[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Just For A Cameo: Can Lee and Wilcox Co-Exist In the Frontcourt?
Author Thread
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/11/2009  11:33 AM
With all the stated issues with David Lee's defensive ability, it might be worth a look to give Wilcox extended minutes at center.

Of course, this is not a permanent solution as neither would be considered intimidators, rather just an audition. The Knicks have absolutely nothing to lose. If Wilcox has a liability is that he can be a foul magnet and pick up personals in bunches. But ask yourselves: "would I rather have Wilcox's active body diving to the rack instead of Jared Jeffries?"

So it goes like this when it matters most, in the fourth quarter:

Wilcox and Lee at co-forward

Harrington and Chandler share responsibility at the skill forward spot

Hughes and Mister Dynamite in the backcourt
once a knick always a knick
AUTOADVERT
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274

3/11/2009  12:04 PM
Personally, I like Lee at Center more than I do at PF. I like the line up of Duhon, Hughes, Chandler, Lee and Harrington with Rooster, N8 and Wilcox coming off the bench. This 8 man rotation looked like it finally found an identity in the second half last night. After the 'angry' dunk by Lee early in the third, the team fought hard for a win. This kind of fight for a win has been lacking down the stretch all season. Now that they've found their identity, do you really want to mess with it again?
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/11/2009  12:25 PM
Lee & Wilcox starting at 4-5 limits u too much offensively... they're both shallow water type players... u need someone like Harrington or Gallo in there to stretch the defense & open up the lane for Nate & Hughes to penetrate & for Lee to run around & grab rebounds.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
3/11/2009  12:32 PM
If you didn't let Duhon, Jeffries, or Q on the floor, meaning that you rotated Gallo, Al, Nate, and Hughes in the 1,2,3 spots... you could get by with Lee and Wilcox.

This is the point we keep coming back to. You need a very specific kind of player to team with Lee to really make the best use of him. He has to be put on 3's and 4's on defense, but be able to play center on offense.

I think it's time to trade Lee for the best package we can get back. Building around him limits the type of player we can put on the floor with him too much.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/11/2009  12:56 PM
Rookie - that 8 man rotation you cited did not find an identity last night. Gallinari was absent. Duhon was ineffective and Lee allowed too many clear paths to the hoop. The Mayor was off his game and Harington was inconsistent. They had 21 turnovers. That is not the identity I seek.

Last night's win was about Nate and Hughes going unconscious. Period.

Lee showed a nice spark coming out of halftime, but the layups allowed ini the fourth quarter were embarassing.

I don't care about designations between forward and center. In effect, the Knicks have no center.

On offense, Wilcox can run a pick and roll as effectively as Lee and finish just as strong. Lee can employ his short range jumper. Hughes and Nate stretch any offense. Chandler and Harrington are versatile and have three point range. Gallinari is gravy.
once a knick always a knick
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274

3/11/2009  1:04 PM
....and this 8 man rotation has played together for how many games? They found some chemistry last night, let's let them play together for a few games and see if the turnovers will decrease, the team defense will improve, and everyone will start to get better looks. Q and JJ2 rode the bench and were DNP's. This was a big step towards solidifying a rotation, don't **** with it.
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
3/11/2009  1:12 PM
That was chemistry last night?
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/11/2009  1:14 PM
A Simple Plan

Rookie - Mid March is a liitle late in the NBA season to solidify a rotation.

With that said, I'm all for Richardson and Jeffries being nailed to the pine.

Wilcox gets Jeffries minutes.

[Edited by - misterearl on 03-11-2009 1:15 PM]
once a knick always a knick
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/11/2009  1:18 PM
The Answer Man Wonders What Game Rookie Was Watching

Q. JohnWallace - That was chemistry last night?

A. (cough)
once a knick always a knick
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27724
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
3/11/2009  1:21 PM
Posted by misterearl:

With all the stated issues with David Lee's defensive ability, it might be worth a look to give Wilcox extended minutes at center.

Of course, this is not a permanent solution as neither would be considered intimidators, rather just an audition. The Knicks have absolutely nothing to lose. If Wilcox has a liability is that he can be a foul magnet and pick up personals in bunches. But ask yourselves: "would I rather have Wilcox's active body diving to the rack instead of Jared Jeffries?"

So it goes like this when it matters most, in the fourth quarter:

Wilcox and Lee at co-forward

Harrington and Chandler share responsibility at the skill forward spot

Hughes and Mister Dynamite in the backcourt

I kind of like the idea of a Nate/Hughes/Harrington/Lee/Wilcox line... you would have the three best offensive players together with the two blue collar rebounders. That line would hustle, but you couldn't spread the floor in the half court set because neither Lee nor Wilcox are real threats to shoot outside of 10 ft (12ft?). But, between Nate/Larry/Al-- if they could get some chemistry you could really work a motion offense. Unfortunately, what ends up happening is that the other players end up standing around watching as [choose one-- Nate/Al/Larry] go one-on-one with their defender. I could give the same type argument for pretty much any lineup you come up with and resolve that it wouldn't work- we eventually will need to get better players.
You know I gonna spin wit it
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274

3/11/2009  1:23 PM
"Rookie - Mid March is a liitle late in the NBA season to solidify a rotation."

