It's amazing because the Knicks are good for the first time in nearly a decade and we still have flame wars on this forum about Starbury
We are not seeing AR and Moz playing because they are extreme liabilities on the court right now. Moz gets a foul just walking onto the court and AR is out of control when he gets playing time. Mozs inability to adapt to the NBA causes him to disrupt the Knicks game; kills momentum and sends the other team to the foul line. AR is just bouncing off the walls when he gets on the court! I know Mike D concentrates on him in practice but AR is struggling. If the Knicks want to burn this season as well, they could just let AR and Moz play and try to see if they can work out their issues on the court.... Do we want that?
A player can have all sorts of talent but if they can not fit into a system or a a city stresses them out.... What good are they to us? They have more trade value than playing value for us... I'm sure Mike D would love a 7 ft player with his athleticism and talent; but if that can't be realized with the Knicks than he needs to be moved.
Extreme liabilities? Or extreme offensive liabilities? Look no one is saying Moz is the next Ewing or that AR is the next Oakley, but I'm sure they can offer this team something to help them win. But, I'm sure you Mike D fans cant/wont see this because Mike D cant see it himself.
When I look at what Jordan Hill and Milliecec (sp) are doing now compared to what they did under Mike D it's ludicrious. Again, neither is an allstar, but they are making contributions. I dont think AR and Moz upset the overall game plan. Just the offensive game plan. Wouldnt you agree?
Would you say that Turiaf also disrupts the Knicks OFFENSIVE game plan? Yet looking at yesterdays game we wouldnt have won without him. Why not utililze a players strengths instead of admonishing him for his weaknesses? Hill and Darko are getting better every game they play. I'm sure giving AR and Moz playing time would have the same affect.
I think you want to tie this playing time into Knick wins. Which I think is incorrect. The Knicks right now are beating the teams they should, but losing to the so called elite teams. These losses are basically because of defense and rebounding. Why not utilize these 7 footers to see if they can make up the difference, or at least decrease the difference? Seems logical to me.
Moz and AR, in my estimation are BOTH offensive and defensive liabilities. This is why they don't play. They're both extremely foul prone, which is a defensive issue. You simply can't have guys on the court that are gonna be constantly sending catz to the line. I don't blame Mike D for not giving them minutes for this reason alone.
On offense they don't play because they don't understand the flow, ie where the ball needs to move. AR is particularly bad in this area. It doesn't help that when he's in he always looks for his own shot, further killing said flow.
Both are turnover prone. Moz has a shown propensity for dropping passes that would lead to easy layins. AR is a walking turnover waiting to happen. He's an Apple turnover, sry i'm really hungry right now.
And, your wrong about Turiaf. He izn't an offensive liability at all. When he's in he moves the ball. He knows where it needs to go. He sets good screens. And when he gets a pass inside he actually catches the ball and can finish/draw a foul/both. On defense, well he's boss.. You should know this atleast-- 10 rebounds and 6 blocks yesterday.. You're wrong about all three players dude.
Last edited by ronoranina; Jan 03, 2011 at 14:01.
You guys call us Mike D fans in a "sarcastic way" but the reality is that they targeted AR and wanted what he has shown flashes of with GS; but they also want to have a wining season. If they continued to play both AR and Moz and their troubles and short comings caused us crucial games... You same guys would be screaming for D'Antoni's head. His bad coaching decision to stay with guys that were not working... Did anyone notice that when they removed both from the rotation we started wining???
Also, just because AR is 7 foot doesn't mean he can be affective in the low post... I mean he's what, 200 pounds???? He's probably more of a 3 than anything else and we have a more rounded player there already. If Turiaf was able to affectively play more time, his sweet spot is around 20 minutes a game, then they would have him on the court more. We need someone who can stay on the floor for major minutes and in consistent more than dominate.
Coach him up and he'll be fine. This guy is not totally useless like Mike D wants you to believe. Just like Darko and Jordan hill werent. When are we as fans going to stop making excuses for Mike D on why he doesnt use this big or that one? You have two instances right in front of your face telling you Mike D was wrong. I'd bet my house he's wrong about AR and Moz...
dantoni is one of the worst coaches ive ever seen.
INCREDIBLY overrated, terrible at drawing up plays, and is about as stubborn a fkn mule as Brown is/was...
But atleast Brown coached/es defense...
I'd rather LOSE some offense to get much better defense anyway.
Send Gallo's frail injury prone ass outta here, let Randolph play more, who is a good rebounder and defender...
Let's Mike Brown in here, or shiyt SOMEBODY. It's about time we started the no layup rule again...
And as wussy as the league is nowadays, i don't care. I WANNA SEE BODIES HITTING THE FLOOR NOW!
U sound like your are from Real Gm lol another Randolph homer
Gallo>>>> Randolph any day of the weak
Gallo gets what he has to do to become better and in that Pacers game he was showing us a full arsenal getting to the line posting up savvy lay ups. Randoplh = knuckle head
So Legend33, I think the Knicks brass does want to sure up the defense, especially getting better on the boards and getting "longer" in the paint. They want to make sure that they address this with out affecting the current format.
Moz & AR aren't anymore liabilities than Turriaf or Williams.
In MDA's system sure they may look lost but that's more of a reflection of this system than their talents.
Face it, these are players that MANY other coaches can find a use for ala Nate & Jordan.
Its a simple issue... This coach does not value fundamentals. All phases of the game must be played well to compete, not just offense. Without value on bigs, defense and the like, you will be limited which we are.
If the bigs we acquire(d) are liabilities, then this is a direct reflection on the coach. And for some reason the majority of bigs we have (had) could not warrant playing time. This forces me to conclude that its not the players but the coach and system. And if that's the case, then we can also conclude that any big player that "fits" this system will not have the fundamental skills (defense, low post presence) needed to make it to the next level.
If MDA thinks we can get by with 7-8 rotations, again we will lack the players, skills needed to go to the next level. Either way, sure while I'm happy we have improved, the writing is on the wall.
It says: Without the proper valuation and implementation of size and defense, scoring will take you only so far. And that's what we've witnessed to this point right? Yeah exciting, yeah improved, and yeah come playoff time, worn down, undersized and a 1st-2nd round victim.
A good coach implements strategy in all phases of the game. He has multiple strategies to attack the opposition in any situation. He learns and adapts to beat teams in multiple ways in multiple phases. He makes players better and puts them in a pos. to win. Along with more intangibles.
MDA is limited. If things don't fall perfectly into place, he has no options. If the players aren't perfectly suited to his flawed system, he has no options. The players available to fit his system... are already on our team, and we've succeeded to improve yet still have flaws easily exposed.
There is only one answer (to those who already see what the future brings based on our stats and performace)... learn to value and implement bigs or you will develop a false sense of security and false hope only to be mauled by more fundamentally sound teams and coaches.
*and we lead the NBA in blocks because we let everyone into the paint.
I especially love the part with the bigger font...that's exactly what I was talking about with coach Pops. The Spurs went from a perennial defensive juggernaut to the best record, so far, in the league with an uptempo "get it and go" style offense...and I'm told that's because they have 3 really good veteran players?
While I'm sure that plays a role in it....Popovich still had make the assessment of his roster and chose to change the team's DNA based on what he had....that has very little to do with "veteran leadership"...that's the coach.....coaching.
But meanwhile Mike D can't figure out a way to implement AR or Moz into the game to put them in positions to have success? And that's ok because of what exactly?