personality and effectiveness, and they way we come across. So phil can have a very productive conversation with his coaching staff every 10 minutes, that doesn't mean they can relay it the way he would, especially with no recent success or history.

Lets face it, who you rather coaching your kids, phil or fisher

Why do you suppose, Phil had Fisher on his list after Kerr? You think Phil didn't spend a long time thinking about who could relate to the player and had the kind of leadership and basketball mind to be a good coach? You think Phil might have noticed how Fisher was a vocal leader in the locker room and on the court all those years? You seem to think you have a better handle on what kind of coach Fisher is than Phil, which I don't believe you do.

Of course Fisher is gonna have to learn a lot of things, but Phil knew this. Phil said that he wanted a young open mind and someone he could mold and mentor. He's talking to fisher on a regular basis and i'm sure Phil is getting feedback from Rambis and Cleamons, as well as players. If there was a serious issue I'm sure Phil wouldn't let it go unaddressed. Phil is happy with Fisher and you aren't. Guess who's opinion I trust more???

It has nothing to do with weather I'm happy with Fisher,I happen to think fisher is a very bright individual, but he is just waaaay to in experience and has to much of a learning curb to be a championship coach unless you have some kind of all star roster. He hired him mostly because of the TRIANGLE, his options were super limited, and still are.

He's never going to say anything negative about fisher, not the guy he went out of his way to hire.If fisher has another disaster season his job is as secure as fort knox, he'll flip this roster 3 more times if he has to. I just didn't like the fact that he sugar coated fishers weaknesses.

You may be severely underestimating Fisher's BBall mind. Dude played for Phil and was trusted. Fish was also with different teams, coaches and with some great players over a long career. Fish's teammates raved about him as a leader. Phil who knows Fish very well, believes in his mind, his temperament and you think that Phil doesn't understand what Fisher is all about in terms of his understanding of the game and being a leader of men. Fisher may not work out in the end but I don't believe it's because he's lacking experience. He has the same damned experience that Kidd had.

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Shows how much phil really does love Melo.

golly does it really though?

"Like Q, Melo is a leader by example, not by exhorting his teammates. He's also very into the triangle, and with a better supporting cast he has every chance to be the MJ and Kobe of our offense."

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Shows how much phil really does love Melo.

golly does it really though?

Yes!

"Like Q, Melo is a leader by example, not by exhorting his teammates. He's also very into the triangle, and with a better supporting cast he has every chance to be the MJ and Kobe of our offense."

i see nothing but neutral statements from jackson on melo. the enthusiasm that comes with love is not there. "leader by example" is code for "not a good leader"-- "very into the triangle" yes, well... we'll shall see. melo his entire career has not had to adhere to a system. he can TRY to adhere, but is anybody going to say with a straight face "melo has the potential to be a playmaker to the same degree as jordan and bryant?!? the answer is a definitive "no." it's an inarguable fact.

hence,

the statement "he has EVERY CHANCE TO BE" is not the same as him saying "he WILL BE." two different statements.

moreover,

he is challenging melo by saying the "supporting cast" is "better," which actually puts the onus on melo to produce real, tangible results.

as i said, if melo doesn't cooperate and shows below-average ability in the triangle then he will be exposed for a fraud once and for all. but if he DOES cooperate and DOES excel and the team reaches the playoffs then he will have redeemed himself to all but 5% of the fan base.

another factor to weigh here is the amount of FU money he has. it's a character-check season for melo.

agreed?

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Shows how much phil really does love Melo.

golly does it really though?

Yes!

"Like Q, Melo is a leader by example, not by exhorting his teammates. He's also very into the triangle, and with a better supporting cast he has every chance to be the MJ and Kobe of our offense."

i see nothing but neutral statements from jackson on melo. the enthusiasm that comes with love is not there. "leader by example" is code for "not a good leader"-- "very into the triangle" yes, well... we'll shall see. melo his entire career has not had to adhere to a system. he can TRY to adhere, but is anybody going to say with a straight face "melo has the potential to be a playmaker to the same degree as jordan and bryant?!? the answer is a definitive "no." it's an inarguable fact.

hence,

the statement "he has EVERY CHANCE TO BE" is not the same as him saying "he WILL BE." two different statements.

moreover,

he is challenging melo by saying the "supporting cast" is "better," which actually puts the onus on melo to produce real, tangible results.

as i said, if melo doesn't cooperate and shows below-average ability in the triangle then he will be exposed for a fraud once and for all. but if he DOES cooperate and DOES excel and the team reaches the playoffs then he will have redeemed himself to all but 5% of the fan base.

another factor to weigh here is the amount of FU money he has. it's a character-check season for melo.

agreed?

So if the Knicks make the playoffs Melo will have redeemed himself in your eyes?

well i hesitate because (1) i just don't like his game, never have. i like pierce, ginobili, paul george, kahwi leonard, durant players. you think his numbers can be 27 5 3 which is just not good enough for winning-- he's been putting those numbers up on inefficient shooting, bitch rebounds and his offensive boarding is usually following his own poorly-considered first shot, all bullyball with no feint or guile. he needs a pierce-like stat line.

redeemed? nah he is too deeply in debt to the fanbase to be redeemed with a mere first round appearance. heck he's been reaching that tremendous goal most of his career, except the last two years. as you may recall the knicks went from 54 to 37 wins in the absence of leadership. gotta love the hard english on that cue ball that jackson sent spinning out there about the good old "lead by example" canard.

here how and when he redeems himself in my eyes, mmkay? i'll take two hard-fought game 6s in the eastern conference finals in the final two years of his contract.... most likely as a 6th man by the last year.

I hope you know Paul Pierce is now a sixth man or maybe 7th man...Melo's rebounds are closer to 7 per game than 5 per..Nothing bitchy about that..Melo is a better career rebounder than Pierce, better career percentage shooter than Pierce..Better career free throws..Since becoming Knick, his stats across the board were better than Pierce..Swap out Pierce and Melo on the Boston squad and I say they win at least two Finals and compete in three...Pierce has been on better teams, with better coaches and in a better organization..

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:Shows how much phil really does love Melo.

golly does it really though?

Yes!

"Like Q, Melo is a leader by example, not by exhorting his teammates. He's also very into the triangle, and with a better supporting cast he has every chance to be the MJ and Kobe of our offense."

i see nothing but neutral statements from jackson on melo. the enthusiasm that comes with love is not there. "leader by example" is code for "not a good leader"-- "very into the triangle" yes, well... we'll shall see. melo his entire career has not had to adhere to a system. he can TRY to adhere, but is anybody going to say with a straight face "melo has the potential to be a playmaker to the same degree as jordan and bryant?!? the answer is a definitive "no." it's an inarguable fact.

hence,

the statement "he has EVERY CHANCE TO BE" is not the same as him saying "he WILL BE." two different statements.

moreover,

he is challenging melo by saying the "supporting cast" is "better," which actually puts the onus on melo to produce real, tangible results.

as i said, if melo doesn't cooperate and shows below-average ability in the triangle then he will be exposed for a fraud once and for all. but if he DOES cooperate and DOES excel and the team reaches the playoffs then he will have redeemed himself to all but 5% of the fan base.

another factor to weigh here is the amount of FU money he has. it's a character-check season for melo.

agreed?

So if the Knicks make the playoffs Melo will have redeemed himself in your eyes?

well i hesitate because (1) i just don't like his game, never have. i like pierce, ginobili, paul george, kahwi leonard, durant players. you think his numbers can be 27 5 3 which is just not good enough for winning-- he's been putting those numbers up on inefficient shooting, bitch rebounds and his offensive boarding is usually following his own poorly-considered first shot, all bullyball with no feint or guile. he needs a pierce-like stat line.

redeemed? nah he is too deeply in debt to the fanbase to be redeemed with a mere first round appearance. heck he's been reaching that tremendous goal most of his career, except the last two years. as you may recall the knicks went from 54 to 37 wins in the absence of leadership. gotta love the hard english on that cue ball that jackson sent spinning out there about the good old "lead by example" canard.

here how and when he redeems himself in my eyes, mmkay? i'll take two hard-fought game 6s in the eastern conference finals in the final two years of his contract.... most likely as a 6th man by the last year.

I hope you know Paul Pierce is now a sixth man or maybe 7th man...Melo's rebounds are closer to 7 per game than 5 per..Nothing bitchy about that..Melo is a better career rebounder than Pierce, better career percentage shooter than Pierce..Better career free throws..Since becoming Knick, his stats across the board were better than Pierce..Swap out Pierce and Melo on the Boston squad and I say they win at least two Finals and compete in three...Pierce has been on better teams, with better coaches and in a better organization..

Is this a joke?
Paul pierce was never a sixth man, he started every single game for the Wizards last season even in his very old age at 37.

Ill give you rebounding, although take into account that melo has featured 76% of all his games as a Sf and twenty two percent as a power forward; in contrast, Paul pierce has featured 70% of all his games as a SF and 26% of all his games as a SG.

Paul pierce has been a way way better shooter than Melo. Pierce has averaged a career 57% TS and has cracked above 60% two seasons consecutively. Meanwhile your mans Melo has a somewhat decent 54% .

Melo would never even make a single final if he was on Boston. He is not the kind of impact player Paul Pierce is at all.

The Truth career actually had 2 stanzas, began his career similar to Me7o as a numbers gunner. Out for self, and buckets, in the 'Toine Walker days.

Once Doc, KG, Jesus, and Rondo came aboard, he sacrificed his offensive game, switched to small forward from 2 guard, became a better facilitator, played much better defense and just became a great teammate overall. He saved his bucket making for clutch time in the 4th quarters of close games. True Knicks fans know this.

There is really no comparison between the 2...maybe young Pierce, but not Paul Pierce from 2008 on.

MaTT4281 wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Anybody that says Me7o's NBA career is in anyway more accomplished than Paul Pierce is just being a biased homer.

The Truth career actually had 2 stanzas, began his career similar to Me7o as a numbers gunner. Out for self, and buckets, in the 'Toine Walker days.

Once Doc, KG, Jesus, and Rondo came aboard, he sacrificed his offensive game, switched to small forward from 2 guard, became a better facilitator, played much better defense and just became a great teammate overall. He saved his bucket making for clutch time in the 4th quarters of close games. True Knicks fans know this.

There is really no comparison between the 2...maybe young Pierce, but not Paul Pierce from 2008 on.

2008...when Pierce was 31 and playing alongside KG and Ray? He was also the second best player on his team those years.

30 years old. He actually changed who he was as a player. Bought in completely to teamball.

Season       Age  Tm  Lg Pos    G   GS   MP  FG  FGA  FG%  3P 3PA  3P%  2P  2PA  2P% eFG%  FT  FTA  FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV  PF  PTS
2006-07       29 BOS NBA  SG   47   46 37.0 7.9 18.1 .439 2.3 5.9 .389 5.7 12.2 .463 .502 6.8  8.6 .796 0.8 5.1 5.9 4.1 1.0 0.3 3.2 2.6 25.0
2007-08       30 BOS NBA  SF   80   80 35.9 6.4 13.7 .464 1.8 4.6 .392 4.6  9.2 .499 .529 5.1  6.1 .843 0.7 4.5 5.1 4.5 1.3 0.5 2.8 2.5 19.6

Just became a more efficient player, took less shots, higher percentage shots, less turnovers, and the numbers reflect this buying into Doc's system.