Knicks · The Return of The Real Carmelo (page 7)

I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I don't think any of us ever looked at Carmelo as an arrogant BB player. In fact, my biggest criticism of him always been the fact that he was too passive and never played with the fire of a Jordan/Kobe/lebron/Wade. I often placed him in the same tier as Vince Carter and MacGrady.

The 2015 Carmelo is showing that he has finally gotten the message. He is getting his teammates involved, he is defending, rebounding, and most of all, he is leading this young core of players. It was a blessing that Phil traded JR whose "childish/unprofessional" personality I believe hindered Carmelo's growth as a leader. He is now surrounded with all around talents, and I hope that he finds the strength to bring it every night, because this dude is too good of a talent to not get the glory that he deserves

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Not at all. The one thing about Pierce I would love for Carmelo to copy is the killer instinct in the 4th quarter. That dude never tries to outmuscle anyone in the paint; he always looks to create that space within his comfort space and looks to burry the shot. Carmelo is the contrary; he always look to overpower instead of finding space and comfort spot on the floor. The step back jumper is one trick Carmelo needs to look to perfect in the forth to regain his place amongst the league true finishers. I am not in favor of the postup plays he has been trying to finish within the last two minutes. He needs to look to attack the basket, and if well defended, create a little separation and elevate with a jumper

He said Wednesday this is a concerted effort established post-surgery.

“There comes a time where you kind of have to do something different and figure the game out,” he said. “Not be narrow-minded coming into the game and be open-minded. Especially on this team there are nights where I need to score a lot of points and some nights I don’t.

“Heading into the season I knew that especially coming off my surgery and rehabbing and all of that and trying to get in the flow of the game. It was better for me to try to get guys going.”

http://m.nydailynews.com/sports/basketba...

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

knicks1248 wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

mreinman wrote:Everyone questions why I expect so much. He is who he is, just appreciate it.

Well no! I know that he was capable of this if he was just willing to pass especially out of the double team. I have never ever seen him play like this.

The dude is very capable, but he must be surrounded with play/shot makers to showcase his true abilities. The Carmelo we saw tonight was never asked to run the point in the past which was a mistake if you ask me

Thats what MDA wanted

To run the point???

Where were you that you don't know MDA wanted MELO to play PF? Back then MELO pouted and didn't want to do it. IMO MELO wasn't fully healthy and was slumping but refused to accept having the ball in his hands and leading his team.

Let the past eight the past. I am enjoying this year's Carmelo. Thank God for Phil's mentorship

MDA had a big communication problem, he's not the type of coach that will cuddle players, it's either you do it or you don't, i don't have to explain myself, this will work as long as you play the way I say.

Phil (along with melo maturing more) has a much better approach towards gunslingers(volume shooters) like Kobe, MJ, and Melo.

If MDA was coaching this team with Fisher as his top assistant, we would be the team to beat in the NBA

The difference if you ask me knicks1248 is the success between the two individuals. Phil is a winner, the same can't be said of MDA. What has he won? Nada

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

that's a ridiculous take. who'd the celtics have other than pierce that were anything? jamison whose game was total shyt and an ineffective kenny anderson. who were the others? in any case, why not consider that these inferior, overrated players he was stuck with actually hindered his ability to use the skills he already possessed, such as:

footwork phenomenal
maintaining his dribble during footwork
ballhandling superior
passing skills are fantastic
pick and roll game superb
terrific ball faker and head faker
eager and capable defender... underrated
pierce is cluuuuuttttccch

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

that's a ridiculous take. who'd the celtics have other than pierce that were anything? jamison whose game was total shyt and an ineffective kenny anderson. who were the others? in any case, why not consider that these inferior, overrated players he was stuck with actually hindered his ability to use the skills he already possessed, such as:

footwork phenomenal
maintaining his dribble during footwork
ballhandling superior
passing skills are fantastic
pick and roll game superb
terrific ball faker and head faker
eager and capable defender... underrated
pierce is cluuuuuttttccch

Your explanation makes it easier to see why Pierce and Carmelo to be viewed as similar players. To be honest, PP is not a bad dude to be compared to.

