Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:Also, I couldn't tell, but what did Deuce look like running the show?

Not a PG but was scoring in the 1sr half. I don't want to see what a close game in the 4th Q looks like. Knicks looked like they were running some kind of simple motion offense. It's pretty sad that our offense is here take the ball and make something happen. Sac looks like one of the worst teams in the league at defense

30+ assist game. Knicks had so many games where they were pushing 40 earlier in the year. Swinging the ball around and getting open looks. Teams have neutralized them by putting a center on Josh or laying off Josh with a center in drop and having a wing on KAT. We haven't made them pay as Josh hesitates to shoot the open 3 and KAT has had trouble posting wings, so we either haven't gotten open looks or struggled with turnovers. And then when **** really bogs down, Jalen takes it (rightly) into his own hands and tries to save us - which he has more than enough times.

But we're back to the beginning now in trying to swing for open looks. We took 34 3's vs the Clippers and only hit 9. We took 40 threes last night and made 22. Sometimes the ball bounces in your favor and sometimes it doesn't,.

VDesai wrote:

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:Also, I couldn't tell, but what did Deuce look like running the show?

Not a PG but was scoring in the 1sr half. I don't want to see what a close game in the 4th Q looks like. Knicks looked like they were running some kind of simple motion offense. It's pretty sad that our offense is here take the ball and make something happen. Sac looks like one of the worst teams in the league at defense

30+ assist game. Knicks had so many games where they were pushing 40 earlier in the year. Swinging the ball around and getting open looks. Teams have neutralized them by putting a center on Josh or laying off Josh with a center in drop and having a wing on KAT. We haven't made them pay as Josh hesitates to shoot the open 3 and KAT has had trouble posting wings, so we either haven't gotten open looks or struggled with turnovers. And then when **** really bogs down, Jalen takes it (rightly) into his own hands and tries to save us - which he has more than enough times.

But we're back to the beginning now in trying to swing for open looks. We took 34 3's vs the Clippers and only hit 9. We took 40 threes last night and made 22. Sometimes the ball bounces in your favor and sometimes it doesn't,.

They will go back to an iso heavy offense when Brunson comes back. They are only playing motion because they are playing without a PG

martin wrote:

VDesai wrote:Have only properly watched highlights, but I'm most curious about OG 8 assists. WHen he puts his head and dribbles he usually has tunnel vision. He makes a good wing pass, but rarely see him create off the bounce. Was he adding new wrinkles? What's great to see is he is dunking everything again. Early in the year when he was rolling offensively he got 3-4 dunks per game. Then his legs seem to crumble.

From what limited I saw, it was more just making the right pass instead of being creative off bounce or whatnot. I could be wrong on this.

Amazing what happens when people make shots - OG gets 8 assists! So did Mikal!

Teams got could at countering. Trap Brunson. Put a center on Hart. Put a wing on KAT. Hart loses confidence in taking open 3s. Guys get bunched up in traffic. Brunson has to ISO for us to score. Bad habits ensue...but guys have to take the reins and be confident in what they are doing. This time with Brunson away hopefully renews their focus and helps define their place in the offense again.

martin wrote:

VDesai wrote:Hey I think we WERE trying to play more motion at the start of the year, when we were top 2 or 3 in offensive rating. Tons of cutting. Tons of dunks for OG. Lots of open corner 3s. Lots of assists. I don't think we're actively trying to ISO and bog down the offense. That was the offense we were running.

Teams got could at countering. Trap Brunson. Put a center on Hart. Put a wing on KAT. Hart loses confidence in taking open 3s. Guys get bunched up in traffic. Brunson has to ISO for us to score. Bad habits ensue...but guys have to take the reins and be confident in what they are doing. This time with Brunson away hopefully renews their focus and helps define their place in the offense again.

I think this is spot on.

Knicks, from Brunson on down, have not re-countered or adjusted enough.

Learning curve still going. Gonna take some time and perhaps roster or lineup changes.

Mitch will help defense and rebounding while adding a difference element but I think it starts with Brunson.

Two observations - while Bridges can create his own offense, he is most comfortable in the midrange and Thibs seems to discourage the midrange game. We need Bridges creating his own offense instead of standing in the corner. If Hart can’t shoot/wont shoot he needs to be replaced in the SL. Same with Bridges.

