CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Melo avg 1 ast in this yrs playoffs, this comes at a point in his career when he said.."I'M DONE SCORING A BUNCH OF POINTS"

And "THIS THE BEST TALENT I EVER HAD AROUND ME"

Then he goes out wins a scoring title, and avg a career low in assist.

While he claims to have very good talent, we have posters saying, melo has no one to pass the ball to..

he's suppose to be our closer, yet he dissapperd in every forth qtr...got his shot blocked, coughed up 3 turnovers all resulting in pacer pts when the game was on the line..

is this our franchise player ?

That's what I am talking about, this is the team MElo wanted. It had the types of players that would let him dominate the offense along with his buddy JR.
NOW he needs help when he comes up short with a coach who has simply coddled him all season long?

you don't trade for players like melo; if you must acquire them it should be only through free agency.

you don't hire coaches like woodson with the playoff record he brought to the table. cronyism in pro sports is not a good idea.

we are going to be circling the drain for a while with this player and this coach.

Woodson was the interim guy. He took an 18-24 team and got them to finish 18-6. The guy before was really bad. The Knicks with Tyson, Amare and Melo as their front line were headed toward the lottery and sending a lottery pick to the Rockets. Woodson got them to the playoffs. Not sure how or why you wouldn't give that guy the job. I also don't see how it is cronyism if you replace a guy that resigns. I don't believe that Woodson was the first choice for defensive assistant.

In regards to trading for Melo, your issue in my opinion is with Walsh and his two star plan/flame out. Walsh wanted Melo and was trying to get him once it became clear that he was going to be moved. The nuggets were trading Melo no matter what the Knicks did. Walsh wanted two stars. Sorry Melo didn't wait to make less money and the Nuggets didn't wait to get nothing for him. However, that was never going to happen.

dolan forced woodson to change agents as a condition for being hired as the knicks coach. woodson complied. not a good sign. in fact that's a bitch move and so far as i am concerned it resonated, and the resonance was the coddling of carmelo anthony. anthony did not improve his defense nor his devotion to a team concept nor did he get into superior conditioning for the playoffs. no way you should be fading in 4th quarters with two point guards out there.

you can keep repeating this nonsense about walsh wanting melo but at the end of the day we are stuck with a fool's gold player and a fool's gold coach-- good enough to make the playoffs but not good enough to reach the final 4 and a legit chance at a title.

the clock has been ticking since february 2011 and the knicks had their best shot with a depleted, old roster that was built around carmelo anthony. now improving the team is next to impossible.

rule 1 of fight club: it's never melo's fault.
rule 2 of fight club: it's never melo's fault.

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Melo avg 1 ast in this yrs playoffs, this comes at a point in his career when he said.."I'M DONE SCORING A BUNCH OF POINTS"

And "THIS THE BEST TALENT I EVER HAD AROUND ME"

Then he goes out wins a scoring title, and avg a career low in assist.

While he claims to have very good talent, we have posters saying, melo has no one to pass the ball to..

he's suppose to be our closer, yet he dissapperd in every forth qtr...got his shot blocked, coughed up 3 turnovers all resulting in pacer pts when the game was on the line..

is this our franchise player ?

That's what I am talking about, this is the team MElo wanted. It had the types of players that would let him dominate the offense along with his buddy JR.
NOW he needs help when he comes up short with a coach who has simply coddled him all season long?

you don't trade for players like melo; if you must acquire them it should be only through free agency.

you don't hire coaches like woodson with the playoff record he brought to the table. cronyism in pro sports is not a good idea.

we are going to be circling the drain for a while with this player and this coach.

Woodson was the interim guy. He took an 18-24 team and got them to finish 18-6. The guy before was really bad. The Knicks with Tyson, Amare and Melo as their front line were headed toward the lottery and sending a lottery pick to the Rockets. Woodson got them to the playoffs. Not sure how or why you wouldn't give that guy the job. I also don't see how it is cronyism if you replace a guy that resigns. I don't believe that Woodson was the first choice for defensive assistant.

In regards to trading for Melo, your issue in my opinion is with Walsh and his two star plan/flame out. Walsh wanted Melo and was trying to get him once it became clear that he was going to be moved. The nuggets were trading Melo no matter what the Knicks did. Walsh wanted two stars. Sorry Melo didn't wait to make less money and the Nuggets didn't wait to get nothing for him. However, that was never going to happen.

dolan forced woodson to change agents as a condition for being hired as the knicks coach. woodson complied. not a good sign. in fact that's a bitch move and so far as i am concerned it resonated, and the resonance was the coddling of carmelo anthony. anthony did not improve his defense nor his devotion to a team concept nor did he get into superior conditioning for the playoffs. no way you should be fading in 4th quarters with two point guards out there.

you can keep repeating this nonsense about walsh wanting melo but at the end of the day we are stuck with a fool's gold player and a fool's gold coach-- good enough to make the playoffs but not good enough to reach the final 4 and a legit chance at a title.

the clock has been ticking since february 2011 and the knicks had their best shot with a depleted, old roster that was built around carmelo anthony. now improving the team is next to impossible.

rule 1 of fight club: it's never melo's fault.
rule 2 of fight club: it's never melo's fault.

rule 3 of fight club: refer to rules 1 and 2

JesseDark wrote:The best team rarely loses in a 4 out of 7 format. We lost, competive node to the Pacers, now fix whats wrong with our roster.

