nixluva wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Melo at the 4 only worked, because we had 2 point guards in the backcourt, and we set a franchise record for 3s that season. Eventually he broke down, sat some games due to the Wests and KG's pounding Melo into submission, then we saw the final outcome in the Indy series.

Forget Melo at the 4, won't work. Traditional lineups worked since the dawn of time. No need to get cute like Golden State, we don't have a Draymond Green or Harrison Barnes or Andre Iguodala that could play multiple positions, defend, pass, and play it all well.

If the 54 win Knicks had some guys like Barnes and Iggy to put alongside Melo and guard guys like Lance Stephenson and Paul George, they could've beaten the Pacers.

I agree with Briggs that Melo is best at the 4. I think Melo at the 4 and Tyson at the 5 was the beginnings of a formula to be very very good. Unfortunately they rarely had any quality guys at the 1, 2, or 3.

54 win season was a mirage. You had Kidd-Felton or Felton- Prigioni, then you had Smith or Shump at the small. They rained 3s and led the league raining 3s. Once that well dried up, they got exposed.

Melo got West'ed and the rest is history. Let's not revisit bad history.

The last two years NBA champions (Spurs and Warriors) led the league in 3pt%. Raining threes is a pretty good way to win in the NBA.

Spurs move the ball around for good looks...GS has Curry and Thompson.

If you are talking about shooting % you are talking about taking good shots or having players who are better at shooting the 3...No?

By the way, 15 other teams shot more 3s than the champion SA Spurs two years ago...one being the Knicks, who took the 5 most in the league and were well above the league average in %. I guess the raining thing doesn't always work.

Defending against them is also important- The Knicks were also the worst in the league in terms of 3pt% against, GS was the 5th best.

Yeah the key is to be efficient on both ends. PERIOD. Doesn't really matter if you aren't the top 3pt shooting team. If you're one of the top efficient teams that's what matters most. Phil wants his team to be versatile and playoff capable. You don't want teams to be able to take away the 3 and that's pretty much all they need to stop you. This team will be able to score inside as well and not just from midrange or from 3. We should be able to draw a lot of fouls and get to the line a lot. Hopefully we can get some shot blocks and get easy transition points.

Nobody cares if you shoot 3's or dunk every play, you need to score efficiently. The 2 most efficient shots are are 0-3 feet and behind the arc. If you are shooting too many shots not in those areas, you probably will be inefficient.

The spurs are a bit of an exception because Parker can't shoot 3's and neither can duncan. They do however shoot way above average and efficiently in the mid range areas which is an exception. If you can shoot at an efficient level in the mid range then I am all for it but very very few players are efficient shooting from there so it is best to design offenses to avoid those shots.

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Playing Melo at the 4 goes against everything they have done to this roster and how to run the triangle effectively. Did you see how slim Melo is? His upper body is more like Kobe than the body of a player who is ready to taking a beating from opposing 4's. And I'm sure it's not by accident. Melo role as the primary scorer in this offense will be the same as Kobe & Jordan's role. He had to commit to bring in superior shape for it to work and so far he has. Hopefully it continues as the season progresses

So Me70 isn't really fat? Or are you just being sarcasnarky?

Either we're going to hear about how Melo can't play 4 because bully bull wears him down, or he's going to be eaten alive trying to guard threes on the wings. Can't wait for this season to start already...

I never said Melo Will play great Defense at the 3. At least he won't take the pounding he get at the 4

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Melo at the 4 only worked, because we had 2 point guards in the backcourt, and we set a franchise record for 3s that season. Eventually he broke down, sat some games due to the Wests and KG's pounding Melo into submission, then we saw the final outcome in the Indy series.

Forget Melo at the 4, won't work. Traditional lineups worked since the dawn of time. No need to get cute like Golden State, we don't have a Draymond Green or Harrison Barnes or Andre Iguodala that could play multiple positions, defend, pass, and play it all well.

If the 54 win Knicks had some guys like Barnes and Iggy to put alongside Melo and guard guys like Lance Stephenson and Paul George, they could've beaten the Pacers.

I agree with Briggs that Melo is best at the 4. I think Melo at the 4 and Tyson at the 5 was the beginnings of a formula to be very very good. Unfortunately they rarely had any quality guys at the 1, 2, or 3.

54 win season was a mirage. You had Kidd-Felton or Felton- Prigioni, then you had Smith or Shump at the small. They rained 3s and led the league raining 3s. Once that well dried up, they got exposed.

Melo got West'ed and the rest is history. Let's not revisit bad history.

The last two years NBA champions (Spurs and Warriors) led the league in 3pt%. Raining threes is a pretty good way to win in the NBA.

Spurs move the ball around for good looks...GS has Curry and Thompson.

If you are talking about shooting % you are talking about taking good shots or having players who are better at shooting the 3...No?

