knickscity wrote:nixluva wrote:knickscity wrote:nixluva wrote:knickscity wrote:nixluva wrote:CrushAlot wrote:nixluva wrote:holfresh wrote:nixluva wrote:holfresh wrote:nixluva wrote:There are some people here that just aren't seeming to get the gist of the problem with Woody. It ain't the regular season!!! Forget about the 54 wins. That only goes so far. The real deal is the PLAYOFFS!!! This team was put together to challenge the Heat in the ECF's. Winning the Atlantic was only the 1st step towards that goal and you can't make a season based solely on that. Woody has always been able to win in the regular season. The thing that bothered many was his failures in the PLAYOFFS. That's where he's historically been weak and he proved it again. Now to make this clear for you guys once more. The real issue isn't whether this team was better than Indy or Miami. The issue is what kind of job did Woodson do in the playoffs with his team. He was awful in the postseason again. Starting with issues in the Boston series and even worse in the Indy series. Huge mistakes!!! Things you just didn't see the other coaches doing. Just compare the jobs MJax, Doc, Vogel, Thibs and Hollins did with their teams even in defeat. They did FAR better than Woodson did. He screwed up his own roster. ALL of those other teams played even better versions of the kind of team they came into the playoffs being. GS was even better offensively, Celtics played even harder, Pacers were even more of the ground n pound team they are, Bulls were even tougher defensively etc. The Knicks didn't play a better version of themselves, they went in the complete opposite direction. That's poor coaching. No excuses.
2012-13 Coach of the Year results
Coach Team 1st 2nd 3rd TotalGeorge Karl Denver 62 26 16 404
Erik Spoelstra Miami 24 17 19 190
Mike Woodson New York 6 28 13 127
Gregg Popovich San Antonio 11 16 17 120
Frank Vogel Indiana 3 11 12 60
Lionel Hollins Memphis 6 4 13 55
Mark Jackson Golden State 3 6 14 47
Tom Thibodeau Chicago 2 7 9 40
Kevin McHale Houston 1 3 3 17
P.J. Carlesimo Brooklyn 1 1 0 8
Vinny Del Negro LA Clippers 1 1 0 8
Larry Drew Atlanta 1 0 1 6
Doc Rivers Boston 0 1 1 4
Scott Brooks Oklahoma City 0 0 3 3
Really, the jobs guys did in defeat?????
I'm convinced that you are are unable to read and comprehend what you've read. This isn't about the regular season. You are putting WAY too much emphasis on that. Aside from making the playoffs the regular season doesn't mean much if you totally mess up in the playoffs. Good teams aren't really obsessed with the regular season. It's all about what you do in the playoffs. What's the point of having the best record if you lose in the playoffs before the WCF or ECF? You can keep on being happy with a nice regular season record as if that really means anything. Once again i'll ask how did Woody do in comparison to the other coaches I listed? Did the Knicks play an even better version of themselves in the playoffs or where they worse?
Is Indy a better more well balanced team than the Knicks...Do they play better defense???If so, you arguments are purely speculative...
Since you're such a lover of the regular season record, i'd have to say that NO the Pacers were not a better team than the Knicks. The Knicks had plenty of depth. Woody just mismanaged the roster. When you play Kidd and JR too much and don't use the rest of your bench that's on the coach!!! The Pacers aren't deep at all!!! They just got better coaching. Vogel used his roster WAY better and he got more out of his team than Woody did in the Playoffs.
I disagree. If you look at the starting five of both teams advantage goes to Indy at every position except where Melo plays and Paul George made that close. Who was Woodson supposed to play if his second leading scorer was struggling that lifts the Knicks over the Pacers? I have heard Camby and Cope's name thrown around. Personally I don't think that gets it done.
Why are you looking at the starting 5 and comparing the teams that way. This isn't a fantasy league!!! It's how the team as a whole plays together that matters most not the individual matchups. When the Knicks played to their strengths they could easily compete with Indy. That means that you don't play slow walk it up BB and have no Ball and Player movement. this played right into the hands of the Pacers. We can't grind it out with them and they really didn't want to play fast and loose with us.
