Splat wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:54 wins was nice and all but the early playoff exit kind of put a damper on it.

U have to crawl before u walk and so on..

its ok to be a little disappointed on how that season ended. It doesnt mean i disregarded the 54 wins, but i expected a deep playoff run. I think thats a extremely fair assessment. Basically i was thrilled with 54 wins but i felt we should have went much further

If you were expecting a deep playoff run then you weren't honest with yourself about the prospects of beating Indiana..

You're not sustaining any logic here. The one consistent thread is you were really happy with the number 54 and nothing else really matters as long as they hit that number. It was a garbage team, but 54 is your way of saying it wasn't even if they played like garbage when it counted. Suit yourself.

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:54 wins was nice and all but the early playoff exit kind of put a damper on it.

U have to crawl before u walk and so on..

its ok to be a little disappointed on how that season ended. It doesnt mean i disregarded the 54 wins, but i expected a deep playoff run. I think thats a extremely fair assessment. Basically i was thrilled with 54 wins but i felt we should have went much further

If you were expecting a deep playoff run then you weren't honest with yourself about the prospects of beating Indiana..

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:54 wins was nice and all but the early playoff exit kind of put a damper on it.

U have to crawl before u walk and so on..

its ok to be a little disappointed on how that season ended. It doesnt mean i disregarded the 54 wins, but i expected a deep playoff run. I think thats a extremely fair assessment. Basically i was thrilled with 54 wins but i felt we should have went much further

If you were expecting a deep playoff run then you weren't honest with yourself about the prospects of beating Indiana..

well its ironic because i thought expecting bigger things after winning 54 games not only shows how happy i was with winning 54 but also confidence i had in the teams. Just settling for a nice regular season didnt seem as exciting

I also root for my team to win every game but I'm usually realistic about the outcome..

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:54 wins was nice and all but the early playoff exit kind of put a damper on it.

U have to crawl before u walk and so on..

its ok to be a little disappointed on how that season ended. It doesnt mean i disregarded the 54 wins, but i expected a deep playoff run. I think thats a extremely fair assessment. Basically i was thrilled with 54 wins but i felt we should have went much further

If you were expecting a deep playoff run then you weren't honest with yourself about the prospects of beating Indiana..

You're not sustaining any logic here. The one consistent thread is you were really happy with the number 54 and nothing else really matters as long as they hit that number. It was a garbage team, but 54 is your way of saying it wasn't even if they played like garbage when it counted. Suit yourself.

We won 54 games on the back of one guy..How about adding other prime players once we shed ""dead salary" that's eating the cap..Don't call me a genius tho...I think that is Phil's plan...

thats not fair it wasnt on the back of one guy. I agree melo was a huge part of it. However as much as i hate jr smith he was also a major piece, tyson chandler was all star that year. Shumpert returned and was a big part too

Well where were they in the playoffs??

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:54 wins was nice and all but the early playoff exit kind of put a damper on it.

U have to crawl before u walk and so on..

its ok to be a little disappointed on how that season ended. It doesnt mean i disregarded the 54 wins, but i expected a deep playoff run. I think thats a extremely fair assessment. Basically i was thrilled with 54 wins but i felt we should have went much further

If you were expecting a deep playoff run then you weren't honest with yourself about the prospects of beating Indiana..

You're not sustaining any logic here. The one consistent thread is you were really happy with the number 54 and nothing else really matters as long as they hit that number. It was a garbage team, but 54 is your way of saying it wasn't even if they played like garbage when it counted. Suit yourself.

We won 54 games on the back of one guy..How about adding other prime players once we shed ""dead salary" that's eating the cap..Don't call me a genius tho...I think that is Phil's plan...

thats not fair it wasnt on the back of one guy. I agree melo was a huge part of it. However as much as i hate jr smith he was also a major piece, tyson chandler was all star that year. Shumpert returned and was a big part too

Well where were they in the playoffs??

i thought we were talking about 54 wins. They sucked in the playoffs but to be honest the whole team stunk against indy

I thought we were talking about Woodson's tenure..

