Jeff Van Gundy told us everything tonight.
All we needed to do is open our ears and we'd know by now what it is.
I opened my ears....but I actually knew it before.
I'm not very smart (despite having a Masters degree), but I think it's not that hard to realize our major problems and it doesn't really take Jeff Van Gundy to open my eyes........
seems like 99% of Knicks fans don't listen to the commentary, cause they're still SOLELY blaming coach D'Antoni......
I really don't know what to make of this fan base.....maybe we get what we deserve???
I watched the game on MSG, didn't hear JVG.
Obviously the Knicks don't have the depth of a Philly or OKC. But that doesn't explain why Fields and Shump are accepting perimeter jumpshots when that's exactly what the defense is willing to give up.
The Celtics beat us with ball movement from the inside out, the Knicks kept swinging the ball around the perimeter and allowing themselves to either be closed on, or take shots outside of their comfort zone.
Tripucka talked about it on the post game show on MSG, you have guys taking shots outside of their comfort zone, and guys not being utilized all game so that way when they're forced to take a shot late, it's not foreign to them.
If I didn't see Lin come in the game in the first half, and penetrate, make passes, hustle, and play half way decent....then watch TD come in the second half and do the exact opposite while the Celtics go on a 14-5 run, maybe I'd give the depth excuse more credence.
I'm all about watching the games and looking at the intricacies throughout the game, not listening to a talking head (although sometimes they're right) on tv.
Your eyes and brain tell you that Lin wasn't hurting the Knicks in the first half. Your eyes and brain tell you that Toney Douglas was hurting the Knicks' offense in the second half. Your eyes and brain tell you that MDA left him out there for some reason, and the Knicks' 12 point lead was lost.
That has nothing to do with depth. Lin was serviceable early on, why go to TD later?
When we're down by 2 with virtually no time on the clock, why not bring in Novak to be a decoy and draw up some sort of play toward the rim? You had bodies running away from the ball and rim, and Novak got to the corner, sealed his man, and caught the ball, with Melo....curling around to a spot behind the 3PT line. Once again, we're down by 2, a 3 is not needed.
I understand playing to win, but do it in a sensible fashion, otherwise play to tie.