SupremeCommander wrote:Sac, LA, Phx, GS and Den in that order... lots of airmiles...

We all know the Knicks have stunk on the road. I think I saw their record in fishmike's thread, which blew me away because they are really bad on the road. I am really looking forward to seeing how the Knicks matchup with Cleveland because I do think the team is starting to play better. All that said I really think this coming roadtrip will tell us a lot about this year's team

We dont match up well with Cleveland making everything that happens this season just a long waste of time

Jmpasq wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:Sac, LA, Phx, GS and Den in that order... lots of airmiles...

We all know the Knicks have stunk on the road. I think I saw their record in fishmike's thread, which blew me away because they are really bad on the road. I am really looking forward to seeing how the Knicks matchup with Cleveland because I do think the team is starting to play better. All that said I really think this coming roadtrip will tell us a lot about this year's team

We dont match up well with Cleveland making everything that happens this season just a long waste of time

while I don't exactly disagree, I think how this season goes will have a huge impact on the next 2 to 5 years. Next season might be the first season in quite some time where we watch the same roster for two consecutive seasons

Jmpasq wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:Sac, LA, Phx, GS and Den in that order... lots of airmiles...

We all know the Knicks have stunk on the road. I think I saw their record in fishmike's thread, which blew me away because they are really bad on the road. I am really looking forward to seeing how the Knicks matchup with Cleveland because I do think the team is starting to play better. All that said I really think this coming roadtrip will tell us a lot about this year's team

We dont match up well with Cleveland making everything that happens this season just a long waste of time

Why post if there's already another stupid thread about this very topic?
Why play basketball if you can't tomahawk jam?
Why shoot if the ball doesn't go in everytime?

Why bother asking about the difference between castration and emasculation? [you'll have to read the thread to get the context here]

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:I know it doesn't set a good precedent but I'd think about sitting Melo, KP, Rose during the GS game.

to what end?

same as Spurs and other teams

When you have a team that you know is going to be 30 games over .500 you can afford to roll the dice on a few games to rest players. Plus the Spurs last year had a 39 year old Duncan, 38 year old Manu, and a 33 year old Parker, all with a ton of playoff miles on their bodies.

Just because the Spurs do it doesn't mean it's a situation that's appropriate for every team.

martin wrote:Hypothetical: Let's say the Knicks win on the road against Sac, Lakers, Suns. Lots of minutes for the starters.

Today, KP is averaging about 36.5 minutes per over the last 3 weeks. Melo lost his shot and found it and Rose just sat the end of the game with back spasms. Let's say that trend kinda, sorta continues but the Knicks still get 3 wins. Sit those 3 against GS and the big 3 get 3 full days off before the last game of the road trip against the Nuggets and 2 additional days rest after. Maybe on those off days instead of doing nothing you put in more than average practices. Is that worth it in the big picture?

Just food for thought.

So we need to blow off the GS game to prepare for the 9-15 Nuggets? To me, beating the Warriors on the road would do more for this team than tanking for the purpose of "rest." Now if GS is blowing us out, by all means shut 'em down early. But the Knicks need to establish a culture of competing first before we consider resting people. Heck, it was just a few weeks ago this team couldn't get off to a decent start on the road and blew very winnable games to Charlotte and Washington.

We're not good enough at this point to considering resting players a la the championship contending Spurs.

Its a good hypothetical to discuss "resting" especially if you have championshp aspirations and talent in line with those aspirations.

No doubt even a close game would be beneficial even if a loss for the team to "feel" it can compete at an elite level even if for some parts of the game.
Knicks know they are a mid level team now and are closing out their lessor opponents well.
Blow outs suck.
Nobody is able to handle the Warriors but perhaps SAS and Cleveland. Im thinking you have to go big on them and beat them up a bit.
Our front line could give them trouble.

http://nypost.com/2016/12/12/hornaceks-knicks-offense-has-scrapped-phils-triangle-walton/

They are off to the franchise’s first 2-0 start to a five-game trip since 2003. They haven’t begun 3-0 on a five-game road trip since 1974.

Nalod wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:I know it doesn't set a good precedent but I'd think about sitting Melo, KP, Rose during the GS game.

to what end?

same as Spurs and other teams

When you have a team that you know is going to be 30 games over .500 you can afford to roll the dice on a few games to rest players. Plus the Spurs last year had a 39 year old Duncan, 38 year old Manu, and a 33 year old Parker, all with a ton of playoff miles on their bodies.

Just because the Spurs do it doesn't mean it's a situation that's appropriate for every team.

martin wrote:Hypothetical: Let's say the Knicks win on the road against Sac, Lakers, Suns. Lots of minutes for the starters.

Today, KP is averaging about 36.5 minutes per over the last 3 weeks. Melo lost his shot and found it and Rose just sat the end of the game with back spasms. Let's say that trend kinda, sorta continues but the Knicks still get 3 wins. Sit those 3 against GS and the big 3 get 3 full days off before the last game of the road trip against the Nuggets and 2 additional days rest after. Maybe on those off days instead of doing nothing you put in more than average practices. Is that worth it in the big picture?

Just food for thought.

So we need to blow off the GS game to prepare for the 9-15 Nuggets? To me, beating the Warriors on the road would do more for this team than tanking for the purpose of "rest." Now if GS is blowing us out, by all means shut 'em down early. But the Knicks need to establish a culture of competing first before we consider resting people. Heck, it was just a few weeks ago this team couldn't get off to a decent start on the road and blew very winnable games to Charlotte and Washington.

We're not good enough at this point to considering resting players a la the championship contending Spurs.

Its a good hypothetical to discuss "resting" especially if you have championshp aspirations and talent in line with those aspirations.

No doubt even a close game would be beneficial even if a loss for the team to "feel" it can compete at an elite level even if for some parts of the game.
Knicks know they are a mid level team now and are closing out their lessor opponents well.
Blow outs suck.
Nobody is able to handle the Warriors but perhaps SAS and Cleveland. Im thinking you have to go big on them and beat them up a bit.
Our front line could give them trouble.

A bunch of teams won rings NOT running the triangle. A bunch of teams won rings NOT resting players in the middle of the season. A bunch of teams won rings NOT launching 3s like the Warriors. Just because Pop does it doesn't mean it's good for everybody.

Between people wanting to tank seasons and write off difficult road games to "rest" players, all I can do is shake my head.

martin wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:I know it doesn't set a good precedent but I'd think about sitting Melo, KP, Rose during the GS game.

to what end?

same as Spurs and other teams

When you have a team that you know is going to be 30 games over .500 you can afford to roll the dice on a few games to rest players. Plus the Spurs last year had a 39 year old Duncan, 38 year old Manu, and a 33 year old Parker, all with a ton of playoff miles on their bodies.

Just because the Spurs do it doesn't mean it's a situation that's appropriate for every team.

martin wrote:Hypothetical: Let's say the Knicks win on the road against Sac, Lakers, Suns. Lots of minutes for the starters.

Today, KP is averaging about 36.5 minutes per over the last 3 weeks. Melo lost his shot and found it and Rose just sat the end of the game with back spasms. Let's say that trend kinda, sorta continues but the Knicks still get 3 wins. Sit those 3 against GS and the big 3 get 3 full days off before the last game of the road trip against the Nuggets and 2 additional days rest after. Maybe on those off days instead of doing nothing you put in more than average practices. Is that worth it in the big picture?

Just food for thought.

So we need to blow off the GS game to prepare for the 9-15 Nuggets? To me, beating the Warriors on the road would do more for this team than tanking for the purpose of "rest." Now if GS is blowing us out, by all means shut 'em down early. But the Knicks need to establish a culture of competing first before we consider resting people. Heck, it was just a few weeks ago this team couldn't get off to a decent start on the road and blew very winnable games to Charlotte and Washington.

We're not good enough at this point to considering resting players a la the championship contending Spurs.

Its a good hypothetical to discuss "resting" especially if you have championshp aspirations and talent in line with those aspirations.

No doubt even a close game would be beneficial even if a loss for the team to "feel" it can compete at an elite level even if for some parts of the game.
Knicks know they are a mid level team now and are closing out their lessor opponents well.
Blow outs suck.
Nobody is able to handle the Warriors but perhaps SAS and Cleveland. Im thinking you have to go big on them and beat them up a bit.
Our front line could give them trouble.

Resting has become en vogue because the Popovich does it. Is there any evidence that resting is effective across the board for all teams? It's like the west coast offense, worked beautifully for the 49ers in the 80s so everyone tried to adopt it and it didn't really work as well for the copy cats.

A bunch of teams won rings NOT running the triangle. A bunch of teams won rings NOT resting players in the middle of the season. A bunch of teams won rings NOT launching 3s like the Warriors. Just because Pop does it doesn't mean it's good for everybody.

Between people wanting to tank seasons and write off difficult road games to "rest" players, all I can do is shake my head.

I'm the opposite. I think resting is effective long term and especially for those players watching an injury or injury history or say over 25. For me that's like questioning whether stretching is really a proven science.

In what way?

Stretching has essentially been scientifically debunked as preventing injury and in fact is widely agreed to be slightly counterproductive.

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:I know it doesn't set a good precedent but I'd think about sitting Melo, KP, Rose during the GS game.

to what end?

same as Spurs and other teams

When you have a team that you know is going to be 30 games over .500 you can afford to roll the dice on a few games to rest players. Plus the Spurs last year had a 39 year old Duncan, 38 year old Manu, and a 33 year old Parker, all with a ton of playoff miles on their bodies.

Just because the Spurs do it doesn't mean it's a situation that's appropriate for every team.

martin wrote:Hypothetical: Let's say the Knicks win on the road against Sac, Lakers, Suns. Lots of minutes for the starters.

Today, KP is averaging about 36.5 minutes per over the last 3 weeks. Melo lost his shot and found it and Rose just sat the end of the game with back spasms. Let's say that trend kinda, sorta continues but the Knicks still get 3 wins. Sit those 3 against GS and the big 3 get 3 full days off before the last game of the road trip against the Nuggets and 2 additional days rest after. Maybe on those off days instead of doing nothing you put in more than average practices. Is that worth it in the big picture?

Just food for thought.

So we need to blow off the GS game to prepare for the 9-15 Nuggets? To me, beating the Warriors on the road would do more for this team than tanking for the purpose of "rest." Now if GS is blowing us out, by all means shut 'em down early. But the Knicks need to establish a culture of competing first before we consider resting people. Heck, it was just a few weeks ago this team couldn't get off to a decent start on the road and blew very winnable games to Charlotte and Washington.

We're not good enough at this point to considering resting players a la the championship contending Spurs.

Its a good hypothetical to discuss "resting" especially if you have championshp aspirations and talent in line with those aspirations.

No doubt even a close game would be beneficial even if a loss for the team to "feel" it can compete at an elite level even if for some parts of the game.
Knicks know they are a mid level team now and are closing out their lessor opponents well.
Blow outs suck.
Nobody is able to handle the Warriors but perhaps SAS and Cleveland. Im thinking you have to go big on them and beat them up a bit.
Our front line could give them trouble.

Resting has become en vogue because the Popovich does it. Is there any evidence that resting is effective across the board for all teams? It's like the west coast offense, worked beautifully for the 49ers in the 80s so everyone tried to adopt it and it didn't really work as well for the copy cats.

A bunch of teams won rings NOT running the triangle. A bunch of teams won rings NOT resting players in the middle of the season. A bunch of teams won rings NOT launching 3s like the Warriors. Just because Pop does it doesn't mean it's good for everybody.

Between people wanting to tank seasons and write off difficult road games to "rest" players, all I can do is shake my head.

I'm the opposite. I think resting is effective long term and especially for those players watching an injury or injury history or say over 25. For me that's like questioning whether stretching is really a proven science.

In what way?

Stretching has essentially been scientifically debunked as preventing injury and in fact is widely agreed to be slightly counterproductive.

you're missing the point, right?

No, I'm asking because I'm not sure if I understood the point.

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Welpee wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Welpee wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:I know it doesn't set a good precedent but I'd think about sitting Melo, KP, Rose during the GS game.

to what end?

same as Spurs and other teams

When you have a team that you know is going to be 30 games over .500 you can afford to roll the dice on a few games to rest players. Plus the Spurs last year had a 39 year old Duncan, 38 year old Manu, and a 33 year old Parker, all with a ton of playoff miles on their bodies.

Just because the Spurs do it doesn't mean it's a situation that's appropriate for every team.

martin wrote:Hypothetical: Let's say the Knicks win on the road against Sac, Lakers, Suns. Lots of minutes for the starters.

Today, KP is averaging about 36.5 minutes per over the last 3 weeks. Melo lost his shot and found it and Rose just sat the end of the game with back spasms. Let's say that trend kinda, sorta continues but the Knicks still get 3 wins. Sit those 3 against GS and the big 3 get 3 full days off before the last game of the road trip against the Nuggets and 2 additional days rest after. Maybe on those off days instead of doing nothing you put in more than average practices. Is that worth it in the big picture?

Just food for thought.

So we need to blow off the GS game to prepare for the 9-15 Nuggets? To me, beating the Warriors on the road would do more for this team than tanking for the purpose of "rest." Now if GS is blowing us out, by all means shut 'em down early. But the Knicks need to establish a culture of competing first before we consider resting people. Heck, it was just a few weeks ago this team couldn't get off to a decent start on the road and blew very winnable games to Charlotte and Washington.

We're not good enough at this point to considering resting players a la the championship contending Spurs.

Its a good hypothetical to discuss "resting" especially if you have championshp aspirations and talent in line with those aspirations.

No doubt even a close game would be beneficial even if a loss for the team to "feel" it can compete at an elite level even if for some parts of the game.
Knicks know they are a mid level team now and are closing out their lessor opponents well.
Blow outs suck.
Nobody is able to handle the Warriors but perhaps SAS and Cleveland. Im thinking you have to go big on them and beat them up a bit.
Our front line could give them trouble.

Resting has become en vogue because the Popovich does it. Is there any evidence that resting is effective across the board for all teams? It's like the west coast offense, worked beautifully for the 49ers in the 80s so everyone tried to adopt it and it didn't really work as well for the copy cats.

A bunch of teams won rings NOT running the triangle. A bunch of teams won rings NOT resting players in the middle of the season. A bunch of teams won rings NOT launching 3s like the Warriors. Just because Pop does it doesn't mean it's good for everybody.

Between people wanting to tank seasons and write off difficult road games to "rest" players, all I can do is shake my head.

I'm the opposite. I think resting is effective long term and especially for those players watching an injury or injury history or say over 25. For me that's like questioning whether stretching is really a proven science.

In what way?

Stretching has essentially been scientifically debunked as preventing injury and in fact is widely agreed to be slightly counterproductive.

Cold stretching not productive. That's microtearing that can lead to trouble. get warmed up, then stretch. Time consuming for sure.