Moderators: cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid
itrsteve wrote:Celebrities at MSG right now:
dkb964 wrote:156-1 Celtics are frauds when pressure is put on them. They would have been toast if Luka was not stupid enough to foul himself out. Enjoy this ONE finals win. There will never be another with the Js and the Celtics cant afford stacked team.
CoP wrote:The scheduling is dumb and they should adjust it.
Since the 2nd round in the East ended earlier, the ECF should start on Tuesday and the WCF on Wednesday. I don't really understand why you'd make Denver and OKC play Game 7 today and then have to play Game 1 of the WCF two days later when you have both ECF teams waiting around.
LFGK wrote:ballzboyee wrote:bronxknicksfan1 wrote:
To start…when did the Pistons almost take out the Knicks? Almost took them out in 7? They were down 3-1 and lost in 6. That isn’t exactly almost taking out anyone.
Knicks coming back against Boston down +20 twice…yeah, they did the improbable against the defending champs. That doesn’t happen. Kinda says a lot about this team that did it not once, but twice on the road. As for getting blown out by Boston in a game without Tatum…they still had another All Star forward with 2 All Defensive team guards out there playing for their pride being down 3-1 when they were fully healthy. Knicks played like ****…then promptly disposed of them in a 38 point blowout the next game.
Bringing up the team’s regular season record against top teams…what’s the point of this? Let’s point out that they were 2-1 against the Pacers this season if that matters so much. Or 2-0 against the Nuggets. or 2-0 against Memphis. Or 3-0 against the Bucks. It’s easy to cherry pick certain matchups and try to create an agenda against a team. But guess what? As you said, the Celtics were 4-0 against them…got taken out in 6 games.
And please, the Cavs had Garland out there playing on a sprained toe. Mobley was on a sprained ankle. Hunter had a dislocated thumb. That team wasn’t close to looking like they were in the regular season since Donovan was out there playing hero ball to make up for those injuries. This isn’t to say that the Pacers wouldn’t have won that series regardless, but making it seem like those injuries didn’t have an impact is laughable.
If the Knicks haven’t proven anything in these playoffs, the Pacers have done much less.
Detroit was ahead in game 6 with 30 second left. Should I remind that Detroit also nearly swept the Knicks in the RS taking 3 out of 4. A game 7 is not a gimme for the Knicks.
Bottom line is the Knicks got swept 0-16 against teams that had dominant runs during the RS. By "dominant" I mean teams that had sustained peaks in which they were clearly in the top 10 in winning percentage for long runs throughout the season -- mostly the back half. I don't consider Memphis and the Bucks in that group because they were not. Of the teams in that group the Knicks had five wins against Houston, Denver, Pacers, and Twolves combined -- all teams Teams that finished in top 10 in winning percentage after January 1. That's still give them a 5-19 record over all. The reason I didn't mention those wins because even if you take them into account their overall record was still terrible. Okay, I'll give you those five wins. There. For the most part, the Knicks got beat down by teams in the top 10. But this is a secondary point really. it's not even that they had a lopsided losing record against what I consider to be elite teams, it's the fact that they got swept in so many season series and many of their losses those games were by double digits. I find this fact to be very unusual for a team that supposedly is a threat.
Look... they were down by 20 on the road twice against Boston. That's who the Knicks have been for almost 99 percent of the season when they have faced elite teams. They were going to get blown out again in both games. Sandwiched in there are those two wild come backs in the second half which essentially saved their season. That's it. We are supposed to believe that's who the Knicks are now. I don't buy it.
Another guys talking about the regular season lol, good luck brother, when Indiana goes home in 5 you can talk about the regular season records all summer with Detroit and Boston fans, I will definitely tell you I told you so
LFGK wrote:Nuntius wrote:LFGK wrote:
I mean your first point fine, regular season they were better but they are bottom 4 in points given up per game, I don't think the team is great defensively, may be the worst team D left and Denver is still in it.
Second point is centered around injury to Mathurin? Cmon man lol Knicks didn't have their starting 3/4/5 and hart was injured. I'm not entertaining Mathurin with all those injuries along with Giannis and Dame, Garland, Mobley and Hunter.
