mrKnickShot wrote:Great article by Peter Vescey - MDA blew the Boston Game(don't always agree with him but he is completely on point here):

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knicks/foul_play_Y5dzyKOA0RDYHDOtyXlxPK?utm_medium=rss&utm_content=Knicks

Great article? They guy says what Mark Jax would have done. The guy has coached less than 40 games.

What Cotton Fitzimmons would have done? Half of Cotton's career he coached without the 3 pt line in place. He coached a .515 winning record and .417 % in the playoffs.

Besides, its Vescey.

Fans love this kind of crap journalism.

CrushAlot wrote:

crzymdups wrote:I hate not fouling when you are up three and less than one possession on the shot clock left in the game. Especially against the Celtics - Pierce and Ray Allen seem to live to hit those shots against us. Foul them and take the game out of their hands.

+1. Sometimes the game situation and opponent dictates what is the most prudent move. Knicks should have fouled. Pierce and Allen are Knick killers in that situation.

The other key here that needs to be emphasized is your opponent has no time outs!

CashMoney wrote:I've never seen a NBA game where a team was up 3 with less than a minute and commit an intentional foul. The game wasn't lost on that one play....I point to the 20+ turn overs.

True Cash and I point to Landry's 3 consecutive TO's to start the 3rd quarter going from up 5 to down 15!

CashMoney wrote:I've never seen a NBA game where a team was up 3 with less than a minute and commit an intentional foul. The game wasn't lost on that one play....I point to the 20+ turn overs.

I have seen it happen a number of times. And, I have seen it this year in the NBA.

Talk show host love saying "we did not lose because of that ..." you can say this in every loss. New England did not lose because of the Welker drop. Yes they freakin did!

WE LOST BECAUSE OF THAT ONE PLAY!!

mrKnickShot wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:

CashMoney wrote:I've never seen a NBA game where a team was up 3 with less than a minute and commit an intentional foul. The game wasn't lost on that one play....I point to the 20+ turn overs.

Now that I think about this, I have not seen it.

This is just a case of hataz using small things to throw blame on MDA.

Wow. At least you did not mention MELO.

This is not just MDA - its the philosophy of not fouling which is quite common.

Nice try.

No one loses a game because of ONE PLAY, OR ONE SHOT, mrKnickShot, if that were the case they would not keep score until the last 30 seconds of the game!

And the heat is being thrown on MDA here, not any other coach! Yea, the philosophy is at question, but it's being used to smear MDA's name in the mud puddles!

Edit - just watched the highlight again. Pierce didn't even take a good shot - a fadeaway and moving to the right- from 25 feet. Didn't even setup or square up correctly. They just have our number I guess. Have to somehow break that.

mrKnickShot wrote:Yes. We could have won in the last 4.9 if it were not for the beautiful play design that we witnessed. Or maybe it was a good play designed but Melo Div'ad the plan.

Now you are probably getting close to the correct answer.

mrKnickShot wrote:

MarburyAnd1Crossover wrote:

mrKnickShot wrote:Yes. We could have won in the last 4.9 if it were not for the beautiful play design that we witnessed. Or maybe it was a good play designed but Melo Div'ad the plan.

Now you are probably getting close to the correct answer.

BLINDERS!!! Man-Hate!

HAHAHAHAHA

DJMUSIC wrote:The poster of this topic is correct

Mike D'Antoni proves that players definitely makes a DIFFERENCE in the game
and the COACHING cannot in key situations unless:

1) Coach is Doc Rivers
2) Coach is Greg Popovich
3) Coach is Phil Jackson
4) Coach is Rick Carlisle

And perhaps few coaches I've forgot to mention

You take the ball out of Paul Pierce hands
At least several stealth teams coaches would have triple-teammed Pierce and make him squander to pass off the ball
to another open Celtic to force up a 3-point shot. Other than Ray Allen ability to STICK it like Pierce you live
with that. b

Not getting the Knick switch defense of Iman Shumpert to be alone & although played good defense the bottom line is
you need to force Paul Pierce to pass the ball, let someone else beat you from 3' if you're not fouling.

NO Mike D'antoni coached team is ever going to have the brains to do that since D'
isnt in MDA's arsenal.

YOu forgot EDDIE!

Every situation is different, but I would have fouled in this situation. #1 I believe we had a foul to give. #2 Boston didn't have any time outs left. The plan should have been to foul when they are inside the 2 pt line &/or before they have any chance at putting up a shot. The best opportunity would have been when KG was handing the ball off to Pierce. Maybe wrap pierce up before he is able to get the ball.

We played good D though Pierce just hit a good shot. When KG is free to set illegal picks as much as he wants its harder to play tough D but they still played through it. We had our own opportunity to win the game, Melo got his Iso on Pierce he just missed his opportunity. But I would take a Melo Iso on Pierce any day of the week.

Jr Smith needs to find his shot