Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: So is going after Crawford and Davis mean that we don't realize what we have in Shump

  1. #1
    Quiet Storm New New York's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,431
    Rep Power
    15

    Default So is going after Crawford and Davis mean that we don't realize what we have in Shump

    This insistence on going after these backcourt players (non of which can defend) seems to point to us not expecting Shump to be in the rotation

    as it is we have TD,Feilds,Bibby and Shump

    so why all this attention on players like Davis and Crawford? non of them represent an immediate impact for us

    our main focus should be trying to grab either a backup for Melo (ie. Shawne Williams) or Stat , not saying our backcourt is ideal, its just simply jammed at this point! and again we are not going after players who upgrade our situation in the backcourt.

    I like what Glen has done so far, kinda confused about the focus on Crawford and Baron tho.

    Without any game experience and just going off workout and college highlights I would take him over both Crawford and Baron Davis and I suspect he will be starting over Feilds by the end of the season

  2. #2
    Scoring Champ CA7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    3,869
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Originally Posted by New New York
    This insistence on going after these backcourt players (non of which can defend) seems to point to us not expecting Shump to be in the rotation

    as it is we have TD,Feilds,Bibby and Shump

    so why all this attention on players like Davis and Crawford? non of them represent an immediate impact for us

    our main focus should be trying to grab either a backup for Melo (ie. Shawne Williams) or Stat , not saying our backcourt is ideal, its just simply jammed at this point! and again we are not going after players who upgrade our situation in the backcourt.

    I like what Glen has done so far, kinda confused about the focus on Crawford and Baron tho.

    Without any game experience and just going off workout and college highlights I would take him over both Crawford and Baron Davis and I suspect he will be starting over Feilds by the end of the season
    I think its a matter of the shortened season, 1 he's a rookie, 2 there's not a lot of time for him to develop in practice so he's going to learn things on the fly and 3 I think they're unsure of where they seem him at, I would love to see him at the point with a scoring/defending 2 Guard like Reggie Williams as the back court of the future for us and letting Fields and Douglas come off the bench, but that seems unlikely at this point.

  3. #3
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    538
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    We can't know what we have in Shump until we see him play actual NBA games

    This shortened season is going to be crazy, we are going to need more depth or every player is going to be exhausted by the time the playoffs roll around

  4. #4
    TYPE-A Red's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,308
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    I think everyone is enamored with the unknown.

    When we needed bigs for rebounding and defense we assumed whoever wasa big on our roster could get starter minutes and they were the answer.

    Now that we need a PG we assume we have one in Shump. I think that's normal wishful thinking. But...

    Now that time has run out on future plans etc... we are in must win now mode. I can see MOA not wanting to experiment with this squad in his last year.

    He wants something definite instead of assuming a new guard can come in and pick up the system quick.

    That's why he tapped TD to be the starter over Bibby and why Shump would really have to be ahead of the curve and impress to crack the rotation.

    B-diddy presents a viable passing option (avg 6+ assists) and should be hungry. Its not a knock on Shump. We need depth for all those back-to-backs, and 3 in 4 days games.

    Shump fills a needed roll in MOA's system because he provides the ability to guard multiple positions and we all know MOA plays players out of natural position and values defensive guys who guard multiple positions...

    Yet he will always defer to offensive skill sets first.

  5. #5
    ★Melo Mafia★ NY17KNICKS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Hudson,FL *Orig* New York
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Shump will show everything he has, its just about making the team better. Cant put the Dice on a rookie when you can have known goods.

  6. #6
    Member serendipity10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    near the lincoln tunnel in Union City, NJ staying close to MSG
    Posts
    449
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Originally Posted by CA7
    I think its a matter of the shortened season, 1 he's a rookie, 2 there's not a lot of time for him to develop in practice so he's going to learn things on the fly and 3 I think they're unsure of where they seem him at, I would love to see him at the point with a scoring/defending 2 Guard like Reggie Williams as the back court of the future for us and letting Fields and Douglas come off the bench, but that seems unlikely at this point.
    It doesn't hurt to have depth on any roster, anyone can step up for a spot. Shumpert has great work ethics and will develop, but I agree with CA7 not enough time this season. Mike Bibby contract is a one year contract and Davis if signed will most likely be a short contract as well. Both Davis and Bibby can teach TD and Iman a thing or two. Crawford is only wanted for his three point shooting.

