Knicks · Rank your Atlantic Division SF (page 6)
You don't have to run plays for him, if you do he does have post moves and excellent touch. You don't have to take him out of the game like Mozgov if you play small ball. You don't have to take him out of the game if they start hack a Dwight.
Holfresh and Newyorknewyork made for each other.
newyorknewyork wrote:And guess what the Hawks did, they traded for Splitter from the Spurs. Now why would they go and do something like that????
Means the coach has more clout that you think and he is helping the guy who made him millions...
dk7th wrote:Not sure what that has to do with Woodson/Lin which is what I asked you about. Also, that was a horrible series. The Knicks lost the rest of their backcourt, Amare punched the fire extinguisher, and I believe that was the first round of Tyson getting over the flu in his Knick career.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:I am not going to address who's team it was but the Knicks had lost 6 straight, 8-10 and had what should have been one of the best frontlines in the league. Woodson took over and won. He also continued to start Lin until he got hurt.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Nice links but I wish you would respond to the question I asked regarding what you wrote. Again, Lin played 7 games under Woodson before getting hurt. The team went 6-1. What was your issue with Woodson/Lin when the Knicks were winning at such a high rate?http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfischer/...
as soon as d'antoni resigned it was no longer lin's team.
they were destroyed by miami 4-1, cementing woodson's legacy as a jayvee season coach.
100-67
104-94
87-70
87-89
106-94the heat toyed with the knicks, winning by an average margin of 15.5 points.
the first game was a "send them a message game" that they have no chance. in fact the game was over by the middle of the second quarter.
this is only one example of woodson being on the receiving end of an ass-whupping in the playoffs. there's a pattern, and a preponderance of blowouts, which is the case with woodson if you care to look at his record in the playoffs and the margin of loss, is demonstrative of an inferior coach, both strategically and in terms of leadership.
as i said, he will not get another head coaching job in the nba. that's indictment enough, wouldn't you say?
newyorknewyork wrote:And guess what the Hawks did, they traded for Splitter from the Spurs. Now why would they go and do something like that????
And this is why Phil will struggle as Head of Basketball Operations..U have to create good will in the league for others to help you..U can't take shots at other teams and players for no reason..It's a small community..
ChuckBuck wrote:If you ask any GM right now who'd you trade for money not an issue, who'd you pick between Al Horford, Dwight Howard, or Tim Mozgov I'm pretty sure Horford would win the vote going away.You don't have to run plays for him, if you do he does have post moves and excellent touch. You don't have to take him out of the game like Mozgov if you play small ball. You don't have to take him out of the game if they start hack a Dwight.
Holfresh and Newyorknewyork made for each other.
While your wrong about Horford going over Howard, that's not the point. The point was that ATL didn't have the flexibility to go big in order to match up when other teams went big. Horford doesn't rebound or rim protect at a consistent high enough level especially in the playoffs to make up for that. Plus he can get out produced by lesser players like a Mozgov.
Since Horford isn't dominant at what he does not having the flexibility to go big or small has hurt there playoff chances. In the playoffs the more complete team usually wins.
holfresh wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:And guess what the Hawks did, they traded for Splitter from the Spurs. Now why would they go and do something like that????Means the coach has more clout that you think and he is helping the guy who made him millions...
They helped each other and was a good trade for both needs. Just like our trade with the Hawks of Hardaway jr for Grant. I don't see one side getting the better of the other for it to be a favor type of deal.
Vs Orlando in 2010. They both played small ball, Howard dominated Horford and ATL guards couldn't stop penetration. They weren't equipped roster wise to do the things necessary to win in the playoffs. Trying to pin it on Woodson is more agenda driven then actual basketball discussion.
newyorknewyork wrote:holfresh wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:And guess what the Hawks did, they traded for Splitter from the Spurs. Now why would they go and do something like that????Means the coach has more clout that you think and he is helping the guy who made him millions...
They helped each other and was a good trade for both needs. Just like our trade with the Hawks of Hardaway jr for Grant. I don't see one side getting the better of the other for it to be a favor type of deal.
Splitter is not a good player for that money...They don't need Splitter..They could get a cheaper player to do that job..Spurs needed the salary slot to add Aldridge...
TheGame wrote:Melo is a decent defender when he puts his mind to it or when matched up on one f his friends, like Lebron. However, he is very inconsistent and usually is just going through the motions. He, however, is not a zero sum player, and I think we will see that this year with better players around him.
