Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 80

Thread: Has crawford really improved? Is he better than a mediocre SG?

  1. #61
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by jzero29
    You see i tend to admire Q's offensive game, he can shoot, and then he can post up. before his back started bothering him all season, he was even doing some good cutting, finishing with some crazy spin moves to the hoop. I wouldn't start carrol, he'd come off the bench, like i think jamaal should be. As far as jamaals penetration, guys like nate and steph could see a couple more attempts and drives. and shots.
    I don't think Nate will be a Knick come camp time. Too many players... and the way he played in summer league shows growth in his game. Heck I hope he goes in a deal for Artest sooner than later!

  2. #62
    Superstar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    519
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    Its not really my opinion, its more what I know is better for this team. Crawford hasn't lead us to any playoff appearances.

    You would have Crawford over Barnes and Carroll, because you like Jamal. Thats opinion. You brought no information or reason why you would choose Crawford over them.

    Caroll and Barnes are cheaper.
    They're actually bigger guards than Crawford.
    They don't dominate the ball and commit painful to the brain turnovers.
    They're role players. Crawford may have more talent than them, but Caroll and Barnes would fit better on this team cause they know they're role. Crawford has no identity on the basketball court. He plays by himself most of the time. Throwing an alley oop to Curry doesn't make him the best teammate or even the best passer on the team. I've seen Crawford ignore David Lee alot of times when he was open. Guys like Collins and Marbury pass it to everyone, even a guy like Jefferies. Crawford kills our ball movement, and I don't want that on my team. He doesn't understand the concept for 5 man team basketball. Therefor he needs to go somewhere and kill other team's ball movement.

    Q and Lee are better than Crawford and added more to the team than Crawford could do. Scoring wasn't a problem, when we lost Lee and Richardson, we lost our consistency on both sides. Marbury, Richardson, Curry, Lee and Balkman were the core of this team that help us to a couple of wins.

    How do you know Crawford would of lead the Knicks to the playoff if he was injured? Stop assuming and predicting things now. Thats something you and I don't know, so bother bringing it up. Lets keep this discussion on things we know about.


    32% is a terrible percentage for a 3pt shooter, you can't even ignore that. If was 35-36%, then I wouldn't care, cause Jamal chucks alot, and thats average. But 32% is terrible. The floor was spaced out? For what? For an iso chuck and miss play by Crawford? Or what about his signature traveling move? Oh man, that move is so nasty...its just great when Crawford carries the ball and hear the ref blow that whistle so loudly, don't you love it?



    It was a typo, I meant to say game. Like I said. "So teams shouldn't give a **** the first 3 quaters and just play their offense to the end? Is this your defense for Crawford? Oh yes, he's a "Shooting" guard, he's suppose to shoot, now what are point guards suppose to do, point their fingers? Please man, Crawford SUCKS at shooting, so we don't need him to shoot. You don't let a 40% FG and 32% 3pt chucker continually shoot the rock, thats just plain stupid."

    If you never saw Carroll play when why even speak of him? You obviously don't know who you're talking and comparing Crawford to someone you have no history off.

    I don't even know what a trick pony is.

    Look at it like this.
    We need a shooter. We don't need a guy who can create his own shot, we have Marbury, Richardson, Robinson, Randolph, Collins, Curry, Chandler and even Nichols shown he could create his own shot.
    We need that shooter to be a role player and not take away shot attempts for our scoring options like Curry, Randolph and Marbury.
    We need an efficient shooter, not a streaky chucker.

    Caroll is a better rebounder than Crawford, and has equally or better per 40 stats than Jamal.

    Matt Caroll
    18.7 PPG
    FG% .417
    3P% .399
    FT% .865
    1.7 TO
    4.7 RPG
    6.1 SMP(shots made per)
    14.6 SP(shots per)
    4.6 FTMP(free throw made per)
    5.1 FTP(free throw per)

    1.3 stl

    Jamal Crawford

    17.8 PPG
    FG% - .401
    3P% - .342
    FT% - .830
    2.7 TO
    3.6 RPG
    6.4 SMP(shots made per)
    16 SP(shots per)

    3.0 FTMP(free throw made per)
    3.7 FTP(free throw per)
    1.4 stl


    So what information can we observe from this?
    We we now see Carroll is as productive as Crawford, scoring wise, while taking less shots per game and committing less turnovers per game. Thats a huge plus.
    Carroll has better shooting percentages from everywhere in the court, compared to Crawford.
    Carroll is also a better rebounder than Jamal.
    Jamal is a very soft player, we understood this a long time ago(you better had understand that and not come back with me some nonsense). Jamal is proven to be even more of a softer player since we now see Carroll has the ability to get to the free throw line more frequently and much better than Jamal. Jamal's quickness, agility, and crossovers are usually if he doesn't get to the free throw line enough. Jamal Crawford goes to the FT line 3 times a game every time he plays close to 40 minutes? What a waste. We don't need a guy camping around the perimeter all the time, who can't even hit his 3pt shots consistently.

    No one called Carroll a better defender or even a good defender. They're both ****ty defenders. Would you guys kindly shut the **** up about the most irrelevant things and get to the real points, thanks.

    Crawford playing 38 minutes a game = close basketball games, no matter how well we play, Crawford is always giving the opposition the chance to score with his turnovers and bad shot selection that lead to easy open basketballs in the fast break. Teams who play Jamal Crawford this many minutes usually finish under 10 games and under or even more than 10 games. The Bulls led by Crawford as their first option were never successful. Same with our Knicks. Its a simple concept to understand, Crawford will never help us be a sucessful team now, and in the future.

    lilman, don't get emotional. Name calling, screaming like a girl on the computer doesn't proven you point. Throw information at me and correct me for my errors, cause I do make errors as you saw with the typo I make.



    Why do you want to see Carroll create his own shot when we got 5-7 other guys on the team who can do that themselves? We need a guy who can hit an open shot, consistently. Jamal isn't that guy.



    Thanks brother.
    Listen Man, stop with the garbage.. you want to quote per 40 stats to me ... okay here is a good one for you per 40 freaks who think that is actually any kind of realistic stat:
    TRB AST STL BLK TO PF PTS
    9.2 1.0 0.8 3.2 3.4 8.3 12.9

    WOW, I think the knicks should sign up this guy right now.. he is exactly what we need... 3 blocks a game 9 rebounds 13 points whew heww... Oh wait its JEROME JAMES!

    STOP WITH THE PER 40 STATS MAN...These dudes don't play those minutes for a reason..

    And I saw what you saw of Matt Carrol when he played against the Knicks... Those are all games I saw - and that is all the games you saw... Yes I am telling you exactly what you saw and didnt see.

  3. #63
    12th man
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Far far away from the orgy that consist of clyde, 8's, rady, smokes and rono
    Posts
    11,260
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    You think Knicks should sign a guy who averages 8.3 fouls per 40 minutes? I'm glad your not anywhere near the front office for the Knicks. BTW, why does it sound like you're about to have a nervous break down when you're about to post?

    I had NBA League Pass all season (To watch my boy Arroyo be mad inconsistant off the bench), Felton is one of my favorite point guards in the NBA, and I caught a little, but not a lot of the Bobcats. Carroll isn't a bad player, he isn't a better overall player then Crawford, but he would be a superior fit for our team.


    Knicks4lyfe, I like Jamal as a person too, but as a player he cannot fit certain roles we need him to play. If Jamal is willing to adjust to a different style, then I'm willing to keep him for another 5-7 years. If Jamal is going to be the same player again this season, I want no business with Jamal, and you shouldn't want any business either, unless you want to see the Knicks lose a couple of more games.

    What you said about Jamal, he can more every time over...which means he has to fail more every time over, for every shot Crawford makes theres a turnover and a miss shot. Its not a good ratio, and Jamal isn't very efficient compared to other SG's in the NBA. Give me the role player who does his job and hit shots.

    Jamal Crawford has a great game against Wade, now thats going to justify your point that Crawford understands his role on the team for the whole season? Crawford has scored 50 for the Bulls before. Did that matter to Chicago? Hell no. What matter to Chicago was winning. They understood Crawford as a primary or secondary scoring option would not lead them to winning. Therefor they traded him for whatever they could get it. Isiah thought Crawford would be all star caliber, but he turned out to be wrong on his gamble/trade. Chicago owned us, got cap space, draft picks and now have Ben Gordon at the SG position, one of the best scorers/shooters in the NBA.

    Not every coach starts this best 5, this isn't NBA live. The Spurs put Ginobili back on the bench, their all star SG, because at times he wouldn't play on the same pace with Duncan and Parker, so they replaced Ginobili with Finley, a veteran player who understood his role on a championship team. This move happened to work out great for the Spurs and led them into a championship.

    Frye is a way better shooter than Randolph? Frye was shooting 38% from the FG half way throughout the season. Frye is a good jumpshooter who's on the same level as Randolph on jumpshooting, lets not go overboard with "waaay". Randolph happends to be a superior overall player.

    Let Crawford go. Bring in a shooter or perimeter defender @ the 2. Something that Crawford isn't, the Anti-Jamal. We have Collins, Chandler, Richardson and Nichols, all capable of playing the 2, let them develop, please don't waste 38 minutes of playing for the Crawford freelance. Stutterstep, Crossover, launch 20 foot fadeaway. Leads to some nasty FG nights of 4-22 for example. Crawford’s thin frame is too ill-suited to fight through picks, and too fragile to slow down a drive once the other team gets a step on him. Jamal has an excellent handle, but there is nothing more frustrating than having Crawford settling for a jumper (comprise 80% of his shots), after he’s faked his defender. Crawford should force the issue towards the basket with his great passing and dribbling skills. He would do well getting fouled driving to the hoop, since he shoots over 85% from the FT

    Plus we have too many guys on our team who can the retarded isolation play Crawford does. I wouldn't miss his autistic style of play and his 6 - 26 FG performances one bit.
    Last edited by metrocard; Jul 24, 2007 at 20:09.

  4. #64
    Member brooklyn_baller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    321
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    I would say yes. Come one he is Mr. Clutch for the Knicks. He has an inpressing jump shot and dribble. What more can people say about him. He would have been the best guard for the Knicks last season if Isiah didn't require all those other guards who can't do nothing. I would say the he is our best guard and better than a mediocre shooting guard.

  5. #65
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    Knicks4lyfe, I like Jamal as a person too, but as a player he cannot fit certain roles we need him to play. If Jamal is willing to adjust to a different style, then I'm willing to keep him for another 5-7 years. If Jamal is going to be the same player again this season, I want no business with Jamal, and you shouldn't want any business either, unless you want to see the Knicks lose a couple of more games.

    What you said about Jamal, he can more every time over...which means he has to fail more every time over, for every shot Crawford makes theres a turnover and a miss shot. Its not a good ratio, and Jamal isn't very efficient compared to other SG's in the NBA. Give me the role player who does his job and hit shots.

    Jamal Crawford has a great game against Wade, now thats going to justify your point that Crawford understands his role on the team for the whole season? Crawford has scored 50 for the Bulls before. Did that matter to Chicago? Hell no. What matter to Chicago was winning. They understood Crawford as a primary or secondary scoring option would not lead them to winning. Therefor they traded him for whatever they could get it. Isiah thought Crawford would be all star caliber, but he turned out to be wrong on his gamble/trade. Chicago owned us, got cap space, draft picks and now have Ben Gordon at the SG position, one of the best scorers/shooters in the NBA.

    Not every coach starts this best 5, this isn't NBA live. The Spurs put Ginobili back on the bench, their all star SG, because at times he wouldn't play on the same pace with Duncan and Parker, so they replaced Ginobili with Finley, a veteran player who understood his role on a championship team. This move happened to work out great for the Spurs and led them into a championship.

