loweyecue wrote:NardDogNation wrote:loweyecue wrote:NardDogNation wrote:loweyecue wrote:NardDogNation wrote:loweyecue wrote:NardDogNation wrote:loweyecue wrote:Melo is not a leader just like Kobe wasn't for most part. But PJAX finally got him there. Melo needs to be coached not coddled - Woody doesn't have the balls or the credibility to get Melo to do what he needs to do. When your mindset coming into game 6 of a playoff is that you need to score 60 points for the team to win - you will never be a leader. Somebody needs to tell this him that he gets paid to play basketball for the NEW YORK KNICKS - and this is not all about Melo and his own greatness.
We'd be so lucky to not have a leader by your standards. Seems like a fast-track to a championship. What exactly qualifies as a leader in your opinion (you can't count Jesus, Mohammed, Moses or any other holy being/entity)?
Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Lebron James, Kobe Bryant (only the last few years), Steve Nash, John Stockton, Tim Duncan, David Robinson ... how many do you need? I am not religious - so need to off load a bunch of mythology on me.
I don't subscribe to any religion, so we're in the same boat. And again, what is it that you consider a leader because all you've done is list names; probably of guys that you like, whether it be their games or personalities.
Read my subsequent posts on the thread. Leaders make people around them better. Everyone of those guys helped others in their team elevate their play. Something Melo has consistently failed to do.
I think that "make people around them better" bit is nonsense because you either have it or you don't. A leader could drive and kick to the open man all day but if that guy isn't a capable shooter, then he isn't making that shot. Similarly, a leader can't make a guy a better rebounder, better defender or better passer. Certainly systems can make guys more efficient (e.g. Steve Nash in an uptempo system) but it takes more than one man to build that system. There is a reason why there has been only 8 champions over the past two decades and its because no one individual is responsible for a team's success.
I think you are taking the "make" part too literally. A leader makes every person in the team understand that they are a valuable part of the functioning whole and that the team is greater than the sum of it's part becuase of them. Ordinary people can accomplish incredible results when they feel they are being appreciated for their contributions. It really isn't that hard. When Michael Jordan called Steve Kerr's number to hit the game winning shot against the Jazz - he didnt make him shoot more accurately. He showed Steve that he trusted him with that critical outcome. The rest is history.
Then being a leader must be highly subjective because what you're suggesting isn't tangible. Allan Houston was the kind of leader you described and this team blew in the early 2000s. In my opinion, you can't cultivate what isn't there so if that guy you pass to isn't a capable shooter, he is not hitting that shot under any circumstances.
Besides, these are grown ass men. If they need an infrequent circlejerk to play up to their abilities then they likely don't have the mental fortitude to be a winner in the first place.
OK we agree to disagree. I never said you can throw sprinkles on dog poop and call it ice cream. So if the skills aren't there they can't do it. But is Felton skilled enough to make 3-4 of those 8 shots? I think so. Grown men don't need leadership? Why do you hink corporations spend millions of dollars on leadership training and metrics? And no leadership isn't tangible - it has never been tangible, but let's not act like it doesn't exist.
Short answer, corporations spend millions on their hierarchy because no one is going to want to assume that level of responsibility (aka dred) without compensation; that and the wealthy are money hungry whores that will prostitute their mothers for a dollar..... but that's a different story.
Felton does make 3-4 shots if he takes 8; he shot 44% in the playoffs and 43% in the regular season so what is your point?
And leadership can be tangible; its just that what you're describing isn't. We've been down by 20-ish points on multiple occasions during the season and have come storming back in the 2nd half to win the game. In almost all of those instances, Melo's offensive prowess has been the catalysis for the charge. That is the kind of leadership that is tangible; leading by example and in doing so giving men hope. Melo cut the lead and made guys believe that they could win it if they put up the effort; made them believe when there was no hope. That's tangible. That's a leader. But you choose to ignore that because it doesn't fit your narrative of the player.