No one has been able to put a team around Melo to see if he is really a prime time player or not..His drive and determination makes me think he is..But you will never know...
CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Not sure what that has to do with Woodson/Lin which is what I asked you about. Also, that was a horrible series. The Knicks lost the rest of their backcourt, Amare punched the fire extinguisher, and I believe that was the first round of Tyson getting over the flu in his Knick career.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:I am not going to address who's team it was but the Knicks had lost 6 straight, 8-10 and had what should have been one of the best frontlines in the league. Woodson took over and won. He also continued to start Lin until he got hurt.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Nice links but I wish you would respond to the question I asked regarding what you wrote. Again, Lin played 7 games under Woodson before getting hurt. The team went 6-1. What was your issue with Woodson/Lin when the Knicks were winning at such a high rate?http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfischer/...
as soon as d'antoni resigned it was no longer lin's team.
they were destroyed by miami 4-1, cementing woodson's legacy as a jayvee season coach.
100-67
104-94
87-70
87-89
106-94the heat toyed with the knicks, winning by an average margin of 15.5 points.
the first game was a "send them a message game" that they have no chance. in fact the game was over by the middle of the second quarter.
this is only one example of woodson being on the receiving end of an ass-whupping in the playoffs. there's a pattern, and a preponderance of blowouts, which is the case with woodson if you care to look at his record in the playoffs and the margin of loss, is demonstrative of an inferior coach, both strategically and in terms of leadership.
as i said, he will not get another head coaching job in the nba. that's indictment enough, wouldn't you say?
not interested in chitchat of this nature as it is all surface stuff and white noise.
it's about culture war, factions, internecine struggle, chaotic management, meddling ownership, meddling agents.
this has been the knicks since dolan became the owner. now that phil jackson is here-- someone who loves the knicks more than dolan does and has a deeper connection to the knicks than dolan ever will-- we are on the road to recovery and perhaps respectability.
woodson was one of the symptoms of what has been wrong with the knicks, who were never capable of handling prosperity and professionalism. they have been an extension of dolan, a walking disease.
so it is not surprising to me that certain posters are bemoaning the present state of and direction of this team, while other posters are rejoicing.
holfresh wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:holfresh wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:And guess what the Hawks did, they traded for Splitter from the Spurs. Now why would they go and do something like that????Means the coach has more clout that you think and he is helping the guy who made him millions...
They helped each other and was a good trade for both needs. Just like our trade with the Hawks of Hardaway jr for Grant. I don't see one side getting the better of the other for it to be a favor type of deal.
Splitter is not a good player for that money...They don't need Splitter..They could get a cheaper player to do that job..Spurs needed the salary slot to add Aldridge...
He has one yr left on his deal at 8.5mil. He isn't breaking the bank. Plus ATL coach is familiar with him, as he is with the coach and system. And has been coached up fundamentaly by one of the best. He will play defense and move the ball and take what's there. Pretty much what they are looking for as they rotate between big and small.
dk7th wrote:You have a tendency to deflect and distract when you write things that are factually wrong and get called out on it. I get it. Hard to argue with the results of the Woodson/Lin dynamic that you were critical of. Lin was Woodson's point guard for 7 games. They went 6-1. The goal is to win. None of the other stuff you are posting relates to how Woodson used Lin which is what the dialogue was about.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Not sure what that has to do with Woodson/Lin which is what I asked you about. Also, that was a horrible series. The Knicks lost the rest of their backcourt, Amare punched the fire extinguisher, and I believe that was the first round of Tyson getting over the flu in his Knick career.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:I am not going to address who's team it was but the Knicks had lost 6 straight, 8-10 and had what should have been one of the best frontlines in the league. Woodson took over and won. He also continued to start Lin until he got hurt.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Nice links but I wish you would respond to the question I asked regarding what you wrote. Again, Lin played 7 games under Woodson before getting hurt. The team went 6-1. What was your issue with Woodson/Lin when the Knicks were winning at such a high rate?http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfischer/...
as soon as d'antoni resigned it was no longer lin's team.
they were destroyed by miami 4-1, cementing woodson's legacy as a jayvee season coach.
100-67
104-94
87-70
87-89
106-94the heat toyed with the knicks, winning by an average margin of 15.5 points.
the first game was a "send them a message game" that they have no chance. in fact the game was over by the middle of the second quarter.
this is only one example of woodson being on the receiving end of an ass-whupping in the playoffs. there's a pattern, and a preponderance of blowouts, which is the case with woodson if you care to look at his record in the playoffs and the margin of loss, is demonstrative of an inferior coach, both strategically and in terms of leadership.
as i said, he will not get another head coaching job in the nba. that's indictment enough, wouldn't you say?
not interested in chitchat of this nature as it is all surface stuff and white noise.
it's about culture war, factions, internecine struggle, chaotic management, meddling ownership, meddling agents.
this has been the knicks since dolan became the owner. now that phil jackson is here-- someone who loves the knicks more than dolan does and has a deeper connection to the knicks than dolan ever will-- we are on the road to recovery and perhaps respectability.
woodson was one of the symptoms of what has been wrong with the knicks, who were never capable of handling prosperity and professionalism. they have been an extension of dolan, a walking disease.
so it is not surprising to me that certain posters are bemoaning the present state of and direction of this team, while other posters are rejoicing.
newyorknewyork wrote:holfresh wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:holfresh wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:And guess what the Hawks did, they traded for Splitter from the Spurs. Now why would they go and do something like that????Means the coach has more clout that you think and he is helping the guy who made him millions...
They helped each other and was a good trade for both needs. Just like our trade with the Hawks of Hardaway jr for Grant. I don't see one side getting the better of the other for it to be a favor type of deal.
Splitter is not a good player for that money...They don't need Splitter..They could get a cheaper player to do that job..Spurs needed the salary slot to add Aldridge...
He has one yr left on his deal at 8.5mil. He isn't breaking the bank. Plus ATL coach is familiar with him, as he is with the coach and system. And has been coached up fundamentaly by one of the best. He will play defense and move the ball and take what's there. Pretty much what they are looking for as they rotate between big and small.
Two years, this year and next year...
CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:You have a tendency to deflect and distract when you write things that are factually wrong and get called out on it. I get it. Hard to argue with the results of the Woodson/Lin dynamic that you were critical of. Lin was Woodson's point guard for 7 games. They went 6-1. The goal is to win. None of the other stuff you are posting relates to how Woodson used Lin which is what the dialogue was about.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Not sure what that has to do with Woodson/Lin which is what I asked you about. Also, that was a horrible series. The Knicks lost the rest of their backcourt, Amare punched the fire extinguisher, and I believe that was the first round of Tyson getting over the flu in his Knick career.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:I am not going to address who's team it was but the Knicks had lost 6 straight, 8-10 and had what should have been one of the best frontlines in the league. Woodson took over and won. He also continued to start Lin until he got hurt.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Nice links but I wish you would respond to the question I asked regarding what you wrote. Again, Lin played 7 games under Woodson before getting hurt. The team went 6-1. What was your issue with Woodson/Lin when the Knicks were winning at such a high rate?http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfischer/...
as soon as d'antoni resigned it was no longer lin's team.
they were destroyed by miami 4-1, cementing woodson's legacy as a jayvee season coach.
100-67
104-94
87-70
87-89
106-94the heat toyed with the knicks, winning by an average margin of 15.5 points.
the first game was a "send them a message game" that they have no chance. in fact the game was over by the middle of the second quarter.
this is only one example of woodson being on the receiving end of an ass-whupping in the playoffs. there's a pattern, and a preponderance of blowouts, which is the case with woodson if you care to look at his record in the playoffs and the margin of loss, is demonstrative of an inferior coach, both strategically and in terms of leadership.
as i said, he will not get another head coaching job in the nba. that's indictment enough, wouldn't you say?
not interested in chitchat of this nature as it is all surface stuff and white noise.
it's about culture war, factions, internecine struggle, chaotic management, meddling ownership, meddling agents.
this has been the knicks since dolan became the owner. now that phil jackson is here-- someone who loves the knicks more than dolan does and has a deeper connection to the knicks than dolan ever will-- we are on the road to recovery and perhaps respectability.
woodson was one of the symptoms of what has been wrong with the knicks, who were never capable of handling prosperity and professionalism. they have been an extension of dolan, a walking disease.
so it is not surprising to me that certain posters are bemoaning the present state of and direction of this team, while other posters are rejoicing.
mental midgets are only capable of seeing numbers in a vacuum and lack the ability to see numbers in context. then there are those who know better but still insist on denying this aspect of rational thought.
