knicks lose....i blame mpharris who blames thibs

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

at the end of the day, losing a close game to them doesn't really matter that we need to analyze it to death. would you have been more convinced we can beat them 4 times out of 7 if we won ?

my biggest takeaway from this game for the possible series is that the jaylen brown injury seems serious and that might possibly give us a chance. albeit a small one.

Honestly, a healthy Horford is more damaging to us than Brown, if he plays in that series we're cooked regardless of whether Brown is out or not. He misses a game, and it's close, he plays in the 3 others and it's blow out city, he has a +33 net rating against use which is highest on their team vs us.

He stops the KAT post ups with weakside help from KP, and on the other end they're still 5 out.

it didn't work yesterday but the knicks were able to really focus on tatum defensively because brown wasn't a threat. that wouldn't be the case if he was healthy. if kp, white, holiday beat you then so be it.

i would have liked to seen our double big lineup against theirs. if we could have bullied them on the boards.

Meh. Healthy KP is their number 2, not Brown. Despite how it's written/spoken in the media.

I mean the thought is to let Brown be traded in the off-season for apron reasons, not KP or White (who's probably the third most important player for the Celtics).

[3toheadmelo]

They want us and any team they play to do that, because it's just math. If we're posting up 20 times, and they're taking 20 threes for every post up we have, we're going to lose.


We took 14 more shots than them, made 16 more 2 pointers than them, and we still lost because they made 19 threes

We lost because they have a top 5 player in the league, not because we didn’t get in a 3 point contest with them lol

They were +24 from three, you don't win games when the other team hits 8 more threes than you and can defend. We're playing an old school brand of basketball vs a team playing future ball.

I’m sure having 5 players that can shoot 3s in their starting lineup must be nice. Meanwhile hart is passing up 3s and killing our spacing.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

To intentionally foul or not to foul has been a debate since the dawn of time. Both have risk.

As I understand, there is no conclusive evidence that suggests that fouling when up 3 increases the odds of winning the game. If the data does support this, the difference is likely insignificant.

The decision really depends on personnel, and the Celtics have unsurprisingly been one of the best free-throw shooting teams in the entire NBA. And their 5-out lineup don't have a weak free throw shooter to target.

I think the response of piling on Thibs is a bit emotional in this instance. Sometimes, you just lose the game and that’s it. It’s just particularly frustrating because it’s the Celtics and we are looking to finally beat them but yesterday the basketball Gods favored them in crunch time.

One can certainly disagree with not fouling and that's fine, but to be up in arms about it is missing how games sometimes don't go your way. It's harder to accept that we have no control over those things.

Idunno Chanel, when he made the 3, there was 3 seconds left in the game. Had he fouled. Even if Tatum made the free throws, we would still be up one with the ball

Knowing this idiot Thibs though he would have inbounded the ball to Hart

The foul would have occured with 10-to-6 seconds left in the clock (not 3).

And rewatching the play, there was the risk of a 4-point play starting with about 8 seconds left in the game. So it would've had to have happened earlier (with Tatum being an 81% free throw shooter).

Without a timeout by Boston, I can understand the reluctance to foul once Tatum dribbled to the middle of the floor. After that, it was quite risky to foul because he was basically facing up.

The way I see it, an incredible player made an incredible shot. I can live with that too.

You foul before he gets to the 3 point line, we saw the same thing with Maxey in the playoffs. They had Embiid set a screen for him at halfcourt, what else could they be doing setting a screen at halfcourt, and Mitch was expecting the drive because our players are coached like it's 2005 and were expecting the drive, and of course the 3 bomb came.

We keep having these discussions about whether or not to foul, and it's almost always after a loss So, the obvious answer is to foul.

[bisme37]

Great game last night you guys.

I can't think of another play where a center blocked Tatum's stepback 3. JT generally killed Bridges and the Knicks as usual, but that was impressive from Mitch.

See ya in Round 2 perhaps.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

We lost because they have a top 5 player in the league, not because we didn’t get in a 3 point contest with them lol

They were +24 from three, you don't win games when the other team hits 8 more threes than you and can defend. We're playing an old school brand of basketball vs a team playing future ball.

I’m sure having 5 players that can shoot 3s in their starting lineup must be nice. Meanwhile hart is passing up 3s and killing our spacing.

