Knicks · Is It Really Just The Talent On The Team? (page 4)

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Splat wrote:

knickscity wrote:
Idk, Melo's primary job is to score and eoverall he hasnt been doing it well. It is worth a note though that him scoring that much hasnt brought much team success though. He has the lowest win% of any playing scoring that much, and thats primarily due to him not doing much else when he does. It's either score alot or score less but more rounded game. A guy making as much as he is should be able to do both...and if he does we'll win more games.

Shumpert has been a pleasant surprise this season for sure....I do hope that continues.

Your explanation is as good as any as to why Melo is not the foundation of a team, but perhaps a superb addition to a team that already plays team ball. I have never gotten the fascination some have with Melo or the repeated assertions he is one of the best players in the league. All I see is a man with a single gift and not that much else. It's a wonderful talent and he is one of the best at one on one ball, but it is often lacking in efficiency. Efficient teams win championships. You don't build off inefficient scorers to accomplish that IMO.

While many here seem to remain anti-Shumpert, he has been very good statistically and is often the fighter on the floor and the leader. I don't know how this can be faulted even if I understand the reticence to proclaim him a reformed player on a major upswing. Prudence says wait for him to play a whole season before judging his value. But I like what I've seen and if he sustains this effort, he will be a quality NBA player going forward.

I noted Triple's post about Melo's feud with Tyson, hence the need to trade him. I have never gotten the vibe Shump and Melo are friendly at all. This may be a factor we can't entirely account for in terms of team chemistry. But I do know Melo very rarely looks to Shump on the court and if he doesn't start doing it, then Melo is a chump, because Shump is converting both on penetration and from outside.

Shump is off to a good start but last year he was ridiculously bad on the offensive side of the court. It was like the Knicks were down a man when he played. I don't remember it being a lot better the previous season. It may not be a quick easy change for guys that have played a lot of minutes with shump to think of him as a contributor on offense.

Shumpert averaged 6 shots per game, what were you expecting on offense? Even with that he was average on threes which isnt nad, was a solid rebounder and despite the switching defense he was a decent one. The only reason why he's doing better on offense this season is because now he can get the ball in this offense.

He shot under 38 % from the floor.

He took 6 shots per game. Unless you really believe him making one more shot to get him to 50% from the field was the difference between last season or not, your not making much sense.

He wasnt bad on offense...he wasnt used at all on offense other than an open three, now he is used more in other areas on offense and the results coincide.

You must have watched something different then I did last year. He was horrible.

Apparently I did. I saw a player who rarely shot the basketball. Now I see a player who has an offense that involves him.

Glad he is doing better. But I disagree about his play on the offensive end last year.

You're disagreeing about him taking 6 shots and wasnt utilized on offense?

No. He was awful. Sometimes it appeared that he wouldn't shoot or finish because he was weary of the outcome. He played just under 2000 minutes and I cringed every time he touched the ball.

Considering he had one of the lowest usage as a starter, I dont see how this would be the case. Shumpert wasnt utilized in the offense other than threes and he hit those at league average. I just dont see how a player who took 6 shots can be viewed as bad let one horrible. Does one more fg make change the viewpoint? Come on my man this makes no sense.

I watched almost every game last year. I know what I saw. The guy was horrible on offense. I am sure you could go back to the game threads from last season and find frequent discussion about his poor play on the offensive side of the ball. Seems like it is time to agree to disagree and move on.

think of the context since shumpert has been here. he has battled back from a significant injury while also getting dicked around big time by the former coach, who has generally been acknowledged as clueless and playing favorites.

not saying shumpert is a great player or is going to be an allstar, but rather that he has not been properly developed and may be coming into his own lately. i admit, i have been a fan of his and had some hopes that he would be more impactful sooner, but have been happy to see him do better.

however... if he is a player who is somehow not best buddies or is at odds with melo in any way because he wants to play according to triangle precepts and resents when teammates play outside of it, i think that is going to be a developing issue.

Yes this needs to be monitored

Which Is why I pointed to Melo's scoring outburst

In his absence and why is it okay

For Shumpert to go hard body at Melo publicly

But not Artest and Tyson who ended up being waived and traded

Shumpert does appear to have a grasp on

How to play in this system, although totally contrary

To how he said he would play early on

Splat wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:So far this season, no one else has been able to make shots.

Wrong. Shump is shooting 50.5% in 10 games.

