View Poll Results: Should David Lee and Nate start?

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • Start David Lee and Nate

    14 73.68%
  • Start David Lee

    1 5.26%
  • Start Nate

    3 15.79%
  • The Bench for David Lee and Nate

    1 5.26%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: ESPN ANALYSIS: START DAVID LEE and NATE

  1. #1
    Moderator
    CoolClyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bronx
    Posts
    2,461
    Rep Power
    20

    Default ESPN ANALYSIS: START DAVID LEE and NATE

    START THE KNICKS ACCORDING TO THEIR PLAYER EFFICIENCY RATING

    John Hollinger's Player Efficiency Rating, (PER) is a player's per-minute productivity, created using formulas that return a value for each NBA player's accomplishments; positive ones, such as field goals, free throws, 3-pointers, assists, rebounds, blocks and steals, and negative ones, such as missed shots, turnovers and personal fouls.

    According to these stats, The Knicks starting lineup should be:

    CURRY (C)
    RANDOLPH (F)
    LEE (F)
    NATE (G)
    MARBURY (G)

    Is this really an unheard of concept?

    That's right, start David Lee and Nate! The Knicks need fresh blood and a swift NYC kick in the ass. What else can go wrong this year? Starting Jefferies and QRich has provided little offense, and their defense is nothing to write home about. Nate has proven he can defend, score at will, and is one Knicks' best 3-point shooters. Better than Q. David Lee has been consistent, and better than Jefferies all year. Why does Jefferies start? He is dead weight, he needs to keep that bench warm!

    Let David Lee and Nate start 10 games in a row, what else can possibly go wrong this year? The current Zeke combos have proven to NOT WORK! EIGHT AND TWENTY FOUR!

    If Jamal doesn't score, the Knicks don't win. Let him be the 6th man who can catch fire. Once Starbury regains his confidence, he can be the spark that guides us, and Nate can be our savior (30 points a game is in the future). David Lee will be a 20/10 man with starting minutes.
    Curry and Randolph need to play more together and work it out, study defense without turning the ball over, pass first and shoot second.

    Isiah doesn't know what he's doing. He can't be president and coach, I blame James Dolan for making Isiah coach in the first place, and I blame Charles Dolan for letting his kid run the club like a circus. Screw those guys! New York is for winners! Like Nate and David Lee!

    GIVE NATE A CHANCE
    GIVE DAVID LEE A CHANCE

    I've said it before and I'll say in again.
    I know these type of stats don't mean ****e, but something's gotta change brothers!

    GIVE PEACE A CHANCE
    CoolClyde

    HOLLINGER PLAYER PROFILES (PER) FOR THE KNICIS

    David Lee 2007-08 Current PER: 17.94
    League Average Comparison: +2.94
    Projected PER: 19.12
    2006-07 PER: 20.31

    Stephon Marbury 2007-08 Current PER: 14.67
    League Average Comparison: -0.33
    Projected PER: 14.61
    2006-07 PER: 15.36

    Zach Randolph 2007-08 Current PER: 17.51
    League Average Comparison: +2.51
    Projected PER: 20.83
    2006-07 PER: 22.81

    Eddy Curry 2007-08 Current PER: 16.03
    League Average Comparison: +1.03
    Projected PER: 16.9
    2006-07 PER: 17.07

    Nate Robinson 2007-08 Current PER: 15.98
    League Average Comparison: +0.98
    Projected PER: 16.59
    2006-07 PER: 15.28

    Jamal Crawford 2007-08 Current PER: 14.49
    League Average Comparison: -0.51
    Projected PER: 14.35
    2006-07 PER: 14.6

    Fred Jones 2007-08 Current PER: 10.65
    League Average Comparison: -4.35
    Projected PER: 10.46
    2006-07 PER: 10.05

    Renaldo Balkman 2007-08 Current PER: 9.27
    League Average Comparison: -5.73
    Projected PER: 16.13
    2006-07 PER: 16.09

    Quentin Richardson 2007-08 Current PER: 6.8
    League Average Comparison: -8.2
    Projected PER: 12.56
    2006-07 PER: 14.3

    Jared Jeffries 2007-08 Current PER: 6.65
    League Average Comparison: -8.35
    Projected PER: 9.62
    2006-07 PER: 8.65

    Mardy Collins 2007-08 Current PER: 1.64
    League Average Comparison: -13.36
    Projected PER: 10.27
    2006-07 PER: 9.09

    Malik Rose 2007-08 Current PER: -0.95
    League Average Comparison: -15.95
    Projected PER: 7.23
    2006-07 PER: 7.76

  2. #2
    Superstar Pricey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Posts
    989
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    that would be who i would start but Lee at SF is interesting.
    Not sure how Curry, Randolph and Lee could play at the same time.

  3. #3

    Default

    I'm a fan of both players, especially li'l Nate but neither should be starting. One could make more of a case for D. Lee (he showed me somehing the way he guarded yao the other night) then for Nate but ultimately the guy who should be starting is Balkman.

