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

hey... we were neck and neck with Milw with 4 weeks left to go
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
5/25/2005  11:26 AM
Posted by fishmike:

why didnt he play through the injury? It was mild knee sprain. MArbury played through it.... to the tune of 40+ minutes a night. If the Bucks were in the playoffs or a real race he would have been on the floor. Thats resting him.
Maybe it was a more severe injury than Marbury's sprain and had nothing to do with tanking; he may have just been unable to play. Alternatively, maybe they were tanking and he didn't need the rest and they were simply smarter than us. I haven't read Redd's medical records and I'm not going to pretend to know anything about his knee injury.
Maybe you can list some teams whose star players were healthy but still had their minutes reduced in April. That would be good evidence to support the claim that some teams were smarter than the Knicks and decided to tank. Redd is an ambiguous case because he was injured. A healthy player would be a better test case.

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 05/25/2005 11:27:18]
AUTOADVERT
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
5/25/2005  11:44 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3118/splits
Kobe.. fewer minute in April

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3007/splits
Garnett... fewer minutes in April

Portland rested everyone... their young guys got a ton of burn in April.

We could go on this all day, but I have no intention of using this thread for you to show that your right about something, because I dont think anyone really cares about that. If you disagree with my opinion that lottery bound teams rested their star down the stretch thats fine. Its my opinion that they did, we didnt, and Milw and Port reaped the benefits from doing so, not only by moving up in the lottery but by being able to better evaluate young players in game situations.

I'm sure the Knicks know 100% how Butler and Ariza will perform if given significant playing time. You can always tell that kind of stuff from practice.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
5/25/2005  11:52 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:

The premise of this thread is wrong because the Bucks did not rest Redd. He played similar minutes (okay two less minutes) per game in April as he did during the rest of the season. It was still less minutes than Marbury got and I would have liked to see Marbury's minutes reduced, but there's no evidence that the Bucks rested Redd once they were eliminated. He missed a few games due to injury, but he played similar mpg in April as he did throughout the rest of the year. That's generally true for all the teams' top players in the lottery too. I don't buy the claim that everyone bad team (or even just some bad teams) but the Knicks are tanking.

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 05/25/2005 11:05:47]

Why is the premise wrong? You admit that Redd sat games due to injury and played fewer minutes when he did play down the stretch. All while the Knicks were playing an injured Marbury major minutes and sitting their young players, all in a misguided effort to win meaningless games.

That goes to management, not to coaching. Isiah has his hand in everything that happens with this team including deciding who gets playing time. If he wanted the kids to get minutes late in the season while resting the veterans, they would have.

It's not about tanking, it's about being smart about resting your vets while giving your young guys some PT to see what they can do in more meaningful minutes. Obviously your chances of losing are greater but when you're already out of the playoffs, that has to be seen as an added benefit. One that has to be taken advantage of. If you have a plan.

If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
5/25/2005  11:56 AM
Kobe's minutes were decreased because he left one game early due to injury and only played 14 min. Otherwise, his minutes for April were the same as other months. Whatever the Lakers did with didn't work since they're picking after the Knicks anwyay

The T-wolves rested Garnett for the final two games of the season. I'll give you that much. It's not like it did them any good, though, because they ended up with the last lottery pick anyway.

For the blazers, Shareef had his mpg cut in April by 0.1 mpg. That's not resting him. Darius Miles had his mpg cut by 0.9 mpg. That's not resting him. Damon Stoudamire had his minutes *increased* by 1.2 mpg. That's obviously not resting him.

Just to be clear: I do agree with you that it would have been nice to rest Marbury and give more minutes to Butler. But I'm not going to pretend that tanking or even resting stars for a long stretch of games is something that teams smarter than the Knicks actually do.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
5/25/2005  12:07 PM
Posted by islesfan:
Posted by Bonn1997:

The premise of this thread is wrong because the Bucks did not rest Redd. He played similar minutes (okay two less minutes) per game in April as he did during the rest of the season. It was still less minutes than Marbury got and I would have liked to see Marbury's minutes reduced, but there's no evidence that the Bucks rested Redd once they were eliminated. He missed a few games due to injury, but he played similar mpg in April as he did throughout the rest of the year. That's generally true for all the teams' top players in the lottery too. I don't buy the claim that everyone bad team (or even just some bad teams) but the Knicks are tanking.