Bonus point - we need a guard besides Brunson who can put it on the floor and beat his man. We really are one or two transaction cycles away from being a serious threat

Philc1 wrote:

VDesai wrote:The OG-Mitch defensive combo is a dream we have barely realized. That said don't sleep on the impact. Individually they are terrific, but together they can be massive. Just disruptive defense.

Agree 100% this is a different team defensively with those 2

NYKnicksMentality approves!

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/NYKmentality85/status/1899618479457681706

martin wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

VDesai wrote:The OG-Mitch defensive combo is a dream we have barely realized. That said don't sleep on the impact. Individually they are terrific, but together they can be massive. Just disruptive defense.

Agree 100% this is a different team defensively with those 2

NYKnicksMentality approves!

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/NYKmentality85/status/1899618479457681706

We gave up 113, 112, 114, 113, 105 and 104 and went 3-3 during that stretch so the stat is bull****. We did however have 2 games where we gave up less points than the league average. Is this like when Mentality cherry picked some stats to make the argument that RJ Barrett was better than Kobe Bryant?

martin wrote:

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

VDesai wrote:The OG-Mitch defensive combo is a dream we have barely realized. That said don't sleep on the impact. Individually they are terrific, but together they can be massive. Just disruptive defense.

Agree 100% this is a different team defensively with those 2

NYKnicksMentality approves!

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/NYKmentality85/status/1899618479457681706

We gave up 113, 112, 114, 113, 105 and 104 and went 3-3 during that stretch so the stat is bull****. We did however have 2 games where we gave up less points than the league average. Is this like when Mentality cherry picked some stats to make the argument that RJ Barrett was better than Kobe Bryant?

? I don't get your perspective.

Knicks went 3-3 cause the offense was ****ty. The stats just show defense. It's a small sample for sure but it's real? It's definitely an isolated stat. Their offensive rating was not good, also at 110. So thus the record.

Over the course of the year, Boston's defensive rating is 110. Top 5. That's a comparison.

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/advanced?dir=A&sort=DEF_RATING

In 4 of the 6 games the opposing team scored more than 112 points. So how is that a top defensive rating of 111.9 Maybe if you just use the last 2 games where the other team scored 105 and 104 we are #1 in the league in defense. It's all masturbation with numbers. Our defense is improved with the return of Mitch but we didn't become the best (or 2nd best) defensive team in the NBA with his return. That is total bull****. There are so many other factors that you can't just take a tiny sample size to manufacture a conclusion. We aren't the 2nd best defensive team in the NBA, we are the what was it? 22nd? and showing improvement with the addition of Mitch and the subtraction of Brunson

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:

Rookie wrote:

martin wrote:

Philc1 wrote:

VDesai wrote:The OG-Mitch defensive combo is a dream we have barely realized. That said don't sleep on the impact. Individually they are terrific, but together they can be massive. Just disruptive defense.

Agree 100% this is a different team defensively with those 2

NYKnicksMentality approves!

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/NYKmentality85/status/1899618479457681706

We gave up 113, 112, 114, 113, 105 and 104 and went 3-3 during that stretch so the stat is bull****. We did however have 2 games where we gave up less points than the league average. Is this like when Mentality cherry picked some stats to make the argument that RJ Barrett was better than Kobe Bryant?

? I don't get your perspective.

Knicks went 3-3 cause the offense was ****ty. The stats just show defense. It's a small sample for sure but it's real? It's definitely an isolated stat. Their offensive rating was not good, also at 110. So thus the record.

Over the course of the year, Boston's defensive rating is 110. Top 5. That's a comparison.

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/advanced?dir=A&sort=DEF_RATING

In 4 of the 6 games the opposing team scored more than 112 points. So how is that a top defensive rating of 111.9 Maybe if you just use the last 2 games where the other team scored 105 and 104 we are #1 in the league in defense. It's all masturbation with numbers. Our defense is improved with the return of Mitch but we didn't become the best (or 2nd best) defensive team in the NBA with his return. That is total bull****. There are so many other factors that you can't just take a tiny sample size to manufacture a conclusion. We aren't the 2nd best defensive team in the NBA, we are the what was it? 22nd? and showing improvement with the addition of Mitch and the subtraction of Brunson

It is absolutely a small sample size, well stated at the outset and that it's just Mitch's return. That's all. Don't overthink it.

In short, we are in agreement.