Knicks are #1!: 3 in a Row & 7 Reasons Why
Renaldo says the Knicks are #1! Hey, we’ll get to that picture in just a minute! Three in a row may not mean a whole lot to you, but it feels pretty good on this end. So how did it happen? First of all, forget that already-developing storyline about Marbury being out being trotted out by both overzealous newspapers and well-respected Knick Defenders. When the Knicks dropped 4 in a row in December without Marbury (& 9 of 12), you barely heard a peep from anyone. Here is the real story:
1) Nice Schedule: Detroit and the Wizards came off flat back-to-back games as well as tough stretches like 4 in 5 nights. The Nets were fresh but this year the Knicks have the Nets number as they have won all three games against them. The Nets have no frontline to expoit the defensive weaknesses in the Knicks front line. I never thought that I would ever say this, but the Nets miss Mikki Moore! Oh yeah, they played 3 home games… the last one coming in New Jersey…
2) Eddy-Zach Combo Meal did not give the game away! Usually when David Lee enters a game in the 1st quarter, the Knicks are already down 5 to 14 points. Not this time! When Lee Enters: They were only -4 points tonight; they were +1 against Detroit, and against the Wizards the Knicks made season history by being up 10 points when Eddy & Zach were split. A bewildered Lee took 57 different looks at the scoreboard to make sure that he was wearing the right uniform.
3) Q didn’t shoot 3-12 in any of the 3 Games!: He even shot 50% in one game! But the dubious Q streak is still alive and well. In all 35 games he has still yet to shoot over 50% in any single game! It is unclear what the NBA record is on this or if anyone has ever kept this up for an entire season in NBA history. The guess here is that the old Knicks record probably belonged to Greg Anthony.
4) Jamal’s Annual Strip-Tease Act: Like clockwork it happens every single year. Jamal goes off for a stretch of games that make you think that MJ is in the building. Then at the end of the year, you look at his season-ending stat line and it still says 41% field goal percentage — just like the previous year… and the one before that. All you can do is ride that wave for as long as possible.
5) The 3 Point Line: Fueled by an unconscious Jamal, the Knicks shot 53% (25-47) from the 3-point line for the last three games. Drop Q’s 1 for 7 from the mix and the Knicks shot 60%! In contrast, the Knicks opponents shot only 30% (18-60) from behind the arc. It is safe to say that both of these trends will not continue.
Here is the bad news: Points #1 -5 will probably not continue. Here is the good news: Points #6 and 7 just might!
6) Nate Robinson’s New Year’s Resolution!: Are we witnessing the unthinkable before our very eyes?: The evolution of Nate Robinson into a real bonafide point guard? First the shooting: He shot 37% in November, 41% in December, and now 51% in January. While he will likely dip back below 50% he is taking better shots, using more pump fakes to fool defenders, and shooting within the offensive flow. But forget all that, let’s talk assists: In the first two months Nate only played in three games where he had more than 3 assists. In January, he has had at least three assists in 5 of the last 7 games including 8 (Wizards) and 10 (Chicago). Okay, now here is the REALLY unbelievable part: he has increased his assists while only averaging one single turnover per game in January! He is changing speeds, controlling his dribble, and setting up teamates – even if it doesn’t result in an assist. For most of us who have watched Nate the last couple of years, the word "poised" and "Nate" in the same sentence was about as likely as saying "Curry" and "shotblocker". If Nate continues down this path, any and all things can become possible in the basketball universe.
7) Renaldo Escapes from Alcatraz!: Well, what took Isiah so long? After an inexplicable string of DNP’s, Balkman has come off the pine the last few games to give the Knicks the kind of hustle, rebounding, putbacks, and contagious energy that have been desparately needed all season long. For those keeping score at home the Knicks are 7-5 when Balkman gets at least 15 minutes of burn. Oh yeah, one more thing: At 5:28 in the 2nd quarter of the Detroit game Renaldo missed his first free throw, looked directly at the rim, and flipped the bird at it. It was a "quick flip" that happened so quickly that I had missed it, but my friend Jonah caught the gesture. Enter DVR freeze frame and digital camera. Did the Renaldo reaction work? Yes! Renaldo nailed the 2nd free throw! Unfortunately, it was his only make on the night in 5 attempts. He now sits at 36% for the season from the line. At that rate, I’d be flippin’ it as well…
Isiah should play these numbers: #4 and #11. They’re as safe a bet as any on this knicks team.
The future is now MODI!
Seattle’s Rainer beach high school back court of Nate and Jamal could lead this team back to relevance the way they’ve been playing lately. True, there’s not really a point guard between them, but they are the most effective guards right now for the knicks.
Zach is getting his touches, and the knicks are winning, but like you said, can they maintain this course for the long-haul?
January 17th, 2008 at 3:47 amAnti-NYSportsNews’ EXCLUSIVE NEW POST
JAMAL CRAWFORD DESERVES TO START…
www.anti-nysportsnews.blogspot.com/
January 17th, 2008 at 6:33 amI’m sure I said this 20 games ago, but I’ll say it again, the Knicks were losing because they lacked effort and cohesion. The major difference between now (3 game winning streak) and then (3 games ago) is that the Knicks are collectively playing with effort, cohesion and trust. The hard part, without being in the locker room is figuring out exactly why. But I suggest that the answer is very simple – the major differences in how and why the Knicks are playing with effort and cohesion are Stephon Marbury and Zach Randolph. Every other reason flows from these two.
Given how the Knicks have performed since last year whenever there was a line-up change due to injuries, Knicks Fanatics should have expected a short adjustment period for the Knicks and Zach Randolph. Randolph did not work with the Knicks over the summer and was not available for early games because he went on bereavement leave. While Zach was replacing Frye and his game had some similarities to Frye minus the softness, ZBO also has a style of play that is very individualistically industrious. Unlike Frye, he is a mano-o-mano player who likes to mix it up, but he does so naturally like he the gym rat he is, alone. He needed time to learn his teammates and them him. He needed time to develop trust and they needed time to trust him.
The unexpected factor was how Marbury would impact the team. He has done so negatively, period. There is no evidence that he has a positive impact on his teammates collectively and the locker room. None. His attitude, reactions and activity helped exacerbate the problems of the adjustment period. (Of course, this all stems from his relationship with Zeke and probably the off-court, in-court off-season into-the-season drama)
First of all, this win streak is not an anomaly. This is how the Knicks were supposed to progress, but many intervening factors extended the progression. Folks want to analyze this by the numbers i.e., 3 game winning streak and their perceptions of how players played in the past, but as a person who spends as much time in the numbers as anyone else, I suggest to you that the numbers this year have been nothing but a byproduct of activity, not an accurate barometer of occurrences collectively. In other words, the lack of team effort and poor coaching can skew all numbers which is one of the main reasons it made no sense for me to do pre-game analysis of the Knicks. The numbers were lying because the problem was and still will be effort, trust and chemistry.
Modi’s recent apologia for Marbury notwithstanding, the Knicks played very differently with Marbury on the court. The Knicks did not try as a team for whatever reason. We can only guess at what was impacting the chemistry of the Knicks. But the evidence is pretty, pretty clear that it revolves around how the team feels about Marbury. Go back to the videotape, forget the stats and watch the games. And once chemistry is disrupted and uncertainty permeates the team — who says the team cancer must be on the floor or in the locker room to still negatively impact the team. Be real. Just because your ex-girlfriend recently moved out doesn’t mean that you will perform better at work – you’re still thinking about her; but when you know she is gone for good and she returns that engagement ring, I bet your azz will mentally heal faster and begin to love the one you’re with.
The MSM will try to focus on this three game winning streak instead of at least the past eight games when the Knicks started to play much better in parts of the game. I don’t have time to do more than go on my recollection for now, but this recent play can at least be traced back to the stellar play of the Knicks against San Antonio where the Knicks lost by only 4 and played very good basketball for 4 quarters. Malik Rose (not ZBO) started that game and provided what had been missing all year – leadership, which was the job of the point guard; which is one of the things that Marbury was actually contracted to provide despite his recent public analysis of his contract. Malik Rose also returned the team to a comfort level they had last year.
Marbury did play 40 minutes in that loss. It was the first time he had played decently in quite a while, but he was not the leader of the team. The leaders of the team and the offense were Jamal Crawford (8 assists), Malik Rose (solid game) and Nate Robinson. Curry even decided to play and had 12 rebounds and 2 steals. Clearly he was psychologically touched by the angel of comfort and the pinch of bench splinters dancing in his head.
The critical point was that a bit of cohesion that only surfaced intermittently during games during the season was clearly accessible for a full game. However, still with Marbury at the helm and without any real leadership on the floor, the Knicks deficiencies rose to the surface in the 3 of the next four games, although with Isiah’s three guard lineup you could see the power being to shift to Nate Robinson as Zeke tried to figure out how to get his best all-round point (all-round includes mental stability) on the floor.
So what happens next. Steph sits and the Knicks play much better. Better play resulted in wins. The Knicks played better. It matters less who they beat than it does that they played in a way that they could beat somebody. In a funk, the Knicks have consistently played poorly against bad teams or teams that are not as good talent wise, so it would not have been surprising if the Knicks had lost to the Detroit and Washington benches. But not only did they win, they won with stellar play and decision making on a play-by-play basis. To blame the victories on Detroit and Washington being tired is simplistic and not nearly accurate. If that were true, then the Knicks like they historically have should have lost to the Nets on the back end of the back-to-back. The Knicks won because they played better ball than they have before and than the team they played.
Finally, Nate’s play was not unexpected. Isiah not playing Nate after a stellar summer league was unexpected. On the surface Nate did everything that Isiah asked, but Zeke believed he needed defense and decided to put Jones in the rotation which squeezed Nate down the bench. Nate is playing the way he is now, during the game, because Marbury’s disposition allowed him to get back into the rotation. Of course, one less starter with time to manage changes the rotation.
I suggest that Marbury out of the lineup positively impacts the mental state of the team, Zeke’s substitution patterns, ball movement and the effort of his teammates. Almost everyone, including opposing players see the evidence of this. It is not all his fault, but his presence and almost schizophrenic (up and down) behavior has a major negative impact on this team. If Marbury is not out for the season, he is this year’s version of Steve Francis for the Knicks; the odd man out until someone, like Nate, gets injured.
I don’t expect miracles, but now I expect that Isiah will keep his job and the Knicks will play better ball for the rest of the year. Unfortunately, without Marbury they have no depth at point and their entire scheme depends on a speedy penetrating point guard to initiate the collapse of the defense and perimeter ball movement. This is not Mardy Collins. Isiah if he sticks to his plans would need to fill a hole in his depth chart in order to expect to make the playoffs. Still this is the team we talked about over the summer – good enough to play Detroit and better than the Nets.
January 17th, 2008 at 8:19 amOkay, Lives, while there are many solid points that you make, you probably know that we disagree — alot. You say that: “the evidence is pretty, pretty clear that it revolves around how the team feels about Marbury.” Well, here is some evidence: the Knicks went 3-9 in December without him, not 9-3. This is a fact that should not be dismissed for convenience purposes.
Lives, you say that Nate’s play of late was not unexpected, but the numbers, and just as importantly, visual observations, say otherwise. He is more poised and a playmaker, something unseen in the first two months. Nate’s newfound disposition did not begin with Marbury’s abscence, but actually began WHILE PLAYING ALONGSIDE MARBURY. This is a fact and this includes Nate’s 10 point assist game. I would suggest that if Nate were playing this way all year AND if Balkman were getting minutes all year, then we would have quite a few more wins — with or without Marbury. Things like Nate’s improvement and Balkman off the bench are very tangible areas to point to. Intangible statements like “mental state” and “leadership” are simply words that cannot be refuted in any way.
There is one factor that has less to do with Marbury and more to do with Isiah. You can’t start 5 scorers in any starting line-up — and I have been saying this for quite some time. It just won’t work. If you have at least one role player in there who will defer, we are much better off. If you have two players that defer, then that is perfect. This is also a reason why the Knicks always play better with either Zach or Eddy in the line-up, but rarely both at the same time. (Note: In the 4 games Zach missed, Curry has averaged 22 points and 9 rebounds.) This is also the reason why the Knicks took off last year after the Denver fight. The suspensions FORCED Isiah to stop with so many scorers in the starting lineup. That is exactly when Marbury started to shine.
Where we agree is that the Knicks will probably play better ball. Nate, Renaldo, and not having 5 starters will accomplish that to some degree. However, if Jamal continues to drop 63% of his threes every night, or if his shooting % magically rises significantly for the rest of the year (say 47%), then I might subscribe to your “mental state theory”. If Jamal returns back to his usual 41% and the Knicks resort back to losing, then I will expect some honest reflection on your part.
January 17th, 2008 at 9:27 amModi, my reflection was honest and I said nothing in the piece above that I would expect to retract. We simply disagree.
First, I wrote about Nate’s expected improvement before the summer league and during the summer league largely because I kept up with what he was doing and saying in interviews. You may not have expected his improved play, but I did and wrote about it before the season. Remember that he also won MVP of the summer league. How do you not play him as much as you play Jones — to act like you are committed to defense. And actually, Nate’s play improved as he got more playing time which was not simply being paired with Marbury. Perhaps some 82games info might be helpful on this issue, but Isiah was all over the place in his substitutions involving Nate.
Your argument about the Knicks going 3-9 without Marbury absolutely fails to refute anything I said. First of all the Knicks were not 3-9 without Marbury. Marbury is still on the team and his presence permeates the team. He is supposed to be the cornerstone and fomerly the focal point of the team. If he has negatively impacted the team and the relationships within the team, then why wouldn’t that continue to impact play on the floor. Am I to believe that once he sits down that everything should immediately be hunky doory. And also note that I said an adjustment period was also part of the reason for poor team play. Your 3-9 w/o Marbury argument holds no water: o’k well maybe a drop.
I do not disagree with your concerns about the lineup and other reasons for poor play, but your Isiah-like (stubborn) insistence on absolving Marbury for being one of the major reasons for the demise of the 2007-2008 Knicks is incredible. I wish Marbury well and pulled for him to, but the fact is that the team responds differently when Marbury is not on the floor or expected to be back on the floor. I love your work, but even you can’t wiggle out of that correlation.
Did you hear Curryjust state that for some reason the team is playing better without Marbury, although he stopped short of saying Marbury was the reason for poor play.
I predict you’ll get religion on this issue one day.
January 17th, 2008 at 9:43 amLives,
– I wasn’t insinuating that your original reflection wasn’t “honest” in any way. I’m just saying that if Craw doesn’t improve, you should revisit your opinion. Of course, if he does, then i will revisit my own. I ask nothing of you that i don’t request from myself.
– I expect the Knicks to improve somewhat because of some of the reasons that i already stated. Whether that has to do with Marbury’s absence will be analyzed, not assumed. If Nate and Balkman consistently go off, the marbury will get blame for something he does not deserve. Now if Jamal consistently goes off, then I am willing to concede the Marbury point. For some reason, I don’t know if the Marbury haters would do the same in reverse.
– Yes, there was a lot of talk on this board by you and others about Nate’s great summer. However, I interpretted that as Nate improving at what he does best: scoring and outside shooting. It is the passing, floor game, and low turnovers that has got me excited and fewer folks were predicting. Maybe you were and I missed it.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:03 amAnti, I read you blog but was unable to comment on it for some reason, so I will do so here. But let me clear things up.
– It is simply not fair to say that the Knicks went south just beacause of Jamal’s injury last year. We also lost Lee and Q when he could still shoot. Add marbury to the disabled list for the final 7 games. IMO, Lee was the biggest single loss because the Knicks had no other rebounders on the team last year.
– Because Marbury is out for the year AND because Jamal is on one of his patented hot streaks, I wouldn’t make him 6th man AT THIS VERY MOMENT. I want to ride this wave until it is low tide again.
– I have never seen a 6th man role as a demotion — only you do. Streaky shooters are tailor made for that role. Doesn’t Ben Gordon play at the end of games? Doesn’t Manu Ginobli? Didn’t Vinnie Johnson help the Knicks win a championship as “the microwave”? How many years did hall of famer Kevin McHale come off the bench? The difference is that Greg Popvich is a better coach than Isiah Thomas.
– Do you know that Ben Gordon scored 20+ points 9 times in the first 25 games as a starter? Since moving to 6th man he has scored 20+ points 8 times in only 11 games.
– We both agree that jamal is clutch at the end of games. Which is why we both agree that he should play at end of games. You and bronx keep talking like I am somehow refuting this point.
– Until Jamal ever shoots more than 41% with his lack of D, he can never be a great 2-guard. At the end of the day it is shooting %, and not razzle-dazzle, sizzle, shake & bake, that win games. The official scorers do not give out extra points for style. If they did Jamal would be an all-star every year.
– Do you think a guy like Sacramento’s John Salmons should be an all-star shooting guard? Unlike Crawford he is shooting 51% from the floor, 40% from 3-point range, and actually plays some pretty good defense. Do you know that Salmons averages only 2 points less than Crawford, but has taken 150 fewer shots!!!! 150 shots!!!
– Anti, when the annual cocktease ends, when Craw actaully elevates his shooting percentage for one year and not one week, then I will happily change my tune and say “Anti is the TRUTH!”. Now if he continues to shoot 40-42% for the rest of the year can you agree to stop giving him hand jobs in the Knicks shower after games? Deal?
January 17th, 2008 at 11:04 amI’m going to stay out of the Crawford discussion for now, but I will say this about Jamal, briefly: He’s a terrible defender, when he’s defending SGs. He’s not as terrible against PGs. If the Knicks have another decent defender in the backcourt (i.e. Nate Robinson + Crawford)), the team does much better than when it doesn’t (i.e. Marbury + Crawford). Offensively… well, you know he’s going to shoot awful shots. The only question is whether they are dropping or not.