conclusion: you are either stupid, deceitful or a combination of the two... not a good look, sister
dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:You have a tendency to deflect and distract when you write things that are factually wrong and get called out on it. I get it. Hard to argue with the results of the Woodson/Lin dynamic that you were critical of. Lin was Woodson's point guard for 7 games. They went 6-1. The goal is to win. None of the other stuff you are posting relates to how Woodson used Lin which is what the dialogue was about.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Not sure what that has to do with Woodson/Lin which is what I asked you about. Also, that was a horrible series. The Knicks lost the rest of their backcourt, Amare punched the fire extinguisher, and I believe that was the first round of Tyson getting over the flu in his Knick career.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:I am not going to address who's team it was but the Knicks had lost 6 straight, 8-10 and had what should have been one of the best frontlines in the league. Woodson took over and won. He also continued to start Lin until he got hurt.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Nice links but I wish you would respond to the question I asked regarding what you wrote. Again, Lin played 7 games under Woodson before getting hurt. The team went 6-1. What was your issue with Woodson/Lin when the Knicks were winning at such a high rate?http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfischer/...
as soon as d'antoni resigned it was no longer lin's team.
they were destroyed by miami 4-1, cementing woodson's legacy as a jayvee season coach.
100-67
104-94
87-70
87-89
106-94the heat toyed with the knicks, winning by an average margin of 15.5 points.
the first game was a "send them a message game" that they have no chance. in fact the game was over by the middle of the second quarter.
this is only one example of woodson being on the receiving end of an ass-whupping in the playoffs. there's a pattern, and a preponderance of blowouts, which is the case with woodson if you care to look at his record in the playoffs and the margin of loss, is demonstrative of an inferior coach, both strategically and in terms of leadership.
as i said, he will not get another head coaching job in the nba. that's indictment enough, wouldn't you say?
not interested in chitchat of this nature as it is all surface stuff and white noise.
it's about culture war, factions, internecine struggle, chaotic management, meddling ownership, meddling agents.
this has been the knicks since dolan became the owner. now that phil jackson is here-- someone who loves the knicks more than dolan does and has a deeper connection to the knicks than dolan ever will-- we are on the road to recovery and perhaps respectability.
woodson was one of the symptoms of what has been wrong with the knicks, who were never capable of handling prosperity and professionalism. they have been an extension of dolan, a walking disease.
so it is not surprising to me that certain posters are bemoaning the present state of and direction of this team, while other posters are rejoicing.
mental midgets are only capable of seeing numbers in a vacuum and lack the ability to see numbers in context. then there are those who know better but still insist on denying this aspect of rational thought.
conclusion: you are either stupid, deceitful or a combination of the two... not a good look, sister
The problem when you start judging teams by anything other than wins and losses, it's left up to the individual's interpretation. So you could endlessly continue to write the BS you write...It has no meaning because winning is never in the equation..17 win season is great because it's a "culture change"..LB 23 win season was "playing the right way"..Phil is bringing in guys from "good families"..We are bringin back scrubs from last year's awful team to "establish continuity"...Who the heck wants to continue anything off a 17 win season...You guys don't need basketball people, you need speech writers..Know what that all means, we aren't winning because that is what they would have been talking about..So until you come to Church and embrace "winning", everything else is Bullshit..
holfresh wrote:dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:You have a tendency to deflect and distract when you write things that are factually wrong and get called out on it. I get it. Hard to argue with the results of the Woodson/Lin dynamic that you were critical of. Lin was Woodson's point guard for 7 games. They went 6-1. The goal is to win. None of the other stuff you are posting relates to how Woodson used Lin which is what the dialogue was about.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Not sure what that has to do with Woodson/Lin which is what I asked you about. Also, that was a horrible series. The Knicks lost the rest of their backcourt, Amare punched the fire extinguisher, and I believe that was the first round of Tyson getting over the flu in his Knick career.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:I am not going to address who's team it was but the Knicks had lost 6 straight, 8-10 and had what should have been one of the best frontlines in the league. Woodson took over and won. He also continued to start Lin until he got hurt.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Nice links but I wish you would respond to the question I asked regarding what you wrote. Again, Lin played 7 games under Woodson before getting hurt. The team went 6-1. What was your issue with Woodson/Lin when the Knicks were winning at such a high rate?http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfischer/...
as soon as d'antoni resigned it was no longer lin's team.
they were destroyed by miami 4-1, cementing woodson's legacy as a jayvee season coach.
