nycdan wrote:

Nalod wrote:

nycdan wrote:It seems like there is a hidden competition among a growing number of talking heads to see who can downplay Brunson's impact on this team more. Whether it's leaving him off of lists he clearly should be on, or outright picking at something ludicrous to downplay his ascendence, it's turning into some form of mass delusion. Sure, you can absolutely say he's not the MVP, but if your list is more than 3 players and he's not on it, that's just an agenda rearing its head.

I get that there are always going to be folks with agendas (*cough* Shaq *cough*) and that's fine, but the volume of people going out of their way to disregard Brunson as a tier 1 player is kind of weird, given the season he's having and the type of guy he appears to be. I would attribute it to people not being able to admit they were wrong, but there are new names popping up with this stuff.

End of the day, winning this postseason - especially without Randle - will be the the right answer to all this. This is the most I've enjoyed Knicks basketball wince Ewing, Oakley and Mason were patrolling the paint and I don't want it to stop.

I think some fans are not fully reading the quotes from Hammon and Parker and get offended by anything that is not pure adulation.
Fact is since January he has been quite elite and we have cut and past stats that have agenda from Twitter dudes to feed this wonderful thing into something even more wonderful. Social media like this is fun but start debating his levels of greatness and now try to extract "an agenda of hate"? I don't see it really.
I think the talking heads will always make waves or create conversations. its their job. Thus I don't have any issues with what they said as they likely were talking up how great he has been but to what level and accomplishment. I don't think he is quite up being coronated into superstardom until after the post season. I would guess he will score points but knicks don't win a chip. Then the knock is "he didn't get us to the next level". Two things, small players rarely do. That was the point from Hammon and Parker. But my point is you need others to do it!!!! Obvious to all of us. Perhaps Larry Browns Pistons was the last team to win without a super duper star. Other than that you have mostly some heavy big dudes. Warriors? They did win one without Durant, but he was there for two of them. The one 22' still had a few HOF players rostered and Wiggins played his best ball.

I think the pushback on Brunson is not his legitimacy but the sample size. This kid in less than two seasons has blown minds. Last year he was not an allstar for that reason. This year he took it another notch and it was never in question. Now he is All NBA. Randle is twice all NBA and look at the lack of respect he gets from us and the league. Brunson at this moment has yet to. As noted by all, he is an improbable looking star player with a style not really conducive to what many think of. Jah Mordant amazes with athletic greatness. Curry is smooth, handsome and personable. He has also been doing it for some time now.

Fair and good points.

I do wonder how much of it is a bias against the Knicks. Maybe just a little, but if you look at the way Randle and now Brunson have been regarded outside of NY, it's a debatable point.

I agree on the point about smaller stars. It does seem to me some other guys of similar stature (Young, Maxey) have gotten less pushback about their size, but it's very possible my social feeds are providing an uneven sample to work with so I defer on that one.

Last point, I agree on sample size when it's one year. But we have seen two solid years now that suggest this is the new Brunson. In the NBA, that's not really a small sample size. Especially playing for Thibs.

Fun fact: Brunson has played just over 5,000 minutes the last two seasons. Haliburton has played just under 5,000 minutes the last 3. I don't know what that means, but it does speak to sample size as being more than just seasons played.

Knick negative bias was years in the making. Results matter and the narrative is changing because we in year 4 since Leon took over. This team is doing things right and the proof is on the court.
Funny, we fans keep going into some “Star” talk. NO doubt more is better. Randle is two time All NBA but we keep finding warts on him. KAT has warts. Zion has Warts. DM wart is “Never beat Jalen in a series”. Jalen’s wart is he too small.

I don’t think Maxey or Trae Young got the kind of “best player” talk or MVP consideration that JB is getting which maybe why there is not as much apparent pushback. Trae had his moment in the sun and Likely on his way to Laker land.
Maxy plays in the Shadow of Embiid and Trae Young had his moment in MSG. While I don’t like the guy I thought his villain act was cool. He delivered.
Jalen stands in nobody’s shadow. He brings attention thru his gaudy point totals. WIll he have an indelible playoff moment? Tune in and find out!

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/jpj_szn/status/1779335982497546380

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/statmuse/status/1779594751966081136

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/Ian_OConnor/status/1786240743993917842

SupremeCommander wrote:I have a question for the old timers:
I wasn't old enough to remember Bernard Kin's 3x 40 point games in a row in the playoffs... how did Brunson's current run compare to BK's dominance? When my dad was here, his #1 favorite think to talk about was the championship teams and #2 was Bernard King smoking everyone

Just curious how people who really experienced both in real time found them to stack up

Scroll down to the playoff log for the season. I tee'd it up for you.
Have to reamember Kings run was like 150 or so games in little over two seasons. Jalen has already surpassed that.
DIfferent game, king was a 6-7 forward with really strong fundamentals but as very quick.
He as a high draft pick who had legal and other issues and was not fulfilling his potential. When he got here, he really turned it on.
He carried a team for a short period. it was fun. Then he blew his knee out. It was awful.

