crzymdups wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:They are 9-15 since that run took place. I think after the Knicks started off 3-8 and then went on the 13-1 run the thought was that D'Antoni had his team on track. However, since that run the team is 9-15 and the guys that are asked to play major minutes, against bigger, traditional lineups are breaking down. How long before D'Antoni is held accountable for his team's performance?

we knew they were entering the toughest 25 games of the schedule towards the end of that 13-1 run. counting the win over the nuggets they went 10-15 over that stretch. the schedule gets easier again - the rest of february is pretty easy, they should be able to do well in march and they play a lot of creampuffs in april.

they're not a deep team, so the injury to wilson hurt them. a full strength wilson tonight and they win.

there is not a lot of margin for error with this team. they are what they are. the price of maintaining cap flexibility.

crzymdups wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:They are 9-15 since that run took place. I think after the Knicks started off 3-8 and then went on the 13-1 run the thought was that D'Antoni had his team on track. However, since that run the team is 9-15 and the guys that are asked to play major minutes, against bigger, traditional lineups are breaking down. How long before D'Antoni is held accountable for his team's performance?

we knew they were entering the toughest 25 games of the schedule towards the end of that 13-1 run. counting the win over the nuggets they went 10-15 over that stretch. the schedule gets easier again - the rest of february is pretty easy, they should be able to do well in march and they play a lot of creampuffs in april.

they're not a deep team, so the injury to wilson hurt them. a full strength wilson tonight and they win.

there is not a lot of margin for error with this team. they are what they are. the price of maintaining cap flexibility.

They are what they are until Melo arrives.

It's really Amare, then everyone else. Felton, Gallo and Chandler are all very good players. The problem is they're so inconsistant, sometimes for stretches too long to overcome. That stretch of wins had multiple guys playing at about their peaks all at once.

Turiaf can't handle starters minutes and they havent had much other help because of the short rotations. No back-up PG hurts big time, Douglas is not the answer. Close games without someone who can create and get off quality shots, is clearly a problem when teams collapse on Amare.

Things will change, soon enough.

MDA has a system that his players must follow. Because basketball is a team sport. playing Mike's system is not optional. Every Knick player must maintain proper spacing on the floor, pass unselfishly, and only shoot open shots that are "high percentage" for the shooter.

If you guys actually think that MDA should have played AR despite the fact that he shot low percentage shots, and didn't know where to stand on the floor, and in general didn't embrace Mike's system, then "I think" the two of you are way off base. Having everyone play Mike's system gives the team a better chance to win. Mike's job is to win as many basketball games as possible. Playing Randolph who is shooting .280 for example, would not have given the Knicks the best chance to win.

Can't you understand that Mike can't afford to let one player play game minutes who hasn't learned the system properly. In life, first you get an education and then you get a job. Randolph, for whatever reason, hasn't finished his education. He needs to sit on the bench until he can play on an almost equivalent level to the starter that he is replacing in the lineup. That hasn't happened yet.

franco12 wrote:

rvwink wrote:"i agree if you're saying AR should be playing. i think that is MDA's biggest mistake in his entire tenure here."

MDA has a system that his players must follow. Because basketball is a team sport. playing Mike's system is not optional. Every Knick player must maintain proper spacing on the floor, pass unselfishly, and only shoot open shots that are "high percentage" for the shooter.

If you guys actually think that MDA should have played AR despite the fact that he shot low percentage shots, and didn't know where to stand on the floor, and in general didn't embrace Mike's system, then "I think" the two of you are way off base. Having everyone play Mike's system gives the team a better chance to win. Mike's job is to win as many basketball games as possible. Playing Randolph who is shooting .280 for example, would not have given the Knicks the best chance to win.

Can't you understand that Mike can't afford to let one player play game minutes who hasn't learned the system properly. In life, first you get an education and then you get a job. Randolph, for whatever reason, hasn't finished his education. He needs to sit on the bench until he can play on an almost equivalent level to the starter that he is replacing in the lineup. That hasn't happened yet.

Oh, Randolph didn't know where to stand on the floor? Whose fault is that??????????????????????

If AR needs extra work, then the staff better put it in, because AR has talent and can help the team win.

If he's sulking and not buying in, then the staff & MDA better get through to him.

All the quotes from AR coming in during the summer was he was excited and wanted to play in this system. WTF happened?

That's AR's fault. Coaches coach but players need to be coachable. If a player is not coachable he rides the pine. Look at Mozgov. He went from starter to bench warmer but brought it in practice everyday. He got a chance to perform and noew finds himself getting minutes.

franco12 wrote:

rvwink wrote:"i agree if you're saying AR should be playing. i think that is MDA's biggest mistake in his entire tenure here."

MDA has a system that his players must follow. Because basketball is a team sport. playing Mike's system is not optional. Every Knick player must maintain proper spacing on the floor, pass unselfishly, and only shoot open shots that are "high percentage" for the shooter.

If you guys actually think that MDA should have played AR despite the fact that he shot low percentage shots, and didn't know where to stand on the floor, and in general didn't embrace Mike's system, then "I think" the two of you are way off base. Having everyone play Mike's system gives the team a better chance to win. Mike's job is to win as many basketball games as possible. Playing Randolph who is shooting .280 for example, would not have given the Knicks the best chance to win.

Can't you understand that Mike can't afford to let one player play game minutes who hasn't learned the system properly. In life, first you get an education and then you get a job. Randolph, for whatever reason, hasn't finished his education. He needs to sit on the bench until he can play on an almost equivalent level to the starter that he is replacing in the lineup. That hasn't happened yet.

Oh, Randolph didn't know where to stand on the floor? Whose fault is that??????????????????????

If AR needs extra work, then the staff better put it in, because AR has talent and can help the team win.

If he's sulking and not buying in, then the staff & MDA better get through to him.

All the quotes from AR coming in during the summer was he was excited and wanted to play in this system. WTF happened?

So AR doesn't need to do anything, it's all someone else's fault.

I hear that too much as it is in everyday life, I don't need to hear it about a spoiled brat making millions of bucks. The guy should take some responsibility for his actions.

BRIGGS wrote:There are so many basic flaws with the way we play--we seem to be looking at the eight ball on a nightly basis before the game starts.

Why did we not call a timeout -2 with .09 on the clock--we were in obvious disarray and we usually come out with a good play from a timeout?

We shoot way too many 3's and the fact that we rely on defense and rebounding as a
s secondary way to win--we need to be almost perfect. Thats why we have such wild swings in the games. If a team like SA is not shooting well--they can still rely on D+R to win games--you cant shoot .52 every game.

First thing I would like to note--this team needs to add a tough guy--a guy who can rebound, play defense guard multiple positions score some points and set a tone. This is just a weak team physically--I mean there is a little there but no where NEAR enough. Turiaf is a guy who is either inconsistent or hurt--how can you rely on a player like that? We need more focus on making this team tougher. I think we should draft Ken Faried from Moorehoue State--Im guess ing well get Carmelo and remove Wilson--but that doesn't solve multiple woes. A big physical athletic guy who can run the floor play tough interior D rebound on both ends--how many times are we one and out--a team that shoots threes need an opportunistic rebounder in there at all times!!! Teams kill us in the paint. We need to start with rebounding and defense--I dont care if the guy doesnt shoot 3's. Its come to a point where I question is this team better without Zach and Crawford? Honestly I think we mightve been better with them. They are both consistent at what they do-we have way to many question marks starting with the COACH

briggs did you feel that way at the time of those trades? zach was just horrible for us his one year here. and he had that giant bloated contract that was going to run through the "shot at free agents" year. it was miraculous to unload him at that point. crawford i was so damn sick of watching. all that dribbling to set up his own fade-away 3? yuck enough already. for the few thrills he gave us of game-winners when it worked, he seemed like the quintessential decent scoring numbers on a lousy team guy. and again with the contract running through the free agent year. i wouldn’t take those trades back at all.

If AR needs extra work, then the staff better put it in, because AR has talent and can help the team win.

If he's sulking and not buying in, then the staff & MDA better get through to him."

If you go to college and flunk all of your courses, is blaming your failure on your teachers a reasonable conclusion. If you look at the progress that Mosgov, Chandler and Gallinari have made working with the same teachers, it is highly likely that AR's poor performance is his own fault. Please remember that AR has now gone through 2 coaches in 3 years, and in both situations he ended up riding the bench. (Ultimately coaches end up trying to motivate players to learn by not giving them playing time.) Also it seems clear to me that Randolph would be a serious step backward compared to playing Chandler, Turiaf, Williams or Mosgov. This is particularly true because AR is shooting .280 and the team's big men are averaging .485.

The coach needs to make his substitutions based on merit. He needs to keep his best players in the game. This is particularly true with this team that tends to win or lose by just a few points one way or the other. I guarantee that if Mike played AR more and that caused the Knicks to lose a few extra games, the same guys that criticized Mike for not giving AR playing time, would be moaning about his sudden inability to win games. Seems to me no matter what Mike does, you are on his case.

markvmc wrote:The Knicks are 12-23 if you take out their 13-1 run

Yes, but they're also 25-0 if you take out the games they lost.

Was going to post the same thing, what's going on with these forums?