The same thing it's always been, the Knicks don't close out games or even win games they should because they're constantly in limbo or playing musical chairs.
By 13MillionDollarMan Go To PostThe same thing it's always been, the Knicks don't close out games or even win games they should because they're constantly in limbo or playing musical chairs.
But the Magic and the Celtics do the same thing and have won more games. Out of context that many lineups looks bad. But it's actually more common than it seems for teams in that echelon.
The Knicks are in the same echelon as the Magic and Celtics?
Aren't you the one going on about how what works for one team doesn't for others? Lord, master of contradictions.
Aren't you the one going on about how what works for one team doesn't for others? Lord, master of contradictions.
By 13MillionDollarMan Go To PostThe Knicks are in the same echelon as the Magic and Celtics?
Aren't you the one going on about how what works for one team doesn't for others? Lord, master of contradictions.
Roughly the same talent level. Magic and Celtics a bit better, but not by a massive amount.
And WTF at your last line. You looked at the Knicks amount of lineups, didn't look at other teams in a similar level to see how consistent it is and then drew a random conclusion. All I did was point out that the Celtics and Magic - literally the ONLY other two teams I looked at, had a similar amount of lineups.
I.e. Fisher wasn't doing something as out of the norm as you originally presented.
Bucks, Wizards, Nuggets - all 5 pages.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostRoughly the same talent level. Magic and Celtics a bit better, but not by a massive amount.Who's talking about what's normal? I'm talking about how inconsistency plagues a particular team, I don't need to compare them to what other teams are doing because that's not the fucking point?
And WTF at your last line. You looked at the Knicks amount of lineups, didn't look at other teams in a similar level to see how consistent it is and then drew a random conclusion. All I did was point out that the Celtics and Magic - literally the ONLY other two teams I looked at, had a similar amount of lineups.
I.e. Fisher wasn't doing something as out of the norm as you originally presented.
Bucks, Wizards, Nuggets - all 5 pages.
By etiolation Go To PostVahagan brings up something I hadn't thought about.I feel like if you want to exploit a size advantage against the Warriors, you have to be bigger / longer at most *every* position, not just center, since that team has so many shooters and it's so important to keep them off the offensive glass. And your players who aren't just there for rim protection (i.e. everyone but your center) have to be mobile enough on defense that Curry, Klay, and Green can't just run around them on screens. And they have to have enough endurance not to get exhausted long before the Warriors do. There aren't many teams in the league with the personnel to pull that off... and then you have to hope you can get enough offense on the other end to actually build up a lead before Curry goes Super Saiyan. Seems to me like it's pretty irrelevant whether you want to play the Warriors' game or not, since you need a stacked team either way to have a chance.
Does the league trying to emulate the Warriors end up helping the Warriors? More teams have transitioned to a more open style with smaller 4s. Is that one of the reasons they are dominating so much? Everyone is playing their game, but they are the masters of that game.
I doubt they want to have games where they need to play Bogut and Speights heavy minutes.
By Gabyskra Go To PostThis has turned into the Vahagn thread. I'm as guilty as anyone of that.Seriously
It's not even fucking entertaining anymore
By DY_nasty Go To PostSeriously
It's not even fucking entertaining anymore
If I make a point and you/gaby/reilo/blackace/everyone else doesn't see the need to jump on board the shit talking or knee jerk responses even when you don't really agree with what you're arguing then yea it becomes that.
FFS I post about the objective fact that the Knicks are a bad shooting team and how that's a serious problem and Reilo and several other people, in their incessant need to troll the Knicks or me, actually try to refute that shit. Like WTF.
I couldn't even agree with you guys at this point and not have the 5 of you go into your "rofl" "lmao" post responses.
If I would have tried what 13million just did - arbitrarily creating a connection between consistency of rotations with end of game execution despite plenty of other teams having better records with similiar levels of inconsistency - I'd have 5 guys jump on board the shit talking train.
Meanwhile - not a peep from either of you.
because Fisher is a shitty coach. His prep seems good... His communication seems ok... But his adjustments, game time coaching and rotations are shit poor.
