Knicks · Is D'Antoni the problem? (page 6)

no the problems in order:

1. not having a pg
2. not having a pg
3. not having a pg
4. having no depth
5. new york fans

nykshaknbake wrote:The only thing I said was the Knicks were not in an upward trajectory pre Melodramatic trade. That's true whether you like MDA or not. Your statement is false. End of story. n

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Not my fault you posted things that didn't correspond to reality. Pre trade they were not headed upward as you said. I do hate him but I always try to stay accurate.

loweyecue wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Wow. What a load of horse$hit. The team was not driving toward sucess pre trade. We were almost 10 game sover 0.500 then worked our way to 2 games over 0.500. I get you like him but how about putting things that are true rather than false in his defense?

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:I don't think management did him any favors in acquiring Anthony and amnestying Billups. In fact it appears there was a disregard for what he needs to be successful. However, I also think that the Berger article that quoted Warkenstein is right when he says D'Antoni is a roster specific coach. I don't think he is the problem this year and I don't think he was put in the position where he can succeed. That being said I do think he had done enough in the past to warrant termination. This year is different. He is not part of the problem but I also don't think he is capable of solving it.

So when was he put in a position to succeed during his tenure as a Knick's coach?

I think pre-trade last year he had the team closest to what he needs to run his style. I think we differ in opinion about how much success he is actually capable of achieving without a totally stacked roster and an mvp running the point.

Right pre-trade last year he had a team that he was driving towards success. He had put the hard work in, taken the early losses worked his way back to .500 and WHAM. He was once again put in a position to fail. will get fired this year, its a sad reflection of just how sick our franchise is.

Does he get credit for getting a team with huge holes in defense to 10 games above 500? Of course not. Then all the key players are involved in trade talks their performance takes a hit and you zero in in that one losing streak and you decide in your infinite wisdom the team was not being driven towards success? You should talk about horse$hit. I get it you hate him but if take your head out of your ass long enough maybe you will be able to see what people are talking about.

Yeah, guess you live in your reality and I in mine. Hatred doesn't usually lend itself to accuracy. Your eyes only interpret what they see based on what your mind has already told them to expect. If you want to be fair try to keep an open mind instead of trying to be accurate. Anyone can spin data anyway they want, it's preconceived notions about how things should be that lead to poor decision making.

And no I don't like MDA as the coach here. Never did. But I do believe he deserves a fair chance he has never had one while he was here. We must agree to disagree. I also don't want us to blindly keep changing coaches because continuity is more important than abrupt change.

Please stop promoting your opinion like it is fact.

Your ignorance clouds your reasoning. What I said was MDA had the team playing increasingly better leading up to the trade. What I didn't do was cherrypick a handful of games to prove my point. Anyone can pick a handful of sequential data points that fit their own belief system and call it a trend. 18 games does not make a trend. If you waqnt to analyze the trend then use the entire season upto the trade as data and this is what you will see.

Uhhh no dude that doesn't prove your point. You might as well do a 10 year analysis and give me a trajectory and tell me this was more relevant.

That red line is more indicative of where the team was headed and how they were playing. Try starting the red line after the 1st third of the season and than tell me it was a small series of sequential games! Two thrids of the sample in question!

If the season was extended and we and never made the trade you realize we would have soon been playing without Amare, right? As it was at the time he was starting to break down and performance was decreasing. The red was the more recent data and the prevailing trend. Would we have continued to lose at that rate? Maybe not exactly but we certainly weren't going to win more than lose with a run into the ground Stat. Good effort. I'll give you a C if you laminate it and get to me by Tuesday.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:The only thing I said was the Knicks were not in an upward trajectory pre Melodramatic trade. That's true whether you like MDA or not. Your statement is false. End of story. n

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Not my fault you posted things that didn't correspond to reality. Pre trade they were not headed upward as you said. I do hate him but I always try to stay accurate.

loweyecue wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Wow. What a load of horse$hit. The team was not driving toward sucess pre trade. We were almost 10 game sover 0.500 then worked our way to 2 games over 0.500. I get you like him but how about putting things that are true rather than false in his defense?

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:I don't think management did him any favors in acquiring Anthony and amnestying Billups. In fact it appears there was a disregard for what he needs to be successful. However, I also think that the Berger article that quoted Warkenstein is right when he says D'Antoni is a roster specific coach. I don't think he is the problem this year and I don't think he was put in the position where he can succeed. That being said I do think he had done enough in the past to warrant termination. This year is different. He is not part of the problem but I also don't think he is capable of solving it.

So when was he put in a position to succeed during his tenure as a Knick's coach?

I think pre-trade last year he had the team closest to what he needs to run his style. I think we differ in opinion about how much success he is actually capable of achieving without a totally stacked roster and an mvp running the point.

Right pre-trade last year he had a team that he was driving towards success. He had put the hard work in, taken the early losses worked his way back to .500 and WHAM. He was once again put in a position to fail. will get fired this year, its a sad reflection of just how sick our franchise is.

Does he get credit for getting a team with huge holes in defense to 10 games above 500? Of course not. Then all the key players are involved in trade talks their performance takes a hit and you zero in in that one losing streak and you decide in your infinite wisdom the team was not being driven towards success? You should talk about horse$hit. I get it you hate him but if take your head out of your ass long enough maybe you will be able to see what people are talking about.

Yeah, guess you live in your reality and I in mine. Hatred doesn't usually lend itself to accuracy. Your eyes only interpret what they see based on what your mind has already told them to expect. If you want to be fair try to keep an open mind instead of trying to be accurate. Anyone can spin data anyway they want, it's preconceived notions about how things should be that lead to poor decision making.

And no I don't like MDA as the coach here. Never did. But I do believe he deserves a fair chance he has never had one while he was here. We must agree to disagree. I also don't want us to blindly keep changing coaches because continuity is more important than abrupt change.

Please stop promoting your opinion like it is fact.

Your ignorance clouds your reasoning. What I said was MDA had the team playing increasingly better leading up to the trade. What I didn't do was cherrypick a handful of games to prove my point. Anyone can pick a handful of sequential data points that fit their own belief system and call it a trend. 18 games does not make a trend. If you waqnt to analyze the trend then use the entire season upto the trade as data and this is what you will see.

nykshaknbake wrote:Uhhh no dude that doesn't prove your point. You might as well do a 10 year analysis and give me a trajectory and tell me this was more relevant. That red line is more indicative of where the team was headed and how they were playing. It was the more recent data and the prevailing trend. But I'll give you a C if you laminate it and get to me by Tuesday.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:The only thing I said was the Knicks were not in an upward trajectory pre Melodramatic trade. That's true whether you like MDA or not. Your statement is false. End of story. n

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Not my fault you posted things that didn't correspond to reality. Pre trade they were not headed upward as you said. I do hate him but I always try to stay accurate.

loweyecue wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Wow. What a load of horse$hit. The team was not driving toward sucess pre trade. We were almost 10 game sover 0.500 then worked our way to 2 games over 0.500. I get you like him but how about putting things that are true rather than false in his defense?

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:I don't think management did him any favors in acquiring Anthony and amnestying Billups. In fact it appears there was a disregard for what he needs to be successful. However, I also think that the Berger article that quoted Warkenstein is right when he says D'Antoni is a roster specific coach. I don't think he is the problem this year and I don't think he was put in the position where he can succeed. That being said I do think he had done enough in the past to warrant termination. This year is different. He is not part of the problem but I also don't think he is capable of solving it.

So when was he put in a position to succeed during his tenure as a Knick's coach?

I think pre-trade last year he had the team closest to what he needs to run his style. I think we differ in opinion about how much success he is actually capable of achieving without a totally stacked roster and an mvp running the point.

Right pre-trade last year he had a team that he was driving towards success. He had put the hard work in, taken the early losses worked his way back to .500 and WHAM. He was once again put in a position to fail. will get fired this year, its a sad reflection of just how sick our franchise is.

Does he get credit for getting a team with huge holes in defense to 10 games above 500? Of course not. Then all the key players are involved in trade talks their performance takes a hit and you zero in in that one losing streak and you decide in your infinite wisdom the team was not being driven towards success? You should talk about horse$hit. I get it you hate him but if take your head out of your ass long enough maybe you will be able to see what people are talking about.

Yeah, guess you live in your reality and I in mine. Hatred doesn't usually lend itself to accuracy. Your eyes only interpret what they see based on what your mind has already told them to expect. If you want to be fair try to keep an open mind instead of trying to be accurate. Anyone can spin data anyway they want, it's preconceived notions about how things should be that lead to poor decision making.

And no I don't like MDA as the coach here. Never did. But I do believe he deserves a fair chance he has never had one while he was here. We must agree to disagree. I also don't want us to blindly keep changing coaches because continuity is more important than abrupt change.

Please stop promoting your opinion like it is fact.

Your ignorance clouds your reasoning. What I said was MDA had the team playing increasingly better leading up to the trade. What I didn't do was cherrypick a handful of games to prove my point. Anyone can pick a handful of sequential data points that fit their own belief system and call it a trend. 18 games does not make a trend. If you waqnt to analyze the trend then use the entire season upto the trade as data and this is what you will see.

You obviously dont understand what trends are and how they are estimated, anyway wasted effort. You probably buy a stock everytime it goes up 5 days in a row, right? That's your type of reasoning isn't it?

I do. But you are right wasted effort. You would be buying Enron after the got outted because you'd be drawing lines and teeling me the stock was on the up and up. because of a one year trend.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Uhhh no dude that doesn't prove your point. You might as well do a 10 year analysis and give me a trajectory and tell me this was more relevant. That red line is more indicative of where the team was headed and how they were playing. It was the more recent data and the prevailing trend. But I'll give you a C if you laminate it and get to me by Tuesday.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:The only thing I said was the Knicks were not in an upward trajectory pre Melodramatic trade. That's true whether you like MDA or not. Your statement is false. End of story. n

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Not my fault you posted things that didn't correspond to reality. Pre trade they were not headed upward as you said. I do hate him but I always try to stay accurate.

loweyecue wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Wow. What a load of horse$hit. The team was not driving toward sucess pre trade. We were almost 10 game sover 0.500 then worked our way to 2 games over 0.500. I get you like him but how about putting things that are true rather than false in his defense?

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:I don't think management did him any favors in acquiring Anthony and amnestying Billups. In fact it appears there was a disregard for what he needs to be successful. However, I also think that the Berger article that quoted Warkenstein is right when he says D'Antoni is a roster specific coach. I don't think he is the problem this year and I don't think he was put in the position where he can succeed. That being said I do think he had done enough in the past to warrant termination. This year is different. He is not part of the problem but I also don't think he is capable of solving it.

So when was he put in a position to succeed during his tenure as a Knick's coach?

I think pre-trade last year he had the team closest to what he needs to run his style. I think we differ in opinion about how much success he is actually capable of achieving without a totally stacked roster and an mvp running the point.

Right pre-trade last year he had a team that he was driving towards success. He had put the hard work in, taken the early losses worked his way back to .500 and WHAM. He was once again put in a position to fail. will get fired this year, its a sad reflection of just how sick our franchise is.

Does he get credit for getting a team with huge holes in defense to 10 games above 500? Of course not. Then all the key players are involved in trade talks their performance takes a hit and you zero in in that one losing streak and you decide in your infinite wisdom the team was not being driven towards success? You should talk about horse$hit. I get it you hate him but if take your head out of your ass long enough maybe you will be able to see what people are talking about.

Yeah, guess you live in your reality and I in mine. Hatred doesn't usually lend itself to accuracy. Your eyes only interpret what they see based on what your mind has already told them to expect. If you want to be fair try to keep an open mind instead of trying to be accurate. Anyone can spin data anyway they want, it's preconceived notions about how things should be that lead to poor decision making.

And no I don't like MDA as the coach here. Never did. But I do believe he deserves a fair chance he has never had one while he was here. We must agree to disagree. I also don't want us to blindly keep changing coaches because continuity is more important than abrupt change.

Please stop promoting your opinion like it is fact.

Your ignorance clouds your reasoning. What I said was MDA had the team playing increasingly better leading up to the trade. What I didn't do was cherrypick a handful of games to prove my point. Anyone can pick a handful of sequential data points that fit their own belief system and call it a trend. 18 games does not make a trend. If you waqnt to analyze the trend then use the entire season upto the trade as data and this is what you will see.