    Frye is a way better shooter than Randolph? Frye was shooting 38% from the FG half way throughout the season. Frye is a good jumpshooter who's on the same level as Randolph on jumpshooting, lets not go overboard with "waaay". Randolph happends to be a superior overall player.

    Let Crawford go. Bring in a shooter or perimeter defender @ the 2. Something that Crawford isn't, the Anti-Jamal. We have Collins, Chandler, Richardson and Nichols, all capable of playing the 2, let them develop, please don't waste 38 minutes of playing for the Crawford freelance. Stutterstep, Crossover, launch 20 foot fadeaway. Leads to some nasty FG nights of 4-22 for example. Crawford’s thin frame is too ill-suited to fight through picks, and too fragile to slow down a drive once the other team gets a step on him. Jamal has an excellent handle, but there is nothing more frustrating than having Crawford settling for a jumper (comprise 80% of his shots), after he’s faked his defender. Crawford should force the issue towards the basket with his great passing and dribbling skills. He would do well getting fouled driving to the hoop, since he shoots over 85% from the FT

    Plus we have too many guys on our team who can the retarded isolation play Crawford does. I wouldn't miss his autistic style of play and his 6 - 26 FG performances one bit.
    Ok. Im lost as to what Jamal does not fit that Carrol and Barnes do other than MAYBE ( Carrol clearly, Barnes iffy imo off one year, cmon ) Shoot better? And I mean, correct me if Im wrong, but there aint exactly a million options out there for the Knicks to just go and get or trade for. Who is the one guy available that you can say trade Jamal now for? Collins likely did not develop his shot enough to be an every day two, they'd leave him open like they did last year when JAMAL WENT DOWN! And no, not saying his 50 point game was the end all, Im saying if you watch the highlights, look at where most the shots came from. After he broke Wade down which he did all game it seemedm he'd get right to the foul line and pop. Also watch the move he gave Mourning and went to the hole. THAT is the Jamal Crawford I like to see because that is him playing to his strengths. That is how he was playing from feb on. And if he continues to, whats the beef?

    I am thinking the complaint is as it usually is with Knick fans, good but not good enough. Yea Crawford got game but he cant shoot well enough. Funny, when we HAD a shooter a great one mind you in Houston, everyone said yea... great shooter, but we like Sprewell better cuz he goes to the hole! Now, we have a two gaurd who has handle, an ok 3p % (could be better) and a really good mid range game and solid passer and again... all we do is complain. He aint big enough, he aint as good as this guy at this, or aint as good as that guy at that.

    Before he was hurt, Crawford was straight up ballin. That is all I care about as a fan. Knicks had no problem scoring, was no triple teams on Curry, and very rarely double teams because of the perimeter threat we had with Crawford and Steph and at times Q. Curry was 25 a night it seemed every night without issue until Crawford the bum got hurt.

    With Zach now in the fold, there will be a lot more 1 on 1 perimeter play, and I'd rather Have Crawford and Steph being able to break their men down at anytime as well as from the perimeter, than a guy who just stands there and that's it.

    Collins can be the backup and provide the d, so no need to go searching there. Nichols as good as he looked in summer league, probably needs a year or two at best before talking about starting. Chandler as well.

    100 bucks on an open 15 footer, Channing or Zach? Honest? That's what I mean way better. fg% can be deceiving. Channing had no post game and forced a lot of tough one handers. Facing his man he is more comfy. As a jumpshooter, he smokes Zach. Everytime Frye takes an open 15 footer you think it's going down. You aint that confident with Zach though he can make em.

    And Spurs needed spark off the bench, something Manu can do well. Finley not so well. Not that Finley is per say a better starter. And they won cuz they play good team D, and they have Tim Duncan ( who bores me to death )

  6. #66
    Superstar ShairanXIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    501
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    32% is a terrible percentage for a 3pt shooter, you can't even ignore that. If was 35-36%, then I wouldn't care, cause Jamal chucks alot, and thats average. But 32% is terrible. The floor was spaced out? For what? For an iso chuck and miss play by Crawford? Or what about his signature traveling move? Oh man, that move is so nasty...its just great when Crawford carries the ball and hear the ref blow that whistle so loudly, don't you love it?
    actually metro 33% 3 pt fg = 50% 2 pt fg... so 32 is just about average... not terrible... but he chucks so many bad looking ones that it makes him look like a worse shooter than he is... kinda like starks that way (minus the defense and grit)...

    oh... and ginobli started coming off the bench for Brent Barry and Bowen like 2 years ago (after chip #2), since Barry could never get his rythm right off the bench...

    Originally Posted by Knicks4lyfe
    Yes I like Jamal, and I happen to like Carrol and Barnes for what they do well also. Im saying I will take the player that can do more every time over the player who can do less.

    Crawford may never be the shooter Carrol is, Carrol may never be the passer, or scorer Crawford is. Because Jamal has much more ability, I will take him every time. I feel like people are going more so on Jamal of old than Jamal of last year. I myself like to judge people based on how I seen them last play. Last I seen Crawford on the floor, the Knicks had no issues scoring points. Losing Q did not help either, but it was not the same impact as losing Jamal.

    FLIP SIDE. It is clear to everyone who has ever watched Zach Randolph and Channing Frye play that Frye is a waaaay better shooter from the perimeter than Zach. But we're so much happier to have Zach than Frye why? BECAUSE HE CAN DO MORE! And that is why even if Barnes or Carrol were on this team right now, neither would start, because the coach is smart enough to play his best 5, and those two would not beat out Jamal.
    the point is that although Jamal is a better talent, Barnes or Carrol would fit in with our current team better... especially since he'll be 3 - 5 option offensively... making first or second option money... i know the money isn't his fault... and the roster makeup isn't either... if Q is healthy then I'd keep him and let him go locco on the second unit... i'm not sure he's a starter next year either...

