Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 80

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

  1. #46
    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

    Originally Posted by jimkcchief88
    Most of the guys on your list are not "pure" shooters. Remember a "pure"shooter most times is a "specialist" brought in for must have baskets and breaking down packed in defenses. Just because you can hit baskets from anywhere sometimes does not make you a pure shooter. MJ wasn't even a pure shooter. The Miller on your list must be Reggie Miller because Mike Miller is a streak shooter, not a pure shooter. Kobe is far from a pure shooter and I wouldn't even put Gilbert on that list though he is close. Pure shooters are guys like Nate McMillen, Kerr, Pax, Craig Hodges and the like. Most pure shooters cannot get their own shot, but are deadly when left open. The guys that can do both are the most deadly legends like Bird and Reggie Miller. I would put Allen Houston in that catagory also except for body of work. I like Jamal because he has old school game. If you leave him open he will hurt you, if you run at him its blow by and then stop and pop( midrange game). He can also finish around the basket which is a deadly combo. You guys forget that today's "veteran players" are yesterday's college juniors and seniors. While I am not against early entry into the league, the guys who do need more time to progress because most NBA coaches coach not teach. They assume your toolbox is already full. Since Jamal has had so many injury problems the word potential still applies. I would hate to see him realize that in another team's uni. Marbury on the other hand is a known quantity, we all know what he can do(score and dish) and what he can't do(make guys around him better and lead a team to quality playoff wins).


    I guess being a pure shooter means you must of played a long time ago? You're mad random with your logic, stick to your point. I listed the best shooters in the NBA, but they're not pure? This is just stupid. Jamal is FAR from a pure shooter, so I don't even know why you're bringing this up. Crawford is the Antoine Walker of the SG position. He's a headache to have on your team and painful to watch him play.

    Ahaha, you said Jamal has an old school game. A painfully hard to watch offensive game, traveling, turnovers, no toughness, overdribling, zero defense, bricking up shots after shots is how they played in the 70s?

    Crawford rarely takes it to the basket, so what he does around the basket is irrelevant.

    Crawford has never made it the NBA playoffs or carried his team to the playoffs. Crawford is a losing player. Loser players = loser team. Marbury has atleast carried a couple of his teams to the playoffs, and Marbury does make his teammates better, but not how Kidd or Nash does it.


    Knicks4lyfe, you don't understand, let me be simple about this.

    **** Jamal Crawford.

    We don't need him to SHOOT so much, he's totally useless on this roster. We got Curry, Randolph, Q-Rich, Marbury and Robinson. All of these guys can average over 15 ppg easily.

    We need a balance of offense and defense, like Detroit or Chicago.


    Matt Caroll shots 41% from the 3pt and is a career 39% 3pt shooter, with a superior FT% and FG%. plus, he's the same age as Jamal, but BIGGER.


    Jamal shoots 32% from the 3pt, is barely a career 40% FG, and is a fragile guard with no toughness, defense or takes care of the ball. Our team weaknesses are Jamal weaknesses. The only thing Jamal does for this team is make us weaker. We don't take care of the ball well, we don't play defense well, and we fall short out of a lot of close games(Jamal's ridiculous shot selection put us in so many close situations we don't need to be in).

    Matt Caroll's 12 ppg in 26 minutes > Jamal's 17 ppg in 38 minutes


    Knicks4lyfe, if Matt Barnes couldn't play defense, he wouldn't be in the NBA. I suggest you research more.

    lilman_bklyn, are you joking? The end of the same only matters? 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.




    We don't need Crawford, let him go for a 2nd rounder. He's one dementional, an extremely streaky scorer, for every good game he has, he has 4-5 bad ones. Too inconsistant too, you could make an agruement he's injury prone too.



    Damn, this thread puts Jamal on my **** list with Eddy. Glad Isiah traded Frye and Francis, my **** list was getting too heavy. Jamal, meet Eddy, Eddy meet Jamal. Oh you guys met before, no kidding.

  2. #47
    Superstar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    519
    Rep Power
    7

    Default I truely want to know if you watched games last season

    Originally Posted by jzero29
    I Thats where your wrong. I think he brings excitment and a little bit of erratic play. Fans seem to love. But Fundamentally the Knicks need a better 3 point shooter. I think him chucking detracts, i think his turnovers detract. Does he get the ball in the big spot, and he makes an exciting play. If it's the game on the line shot, he makes, misses or turnsover. I'd rather live with a drive and dish by steph to a shooting threat outside. Thats a big problem on the knicks. Steph drive kicks it out to a wide open jamaal, instead of taking the smart shot , he then drives to a crowded hoop because steph and his man jsut went in there. Then He''ll shoot in a crowd at the end of the game instead of passing to anyone but curry.
    I know Guards are suppose to shoot! but they are suppose to do it well!!!
    Key stat he ranked in the bottom of FG% and in the bottom of 3pt FG%. He only avged 17ppg, due to his number of attempts. Before he got hurt the only person on the team who had more shots then him was curry. I'd much rather see Q shooting or Marbury. other SG who take that many shots, avg like 20ppg. Because they hit more shots! Because their FG% is way better.
    With everything you said, the point still remains, after that last game Crawford played against the Heat, the Knicks were thriving and strongly in the playoff hunt... He goes out, and suddenly they are not in the playoff hunt... I know YOU and some OTHERS, would like to believe the Knicks hit a wall or some other crap, but the fact remains, Crawford helps the Knicks win, he gives them a little of everything which makes him a player that the Knicks need in the line-up. I can say maybe from previous years why someone would come out so overwhelmingly against Crawford, but after the season that just past, it is just ludricous to me. You harp on the fact that he averaged 17ppg. But yo, he is the 3rd option!!! Curry, Marbury and then Crawford, How many points do you want your 3rd option to score??? I trley dont get some people

  3. #48
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Originally Posted by metrocard


    Knicks4lyfe, you don't understand, let me be simple about this.

    **** Jamal Crawford.

    We don't need him to SHOOT so much, he's totally useless on this roster. We got Curry, Randolph, Q-Rich, Marbury and Robinson. All of these guys can average over 15 ppg easily.

    We need a balance of offense and defense, like Detroit or Chicago.


    Matt Caroll shots 41% from the 3pt and is a career 39% 3pt shooter, with a superior FT% and FG%. plus, he's the same age as Jamal, but BIGGER.