You obviously dont understand what trends are and how they are estimated, anyway wasted effort. You probably buy a stock everytime it goes up 5 days in a row, right? That's your type of reasoning isn't it?

nykshaknbake wrote:I do. But you are right wasted effort. You would be buying Enron after the got outted because you'd be drawing lines and teeling me the stock was on the up and up. because of a one year trend.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Uhhh no dude that doesn't prove your point. You might as well do a 10 year analysis and give me a trajectory and tell me this was more relevant. That red line is more indicative of where the team was headed and how they were playing. It was the more recent data and the prevailing trend. But I'll give you a C if you laminate it and get to me by Tuesday.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:The only thing I said was the Knicks were not in an upward trajectory pre Melodramatic trade. That's true whether you like MDA or not. Your statement is false. End of story. n

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Not my fault you posted things that didn't correspond to reality. Pre trade they were not headed upward as you said. I do hate him but I always try to stay accurate.

loweyecue wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Wow. What a load of horse$hit. The team was not driving toward sucess pre trade. We were almost 10 game sover 0.500 then worked our way to 2 games over 0.500. I get you like him but how about putting things that are true rather than false in his defense?

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:I don't think management did him any favors in acquiring Anthony and amnestying Billups. In fact it appears there was a disregard for what he needs to be successful. However, I also think that the Berger article that quoted Warkenstein is right when he says D'Antoni is a roster specific coach. I don't think he is the problem this year and I don't think he was put in the position where he can succeed. That being said I do think he had done enough in the past to warrant termination. This year is different. He is not part of the problem but I also don't think he is capable of solving it.

So when was he put in a position to succeed during his tenure as a Knick's coach?

I think pre-trade last year he had the team closest to what he needs to run his style. I think we differ in opinion about how much success he is actually capable of achieving without a totally stacked roster and an mvp running the point.

Right pre-trade last year he had a team that he was driving towards success. He had put the hard work in, taken the early losses worked his way back to .500 and WHAM. He was once again put in a position to fail. will get fired this year, its a sad reflection of just how sick our franchise is.

Does he get credit for getting a team with huge holes in defense to 10 games above 500? Of course not. Then all the key players are involved in trade talks their performance takes a hit and you zero in in that one losing streak and you decide in your infinite wisdom the team was not being driven towards success? You should talk about horse$hit. I get it you hate him but if take your head out of your ass long enough maybe you will be able to see what people are talking about.

Yeah, guess you live in your reality and I in mine. Hatred doesn't usually lend itself to accuracy. Your eyes only interpret what they see based on what your mind has already told them to expect. If you want to be fair try to keep an open mind instead of trying to be accurate. Anyone can spin data anyway they want, it's preconceived notions about how things should be that lead to poor decision making.

And no I don't like MDA as the coach here. Never did. But I do believe he deserves a fair chance he has never had one while he was here. We must agree to disagree. I also don't want us to blindly keep changing coaches because continuity is more important than abrupt change.

Please stop promoting your opinion like it is fact.

Your ignorance clouds your reasoning. What I said was MDA had the team playing increasingly better leading up to the trade. What I didn't do was cherrypick a handful of games to prove my point. Anyone can pick a handful of sequential data points that fit their own belief system and call it a trend. 18 games does not make a trend. If you waqnt to analyze the trend then use the entire season upto the trade as data and this is what you will see.

You obviously dont understand what trends are and how they are estimated, anyway wasted effort. You probably buy a stock everytime it goes up 5 days in a row, right? That's your type of reasoning isn't it?

Like I suspected. Pure genius.

To illustrate

Well, I guess your moninker fits.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:I do. But you are right wasted effort. You would be buying Enron after the got outted because you'd be drawing lines and teeling me the stock was on the up and up. because of a one year trend.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Uhhh no dude that doesn't prove your point. You might as well do a 10 year analysis and give me a trajectory and tell me this was more relevant. That red line is more indicative of where the team was headed and how they were playing. It was the more recent data and the prevailing trend. But I'll give you a C if you laminate it and get to me by Tuesday.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:The only thing I said was the Knicks were not in an upward trajectory pre Melodramatic trade. That's true whether you like MDA or not. Your statement is false. End of story. n

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Not my fault you posted things that didn't correspond to reality. Pre trade they were not headed upward as you said. I do hate him but I always try to stay accurate.

loweyecue wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:Wow. What a load of horse$hit. The team was not driving toward sucess pre trade. We were almost 10 game sover 0.500 then worked our way to 2 games over 0.500. I get you like him but how about putting things that are true rather than false in his defense?