Third point, fine but at the same token Mitch and KAT are just playing gsme25-30 together and what they do out there together these playoffs is pretty absurd.
Again no disrespect to the pacers at all(screw haliburton thiugh) I don't see this being a long series at all. Bad matchup with both teams at 100%
Read the parenthesis right at the start of my second point. What does the parenthesis say? Here, I'll quote it:I'm not trying to say that our injury issues were as important as their injury issues
The whole point I was making was this year's team is not the same as last year's team. That was the entire point of my post. And Mathurin playing this year is one of the reasons why this isn't the same team. And, obviously, the Knicks are a much different and better team as well. I'm not contesting that point whatsoever.
What will this series be, talk to me, how many games and for who?
Capn'O wrote:We're the recovering meth addict older brother. And we've been clean for a few years now, thank you very much. Very uncouth to bring it up.
LFGK wrote:Nuntius wrote:LFGK wrote:
I mean your first point fine, regular season they were better but they are bottom 4 in points given up per game, I don't think the team is great defensively, may be the worst team D left and Denver is still in it.
Second point is centered around injury to Mathurin? Cmon man lol Knicks didn't have their starting 3/4/5 and hart was injured. I'm not entertaining Mathurin with all those injuries along with Giannis and Dame, Garland, Mobley and Hunter.
Third point, fine but at the same token Mitch and KAT are just playing gsme25-30 together and what they do out there together these playoffs is pretty absurd.
Again no disrespect to the pacers at all(screw haliburton thiugh) I don't see this being a long series at all. Bad matchup with both teams at 100%
Read the parenthesis right at the start of my second point. What does the parenthesis say? Here, I'll quote it:I'm not trying to say that our injury issues were as important as their injury issues
The whole point I was making was this year's team is not the same as last year's team. That was the entire point of my post. And Mathurin playing this year is one of the reasons why this isn't the same team. And, obviously, the Knicks are a much different and better team as well. I'm not contesting that point whatsoever.
What will this series be, talk to me, how many games and for who?
CoP wrote:The scheduling is dumb and they should adjust it.
Since the 2nd round in the East ended earlier, the ECF should start on Tuesday and the WCF on Wednesday. I don't really understand why you'd make Denver and OKC play Game 7 today and then have to play Game 1 of the WCF two days later when you have both ECF teams waiting around.
bronxknicksfan1 wrote:Marrs-Law wrote:Really looking forward to this one. I can argue back and forth about which team is better etc., but at worst I don't think the Pacers are much worse than the Knicks. If it gets to six or seven (which, at worst for the Pacers, I think it will) I have much more confidence in the Pacers' experience, depth, and coaching than a run-into-the-ground Brunson.
As for who had the better Eastern Conference semi-finals, I won't bother to contest that the Knicks faced a better team than the Pacers did. I do, however, think it is much more impressive to definitively crush the 60+ game winning 1 seed (albeit somewhat injured) than come back from multiple 20-point deficits because your opponent would rather brick threes than let their elite forwards get inside the arc.
oh, Hali > Brunson. Pacers in Six
Donovan > Brunson
Embiid > Brunson
Cade > Brunson
Tatum > Brunson
Now we got Hali > Brunson. Prove them wrong again, my GOAT.
cgf wrote:druggas wrote:I'll bet on the team with the best coach. Figure out who that is!
Carlisle’s great, but Thibs just keeps getting better & learning from his mistakes, every year.
LFGK wrote:Marrs-Law wrote:Really looking forward to this one. I can argue back and forth about which team is better etc., but at worst I don't think the Pacers are much worse than the Knicks. If it gets to six or seven (which, at worst for the Pacers, I think it will) I have much more confidence in the Pacers' experience, depth, and coaching than a run-into-the-ground Brunson.
