Splat wrote:Same fans, different board.

If you don't agree, you call the other person stupid or a know nothing.

It wasn't always like that. Everyone is a little testy after 15yrs of losing. Things will improve once they start winning again

assuming melo is in the frontcourt you cannot afford to start stoudemire. bargnani is a less bad option.

so that leaves a big man, and he has to be the best defender of the lot.

calderon
shumpert
anthony
bargani
dalembert

that's what i see on paper.

i say this without having seen any of the new 4/5s that have been mentioned. if there is among them somebody who is an adept passer and cutter, and who can box out his man, and hopefully has a decent 16 footer then so much the better.

dk7th wrote:assuming that calderon is starting, you cannot afford to start anyone else BUT shumpert.

assuming melo is in the frontcourt you cannot afford to start stoudemire. bargnani is a less bad option.

so that leaves a big man, and he has to be the best defender of the lot.

calderon
shumpert
anthony
bargani
dalembert

that's what i see on paper.

i say this without having seen any of the new 4/5s that have been mentioned. if there is among them somebody who is an adept passer and cutter, and who can box out his man, and hopefully has a decent 16 footer then so much the better.

Penciling in Bargs right now is a crapshoot. I maintain his continued DNP's in preseason doesn't bode well for his candidacy as a starter. Guy is cursed. Jason is probably better than Bargs for the same services at this point, because Bargs is great for a stretch, then he totally disappears.

Bargs was a ghost in the 2nd half last year after decent first halfs. The coaching staff knows this so if Bargs gets time, I think it will be earlier, but I doubt he will be a closer.

dk7th wrote:

truth be told i am not a fan of bargnani, so if this fellow smith is better on defense at least that could be a plus. having looked at his shooting numbers, however, he is not nearly the midrange shooter that bargnani is. in fact bargnani is quite effective in the midrange. too bad he sucks in every other aspect of the game ha ha.

that said, basketball is about teamwork and synergy-- it's the main reason why you sort have to hold your nose when you see him play basketball. i agree with you about shumpert. the kid has been crapped on by woodson and the fans and for no good reason in my opinion.

Bargs is a mirage. He can fake people out of their shoes and drive, but that's not always a good thing with him as he often spazzes out instead of converting. His season ending injury was a case of that.

Everything Bargs possesses are talents more coherent players use to be stars, but he's just fizzles continuously. He does not add up over the length of a game, much less a season.

I think Jose will help Bargs much less than even Bargs & Jose would like to have us believe.

In the end, I put Bargs at the every end of the rotation since I don't think salary is a factor any longer. Jason is superior to Bargs from first look. Thus, Bargs is redundant is Jason stays healthy.

Bargs is a 2nd or 3rd quarter sub at best. He's not a starter and not a closer. And that puts him on the fence for rotation time. If he performs well, he will be a welcome 15 minute player. I doubt he'll average more minutes than that.

Bargs and Stat are expensive insurance policies, not much more.

No future for either means their value is limited strictly to what can you do for me now. Today. Otherwise, you sit.

babyKnicks wrote:After tonight, rethinking the acy starting lineup thoughts. He looked good.

Look at Acy like you'd look at Shump. What is the overall contribution and how does he mix with a certain unit?

Does he complement Melo?

Does he get boards others would not get?

Does he hit a decent percentage on open mid-range shots?

Does he hit a high percentage on lobs and putbacks?

Does he hold down the scoring averages on his defensive assignments?

Does he fit in the triangle and facilitate ball movement?

Does Melo continue to get good looks with Acy on the court?

Basically, does he fit and up the defensive intensity of the 1st unit while holding his own on a circumscribed amount of offensive opportunities?

I think so far the answer to these is Yes.

It looks like he or J.Smith are best to start, but Jason may be better to spell Sam so I give Acy the nod to start.

babyKnicks wrote:After tonight, rethinking the acy starting lineup thoughts. He looked good.

Awesome. I encourage everyone to watch what is transpiring instead of making judgements based on what they expect ON PAPER

Splat wrote:That's exactly it.

Bargs and Stat are expensive insurance policies, not much more.

No future for either means their value is limited strictly to what can you do for me now. Today. Otherwise, you sit.

Larkin is a P&R guy and Fisher has said he likes Larkin/Early/THjr in that second unit. Add Amare and thats a good bench. Especially if he's giving you what we got late last year. Than its a great bench.

Splat wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Splat wrote:Same fans, different board.

If you don't agree, you call the other person stupid or a know nothing.

if the problem follows you around from board to board maybe its you not the fans. Ive read your posts. You seem to know your stuff. You also seem totally incapable of seeing past your dislike for Amare. I get it. You want to move on. Not everyone feels that way and your feelings arent facts. If your going spout hate for the guy and not listen to anyone else's thoughts on the subject than I am pretty sure you just made yourself one of the "same fans" your complaining about.

Happy hump day. Glad to have to you aboard.

It is really simple. I answer you with my opinion when I respond to you without calling you stupid or saying you're ignorant of the game. And all I ask is that you do the same. State your case and agree to disagree. It is not asking for much and it keeps things sane while still having some common ground as Knicks fans.

And I think a good place to start is by letting go of this tendency some have to call other posters haters. It is pretty much a substitute term for labeling someone dismissively just like the other terms.

I don't hate Amare. I said he sucks so that was inflammatory and I can do better. But other than that, I have accounted for my opinion in enough detail to make my case about why he is not a very good fit.

Either way, I don't really care if he does play despite my opinion if he can be a net positive. You said he is a net positive, yet I don't know where you get that from. 55% is nice, but was Tyson a good player because he led the league in FG%? No.

Just answer me civilly how Stat's history of games where he often has had the worst +/- on the team is not a significant factor. I said teams often gain ground with him on the floor. How is this not relevant?

That's what these people don't get. They can't accept the fact that you have a different opinion. They want everyone to agree all the time and if you don't then they start slinging insults. It becomes personal.

For the most part I try to stick to basketball I will never personally attack someone behind a keyboard. Except for the occasional time when we are all joking around and having some fun.

Any we're not going to agree all the time. It's keeps the discussion going which is what a forum is about.

Everyone can't agree all the time. If you can argue with you or own family, teachers etc you can certainly argue on a forum. It makes things a lot more interesting