mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:What if we wouldn't have even made the playoffs without him though? If Melo gets mulligans for two years of bad playoff outcomes, Tyson should get two also.
thats where you are wrong.
Melo was playing 1 on 5!! Geeeez - even a stat geek knows this.
Have you ever played? Have you ever played on a team that sucked against a team of stars?
Obviously not.
Exactly - you're giving him two mulligans - a mulligan means, for whatever reasons, "last time didn't count; you get another chance."
Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:What if we wouldn't have even made the playoffs without him though? If Melo gets mulligans for two years of bad playoff outcomes, Tyson should get two also.
thats where you are wrong.
Melo was playing 1 on 5!! Geeeez - even a stat geek knows this.
Have you ever played? Have you ever played on a team that sucked against a team of stars?
Obviously not.
Exactly - you're giving him two mulligans - a mulligan means, for whatever reasons, "last time didn't count; you get another chance."
No I am not.
He played excellent considering.
He did not play bad because he had an awful squad.
big difference
What I meant when I said "Last time didn't count" is that you're saying "the outcome of the playoff series doesn't count against you"
mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:What if we wouldn't have even made the playoffs without him though? If Melo gets mulligans for two years of bad playoff outcomes, Tyson should get two also.
thats where you are wrong.
Melo was playing 1 on 5!! Geeeez - even a stat geek knows this.
Have you ever played? Have you ever played on a team that sucked against a team of stars?
Obviously not.
Exactly - you're giving him two mulligans - a mulligan means, for whatever reasons, "last time didn't count; you get another chance."
No I am not.
He played excellent considering.
He did not play bad because he had an awful squad.
big difference
The biggest difference between us though is that I don't think there's ever a justification for taking bad shots (low % shots with a lot of time left on the shot-clock). Even if you're playing with 4 midgets - if they made it to the NBA, you should be spending the earlier seconds of the shot-clock trying to get a high percentage shot.
Bonn1997 wrote:What I meant when I said "Last time didn't count" is that you're saying "the outcome of the playoff series doesn't count against you"
(Most Often) You can't judge a game based on a player rather than its personnel.
can't compare Melo and Chandler
Or Melo and Stat
Cause they were no shows.
Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:What if we wouldn't have even made the playoffs without him though? If Melo gets mulligans for two years of bad playoff outcomes, Tyson should get two also.
thats where you are wrong.
Melo was playing 1 on 5!! Geeeez - even a stat geek knows this.
Have you ever played? Have you ever played on a team that sucked against a team of stars?
Obviously not.
Exactly - you're giving him two mulligans - a mulligan means, for whatever reasons, "last time didn't count; you get another chance."
No I am not.
He played excellent considering.
He did not play bad because he had an awful squad.
big difference
The biggest difference between us though is that I don't think there's ever a justification for taking bad shots (low % shots with a lot of time left on the shot-clock). Even if you're playing with 4 midgets - if they made it to the NBA, you should be spending the earlier seconds of the shot-clock trying to get a high percentage shot.
I often hate Melo's shot selection and don't excuse it. Frustrating as hell.
But, I would rather that than Novak trying to get open and us getting 24 second violations
JR fading away from half court
Chandler doing anything other than dunk
TD - nuff said
Stat turning the ball over
The crazy thing is that when Melo shoots those retarded shots, I actually have hope that they will go in. When Baron Davis is laughing and being drunk, I have zero hope.
I think Melo has been better at moving the ball this year though his assists are way down from last year (just proves that stats don't tell the whole story). HE STILL HAS LOTS OF ROOM TO IMPROVE - is never too late.
mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:What if we wouldn't have even made the playoffs without him though? If Melo gets mulligans for two years of bad playoff outcomes, Tyson should get two also.
thats where you are wrong.
Melo was playing 1 on 5!! Geeeez - even a stat geek knows this.
Have you ever played? Have you ever played on a team that sucked against a team of stars?
Obviously not.
Exactly - you're giving him two mulligans - a mulligan means, for whatever reasons, "last time didn't count; you get another chance."
No I am not.
He played excellent considering.
He did not play bad because he had an awful squad.
big difference
The biggest difference between us though is that I don't think there's ever a justification for taking bad shots (low % shots with a lot of time left on the shot-clock). Even if you're playing with 4 midgets - if they made it to the NBA, you should be spending the earlier seconds of the shot-clock trying to get a high percentage shot.
I often hate Melo's shot selection and don't excuse it. Frustrating as hell.
But, I would rather that than Novak trying to get open and us getting 24 second violations
JR fading away from half court
Chandler doing anything other than dunk
TD - nuff said
Stat turning the ball over
The crazy thing is that when Melo shoots those retarded shots, I actually have hope that they will go in. When Baron Davis is laughing and being drunk, I have zero hope.
