Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: QuEntin Richardson.. Tuff enough?

  1. #1
    Next season, keep waiting donchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    1,697
    Rep Power
    12

    Default QuEntin Richardson.. Tuff enough?

    OK, I'll be honest, we've been talking about old news for a while now. I feel it's time to go out on a limb and come up with a few new ones.

    Recap: Quintin Richardson was trades from Pheonix to NY for Kurt Thomas as we all know. Q Rich has big shoes to fill. Thomas was with out question the tuffest guy on the knicks squad since Charles Oakley. (If you don't know who Oakley is you must go to bed right away!) So the question that comes to mind is, is Richardson tuff enough. Will he go inside and be some what of a threat or just settle for the open jump shot.
    Pros & Cons

    Pro: Young and athletic
    Con: May be prone to injury.
    Con: Married to Singer Brandy. (Good @&$$^ can make your legs week.)
    Pro: Last year seasion high 37pts

    I'm curious to what u guys think. Some say we don't need another streaky shooter, but I know this kid can dunk is @ss off!

  2. #2
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,590
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    tough enough? tougher than crawford yes! and thats all we need, a stronger more mature Shooting Guard and thats what we have.

    his back was a problem but Isiah made sure insurance covered his back and had tests done before he accepted the trade. Thats what made it take 2+ weeks to go through.

    not sure if you remember the old Quentin Richardson? the one who played in LA for the Clippers. the "Q-Rich" you are familiar with now is the D'Antoni formed Richardson. the run and gun poor shot selection settle for a 3 or jumpshot Richardson...

    the real Richardson is the one from LA. the one who posted up like nobodies business. the one who passed or dribble to create the best shot available. and in the press conference, when acquired, he said the plus side of coming to the knicks is the ability to play his type of game his ORIGINAL style..

    with Quentin I see nothing but a plus side. a young, athletic, 6'6 shooting guard, with incredible dunking, posting up and shooting skills..

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

    Default

    I never seen Kurt thomas as someone who was "tuff" but to anwser your ? yes q-rich is a quick athletic strong 2 guard/3 who can do it all

    he can defend a lil shoot dunk post up and grab some boards........

    i think Q will be a great asset to this team

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    east coast
    Posts
    94
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I think kurt thomas was tough just because he wasn't the strongest, quickest, or most athletic guy but somehow he found ways to be a tough defender and rebounder. I've seen him miss easy dunks which is pathetic for a 6 foot 9 player but i gotta give him credit for how tough he played. At the same time, oakley was much tougher.

    I agree about q-rich, hes a better defender than crawford and he'll contribute a lot to the team.

  5. #5
    Superstar ny3nyk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Queens, New York
    Posts
    520
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    yea hes tough enough but not at small foward. its time we play our players in their natural positions, and what kind of game they specialize in. i think in getting q-rich we are getting wayyy more than we deserve for kurt thomas. it gives us a versatile guard that is actually BIG and bulky, unlike crawford. i expect richardson's rebounding to go way up

  6. #6
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    College VA TECH
    Posts
    29
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Q .Rich

    I think Q was a good pick up for the Knicks hopefully he can help spread the floor...and give us some defense...other than that matador crap H20 has been getting away with for since he came into the leauge..I mean what other college player has played for their father their entire basketball life? But anywho he needs to go back to posting guys up abd banging on the inside and then kickking the ball back out and of course NYK is all about defense kicking the crap out of you and taking it to the whole.

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    London/Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    41
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I don't think who he's married to has anything to do with his game .

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    86
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    well think about it this way.. would u rather have nate robinson and Q or an oldd kurt thomas. IMO i dont think kurt thomas is Tuff enough nemore..

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    470
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    excellent point dont forget nate essentially came with the package

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    QUEENS
    Posts
    101
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Q is a big strong SG who can rebound shoot and post up. As long as he doesnt chuck up shots like he did in Phoenix, he is good with me. I wanna see him get down and bang around for some boards and inside points. He could have a good inside outside game. Much better than Crawford.

  11. #11
    Knicks Guru hometheaterguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    I see the tandem of Marbury, Crawford and Quentin as a HUGE question mark. Between the three of them, they should set NBA records in 3 point attempts and shot attempts in a game! Also, if QR does start at the 3, we will be a very small team from 3-1. If Curry is healthy, stays with the Knicks and sarts at the 5, we will be the worst rebounding team in the NBA. Listen, I am not upset on loosing Kurt Thomas, in the QR trade. The players that the Knicks have used in these trades are, imo, expendable. Sweets is the one that had some type of a defensive game, but I can live with trading him if we get back someone who fills a need. It seems like Isiah keeps adding more and more scorers and chipping away at a team the was bad on D and making them anemic on D! We have a defensive minded Coach and a team that is turing into a run and gun squad. It doesn't make sence to me at all!! Am I crazy or am I seeing things perfectly clear??!!!?? If they Started JJ at the 5 and put Curry at the 4, then we would have some force in the front court. Ariza and QR starting will give us a little more size and gearth at the 3 and 2. While QR and JC are both 6'5", QR is a "bigger" guy. But we really need to add a guy who can defend and he needs to be a 4.

  12. #12
    Superstar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    955
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    i think ariza will soon be at the 3 keeping q at the 2. size isnt really an issue that way and if marbury becomes more of a passing pg the ball should be evenly distributed around everyone. btw i think q is listed at 6'5 but hes still taller and bigger than craw and has a great post up game and is a great rebounder.

Similar Threads

  1. Jeffries a Knick. Is there room for Richardson?
    By donchris in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: Aug 14, 2006, 10:12
  2. Trade Reported: KT for Q Richardson
    By rady in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: Jun 23, 2005, 18:41
  3. Q Richardson
    By e_D in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Jun 02, 2004, 14:17

Posting Permissions

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