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

What is the difference in Bernard King - Carmelo Anthony when it comes to scoring?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 3 of 5 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4  5 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
knickscity
Posts: 24533
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 6/2/2012
Member: #4241
USA
6/11/2013  2:51 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Uptown wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
VCoug wrote:I'm too young to have watched King play for the Knicks so I can only go by their statistics. The thing that jumps out at me is that King shot a much higher % from the field than Melo. For his career King shot 51.8% from the field while Melo's only a 45.6% career shooter. King's worst shooting season was 90-91 near the end of his career when he shot 47.2% from the field; Melo only has 3 seasons where he's shot that well and one of them was the year he shot 47.6%. Melo's a better 3-point shooter but is only 33.4% for his career which isn't very good, though he's been better 2 of the 3 years he's been here. King was a bad 3-point shooter and only took 134 in his entire career; completely unsurprising since he came into the league before there even was a 3-point shot.

What's interesting is that Melo is a much better FT shooter than King, shooting 80.8% from the line for his career compared to 73% for King. This leads me to believe that King was better at getting off good, high percentage shots than Melo is; King probably took and hit more shots in the paint and at the rim than Melo does. Melo, for his career, is only an average shooter at the rim and below average when in the paint. Overall, he's only average when within 8 feet of the basket.

If you're into advanced stats they look very similar:

TS% - King 56.1%; Melo 54.55

eFG% - King 51.9% Melo 48%

ORating - King and Melo 108

DRating - King and Melo 107

Career Win Shares - King 75.4 (874 games played); Melo 72.4 (713 games played)

WS/48 - King 0.123; Melo 0.134


King was a much better player before his ACL tear. Before the tear, he was better than Melo ever was. But he still was not a superstar.

Spoken like someone who probably never saw King play. Bernard was indeed a superstar from 83-85. In fact Larry Bird called him the best pure scorer he had had played against was among the top handfull of players in the league in his opinion. King lit up the best defenders in the league during that stretch, from Cornbred Maxwell, to Cooper, Cureton (sp) etc. He avereaged about 40 for aplayoff series against the Pistons and almost single handedly beat the champs (Celts) in a series. How could you say he wasn't a superstar....BTW, he's a hall a famer....so how wssn't he a superstar?


HOF, all-star, all other awards give way too much weight to PPG. So of course he's going to get them. He obviously had the popularity of a superstar. He just didn't excel in anything other than PPG.

Have you seen King play live? I'm truly curious based on the comments.
AUTOADVERT
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
6/11/2013  2:55 PM
It's OK to be a SCORER. I LOVED King. The saddest thing for me was not getting to see King and Ewing together. King was a different player than Melo. Much more quickness and no messing around. He didn't hold the ball and think for 10 seconds. King had guys back peddling all night. I think Melo is best when he plays like that. When Melo plays fast he's a much more dangerous guy. When he goes into ISO Melo mode it not only hurts him but his team. King put so much pressure on the defense that he actually helped his team much more. A teammate of King new what he was going to do and the timing was pretty much the same catch and make his move and there wasn't much hesitation so you knew to crash the boards.

Let's also understand the game is so different now than then. The game was different in the 80's and different in the 90's. It's hard to compare eras directly. That being said, I wish that Melo would learn from King in terms of only taking high % shots. Melo makes things harder for himself than they have to be. It's the very thing that Karl and MDA were trying to get him to understand. Even after Melo got to experience what it was like to play faster in the Olympics and had great success, he couldn't stay in that mindset for an entire season. He seemed to get the idea in the Pacer series in games 2, 5 & 6. If he can learn from this maybe he can really improve his game for the rest of his career.
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
6/11/2013  4:16 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Uptown wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
VCoug wrote:I'm too young to have watched King play for the Knicks so I can only go by their statistics. The thing that jumps out at me is that King shot a much higher % from the field than Melo. For his career King shot 51.8% from the field while Melo's only a 45.6% career shooter. King's worst shooting season was 90-91 near the end of his career when he shot 47.2% from the field; Melo only has 3 seasons where he's shot that well and one of them was the year he shot 47.6%. Melo's a better 3-point shooter but is only 33.4% for his career which isn't very good, though he's been better 2 of the 3 years he's been here. King was a bad 3-point shooter and only took 134 in his entire career; completely unsurprising since he came into the league before there even was a 3-point shot.