    I don't think the Knicks are going to sign neither Davis or Crawford. Crawford already turned down a contract and the sign and trade looks doubtful. Baron Davis is having severe back problems which might make the Knicks hesitant to sign, and plus he has to be waived.

    Shawne Williams was offered a contract and now weighing his options from the Knicks, Nets, Lakers, Mavs, and Heat. Other teams offered more money, but we will find out tomorrow. The Knicks are also looking to sign Jerome Jordan.

  7. #7
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    538
    Rep Power
    5

    Default

    Originally Posted by NY17KNICKS
    Shump will show everything he has, its just about making the team better. Cant put the Dice on a rookie when you can have known goods.
    exactly.. Plus if he plays Point guard, that leaves us pretty thin at shooting guard, but if he plays shooting guard, that leaves us thin at point.. We need at least one more player at either of these positions just to give us better depth

  8. #8
    Quiet Storm New New York's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,431
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Originally Posted by Red
    I think everyone is enamored with the unknown.

    When we needed bigs for rebounding and defense we assumed whoever wasa big on our roster could get starter minutes and they were the answer.

    Now that we need a PG we assume we have one in Shump. I think that's normal wishful thinking. But...

    Now that time has run out on future plans etc... we are in must win now mode. I can see MOA not wanting to experiment with this squad in his last year.

    He wants something definite instead of assuming a new guard can come in and pick up the system quick.

    That's why he tapped TD to be the starter over Bibby and why Shump would really have to be ahead of the curve and impress to crack the rotation.

    B-diddy presents a viable passing option (avg 6+ assists) and should be hungry. Its not a knock on Shump. We need depth for all those back-to-backs, and 3 in 4 days games.

    Shump fills a needed roll in MOA's system because he provides the ability to guard multiple positions and we all know MOA plays players out of natural position and values defensive guys who guard multiple positions...

    Yet he will always defer to offensive skill sets first.

    I don't see Shump at all as a PG!! I see him as a SG soley.

    I actually mentioned Feilds as well in the potential backcourt logjam and he is clearly not a PG nor do I think Crawford is a PG

    What I am saying is that we are going after backcourt players when we cleary have a few options there (and I did not mention Bill Walker) so that begs the question do we not realize we have a real player in this kid.

    In terms of him being an "unknown", that could be said for any of the rookies in terms of not being able accuratley gauge how they are going to be as a pro, true there is not much to go on with Shumpert besides his Lockout League experience (which was one of the best of all rookies there) but we are coming off a year when we had a strong rookie outing from Feilds (who Miike Dantoni dismissed immdediatley but his brother who coached him in Summer League convinced him he had a player) so why would you not put more stock in the player you drafted?

    Look more times then not I would dismiss this as a couch who does not want to put too much pressure on a rookie, but....Mike D has a track record of not recognizing young talent if their offense is not off the charts spectacular at first glance, in particular their jump shot.

    Passed on Rondo due to a lack of a jump shot and like I said had to be sold on Feilds, so I just wonder has he already began to look past Shump?

  9. #9
    Member serendipity10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    near the lincoln tunnel in Union City, NJ staying close to MSG
    Posts
    449
    Rep Power
    4

    Default

    Crawford is a lost cause, and Maurice Evans is being looked at.

  10. #10
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,845
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by Red
    I think everyone is enamored with the unknown.

    When we needed bigs for rebounding and defense we assumed whoever wasa big on our roster could get starter minutes and they were the answer.

    Now that we need a PG we assume we have one in Shump. I think that's normal wishful thinking. But...

    Now that time has run out on future plans etc... we are in must win now mode. I can see MOA not wanting to experiment with this squad in his last year.

    He wants something definite instead of assuming a new guard can come in and pick up the system quick.

    That's why he tapped TD to be the starter over Bibby and why Shump would really have to be ahead of the curve and impress to crack the rotation.