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 05/25/2005 11:05:47]

Why is the premise wrong? You admit that Redd sat games due to injury and played fewer minutes when he did play down the stretch. All while the Knicks were playing an injured Marbury major minutes and sitting their young players, all in a misguided effort to win meaningless games.

That goes to management, not to coaching. Isiah has his hand in everything that happens with this team including deciding who gets playing time. If he wanted the kids to get minutes late in the season while resting the veterans, they would have.

It's not about tanking, it's about being smart about resting your vets while giving your young guys some PT to see what they can do in more meaningful minutes. Obviously your chances of losing are greater but when you're already out of the playoffs, that has to be seen as an added benefit. One that has to be taken advantage of. If you have a plan.
The premise is wrong because star players on bad teams including Redd were not rested when healthy. When unable to play, no player should be playing, be it a star on a bad team or on a championship level team. That's just protecting the long-term health of the player; it has nothing to do with strategy. Again, we don't know how bad REdd's injury was. They could have been sitting him so that they'd lose more games or they could have been sitting him out because he was unable to play. His situation is ambiguous because there are multiple reasons why he could have been sitting and thus is not a good test case.
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
5/25/2005  12:11 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3726/splits
Travis Outlaw 23 minutes in April, 7 minute pre all-star

Ha Seung-Jin played in the 2nd half

Joel Przybilla 19 minutes pre all star, 32 minutes post all star

Telfair 10 minutes pre all star, 32 minutes post all star.

While I'm sure you have a great reason for this please... dont pretend for my account. Like I said I dont care.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
5/25/2005  12:14 PM
Posted by fishmike:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3726/splits
Travis Outlaw 23 minutes in April, 7 minute pre all-star

Ha Seung-Jin played in the 2nd half

Joel Przybilla 19 minutes pre all star, 32 minutes post all star

Telfair 10 minutes pre all star, 32 minutes post all star.

While I'm sure you have a great reason for this please... dont pretend for my account. Like I said I dont care.
Are these guys star players? I thought we were talking about resting star players? If we're changing the topic to playing young players, then Sweetney played 5 mpg more post than pre all star.

Isles, when Redd was healthy in April, the Bucks played him heavy minutes and were obviously trying to win meaningless games. The bottom line is that the Bucks weren't smarter than the Knicks; they were just luckier.

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 05/25/2005 12:20:10]
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
5/25/2005  12:23 PM
Dude, he's talking about how the reserves got more and more minutes AFTER the all star game, when it was clear they were out of contention. Ariza's time decreased and decreased. Butler played like, a total of 1 minute. Marbury had some nagging injuries, yet he continued to play his usual playing time, heck, even more. Crawford and TT continued to get their playing time. KT and Mo T got theirs. We won like 3 meaningless games at the end that we definitely could have and should have lost. So really, what was the point in not giving Ariza 25 minutes, Butler maybe 10 15 minutes and Sundov, ohhh, 12 minutes. Bonn, I know you like to look at the Knicks as if they are surrounded by roses and honey, but truthfully, they are in perhaps the deepest pits of the NBA and one of the most poorly run teams in all of sports. Dolan needs to sell the team for the interest of all parties.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
5/25/2005  12:26 PM
Posted by fishmike:

They rested Michael Redd and played their whole roster. Now they will have a franchise center for a decade to build around.

We played Marbury 45 minutes a game and might be able to add a wing player that can make the rotation. But I can always take solace in those games we won in March. They were all so exciting.

I'm so glad we are under new management. ITs had such a huge impact
In your quest for 10,000 posts and ensuring the universe your right about everything you missed the most important part of my original statement. Funny how the the two teams that moved up rested guys and played their young players.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
5/25/2005  12:28 PM
I have to agree with fish here, there was no reason why ariza got DNP's, butler got no playing time whatsoever and marbury played 48 mpg.. When you are in a game,a blowout game, either up or down by 30 in the 4th quarter, what should you do? A) rest your starters and bring in the younger guys for some playing time, or B) play your starter the whole 4th quarter trying to preserve the integrity of the game?

I think it is clear, most teams pick choice A. This is what the knicks should have done late in the season, it was garbage time, no playoffs, no reason to play starters big minutes, this is simple and smart thinking, what the knicks were thinking is beyone me or logic IMO.. we could have accomplished a lot, we could have seen what the youngsters could do, especially against teams like the bulls and wizzards who were playing hard for playoff seedings, and we could of rested our starters while getting better lottery position... Simple and plain.. Just think now how much better the Bucks lineup will look with Bogut and marvin williams playing with redd, and TJ ford if he comes back... damn good I say...
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
5/25/2005  12:31 PM
Wait, wait, let me scroll through that post one time Fish, I haven't gotton the main point yet.......

Ah yes, now I see. The Knick games were exciting b/c Marbury played 45 minutes. OK, I now know everything in Knickland is OK.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
5/25/2005  12:42 PM
forget about Bogut or Gerald Green... we will always have the April wins of 05 to look back on with fondness
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
5/25/2005  1:07 PM
Don't forget that Mo T is gonna be one super duper trade asset in 7 years.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
5/25/2005  1:07 PM
Posted by fishmike:

its not sloppy thinking.

Sure it is. Mind you, I agree with you about what the Knicks should have done, 100%. What I don't like is that you (and plenty of other ppl I'm sure) are letting yourself become so upset because now you have the knowledge that the 6th slot won the lotto. You're thinking, "winning a few extra games cost us the first pick!" when you should be thinking "winning a few extra games cost us 3 percentage points." The Knicks really SHOULD have done everything they could to get as high a chance at #1 as possible, but practically speaking, they only cost themselves an extra 3% chance at the pick. And because no one can see the future, the outcome of our extra wins must be evaluated as costing us 3% chance, NOT as costing us the top pick. The same logic that punishes the Knicks for losing the top pick, rather than losing 3% points, should also punish the Jazz and Hornets for winning TOO MANY lottery balls, which is obviously nonsense. You play for the percentages, and your standing should be evaluated only in terms of the percentages-- whatever happens with the actual outcome is just luck, and you should NOT be held accountable for the actual outcome.

Getting worked up over the actual result of this lotto is kind of like opting not to spend 5 bucks on a scratch-and-win lottery ticket, then seeing someone else buy the same ticket and winning a million bucks. Hey, it sucks, and you probably really feel down in the pits if that happens, but you shouldn't-- the chances were so low for you to win, and there's no way you could've known this particular ticket was the winner. You should not think "I cost myself a million bucks"; you should think "I cost myself a small chance at a million bucks, and I just happened to be unlucky."

And again, I'm not exonerating anyone here-- you can go back on this forum or the NYT forum and you'll see I was 100% for an out-and-out tank. There was certainly no purpose at all in playing Steph ragged and playing to win every game, other than for Herb to push the noose an extra couple of centimeters from his neck. What I am saying is that the actual COST of that poor decision making on the part of the organization as a whole should be regarded as losing a relatively meager 3% chance of winning, NOT as losing the #1 pick.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
fishmike
Posts: 53867
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
5/25/2005  1:23 PM
Tom.. thats not what I am saying at all. Where did I say winning those games cost us the #1 pick? My point was two fold... that winning those games cost us a *chance* at that pick and that a team that took the philosophy I was begging for *did* win the pick. I also mentioned Portland moved up as well and they played their young guys heavily in the 2nd half of the season. Nowhere do I say this cost us the actual #1.

