nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Can someone show me any evidence to the young players playing better to close the season?

Did you watch the games or not??? If you did watch then you don't need any more evidence that the younger players were showing some growth. Like Phil said they didn't have enough talent to get wins but they were doing the right things. Also KP missed games down the stretch.

Next season the team could have a fresh new start without the resistant presence of Melo hovering like a dark cloud. I'm praying that a deal can be made to get Melo out cuz I don't think he's worth the hassle and he's not a positive influence.

So your answer is no? Okay, Just say no we are supposed to go by the eye test.

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Can someone show me any evidence to the young players playing better to close the season?

Did you watch the games or not??? If you did watch then you don't need any more evidence that the younger players were showing some growth. Like Phil said they didn't have enough talent to get wins but they were doing the right things. Also KP missed games down the stretch.

Next season the team could have a fresh new start without the resistant presence of Melo hovering like a dark cloud. I'm praying that a deal can be made to get Melo out cuz I don't think he's worth the hassle and he's not a positive influence.

So your answer is no? Okay, Just say no we are supposed to go by the eye test.

You are clearly not paying attention if you think the younger players didn't show some growth. Besides what is your point anyway??? What are you trying to get at without actually saying anything?

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Can someone show me any evidence to the young players playing better to close the season?

Did you watch the games or not??? If you did watch then you don't need any more evidence that the younger players were showing some growth. Like Phil said they didn't have enough talent to get wins but they were doing the right things. Also KP missed games down the stretch.

Next season the team could have a fresh new start without the resistant presence of Melo hovering like a dark cloud. I'm praying that a deal can be made to get Melo out cuz I don't think he's worth the hassle and he's not a positive influence.

So your answer is no? Okay, Just say no we are supposed to go by the eye test.

You are clearly not paying attention if you think the younger players didn't show some growth. Besides what is your point anyway??? What are you trying to get at without actually saying anything?

It's a pretty straightforward question is there any evidence that the young his were playing better? Did they shoot better or grab more boards/ast per 36? Did their off/def rtg improve or maybe their +/- got better.

A number of the young guys played to near or career highs. many were playing double-double or near double-double games. TV analysts expressed a lot of love for Hernangomez. Phil talks glowingly about baker, Randle, Hernangomez, KP, O'Quinn.

What's not to like? Oh, empty stats like melo's? Yeah, in that case, you're right. The kids stink.

He was spot on about where the disconnect was from, and that there was resistence. He was also spot on that we played completely different with less talent but better defense when guys like Ron Baker were running through screens and playing hard on D. He's a great basketball mind. He knows the game. He is also clearly seeing that he is best as a mentor and not a day to day GM.

Our biggest weakness was defense and Phil clearly sees that.

Other things he saw that I as a fan who watched almost every minute this season saw

1- Melo holds the ball too long, but is a great scorer.
2- KP/Melo/Rose are all scorers. Not defensive minded. They all flow with their offense. It was bad chemistry. Need more defensive minded players around one of them and a leader
3- Ron Baker is our best defender at point and really helps the way we defend even though talent wise we are lacking with someone like him starting. He sets the right tone on both ends.
4- Horny is an inexperienced coach. He needs to develop and Phil needs to help him. I don't think Horanchek gets it yet.
5- Rose is a great scorer, but not a point that can organize the offense. Rose can be a good scorer in the Tri or any offense but needs to play the 2 with someone else playing the 1 duties.
6- KP is not ready to carry a franchise.

I think Phil clearly sees the problems. Which is very important. Now not sure if he will make the right moves, but he does see the same things I do, so I can't complain about his PC. He didn't blame Melo for all the problems, but is being honest. Players like Melo and what NY is trying to do don't mesh. He also made a great tanking comparison. The Bulls tanked hard in 99-00, 00-01 and wound up with Tyson Chandler/Eddy Curry. They've had so many great picks since and still not gotten back to where they were. They thought tanking was the right way, instead of competitive rebuilding and it has not shown to work.

nyknickzingis wrote:Oh and Phil clearly sees the change in the game. It's a guard game. He also says that when he was coaching defending transition was the key element. Now it's stopping or designing to stop the pick and rolls. So he knows what is out there. He just doesn't have the players to do it. I think he knows what he wants with the younger players and needs to stick with his guns and see this out.

