Turiaf scored 2 pts.. Did he help us beat Indy???

Clyde & The Pearl said:

Not trying to get into a dick swinging contest with you ronoranina, but I've forgotten more about BBall than you'll ever know.

Based on your philosphy when STAT was averaging 7 T O's a game (he's still over 4) he should have been benched. Nah I dont think so. Does Moz get into foul trouble a bit too much? Possibly? But. IMHO he's being targeted by the refs. Many of his foull calls are of the ticky tack variety. I've seen this kid develop. In preseason he had a problem with moving screens. Got coached up now you rarely see that called on him (when he actually plays). The only solution for this is to let him play and let the refs see he's game more, and coach him up.

As far as AR I thought it was shot selection? Funny that a coach that wants shots to go up in 7 secs or less has a problem with a players shot selection. The problem is AR doesnt have a midrange jumper of note. If he did he'd be playing. It doesnt matter that defensively he could lock down a bunch of small forwards in this league. It doesnt matter that if you get him closer to the rim his shooting % goes up DRASTICALLY. If he cant run the offense to COACHES liking he's benched.

Whats funny Gallo (although I admit he's improving) couldnt defend my 12 year old neice. But because he's the BEST SHOOTER our coach has ever seen he gets 35 mins a night. You wanna look at flaws? Lets look at Gallos. He's weak. Cant take it to the rim consistently. No handle. Cant defend. Cant shoot off the dribble. Has no left hand. Inside game is NON-EXISTENT. Yet coach extols his limited game. But offensively he fits what Mike D wants to do. Like I said in another post defense is 50% of basketball.

In the future when you come at me make sure its real. Nitpicking at a players flaws doesnt make that player totally useless to that team.

Basically we need a new coach...

Click to expand...

This an inane post. You're acting like you know the game but your posts say different.. The fact Knuckles2k2 agrees w u says a lot..

Yes Amare averages almost 4 to's a game, but he's also giving you 26 and 9, so you live w that.

Why's that so hard to understand. It's about trade offs.

If AR and Moz had enough to bring to the table they'd be playing dude. Unfortunately our margin for victory is slim. So we can't afford dumb play (ridiculous to's and fouls) from players that can't help us drastically in another area that is of particular importance to the team.

It's just like you and others going on about Chandler playing D on bigs when he scoring prolificly. It's like I said, you can't have it both ways. It's either have Moz on somebody like dwight, whom he'd would surely foul gratuitously, then on the other end not give us anything, or have Chandler guarding him in spot situation once in a while as he continues to own @ the other end..

That's the reason making the so-called defensive substitution of Moz/AR for Chandler is retarted. It's a bad trade off.

With Turiaf he can actually play great defense, but on offense he's a glue player. He doesn't hurt us at all when he's out there. That's what separates him from AR and Moz. AR/ Moz hurt us on both ends of the court. They're not ready dude. That's why the premise of your opening argument is shot to shat. Yes Turiaf brings what he brings on D, but your glossing over the fact that AR/Moz have not shown they can be trusted to stay on the floor w out fouling dudes needlessly. Yes our rotation guys each only get 6 fouls, but they've shown they have a lot more savvy w regards to how they use them. This is so simple. You can't have guys in the game that draw fouls to easily.. You just can't. This shows a lack of knowledge about the game Clydeandthepearl.

Oh and you must not watch the Knicks that much because your assessments of Gallo are so far off the mark..

Gallo does have a good left left hand; don't suppose you saw the nice up and under move that he punctuated with a pretty left handed finish yesterday. Infact when he drives he normally prefers to finish w the left. He can handle the ball. God, I've gone over this a million times w people. Gallo is a nice ball-handler and not just for a 6'10''. When he's aggressive he gets to the rim at will. He can draw fouls easily. Right now he's second on the team in fta'd and made. How's he getting to the rim?? He couldn't be dribling his way there could he? Gallo's ability to get to the rim when he wants at 6'10'',even against smaller faster players is primarily due to his (underrated/deceptive quickness) handle and solid footwork as he's not a fast player. Yes he fits in w what Mike D wants as he can score, process info on O and D, but he's also still learning and will be able to do more as he continues to gain experience.

Fortunately for Gallo he's not turnover prone and he's very efficient. These are two areas AR suffers in, hence the lack of minutes. Moz is just as bad in the turnover area, as he's just not aware enough on offense. I mean to the point where I've seen passes hit him in the hands and carum out of bounds, which shows he's not ready or doesn't know when the ball's coming. You can't do that at this level.