People against cutting a stars minutes from 42 to 32 and playing the whole bench say things like the lottery is all luck and it doesnt matter. Well... it is luck, thats for sure. But two of the 3 teams that won the lottery clearly made some of their own luck.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
5/25/2005  1:35 PM
What I don't like is that you (and plenty of other ppl I'm sure) are letting yourself become so upset because now you have the knowledge that the 6th slot won the lotto. You're thinking, "winning a few extra games cost us the first pick!" when you should be thinking "winning a few extra games cost us 3 percentage points." The Knicks really SHOULD have done everything they could to get as high a chance at #1 as possible, but practically speaking, they only cost themselves an extra 3% chance at the pick. And because no one can see the future, the outcome of our extra wins must be evaluated as costing us 3% chance, NOT as costing us the top pick. The same logic that punishes the Knicks for losing the top pick, rather than losing 3% points, should also punish the Jazz and Hornets for winning TOO MANY lottery balls, which is obviously nonsense. You play for the percentages, and your standing should be evaluated only in terms of the percentages-- whatever happens with the actual outcome is just luck, and you should NOT be held accountable for the actual outcome.

tom, the extra 3% chance isn't all that was lost...even if the Knicks had nabbed that #6 overall pick & didn't win the lottery, i'd love our chances of getting a great prospect like Greene alot more than what standing w/the #8 pick gives us...1 lottery spot in that range can mean the difference between an Andre Iguodala & a Luke Jackson...not saying it's an automatic, but it gives us less options.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
5/25/2005  1:51 PM
Posted by TMS:

hey guys, stop complaining...it's more important to be ethical & preserve the spirit of competition than to make moves to help your future...didn't they teach you that in Sports fans ethics 101?

They can preserve the spirit of cpmpetition when they are good. Right now the team needed to tank as that is also a strategy often implememnted by the GMs in the NBA.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
5/25/2005  1:58 PM
Posted by Vmart:
Posted by TMS:

hey guys, stop complaining...it's more important to be ethical & preserve the spirit of competition than to make moves to help your future...didn't they teach you that in Sports fans ethics 101?

They can preserve the spirit of cpmpetition when they are good. Right now the team needed to tank as that is also a strategy often implememnted by the GMs in the NBA.

it wouldn't be the gentlemanly thing to do...afterall, the Knicks have always been known to be the gentlemen of the NBA...we can't ruin that reputation...what would our kids think?
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
5/25/2005  5:10 PM
Posted by fishmike:
Posted by fishmike:

They rested Michael Redd and played their whole roster. Now they will have a franchise center for a decade to build around.

We played Marbury 45 minutes a game and might be able to add a wing player that can make the rotation. But I can always take solace in those games we won in March. They were all so exciting.

I'm so glad we are under new management. ITs had such a huge impact
In your quest for 10,000 posts and ensuring the universe your right about everything you missed the most important part of my original statement. Funny how the the two teams that moved up rested guys and played their young players.
They played their whole roster? Not many teams had a 19 year old 2nd rd draft pick getting close to 20 mpg. We played our roster as much as most teams, which was still less than I wanted. (I wanted to see more of Butler.) Were there so many more reserves on Mil getting minutes? Were they young 2nd rd picks like Ariza?
Here in the toronto area, a few people have said to me that they wish their lottery pick last year (Arraujo) could get as much playing time as our 2nd rd pick. In NJ, the fans were saying on message boards they should have lost more games so they could get a lottery pick instead of a 1st rd sweep. This is just a criticism that every team that doesn't get lucky in the lottery hears from their fans.

In your quest for 10,000 posts and ensuring the universe your right about everything
That's just really lame, fish. I thought you were better than that. It's no secret that we both don't like each other and both think the other knows little about the game, but we can at least stick to basketball.
Killa4luv
Posts: 27769
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
5/25/2005  6:43 PM
I thik you guys are being a bunch of cry babies. Get over it. They shoulda played the young'ns more regardless of 3 percentage points, but they didn't. It didn't necasarily cost us anything. We were a better team than Milwaukee and if we had a worse rrecord and tanked intentionally Stern may have made a call to the knicks front officve. In any case what has happened has happened lets see what we get. OYou guys are acting like Gerald Green is Lebron or something. theres a 6-8 2 guard available in the second round named Sean Banks, he's from NJ and he is really NICE. He can be our consolation prize and he can be every bit as good, provided he doesn't join a gang and get killed or something.
Page 2 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
hey... we were neck and neck with Milw with 4 weeks left to go
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©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