20 Feet

Crazy⑧s

Crazy⑧s

Evacuee
The international 3 point line's distance from the baseline is 20' 6.1 ".

The NBA's, 23' 9".

I purchased NBA league pass broadband on opening night, and one of it's best features is play by play indicators in separate categories. I can watch, individually, all the main statistical events of the game.

I've reviewed each game, and there is a resounding, obvious, outstanding truth about our team.

We play our best ball ,within that semi circle, 20 feet from the basket.

Our best squad, playing a cutting/passing game, is:

1 Felton
2 Douglas or Landry
3 Chandler
4 STAT
5 Ronnie

For those of you who have the 'Premium Package' NBA League Pass, if you can be bothered, check it out. It's a resonating truth.

Chandler and Fields are excellent off the ball and create more confusion from the D the more perpetual they are with their movement. Our youth and active legs is an advantage and should be amplified with more movement off the ball. Clearly, this opens up the paint for STAT and Felton by distracting appointed double teams from the opposition. Douglas, in turn, gets better looks at hitting his floaters in the lane. Ronnie mops up the poop.

Originally posted by Mafra:

Someone please teach D'antoni some math.

1 3-pointer every 4 possessions = THREE points.

1 layup and a 10-foot swish every 4 possessions = FOUR points.

An offense based on long-range shooting is doomed to fail b/c it relies on low pct shots. An offense predicated on 3-point shooting when you lack even one reliable sniper is straight up suicide.
Click to expand...

Such an obvious truth. And we are capable of putting in a lot of points if we play a game that relies more on ball/player movement and less on launching prayers.
:smokin:
 
mafra

mafra

Legend
Last night was the perfect example of this.... Knicks were 7-31 from 3-point range. Basically, that's 24 possessions they threw away. In those 24 possessions, say they only took 11 threes.... That's an extra 13 possessions. In those 13 possessions, say they make 3 shots. 3-13 is reasonable to expect, no? If that happens, they have another 9 points and they win the game. Simple Math.

Warriors shot TEN threes. They were 5-10. So, they took 21 less threes and made only 2 less. They had nearly 80 points in the paint.

Layups beat 3s all night fellows. Higher pct.

THANKS for the heads-up Crazy!
 
Crazy⑧s

Crazy⑧s

Evacuee
^

It's incredible that we remained so close in the 4th, having shot 12 less shots, 21 more threes along with 6 less assists. But, we get to the line(43x), attack the rim, get some stops and we're right back in there.

Is there some form of elusive arithmetic that D'Antoni can't figure out here? Because it's not the first time we've seen erratic losses from this team, including last year.

In 7 games alone, we've blown four 4th quarter leads for a narrow loss against teams we're more than capable of beating.

Bring back Hubie Brown.
 
mafra

mafra

Legend
Knicks down by a single point. 20 seconds left. Douglas misses a 3. Gallo misses a 3. Wilson passes to Gallo, he drives and misses layup (b/c he's worried about contact)...

BUT... why is Douglas shooting the ball here? Why is he shooting a 3? Especially on a night he's 0-6 from downtown?

That's coaching right there.

GET THE BALL TO THE 100 MILLION DOLLAR MAN. If he wants, he'll kick it back out...

If we lose with the ball in STAT's hand.... FINE.

I don;t want T-Douglas shooting 12 shots, when STAT gets 15. Stat should've had 60 points last night with the chumps guarding him. We beat ourselves.
 
Crazy⑧s

Crazy⑧s

Evacuee
More VS GSW math:

Fields' +/- was +9
Walker's +/- was +2

These lads were the only Knick players with a positive +/- in the game.

Gallo, who either could replace and be as, if not more, effective was -7. Second only to Felton at -13. Randolph was -5.

Amongst SF capable players, Gallo, our starter, is 3rd in efficiency:

Chandler - +16.12
Fields - +12.25
Gallo - +11.25
Randolph - +5.2
Walker - +3.38

I'll reiterate that our best starting 5, playing our best method of effective scoring, rebounding and defence is:

1. Felton
2. Fields
3. Chandler
4. STAT
5. Ronnie T

Can't read too much in to +/-, but this is more irefutable evidence that the Italian's here in NY are crusty.
 
KingCharles34

KingCharles34

All Star
I strongly agree with this 5 star thread....

That would be our best starting lineup

And perhaps Gallo would feel more comfortable coming off the bench like he should be

When Stoudemire gets the ball why does the rest of the team act stiffer then rigor mortis? They should be cuttin to the hoop and they need to remember to give Stat enough room so that a second defender cant come from his blind side and swipe the ball away. Our offense has been really pathetic and STUPID, i do blame some of this on Antoni. What the fukk are his plans? It honestly looks like the team is just playing without much chemistry and without a coach.
 
P

Paul1355

All Star
Crazy8s said:
The international 3 point line's distance from the baseline is 20' 6.1 ".

The NBA's, 23' 9".

I purchased NBA league pass broadband on opening night, and one of it's best features is play by play indicators in separate categories. I can watch, individually, all the main statistical events of the game.

I've reviewed each game, and there is a resounding, obvious, outstanding truth about our team.

We play our best ball ,within that semi circle, 20 feet from the basket.

Our best squad, playing a cutting/passing game, is:

1 Felton
2 Douglas or Landry
3 Chandler
4 STAT
5 Ronnie

For those of you who have the 'Premium Package' NBA League Pass, if you can be bothered, check it out. It's a resonating truth.

Chandler and Fields are excellent off the ball and create more confusion from the D the more perpetual they are with their movement. Our youth and active legs is an advantage and should be amplified with more movement off the ball. Clearly, this opens up the paint for STAT and Felton by distracting appointed double teams from the opposition. Douglas, in turn, gets better looks at hitting his floaters in the lane. Ronnie mops up the poop.



Such an obvious truth. And we are capable of putting in a lot of points if we play a game that relies more on ball/player movement and less on launching prayers.
:smokin:
Click to expand...
what is amazing to me is that u have more basketball knowledge and know this team more than our coaching staff
 
CoolClyde

CoolClyde

Moderator
Crazy F*ckin' 8's

Crazy8s said:
More VS GSW math:

Fields' +/- was +9

...our best starting 5, playing our best method of effective scoring, rebounding and defence is:

1. Felton
2. Fields
3. Chandler
4. STAT
5. Ronnie T

Can't read too much in to +/-, but this is more irefutable evidence that the Italian's here in NY are crusty.
Click to expand...
:agreed:
Crazy F*ckin 8's you are so f*ckin right!
Mrs. Fields foldin the Laundry is the Man! 'Antoni shitstache needs to give him more minutes,
less minutes to Gallipini, esp when the cock's not swishin' the rock

I LIKE that starting 5. Bony T deserves to start over Moscow the Foul,
and Weedson needs to start over unconfident unreliable cockhead.
Maybe then we won't be trailing every f*cking game

Crusty f*cking Italian bread!

Good thread mate!
loser_toni.jpg
 
Crazy⑧s

Crazy⑧s

Evacuee
Tonight we hit 35-92 shots. I went back to count how many of them were set jump shots within the 3 point line and there were:

5

5 makes out of 14 attempts. Still terrible percentage wise but are they not higher percentage shots?

Fields again was one of 2 players in the +/- category to be in the +. The other, believe it or not, was Anthony Randolph, who got no burn when we needed help on the boards, bar a 3 minute spurt in which he took down 2, one at each end.

11 of 29 from 3, no boxing out, no picks set for anyone bar Felton and Mike D is complaining about the execution of a rancid system with putrid results.

It can't be denied that blame goes to the players and Ronnie would've dealt some inside pain to Love, but who's at the helm? And who's getting payed $100M to play inside - at least defensively?
 
B

boog7

Rookie
i agree, gallo needs to become the 6th man

...perhaps Gallo would feel more comfortable coming off the bench like he should be

gallo doesn't have the skill level needed to be a starting small forward on an NBA team. he's a one dimensional player who's not even all that good at his one dimension. gallo has great range on his jumper but the guy routinely misses wide open looks. he's advertised as some kind of sharp shooter but the truth is that he's a pretty average shooter; 32% from 3-point range.

if u bring gallo off the bench, maybe he can get hot against the other teams back-ups and score in bunches and then u don't have to suffer from the other limitations of his games; no foot speed, weak defensive ability, poor rebounding, no shot blocking, etc, against the other team's starting small forward which will almost always be a mismatch working against the knicks b/c gallo is arguably the worst starting 3 in the league. beasly destroyed him last night.
 
ronoranina

ronoranina

Fundamentally Sound
Paul1355 said:
what is amazing to me is that u have more basketball knowledge and know this team more than our coaching staff
Click to expand...

wow, you actually think that and had the nerve to submit it on this thread... (shakes head)

the reason fields doesn't get more time is because he is a rookie. and all of the inherent mistakes rookies normally make he's not immune to.

he doesn't know the NBA game as well as all of you think he does.. the more minutes he got the more mistakes he'd make and you guys would then all be over your respective fields crushes..

gallo knows the game better. so does chandler. they both played 40 min last night and had one turnover each. not saying they'd do that consistently but they would certainly be more inclined to less mistakes than fields at this point.

while fields learning curve may not be as steep as most rookies due to him being at stanford for 4 yrs., he still learning and has a long way to go.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top