I think Melo has been better at moving the ball this year though his assists are way down from last year (just proves that stats don't tell the whole story). HE STILL HAS LOTS OF ROOM TO IMPROVE - is never too late.
I highly doubt that would be a problem. We had no reliable shot-creators against Miami or Chicago and how many shot-clock violations did we have? It's really not that hard to get a shot off in the NBA - shot clock violations are rare.
Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:What if we wouldn't have even made the playoffs without him though? If Melo gets mulligans for two years of bad playoff outcomes, Tyson should get two also.
thats where you are wrong.
Melo was playing 1 on 5!! Geeeez - even a stat geek knows this.
Have you ever played? Have you ever played on a team that sucked against a team of stars?
Obviously not.
Exactly - you're giving him two mulligans - a mulligan means, for whatever reasons, "last time didn't count; you get another chance."
No I am not.
He played excellent considering.
He did not play bad because he had an awful squad.
big difference
The biggest difference between us though is that I don't think there's ever a justification for taking bad shots (low % shots with a lot of time left on the shot-clock). Even if you're playing with 4 midgets - if they made it to the NBA, you should be spending the earlier seconds of the shot-clock trying to get a high percentage shot.
I often hate Melo's shot selection and don't excuse it. Frustrating as hell.
But, I would rather that than Novak trying to get open and us getting 24 second violations
JR fading away from half court
Chandler doing anything other than dunk
TD - nuff said
Stat turning the ball over
The crazy thing is that when Melo shoots those retarded shots, I actually have hope that they will go in. When Baron Davis is laughing and being drunk, I have zero hope.
I think Melo has been better at moving the ball this year though his assists are way down from last year (just proves that stats don't tell the whole story). HE STILL HAS LOTS OF ROOM TO IMPROVE - is never too late.
I highly doubt that would be a problem. We had no reliable shot-creators against Miami or Chicago and how many shot-clock violations did we have? It's really not that hard to get a shot off in the NBA - shot clock violations are rare.
THAT IS COMPLETELY WRONG!
It is extremely hard to get off a high pct shot against top defensive teams. Especially WHEN YOU CAN BARELY GET THE BALL UP THE COURT!!
Are you serious with this? You really did not watch the games did you?
mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:What if we wouldn't have even made the playoffs without him though? If Melo gets mulligans for two years of bad playoff outcomes, Tyson should get two also.
thats where you are wrong.
Melo was playing 1 on 5!! Geeeez - even a stat geek knows this.
Have you ever played? Have you ever played on a team that sucked against a team of stars?
Obviously not.
Exactly - you're giving him two mulligans - a mulligan means, for whatever reasons, "last time didn't count; you get another chance."
No I am not.
He played excellent considering.
He did not play bad because he had an awful squad.
big difference
The biggest difference between us though is that I don't think there's ever a justification for taking bad shots (low % shots with a lot of time left on the shot-clock). Even if you're playing with 4 midgets - if they made it to the NBA, you should be spending the earlier seconds of the shot-clock trying to get a high percentage shot.
I often hate Melo's shot selection and don't excuse it. Frustrating as hell.
But, I would rather that than Novak trying to get open and us getting 24 second violations
JR fading away from half court
Chandler doing anything other than dunk
TD - nuff said
Stat turning the ball over
The crazy thing is that when Melo shoots those retarded shots, I actually have hope that they will go in. When Baron Davis is laughing and being drunk, I have zero hope.
I think Melo has been better at moving the ball this year though his assists are way down from last year (just proves that stats don't tell the whole story). HE STILL HAS LOTS OF ROOM TO IMPROVE - is never too late.
I highly doubt that would be a problem. We had no reliable shot-creators against Miami or Chicago and how many shot-clock violations did we have? It's really not that hard to get a shot off in the NBA - shot clock violations are rare.
THAT IS COMPLETELY WRONG!
It is extremely hard to get off a high pct shot against top defensive teams. Especially WHEN YOU CAN BARELY GET THE BALL UP THE COURT!!
Are you serious with this? You really did not watch the games did you?
Chill out - you simply misread what I wrote. I said it's not hard to get a shot off - I didn't say it's not hard to get a high percentage shot off. Your worry was about getting any shot off - or at least that's what discussing shot-clock violations implies. If your concern is getting off high percentage shots, then you should agree that as long as there are 4 professional basketball players on the court, Melo should never take bad shots with lots of time on the shot-clock. He violated that rule way too often in the playoffs for me to give him a pass.
With Melo, you have to take the good with the bad at times as you know has been the case with Kobe.
With Miami, they were often left with very little time on the shot clock for even a mid to low pct shot. When that is happening and you can take a shot early in the shot clock that is not completely awful, you take it. Not always though and Melo certainly jacked up some dumb ones.
But its not white and black. You really need to watch the games and judge (partly) based on that.
Bonn1997 wrote:Do I have to remind you that Melo makes only about 30% of his contested jump shots?
http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topi...
