# New York vs. Sacramento (1/4)



## Peja Vu (Jun 9, 2002)

<center> *vs.* 

*New York Knicks (16-14) vs. Sacramento Kings (19-9) 
Madison Square Garden, Tuesday January 4, 2005
7:30 ET, MSG/NBALP *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Probable Starters





































Nazr Mohammed/Kurt Thomas/Tim Thomas/Allan Houston/Stephon Marbury 





































Brad Miller/Chris Webber/Peja Stojakovic/Doug Christie/Mike Bibby 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Kings board game thread 
-NBA.com Preview *</center>


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

The Knicks usually beat the Kings when Webber is out, with a big game from Allan Houston.

Webber's not out.

I wish I could see the carnage, but D-day is 1 hour from now, and I doubt they'll have the Knicks in Pennsylvania. I'll keep an eye out for a Korver jersey though.


----------



## DwyaneWade4MVP (Apr 1, 2004)

My prediction: 

Kings 101
Knicks 89


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

> The Knicks usually beat the Kings when Webber is out, with a big game from Allan Houston.


what about tim thomas' 33 point game vs the kings last season? does that one count to you? and it seems like we ALWAYS beat the kings at MSG

the kings havent won a game at MSG in 9 years. I doubt today will be the second win for the kings



> Since they moved to Sacramento in 1985, the Kings have only one victory here in 18 games against the Knicks. The lone win came on January 13, 1996.


----------



## SacTown16 (Feb 2, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>PennyHardaway</b>!
> 
> 
> what about tim thomas' 33 point game vs the kings last season? does that one count to you? and it seems like we ALWAYS beat the kings at MSG
> ...


It figures Tim Thomas killed us last year, the Kings have a history of poor interior defense. Opposing 4's kill us


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

after one the kings were up 1. then lenny puts in BRUNO SUNDOV??????????? Penny hardaway? and were down 13. two crappy players that have done nothing good all year. penny came in and right when the ball touched his fingers he just had to shoot cause he wants to average 20 points per game, and sundov has terrible terrible interior d, retarded shots, and some turnovers.

and penny and sundov both just got posterized. who is this evans guy?


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

another thing i noticed. lennys is worse then Don Chaney.

tim thomas has a great first quarter....tim doesnt come back in until 5 minutes left in the second, after the kings went up 15. 

Marbury didnt come back in the game until 2 minutes left in the second. thats just retarded. 

Penny shouldnt play ever again, id rather have Shandon at this point, at least shandon doesnt force shots every time the balls in his hands thinking hes a 20 points per game scorer.

lenny has the worst lineups. and when the third starts our guys wont be motivated since lenny cant yell or his lungs will collapse. hes just gonna do that giggling thing, and the players are not gonna listen to this moron.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Penny, while we kept pace with them in the first quarter it's because they played down to our slow poke level. Wilkens put in Ariza and JYD in the 2nd for energy and that's when the Kings woke up, That's NOT predictable. And Steph played like crapola the first quarter, just lazy, chucking, not pushing tempo, no leader ship -- I'm glad he had his *** sat, and I think it's part of what woke him up for the second half.

To blame Wilkens for the lack of energy, enthusiasm, and leadership from Marbury is tired.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

lenny lacks energy and leadership, and thats what we see on the court. Larry browns teams are tough defensive squads, lennys are ***** no defense free spirits doing whatever they want


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Marbury lacks energy and leadership, and thats what we see on the court. Kidd's teams are tough defensive squads, Marbury's are ***** no defense free spirits doing whatever they want


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

how about Lennys raptors? Lennys Cavs? they all sucked on D and never played with any intensity


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I'm too disgusted with Lenny's end of game management to defend him other than to say he's coached 9 50+ win teams, he managed to motivate them. I'm really tired of Stephyll and Hyde out there. He stet a piss poor tone of leadership in the first half tonight. I'm tired of being led by a guy who can't play for Wilkens. Lenny's not Riley, but he is the coach, where not gonna get Phil midseason, Lenny is who we have, he's who Isiah gave to this team, and I expect the team to play for him. It doesn't take a genius coach to tell your team to play hard and crisp for 48 minutes. If we know it they know it, they don't need Phil to tell them.

Point is guys who play hard, with heart and passion every night, like Iverson, Wade, Bibby, Kidd, Nash, etc, don't need guru's to be told to play that way. Why does Marbury?


----------



## townknave (Jun 28, 2003)

Oak,

Did you see the third quarter? Marbury was our best player on the court this game. It's because of his energy and leadership that we didn't get blown out. We suck because we can't defend the 2,3, and 4 spots. Maurice Evans looked like LeBron out there, for F's sake.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*damn sure wasn't tim thomas*

who was "guarding" evans out there?


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Yes I saw the 3rd quarter. I said he set a poor tone in the first half. You talk like I'm talking about his talent or ability. I'm not, I know what he's capable of, my complaint is about what he gives.

I did not like the pace of the game in the 1st quarter. Marbury looked like Charlie Ward, jogging it up, a little perimeter pass, jack a three. It was lulling me to sleep and I could see the rest of the players looking the same. I felt fortunate that the Kings were playing down to our level, scoring blow their season average in spite of no D from us. We ended the quarter down 1 at 22-21.

Unfortunately I knew it wouldn't last and indeed it didin't. 2nd quarter they started to run and ooop and we didn't, and Steph still wasn't penetrating, and we got our azzez handed to us and ended up losing the quarter 34-22. Then Steph scored 17 in the 3rd and I don't know how many in the 4th, not many.

This kind of inconsistency doesn't cut it and he sets the tone for this team. He often starts without a sense of urgency, he's laconic coming onto or off the court, he's often stoic and disinterested, then he turns on the turbos and we have a spurt. That spurt may last a few quarters, or a few games, but it an on and off pattern that I think leaves teammates unsettled. 

I don't expect Marbury to give us 30/10 every night and I'm not sure it would be good if he did. but I do expect him to start games like he cares, to play both ends of the floor, to penetrate and dish, to set a tone of urgency, to do what it takes to make this team compete. He did do that in the quarter you mentioned. He did it a little in the 4th. He did squat of it in the first half where the game was lost.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*strange patterns*

good post oakley, we have been losing far too many games in the first half, then in the third do a superburst to catch up in the deficit, only to fall behind in the fourth due to lack of energy.


----------



## townknave (Jun 28, 2003)

Marbury didn't have a great first quarter, granted. But he's not going to play great every quarter. People get so disappointed with Marbury because they expect him to be a franchise player. He's not. No point guard really is, including Kidd and Nash. 

I didn't like the pace of the game in the first quarter either, but it's pretty clear we were playing that pace because that was Lenny's game plan- don't let them run. I do think our team comes out without intensity way too often, but I think blaming out point guard for this is a little unfair. It is the coach who must motivate his players, and Lenny is looking like just about the worst motivator in the league. 

It seems we agree on the symptoms, but not quite on the diagnosis. I still think our main problem is a soft coach and the fact that we're a horrendous defensive team. I've never seen another team that had this incredible ability to turn opposing scrubs into stars like we do. This wouldn't be so bad if we were a great offensive team, like many of our fans seem to think we are, but we're not. We're a mediocre offensive team. We may have the worst starting forwards in the NBA. We are just not that good and talented yet, though we're fairly deep. I think .500 is around where we're supposed to be right now (though I think we'd be .600 if we got a coach who has demonstrated an ability to get teams to play defense, like Fratello).


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>townknave</b>!
> Marbury didn't have a great first quarter, granted. But he's not going to play great every quarter. People get so disappointed with Marbury because they expect him to be a franchise player. He's not. No point guard really is, including Kidd and Nash.


I didn't bring up the comparison, but since you did, it's rare that you see these guys come out flat. Not so Marbrury.



> I didn't like the pace of the game in the first quarter either, but it's pretty clear we were playing that pace because that was Lenny's game plan- don't let them run.


Well Steph's feet didn't touch the paint in the first half. 3 pointers is exactly how you let a fast break team break. Furthermore, our plan surely didn't work because they ran over us in the second quarter. However, when our tempo and intensity increased in the 3rd we got back into it.



> I do think our team comes out without intensity way too often, but I think blaming out point guard for this is a little unfair. It is the coach who must motivate his players, and Lenny is looking like just about the worst motivator in the league.


Well I think it;'s a cop out to just dump it all on the coach, as if the players know less then fans, and have no pride worth working for.

Plus Lenny didn't have such problems motivating Mookie Blaylock and Dominique, or Mark Price and and Ehlo. Why these guys? Lenny's had multiple 50+ win seasons, so we KNOW he can motivate that high, do we know Steph can?

I'll also note that Larry Brown is one of the great coaches of the game and I saw him get the same inconsistency and "wake up calls" from Steph all summer.



> It seems we agree on the symptoms, but not quite on the diagnosis. I still think our main problem is a soft coach and the fact that we're a horrendous defensive team. I've never seen another team that had this incredible ability to turn opposing scrubs into stars like we do. This wouldn't be so bad if we were a great offensive team, like many of our fans seem to think we are, but we're not. We're a mediocre offensive team. We may have the worst starting forwards in the NBA. We are just not that good and talented yet, though we're fairly deep. I think .500 is around where we're supposed to be right now (though I think we'd be .600 if we got a coach who has demonstrated an ability to get teams to play defense, like Fratello).


I admit Wilkens late game failures have cost us the opportunity to win a couple of games, but we still don't know we'd have won them. But Wilkens is an able coach. People talk like we can just replace him with our uncle and the team will do better. And like it's okay for Steph to need someone to do it for him. Bibby came 'up' for the game, is Adelman a great motivator? JYD and Ariza, (energy players to begin with), came to play, why is Lenny is good enough for them but not Stephon. Can we admit that Marbury is not an energy player at least? That one of the reasons we need a motivator is because HE, Marbury, needs a motivator?

Look I have no love for Wilkens, I just don't like seeing him used as a crutch and a scapegoat. When a better coach can be had we should go for it. In the meanwhile I expect these guys to put out for him, most of all our 'leader', Stephon.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

but oak, when the kings went on their run in the second, marbury wasnt in the game. in fact, he didnt get put in until late in the quarter! him and Tim thomas, who played well in the first, didnt get back in until we were down 13-16 points. when steph came back in he cut the lead down to 11 from 16 to end the half. and it was him, he had no support. the time with marbury on the bench is when we fall apart. remember that ariza, penny, moochie, JYD, sundov lineup? wtf was that? whos gonna score with that lineup? Moochie gets trapped under ostertag to end the possesion. Penny does his micheal Jordan impersonation, except he sucks. the players have no clue what to do when steph is on the bench. that has to show that marbury is the leader, since they suck horribly without him. in fact, our team is -17 with steph on the bench.

was that marburys fault too? lennys rotation is the work of a crazy old man who wanted to go to sleep early to watch the price is right.

Rashidi throws a million and one stats at us, but he didnt show the Roland ratings. basically, its the value of a player to his team. Marbury is ranked 4th, under Bryant, Dirk, and Kirilenko. 

Antoine walker is dead last at 215. But whos nearby? at 209, Jamal Crawford, showing that he is not helping us really.

http://www.82games.com/rolandratings0405.htm

im not a big fan of marbury, but to me hes giving it his best out there. the last week or two hes been driving a whole lot more and its showed in the W-L column. you cant say the same about the rest of the team.

and Lenny might have had a few 50 win teams, but hes been coaching FOREVER. Even Don Chaney won coach of the year once. Lenny is known league wided as to being one of the worst, hes outdated. 

If we had a coach who was like herm edwards, our team would be giving 120 percent from the opening tip til the end no matter what the circumstances are. But lenny is laid back, and even in devastating blowouts he still manages to giggle in his postgame interview. Van gundy would be pissed at his team even if they just won the nba finals. he would have a laundry list of complaints. he isnt satisfied as easily as Lenny, and hes easily 20x the coach. we need a guy who can motivate, not lenny. when i thought we got fratello i was really happy, but then when i found out the NY post screwed up and it was lenny i knew we had a problem. Just ask raptor fans.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

I think everyone i right on this one....

Lenny is not a great X and O coach..Oak,for every game Lenny has won,he has lost..Lennys claim to fame should be games coached and longevity..

Penny,I dont know if Stef can concievably play all out for 40 minutes.Perhaps he is conserving some energy as he knows that in the 3rd and 4th quarter,its all him.

JC may not be rated highly,but he makes the Knicks a bit tougher to play.His D is better than H20's and he takes some of the pressure off Stef.Every team needs two stars,and TT's ego is not star quality..

I am not saying JC is a star,but he has the mindset and talent.And when hes on,the Knicks are a very tough team to beat...


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Lots of problems...*

Primarily a mismatched coach/team. Lenny did well IN HIS TIME. Players are different now and he is not. This team is not a good defensive team and the reason is that we do not have defensive minded players. They have to be reminded to play it. And does anyone think we really should be making NAZR a primary option? Regardless of his numbers, the team struggles when he gets a lot of touches. He is a black hole. The team needs to play as a team both on O and D and when they don't, it's ugly. I would make 3 changes if I could. Bring in Artest and Camby. The rise in intensity and defense would be a Godsend. Next, bring in a dynamic, demanding coach. 

I think Artest with Ariza, JC, and Marbury would be a killer combo. Camby would give us a real defensive presence and just about duplicate Nazr's offensive production.

That team would be a killer defensive team with no drop off in offense.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*nazr = black hole*

alphadog that is a good point concerning nazr. it seems whenever he gets the ball, the shot is going up similiar to a post oriented slava medvedenko in that manner. he has no interior passing skills whatever, i've never seen him kick out to an open shooter, or even make a bounce pass across the court. definitely lacking some fundamentals here.

and also, whenever he gets like a 20/10 game, or is just me or does it seem like those numbers he is putting up have no impact on the game at all? maybe i am the only one.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Penny, there are a few things. 

You know I'm not a Wilkens lover or Marbury hater, I just think the knee jerk reaction to blame Lenny after every bad outing misses the point.

About Marbury on the bench when we were losing. Yes, and I wasn't surprised he was benched, he really wasn't bringing anything to the table. None of the starters were so it was logical that Wilkens would bring in his energy squad. I assure you if the starters were the ones who cot blown out in the second, as I'm sure they would have, we'd have fans asking why he doesn't play more JYD and Ariza. It's a no win situation for him. The reason we got whooped in the 2nd was because we started the game like crap. We scored 21 on a bad defensive squad and it was by the grace of god they only scored 22. In the second half they simply turned it up and we didn't, which means we didn't begin to play until the second half. Just inexcusable.

And I know how dependent on Marbury we are, which is why I demand a lot from him. The problem is last night he was reverting to old form. You know the dish first mentality. Now I don't have a problem with him dishing first, the problem is when he goes in that mode he does so with no energy and conviction. If he played that way with the same passion and determination he does to score he _might_ be as good as Kidd. But he doesn't. In the first half last nigh a "penetration" was if he crossed the 3 point line. A pass was if he passes from himself at the 10 oclock position on the arc to KT at the 2 oclock position. And I'm not joking, the whole first half I'd be surprised if he had one pass longer than 6 feet or if he got paint on his shoes once. That is not setting up your teammates to win. Damn right Moochie's gonna get burn in that case.

Seriously, he just has two totally different body languages, intensities, mentalities, and the first half last night we got the one that loses.

My fear with marbury is that a tough coach like Larry Brown got the same Stephyll and Hyde from Marbury, so it's not the coach. Or if it is, and Brown isn't good enough, then what? Fine, we'll get Steph Phil Jackson. But we also know this team needs to run, but Steph couldn't with Wade, Marion, Jefferson, Amare, Boozer. Fine we'll try to get him Lebron. Oh, I forgot, Bron was there too. Or maybe Shaq. Then with the best coach in the world, and the best runners, or the best bigman, then we can expect Marbury to "lead" the team? If the Olympics showed us anything it was even with all that when Marbury played like a slacker we lost, when he brought his A game we won. And that's with an all-star cast.

So Phil, Lebron and Shaq isn't going to happen, and if it does and Steph plays in loser mode we'd still lose. However, even with Wilkens and KT and cast, when Marbury plays in winner mode we can win. Not the championship, but plenty of close games we've lost this year. 

So which should we expect, Isiah to amass the greatest coached and best assembled team before we play hard, or Steph to bring it every night? 

Which approach has worked for Nash and Kidd led teams? Kidd hated Byron but won with him, and you think they won 13 straight last year cause Opie, I mean Frank, is such a great coach? Are the Suns really cooking because Mike D'Antoni, with his .315 winning record with other clubs, is such a great X and O man, or such a great motivator, or defensive stickler?

Fine fire Wilkens. I'll shed not a tear. But until Marbury figures out how to bring the energy be prepared for more cursing and figuring out how to get Shaq and Lebron.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Oak...*

maybe Marbury isn't Kidd on the break but how do we know how good or bad he really is? He was young with a so-so Minny team...on a Net squad loaded with injuries and not really looking to get up and down (lots of conflict on that team)...on the Suns with a Rookie Amare for only a few weeks and Marion (no real boarder control or defense to run)...and then last years Knicks and this years Knicks. No rebounds or stops means no running. Kidd couldn't run this team. I want to see a healthy, athletic team around him that plays defense and boards before I will say he isn't good at it. Nash was no where near this good breaking with Dallas but now he has the guys around him and a coach committed to it. I think you are being overly harsh. I agree with the "dish first" version, however. He needs to be aggressive....that is just what he is...a scoring PG.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Alpha, I am being overly harsh, in contrast to those who are overly forgiving, and who just will do anything to take the blame off Steph.

And please tell why he couldn't run with Iverson, Wade, Lebron, Jefferson, Marion, Amare, Boozer and Duncan? (Some of which he's played with before mind you)

When you say he needs more athletic players, tell me who is MORE ATHLETIC than them?

And I'd bet my last pair of underwear Kidd and Nash could do a lot more running with JC, TT, Ariza, JYD, and Nazr than Marbury. I'd even throw in my last sock with that.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Hmm...*

Well.....Iverson loves to run and he couldn't get these guys to run when he played the point, either. What I am saying is that I know SM is not a prototypical run and gun PG but I think he is more than adequate at it. The problem as I see it is that he needs to get the ball in his hands early and we are not a great rebounding team and we don't get a ton of stops or turnovers. When Nazr gets a board (or anyone else, for that matter) it doesn't get to Stephon quickly enough to get numbers. Watch the games...no one is getting out ahead of Marbury unless they get a steal or a long 'bound. Look at the style of defense..lazy. No intensity...no breaks. If you want a running team, hire a running coach. That is what the Suns did. With the Celts and Lakers, it was an organizational philosophy. You simply will not see teams that play uninspired defense run well...only sporadically. Nothing personal against Lenny...I just think the game has passed him by. Get intense guys that are not allergic to defense and hard work(Artest, Ariza, Camby, Marbury, and hopefully JC and Sweets)..match them with an intense up-tempo coach and roll the ball out.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

See, right or wrong, I feel better about tonight"s loss to Miami than last nights, because at least we played hard all game.

My bottom line on the conversation is we still have a lot of flaws, but one of them is leadership, and I'd just like to see Marbury exercise his NOW rather than us waiting and hoping we can find it in our next coach. I did NOT feel Marbury exhibited adequate leadership yesterday, while I do today. It's about effort.

But alpha, I understand the theory you are working off of here:



> You simply will not see teams that play uninspired defense run well...only sporadically.


but history defies it so often it's not funny. Think Phoenix now, Dallas with Nash, Sacramento. These are some of the more consistent running teams in the league and they are known poor defenders.


----------

