dk7th wrote:

nixluva wrote:The Mavs were 22nd in Defensive Efficiency and with Tyson the Knicks were 24th!!! As bad as Jose is and Dalembert is supposed to be such a drop off from Tyson and yet the Mavs were still better defensively. So now we take Jose n Dalembert and they take Felton and Tyson. It will be interesting to see how things work out.

what these ratings don't reflect is the level of dysfunction and the resulting lack of commitment to defense and hustle. tyson is a winning player, a champion, who was surrounded by a bunch of career losers, mostly has beens and never weres. must have been tough to be pissing into the wind and have to come back into a situation where the team went 6-14 in your absence.

Tyson was part of a winning Mavs team and great for him. I don't think the Knicks were run as well and you're right about dysfunction but that's no excuse for how Tyson often behaved. IMO Tyson refused to accept his share of blame which is a character flaw.

Tyson wasn't THE problem but he did have his share of responsibility. He really didn't have to comment on the issue after so much time passed. Just be happy in your return to Dallas and help your new team. But no he had to say something and as usual reject any blame for what went wrong.

dk7th wrote:

nixluva wrote:

dk7th wrote:

nixluva wrote:The Mavs were 22nd in Defensive Efficiency and with Tyson the Knicks were 24th!!! As bad as Jose is and Dalembert is supposed to be such a drop off from Tyson and yet the Mavs were still better defensively. So now we take Jose n Dalembert and they take Felton and Tyson. It will be interesting to see how things work out.

what these ratings don't reflect is the level of dysfunction and the resulting lack of commitment to defense and hustle. tyson is a winning player, a champion, who was surrounded by a bunch of career losers, mostly has beens and never weres. must have been tough to be pissing into the wind and have to come back into a situation where the team went 6-14 in your absence.

Tyson was part of a winning Mavs team and great for him. I don't think the Knicks were run as well and you're right about dysfunction but that's no excuse for how Tyson often behaved. IMO Tyson refused to accept his share of blame which is a character flaw.

Tyson wasn't THE problem but he did have his share of responsibility. He really didn't have to comment on the issue after so much time passed. Just be happy in your return to Dallas and help your new team. But no he had to say something and as usual reject any blame for what went wrong.

i am sorry but i don't know what you are referring to when you say "how he behaved." what did he do or say in an admittedly dysfunctional situation that he is being admonished. i don't mean the comments he responded to questioning his character, i mean the actions and words that he manifested while a knick.

what did he do or say that was wrong? i am asking because i always think of double standards when i think of the knicks, that and cronyism and favoritism.

I think you are both right
In the end, DEF is played with a philosophy/schemes and players/rotations
Tyson didn't play well but he was screwed from the start with Woodson's philosophy, so regardless he was going to get blamed with the help the poor defenders we had that needed help but NO ONE could help Chandler's man if he rotates
Iman Shumpert was playing more minutes at SF and switches on PF more than he actually defended PG's, where he had to bulk up and get stronger vs getting back speed/quickness to the level he was at when he was a "rook"

Woodson's philosophy was flawed from the start but refused to accept it and tried to execute it as if we were the Detroit Pistons under Larry Brown

We did not have the IQ, athleticism, mobility, versatility, Prince in his prime, Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, all being good 1v1 and help defenders, as well as ....
Affalo, Delfino, among many other solid role players that played TEAM ball on both ends

In Dallas, he had Marion who was still a very good help and 1v1 defender that could defend multiple positions
Dirk was very under rated, as well as Barea, Brewer/Peja/Stevenson, and Kidd which had either speed or size

nixluva wrote:Tyson was great his 1st yr in NY but last 2 years he fell off a lot. His defensive rating was 99 in year 1 and then 104 and 106 last 2 yrs. He would often overreact to any contact and draw techs. He didn't always give full effort which is inexcusable given his lack of offensive burden. He openly bitched when that was the last thing we needed from him and refused to accept blame for his lack of effort. IMO he was not the leader and positive force that he was given credit for being. Much was made about the loss of Kidd and Sheed but WE STILL HAD TYSON! What the heck was he doing? He's a vet and supposed leader so what was the deal.