As for who had the better Eastern Conference semi-finals, I won't bother to contest that the Knicks faced a better team than the Pacers did. I do, however, think it is much more impressive to definitively crush the 60+ game winning 1 seed (albeit somewhat injured) than come back from multiple 20-point deficits because your opponent would rather brick threes than let their elite forwards get inside the arc.
oh, Hali > Brunson. Pacers in Six
My brother in Christ, what experience advantage do the pacers have? Coaching? Jim Carey??? The guy who just whines and b*tches to the refs? Okand if you truly believe haliburton is anywhere near Brunson then sure your entire post then makes sense to me, 5 games before you join Cancun Cunningham and Bahamas Brown
knicksNOTslick wrote:Dan33185 wrote:
Pretty sure that's the 12 year old Knick fan in this thread
It's not like the dude wearing a Pacers jersey was just walking down the street minding his own business. There was a Knicks crowd that was there.
So it seems to me he was looking for trouble. I get it, Knicks fans shouldn't have done what they did. But he was also wrong. Dude was trying to be a troll. You can't act all shocked after that.
Nuntius wrote:LFGK wrote:ballzboyee wrote:
Detroit was ahead in game 6 with 30 second left. Should I remind that Detroit also nearly swept the Knicks in the RS taking 3 out of 4. A game 7 is not a gimme for the Knicks.
Bottom line is the Knicks got swept 0-16 against teams that had dominant runs during the RS. By "dominant" I mean teams that had sustained peaks in which they were clearly in the top 10 in winning percentage for long runs throughout the season -- mostly the back half. I don't consider Memphis and the Bucks in that group because they were not. Of the teams in that group the Knicks had five wins against Houston, Denver, Pacers, and Twolves combined -- all teams Teams that finished in top 10 in winning percentage after January 1. That's still give them a 5-19 record over all. The reason I didn't mention those wins because even if you take them into account their overall record was still terrible. Okay, I'll give you those five wins. There. For the most part, the Knicks got beat down by teams in the top 10. But this is a secondary point really. it's not even that they had a lopsided losing record against what I consider to be elite teams, it's the fact that they got swept in so many season series and many of their losses those games were by double digits. I find this fact to be very unusual for a team that supposedly is a threat.
Look... they were down by 20 on the road twice against Boston. That's who the Knicks have been for almost 99 percent of the season when they have faced elite teams. They were going to get blown out again in both games. Sandwiched in there are those two wild come backs in the second half which essentially saved their season. That's it. We are supposed to believe that's who the Knicks are now. I don't buy it.
Another guys talking about the regular season lol, good luck brother, when Indiana goes home in 5 you can talk about the regular season records all summer with Detroit and Boston fans, I will definitely tell you I told you so
I don't think he will since he doesn't look like a Pacers fan. It just looks like he doesn't like the Knicks for whatever reason.
For what is worth, regular season matchups mean nothing. But if you're still confident on your Knicks in 5 take, how about a bet?
Marrs-Law wrote:LFGK wrote:Marrs-Law wrote:Really looking forward to this one. I can argue back and forth about which team is better etc., but at worst I don't think the Pacers are much worse than the Knicks. If it gets to six or seven (which, at worst for the Pacers, I think it will) I have much more confidence in the Pacers' experience, depth, and coaching than a run-into-the-ground Brunson.
As for who had the better Eastern Conference semi-finals, I won't bother to contest that the Knicks faced a better team than the Pacers did. I do, however, think it is much more impressive to definitively crush the 60+ game winning 1 seed (albeit somewhat injured) than come back from multiple 20-point deficits because your opponent would rather brick threes than let their elite forwards get inside the arc.
oh, Hali > Brunson. Pacers in Six
My brother in Christ, what experience advantage do the pacers have? Coaching? Jim Carey??? The guy who just whines and b*tches to the refs? Ok
Ok, to make it quick... Carlisle is an objectively better coach than Thibs (ring, multiple finals appearances, outcoached everyone (even Doc Rivers!) in this playoffs so far, and I believe last playoffs). Pacers have gone to 2 ECF as opposed to y'alls one (+ this core has faced more adversity, I think), so that looks like an experience advantage to me.
Hali > Brunson I was kidding somewhat, I think it's closer to 50/50 though I have Hali over him because I'm a Pacers fan. Brunson obviously is better at scoring, but Hali is the better offensive engine overall, unless one thinks most of the Pacer's offensive advantage is more due to the offensive scheme than anything else. fwiw, a Hali/Brunson trade would be disastrous for both teams, I would think.
I think we'll see Brunson put up a lot of points on ok efficiency, but the Knicks offense will overall be outscored by the Pacers. If that actually happens, who'd you rather have? A player who is a good scorer but leads a decent offense, or a player who is probably the worst scoring star in the league but who somehow leads an elite offense?
Nuntius wrote:LFGK wrote:ballzboyee wrote:
Detroit was ahead in game 6 with 30 second left. Should I remind that Detroit also nearly swept the Knicks in the RS taking 3 out of 4. A game 7 is not a gimme for the Knicks.
Bottom line is the Knicks got swept 0-16 against teams that had dominant runs during the RS. By "dominant" I mean teams that had sustained peaks in which they were clearly in the top 10 in winning percentage for long runs throughout the season -- mostly the back half. I don't consider Memphis and the Bucks in that group because they were not. Of the teams in that group the Knicks had five wins against Houston, Denver, Pacers, and Twolves combined -- all teams Teams that finished in top 10 in winning percentage after January 1. That's still give them a 5-19 record over all. The reason I didn't mention those wins because even if you take them into account their overall record was still terrible. Okay, I'll give you those five wins. There. For the most part, the Knicks got beat down by teams in the top 10. But this is a secondary point really. it's not even that they had a lopsided losing record against what I consider to be elite teams, it's the fact that they got swept in so many season series and many of their losses those games were by double digits. I find this fact to be very unusual for a team that supposedly is a threat.
Look... they were down by 20 on the road twice against Boston. That's who the Knicks have been for almost 99 percent of the season when they have faced elite teams. They were going to get blown out again in both games. Sandwiched in there are those two wild come backs in the second half which essentially saved their season. That's it. We are supposed to believe that's who the Knicks are now. I don't buy it.
Another guys talking about the regular season lol, good luck brother, when Indiana goes home in 5 you can talk about the regular season records all summer with Detroit and Boston fans, I will definitely tell you I told you so
I don't think he will since he doesn't look like a Pacers fan. It just looks like he doesn't like the Knicks for whatever reason.
For what is worth, regular season matchups mean nothing. But if you're still confident on your Knicks in 5 take, how about a bet?
ballzboyee wrote:Nuntius wrote:LFGK wrote:
Another guys talking about the regular season lol, good luck brother, when Indiana goes home in 5 you can talk about the regular season records all summer with Detroit and Boston fans, I will definitely tell you I told you so
I don't think he will since he doesn't look like a Pacers fan. It just looks like he doesn't like the Knicks for whatever reason.
For what is worth, regular season matchups mean nothing. But if you're still confident on your Knicks in 5 take, how about a bet?
Right now the officiating has been very loose, especially on the perimeter. The Knicks basically beat the hell out of Boston's guards. The officiating what matters at this point and injuries. Team just don't magically become better because "it's the playoffs." This is a total myth. What happens is that officiating has shifted and the Knicks are being allowed to muck-up the game and make it a scrum. These are ugly games. In game 6 Brown called for a push off which was basically retaliation. He ended up fouling in the third intentionally out of protest So, yea, right now the Knicks are getting away with murder in terms of the officiating.
If you played sports at all, then you know that whether or the not the RS matters really depends on the overall record of certain matchups. Some games matter more than others. Teams want to at least split against elite opponents. Nobody wants to get swept. Schedules are setup to test teams against one another within windows of the season. A lot of times teams are playing multiple games within a few days or couple of week to accommodate out-of-conference scheduling and long road trips. If a team is actually decent the competitive psychology dictates if they lose one game, they are definitely going to be locked in for that next game. If that team loses two in a row, then the next game is even more important from a psychological and morale perspective. If a team loses back-to-back-to-back, the rubber match becomes a de facto playoff game. That's just the way it works. No necessarily a playoff game, but there exists a playoff mentality associated with those games in the regular season. The whole franchise has that final game circled and the coaches are focused. You are basically trying to avoid getting punked out by your rival. To say those games do not matter at all is to not understand the ebb and flow of competitive basketball throughout the season.