    Jamal shoots 32% from the 3pt, is barely a career 40% FG, and is a fragile guard with no toughness, defense or takes care of the ball. Our team weaknesses are Jamal weaknesses. The only thing Jamal does for this team is make us weaker. We don't take care of the ball well, we don't play defense well, and we fall short out of a lot of close games(Jamal's ridiculous shot selection put us in so many close situations we don't need to be in).

    Matt Caroll's 12 ppg in 26 minutes > Jamal's 17 ppg in 38 minutes


    Knicks4lyfe, if Matt Barnes couldn't play defense, he wouldn't be in the NBA. I suggest you research more.
    Totally your opinion, and who is changing that? Only thing Im saying is that based off of last season, I'd rather have Jamal a million times over than Carrol or Barnes. Not even a debate. Heck I would not even take those guy sover Nate at this point.

    Last season, Jamal played within his game. Somehow Isaiah got him to stop taking Fade away 3's and concentrate on his strengths more. He is very good from 15 ft and got to the line more than any time in his career. If he continues to build off that he will be even better. And remember, his role changed a lot during the season as well.

    And this is the bottom line... Things all fell apart WHEN HE GOT HURT! If Crawford would have never got hurt the Knicks would have made the playoffs without Lee and Q.

    You guys can throw out all the percentages you like. And to some extent they matter. But you still have to go by what you see. The floor was spaced when Crawford was on the floor. He went out, it shrunk. We started to lose. Hmmm...
    Last edited by rady; Jul 24, 2007 at 12:29.

  4. #49
    Superstar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    519
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    I guess being a pure shooter means you must of played a long time ago? You're mad random with your logic, stick to your point. I listed the best shooters in the NBA, but they're not pure? This is just stupid. Jamal is FAR from a pure shooter, so I don't even know why you're bringing this up. Crawford is the Antoine Walker of the SG position. He's a headache to have on your team and painful to watch him play.

    Ahaha, you said Jamal has an old school game. A painfully hard to watch offensive game, traveling, turnovers, no toughness, overdribling, zero defense, bricking up shots after shots is how they played in the 70s?

    Crawford rarely takes it to the basket, so what he does around the basket is irrelevant.

    Crawford has never made it the NBA playoffs or carried his team to the playoffs. Crawford is a losing player. Loser players = loser team. Marbury has atleast carried a couple of his teams to the playoffs, and Marbury does make his teammates better, but not how Kidd or Nash does it.


    Knicks4lyfe, you don't understand, let me be simple about this.

    **** Jamal Crawford.

    We don't need him to SHOOT so much, he's totally useless on this roster. We got Curry, Randolph, Q-Rich, Marbury and Robinson. All of these guys can average over 15 ppg easily.

    We need a balance of offense and defense, like Detroit or Chicago.


    Matt Caroll shots 41% from the 3pt and is a career 39% 3pt shooter, with a superior FT% and FG%. plus, he's the same age as Jamal, but BIGGER.


    Jamal shoots 32% from the 3pt, is barely a career 40% FG, and is a fragile guard with no toughness, defense or takes care of the ball. Our team weaknesses are Jamal weaknesses. The only thing Jamal does for this team is make us weaker. We don't take care of the ball well, we don't play defense well, and we fall short out of a lot of close games(Jamal's ridiculous shot selection put us in so many close situations we don't need to be in).

    Matt Caroll's 12 ppg in 26 minutes > Jamal's 17 ppg in 38 minutes


    Knicks4lyfe, if Matt Barnes couldn't play defense, he wouldn't be in the NBA. I suggest you research more.

    lilman_bklyn, are you joking? The end of the same only matters? 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.




    We don't need Crawford, let him go for a 2nd rounder. He's one dementional, an extremely streaky scorer, for every good game he has, he has 4-5 bad ones. Too inconsistant too, you could make an agruement he's injury prone too.



    Damn, this thread puts Jamal on my **** list with Eddy. Glad Isiah traded Frye and Francis, my **** list was getting too heavy. Jamal, meet Eddy, Eddy meet Jamal. Oh you guys met before, no kidding.
    The end of the same only matters? what are you talking about? You must have me confused with someone else, read my post again train boy.. check this out I am assuming you spend a lot of time down in Charlotte to see how great Matt Carrol is right? I'm sure you have seen how great defense he plays right? GET THE F*CK OUTTA HERE WIT DAT BULLSHYTE.. Like was stated b4, the guy is a one trick pony. I dont' know how good of a defender he is because i never saw him play, and I'm sure YO AZZ and other dudes on here praising this MOFO has never seen him play that much either so I really don't want to hear the crap coming from you guys about how great a defender he is.. what are you basing this on? STOP IT! There is a reason that dude comes off the bench and plays those minutes, because leaving him out on the floor longer will hurt the team. And the stats that you put out there are also crappy as well, besides the fact that he is a good 3pt shooter/foul shooter he doesn't do anything better than crawford.. the field goal% throughout their careers are statiscally the same, crawford averages more rebounds, more assist, more steals, Come the hell on.

  5. #50
    Superstar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    519
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Originally Posted by Knicks4lyfe
    Originally Posted by metrocard


    Knicks4lyfe, you don't understand, let me be simple about this.

    **** Jamal Crawford.

    We don't need him to SHOOT so much, he's totally useless on this roster. We got Curry, Randolph, Q-Rich, Marbury and Robinson. All of these guys can average over 15 ppg easily.

    We need a balance of offense and defense, like Detroit or Chicago.


    Matt Caroll shots 41% from the 3pt and is a career 39% 3pt shooter, with a superior FT% and FG%. plus, he's the same age as Jamal, but BIGGER.


    Jamal shoots 32% from the 3pt, is barely a career 40% FG, and is a fragile guard with no toughness, defense or takes care of the ball. Our team weaknesses are Jamal weaknesses. The only thing Jamal does for this team is make us weaker. We don't take care of the ball well, we don't play defense well, and we fall short out of a lot of close games(Jamal's ridiculous shot selection put us in so many close situations we don't need to be in).