And Melo's teammates actually have a higher shooting percentage than he does anyway

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Splat wrote:

knickscity wrote:
Idk, Melo's primary job is to score and eoverall he hasnt been doing it well. It is worth a note though that him scoring that much hasnt brought much team success though. He has the lowest win% of any playing scoring that much, and thats primarily due to him not doing much else when he does. It's either score alot or score less but more rounded game. A guy making as much as he is should be able to do both...and if he does we'll win more games.

Shumpert has been a pleasant surprise this season for sure....I do hope that continues.

Your explanation is as good as any as to why Melo is not the foundation of a team, but perhaps a superb addition to a team that already plays team ball. I have never gotten the fascination some have with Melo or the repeated assertions he is one of the best players in the league. All I see is a man with a single gift and not that much else. It's a wonderful talent and he is one of the best at one on one ball, but it is often lacking in efficiency. Efficient teams win championships. You don't build off inefficient scorers to accomplish that IMO.

While many here seem to remain anti-Shumpert, he has been very good statistically and is often the fighter on the floor and the leader. I don't know how this can be faulted even if I understand the reticence to proclaim him a reformed player on a major upswing. Prudence says wait for him to play a whole season before judging his value. But I like what I've seen and if he sustains this effort, he will be a quality NBA player going forward.

I noted Triple's post about Melo's feud with Tyson, hence the need to trade him. I have never gotten the vibe Shump and Melo are friendly at all. This may be a factor we can't entirely account for in terms of team chemistry. But I do know Melo very rarely looks to Shump on the court and if he doesn't start doing it, then Melo is a chump, because Shump is converting both on penetration and from outside.

Shump is off to a good start but last year he was ridiculously bad on the offensive side of the court. It was like the Knicks were down a man when he played. I don't remember it being a lot better the previous season. It may not be a quick easy change for guys that have played a lot of minutes with shump to think of him as a contributor on offense.

Shumpert averaged 6 shots per game, what were you expecting on offense? Even with that he was average on threes which isnt nad, was a solid rebounder and despite the switching defense he was a decent one. The only reason why he's doing better on offense this season is because now he can get the ball in this offense.

He shot under 38 % from the floor.

He took 6 shots per game. Unless you really believe him making one more shot to get him to 50% from the field was the difference between last season or not, your not making much sense.

He wasnt bad on offense...he wasnt used at all on offense other than an open three, now he is used more in other areas on offense and the results coincide.

You must have watched something different then I did last year. He was horrible.

Apparently I did. I saw a player who rarely shot the basketball. Now I see a player who has an offense that involves him.

Glad he is doing better. But I disagree about his play on the offensive end last year.

You're disagreeing about him taking 6 shots and wasnt utilized on offense?

No. He was awful. Sometimes it appeared that he wouldn't shoot or finish because he was weary of the outcome. He played just under 2000 minutes and I cringed every time he touched the ball.

Considering he had one of the lowest usage as a starter, I dont see how this would be the case. Shumpert wasnt utilized in the offense other than threes and he hit those at league average. I just dont see how a player who took 6 shots can be viewed as bad let one horrible. Does one more fg make change the viewpoint? Come on my man this makes no sense.

I watched almost every game last year. I know what I saw. The guy was horrible on offense. I am sure you could go back to the game threads from last season and find frequent discussion about his poor play on the offensive side of the ball. Seems like it is time to agree to disagree and move on.

think of the context since shumpert has been here. he has battled back from a significant injury while also getting dicked around big time by the former coach, who has generally been acknowledged as clueless and playing favorites.

not saying shumpert is a great player or is going to be an allstar, but rather that he has not been properly developed and may be coming into his own lately. i admit, i have been a fan of his and had some hopes that he would be more impactful sooner, but have been happy to see him do better.

however... if he is a player who is somehow not best buddies or is at odds with melo in any way because he wants to play according to triangle precepts and resents when teammates play outside of it, i think that is going to be a developing issue.

