jr lucosa wrote:The Rebel wrote:To put things into perspective, in 2008 it took 50 wins to make the playoffs in the western conference, it also took 37 wins in the eastern conference, to get to 37 wins the Knicks would have to finish the season with a 52% winning percentage, for a team that is currently at a 25% winning percentage I would say the chances are very slim, even in a weak division.
This isn't your average watered down eastern conference though and the Atlantic division might be worse than... ever? Boston leads that division at 10-14 and I don't think anyone believes in them, Toronto is 2nd place at 7-14, the Knicks are 1.5 games behind Toronto. Is there a single team you look at in that division and say "Yeah they are definitely better than the Knicks"? I don't think so. And Melo is the best player in that division. Knicks could be in first place in a matter of weeks. I'd say get back to me in a month and lets look over the standings again.
2008 was one of the worst eastern conferences the league has ever seen, you see the eastern conference teams all have to play each other 52 or so games a year, making almost impossible that the eastern conference is near as bad as the hype. Hell right now boston is already at 10 wins, so is your argument that Boston cannot win 27 games out of the next 58, but that the Knicks can win 50% of their games through the end of the year?
I have to wonder have you even watched any Knicks games? You can bring up how good Melo is, but 1 player cannot do it alone, that is a roster full of bad streaky jumpshooters and injury prone bigs with limited skill sets. I have watched as many Carmelo Anthony games as anybody, and I can tell you he is not the guy to carry a roster like that, and in fact that is one reason you are hearing all about his stats and him wanting out. Even last night it was a joke the Knicks won the game against the Bulls, the bulls best offensive player on the floor was Mike Dunleavy (Deng, Butler, and of course Rose are out) with them missing 3 starters, if the Bulls had given any effort in the 1st half they win the game, instead the Knicks were up 23 points in the 3rd quarter before the Bulls decided to play. You ask who is better then the Knicks are in their division, it is an easy argument that all of those teams has been so far and all of them have the potential to get even better.
Let's go through the teams shall we? Boston, traded 2 overpaid well into their decline players for picks, they are missing by far their best player who is due back soon from a knee injury, yet you seem to think they will not win 2 more games then their pace indicates now? The Raptors just traded a very ineffecient chucker who has shown to be a net negative for his team, and got back 3 decent role players, yet they are going to get considerably worse (there are arguments that the deal made them better). The Nets have been missing their best player and 6th man since the start of the season, plus their starting SF, yet they are not going to get better if they get healthy? The one team I will give you is the 76ers, but the Knicks are already out losing them as well. The Knicks on the other hand still have Chandler out, but outside of him have been relatively healthy this season (considering Melo usually misses 15 game per year, Amare is playing this week, and Kmart is healthier then he has ever been), personally i do not get why so many are convinced that they turn the team around.
Also why would you bring up Toronto? Did they change the rules that the top 2 finishers in a division must be in the playoffs? Last I checked it was the top 1, and the Knicks are 3 1/2 back of Boston, and 2 1/2 back of the 8th place Bulls.