Of those 5 things you kinda need to be good at 3 of them and at least exceptional at 1 to be a good coach in the NBA
Of those 5 things you kinda need to be good at 3 of them and at least exceptional at 1 to be a good coach in the NBA
How many "traditional centers" are in the league today and how many of those centers actually have a back to the basket post game that one would think of when they think "traditional center"?
If I hadn't watched games in previous decades, based on the last few pages, I would assume "traditional center" meant defensive big man with no shot and a poor FT%.
I kinda feel like the emergence of the three game and spreading the floor coincided with a decline in overall talent available at the C position.
If I hadn't watched games in previous decades, based on the last few pages, I would assume "traditional center" meant defensive big man with no shot and a poor FT%.
I kinda feel like the emergence of the three game and spreading the floor coincided with a decline in overall talent available at the C position.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostIf I would have tried what 13million just did - arbitrarily creating a connection between consistency of rotations with end of game execution despite plenty of other teams having better records with similiar levels of inconsistency - I'd have 5 guys jump on board the shit talking train.because 13 has never compared themself to Phil and Pop
Meanwhile - not a peep from either of you.
By blackace Go To Postbecause Fisher is a shitty coach. His prep seems good… His communication seems ok… But his adjustments, game time coaching and rotations are shit poor.
Of those 5 things you kinda need to be good at 3 of them and at least exceptional at 1 to be a good coach in the NBA
The Nuggets are 12-19. This time last year...they were 13-19 - in a much tougher conference - and still dealing with injuries.
All I've heard from this crowd is that Malone is a great coach and that Shaw was a shitty one. Based on literally nothing of substance other than a small sample size in Sacramento last year and a belief in basketball philosophy. Maybe you guys don't know what a good coach is? Maybe your way of judging is wrong? Maybe championing guys like Karl/Gentry/Malone/Snyder as great coaches who are all dealing with losing records right now would make you go "huh, maybe I was wrong".
Nope - full steam ahead.
By blackace Go To Postbecause 13 has never compared themself to Phil and Pop
So you're saying because you misunderstood me I've now become a target for you guys? Well - that's fair.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostIf I would have tried what 13million just did - arbitrarily creating a connection between consistency of rotations with end of game execution despite plenty of other teams having better records with similiar levels of inconsistency - I'd have 5 guys jump on board the shit talking train.Again, if a team has someone like Galloway throwing up contested threes and failing at it, what does another team have shit all to do with it? You can see for yourself it doesn't work, you don't need to talk about what some other fucking team is doing. One doesn't need to look at "other teams" to question the choices of a coach and his inability to have a line up he trusts to do shit, like end games, or keep leads or whatever the fuck else.
I'm not sure how I can buy the argument that the Knicks are a "bad shooting" team when the shots they attempt the most of (3-10ft, 10-16ft, 16ft-3p) they rank above average (8th, 14th and 6th in FG%, respectively) and the shots they are 24th in FG% for the league (3pt) are also the shot attempts they take a super low amount of leaguewide (21st in % of FGA).
But obviously Fisher's sterling coaching career is being dragged down by poor shooting. The fact that they are piss poor near the rim (28th in the league in in FG% 0-3ft, 30th in % of FGA) is supposed to mean they are a bad shooting team. Literally, the only long distance shot they are bad at is the three, and even then, that's manageable moreso than just being abysmal near the rim.
But obviously Fisher's sterling coaching career is being dragged down by poor shooting. The fact that they are piss poor near the rim (28th in the league in in FG% 0-3ft, 30th in % of FGA) is supposed to mean they are a bad shooting team. Literally, the only long distance shot they are bad at is the three, and even then, that's manageable moreso than just being abysmal near the rim.
By 13MillionDollarMan Go To PostAgain, if a team has someone like Galloway throwing up contested threes and failing at it, what does another team have shit all to do with it? You can see for yourself it doesn't work, you don't need to talk about what some other fucking team is doing. One doesn't need to look at "other teams" to question the choices of a coach and his inability to have a line up he trusts to do shit, like end games, or keep leads or whatever the fuck else.
