If he's going to be the main scorer in the 2nd unit, a role I think he's well suited for, then he'll have to continue to be aggressive offensively and his % will come down over time. That's OK. I'm happy w/ him at 45-47% while carrying the load for the 2nd unit, rebounding and playing D like he's been doing.

I agree that he should ease up on the 3's unless he's wide open on a secondary break or a drive and kick to the corner (seems to me he hits that corner 3 at a reasonable %).

oohah wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:He is playing so well for the most part but has taken bad 3's/shots in the 4th Q the last 2 games. If he sticks to a quality 3 1-3 times a game and concentrates on the 2--I think he can shoot 50%.

Yeah, but this is D'Antoni's system so you have to understand that Chandler is essentially required to take a large number of three-point shots.

oohah

When your only tools is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Let's ignore the fact that we have more steals, almost twice as many blocks, less turnovers, 138 Rebounds to our Opponents 140, less turnover 43 is to 45 and out-rebounded Opps on the offensive glass but lets keep harping on the 3-pt shooting. http://www.nba.com/knicks/stats/.

What's killing us is low assists numbers and yes I fully expect that to improve as Felton gets more experience with this team.

oohah wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:He is playing so well for the most part but has taken bad 3's/shots in the 4th Q the last 2 games. If he sticks to a quality 3 1-3 times a game and concentrates on the 2--I think he can shoot 50%.

Yeah, but this is D'Antoni's system so you have to understand that Chandler is essentially required to take a large number of three-point shots.

oohah

This isn't true. Dude takes stupid shots. He cost us the game vs. Portland by taking an ill-advised and contested three point shot (trying to answer Andre Miller's three) with a ton of time left on the shot clock in a one point game with 2 minutes to play.

kam77 wrote:

oohah wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:He is playing so well for the most part but has taken bad 3's/shots in the 4th Q the last 2 games. If he sticks to a quality 3 1-3 times a game and concentrates on the 2--I think he can shoot 50%.

Yeah, but this is D'Antoni's system so you have to understand that Chandler is essentially required to take a large number of three-point shots.

oohah

This isn't true. Dude takes stupid shots. He cost us the game vs. Portland by taking an ill-advised and contested three point shot (trying to answer Andre Miller's three) with a ton of time left on the shot clock in a one point game with 2 minutes to play.

Come on without Chandler were not even in the game--guy had 16 rebounds and through 3 was 8-17. The guy who cost us the game was Amare--terrible to's and could not make a shot

AnubisADL wrote:Chandler is jacking ALOT of shots. He wants that $$$$ this summer.

This is true. I try to draft guys in contracts years in my fantasy leagues. Athletes don't F around in contract years.

GodSaveTheKnicks wrote:

AnubisADL wrote:Chandler is jacking ALOT of shots. He wants that $$$$ this summer.

This is true. I try to draft guys in contracts years in my fantasy leagues. Athletes don't F around in contract years.

Tying his shot production to contract year only is tough.

What about the fact that Gallo isn't playing well and Turiaf doesn't shoot outside of 3 feet so there cumulatively a lot more shots out there?

And also because Landry is a rook and picking his shots precisely?

Or perhaps because he is coming off the bench and they NEED him to carry the scoring load more?

kam77 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

kam77 wrote:

oohah wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:He is playing so well for the most part but has taken bad 3's/shots in the 4th Q the last 2 games. If he sticks to a quality 3 1-3 times a game and concentrates on the 2--I think he can shoot 50%.

Yeah, but this is D'Antoni's system so you have to understand that Chandler is essentially required to take a large number of three-point shots.

oohah

This isn't true. Dude takes stupid shots. He cost us the game vs. Portland by taking an ill-advised and contested three point shot (trying to answer Andre Miller's three) with a ton of time left on the shot clock in a one point game with 2 minutes to play.

Come on without Chandler were not even in the game

I don't understand this logic... so because Chandler had a good game up until then its OK for him to take a bad shot with the game in the balance?

Its as bad as Al Harrington hanging on the rim IMO. Cost us a game we would probably win.

It is never ok to take a bad shot.

knicks1248 wrote:I hate to be the negative..but were still losing games..when all is said and done, its the W's the matter..I'm sick of losing and 1 or 2 players play well, what's the point. Dude had a monster game like so many of David lee's win less efforts...its a shame because chandler efforts will probably get him traded...

Yeah you hit the nail on the head the object is to win and nothing else. If the losing continues the seeds of doubt will be placed even in Amare's head. Winning is a must. That is why I wanted Melo here ASAP not via FA. I could careless about next year right now is what matters for the future. Gallo needs to snap out of his funk and he will but he has to do it before the team gets itself in a big hole and has to basically climb out of a hole. They should have beaten the blazers, I thought MDA played the end poorly and the team has to stop jacking threes. Clock management is a must in the end. The lack of attack mode towards the end of the game hurts the team they rely to much on exterior play for their scoring. A go to player is definitely missing. Chandler isn't a go to player and neither is Gallo. Amare is PF/C and those are never go to type players they need the ball in optimal condition to score. Hence the need to get Melo he is a go to player and he would help out the burden that is on Amare a lot.

nixluva wrote:His % on 3's will improve with more shots. I think he's often rushing and his form suffers. If you look at his feet when he took his last 3 in the Blazer game he wasn't set properly. The reason guys like Ray Allen are so good is that their form is almost flawless everytime.

Chan has stepped up to the next level and it really is right about that time for this to happen. He had some injury setbacks, but now he's back to where he should've been if not for the injuries. I think people have to allow more time for these players to perfect what they're trying to do. This is 3 GAMES!!! It's gonna take more than that to fully adjust to their roles. Remember Chan started off last year taking too many 3's then he settled down into a good groove.

his 3 % should go up a bit more, however his best as low 30s before. is that good enough with him taking 6+ 3s a game?