Yes this needs to be monitored

Which Is why I pointed to Melo's scoring outburst

In his absence and why is it okay

For Shumpert to go hard body at Melo publicly

But not Artest and Tyson who ended up being waived and traded

Shumpert does appear to have a grasp on

How to play in this system, although totally contrary

To how he said he would play early on

i didn't watch that game but i assume melo did not score the majority of those points within the triangle. also, sight unseen, i often assume that melo has a playground dueler's mentality, and will often get caught up in outscoring his main adversary but at the expense of doing other things to actually win. win the battle, lose the war sort of thing.

it's a shame if shumpert doesn't play-- denver's backcourt is liable to shred the knicks, and if their 3-point shooters get clean looks it could get ugly fast.

you have to hope that denver players' body clocks don't like playing 11am games even as their hemoglobin levels are raised at sea level.

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Splat wrote:

knickscity wrote:
Idk, Melo's primary job is to score and eoverall he hasnt been doing it well. It is worth a note though that him scoring that much hasnt brought much team success though. He has the lowest win% of any playing scoring that much, and thats primarily due to him not doing much else when he does. It's either score alot or score less but more rounded game. A guy making as much as he is should be able to do both...and if he does we'll win more games.

Shumpert has been a pleasant surprise this season for sure....I do hope that continues.

Your explanation is as good as any as to why Melo is not the foundation of a team, but perhaps a superb addition to a team that already plays team ball. I have never gotten the fascination some have with Melo or the repeated assertions he is one of the best players in the league. All I see is a man with a single gift and not that much else. It's a wonderful talent and he is one of the best at one on one ball, but it is often lacking in efficiency. Efficient teams win championships. You don't build off inefficient scorers to accomplish that IMO.

While many here seem to remain anti-Shumpert, he has been very good statistically and is often the fighter on the floor and the leader. I don't know how this can be faulted even if I understand the reticence to proclaim him a reformed player on a major upswing. Prudence says wait for him to play a whole season before judging his value. But I like what I've seen and if he sustains this effort, he will be a quality NBA player going forward.

I noted Triple's post about Melo's feud with Tyson, hence the need to trade him. I have never gotten the vibe Shump and Melo are friendly at all. This may be a factor we can't entirely account for in terms of team chemistry. But I do know Melo very rarely looks to Shump on the court and if he doesn't start doing it, then Melo is a chump, because Shump is converting both on penetration and from outside.

Shump is off to a good start but last year he was ridiculously bad on the offensive side of the court. It was like the Knicks were down a man when he played. I don't remember it being a lot better the previous season. It may not be a quick easy change for guys that have played a lot of minutes with shump to think of him as a contributor on offense.

Shumpert averaged 6 shots per game, what were you expecting on offense? Even with that he was average on threes which isnt nad, was a solid rebounder and despite the switching defense he was a decent one. The only reason why he's doing better on offense this season is because now he can get the ball in this offense.

He shot under 38 % from the floor.

He took 6 shots per game. Unless you really believe him making one more shot to get him to 50% from the field was the difference between last season or not, your not making much sense.

He wasnt bad on offense...he wasnt used at all on offense other than an open three, now he is used more in other areas on offense and the results coincide.

You must have watched something different then I did last year. He was horrible.

Apparently I did. I saw a player who rarely shot the basketball. Now I see a player who has an offense that involves him.

Glad he is doing better. But I disagree about his play on the offensive end last year.

You're disagreeing about him taking 6 shots and wasnt utilized on offense?

No. He was awful. Sometimes it appeared that he wouldn't shoot or finish because he was weary of the outcome. He played just under 2000 minutes and I cringed every time he touched the ball.

Considering he had one of the lowest usage as a starter, I dont see how this would be the case. Shumpert wasnt utilized in the offense other than threes and he hit those at league average. I just dont see how a player who took 6 shots can be viewed as bad let one horrible. Does one more fg make change the viewpoint? Come on my man this makes no sense.

I watched almost every game last year. I know what I saw. The guy was horrible on offense. I am sure you could go back to the game threads from last season and find frequent discussion about his poor play on the offensive side of the ball. Seems like it is time to agree to disagree and move on.

think of the context since shumpert has been here. he has battled back from a significant injury while also getting dicked around big time by the former coach, who has generally been acknowledged as clueless and playing favorites.

not saying shumpert is a great player or is going to be an allstar, but rather that he has not been properly developed and may be coming into his own lately. i admit, i have been a fan of his and had some hopes that he would be more impactful sooner, but have been happy to see him do better.

however... if he is a player who is somehow not best buddies or is at odds with melo in any way because he wants to play according to triangle precepts and resents when teammates play outside of it, i think that is going to be a developing issue.