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

misterearl wrote:54 wins seems like a decade ago

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

holfresh wrote:Woodson never got the credit he deserved...Woodson took this team as far as it could have gone..The second round and lost to a better Indiana team during his 54 win season...We saw the Knicks for exactly what they were..A one man show..The better team in Indiana exposed that and many of us couldn't accept it nor didn't we want to believe it..We should have won if it wasn't for the "coach" many cried..We are 4-19 now with essentially the same core minus flu Tyson and with a much better Amare...We didn't improve on it, so here we are...A new coach trying to find his way implementing his boss' system...Coaching is more than a system...It also means putting players in their best position to succeed..Woodson knew how to do that..Fisher has to learn this, among many other things...

Even if Indy was better, that was still one of the worst playoff coaching performances of all time. Rewriting history now and trying to make out Mike Woodson to be a decent coach in the context of the team's current woes is completely invalid. Mike Woodson was a trash coach. The only point being made here today that holds any weight is we had a trash team then, just as we do know and Woodson at least green lighted our chuckers and let them run the asylum. That helped get us halfway up the mountain, but it was never going any higher than that. Woodson was a terrible coach.

I don't have to rewrite history, it's already written..18-6 then 54 wins followed by a 37 win team...It's written..2 playoff appearance in 2 and 1/4 years..When was the last time that happened here..When will be the next time??

well said.

splat. History is written in the numbers.

keep telling yourself that. That 54 win team was garbage. They were gutless in the playoffs. They were an abomination.

If numbers are so great, then Melo's scoring title makes him a top 10 player despite being the lowest ranked defensive player at his position in the NBA. You can cherry pick statistics all you want.

Can't cherry pick the most important stat of all..Wins..

which is of greater value: regular season records or playoff success?

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

misterearl wrote:54 wins seems like a decade ago

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

holfresh wrote:Woodson never got the credit he deserved...Woodson took this team as far as it could have gone..The second round and lost to a better Indiana team during his 54 win season...We saw the Knicks for exactly what they were..A one man show..The better team in Indiana exposed that and many of us couldn't accept it nor didn't we want to believe it..We should have won if it wasn't for the "coach" many cried..We are 4-19 now with essentially the same core minus flu Tyson and with a much better Amare...We didn't improve on it, so here we are...A new coach trying to find his way implementing his boss' system...Coaching is more than a system...It also means putting players in their best position to succeed..Woodson knew how to do that..Fisher has to learn this, among many other things...

Even if Indy was better, that was still one of the worst playoff coaching performances of all time. Rewriting history now and trying to make out Mike Woodson to be a decent coach in the context of the team's current woes is completely invalid. Mike Woodson was a trash coach. The only point being made here today that holds any weight is we had a trash team then, just as we do know and Woodson at least green lighted our chuckers and let them run the asylum. That helped get us halfway up the mountain, but it was never going any higher than that. Woodson was a terrible coach.

I don't have to rewrite history, it's already written..18-6 then 54 wins followed by a 37 win team...It's written..2 playoff appearance in 2 and 1/4 years..When was the last time that happened here..When will be the next time??

well said.

splat. History is written in the numbers.

keep telling yourself that. That 54 win team was garbage. They were gutless in the playoffs. They were an abomination.

If numbers are so great, then Melo's scoring title makes him a top 10 player despite being the lowest ranked defensive player at his position in the NBA. You can cherry pick statistics all you want.

Can't cherry pick the most important stat of all..Wins..

which is of greater value: regular season records or playoff success?

It's not one or the other..Woodson did a good job while here..He won in the regular season and took the team as far as it can go in the playoffs, that used to be a good thing..His team was no match for Indy..No fault of his, just constructed badly because of salary...Salary rolls of next year..

arkrud wrote:

holfresh wrote:

dk7th wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

misterearl wrote:54 wins seems like a decade ago

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

holfresh wrote:Woodson never got the credit he deserved...Woodson took this team as far as it could have gone..The second round and lost to a better Indiana team during his 54 win season...We saw the Knicks for exactly what they were..A one man show..The better team in Indiana exposed that and many of us couldn't accept it nor didn't we want to believe it..We should have won if it wasn't for the "coach" many cried..We are 4-19 now with essentially the same core minus flu Tyson and with a much better Amare...We didn't improve on it, so here we are...A new coach trying to find his way implementing his boss' system...Coaching is more than a system...It also means putting players in their best position to succeed..Woodson knew how to do that..Fisher has to learn this, among many other things...

Even if Indy was better, that was still one of the worst playoff coaching performances of all time. Rewriting history now and trying to make out Mike Woodson to be a decent coach in the context of the team's current woes is completely invalid. Mike Woodson was a trash coach. The only point being made here today that holds any weight is we had a trash team then, just as we do know and Woodson at least green lighted our chuckers and let them run the asylum. That helped get us halfway up the mountain, but it was never going any higher than that. Woodson was a terrible coach.

I don't have to rewrite history, it's already written..18-6 then 54 wins followed by a 37 win team...It's written..2 playoff appearance in 2 and 1/4 years..When was the last time that happened here..When will be the next time??

well said.

splat. History is written in the numbers.

keep telling yourself that. That 54 win team was garbage. They were gutless in the playoffs. They were an abomination.

If numbers are so great, then Melo's scoring title makes him a top 10 player despite being the lowest ranked defensive player at his position in the NBA. You can cherry pick statistics all you want.

Can't cherry pick the most important stat of all..Wins..

which is of greater value: regular season records or playoff success?

It's not one or the other..Woodson did a good job while here..He won in the regular season and took the team as far as it can go in the playoffs, that used to be a good thing..His team was no match for Indy..No fault of his, just constructed badly because of salary...Salary rolls of next year..

Real NBA teams are not build for one season or one playoff.
I want a contender in NY. I do not care if they lose 70 games for 3 years if this will help to build an elite NBA team.
15 years of sucking and 40+ years without a chip is too much. Enough is enough.
And fans who want to win a couple of games more here and there for their momentary pleasure regardless of the cost are worth that Dolan, Isiah, and Marbs taken together.
Woodson was stopgap figure to keep the ship of fools afloat.
Now he get paid for this and get the job he really deserves.

real nba teams actually make a positive impression in the second rounds, regardless of their regular-season records. first round appearances and second round annihilations are a reflection of inept coaching as well as incomplete players. knicks had both so they got destroyed in the second round.

i know a playoff-worthy team when i see one and my impression that entire season of 54 wins was they did NOT look like a playoff team. i do recall two or three really inspiring wins, a couple with kidd and one against okc in the spring without kidd. meanwhile i recall people saying such nonsense like "a win is a win." no it isn't! it's a win when the team looks like it can be an effective playoff team.

first round appearances are merely non-competitive revenue-generators in general, last year being a notable exception.

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:54 wins was nice and all but the early playoff exit kind of put a damper on it.

U have to crawl before u walk and so on..

its ok to be a little disappointed on how that season ended. It doesnt mean i disregarded the 54 wins, but i expected a deep playoff run. I think thats a extremely fair assessment. Basically i was thrilled with 54 wins but i felt we should have went much further

If you were expecting a deep playoff run then you weren't honest with yourself about the prospects of beating Indiana..

You're not sustaining any logic here. The one consistent thread is you were really happy with the number 54 and nothing else really matters as long as they hit that number. It was a garbage team, but 54 is your way of saying it wasn't even if they played like garbage when it counted. Suit yourself.

We won 54 games on the back of one guy..How about adding other prime players once we shed ""dead salary" that's eating the cap..Don't call me a genius tho...I think that is Phil's plan...

holfresh wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

holfresh wrote:

Splat wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

StarksEwing1 wrote:54 wins was nice and all but the early playoff exit kind of put a damper on it.

U have to crawl before u walk and so on..

its ok to be a little disappointed on how that season ended. It doesnt mean i disregarded the 54 wins, but i expected a deep playoff run. I think thats a extremely fair assessment. Basically i was thrilled with 54 wins but i felt we should have went much further

If you were expecting a deep playoff run then you weren't honest with yourself about the prospects of beating Indiana..

You're not sustaining any logic here. The one consistent thread is you were really happy with the number 54 and nothing else really matters as long as they hit that number. It was a garbage team, but 54 is your way of saying it wasn't even if they played like garbage when it counted. Suit yourself.

We won 54 games on the back of one guy..How about adding other prime players once we shed ""dead salary" that's eating the cap..Don't call me a genius tho...I think that is Phil's plan...

On the back of one guy? So Woodson isn't a genius? Melos just really good?

MDA had the essentially the same team..Maybe it was Herb..

MDA had kidd?

Woody was a tool. We made retarded trades that gave us a chance to get geriatric wins for a short period of time.