nixluva wrote:If I'm Phil I might take a look at Jimmer but the fact that he hasn't done it yet may be an indication that he's not 100% sold on Jimmer just yet.

Jackson doesn't want to mess up Grant if he can avoid it.

But maybe he can't avoid it. (Grant has had his chances . . .).

Otherwise, there'd apparently be little reason not to try Fredette on a 10-day. Costs nothing and has potentially disproportionate upside.

And then . . . we'd know "once and for all".

But maybe it'll still happen.

BTW: Do you feel there's anything in the idea that Fisher, being a PG himself, might be more sympathetic to Grant and Calderon than he should be (?)

CrushAlot wrote:I am starting to think the guy the Knicks need to bring up is Bachynski. When I watched Bachynski last year I thought that he never would be an nba player. His transformation has been amazing and when he talks about last year he says he wasn't in shape.

PG is where we really hurt at this point . . .

Malcolm wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

Malcolm wrote:IMO, Calderon isn't great but he's not as much of a problem as Grant at this time.

If Calderon could play 48 minutes, we'd be a better team than we have now.

So, I say do the easier thing first: get an upgrade for Grant . . .

That is not saying much. Grant is a much better defender.

Yes, but our defense is currently top 10.

Our offense is currently bottom 10.

Calderon (49% shooting) is helping offense more than he is hurting defense.

Grant (35% shooting) is hurting offense more than he is helping defense . . .

So where do you find these types of numbers? I can't

martin wrote:

blkexec wrote:How about take on a bigger challenge and talk about the Hows?.....instead of the Whats?[/b]

BINGO

** Replace Grant (35% shooting) in the rotation with Fredette
** Send Grant to D-League to play 40 minutes regularly

** See what happens . . .

Malcolm wrote:

martin wrote:

Malcolm wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

Malcolm wrote:IMO, Calderon isn't great but he's not as much of a problem as Grant at this time.

If Calderon could play 48 minutes, we'd be a better team than we have now.

So, I say do the easier thing first: get an upgrade for Grant . . .

That is not saying much. Grant is a much better defender.

Yes, but our defense is currently top 10.

Our offense is currently bottom 10.

Calderon (49% shooting) is helping offense more than he is hurting defense.

Grant (35% shooting) is hurting offense more than he is helping defense . . .

So where do you find these types of numbers? I can't

These are ESPN stats for FG% -- offensive and defensive . . .

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/defense-per-game/sort/shootingEfficiencyOpponent

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/offense-per-game/sort/shootingEfficiency

Thanks.

I don't know how to square the defensive stats that Hollinger puts out, the defensive efficiency per 100 possession, which only put the Knicks in the middle of the pack.

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

Seems all anyone has is a question mark answer? What is wrong with developing talent? Whats wrong with Grant? We are improving as a team are we not? Is it smart to say "hey, the last two weeks have been so much better, lets pull a better talant out of thin air".

You get a certain balance FOR NOW.
You get a good rotation FOR NOW.
You work on evolving the triangle FOR NOW.
We work towards getting to .500 FOR NOW.

Jose has been improving all season. So has melo. And KP is growing at a very nice pace. Its not static.

Malcolm wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

Malcolm wrote:IMO, Calderon isn't great but he's not as much of a problem as Grant at this time.

If Calderon could play 48 minutes, we'd be a better team than we have now.

So, I say do the easier thing first: get an upgrade for Grant . . .

That is not saying much. Grant is a much better defender.

Yes, but our defense is currently top 10.

Our offense is currently bottom 10.

Calderon (49% shooting) is helping offense more than he is hurting defense.

Grant (35% shooting) is hurting offense more than he is helping defense . . .

I understand what you are saying about Grant, but you've said it twice now.
Grant is a rookie, the problem is we don't really have a PG and it is unfair to put that pressure on Grant. It is ok, he is an adult, but we need either Jose to
perform or to get a PG that does.

Our defense is quite good now, if we get a PG who can play defense, we become a much much better team.

crzymdups wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:Calderon's about an identity the Knicks are trying to establish. Pass first, look for teammates before your own shot. I'm not a big fan, but I can't see Phil trade him. What the Knicks need is a scoring guard. Afflalo is inconsistent. I love AA as a role player but we're expecting or relying on him to give us 15-20 points a night and he just can't. He can do it a few nights, then not for a few games. We need someone in the backcourt to give balance to the scoring.

With Calderon/Galloway/Grant all capable to play at PG and different roles, the position I think is easier to upgrade and more plausible to help the team right away is shooting guard.

I am sorry, I disagree with you wholeheartedly. The position we MUST upgrade is the PG spot.

Congrats. The rest of us have been saying that for months while you were busy critiquing Melo's outfits.

Had a poor game yesterday, although our bigs did not challenge Parker as much as they usually do on penetrators...even KP held back, once. Gallo got beat by Parker, too.

Calderon and Gallo also had moments when the got away from their defenders but did not take the short J Parker is so good at, and neither of them is considered to be a top flight penetrator.

TP is a 4 time champion...I could be wrong (I know I'm not), but I expect that Parker's ability to do what he did yesterday is one of the things that has made his career as great as it has been. He's done that kind of thing in the finals...its what he does for a living.

Clyde commented on Gallo not taking away Parker's ability to go right...that's something to think about, but the game's rules are designed to help guys like Parker and Ginobili who go to the basket like they do. For the most part, you are simply not going to stop a good PG who wants to go to the basket with some help from a pick.

Do I want a better defender at PG...sure, but I don't imagine he's going to stop a player like Parker on any kind of consistent basis.

WaltLongmire wrote:Not easy for a PG to be an effective 1/1 defender these days. Throw in a good pick and it is almost impossible to defend against a quick #1. D has never bee Jose's strong suit, but he's done a little better recently.

Had a poor game yesterday, although our bigs did not challenge Parker as much as they usually do on penetrators...even KP held back, once. Gallo got beat by Parker, too.

Calderon and Gallo also had moments when the got away from their defenders but did not take the short J Parker is so good at, and neither of them is considered to be a top flight penetrator.

TP is a 4 time champion...I could be wrong (I know I'm not), but I expect that Parker's ability to do what he did yesterday is one of the things that has made his career as great as it has been. He's done that kind of thing in the finals...its what he does for a living.

Clyde commented on Gallo not taking away Parker's ability to go right...that's something to think about, but the game's rules are designed to help guys like Parker and Ginobili who go to the basket like they do. For the most part, you are simply not going to stop a good PG who wants to go to the basket with some help from a pick.

Do I want a better defender at PG...sure, but I don't imagine he's going to stop a player like Parker on any kind of consistent basis.

Good post. I mentioned yesterday that was the difference in the game

TP penetrated for his floater or created opportunities and Jose hesitated

I'm not a Jose hater. I just think he needs to be limited. I also think fisher is (finally) using Grant in a reasonable way which could also develop his game

Does anyone know the scoop w Shaun Livingston and if he could be had

I agree w ur point about TP and picks. But sometimes the best way to handle that is to punish them on the other end for example posting up or whatever (tall PG mismatch)

A Triangle PG has to have the ability to want to play off the ball and be a spot up guy. I don't see too many PG's out there who would be happy and willing in that role. The other thing is scoring balance. We get 22 from Melo, 14 from KP, 8 from RLO for about 44 a night there. Maybe a bit more in recent weeks. The backcourt gives us about 20 a night on average with Afflalo/Calderon. You need a a scoring guard in there, who can give you more balance. 10 more points from the backcourt puts us into contending for the East. It won't be easy though.

Kevin Martin makes a ton of sense to me, he has experience in a similar offense in Sacramento.