dk7th wrote:

codeunknown wrote:

dk7th wrote:

codeunknown wrote:The Nets made a poor decision. Depending on the Knicks back-up point guard situation, they're likely to remain better than the Nets this season.

basketball is a game of skill and highly-skilled all-around players like garnett and pierce can remain effective for quite a while. the main aspect of their effectiveness is creating offensive cohesion which leads to synergy, ie where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. the most impressive thing about garnett and pierce is their passing games and court vision. there is no substitute for BBIQ.

i think the nets have challenges in terms of cohesion only if johnson refuses to be a team player. i think williams will thrive playing alongside both garnett and pierce because he will not be under such pressure to orchestrate. kidd and prigioni had the same salutary effect on felton and we can agree that williams is a better player than felton. johnson is not as bad as anthony at undermining cohesion but it will still be a challenge.

obviously the issue will be keeping the minutes to between 24-28 minutes a night but they ought to be a very strong team next season, barring injury.

best of all it will make for a great rivalry.

Johnson isn't the core issue, although he makes for a good scapegoat.
Their pieces aren't arranged appropriately. It's true that basketball sense is essential to doing well - as is the physical substrate in which it is housed. Again, a good team, but one that won't defeat the Heat or Pacers.

well your point was that the knicks would be the better team, pending the backup point guard situation. i don't see the clumsiness-- that's the term phil jackson used to describe the knicks roster last season-- i dont see that clumsiness with the nets roster that you are implying here.

the center is the center, the point guard is the point guard, the power forward is the power forward.

so far so good.

the only issue i see is where pierce and johnson play on the floor. with pierce it does not matter if he is below or above the free throw line because he is comfortable anywhere... so that basically leaves johnson needing to operate from specific spots where he needs to be comfortable.

where else is the there an inappropriate arrangement?

I don't think you're understanding quite what I'm saying. Classifying certain players as point guards, power forwards etc is a rudmimentary and incomplete assessment of the team makeup - don't you think? The deficiency is in the maximal potential schematically achievable with the given parts - briefly some factors include limited pick and roll options, dribble penetration, defensive lineup adaptability, endurance etc. This is the crux of the "arrangement" issue as I see it.

The Nets success will largely stand on jump shooting, which they do well, but likely not quite well enough from 3pt territory without significant transition chances. Coaching and the bench are additional liabilities. As constructed, I like the knicks odds here.

dk7th wrote:

codeunknown wrote:

dk7th wrote:

codeunknown wrote:

dk7th wrote:

codeunknown wrote:The Nets made a poor decision. Depending on the Knicks back-up point guard situation, they're likely to remain better than the Nets this season.

basketball is a game of skill and highly-skilled all-around players like garnett and pierce can remain effective for quite a while. the main aspect of their effectiveness is creating offensive cohesion which leads to synergy, ie where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. the most impressive thing about garnett and pierce is their passing games and court vision. there is no substitute for BBIQ.

i think the nets have challenges in terms of cohesion only if johnson refuses to be a team player. i think williams will thrive playing alongside both garnett and pierce because he will not be under such pressure to orchestrate. kidd and prigioni had the same salutary effect on felton and we can agree that williams is a better player than felton. johnson is not as bad as anthony at undermining cohesion but it will still be a challenge.

obviously the issue will be keeping the minutes to between 24-28 minutes a night but they ought to be a very strong team next season, barring injury.

best of all it will make for a great rivalry.

Johnson isn't the core issue, although he makes for a good scapegoat.
Their pieces aren't arranged appropriately. It's true that basketball sense is essential to doing well - as is the physical substrate in which it is housed. Again, a good team, but one that won't defeat the Heat or Pacers.

well your point was that the knicks would be the better team, pending the backup point guard situation. i don't see the clumsiness-- that's the term phil jackson used to describe the knicks roster last season-- i dont see that clumsiness with the nets roster that you are implying here.

the center is the center, the point guard is the point guard, the power forward is the power forward.

so far so good.

the only issue i see is where pierce and johnson play on the floor. with pierce it does not matter if he is below or above the free throw line because he is comfortable anywhere... so that basically leaves johnson needing to operate from specific spots where he needs to be comfortable.

where else is the there an inappropriate arrangement?

I don't think you're understanding quite what I'm saying. Classifying certain players as point guards, power forwards etc is a rudmimentary and incomplete assessment of the team makeup - don't you think? The deficiency is in the maximal potential schematically achievable with the given parts - briefly some factors include limited pick and roll options, dribble penetration, defensive lineup adaptability, endurance etc. This is the crux of the "arrangement" issue as I see it.

The Nets success will largely stand on jump shooting, which they do well, but likely not quite well enough from 3pt territory without significant transition chances. Coaching and the bench are additional liabilities. As constructed, I like the knicks odds here.

you seem to know something about the game so when i say "such and such is an X" i assumed it was clear what the roles/functions were.

pierce is a great pick and roll player, as is garnett. that is a core skill that enhances any team's offense.

i foresee several outcomes from this one play: (1) pierce hits the j (2) garnett finishes (3) dump off pass to an open williams if his man converges on pierce (4) pocket pass from garnett as roller to lopez as finisher.

anything wrong with what i said so far?

Probably unwise to assume that as the roles are variable depending on the diversity/redundancy within a roster as well as the likely counters expected within the league climate.

The combination posted above has several options. The weighted average of the scoring probabilities determines the utility of the set. Less quantitatively, the position of the pick is significant here as Pierce is most comfortable shooting from 15-18 feet. Despite this consideration - with Pierce's limited explosion off the pick, and with the preference of both arms of the pick and roll being a jump shot, the play is susceptiple to switching, transient help from the roll defender and, in some instances, simply ducking under the screen.

In fact, the Williams/Garnett version is a stronger threat.