Now I'd like see AR & Moz get more minutes too. But if they can't play they can't play. If your going to make silly, needless fouls and dumbass turnovers you can't be trusted w minutes. THEY, SO FAR, HAVE PROVED THEY ARE NOT READY TO BE TRUSTED YET. I don't blame Mike D for not playing them.

Fouls and turnovers.. It really is that simple dude.

ronoranina said:

This an inane post. You're acting like you know the game but your posts say different.. The fact Knuckles2k2 agrees w u says a lot..

Yes Amare averages almost 4 to's a game, but he's also giving you 26 and 9, so you live w that.

Why's that so hard to understand. It's about trade offs.

If AR and Moz had enough to bring to the table they'd be playing dude. Unfortunately our margin for victory is slim. So we can't afford dumb play (ridiculous to's and fouls) from players that can't help us drastically in another area that is of particular importance to the team.

It's just like you and others going on about Chandler playing D on bigs when he scoring prolificly. It's like I said, you can't have it both ways. It's either have Moz on somebody like dwight, whom he'd would surely foul gratuitously, then on the other end not give us anything, or have Chandler guarding him in spot situation once in a while as he continues to own @ the other end..

That's the reason making the so-called defensive substitution of Moz/AR for Chandler is retarted. It's a bad trade off.

With Turiaf he can actually play great defense, but on offense he's a glue player. He doesn't hurt us at all when he's out there. That's what separates him from AR and Moz. AR/ Moz hurt us on both ends of the court. They're not ready dude. That's why the premise of your opening argument is shot to shat. Yes Turiaf brings what he brings on D, but your glossing over the fact that AR/Moz have not shown they can be trusted to stay on the floor w out fouling dudes needlessly. Yes our rotation guys each only get 6 fouls, but they've shown they have a lot more savvy w regards to how they use them. This is so simple. You can't have guys in the game that draw fouls to easily.. You just can't. This shows a lack of knowledge about the game Clydeandthepearl.

Oh and you must not watch the Knicks that much because your assessments of Gallo are so far off the mark..

Gallo does have a good left left hand; don't suppose you saw the nice up and under move that he punctuated with a pretty left handed finish yesterday. Infact when he drives he normally prefers to finish w the left. He can handle the ball. God, I've gone over this a million times w people. Gallo is a nice ball-handler and not just for a 6'10''. When he's aggressive he gets to the rim at will. He can draw fouls easily. Right now he's second on the team in fta'd and made. How's he getting to the rim?? He couldn't be dribling his way there could he? Gallo's ability to get to the rim when he wants at 6'10'',even against smaller faster players is primarily due to his (underrated/deceptive quickness) handle and solid footwork as he's not a fast player. Yes he fits in w what Mike D wants as he can score, process info on O and D, but he's also still learning and will be able to do more as he continues to gain experience.

Fortunately for Gallo he's not turnover prone and he's very efficient. These are two areas AR suffers in, hence the lack of minutes. Moz is just as bad in the turnover area, as he's just not aware enough on offense. I mean to the point where I've seen passes hit him in the hands and carum out of bounds, which shows he's not ready or doesn't know when the ball's coming. You can't do that at this level.

Now I'd like see AR & Moz get more minutes too. But if they can't play they can't play. If your going to make silly, needless fouls and dumbass turnovers you can't be trusted w minutes. THEY, SO FAR, HAVE PROVED THEY ARE NOT READY TO BE TRUSTED YET. I don't blame Mike D for not playing them.

Fouls and turnovers.. It really is that simple dude.

Click to expand...

You probably misjudged what Jordan Hill and Darko bring to the table the same way you are doing with AR and Moz. The same way your coach Mike D has. You have an excuse because you dont coach in the NBA. Mike D has none.

Your trade off BS is just that. BS. What your doing by putting a 6 8 chandler on Dwight is enhancing his game even more. Being that Dwight isnt guarding Chandler at the other end there isnt a true tradeoff. Things are easier for Dwight offensively yet there the same for Chandler.

Basketball is a game of length. When a team has length you wanna play your length to make it a bit more difficult for the other team to score. Like I said defense is 50% of basketball. What you and your coach advocate will never win championships. Playing small may work against some less talented teams, but when you play against the good teams the bigger, longer teams almost always win. Its been proven throughout the history of the game.

What the Knicks are doing is making other teams bigs more prolific when they play them. See the Miami game and Ilguaskis (sp) if you want more proof.

As far as Gallo he has all the flaws in his game that I stated. Plus one that I missed. He cant finish at the rim.

Clyde & The Pearl said:

7 TO's a game is alot, but I agree you dont bench STAT. You think Gallo goes to the rim? Just lately I've seen an effort from him to get there. When he does 90% of the time one bump and he's falling on the floor flailing his arms all over the place. Unless he is untouched he aint finishing.

Click to expand...

I don't care if he is grabbing his knee and crying like a little girl, as long as he ends up on the charity line.... Which he is! By the way, he does throw it up and from time to time, it goes in so he get's a chance at 3!

Clyde & The Pearl said:

I asked this in my other thread. When are we going to stop making excuses when it comes to Mike D and his handling of bigs? He's been proven wrong twice already. I'd bet my house that he's wrong about Moz and AR.

Click to expand...

He is? Hmmm, I'm sorry, I thought the Knicks were wining... Also, I swear that on my television I watched Mozgov get 2 fouls within the first 2 minutes of stepping onto the court....Every game. I also remember with AR, he will block a shot but then blow the defense when transitioning down court, never mind bricking up most of his shots. AR is a long term project! One that may produce huge returns but nothing that he has done has shown that he deserves being in the rotation. It doesn't matter what he did 3 years ago, this year he hasn't earned a spot.

Clyde & The Pearl said:

Think Knicks are trying to win, granted I understand. But, when we go up against the Celts, Heat, Hawks, and other teams in the playoffs, with bigs length is mandatory. I think we need to get these guys as much PT as possible without hurting our win total.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that Boston's bigs can cause us issues but 2 7 footers that can't get out of their own way is not the answer either! Being 7' tall isn't the only criteria needed to earn a spot!

Clyde & The Pearl said:

You probably misjudged what Jordan Hill and Darko bring to the table the same way you are doing with AR and Moz. The same way your coach Mike D has. You have an excuse because you dont coach in the NBA. Mike D has none.

Your trade off BS is just that. BS. What your doing by putting a 6 8 chandler on Dwight is enhancing his game even more. Being that Dwight isnt guarding Chandler at the other end there isnt a true tradeoff. Things are easier for Dwight offensively yet there the same for Chandler.

Basketball is a game of length. When a team has length you wanna play your length to make it a bit more difficult for the other team to score. Like I said defense is 50% of basketball. What you and your coach advocate will never win championships. Playing small may work against some less talented teams, but when you play against the good teams the bigger, longer teams almost always win. Its been proven throughout the history of the game.

What the Knicks are doing is making other teams bigs more prolific when they play them. See the Miami game and Ilguaskis (sp) if you want more proof.

As far as Gallo he has all the flaws in his game that I stated. Plus one that I missed. He cant finish at the rim.

Click to expand...

Dude Darko and Hill still suck.. Where is the loss there? Forgive me if i'm missing the value in those cast-offs..

And you're just retarded if you can't understand that by taking Chandler out for Moz/ AR your trading a good undersized defender and venerable scorer for length that brings fouls and to's due to inexperience w virtually no scoring. So in effect your losing Chandler and getting nothing, but "length" as you say. But what's length if it's not used effectively? In the case of AR/ Moz they foul guys excessively, so I wouldn't say they're using their length well.. That I have to further clarify this point says a lot.

ronoranina said:

Dude Dark and Hill still suck.. Where is the loss there? Forgive me if i'm missing the value in those cast-offs..

And you're just retarded if you can't understand that by taking Chandler out for Moz/ AR. Your trading a good undersized defender and venerable scorer for length that brings fouls and to's due to inexperience. So in effect your losing Chandler and getting nothing, but "length". But what's length if it's not used effectively? In the case of AR/ Moz they foul guys excessively, so I wouldn't say they're using their length effectively. That I have to further clarify this point says a lot.

Click to expand...

So now we know Mike Dantoni's screen name on this site. Its ronoranina.

I'll quote you so you can understand. You seem a bit slow. Seems like you'd have to smarten up just to be stupid. "So in effect your losing Chandler and getting nothing, but "length".

First of all you're not getting nothing. Unless you're from that Mike D school of basketball where defense doesnt count. You are getting a more capable defender on Dwight and Ilguaskis. You did see how these guys ate us up in the paint? On the offensive glass? Or were you to busy watching Gallo's three point stroke? Again DEFENSE is 50% of basketball.