    B-diddy presents a viable passing option (avg 6+ assists) and should be hungry. Its not a knock on Shump. We need depth for all those back-to-backs, and 3 in 4 days games.

    Shump fills a needed roll in MOA's system because he provides the ability to guard multiple positions and we all know MOA plays players out of natural position and values defensive guys who guard multiple positions...

    Yet he will always defer to offensive skill sets first.
    Yep. All this.

    NNY, Shump is a rookie! Either we are or aren't a playoff bound team that wants to be a contender.

    If you think you're a contender, you don't roll into the season resting hopes on completely unknown entities....Simple as that.

    Adding Crawford, and Baron, give us known quantities, and true depth.

    No offense, but some of the names you've trotted out (Billy Walker) are just trash....if you consider yourself a legit playoff team and contender.

    And I like Walker. I like Shump.

    But you're thread title even says "we don't realize what we have in Shump"....

    Broheem.....*YOU* don't know what you have in Shump, in any meaningful way.

    Right now we have some young combo guards, a guard/sf in Fields, and Bibby. Shump isn't defined as either a PG or a SG at this point in his career.

    We're looking to add, on the cheap, a veteran SG and PG.

    We don't have a lot of depth at *any* of our guard spots -- don't confuse volume with reliability and true depth.

    Getting Crawford and Baron would be hugely positive moves; and if anything protect the value of a Shumpert, where he can develop his skills at his pace, and play a valuable positive role on the team maximizing what he can vs getting thrown to the wolves and failing.

  11. #11
    The Knicks are Back DaTPRiNCE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn N.Y.........Alexandria,Egypt in the blood
    Posts
    3,862
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    its not that were not confident in him, its that were trying to make our team deeper. lets face it having crawford come off the bench as the 6th man makes us a much more lethal team. and that allows shumpert to take his time with his offense and mainly help out on D, when he's ready he'll beast. maybe even from the get-go. Deep teams win championships and crawford adds depth thats why i want him so bad

  12. #12
    TYPE-A Red's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,308
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by New New York
    I don't see Shump at all as a PG!! I see him as a SG soley.

    I actually mentioned Feilds as well in the potential backcourt logjam and he is clearly not a PG nor do I think Crawford is a PG
    Shump was a PG at GT, his athleticism off the charts, defense up to par, the only question was could he develop his outside shot- and supposedly he did.

    Consider the MOA offense takes time to master; consider MOA is a lame duck coach, and the other current PG options and he's number three behind TD and Bibby. That's his natural position, not where you feel or MOA may decide to play him.

    MOA is quoted as saying he expects much from Fields, who supposedly worked on his jumper. Fields will start at the 2.

    If Shump performs better than either TD, Bibby, or Fields, make no mistake, not only will that be a feat, but MOA will start him or get him minutes off the bench.



    Originally Posted by New New York
    What I am saying is that we are going after backcourt players when we cleary have a few options there (and I did not mention Bill Walker) so that begs the question do we not realize we have a real player in this kid.

    In terms of him being an "unknown", that could be said for any of the rookies in terms of not being able accuratley gauge how they are going to be as a pro, true there is not much to go on with Shumpert besides his Lockout League experience (which was one of the best of all rookies there) but we are coming off a year when we had a strong rookie outing from Feilds (who Miike Dantoni dismissed immdediatley but his brother who coached him in Summer League convinced him he had a player) so why would you not put more stock in the player you drafted?
    Crawford technically, with all his faults, if signed, would be the best 6th man option we have.

    And B-Diddy would be the best PG option we have also (if healthy). Those wouldn't just be depth signings, but upgrades.

    Again IF Shump can prove he can do better, more power to him. That would be a hell of a draft pick.

    Originally Posted by New New York
    Look more times then not I would dismiss this as a couch who does not want to put too much pressure on a rookie, but....Mike D has a track record of not recognizing young talent if their offense is not off the charts spectacular at first glance, in particular their jump shot.

    Passed on Rondo due to a lack of a jump shot and like I said had to be sold on Feilds, so I just wonder has he already began to look past Shump?
    Let's hope Shump is off the charts spectacular his first chance.

