What's Clyde Wearing Tonight:
That picture doesn't do it proper justice. Sorry for the poor quality (digital photo of the TV is the best I could do), but until someone starts a website, I'm going to make it my duty to document my homey Clyde's ill style. Seriously... how many people in the world can pull this off? Clyde, you the man!And he used the phrase "canine defense and feline offense" to describe Balkman's performance in the last game.
The Magic come in with three wins already on the road. They have been pretty impressive so far. So rather than recap the game, or give the play by play, we're going to try some different analysis. Specifically: The Knicks were able to hang with the Magic for most of the game... what happened that allowed the Magic to pull away during one crucial stretch (the end of the third/beginning of the fourth)?
General Observations:
1) Crawford and Marbury combined for 12 assists, which is not bad. But they also had 11 turnovers. The Knicks, as a whole, had a season-high in turnovers (20). At the half they had around 4 turnovers, so they had a very sloppy second half which doomed them. Early in the game the Knicks were winning the turnover battle, causing the Magic (also generally a sloppy team) to give up the ball. But later on the Knicks were unable to hold on to the ball, and the Magic like to fast break and score quickly of turnovers (the open threes in transition really hurt the Knicks).
2) Dwight Howard fronted Eddy Curry for most of the game on defense. Very few players in the league (maybe Amare Stoudemire and Yao) can get away with this. Because of his 12'6 reach, it's damn near impossible to toss a pass behind Howard for an alley-oop or anything (as the Knicks normally do when Curry being fronted); in fact, after avoiding it for most of the game, Richardson tried to toss one behind Howard into Curry late in the third; Howard skied up for it and stole it with ease.
The result is a productive, but underutilized, Eddy Curry: 7-9 for 19 points. Had he been able to get position on Howard more, maybe he could have gotten him into foul trouble. Instead, Curry was neutralized effectively as a threat for most of the game.
3) The Knicks guards actually should have more assists. In fact, the first half was one of the best team passing halves you'll see this season from any team! Almost every Knicks was swinging the ball around until it found the open man... the Magic's porous defense is a cause for that, too. But you will not see too many example of more unselfish play. Curry, Randolph, Marbury, Richardson - all had nice feeds/passes.
4) Those open looks didn't not result in as many points as they should have, though. The Knicks lead 49-48 at the half. The should have had at least 60 points.
Here are some missed shots that were totally wide open:
-Q missed a wide open three in the first off a nice feed from Marbury.
-Crawford twice missed wide open threes in the first period.
-Marbury missed a wide open three in the second.
-Z missed a wide open 12-footer off a nice Nate Robinson drive and pass.
-Z again misses a wide open jumper (about 15 feet?) off a Marbury pass.
-Right before halftime Crawford missed a wide open three again.
That's 15 points that the Knicks could have used. As all were wide open (no hands in their face, or even a defender near by), you have to think that a team should hit at least 3 of those missed threes, and one of the Randolph jumpers. 11 points might have given the Knicks some breathing room.
5) Jameer Nelson ate up Marbury in the first quarter. He had 10 points and 4 assists, and all that (with the exception of a deuce on Nate late in the quarter) were all off Marbury's defense. In fact, with the Knicks up 17-10 it was Nelson who ignited the Magic comeback. The quarter ended in a 28-28 tie. The Knicks backcourt has got to improve their man to man defense.
6) The Knicks are normally a great rebounding team, but the Magic neutralized that advantage. In fact, Dwight Howard outrebounded the Knicks by himself in the first quarter, 10-8. That's sick. The offensive rebounds especially were helping Orlando stay in the game.
7) Those turnovers. Let's go through some of the notes I have on the Knicks turnovers:
#3: Randolph traveled.
#4: Nate Robinson called for a carry or discontinue.
#5: Marbury gets sloppy, stripped by Nelson on inbounds (he got it back immediately, though).
Some 2nd half turnovers:
#6: Crawford called for a travel.
#7: Crawford traveled again (or was it a palming)?
#8: Marbury, bad pass stolen.
#9: 3 second violation (a result of over passing, which is not a terrible thing).
#10: Richardson's pass to Curry stolen by the fronting Howard (acting nonchalant in front of an audience... I was just frontin').
#11: Crawford again travels (carry).
Ridiculous turnovers - the carries and discontinues will probably go away as the refs stop paying so much attention to it, but the Knicks have to be careful about those calls right now.
Then comes the crucial sequence. The game is tied 71-71, under 2:00 to go in the third quarter:
-Crawford misses a jumper in the
paint.
-Rashard Lewis hits a three with a hand in his face.
74-71.
-Robinson nice drive, leaves his man behind, but just misses the finish as Foyle forces him to change the arc of his shot.
-Lewis another three, and gets fouled by the late
arriving Balkman: 77-71 (hits all three FTs).
-Nate hits two FTs. 77-73.
-Balkman good defense on Lewis leads to a Nate
Robinson steal . On the fast break Nate
charges into Dooling.
End the third quarter 77-73 Magic.
-Good defense by the Knicks
results in a bad Magic shot, Lee rebound.
-Crawford with a great alley-oop pass to Curry,
plus the foul. He hits. 77-76.
-Balkman great steal (again with the defense),
but his pass to Lee in fast break isn't handled. The Knicks slow it down,
and Crawford travels (carry).
-Crawford on the other end loses his man (Dooling),
who gets a great back door pass and hits the layup while
getting fouled by Balkman. 80-76. Crawford checks out.
-Curry misses a shot in the paint while being
defended by Foyle.
-Missed three by Garrity (wide open, no defense by
Curry) results in Curry rebound.
-Nate nice drive, again can't finish the
layup because of Foyle's defense.
-In transition Nelson pushes it up, then
throws it back to the wide open Turkoglu for three.
83-76.
-Marbury shoots a deep, contest three.
Why?!?
-Balkman alters Turkoglu's drive, grabs the rebound.
-Nate Robinson again with a great drive, and
has to alter his layup because of Foyle.
Is it Foyle's defense, or Nate's hesitation to draw contact, due to his bad
hammy. He immediately checks out the game and gets on a bike
machine. His hammy is bothering him, I guess.
-Howard misses a jump hook. Good defense by the
Knicks.
-Balkman misses a three (!), grabs the rebound, drives, gets hacked. Misses both free throws. 83-76.
-Howard again misses a jump hook deep in the paint. Credit Zach for his tough defense in this case.
-Marbury drives, but misses the layup (guess who?), but
Things get ugly quickly:
-Turkoglu misses a drive, Howard misses the putback, but Foyle gets the tip in. 85-79
-
-Curry somehow ends up on Turkoglu after a pick.
-
-Turkoglu with a nice pass that results in
a vicious back door dunk by Howard. The crowd is silenced. 90-81.
-Marbury tosses away a pass, stolen by Nelson - resulting in two easy fast break points.
92-81. 5:42.
-Curry gets stripped by
Foyle.
-And Nelson to a wide open Lewis, who gets
fouled by the late arriving
-If it doesn't make sense, here's the breakdown: Red = bad Knicks. Green = good Knicks. Blue = good plays by Magic.
-The Knicks got some defensive stops, but could not covert on the offensive side. Credit Foyle. The man was the difference in a lot of layups going down. He also got the steal that lead to the fast break three that sealed the game. Three blown layups!?
-Turnovers also hurt the Knicks in that sequence, but not as much as their lack of transition defense. They left the perimeter guys wide open several times while getting back on defense. That's because the guards could not slow down Nelson or Dooling as they pushed the ball.
-Jared Jeffries might have made a difference in this game. His ability to guard a Lewis or Turkoglu - or at least wave his 6'11 arms in in their face as they shoot threes, altering their arc - is useful. He's better at Balkman at getting a hand in a perimeter shooters' grill, and he doesn't foul as much. I'm not a huge Jeffries fan, but I do recognize what he brings to the table.
Final observations:
The Magic played incredibly well. I have completely underestimated how good their offense is. They had four 20 point scorers, but the defense in the end was the defensive energy provided by their bench guy Foyle. Sounds a lot like they used the Knicks recipe for beating the Nuggets on Tuesday to beat the Knicks on Friday!
Embedding enabled, so I have to link to it: 360 (What Goes Around) - Grand Puba.
My feeling: The Magic will be a top-3 team in the East if they keep playing like this. They have that southeast division locked up (the Wizards sucked like we predicted). But I think the Knicks might be able to hang with them next time. The Heat are up tonight.
*************
Quick response to some great comments:
First off, mad props to Greek Prof for this line (in response to the "Can It Be All So Simple" graph):
"a .05% sliver of the pie chart should reserved for babes who came feet first.
In response to Ricky's comment on the Curry/Randolph, and his impressions that "form the most unathletic frontcourt in the league":
I can't argue much about Curry's unathleticness, but I have been surprised by Randolph so far this season (and preseason, too). Most writers lazily made Randolph out to be Curry version 2.0; that's why you can't listen to the lazy, cliche-spewing writers.
Randolph and Curry are two totally different players; Randolph can rebound, and rebound well (like top-15 well). That he grabbed double-figures in boards against Howard and the Magic (even David Lee couldn't work his magic against Orlando) illustrates that he's a good boarder. He's better at defense, particularly he has quick hands which lead to far more steals than Curry will ever get on defense. Randolph can pass the ball better, and in fact had some pretty looks and feeds to Curry in this game.
And Randolph has more of an assortment of moves - he can drive, jump hook, or face up and shoot a 15 footer. Curry has to get the post down low. He's a monster when he does - no one in this league is more efficient with the ball in the paint. No one. That's when you understand why he gets compared to Shaq. That's also when you realize how nice Shaq really was; the difference is that Shaq's game wasn't just that one aspect, that power game. He could do much more. Curry can't, and when you see how easily he got taken out of the game by Howard's fronting, you realize one thing: Thank goodness there aren't too many players in the league like Howard, or Curry might be useless.
But Howard is pretty much one of a kind (or a small breed). So Curry will bounce back soon.
Bottom line: Curry has limited moves; Randolph is a totally different player than I envisioned - he's more of the PF the Knicks needed.
************
Last item: I caught the little flareup between The Last Poet and Rickhouse in the comments. Let me weigh in:
Rickhouse: I respect your writing tremendously; you have a scout's eye for this. There are people who feel the same way The LP does on this topic, however. I'm one of them. I don't think this makes you a racist or anything - to me it's more about spouting cliches and not owning your words.
Hinrich isn't unathletic or less talented than most others. That bothered me more than anything else about your comments. He plays more basketball in a month than you or I do in a year; Kirk plays more basketball in a year than you or I do in our entire lives. Believe me, he's athletic. Get your the most athletic person you know on the court with Hinrich; guarantee you Hinrich will be faster, quicker, maybe even stronger. And while me, you and your boys will be tired, Hinrich will still be running up and down the court like he has fresh legs. He's a professional athlete, and to be that good at something requires talent.
And if he's so "hardworking", what's up with his career 41% FG%? Maybe he should work harder at improving his jumper? Maybe work harder at shooting more 12-18 footers, and not so many threes?
Keep in mind that he's been coached since 3rd grade by his father, a basketball coach. He was named Mr. Iowa. This is a gifted player we are talking about.
Listen, Hinrich plays good defense, no doubt. What he brings to the table is a different skill set than Ben Gordon. When both got into the NBA, neither was a PG. In fact, Chris Duhon ended up the starting PG for a season because neither Gordon nor Hinrich have "true" point guard skills. They both have pluses and minuses. Hinrich's defense is a plus; Gordon's mid-range game and instant offense is a plus.
Anyway, my point isn't to get too much into those two players. I just think it's a bit of a cliche to write that Hinrich is a "prototypical white scrappy overachiever". What is he overachieving at? He shouldn't be in the NBA? Why not? He's been coached by his dad since he was 8 years old! He's got as much talent as the next dude that's been playing basketball his entire life.
Maybe I'm holding you to a higher standard, Rickhouse. But it's because most of us blog for fun, for a hobby to spend down time at work. You actually have the potential for more from this, though. You are young, and far ahead of the curve. You have a bright future, and I would like you to try to keep an open mind on things you read and write about - don't just read the cliches of lazy writers and accept them as fact. Look beyond that stuff, and you'll be better for it....
Leave a comment
|
6 Comments
Comments
StarburyFan: I'm gonna be keeping tabs on this as the season goes along, so maybe we'll have some data to go test your theory with by the end of the year!
thanks for clarifying but you didn't show that Zach & Cuyurry DON'T for the most unathletic frontcourt in the league
you said that they can coexist, which is something I can agree on, but my point was another, I was talking only about athletics skills
Not coming at you, just talking, of course
I also was impressed by 4), I hope for you that Marbury watches he tape and is ashamed of himself for that poor defense, Nelson had a career night or something close
curious to know if you like Q Rich, you didn't write a line about him. I find him useless
(I know self-promotion is lame but since you have a good sense of humour go read the last post on my blog about Hawks GM's web page, I think you will find many things to laugh at...unebelievable)
bad spell again, I forgot to re read id before posting, sorry
- Curry (not Cuyurry, LOL)
- athletic skills
Ricky: Gotcha. I was trying to explain that Curry is unathletic, but not Randolph. He's got moves, he can rebound, he has good hands on defense.
Now, Curry is not nearly as skilled as Randolph at those things. He does have quick feet, and can get up and dunk on alley-oops, and post, and make strong moves in the paint. To me, a guy like Mark Blount is the definition of unathletic. But then again, he's not starting.
In terms of starters, I'll think about it, but yeah - the Knicks might be the slowest, proddiest frontcourt in the league. They are weak on blocking shots.
But they are also the biggest and strongest, too. They are both agile, and can dunk and get up and grab alley-oops. So pick your definition of "athletic".
My thoughts on Q-Rich: He serves a purpose. He plays decent man to man defense. He's not necessary - Jeffries can do that, Balkman can do that. He has offensive skills - he can hit the three, and post up on smaller players, but he isn't expected to do that. Basically he's a player who is being used in a smaller role than what he's used to do in the past. I'm okay with that because he's not needed to have a bigger role. I would like him better if he really excelled at his role. Right now he's decent man to man, but not consistently great or game turning (like Balkman or Jeffries can be). He needs to hit the threes more consistently, too.
He's a decent role player, but not excelling in that role.
i noticed the jacket too man, that was something else. perhaps there is a correlation in what clyde wears, and if the knicks win or not? conservative = more wins? outlandish 70's attire = more defeats?
just a theory, nothing to back it up with.