Getting to the point..PG???

if we are so thirst for a PG(which i dont agree on when we have nate and crawford who could play the PG)why dont we try to get jay williams....he is not expensive and he is better than snow wit the accident

its time we get a quality player, not an available decent player. its like saying would you have kg or or damon jones and larry hughes. obviously kg would be the better pick. jay williams doesnt have that explosiveness anymore so that would hurt his defence wouldnt it. plus, its better to have a big point guard like crawford, makes them mroe versatile, like pennys old days or the current marko jaric who i would like with the knicks

from someone who personally nos jay williams...we bof from plainfield newjersy......he still nasty i just seen him over the summer workin out playin in da rec gym n ****.....tryin to get him wouldnt be bad

the knicks are not thirst for a pg, they are thirst for a C and a PF. they need someone better than frye and james. they need someone like curry.

i meant to say that people in here are sayin we need a PG...how bout a suggestion? does any body remember frank williams? we should give him a shot

i dont think its so much of us saying we need one, more than Larry Brown saying he wants Steph to play the 2 and needing a "true" point guard like Snow as our starting PG. Now say that is the instance which i hate the idea horribly..i'd actually give a few people a change a bunch of unprovens actually. they come cheap and if they dont work out you go with someone else. Surprsingly and this mite sound weird but would go with someone like Troy Bell or Dan Dickau. They could split the time well with Nate...I think Frank Williams has been a discussion around this forum for quite some time due to his heart, good passing skills and defensive toughness. i think hed be a great option aswell...BUT

my first option is still and always will be Stephon at the PG and Q-Rich at the SG..

i am not going to start an arguement here and argee wit u nyknicks.......we need someone with heart......someone like

latrell spreewell
john starks
or the late great JYD

they all had heart.....and its that love for the team that will have them diving on teh court fightin for lose balls.....never givin up and that is wut the knicks are missing......

yea people say marbs has heart......hes from BK hes a homegrown player ect. ect. but i havnt seen his heart on the court yet........im not knockin his game......im jus sayin

yeah we reallii do need another pg cuz its not like we have starbury or jamal crawford or nate robinson right??? (( i wish there was a sarcasm font))

The Knicks are hungry for a point guard. We've got the center spot filled. But if Marbury moves to SG, which will most likely happen, then point is vacant. The only choice that I can see at this point is Snow or Crawford at point! As far a Richardson playing SG, the question comes to mind who is the better scorer, Richardson or Marbury? The better scorer should play SG.

How can all of you say marbury isn't a true pg? How many other players in the league average 8 assists? A point guards job is to pass the ball and thats what marbury does. It would be stupid to move marbury to shooting guard. How many 6 foot 2 sg's who can't dunk that good are stars in the nba? Marbuy is a TRUE pg and i strongly disagree with anyone who thinks hes not a pg and he shold be moved to the shooting guard position. Just think about the questions i included. The answers conclude that we dont need a pg because we have one.

i dont totaly disagree wit marbury movin to the 2 cuz even though he is 6'2 and can't dunk....not many people who are 6'6 and that could dunk could stop him cuz when steph drives in is very hard to stop.....(remember AI is barely 6 ft tall barely dunkin)

I think the idea is just to get Marbury moving without the ball in his hands and to get the ball moving more period. Last year Marbury dominated the ball. It seemed like on every possession Marbury dribbled around for a while then drove to the basket and either shot or passed. Not so hard to defend when you know what's coming. If Marbury's in the backcourt with Nate or Crawford you can have a more traditional/ old-school approach with two guards either of whom can run the offense or play off the ball (like the Spurs). This could also change Crawford's role, and his role will definitely change in some way because I don't see Larry letting him take 7 3-pters.

moving Steph to the 2 makes a weird situation with the likes of Q-Rich, JC, Nate, Penny, Allan and even Ariza..

if steph moves to the two then q-rich will start of play backup to Tim leaving Ariza out of the loop. WHICH I DONT WANT.

if steph moves then JC will definetely be the odd man out, which I think he will be anyways (sadly) due to Brown's strict mind set/1st impressions.

the thing you have to remember about stephon is that even though taller than AI...Steph is not that quick! He cant run around people like AI could/can. I think Stephon is a very talented player just the facts are facts. and Stephon will NOT be successful at the 2 spot...

dont worry ariza and Q will ge there minutes......


