BigDaddyG wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:Is RJ officially out of his slump or are the Celts just bad at defense to start the season?

Barrett’s slump was really only like 2 games to be honest. He just hasn’t taken that next step until tonight.

You can't make the case it was all the games. Think this is the first night where he shot above league average.

Barrett's 4th quarter performance has been worthless on offense/defense from not playing team-ball, the individual ISO scoring hasn't been working for him and Bully-Ball Randle to win games in the 4th quarter in a long while. And neither has the two Knicks players defending opponent top scorer in the 4th quarter. Flagrant in the 4th quarter SMH
Randle 29 pts in 39 minutes, and Barrett's 9-15 for 27 pts in 35 minutes did not put a dent in the Celtics high scoring in the 4th quarter or the Celtics scoring 101 pts in 3 quarters. A no defense game Boston 133 - Knicks 118

Kemet wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:Is RJ officially out of his slump or are the Celts just bad at defense to start the season?

Barrett’s slump was really only like 2 games to be honest. He just hasn’t taken that next step until tonight.

You can't make the case it was all the games. Think this is the first night where he shot above league average.

Barrett's 4th quarter performance has been worthless on offense/defense from not playing team-ball, the individual ISO scoring hasn't been working for him and Bully-Ball Randle to win games in the 4th quarter in a long while. And neither has the two Knicks players defending opponent top scorer in the 4th quarter. Flagrant in the 4th quarter SMH
Randle 29 pts in 39 minutes, and Barrett's 9-15 for 27 pts in 35 minutes did not put a dent in the Celtics high scoring in the 4th quarter or the Celtics scoring 101 pts in 3 quarters. A no defense game Boston 133 - Knicks 118

Can't argue. Tatum and Brown are going to get theirs, but Sam Hauser? Role players light us up consistently.

One thing Thibs has always done is has his defensive principles in order but we have 2 guys or more literally running away from open shooters out of either confusion or apathy.

I get that the philosophy is to shut down drives to the rim 1st but the same philosophy does not include guys just failing to get out to shooter or just simply not knowing where to be.

Disgusting game to watch defensively.

Clean wrote:

This is a fundamental problem with Thibs scheme. It's been this way since he was signed. If teams shoot poorly on open shots our defense looks great. If they shoot well on open shots our D looks like trash. Thibs was never a defensive genius he just rolled the dice that teams could not hit open shots from deep. This worked back in the day because there was not an emphasis on 3pt shooting. Now every team except us and the Lakers can easily knock down open 3's.

This seems to suggest that Thibs should go. If he cannot install a solid defense. what is he good for? There are better offensive coaches out there.

I would still hate to see a radical mid-season move, like firing Thibs. We are not winning a chip this year, and between yet another 1st round playoff exit (which is our ceiling) and a shot at Viktor W, I might prefer the latter.

Clean wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

Clean wrote:

This is a fundamental problem with Thibs scheme. It's been this way since he was signed. If teams shoot poorly on open shots our defense looks great. If they shoot well on open shots our D looks like trash. Thibs was never a defensive genius he just rolled the dice that teams could not hit open shots from deep. This worked back in the day because there was not an emphasis on 3pt shooting. Now every team except us and the Lakers can easily knock down open 3's.

This seems to suggest that Thibs should go. If he cannot install a solid defense. what is he good for? There are better offensive coaches out there.

I would still hate to see a radical mid-season move, like firing Thibs. We are not winning a chip this year, and between yet another 1st round playoff exit (which is our ceiling) and a shot at Viktor W, I might prefer the latter.

This scheme in it self is not bad. What makes it bad is my second issue with Thibs. You have to fight him for him to make in game or in season adjustments. I have no problem with him prioritizing to protect the paint. However, if the team shows you they can hit those open shots its time for plan B. The issue is Thibs does not have a plan B. He will continually go with those dice rolls on them missing open shots. The problem is the odds are no longer in his favor.

I was never a Thibs fan when he was hired- I’ve had to give him props for his first year miracle- but that is looking more like an aberration than anything Thibs did.

