CrushAlot wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

VCoug wrote:I think Woodson's future might be tied Thursday's game against Brooklyn. Dolan's made it very clear through his actions and his recent interview that he has a huge chip on his shoulder regarding the Nets move to Brooklyn and especially about Prokhorov. I think if we win Woodson will be given a ton of leeway to work through our problems; if we lose he might not make through New Year's.

If we got embarrassed on national television against them, Woodys done (my opinion).

Well Pierce is out and Alan Anderson killed the Knicks every they played the raps last year. It should be interesting.

Three

For the Knicks, much depends on 3-point shooting. They are well below the league average in 3-point percentage because of a combination of a less effective offense (and thus fewer open shots) and a startling number of misses on wide-open attempts. J. R. Smith and Felton attempt a lot of 3-pointers but are 27.7 percent from long range combined. Andrea Bargnani is at a respectable 33 percent, but that is a far cry from the scorching shooting that Chris Copeland and Steve Novak, both now with other teams, were capable of providing last season.

- NYTimes

Dagger wrote:Honestly when you look into the face of Woodson do you see a pensive, intelligent man that can lead a team of men? He has kind of a vacant look in his eyes, like there isn't full activity upstairs. When you look at guys like Mark Jackson, Lionel Hollins, hell even Dantoni you can at least tell there are thoughts running through their minds, cogs grinding and twirling. With Woodson it's just this empty look of cluelessness.

Woodson face is the face of man who has to deal with Knicks management on a day to day basis. Don Chaney and Lenny Wilkens, two men who are well respected by their peers, had the same look. He'll, even I had the same look after last night's game. Can you imagine having to attend a meeting where one of the main talking points is Chris Smith? You think Popovich wouldn't have a look of defeat permantly pressed on his face if he was forced to deal with this on a regular basis? had the same look too, except he at least had enough strength to hide it with a tired smile.

BigDaddyG wrote:

Dagger wrote:Honestly when you look into the face of Woodson do you see a pensive, intelligent man that can lead a team of men? He has kind of a vacant look in his eyes, like there isn't full activity upstairs. When you look at guys like Mark Jackson, Lionel Hollins, hell even Dantoni you can at least tell there are thoughts running through their minds, cogs grinding and twirling. With Woodson it's just this empty look of cluelessness.

Woodson face is the face of man who has to deal with Knicks management on a day to day basis. Don Chaney and Lenny Wilkens, two men who are well respected by their peers, had the same look. He'll, even I had the same look after last night's game. Can you imagine having to attend a meeting where one of the main talking points is Chris Smith? You think Popovich wouldn't have a look of defeat permantly pressed on his face if he was forced to deal with this on a regular basis? had the same look too, except he at least had enough strength to hide it with a tired smile.

So have some dignity end step down like MDA did, his reputation his headed in the toilet..

Notice all the coaches that got fired from the knicks Wilkens, brown, chaney Thomas, they never coached another game in the NBA..

The ones that step down..JVG, MDA went on to caoch another team..

Since when were people "plug and play" robots?

Meaning, the human interaction or cooperation of a team unit can be affected by the addition or subtraction of just one player. In the case of 2013-14 Knicks, the lack of cohesion could be due to missing the positive influence of NBA Hall of Fame player Jason Kidd.

Think about subtracting a Hall of Fame thinker from practice, the huddles during timeouts and crunch time. Ray Felton was playing injured. Still is. Tyson Chandler is out. JR Smith was MIA and out of sync. Shump had surgery. We have a certified scrub on the roster collecting a check in Erie.

That is just plain stupid.

Add to that the fact the league is different, the competition is different. In many cases, the talent is superior to ours, especially at the most essential position on the court... at point guard.

All rosters have changed. Teams are just different. The NO Pelicans are not pushovers. The west coast teams we just played all have superior talent. Nothing stays the same. No one stays the same.

The Boston Celtics are totally different.

Numbers lie. Adapt or die.

We can put blame on the players and rightfully so, but we are too deep and talented not to have a plan of action. Even dantoni put Jared at the top of the key guarding point guards. You have to coach what you have. Figure something out.

Woodson is still trying. So he should be unemployed

I thought the Bargs deal was bad for the draft picks we gave up, but an upgrade in talent.

but teams with less talent have played better ball than the Knicks are today.

The fish from the head, you take this by frame; in the bigger picture it's Dolan, in the smaller frame it's Woody.

Woody looks like a dufus on the sideline and he is not playing guys by merit but by politics,

Shump rightfully chewed Melo out and didn't see the hardwoods again but he has JR playing all final minutes while the guy's been shooting 30% in the last 5 minutes all game. Google it

misterearl wrote:

VCoug wrote:http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304854804579234432664601724?KEYWORDS=chris+herring

Good article about Woodson from Chris Herring. Here's what stood out to me most of all:

A film study of the Knicks' past 10 games shows they've surrendered baskets 60% of the time (82-of-137) and allowed 1.3 points per play when they switch—up from the 28% score rate and 0.48 points per play when they keep their assignments.

Now many of those games from last year was Tyson Chandler on the court?

Sheesh

Does it matter? Teams are scoring 60% of the time when we switch and 28% of the time when we don't. Regardless if Tyson Chandler or Patrick Ewing or Moses Malone or Bill Russell is out there playing for us when the numbers are that stark we clearly need to change our defensive philosophy.

Teams are scoring 60% of the time when we switch and 28% of the time when we don't.

Q. VCoug - Does it matter?

A. Absolutely, having Bill Russell (circa 1968), Patrick Ewing, Moses Malone or Tyson (or Wilson) Chandler would matter.