    Originally Posted by Knicks4lyfe
    Ok. Im lost as to what Jamal does not fit that Carrol and Barnes do other than MAYBE ( Carrol clearly, Barnes iffy imo off one year, cmon ) Shoot better? And I mean, correct me if Im wrong, but there aint exactly a million options out there for the Knicks to just go and get or trade for. Who is the one guy available that you can say trade Jamal now for? Collins likely did not develop his shot enough to be an every day two, they'd leave him open like they did last year when JAMAL WENT DOWN! And no, not saying his 50 point game was the end all, Im saying if you watch the highlights, look at where most the shots came from. After he broke Wade down which he did all game it seemedm he'd get right to the foul line and pop. Also watch the move he gave Mourning and went to the hole. THAT is the Jamal Crawford I like to see because that is him playing to his strengths. That is how he was playing from feb on. And if he continues to, whats the beef?

    I am thinking the complaint is as it usually is with Knick fans, good but not good enough. Yea Crawford got game but he cant shoot well enough. Funny, when we HAD a shooter a great one mind you in Houston, everyone said yea... great shooter, but we like Sprewell better cuz he goes to the hole! Now, we have a two gaurd who has handle, an ok 3p % (could be better) and a really good mid range game and solid passer and again... all we do is complain. He aint big enough, he aint as good as this guy at this, or aint as good as that guy at that.

    Before he was hurt, Crawford was straight up ballin. That is all I care about as a fan. Knicks had no problem scoring, was no triple teams on Curry, and very rarely double teams because of the perimeter threat we had with Crawford and Steph and at times Q. Curry was 25 a night it seemed every night without issue until Crawford the bum got hurt.

    With Zach now in the fold, there will be a lot more 1 on 1 perimeter play, and I'd rather Have Crawford and Steph being able to break their men down at anytime as well as from the perimeter, than a guy who just stands there and that's it.

    Collins can be the backup and provide the d, so no need to go searching there. Nichols as good as he looked in summer league, probably needs a year or two at best before talking about starting. Chandler as well.

    100 bucks on an open 15 footer, Channing or Zach? Honest? That's what I mean way better. fg% can be deceiving. Channing had no post game and forced a lot of tough one handers. Facing his man he is more comfy. As a jumpshooter, he smokes Zach. Everytime Frye takes an open 15 footer you think it's going down. You aint that confident with Zach though he can make em.
    you're right about the chemistry... but some guys do get better when their crutch leaves the team (Dirk, Nash, Mac)...

    i don't see how there will be more one-on-one perimeter play with Zach in the fold... wouldn't that decrease it since he and curry would get the majority of the touches (a good thing)... meaning no more 16 seconds of dribbling without setting up the offense...

    i think you need to watch Zach play more... 100 bucks for a 15 footer? I got Zach... reminds me a lot of a young C-Webb (minus the passing)...

  7. #67
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by ShairanXIII
    the point is that although Jamal is a better talent, Barnes or Carrol would fit in with our current team better... especially since he'll be 3 - 5 option offensively... making first or second option money... i know the money isn't his fault... and the roster makeup isn't either... if Q is healthy then I'd keep him and let him go locco on the second unit... i'm not sure he's a starter next year either...



    you're right about the chemistry... but some guys do get better when their crutch leaves the team (Dirk, Nash, Mac)...

    i don't see how there will be more one-on-one perimeter play with Zach in the fold... wouldn't that decrease it since he and curry would get the majority of the touches (a good thing)... meaning no more 16 seconds of dribbling without setting up the offense...

    i think you need to watch Zach play more... 100 bucks for a 15 footer? I got Zach... reminds me a lot of a young C-Webb (minus the passing)...
    He said as a starter, and I highly doubt that. You're going to face teams that will play straight up at times, and that would make Barnes and Carrol ineffective since they can't put it on the floor. Considering especially since none of the gaurds will probably be posting up any, it's even more imperative that you have some that can beat their man.

    Off picks, screens and the such, you need ball handlers and good passers to handle good rotating defenses. You want Barnes and Carrol in that role? Cuz good teams will force them to play to their weaknesses. Better believe it. I think we could use players like them off the bench for 20-25 min per, but not starting. They just don't do enough. We don't run Dantoni's gimmick offense where Nash runs off a million picks and passes to a team fulla spot up shooters. We have a power team. Good teams will double and rotate well, and those guys who can't put the ball on the floor will have bad nights. It's a headache to double, then rotate, then you run into guys like Crawford and Steph who then play off that and go by their man, OR shoot.

    Curry
    Zach
    Q ( but I hope this becomes Artest )
    Crawford
    Steph

    No way you can look at that lineup and put Carrol or Barnes there and think it's better.

    I gotta take Frye wide open. But you aint doing bad either way.

    Zach>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Frye cuz he is simply the better player. Like Crawford is to Barnes and Carrol. And for this team

  8. #68
    Superstar jzero29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, New York
    Posts
    648
    Rep Power
    8

    Nyk Logo ShairanXIII, intelegence

    Originally Posted by ShairanXIII
    ****... my "intelegence" is being questioned by the ignorant... i was talking about in 2004 - 2005 when we signed him... the point was that Isiah's plan fell apart then and we're suffering for it now... we were already OVER the cap when we signed him... remember? crawford added to our numbers beyond 2006 (when H20's contract expired)... but his signing didn't suddenly put us over the cap... c'mon dude... lemme explain forums to you... READ... ANALYZE... DEVELOP A RATIONAL COUNTER-ARGUMENT... RESEARCH (If necessary)... REPLY... btw... it's INTELLIGENCE...