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:I don't think management did him any favors in acquiring Anthony and amnestying Billups. In fact it appears there was a disregard for what he needs to be successful. However, I also think that the Berger article that quoted Warkenstein is right when he says D'Antoni is a roster specific coach. I don't think he is the problem this year and I don't think he was put in the position where he can succeed. That being said I do think he had done enough in the past to warrant termination. This year is different. He is not part of the problem but I also don't think he is capable of solving it.

So when was he put in a position to succeed during his tenure as a Knick's coach?

I think pre-trade last year he had the team closest to what he needs to run his style. I think we differ in opinion about how much success he is actually capable of achieving without a totally stacked roster and an mvp running the point.

Right pre-trade last year he had a team that he was driving towards success. He had put the hard work in, taken the early losses worked his way back to .500 and WHAM. He was once again put in a position to fail. will get fired this year, its a sad reflection of just how sick our franchise is.

Does he get credit for getting a team with huge holes in defense to 10 games above 500? Of course not. Then all the key players are involved in trade talks their performance takes a hit and you zero in in that one losing streak and you decide in your infinite wisdom the team was not being driven towards success? You should talk about horse$hit. I get it you hate him but if take your head out of your ass long enough maybe you will be able to see what people are talking about.

Yeah, guess you live in your reality and I in mine. Hatred doesn't usually lend itself to accuracy. Your eyes only interpret what they see based on what your mind has already told them to expect. If you want to be fair try to keep an open mind instead of trying to be accurate. Anyone can spin data anyway they want, it's preconceived notions about how things should be that lead to poor decision making.

And no I don't like MDA as the coach here. Never did. But I do believe he deserves a fair chance he has never had one while he was here. We must agree to disagree. I also don't want us to blindly keep changing coaches because continuity is more important than abrupt change.

Please stop promoting your opinion like it is fact.

Your ignorance clouds your reasoning. What I said was MDA had the team playing increasingly better leading up to the trade. What I didn't do was cherrypick a handful of games to prove my point. Anyone can pick a handful of sequential data points that fit their own belief system and call it a trend. 18 games does not make a trend. If you waqnt to analyze the trend then use the entire season upto the trade as data and this is what you will see.

You obviously dont understand what trends are and how they are estimated, anyway wasted effort. You probably buy a stock everytime it goes up 5 days in a row, right? That's your type of reasoning isn't it?

Like I suspected. Pure genius.

nykshaknbake wrote:To illustrate

Again you illustrate your ignorance. Anyone can take a chart stsarting at a high point and draw a downwards facing trndline. Only idiots use that as proof. Using your logic I could slice of a piece of the graph that would project the Knicks would win all 82 games. You just don't get it, do you?

The trend is what it is. The good teams don't have graphs like this showing downward trends...I don't know what to tell you. The good teams win at rates above 0.500, especially in the 2nd half of the season. I think my trendline is much more in context than yours as well. You basically have us back at 10m games over 0.500 if we didn't do the trade. With a worn out starting rotation and all other NBA teams tightening their D and intensity except for us. As far as ignorance I guarantee I have more education than you.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:To illustrate

Again you illustrate your ignorance. Anyone can take a chart stsarting at a high point and draw a downwards facing trndline. Only idiots use that as proof. Using your logic I could slice of a piece of the graph that would project the Knicks would win all 82 games. You just don't get it, do you?

nykshaknbake wrote:The trend is what it is. The good teams don't have graphs like this showing downward trends...I don't know what to tell you. The good teams win at rates above 0.500, especially in the 2nd half of the season. I think my trendline is much more in context than yours as well. As far as ignorance I guarantee I have more education than you.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:To illustrate

Again you illustrate your ignorance. Anyone can take a chart stsarting at a high point and draw a downwards facing trndline. Only idiots use that as proof. Using your logic I could slice of a piece of the graph that would project the Knicks would win all 82 games. You just don't get it, do you?

