Worth noting MSG is done for the year, so all games moving forward will be on TNT or ESPN/ABC only.
Knicks moderate/heavy favorites going in, but a loss tonight could give the Pacers all the confidence they need.
Attack the glass, protect the 3, and if we execute how we can I like our chances. OG should give Pascal fits, but I'm curious who they end up matching up with Halliburton. With how he guarded Maxey I don't hate giving Donte the first shot.
The thought/comment was in response to us getting a new 3 and D 3.
Hart is such a winning player, with one main flaw; his inconsistent shooting.
I understand players often have limitations, but players also do improve. There are many examples, including Deuce, who improved his shooting in one offseason.
Hart improved his 3 pt shooting from the reg season to the playoffs and he attributed it to his working on it.
Why can't he continue to work on it this coming offseason and make the improvement more permanent? Like Deuce apparently has done.
I know Hart's been in the league a while and many will say "he is what he is", but has he ever shot 500 3s a day in the offseason like Deuce did last yr?
The thought/comment was in response to us getting a new 3 and D 3.
Hart is such a winning player, with one main flaw; his inconsistent shooting.
I understand players often have limitations, but players also do improve. There are many examples, including Deuce, who improved his shooting in one offseason.
Hart improved his 3 pt shooting from the reg season to the playoffs and he attributed it to his working on it.
Why can't he continue to work on it this coming offseason and make the improvement more permanent? Like Deuce apparently has done.
I know Hart's been in the league a while and many will say "he is what he is", but has he ever shot 500 3s a day in the offseason like Deuce did last yr?
I can't believe how bad his FT shooting is and I can't imagine he's ever tried the Deuce training of shooting anywhere close to 500 FTs a day in an offseason.
His FTs look like that of someone who's barely ever played. The lack of arc, which is one of the main fundamentals, is a joke. How hard is it to use more arc? He looks like he NEVER practices w/ more arc.
He just stinks at it. Lots of guys never get good at it.
He just stinks at it. Lots of guys never get good at it.
I don't doubt that he practices, but if he's practicing with the same awful mechanics (lack of arc) over and over, what good is it?
Has he ever tried more arc? Has he ever tried ANYTHING differently? (I don't expect anyone to know this)
I know some, especially big men, have been bad and never got better (with some, it seems like their hands are too big). But Mitch has one obvious problem with his mechanics and I never see him trying to change it. It's the same line drives every time, often hitting the front of the rim.
They should've put in his contract that he has to shoot X many FTs in the offseason with a minimum of X degrees of arc.
He's so bad that you can't even have him on the floor at the end of a tight game. And he doesn't make up for it in other ways, like someone like Shaq.
Quote:
When the rest of the team is shooting around at games, he's at the line shooting FT.
He just stinks at it. Lots of guys never get good at it.
I don't doubt that he practices, but if he's practicing with the same awful mechanics (lack of arc) over and over, what good is it?
Has he ever tried more arc? Has he ever tried ANYTHING differently? (I don't expect anyone to know this)
I know some, especially big men, have been bad and never got better (with some, it seems like their hands are too big). But Mitch has one obvious problem with his mechanics and I never see him trying to change it. It's the same line drives every time, often hitting the front of the rim.
They should've put in his contract that he has to shoot X many FTs in the offseason with a minimum of X degrees of arc.
He's so bad that you can't even have him on the floor at the end of a tight game. And he doesn't make up for it in other ways, like someone like Shaq.
ever see Wilt Chamberlain shoot FTs? Scary bad.
It does limit his usefulness at the end of games. But I give the guy a ton of credit for playing through obvious pain from that dickhead Embiid's cheap bullshit. He's out there hobbled and giving the team all he's got. I cringe when he goes to the line but I still love the guy.
Guys like Wilt and Shaq had multiple issues with their mechanics. All I'm saying is it seems Mitch has one main issue (lack of arc) that it seems shouldn't be that impossible to change. I'm not saying he would ever be a great FT shooter, but 41% is ridiculous.
I just looked at his stats and what's crazy is Mitch has gotten progressively worse at FTs every yr he's been in the league. His rookie yr he shot 60%, then 57% his 2nd yr, then .491, .486, .484 and .409 this yr.
Anyway, I'll drop it. I did find an interesting video linked below about Wilt. In it, Tommy Heinsohn said that he thought Wilt was "too strong" and that he witnessed Wilt take FTs from half court and made 20 out of 25.
The curious case of Wilt Chamberlain's FTs - ( New Window )
Anyway, it was interesting.
Anyway, it was interesting.
Don Nelson used a 1 handed FT form back in the '70s
That man's name? Anthony Mason.
Quote:
looking to the off-season while the Knicks are still alive but more size and another scorer off the bench... both would be ideal. Size might be as "simple" as using one of the firsts on a big man (the one area this draft is viewed as pretty strong).
We have a few needs: the aforementioned stretch-5; a backup ball-handling, pass-first PG, preferably one with size; a sharpshooter if we move on from Bojan; a rim-protector if we move on from Mitchell...
But we can discuss that in a month or two.
I still can't help but think that a healthy Randle is exactly what this team needs. A guy who can stretch the defense, create his own shot, can handle the ball and is an above average passer for his position. I mean maybe I'm wrong but I feel like that's the exact type of player that would elevate this starting lineup even more and we have him.
He just needs to be healthy and bought into what we're doing as a team. Randle's not a bad guy and he sees what everyone else is seeing - this is Brunson's team and if he can handle being a "Robin" and can keep his emotions in check, this starting 5 next year will be even better
Happened to come across an article from late December about Haliburton having to leave a Pacers' practice because of back pain. I wasn't aware his back issue pre-dated the January 8 hamstring injury. Since it did, it could have been a precipitant.
He's been seen using a brace to sit on the bench. He was listed as questionable during the Bucks' series with back spasms. He was questionable for Game 1 last night.
Back issues aren't as predictable as other injuries. One day you may wake up in spasm and the next day not. I don't believe anyone is in a position to pass informed judgment on Haliburton, either to criticize him or to know what version might show up for the next game of this series.
Back issues aren't as predictable as other injuries. One day you may wake up in spasm and the next day not. I don't believe anyone is in a position to pass informed judgment on Haliburton, either to criticize him or to know what version might show up for the next game of this series.
I've had back issues for years (long story); have had 5 back ops. It can not only cause back pain, but pain elsewhere including the legs.
Good chance he's not going to be right the rest of this season, but as you said he could have some nights better than others.
Biggest thing being "create his own shot". Brunson is pretty much the only guy who can do that consistently now.
Quote:
I still can't help but think that a healthy Randle is exactly what this team needs. A guy who can stretch the defense, create his own shot, can handle the ball and is an above average passer for his position.
Biggest thing being "create his own shot". Brunson is pretty much the only guy who can do that consistently now.
Last year and the year before, I thought Randle ground this offense to a halt in the post season. He seemed to have changed his game a bit to fit the team this year. It would have been interesting to see this team with him this time of year. Then again, if he was healthy, they may not have traded for OG.
As for the offensive foul on the screen, I thought it was legit call. One, he was moving, two, he thrust his lower body out, even if subtly, after the initial contact. It wasn't excessive force, but it was an illegal screen.
I thought the officiating was just bad all around and not in either teams favor overall.
Quote:
In comment 16508912 DaShotel13 said:
Quote:
I still can't help but think that a healthy Randle is exactly what this team needs. A guy who can stretch the defense, create his own shot, can handle the ball and is an above average passer for his position.
Biggest thing being "create his own shot". Brunson is pretty much the only guy who can do that consistently now.
I feel like OG can, but is hesitant to do so.
Last year and the year before, I thought Randle ground this offense to a halt in the post season. He seemed to have changed his game a bit to fit the team this year. It would have been interesting to see this team with him this time of year. Then again, if he was healthy, they may not have traded for OG.
Yeah but they traded for OG before Randle was hurt
I guess, maybe it’s short nostalgia, but I’m very optimistic that Randle can integrate and integrate well into this starting lineup and be complimentary.
But that’s for next year, this year let’s keep it going!!
As for the offensive foul on the screen, I thought it was legit call. One, he was moving, two, he thrust his lower body out, even if subtly, after the initial contact. It wasn't excessive force, but it was an illegal screen.
I thought the officiating was just bad all around and not in either teams favor overall.
You’re missing the moving screen by DDV before the kick ball. Seems like there’s been more animosity why that wasn’t called and the one at the end was. Both were moving screens but I wouldn’t have called either.
The kick ball call is very bad look. You can’t call what you don’t see. It wasn’t even close.
Quote:
But, in real time, it certainly looked like the right call. Since that isn't reviewable, I have a hard time even saying it was egregious. It was just the wrong call in a tough spot.
As for the offensive foul on the screen, I thought it was legit call. One, he was moving, two, he thrust his lower body out, even if subtly, after the initial contact. It wasn't excessive force, but it was an illegal screen.
I thought the officiating was just bad all around and not in either teams favor overall.
You’re missing the moving screen by DDV before the kick ball. Seems like there’s been more animosity why that wasn’t called and the one at the end was. Both were moving screens but I wouldn’t have called either.
The kick ball call is very bad look. You can’t call what you don’t see. It wasn’t even close.
JT I dunno what you were watching but the kicked ball that wasn't, very much looked like a kicked ball in real time. My first reaction to the play was "oh good it was kicked". There's no denying in hindsight that it wasn't, and the fact that the play is not reviewable is weird, but it is the rule.
Quote:
But, in real time, it certainly looked like the right call. Since that isn't reviewable, I have a hard time even saying it was egregious. It was just the wrong call in a tough spot.
As for the offensive foul on the screen, I thought it was legit call. One, he was moving, two, he thrust his lower body out, even if subtly, after the initial contact. It wasn't excessive force, but it was an illegal screen.
I thought the officiating was just bad all around and not in either teams favor overall.
You’re missing the moving screen by DDV before the kick ball. Seems like there’s been more animosity why that wasn’t called and the one at the end was. Both were moving screens but I wouldn’t have called either.
The kick ball call is very bad look. You can’t call what you don’t see. It wasn’t even close.
Well if we're going back to review other bad calls, shouldn't we also note the offensive foul call on a Dante pick on Nembhart that they did call, which was egregiously wrong? Nembhart flopped way harded than Dante did and yet no one mentions it.
x2. It was way worse and Dante's screen was actualy legal whereas Turner's, by the letter of the rule, was not.
Quote:
In comment 16508951 Matt M. said:
Quote:
But, in real time, it certainly looked like the right call. Since that isn't reviewable, I have a hard time even saying it was egregious. It was just the wrong call in a tough spot.
As for the offensive foul on the screen, I thought it was legit call. One, he was moving, two, he thrust his lower body out, even if subtly, after the initial contact. It wasn't excessive force, but it was an illegal screen.
I thought the officiating was just bad all around and not in either teams favor overall.
You’re missing the moving screen by DDV before the kick ball. Seems like there’s been more animosity why that wasn’t called and the one at the end was. Both were moving screens but I wouldn’t have called either.
The kick ball call is very bad look. You can’t call what you don’t see. It wasn’t even close.
JT I dunno what you were watching but the kicked ball that wasn't, very much looked like a kicked ball in real time. My first reaction to the play was "oh good it was kicked". There's no denying in hindsight that it wasn't, and the fact that the play is not reviewable is weird, but it is the rule.
The last thing the NBA needs is refs calling what they think they see. He had no angle and was clearly blocked. But like some have said “dem da breaks”.
But that may have been a bigger missed call because the pacers probably would have gotten a fast break with under 50 seconds.
I just hope the NBA doesn’t force it to be even next game like they did by not ejecting Embiid in game 2 - which he should have. Every knicks game has been amazing to watch.
On a side note - if Jamal Murray doesn’t get suspended - that would be the biggest crock of shit I’ve seen in a long time.
This team has shown a ton of mental toughness, so even if they lose the next one and go to Indiana 1-1, they still have a great chance.
This team has shown a ton of mental toughness, so even if they lose the next one and go to Indiana 1-1, they still have a great chance.
I agree. Like I said last night - in order to win it all you need two things.
1. Win games when you’re not at your best
2. A few breaks
Every team has experienced this in winning their championships.
If that happened today, we'd be arguing screenshots and video clips on the internet ad infinitum. Everyone is an armchair referee on the internet just like we're all armchair scientists and lawyers too.
The reality is that every team is dealing with the same collection of flawed referees. Sometimes it goes your team's way and sometimes it doesn't. That's all there really is to it, so we should all just get mad, get over it and move on.
Anyway, it was interesting.
I remember seeing an interview once with Rick Barry where he claimed he could teach any player to be a good FT shooter but players were too embarrassed to learn his underhand shot which he claimed is a much easier and natural motion for a person to use
I am confused on the wording on turners screen. It’s listed as INC, but says he was moving. What am I missing?
1 flop by Indy (which wouldn’t have been called without the flop)
1 flop by NYK (which could have been called without the flop)
1 lost Indy possession from a non-existent kick
1 lost NYK possession from a missed kick
1 successful challenge per team overturning bad calls.
[quote] In comment 16509043 Strahan91 said:
Quote:
2 that benefited the Knicks and 2 that benefited the Pacers. All that hoopla for nothing
I am confused on the wording on turners screen. It’s listed as INC, but says he was moving. What am I missing?[/quote
]
I believe you're confusing the illegal screen called on Turner at 12.7 with the one that wasn't called at 10.7.
The latter is actually pretty funny. The game is pretty much lost for the Pacers at that point and Turner just blatantly wipes out DDV. To get his money's worth, I suppose.
@IanBegley
Knicks are ruling Mitchell Robinson as out for Wednesday's Game 2 due to left ankle injury management. Robinson hurt the ankle in the PHI series and had significant surgery on it earlier in season. Knicks will presumably turn to Precious Achuiwa in Robinson's absence.
Precious will step up.
Report - ( New Window )
Quote:
2 that benefited the Knicks and 2 that benefited the Pacers. All that hoopla for nothing
I am confused on the wording on turners screen. It’s listed as INC, but says he was moving. What am I missing?
INC means “incorrect no call” in other words refs swallowed their whistle and were wrong to do so. There is a key explaining the codes at the bottom.
Quote:
In comment 16509043 Strahan91 said:
Quote:
2 that benefited the Knicks and 2 that benefited the Pacers. All that hoopla for nothing
I am confused on the wording on turners screen. It’s listed as INC, but says he was moving. What am I missing?
INC means “incorrect no call” in other words refs swallowed their whistle and were wrong to do so. There is a key explaining the codes at the bottom.
Thanks. But like someone said earlier I got the wrong screen mixed up. The one you showed was clearly a moving screen and should have been called.
I think this is the perfect series for Precious. He's quicker and more agile than Mitch. I also wonder if this means a Burks/Shake appearance as 7 men rotation won't work in this series
Quote:
In comment 16508936 Greg from LI said:
Quote:
In comment 16508912 DaShotel13 said:
Quote:
I still can't help but think that a healthy Randle is exactly what this team needs. A guy who can stretch the defense, create his own shot, can handle the ball and is an above average passer for his position.
Biggest thing being "create his own shot". Brunson is pretty much the only guy who can do that consistently now.
I feel like OG can, but is hesitant to do so.
Last year and the year before, I thought Randle ground this offense to a halt in the post season. He seemed to have changed his game a bit to fit the team this year. It would have been interesting to see this team with him this time of year. Then again, if he was healthy, they may not have traded for OG.
Yeah but they traded for OG before Randle was hurt
I guess, maybe it’s short nostalgia, but I’m very optimistic that Randle can integrate and integrate well into this starting lineup and be complimentary.
But that’s for next year, this year let’s keep it going!!
Now THAT's a soft call. And it's the same ref who later made the call against Turner.
twitter - ( New Window )