|
|
Post by irish2u2 on Sept 19, 2009 13:27:59 GMT -5
I totally disagree that Harrington is a "zero sum" player. I don't think he is a sieve on defense, he boards well and obviously he can score. He is a player who can effectively cover both forward spots. My lone complaint about Harrington is above the shoulders and even that is based on two incidents.
Curry can be better and certainly a leaner body helps him but the biggest improvement he can make is just effort. If Curry plays hard he can be effective though like Ken I am of the opinion that Darko ultimately is the better fit and his upside is at least equal to Eddy's.
I don't see Nate as a SF. ; ) I think his skill set lends itself to a SG but he has the ability to play an effective backup PG and even start for limited periods of time. Like Eddy and to a lesser extent Harrington all of Nate's issues are north of his shoulders. I think Eddy can improve but I am more doubtful on Nate changing his "spots" than anybody else on the Knicks because his history with us shows an almost infantile stubbornness and an ability to rationalize his behavior even when his position is indefensible.
I do think DK has a great point about playing youngsters. We have a number of players playing for a contract which can be a good thing for us but they likely will not be part of our future. The young guys are a part of the Knicks down the road and as such PT for Toney Douglas and Jordan Hill just isn't smart...it's vital. To a lesser extent let's see what Gabe Pruittt or Sun Yue (I think one makes the team but not both) can do.
I think the main thing to look forward to this year is Gallinari. Healthy at last he can show us a glimpse at our future.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Sept 19, 2009 19:46:00 GMT -5
Yes, Ken, I do see Nate as an RSSF, just as you do. It's a love/hate relationship with him, when he plays the system, stays within himself(and the system), I love him. When he goes off on his own tangent, I hate him. With him it comes down to keeping his emotions under control enough to use his head. I think he has a hard time doing that. His approach to the game is almost diamtrically and drastically different than David Lee. Who kind of hides his emotions, although he does exhibit determination. There are three keys to a successful season this year as I see it. The first and obvious is Gallinari. He must play up to at least some of the hype generated. The second and more paradoxical is who and what will happen at the center position. The third is how to keep our adequate PG, Duhon playing adequately. This means finding a backup from among the myriad camp invitees and draftees. Someone who can come in a keep the flow well enough for him to not hit the wall in January again. Whether it is Pruitt, Douglas, Sun Yue or Joe Crawford, i don't know. I just know it is not Nate. I hope it is Douglas, because I think we will get some defense from him, more than the others.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatgates on Sept 20, 2009 13:46:06 GMT -5
I don't expect the 1st year guys to play very much. Playing time for jordan hill and toney douglas might be beneficial but WINNING is vital. Since I don't feel the knicks have a large margin for error I'd expect the rooks to have to learn alot before they get meaningful minutes on the court.
I also think harrington is better than we are giving him credit for ( hate dangling participle but too lazy to rewrite). He is certainly better than i thought he was.
I do agree that the #1 key is gallanari. If he is healthy & better than Bargnani's 2nd half of last season then we are on a good path.
|
|
|
|
Post by neilverson on Sept 21, 2009 12:09:22 GMT -5
Whats up guys I think Nate has the ability to play great defense, he just doesn't. I hoped as a rookie he would pester Marbury into becoming an elite player by hounding him up and down the court in practices. With that said, I just have to say Nate could never be a 3, even with 12 inches tacked on. He doesnt have the knack to defend.
I'm 27 years old, growing up I remember all the best small forwards played D- even the offensive minded ones like Dominique Wilkins and Sean Elliot, the slower footed ones like Larry Bird and Chris Mullin(not so much) and then the actual stoppers at the position like Stacey Augmon and Derrick McKey. I considered guys like LJ and Barkley power forwards. Smaller swingman like Eddie Jones in LA and Sprewell here in NY were forced to play the 3 and managed because they were such good defenders.
Pippen is one of the top defenders of that generation and even today guys like Artest, Odom, Butler, Granger, Marion and now Ariza define the position and lead by example on the defensive end. Then there's Lebron who defines everything the Knicks need.
Anyway, theres alot of talk on this board that we need defense at pivot and at the point...which is vital. But I always felt small forward was equally important a position to get big stops at on a consistant game by game basis. 3's should be players that play defense whether they have natural athletic tools to do so(preferably), or simply with hard work.
neil
|
|
|
|
Post by kgooglog on Sept 22, 2009 8:37:54 GMT -5
We all must get together one day and go to the Garden--but we cannot bring our computers! The thought and observations that evolve here are simply ambrosia to me--I think you all our the most astute fans of the Knicks I've met anywhere.
I agree that our team is better this year, although I also see that the PG as well as the 5 position, should be our main concern. For some reason, I am much more at ease with our center position, for although Darko Milicic has yet to reach his #2 overall draft potential, he has certainly had his share of obstacles in development. Playing on a championship caliber Detroit Pistons' squad, or shall I say, not playing on a championship caliber team, did nothing but hold this guy's development back. Larry Brown's arrival nearly killed this player's career and I am certain, battered his own self-worth. I believe Darko will be an awesome addition to a player friendly coach who runs a system designed for a passing, defensive-minded pivot who can board and score outside of three feet.
I think that an in-shape Eddy Curry will only enhance the Knicks at the 5 as well. Along with Darko, Eddy gives us TWO centers who are 6'11 and taller. At worst, he plays well enough to draw interest from another GM whose team lacks a true center, and there are a few of these NBA teams that can certainly use a young, scoring pivot. At best, Curry comes back and plays to the best of his abilities, an ability we all saw glimpses of during his near all-star season of 19 PPG and 7 RPG. I don't believe Eddy will be able to score that amount in Mike D's system, rather I hope that his leaner body helps him more with rebounding and blocked shots, two areas which Curry has never excelled at. Perhaps weighing close to 400 pounds has impeded this area of his game, which, by weight loss, should help his leaping ability as well as his past porous matador defense.
Now, we are onto the pivotal role that Gallo must play on this team. I see Danilo in the role that Bill describes, meaning a point forward. I also see him as a spot 5, and hopefully playing a Jack Sikma-like role which means having a multi-faceted player who can pass, shoot (which we know Gallo is superb at), board when needed, and play defense. We know Gallo is defensive-minded and has aggression, and IMHO, it is simply a matter of an adjustment of footwork and much valued court time before we see this player's potential unfold. I absolutely love him and David Lee at the forward spots, as I see the two as complete opposites, yet complimentary of each other.
Like Gates brought up, we need to play Hill and Douglas. I think that Toney Douglas may actually see more time than Jordan Hill, initially. I think this is due to a pretty short line of Knick PGs. Duhon is the only true PG on the Knicks and Nate will be used as a super-sub, I am sure. Hill has a bunch of forwards ahead of him, but he will find his minutes. Of course, so much of what I am writing is contingent upon David Lee resigning with NY, which I believe will happen. However, it may be a sign and trade, which then means Jordan Hill gets max minutes at the PF spot, unless CB4 is coming back in return for Lee. If Hill is also a pivot, than we have a three-headed center named Cerberus or whatever that Greek Mythology doggie was named.
Ah, if this were only 2010, we can debate on LeBron's prowess at 4 positions, how many shots per game do we allow for Chris Bosh, and the victory total which will be close to 65 wins. That is an unofficial prediction for next year. I also can say with a level of certainty that Larry Hughes will not be a Knick next year.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Sept 22, 2009 13:21:57 GMT -5
Playing Gallinari ocassionally at center would be an interesting strategy, if the other forwards are Hill and Lee. The object would be to draw the opposing center out to the perimeter, giving open lanes for the pick and rollers and operators under the basket, and those guys are Hill and Lee, maybe Darko. So it would have to be a specialized package aimed at that. Duhon and good wing player and those aforementioned three. It would not work with Curry and/or Harrington in the game, as they would clog up or slow down that strategy. The wing player would have to be a real good catch and shoot player, whom I am not sure we have. Chandler maybe but his range is still somewhat limited. Hughes, Nate and Douglas would be imperfect fits in that role. If the opposing center doesn't come out then Gallinari shoots a three. If the opponents switch assignments then there will be a mismatch somewhere, and if the center comes out the lanes are now open for Lee and Hill. The wing player is the safety valve, in case nothing else is open, he should be.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironman95 on Sept 22, 2009 13:34:07 GMT -5
As an aside, I don't think Nate can play the 3, I think he has the skills normally associated with an SF. What can he do? He is a good rebounder. He can throw it down. He can spot up for a jump shot. He can create his own shot. These are all normal good skills for a SMALL FORWARD. That is the problem. Wrong skill set for the body he actually has. Wrong skill set for running a team as a PG. Unless he suppresses his desire to do those things and learns how to be a floor general and distributor of the ball, he will always be just a side-show to the main event. Sometimes a very entertaining side-show, but in the long run, his act will run thin and won't get the Knicks to where they need to get.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatgates on Sept 22, 2009 15:01:53 GMT -5
Playing Gallinari ocassionally at center would be an interesting strategy, if the other forwards are Hill and Lee. The object would be to draw the opposing center out to the perimeter, giving open lanes for the pick and rollers and operators under the basket, and those guys are Hill and Lee, maybe Darko. So it would have to be a specialized package aimed at that. Duhon and good wing player and those aforementioned three. It would not work with Curry and/or Harrington in the game, as they would clog up or slow down that strategy. The wing player would have to be a real good catch and shoot player, whom I am not sure we have. Chandler maybe but his range is still somewhat limited. Hughes, Nate and Douglas would be imperfect fits in that role. If the opposing center doesn't come out then Gallinari shoots a three. If the opponents switch assignments then there will be a mismatch somewhere, and if the center comes out the lanes are now open for Lee and Hill. The wing player is the safety valve, in case nothing else is open, he should be. |
|