Then your ignorance is only matched by your arrogance.

try responding to the rest of the content of my post. It takes alot of arrogance to be labeling others as ignorant which you've done 3 times now you pompous tool.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:The trend is what it is. The good teams don't have graphs like this showing downward trends...I don't know what to tell you. The good teams win at rates above 0.500, especially in the 2nd half of the season. I think my trendline is much more in context than yours as well. As far as ignorance I guarantee I have more education than you.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:To illustrate

Again you illustrate your ignorance. Anyone can take a chart stsarting at a high point and draw a downwards facing trndline. Only idiots use that as proof. Using your logic I could slice of a piece of the graph that would project the Knicks would win all 82 games. You just don't get it, do you?

Then your ignorance is only matched by your arrogance.

nykshaknbake wrote:try responding to the rest of the content of my post. It takes alot of arrogance to be labeling others as ignorant which you've done 3 times now you pompous tool.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:The trend is what it is. The good teams don't have graphs like this showing downward trends...I don't know what to tell you. The good teams win at rates above 0.500, especially in the 2nd half of the season. I think my trendline is much more in context than yours as well. As far as ignorance I guarantee I have more education than you.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:To illustrate

Again you illustrate your ignorance. Anyone can take a chart stsarting at a high point and draw a downwards facing trndline. Only idiots use that as proof. Using your logic I could slice of a piece of the graph that would project the Knicks would win all 82 games. You just don't get it, do you?

Then your ignorance is only matched by your arrogance.

I already responded to your "content". You take a part of the data tat fits your theory and you ignore the rest. There is no reason to keep regurgitating this. It also takes a lot of arrogance to call someone's post "horseshit" without even understanding what they are saying. So deal with it.

You haven't responded. But I shouldn't have labeled your post as such. My apologies. I did understand your initial post however. 2/3 of the sample is not just a part. Looking at short term trends is a major part of sports analysis. The more recent the more relevant. It's a major part of why alot of sports analysts have the Giants winning tomorrow instead of the Pats. If you look at the a season trend only the Pats are the easy favorite.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:try responding to the rest of the content of my post. It takes alot of arrogance to be labeling others as ignorant which you've done 3 times now you pompous tool.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:The trend is what it is. The good teams don't have graphs like this showing downward trends...I don't know what to tell you. The good teams win at rates above 0.500, especially in the 2nd half of the season. I think my trendline is much more in context than yours as well. As far as ignorance I guarantee I have more education than you.

loweyecue wrote:

nykshaknbake wrote:To illustrate

Again you illustrate your ignorance. Anyone can take a chart stsarting at a high point and draw a downwards facing trndline. Only idiots use that as proof. Using your logic I could slice of a piece of the graph that would project the Knicks would win all 82 games. You just don't get it, do you?

Then your ignorance is only matched by your arrogance.

I already responded to your "content". You take a part of the data tat fits your theory and you ignore the rest. There is no reason to keep regurgitating this. It also takes a lot of arrogance to call someone's post "horseshit" without even understanding what they are saying. So deal with it.

Additionally since we are talking about which way the team was headed a graph that trends rate of winning instead of static win loss record overall would be what we should be looking at. If we looked at that the short term trend should be even more telling and I think(at 1st blush) the season trend would be as well.

Knicks on a 4 game win streak thanks to the awesomeness of Jeremy Lin. Yea... I dont think D'Antoni was the problem

I have seen the future. The same thing happened to the Suns when their idiot media were screaming for a defensive change, as if D'Antoni wasn't paying adequate attention to defense.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2009-02-...

History repeats itself. The same fate awaits us.

Lenny Wilkens - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when Marbury turned against him. However after he left the losing continued.

Larry Brown - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when Marbury turned against him. However after he left the losing continued.

Isiah Thomas - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when Marbury turned against him. However after he left the losing continued.

Donnie Walsh - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when he resisted trading for melo. However after he left the losing continued.

Mike D'Antoni - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when Carmelo turned against him. However after he left the losing continued?

Surely, now that D'Antoni is gone we are going to win a championship.

subzero0 wrote:Lenny Wilkens - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when Marbury turned against him. However after he left the losing continued.