Yea, this is kind of where I am with him. I don't think he was totally god awful in his role as a center and a leader, but he simply wasn't big enough to fill the leadership vacuum that last season. And was Tyson even specifically called out by Phil? I thought it was more a general dig. Chemistry is about the overall mix, not just the individual parts. I think the fact he got rankled by it is very telling about his personality.

But as far as the talking, players no different than workers at a normal job express displeasure when they have seen enough....and I see nothing wrong with that.

Sure Tyson didnt play to his capability in any of the playoffs.....but name any player who has on the team? Is melo's capability low 40's high 30's in shooting and dismal from three in the playoffs?

Sometimes I really do think there are some blatant biases to some and automatic forgiveness for others.

Tyson was signed to anchor a defense on a team that had none at all, so the Knicks failed themselves by signing him in the first place. Only dwight Howard at that time was capable of doing that on a nightly basis.

Tyson certainly filled that role in the first year, and did it in spurts in the second, but what hurt Tyson was three things.....

1) He was a lone man in the water on defense. The first year his second best defnder was a rookie in Shumpert. he had zero help on anightly basis in the second season, and no one played defense at all in the third.

2) Since the team doesnt defend they resorted to a lazy switching strategy which compounded the defensive inepttitude even further.

3) Tyson was physically breaking down and in the third year was also battle problems at home.

Tyson didnt have these worries when he played in Dallas....he was healthy, the defensive system was a solid one...and he had tones of help in marion, stevenson, caron butler sometimes and jason kidd.

This imo set the Knicks back....instead of putting together a formula, they expected guys to indivdually get things done.

Thats not how a team works at all.

nixluva wrote:Tyson was great his 1st yr in NY but last 2 years he fell off a lot. His defensive rating was 99 in year 1 and then 104 and 106 last 2 yrs. He would often overreact to any contact and draw techs. He didn't always give full effort which is inexcusable given his lack of offensive burden. He openly bitched when that was the last thing we needed from him and refused to accept blame for his lack of effort. IMO he was not the leader and positive force that he was given credit for being. Much was made about the loss of Kidd and Sheed but WE STILL HAD TYSON! What the heck was he doing? He's a vet and supposed leader so what was the deal.

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:Tyson was great his 1st yr in NY but last 2 years he fell off a lot. His defensive rating was 99 in year 1 and then 104 and 106 last 2 yrs. He would often overreact to any contact and draw techs. He didn't always give full effort which is inexcusable given his lack of offensive burden. He openly bitched when that was the last thing we needed from him and refused to accept blame for his lack of effort. IMO he was not the leader and positive force that he was given credit for being. Much was made about the loss of Kidd and Sheed but WE STILL HAD TYSON! What the heck was he doing? He's a vet and supposed leader so what was the deal.

Yeah and if you read what the media is reporting in Dallas it sounds like he is at least talking to the media like he is a leader there.

It's fair to say things in NY wore on Tyson and he probably feels liberated and reinvigorated being back in Dallas. I just think he failed to live up to his rep in NY. There are no promises that that things will be easy when you sign a contract. KG toiled in Minny for years and maintained his professionalism and leadership on every stop he's made. No excuse for Tyson when comparing with how KG has handled his role.

knickscity wrote:In honesty tyson would have been best served to get on down when he saw the tables turn....primarily when D'antoni was gone and Woodson took over. the difference in Tyson was very clear at that point.

But as far as the talking, players no different than workers at a normal job express displeasure when they have seen enough....and I see nothing wrong with that.

Sure Tyson didnt play to his capability in any of the playoffs.....but name any player who has on the team? Is melo's capability low 40's high 30's in shooting and dismal from three in the playoffs?

Sometimes I really do think there are some blatant biases to some and automatic forgiveness for others.