By the way, 15 other teams shot more 3s than the champion SA Spurs two years ago...one being the Knicks, who took the 5 most in the league and were well above the league average in %. I guess the raining thing doesn't always work.

Defending against them is also important- The Knicks were also the worst in the league in terms of 3pt% against, GS was the 5th best.

Yeah the key is to be efficient on both ends. PERIOD. Doesn't really matter if you aren't the top 3pt shooting team. If you're one of the top efficient teams that's what matters most. Phil wants his team to be versatile and playoff capable. You don't want teams to be able to take away the 3 and that's pretty much all they need to stop you. This team will be able to score inside as well and not just from midrange or from 3. We should be able to draw a lot of fouls and get to the line a lot. Hopefully we can get some shot blocks and get easy transition points.

Nobody cares if you shoot 3's or dunk every play, you need to score efficiently. The 2 most efficient shots are are 0-3 feet and behind the arc. If you are shooting too many shots not in those areas, you probably will be inefficient.

The spurs are a bit of an exception because Parker can't shoot 3's and neither can duncan. They do however shoot way above average and efficiently in the mid range areas which is an exception. If you can shoot at an efficient level in the mid range then I am all for it but very very few players are efficient shooting from there so it is best to design offenses to avoid those shots.

Phil obviously looks for players that are efficient from midrange, but also he wants players that can post up and also get to the rim. No matter how you slice it, if your team plays efficiently it doesn't matter what percentage of your shots come from 3pt range. You're either Efficient or you're not. Phil's teams have been efficient playing the Triangle so the offense isn't the problem in terms of efficiency. This team will be able to get 3's. It's really up to the players how many they take. There are always players on the perimeter in this offense so if the ball is moving there will be open 3's.

the proof will be in the pudding. They will either take efficient shots or they wont.

Philly won't take inefficient shots no matter how bad they are since that is not the way the game is played anymore. Sh1t shots are being removed from most systems.

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:Melo at the 4 only worked, because we had 2 point guards in the backcourt, and we set a franchise record for 3s that season. Eventually he broke down, sat some games due to the Wests and KG's pounding Melo into submission, then we saw the final outcome in the Indy series.

Forget Melo at the 4, won't work. Traditional lineups worked since the dawn of time. No need to get cute like Golden State, we don't have a Draymond Green or Harrison Barnes or Andre Iguodala that could play multiple positions, defend, pass, and play it all well.

If the 54 win Knicks had some guys like Barnes and Iggy to put alongside Melo and guard guys like Lance Stephenson and Paul George, they could've beaten the Pacers.

I agree with Briggs that Melo is best at the 4. I think Melo at the 4 and Tyson at the 5 was the beginnings of a formula to be very very good. Unfortunately they rarely had any quality guys at the 1, 2, or 3.

54 win season was a mirage. You had Kidd-Felton or Felton- Prigioni, then you had Smith or Shump at the small. They rained 3s and led the league raining 3s. Once that well dried up, they got exposed.

Melo got West'ed and the rest is history. Let's not revisit bad history.

The last two years NBA champions (Spurs and Warriors) led the league in 3pt%. Raining threes is a pretty good way to win in the NBA.

Spurs move the ball around for good looks...GS has Curry and Thompson.

If you are talking about shooting % you are talking about taking good shots or having players who are better at shooting the 3...No?

By the way, 15 other teams shot more 3s than the champion SA Spurs two years ago...one being the Knicks, who took the 5 most in the league and were well above the league average in %. I guess the raining thing doesn't always work.

Defending against them is also important- The Knicks were also the worst in the league in terms of 3pt% against, GS was the 5th best.

Yeah the key is to be efficient on both ends. PERIOD. Doesn't really matter if you aren't the top 3pt shooting team. If you're one of the top efficient teams that's what matters most. Phil wants his team to be versatile and playoff capable. You don't want teams to be able to take away the 3 and that's pretty much all they need to stop you. This team will be able to score inside as well and not just from midrange or from 3. We should be able to draw a lot of fouls and get to the line a lot. Hopefully we can get some shot blocks and get easy transition points.

Nobody cares if you shoot 3's or dunk every play, you need to score efficiently. The 2 most efficient shots are are 0-3 feet and behind the arc. If you are shooting too many shots not in those areas, you probably will be inefficient.

The spurs are a bit of an exception because Parker can't shoot 3's and neither can duncan. They do however shoot way above average and efficiently in the mid range areas which is an exception. If you can shoot at an efficient level in the mid range then I am all for it but very very few players are efficient shooting from there so it is best to design offenses to avoid those shots.

Phil obviously looks for players that are efficient from midrange, but also he wants players that can post up and also get to the rim. No matter how you slice it, if your team plays efficiently it doesn't matter what percentage of your shots come from 3pt range. You're either Efficient or you're not. Phil's teams have been efficient playing the Triangle so the offense isn't the problem in terms of efficiency. This team will be able to get 3's. It's really up to the players how many they take. There are always players on the perimeter in this offense so if the ball is moving there will be open 3's.

the proof will be in the pudding. They will either take efficient shots or they wont.