    Matt Caroll's 12 ppg in 26 minutes > Jamal's 17 ppg in 38 minutes


    Knicks4lyfe, if Matt Barnes couldn't play defense, he wouldn't be in the NBA. I suggest you research more.
    Totally your opinion, and who is changing that? Only thing Im saying is that based off of last season, I'd rather have Jamal a million times over than Carrol or Barnes. Not even a debate. Heck I would not even take those guy sover Nate at this point.

    Last season, Jamal played within his game. Somehow Isaiah got him to stop taking Fade away 3's and concentrate on his strengths more. He is very good from 15 ft and got to the line more than any time in his career. If he continues to build off that he will be even better. And remember, his role changed a lot during the season as well.

    And this is the bottom line... Things all fell apart WHEN HE GOT HURT! If Crawford would have never got hurt the Knicks would have made the playoffs without Lee and Q.

    You guys can throw out all the percentages you like. And to some extent they matter. But you still have to go by what you see. The floor was spaced when Crawford was on the floor. He went out, it shrunk. We started to lose. Hmmm...
    CO-SIGN, There is no HMMM about it... You can't argue 1+1=2... People want to talk about getting this dude here and this dude there, **** we had barnes and he showed his worth.. and so we let his azz go.. there is a reason why there are no takers on him, because the rest of the NBA knows what you guys don't seem to, the dude played well within a system. the dude is a role player man..
    Last edited by rady; Jul 24, 2007 at 12:29.

  6. #51
    Your Best Bet is B Ez datruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    1,553
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    I guess being a pure shooter means you must of played a long time ago? You're mad random with your logic, stick to your point. I listed the best shooters in the NBA, but they're not pure? This is just stupid. Jamal is FAR from a pure shooter, so I don't even know why you're bringing this up. Crawford is the Antoine Walker of the SG position. He's a headache to have on your team and painful to watch him play.

    Ahaha, you said Jamal has an old school game. A painfully hard to watch offensive game, traveling, turnovers, no toughness, overdribling, zero defense, bricking up shots after shots is how they played in the 70s?

    Crawford rarely takes it to the basket, so what he does around the basket is irrelevant.

    Crawford has never made it the NBA playoffs or carried his team to the playoffs. Crawford is a losing player. Loser players = loser team. Marbury has atleast carried a couple of his teams to the playoffs, and Marbury does make his teammates better, but not how Kidd or Nash does it.


    Knicks4lyfe, you don't understand, let me be simple about this.

    **** Jamal Crawford.

    We don't need him to SHOOT so much, he's totally useless on this roster. We got Curry, Randolph, Q-Rich, Marbury and Robinson. All of these guys can average over 15 ppg easily.

    We need a balance of offense and defense, like Detroit or Chicago.


    Matt Caroll shots 41% from the 3pt and is a career 39% 3pt shooter, with a superior FT% and FG%. plus, he's the same age as Jamal, but BIGGER.


    Jamal shoots 32% from the 3pt, is barely a career 40% FG, and is a fragile guard with no toughness, defense or takes care of the ball. Our team weaknesses are Jamal weaknesses. The only thing Jamal does for this team is make us weaker. We don't take care of the ball well, we don't play defense well, and we fall short out of a lot of close games(Jamal's ridiculous shot selection put us in so many close situations we don't need to be in).

    Matt Caroll's 12 ppg in 26 minutes > Jamal's 17 ppg in 38 minutes


    Knicks4lyfe, if Matt Barnes couldn't play defense, he wouldn't be in the NBA. I suggest you research more.

    lilman_bklyn, are you joking? The end of the same only matters? 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.




    We don't need Crawford, let him go for a 2nd rounder. He's one dementional, an extremely streaky scorer, for every good game he has, he has 4-5 bad ones. Too inconsistant too, you could make an agruement he's injury prone too.



    Damn, this thread puts Jamal on my **** list with Eddy. Glad Isiah traded Frye and Francis, my **** list was getting too heavy. Jamal, meet Eddy, Eddy meet Jamal. Oh you guys met before, no kidding.
    yeah carroll gotta better FG% and better point per minute but i wanna see carroll create for his own shot like jamal does, i dont even remember seeing carroll dribbling against the knicks and u talking about one dimensional???how is jamal one dimensional when he is a good scorer and he makes curry better?

  7. #52
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,946
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    I guess being a pure shooter means you must of played a long time ago? You're mad random with your logic, stick to your point. I listed the best shooters in the NBA, but they're not pure? This is just stupid. Jamal is FAR from a pure shooter, so I don't even know why you're bringing this up. Crawford is the Antoine Walker of the SG position. He's a headache to have on your team and painful to watch him play.

    Ahaha, you said Jamal has an old school game. A painfully hard to watch offensive game, traveling, turnovers, no toughness, overdribling, zero defense, bricking up shots after shots is how they played in the 70s?

    Crawford rarely takes it to the basket, so what he does around the basket is irrelevant.

    Crawford has never made it the NBA playoffs or carried his team to the playoffs. Crawford is a losing player. Loser players = loser team. Marbury has atleast carried a couple of his teams to the playoffs, and Marbury does make his teammates better, but not how Kidd or Nash does it.


    Knicks4lyfe, you don't understand, let me be simple about this.

    **** Jamal Crawford.

    We don't need him to SHOOT so much, he's totally useless on this roster. We got Curry, Randolph, Q-Rich, Marbury and Robinson. All of these guys can average over 15 ppg easily.

    We need a balance of offense and defense, like Detroit or Chicago.


    Matt Caroll shots 41% from the 3pt and is a career 39% 3pt shooter, with a superior FT% and FG%. plus, he's the same age as Jamal, but BIGGER.


    Jamal shoots 32% from the 3pt, is barely a career 40% FG, and is a fragile guard with no toughness, defense or takes care of the ball. Our team weaknesses are Jamal weaknesses. The only thing Jamal does for this team is make us weaker. We don't take care of the ball well, we don't play defense well, and we fall short out of a lot of close games(Jamal's ridiculous shot selection put us in so many close situations we don't need to be in).

    Matt Caroll's 12 ppg in 26 minutes > Jamal's 17 ppg in 38 minutes


    Knicks4lyfe, if Matt Barnes couldn't play defense, he wouldn't be in the NBA. I suggest you research more.

    lilman_bklyn, are you joking? The end of the same only matters? 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.




    We don't need Crawford, let him go for a 2nd rounder. He's one dementional, an extremely streaky scorer, for every good game he has, he has 4-5 bad ones. Too inconsistant too, you could make an agruement he's injury prone too.



    Damn, this thread puts Jamal on my **** list with Eddy. Glad Isiah traded Frye and Francis, my **** list was getting too heavy. Jamal, meet Eddy, Eddy meet Jamal. Oh you guys met before, no kidding.
    I used to wonder why everyone on the board want you banned and now I know. You missed the whole point of what I was saying because you focus on one or two words and miss the whole point. Can't reason with the unreasonable.

  8. #53
    Superstar jzero29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, New York
    Posts
    643
    Rep Power
    7

    Nyk Logo Mislead sheep, easily dazzled by the random exciting plays, ignore the screw ups

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    Crawford has never made it the NBA playoffs or carried his team to the playoffs. Crawford is a losing player. Loser players = loser team. Marbury has atleast carried a couple of his teams to the playoffs, and Marbury does make his teammates better, but not how Kidd or Nash does it.

    We don't need him to SHOOT so much, he's totally useless on this roster. We got Curry, Randolph, Q-Rich, Marbury and Robinson. All of these guys can average over 15 ppg easily.

    We need a balance of offense and defense, like Detroit or Chicago.

    Matt Caroll shots 41% from the 3pt and is a career 39% 3pt shooter, with a superior FT% and FG%. plus, he's the same age as Jamal, but BIGGER.

    .
    Good point Metrocard, Jamaal has never won with anyteam being a main option. Carrol is similar and not only bigger, cheaper. He is just as good as jamaal on defense. maybe mat carrol isn't as good all around on offense. But he doesn't need to dominate the ball like crawford does to be effective. So other players who do need to dominate, get the ball and when they draw their doubles a good role playing shooter will be there. Maybe he mad curry a little better, i think curry would have done well with anyone who consistently fed him the ball, he's a big guy. But jamaals dominance of the ball detracted from everyone elses game, for instance, stephs game. jamaal takes the ball away from our best player, outside of curry. Jamaa l is good all around offensive player, except his tendency to turn over, take ridiculous shots and dominate the ball. So if you want to see jamall crawford shoot, and not qrich and steph? then these people are idiots. Metrocard i think your the only one who sees it. Blance is where its at. Even Kobe's team can't make it to NBA finals, no balance. Jamaal is no Kobe. Kobe can shoot. Detroit chicago, san antonio, utah, phoenix. They don't really have any player who needs the ball constantly besides their PG, who sets up everyone, not just one player(eddy curry)

    Originally Posted by lilman_bklyn
    With everything you said, the point still remains, after that last game Crawford played against the Heat, the Knicks were thriving and strongly in the playoff hunt... He goes out, and suddenly they are not in the playoff hunt... I know YOU and some OTHERS, would like to believe the Knicks hit a wall or some other crap, but the fact remains, Crawford helps the Knicks win, he gives them a little of everything which makes him a player that the Knicks need in the line-up. I can say maybe from previous years why someone would come out so overwhelmingly against Crawford, but after the season that just past, it is just ludricous to me. You harp on the fact that he averaged 17ppg. But yo, he is the 3rd option!!! Curry, Marbury and then Crawford, How many points do you want your 3rd option to score??? I trley dont get some people
    Lilman first of all, in 15 less games crawford shot only 60 shots less than marbury, so he would have ended up shooting his 15 per game, Some of those 15 shots would have been marburys, jamaal if healthy would have shot way more than steph, our best shooter, besides q-rich. so if you shoot second most on team, your the second option. Thats just plain fundemental. If i have to constantly go over these things with you. I'm going to pull all my hair out.

    Knicks for Life, you mention how jamaal doesn't shot fade away 3's plays to his strengths and got to the line more than any time in his career? Maybe you watched most of his good games and missed all (the many) the terrible ones? He was 228-272 from the line last year, (thats 272 foul shots attempted for those special people who don't understand numbers). The previous year,under brown, (who limited his shots and put him in the role he should have), he was 295-357 from the line, 357 foulshots is more than 272 right? 295 foul shots made, is more than 272 attempted. So it is safe to say this wasn't the year he went to the line most. The avgs are similar.

    As for as them dropping out of the playoff race, when crawford wasn't around, they didn't have a shooting guard at all at that time. I remeber crawford was out early in the year, and q-rich was SG, they went on a roll, Curry was scoring and everything with out jamaal holding his hand!!!Amazing, then crawford forced back into mix, screwed them up. And when jamaal went down at the end of the year that left the knicks without a true sg. The only guy was mardy collins? ROOKIE, who made a ton of ROOKIE mistakes. It's not like they were winning everygame while they were with him and they lost all without him, The end of the season, Qrich, steph and jamaal were all out, for long stretches and LEE. So a big part of the knicks wasn't playing. They started losing. It wasn't Just crawfords absence it was half the team was gone.

    Totally your opinion, and who is changing that? Only thing Im saying is that based off of last season, I'd rather have Jamal a million times over than Carrol or Barnes. Not even a debate. Heck I would not even take those guy sover Nate at this point.

    Last season, Jamal played within his game. Somehow Isaiah got him to stop taking Fade away 3's and concentrate on his strengths more. He is very good from 15 ft and got to the line more than any time in his career. If he continues to build off that he will be even better. And remember, his role changed a lot during the season as well.

    And this is the bottom line... Things all fell apart WHEN HE GOT HURT! If Crawford would have never got hurt the Knicks would have made the playoffs without Lee and Q.

    You guys can throw out all the percentages you like. And to some extent they matter. But you still have to go by what you see. The floor was spaced when Crawford was on the floor. He went out, it shrunk. We started to lose. Hmmm...
    Okay, Crawford is a better all around player on Offense, They are similar on defense. Carrol is just a roll player(who DID start most of last season, just not in the begining) My problem with crawford is he takes more shots than better players on his own team, he should be the 4th option last year, with the addition of Randolph the 5th option this year. the order should be 1 curry, 2/3 randolph/marbury 4th Qrich 5th crawford. You can't debat the first 3, maybe q-rich, but i like him, better D, Better shooter. So as the 5th option, getting his large salary, you couldn't replace the 5th option with a guy like mat carrol? for less than half the money? This is why the knicks have cap trouble. Because you don't care about over paying 5th option players. It's a sickness. Whats wrtong with haveing a role player that won't take shots away from your top 4 offensive options?

    Originally Posted by Knicks4lyfe
    Jzero, no way in hell you convincing anyone with half a brain Matt Carrol plays defense. I guess it's not possible for him to have a good day and Jamal have a bad day? Secondly, for as good as you say he is, he fg is only 3 points higher than Jamals and JC shoots a lot more.

    Carrol is so good on both ends, they gave him money to stay, and then made him a bench warmer by trading for Richardson. How bout that.

    And again far as triple teams go. TEAMS... not one, but ALL them teams knew no one could shoot from the perimeter save Steph and Nate. Collins, Balkman Malik, these guys were in the game same time

    The gaurd with the ball, his man would basically dare him to shoot, and then on the pass, here comes the other big on Curry. Constantly when the play was called for him. Many teams did this. And why would that not be the game plan? NO ONE ON THE TEAM CAN SHOOT LOL!!!! Make them beat you!

    I dont know... If I was a coach that would be in my game plan.
    exactly, No one on the team can shoot, All though I think Q-rich can, but he gets hurt to often. No one on the team can shoot including crawford, worst fg% out of all guards and small forwards, except ROOKIE collins, rookie jitters? The knicks need a shooter. I'd sacrifice jamaals versitile game, let marbury, nate and others pick up that slack, and bring in a straight shooter. A guy who doesn't need to dominate the ball to get it done. Someone who can camp out on the arch, but can't be left alone.
    I'm sorry I didn't mean to promote carrol to allstar quality, I'm just saying he's a decent 5th option, such as jamaals role should be, behind curry,zack/marbury, q-rich then Crawford. Carrol is a decent 5th option. Crawford is not a good second option, as he tends to chuck and turnover to much, dominating the ball and not getting the rest of his team involved (beside Curry).

    Originally Posted by lilman_bklyn
    The end of the same only matters? what are you talking about? You must have me confused with someone else, read my post again train boy.. check this out I am assuming you spend a lot of time down in Charlotte to see how great Matt Carrol is right? I'm sure you have seen how great defense he plays right? GET THE F*CK OUTTA HERE WIT DAT BULLSHYTE.. Like was stated b4, the guy is a one trick pony. I dont' know how good of a defender he is because i never saw him play, and I'm sure YO AZZ and other dudes on here praising this MOFO has never seen him play that much either so I really don't want to hear the crap coming from you guys about how great a defender he is.. what are you basing this on? STOP IT! There is a reason that dude comes off the bench and plays those minutes, because leaving him out on the floor longer will hurt the team. And the stats that you put out there are also crappy as well, besides the fact that he is a good 3pt shooter/foul shooter he doesn't do anything better than crawford.. the field goal% throughout their careers are statiscally the same, crawford averages more rebounds, more assist, more steals, Come the hell on.
    1 Carrol started most of last season. He may not be as exciting and he isn't as good all around on offense as jamaal. But he's more what the knicks really need out of the SG position. Someone who doesn't need to dominate the ball and taking shots away from better options. again i list the order of 1 curry 2/3 zach/marbury 4 q-rich 5 crawford. I think carrol would be a fine fifth option off the bench instead of turnover prone and bad shot taking crawford. Crawford is a better player and could be good elsewhere or if we traded a couple guys in front of him, on the offensive option ranks. He's over paid for a 5th option, carrol would not only fit better, not needing as many shots to be affective, he makes money sense as well, something NY has to start paying attention to, or we'l wallow in mediocrety or plain out losing, forever! Crawford dominates the ball, making himself the 2nd option, by shooting more than anyone beside curry. Marbury should have gotten more shots than him. But he didn't. Crawford can't play like he did last year, he needs to play the role of 4th or 5th option, which is why he's overpaid and as metrocard said worthless. Other guys avging 15 shots were like at least whole point higher than crawford in scoring avg. and those are the scrubs!!! The only guy who was with jamaal was stojackavic(similar), who everyone knows had a terrible season last year, with injuries and such,Still shot better from 3pt land than jamaal did from anywhere on floor. but jamaals similar season is called one of his best? Come on! The only stat jamaal has him on is assists, thanks to eddy curry, but jamaal with all his turnovers because he's passing in to eddy instead of the point guard. The pg should be passing, or at least, not turning it over so much!!!

    Originally Posted by datruth
    yeah carroll gotta better FG% and better point per minute but i wanna see carroll create for his own shot like jamal does, i dont even remember seeing carroll dribbling against the knicks and u talking about one dimensional???how is jamal one dimensional when he is a good scorer and he makes curry better?
    Less cheeseburgers and more laps! that makes eddy better. Do you really think a guy who scored so well, even when doubled, cares who's passing him the ball as long as they keep doing it? I'll give you eddy struggled when jamaal was out, but so was q-rich and steph for most of that time, They had NO shooters at all!!! So of course with out a SG on your roster the perimeter shrinks for the big man. and not to mention, Curry is a little heavy. His stamina has been an issue for a long time. Long season, tired legs, teams paying him more attention, Not a shooting guard on the active roster? And on defense, lee was out for a good portion of that time too. Eddy having to work harder, on defense, how many offensive rebounds did other teams have at end of season, second chance points, eddy having to play d longer that when he had good rebounder like lee and q-rich next to him. 4/5th option jamaal, is just an overpaid guy, We could settle for a little less all around offensive talent, and go with a more talented shooter, for less cash. that equals more shots for randolph, curry, marbury and Q-rich. get ride of crawford all together and Nate gets more time and shots. Better 3pt shooter. Can take it to the hole. Still can be labled with potential. I'm just saying crawford is overpaid and not talented enough at any position to start. If the knicks were smart they'd get ride of him, but they can't because no one wants to pay that much for his mediocre slightly above avg skills on offense. See he's good at alot of different things on offense, but a master of none, there are sg out there, that don't get paid as much as crawford that could easily bring more to the team by needing the ball less. I'd take stoja over him anyday. They get paid similar money. You tell me is crawford worth it?

  9. #54
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    49
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    Crawford lost a lot more games than he has won, by a large margain. He just isn't a smart basketball player. He's very careless with the ball and takes the shots that he doesn't need to take.

    Marbury is a superior NBA player compared to Jamal, by far. Marbury is B/B+ Crawford is a C+ player at best, would be a C cause his defense is so bad and he's one dementional.

