Starting 5 should be...
This set of starting 5 should start each game, or at least start the second and 4th quarters, because they bring more energy and defend much better than the rest of the cap-busters!!!
Jeffries should probably replace Cato when he comes back in mid-december.
If I were Isiah, I'd tell my starters that if they don't have a lead by the end of the first quarter of each game, they will watch the second and fourth quarters from the bench. That should probably put a sense of urgency into them.
why cato in front of curry? we've yet to see him in real action nor hear of him doing anything amazing in practice so he doesnt deserve the starting job. i think nate is probably the x-factor of the team but its best for him to be the main energy bringer. i like the idea of jefferis at center because we'll pose as a new threat with a center-guard like diaw.
Theres no way to me that your dont start marbury. heres my 5.
This is the best starting lineup for several reasons. Francis cant play with marbury, let him come of the bench and get the minutes when marbs isnt on the court. also some games curry or frye can be dominating, when they are the knicks dominate, when there not just bring in balkman and lee. they can play the big spots and bring energy. but when curry and frye are on, they are better then lee and balkman, so at least give them a chance to have a good game. when jeffries returns you can plug him in for frye or curry, but i say keep q rich starting he is playing great.
No favorites here...I say we keep the same lineup. In my opinion...Crawford has been doing just as bad as francis. At least francis is scrapping and playing D. Crawford is just turning the ball over and jacking up 3s like the crawford of old. He needs to play under control like he did with LB and then maybe we can talk about him starting. But if he's playing like he has lately then Francis should just stay put.
Here's what differentiates the STARTERS from the BENCH, in my opinion.
It aint scoring - Both groups had better be able to score or they should not be on the floor, that is why they sub for one another because for one reason or another the group or a player is unable to score.
It aint defense - Both groups had better be able to defend (within reason of course, given that some will be better than others). Again that is why a defensive sub is made if a player or unit on the opposing team is going off.
It is decision making - Starters must have a better understanding of the game and make very good choices both defensively and offensively, especially in critical moments.
It is poise & confidence - Starters can't be rattled when things go wrong and must have the ability to rise to higher levels of performance as needed.
It is execution - Starters must be the best at executing the teams offense and defense.
IT IS CONSISTENCY- Starters have to be the most consistent players on both ends of the floor, night in and night out.
I think that one area where the bench is differentiated is in the energy level. I think that they have to come in with greater intensity since they usually do not play as many minutes. (btw, this is the reason why when the NYK make a come back they don't have energy to close out in a win)
So who on this team fits the profile of starters? I really can't tell. The starters have not shown themselves yet. Here's why:
Francis and Marbury - should be starters but they're still trying to figure out how to play together
Curry - Should be a starter but is a victim of questionable work ethic, sub-par defense (foul trouble) and a confused back-court (marbury & francis)
Frye - ????? seems to be improving a little but may just be the odd man out. His defense has improved from last year but defense is not his game. He needs to be the first, second or third scoring option when on the floor to be effective. With Curry, Marbury, Francis & Richardson on the floor his game will suffer.
Lee - Definitely playing like a starter but have problems guarding bigger PF in the league. I would be willing to start him a PF unless someone bette come along.
Jeffries - Is out with broken hand. Jury still out.
Richardson - Has proven that he should be a starter. Question is should he start at the 3 or the 2. I happen to think that he should start at the 2 spot, which would meant that either Francis or Marbury will have to go.
Definite strong bench: Crawford, Robinson, Balkman
My prefered starting five would:
Marbury (don't know why, but I think he'll be important this year)
Frye/Curry (doesn't make that a big difference imo)
When Jeffries is back he'll start at SF, while Q switches at 2 and JC to become 1. option of the bench.
curry or frye
Why would you start Lee? Wouldn't you want the spark off the bench that he provides.
that is true but you also have nate, jamal, and balkman to spark of the bench, a little spark in the beginning of the game would really set the tone, a little spark would also get marbury, francis,Q, and curry really ignited, he would be a lot better than frye :fire:
I think the starters should be:
3. Jeffries (Once back from injury)
Bench: Balkman, Crawford, James, Lee, Marbury, Robinson, Etc.
The problem with the Knicks is a sense of entitlement. No one is owed a starting position. That should be earned day in & out. Those who don't bring effort, energy, and attention to detail, really should look at playing for the Heat or someone else.
curry at center
jerome james at power forward
kevin cato at small forward
malik rose at shooting guard
starbury at the point..
we won;t win many games, but think of the entertainment value... something like the 62 mets... they lost 120 games, but there was lots of laughs
Starting 5 Should Be
PG Nate Robinson
SG Steve Francis
PF D Lee
C Eddy curry
Robinson and Francis would be a diaster backcourt.