What about his philosophy on "cheap" three pointers? The league as a whole takes twice as many threes as it did in 2010. Phil thinks it can't win. The team that won the most games ever over three seasons, dethroning Phil's Bulls, features a player who has hit the most threes ever over three seasons.

nyknickzingis wrote:Oh and Phil clearly sees the change in the game. It's a guard game. He also says that when he was coaching defending transition was the key element. Now it's stopping or designing to stop the pick and rolls. So he knows what is out there. He just doesn't have the players to do it. I think he knows what he wants with the younger players and needs to stick with his guns and see this out.

It's amazing how many people are laying into Phil after it- I don't get what bits of it they disagree with. Do they think Melo is unselfish and plays good defense? Do they think we don't need to rebuild? That we don't need more athletic players, that we don't need players that defend and are unselfish?

smackeddog wrote:

nyknickzingis wrote:Oh and Phil clearly sees the change in the game. It's a guard game. He also says that when he was coaching defending transition was the key element. Now it's stopping or designing to stop the pick and rolls. So he knows what is out there. He just doesn't have the players to do it. I think he knows what he wants with the younger players and needs to stick with his guns and see this out.

It's amazing how many people are laying into Phil after it- I don't get what bits of it they disagree with. Do they think Melo is unselfish and plays good defense? Do they think we don't need to rebuild? That we don't need more athletic players, that we don't need players that defend and are unselfish?

Now that he has another real shot at some significant talent with the 2017 lotto pick, he needs to hit a homerun again. He has actually had very little opportunity to add elite talent. That's how you win. The Warriors were in the lottery for year after year before they got it right. Phil hasn't had his lottery picks. One pick in 3 years is a huge blow to rebuilding. I can't think of a single team that was able to rebuild into a contender in 3 years with 1 draft pick in 3 years.

I want to see the finished post-Melo product, which will be a year from now. I want to see what this team looks like post-2018 draft pick. If he's gotten us 4-5 young core players, and a competitive team, I will be happy. Dolan decided to pay him 12M a year not us fans, He is taking all the heat that most executives don't take. That's part of why he is paid so much. He has a plan, he has to see it out. I am just happy he knows what is going on, He pretty much sees the same things I saw as a fan of the team. I think I may have missed only a few moments of game action this year. Phil's analysis of the team was spot on. He even said about the season's start "We were scoring 105. 106 a night so we felt ok about the offense, lets try to get our D cleaned up". It's not about the Triangle alone. He clearly sees what sort of defenders and defense we need. He saw what difference Ron Baker makes just with effort on D.

We won 4 our our last 7 games, most of them due to the better effort on D and better ball movement/system on offense. He is spot on, the way the team played with less talent is how a team with more talent should strive to play.

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Can someone show me any evidence to the young players playing better to close the season?

Did you watch the games or not??? If you did watch then you don't need any more evidence that the younger players were showing some growth. Like Phil said they didn't have enough talent to get wins but they were doing the right things. Also KP missed games down the stretch.

Next season the team could have a fresh new start without the resistant presence of Melo hovering like a dark cloud. I'm praying that a deal can be made to get Melo out cuz I don't think he's worth the hassle and he's not a positive influence.

So your answer is no? Okay, Just say no we are supposed to go by the eye test.

You are clearly not paying attention if you think the younger players didn't show some growth. Besides what is your point anyway??? What are you trying to get at without actually saying anything?

It's a pretty straightforward question is there any evidence that the young his were playing better? Did they shoot better or grab more boards/ast per 36? Did their off/def rtg improve or maybe their +/- got better.

A number of the young guys played to near or career highs. many were playing double-double or near double-double games. TV analysts expressed a lot of love for Hernangomez. Phil talks glowingly about baker, Randle, Hernangomez, KP, O'Quinn.

What's not to like? Oh, empty stats like melo's? Yeah, in that case, you're right. The kids stink.

He's saying he didn't really watch the games cuz if he did then he would know that the kids did show growth. Arguments like this get a bit silly after a while. It really isn't important because the kids got extended minutes and didn't embarrass themselves. Instead they came together and gained confidence that they can take into the offseason. Anyone watching saw it.

He has a legitimate question. If you go strictly by the eye test, there is the risk you'll just see whatever you want to see.

I imagine Nix would have had charts galore of all kind of stats if they really played better. Maybe they did and he is to tired or simply doesn't want to waste his time that's cool. I was just wondering if there was any evidence to back up the statement of the young guys playing better. I watched the games and participated in most of the game threads but I didn't see anything special other than guys trying hard. Lou Amundson tried hard but usually it results in a crappy all around game. Did the young guys look better at the start of the season or were they better at the end? Just glancing at some of the players numbers a lot of them actually had pretty bad stats according to B-ref. Bad +/-, bad TS%, Def/off rtg, and other lower stats. Ronny Baker scored the ball better tahn the month before but his better is still putrid(47.7% TS%). It seems that his best month was in January when it comes to efficiency, rebounding, Ortg, and he even had a positive +/-. I will say his passing looked good but I always like his passing. I don't see a Hornacek when I watch Ron, I see someone closer to Kirk Hinrich which isn't all bad. Hinrich actually started his career off well but after a few years he wasn't really that effective despite continuing to get time. If Ron can develop his 3pt shot and become a better finisher he might have a chance to stick around. Even if he never becomes an efficient player if he can be a 4+ rebs, 6+ ast, 1.5+ stls, and keep his tovs under 3 I think he will be a nice back up occasional/possible starter.

Funny, I look at those numbers and that is basically what Malcolm Brogdon put up as a rookie. Coming out of college both had similar styles of play and if you look at their measurables they even match up similar in every category. So what stop Baker from being Brogdon? Also, who knows maybe he becomes brogdon like. Then again we need to see if Brogdon can keep his level of play up.

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Can someone show me any evidence to the young players playing better to close the season?

Did you watch the games or not??? If you did watch then you don't need any more evidence that the younger players were showing some growth. Like Phil said they didn't have enough talent to get wins but they were doing the right things. Also KP missed games down the stretch.

Next season the team could have a fresh new start without the resistant presence of Melo hovering like a dark cloud. I'm praying that a deal can be made to get Melo out cuz I don't think he's worth the hassle and he's not a positive influence.

So your answer is no? Okay, Just say no we are supposed to go by the eye test.

You are clearly not paying attention if you think the younger players didn't show some growth. Besides what is your point anyway??? What are you trying to get at without actually saying anything?

It's a pretty straightforward question is there any evidence that the young his were playing better? Did they shoot better or grab more boards/ast per 36? Did their off/def rtg improve or maybe their +/- got better.

A number of the young guys played to near or career highs. many were playing double-double or near double-double games. TV analysts expressed a lot of love for Hernangomez. Phil talks glowingly about baker, Randle, Hernangomez, KP, O'Quinn.

What's not to like? Oh, empty stats like melo's? Yeah, in that case, you're right. The kids stink.

He's saying he didn't really watch the games cuz if he did then he would know that the kids did show growth. Arguments like this get a bit silly after a while. It really isn't important because the kids got extended minutes and didn't embarrass themselves. Instead they came together and gained confidence that they can take into the offseason. Anyone watching saw it.

He has a legitimate question. If you go strictly by the eye test, there is the risk you'll just see whatever you want to see.

I imagine Nix would have had charts galore of all kind of stats if they really played better. Maybe they did and he is to tired or simply doesn't want to waste his time that's cool. I was just wondering if there was any evidence to back up the statement of the young guys playing better. I watched the games and participated in most of the game threads but I didn't see anything special other than guys trying hard. Lou Amundson tried hard but usually it results in a crappy all around game. Did the young guys look better at the start of the season or were they better at the end? Just glancing at some of the players numbers a lot of them actually had pretty bad stats according to B-ref. Bad +/-, bad TS%, Def/off rtg, and other lower stats. Ronny Baker scored the ball better tahn the month before but his better is still putrid(47.7% TS%). It seems that his best month was in January when it comes to efficiency, rebounding, Ortg, and he even had a positive +/-. I will say his passing looked good but I always like his passing. I don't see a Hornacek when I watch Ron, I see someone closer to Kirk Hinrich which isn't all bad. Hinrich actually started his career off well but after a few years he wasn't really that effective despite continuing to get time. If Ron can develop his 3pt shot and become a better finisher he might have a chance to stick around. Even if he never becomes an efficient player if he can be a 4+ rebs, 6+ ast, 1.5+ stls, and keep his tovs under 3 I think he will be a nice back up occasional/possible starter.

Funny, I look at those numbers and that is basically what Malcolm Brogdon put up as a rookie. Coming out of college both had similar styles of play and if you look at their measurables they even match up similar in every category. So what stop Baker from being Brogdon? Also, who knows maybe he becomes brogdon like. Then again we need to see if Brogdon can keep his level of play up.

When talking about the younger players there are INTANGIBLE things that I saw that aren't necessarily going to show up in the numbers. Things like decisions with and without the ball. Defensive awareness, cohesion and 2nd effort. Being a bit more patient and less frantic or nervous. Ball and Player movement getting crisper with better timing and execution. Players like Baker and Ndour getting more comfortable and looking smoother offensively.

These things may not move the needle in terms of their stats but you can perceive them visually.

fwk00 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Can someone show me any evidence to the young players playing better to close the season?

Did you watch the games or not??? If you did watch then you don't need any more evidence that the younger players were showing some growth. Like Phil said they didn't have enough talent to get wins but they were doing the right things. Also KP missed games down the stretch.

Next season the team could have a fresh new start without the resistant presence of Melo hovering like a dark cloud. I'm praying that a deal can be made to get Melo out cuz I don't think he's worth the hassle and he's not a positive influence.

So your answer is no? Okay, Just say no we are supposed to go by the eye test.

You are clearly not paying attention if you think the younger players didn't show some growth. Besides what is your point anyway??? What are you trying to get at without actually saying anything?

It's a pretty straightforward question is there any evidence that the young his were playing better? Did they shoot better or grab more boards/ast per 36? Did their off/def rtg improve or maybe their +/- got better.

A number of the young guys played to near or career highs. many were playing double-double or near double-double games. TV analysts expressed a lot of love for Hernangomez. Phil talks glowingly about baker, Randle, Hernangomez, KP, O'Quinn.

What's not to like? Oh, empty stats like melo's? Yeah, in that case, you're right. The kids stink.

He's saying he didn't really watch the games cuz if he did then he would know that the kids did show growth. Arguments like this get a bit silly after a while. It really isn't important because the kids got extended minutes and didn't embarrass themselves. Instead they came together and gained confidence that they can take into the offseason. Anyone watching saw it.

He has a legitimate question. If you go strictly by the eye test, there is the risk you'll just see whatever you want to see.

I imagine Nix would have had charts galore of all kind of stats if they really played better. Maybe they did and he is to tired or simply doesn't want to waste his time that's cool. I was just wondering if there was any evidence to back up the statement of the young guys playing better. I watched the games and participated in most of the game threads but I didn't see anything special other than guys trying hard. Lou Amundson tried hard but usually it results in a crappy all around game. Did the young guys look better at the start of the season or were they better at the end? Just glancing at some of the players numbers a lot of them actually had pretty bad stats according to B-ref. Bad +/-, bad TS%, Def/off rtg, and other lower stats. Ronny Baker scored the ball better tahn the month before but his better is still putrid(47.7% TS%). It seems that his best month was in January when it comes to efficiency, rebounding, Ortg, and he even had a positive +/-. I will say his passing looked good but I always like his passing. I don't see a Hornacek when I watch Ron, I see someone closer to Kirk Hinrich which isn't all bad. Hinrich actually started his career off well but after a few years he wasn't really that effective despite continuing to get time. If Ron can develop his 3pt shot and become a better finisher he might have a chance to stick around. Even if he never becomes an efficient player if he can be a 4+ rebs, 6+ ast, 1.5+ stls, and keep his tovs under 3 I think he will be a nice back up occasional/possible starter.

Funny, I look at those numbers and that is basically what Malcolm Brogdon put up as a rookie. Coming out of college both had similar styles of play and if you look at their measurables they even match up similar in every category. So what stop Baker from being Brogdon? Also, who knows maybe he becomes brogdon like. Then again we need to see if Brogdon can keep his level of play up.

The question isn't whether the young guys got better, it is whether or not after three years Melo can understand the triangle or play defense. Any evidence of that?

No?

What will make next year different? Less defense? More Iso-Melo?

The Knicks need to impose an IQ test at training camp. If Melo can't pass - GTFO.

I think over the past few months it was suggested that isolation play is why Phil wanted Melo so much to be part of the triangle...Apparently they go ISO when the triangle gets tired and doesn't yield any results..And the evidence for that is in MJ and Kobe taking 25/28 shots per game during the playoffs while Phil was their coach...Melo shot attempt average never reached those totals...So the Melo holds the ball, and don't pass, argument is totally bogus in my opinion...I mean, I saw Kobe and MJ play...

nixluva wrote:

holfresh wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

fwk00 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Can someone show me any evidence to the young players playing better to close the season?

Did you watch the games or not??? If you did watch then you don't need any more evidence that the younger players were showing some growth. Like Phil said they didn't have enough talent to get wins but they were doing the right things. Also KP missed games down the stretch.

Next season the team could have a fresh new start without the resistant presence of Melo hovering like a dark cloud. I'm praying that a deal can be made to get Melo out cuz I don't think he's worth the hassle and he's not a positive influence.

So your answer is no? Okay, Just say no we are supposed to go by the eye test.

You are clearly not paying attention if you think the younger players didn't show some growth. Besides what is your point anyway??? What are you trying to get at without actually saying anything?

It's a pretty straightforward question is there any evidence that the young his were playing better? Did they shoot better or grab more boards/ast per 36? Did their off/def rtg improve or maybe their +/- got better.

A number of the young guys played to near or career highs. many were playing double-double or near double-double games. TV analysts expressed a lot of love for Hernangomez. Phil talks glowingly about baker, Randle, Hernangomez, KP, O'Quinn.

What's not to like? Oh, empty stats like melo's? Yeah, in that case, you're right. The kids stink.

He's saying he didn't really watch the games cuz if he did then he would know that the kids did show growth. Arguments like this get a bit silly after a while. It really isn't important because the kids got extended minutes and didn't embarrass themselves. Instead they came together and gained confidence that they can take into the offseason. Anyone watching saw it.

He has a legitimate question. If you go strictly by the eye test, there is the risk you'll just see whatever you want to see.

I imagine Nix would have had charts galore of all kind of stats if they really played better. Maybe they did and he is to tired or simply doesn't want to waste his time that's cool. I was just wondering if there was any evidence to back up the statement of the young guys playing better. I watched the games and participated in most of the game threads but I didn't see anything special other than guys trying hard. Lou Amundson tried hard but usually it results in a crappy all around game. Did the young guys look better at the start of the season or were they better at the end? Just glancing at some of the players numbers a lot of them actually had pretty bad stats according to B-ref. Bad +/-, bad TS%, Def/off rtg, and other lower stats. Ronny Baker scored the ball better tahn the month before but his better is still putrid(47.7% TS%). It seems that his best month was in January when it comes to efficiency, rebounding, Ortg, and he even had a positive +/-. I will say his passing looked good but I always like his passing. I don't see a Hornacek when I watch Ron, I see someone closer to Kirk Hinrich which isn't all bad. Hinrich actually started his career off well but after a few years he wasn't really that effective despite continuing to get time. If Ron can develop his 3pt shot and become a better finisher he might have a chance to stick around. Even if he never becomes an efficient player if he can be a 4+ rebs, 6+ ast, 1.5+ stls, and keep his tovs under 3 I think he will be a nice back up occasional/possible starter.

Funny, I look at those numbers and that is basically what Malcolm Brogdon put up as a rookie. Coming out of college both had similar styles of play and if you look at their measurables they even match up similar in every category. So what stop Baker from being Brogdon? Also, who knows maybe he becomes brogdon like. Then again we need to see if Brogdon can keep his level of play up.

The question isn't whether the young guys got better, it is whether or not after three years Melo can understand the triangle or play defense. Any evidence of that?

No?

What will make next year different? Less defense? More Iso-Melo?

The Knicks need to impose an IQ test at training camp. If Melo can't pass - GTFO.

I think over the past few months it was suggested that isolation play is why Phil wanted Melo so much to be part of the triangle...Apparently they go ISO when the triangle gets tired and doesn't yield any results..And the evidence for that is in MJ and Kobe taking 25/28 shots per game during the playoffs while Phil was their coach...Melo shot attempt average never reached those totals...So the Melo holds the ball, and don't pass, argument is totally bogus in my opinion...I mean, I saw Kobe and MJ play...

[b]The evolution of the Triangle is going well.[/b] If you watched the games then you saw Jeff's Motion and PnR infused EARLY and Side Triangle only coming in as a factor when it made sense! Phil APPROVES of those Jeff Hornacek tweaks and the players did well executing the offense up to their abilities. We still need greater Talent.

We have to find a way to splice you into this video...