    All this all star potential junk needs to go too. He's too one dementional and doesn't post up good enough all around stats to be an all star, period. The only way he makes the all star team if he averages 25 ppg. He couldn't even do that in Chicago as the main option. He's very talented, but his performance on the court is no where near All star level. A less talented guy like Ginobili made the all star averaged 15 or 16 ppg, why? Defensively, he's one of the best at his position, he was an excellent passer and an unselfish player, who at the same time was very entertaining and a smart basketball player, an all around game. You don't even need to be flashy...check out Rip Hamilton, dude is as one dementional at Crawford, but whats the difference? Consistency.

    There a tons of SG's in the NBA who can fill his position much better, from Kobe to Raja to even an all around combo guard like John Salmons who plays defense or a defensive role player like Francisco Garcia. These guys know how to play basketball. Send Crawford and Robinson back to the circus so they can preform their tricks. I'm tired of sacrificing wins so these bums can look autistic on the court.

    I stand corrected u made a valid point

  10. #55
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    8

    Default Jzero..

    My bad, the stat I was meaning to refer to was ft's vs 3pa. At the time he had more fta than 3's at. And had he not gotten hurt he likely would have eclipsed his high in fta as well.

    So he was not just chucking a bunch of three's like he used to and was getting to the line more. If you watched him play, compared to other years, he appeared to finally play more to his strength's than his weaknesses. And if he is going to continue along that path, he is going to flat out be a star. No one in the league can gaurd this guy alone. It used to be he would break his man's ankles and hear the ooh's and aaaah's and then take a silly fadeaway from the stands instead of taking a shot he is accustomed to hitting. Last year somehow Isaiah got him to play to his strengths. And if he continues in that manner then he should actually be nothing less than the third option on the team.

    I say that because he has more ability as an offensive player than Q, even though Q may be a slightly better shooter. Also he was a two avg almsot 5 dimes a game. And they all did not go to just Curry. Besides Steph, Crawford is the best passer on the team with Lee a close third.

    Steph should be the last Option offensively simply because he can do whatever he wishes to his man at anytime. Makes this team potentially deadly offensively if he continues to build on how he played last season, which I think he will.

    Now, don't get me wrong... Carrol would be filthy as a bench player on this team. He is seemingly automatic when left alone. But to start him over Jamal is a stretch. Even being a better shooter. But it aint like teams are going to start saying anytime soon " Don't worry about Crawford, leave him open from 3 " So in essence he is respected in the same manner as Carrol, but unlike Carrol he can pull his man out his shoes off the dribble and create for others.

    Crawford>>>>>>>>> Carrol.

  11. #56
    Your Best Bet is B Ez datruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    1,553
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by jzero29
    Good point Metrocard


    Less cheeseburgers and more laps! that makes eddy better. Do you really think a guy who scored so well, even when doubled, cares who's passing him the ball as long as they keep doing it? I'll give you eddy struggled when jamaal was out, but so was q-rich and steph for most of that time, They had NO shooters at all!!! So of course with out a SG on your roster the perimeter shrinks for the big man. and not to mention, Curry is a little heavy. His stamina has been an issue for a long time. Long season, tired legs, teams paying him more attention, Not a shooting guard on the active roster? And on defense, lee was out for a good portion of that time too. Eddy having to work harder, on defense, how many offensive rebounds did other teams have at end of season, second chance points, eddy having to play d longer that when he had good rebounder like lee and q-rich next to him. 4/5th option jamaal, is just an overpaid guy, We could settle for a little less all around offensive talent, and go with a more talented shooter, for less cash. that equals more shots for randolph, curry, marbury and Q-rich. get ride of crawford all together and Nate gets more time and shots. Better 3pt shooter. Can take it to the hole. Still can be labled with potential. I'm just saying crawford is overpaid and not talented enough at any position to start. If the knicks were smart they'd get ride of him, but they can't because no one wants to pay that much for his mediocre slightly above avg skills on offense. See he's good at alot of different things on offense, but a master of none, there are sg out there, that don't get paid as much as crawford that could easily bring more to the team by needing the ball less. I'd take stoja over him anyday. They get paid similar money. You tell me is crawford worth it?
    why u make it seem curry is still like 350 pounds, curry has shown that he cares and wants to improve, curry has gotten slimer but yet the cheeseburgers jokes still come???time to let it go, also jamal crawford is the best passer in this team, and yes curry struggled a lil bit more without no SG, but how come when crawford got injured malik rose became the only play CAPABLE to throw up a alley oop(even though they rarely they connected), that chemistry that jamal and curry got is not replaceable and what this team lacks, CHEMISTRY, and jamal and curry dont have no problem wit dat

  12. #57
    Superstar jzero29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Staten Island, New York
    Posts
    643
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Originally Posted by Knicks4lyfe
    My bad, the stat I was meaning to refer to was ft's vs 3pa. At the time he had more fta than 3's at. And had he not gotten hurt he likely would have eclipsed his high in fta as well.

    So he was not just chucking a bunch of three's like he used to and was getting to the line more. If you watched him play, compared to other years, he appeared to finally play more to his strength's than his weaknesses. And if he is going to continue along that path, he is going to flat out be a star. No one in the league can gaurd this guy alone. It used to be he would break his man's ankles and hear the ooh's and aaaah's and then take a silly fadeaway from the stands instead of taking a shot he is accustomed to hitting. Last year somehow Isaiah got him to play to his strengths. And if he continues in that manner then he should actually be nothing less than the third option on the team.

    I say that because he has more ability as an offensive player than Q, even though Q may be a slightly better shooter. Also he was a two avg almsot 5 dimes a game. And they all did not go to just Curry. Besides Steph, Crawford is the best passer on the team with Lee a close third.

    Steph should be the last Option offensively simply because he can do whatever he wishes to his man at anytime. Makes this team potentially deadly offensively if he continues to build on how he played last season, which I think he will.

    Now, don't get me wrong... Carrol would be filthy as a bench player on this team. He is seemingly automatic when left alone. But to start him over Jamal is a stretch. Even being a better shooter. But it aint like teams are going to start saying anytime soon " Don't worry about Crawford, leave him open from 3 " So in essence he is respected in the same manner as Carrol, but unlike Carrol he can pull his man out his shoes off the dribble and create for others.

