he was cold the first 3 quarters and went off in the 4th dispite his shot not falling in. luck my ass. he still closed the game for them in the 4th.
So what if he made two shots at the end of the game? If it weren't for Tony Douglas going 10-12 those two shots would mean squat. Again if all you do is chuck shots some of those are bound to go in, it just so happened his shots went in at the end of the game. Still doesn't change the fact he got them into the hole in the first place with his 10-25 shooting.
who said melo was the reason for them winning? they needed buckets down the stretch. melo stepped up in the 4th. amare fouled out. melo closed the game / stay mad.
I'm not mad at all. I'm just saying he "closed" something he opened in the first place. Its like if a theif stole your wallet then gave it back to you. Sure its great he returned it, but if he didn't steal it he wouldn't have to return it in the first place.
Not a Melo fan here, but I think his presence on the floor makes things easier for other players on offense. I think he helps the Knicks more than he hurts the Knicks, and that's a completely reasonable statement. It appears like you're trying to state the opposite, or at least say Melo has a null effect overall on the Knicks, and that doesn't make sense.
He definitely helps them in spots, like last night after Amare fouled out, when it gets down to the 4th period in a mostly halfcourt scheme, and, without Gallo/Chandler/Felton around, there's not really anybody to create anything on offense (not taht those guys were awesome but they were helpful in spots) - on the negaative side he basically lulls the rest of the team into a Cleveland w/LeBron-esque "stand around and watch him do something" scheme - It's great when he makes a shot (which he def. can) but can stagnate.
That's fair to say. I think the Knicks accepted that possibility though, because overall, they think it'll help them win. Now I'm not ignoring the fact that the marketing side of things has a huge effect too, but the risk that superstar iso players bring to the table is outweighed by their potential gains in winning. Not sure if I can statistically support this, but I don't think it's a bad opinion.
