Some dude named Jason M. Williams from RealGM.com wrote a nice article on Knick lineups. A lot of the sentiments have been expressed here on the board, but it was a good article, so I figured its worth discussing:

http://www.realgm.com/src_twoplusthefoul/170/20071212/the_chicken_or_the_egg/

The Chicken Or The Egg?
Authored by Jason M. Williams - 12th December, 2007 - 12:56 pm

Madison Square Garden has become a stable nesting ground for boo-birds lately, as the Knicks have dragged their way to an embarrassing 6-14 record through the first quarter of the season. Recent reports suggest that Isiah Thomas is unhappy with the fans, labeling their relentless booing as the culprit for the team’s dismal play.

Nowadays many of the Garden faithful have been heard booing Thomas and his players during player introductions. However, the heavy showering of jeers normally only begins to surface once the team digs itself into a routine early double-digit deficit.

The age-old question can be applied to this current Knicks' situation – Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Which came first, the poor play or the booing?

While Thomas has blamed the fans for the team’s lackluster starts, the onus can only be placed on himself when you look at the lineups he has put on the floor so far this season.

The Knicks have a very talented roster, but the majority of their personnel are blatantly one-dimensional ballplayers. For every offensive-minded player who lacks defensive intensity and the notion to distribute the ball to his teammates (think Eddy Curry), they have a ruthless defensive-oriented player who looks immediately to pass because he’s incapable of putting the ball in the hoop (think Jared Jeffries).

The sole purpose of constructing a team with the intention of developing team chemistry is to integrate these differing styles of play so that they complement one another properly. This is where Isiah Thomas is guilty of being the chicken.

His normal starting five consists of Stephon Marbury, Jamal Crawford, Quentin Richardson, Zach Randolph, and Eddy Curry. His second team often consists of Fred Jones, David Lee, Renaldo Balkman, and Jared Jeffries. This demonstrates that Thomas likes to deploy two units: one comprised solely of selfish ball-hogs who lack any tenacity on defense or on the boards, while the second group loves nothing more than shutting down their man defensively and getting to the ball at all costs.

Perhaps if Thomas decided to intertwine his first and second units, he would be able to avoid the routine mid-first quarter timeout with the Knicks already down twelve and the looming Garden fans already calling for their heads. Not a single player in his starting lineup is renowned for having defensive competence and blocked shots occur as often as New York City subway stations get cleaned.

Isiah Thomas has been reluctant in the past to shake up his starting lineup because he feels that he likes to insert his ‘energy guys’ including Balkman, Lee, and Nate Robinson when the team needs a boost. But wouldn’t the team best be served by having these sparkplugs in the game from the onset? Why wait until the team is facing a ten-point deficit to bring in guys who are willing to push the envelope and change the tempo of the game?

So, what starting lineup should Isiah Thomas consider using? Let’s take a closer look.

With the recent absence of point guard Stephon Marbury, it is clear he is the most capable distributor (7.3 assists per 48 min) on the roster and the only ‘starter’ who can really bring a nasty defensive edge when needed. His ability to penetrate the lane and kick the ball to open teammates gives the Knicks better ball movement. He can also take command of the game in spurts and is shooting 42% from downtown. He must remain the starting point guard.

The strongest part of Jamal Crawford’s game is his uncanny ability to catch fire and score at will when bobbing and weaving at the top of the key. His numbers also suggest that he is the second-most capable ball distributor on the roster (5.4 assists per 48 min) and thus should lead the second unit.

Stepping into the shooting guard position should be Marbury’s current replacement in the starting five, Fred Jones. He has been a solid defender and is putting up 14.2 points, 4.8 rebounds, 3.8 assists, and 2.2 steals per 48 min. while shooting a healthy 34% from three-point.

Quentin Richardson needs to take a seat. While his rebounding has been effective, his defense and conditioning are severely suspect, and his shot has been just unbearably awful (32% from field, 28% from three). His extreme competitiveness and fiery demeanor in the huddle are often the cause for his overrated status as a ‘stout defender.’

He has to be replaced by second-year standout Renaldo Balkman. While Balkman doesn’t offer much offensively, he has grabbed 10.5 points, 10.5 rebounds and leads the team with 1.47 blocks per 48 min. His defensive prowess is unmatched on the roster, and his 54% shooting from the field can be attributed to his superior awareness around the hoop for easy put-backs off of offensive rebounds.