100-67
104-94
87-70
87-89
106-94the heat toyed with the knicks, winning by an average margin of 15.5 points.
the first game was a "send them a message game" that they have no chance. in fact the game was over by the middle of the second quarter.
this is only one example of woodson being on the receiving end of an ass-whupping in the playoffs. there's a pattern, and a preponderance of blowouts, which is the case with woodson if you care to look at his record in the playoffs and the margin of loss, is demonstrative of an inferior coach, both strategically and in terms of leadership.
as i said, he will not get another head coaching job in the nba. that's indictment enough, wouldn't you say?
not interested in chitchat of this nature as it is all surface stuff and white noise.
it's about culture war, factions, internecine struggle, chaotic management, meddling ownership, meddling agents.
this has been the knicks since dolan became the owner. now that phil jackson is here-- someone who loves the knicks more than dolan does and has a deeper connection to the knicks than dolan ever will-- we are on the road to recovery and perhaps respectability.
woodson was one of the symptoms of what has been wrong with the knicks, who were never capable of handling prosperity and professionalism. they have been an extension of dolan, a walking disease.
so it is not surprising to me that certain posters are bemoaning the present state of and direction of this team, while other posters are rejoicing.
mental midgets are only capable of seeing numbers in a vacuum and lack the ability to see numbers in context. then there are those who know better but still insist on denying this aspect of rational thought.
conclusion: you are either stupid, deceitful or a combination of the two... not a good look, sister
The problem when you start judging teams by anything other than wins and losses, it's left up to the individual's interpretation. So you could endlessly continue to write the BS you write...It has no meaning because winning is never in the equation..17 win season is great because it's a "culture change"..LB 23 win season was "playing the right way"..Phil is bringing in guys from "good families"..We are bringin back scrubs from last year's awful team to "establish continuity"...Who the heck wants to continue anything off a 17 win season...You guys don't need basketball people, you need speech writers..Know what that all means, we aren't winning because that's what they would have been talking about if they were winning..So until you come to Church and embrace "winning", everything else is Bullshit..
sorry but you're wrong about winning. it's not *that* you win but *how* you win that matters. this is one of the great things that bill bradley said.
you will notice that the playoff format allows for 16 teams in a 30 team league. this by definition rewards mediocrity. nate silver is trying to address some of this issue by not rewarding division winners with a top 4 guaranteed seed. this, because portland had no business being seeded as high as it was, and the way they were dispatched is proof positive that a win is definitely not a win. and you may extrapolate from this phenomenon that a second seed may not actually be a true second seed. with 82 games there is plenty of wiggle room, unlike with football, where a win is a win.
in order to win it all you have to play the right way. only about 6 teams in any given year play the right way, and all 6 of those teams will be playing in the conference semi-finals. the remaining two teams who appear do not play the right way, so even some second-round series have one team that just doesn't belong. the knicks against indiana is a classic example of this.
much of this has to do with coaching. the knicks allowed an overmatched boston team some life, allowing them to win two games in a row-- this was the dressed in black for a boston funeral series. in a stiffer test they then lost the first game against indiana, losing home court. carmelo stunk up the joint and woodson was outcoached.
why did they lose home court: the woodson/melo/smith triumverate was exposed for the frauds that they are.
dk7th wrote:holfresh wrote:dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:You have a tendency to deflect and distract when you write things that are factually wrong and get called out on it. I get it. Hard to argue with the results of the Woodson/Lin dynamic that you were critical of. Lin was Woodson's point guard for 7 games. They went 6-1. The goal is to win. None of the other stuff you are posting relates to how Woodson used Lin which is what the dialogue was about.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Not sure what that has to do with Woodson/Lin which is what I asked you about. Also, that was a horrible series. The Knicks lost the rest of their backcourt, Amare punched the fire extinguisher, and I believe that was the first round of Tyson getting over the flu in his Knick career.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:I am not going to address who's team it was but the Knicks had lost 6 straight, 8-10 and had what should have been one of the best frontlines in the league. Woodson took over and won. He also continued to start Lin until he got hurt.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Nice links but I wish you would respond to the question I asked regarding what you wrote. Again, Lin played 7 games under Woodson before getting hurt. The team went 6-1. What was your issue with Woodson/Lin when the Knicks were winning at such a high rate?http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfischer/...
as soon as d'antoni resigned it was no longer lin's team.
they were destroyed by miami 4-1, cementing woodson's legacy as a jayvee season coach.
100-67
104-94
87-70
87-89
106-94the heat toyed with the knicks, winning by an average margin of 15.5 points.
the first game was a "send them a message game" that they have no chance. in fact the game was over by the middle of the second quarter.
this is only one example of woodson being on the receiving end of an ass-whupping in the playoffs. there's a pattern, and a preponderance of blowouts, which is the case with woodson if you care to look at his record in the playoffs and the margin of loss, is demonstrative of an inferior coach, both strategically and in terms of leadership.
as i said, he will not get another head coaching job in the nba. that's indictment enough, wouldn't you say?
not interested in chitchat of this nature as it is all surface stuff and white noise.
it's about culture war, factions, internecine struggle, chaotic management, meddling ownership, meddling agents.
this has been the knicks since dolan became the owner. now that phil jackson is here-- someone who loves the knicks more than dolan does and has a deeper connection to the knicks than dolan ever will-- we are on the road to recovery and perhaps respectability.
woodson was one of the symptoms of what has been wrong with the knicks, who were never capable of handling prosperity and professionalism. they have been an extension of dolan, a walking disease.
so it is not surprising to me that certain posters are bemoaning the present state of and direction of this team, while other posters are rejoicing.
mental midgets are only capable of seeing numbers in a vacuum and lack the ability to see numbers in context. then there are those who know better but still insist on denying this aspect of rational thought.
conclusion: you are either stupid, deceitful or a combination of the two... not a good look, sister
The problem when you start judging teams by anything other than wins and losses, it's left up to the individual's interpretation. So you could endlessly continue to write the BS you write...It has no meaning because winning is never in the equation..17 win season is great because it's a "culture change"..LB 23 win season was "playing the right way"..Phil is bringing in guys from "good families"..We are bringin back scrubs from last year's awful team to "establish continuity"...Who the heck wants to continue anything off a 17 win season...You guys don't need basketball people, you need speech writers..Know what that all means, we aren't winning because that's what they would have been talking about if they were winning..So until you come to Church and embrace "winning", everything else is Bullshit..
sorry but you're wrong about winning. it's not *that* you win but *how* you win that matters. this is one of the great things that bill bradley said.
you will notice that the playoff format allows for 16 teams in a 30 team league. this by definition rewards mediocrity. nate silver is trying to address some of this issue by not rewarding division winners with a top 4 guaranteed seed. this, because portland had no business being seeded as high as it was, and the way they were dispatched is proof positive that a win is definitely not a win. and you may extrapolate from this phenomenon that a second seed may not actually be a true second seed. with 82 games there is plenty of wiggle room, unlike with football, where a win is a win.
in order to win it all you have to play the right way. only about 6 teams in any given year play the right way, and all 6 of those teams will be playing in the conference semi-finals. the remaining two teams who appear do not play the right way, so even some second-round series have one team that just doesn't belong. the knicks against indiana is a classic example of this.
much of this has to do with coaching. the knicks allowed an overmatched boston team some life, allowing them to win two games in a row-- this was the dressed in black for a boston funeral series. in a stiffer test they then lost the first game against indiana, losing home court. carmelo stunk up the joint and woodson was outcoached.
why did they lose home court: the woodson/melo/smith triumverate was exposed for the frauds that they are.
Here is why you never win these arguments..Your arguments never are based on facts or truths..2 questions..Was Indiana the better team? and Did a Woodson coached team exceed your expectations??..I always get you with these two truths..
holfresh wrote:dk7th wrote:holfresh wrote:dk7th wrote:CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:You have a tendency to deflect and distract when you write things that are factually wrong and get called out on it. I get it. Hard to argue with the results of the Woodson/Lin dynamic that you were critical of. Lin was Woodson's point guard for 7 games. They went 6-1. The goal is to win. None of the other stuff you are posting relates to how Woodson used Lin which is what the dialogue was about.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Not sure what that has to do with Woodson/Lin which is what I asked you about. Also, that was a horrible series. The Knicks lost the rest of their backcourt, Amare punched the fire extinguisher, and I believe that was the first round of Tyson getting over the flu in his Knick career.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:I am not going to address who's team it was but the Knicks had lost 6 straight, 8-10 and had what should have been one of the best frontlines in the league. Woodson took over and won. He also continued to start Lin until he got hurt.CrushAlot wrote:dk7th wrote:Nice links but I wish you would respond to the question I asked regarding what you wrote. Again, Lin played 7 games under Woodson before getting hurt. The team went 6-1. What was your issue with Woodson/Lin when the Knicks were winning at such a high rate?http://espn.go.com/new-york/nba/story/_/...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfischer/...
as soon as d'antoni resigned it was no longer lin's team.
they were destroyed by miami 4-1, cementing woodson's legacy as a jayvee season coach.
100-67
104-94
87-70
87-89
106-94the heat toyed with the knicks, winning by an average margin of 15.5 points.
the first game was a "send them a message game" that they have no chance. in fact the game was over by the middle of the second quarter.
this is only one example of woodson being on the receiving end of an ass-whupping in the playoffs. there's a pattern, and a preponderance of blowouts, which is the case with woodson if you care to look at his record in the playoffs and the margin of loss, is demonstrative of an inferior coach, both strategically and in terms of leadership.
as i said, he will not get another head coaching job in the nba. that's indictment enough, wouldn't you say?
not interested in chitchat of this nature as it is all surface stuff and white noise.
it's about culture war, factions, internecine struggle, chaotic management, meddling ownership, meddling agents.
this has been the knicks since dolan became the owner. now that phil jackson is here-- someone who loves the knicks more than dolan does and has a deeper connection to the knicks than dolan ever will-- we are on the road to recovery and perhaps respectability.
woodson was one of the symptoms of what has been wrong with the knicks, who were never capable of handling prosperity and professionalism. they have been an extension of dolan, a walking disease.
so it is not surprising to me that certain posters are bemoaning the present state of and direction of this team, while other posters are rejoicing.
mental midgets are only capable of seeing numbers in a vacuum and lack the ability to see numbers in context. then there are those who know better but still insist on denying this aspect of rational thought.
conclusion: you are either stupid, deceitful or a combination of the two... not a good look, sister
The problem when you start judging teams by anything other than wins and losses, it's left up to the individual's interpretation. So you could endlessly continue to write the BS you write...It has no meaning because winning is never in the equation..17 win season is great because it's a "culture change"..LB 23 win season was "playing the right way"..Phil is bringing in guys from "good families"..We are bringin back scrubs from last year's awful team to "establish continuity"...Who the heck wants to continue anything off a 17 win season...You guys don't need basketball people, you need speech writers..Know what that all means, we aren't winning because that's what they would have been talking about if they were winning..So until you come to Church and embrace "winning", everything else is Bullshit..
sorry but you're wrong about winning. it's not *that* you win but *how* you win that matters. this is one of the great things that bill bradley said.
you will notice that the playoff format allows for 16 teams in a 30 team league. this by definition rewards mediocrity. nate silver is trying to address some of this issue by not rewarding division winners with a top 4 guaranteed seed. this, because portland had no business being seeded as high as it was, and the way they were dispatched is proof positive that a win is definitely not a win. and you may extrapolate from this phenomenon that a second seed may not actually be a true second seed. with 82 games there is plenty of wiggle room, unlike with football, where a win is a win.
in order to win it all you have to play the right way. only about 6 teams in any given year play the right way, and all 6 of those teams will be playing in the conference semi-finals. the remaining two teams who appear do not play the right way, so even some second-round series have one team that just doesn't belong. the knicks against indiana is a classic example of this.
much of this has to do with coaching. the knicks allowed an overmatched boston team some life, allowing them to win two games in a row-- this was the dressed in black for a boston funeral series. in a stiffer test they then lost the first game against indiana, losing home court. carmelo stunk up the joint and woodson was outcoached.
why did they lose home court: the woodson/melo/smith triumverate was exposed for the frauds that they are.
Here is why you never win these arguments..Your arguments never are based on facts or truths..2 questions..Was Indiana the better team? and Did a Woodson coached team exceed your expectations??..I always get you with these two truths..
according to your "reasoning" the knicks were the better team because their regular-season record said so.
the answer to the first question is that the pacers were the better team, and by answering this way you are forced to concede that a win is not a win.
check.
the answer to the second question is directly linked to the first question, and the answer here is "no."
checkmate.