Quote:
Originally Posted by Da Grinch
walsh has his beliefs , but i dont think they are as black and whate as the media makes it appear.
he had smits on that team for a while and just buoyed him with tough guys(greg dreiling lasalle thompson) to make up for what he lacked until he became a very , very good player and even then he had antonio and dale davis .they had a good scorer with softness/defnsive issues and put defensive players and toughness around him to make up for what he lacked...he didn't get rid of smits he made smits better by hiding some of his flaws to some degree .
he wants a defensive team ...but who wouldn't especially after watching the knicks the last seasons.
i definitely agree with trading quantity for quality .
i believe you get talent and then you get the players you need to fit the system and personel you have....
I think Thomas' main failing as a GM was having the wrong guy as coach , a coach that allowed his players to freelance too much on offense , he allowed Zach to chuck basically and get out of the offense , ditto marbury early in the season...there was no accountability and he lost the team early by choosing to play marbury in that game after the players voted him out ...I understand Mardy got hurt early but it was just a mistake , a mistake combined with zach's chucking just torpedoed the season.
|
The thing is that I feel it would be much easier to build a good defensive team through a strong defensive focal point in the paint. No matter how good a perimeter defender you are, you are going to get beat as a result of screens, excellent ballhandling or not focusing. A defensive center fixes a lot of that because of their ability to help and disrupt the offensive rhythm. Like I said, there is many ways to win in this game but I feel as though there is one model that is emerging as the most effective way given the culture of the league now (Hornets).
Smits was a pretty soft center in Indiana but look what it took to help him win; a player capable of being the franchise leader in rebounds and block shots (Dale Davis) and an eventual all-star (Antonio Davis) who were both top tier defenders. This was in addition to the fact that the team boasted two all-star caliber players on the perimeter (Reggie Miller and Jalen Rose), one of which is recognized as a HOF and one of the greatest clutch players of all-time and a PG that dished out the 2nd most assist in league history, who was still in his prime (Mark Jackson). All this and no title. Even if we did decide to build our team in this fashion, how long would it take us to find players that can do that sort of thing? And even if we did find them, would it make us title contenders with the league becoming more uptempo? I think it might very well be easier to build an uptempo team that is founded on some of the same principles of a winner: playing solid defense, in and outside the paint, and scoring the ball consistently in the 15 ft area around the basket.
Think about it for a second; the proof is almost in the pudding. Who beat the Pacers in the 1999 playoffs? The New York Knicks who ran a more uptempo style of game that exploited that donut hole down low(and made irrelevant and/or inconsistent offensively at the very least). Almost all the young teams are following a similar blueprint 10 years later with a few moderations and for just cause. The league has been changing rules that favor more uptempo offenses and does not nearly reward low post play as much as in the past (evident from the lack of fouls called for Eddy Curry the past couple of years). We been missing out on several prominent, franchise changing players, the past couple of drafts that could benefit from these rule changes. I believe its time that we make a change about that.
About Zeke's biggest mistake, I think it all goes back to what you said earlier about having a first rounder ego. Is there much he could have done about the freelancing given these players resume and pedigree in the past?