Another thing. Whats wrong with fouling Dwight? He shoots 50% from the line. He shots 99% when dunking on your head. Which would you rather have? Really?

Again Jordan Hill and Darko arent Pat and Oakley but they are contributing to an NBA team just months after your boy Mike D said they couldnt. I'd say he is also wrong about AR and Moz.

hometheaterguy said:

I don't care if he is grabbing his knee and crying like a little girl, as long as he ends up on the charity line.... Which he is! By the way, he does throw it up and from time to time, it goes in so he get's a chance at 3!

Click to expand...

Basically thats what he's doing. This kid has had 3-4 years to learn the NBA game and what to expect. Him not being much stronger than he was year one is a real turn off for me.


He is? Hmmm, I'm sorry, I thought the Knicks were wining... Also, I swear that on my television I watched Mozgov get 2 fouls within the first 2 minutes of stepping onto the court....Every game. I also remember with AR, he will block a shot but then blow the defense when transitioning down court, never mind bricking up most of his shots. AR is a long term project! One that may produce huge returns but nothing that he has done has shown that he deserves being in the rotation. It doesn't matter what he did 3 years ago, this year he hasn't earned a spot.[/quote]

I wonder exactly what was said about Darko and Hill last year? I do remember Hill being considered a long term project. Funny, He's getting 20-25 mins a night less than a year after being traded and making a contribution.



Yes, I agree that Boston's bigs can cause us issues but 2 7 footers that can't get out of their own way is not the answer either! Being 7' tall isn't the only criteria needed to earn a spot![/quote]

Dude if these guys were only tall they wouldnt have NBA contracts. There are alot of tall %$%% walking the street broke...

Clyde & The Pearl said:

So now we know Mike Dantoni's screen name on this site. Its ronoranina.

I'll quote you so you can understand. You seem a bit slow. Seems like you'd have to smarten up just to be stupid. "So in effect your losing Chandler and getting nothing, but "length".

First of all you're not getting nothing. Unless you're from that Mike D school of basketball where defense doesnt count. You are getting a more capable defender on Dwight and Ilguaskis. You did see how these guys ate us up in the paint? On the offensive glass? Or were you to busy watching Gallo's three point stroke? Again DEFENSE is 50% of basketball.

Another thing. Whats wrong with fouling Dwight? He shoots 50% from the line. He shots 99% when dunking on your head. Which would you rather have? Really?

Again Jordan Hill and Darko arent Pat and Oakley but they are contributing to an NBA team just months after your boy Mike D said they couldnt. I'd say he is also wrong about AR and Moz.

Click to expand...

But those guys don't play good d. They foul guys. I'm sorry but 6 quick team fouls and us in the penalty is not good defense. It seems to me that Mike D doesn't want to start a parade of guys to the line for the sake of "length". This has already been clearly explained to u several times by myself and other posters. You've lost this argument already. You're making no sense.

Clyde & The Pearl said:

Basically thats what he's doing. This kid has had 3-4 years to learn the NBA game and what to expect. Him not being much stronger than he was year one is a real turn off for me.


He is? Hmmm, I'm sorry, I thought the Knicks were wining... Also, I swear that on my television I watched Mozgov get 2 fouls within the first 2 minutes of stepping onto the court....Every game. I also remember with AR, he will block a shot but then blow the defense when transitioning down court, never mind bricking up most of his shots. AR is a long term project! One that may produce huge returns but nothing that he has done has shown that he deserves being in the rotation. It doesn't matter what he did 3 years ago, this year he hasn't earned a spot.

I wonder exactly what was said about Darko and Hill last year? I do remember Hill being considered a long term project. Funny, He's getting 20-25 mins a night less than a year after being traded and making a contribution.



Yes, I agree that Boston's bigs can cause us issues but 2 7 footers that can't get out of their own way is not the answer either! Being 7' tall isn't the only criteria needed to earn a spot!

Dude if these guys were only tall they wouldnt have NBA contracts. There are alot of tall %$%% walking the street broke...

Click to expand...

I'm still not sure what your argument is for not only putting them into the rotation but starting Mozgov??? We tried that and it failed, why would we revisit it?? Darko got an extension from a team that wasn't playing for anything based on the last few months of the season... Can you say Jerome James?
What has Jordan Hill done for Houston? Am I missing something?
I have to admit that I would like to see AR get some consistent minutes, but since we are always in the thick of it in the 4th, there really isn't any "garbage time" that can afford us some development time for AR, Mozgov and Rautins... Randolph needs to be on a team that will give him no less than 20/25 minutes a game to really hone his game and right some things that are off.

Is there that much of a difference between two young 7 footers who might foul people and eventually send them to the line, or having 1-2 fouls at the end of the 1st quarter but give up 32 points in the quarter to the Pacers, most of which were off of 2nd chance points?

Call me crazy...but I'd rather my young players develop (which you need actual coaching and reps for) as opposed to maintaining the offensive integrity and not fouling people but let them score at will early and often.

Catch 22...heads, I win...tails, you lose. That's what happens to young teams with inexperienced players. But they're called growing pains, they're not permanent.

We're not winning anything this year...even if we get a backup PG and a center that D'Antoni would use in his offense. So there really is no excuse for D'Antoni not playing them other than stupidity and stubbornness, and don't talk to me about "winning now" because as patient as Donnie is he's likely to tough out the growing pains and let the players show what they have and how they're growing. Dude advocates for AR to play so I don't think he'd can D'Antoni for playing him and losing a game or two.

How come coach Pops can transition the Spurs from a defensive juggernaut to an offensive powerhouse BASED ON THE CHANGES TO HIS ROSTER but D'Antoni can't work a young, talented, long, versatile, big like AR into his offense and give him time to grow? Is it really all about winning right now? Because if so then he's failed before he even began. Winning = title, we're not a title contender so everything should be geared towards making us one. Not trying to erase a decade of irrelevancy by making a one and done playoff appearance this year.

And the development of young players is vital to a team's success going forward.

nuckles2k2 said:

Is there that much of a difference between two young 7 footers who might foul people and eventually send them to the line, or having 1-2 fouls at the end of the 1st quarter but give up 32 points in the quarter to the Pacers, most of which were off of 2nd chance points?

Call me crazy...but I'd rather my young players develop (which you need actual coaching and reps for) as opposed to maintaining the offensive integrity and not fouling people but let them score at will early and often.

Catch 22...heads, I win...tails, you lose. That's what happens to young teams with inexperienced players. But they're called growing pains, they're not permanent.

We're not winning anything this year...even if we get a backup PG and a center that D'Antoni would use in his offense. So there really is no excuse for D'Antoni not playing them other than stupidity and stubbornness, and don't talk to me about "winning now" because as patient as Donnie is he's likely to tough out the growing pains and let the players show what they have and how they're growing. Dude advocates for AR to play so I don't think he'd can D'Antoni for playing him and losing a game or two.

How come coach Pops can transition the Spurs from a defensive juggernaut to and offensive powerhouse BASED ON THE CHANGES TO HIS ROSTER but D'Antoni can't work a young, talented, long, versatile, big like AR into his offense and give him time to grow? Is it really all about winning right now? Because if so then he's failed before he even began. Winning = title, we're not a title contender so everything should be geared towards making us one. Not trying to erase a decade of irrelevancy by making a one and done playoff appearance this year.

And the development of young players is vital to a team's success going forward.

Click to expand...

Am I missing something or are we not trying to be a playoff team this year?? If so, then every game counts. We need every win we can get.

We're not the Spurs. We don't have a 3 really good/great players like Duncan, Ginobili and Parker to provide stability while young players are brought along..

All we have is Amare, which makes our margin for victory slimmer. Which means we can't give important minutes to players who can't be trusted not to fack up in the game.

What is so difficult to understand about this??

ronoranina said:

But those guys don't play good d. They foul guys. I'm sorry but 6 quick team fouls and us in the penalty is not good defense. It seems to me that Mike D doesn't want to start a parade of guys to the line for the sake of "length". This has already been clearly explained to u several times by myself and other posters. You've lost this argument already. You're making no sense.

Click to expand...

OK I get where our disconnect is. You think Moz and AR have to be perennially 1st team all defense in order to play against the bigs in this league. I think they just need to be better than a 6 8 Chandler. Being that they both at least 4 inches taller I think they are.

Who says were going to get to the penalty early every quarter these guys play? You? The other posters? Its not likely. But even if we did the benefits these cats could offer far outweigh putting other teams starting centers on the line. If you dont know MOST starting centers in the NBA shoot free throws very poorly. The benefits are they'll decrease 2nd chance points and used properly increase ours. Now this "TRADE OFF" I can deal with.

I'm making sense. Its just that I dont agree with because you think Mike D is doing an excellent coaching job.

hometheaterguy said:

I'm still not sure what your argument is for not only putting them into the rotation but starting Mozgov??? We tried that and it failed, why would we revisit it?? Darko got an extension from a team that wasn't playing for anything based on the last few months of the season... Can you say Jerome James?
What has Jordan Hill done for Houston? Am I missing something?
I have to admit that I would like to see AR get some consistent minutes, but since we are always in the thick of it in the 4th, there really isn't any "garbage time" that can afford us some development time for AR, Mozgov and Rautins... Randolph needs to be on a team that will give him no less than 20/25 minutes a game to really hone his game and right some things that are off.

Click to expand...

Never said start Moz. Start Turiaf. But being that Turiaf is only a 20-25 min a night player get Moz 10 min at least. You can go small the other 12-13 mins a night if necessary.

Jordan Hill is making a contribution to his team. Months after Mike D deemed him useless. Why is this so hard to understand?

Clyde & The Pearl said:

OK I get where our disconnect is. You think Moz and AR have to be perennially 1st team all defense in order to play against the bigs in this league. I think they just need to be better than a 6 8 Chandler. Being that they both at least 4 inches taller I think they are.

Who says were going to get to the penalty early every quarter these guys play? You? The other posters? Its not likely. But even if we did the benefits these cats could offer far outweigh putting other teams starting centers on the line. If you dont know MOST starting centers in the NBA shoot free throws very poorly. The benefits are they'll decrease 2nd chance points and used properly increase ours. Now this "TRADE OFF" I can deal with.

I'm making sense. Its just that I dont agree with because you think Mike D is doing an excellent coaching job.

Click to expand...

No, dummy, I think they have to not be foul machines (which they are at this point) in order to play against bigs in the league.

Shit Williams is what, 6'9 and an average defender. But you don't hear me complaining about him and coach plays em because he doesn't foul guys incessantly. It helps that he can shoot too, but thas besides the point.

It's as I said the reason Moz and AR don't play is because of fouls and to's.

And, as others have pointed out more recently, AR is more facked because he can't shoot consistently.

Let's see if I can get you to understand from a different angle. If AR remained offensively challenged as he is w his bad shot selection and bad shooting, but he kept his to's low, understood the flow of the offense and could play good d & rebound w out fouling. I think Mike D would have no choice but to play him. Making sense??

AR is not there yet w respect to the above areas. If and when he can be trusted he'll play. Same for Moz..

ronoranina said:

No, dummy, I think they have to not be foul machines (which they are at this point) in order to play against bigs in the league.

Shit Williams is what, 6'9 and an average defender. But you don't hear me complaining about him and coach plays em because he doesn't foul guys incessantly. It helps that he can shoot too, but thas besides the point.

It's as I said the reason Moz and AR don't play is because of fouls and to's.

And, as others have pointed out more recently, AR is more facked because he can't shoot consistently.

Let's see if I can get you to understand from a different angle. If AR remained offensively challenged as he is w his bad shot selection and bad shooting, but he kept his to's low, understood the flow of the offense and could play good d & rebound w out fouling. I think Mike D would have no choice but to play him. Making sense??

AR is not there yet w respect to the above areas. If and when he can be trusted he'll play. Same for Moz..

Click to expand...

Dude, you're an idiot. I'm done. But, before I go I'll render this last post as useless as your previous posts. You keep rehashing fouls and T O's as the major reason Mike D doesnt play these guys. Are these the same reasons he didnt play Darko and Hill? Did he favor a small lineup in Phoenix because the bigs there also were T O and foul prone?

If you cant see that Mike D is just comfortable with guys that can shoot from at least 15ft you are blind my friend. Players have to fit his system in order to get run. He could have Chris Dudley (I doubt you know who he is or what his strengths and weaknesses were on the court) and he'd get absolutely no playing time.

Your point about Williams is also dumb. If Williams couldnt shoot he wouldnt be playing. I mean you cant be this much of an idiot not to see this. Can you? If you switch Williams and Randolphs skill set right now we'd be talking about Williams not getting any PT. You have to realize this. I think.

Please know what you're talking about before you approach anyone else with this subject. I mean I hate for a fellow Knick fan to sound so ignorant.

Like I said before DEFENSE IS 50% of basketball!!!

good points guys nice thread........ people going back and fourth making there point and backing it up ........ i agree on starting Turiaf give him 20 dont overwork him and then give Moz like 5-10 see how he does.... then run the court like we do well and go small for like 15-20 n also see how that goes, then maybe we can give Ar 5-10 and see how he plays start slow with him give em a lil development nd a CHANCE.... no one disrespecting eachother cool cool... Clyde +1 rep and Rona u both make good points tho i have to agree with some of both of ur points..... now lets take it to the spurs tomorrow, GO KNICKS. give me 30 tomorrow stat! n stay out of godamn foul trouble, hopefully Turiaf will help him out...

Damn great points in this Thread!

However I'm going to have to disagree that AR and Mozgov can be as effect without scoring and playing D like Turiaf can because of one thing, and that is confidence. Turiaf has major confidence in himself and the team and brings it every day. Just like in the Pacer game he was playing great and Missed a dunk but he didn't let that get him down he even said at half that he knows he can play better and shouldn't miss dunks ever.
Now how many times have we seen Moz miss the ball or commit a foul and instantly get down on himself or how many times have we seen Ar pout while being on the bench. This is because they lack confidence, whether it goes back to Mike D not playing them or they just don't think their that good i don't know. But trust me until they get confident in themselves they won't produce what we think they can.

Knicksfansince92 said:

Damn great points in this Thread!

However I'm going to have to disagree that AR and Mozgov can be as effect without scoring and playing D like Turiaf can because of one thing, and that is confidence. Turiaf has major confidence in himself and the team and brings it every day. Just like in the Pacer game he was playing great and Missed a dunk but he didn't let that get him down he even said at half that he knows he can play better and shouldn't miss dunks ever.
Now how many times have we seen Moz miss the ball or commit a foul and instantly get down on himself or how many times have we seen Ar pout while being on the bench. This is because they lack confidence, whether it goes back to Mike D not playing them or they just don't think their that good i don't know. But trust me until they get confident in themselves they won't produce what we think they can.

Click to expand...

agreed, but when Turiaf and Stat on the floor at the same time i like i like...
and Ar nd Moz need some minutes but slowly and they need to PROVE themselves on the court....

welcometonycity said:

agreed, but when Turiaf and Stat on the floor at the same time i like i like...
and Ar nd Moz need some minutes but slowly and they need to PROVE themselves on the court....

Click to expand...

Yeah I think they should get Billy Walker's minutes and some of Shawne's too because 20 mins a game is to high for him. I think at one point we should see

TD
Fields
Gallo
Randolph
Gov

on the floor for like a 5-7 min stretch to really rest our Capts.

Now that Gallo's out the starting rotation should be

Felton
Fields
Chandler
Amar'e
Turiaf

G - Douglas, Walker
F - Randolph, Williams
C - Mozgov

That's not a terrible ten man rotation and the most important thing is that it gives our starters some time to rest. We should make use of a rotation like that in a game against, say, the Spurs, for example, where we probably wouldn't win even at full strength, so we might as well send in our backups to get them some playing time. Same with blowout games.

I don't really understand why this is an attack on D'antoni?

If Turiaf is a dud in the offense but is getting very significant playing time and being used effectively doesn't that mean that D'antoni knows HOW to use the big man? He's got 2 points yet D'antoni lets him play, so clearly it's not ALL about offense for D'ant. He would play him more if the guy wasn't an injury waiting to happen.

But in the mean time, Chandler has been pretty effective as a starting 4, but again he is playing out of position and against big power house teams like the lakers this small lineup is going to be ineffective.

Some people here seem to think that playing Mozgov or AR will help. Some would rather we took away minutes form players who are playing well and cohesively and giving us WINS, bringing us to the playoffs, and give them to our youngest, turnover prone low basketball IQ rookies...

Ok so D'antoni, Walsh, Management, the players themselves, the fan base and the analysts have all stated "Playoffs or BUST" yet some people here want us to give up easy buckets, take poor shots, disrupt the offensive flow, give teams fouls and free baskets.... for what? So AR, a throw in on the D.Lee trade, can get some burn and possibly injure himself to ruin any trade potential? Or so that Mozgov can go out there, foul out while cloging the lane and turning over the ball on offense?

AR and Moz get what they earn in practice. And when they get those minutes they should turn in a much better performance. Then we can play them more regularly. Until they prove they can be effective there is no reason to give them a lot of burn in a year when we are trying to make the playoffs.