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

that's a ridiculous take. who'd the celtics have other than pierce that were anything? jamison whose game was total shyt and an ineffective kenny anderson. who were the others? in any case, why not consider that these inferior, overrated players he was stuck with actually hindered his ability to use the skills he already possessed, such as:

footwork phenomenal
maintaining his dribble during footwork
ballhandling superior
passing skills are fantastic
pick and roll game superb
terrific ball faker and head faker
eager and capable defender... underrated
pierce is cluuuuuttttccch

I agree, pierce is a great player. But I remember clear as day that things said about Melo were said about Pierce before the other guys arrived. Winning changes everything and makes certain things easily forgotten.

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

that's a ridiculous take. who'd the celtics have other than pierce that were anything? jamison whose game was total shyt and an ineffective kenny anderson. who were the others? in any case, why not consider that these inferior, overrated players he was stuck with actually hindered his ability to use the skills he already possessed, such as:

footwork phenomenal
maintaining his dribble during footwork
ballhandling superior
passing skills are fantastic
pick and roll game superb
terrific ball faker and head faker
eager and capable defender... underrated
pierce is cluuuuuttttccch

I agree, pierce is a great player. But I remember clear as day that things said about Melo were said about Pierce before the other guys arrived. Winning changes everything and makes certain things easily forgotten.

Carmelo is well on his way this season. For the first time of Carmelo's career he is behaving as if he truly understand the game. It hurts to see that it has taken him this long to get it, but never the less, he gets it now

Knicks1969 wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

that's a ridiculous take. who'd the celtics have other than pierce that were anything? jamison whose game was total shyt and an ineffective kenny anderson. who were the others? in any case, why not consider that these inferior, overrated players he was stuck with actually hindered his ability to use the skills he already possessed, such as:

footwork phenomenal
maintaining his dribble during footwork
ballhandling superior
passing skills are fantastic
pick and roll game superb
terrific ball faker and head faker
eager and capable defender... underrated
pierce is cluuuuuttttccch

I agree, pierce is a great player. But I remember clear as day that things said about Melo were said about Pierce before the other guys arrived. Winning changes everything and makes certain things easily forgotten.

Carmelo is well on his way this season. For the first time of Carmelo's career he is behaving as if he truly understand the game. It hurts to see that it has taken him this long to get it, but never the less, he gets it now

well that's what this season and next hinges on-- a 124 million dollar player "getting it."

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

Pierce also got to the Eastern Conference Finals his first year in the playoffs and the second round the year after that. And he had to deal with the Antoine Walker shenanigans before his team got KG and Ray.

His career actually lineups up pretty well with Melo if you look at it. The portion where his team imploded around him and they missed the playoffs for a few years happened early to him - basically what has happened to Melo the past two seasons.

I agree he didn't change all that much about his game - he just bought into the team concept and sacrificed his own stats - and really sacrificed himself as the face of the Celtics to KG. People were worried he would struggle with that, but he bought in graciously and the Celtics became a great team. That's the hope for Melo - and I think he's making the right adjustments to his game, possibly more than Pierce ever did. The other hope is that we can add another piece or two so he can really compete in his last few good years.

crzymdups wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

Pierce also got to the Eastern Conference Finals his first year in the playoffs and the second round the year after that. And he had to deal with the Antoine Walker shenanigans before his team got KG and Ray.

His career actually lineups up pretty well with Melo if you look at it. The portion where his team imploded around him and they missed the playoffs for a few years happened early to him - basically what has happened to Melo the past two seasons.

I agree he didn't change all that much about his game - he just bought into the team concept and sacrificed his own stats - and really sacrificed himself as the face of the Celtics to KG. People were worried he would struggle with that, but he bought in graciously and the Celtics became a great team. That's the hope for Melo - and I think he's making the right adjustments to his game, possibly more than Pierce ever did. The other hope is that we can add another piece or two so he can really compete in his last few good years.

only problem is that melo does not possess or exhibit the same skill level as paul pierce.

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

PP was a good player right out of the gate and had very good seasons before super celtic friends.

Knicks1969 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

that's a ridiculous take. who'd the celtics have other than pierce that were anything? jamison whose game was total shyt and an ineffective kenny anderson. who were the others? in any case, why not consider that these inferior, overrated players he was stuck with actually hindered his ability to use the skills he already possessed, such as:

footwork phenomenal
maintaining his dribble during footwork
ballhandling superior
passing skills are fantastic
pick and roll game superb
terrific ball faker and head faker
eager and capable defender... underrated
pierce is cluuuuuttttccch

Your explanation makes it easier to see why Pierce and Carmelo to be viewed as similar players. To be honest, PP is not a bad dude to be compared to.