    Look at Shump as probably (currently) a poor-mans Wilson Chandler in our system; who hopefully has handle and decision making to grasp the system and run the point. If he can do that better than anyone mentioned

    WE WILL WIN THE NBA CHAMPIONSHIP.

  13. #13
    Super Moderator RunningJumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,971
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by New New York
    This insistence on going after these backcourt players (non of which can defend) seems to point to us not expecting Shump to be in the rotation

    as it is we have TD,Feilds,Bibby and Shump

    so why all this attention on players like Davis and Crawford? non of them represent an immediate impact for us

    our main focus should be trying to grab either a backup for Melo (ie. Shawne Williams) or Stat , not saying our backcourt is ideal, its just simply jammed at this point! and again we are not going after players who upgrade our situation in the backcourt.

    I like what Glen has done so far, kinda confused about the focus on Crawford and Baron tho.

    Without any game experience and just going off workout and college highlights I would take him over both Crawford and Baron Davis and I suspect he will be starting over Feilds by the end of the season
    Which is why we need need to see him play in the NBA first.

  14. #14
    TYPE-A Red's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    2,308
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    Originally Posted by New New York
    This insistence on going after these backcourt players (non of which can defend) seems to point to us not expecting Shump to be in the rotation

    as it is we have TD,Feilds,Bibby and Shump

    so why all this attention on players like Davis and Crawford? non of them represent an immediate impact for us

    our main focus should be trying to grab either a backup for Melo (ie. Shawne Williams) or Stat , not saying our backcourt is ideal, its just simply jammed at this point! and again we are not going after players who upgrade our situation in the backcourt.

    I like what Glen has done so far, kinda confused about the focus on Crawford and Baron tho.

    Without any game experience and just going off workout and college highlights I would take him over both Crawford and Baron Davis and I suspect he will be starting over Feilds by the end of the season

    Originally Posted by RunningJumper
    Which is why we need need to see him play in the NBA first.
    I'd say...

    that's what makes you a fan and MOA the coach.
    Last edited by Red; Dec 13, 2011 at 20:17.

  15. #15
    Veteran Paul1355's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    5,464
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Originally Posted by New New York
    This insistence on going after these backcourt players (non of which can defend) seems to point to us not expecting Shump to be in the rotation

    as it is we have TD,Feilds,Bibby and Shump

    so why all this attention on players like Davis and Crawford? non of them represent an immediate impact for us

    our main focus should be trying to grab either a backup for Melo (ie. Shawne Williams) or Stat , not saying our backcourt is ideal, its just simply jammed at this point! and again we are not going after players who upgrade our situation in the backcourt.

    I like what Glen has done so far, kinda confused about the focus on Crawford and Baron tho.

    Without any game experience and just going off workout and college highlights I would take him over both Crawford and Baron Davis and I suspect he will be starting over Feilds by the end of the season
    We don't know what to expect from Shumpert as far as pure point guard skills. We now he has athelticism and can dunk the ball and has been improving his shot. BUT

    Does Shumpert have the handling and court vision to be a starting PG?

    This is why we are pursuing Baron Davis and offered Barea a contract which he rejected.

    I believe Shumpert has better court vision than TD, because frankly TD has no court vision.

    We can go with a one year option at the point, a veteran presence to replace Chauncey's role. Let Shumpert come into his own and we'll see if he is better at the 1 or 2. Hopefully Shumpert can show to be a good PG so we can bench Douglas and play Fields, if Fields is improving.

    Give us a big lineup

    Shumpert-6'6
    Fields-6'7
    Melo-6'9
    Amare-6'11(grew an inch according to Amare)
    Tyson-7'1

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 117
    Last Post: Jun 28, 2009, 18:58
  2. Crawford Could Be Traded To Clippers?
    By YEARITEHERE in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: Jul 02, 2008, 11:45
  3. where's marbury?
    By reckoning in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Jun 25, 2008, 18:17
  4. Replies: 76
    Last Post: Jan 31, 2008, 18:05
  5. In Fairness to Last Season
    By Kiyaman in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: Sep 27, 2007, 15:11

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •