Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 96

Thread: Optimism 4 2005

  1. #16
    Superstar KnicksFan20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nj
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    you make an excellent point, but is crawford the pointguard marbury is , i dont think so and dont think he will ever be, so next years draft we will be looking for a point.



    Wut Are u ****in stupid or somthing............we got NATE ROBINSON who is our pg.......why would we draft one next year dumass


    plus i see nate as a potential starter if not this year definatly next year


    he has the facial features of crawford and body like steph...

  2. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    188
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Nate Robinson should be a good player, but you can't ask him to lead a team anywhere as a rookie. I think that the rebuilding is about done. Maybe one free agent. This is where Zeke has been going the whole time. A great point some jump shooters and some young bigmen.

  3. #18
    Superstar KnicksFan20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nj
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Also who was #25 he was pretty good......they said he played in france or somthing......he could be solid off the bench

  4. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    201
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    You're completely mistaken. Marbury isn't a PG. Atleast not what a PG is supposed to be. The reason are team always looks so stagnant out there is b/c the balls doesnt move around as much as it should. If it isn't a pick and roll for Marbury, then it's a one on one with Crawford. Everyone else just stands around.

    However, when Crawford plays the POINT, not SG, our offense runs more smoothly and our players get more involved. Not only that, but Crawford can push the ball full court, something that Marbury will never do b/c let's face it, players don't just change at the drop of a hat, especially 9 years into their career. You also have to consider his knees prohibiting him from going full on down the court...

    And then there's atleast 3 or more other factors to consider, chief among them the glut at guard. NOW is the time to trade Marbury...

    Oh, and if there's anyone we should be waiving, it's not Houston, it's Rose. I love Rose, but his contract expires 4 years from now. It's not worth keeping him for that long, especially with the glut at PF and his contract being bloated...

  5. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    188
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Nate Robinson is a stretch as a starter and especially on an average team. He's nowhere as good as Steph, ever. I don't love Steph, but the teams built around him I dont know why I agrue with you guys about this. Steph is the team he's not going anywhere unless Isiah is blown away. Otherwise Isiah's out the door.

  6. #21
    Superstar KnicksFan20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nj
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    once again i agree with bobs......


    when crawford played the point last year......he was finding good shots for his players......there was alot of ball movements...

    and when he was in he was racking up the assists instead of the pnts.....


    crawford is quicker then marbury,better off the dribble, better shooter and he is a better PG period.....steph will be great some days when he gets everyone invlolved then theres days when its all about him.....



    side not: n e one see how big ariza got?

  7. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    188
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Bob: Do you watch basketball? Stephon Marbury never plays within a system, but he is a point guard, not questions asked. He penetrates at will and creates for others. What glut at guard? Steph, Crawford, and Nate. Q is a swingman, he played 3 on a team that won 60 games.

  8. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    201
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    You know Ted, I basically can't be wrong. If you read my arguement on the first page, I clearly state why Steph is no good for any number of reasons. The only player on a team you should ever have to build around is a Center, or coach. Marbury is a PG, his job is to distribute the ball. However, like Francis, he's a scoring PG. That's why our Offense runs so stagnantly. The ball doesnt move around at all. And look at it this way - based on what I've seen of Nate even before his rookie season, I'm basically blown away. His skill level is VERY high. He plays the same style as Marbury, and while nobody can tell if his potential is as high, he also plays on the ball D, and pushes the ball up the court, 2 things Steph can't do...

    Marbury SHOULD be out or Isiah just isn't getting it...

  9. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    188
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Crawford is quicker than Marbury? Better off the dribble? What. Marbury can take anyone in the league off the dribble, and Crawford is a jump shooter.

  10. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    188
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Bob: good luck with Nate as your starter. Jordan prolly wasn't a good player to build around right. TD? KG? both 4s. I quit.

    You are wrong. Read the long one I wrote where you actually sent a intelligent response. You won't win a championship with Marbury but you'll make the playoffs. I don't like him either but you can't give him away or we won't get a player of his callaber for several years. You're not getting anything good for him. You tell me who you'd trade him for.

  11. #26
    Superstar KnicksFan20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nj
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    crawford is better off the dribble......he just doesnt penatrate much so u dont see that as much


    crawford has one of the top 3 or 4 crossover moves in the league behind


    Iverson
    wade
    baron davis
    crawford

    crawford could be put at 3rd best............


    if crawford could put on some weight.....he will be amazing......marbs uses his strenght to penetrante not his quickness......hell make a move then basicall use his body to stay infront of the defender so the defender cant get in front of him.....



    and i should ask u if uve watched n e knick games last year......because crawford had improved his selection and drove to the basket acationaly so hes not just a jump shooter

  12. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    201
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Ted, simply STFU. I've explained point by point why Steph should be dealt. I like his heart and how he never takes a game off, but sometimes you gotta swallow your pride, and accept reality.

    Crawford gets our players more involved. He can push the ball down the floor. He's taller, which will enable him to create more matchup problems.

    Marbury is starting to get over the hill. He's hugely overpaid. And the only play he knows is the pick and roll, which he is a master at, but nonetheless leaves the team stagnant.

    And if you actually took my arguements to heart, you'd realize there are a couple or so more arguements that are equally valid. you could go along with any one of them, and you'd be right.

    Q will play Guard/Forward for us. Why? B/c Ariza really can't play much SG, and Timmy won't dealt unless it's for a huge contract, which I don't see or want happening. Timmy will get atleast 25 mins. a game at Sf. Q will probably start at SG, and then move to SF to let Crawford come off the bench at the 2 (IF AND ONLY IF WE KEEP MARBURY). Trading Marbury allows every player to get the minutes he deserves and to play the position he is supposed to.

    End of ****in story...

  13. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    188
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Jason Kidd wasn't someone you can build a conference champion around was he? Who is Detroit built around? No one. Who won the Finals MVP for them? A scoring point: Billups.

  14. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    188
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    You've explained it and I've told you why you're wrong.

  15. #30
    Superstar KnicksFan20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Nj
    Posts
    554
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    detroit also has 2 big men in ben wallace and rasheed wallace witch is the reason why the pistons made it to the finals


    sure if marbury had 2 great bigmen he could take knicks deep into the p/offs but he wont get them......


    he costs to much for the knicks to maintaine........he has his knee problems as mentioned before.......


    sure he brings energy to games.....and fill seats and makes money off his jersey.....

    but ID RATHER SEE THE TEAM GO SOMEWHERE........marbury is a great player....but he cannot do n e thing for us....

Similar Threads

  1. R.I.P Eddie Guerrero 1967 - 2005
    By SouthamptonAin'tNewYawk! in forum Other Sports
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Dec 09, 2005, 23:29
  2. 2005 Ticket Sales Thread
    By Peach_NYK_21 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Aug 11, 2005, 19:53
  3. NYK Coach Decision 2005
    By NYKnicks15 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: May 20, 2005, 02:12
  4. [New Editorial] All-Star Weekend 2005
    By rady in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Feb 26, 2005, 12:12
  5. MADden 2005!!
    By TmAc N Knicks4life in forum Hangout
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Aug 29, 2004, 04:53

Posting Permissions

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