The chemistry and spacing issue is still unanswered.

I think we go to ECF's and with Miami vulnerable who knows? But I think we get by Indy.

Melo would not have as much wear and tear and maybe he don't lead the league in scoring, but thats ok.

smackeddog wrote:If JR, Tyson and Melo were healthy in the playoffs we would have beaten the Pacers even without Amar'e. though I've noticed history has been re-written to make out the Pacers were vastly superior to us. And all that 'straight up' nonsense about Hibbert has been forgotten too. The fact is the nba blatantly change the way the game is called to make Hibbert into a star- it was pathetic!

so what if george hill were healthy, and what if granger was healthy and playing?

pacers were just better, bigger, stronger, faster, younger.... the end...

Also the pieces to that team fit.. a healthy amare is still oil and water with carmelo.... doesn't really matter if they are healthy, they both were healthy vs boston a couple of years ago and we damn near got swept...

pacers have a very good TEAM... that is on the rise.... they didn't win because we had injuries, they had injuries as well. they won because they are built better with better pieces and their best player George is the best all around player in the series and he impacts both ends, pretty much a game changer..

franco12 wrote:we were an over rated 54 win team. Meaning we weren't as good as our record.

We got off to a fast start- but a month or two in, when Kidd stopped being effective, we essentially became a 500 team.

smackeddog wrote:

tkf wrote:

smackeddog wrote:If JR, Tyson and Melo were healthy in the playoffs we would have beaten the Pacers even without Amar'e. though I've noticed history has been re-written to make out the Pacers were vastly superior to us. And all that 'straight up' nonsense about Hibbert has been forgotten too. The fact is the nba blatantly change the way the game is called to make Hibbert into a star- it was pathetic!

so what if george hill were healthy, and what if granger was healthy and playing?

pacers were just better, bigger, stronger, faster, younger.... the end...

Also the pieces to that team fit.. a healthy amare is still oil and water with carmelo.... doesn't really matter if they are healthy, they both were healthy vs boston a couple of years ago and we damn near got swept...

pacers have a very good TEAM... that is on the rise.... they didn't win because we had injuries, they had injuries as well. they won because they are built better with better pieces and their best player George is the best all around player in the series and he impacts both ends, pretty much a game changer..

Granger takes minutes from Paul George (who is a much better player)- a healthy Granger would have meant poorer defense and more chucking. Pacers are a good team, and I like their defense, but I still think we could have beaten them if healthy.

This Melo/Amar'e talk was relevant 2 years ago. Now Amar'e is a bench player (20mins if that) and has a post game- it's not an issue anymore.

This myth that the Pacers were light years ahead of us, simply wasn't true- we had a better season record, and our series was pretty close considering our main players were ailing.

they beat us because we live and die by 3 pointers and they were #1 against that. then there's hibbert.

the end.

the way to beat them is to shoot well in the midrange and that means a good pick and roll game with good step-back jumpshooters.

knicks didn't have a single play featuring a step-back jumper.

the end.

CrushAlot wrote:

franco12 wrote:we were an over rated 54 win team. Meaning we weren't as good as our record.

We got off to a fast start- but a month or two in, when Kidd stopped being effective, we essentially became a 500 team.

I disagree. The Knicks had so many injuries that they overcame and needed a big run down the stretch to clinch the Atlantic and get the second seed.

who under forty and without a history of injuries (Amar'e) was out for us? You fill roster spots with guys on the wrong side of 40, you end up with injuries.

Now - what did hurt us in the play offs was JR and Melo both getting hurt- though I think we would have lost to Indiana anyway as I think we were exposed for being too simplistic and shallow talent wise - I mean, once you stopped Melo, who was our threat? JR who was more likely to shoot 4 for 20 as he would be 14 for 20?

franco12 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

franco12 wrote:we were an over rated 54 win team. Meaning we weren't as good as our record.

We got off to a fast start- but a month or two in, when Kidd stopped being effective, we essentially became a 500 team.

I disagree. The Knicks had so many injuries that they overcame and needed a big run down the stretch to clinch the Atlantic and get the second seed.

who under forty and without a history of injuries (Amar'e) was out for us? You fill roster spots with guys on the wrong side of 40, you end up with injuries.

Now - what did hurt us in the play offs was JR and Melo both getting hurt- though I think we would have lost to Indiana anyway as I think we were exposed for being too simplistic and shallow talent wise - I mean, once you stopped Melo, who was our threat? JR who was more likely to shoot 4 for 20 as he would be 14 for 20?

CrushAlot wrote:

franco12 wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

franco12 wrote:we were an over rated 54 win team. Meaning we weren't as good as our record.

We got off to a fast start- but a month or two in, when Kidd stopped being effective, we essentially became a 500 team.

I disagree. The Knicks had so many injuries that they overcame and needed a big run down the stretch to clinch the Atlantic and get the second seed.

who under forty and without a history of injuries (Amar'e) was out for us? You fill roster spots with guys on the wrong side of 40, you end up with injuries.

Now - what did hurt us in the play offs was JR and Melo both getting hurt- though I think we would have lost to Indiana anyway as I think we were exposed for being too simplistic and shallow talent wise - I mean, once you stopped Melo, who was our threat? JR who was more likely to shoot 4 for 20 as he would be 14 for 20?

Your complaint is with the roster. Guys were hurt. Tyson was hurt and sick. Melo, Tyson and JR essentially were the big three last year for the Knicks. Shump was erratic and coming back from injury. As you said, Amare's health will always be an issue. Hopefully the age of the guys on the roster was addressed. Metta, Bargs and Beno in the rotation and a full year of Shump with a training camp should help a lot.

Excuses, excuses, excuses...
How about take the responsibility and look at the reasons we are the 5th team in the East at best?
How team can improve if we have all cool already?