Knicks · Rubio (page 3)
eViL wrote:Allanfan20 wrote:One day, people will stop the comparisons and put a hault on declaring a player as the nextcoming Player X... and those people will end up being a lot more satisfied in their lives.Rubio is a fun player to watch but ease it on the Maravich/Nash/Kidd/Magic stuff. He played 1 game. I say that and I think he'll be good... but come on.
good post. allanfan is the next bippity.
Woah, let's relax a little. Let's not put too much pressure on the young fellow. I know The Bip has slipped a bit but at one time he was arguablly the greatest poster in internet history. To expect Allanfan to perform at that level is not fair to him. Let him create his won identity. We really seem to forget how great Bip was. I mean I know he doesn't come to the boards as often any more. And when he does he normally just goes off on some hate filled rant, filled with rambling run on sentences that make no sense to teh average english muffin even though cookies sometimes taste better at christmas time when they are paying the right amount of money up front to burn this mofo to the ground. But sendclosk.
CrushAlot wrote:Nalod wrote:CrushAlot wrote:Nalod wrote:During Douglas's rookie year the team won won 29 games with a bunch of marginal vets with expiring contracts playing ahead of Hill and Douglas. Douglas did not get consistent minutes until the March Texas road trip when Walsh traveled with the team to evaluate the coaching staff and players. The fact that Toney is starting now has more to do with Walsh than D'Antoni in my opinion. Walsh got burned in the McGrady trade and he reacted. He is a class guy and never criticized his coach but that trip coincided with Douglas getting minutes.CrushAlot wrote:Allanfan20 wrote:Maybe there were two or three stretches in which he played exceptional, that were short lived, but overall, I saw him jacking up bad shots and falling asleep on defense. Then he was thrown to the bench b/c of this and when he got some more minutes, before the trade, he played overly tentative.He was the youngest guy on the team by several years. He was in a new city and he was coming back from an injury. It was apparent after the coach screamed at him in the Milan game that he wasn't going to fit in and there were threads speculating that he wasn't going to be embraced by the coach as soon as he was acquired. How come Dan D'Antoni worked as a personal tutor with Moz and Randolph was behind Rautins on the depth chart? Randolph is young and is not a finished product but his talent is undeniable. One of my biggest issues with D'Antoni is how he has dealt with some of the young guys, Hill, Douglas, Randolph etc.Randolph strikes me as a guy who desperately needed the four years of LSU basketball because if he stayed, I bet we would have been talking about a different player. It's players like Randolph that make me want the NBA to increase the age limit.
Instead, Randolph is a guy who just doesn't know how to play.
Douglas is starting......Hill was not ready and was traded by the Gm. Randolph was not ready for prime time. Mozzy? Gallo? Fields? Shawn? Wilson? All young guys also.
I think that has all been hashed out before..........
It appears maybe Walsh went on a road trip to "MAKE" MDA play Douglas.......
Or did Walsh take a road trip to watch him play?
Do you have like a bulletin board up in you bedroom with articles and pictures linked together with string to create a theory and perhaps prove it one day?
The notion that another coach could have done much better is never to be substantiated. Hill may turn out to be a good player. It happens. Ebb and flow of player movement never works out the way we want it. If we kept Frye, he would be perfect for this system now. Same with Reezy. Can't go back.......
This is the knicks with a long history of not being patient about player development and never to enter the crater of lottery because it ruins attendance and we trade our picks.
No bulletin board. I do think D'Antoni should have been fired for the way things were handled that year. I am going to respond when people gloss over what really happened with playing time, that roster and some other players that were never given a chance. As far as would another coach have handled things differently, I am almost sure of it. That year was the beginning of a total rebuild. The team had two first round picks and a bunch of expiring contracts on the roster. The team was winning nothing and playing for nothing. I think almost any other coach would have gotten his young players on the court more during a season like that. In regards to player movement, I agree that you can't go back and it generally cannont be controlled. However, the argument at the time of the McGrady trade was that had Hill been given minutes that two first round picks might not have been included along with the teams lottery pick that year.
We called for his firing daily and yet asked him to play young guys that would have led to more losses and more calls for guys getting fired. Love it.