Yes this needs to be monitored

Which Is why I pointed to Melo's scoring outburst

In his absence and why is it okay

For Shumpert to go hard body at Melo publicly

But not Artest and Tyson who ended up being waived and traded

Shumpert does appear to have a grasp on

How to play in this system, although totally contrary

To how he said he would play early on

i didn't watch that game but i assume melo did not score the majority of those points within the triangle. also, sight unseen, i often assume that melo has a playground dueler's mentality, and will often get caught up in outscoring his main adversary but at the expense of doing other things to actually win. win the battle, lose the war sort of thing.

it's a shame if shumpert doesn't play-- denver's backcourt is liable to shred the knicks, and if their 3-point shooters get clean looks it could get ugly fast.

you have to hope that denver players' body clocks don't like playing 11am games even as their hemoglobin levels are raised at sea level.

What I have noticed is that Shumpert has been getting lit up as well, but that isnt his defensive expertise. His defense is disrupting pg's plamaking with the ball, not necessarily guarding opposing shooters. But also as of late the Knicks arent help defnding at all it's basically guard your man and if not...oh well.

dk7th wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Splat wrote:

knickscity wrote:
Idk, Melo's primary job is to score and eoverall he hasnt been doing it well. It is worth a note though that him scoring that much hasnt brought much team success though. He has the lowest win% of any playing scoring that much, and thats primarily due to him not doing much else when he does. It's either score alot or score less but more rounded game. A guy making as much as he is should be able to do both...and if he does we'll win more games.

Shumpert has been a pleasant surprise this season for sure....I do hope that continues.

Your explanation is as good as any as to why Melo is not the foundation of a team, but perhaps a superb addition to a team that already plays team ball. I have never gotten the fascination some have with Melo or the repeated assertions he is one of the best players in the league. All I see is a man with a single gift and not that much else. It's a wonderful talent and he is one of the best at one on one ball, but it is often lacking in efficiency. Efficient teams win championships. You don't build off inefficient scorers to accomplish that IMO.

While many here seem to remain anti-Shumpert, he has been very good statistically and is often the fighter on the floor and the leader. I don't know how this can be faulted even if I understand the reticence to proclaim him a reformed player on a major upswing. Prudence says wait for him to play a whole season before judging his value. But I like what I've seen and if he sustains this effort, he will be a quality NBA player going forward.

I noted Triple's post about Melo's feud with Tyson, hence the need to trade him. I have never gotten the vibe Shump and Melo are friendly at all. This may be a factor we can't entirely account for in terms of team chemistry. But I do know Melo very rarely looks to Shump on the court and if he doesn't start doing it, then Melo is a chump, because Shump is converting both on penetration and from outside.

Shump is off to a good start but last year he was ridiculously bad on the offensive side of the court. It was like the Knicks were down a man when he played. I don't remember it being a lot better the previous season. It may not be a quick easy change for guys that have played a lot of minutes with shump to think of him as a contributor on offense.

Shumpert averaged 6 shots per game, what were you expecting on offense? Even with that he was average on threes which isnt nad, was a solid rebounder and despite the switching defense he was a decent one. The only reason why he's doing better on offense this season is because now he can get the ball in this offense.

He shot under 38 % from the floor.

He took 6 shots per game. Unless you really believe him making one more shot to get him to 50% from the field was the difference between last season or not, your not making much sense.

He wasnt bad on offense...he wasnt used at all on offense other than an open three, now he is used more in other areas on offense and the results coincide.

You must have watched something different then I did last year. He was horrible.

Apparently I did. I saw a player who rarely shot the basketball. Now I see a player who has an offense that involves him.

Glad he is doing better. But I disagree about his play on the offensive end last year.

You're disagreeing about him taking 6 shots and wasnt utilized on offense?

No. He was awful. Sometimes it appeared that he wouldn't shoot or finish because he was weary of the outcome. He played just under 2000 minutes and I cringed every time he touched the ball.

Considering he had one of the lowest usage as a starter, I dont see how this would be the case. Shumpert wasnt utilized in the offense other than threes and he hit those at league average. I just dont see how a player who took 6 shots can be viewed as bad let one horrible. Does one more fg make change the viewpoint? Come on my man this makes no sense.

I watched almost every game last year. I know what I saw. The guy was horrible on offense. I am sure you could go back to the game threads from last season and find frequent discussion about his poor play on the offensive side of the ball. Seems like it is time to agree to disagree and move on.