They are not the same, PP is/was the player that we hope melo can become.

mreinman wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

that's a ridiculous take. who'd the celtics have other than pierce that were anything? jamison whose game was total shyt and an ineffective kenny anderson. who were the others? in any case, why not consider that these inferior, overrated players he was stuck with actually hindered his ability to use the skills he already possessed, such as:

footwork phenomenal
maintaining his dribble during footwork
ballhandling superior
passing skills are fantastic
pick and roll game superb
terrific ball faker and head faker
eager and capable defender... underrated
pierce is cluuuuuttttccch

Your explanation makes it easier to see why Pierce and Carmelo to be viewed as similar players. To be honest, PP is not a bad dude to be compared to.

They are not the same, PP is/was the player that we hope melo can become.

Forgetting that Pierce is more myth than reality, anyone expecting Melo to significantly morph his game in year 13 is just paying rhetorical games.

bigbasketballs wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

that's a ridiculous take. who'd the celtics have other than pierce that were anything? jamison whose game was total shyt and an ineffective kenny anderson. who were the others? in any case, why not consider that these inferior, overrated players he was stuck with actually hindered his ability to use the skills he already possessed, such as:

footwork phenomenal
maintaining his dribble during footwork
ballhandling superior
passing skills are fantastic
pick and roll game superb
terrific ball faker and head faker
eager and capable defender... underrated
pierce is cluuuuuttttccch

Your explanation makes it easier to see why Pierce and Carmelo to be viewed as similar players. To be honest, PP is not a bad dude to be compared to.

They are not the same, PP is/was the player that we hope melo can become.

Forgetting that Pierce is more myth than reality, anyone expecting Melo to significantly morph his game in year 13 is just paying rhetorical games.

I don't expect melo to change, I PRAY that phil can get into his head and there are signs that there is somebody in melo's head.

Melo does not need to morph his game, it takes a mindset transplant to see that playing like he did last night is what everybody desperately wants from him.

Carmelo was not very happy with Barkley, but I for one was happy with Barkley's action. Carmelo really should not have responded as he did. First and foremost, I thought it was illadvise of him to state that he does not know Barkley. All true student of the game often embrace iconic figures like Barkley. It is ironic of Carmelo, because even Clyde Feazier claimed that Carmelo never confer with him about anything.

crzymdups wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

bigbasketballs wrote:

Knicks1969 wrote:I never liked PP's game until after Garnett's arrival. I always thought he was arrogant and trigger happy. When Garnett and Allen arrived,PP changed his total approach and became a better all around BB player.

I think the idea Pierce suddenly became a different player is more myth than reality. Yeah, he took less shots. He now has Allen, KG in the starting line-up and a true PG distributing. Of course he was going to take less shots.

Is that really a big deal considering the team they were before that?

Pierce led celtics teams in his prime that did not make the playoffs. Teams with more talent than the Knicks have had in some years with Melo. But once you get really good players alongside you and your workload decreases, you tend to round out your game a little bit. Pierce made the right adjustments, but he wasn't a much different player. He gets associated with that championship team though, so it makes him a better player, leader, etc by association. Winning changes the perception of everyone, and it becomes easy to say he became a better player.

Pierce also got to the Eastern Conference Finals his first year in the playoffs and the second round the year after that. And he had to deal with the Antoine Walker shenanigans before his team got KG and Ray.

His career actually lineups up pretty well with Melo if you look at it. The portion where his team imploded around him and they missed the playoffs for a few years happened early to him - basically what has happened to Melo the past two seasons.

I agree he didn't change all that much about his game - he just bought into the team concept and sacrificed his own stats - and really sacrificed himself as the face of the Celtics to KG. People were worried he would struggle with that, but he bought in graciously and the Celtics became a great team. That's the hope for Melo - and I think he's making the right adjustments to his game, possibly more than Pierce ever did. The other hope is that we can add another piece or two so he can really compete in his last few good years.

Would have been stupid for him not to as he wasn't on KGs level. He is closer to Ray Allen then KG.

Pierce had an old school savvy game to him. But just like everyone else the quality of team overrides all else.

In 2 yrs KP, Melo, Affalo could be decent if we add another young stud.

We need to either draft a PG (we have no draft pick next year), or get one via FA. We need Westbrook

Knicks1969 wrote:We need to either draft a PG (we have no draft pick next year), or get one via FA. We need Westbrook

How about Curry?