On the other hand, if you understand the overall meaning and competitive psychology behind each game, then you know that if a team can't get over the hump and steal a game here and there in those scenarios, then this fact is a real strong indication of their actual overall ceiling. That team is basically capped. They are trying to avoid a sweep and bringing everything they got, but they are incapable of winning when their pride is on the line.
This first game is in New York. We are going to know probably within the first three periods whether or not the officials are going to allow the Knicks to beat the hell out of the Pacers guards like they did Boston. I expect since this is conference finals, the officiating is going to be cleaned up, but who knows. If this series gets officiated like the RS, the Knicks are in a lot of trouble. On the other hand, if the officials allow the Knicks to push off and ride their elbows into hips and backs of the Pacer guards, then the Knicks can possibly win it.
ballzboyee wrote:Nuntius wrote:LFGK wrote:
Another guys talking about the regular season lol, good luck brother, when Indiana goes home in 5 you can talk about the regular season records all summer with Detroit and Boston fans, I will definitely tell you I told you so
I don't think he will since he doesn't look like a Pacers fan. It just looks like he doesn't like the Knicks for whatever reason.
For what is worth, regular season matchups mean nothing. But if you're still confident on your Knicks in 5 take, how about a bet?
Right now the officiating has been very loose, especially on the perimeter. The Knicks basically beat the hell out of Boston's guards. The officiating what matters at this point and injuries. Team just don't magically become better because "it's the playoffs." This is a total myth. What happens is that officiating has shifted and the Knicks are being allowed to muck-up the game and make it a scrum. These are ugly games. In game 6 Brown called for a push off which was basically retaliation. He ended up fouling in the third intentionally out of protest So, yea, right now the Knicks are getting away with murder in terms of the officiating.
If you played sports at all, then you know that whether or the not the RS matters really depends on the overall record of certain matchups. Some games matter more than others. Teams want to at least split against elite opponents. Nobody wants to get swept. Schedules are setup to test teams against one another within windows of the season. A lot of times teams are playing multiple games within a few days or couple of week to accommodate out-of-conference scheduling and long road trips. If a team is actually decent the competitive psychology dictates if they lose one game, they are definitely going to be locked in for that next game. If that team loses two in a row, then the next game is even more important from a psychological and morale perspective. If a team loses back-to-back-to-back, the rubber match becomes a de facto playoff game. That's just the way it works. No necessarily a playoff game, but there exists a playoff mentality associated with those games in the regular season. The whole franchise has that final game circled and the coaches are focused. You are basically trying to avoid getting punked out by your rival. To say those games do not matter at all is to not understand the ebb and flow of competitive basketball throughout the season.
On the other hand, if you understand the overall meaning and competitive psychology behind each game, then you know that if a team can't get over the hump and steal a game here and there in those scenarios, then this fact is a real strong indication of their actual overall ceiling. That team is basically capped. They are trying to avoid a sweep and bringing everything they got, but they are incapable of winning when their pride is on the line.
This first game is in New York. We are going to know probably within the first three periods whether or not the officials are going to allow the Knicks to beat the hell out of the Pacers guards like they did Boston. I expect since this is conference finals, the officiating is going to be cleaned up, but who knows. If this series gets officiated like the RS, the Knicks are in a lot of trouble. On the other hand, if the officials allow the Knicks to push off and ride their elbows into hips and backs of the Pacer guards, then the Knicks can possibly win it.
LFGK wrote:Nuntius wrote:LFGK wrote:
Another guys talking about the regular season lol, good luck brother, when Indiana goes home in 5 you can talk about the regular season records all summer with Detroit and Boston fans, I will definitely tell you I told you so
I don't think he will since he doesn't look like a Pacers fan. It just looks like he doesn't like the Knicks for whatever reason.
For what is worth, regular season matchups mean nothing. But if you're still confident on your Knicks in 5 take, how about a bet?
Sure since this isn't going to stop until I say fine what's the bet lol