I guess my view point is different than some, I will never state a player is bad in an area they arent used. That would be like blaming Novak for not hitting layups....not his role, not his strength. But I dont view message board discussion as fact, we all focus on different things on the court, so we'll naturally pick at what we already dont like and turn a blind eye to other things just as obvious.

Kinda like the never ending defense of melo even when he shoots like garbage....."at least he's doing other things well" is the rationale. Well guess what? Thats what Shumpert was doing...moved the ball well, wasnt racking up turnovers, hit his threes at league average and rebounded the basketball very well. But i understand...horrible because he could hit 3-6, and wound up 2-6.

But yeah, it's best to agree to disagree especially since my orginal comment was main focused on melo anyway....the guy who misses more than anyone on the team attempts.

you raise a very important point that fans of volume scorers can't face: all those extra missed shots, usually poorly chosen shots, really take their toll on the rest of the team. in the playoffs bad shots are tantamount to turnovers, and are hardly conducive to winning in the regular season against above-.500 teams.

edit: i mean which is worse, player A missing 4 shots or player B missing 12 shots?

It's no secret Melo kills a teams offensive strategy mainly because when he shoots alot he does little else on the court no matter if he shoots well or not. There's a difference in taking over a game and taking over the entire game.

But yeah missing 12 shots when the next player on the team attempts 9 certainly does not bode well for success on that end of the court.

knickscity wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Splat wrote:

knickscity wrote:
Idk, Melo's primary job is to score and eoverall he hasnt been doing it well. It is worth a note though that him scoring that much hasnt brought much team success though. He has the lowest win% of any playing scoring that much, and thats primarily due to him not doing much else when he does. It's either score alot or score less but more rounded game. A guy making as much as he is should be able to do both...and if he does we'll win more games.

Shumpert has been a pleasant surprise this season for sure....I do hope that continues.

Your explanation is as good as any as to why Melo is not the foundation of a team, but perhaps a superb addition to a team that already plays team ball. I have never gotten the fascination some have with Melo or the repeated assertions he is one of the best players in the league. All I see is a man with a single gift and not that much else. It's a wonderful talent and he is one of the best at one on one ball, but it is often lacking in efficiency. Efficient teams win championships. You don't build off inefficient scorers to accomplish that IMO.

While many here seem to remain anti-Shumpert, he has been very good statistically and is often the fighter on the floor and the leader. I don't know how this can be faulted even if I understand the reticence to proclaim him a reformed player on a major upswing. Prudence says wait for him to play a whole season before judging his value. But I like what I've seen and if he sustains this effort, he will be a quality NBA player going forward.

I noted Triple's post about Melo's feud with Tyson, hence the need to trade him. I have never gotten the vibe Shump and Melo are friendly at all. This may be a factor we can't entirely account for in terms of team chemistry. But I do know Melo very rarely looks to Shump on the court and if he doesn't start doing it, then Melo is a chump, because Shump is converting both on penetration and from outside.

Shump is off to a good start but last year he was ridiculously bad on the offensive side of the court. It was like the Knicks were down a man when he played. I don't remember it being a lot better the previous season. It may not be a quick easy change for guys that have played a lot of minutes with shump to think of him as a contributor on offense.

Shumpert averaged 6 shots per game, what were you expecting on offense? Even with that he was average on threes which isnt nad, was a solid rebounder and despite the switching defense he was a decent one. The only reason why he's doing better on offense this season is because now he can get the ball in this offense.

He shot under 38 % from the floor.

He took 6 shots per game. Unless you really believe him making one more shot to get him to 50% from the field was the difference between last season or not, your not making much sense.

He wasnt bad on offense...he wasnt used at all on offense other than an open three, now he is used more in other areas on offense and the results coincide.

You must have watched something different then I did last year. He was horrible.

Apparently I did. I saw a player who rarely shot the basketball. Now I see a player who has an offense that involves him.

Glad he is doing better. But I disagree about his play on the offensive end last year.

You're disagreeing about him taking 6 shots and wasnt utilized on offense?

No. He was awful. Sometimes it appeared that he wouldn't shoot or finish because he was weary of the outcome. He played just under 2000 minutes and I cringed every time he touched the ball.