Larry Brown - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when Marbury turned against him. However after he left the losing continued.

Isiah Thomas - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when Marbury turned against him. However after he left the losing continued.

Donnie Walsh - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when he resisted trading for melo. However after he left the losing continued.

Mike D'Antoni - Fans initially loved him but he was run out of town because he was fingered by Dolan as the problem when Carmelo turned against him. However after he left the losing continued?

Surely, now that D'Antoni is gone we are going to win a championship.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry

nixluva wrote:

DJMUSIC wrote:D'Antoni isn't the only problem however Coach Mike is one of the primary problems on Knicks &r NY Basketball.
Coach Mike system is old in today's NBA. Coach system was once successful in NBA & Europe. No longer the case.

I just made a thread were teams are openly stating that they've gone to an uptempo spread offense like SSOL. So how is his system passe'? Teams are just now coming around to what he's been preaching.

DJMUSIC wrote:D'Antoni systems has not adjusted much regardless of roster changes some were his own & some were NYK hierarchy pushed onto Mike regardless if fair or not.

There are plenty of old & new NBA coaches currently getting MORE OUT OF THEIR Nba roster and has same issues all coaches has. Without the perfect roster many NBA coaches have their own teams BETTER prepared to play a basketball game.

There's this myth that Mike has actually had perfect rosters over his career. Tell me which roster was perfect? IMO if he had a perfect roster where he not only had the scorers, but also the defensive Center he lacked in PHX, he would've won a title. This team has a substandard backcourt and I don't know of any team that can win if they don't have effective backcourt play. These guards have to do better. Both PG's and SG's.

DJMUSIC wrote:When Amare states "Guys need to start to read the board, game plan" What kind of garbage is that ?and whom is most responsible ? for Guys not knowing a GAME plan for specific team for a NBA game. Which 1 person is responsible for enforcing game plan?

A coach can only give instruction. He can make players care!!! This has been proven over and over again here in NY. That's why teams kill themselves to get players like CP3 or D Howard. They bring it every single night. No nights off. STAT and Tyson know what the team has gone over in practice and when the see teammates completely ignore those instructions that's what he's complaining about.

Remember that game where they had come out of a timeout and just got instruction and TD totally didn't follow that instruction and we didn't get a good shot off. That's the kind of thing that you can't fix as a coach if the players don't listen. Players have to execute what you teach them, but you can't MAKE THEM DO IT! We need our leaders to stay on top of the team to keep them in line. That's the good thing about STAT and Tyson being vocal. Every coach needs a surrogate in the locker room. It seems that STAT and Tyson are the ones trying to lead the team as much as they can. It would be GREAT if we had a PG that was a floor leader too.

So PG growing young J.Lin isnt a Floor leader ?
for our Knick team ?

I'm satisfied with PG Lin now
and next season

other pieces like D and Rebounding, bench need to be shored up.

If Amare isnt going to defend or rebound or block shots or Show leadership get him out (been here 3 yrs)
If Melo isnt going to work/mesh then he leaves next yr.

If Amare is 1/2 player and Melo isnt having a poor season the coach and team would be relevant again today.

Amare is lucky
he gets biggest pass of any Knickerbocker I've seen in a lifetime.
He cites he's healthy and plays like poo-poo each wk

nixluva wrote:You have to understand that most of the time i'm responding to negative posts, so it only makes it seem like I like everything that MDA does. Of course he's not perfect and makes mistakes like every coach. He's often had problems settling on rotations and they don't always work. He's of course known for his teams not being great defensively and he's partly to blame since he doesn't really want a grind it out style.

Still overall I support the coach cuz he's a VERY good NBA coach. We've never seen him at his best cuz we keep changing the team on him. IF you can't understand how that can effect a coach then I don't know what to tell you. It's a very logical thing to understand that a lack of roster continuity is bad for a coach.

I want you to go and look up all the players this coach has had since he came here. It's a staggering number of players. Coaches don't like that. Not to mention the lack of a PG. He'll eventually figure out something this team can do to improve this year.

nixluva
we may agree to disagree

but like many others I DO Respect we're all STEALTH knick fans
despite all the mess of org.

One day Knicks will get it right and make fans happy.
Maybe next season ? we'll see