    Crawford>>>>>>>>> Carrol.
    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.


    Originally Posted by datruth
    why u make it seem curry is still like 350 pounds, curry has shown that he cares and wants to improve, curry has gotten slimer but yet the cheeseburgers jokes still come???time to let it go, also jamal crawford is the best passer in this team, and yes curry struggled a lil bit more without no SG, but how come when crawford got injured malik rose became the only play CAPABLE to throw up a alley oop(even though they rarely they connected), that chemistry that jamal and curry got is not replaceable and what this team lacks, CHEMISTRY, and jamal and curry dont have no problem wit dat
    I can't help the cheeseburger jokes. I admitt this past year he imroved his stamina and seemed to be in some sort of shape at start of season. He did show signs of fatigue toward end of season,(i also admitt that could be due to the lack of a sg on the floor), hopefully Zach can help ease some of his load offensively and curry, be more energetic. As far as crawford and curry, I admitt they do show good chemistry together, and to bring someone else in, it would take time to develope the same level of chemistry, but it would be worth it in my opinion. Crawford, isn't the best passer, his turnovers show this, he can fake the shoes off anyone, he's an got the killer crossover, a decent shot(plenty better out there). His game just makes everyone else useless, except curry. Because just like every other guard, he's not a true point guard. He's also not a true SG. he's a mix with no real specialty, minus the crossover. Plus the had rose passing it to him because they literally had no-one else. That was for only one game i can remember maybe a 2-3 at most. I forget what happened, but Isaih had rose playing point/forward. It was ridiculous. The knicks were insanely short handed at end of season, due to injuries. Thats how bad it was that they had a game with Rose playing point!!! It wasn't just crawford out.

  13. #58
    Superstar ShairanXIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    501
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Originally Posted by jzero29
    ShairanXIII, you say our team couldn't survive Matt carrol/Barnes at sg? So how they have played last couple years is your Idea of surviving? Interesting. At least now I know the intelegence of the person who's replying. It would be tough not having so much salary over the cap, what would they do if they weren't paying extra for the lux tax! That may have been the only difference in out come over the past couple years. Luxary tax. Because they haven't wwon much. The one season that was okay was the playoff season, and that was a very weak showing by the east all around.
    ****... 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...

    Originally Posted by metrocard
    I guess being a pure shooter means you must of played a long time ago? You're mad random with your logic, stick to your point. I listed the best shooters in the NBA, but they're not pure? This is just stupid. Jamal is FAR from a pure shooter, so I don't even know why you're bringing this up. Crawford is the Antoine Walker of the SG position. He's a headache to have on your team and painful to watch him play.

    Ahaha, you said Jamal has an old school game. A painfully hard to watch offensive game, traveling, turnovers, no toughness, overdribling, zero defense, bricking up shots after shots is how they played in the 70s?

    Crawford has never made it the NBA playoffs or carried his team to the playoffs. Crawford is a losing player. Loser players = loser team. Marbury has atleast carried a couple of his teams to the playoffs, and Marbury does make his teammates better, but not how Kidd or Nash does it.

    **** Jamal Crawford.

    We don't need him to SHOOT so much, he's totally useless on this roster. We got Curry, Randolph, Q-Rich, Marbury and Robinson. All of these guys can average over 15 ppg easily.

    We need a balance of offense and defense, like Detroit or Chicago.

    Matt Caroll shots 41% from the 3pt and is a career 39% 3pt shooter, with a superior FT% and FG%. plus, he's the same age as Jamal, but BIGGER.

    Jamal shoots 32% from the 3pt, is barely a career 40% FG, and is a fragile guard with no toughness, defense or takes care of the ball. Our team weaknesses are Jamal weaknesses. The only thing Jamal does for this team is make us weaker. We don't take care of the ball well, we don't play defense well, and we fall short out of a lot of close games(Jamal's ridiculous shot selection put us in so many close situations we don't need to be in).

    Matt Caroll's 12 ppg in 26 minutes > Jamal's 17 ppg in 38 minutes

    We don't need Crawford, let him go for a 2nd rounder. He's one dementional, an extremely streaky scorer, for every good game he has, he has 4-5 bad ones. Too inconsistant too, you could make an agruement he's injury prone too.

    Damn, this thread puts Jamal on my **** list with Eddy. Glad Isiah traded Frye and Francis, my **** list was getting too heavy. Jamal, meet Eddy, Eddy meet Jamal. Oh you guys met before, no kidding.
    You're right about Jamal's effectiveness... and with Randolph on the team... he is very expendable... but we gotta remember this about Mal before we trade him for scaps... 1) Before Steph, Before Nate... before any of our other guards bought into the system... Craw was the one most willing to buy into IT's system and feed EC... 2) He and EC are best friends (not very imp), but some players are never the same after they lose their best friends (Steve Francis after Mobley was traded) while some guys improve (Dirk/Nash)... we don't know which Eddy will be... but... let's just make sure we get quality back... I hear Jersey is looking to ship out RJ and want a "combo guard"... maybe we can convince them to take JCraw and JJ20 for Collins and Jefferson...

    Originally Posted by jzero29
    Good point Metrocard, Jamaal has never won with anyteam being a main option. Carrol is similar and not only bigger, cheaper. He is just as good as jamaal on defense. maybe mat carrol isn't as good all around on offense. But he doesn't need to dominate the ball like crawford does to be effective. So other players who do need to dominate, get the ball and when they draw their doubles a good role playing shooter will be there. Maybe he mad curry a little better, i think curry would have done well with anyone who consistently fed him the ball, he's a big guy. But jamaals dominance of the ball detracted from everyone elses game, for instance, stephs game. jamaal takes the ball away from our best player, outside of curry. Jamaa l is good all around offensive player, except his tendency to turn over, take ridiculous shots and dominate the ball. So if you want to see jamall crawford shoot, and not qrich and steph? then these people are idiots. Metrocard i think your the only one who sees it. Blance is where its at. Even Kobe's team can't make it to NBA finals, no balance. Jamaal is no Kobe. Kobe can shoot. Detroit chicago, san antonio, utah, phoenix. They don't really have any player who needs the ball constantly besides their PG, who sets up everyone, not just one player(eddy curry)

    My problem with crawford is he takes more shots than better players on his own team, he should be the 4th option last year, with the addition of Randolph the 5th option this year. t

    I'm sorry I didn't mean to promote carrol to allstar quality, I'm just saying he's a decent 5th option, such as jamaals role should be, behind curry,zack/marbury, q-rich then Crawford. Carrol is a decent 5th option. Crawford is not a good second option, as he tends to chuck and turnover to much, dominating the ball and not getting the rest of his team involved (beside Curry).

    Less cheeseburgers and more laps! that makes eddy better. Do you really think a guy who scored so well, even when doubled, cares who's passing him the ball as long as they keep doing it? I'll give you eddy struggled when jamaal was out, but so was q-rich and steph for most of that time, They had NO shooters at all!!! So of course with out a SG on your roster the perimeter shrinks for the big man. and not to mention, Curry is a little heavy. His stamina has been an issue for a long time. Long season, tired legs, teams paying him more attention, Not a shooting guard on the active roster? And on defense, lee was out for a good portion of that time too. Eddy having to work harder, on defense, how many offensive rebounds did other teams have at end of season, second chance points, eddy having to play d longer that when he had good rebounder like lee and q-rich next to him. 4/5th option jamaal, is just an overpaid guy, We could settle for a little less all around offensive talent, and go with a more talented shooter, for less cash. that equals more shots for randolph, curry, marbury and Q-rich. get ride of crawford all together and Nate gets more time and shots. Better 3pt shooter. Can take it to the hole. Still can be labled with potential. I'm just saying crawford is overpaid and not talented enough at any position to start. If the knicks were smart they'd get ride of him, but they can't because no one wants to pay that much for his mediocre slightly above avg skills on offense. See he's good at alot of different things on offense, but a master of none, there are sg out there, that don't get paid as much as crawford that could easily bring more to the team by needing the ball less. I'd take stoja over him anyday. They get paid similar money. You tell me is crawford worth it?
    it's Mr. Intelegence again... Detroit's offense is much more predicated on the iso game under Flip... Sheed/Prince posting... Rip dribbling and shooting the mid... Sheed setting up at three and shooting... Chauncey doesn't "set up everyone"... that's why they haven't won as much in the post season... SA is the best team in the league... PERIOD... Uta... Deron Williams sets up Boozer in the post (primary option) and Boozer can also pass the ball to Okur, or their shooters... let's not forget the pick and roll... the difference between us and those teams is that the players buy into the coach's system... everyone knows their role and executes it... it's not necessarily a lack of balance... since I think last season (more so now) we have a nice balance of players... they just need to execute it...

    like I said before... I agree about his role in the offense...

    your argument in the last paragraph I quoted states your point more clearly... but despite what you think about Curry... the fact is... Crawford was the first guy really checking for him last season... he seems to have the confidence from everyone else now though... so maybe next season he will be the beast he needs to be without Crawford... but Craw definately helped with his development...

    my question to you though... who would you trade 'Mal for?

  14. #59
    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

    Originally Posted by Knicks4lyfe
    Totally your opinion, and who is changing that? Only thing Im saying is that based off of last season, I'd rather have Jamal a million times over than Carrol or Barnes. Not even a debate. Heck I would not even take those guy sover Nate at this point.

    Last season, Jamal played within his game. Somehow Isaiah got him to stop taking Fade away 3's and concentrate on his strengths more. He is very good from 15 ft and got to the line more than any time in his career. If he continues to build off that he will be even better. And remember, his role changed a lot during the season as well.

    And this is the bottom line... Things all fell apart WHEN HE GOT HURT! If Crawford would have never got hurt the Knicks would have made the playoffs without Lee and Q.

    You guys can throw out all the percentages you like. And to some extent they matter. But you still have to go by what you see. The floor was spaced when Crawford was on the floor. He went out, it shrunk. We started to lose. Hmmm...
    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?

    Originally Posted by lilman_bklyn
    The end of the same only matters? what are you talking about? You must have me confused with someone else, read my post again train boy.. check this out I am assuming you spend a lot of time down in Charlotte to see how great Matt Carrol is right? I'm sure you have seen how great defense he plays right? GET THE F*CK OUTTA HERE WIT DAT BULLSHYTE.. Like was stated b4, the guy is a one trick pony. I dont' know how good of a defender he is because i never saw him play, and I'm sure YO AZZ and other dudes on here praising this MOFO has never seen him play that much either so I really don't want to hear the crap coming from you guys about how great a defender he is.. what are you basing this on? STOP IT! There is a reason that dude comes off the bench and plays those minutes, because leaving him out on the floor longer will hurt the team. And the stats that you put out there are also crappy as well, besides the fact that he is a good 3pt shooter/foul shooter he doesn't do anything better than crawford.. the field goal% throughout their careers are statiscally the same, crawford averages more rebounds, more assist, more steals, Come the hell on.
    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.

    Originally Posted by datruth
    yeah carroll gotta better FG% and better point per minute but i wanna see carroll create for his own shot like jamal does, i dont even remember seeing carroll dribbling against the knicks and u talking about one dimensional???how is jamal one dimensional when he is a good scorer and he makes curry better?
    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.

    Originally Posted by reuel
    I stand corrected u made a valid point
    Thanks brother.

  15. #60
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,221
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    [quote=metrocard;34960]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?



    So what I say is my opinion, what you say is somehow not an opinion, but what is better for the team? Which the rest of the free world that does not agree with you will scratch their heads and say... is that not his opinion?

    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.

    What about last year told you Jamal did not know his role? He seemed to really start to get it after he bust Wade's behind at the Garden ( who can play d, when is Carrol or Barnes puttin 52 on Wade? NBA LIVE? ) Seemed to me that Crawford learned his role very well. 4.4 Dimes per game... how many 2g's avg that last year?
    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.

Similar Threads

  1. crawford a knick and its final.......
    By JJtheKnick in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: Jan 10, 2008, 15:33
  2. Crawford??The Real Deal???
    By TR1LL10N in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: Jul 20, 2007, 15:01
  3. Crawford will play!
    By rady in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Nov 16, 2004, 11:22
  4. Crawford Wants to Win
    By jsm0331 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Aug 16, 2004, 17:37
  5. Crawford rejects the trade
    By jsm0331 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Aug 04, 2004, 17:35

Posting Permissions

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