This is actually the third rotation. There was the Randolf/Crawford rotation which morphed into the TT/Harrington rotation. Then the post trade deadline rotation when we got Hughes and Wilcox. Three weeks to work in the new players and get them back into game shape is what it took. It is what it is. Looks like the tinkering is done. Wilcox comes off the bench.
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274

3/11/2009  1:27 PM
"The Answer Man Wonders What Game Rookie Was Watching"

Please get over yourself. Speaking in third person and calling yourself 'the answer man'...If you have anything to say, just say it and stop the bull****.
Rookie
Posts: 27322
Alba Posts: 28
Joined: 10/15/2008
Member: #2274

3/11/2009  1:34 PM
BTW earl, how would you like to have a serious conversation with me if I decided I was going to talk like a pirate?

misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/11/2009  1:39 PM
EwingsGlass - it is ALL about motion.

Work with me a moment. You reprogram Wilcox in the mold of a back-to-the-basket undersized center (see Dave Cowens) and run the halfcourt offense through him. He is schooled in the fine art of instantly recognizing a double team and not holding the ball for more than 2 seconds. Wilcox has great hands and only needs to think like a distributor. His job is to spot cutters like Harrington and Hughes, who both finish well and get to the foul line.


You take the ball out of Nate's hands on every other possession, just for variety sake, and so cats don't stand around hypnotized his act... you know The Toy can get his shot but that is not the objective. The objective is balance.

David Lee finds a sweet spot from the corner, inside the arc and shoots at will.

Speaking of Wil, there is always the young Chandler or the adored Gallinari to pick up the outside shooting slack from deep.

Everybody boxes out. Everybody rebounds.

It could happen.

(The fact remains, Walsh MUST find a legit 6'11)
once a knick always a knick
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/11/2009  1:43 PM
Fact: The Answer Man Doesn't Take Basketball Conversation All That Serious

Q. Rookie - how would you like to have a serious conversation with me if I decided I was going to talk like a pirate?

A. No problem, as long as I can talk like both Cheech and Chong.
once a knick always a knick
arkrud
Posts: 32217
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/31/2005
Member: #995
USA
3/11/2009  1:43 PM
DAntony will not tolerate players who cannot consistently score in general.
Wilcox is not his man, JJ is not his man, and Q is not his man anymore.
Mike will play these bodies only if he will have nobody else to play.
So he will not explore them in the lineups. They will be out rather sooner than later.
Even Eddy has potentially more value for Mike. He can score... maybe...
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Hamlet
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27724
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
3/11/2009  1:48 PM
Posted by misterearl:

EwingsGlass - it is ALL about motion.

Work with me a moment. You reprogram Wilcox in the mold of a back-to-the-basket undersized center (see Dave Cowens) and run the halfcourt offense through him. He is schooled in the fine art of instantly recognizing a double team and not holding the ball for more than 2 seconds. Wilcox has great hands and only needs to think like a distributor. His job is to spot cutters like Harrington and Hughes, who both finish well and get to the foul line.


You take the ball out of Nate's hands on every other possession, just for variety sake, and so cats don't stand around hypnotized his act... you know The Toy can get his shot but that is not the objective. The objective is balance.

David Lee finds a sweet spot from the corner, inside the arc and shoots at will.

Speaking of Wil, there is always the young Chandler or the adored Gallinari to pick up the outside shooting slack from deep.

Everybody boxes out. Everybody rebounds.

It could happen.

(The fact remains, Walsh MUST find a legit 6'11)

I agree with the concept. I think the Nate/Hughes/Al lineup needs to figure out how to balance the shots and keep players in the game when off the ball.

You know I gonna spin wit it
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/11/2009  2:00 PM
EwingsGlass - when you compare the versatility of players like Marion, Stoudamire and Diaw to what the Knicks are working with, one can sense the impatience of D'Antoni to convince his players to buy into a system that rewards execution of the passing game over individual effort. Especially in the fourth quarter.

The misnomer is that Coach Dan has an aversion to a center. I contend he only has an aversion to a traditional "shoot-first" center. For example, The beauty of Marcus Camby was that he played guard in high school. He could put the ball on the floor and could make a pass.

The best part? Camby kept his head up. As a result, he and Kurt Thomas became a dangerous combination as Thomas had some of his most consistent production as a Knick. By the same token, Robinson and Duncan were dangerous not due to individual play, but because they looked for each other.

If Walsh could find a 24 year old Camby the Knicks would be straight.


once a knick always a knick
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
3/11/2009  2:02 PM
I think they can co-exist. Provided, of course, that one of them is not from an alternate universe. In that case, I'd recommend keeping them separated at all times.
https:// It's not so hard.
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27724
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
3/11/2009  2:09 PM
Posted by BasketballJones:

I think they can co-exist. Provided, of course, that one of them is not from an alternate universe. In that case, I'd recommend keeping them separated at all times.

Hmmm... maybe we should work on getting an alternative universe Eddie Curry. It would make a pretty big boom, but it might be worth it with the salary cap considerations in mind... can we get CERN to work on this?
You know I gonna spin wit it
Just For A Cameo: Can Lee and Wilcox Co-Exist In the Frontcourt?

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy