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

one real problem i see with this club and personell going forward
Author Thread
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
4/15/2004  10:14 AM
is that we don't have two-way players. We have a few nice offensive pieces, two undersized Cs in KT and NZR who dont intimidate[although KT is probably the best defender on the team] + your primary wings are H2O TT backed up by Penny, the defense is not going to be as good as the offense. We have had selected times during the year when we had Deke Van Horn Andersen Mcdyess Ward where we played good D-although there wasnt suffecient offensive balance---going forward we need to find balance---i still believe we need to increase athletiscm and get bigger and younger-and somehow find a set rotation of players.
RIP Crushalot😞
AUTOADVERT
diderotn
Posts: 25657
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/15/2004
Member: #650
USA
4/15/2004  10:21 AM
I totally disagree with that. The only reason that our team doesn't have a defensive identity is because Lenny was never knowned as a defensive coach. Look at Dallas, they don't have a defensive minded coach, therefore they don't play defense. As for two way players, we have plenty: Marb is a PG/SG (G), TT is a SG/SF/PF, Kurt is a SF/PF/C, same goes for Naser. What we really need is for Lenny to get a clue, and a sense of urgency. The team takes his demeanor on the court. They have started slow almost every game. Mainly because of bad starting lineup. Anderson?????? Why is he a starter???????
The true Knickabocker..........
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
4/15/2004  10:32 AM
two way players meaning they play offense and defense. Thats why Detroit and Indiana are good teams--they have good two way players--thats why they get away with bad shooting nights. we have deke thomas and andersen and to a degree marbury[although i keep seeing him getting blown by] you're right, the coach doesnt seem like he stresses D enough because you can play team D-especially when you can formulate into a semi-zone at times[which would be smart to play aginst the poor shooting Nets] with Deke in the middle.
RIP Crushalot😞
diderotn
Posts: 25657
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/15/2004
Member: #650
USA
4/15/2004  10:49 AM
I don't believe that individual defender is that beneficial to a team. Team D concept is the best approach. However, the coach or bether yet the anchor (Marburry) has to demand it from his team-mates.

I think that this problem was created by the approach of either Isia or Lenny. After the big trade, one of the two should have gone to Marb and immediately promote him to captain. As a Captain, it would be imperative for him to command, or be more voccal on the court.

If I am wrong, please let me know.
The true Knickabocker..........
TheSage
Posts: 21039
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 2/20/2003
Member: #386
4/15/2004  11:18 AM
Good D is usually the product of coaching. Sure you have some teams that had good D because of defensive standouts like Chi with MJ and Pippen but then you had the knicks of the late 60's and 70's with both great individual defenders like Clyde and DeBusshere althought neither of those two were speed merchants and when you combined them with an undersized center and slow footed Bradley you still had great D. How about the Knicks of the 90's with solid players who were were not overly quick but when combined with the right defensive philosophy were a fine defensive team.

Point being that this knick team with good athletes can be a fine defensive squad witht he right defensive system for the personnel on the floor.

[Edited by - TheSage on 04/15/2004 11:20:30]
fishmike
Posts: 53829
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
4/15/2004  11:32 AM
I understand what Briggs is saying and patially agree.

I think a better way to put it is we dont do enough other things well to survive a bad shooting night. When Steph, TT, KT, Nazr and co are hitting their open shots we can win any game. But when he shoot a low % from the field we arent good enough in the other areas to overcome that. Those other areas being defense, rebounding, taking care of the ball, forcing turnovers, blocking shots and getting to the FT line.

The KNicks of the 90s could shoot 39% in a playoff series and win because we would got to the line 25 times, totally dominate the boards and hold the opposition to an even lower FG%.

That being said I still just think we need some time. Memphis won 28 games last year even after Hubie was hired shortly after the start of the season. Look at them now...

I totally disagree about Lenny not being a defensive minded coach. His Hawk teams of the 90s with Steve Smith, Mookie and Deke certainly were not a scoring group. They won 45-50 games each year because they played tough defense.

We have had so much player movement we dont even have a set rotation yet for crying out loud.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
diderotn
Posts: 25657
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 4/15/2004
Member: #650
USA
4/15/2004  2:06 PM
Lenny is not knowned for Defense. Look at his track record if you don't believe me. Recently, his Toronto team was one of the worst in the league, partly because of Vince inability to play d, and partly because of lenny's scheme. For Lenny to have some success defensively, he will have to do one thing, he will need to constantly push on that button. Guys don't respond very well if you don't demand at every possession. A guy like Kobe would have definitely thrive in Lenny's system, but the like of TMac and anticipators like Marb and Vince wouldn't. Some guys would take it upon themselves to play defense, some you have to force them to do that.
The true Knickabocker..........
one real problem i see with this club and personell going forward

©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