Bippity10 wrote:I don't think anyone said he even needed to start those guys but he didn't even give them minutes for long stretches of the season. Also, he only won 29 games. I am not sure how much worse he would have done if he had Hill and Douglas in the rotation and got them a few minutes a night.CrushAlot wrote:Nalod wrote:CrushAlot wrote:Nalod wrote:During Douglas's rookie year the team won won 29 games with a bunch of marginal vets with expiring contracts playing ahead of Hill and Douglas. Douglas did not get consistent minutes until the March Texas road trip when Walsh traveled with the team to evaluate the coaching staff and players. The fact that Toney is starting now has more to do with Walsh than D'Antoni in my opinion. Walsh got burned in the McGrady trade and he reacted. He is a class guy and never criticized his coach but that trip coincided with Douglas getting minutes.CrushAlot wrote:Allanfan20 wrote:Maybe there were two or three stretches in which he played exceptional, that were short lived, but overall, I saw him jacking up bad shots and falling asleep on defense. Then he was thrown to the bench b/c of this and when he got some more minutes, before the trade, he played overly tentative.He was the youngest guy on the team by several years. He was in a new city and he was coming back from an injury. It was apparent after the coach screamed at him in the Milan game that he wasn't going to fit in and there were threads speculating that he wasn't going to be embraced by the coach as soon as he was acquired. How come Dan D'Antoni worked as a personal tutor with Moz and Randolph was behind Rautins on the depth chart? Randolph is young and is not a finished product but his talent is undeniable. One of my biggest issues with D'Antoni is how he has dealt with some of the young guys, Hill, Douglas, Randolph etc.Randolph strikes me as a guy who desperately needed the four years of LSU basketball because if he stayed, I bet we would have been talking about a different player. It's players like Randolph that make me want the NBA to increase the age limit.
Instead, Randolph is a guy who just doesn't know how to play.
Douglas is starting......Hill was not ready and was traded by the Gm. Randolph was not ready for prime time. Mozzy? Gallo? Fields? Shawn? Wilson? All young guys also.
I think that has all been hashed out before..........
It appears maybe Walsh went on a road trip to "MAKE" MDA play Douglas.......
Or did Walsh take a road trip to watch him play?
Do you have like a bulletin board up in you bedroom with articles and pictures linked together with string to create a theory and perhaps prove it one day?
The notion that another coach could have done much better is never to be substantiated. Hill may turn out to be a good player. It happens. Ebb and flow of player movement never works out the way we want it. If we kept Frye, he would be perfect for this system now. Same with Reezy. Can't go back.......
This is the knicks with a long history of not being patient about player development and never to enter the crater of lottery because it ruins attendance and we trade our picks.
No bulletin board. I do think D'Antoni should have been fired for the way things were handled that year. I am going to respond when people gloss over what really happened with playing time, that roster and some other players that were never given a chance. As far as would another coach have handled things differently, I am almost sure of it. That year was the beginning of a total rebuild. The team had two first round picks and a bunch of expiring contracts on the roster. The team was winning nothing and playing for nothing. I think almost any other coach would have gotten his young players on the court more during a season like that. In regards to player movement, I agree that you can't go back and it generally cannont be controlled. However, the argument at the time of the McGrady trade was that had Hill been given minutes that two first round picks might not have been included along with the teams lottery pick that year.We called for his firing daily and yet asked him to play young guys that would have led to more losses and more calls for guys getting fired. Love it.
CrushAlot wrote:Bippity10 wrote:I don't think anyone said he even needed to start those guys but he didn't even give them minutes for long stretches of the season. Also, he only won 29 games. I am not sure how much worse he would have done if he had Hill and Douglas in the rotation and got them a few minutes a night.CrushAlot wrote:Nalod wrote:CrushAlot wrote:Nalod wrote:During Douglas's rookie year the team won won 29 games with a bunch of marginal vets with expiring contracts playing ahead of Hill and Douglas. Douglas did not get consistent minutes until the March Texas road trip when Walsh traveled with the team to evaluate the coaching staff and players. The fact that Toney is starting now has more to do with Walsh than D'Antoni in my opinion. Walsh got burned in the McGrady trade and he reacted. He is a class guy and never criticized his coach but that trip coincided with Douglas getting minutes.CrushAlot wrote:Allanfan20 wrote:Maybe there were two or three stretches in which he played exceptional, that were short lived, but overall, I saw him jacking up bad shots and falling asleep on defense. Then he was thrown to the bench b/c of this and when he got some more minutes, before the trade, he played overly tentative.He was the youngest guy on the team by several years. He was in a new city and he was coming back from an injury. It was apparent after the coach screamed at him in the Milan game that he wasn't going to fit in and there were threads speculating that he wasn't going to be embraced by the coach as soon as he was acquired. How come Dan D'Antoni worked as a personal tutor with Moz and Randolph was behind Rautins on the depth chart? Randolph is young and is not a finished product but his talent is undeniable. One of my biggest issues with D'Antoni is how he has dealt with some of the young guys, Hill, Douglas, Randolph etc.Randolph strikes me as a guy who desperately needed the four years of LSU basketball because if he stayed, I bet we would have been talking about a different player. It's players like Randolph that make me want the NBA to increase the age limit.