Rarely is correct, but in this case IT REALLY HAPPENED

Kind of reminds me of the Buffalo Bills vs the NY Giants 1990 Superbowl. Bills coach Marv Levy got out coached by Bill Parcells when the Bills had the best thing going that yr. They let the strategy of a 34 yr old OJ Anderson run over them.

playa2 wrote:

JesseDark wrote:The best team rarely loses in a 4 out of 7 format. We lost, competive node to the Pacers, now fix whats wrong with our roster.

Rarely is correct, but in this case IT REALLY HAPPENED

Kind of reminds me of the Buffalo Bills vs the NY Giants 1990 Superbowl. Bills coach Marv Levy got out coached by Bill Parcells when the Bills had the best thing going that yr. They let the strategy of a 34 yr old OJ Anderson run over them.

playa, the knicks were not better than the pacers..

and as far as the bills example go.. maybe the bills were better, the game came down to a FG, this series didn't go 7 games.... and to further validate how good the bills were, they went to the superbowl 4 straight years playa!! so yea, maybe you can make an argument for the bills, but as for the knicks, they were beat by a team that was bigger, faster, younger, stronger, better!

The two non knick fans(because of our personnel) TKF and Nalod are the LAST two I would listen to on a matter like this.
Ian Begely of ESPN made it clear what Woodson did was Strange !

Why is that hard to understand, that gave the Pacers an advantage period.

Melo at the four is Woodson’s crutch. Melo has no idea how to play with the big boys. A team with this much talent should have played better under Woodson.

"We need some more continuity as far as running something that everybody knows we're in it -- just something with more pace," he said. "We have a lot of dead possessions where we don't really have any cohesiveness. We're just sort of out there and it becomes watching whoever has the ball."

I support Melo and think we can win with him but the one thing that I cant help but think about is why teams with stagnation and lack of ball movement seem to follow him around.

playa2 wrote:The Knicks just didn't play better than the Pacers in 6 games, and I partly blame Woodson for not utilizing what would have made the Pacers sweat a lil more.

The two non knick fans(because of our personnel) TKF and Nalod are the LAST two I would listen to on a matter like this.
Ian Begely of ESPN made it clear what Woodson did was Strange !

Why is that hard to understand, that gave the Pacers an advantage period.

Melo at the four is Woodson’s crutch. Melo has no idea how to play with the big boys. A team with this much talent should have played better under Woodson.

you are just underestimating the pacers and frank vogel. first off, they did not need to double which is a sign of an elite team. what does that mean with the knicks? it means that if you don't move the ball, move without the ball, and don't make plays off of dribble drives then you are going nowhere. knicks have always had a problem moving the ball.

two main culprits here are felton and anthony. add smith too. all three flat out SUCK at this part of the game. none can make a play off dribble drives consistently to keep the collapsing lane defense guessing. all try to finish when they are within 8-10 feet of the basket. all commit to the air once they are in the lane. they are either trying to draw fouls or trying to score. melo and smith NEVER make plays off of dribble drives. NEVER. fetlon only rarely which is why he is NOT a point guard. vogel sees this and licks his chops. this plays right into the pacers hands. any elite defense in fact.

woodson is not an elite coach but you can't expect him to teach these three knuckleheads to learn footwork and genuine ball-handling skills with the head up overnight.

We finished 4.5 games ahead of them in the standings for a reason...

Still you gotta give the Pacers credit. They threw us of our game and totally realized that Tyson wasn't really on his game and they just pounded us inside.

knicks1248 wrote:

AnubisADL wrote:

playa2 wrote:We had the better players and more experienced players , they weren't inserted into the game when we needed them the most.

Then on the other hand he played guys who gave us nothing more minutes than they deserved.

Who are these players?

felton is better then hill

melo is better then paul G

shump is better then lance

amare when healthy IS BETTER THEN west

prigs is better then DJ

cope is better then mihimini (what ever his name is)

Vogel is better then woodson, and he prepared his team more, and got them to play smarter through preparation..

OUR biggest advantage was our bench, and we failed to use it

I guess wins and losses no longer count