Knicks · what else can melo do?! 44 pts, 9 boards? (page 11)

TeamBall wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

It's not useless but very overvalued by most people. Especially media types

It definitely is. It's also a huge draw for a casual fan. But it doesn't hurt to have a guy who can score on your team.

all depends on how he gets those points. that's why melo is a dinosaur.

gunsnewing wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

It's not useless but very overvalued by most people. Especially media types

Yeah, and the scoreboard seems to think it counts too. So who was leading the team during those first 23 games? Let's hear about them. Again. And what difference makers they are a year later.

And aren't most media types busy writing about what a useless PPG inefficient scorer Melo is, and how he actually makes teammates worse?

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

Maybe a little above useless. There's no point in using it when there are so many better stats available. It's like staring at a map when you have a GPS.

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

It's not useless but very overvalued by most people. Especially media types

Yeah, and the scoreboard seems to think it counts too. So who was leading the team during those first 23 games? Let's hear about them. Again. And what difference makers they are a year later.

And aren't most media types busy writing about what a useless PPG inefficient scorer Melo is, and how he actually makes teammates worse?

Well you said stats and you must know the difference between singular and plural, right? So what besides PPG did you even have in mind?

fishmike wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Oh I see. 18-4 that year and the finish last year were similar in that we beat up on weaker teams playing HEROBALL and got crushed both times once the playoffs rolled around

Guns... its just not how it happened. Knicks beat Indy 2x, the Nets, the Bulls, The Clippers, Hawks...

Lin tweeked his knee, and shut it down.

And last year the Knicks beat almost every elite team in the league at least once... I 100000% agree that iso ball is not going to win in the playoffs and thats part of why Melo's teams fail, when he's the primary scorer. You must have another guy to lean on.

No I'm assuming most of the 18-4 run came after Lin and Amare went down and we rode Melo. Yes it worked both years against some elite teams and lottery teams but was completely exposed in the playoffs both years.

When we beat Indiana on home and home back to backs we had Melo, Amare and Lin and see 6-1. That's the most excited I've been about a knick team since the 90s. They were blowing everyone out. Melo and Amare were both playing great. LIN's scoring numbers obviously dipped to around 14 & 6 with the ball not being in his hands as much during Linsanity but he was a key contributor to that stretch

The Lin and Amare go down shortly after. Remember how demoralizing that was? And we were all hoping that They would make it back in time for the playoffs? Because we knew Miami would eat us up if we solely relied on Melo? Then everyone wants to kick Lin on his way out but that's another story.

I felt a lot better about that teams chance than last year's team that consisted of Melo and a couple 40yr olds and Amare who was a nonfactor. That was the core to be excited about going foward with Melo. Credit to the Knicks and Woodson for beating up on weaker teams and winning 54games mostly force feeding Melo but to me it's not about just making the playoffs 1yr and the n falling off the face of the earth with no sustainability. We don't have to win it all. I just want to get back to being a contender every year like we were. At least get to the ECF or at the very least a competitive 2nd rd series.

Getting bounced last year by a far superior and superior coaches team like Indiana would've been ok if we had talented core to build off the loss but we didn't. Kidd retired and we were left with Felton as starting pg when we removed him from pg last year

Now here you go 21-36 is the result of Giving up all those draft picks and assets over the years

I'd be very afraid of whatever direction mills and Dolan go in because it can lead to another decade is of being the laughing stock of the league. Hey certainly haven't earned our trust

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

It's not useless but very overvalued by most people. Especially media types

Yeah, and the scoreboard seems to think it counts too. So who was leading the team during those first 23 games? Let's hear about them. Again. And what difference makers they are a year later.

And aren't most media types busy writing about what a useless PPG inefficient scorer Melo is, and how he actually makes teammates worse?

Well you said stats and you must know the difference between singular and plural, right? So what besides PPG did you even have in mind?

Who provided the non-boring leadership during those 23 games? Simple question. The original statement was, Melo-led teams are boring, but the first 23 games of last season were awesome.

4 responses and no answer so far.

Bonn1997 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

Maybe a little above useless. There's no point in using it when there are so many better stats available. It's like staring at a map when you have a GPS.

just out of curiousity... what determines who wins the game and who loses? Is that TS% Or points scored... just wondering.

Useless indeed.

