| Author | Thread |
| AUTOADVERT |
|
CashMoney
Posts: 23145 Alba Posts: 4 Joined: 1/15/2011 Member: #3374 USA |
7/1/2013 11:23 PM
fishmike wrote:Finestrg wrote:Gumdrops and rainbows spin on it. Bottom line -- it's a lot to give up for an inferior player who doesn't make us any better. He can play indeed. As far as I'm concerned he makes us better. People can choose to concentrate on the things he doesn't do well but I'd rather focus on the things he does do well and how he'll make things easier for #7. Besides, this is only the beginning. Grunwald said that no major moves would be made this off season and bang we pull off the Bargs trade. Can't wait to see what else we can pull off. Blue & Orange 4 Life!
|
|
Sangfroid
Posts: 24681 Alba Posts: 1 Joined: 7/7/2009 Member: #2784 |
7/2/2013 9:33 AM
No rebounds, no rings. Who the hell is gonna get the ball??? Chandler is good for 10. After that, it's a crap shoot. Let's hope flu Tyson doesn't show up this year.
"We are playing a game. We are playing at not playing a game..."
|
|
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654 Alba Posts: 2 Joined: 2/2/2004 Member: #581 USA |
7/2/2013 10:02 AM
Sangfroid wrote:No rebounds, no rings. Who the hell is gonna get the ball??? Chandler is good for 10. After that, it's a crap shoot. Let's hope flu Tyson doesn't show up this year. Moving Melo and Shump down to SF and SG should help a lot. Once that's done, Bargs will be the only bad rebounder in the starting lineup. His rebounding is a big liability though. You're right about that. |
|
jrodmc
Posts: 32927 Alba Posts: 50 Joined: 11/24/2004 Member: #805 USA |
7/2/2013 10:16 AM
KEEPCAMBYNY wrote:djsunyc wrote:hibbert won't be guarding bargs b/c he can't Hopefully he's actually on the floor next season longer than Sheed was. Which is not anything approaching a sure bet. |
|
ChuckBuck
Posts: 28851 Alba Posts: 11 Joined: 1/3/2012 Member: #3806 USA |
7/2/2013 10:37 AM
The "No Rebounds No Rings" is an old wives tale. If you get pounded on the glass, you have to have better efficient offense to make up for it.
We got bounced by the Pacers because we got out offensed (89 pts/gm only) and out toughed (Tyson Chandler/JR no shows). FYI, the Pacers outrebounded the Heat by +8 and the Spurs outrebounded the Heat by +2. There goes that rebounds argument. |
|
knickstorrents
Posts: 21121 Alba Posts: 0 Joined: 1/23/2010 Member: #3050 Hong Kong |
7/2/2013 10:55 AM
ChuckBuck wrote:The "No Rebounds No Rings" is an old wives tale. If you get pounded on the glass, you have to have better efficient offense to make up for it. From http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201306030MIA.html In game 7, Miami outrebounded Indiana 43-37. Miami got 15 offensive rebounds to Indiana's 8. Rebounds certainly do matter. There were several lopsided games in that series. In one game Indiana outrebounded Miami by 20. That will skew the average. Make no mistake. Rebounds matter. Rose is not the answer.
|
|
ChuckBuck
Posts: 28851 Alba Posts: 11 Joined: 1/3/2012 Member: #3806 USA |
7/2/2013 11:04 AM LAST EDITED: 7/2/2013 11:04 AM
knickstorrents wrote:ChuckBuck wrote:The "No Rebounds No Rings" is an old wives tale. If you get pounded on the glass, you have to have better efficient offense to make up for it. It matters to a certain extent yes, but isn't the end all be all. Would I rather the Knicks get better on the boards? Yes, of course. But the reality is, small ball lineups and efficient offense like the Heat beats big lineups like the Pacers and Spurs at the end of the day. The Knicks team wise did a good job on the Pacers defensively, except of course Chandler getting eaten alive by Hibbert. That said, if Chandler or K-Mart had provided any offensive punch from the frontcourt, we probably beat the Pacers. Enter Bargnani, to stretch out Hibbert/West all the way to the 3 pt line... As for the Heat, I believe Bargs had some of his best games against Chris Bosh. |