Do you take into account that those jump shots open up high pct drives that also lead to FT attempts?
mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Do I have to remind you that Melo makes only about 30% of his contested jump shots?
http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topi...
Do you take into account that those jump shots open up high pct drives that also lead to FT attempts?
No. Do you have evidence for that claim/excuse?
Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Do I have to remind you that Melo makes only about 30% of his contested jump shots?
http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topi...
Do you take into account that those jump shots open up high pct drives that also lead to FT attempts?
No. Do you have evidence for that claim/excuse?
Glad you asked.
Nope.
I WATCH THE DAMN GAME!! Try it - its not all available the next day on the stat sheet for your edification.
mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Do I have to remind you that Melo makes only about 30% of his contested jump shots?
http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topi...
Do you take into account that those jump shots open up high pct drives that also lead to FT attempts?
No. Do you have evidence for that claim/excuse?
Glad you asked.
Nope.
I WATCH THE DAMN GAME!! Try it - its not all available the next day on the stat sheet for your edification.
I watch the game too and I see contested jump shots hurting the team. Clearly the "I watch the game" statement won't resolve anything.
I find it highly unlikely that a shot you hit at 30% is actually some kind of secret weapon benefiting the team.
Once you realize the importance of scoring efficiency (and it sounds like you now generally speaking do), when you watch the game you see it entirely differently. You're no longer distracted by flashy, high volume, inefficient offense.
Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:mrKnickShot wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Do I have to remind you that Melo makes only about 30% of his contested jump shots?
http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topi...
Do you take into account that those jump shots open up high pct drives that also lead to FT attempts?
No. Do you have evidence for that claim/excuse?
Glad you asked.
Nope.
I WATCH THE DAMN GAME!! Try it - its not all available the next day on the stat sheet for your edification.
I watch the game too and I see contested jump shots hurting the team. Clearly the "I watch the game" statement won't resolve anything.
I find it highly unlikely that a shot you hit at 30% is actually some kind of secret weapon benefiting the team.
Some of them are clearly bad shots. I have stated that over and over again. They do keep the defense running at him even if its dumb on the defenders part since it opens up his drives when he fakes that (dumb, contested) shot.
Watching the game is not a cop out. Its pivotal.
I am not gaga over Melo and he is not my speed. I just try to see him for what he is and know that there is much disdain for him from the various YUTE people, MDA, Gallo, etc.
I hated Kobe because he took those horrible shots. I hate when Melo does it. I just try to appreciate the other aspects of his game that are unstoppable - if he just did what Kobe was never willing to do.
Bonn1997 wrote:Once you realize the importance of scoring efficiency (and it sounds like you now generally speaking do), when you watch the game you see it entirely differently. You're no longer distracted by flashy, high volume, inefficient offense.
Melo has been sufficiently efficient this year. I'd imagine his efficiency will increase slightly when Amar'e returns and he is able to get one or two easy baskets a game as a result, possibly. You must be speaking about yester-year which is irrelevant.
NUPE wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Once you realize the importance of scoring efficiency (and it sounds like you now generally speaking do), when you watch the game you see it entirely differently. You're no longer distracted by flashy, high volume, inefficient offense.
Melo has sufficiently efficient this year. I'd imagine his efficiency will increase slightly when Amar'e returns and he is able to get one or two easy baskets a game as a result, possibly. You must be speaking about yester-year which is irrelevant.
I'm talking about his whole career - it is poor math to look at any small sample of games (including the less than 20 he's played this year).
Bonn1997 wrote:Once you realize the importance of scoring efficiency (and it sounds like you now generally speaking do), when you watch the game you see it entirely differently. You're no longer distracted by flashy, high volume, inefficient offense.
I was always a stat geek. Just not for things that I don't understand like Win Shares.
When people say that Andre Miller was their type of player and he has a WS of .122 for his career, I question it.
When WS fails, we can fall to WP's ... I know.
I have read many dissenting args to WS's and cannot buy into it. You don't get it either - you were just told that its a viable stat. I don't like being told what to believe.
I have been fair in my assessment of what Carmelo is. I also hold out hope that he can be better and believe that he has improved this year. Explain his horrible assists numbers compared to 3.6 last year and tell me which year he was more selfish. PLEASE
HOPE is a good thing. The religion of science can be dangerous.
Bonn1997 wrote:NUPE wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Once you realize the importance of scoring efficiency (and it sounds like you now generally speaking do), when you watch the game you see it entirely differently. You're no longer distracted by flashy, high volume, inefficient offense.
Melo has sufficiently efficient this year. I'd imagine his efficiency will increase slightly when Amar'e returns and he is able to get one or two easy baskets a game as a result, possibly. You must be speaking about yester-year which is irrelevant.
I'm talking about his whole career - it is poor math to look at any small sample of games (including the less than 20 he's played this year).
His sample size under Woody is becoming larger and larger. Watch out!