Tyson was signed to anchor a defense on a team that had none at all, so the Knicks failed themselves by signing him in the first place. Only dwight Howard at that time was capable of doing that on a nightly basis.

Tyson certainly filled that role in the first year, and did it in spurts in the second, but what hurt Tyson was three things.....

1) He was a lone man in the water on defense. The first year his second best defnder was a rookie in Shumpert. he had zero help on anightly basis in the second season, and no one played defense at all in the third.

2) Since the team doesnt defend they resorted to a lazy switching strategy which compounded the defensive inepttitude even further.

3) Tyson was physically breaking down and in the third year was also battle problems at home.

Tyson didnt have these worries when he played in Dallas....he was healthy, the defensive system was a solid one...and he had tones of help in marion, stevenson, caron butler sometimes and jason kidd.

This imo set the Knicks back....instead of putting together a formula, they expected guys to indivdually get things done.

Thats not how a team works at all.

CrushAlot wrote:

nixluva wrote:Tyson was great his 1st yr in NY but last 2 years he fell off a lot. His defensive rating was 99 in year 1 and then 104 and 106 last 2 yrs. He would often overreact to any contact and draw techs. He didn't always give full effort which is inexcusable given his lack of offensive burden. He openly bitched when that was the last thing we needed from him and refused to accept blame for his lack of effort. IMO he was not the leader and positive force that he was given credit for being. Much was made about the loss of Kidd and Sheed but WE STILL HAD TYSON! What the heck was he doing? He's a vet and supposed leader so what was the deal.

Yeah and if you read what the media is reporting in Dallas it sounds like he is at least talking to the media like he is a leader there.

Maybe because there is an agenda to

Justify acquiring him again from the media

But from his own mouth/////

http://www.mavs.com/mavs-teammates-hope-mimic-dirk-nowitzkis-tireless-work-ethic/

Mavs center Tyson Chandler echoes those sentiments after joining forces with Nowitzki to help lead the franchise to its first championship.

Chandler was recognized as the defensive anchor and heart and soul of that championship squad during his lone season with the Mavs prior to rejoining the team this summer in a six-player trade with New York. But the credit belongs solely with No. 41, Chandler says, after Nowitzki was named the Finals MVP while putting the team and franchise on his back to avenge the lost to the Heat five years prior.

“First of all, I mean, we don’t have enough time on this (radio) show for me to explain the type of respect that I have for Dirk Nowitzki,” Chandler said in a recent interview with 105.3 FM The Fan. “I mean, he and Jason Kidd are the two most incredible teammates I’ve ever been around, as far as two feature Hall of Famers and you would not know it walking into the gym and walking into the practice facility. You know, they’re in every meeting, they’re at every practice, super humble and always passing the credit along. And just the type of guy that, if I were a GM, president or owner, that I would want to start my team with. And he’s given Dallas his everything.

“You know, when I first got here, I remember coming back late at night to try to get a lift in or work on free throws and this and that. And every single time that I got there he was there, putting up shot after shot after shot. And it just shows that, you know, he is never going to settle, he doesn’t want to settle, he only wants to win and he’s willing to do whatever it takes. … You know, a lot was made about what I did and what I accomplished the year that I was there, but he’s the man. And when you have the top dog leading that way, you can’t help but fall in line.”

nixluva wrote:Tyson isn't the same player he was when the Mavs won the title and they don't have as many defensive players either. Not to say they won't improve with Tyson but the Title team was ranked #8 in defense that year and last year they were ranked #22. IMO I doubt one guy makes that much of a difference. If Tyson does then that just underscores how much he underperformed here last year. He can't have it both ways. When he defended great the Knick had a good defense and when he played like Flu Tyson we stunk defensively.

baloney. when you are a dysfunctional and chaotic franchise and team, defense is absolutely the first thing to plummet. one guy in a healthy situation can make a very big difference. so if he does better on the mavs it is indication not how poorly he performed here but how poorly run the knicks were and how much of a black hole the absence of leadership caused. his comments about dirk nowitzki that were just quoted really underscores that point while undermining your opinion.