Galloway was leading the league in 3pt FG% through roughly the first month of basketball. He then fell off the cliff. Calderon can't defend anyone, so they have no choice BUT Galloway unless he can't hit shit and Calderon is hot. Teams WITHOUT 8-9 good consistent basketball players have to shuffle their lineups. The Knicks aren't losing because their lineups are inconsistent, they're losing because their players are - especially at making shots.
You're creating a causal relationship that makes sense to you but that isn't borne out by the facts - tons of different teams use tons of different lineups - they win more - their team shoots better.
So you're saying because you misunderstood me I've now become a target for you guys? Well - that's fair.
this is the point. It's never you... you always a victim and never, ever, wrong.
By reilo Go To PostI'm not sure how I can buy the argument that the Knicks are a "bad shooting" team when the shots they attempt the most of (3-10ft, 10-16ft, 16ft-3p) they rank above average (8th, 14th and 6th in FG%, respectively) and the shots they are 24th in FG% for the league (3pt) are also the shot attempts they take a super low amount of leaguewide (21st in % of FGA).
But obviously Fisher's sterling coaching career is being dragged down by poor shooting. The fact that they are piss poor near the rim (28th in the league in in FG% 0-3ft, 30th in % of FGA) is supposed to mean they are a bad shooting team. Literally, the only long distance shot they are bad at is the three, and even then, that's manageable moreso than just being abysmal near the rim.
You're making it seem as if the shots they are bad at - they shoot the least. So it's not having a dramatic effect on their overall shooting. EXCEPT - they're 25th in the league in FG%. So, you're wrong.
Dude If I just made this argument - you'd troll me for 3 years.
By blackace Go To Postthis is the point. It's never you… you always a victim and never, ever, wrong.
Holy shit you JUST said that you're treating me differently than 13 because "he didn't compare himself to phil and pop"
I'm wrong plenty - and I say it and apologize. But fuck the 5 or 6 of you predictably trolling/challenging me and then admitting to it and suggesting why I deserve it - and then responding with this shit.
The funny thing is that you basically have people lowkey not shitting on Jackson's ability to GM by saying the team is capable of better (something Vahagn should pick up on given his total admiration of the dude) but confused by the other choices like HOW those pieces are being deployed, which would be Fish's responsibility. Why in the fuck are you caping for the coach this hard?
By 13MillionDollarMan Go To PostThe funny thing is that you basically have people lowkey not shitting on Jackson's ability to GM by saying the team is capable of better (something Vahagn should pick up on given his total admiration of the dude) but confused by the other choices like HOW those pieces are being deployed, which would be Fish's responsibility. Why in the fuck are you caping for the coach this hard?
They are in the bottom bottom bottom tier in FG% at the 3 point line, at the rim, and wide open shots. You're talking about the most efficient and easiest shots in basketball - and they're missing them.
It's not Phil's fault that a ton of the guys are shooting well below their career numbers and it's not Fisher's fault that the guys are missing open shots and layups.
Look - it's simple. If the Knicks were a top tier 3 point shooting team - but barely shot any of them. If they were a top tier shooting team at the rim - but barely shot any of them. If they were a top tier open shooting team - but barely shot any of them.
That's the coach. Heck, if that was the case I'd abandon my support of the system and agree with you. But if they SUCK at making the shots they should, and they shoot a lot of shots they're actually relatively good at - how is that an indictment of the coach?
By Moris Go To PostThis is a lot of talk for a bad team that outside of their Rookie is largely uninteresting.I don't even think they're a bad team at points, there are games they could have won as in they're not getting blown out, they're just inconsistent or can't finish, that's definitely a coaching issue whether by their actions on the court or just not instilling confidence in their team.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostHoly shit you JUST said that you're treating me differently than 13 because "he didn't compare himself to phil and pop"It was more of a joking way of telling you that you overrate your basketball knowledge.
I'm wrong plenty - and I say it and apologize. But fuck the 5 or 6 of you predictably trolling/challenging me and then admitting to it and suggesting why I deserve it - and then responding with this shit.
You are good for getting condescending when talking the triangle / Phil / Fisher / Kobe.. and telling people they are "dense" or "they don't understand the triangle" and so forth but then a few post later you are crying victim because people disagree with you...
we all love the sport.. I was fairly heavily recruited, and coached to the high school level.. I have been playing, watching, and coaching for 30 years
So I would suggest keeping in mind, we are all armchair GMs and coaches here..
I even prefaced my damn "are centers really necessary" with some "I'm probably full of shit here", I mean that's pretty much the antithesis of trying to act like a know it all and just strike up a conversation with people who probably know better. But continue to wonder why some of us get less shit.
By 13MillionDollarMan Go To PostI don't even think they're a bad team at points, there are games they could have won as in they're not getting blown out, they're just inconsistent or can't finish, that's definitely a coaching issue whether by their actions on the court or just not instilling confidence in their team.
I'm 70/30 split as to whether if them being close and faltering is them underperforming or if them being competitive for most of a game is them overachieving. I think most nights it's the latter cause their roster is mediocre as hell.
If you guys are going to continue to look at the sun, against your own advice, may I suggest
http://www.amazon.com/Eclipser-Glasses-Eclipse-Folded-Sleeved/dp/B007C7C4L2
http://www.amazon.com/Eclipser-Glasses-Eclipse-Folded-Sleeved/dp/B007C7C4L2
By blackace Go To PostIt was more of a joking way of telling you that you overrate your basketball knowledge.
You are good for getting condescending when talking the triangle / Phil / Fisher / Kobe.. and telling people they are "dense" or "they don't understand the triangle" and so forth but then a few post later you are crying victim because people disagree with you…
we all love the sport.. I was fairly heavily recruited, and coached to the high school level.. I have been playing, watching, and coaching for 30 years
So I would suggest keeping in mind, we are all armchair GMs and coaches here..
If I didn't think the people on this thread had basketball knowledge or value I wouldn't come here.
I get condescending about the Triangle because I hear information about it wrong 99% of the time. I even hear information about it incorrectly from play by play guys or color commentators who've been covering or playing the sport for decades. It doesn't mean people don't understand basketball - it just means they're wrong about this specific thing.
That being said - there is DEFINITELY a slant towards a certain type of basketball and a certain type of analysis on this forum. It's not the same everywhere.
But this is more about the idea that a page gets filled up by me. When I make a post - routinely like 6 guys start challenging or trolling me. And If I respond and carry on 6 conversations at once - this happens. With me it happens routinely.
It happened with DY over the summer and his 49 win projection. That shit dominated multiple pages several times. It's what happens when a bunch of guys are discussing the same thing.
By Fenderputty Go To PostIf you guys are going to continue to look at the sun, against your own advice, may I suggestSeriously
http://www.amazon.com/Eclipser-Glasses-Eclipse-Folded-Sleeved/dp/B007C7C4L2
I can't very well put 3SP on everyone's ignore list so sooner or later people (you too reilo) are gonna have to realize what you're arguing with. I haven't given one tangible fuck ever since that MKG bullshit he went off on... After a certain point you just have to stop responding. I mean, yeah, I'll still debate but everyone knows the drill now.
lol I'm in it again now
Definitely the same thing. 💯
By DY_nasty Go To PostSeriously
I can't very well put 3SP on everyone's ignore list so sooner or later people (you too reilo) are gonna have to realize what you're arguing with. I haven't given one tangible fuck ever since that MKG bullshit he went off on… After a certain point you just have to stop responding. I mean, yeah, I'll still debate but everyone knows the drill now.
lol I'm in it again now
Definitely the same thing. 💯
You don't need to defend Gaby or Reilo's honor every time I disagree with them. And they don't need to defend yours. But hey - NBA GAF was shut down for being insular as shit and you guys came here and are being accused of the same thing but by all means - keep pretending it's a problem that doesn't exist.
I post on several basketball forums - trust me that this is the only community this shit happens in.
There is some merit to the conversation though, it just doesn't have to do with the Knicks.
I miss "traditional centers"
I miss "traditional centers"
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostYou're making it seem as if the shots they are bad at - they shoot the least. So it's not having a dramatic effect on their overall shooting. EXCEPT - they're 25th in the league in FG%. So, you're wrong.Except they shoot almost 47% on mid-range shots. I just told you it's their three point shooting and at-rim percentages that's dragging them down. They're a bad three-point shooting team, but not an overall bad shooting team. If they converted their 0-3 FG attempts at a rate the Spurs do, they'd be tied for 11th in 2PT FG%.
Dude If I just made this argument - you'd troll me for 3 years.
But that argument warranted you to call me stupid, and other ad-hominen attacks. So whatever, I'm done trying to have a nuanced argument.
Anyways, I hope (despite that it might give Gaby an aneurysm) that Rolo is in for a lot of minutes tonight...In the mood to watch him, uh, rebound balls..
By DY_nasty Go To PostReilobrehI'm done. I was actually trying to have an honest and nuanced argument with him, but it got this response last time, so whatever.
Pls
I'd be fine if you presented one good argument. But it's all just stupidity. A mindless regurgitation of cherry picked numbers with no underlying understanding of principle. You present as much nuanced thought as your moniker man.
By 3SidedPolygons Go To PostI post on several basketball forums - trust me that this is the only community this shit happens in.Then leave it? Greener pastures!
How do you have time for so many anyway?
The idea that we run to each other's defense is preposterous. In the very little time we address one another, it's usually to say that we really should orient the conversation towards someone/thing else. But I watch the Knicks, I can't help that much.
I'll say one thing: the forum is sufferring from the conversation being in just one thread. 3SP should have his own triangle/Phil Jackson related thread. I think that's the best course of action.
account suicide bet
winslow is an allstar by his third season and is the consensus thrid best player outta the draft.
winslow is an allstar by his third season and is the consensus thrid best player outta the draft.
By reilo Go To PostI'm done. I was actually trying to have an honest and nuanced argument with him, but it got this response last time, so whatever.
You weren't having a nuanced argument at all. You were bending yourself into a pretzel just to argue and just sarcastic trolling along with it.
By 13MillionDollarMan Go To PostIt's funny to hear that conversation is always against a singular person when weeks ago Gaby and I were arguing about Rolo and we're still trolling each other back and forth about it. He keeps talking about "boxing out" and my current username is to poke him in the eye.
No one suggested that people don't go back and forth. I said what happens with me is I deal with 5-6 people arguing with me at the exact same time, even on shit they don't give a fuck about - just to defend each other and argue. There's no need for that shit. Ever. But it happens routinely - usually from the same 5-6 guys.
I've put Gaby and Giri and TheKad on block or that number would be higher.
It's funny to hear that conversation is always against a singular person when weeks ago Gaby and I were arguing about Rolo and we're still trolling each other back and forth about it. He keeps talking about "boxing out" and my current username is to poke him in the eye.
By Fenderputty Go To PostThere is some merit to the conversation though, it just doesn't have to do with the Knicks.
I miss "traditional centers"
I feel we might be entering a silver age of centers again..
DMC
KAT
Okafor
Vucevic
Monroe
Drummond
Whiteside
Gobert
Horford
Gasol
http://slaent.com/thread/4708/
On May 26th, 2014 I had over 2700 posts, I know for a fact before the temp forum ended I had over 5000 posts
Where the fuck are my posts reilo?
where the fuck are my posts?!
On May 26th, 2014 I had over 2700 posts, I know for a fact before the temp forum ended I had over 5000 posts
Where the fuck are my posts reilo?
where the fuck are my posts?!
By 13MillionDollarMan Go To PostIt's funny to hear that conversation is always against a singular person when weeks ago Gaby and I were arguing about Rolo and we're still trolling each other back and forth about it. He keeps talking about "boxing out" and my current username is to poke him in the eye.Every time he misses a shot, I actually feel bad for you!
By PSYCH! Go To Posthttp://slaent.com/thread/4708/You have #fuckyourpostcount posts.
On May 26th, 2014 I had over 2700 posts, I know for a fact before the temp forum ended I had over 5000 posts
Where the fuck are my posts reilo?
where the fuck are my posts?!