What's interesting is that Melo is a much better FT shooter than King, shooting 80.8% from the line for his career compared to 73% for King. This leads me to believe that King was better at getting off good, high percentage shots than Melo is; King probably took and hit more shots in the paint and at the rim than Melo does. Melo, for his career, is only an average shooter at the rim and below average when in the paint. Overall, he's only average when within 8 feet of the basket.

If you're into advanced stats they look very similar:

TS% - King 56.1%; Melo 54.55

eFG% - King 51.9% Melo 48%

ORating - King and Melo 108

DRating - King and Melo 107

Career Win Shares - King 75.4 (874 games played); Melo 72.4 (713 games played)

WS/48 - King 0.123; Melo 0.134


King was a much better player before his ACL tear. Before the tear, he was better than Melo ever was. But he still was not a superstar.

Spoken like someone who probably never saw King play. Bernard was indeed a superstar from 83-85. In fact Larry Bird called him the best pure scorer he had had played against was among the top handfull of players in the league in his opinion. King lit up the best defenders in the league during that stretch, from Cornbred Maxwell, to Cooper, Cureton (sp) etc. He avereaged about 40 for aplayoff series against the Pistons and almost single handedly beat the champs (Celts) in a series. How could you say he wasn't a superstar....BTW, he's a hall a famer....so how wssn't he a superstar?


HOF, all-star, all other awards give way too much weight to PPG. So of course he's going to get them. He obviously had the popularity of a superstar. He just didn't excel in anything other than PPG.

Was George Gervin a superstar??
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
6/11/2013  4:27 PM    LAST EDITED: 6/11/2013  4:38 PM
Uptown wrote:
VCoug wrote:I'm too young to have watched King play for the Knicks so I can only go by their statistics. The thing that jumps out at me is that King shot a much higher % from the field than Melo. For his career King shot 51.8% from the field while Melo's only a 45.6% career shooter. King's worst shooting season was 90-91 near the end of his career when he shot 47.2% from the field; Melo only has 3 seasons where he's shot that well and one of them was the year he shot 47.6%. Melo's a better 3-point shooter but is only 33.4% for his career which isn't very good, though he's been better 2 of the 3 years he's been here. King was a bad 3-point shooter and only took 134 in his entire career; completely unsurprising since he came into the league before there even was a 3-point shot.

What's interesting is that Melo is a much better FT shooter than King, shooting 80.8% from the line for his career compared to 73% for King. This leads me to believe that King was better at getting off good, high percentage shots than Melo is; King probably took and hit more shots in the paint and at the rim than Melo does. Melo, for his career, is only an average shooter at the rim and below average when in the paint. Overall, he's only average when within 8 feet of the basket.

If you're into advanced stats they look very similar:

TS% - King 56.1%; Melo 54.55

eFG% - King 51.9% Melo 48%

ORating - King and Melo 108

DRating - King and Melo 107

Career Win Shares - King 75.4 (874 games played); Melo 72.4 (713 games played)

WS/48 - King 0.123; Melo 0.134

I saw plenty of Bernard King as a kid. Other than Dr. J, he was my first BB hero. As far as comparing him with Melo, you have to keep things in perspective. It was a much different game then, than it is now. King was 6'6 200-205 pounds. That would be considered small by todays standards but during the early 80's, he was a monster in the post with his broad shoulders and quick release. Melo is much bigger than King and is a better shooter from distance......

The game is so different now that it's really difficult to compare...Bernard had two insane years with the Knicks...Melo had a better overall career as a player..Melo is bigger, stronger, a better distance shooter, and a more physical player than Bernard...Melo is a better defender...Bernard's gift was his quick release and his ability to slash and get his shot off in the lane while moving...If I'm starting a team today, I would pick Melo over Bernard without hesitation because I don't think Bernard's size and quickness advantages translates to today's game..

