Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
BRIGGS wrote:Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
Vastly overrated player. But on the Knicks he is the best they got.
When train went of rails it is... well... train wreck...
BRIGGS wrote:Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
So true. Chandler is a nice player but they can live without him. He is overpaid and injury prone. New Orleans had to blow the whole thing up bc of him. People who think we will be vastly improved when he comes back are delusional. He's not gonna do anything about nobody other than Melo or Bangs making a shot. He definitely isn't gonna help the backcourt defense. People talk about our weak side help and all this crap but our PG shouldn't be getting beat off the dribble every time down the floor. You can't be competitive or play defense when that happens.
I think the felton, prigs lineup helped a lot. Not sure why that hasn't been revisited.
CrushAlot wrote:I think the felton, prigs lineup helped a lot. Not sure why that hasn't been revisited.
Because our coach is a mental midget.
What about the time we won 13 games in a row last season? Did Tyson have anything to do with that?
And if he didn't, did Felton play with a bad hammy and was Prigs a year older?
A better question would be how did we stop the opposing PG during that stretch, and how could we duplicate that now?
I hate Uncle Drew...
Vmart wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
Vastly overrated player. But on the Knicks he is the best they got.
thats sad, but true..
BRIGGS wrote:Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
If K-Mart gives you big #s, Melo plays the best ball of his career, and you're in a very weak conference, you can win 9 games with one of your all-stars being out.
It's odd but not surprising that Chandler is valued so much more around the league than by Knicks fans. I guess Tyson doesn't do enough flashy inefficient scoring.
MSG3 wrote:CrushAlot wrote:I think the felton, prigs lineup helped a lot. Not sure why that hasn't been revisited.
Because our coach is a mental midget.
It's amazing he hasn't done what worked so well last year.
Bonn1997 wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
If K-Mart gives you big #s, Melo plays the best ball of his career, and you're in a very weak conference, you can win 9 games with one of your all-stars being out.
It's odd but not surprising that Chandler is valued so much more around the league than by Knicks fans. I guess Tyson doesn't do enough flashy inefficient scoring.
Chandler only has value for a team that is completely set at the other 4 positions as you can see the knicks are only set at one position. Dallas was set at all the other positions hence a Championship. OKC can use that blue print with Chandler.
Vmart wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
If K-Mart gives you big #s, Melo plays the best ball of his career, and you're in a very weak conference, you can win 9 games with one of your all-stars being out.
It's odd but not surprising that Chandler is valued so much more around the league than by Knicks fans. I guess Tyson doesn't do enough flashy inefficient scoring.
Chandler only has value for a team that is completely set at the other 4 positions as you can see the knicks are only set at one position. Dallas was set at all the other positions hence a Championship. OKC can use that blue print with Chandler.
but if he averaged 5 more points a game on 15% lower shooting (putting him at around 15 PPG on 48% shooting), you'd love him, right?
I really thought the crashing of this roster despite having so many volume scorers might change people's views on the importance of volume vs. efficiency.
When u have too many volume scorers...your offense will be 90% iso. Can't have melo and other melo wanna bees. But it's hard. If you see melo putting up 30 shots to get 30 puts and receive a max contract....what do you think others will do? That's why it's hard to build around melo and other volume shooters.
Knixkik wrote:MSG3 wrote:CrushAlot wrote:I think the felton, prigs lineup helped a lot. Not sure why that hasn't been revisited.
Because our coach is a mental midget.
It's amazing he hasn't done what worked so well last year.
He tried it for 1 game, we lost and he never went back to it. A few days ago he was asked and he said he may reconsider it down the road..smh..he's turning into the biggest idiot in the business
Bonn1997 wrote:Vmart wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
If K-Mart gives you big #s, Melo plays the best ball of his career, and you're in a very weak conference, you can win 9 games with one of your all-stars being out.
It's odd but not surprising that Chandler is valued so much more around the league than by Knicks fans. I guess Tyson doesn't do enough flashy inefficient scoring.
Chandler only has value for a team that is completely set at the other 4 positions as you can see the knicks are only set at one position. Dallas was set at all the other positions hence a Championship. OKC can use that blue print with Chandler.
but if he averaged 5 more points a game on 15% lower shooting (putting him at around 15 PPG on 48% shooting), you'd love him, right?
I really thought the crashing of this roster despite having so many volume scorers might change people's views on the importance of volume vs. efficiency.
Why should FG suffer to get 5 more points. Instead of tapping out grab rebound go up strong get fouled get the points at the line or get an and one.
Vmart wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Vmart wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Tyson Chandler played in 3 of those games.
If K-Mart gives you big #s, Melo plays the best ball of his career, and you're in a very weak conference, you can win 9 games with one of your all-stars being out.
It's odd but not surprising that Chandler is valued so much more around the league than by Knicks fans. I guess Tyson doesn't do enough flashy inefficient scoring.
Chandler only has value for a team that is completely set at the other 4 positions as you can see the knicks are only set at one position. Dallas was set at all the other positions hence a Championship. OKC can use that blue print with Chandler.
but if he averaged 5 more points a game on 15% lower shooting (putting him at around 15 PPG on 48% shooting), you'd love him, right?
I really thought the crashing of this roster despite having so many volume scorers might change people's views on the importance of volume vs. efficiency.
Why should FG suffer to get 5 more points. Instead of tapping out grab rebound go up strong get fouled get the points at the line or get an and one.
I don't know who FG is but 48% but to put this in some more context: 5 more PPG would put him ahead of David West in points and FG% and would basically mean going 2 for 7 on his additional shot attempts and hitting a free throw. I'm sure other players are making more than 2 of the 7 extra shots they take because of his low volume. I'm sure he could force up 7 more shots a game and hit 2 of them also but that wouldn't help the team.