The Celtics are +117 from three vs us, they've made 84, and we've made 45. The Thunder and Cavs are also in the top 10 for threes attempted per game, the Cavs get threes with a non-shooting big on the floor, so do the Thunder when IHart is out there.


We're not even taking high volume threes when Hart is off the floor, so it's not that, it's that we just don't hunt the shot. Watching KP set screens for dudes at halfcourt, then seeing us clear out and iso, it's a difference in how we operate independent of there being a bad shooter. They were still getting threes up when Kornet/KP were out there because they value that shot above everything else.

[The KnicksFix]

Idunno Chanel, when he made the 3, there was 3 seconds left in the game. Had he fouled. Even if Tatum made the free throws, we would still be up one with the ball

Knowing this idiot Thibs though he would have inbounded the ball to Hart

The foul would have occured with 10-to-6 seconds left in the clock (not 3).

And rewatching the play, there was the risk of a 4-point play starting with about 8 seconds left in the game. So it would've had to have happened earlier (with Tatum being an 81% free throw shooter).

Without a timeout by Boston, I can understand the reluctance to foul once Tatum dribbled to the middle of the floor. After that, it was quite risky to foul because he was basically facing up.

The way I see it, an incredible player made an incredible shot. I can live with that too.

You foul before he gets to the 3 point line, we saw the same thing with Maxey in the playoffs. They had Embiid set a screen for him at halfcourt, what else could they be doing setting a screen at halfcourt, and Mitch was expecting the drive because our players are coached like it's 2005 and were expecting the drive, and of course the 3 bomb came.

We keep having these discussions about whether or not to foul, and it's almost always after a loss So, the obvious answer is to foul.

Exactly this. When up three. We are the only team that consistently gives up the 3 on the ensuing play. Thibs coaches it like it’s 2005, couldn’t have said it better myself

[GONYK]

That’s what he did in the wcf and look what happened I rather him feast down low in the block like he did last night

Florida education system has failed my boy

3 > 2

Where we rank in attempts per game.

This is both an arithmetic and geometry problem for Thibs

[NoDopeOnSundays]

Great game last night you guys.

I can't think of another play where a center blocked Tatum's stepback 3. JT generally killed Bridges and the Knicks as usual, but that was impressive from Mitch.

See ya in Round 2 perhaps.

You cool and all bis....but

[Fury]

Great game last night you guys.

I can't think of another play where a center blocked Tatum's stepback 3. JT generally killed Bridges and the Knicks as usual, but that was impressive from Mitch.

See ya in Round 2 perhaps.

You cool and all bis....but

Anyone else watch From?

[bisme37]

Great game last night you guys.

I can't think of another play where a center blocked Tatum's stepback 3. JT generally killed Bridges and the Knicks as usual, but that was impressive from Mitch.

See ya in Round 2 perhaps.

You cool and all bis....but

Anyone else watch From?

I do. Really good.

[MrDollarBills]

KAT needs to be putting up more threes as well as being a bully down low.

If they're gonna put a wing on him, let him best their ass down low yeah but the onus should still be maximizing his ability to hit threes at an elite clip for a big man.

I don't wanna keep ragging on Tom, because really last night it was dog fight and we didn't quit, but this is where he lacks foresight and modern sensibilities.

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

To intentionally foul or not to foul has been a debate since the dawn of time. Both have risk.

As I understand, there is no conclusive evidence that suggests that fouling when up 3 increases the odds of winning the game. If the data does support this, the difference is likely insignificant.

The decision really depends on personnel, and the Celtics have unsurprisingly been one of the best free-throw shooting teams in the entire NBA. And their 5-out lineup don't have a weak free throw shooter to target.

I think the response of piling on Thibs is a bit emotional in this instance. Sometimes, you just lose the game and that’s it. It’s just particularly frustrating because it’s the Celtics and we are looking to finally beat them but yesterday the basketball Gods favored them in crunch time.

One can certainly disagree with not fouling and that's fine, but to be up in arms about it is missing how games sometimes don't go your way. It's harder to accept that we have no control over those things.

100% agree with this post. There are many systematic things for Knicks fans to be extremely annoyed about imo. Losing this one specific overtime game is not one of them.

Yes, mistakes were made, but that happens. Look at the Nuggs rookie(?) bumping Jokic on the end of game p'n'r which resulted his pass to Broadie going into the back court and in the coach and the GM being fired.

Oh, wai....

[MrDollarBills]

Great game last night you guys.

I can't think of another play where a center blocked Tatum's stepback 3. JT generally killed Bridges and the Knicks as usual, but that was impressive from Mitch.

See ya in Round 2 perhaps.

You cool and all bis....but

Anyone else watch From?

What's this one? Is it on Amazon?

[Guano]

To intentionally foul or not to foul has been a debate since the dawn of time. Both have risk.

As I understand, there is no conclusive evidence that suggests that fouling when up 3 increases the odds of winning the game. If the data does support this, the difference is likely insignificant.

The decision really depends on personnel, and the Celtics have unsurprisingly been one of the best free-throw shooting teams in the entire NBA. And their 5-out lineup don't have a weak free throw shooter to target.

I think the response of piling on Thibs is a bit emotional in this instance. Sometimes, you just lose the game and that’s it. It’s just particularly frustrating because it’s the Celtics and we are looking to finally beat them but yesterday the basketball Gods favored them in crunch time.

One can certainly disagree with not fouling and that's fine, but to be up in arms about it is missing how games sometimes don't go your way. It's harder to accept that we have no control over those things.

[NoDopeOnSundays]

You cool and all bis....but

Anyone else watch From?

What's this one? Is it on Amazon?

It's on Epix, or the high seas if you're Captain Jack.


It's from the people that did Lost, so if you like that kind of thing it's good, if you don't it'll make you angry.

[bisme37]

You cool and all bis....but

Anyone else watch From?

What's this one? Is it on Amazon?

It's on MGM+ (formerly Epix), but I think you can watch on Prime as well.

[MrDollarBills]

We lost because they have a top 5 player in the league, not because we didn’t get in a 3 point contest with them lol

They were +24 from three, you don't win games when the other team hits 8 more threes than you and can defend. We're playing an old school brand of basketball vs a team playing future ball.

I’m sure having 5 players that can shoot 3s in their starting lineup must be nice. Meanwhile hart is passing up 3s and killing our spacing.

It would be a lot easier to get away with having Mitch as the non spacer with the starters than Josh. Josh's man doesn't bother because he's not a threat to shoot or catch lobs

[NoDopeOnSundays]

To intentionally foul or not to foul has been a debate since the dawn of time. Both have risk.

As I understand, there is no conclusive evidence that suggests that fouling when up 3 increases the odds of winning the game. If the data does support this, the difference is likely insignificant.

The decision really depends on personnel, and the Celtics have unsurprisingly been one of the best free-throw shooting teams in the entire NBA. And their 5-out lineup don't have a weak free throw shooter to target.

I think the response of piling on Thibs is a bit emotional in this instance. Sometimes, you just lose the game and that’s it. It’s just particularly frustrating because it’s the Celtics and we are looking to finally beat them but yesterday the basketball Gods favored them in crunch time.

One can certainly disagree with not fouling and that's fine, but to be up in arms about it is missing how games sometimes don't go your way. It's harder to accept that we have no control over those things.

Me when that Shams bomb hits "The NY Knicks are elevating coach Tom Thibodeau to front office position"

[MrDollarBills]

Anyone else watch From?

What's this one? Is it on Amazon?

It's on MGM+ (formerly Epix), but I think you can watch on Prime as well.

Oh okay I will look it up. Amazon owns MGM so that sounds right

bis I'm trying to remember: weren't you chopping it up with us on the WNBA board last year during the season??

[B8RcDeMktfxC]

KAT needs to be putting up more threes as well as being a bully down low.

If they're gonna put a wing on him, let him best their ass down low yeah but the onus should still be maximizing his ability to hit threes at an elite clip for a big man.

I don't wanna keep ragging on Tom, because really last night it was dog fight and we didn't quit, but this is where he lacks foresight and modern sensibilities.

I kinda get this. But, the other way of looking at this is that the Knicks went from being blown out in their 0-8 games against the top three to a close overtime loss. That's a pretty big improvement. Now any single game isn't really evidence for anything usually (and certainly in this case). But the worry is/was that Thibs really doesn't get it. If it's that he might lose games which are literally on the edge that's a different story. (One I'd personally probably believe, but hard to distinguish from the players making +ve or -ve plays in game.)