The pairing of Eddy Curry and Zach Randolph must take a detour if Isiah wishes to right this sinking ship. Both guys are much better without the other on the floor, and both guys are capable of having the offense run through them. While both are sluggish and uninspired on defense, Randolph is a prolific rebounder, which gives him the nod over Curry in the starting five. Z-Bo has delivered 25.0 points, 14.7 rebounds, 2.2 assists, and 1.21 steals per 48 minutes, compared to Eddy’s 24.1, 8.8, 0.9, and 0.42, respectively.

The last starting roster spot belongs to the ball-hawking Mr. Intangibles David Lee. Lee has been efficient on defense and just as dominant as Randolph on the boards. His 17.8 points and 14.5 rebounds per 48 min give the Knicks ample second chance opportunities to control the game while he pairs with Balkman to put-back any shot left short by the guards.

This new starting five of Marbury, Jones, Balkman, Randolph, and Lee will give the Knicks a penetrating distributor, two three-point threats, a low post monster, a lock-down defender, three complimentary solid defenders, three guys to clean the boards, and two to thrive on put-back baskets under the hoop.

The second unit will enlist the dynamic offensive pairing of Jamal Crawford and Eddy Curry, who have developed a strong bond on and off the court since their playing days in Chicago. Richardson and Robinson will not only offer Crawford and Curry options to kick to for open three-point shots but will also team with defensive specialist Jared Jeffries to supply the team with solid rebounding (Richardson 10.0, Robinson 6.9, and Jeffries 8.9 rebounds per 48 min).

This rotation shake-up is just what the Knicks need to get back on track. Despite their woeful record, they are still easily within striking range of reaching the playoffs. They are only three games out of the eighth seed with over sixty games left to play.

The most difficult part of this situation is that Isiah’s current lineup is currently stocked with some of the biggest egos and playing-time whiners in the league. It would take a miracle for Zeke to have the guts to remove the aforementioned three starters from the opening lineup to better set the team up to succeed.

Going back to the original question – what exactly is causing this disgraceful play by this talented and deep Knicks' team? Is it the booing that is causing them to lose confidence and thus affecting their ability to compete at a high level? Or, is it Isiah’s one-dimensional rotations that put them in a position to fail, which ultimately leads to booing?

This dilemma seems a little easier for Thomas to answer than the age-old question of whether the chicken or the egg came first…

Feel free to contact Jason M. Williams with your thoughts. He can be reached at Jason.Williams@RealGM.com for comments or questions.

A few of us have been harping on balance. And I know I've been harping on the idiocy of seperating the "energy" from the starting lineup. The 2 lineups he proposes definitely make sense to me.

That looks like a really good article. Too bad it's so long.

Posted by djsunyc:

his initial "chicken or egg" question has nothing to do with the article.

Knick fans need to ponder on who came first, the idiot or the moron

Quentin Richardson needs to take a seat. While his rebounding has been effective, his defense and conditioning are severely suspect, and his shot has been just unbearably awful (32% from field, 28% from three). His extreme competitiveness and fiery demeanor in the huddle are often the cause for his overrated status as a ‘stout defender.’

That's probably the best part of the article. I don't agree with the part about the team being stocked with Egos and play time whores. Outside of thinking Marbury and Zach would destroy the the locker Room if they were benched, who else on the team would do that????

Posted by majorleads:

HORRIBLE ARTICLE. I stopped reading when I read this...

The Knicks have a very talented roster, but the majority of their personnel are blatantly one-dimensional ballplayers.

We don't have a "very" talented roster as the author claims. VERY talented rosters don't have a majority of one-dimensional players. What could this guy possibly say to make up for that ridiculous statement? I've been saying it every year for the past 4 years now, and I'm sure TKF can back me up on this even when he disagreed with me back then, I kept asking WHERE IS THE TALENT?

And defense, motivation and brains. You called it right every time.

Players in NBA are starting based on contract money.
More contract money means more responsibility... for coach/GM to start the man and play him more minutes.
Our lineup is correct in this respect.
If contract is not reflecting the quality of the player it's GM fault. If majority of players are underperforming, GM is bad and should be fired.
If GM wants to fix this - he must hire good coach to make it work or trade players.
If he failed to do so - he is incompetent and must be fired.

You can mix and much different kind of crap but the result will be... mixed crap, regardless of the components.
It can look and stink differently but essentially will be crap anyway.