Considering he had one of the lowest usage as a starter, I dont see how this would be the case. Shumpert wasnt utilized in the offense other than threes and he hit those at league average. I just dont see how a player who took 6 shots can be viewed as bad let one horrible. Does one more fg make change the viewpoint? Come on my man this makes no sense.

I watched almost every game last year. I know what I saw. The guy was horrible on offense. I am sure you could go back to the game threads from last season and find frequent discussion about his poor play on the offensive side of the ball. Seems like it is time to agree to disagree and move on.

think of the context since shumpert has been here. he has battled back from a significant injury while also getting dicked around big time by the former coach, who has generally been acknowledged as clueless and playing favorites.

not saying shumpert is a great player or is going to be an allstar, but rather that he has not been properly developed and may be coming into his own lately. i admit, i have been a fan of his and had some hopes that he would be more impactful sooner, but have been happy to see him do better.

however... if he is a player who is somehow not best buddies or is at odds with melo in any way because he wants to play according to triangle precepts and resents when teammates play outside of it, i think that is going to be a developing issue.

Yes this needs to be monitored

Which Is why I pointed to Melo's scoring outburst

In his absence and why is it okay

For Shumpert to go hard body at Melo publicly

But not Artest and Tyson who ended up being waived and traded

Shumpert does appear to have a grasp on

How to play in this system, although totally contrary

To how he said he would play early on

i didn't watch that game but i assume melo did not score the majority of those points within the triangle. also, sight unseen, i often assume that melo has a playground dueler's mentality, and will often get caught up in outscoring his main adversary but at the expense of doing other things to actually win. win the battle, lose the war sort of thing.

it's a shame if shumpert doesn't play-- denver's backcourt is liable to shred the knicks, and if their 3-point shooters get clean looks it could get ugly fast.

you have to hope that denver players' body clocks don't like playing 11am games even as their hemoglobin levels are raised at sea level.

What I have noticed is that Shumpert has been getting lit up as well, but that isnt his defensive expertise. His defense is disrupting pg's plamaking with the ball, not necessarily guarding opposing shooters. But also as of late the Knicks arent help defnding at all it's basically guard your man and if not...oh well.

i find that approach better long-term than switching. potentially helps a coach mete out minutes on merit. if shumpert is getting lit up by shooting guards that is a shame, but then again if he is disrupting the initial ballhandlers well that has to count for something. same thing goes for players who actually box out their men on rebounds, etc etc

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Splat wrote:

knickscity wrote:
Idk, Melo's primary job is to score and eoverall he hasnt been doing it well. It is worth a note though that him scoring that much hasnt brought much team success though. He has the lowest win% of any playing scoring that much, and thats primarily due to him not doing much else when he does. It's either score alot or score less but more rounded game. A guy making as much as he is should be able to do both...and if he does we'll win more games.

Shumpert has been a pleasant surprise this season for sure....I do hope that continues.

Your explanation is as good as any as to why Melo is not the foundation of a team, but perhaps a superb addition to a team that already plays team ball. I have never gotten the fascination some have with Melo or the repeated assertions he is one of the best players in the league. All I see is a man with a single gift and not that much else. It's a wonderful talent and he is one of the best at one on one ball, but it is often lacking in efficiency. Efficient teams win championships. You don't build off inefficient scorers to accomplish that IMO.

While many here seem to remain anti-Shumpert, he has been very good statistically and is often the fighter on the floor and the leader. I don't know how this can be faulted even if I understand the reticence to proclaim him a reformed player on a major upswing. Prudence says wait for him to play a whole season before judging his value. But I like what I've seen and if he sustains this effort, he will be a quality NBA player going forward.

I noted Triple's post about Melo's feud with Tyson, hence the need to trade him. I have never gotten the vibe Shump and Melo are friendly at all. This may be a factor we can't entirely account for in terms of team chemistry. But I do know Melo very rarely looks to Shump on the court and if he doesn't start doing it, then Melo is a chump, because Shump is converting both on penetration and from outside.

Shump is off to a good start but last year he was ridiculously bad on the offensive side of the court. It was like the Knicks were down a man when he played. I don't remember it being a lot better the previous season. It may not be a quick easy change for guys that have played a lot of minutes with shump to think of him as a contributor on offense.

Shumpert averaged 6 shots per game, what were you expecting on offense? Even with that he was average on threes which isnt nad, was a solid rebounder and despite the switching defense he was a decent one. The only reason why he's doing better on offense this season is because now he can get the ball in this offense.

