Running is not the problem, early perimeter shots can be an issue. If we play a team like the Cs, who don't crash the offensive board, but instead gets back on D and rely on high percentage shots in the half court, they'll be able to contend with us running, and also crash the defensive boards to make us go one-and-done. Getting a stop on defense means nothing if you push the ball up the court, put up an early jumper, and can't get the rebound because your rebounders haven't established any sort of position because they're either not in a spot to do so, or they are being boxed out, etc.
I don't see a problem with running as long as we're running to the rim, and not settling for the first open three, with very little chance of grabbing a board. I also want to see the team develop an offense that can compete with a team that slows the game down, and creates fewer possessions. The more tools in the tool-belt, the better chance of success.
Those things have nothing to do with defense. They're team philosophy, and I for one, am tired of being a fan of a team that "lives by the 3, and dies by the 3." I want my team to be the one that can give it to you from the inside, outside, defensively, or a combo of all 3. There seriously shouldn't be any argument against that. But the past few years tells us that MDA wants his system to be the victor with very little outside influence. I can't tell anyone what the future will hold, but the Knicks need a culture change to get to the top, not just an assistant coach to take over defense and teach the fundamentals of helping the helper.
I guess we'll see what happens when the lockout ends.