I think people are extrapolating Bernard's career off two great years with the Knicks...Bonn said that Bernard was better than Melo ever was simply isn't true...
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/11/2013  4:59 PM
holfresh wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Uptown wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
VCoug wrote:I'm too young to have watched King play for the Knicks so I can only go by their statistics. The thing that jumps out at me is that King shot a much higher % from the field than Melo. For his career King shot 51.8% from the field while Melo's only a 45.6% career shooter. King's worst shooting season was 90-91 near the end of his career when he shot 47.2% from the field; Melo only has 3 seasons where he's shot that well and one of them was the year he shot 47.6%. Melo's a better 3-point shooter but is only 33.4% for his career which isn't very good, though he's been better 2 of the 3 years he's been here. King was a bad 3-point shooter and only took 134 in his entire career; completely unsurprising since he came into the league before there even was a 3-point shot.

What's interesting is that Melo is a much better FT shooter than King, shooting 80.8% from the line for his career compared to 73% for King. This leads me to believe that King was better at getting off good, high percentage shots than Melo is; King probably took and hit more shots in the paint and at the rim than Melo does. Melo, for his career, is only an average shooter at the rim and below average when in the paint. Overall, he's only average when within 8 feet of the basket.

If you're into advanced stats they look very similar:

TS% - King 56.1%; Melo 54.55

eFG% - King 51.9% Melo 48%

ORating - King and Melo 108

DRating - King and Melo 107

Career Win Shares - King 75.4 (874 games played); Melo 72.4 (713 games played)

WS/48 - King 0.123; Melo 0.134


King was a much better player before his ACL tear. Before the tear, he was better than Melo ever was. But he still was not a superstar.

Spoken like someone who probably never saw King play. Bernard was indeed a superstar from 83-85. In fact Larry Bird called him the best pure scorer he had had played against was among the top handfull of players in the league in his opinion. King lit up the best defenders in the league during that stretch, from Cornbred Maxwell, to Cooper, Cureton (sp) etc. He avereaged about 40 for aplayoff series against the Pistons and almost single handedly beat the champs (Celts) in a series. How could you say he wasn't a superstar....BTW, he's a hall a famer....so how wssn't he a superstar?


HOF, all-star, all other awards give way too much weight to PPG. So of course he's going to get them. He obviously had the popularity of a superstar. He just didn't excel in anything other than PPG.

Was George Gervin a superstar??


Probably but not at the Lebron level. He was an outstanding scorer and one of the best rebounding, shot-blocking back-court players in the game.
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
6/11/2013  5:55 PM    LAST EDITED: 6/11/2013  6:02 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
holfresh wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Uptown wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
VCoug wrote:I'm too young to have watched King play for the Knicks so I can only go by their statistics. The thing that jumps out at me is that King shot a much higher % from the field than Melo. For his career King shot 51.8% from the field while Melo's only a 45.6% career shooter. King's worst shooting season was 90-91 near the end of his career when he shot 47.2% from the field; Melo only has 3 seasons where he's shot that well and one of them was the year he shot 47.6%. Melo's a better 3-point shooter but is only 33.4% for his career which isn't very good, though he's been better 2 of the 3 years he's been here. King was a bad 3-point shooter and only took 134 in his entire career; completely unsurprising since he came into the league before there even was a 3-point shot.

What's interesting is that Melo is a much better FT shooter than King, shooting 80.8% from the line for his career compared to 73% for King. This leads me to believe that King was better at getting off good, high percentage shots than Melo is; King probably took and hit more shots in the paint and at the rim than Melo does. Melo, for his career, is only an average shooter at the rim and below average when in the paint. Overall, he's only average when within 8 feet of the basket.

If you're into advanced stats they look very similar:

TS% - King 56.1%; Melo 54.55

eFG% - King 51.9% Melo 48%

ORating - King and Melo 108

DRating - King and Melo 107

Career Win Shares - King 75.4 (874 games played); Melo 72.4 (713 games played)

WS/48 - King 0.123; Melo 0.134


King was a much better player before his ACL tear. Before the tear, he was better than Melo ever was. But he still was not a superstar.

Spoken like someone who probably never saw King play. Bernard was indeed a superstar from 83-85. In fact Larry Bird called him the best pure scorer he had had played against was among the top handfull of players in the league in his opinion. King lit up the best defenders in the league during that stretch, from Cornbred Maxwell, to Cooper, Cureton (sp) etc. He avereaged about 40 for aplayoff series against the Pistons and almost single handedly beat the champs (Celts) in a series. How could you say he wasn't a superstar....BTW, he's a hall a famer....so how wssn't he a superstar?