As for the modest three-game win streak: I credit the much improved ball movement (not coincidentally, the Knicks have also had their best three game stretch of assists/turnovers). Nate Robinson is a factor in that, so I guess we agree that Nate has been a catalyst. But also a catalyst has been the big men’s willingness to make the extra pass - both Randolph and Curry have been going back outside with the ball quite a bit. And, on the perimeter, you are seeing the extra pass, too. The Knicks have been moving the ball the best they have all year, and that’s not just because of Robinson (though he is a factor in it). Everyone is looking to make the extra pass, and it’s very noticeable now.
Seeing Balkman on the court again is also a good thing, too. Good point.
Bottom line: if the Knicks keep moving the ball, and keep the offense balanced… they can keep winning. It’s a big “if”….
January 17th, 2008 at 2:03 pmLast night was a perfect example of the big men making the pass. It didn’t happen everytime, but it happened a lot. Zack Randolph was passing a lot and he and Curry even had some high low action working a few times. That action actually works better with Randolph and Curry because oppenents do not respect Lee once he get outside of the paint. And Lee is a terribe defender, as SML has said on many occasions.
January 17th, 2008 at 3:01 pmHere is the man most responsible for the Knicks winning streak - Dan Jurdy!!
Who?? Dan Jurdy!!!
http://www.seattleschools.org/schools/rainierbeach/faculty/danjurdy.html
Rainier Beach Athletics, baby!! That’s who!! Crawfish and NateRob!
January 17th, 2008 at 5:33 pmallen, offensive chemistry between Zach & Eddy may one day be possible. it is the defensive end that I can never see coming to fruition. Yes, Lee reminds no one of a young Ben wallace, but my eyes see a better defensive complement to either Randolph and Curry. Lee is more adept at roaming out to the perimeter on defense than either of them.
– Yes Temple, it’s the Seattle connection!
– SML, there definitely we nice passes on the inside. HOWEVER, I noticed that right after that happened an equally easy pass & bucket for the Nets happened against the Knicks. all together you are right that it is all about ball movement. We are dead without it. We must make the defenses work!
January 17th, 2008 at 5:58 pmIronically, Josh Boone would have been a really nice fit next to Curry in that he defends, rebounds and occasionally bocks some shots. Instead we have Balkman rooted to the bench.
January 18th, 2008 at 2:04 pmModi- While were talking defense..How would you describe Zach Randolph’s attitude towards it?Last night,I couldn’t help but notice his attitude towards Antwan J.(who to me..is more of the more complex players in the lague to guard),AJ went BONKERS on him. In the third qt. when Isiah removed him from the floor,Zach’s demeanor seemed carefree as he watched from the bench (Dont know if you noticed that!) I had to be brutally honest w/ myself last night, after watching AJ score on a jam,where Zach couldnt see the ball and the man simult… I dont know… something inside of me dies when I see D’ like that. And and even worst, no desire what so ever to make adjustments.
Is coach IT totally obilvious to his teams deficiencies on D. As far as Im concerned,we can put up points with anybody in the league…BARNONE. What it boils down to Defense!!!
We are an impressive LAST in BLOCKSHOTS pg in the NBA!! That’s now secret,but with glearing weaknesses as such…Shouldn’t team defense be on the LOCKER ROOM bulleten board in BIG BOLD letters…Read and Weap..with a big “HELP WANTED” sign right next to it…” SHOTBLOCKERS needed-no exp. req.!
Mod- Not since KATRINA, has there been a greater cry for HELP after the flood.
I dont care what we do, If NYK do not get someone in here who gives a shit about stopping HIS MAN and helping stop HIS man’s MAN, we
More importantly, Stoping teams primary threats shouldn’t fall squarely on one defeneders shoulder.
January 19th, 2008 at 4:26 pmI dont care what we do, If NYK do not get someone in here who gives a shit about stopping HIS MAN and helping stop HIS man’s MAN, we will be irrellavent FOREVER.
More importantly, Stoping teams primary threats shouldn’t fall squarely on one defeneders shoulder…But concentrated effort by all to at least DISRUPT opponents offensives tendencies…!DAMN.
January 19th, 2008 at 4:31 pmEhus,I was actually at that Wizards game. I think that you know how I feel about Zach. He is pretty much just as bad on defense as Curry. But you could hide at least ne of them, but not both.
If Isiah consistently played the right combos, this could be a .500 team… did you say “shotblocking?”
January 20th, 2008 at 2:48 am