Philly won't take inefficient shots no matter how bad they are since that is not the way the game is played anymore. Sh1t shots are being removed from most systems.

You talking about Philly? Who cares what they do? Taking away the midrange doesn't necessarily make a team better. IMO it makes the team more predictable than if you have a balanced attack that features ALL areas of the floor. If you face a 3pt shooting team and can take away the 3pt shot then you will see that team struggle. Meanwhile the Knicks don't rely on any one thing. This style is playoff ready. Don't make the mistake of thinking how they played last year is the real Triangle offense. That was not how it's supposed to be done.

this is the way NBA is going ... listen to the announcers who said it 10 times. Teams will be looking for 3's and layups. Lots of drives and kicks. Teams will look to eliminate the mid range. Many teams are doing this already.

Again, if we are the team left that is taking lots of those inefficient shots then that will not be good.

TPercy wrote:Absoultely not. am I the only person who is seriously concerned about our terrible depth at the 3 position??

We have

Early
Derrick Williams
Lance Thomas.

These guys are borderline NBA players never mind being rotation players. We need to hopefully pull a trade off that could strengthen our depth at that position.

positions are becoming less and less important. Guys get moved around all over the place.

martin wrote:

TPercy wrote:Absoultely not. am I the only person who is seriously concerned about our terrible depth at the 3 position??

We have

Early
Derrick Williams
Lance Thomas.

These guys are borderline NBA players never mind being rotation players. We need to hopefully pull a trade off that could strengthen our depth at that position.

I'm guessing that AA and Sasha will play 3 in certain lineups. Knicks got a **** ton of bigs, so 3 guard lineup will be AOK.

gunsnewing wrote:I don't know what the problem is. Derrick Williams is a heck of a backup SF who can start at SF for a lot of teams. Ideally you want to limit Melo's minutes but he will still play around 34-35mins per game. If Melo were to miss any significant time than Derrick is more than adequate as a temporary replacement and maybe he plays great. He really improved late last season. It's not like you are replacing Melo with Ronnie Brewer or Billy Walker. Even Lance Thomas is a nice stop gap replacement. He vines you the occasion 15pt game

fishmike wrote:honestly this doesnt matter in the NBA anymore, there is a blend between 1/2 and 3/4. At this point your a guard, a forward or a center, or even a PF/C. The days of guys being set and only playing 1 spot are over. That NBA is gone. The shift has been happening for awhile and GS last year made it crystal clear. Its all give and take. Melo can play and will play both forward spots.

It all comes down to talent and who is healthy..If Grizzlies had a healthy Tony Allen and Conley the outcome could have been much different against GS..Same for KLove and Irving..Spurs will be running a near traditional lineup, you think they are doomed to fail?..Its roster talent..

TPercy wrote:

mreinman wrote:

TPercy wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:I don't know what the problem is. Derrick Williams is a heck of a backup SF who can start at SF for a lot of teams. Ideally you want to limit Melo's minutes but he will still play around 34-35mins per game. If Melo were to miss any significant time than Derrick is more than adequate as a temporary replacement and maybe he plays great. He really improved late last season. It's not like you are replacing Melo with Ronnie Brewer or Billy Walker. Even Lance Thomas is a nice stop gap replacement. He vines you the occasion 15pt game

Derrick Williams is not a "heck of a back up SF". He is barely an NBA player. The guy litterally sucks at almost everything.

leave guns alone he lost shump :-)

Hehe, I get that Dwill is his mans and he has high hopes for him. We all have our favorites on the roster who suck but we love them so much that it is hard for us to admit the truth about them(how much i liked Calderon during his career and Ricky Ledo)

That being said, we all know about how much potential Derrick Williams had coming into the NBA, but it is far far from showing. When Phil signed him, I felt as if he took 5 million of cap space and set it on fire. He needs to prove to us that he deserves to be a rotational player here and that he has what it takes to change his game. Until then, we are still relatively screwed when it comes to the amount of guys who can play the 3 position reliably.

It isn't as bad as you're making it out to be IMO. This roster has enough flexibility in it to be fine at SF behind Melo. We've gotta allow time for new players to get more comfortable and the team as a whole to develop some more chemistry.

DWill has a long way to go in terms of improving his BB IQ. Still there are gonna be TONS of easy baskets for him in this offense once his teammates start to look for him cutting and lurking when his man is out of position. I'm not expecting miracles with DWill. Just need him to give effort and make some gradual improvement.

Early looks ready to contribute IMO. These guys aren't gonna be perfect but if they can make solid contributions then that should be enough. Guys have to find a comfort level and niche. That's gonna take a look at little more time than one game.