HOF, all-star, all other awards give way too much weight to PPG. So of course he's going to get them. He obviously had the popularity of a superstar. He just didn't excel in anything other than PPG.

Was George Gervin a superstar??


Probably but not at the Lebron level. He was an outstanding scorer and one of the best rebounding, shot-blocking back-court players in the game.

Gervin played Melo's position small forward but can play guard if needed because of his shooting range...he was a superstar in a true sense of the work...LeBron will be an all time great when it's all said and done...Bernard had two great seasons in the NBA...I don't think you can extrapolate that to being better than Melo ever was...Melo has had a better career thus far without question...
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/11/2013  6:19 PM    LAST EDITED: 6/11/2013  6:19 PM
holfresh wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
holfresh wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Uptown wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
VCoug wrote:I'm too young to have watched King play for the Knicks so I can only go by their statistics. The thing that jumps out at me is that King shot a much higher % from the field than Melo. For his career King shot 51.8% from the field while Melo's only a 45.6% career shooter. King's worst shooting season was 90-91 near the end of his career when he shot 47.2% from the field; Melo only has 3 seasons where he's shot that well and one of them was the year he shot 47.6%. Melo's a better 3-point shooter but is only 33.4% for his career which isn't very good, though he's been better 2 of the 3 years he's been here. King was a bad 3-point shooter and only took 134 in his entire career; completely unsurprising since he came into the league before there even was a 3-point shot.

What's interesting is that Melo is a much better FT shooter than King, shooting 80.8% from the line for his career compared to 73% for King. This leads me to believe that King was better at getting off good, high percentage shots than Melo is; King probably took and hit more shots in the paint and at the rim than Melo does. Melo, for his career, is only an average shooter at the rim and below average when in the paint. Overall, he's only average when within 8 feet of the basket.

If you're into advanced stats they look very similar:

TS% - King 56.1%; Melo 54.55

eFG% - King 51.9% Melo 48%

ORating - King and Melo 108

DRating - King and Melo 107

Career Win Shares - King 75.4 (874 games played); Melo 72.4 (713 games played)

WS/48 - King 0.123; Melo 0.134


King was a much better player before his ACL tear. Before the tear, he was better than Melo ever was. But he still was not a superstar.

Spoken like someone who probably never saw King play. Bernard was indeed a superstar from 83-85. In fact Larry Bird called him the best pure scorer he had had played against was among the top handfull of players in the league in his opinion. King lit up the best defenders in the league during that stretch, from Cornbred Maxwell, to Cooper, Cureton (sp) etc. He avereaged about 40 for aplayoff series against the Pistons and almost single handedly beat the champs (Celts) in a series. How could you say he wasn't a superstar....BTW, he's a hall a famer....so how wssn't he a superstar?


HOF, all-star, all other awards give way too much weight to PPG. So of course he's going to get them. He obviously had the popularity of a superstar. He just didn't excel in anything other than PPG.

Was George Gervin a superstar??


Probably but not at the Lebron level. He was an outstanding scorer and one of the best rebounding, shot-blocking back-court players in the game.

Gervin played Melo's position small forward but can play guard if needed because of his shooting range...he was a superstar in a true sense of the work...LeBron will be an all time great when it's all said and done...Bernard had two great seasons in the NBA...I don't think you can extrapolate that to being better than Melo ever was...Melo has had a better career thus far without question...


I didn't say he had a better career than Melo. I said pre-injury (meaning his prime years), he was better than Melo. From 1980-1 to 1984-5, he was better than any 5 year stretch Melo has had. I can't imagine Melo averaging 25 PPG on 56% shooting from the field for a 5 year stretch. It's hard to imagine him doing that for a 5 week stretch actually.
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
6/11/2013  6:44 PM    LAST EDITED: 6/11/2013  6:44 PM
Melo has had 3 yrs where he's been out of his mind in April, but then falls back to earth in the post season.

DATE	 MIN	FGM-FGA	    FG%	3PM-3PA	3P%	FTM-FTA	 FT%	REB	AST	BLK	STL	PF	TO	PTS
Apr 2013 36.4	14.3-26.5  .538	2.6-5.6	.467	5.8-6.9	.836	9.9	2.1	0.5	0.5	2.6	1.5	36.9
Apr 2012 36.9	11.3-22.8  .495	1.9-4.2	.460	5.4-6.7	.813	7.3	3.6	0.4	1.1	3.1	2.5	29.8
Apr 2011 33.2	9.5-20.2   .471	3.2-7.3	.432	4.3-4.8	.897	8.0	2.5	1.5	1.2	2.8	1.5	26.5

Melo seems to have a strong April which pumps up his stats a bit with higher % shooting than he normally has. If he was able to actually play closer to this level for most of the season and in particular in the PLAYOFFS, it would be very good. IMO it's Melo inconsistency and low efficiency that is his biggest downfall. Since he's been here he's shown that for a good stretch he can focus in but exhausts his energy and then plays less than optimal. Sometimes he'll have a strong month, fade and then come on strong at the end of the season, only to fade again in the post season.
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
6/11/2013  7:12 PM    LAST EDITED: 6/11/2013  7:41 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
holfresh wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
holfresh wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Uptown wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
VCoug wrote:I'm too young to have watched King play for the Knicks so I can only go by their statistics. The thing that jumps out at me is that King shot a much higher % from the field than Melo. For his career King shot 51.8% from the field while Melo's only a 45.6% career shooter. King's worst shooting season was 90-91 near the end of his career when he shot 47.2% from the field; Melo only has 3 seasons where he's shot that well and one of them was the year he shot 47.6%. Melo's a better 3-point shooter but is only 33.4% for his career which isn't very good, though he's been better 2 of the 3 years he's been here. King was a bad 3-point shooter and only took 134 in his entire career; completely unsurprising since he came into the league before there even was a 3-point shot.

What's interesting is that Melo is a much better FT shooter than King, shooting 80.8% from the line for his career compared to 73% for King. This leads me to believe that King was better at getting off good, high percentage shots than Melo is; King probably took and hit more shots in the paint and at the rim than Melo does. Melo, for his career, is only an average shooter at the rim and below average when in the paint. Overall, he's only average when within 8 feet of the basket.

If you're into advanced stats they look very similar:

TS% - King 56.1%; Melo 54.55

eFG% - King 51.9% Melo 48%

ORating - King and Melo 108

DRating - King and Melo 107

Career Win Shares - King 75.4 (874 games played); Melo 72.4 (713 games played)

WS/48 - King 0.123; Melo 0.134


King was a much better player before his ACL tear. Before the tear, he was better than Melo ever was. But he still was not a superstar.

Spoken like someone who probably never saw King play. Bernard was indeed a superstar from 83-85. In fact Larry Bird called him the best pure scorer he had had played against was among the top handfull of players in the league in his opinion. King lit up the best defenders in the league during that stretch, from Cornbred Maxwell, to Cooper, Cureton (sp) etc. He avereaged about 40 for aplayoff series against the Pistons and almost single handedly beat the champs (Celts) in a series. How could you say he wasn't a superstar....BTW, he's a hall a famer....so how wssn't he a superstar?


HOF, all-star, all other awards give way too much weight to PPG. So of course he's going to get them. He obviously had the popularity of a superstar. He just didn't excel in anything other than PPG.

Was George Gervin a superstar??


Probably but not at the Lebron level. He was an outstanding scorer and one of the best rebounding, shot-blocking back-court players in the game.

Gervin played Melo's position small forward but can play guard if needed because of his shooting range...he was a superstar in a true sense of the work...LeBron will be an all time great when it's all said and done...Bernard had two great seasons in the NBA...I don't think you can extrapolate that to being better than Melo ever was...Melo has had a better career thus far without question...


I didn't say he had a better career than Melo. I said pre-injury (meaning his prime years), he was better than Melo. From 1980-1 to 1984-5, he was better than any 5 year stretch Melo has had. I can't imagine Melo averaging 25 PPG on 56% shooting from the field for a 5 year stretch. It's hard to imagine him doing that for a 5 week stretch actually.

Yesterday's game is a different game where players try to get into the lane and drive more versus today's deep shooting teams..Apples and Oranges..I think Melo is better because he is bigger and stronger with more range...Crazy as it sounds, Melo is more complete...In today's game, Melo would be better..

Melo has put up better numbers than Bernard 4 of out the 5 years your are mentioning...Peope are extrapolating Kings two years with the Knicks into career numbers...They did the same with Bill Walton who had two good NBA seasons...Walton score close 7k points in his career..Just as a measure, Ewing scored 24k...Walton is a top 50 great..
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/11/2013  9:17 PM
“I was always taught — Take High Percentage shots — don’t force it — don’t be a one man show

-Bernard King
playa2
Posts: 34922
Alba Posts: 15
Joined: 5/15/2003
Member: #407
6/11/2013  9:33 PM
playa2 wrote:In a day when most of you judge players by rings.

Neither of them made their teammates better and neither of them won rings in the association.

Bernard was very athletic and the players in his day were not like they are today. I heard Jordan say the greatest defender he faced wasn't Bruce Bowen of Gerald Wilkins, but Mitch Richmond!

The more athletic the league the more you tend to be hindered trying to score, so Bernard although great had a lil advantage there.

My question had to do with scoring, both of those players excelled at scoring when their teammates just watched them go to work.

They both had the ability to take over games and put fear in those who tried to defend them.

As far as scoring I see no difference.

Again the question was What is the difference in Bernard King - Carmelo Anthony when it comes to SCORING?


Nothing was different compared to today standards

Both got No rings and their teammates just watched them score the basketball.

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.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/11/2013  9:48 PM
playa2 wrote:
playa2 wrote:In a day when most of you judge players by rings.

Neither of them made their teammates better and neither of them won rings in the association.

Bernard was very athletic and the players in his day were not like they are today. I heard Jordan say the greatest defender he faced wasn't Bruce Bowen of Gerald Wilkins, but Mitch Richmond!

The more athletic the league the more you tend to be hindered trying to score, so Bernard although great had a lil advantage there.

My question had to do with scoring, both of those players excelled at scoring when their teammates just watched them go to work.

They both had the ability to take over games and put fear in those who tried to defend them.

As far as scoring I see no difference.

Again the question was What is the difference in Bernard King - Carmelo Anthony when it comes to SCORING?


Nothing was different compared to today standards

Both got No rings and their teammates just watched them score the basketball.


So you start a thread. There are 50 replies. But the only person you reply to is yourself?!
Nalod
Posts: 71312
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
6/11/2013  11:27 PM
King came here and resurrected a promising career that was in trouble because of his off court legal problems.

Melo was a "star" in college and was a promoted "star" in the NBA who forced his way to NY.

The trade was more than just "gallo".

He was "coming home" and has been sold to fans as "mooby": to be worshipped and celebrated without merit.

King was aquired for much less and was not a "savior'.

Thus, he blew us away!

and it was a very small window.
knickstorrents
Posts: 21121
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/23/2010
Member: #3050
Hong Kong
6/11/2013  11:52 PM
Biggest difference - Bernard always played within the offence. Melo seems to lack basic basketball understanding and hardly ever plays within the offence.

When Bernard scores, he scores within the offensive flow. As others have said he makes quick decisions, and usually when he takes the shot it's the best shot available for the team at that time.

When Melo shoots, it could be the best shot available, the worst shot available, or whatever. Carmelo doesn't really THINK which is my main issue with him.

You can't win championships being physically talented but dumb. You need to be smart too.

Rose is not the answer.
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
6/12/2013  1:23 AM    LAST EDITED: 6/12/2013  1:55 AM
Nalod wrote:King came here and resurrected a promising career that was in trouble because of his off court legal problems.

Melo was a "star" in college and was a promoted "star" in the NBA who forced his way to NY.

The trade was more than just "gallo".

He was "coming home" and has been sold to fans as "mooby": to be worshipped and celebrated without merit.

King was aquired for much less and was not a "savior'.

Thus, he blew us away!

and it was a very small window.

"Melo forcing his way here" is the view of some one who has lost something in Melo coming here...Did DWill "force" his way to the Nets...Did Bron "force" his way to Miami...Who ever heard a fan base objecting to a better player wanting and coming to their city to play ball??
VCoug
Posts: 24935
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/28/2007
Member: #1406
6/12/2013  3:44 AM
knickstorrents wrote:Biggest difference - Bernard always played within the offence. Melo seems to lack basic basketball understanding and hardly ever plays within the offence.

When Bernard scores, he scores within the offensive flow. As others have said he makes quick decisions, and usually when he takes the shot it's the best shot available for the team at that time.

When Melo shoots, it could be the best shot available, the worst shot available, or whatever. Carmelo doesn't really THINK which is my main issue with him.

You can't win championships being physically talented but dumb. You need to be smart too.

Yeah, after 2.5 seasons this is pretty much the same conclusion I've come to. I no longer believe that Melo is a player that we can build a championship caliber team around. Physically, I believe he has the talent but he just doesn't get it.

Now the joy of my world is in Zion How beautiful if nothing more Than to wait at Zion's door I've never been in love like this before Now let me pray to keep you from The perils that will surely come
playa2
Posts: 34922
Alba Posts: 15
Joined: 5/15/2003
Member: #407
6/12/2013  6:00 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
playa2 wrote:
playa2 wrote:In a day when most of you judge players by rings.

Neither of them made their teammates better and neither of them won rings in the association.

Bernard was very athletic and the players in his day were not like they are today. I heard Jordan say the greatest defender he faced wasn't Bruce Bowen of Gerald Wilkins, but Mitch Richmond!

The more athletic the league the more you tend to be hindered trying to score, so Bernard although great had a lil advantage there.

My question had to do with scoring, both of those players excelled at scoring when their teammates just watched them go to work.

They both had the ability to take over games and put fear in those who tried to defend them.

As far as scoring I see no difference.

Again the question was What is the difference in Bernard King - Carmelo Anthony when it comes to SCORING?


Nothing was different compared to today standards

Both got No rings and their teammates just watched them score the basketball.


So you start a thread. There are 50 replies. But the only person you reply to is yourself?!

Because people are thick, the question had nothing to do with all the DIFFERENT CATEGORIES PEOPLE ARE BRINGING UP, IT HAD TO DO WITH SCORING.

We already have a gazillion threads on all those categories mentioned about Melo.

They are identical in scoring, the league was physically weaker back when Bernard played.

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.
yellowboy90
Posts: 33942
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/23/2011
Member: #3538
6/12/2013  7:56 AM
To me it boils down to this healthy Melo is elite. Nicked up Melo is pretty good to average. Hurt melo is awful. SOme players can play through injuries and Melo doesn't do it a good job at that.
jrodmc
Posts: 32927
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 11/24/2004
Member: #805
USA
6/12/2013  8:27 AM
BK was nowhere near as fat as Melo is. If you compare Body Fat Mass ratio over their respective careers, it's just plain as day.


In other news, Melo just missed yet another low percentage shot in a pickup game.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/12/2013  8:43 AM    LAST EDITED: 6/12/2013  8:45 AM
playa2 wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
playa2 wrote:
playa2 wrote:In a day when most of you judge players by rings.

Neither of them made their teammates better and neither of them won rings in the association.

Bernard was very athletic and the players in his day were not like they are today. I heard Jordan say the greatest defender he faced wasn't Bruce Bowen of Gerald Wilkins, but Mitch Richmond!

The more athletic the league the more you tend to be hindered trying to score, so Bernard although great had a lil advantage there.

My question had to do with scoring, both of those players excelled at scoring when their teammates just watched them go to work.

They both had the ability to take over games and put fear in those who tried to defend them.

As far as scoring I see no difference.

Again the question was What is the difference in Bernard King - Carmelo Anthony when it comes to SCORING?


Nothing was different compared to today standards

Both got No rings and their teammates just watched them score the basketball.


So you start a thread. There are 50 replies. But the only person you reply to is yourself?!

Because people are thick, the question had nothing to do with all the DIFFERENT CATEGORIES PEOPLE ARE BRINGING UP, IT HAD TO DO WITH SCORING.

We already have a gazillion threads on all those categories mentioned about Melo.

They are identical in scoring, the league was physically weaker back when Bernard played.

No, they're very similar in PPG, not in scoring. Clearly, if one guy is hitting 55% and the other is hitting 45%, they're not scoring at an equally effective rate. Highlight films don't show missed shots. So you're only going to confirm your initial belief that they're very similar if you watch highlight films. The naked eye during games probably isn't even going to notice if one player is shooting 9 for 20 and the other 9 for 17 unless you keep written play by play notes.
Page 3 of 5 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4  5 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
What is the difference in Bernard King - Carmelo Anthony when it comes to scoring?
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