    my question to you though... who would you trade 'Mal for?
    My whole pointabout the cap, is the knicks are willing to put up with these underachieving players getting overpaid salaries, just so they have a flashy game or some big names and overlook the role player that can actually help. It's a Sickness us knickfans have. We want the star player, we want the big name, that is why we are so high over the cap, and will never get the big name while he's any good, Teams only trade those players when they stop being cost effective and NY collects them and signs them to these crippling contracts. In that cap remark i made, i stated so much over the cap, Meaning They are over, but now they are more over, they are paying more than they would for lux tax than if they didn't have him. It's a general statement about the knicks philosophy, Isaih, when he got here was given green light to go against the cap. I mean he can keep adding salary in sign and trades, and getting guys like crawford, that other teams aren't interested in for that kind of money. To get our cap under control, and go in the right direction, isiah should be looking to add the role player, the regular guy, not another bloated contract for an overhyped guard such as crawford, that doesn't fit the system. Who by the way, bought into the system because it allowed him to shoot like a mad man. It made him second option and put ball in his hands most of the game. Anyway, not having jamaal would put the knicks heading in the right direction, and if we keep going the other way, by adding more jamaals...we'll never be a championship contending team again, and you can kiss glory days goodbye. So if they had not signed jamaal, let those contracts expire and signed cheaper guys that fit better in the system, we'd still be in the same mess? It's the aattitude of, well we're over already might as well as tack on more, burden our future. Besides the fact that jamaal isn't a good sg, he's overpaid. He contributes to a bigger problem the knicks have with the cap. Contribute meaning, he's not the only problem or cause of problem, but he adds to it. He gets paid to much for to little. It was a half sarcastic statment, stating that the knicks, need to pay more to lux tax because if they didn't they'd miss it. That paying the luxary tax was part of jamaals appeal to the knicks.

    These past few years the knicks haven't been surviving, they haven't been close to .500 in years. They've been a joke, even the year they made playoffs, no one was worried about the knicks, no one feared the knicks, like the good old days. You call the jamaal crawford error surviving? Ha!

    If detroits offense is so predictable, why are they in the playoffs every year? You don't think the free agent lose of ben wallace on defence, has anything to do with detroit not winning? Did you forget webbers contributions to detroit? R.Wallace's inside and outside game? billups doesn't set anyone up, he never drives and kicks out to RIP R.Wallace or PRINCE, there are no dishes to McDyess webber or a cuting prince or rip? They didn't have one of the most ballanced offenses this past year? Your insane.

    I will say, darkos contract is crazy! is it really 3yrs 21mill? Maybe he'll have a decent year and the knicks will trade for him to, over rated, and overpaid, perfect for crawford. maybe when crawford awful contract is ready to expire, they can trade for darko. Better yet it will probably be a sign and trade, knicks to far over cap to sign him in 3yrs, and the knicks will give up their draft picks(only place isiah can judge talent) and probably best low salary player with decent overpaid player, with expiring contract for darko.

    Who to get for jamaal, i don't even care. I just think he cloggs up the offense, excludingto many other talented players, marbury Q and frye all took steps backward in there offensive game, the only one he helps is eddy curry. Commits to many turnovers to have the rock all the time, and I've just had enough, Trade him for a draft pick, or if his contracts expiring soon let it.. Clear some cap room(i know that won't fix it, but it's a step in right direction)
    We need to start clearing Cap room so we can offer a stud free agent worth aquiring an appealing contract. Let some young palyers with potential(that isiah seems to be able to pick) develope. Rebuild. I like watching young players. Ditch the high priced dead weight. J.James, J.Jefferies. Although they aren't dead weight, crawford and Q, they are overpaid. and haven't produced.

  9. #69
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by jzero29
    My whole pointabout the cap, is the knicks are willing to put up with these underachieving players getting overpaid salaries, just so they have a flashy game or some big names and overlook the role player that can actually help. It's a Sickness us knickfans have. We want the star player, we want the big name, that is why we are so high over the cap, and will never get the big name while he's any good, Teams only trade those players when they stop being cost effective and NY collects them and signs them to these crippling contracts. In that cap remark i made, i stated so much over the cap, Meaning They are over, but now they are more over, they are paying more than they would for lux tax than if they didn't have him. It's a general statement about the knicks philosophy, Isaih, when he got here was given green light to go against the cap. I mean he can keep adding salary in sign and trades, and getting guys like crawford, that other teams aren't interested in for that kind of money. To get our cap under control, and go in the right direction, isiah should be looking to add the role player, the regular guy, not another bloated contract for an overhyped guard such as crawford, that doesn't fit the system. Who by the way, bought into the system because it allowed him to shoot like a mad man. It made him second option and put ball in his hands most of the game. Anyway, not having jamaal would put the knicks heading in the right direction, and if we keep going the other way, by adding more jamaals...we'll never be a championship contending team again, and you can kiss glory days goodbye. So if they had not signed jamaal, let those contracts expire and signed cheaper guys that fit better in the system, we'd still be in the same mess? It's the aattitude of, well we're over already might as well as tack on more, burden our future. Besides the fact that jamaal isn't a good sg, he's overpaid. He contributes to a bigger problem the knicks have with the cap. Contribute meaning, he's not the only problem or cause of problem, but he adds to it. He gets paid to much for to little. It was a half sarcastic statment, stating that the knicks, need to pay more to lux tax because if they didn't they'd miss it. That paying the luxary tax was part of jamaals appeal to the knicks.

    These past few years the knicks haven't been surviving, they haven't been close to .500 in years. They've been a joke, even the year they made playoffs, no one was worried about the knicks, no one feared the knicks, like the good old days. You call the jamaal crawford error surviving? Ha!

    If detroits offense is so predictable, why are they in the playoffs every year? You don't think the free agent lose of ben wallace on defence, has anything to do with detroit not winning? Did you forget webbers contributions to detroit? R.Wallace's inside and outside game? billups doesn't set anyone up, he never drives and kicks out to RIP R.Wallace or PRINCE, there are no dishes to McDyess webber or a cuting prince or rip? They didn't have one of the most ballanced offenses this past year? Your insane.