He shot under 38 % from the floor.

He took 6 shots per game. Unless you really believe him making one more shot to get him to 50% from the field was the difference between last season or not, your not making much sense.

He wasnt bad on offense...he wasnt used at all on offense other than an open three, now he is used more in other areas on offense and the results coincide.

You must have watched something different then I did last year. He was horrible.

Apparently I did. I saw a player who rarely shot the basketball. Now I see a player who has an offense that involves him.

Glad he is doing better. But I disagree about his play on the offensive end last year.

You're disagreeing about him taking 6 shots and wasnt utilized on offense?

No. He was awful. Sometimes it appeared that he wouldn't shoot or finish because he was weary of the outcome. He played just under 2000 minutes and I cringed every time he touched the ball.

Considering he had one of the lowest usage as a starter, I dont see how this would be the case. Shumpert wasnt utilized in the offense other than threes and he hit those at league average. I just dont see how a player who took 6 shots can be viewed as bad let one horrible. Does one more fg make change the viewpoint? Come on my man this makes no sense.

I watched almost every game last year. I know what I saw. The guy was horrible on offense. I am sure you could go back to the game threads from last season and find frequent discussion about his poor play on the offensive side of the ball. Seems like it is time to agree to disagree and move on.

think of the context since shumpert has been here. he has battled back from a significant injury while also getting dicked around big time by the former coach, who has generally been acknowledged as clueless and playing favorites.

not saying shumpert is a great player or is going to be an allstar, but rather that he has not been properly developed and may be coming into his own lately. i admit, i have been a fan of his and had some hopes that he would be more impactful sooner, but have been happy to see him do better.

however... if he is a player who is somehow not best buddies or is at odds with melo in any way because he wants to play according to triangle precepts and resents when teammates play outside of it, i think that is going to be a developing issue.

Yes this needs to be monitored

Which Is why I pointed to Melo's scoring outburst

In his absence and why is it okay

For Shumpert to go hard body at Melo publicly

But not Artest and Tyson who ended up being waived and traded

Shumpert does appear to have a grasp on

How to play in this system, although totally contrary

To how he said he would play early on

i didn't watch that game but i assume melo did not score the majority of those points within the triangle. also, sight unseen, i often assume that melo has a playground dueler's mentality, and will often get caught up in outscoring his main adversary but at the expense of doing other things to actually win. win the battle, lose the war sort of thing.

it's a shame if shumpert doesn't play-- denver's backcourt is liable to shred the knicks, and if their 3-point shooters get clean looks it could get ugly fast.

you have to hope that denver players' body clocks don't like playing 11am games even as their hemoglobin levels are raised at sea level.

Well Looks like Shaw may have found something

He played Gary Harris early against Indy

This kid has mad game, if he starts him and maybe McGee

It could get ugly as Denver looks to push pace

Gallo may be finding his stroke too

He's coming off the bench as a weapon

The key is for Larkin to pressure Lawson, slow him down

Pack the paint on Denver because their offense isn't pretty either

Yes Melo deserted the Triangle against Utah often

And Gordon got visibly under his skin

dk7th wrote:

knickscity wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

knickscity wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Splat wrote:

knickscity wrote:
Idk, Melo's primary job is to score and eoverall he hasnt been doing it well. It is worth a note though that him scoring that much hasnt brought much team success though. He has the lowest win% of any playing scoring that much, and thats primarily due to him not doing much else when he does. It's either score alot or score less but more rounded game. A guy making as much as he is should be able to do both...and if he does we'll win more games.

Shumpert has been a pleasant surprise this season for sure....I do hope that continues.

Your explanation is as good as any as to why Melo is not the foundation of a team, but perhaps a superb addition to a team that already plays team ball. I have never gotten the fascination some have with Melo or the repeated assertions he is one of the best players in the league. All I see is a man with a single gift and not that much else. It's a wonderful talent and he is one of the best at one on one ball, but it is often lacking in efficiency. Efficient teams win championships. You don't build off inefficient scorers to accomplish that IMO.

While many here seem to remain anti-Shumpert, he has been very good statistically and is often the fighter on the floor and the leader. I don't know how this can be faulted even if I understand the reticence to proclaim him a reformed player on a major upswing. Prudence says wait for him to play a whole season before judging his value. But I like what I've seen and if he sustains this effort, he will be a quality NBA player going forward.