  4. #4
    Member BleedOrangeAndBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bronx,New York
    Posts
    54
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally Posted by Eddy Currys House Special
    I'm a fan of both players, especially li'l Nate but neither should be starting. One could make more of a case for D. Lee (he showed me somehing the way he guarded yao the other night) then for Nate but ultimately the guy who should be starting is Balkman.
    I AGREE WITH THE STARTING BALKMAN PART BECAUSE Q-RICH AND JEFFRIES AINT SHIIT BUT I ALSO THINK THAT NATE SHOULD START.THE STARTING LINEUP SHOULD BE

    PG-STEPH
    SG-NATE
    SF-BALKMAN
    PF-RANDOLPH OR ROSE (U PICK)
    C-CURRY

    THE REASON I HAVE NATE AT THE 2 IS BECAUSE HE IS A BETTER OFF BALL PLAYER THAN STEPH.
    I DONT SEE THIS STARTING LINE-UP GETTING BLOWNED OUT BY 20 AND LEE & CRAWFORD WHAT BE A SWEET COMBO OFF THE BENCH.I WOULD ALSO GIVE MARDY COLLINS SOME MORE TIME SO HE CAN REGAIN HIS CONFIDENCE, LAST YEAR HE SHOWED SOME GOOD SIGNS.

  5. #5
    is the Bo$$ Toons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Bahamas
    Posts
    2,379
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    lee randolph and curry will never work in the front court.....never ever in life....nate at the 2??? no no no, he already has a disadvantage when i saw jose calderon posting and fading on him....u cant teach height...that line up will give the opposition carreer numbers both individually and a sa team.....
    fred jones
    jamal crawford
    balkman
    lee
    curry

  6. #6
    Veteran OriginalKnickGrandson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    1,116
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    My Five:

    PG-Nate-offence(outside threat)
    SG-Collins-defence
    SF-Chandler-most complete SF offencivly and defencivly
    PF-Lee-need this guy on the court .
    C-Curry-Post offence(no other reason!)

    I've got Curry in the post schooling leage Center's and kicking it out to Chandler and Nate to hit the open jumpers(if he learns how to pass out of the double teams) and then I've got Lee in for chemistry and boards,Chandler in for floor balance,Collins in for defence,ball handling and passing and finaly Nate the great for outside shooting and fear-less-ness when takeing it to the hole where Eddy and Lee can clean up the offencive glass when Nate gets a big to help out the guard looking for his jock-strap! He (Nate) just needs to do more passing like he was doing this summer when he took the honars of Summer Leage MVP and then he will finaly become the true PG we so despritly need.

  7. #7
    Superstar The 1 and Only's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    995
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by CoolClyde
    START THE KNICKS ACCORDING TO THEIR PLAYER EFFICIENCY RATING

    John Hollinger's Player Efficiency Rating, (PER) is a player's per-minute productivity, created using formulas that return a value for each NBA player's accomplishments; positive ones, such as field goals, free throws, 3-pointers, assists, rebounds, blocks and steals, and negative ones, such as missed shots, turnovers and personal fouls.

    According to these stats, The Knicks starting lineup should be:

    CURRY (C)
    RANDOLPH (F)
    LEE (F)
    NATE (G)
    MARBURY (G)

    Is this really an unheard of concept?

    That's right, start David Lee and Nate! The Knicks need fresh blood and a swift NYC kick in the ass. What else can go wrong this year? Starting Jefferies and QRich has provided little offense, and their defense is nothing to write home about. Nate has proven he can defend, score at will, and is one Knicks' best 3-point shooters. Better than Q. David Lee has been consistent, and better than Jefferies all year. Why does Jefferies start? He is dead weight, he needs to keep that bench warm!

    Let David Lee and Nate start 10 games in a row, what else can possibly go wrong this year? The current Zeke combos have proven to NOT WORK! EIGHT AND TWENTY FOUR!

    If Jamal doesn't score, the Knicks don't win. Let him be the 6th man who can catch fire. Once Starbury regains his confidence, he can be the spark that guides us, and Nate can be our savior (30 points a game is in the future). David Lee will be a 20/10 man with starting minutes.
    Curry and Randolph need to play more together and work it out, study defense without turning the ball over, pass first and shoot second.

    Isiah doesn't know what he's doing. He can't be president and coach, I blame James Dolan for making Isiah coach in the first place, and I blame Charles Dolan for letting his kid run the club like a circus. Screw those guys! New York is for winners! Like Nate and David Lee!

    GIVE NATE A CHANCE
    GIVE DAVID LEE A CHANCE

    I've said it before and I'll say in again.
    I know these type of stats don't mean ****e, but something's gotta change brothers!

