"They're not Carmelo," Ewing said, laughing. "They're not Carmelo."

[ShaqAttack3234]

That was a great year for Ewing. He got league wide recognition as well. In the Sporting News Player of the year voting:

^LA Times, May 1990. Pretty amazing to get a decent amount of votes with Jordan, Magic and Barkley playing at their best.

This is another nice piece on him early in the season when the Knicks were doing well. It focuses on his improvements that year as well as the impact he's making.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...t+center&hl=en

Mychal Thompson mentions he's arguably the best in the league, neck and neck with Magic. Jordan gives him some props as well.

Yeah, I saw that Mychael Thompson quote in this Sports Illustrated article.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...3089/index.htm

He was considered right there in the MVP race through most of the season until the Knicks record fell off in March when Oakley went down, and their rotation was changing with the midseason trade and some players coming back. They also had to transition Cheeks into the starting point guard role due to Mark Jackson playing so poorly that I've seen several 1990 games where he was getting booed at home.

The article talking about his improvements is good. I thought his passing seemed better that year, and I think he handled double teams better than during the mid 90's because he was quicker and more decisive with his moves. it made him seem less predictable than the version of Ewing I watched growing up. He could shoot jumpers, but didn't seem to drift as far out on the perimeter or fall in love with the 18-20 footers like he could later in his career. That and the added athleticism as well as Jackson emphasizing him getting more touches makes that version of Ewing vastly superior to any other.

Here's a quote from Magic as well.

''If he doesn't win it, he'll be right there,'' said Magic Johnson, who has won the award twice. ''And if he continues putting up the numbers he's putting up, it's going to be hard for any of us to beat him out.

''He has taken his game to another level,'' Johnson continued, ''a level I've never seen him play at before. He's dominating offensively and defensively, but he's also making the right plays at the right time. He's leading his team, as opposed to before, when it seemed he'd just as soon let somebody else lead. That's the real mark of an m.v.p.''

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/11/sp...attention.html

Here's one from the NY Times in January of that year.

As a result of all of this, Ewing, at least to this point, is the leading candidate for league's most valuable player award.

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/01/09/sp...rill-show.html

[NugzHeat3]

Yeah, I saw that Mychael Thompson quote in this Sports Illustrated article.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...3089/index.htm

He was considered right there in the MVP race through most of the season until the Knicks record fell off in March when Oakley went down, and their rotation was changing with the midseason trade and some players coming back. They also had to transition Cheeks into the starting point guard role due to Mark Jackson playing so poorly that I've seen several 1990 games where he was getting booed at home.

The article talking about his improvements is good. I thought his passing seemed better that year, and I think he handled double teams better than during the mid 90's because he was quicker and more decisive with his moves. it made him seem less predictable than the version of Ewing I watched growing up. He could shoot jumpers, but didn't seem to drift as far out on the perimeter or fall in love with the 18-20 footers like he could later in his career. That and the added athleticism as well as Jackson emphasizing him getting more touches makes that version of Ewing vastly superior to any other.

Here's a quote from Magic as well.



http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/11/sp...attention.html

Here's one from the NY Times in January of that year.



http://www.nytimes.com/1990/01/09/sp...rill-show.html

That SI article you linked was a great read. Bird questioned his rebounding but I wouldn't be terribly concerned with it since he's playing next to Oakley and getting around 4 blocks which will naturally leave him out of position. He really came a long way that season and you see it in the stats too, its a sudden improvement by a great amount.

The bolded is a great breakdown of his game. I do wonder one thing though. They seem like an average defensive team that year despite the personnel being there. Ewing is probably at his best defensively, Oakley and Wilkins are two good-great defenders and Mo Cheeks, you mentioned, was a good defender as well though past his prime at that point.

Jackson getting boo'd is funny though. I think it was in that 51 pt game you posted against Boston.

[knickswin]

I wouldn't rest my championship dreams on Melo so I'm a little biased against that. I'd take my chances with Ewing as the #1 with Melo filling in at #2.

Eh, like ShaqAttack and NugzHeat have been talking about, it depends on which Ewing you're talking about. There's a big difference between 1990 Ewing and just about every other version of Ewing, particularly the late 90s versions. 1990 Ewing would probably be the first option and there'd be a Shaq/Kobe dynamic. Ewing was so dominant inside that year, and even though he had that jumper, he didn't settle for it too much.

After that though, I think Carmelo would be the first option. The Ewing I remember was always settling for those elbow and baseline jumpers. As a scorer, Carmelo's better than that. I mean, that's kind of similar to Amar'e's game and he's definitely the second option to Carmelo.

[ShaqAttack3234]

That SI article you linked was a great read. Bird questioned his rebounding but I wouldn't be terribly concerned with it since he's playing next to Oakley and getting around 4 blocks which will naturally leave him out of position. He really came a long way that season and you see it in the stats too, its a sudden improvement by a great amount.

Ewing's rebounding was respectable that season for a star center, not as good as some, but not a weakness. Playing with Oakley probably did lower his rebounding numbers.

Here are Ewing's numbers in 21 games without Oakley that season.

29.8 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 2 apg, 3.3 bpg, 1.1 spg, 3.2 TO, 56.1 FG%

Rebounding went up noticeably, shot blocking fell off a bit and interestingly, his scoring and efficiency went up.

He actually had two 40/20 games that season and flirted with 40/20 three other times. A very rare feat, look up how few times this has been done going back as far as basketball-reference's gamelogs go.

44/24/4/3, 17/27 FG, 10/15 FT vs Golden State
44/22/4/7/2, 18/28 FG, 8/12 FT vs Clippers
37/21/3/6, 15/26 FG, 7/9 FT vs Denver
37/19/2/9, 17/24 FG, 3/4 FT vs Philly
51/18, 20/29 FG, 11/13 FT vs Boston

Another interesting fact is that he had eleven 40+ point games during the regular season and shot over 60% in all of them. As well as during his 44 point game vs Boston in the playoffs when he shot 18/24. Just missed the 60% mark in his 45 point game vs Detroit in the second round when he shot 14/24(58.3%)

The bolded is a great breakdown of his game. I do wonder one thing though. They seem like an average defensive team that year despite the personnel being there. Ewing is probably at his best defensively, Oakley and Wilkins are two good-great defenders and Mo Cheeks, you mentioned, was a good defender as well though past his prime at that point.

Cheeks was still good, but older and didn't play that much with the Knicks during the regular season. Mark Jackson was the starting point guard for most of the season and he couldn't guard a chair. Oakley was good, but missed 21 games. Would be interested to see their defensive rating with and without Oakley. they did have the personnel to be better and it's puzzling considering how good Ewing was defensively. here's a good game highlighting his defense.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3B5F37EC462D7E92

Jackson getting boo'd is funny though. I think it was in that 51 pt game you posted against Boston.

yeah, he got booed in that game as well as a March 13th game vs Chicago that Da realist posted off the top of my head.

[NugzHeat3]

Ewing's rebounding was respectable that season for a star center, not as good as some, but not a weakness. Playing with Oakley probably did lower his rebounding numbers.

Here are Ewing's numbers in 21 games without Oakley that season.

29.8 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 2 apg, 3.3 bpg, 1.1 spg, 3.2 TO, 56.1 FG%

Rebounding went up noticeably, shot blocking fell off a bit and interestingly, his scoring and efficiency went up.

He actually had two 40/20 games that season and flirted with 40/20 three other times. A very rare feat, look up how few times this has been done going back as far as basketball-reference's gamelogs go.

44/24/4/3, 17/27 FG, 10/15 FT vs Golden State
44/22/4/7/2, 18/28 FG, 8/12 FT vs Clippers
37/21/3/6, 15/26 FG, 7/9 FT vs Denver
37/19/2/9, 17/24 FG, 3/4 FT vs Philly
51/18, 20/29 FG, 11/13 FT vs Boston

Another interesting fact is that he had eleven 40+ point games during the regular season and shot over 60% in all of them. As well as during his 44 point game vs Boston in the playoffs when he shot 18/24. Just missed the 60% mark in his 45 point game vs Detroit in the second round when he shot 14/24(58.3%)



Cheeks was still good, but older and didn't play that much with the Knicks during the regular season. Mark Jackson was the starting point guard for most of the season and he couldn't guard a chair. Oakley was good, but missed 21 games. Would be interested to see their defensive rating with and without Oakley. they did have the personnel to be better and it's puzzling considering how good Ewing was defensively. here's a good game highlighting his defense.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3B5F37EC462D7E92



yeah, he got booed in that game as well as a March 13th game vs Chicago that Da realist posted off the top of my head.

Wow, I just watched the last 20 seconds of the Bulls vs Knicks game you linked. There's no way Tucker got the shot off in time but still it was an incredibly quick, high arcing release and an amazing shot all things considered.

Good looking out on the numbers. 11 40 pt games sort of shocked me.

I guess the perimeter defense - Wilkins was the weak link on that team. Jackson, Kiki are not exactly solid in that regard.

A little OT but have you noticed how badly Shaq killed the Knicks in 1995?

4 games against Ewing, a great defensive team and here are his numbers.

40.2 ppg
13 rpg
62.9 FG%



Makes me wish the Knicks beat the Pacers in the POs that year. Shaq would've wrecked that team apart if the regular season is any indication.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Wow, I just watched the last 20 seconds of the Bulls vs Knicks game you linked. There's no way Tucker got the shot off in time but still it was an incredibly quick, high arcing release and an amazing shot all things considered.

Good looking out on the numbers. 11 40 pt games sort of shocked me.

I guess the perimeter defense - Wilkins was the weak link on that team. Jackson, Kiki are not exactly solid in that regard.

A little OT but have you noticed how badly Shaq killed the Knicks in 1995?

4 games against Ewing, a great defensive team and here are his numbers.

40.2 ppg
13 rpg
62.9 FG%



Makes me wish the Knicks beat the Pacers in the POs that year. Shaq would've wrecked that team apart if the regular season is any indication.

Yeah, regarding the Knicks defense in '90, personnel doesn't always tell the story.

it's kind of like the 2001 Lakers. the previous season they were the best defensive team in the league, but were then mediocre throughout the regular season. Shaq wasn't quite as good defensively, particularly at the start of the season, but Fox was a big improvement over Rice and Grant was an improvement over Green. Then they went on to play extremely well defensively in the playoffs. And that was with Harper not really being around and I thought that Bryant/Harper backcourt was better defensively than the Fisher/Bryant backcourt. Fisher was a good defensive guard back then, but Harper was better and that put Kobe guarding point guards more often, and his on the ball defense vs smaller guards was exceptional in 2000 and 2001(before Harper went down) due to his length and quickness.

Part of it was probably the team lacking chemistry with the Shaq/Kobe feud, Isaiah Rider causing distractions ect. as well as Shaq being lazier and Kobe forcing things more leading to more turnovers and poor shots which can also lead to baskets for opposing teams.

But what's even more puzzling to me is that I have no doubt that Shaq was better defensively in 2001 than 2002, and Grant was a better defender than Samaki Walker, yet the 2002 Lakers were better defensively than the 2001 Lakers....by far.

They held opponents to a league best 42.4% from the field, and had the 7th best defensive rating at 101.7, but it was something like 103.8, iirc in the 15 games Shaq missed so in reality, their defensive rating was probably equal to at least top 5 when Shaq played.

So the 2001 season ends up even more puzzling to me than the '90 Knicks considering the personnel as well as their defense in '00 and '02.

Didn't know that about Shaq's numbers in '95 vs Ewing. I remember that he started dominating him at one point, but didn't know his numbers looked like that. '95 Shaq was noticeably better than '93 or '94. More skilled, polished and better equipped to face tough defenses.

[Scoooter]

Eh, like ShaqAttack and NugzHeat have been talking about, it depends on which Ewing you're talking about. There's a big difference between 1990 Ewing and just about every other version of Ewing, particularly the late 90s versions. 1990 Ewing would probably be the first option and there'd be a Shaq/Kobe dynamic. Ewing was so dominant inside that year, and even though he had that jumper, he didn't settle for it too much.

After that though, I think Carmelo would be the first option. The Ewing I remember was always settling for those elbow and baseline jumpers. As a scorer, Carmelo's better than that. I mean, that's kind of similar to Amar'e's game and he's definitely the second option to Carmelo.

That's not really Amar'e's game though. He shot a lot of jumpers last year because he didn't have a competent point guard helping him get anything better. He absolutely thrives as a finisher in the paint. If this Knicks team added someone like Steve Nash, Amar'e may well become the first option.

[NugzHeat3]

Yeah, regarding the Knicks defense in '90, personnel doesn't always tell the story.

it's kind of like the 2001 Lakers. the previous season they were the best defensive team in the league, but were then mediocre throughout the regular season. Shaq wasn't quite as good defensively, particularly at the start of the season, but Fox was a big improvement over Rice and Grant was an improvement over Green. Then they went on to play extremely well defensively in the playoffs. And that was with Harper not really being around and I thought that Bryant/Harper backcourt was better defensively than the Fisher/Bryant backcourt. Fisher was a good defensive guard back then, but Harper was better and that put Kobe guarding point guards more often, and his on the ball defense vs smaller guards was exceptional in 2000 and 2001(before Harper went down) due to his length and quickness.

Part of it was probably the team lacking chemistry with the Shaq/Kobe feud, Isaiah Rider causing distractions ect. as well as Shaq being lazier and Kobe forcing things more leading to more turnovers and poor shots which can also lead to baskets for opposing teams.

But what's even more puzzling to me is that I have no doubt that Shaq was better defensively in 2001 than 2002, and Grant was a better defender than Samaki Walker, yet the 2002 Lakers were better defensively than the 2001 Lakers....by far.

They held opponents to a league best 42.4% from the field, and had the 7th best defensive rating at 101.7, but it was something like 103.8, iirc in the 15 games Shaq missed so in reality, their defensive rating was probably equal to at least top 5 when Shaq played.

So the 2001 season ends up even more puzzling to me than the '90 Knicks considering the personnel as well as their defense in '00 and '02.

Didn't know that about Shaq's numbers in '95 vs Ewing. I remember that he started dominating him at one point, but didn't know his numbers looked like that. '95 Shaq was noticeably better than '93 or '94. More skilled, polished and better equipped to face tough defenses.

Yeah the 2001 team really stepped up in the playoffs after an underachieving season.

You should check their defensive numbers out here (in the paint, perimeter). Kind of shows the value of their defense and who was having the greatest impact. It only goes up till 1998 but its interesting nonetheless.

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball...s/00/4/eff/1-1

In 2000, LA was giving up a lot of shots in the paint but their opposing FG% is 2nd right after Miami which kind of illustrates Zo's and Shaq's impact.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Yeah the 2001 team really stepped up in the playoffs after an underachieving season.

You should check their defensive numbers out here (in the paint, perimeter). Kind of shows the value of their defense and who was having the greatest impact. It only goes up till 1998 but its interesting nonetheless.

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball...s/00/4/eff/1-1

In 2000, LA was giving up a lot of shots in the paint but their opposing FG% is 2nd right after Miami which kind of illustrates Zo's and Shaq's impact.

Thanks, pretty interesting, I'm surprised they have these stats available. The Spurs were number 3 in 2000 in terms of opponents FG% in the paint in 2000. Makes sense considering Duncan/Robinson. It also shows how much of an impact Zo's shot blocking had considering Miami was only 7th in defensive rating in 2000, but first in opponents FG% in the paint.

Lakers were 7th in 2001(surprising when you consider they were below average in defensive rating) and 1st in 2002.

Similar with Howard in Orlando, 2nd in 2007 and 2008, 3rd in 2009, 1st in 2010 and 2nd in 2011.

Regarding your comment about LA giving up a lot of shots in the paint, but forcing opponents into a low percentage. here's Phil's comments on that about the 2000 season.

we were funneling guys baseline and sideline, and overplaying everybody so they'd be forced to deal with Shaq in the lane.

[NugzHeat3]

Thanks, pretty interesting, I'm surprised they have these stats available. The Spurs were number 3 in 2000 in terms of opponents FG% in the paint in 2000. Makes sense considering Duncan/Robinson. It also shows how much of an impact Zo's shot blocking had considering Miami was only 7th in defensive rating in 2000, but first in opponents FG% in the paint.

Lakers were 7th in 2001(surprising when you consider they were below average in defensive rating) and 1st in 2002.

Similar with Howard in Orlando, 2nd in 2007 and 2008, 3rd in 2009, 1st in 2010 and 2nd in 2011.

Regarding your comment about LA giving up a lot of shots in the paint, but forcing opponents into a low percentage. here's Phil's comments on that about the 2000 season.

Yeah that's what I was thinking too. Funneling to Shaq would've been the best idea. At first, I thought it was due to weak perimeter defense but then I realized it couldn't be.

[amfirst]

U don't need another superstar to win, just a balance team. The Mavs proved that.

Dirk was the only superstar, however, Jason Terry looked like a superstar also in the playoffs.

Shaq had Kobe, but the rest of the team sucked, besides when Rice came.

Where u lack u can balance out somewhere else. Mavs did this, their team was well balanced.

[ShaqAttack3234]

U don't need another superstar to win, just a balance team. The Mavs proved that.

Dirk was the only superstar, however, Jason Terry looked like a superstar also in the playoffs.

Shaq had Kobe, but the rest of the team sucked, besides when Rice came.

Where u lack u can balance out somewhere else. Mavs did this, their team was well balanced.

You're correct that you don't need another superstar to win except saying Terry played like one is an exaggeration.

Rice also wasn't even the 3rd best player from those 3 championship years. Both Fisher and Fox played better in the 2001 playoffs than Rice did in 2000, same with Horry in '02, even Ron Harper in '00 made more positive contributions. I'd say Grant's post defense in the 2001 run also made more of an impact.

[Rameek]

Fact was the franchise was making tons of money during this time frame... no empty seats watching riles and van gundy teams play awesome defense and seeing ewing basically carry the team on his shoulders.

Fans of the Knicks knew and bagged for additional help ...

So they dropped money to late on a SG that only did jump shots and then blew out his knee.

Remember the first year Ewing came into the league a , defensive , rebounding college playing machine , turns into a awesome wing jump shooter as well.

NY's owner 2 years into Ewings career had many opportunities to bring a player or two into the fold and make legit runs....

AND HE DID NOT.

[COLOR="Navy"]Ewing's ego was too large to accept a co-star. Most Knick fans knows this.[/COLOR]