    I will say, darkos contract is crazy! is it really 3yrs 21mill? Maybe he'll have a decent year and the knicks will trade for him to, over rated, and overpaid, perfect for crawford. maybe when crawford awful contract is ready to expire, they can trade for darko. Better yet it will probably be a sign and trade, knicks to far over cap to sign him in 3yrs, and the knicks will give up their draft picks(only place isiah can judge talent) and probably best low salary player with decent overpaid player, with expiring contract for darko.

    Who to get for jamaal, i don't even care. I just think he cloggs up the offense, excludingto many other talented players, marbury Q and frye all took steps backward in there offensive game, the only one he helps is eddy curry. Commits to many turnovers to have the rock all the time, and I've just had enough, Trade him for a draft pick, or if his contracts expiring soon let it.. Clear some cap room(i know that won't fix it, but it's a step in right direction)
    We need to start clearing Cap room so we can offer a stud free agent worth aquiring an appealing contract. Let some young palyers with potential(that isiah seems to be able to pick) develope. Rebuild. I like watching young players. Ditch the high priced dead weight. J.James, J.Jefferies. Although they aren't dead weight, crawford and Q, they are overpaid. and haven't produced.

    J, you remember this team when Zeke got here? Honestly? All I keep hearing you guys say is Crawford does not fit the system. Isaiah's goal was to get younger and more athletic. That was his goal from jump starting with Steph. Then it was JC, then Qrich, then Curry. Then the drafts, Nate, Frye, Lee, Chandler, Balkman. If you look at those players... They all have these two things in common... YOUNG AND ATHLETIC. So technically, JC does fit the system. Can he play better? Sure. EVERYONE CAN. Curry can play defense like he weighs. Nate can stop going under the screens, and go over. Lee can learn to move his feet better on d and keep his hands up. Get a 3 point shot. Balkman can gaurd anyone 6.9 and under, but he sure can learn to shoot better. EVERYONE on the Knicks can get better. And based off last year, I have huge hopes that they see their deficiencies. For the first time in years the Knicks were not just a jumbled mess. They were actually playing like a team. And JC was a big part of that. The system is in place. The ball runs through Curry and Zach, and if it swings out, Steph, JC , and whoever else knowing what to do next, whether repost, or drive, or shoot. That is the system. JC played within it last year. So how do you guys keep saying he does not fit the system?

    It would be better if ya'll just said... I don't like him as a player personally and I want him gone. The not fitting the system mantra does not fit because I tell you what, many people outside of here who watched the Knicks say JC was actually a BRIGHT spot on the team last year. He was not the reason Steph's numbers went down, Zeke's system is the reason it went down, because it forced Curry to play big in the paint offensively. Because of that, we not have the most dominant big man in the game offensively, barely 25. No one knew Curry had that in him. He had the ability, but it never came to fruition. Because Steph took a back seat, now we know! And the team is better off for it. Curry's confidence rose. And if he gets that 15 footer he started to use because of the triple teams late last season, the league can hang it up! Couple that with Steph finally learning to trust his teammates, and know when to turn it on offensively, and picked his game up defensively, and the same for JC mind you... he was not just gunning. For the most part he strayed away from forcing the action and played within himself.. The Knicks can make big noise if they step it up on defense.

    And remember... the system is only a year old. In camp guys will know what to do and where to be. And coming off last year with the improvements of the Lee's Balkman's, Collins's, and such we'll hopefully just pick up from where we left off and get better.

    If JC comes out like JC of old, I'll be the first one to say shoot him in the knee caps. But off last year, his best year to me and many others as a Knick... I just don't see him reverting. He finally got it...

  10. #70
    Superstar jzero29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, New York
    Posts
    648
    Rep Power
    8

    Nyk Logo New target aquired

    Okay, I'm not a fan of JC, i think he handles the ball to much, shoots poorly passes poorly and makes bad decisions, cost the knicks more games than he's won and is overpaid for is skill level. If he can fix those things, I'll love him and think he's finally improved at all and turned the corner. I do find him exciting to watch but it hasn't produced a winning season yet. I think knicks need to take the ball out of his hands and into someone more reliable.
    p.s. you are right about the system, it was set up for him to take to many shots. Him and curry, both bad passers, averaged over 6 TO a game between them. that's too much. the system was geared for isiahs most scrutinized two moves. He wants eddy to succeed and jamaal too. So he took the restraints of jamaals shot. So then it's the system i think sticks. Not just Crawfords shot.

    Either way, I harp about him being over paid, I just read malik rose makes 7.1 million this season!!! talk about over paid!!! He doesn't catch much heat because no one makes him out to be anything more than he is, a tough hard playing role player. His huge contract doesn't come up much. But 7.1 million!!! It's Sick! Everyone mentions jerome james 5.8 mill, bench warmer. jarred jefferies 5.6 million, coat rack. (someone who just sits in corner and holds peoples coats for them while they are in the game, except he's actually on the court!) Q-rich another overpaid player(8.1million), considering his back and production. Marbury, gets paid! 20million, The old marbury is worth it, he won games, got assits, scored a ton. Now all he does is watch crawford bring the ball up! If your going to pay a guy 20million per year, more than 1/3 of the NBA salary cap. If your gonna pay him you have to lethim play his game and build around him, not expect him to change into something he may not be good at. Uggggh! This is tough. I didn't know our situation was so bleak. It doesn't look like cap room is available until 2010 and bythen who knows what contracts we'll have!

  11. #71
    Member KnicksFan4Realz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Phoenix,AZ
    Posts
    406
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Does anyone here realize for the cost of Crawford, Rose, James, and Jeffries...all combined salaries for the next 3 season including this upcoming 1...we could have had RAY ALLEN...with some left over...

    Crawford $7,920,000 (2007-08) $8,640,000(2008-09)= $16,560,000
    Rose $7,101,250 (2007-08) $7,647,500(2008-09)= $14,748,750
    James $5,800,000(2007-08) $6,200,000(2008-09)= $12,000,000
    Jeffries $5,632,200 (2007-08) $6,049,400(2008-09) $6,466,600 (2009-10)= $18,148,200

    All together for these 4 players over the next 2 and 3 seasons respectively that's $ 61,456,950..

    Ray Allen's contract over the next 3 seasons including this upcoming...(2007-2010) $52,165,290...

    In this same span of time over 3 years we could have saved $9,291,660 dollars....

    This is why I do not find Isiah Thomas to be credible. Yes I know this is 1 player vs 4....and various positions....however, Ray Allen is better than all these guys combined...and cost less than all these guys combined.

    With a Marbury eventhough I'm no fan of him either...and a Curry and Randolph...U REALLY COULD'VE BEEN MAKING NOISE FOR THE NEXT 3 YEARS IN THE EAST.

  12. #72
    Superstar ShairanXIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    501
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Originally Posted by jzero29
    If detroits offense is so predictable, why are they in the playoffs every year? You don't think the free agent lose of ben wallace on defence, has anything to do with detroit not winning? Did you forget webbers contributions to detroit? R.Wallace's inside and outside game? billups doesn't set anyone up, he never drives and kicks out to RIP R.Wallace or PRINCE, there are no dishes to McDyess webber or a cuting prince or rip? They didn't have one of the most ballanced offenses this past year? Your insane.

    Who to get for jamaal, i don't even care. I just think he cloggs up the offense, excludingto many other talented players, marbury Q and frye all took steps backward in there offensive game, the only one he helps is eddy curry. Commits to many turnovers to have the rock all the time, and I've just had enough, Trade him for a draft pick, or if his contracts expiring soon let it.. Clear some cap room(i know that won't fix it, but it's a step in right direction)
    We need to start clearing Cap room so we can offer a stud free agent worth aquiring an appealing contract. Let some young palyers with potential(that isiah seems to be able to pick) develope. Rebuild. I like watching young players. Ditch the high priced dead weight. J.James, J.Jefferies. Although they aren't dead weight, crawford and Q, they are overpaid. and haven't produced.
    I cut all the parts that I AGREE with... I still think you're giving Jamal shyte for things that were beyond his control to a certain degree (coaching changes, new systems, new roles, new teammates), but I see where you're coming from...

    Detroit was in the playoffs under their last 3 coaches actually... Carlisle, LB and Saunders... that tells me that Dumars has constructed a very good roster... The team you described are the LB Pistons (offensively)... under Saunders... Chauncey brings it up and passes the ball to someone who tries to set up their own shot... LB used to milk the clock until the opponent was too tired and they'd get open shots for Rip... Saunders' style is much more quick hitting... that's why Det (and their opponents) scores so much more now... Ben Wallace left AFTER last year's debacle with Saunders in the playoffs... so no... I don't think it has anything to do with him leaving... the fact is... before inheriting a championship roster, Flip only coached one team beyond the first round...

    ohhh... and the most balanced offense last season??? that would be the Spurs...

    Since you agreed that getting rid of Mal for nothing won't bring us under cap, why do it? Why not hold on until his contract is up in 09 (opt out) or 10 (expires)? I'm not saying that he fits or that his contract matches his worth, but why not "risk" keeping a talented offensive player until we can find something better (a cheaper spot shooter or a defensive presence)?

    Originally Posted by Knicks4lyfe
    J, you remember this team when Zeke got here? Honestly? All I keep hearing you guys say is Crawford does not fit the system. Isaiah's goal was to get younger and more athletic. That was his goal from jump starting with Steph. Then it was JC, then Qrich, then Curry. Then the drafts, Nate, Frye, Lee, Chandler, Balkman. If you look at those players... They all have these two things in common... YOUNG AND ATHLETIC. So technically, JC does fit the system. Can he play better? Sure. EVERYONE CAN. Curry can play defense like he weighs. Nate can stop going under the screens, and go over. Lee can learn to move his feet better on d and keep his hands up. Get a 3 point shot. Balkman can gaurd anyone 6.9 and under, but he sure can learn to shoot better. EVERYONE on the Knicks can get better. And based off last year, I have huge hopes that they see their deficiencies. For the first time in years the Knicks were not just a jumbled mess. They were actually playing like a team. And JC was a big part of that. The system is in place. The ball runs through Curry and Zach, and if it swings out, Steph, JC , and whoever else knowing what to do next, whether repost, or drive, or shoot. That is the system. JC played within it last year. So how do you guys keep saying he does not fit the system?

    It would be better if ya'll just said... I don't like him as a player personally and I want him gone. The not fitting the system mantra does not fit because I tell you what, many people outside of here who watched the Knicks say JC was actually a BRIGHT spot on the team last year. He was not the reason Steph's numbers went down, Zeke's system is the reason it went down, because it forced Curry to play big in the paint offensively. Because of that, we not have the most dominant big man in the game offensively, barely 25. No one knew Curry had that in him. He had the ability, but it never came to fruition. Because Steph took a back seat, now we know! And the team is better off for it. Curry's confidence rose. And if he gets that 15 footer he started to use because of the triple teams late last season, the league can hang it up! Couple that with Steph finally learning to trust his teammates, and know when to turn it on offensively, and picked his game up defensively, and the same for JC mind you... he was not just gunning. For the most part he strayed away from forcing the action and played within himself.. The Knicks can make big noise if they step it up on defense.

    And remember... the system is only a year old. In camp guys will know what to do and where to be. And coming off last year with the improvements of the Lee's Balkman's, Collins's, and such we'll hopefully just pick up from where we left off and get better.

    If JC comes out like JC of old, I'll be the first one to say shoot him in the knee caps. But off last year, his best year to me and many others as a Knick... I just don't see him reverting. He finally got it...
    I love Jamal and hope he can prove the doubters wrong... but right now... he's earning third option money... if he's not a productive third option, then he needs to be moved... how many 4 or 5 options are there in the league making 8 mil per? I still think Barnes, Carrol, Kapono or Mo Peterson would fit our system better, cuz those guys are used to being 3 - 5 option and play their roles well... when teams play us straight up... their best wing defender will likely be on Steph or Q (who can post up by the way) so that leaves at best their 2nd best perimeter defender of our shooter... how many teams (SA doesn't count) have 2 great perimeter defenders?

  13. #73
    Superstar jzero29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, New York
    Posts
    648
    Rep Power
    8

    Nyk Logo Misunderstanding

    Shairan I said detroits one of the most balanced, not the most balnced, offenses. Maybe they operated that way in playoffs, but during the season Billups avged 7 assists? where did they come from if they weren't him setting players up? they got away from that in conference finals, and they lost. Did it matter who was coaching, if it's balanced it's balanced. they got scoring from everyone. Inside outside, mid range, shooters, post ups, drives. Well balanced multi-dimensional offense. Contributions from almost every player as well.

    Crawford won't immediately help the cap, nothing could help the knicks cap immediately, but why not start to trim away the fat. Why wait it out? he's taking up a roster spot. He's over rated as far as talent. his crossover is the only thing not easily replaced. I am not saying other guys are better all around and available, Other teams aren't interested in Jamaal crawford for a reason. I just think you can't have marbury and crawford on same team, they both need ball to be successful, and there is only one ball. marbury is far better, proven guard than crawford. they both play the same game, except marbury is better in every area. time to take the shackles of Marbury, let him play jamaals role. And send jamaal packing, down the line it will help. Marbury's contract is shorter. all though more than twice as expensive. Can't trade him. Once marbury's contract is up, after next year, he can either sign for a good deal, and we can put good players around him, or we could still have crawford. We have to plan for future sometime! the knicks org. has ignored it long enough.

  14. #74
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by KnicksFan4Realz
    Does anyone here realize for the cost of Crawford, Rose, James, and Jeffries...all combined salaries for the next 3 season including this upcoming 1...we could have had RAY ALLEN...with some left over...

    Crawford $7,920,000 (2007-08) $8,640,000(2008-09)= $16,560,000
    Rose $7,101,250 (2007-08) $7,647,500(2008-09)= $14,748,750
    James $5,800,000(2007-08) $6,200,000(2008-09)= $12,000,000
    Jeffries $5,632,200 (2007-08) $6,049,400(2008-09) $6,466,600 (2009-10)= $18,148,200

    All together for these 4 players over the next 2 and 3 seasons respectively that's $ 61,456,950..

    Ray Allen's contract over the next 3 seasons including this upcoming...(2007-2010) $52,165,290...

    In this same span of time over 3 years we could have saved $9,291,660 dollars....

    This is why I do not find Isiah Thomas to be credible. Yes I know this is 1 player vs 4....and various positions....however, Ray Allen is better than all these guys combined...and cost less than all these guys combined.

    With a Marbury eventhough I'm no fan of him either...and a Curry and Randolph...U REALLY COULD'VE BEEN MAKING NOISE FOR THE NEXT 3 YEARS IN THE EAST.
    To me, the only real bad contracts there are James and Jefferies. James was a need player at the time before Curry. Had Curry been available before the signing of James, James surely would not be here.

    Jefferies had a bad season last year. Was hurt, and tried to make it all happen in one shot due to the contract criticism he recieved. He is a role player making a lot of money. I bet if you searched every roster you can find similar players on every team. But becuase of the young talent on the team now, he does not fit the team imo.

    Rose I believe came along with a draft pick from SA I believe turned into David Lee. Not sure but I think the Rose trade sent away bum Nazr Muhammed, and allowed us to draft Lee. How did we lose?

    Crawford is overpaid. But not by much. Not like he is making Kobe money here. You guys are going a bit overboard. You can find WAAAAAY wosre players making as much or more than Jamal if you looked. Try it.

    All this money stuff means nothing. No one is out there to even spend money on. It is about this team continuing to get better.

    Zeke between drafts and some of his FA moves working out, now has a nucleus to work with. Now let's see what he does with it. He got Zach after seeing Channing for two years. Now he should get Artest with the Kings shopping Bibby. He has the pieces.

  15. #75
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Originally Posted by jzero29
    Shairan I said detroits one of the most balanced, not the most balnced, offenses. Maybe they operated that way in playoffs, but during the season Billups avged 7 assists? where did they come from if they weren't him setting players up? they got away from that in conference finals, and they lost. Did it matter who was coaching, if it's balanced it's balanced. they got scoring from everyone. Inside outside, mid range, shooters, post ups, drives. Well balanced multi-dimensional offense. Contributions from almost every player as well.

    Crawford won't immediately help the cap, nothing could help the knicks cap immediately, but why not start to trim away the fat. Why wait it out? he's taking up a roster spot. He's over rated as far as talent. his crossover is the only thing not easily replaced. I am not saying other guys are better all around and available, Other teams aren't interested in Jamaal crawford for a reason. I just think you can't have marbury and crawford on same team, they both need ball to be successful, and there is only one ball. marbury is far better, proven guard than crawford. they both play the same game, except marbury is better in every area. time to take the shackles of Marbury, let him play jamaals role. And send jamaal packing, down the line it will help. Marbury's contract is shorter. all though more than twice as expensive. Can't trade him. Once marbury's contract is up, after next year, he can either sign for a good deal, and we can put good players around him, or we could still have crawford. We have to plan for future sometime! the knicks org. has ignored it long enough.

    The Knicks had like 6-7 players avg double figures. Bigs and wing. So they must have had SOME type of balance in their system

Similar Threads

  1. crawford a knick and its final.......
    By JJtheKnick in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: Jan 10, 2008, 16:33
  2. Crawford??The Real Deal???
    By TR1LL10N in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: Jul 20, 2007, 16:01
  3. Crawford will play!
    By rady in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Nov 16, 2004, 12:22
  4. Crawford Wants to Win
    By jsm0331 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Aug 16, 2004, 18:37
  5. Crawford rejects the trade
    By jsm0331 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Aug 04, 2004, 18:35

Posting Permissions

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