Knicks · 2015-16 Other NBA games and League things....... (page 24)

Philly down by 5 at the half to Dallas competing their azzes off. How is it that this team of so many stiffs can play some competitive basketball with good teams? Is it their system? NO LONG 2's at all? Philly shoots .7 of their shots between 16 and 23 feet. .8 from 10-16. That is smart basketball. Now they need some players

Sullinger is really playing great this year. Ok4 was a good comp. Not so sure that Ok4 will be the better player.

mreinman wrote:Sullinger is really playing great this year. Ok4 was a good comp. Not so sure that Ok4 will be the better player.

Ouch. You really don't like him.

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:Also,

They lost to cleveland at home 107-100. It was a very competitive game. Actually blew a big lead.

Lost at Milwaukee 91-87. That is pretty damn competitive.

They lost at cleveland 108-102. Philly at half time, played badly in the 3rd and then outscored them in the fourth.

They lost at the Spurs 92-83. Philly won the second and fourth quarter. That is not easy to do in SA.

This is not a team that is not trying to win. They just don't have that goto guy. One player can change everything. They have also given themselves a ton of chances at hitting big in the lotto.

Saric is also a really nice asset that will hopefully be coming soon.

Embiid has been a bust but its not like there was an obvious pass up.

I don't think any team, no matter how bad, loses by 15 every night. If you appreciate advance stats then you know differential is one of the more respected indicators, across all sports.

For every close game they'd played, they've been blown out two more. For every bad team I think I can show you a game every 3 or 4 where they kept it to single digits.

As to "the process" I'll again say I have less of an issue with the theory of stockpiling a bunch of good young players and more of an issue of what happens then?

Do you pay them all? Going with a roster of 6-8 HIGH lottery picks? If you do, you aren't getting a solid bench. IF they turn out to be anything, they're all going to be commanding $20 before you know it.

Do you just keep turning them over when they get too expensive?

Houston got Harden because they could pay him (immediately) when OKC couldn't and you could project what adding him to a 42 win team could mean. Is Philly gonna be in either of those positions? Good enough that a Harden does something for them AND willing to pay him?

To be up front, these are what prompted my original comment:

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/666256646163705856

Click here to view the Tweet

Javascript is not enabled or there was problem with the URL: https://twitter.com/ESPNSteinLine/status/666256894948806657

Click here to view the Tweet

Not only are they historically bad, they're somehow top heavy too.

I don't like the sound of that mix.

Are they referring to rookies? The Knicks have Calderon, Galloway, Amundson, and Thomas on their team. In regards to your Harden question, I think you have to ask is anyone better than what might be around the corner in the draft for Hinkie? That is a tough question. I thought there were some flaws in his plan this past year when he had to cut some of his second round picks at the end of training camp.

mreinman wrote:Philly down by 5 at the half to Dallas competing their azzes off. How is it that this team of so many stiffs can play some competitive basketball with good teams? Is it their system? NO LONG 2's at all? Philly shoots .7 of their shots between 16 and 23 feet. .8 from 10-16. That is smart basketball. Now they need some players

I still take exception to the idea they're playing competitive basketball. I doubt that holds up to objective scrutiny.

I THINK you're just describing NBA basketball. I look at the Nets, Lakers and Pelicans scores and I don't see anything much different than than what the Sixers have done and whatever differences there are doesn't favor them.

We've set the bar low if we're saying managing to stay in a game for 34 minutes on your home court against a middling team is impressive.

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:Sullinger is really playing great this year. Ok4 was a good comp. Not so sure that Ok4 will be the better player.

Ouch. You really don't like him.

not really. but Sullinger is actually playing great. Check out what he is doing. And it was so pretty to see a guy his size pull up for a 3 on the break and drain it.

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:Philly down by 5 at the half to Dallas competing their azzes off. How is it that this team of so many stiffs can play some competitive basketball with good teams? Is it their system? NO LONG 2's at all? Philly shoots .7 of their shots between 16 and 23 feet. .8 from 10-16. That is smart basketball. Now they need some players

I still take exception to the idea they're playing competitive basketball. I doubt that holds up to objective scrutiny.

I THINK you're just describing NBA basketball. I look at the Nets, Lakers and Pelicans scores and I don't see anything much different than than what the Sixers have done and whatever differences there are doesn't favor them.

We've set the bar low if we're saying managing to stay in a game for 34 minutes on your home court against a middling team is impressive.

They are not impressive, they are competitive because of their system. If they took stupid mid range shots like everyone else, they would lose by 40 every night.

Dallas is not a middling team, they are a very good team. And, losing by 6 is competitive.

Watch them play a game, you may get a bit more inspired. And, I love the fact that they only take high pct shots even if they have low pct players.

mreinman wrote:They are not impressive, they are competitive because of their system.

Again, define competitive?

When the final buzzer goes off, they're not only losing every game, they're losing them by a significantly wider margin than anyone else.

If they're competitive, EVERYONE is MORE competitive, taking the meaning out of the term.

They ARE less competitive than anyone else, if the score counts.

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:They are not impressive, they are competitive because of their system.

Again, define competitive?

When the final buzzer goes off, they're not only losing every game, they're losing them by a significantly wider margin than anyone else.

If they're competitive, EVERYONE is MORE competitive, taking the meaning out of the term.

They ARE less competitive than anyone else, if the score counts.

They have had some games that they got blown out badly which skews their diff.

Like I said they played a number of teams extremely close. If not for their system and their pace, and perhaps their coaching, they don't stand a chance in these games.

So, what I see is that they are running houstons system and now they gotta get a couple of players. I would say that by mid season next year, we will be seeing far more actual wins.

mreinman wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:They are not impressive, they are competitive because of their system.

Again, define competitive?

When the final buzzer goes off, they're not only losing every game, they're losing them by a significantly wider margin than anyone else.

If they're competitive, EVERYONE is MORE competitive, taking the meaning out of the term.

They ARE less competitive than anyone else, if the score counts.

They have had some games that they got blown out badly which skews their diff.

I don't doubt that is accurate, both parts.

But it is true of EVERY team, including the Lakers, Pelicans, and Nets.

That is cooked into anyone's point differential.

The Sixers are the NBA's worst.

Everyone is MORE competitive than they are, whatever metric you want to use.

Noel has a year under his belt, they've added Okafor and McConnell and the results are no different, or better.

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:Sullinger is really playing great this year. Ok4 was a good comp. Not so sure that Ok4 will be the better player.

Ouch. You really don't like him.

not really. but Sullinger is actually playing great. Check out what he is doing. And it was so pretty to see a guy his size pull up for a 3 on the break and drain it.

I find Sullener so annoying- he could be great if he only took his conditioning seriously. He said he was this offseason but still came to camp looking plump. He'll eventually eat his way out of the league in a few years, like Derrick Coleman.

smackeddog wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:Sullinger is really playing great this year. Ok4 was a good comp. Not so sure that Ok4 will be the better player.

Ouch. You really don't like him.

not really. but Sullinger is actually playing great. Check out what he is doing. And it was so pretty to see a guy his size pull up for a 3 on the break and drain it.

I find Sullener so annoying- he could be great if he only took his conditioning seriously. He said he was this offseason but still came to camp looking plump. He'll eventually eat his way out of the league in a few years, like Derrick Coleman.

Derrick Coleman played 15 years in the NBA...

holfresh wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:Sullinger is really playing great this year. Ok4 was a good comp. Not so sure that Ok4 will be the better player.

Ouch. You really don't like him.

not really. but Sullinger is actually playing great. Check out what he is doing. And it was so pretty to see a guy his size pull up for a 3 on the break and drain it.

I find Sullener so annoying- he could be great if he only took his conditioning seriously. He said he was this offseason but still came to camp looking plump. He'll eventually eat his way out of the league in a few years, like Derrick Coleman.

Derrick Coleman played 15 years in the NBA...

Michael Sweetney or Oliver Miller probably better analogy:

holfresh wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:Sullinger is really playing great this year. Ok4 was a good comp. Not so sure that Ok4 will be the better player.

Ouch. You really don't like him.

not really. but Sullinger is actually playing great. Check out what he is doing. And it was so pretty to see a guy his size pull up for a 3 on the break and drain it.

I find Sullener so annoying- he could be great if he only took his conditioning seriously. He said he was this offseason but still came to camp looking plump. He'll eventually eat his way out of the league in a few years, like Derrick Coleman.

Derrick Coleman played 15 years in the NBA...

I meant in terms of him being frustrating- Coleman was a beast, but he could have so much better if he'd taken his conditioning properly.

Did not see the injury, but Anthony Davis left the Denver game after 6 minutes with a shoulder issue.

In his first 3 years he's missed almost 50 games...not including this season.

Hassan Whiteside had 22pts 14rebs 10blocks tonight... and lost.

Danilo Gallinari had 32pts 8rebs 8ast and won.

Warriors/Raptors turned into a good game..Poor Raptor execution down the stretch..DeRozen just isn't prime time..

Cory joseph was a good signing. This kid can play. Think that he would have been a much better choice than afflalo,

Lowry killed Toronto..dumb dumb plays..

Toronto had great guard play. Their bigs suck.

mreinman wrote:Cory joseph was a good signing. This kid can play. Think that he would have been a much better choice than afflalo,

They could have gotten Joseph and kept AA. It would have meant not signing Williams and giving Lou and Lance the minimum. Two more ways would revolve around cutting Jose: they could stretch jose and not sign Williams or stretch jose and have given Lou?lance vet minimums.