I noted Triple's post about Melo's feud with Tyson, hence the need to trade him. I have never gotten the vibe Shump and Melo are friendly at all. This may be a factor we can't entirely account for in terms of team chemistry. But I do know Melo very rarely looks to Shump on the court and if he doesn't start doing it, then Melo is a chump, because Shump is converting both on penetration and from outside.

Shump is off to a good start but last year he was ridiculously bad on the offensive side of the court. It was like the Knicks were down a man when he played. I don't remember it being a lot better the previous season. It may not be a quick easy change for guys that have played a lot of minutes with shump to think of him as a contributor on offense.

Shumpert averaged 6 shots per game, what were you expecting on offense? Even with that he was average on threes which isnt nad, was a solid rebounder and despite the switching defense he was a decent one. The only reason why he's doing better on offense this season is because now he can get the ball in this offense.

He shot under 38 % from the floor.

He took 6 shots per game. Unless you really believe him making one more shot to get him to 50% from the field was the difference between last season or not, your not making much sense.

He wasnt bad on offense...he wasnt used at all on offense other than an open three, now he is used more in other areas on offense and the results coincide.

You must have watched something different then I did last year. He was horrible.

Apparently I did. I saw a player who rarely shot the basketball. Now I see a player who has an offense that involves him.

Glad he is doing better. But I disagree about his play on the offensive end last year.

You're disagreeing about him taking 6 shots and wasnt utilized on offense?

No. He was awful. Sometimes it appeared that he wouldn't shoot or finish because he was weary of the outcome. He played just under 2000 minutes and I cringed every time he touched the ball.

Considering he had one of the lowest usage as a starter, I dont see how this would be the case. Shumpert wasnt utilized in the offense other than threes and he hit those at league average. I just dont see how a player who took 6 shots can be viewed as bad let one horrible. Does one more fg make change the viewpoint? Come on my man this makes no sense.

I watched almost every game last year. I know what I saw. The guy was horrible on offense. I am sure you could go back to the game threads from last season and find frequent discussion about his poor play on the offensive side of the ball. Seems like it is time to agree to disagree and move on.

think of the context since shumpert has been here. he has battled back from a significant injury while also getting dicked around big time by the former coach, who has generally been acknowledged as clueless and playing favorites.

not saying shumpert is a great player or is going to be an allstar, but rather that he has not been properly developed and may be coming into his own lately. i admit, i have been a fan of his and had some hopes that he would be more impactful sooner, but have been happy to see him do better.

however... if he is a player who is somehow not best buddies or is at odds with melo in any way because he wants to play according to triangle precepts and resents when teammates play outside of it, i think that is going to be a developing issue.

Yes this needs to be monitored

Which Is why I pointed to Melo's scoring outburst

In his absence and why is it okay

For Shumpert to go hard body at Melo publicly

But not Artest and Tyson who ended up being waived and traded

Shumpert does appear to have a grasp on

How to play in this system, although totally contrary

To how he said he would play early on

i didn't watch that game but i assume melo did not score the majority of those points within the triangle. also, sight unseen, i often assume that melo has a playground dueler's mentality, and will often get caught up in outscoring his main adversary but at the expense of doing other things to actually win. win the battle, lose the war sort of thing.

it's a shame if shumpert doesn't play-- denver's backcourt is liable to shred the knicks, and if their 3-point shooters get clean looks it could get ugly fast.

you have to hope that denver players' body clocks don't like playing 11am games even as their hemoglobin levels are raised at sea level.

What I have noticed is that Shumpert has been getting lit up as well, but that isnt his defensive expertise. His defense is disrupting pg's plamaking with the ball, not necessarily guarding opposing shooters. But also as of late the Knicks arent help defnding at all it's basically guard your man and if not...oh well.

i find that approach better long-term than switching. potentially helps a coach mete out minutes on merit. if shumpert is getting lit up by shooting guards that is a shame, but then again if he is disrupting the initial ballhandlers well that has to count for something. same thing goes for players who actually box out their men on rebounds, etc etc

Man to man, when most cant defend at all is just as bad as switching from an impact standpoint...both are lazy ways to defend. Your best defenses can hold their own and the help out. As far as Shumpert goes his pg assignments havent really killed him, it's usually when he guards other positions. Shumperts defense helps stall opposing offenses not necessarily guys from shooting.