Woody panicked and tried to go BIG!!! That plays right into the strength of the Pacers who want to bang with teams. We needed to push the pace and play early in the shot clock. You can't be scared to miss a shot and try to play slow and safe if you're the Knicks. You have to believe in your style and that yes you might miss some shots, but in the end playing faster will eventually work out for the best cuz we had a jump shooting team. We needed MORE SHOTS not less. As they say styles make fights and we tried to slug it out rather than stick and move and pepper them with punches. We needed to out point them, not try to go toe to toe inside with them. You play slow and they get their defense set and it's gonna be a struggle.
I believe the Pacers had alot to do with what the Knicks were able to do.We dont even have players to push the tempo, and our best two scorers dont play well without the ball.
No we could've played faster. We literally walked it up and didn't get into our motion and ball movement. Woody simplified the offense and it started in the Boston series. We got less PnR, screen, curl and pop offense as the playoffs went along. YES the Pacers are a great defensive team but what were the Knicks offensively, chopped liver. This team was #3 in the league in offensive efficiency. Most of that we built up when the team was actually sharing the ball at a high level. Woody has to be the one that makes sure this team never forgot it's identity. Get the ball up the floor with plenty of shot clock and MOVE the ball until you get an open shot. Have some off the ball motion to make the defense adjust and you'll get open looks. This is how you play winning ball. If you can honestly say that the Knicks stuck with this for the entire playoffs and lost doing it then i'd agree with you, but you know that's not the case.
This top 3 offense stuff is nonsense, the team made a bunch of threes, and didn't turn over the ball, thats all.They weren't top 10 in any offense related standpoint other than threes.
18th in fg%, 20th in ft attempts, 13th in makes.
The pacers only made the inefficiencies wlook worse and solid defense do.
You're only making my point even more. The thing is that the offense taken as a whole was good to start the year, but then we had that long stretch of .500 BB and that's when the bad habits started. Woody had a lot to do with the team not really sticking to and further developing the offense to be more diverse and efficient. If this team had stuck with the principles they had at the start, things would've been better in the playoffs.
The fact is that this was a 3pt shooting team but the only way you can take that many 3's is to have GREAT ball and player movement. If all you do is jack 3's there's no way you could do that consistently enough to win 54 games unless you're doing it the right way. The Knicks had a strange season in terms of being consistent. They had a great start and a great finish with a lot of mediocre in between. Then rather than tighten things up and get back to what was the best style of play in the playoffs Woody didn't do that. The team started playing away from it's strengths and that's why they couldn't put the Celtics away and why they lost to the Pacers.
You've got to go at the Pacers with more early offense before Hibbert gets back on D. He's not some speed demon that can beat most people down the court. Since the Knicks didn't really push the ball they ended up going against the set D and that was a huge mistake. Once Hibbert is in the paint just standing there waiting you have to make them move and that would involve swinging the ball and getting player movement off the ball. West and Hibbert can't guard outside the paint so we had an advantage in that regard, but didn't use that.
Felton getting injured had alot to do with that stretch.Against the Pacers you can't run off the inbounds, they are younger, and Hibbert wasn't the only one playing defense out there.
George had Melo and JR on lockdown when he held them, as he even had success in even slowing down lebron.
i guess no one watched the impact the Pacers had against Miami and somehow really believes the Knicks were better.
The Knicks was the only team that got out of the first round that doesn't play defense.
It's not about RUNNING, but rather the pace at which you run your offense regardless of make or miss by the other team. You have to understand what makes your offense most effective. It's almost as if people just assume that you can't get ball movement, make good use of screens and curls, PnR to suck the defense in and then kick, space the floor and get good off the ball movement regardless of the defense wanting to suck you into their style of play.
You can't make the case that the Knicks ran good offense because they didn't. If the Knicks actually ran good offense and were stopped by superior defense that would be one thing, but that's not how it went down. When Woody decided to try and go big that was an even further capitulation to the Pacers style of play. If you want I can break it down to extremely specific plays, but I don't think it's necessary cuz EVERYONE saw that the Knicks offense devolved into standing around and going ISO.
You beat great defense with even better offense. That's the only thing the Knicks had in their favor. Woody failed to use his roster to the best of it's ability. As I said, if you play Kidd and JR when they're slumping and refuse to use Prigs who had a very nice +/- and not fully use Cope as well, then you are not giving your team the best advantage. Also Woody is the one who allowed Melo and JR to get used to going ISO rather than playing within the flow of a Team Oriented ofense.
6/16/2013 7:38 PM