It was a short run but he was a brooklyn kid who really "came home" and took his game to new levels. Like Jalen it was improbable ascension that made it so much fun.
King took one three pt shot in that playoff run. It was 12 games.
Lets see if we can get by INDY.
Brunson is a short player carrying this team. Its not knick hate that says its unlikely. Its basically the historical tied to the concept.
You If he can carry t his team to the finals and win, he will have defied history. Until then Becky Hammon and others are still correct. "Small guards when are the best player don't win chips".

Embiid was not close to 100%. If he was Im not so certain we win t his series. Maxey was not too far off from Jalen.
We down Jules and Bojan. We are a better team but Im just going by who played.

I hope to hell Im wrong and this team wins a chip? Jalen has defied many odds in his career. Why stop now??

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://www.twitter.com/frankiestwoloud/status/1786240115561411013

“We’ve seen Jalen Brunson in the playoffs with the (Dallas Mavericks), and he was No. 2 or 3 … but as a No. 1 option last season in the playoffs, great first round, second round not so much,” Parker said.

"Every game that they play, they always have the second-best player," Smith declared. "They can play better than you, but they are not walking into the gym and saying that's a better player."

Smith's co-panelists concurred, joining the masses in prescribing a blockbuster trade to ensure a better chance at contention. Barkley claimed that the Knicks had not made any worthwhile additions in any of the past three seasons, a particularly damning statement considering that president Leon Rose and executive vice president William Wesley were reportedly hired due to pasts as player representatives.

joec32033 wrote:

“We’ve seen Jalen Brunson in the playoffs with the (Dallas Mavericks), and he was No. 2 or 3 … but as a No. 1 option last season in the playoffs, great first round, second round not so much,” Parker said.

"Every game that they play, they always have the second-best player," Smith declared. "They can play better than you, but they are not walking into the gym and saying that's a better player."

Smith's co-panelists concurred, joining the masses in prescribing a blockbuster trade to ensure a better chance at contention. Barkley claimed that the Knicks had not made any worthwhile additions in any of the past three seasons, a particularly damning statement considering that president Leon Rose and executive vice president William Wesley were reportedly hired due to pasts as player representatives.

ToddTT wrote:Everything about her is irritating. Can we just forget she exists? That would be swell.

I will never stop reposting this as long as Brunson is here. I would love to post more. This man is proving so many people wrong, and so many people need to eat their words. Constant reminder that no matter how doubted you are, you can's measure heart. I can not believe how lucky the Knicks are to have this guy, Not only as a player. He is a leader. He is a rock. He is him. I have been watching the Knicks since the mid 80's, when I was a kid. Never have I felt more comfortable that a player will just not let them lose.

Real Talk.

P.S. Fuck Becky, Fuck Candace, Fuck Kenny, Fuck Inside the NBA on TNT (minus Ernie)

P.P.S. Big Perk I never saw you coming, but keep on keepin' on.

Nalod wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:I have a question for the old timers:
I wasn't old enough to remember Bernard Kin's 3x 40 point games in a row in the playoffs... how did Brunson's current run compare to BK's dominance? When my dad was here, his #1 favorite think to talk about was the championship teams and #2 was Bernard King smoking everyone

Just curious how people who really experienced both in real time found them to stack up

Scroll down to the playoff log for the season. I tee'd it up for you.
Have to reamember Kings run was like 150 or so games in little over two seasons. Jalen has already surpassed that.
DIfferent game, king was a 6-7 forward with really strong fundamentals but as very quick.
He as a high draft pick who had legal and other issues and was not fulfilling his potential. When he got here, he really turned it on.
He carried a team for a short period. it was fun. Then he blew his knee out. It was awful.

It was a short run but he was a brooklyn kid who really "came home" and took his game to new levels. Like Jalen it was improbable ascension that made it so much fun.
King took one three pt shot in that playoff run. It was 12 games.
Lets see if we can get by INDY.
Brunson is a short player carrying this team. Its not knick hate that says its unlikely. Its basically the historical tied to the concept.
You If he can carry t his team to the finals and win, he will have defied history. Until then Becky Hammon and others are still correct. "Small guards when are the best player don't win chips".

Embiid was not close to 100%. If he was Im not so certain we win t his series. Maxey was not too far off from Jalen.
We down Jules and Bojan. We are a better team but Im just going by who played.

I hope to hell Im wrong and this team wins a chip? Jalen has defied many odds in his career. Why stop now??

Dad always lamented that a peak King never got to play with Ewing. That was a bigger deal to him than taking away the pick that yielded Pippen, or missing Kobe by a pick (or missing out on Steph)

Which 40 points a gang over three games in the playoffs was more impressive to you? I can’t imagine King’s stretch was more impressive, but I feel like 40 in that era is way more impressive than today. Which impresses you more?