Knicks Morning News (2015.09.08)

  • [New York Times] Sports Briefing | Basketball: Tony Parker Achieves European Milestone (Tue, 08 Sep 2015 04:04:19 GMT)

    Parker became the leading scorer in European championship history as he led France, the defending champion, to a 69-66 victory over Poland.

  • [New York Post] Porzingis ‘can’t wait’ to show off bulky body at Knicks camp (Tue, 08 Sep 2015 00:14:22 -0400)

    Kristaps Porzingis attended the night session of the U.S. Open Sunday and looked noticeably broader than he did during the Las Vegas summer league. The Post reported Monday the 7-foot-3…

  • Liked it? Take a second to support Mike Kurylo on Patreon!

    Mike Kurylo

    Mike Kurylo is the founder and editor of KnickerBlogger.net. His book on the 2012 Knicks, "We’ll Always Have Linsanity," is on sale now. Follow him on twitter (@KnickerBlogger).

    31 thoughts to “Knicks Morning News (2015.09.08)”

    1. Picking up on the conversation started over the weekend…

      Zinger is up 11 lbs is big news. Let’s look at this. He gained 11 lbs in about 7 weeks, about a pound and a half. And supposedly it’s all muscle. He’s midway through the off-season. Training camp is still a few weeks away. It’s not far-fetched that by the time camp opens, he’ll be up 20 lbs of upper body strength.

      With all the hooplah about his weight, I wasn’t worried. Gaining weight has never been tough for me :) so why should it be for him? What worries me is his stamina. We’re looking for him to play about 90+ games this year, right? When was the last time he played 50 games in a season? That’s the bigger challenge. I just hope he isn’t worn out by January.

    2. This is certainly the time for hopes, dreams, and Best Shape of My Career stories. But it’s hard not to get excited about Porzingis so far, based on everything he’s said and everyone else has said about him. There are obvious questions about strength, endurance, etc., but if the guy fails, it won’t be for lack of effort.

    3. He hasn’t even played in the league and he’s already coming to camp in the best shape of his life.

    4. “When was the last time he played 50 games in a season?”
      Six months ago. He played 34 league games and 16 Eurocup games this past season.

    5. Johnno,
      I accept the correction. I originally thought that the two were different seasons but then when I looked at the schedule they were intertwined.

    6. The headline for Marc Berman latest article about the Knicks in the NY Post: “Knicks going back to West Point because it worked so well the first time”.

      This is why the NY Post is a rag. BTW, I doubt Berman writes his own headlines.

    7. Did anyone else see the report that Tina Cervasio will no longer be doing the MSG Knicks broadcasts? I’m disappointed to hear that — I really like her. Can’t they figure out a way to dump those dopey Jill Martin interviews and keep Tina? By the way, Berman is a total hack, but that headline is pretty funny.

    8. Divisions no longer a factor to make the playoffs. Seeding will be based on best 8 in each conference. Alan Hahn tweeted that the only difference in teams in and out last year would have been Nets out, Thunder in.

    9. There was a pic of KP on twitter putting up some shots in the gym. You can definitely see a lot more definition in his arms. They still aren’t huge, but he is gradually turning the noodles into guns.

      Love the NBA changing the format of playoff seeding. Definitely a good thing for the West given the level of competition for playoff spots.

    10. Alan Hahn tweeted that the only difference in teams in and out last year would have been Nets out, Thunder in.

      I think Hahn meant that would be the only change if the NBA had taken a step beyond the current one and just picked the top 16 teams, regardless of conference. That still isn’t happening, meaning the Thunder still would have missed the playoffs under this new system.

    11. That we didn’t get to see Russ Westbrook chuck 80 shots in a playoff game should a criminal offense. He would have made at least 30 of them.

    12. Yeah, the only difference this would have happened last year is that the Spurs would not have had to play the Clippers in the first round. It would have been the Clippers versus the Trailblazers and the Spurs versus the Grizzlies. Everything else would have been the same. The issue, of course, is that that one change would have been very significant, as it could have kept the Clippers, Spurs and Warriors in play for round two of the playoffs.

      My only “problem” with this is while this is clearly the fairer way to do it, then why even have divisions if winning the division is meaningless? I am not even saying that I want divisions, but if you’re going to get rid of divisions having a benefit, then you might as well just get rid of them period.

    13. My interpretation is that winning the division still does mean an automatic playoff bid. In the unlikely event that there were 8 teams in a conference with a better record than a division winner, the division winner would still get in over the 8th non-division winner. It’s not much, but it’s something.

    14. My only “problem” with this is while this is clearly the fairer way to do it, then why even have divisions if winning the division is meaningless? I am not even saying that I want divisions, but if you’re going to get rid of divisions having a benefit, then you might as well just get rid of them period.

      My thoughts exactly. This reeks of knee jerk reaction. Z Man you are incorrect, there is no benefit to winning a division

    15. @13 Brian, I thought the same thing then did the schedule math. It would mean an 86 game season which I don’t think is bad but can’t just be done with a snap of a finger:
      In conference: 4 games x 14 teams = 56
      Out of conference: 2 games x 15 teams = 30

      @14 Z-man, Last year the division leaders would have all made the playoffs. It’s virtually impossible to miss he playoffs if you win a division. I looked at the results going back to 2003-4 when the structure changed and 100% of the division winners would have made the playoffs … easily.

    16. @16 you could still do some conference foes 3x and some 4x to keep it at 82. You are also correct that you most likely would still make the playoffs, but again what is the point of the divisions? They need to be eliminated.

    17. 86 games is a logical number and it works if they expand to 32 teams too. (4 divisions of 4 teams).
      In Division 3 x 6= 18
      In Conference 12 x 3 = 36
      OO Conference 16 x 2 = 32
      Total: 86.

      Unlike baseball which has to worry about weather, it’s easy to add games to an NBA schedule. The issue is (and always will be) the CBA.

    18. Z Man you are incorrect, there is no benefit to winning a division

      He is correct in saying that division winners automatically make the playoffs. It has never been the case that a division winner would not have made the playoffs had they not won the division, but it is still theoretically possible, so yes, there is a slight, slight advantage to winning your division still.

    19. @13 Brian, I thought the same thing then did the schedule math. It would mean an 86 game season which I don’t think is bad but can’t just be done with a snap of a finger:
      In conference: 4 games x 14 teams = 56
      Out of conference: 2 games x 15 teams = 30

      I would just knock off one game apiece from a randomly selected group of teams each year, so you’d play 3 games against four teams and 4 games against the other 10. Perhaps make sure that the teams you play 3 games against are never teams in your general region.

      Already people don’t care about divisions (except on the rare occasion when it makes a difference with the #4/5/6 seeds. So that change wouldn’t even really make much of a difference in how people view the NBA.

    20. @19 there is no advantage. There is just the math of it. If there are 4 teams behind you in the division there is a higher percentage that you are in the top 8. But say everyone in your division finishes under 500 you could miss the playoffs. You are just the best bad team in a meaningless grouping.

      There are 10 teams outside of your division. You could have the 9-11th best record in conference and still win your division

    21. Once LeBron & Assorted Scrubs are done making the Finals every year from a weak conference, I think you’ll see the conferences be dissolved. It just doesn’t make sense to do it anymore. There’s virtually no difference between travelling from NYC to LA or New Orleans to LA when you’re doing it in a charter jet.

    22. I agree that it is only a theoretical advantage, but that still counts. Portland was 6 losses away from being in that boat last year.

      If expansion has to happen, I kinda like the plan in @18. Cut back on pre-season and get it on in mid-October. But doubt that the union buys in.

    23. @22 Anyone notice how LeBron basically played like a family-sized Russell Westbrook in the playoffs? Nothing like a .487 TS% on a 38% usage!

      Is it possible that LeBron is in decline?

    24. Is it possible that LeBron is in decline?

      Absolutely. But a drop from 66 to 48 TS% over one season either means he stopped taking hGH or the sample size was too small to fairly assess his decline. I would blame his teammates.

      Crazy, arbitrary cherry-picked stat:

      ’13-’14 playoffs: 17 out of 20 games with a TS% above .600
      ’14-’15 playoffs: 1 out of 20 games with a TS% above .600

      I don’t know if games like this are behind him:

      http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201405120BRK.html

      And they only won by 6!

    25. The sad thing (happy for Knicks fans, I guess) is that LeBron will probably never be part of a great team again. I doubt he can leave Cleveland again, and while he may win a chip or two there, they will be ugly teams. His best chance of having a “big 3” was lost when he dissed and ditched Wiggins in favor of Love. Wiggins could have been his Scottie Pippen.

    26. @22 Anyone notice how LeBron basically played like a family-sized Russell Westbrook in the playoffs? Nothing like a .487 TS% on a 38% usage!

      Is it possible that LeBron is in decline?

      He’s definitely in decline, but he’s still excellent (and was playing without 2/3rd of his team’s “Big Three”). To put his performance into context, Melo has only had nine individual playoff games in his career where his game score exceeded Lebron’s average game score for the NBA Finals (I mean that as a compliment to Lebron, by the way, not as a shot at Melo. It was more to show how rare the game scores are that Lebron was dropping as averages in the Finals).

      But yes, Lebron’s offense was fugly during the Finals, no doubt about it.

    27. I guess that is just about what happens when the other guys you rely on are jr smith, shumpert and washed up/never had game guys…lebron still casually put up some big numbers in assists rebounding tho..

      Kinda interested to see who has a better season btwn Tyson/mozgov/rolo?

    28. Phoenix was a weird choice for Chandler. He’s so much older than the rest of the team. I did not like that fit for him at all. Well, I guess they did pay him a shit ton of money, so there’s that.

    29. “There’s virtually no difference between travelling from NYC to LA or New Orleans to LA when you’re doing it in a charter jet.”
      I used to do a lot of east-west travel on business (albeit not on a charter) and I disagree. In my experience, there is a huge difference between traveling 3,000 miles across 3 time zones (NYC to LA) and 1,600 miles across 2 time zones (NO to LA). I used to fly pretty regularly from NY to Dallas (1,400 miles) and it was no big deal, but NY to San Francisco used to wipe me out for a couple days. Maybe I’m wrong and flying on a charter makes a big difference, but I think that cross country travel is tough regardless of how you fly.

    Comments are closed.