Instead, Randolph is a guy who just doesn't know how to play.
Douglas is starting......Hill was not ready and was traded by the Gm. Randolph was not ready for prime time. Mozzy? Gallo? Fields? Shawn? Wilson? All young guys also.
I think that has all been hashed out before..........
It appears maybe Walsh went on a road trip to "MAKE" MDA play Douglas.......
Or did Walsh take a road trip to watch him play?
Do you have like a bulletin board up in you bedroom with articles and pictures linked together with string to create a theory and perhaps prove it one day?
The notion that another coach could have done much better is never to be substantiated. Hill may turn out to be a good player. It happens. Ebb and flow of player movement never works out the way we want it. If we kept Frye, he would be perfect for this system now. Same with Reezy. Can't go back.......
This is the knicks with a long history of not being patient about player development and never to enter the crater of lottery because it ruins attendance and we trade our picks.
No bulletin board. I do think D'Antoni should have been fired for the way things were handled that year. I am going to respond when people gloss over what really happened with playing time, that roster and some other players that were never given a chance. As far as would another coach have handled things differently, I am almost sure of it. That year was the beginning of a total rebuild. The team had two first round picks and a bunch of expiring contracts on the roster. The team was winning nothing and playing for nothing. I think almost any other coach would have gotten his young players on the court more during a season like that. In regards to player movement, I agree that you can't go back and it generally cannont be controlled. However, the argument at the time of the McGrady trade was that had Hill been given minutes that two first round picks might not have been included along with the teams lottery pick that year.We called for his firing daily and yet asked him to play young guys that would have led to more losses and more calls for guys getting fired. Love it.
There were guys that I coached that had the talent to play. Everyone screamed that they should be playing. But in practice their flaws(and sometimes laziness) were so pronounced that I could not play them. Rewarding bad habits (either out of laziness or lack of development) and tryign to work things out on the floor rarely works. It usually leads to shattered confidence and further bad habits. When Douglas was ready he got time. Mozgov, Fields, Shumpert all got time. So maybe there was a reason that Hill and Douglas did not play. We don't know do we? Maybe Hill was lazy as rumored. Maybe Douglas wasn't ready until late in the season. Maybe D'Antoni handled it wrong. Maybe you would have handled it the same way. Without being in practice how do you know?
NYY1NYK2 wrote:I'm glad we dint trade away any assets to land rubio. 6pts a game with 5-6ast is not gonna get the job done in NY. Felton was and is better than this guy.
I think he can play. Maybe he ends up worse than Felton, who knows. I thought this compilation did a great job of showing the good, the bad, and the ugly with Rubio.
Was MDA right about giving Jordan Hill very little playing time? In 2009 Jordon Hill played 23 games, and averaged 16:11 minutes a game. He shot 52% from the field, averaged 6.4 points, and 5 rebounds per game. A year later, he averaged 15:35 a game for 72 games. His 5.6 points, 4.3 rebounds, and 49.2% shooting average were all worse in his second year than his first year's production.
If he can't improve from his rookie year to his second year of play, its pretty clear that Jordan Hill wasn't working on his game hard enough. A player who doesn't work hard on his game, doesn't just hurt himself. All of Mike's players need to be on the same page, in order to spread the floor properly and make Mike's system work. One player who is consistently not in the right place, ends up hurting the whole team's chances to win.
MSG3 wrote:Rubio having his coming out party tonight. kid looks legit. Had Minny in position to beat Miami.
Miami got bailed out by the refs with many imaginary fouls on Wade and Lebron, who can push and shove at will...
Anyway, Rubio made insane assists (he got like 12 total), 2 of them were just crazy.
Thinking we could have had that guy, sigh, he was just born to play in NYC.
CrushAlot wrote:I didn't see the game but I checked the box score and saw Randolph got minutes and had 12 and 3. Did he play well?
Yes, played okay. Was the benefit of some nice Rubio passes (the difference a pg can make is unbelievable,) also had a nice block late in the game. I think he got major minutes because of Beasley. Only caught the tale end of the 3rd and most of the 4th and didn't see Beasley out there. Not sure why.
Uptown wrote:Thanks. I heard Adelman wasn't happy with him in training camp.CrushAlot wrote:I didn't see the game but I checked the box score and saw Randolph got minutes and had 12 and 3. Did he play well?Yes, played okay. Was the benefit of some nice Rubio passes (the difference a pg can make is unbelievable,) also had a nice block late in the game. I think he got major minutes because of Beasley. Only caught the tale end of the 3rd and most of the 4th and didn't see Beasley out there. Not sure why.