Then the offseason comes around and Lin is completely neglected in favor of acquiring 40yr old Nash. I don't think it's crazy to say CAA got cold feet about Melo's worth being slightly diminished and therefore wanted to diminish LIN's role instead. It's possible this time around Melo has matured and truly wants to win a ring and won't go after max money. We will see

gunsnewing wrote:

fishmike wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Oh I see. 18-4 that year and the finish last year were similar in that we beat up on weaker teams playing HEROBALL and got crushed both times once the playoffs rolled around

Guns... its just not how it happened. Knicks beat Indy 2x, the Nets, the Bulls, The Clippers, Hawks...

Lin tweeked his knee, and shut it down.

And last year the Knicks beat almost every elite team in the league at least once... I 100000% agree that iso ball is not going to win in the playoffs and thats part of why Melo's teams fail, when he's the primary scorer. You must have another guy to lean on.

No I'm assuming most of the 18-4 run came after Lin and Amare went down and we rode Melo. Yes it worked both years against some elite teams and lottery teams but was completely exposed in the playoffs both years.

When we beat Indiana on home and home back to backs we had Melo, Amare and Lin and see 6-1. That's the most excited I've been about a knick team since the 90s. They were blowing everyone out. Melo and Amare were both playing great. LIN's scoring numbers obviously dipped to around 14 & 6 with the ball not being in his hands as much during Linsanity but he was a key contributor to that stretch

The Lin and Amare go down shortly after. Remember how demoralizing that was? And we were all hoping that They would make it back in time for the playoffs? Because we knew Miami would eat us up if we solely relied on Melo? Then everyone wants to kick Lin on his way out but that's another story.
I felt a lot better about that teams chance than last year's team that consisted of Melo and a couple 40yr olds and Amare who was a nonfactor. That was the core to be excited about going foward with Melo. Credit to the Knicks and Woodson for beating up on weaker teams and winning 54games mostly force feeding Melo but to me it's not about just making the playoffs 1yr and the n falling off the face of the earth with no sustainability. We don't have to win it all. I just want to get back to being a contender every year like we were. At least get to the ECF or at the very least a competitive 2nd rd series.

Getting bounced last year by a far superior and superior coaches team like Indiana would've been ok if we had talented core to build off the loss but we didn't. Kidd retired and we were left with Felton as starting pg when we removed him from pg last year

Now here you go 21-36 is the result of Giving up all those draft picks and assets over the years

I'd be very afraid of whatever direction mills and Dolan go in because it can lead to another decade is of being the laughing stock of the league. Hey certainly haven't earned our trust

Guns... I hear you, but your kind of making my point. When we had Melo, Lin and Amare healthy they were crushing it. I 100% agree, iso Melo ball isnt the way to win, but thats not because its all you get with Melo, its because that was the only option at the time.

Every star, even Lebron, KD, Shaq and Jordan needed another star next to them to win. People here throw stuff out like Melo cant play with other stars or doesnt make guys better, but every shred of evidense points to exactly the opposite. Ive posted the stats.

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

Maybe a little above useless. There's no point in using it when there are so many better stats available. It's like staring at a map when you have a GPS.

just out of curiousity... what determines who wins the game and who loses? Is that TS% Or points scored... just wondering.

Useless indeed.

It's certainly neither of those since points allowed is just as important as points scored. But it's really the team that makes more efficient use out of the roughly 95 to 100 possessions per game it will get.

gunsnewing wrote:Then the offseason comes around and Lin is completely neglected in favor of acquiring 40yr old Nash. I don't think it's crazy to say CAA got cold feet about Melo's worth being slightly diminished and therefore wanted to diminish LIN's role instead. It's possible this time around Melo has matured and truly wants to win a ring and won't go after max money. We will see

Guns that idiotic move not only cost us Lin, it cost us Landry Fields also. Toronto only gave him that deal because they wanted to submarine the Knicks using him to S&T Nash. As the Knicks do their business publicly Toronto pounced on that. I have no problem not matching that deal. It a crap contract, but I also think we could have resigned Fields to the cheap (3 years $10-$12mm) but we didnt even get that chance.

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

It's not useless but very overvalued by most people. Especially media types

Yeah, and the scoreboard seems to think it counts too. So who was leading the team during those first 23 games? Let's hear about them. Again. And what difference makers they are a year later.

And aren't most media types busy writing about what a useless PPG inefficient scorer Melo is, and how he actually makes teammates worse?

Well you said stats and you must know the difference between singular and plural, right? So what besides PPG did you even have in mind?

Who provided the non-boring leadership during those 23 games? Simple question. The original statement was, Melo-led teams are boring, but the first 23 games of last season were awesome.

4 responses and no answer so far.

Speaking for myself I made it clear that my main issue is not with Melo the player but how he got himself here. I said you can win with Melo with the right pieces and playing the right way. We had that for 23games but those pieces were 40 and broke down shortly thereafter. Vet min deals and NBDL players is the best you can do when you are capped out with no picks, no young assets and Mid level exceptions.

Now here we are all these years later. Melo is entering his 30s. Having waisted his prime years because he forced the Knicks hand in getting him here. Now you have to wonder if it's worth extending his contract

This is he stuff you grow accustomed to as a Knicks fans since Dolan took over in 1998

Bonn1997 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

Maybe a little above useless. There's no point in using it when there are so many better stats available. It's like staring at a map when you have a GPS.

Oh I see you're talking about from a talent evaluation standpoint? I thought you were dismissing scorers altogether.

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

Maybe a little above useless. There's no point in using it when there are so many better stats available. It's like staring at a map when you have a GPS.

Oh I see you're talking about from a talent evaluation standpoint? I thought you were dismissing scorers altogether.

Well, no, clearly a big part of what makes Lebron and Durant so great is that they can score highly efficiently at a high volume. It's debated within the stat community - there may be some value but it's probably low to high volume at average efficiency. A lot of averageness isn't really great.

gunsnewing wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

It's not useless but very overvalued by most people. Especially media types

Yeah, and the scoreboard seems to think it counts too. So who was leading the team during those first 23 games? Let's hear about them. Again. And what difference makers they are a year later.

And aren't most media types busy writing about what a useless PPG inefficient scorer Melo is, and how he actually makes teammates worse?

Well you said stats and you must know the difference between singular and plural, right? So what besides PPG did you even have in mind?

Who provided the non-boring leadership during those 23 games? Simple question. The original statement was, Melo-led teams are boring, but the first 23 games of last season were awesome.

4 responses and no answer so far.

Speaking for myself I made it clear that my main issue is not with Melo the player but how he got himself here. I said you can win with Melo with the right pieces and playing the right way. We had that for 23games but those pieces were 40 and broke down shortly thereafter. Vet min deals and NBDL players is the best you can do when you are capped out with no picks, no young assets and Mid level exceptions.

Now here we are all these years later. Melo is entering his 30s. Having waisted his prime years because he forced the Knicks hand in getting him here. Now you have to wonder if it's worth extending his contract

This is he stuff you grow accustomed to as a Knicks fans since Dolan took over in 1998

its fair. I hated that part two. If he was so all about winning he should have come as a FA, but he wanted his contract under the CBA. I get it. He's a pro athlete and he was looking out for himself first there. That being said no player, not one takes less money to help the team. I mean Lebron/Wade/Bosh took a very little less to play together, NOT to help Miami. DHoward went to Houston for his own benefit, because he didnt want to be in LA. We loved with Lin did but he turned Linsanity into the most money he could get. Copeland left for more cash.

Your only a pro athlete once, and there is huge pressure to make as much as you can while your skills are peeking. Asking Melo to do something literally NO OTHER pro athlete does isnt really fair to Melo. Any example of a pro athlete doing this is ultra rare and loaded with unsual circumstances..

Cano.. left for the money. Clemens left for the money... you get the idea. Find those guys are easy. Show me the guys who sign at a discount to help the team. If it happens its only after they have made a fortune or their skills are declining. Like Duncan or Dirk.

My problem is seeing Melo be painted as the victim in all of this. Is it worth starting from scratch again with Melo know that he is entering his 30s I honestly don't know nor do I trust this organization To do the right thing

fishmike wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

It's not useless but very overvalued by most people. Especially media types

Yeah, and the scoreboard seems to think it counts too. So who was leading the team during those first 23 games? Let's hear about them. Again. And what difference makers they are a year later.

And aren't most media types busy writing about what a useless PPG inefficient scorer Melo is, and how he actually makes teammates worse?

Well you said stats and you must know the difference between singular and plural, right? So what besides PPG did you even have in mind?

Who provided the non-boring leadership during those 23 games? Simple question. The original statement was, Melo-led teams are boring, but the first 23 games of last season were awesome.

4 responses and no answer so far.

Speaking for myself I made it clear that my main issue is not with Melo the player but how he got himself here. I said you can win with Melo with the right pieces and playing the right way. We had that for 23games but those pieces were 40 and broke down shortly thereafter. Vet min deals and NBDL players is the best you can do when you are capped out with no picks, no young assets and Mid level exceptions.