JC will get subbed for JC and marbs will be moved to the 1 and Q will play the 2 when JC is on the bench....then ariza will play the 3 like normal......

but marbs movin to the 2 makes everything complicated...i jus dont like it......but well see preseason how it turns out

I reallii want Marbury to play the 2.. Last yr he was taught to pass first and most of those assists came from kurt thomas.. Now with him gone starbury could now focus mostly on scoring.

And i wouldnt be that upset to see a bench of nate robinson, TT, David Lee and company

with marbury at the 2, you think q will play the 3? thats thomas's job, a 6'10 small foward not a 6'6 small foward. and with marbury at the 1 his penetration and dish out to a wing player that we have so much of can help us avg 100 pts a game. we could have robinson, marbury, and q or ariza on the floor at the same time, killing teams with out of the charts athletiscm or shooting the lights out of the garden

Yeah but look how small our line up would be with Marbury Robinson Q and Ariza on the floor at the same time

What's complicated! The purpose of Marbury moving to the two spot is because he's a born scorer. Simple! It may be odd for Crawford at first but he has filled in as point guard in the past. No one is comparing Steph to AI. The comparison is pertaining to the transition of two totally different players moving to a position that may better suit them. It worked for A.I., it may work for Marbury. As I've said before, if your point guard is the leading scorer on your team, you've got a serious problem. Ether he's not distributing the ball well enough or his options to distribute the ball are limited. In any case the best option is to move that score to a place that better suits him. As far as the status of Ariza, it true, having Richardson at 3 does shorten Ariza's playing time. Honestly, I don't expect Thomas to make it through the season. So the Ariza problem takes care of it's self. For the moment he can help H2O pass out towels and gaterade.

spoken like a true knick fan..not...have ARIZA hand out towels for now?!?!? Trevor Ariza one of the high points of being a knick fan.."hey the knicks suck" "well we do have that Ariza kid" atleast thats what i say haha...still have ARIZA HAND OUT TOWELS?! wow...now i know Tim probably wont make it through the season BUT that doesnt mean you can take the for granted. thats an IF and a big one to waste the talents of Ariza upon.

now not distrubuting enough is quite a statement..you keep Steph at the Point guard because in all actuality he IS distributing enough...name someone besides Nash who averages higher in APG's?!?!? thank you! and yes our lead scorer is Marbury and its not his fault (sure he is a ball hog) but most of our other players suck! if he wasnt the best player on the team he wouldnt be averaging the most PPG. and theres a difference between a SHOOTING guard and what Steph will be, a LAYUP guard...because thats how he gets his points mainly...and would still if put in the SG position...hes not tall enough to shoot over the 6'5 natural SG's nor is he fast enough to get around them either! Keep Stephon at the point guard positon because that is where he belongs!

why must something so easy be made so difficult??? names aside lets look at this problem differently...

a 6'10 big bodied, mobile, athletic, good shooter
a 6'7 long bodied, lane-driving dunker, defender, unreliable jump shot
a 6'6 athletic, can post up, dunker with above average shooting skills
a 6'5 scrawny, dribbler with great shooting skills, poor shot selection
a 6'2 dribbler, lane-driving, playmaker, layup waiting to happen 8.1 APG
a 5'9 dribbler, driver/dunker, passer, fast paced

you have 3 positions to fill and 2 to each position what do you do? what do you do?

hmm i think id put the first two as SF's, the second 2 as SG's and the last 2 as PG's...disagree???

Woah woah... Let's back up. If you read my statement you'd see that what I said was "If your point guard is the leading scorer on your team, you've got a serious problem. "Ether" he's not distributing the ball well enough "or" his options to distribute the ball are limited." I'm not saying at all that Steph was bad PG, just that he may be a better SG. Why do you think Larry wants Snow? To warm the bench while Marbury starts as point guard. I don't think so. You underestimate Steph. He's a good player that will soon be a great player and is a pretty good shooter. A lay up guard? Come on! Do you think all of his points made last year were in lay ups. In the east Steph will hold his own at two. As far as Ariza, ha ha. Yeah I know that was off the top with that one. I'm not concerned with what knicks fans think, or think they think. Most fans seem to have a slight case of dementia. They love you, they love you not! Steph belongs at PG. lol I can think of a hall of famor that might disagree with you.
Better distributors that Steph. That's an easy one. Ever heard of a guy named Jason Kid?