Amazingly, we stayed close with the Celtics. They are clearly a better team. They came together last year and their core is amazing, great defense, stout athletes. Their shooting is what undid them against GS in the finals. They’ve improved a lot this year- they are ranked 5th for 3pt %(we’re 25)

In game adjustments and flexibility. I looked at the box score and he seemed to go heavy with minutes on the starting five, more so than he has done this year. I don’t think you can realistically go 10 deep, no matter how much I was a fan of Pitino’s Knicks that pressed and bombed 3s before it was fashionable.

In the 4th, Boston simply shot us out of the game. They shot 6 of 10 from 3, we shot 1 of 5.

They made 6 FTs, we made 1.

That was pretty much the differential right there.

Now- weirdly, I look at Obi’s line and it’s pretty anemic- he played just 15 minutes, scored 7 points- not especially strong shooting night.

But he was our leading scorer for the 4th quarter in just 6 minutes with all of his 7 points.

FFS! Obi is an offensive talent. He is our only 3pt threat at this point, he is a high efficiency scorer unlike RJ & Randle.

When does a coach actually think- oh ****, I’ve got a tool I haven’t been using.

Obi should be getting 28 minutes at least a night.

For anyone who says Thibs cares about defense, that actually isn’t coming through.

But give the Celtics kudos. Even though most of their threes were completely wide open with nobody within 10 feet of them but they still made them. That team is too seasoned and Tatum and Brown are too good to give them that freedom and space. I don't pretend to be some basketball genius and Thibs studies and knows more about this game then any of us but I do not understand this defensive scheme with having all defenders pack the paint and leave shooters 10' wide open. Especially on the weak side. I just do not understand it!!

On the bright side, both RJ and Randle started to hit the three. Reddish made some nice defensive plays but needs to hit shots. Hartenstein plays like an old school Knick. Love his hustle! Rose gave us a nice boost in the second quarter and Obi picked it up late. Brunson was great on his iso's. IQ needs to pick it up. Fournier looks lost. Clearly getting demoted hurt his feeling but he's got nobody to blame but himself.

Kemet wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:Is RJ officially out of his slump or are the Celts just bad at defense to start the season?

Barrett’s slump was really only like 2 games to be honest. He just hasn’t taken that next step until tonight.

You can't make the case it was all the games. Think this is the first night where he shot above league average.

Barrett's 4th quarter performance has been worthless on offense/defense from not playing team-ball, the individual ISO scoring hasn't been working for him and Bully-Ball Randle to win games in the 4th quarter in a long while. And neither has the two Knicks players defending opponent top scorer in the 4th quarter. Flagrant in the 4th quarter SMH
Randle 29 pts in 39 minutes, and Barrett's 9-15 for 27 pts in 35 minutes did not put a dent in the Celtics high scoring in the 4th quarter or the Celtics scoring 101 pts in 3 quarters. A no defense game Boston 133 - Knicks 118

Is this just looking to place blame on guys you don't like? Doesn't seem like an accurate description of issues last night. Did you expect us to blow out the Celts? Knicks hung in. Mostly due to good games by Brunson, RJ and Randle. If you are going to trash any of those players, mention the ones who actually had bad games first. Obi, IQ and EF were a minus 22, 19 and 16. Cam shot 16% and played 37 minutes.

Your only accurate criticism was the 3pt defense. No excuse to give up that many threes.
Effort was there by players. Just bad scheme on the perimeter. Which was to go under picks most of the first three quarters. They finally decided to immediately switch high off picks in the 4th but it did not help. The rotational defense was also bad. Things they can work on. Btw, Celts also shot the **** out the ball. Regardless of many of them being wide open, they made them. There were still many other made shots in which they either had a hand in their faces or were from 26+ away. They also pushed the pace well and made the extra pass. That is why they were in the finals.

As for the good news... as well as Boston played and as bad as our three point defense was, we were still right in the game until the last Boston run.

franco12 wrote:

Clean wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

Clean wrote:

This is a fundamental problem with Thibs scheme. It's been this way since he was signed. If teams shoot poorly on open shots our defense looks great. If they shoot well on open shots our D looks like trash. Thibs was never a defensive genius he just rolled the dice that teams could not hit open shots from deep. This worked back in the day because there was not an emphasis on 3pt shooting. Now every team except us and the Lakers can easily knock down open 3's.

This seems to suggest that Thibs should go. If he cannot install a solid defense. what is he good for? There are better offensive coaches out there.

I would still hate to see a radical mid-season move, like firing Thibs. We are not winning a chip this year, and between yet another 1st round playoff exit (which is our ceiling) and a shot at Viktor W, I might prefer the latter.

This scheme in it self is not bad. What makes it bad is my second issue with Thibs. You have to fight him for him to make in game or in season adjustments. I have no problem with him prioritizing to protect the paint. However, if the team shows you they can hit those open shots its time for plan B. The issue is Thibs does not have a plan B. He will continually go with those dice rolls on them missing open shots. The problem is the odds are no longer in his favor.

I was never a Thibs fan when he was hired- I’ve had to give him props for his first year miracle- but that is looking more like an aberration than anything Thibs did.

Amazingly, we stayed close with the Celtics. They are clearly a better team. They came together last year and their core is amazing, great defense, stout athletes. Their shooting is what undid them against GS in the finals. They’ve improved a lot this year- they are ranked 5th for 3pt %(we’re 25)

In game adjustments and flexibility. I looked at the box score and he seemed to go heavy with minutes on the starting five, more so than he has done this year. I don’t think you can realistically go 10 deep, no matter how much I was a fan of Pitino’s Knicks that pressed and bombed 3s before it was fashionable.

In the 4th, Boston simply shot us out of the game. They shot 6 of 10 from 3, we shot 1 of 5.

They made 6 FTs, we made 1.

That was pretty much the differential right there.

Now- weirdly, I look at Obi’s line and it’s pretty anemic- he played just 15 minutes, scored 7 points- not especially strong shooting night.

But he was our leading scorer for the 4th quarter in just 6 minutes with all of his 7 points.

FFS! Obi is an offensive talent. He is our only 3pt threat at this point, he is a high efficiency scorer unlike RJ & Randle.

When does a coach actually think- oh ****, I’ve got a tool I haven’t been using.

Obi should be getting 28 minutes at least a night.

For anyone who says Thibs cares about defense, that actually isn’t coming through.

This is a great thread. But Thibs gamble failed precisely because the Celtics shot 53% from three.

If the Celts ONLY shoot 41% from three the Knicks probably win and that's still asking your opponent to hit a very high percentage of their threes to win.

Guys, sometimes a loss is another team doing something incredible to win.

Sambakick wrote:
This is a great thread. But Thibs gamble failed precisely because the Celtics shot 53% from three.

If the Celts ONLY shoot 41% from three the Knicks probably win and that's still asking your opponent to hit a very high percentage of their threes to win.

Guys, sometimes a loss is another team doing something incredible to win.

Yeah, but if you look at the Cavs game, there the opponent also went haywire from 3. And then there was this All-Star level outing by Maxey and a few 76er scrubs against us. If different teams consistently do this something incredible against us, the problem is with us, not with them. There is this apparent troubling trend of the Knicks defending the 3 poorly. Can Thibs address it promptly before the season turns into a disaster?

martin wrote:

ESOMKnicks wrote:

Sambakick wrote:
This is a great thread. But Thibs gamble failed precisely because the Celtics shot 53% from three.

If the Celts ONLY shoot 41% from three the Knicks probably win and that's still asking your opponent to hit a very high percentage of their threes to win.

Guys, sometimes a loss is another team doing something incredible to win.

Yeah, but if you look at the Cavs game, there the opponent also went haywire from 3. And then there was this All-Star level outing by Maxey and a few 76er scrubs against us. If different teams consistently do this something incredible against us, the problem is with us, not with them. There is this apparent troubling trend of the Knicks defending the 3 poorly. Can Thibs address it promptly before the season turns into a disaster?

Anyone have season stats on 3pt defense%?

https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/opponent-three-point-pct

Currently middle of the pack at 13th but 22nd the last three games.