Now here we are all these years later. Melo is entering his 30s. Having waisted his prime years because he forced the Knicks hand in getting him here. Now you have to wonder if it's worth extending his contract

This is he stuff you grow accustomed to as a Knicks fans since Dolan took over in 1998

its fair. I hated that part two. If he was so all about winning he should have come as a FA, but he wanted his contract under the CBA. I get it. He's a pro athlete and he was looking out for himself first there. That being said no player, not one takes less money to help the team. I mean Lebron/Wade/Bosh took a very little less to play together, NOT to help Miami. DHoward went to Houston for his own benefit, because he didnt want to be in LA. We loved with Lin did but he turned Linsanity into the most money he could get. Copeland left for more cash.

Your only a pro athlete once, and there is huge pressure to make as much as you can while your skills are peeking. Asking Melo to do something literally NO OTHER pro athlete does isnt really fair to Melo. Any example of a pro athlete doing this is ultra rare and loaded with unsual circumstances..

Cano.. left for the money. Clemens left for the money... you get the idea. Find those guys are easy. Show me the guys who sign at a discount to help the team. If it happens its only after they have made a fortune or their skills are declining. Like Duncan or Dirk.

I guess you can't fault Melo for other GM's knowing they ca. Easily get Dolan to bend over backwards in trades based on Knicks history. They got played by Ujiri. I honestly don't know if we wi ever get out of this mess with this owner. If I'm going to give up championship aspirations and just watch and enjoy the games I rather watch an exciting young team with a core built through the draft. Not the same called out garbage we've been subjected to for 15yrs

Bonn1997 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

Maybe a little above useless. There's no point in using it when there are so many better stats available. It's like staring at a map when you have a GPS.

i LOL'd on that one.

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

It's not useless but very overvalued by most people. Especially media types

Yeah, and the scoreboard seems to think it counts too. So who was leading the team during those first 23 games? Let's hear about them. Again. And what difference makers they are a year later.

And aren't most media types busy writing about what a useless PPG inefficient scorer Melo is, and how he actually makes teammates worse?

Well you said stats and you must know the difference between singular and plural, right? So what besides PPG did you even have in mind?

Who provided the non-boring leadership during those 23 games? Simple question. The original statement was, Melo-led teams are boring, but the first 23 games of last season were awesome.

4 responses and no answer so far.

jason kidd made the knicks fun to watch and both he and sheed put melo in his proper place as a beta dog. when the ball moves it makes players believe and that carries over to the defensive end.

fishmike wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:The first 23 games were awesome. The way they played after that was not condusive to winning in the playoffs

And who led the team during those first 23 awesomely boring games?

Clearly the guys who aren't here were critical difference makers (even if you devalue them because of low PPG). It's not really that hard to notice the co-occurrence of certain players leaving and the team going downhill. You can't just force any agenda into your interpretation of the games. If players A, B, and C leave while D stays and the team goes downhill, it's borderline delusional to argue that player D was carrying the team.

Unless of course, you happen to look at the statistics from those 23 games.

What stats? PPG?

I'm curious do you think ppg is useless or just overvalued?

Maybe a little above useless. There's no point in using it when there are so many better stats available. It's like staring at a map when you have a GPS.

just out of curiousity... what determines who wins the game and who loses? Is that TS% Or points scored... just wondering.

Useless indeed.

how were those points scored and on how many shots? were there any bad, low percentage shots not taken in the flow of the offense? did said player undermine or prevent offensive flow as he accrued those points? did he allow the players he defended to score more than their averages?

gunsnewing wrote:My problem is seeing Melo be painted as the victim in all of this. Is it worth starting from scratch again with Melo know that he is entering his 30s I honestly don't know nor do I trust this organization To do the right thing

painted by who? Your reading too many of TFKs posts. All I see Melo doing to going out and playing hard. Ive almost developed more respect for him because he's gotten better here every year, despite all the idiocy that surrounds this franchise.

I 100000% agree though, ZERO confidence this organization does anything right. They will mismanage with Melo or without him.

You know I hated the trade. I went on and on with JRod over the holes in Melo's game, his lack of eff% scoring... all of it. Ive watched him and seen his impact. He can be a big piece of an elite team. Part of a dynamic duo or big three no problem.

We have seen him win against the Heat and OKC and the Spurs and every other good team. I would like to see him with a real supporting cast. I think if we want to build something a guy like Melo is the hardest piece to get. We could have the #1 pick and choose between Bargs, Aldridge, Tyrus Thomas, Sheldon Williams or Adam Morrison... (I know, worst draft, but you get the idea).

A smart team would hedge. A smart team wouldnt have traded the picks for Bargs. They would build around MElo, but still work on the bottom of the roster looking for prospects and young players. Knicks only do that when they need warm bodies.