    GIVE PEACE A CHANCE
    CoolClyde

    HOLLINGER PLAYER PROFILES (PER) FOR THE KNICIS

    David Lee 2007-08 Current PER: 17.94
    League Average Comparison: +2.94
    Projected PER: 19.12
    2006-07 PER: 20.31

    Stephon Marbury 2007-08 Current PER: 14.67
    League Average Comparison: -0.33
    Projected PER: 14.61
    2006-07 PER: 15.36

    Zach Randolph 2007-08 Current PER: 17.51
    League Average Comparison: +2.51
    Projected PER: 20.83
    2006-07 PER: 22.81

    Eddy Curry 2007-08 Current PER: 16.03
    League Average Comparison: +1.03
    Projected PER: 16.9
    2006-07 PER: 17.07

    Nate Robinson 2007-08 Current PER: 15.98
    League Average Comparison: +0.98
    Projected PER: 16.59
    2006-07 PER: 15.28

    Jamal Crawford 2007-08 Current PER: 14.49
    League Average Comparison: -0.51
    Projected PER: 14.35
    2006-07 PER: 14.6

    Fred Jones 2007-08 Current PER: 10.65
    League Average Comparison: -4.35
    Projected PER: 10.46
    2006-07 PER: 10.05

    Renaldo Balkman 2007-08 Current PER: 9.27
    League Average Comparison: -5.73
    Projected PER: 16.13
    2006-07 PER: 16.09

    Quentin Richardson 2007-08 Current PER: 6.8
    League Average Comparison: -8.2
    Projected PER: 12.56
    2006-07 PER: 14.3

    Jared Jeffries 2007-08 Current PER: 6.65
    League Average Comparison: -8.35
    Projected PER: 9.62
    2006-07 PER: 8.65

    Mardy Collins 2007-08 Current PER: 1.64
    League Average Comparison: -13.36
    Projected PER: 10.27
    2006-07 PER: 9.09

    Malik Rose 2007-08 Current PER: -0.95
    League Average Comparison: -15.95
    Projected PER: 7.23
    2006-07 PER: 7.76
    I like the lineup but where would the energy come from off the bench? Balkman can't be the only one...

  8. #8
    The Gold Mac MSGKnickz33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    4,474
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    whos in my starting 5?

    Nate
    Marbury
    Balkman
    Lee
    Randolph

    Where does the energy off the bench come from?

    I cant answer this question. Marbury would have to prove he can still guard shooting guards like he did last year, I think he can but alot of people on here would disagree.

  9. #9
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    962
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Jamal brings that energy. Wasn't he basically a sixth man at the beginning of the year last year....when we tried the whole Steve Francis Marbury combo. I believe jamal was great as the catalyst for the second team if i remember correctly. Him balkman lee and nate

  10. #10
    Member BleedOrangeAndBlue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Bronx,New York
    Posts
    54
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally Posted by Toons
    lee randolph and curry will never work in the front court.....never ever in life....nate at the 2??? no no no, he already has a disadvantage when i saw jose calderon posting and fading on him....u cant teach height...that line up will give the opposition carreer numbers both individually and a sa team.....
    fred jones
    jamal crawford
    balkman
    lee
    curry
    With this starting line up all the defense will have to do is pack it in on curry. None of the other four guys on the court is good scorers except for jamal and none of them is consistant from three. thats why i said marbury at the one and nate at the two so curry can have some one to kick it out to. Even though nate is at the 2 he can guard the point on defense and marbury could guard the 2

  11. #11
    KnicksonLIN.com
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,073
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    If this question was asked to me at the beginning of the year, where the Knicks were 2-1, I would've said hell no. But this isn't the beginning of the season, and since that start, the knicks have fallen to a grim 8-24 record. I would start both nate and lee, cause they've played hard all year, unlike Curry(who has no d and is in terrible shape), Crawford(who has no d and no consistency), and Richardson(who can't shoot and is in terrible shape).
    My lineup would be: PG:Marbury SG:Nate SF:Chandler PF:Randolph C:Lee
    Note: I'd much rather start a good defensive player at Center, but we don't have one.

  12. #12
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,638
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by BleedOrangeAndBlue
    THE STARTING LINEUP SHOULD BE

    PG-STEPH
    SG-NATE
    SF-BALKMAN
    PF-RANDOLPH OR ROSE (U PICK)
    C-CURRY
    .
    you better be playing with 2...maybe 3 balls with this starting lineup...

  13. #13
    Superstar The 1 and Only's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    995
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by clumsy
    Jamal brings that energy. Wasn't he basically a sixth man at the beginning of the year last year....when we tried the whole Steve Francis Marbury combo. I believe jamal was great as the catalyst for the second team if i remember correctly. Him balkman lee and nate
    You have a good point there....have JC, Balkman, and/or Jeffries, Chandler, Q-Rich (whichever the situation permits) come off the bench...I don't have a problem with this lineup at all. Lee does slow us down at the SF, and his defense at that position is TERRIBLE (Lee lovers don't give me too hard of a time now lol). Whatever gives us more Ws though...

  14. #14
    Cutest Guy Here Kennedy Curse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Queens New York Ozone park
    Posts
    913
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    yea dosent sound bad at all...

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    San Antonio
    Posts
    76
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    i would prolly go with:

    Marbury
    Nate
    Collins
    Lee
    Curry

    If we start these guys we got a badass bench

    Crawford
    Balkman
    Jones
    Randolph

    And that should be it a 9 man rotation allowing the guys who are playing minutes to get settled in and not have to be shuffled in and out of the game consistently. This really messed up the flow of the game.

    And why is everyone on Chandler's nuts, i understand we want to give him a chance but come on starting lineup? are you serious? If injuries or foul problems permit throw him in there but thats it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •