nuckles2k2
Superstar
shumps offensive game is already above t. allens.... my point is when we all talk about the knicks success,its always contingent on those 3 things happening. and because they arent gonna happen people get pessimistic. im simply saying that the things i brought up can make us better without the "ifs" that are brought up on this site. stat isnt gonna have an impact on our season and i love him but it is what it is. melo can be a better facilitator but heres the thing he actually is a good facilitator. guards dont cut and hit open shots. if bargs hit shots off melos double melo gets the assist and for stat lovers itll appear he became a better faciliator when teammates are just hitting shots off of passes melo already makes. stretch the fllor with bargs, pull a big out guards can penentrate easier and cut easier. they cut when melo is doubled he will easily find you. alot of emphasis is on melo because the iso offfense is just that an offense. an offense that thrives on spot up jump shots and finding cutters. and our iso runs through melo. if bargs is hitting the shots being a legit threat they will respect him and melo finding those cutters such as shump.
Dude... I'm just pointing out that you're speaking from a standpoint of "if this, and if that" just like everyone else.
I just think it makes more sense that IF Tyson wasn't our only "rebounder" and IF we had a big who can physically hold up against the rough play in the paint for 82 games, then we'd have a better chance at doing something. Purely from a standpoint of having extra possessions and limiting the oppnents possessions as a start.
You just detailed this entire scenario of what you think would be an ideal offensive set for the Knicks...and to that I say...when we can't finish our defense and secure the ball, and the opponents are killing us with second shot opportnities...what then? The notion that the Knicks problems are on offense in-and-of-itself is the problem.