ImageImageImageImageImage

LOL x 5000: STAT thinks Knicks might be

Moderators: dakomish23, Capn'O, j4remi, Deeeez Knicks, NoLayupRule, GONYK, mpharris36, HerSports85, Jeff Van Gully

HatersGonHate
Junior
Posts: 328
And1: 151
Joined: Jan 09, 2014

Re: LOL x 5000: STAT thinks Knicks might be  

Post#61 » by HatersGonHate » Tue Apr 15, 2014 5:38 am

NYKat wrote:
HatersGonHate wrote:
NYKat wrote:
Vogel made that team.

Don't get it f*cked up.

Under another coach, Stevenson is JR Smith, George Hill is Raymond Felton, and Paul George is Luol Deng


Congrats on the worst post ever.


Is it though?

Compare their starters individual resumes to ours...

Felton, JR, Melo, Amare, Chandler >>> Hill, George, Stephenson, West, Hibbert

We kill them on paper, Vogel is the difference, he maxed out on their potential. Woodson would have that team at the bottom of the conference


Oh yeah, Woodson would've brought this team from 55 wins to 20 wins.

You're embarrassing yourself, please re-evaluate your life.
User avatar
CharlesOakley
Veteran
Posts: 2,734
And1: 2,486
Joined: Jun 27, 2006

Re: LOL x 5000: STAT thinks Knicks might be  

Post#62 » by CharlesOakley » Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:41 pm

HatersGonHate wrote:
NYKat wrote:
HatersGonHate wrote:
Congrats on the worst post ever.


Is it though?

Compare their starters individual resumes to ours...

Felton, JR, Melo, Amare, Chandler >>> Hill, George, Stephenson, West, Hibbert

We kill them on paper, Vogel is the difference, he maxed out on their potential. Woodson would have that team at the bottom of the conference


Oh yeah, Woodson would've brought this team from 55 wins to 20 wins.

You're embarrassing yourself, please re-evaluate your life.


Dude - stop using hyperbole to make a point. Nobody said the Pacers would be at 20 wins. You keep moving the target. If you can't recognize that our roster is better than Chicago, Toronto and in the same ballpark as Indiana then it's you who is embarrassing himself.

I would honestly like to know who anyone thinks is a worse coach than Woodson?
NYKat
RealGM
Posts: 11,107
And1: 4,395
Joined: Sep 30, 2009

Re: LOL x 5000: STAT thinks Knicks might be  

Post#63 » by NYKat » Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:38 pm

I still believe in this roster, with a coach who knows how to coach mental toughness. Most of our losses this year were because we consistently wet the bed in close games, and iso-Melo reliance, especially at home.

If Amare (stays healthy and) develops his ability to pass out of the post, he can be quite serviceable in the triangle offense. The guy is close to 55% fg so using him as 1st or 2nd option is not a bad idea. It shouldn't take major roster tweaking to get us back to .500+ team. We can be competitive until 2015.
Nazrmohamed
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,975
And1: 2,997
Joined: May 16, 2013
     

Re: LOL x 5000: STAT thinks Knicks might be  

Post#64 » by Nazrmohamed » Tue Apr 15, 2014 1:40 pm

Why wont stat just stfu
HatersGonHate
Junior
Posts: 328
And1: 151
Joined: Jan 09, 2014

Re: LOL x 5000: STAT thinks Knicks might be  

Post#65 » by HatersGonHate » Tue Apr 15, 2014 2:14 pm

http://grantland.com/features/nba-awards-season/

There's a section in there on the sheer absurdity of Amare's quote.
User avatar
Sark
RealGM
Posts: 19,274
And1: 16,044
Joined: Sep 21, 2010
Location: Merry Pills
 

Re: LOL x 5000: STAT thinks Knicks might be  

Post#66 » by Sark » Tue Apr 15, 2014 5:17 pm

HatersGonHate wrote:http://grantland.com/features/nba-awards-season/

There's a section in there on the sheer absurdity of Amare's quote.



Wow, Grantland taking a shot at the Knicks? Hell must be frozen over.

Return to New York Knicks