After all the hate directed at Crawford, on this site, gone unchallenged, I think it's time that people who think, like me, that it's BS, create a Crawford support thread.
Most of the haters use Crawford's FG percentage, which has hovered around 40%, average for a guard, to make their point. However, Iverson, for example, has multiple years at around, or slightly below, 40 percent from the field. Haters use the percentage he shoots as their principle argument, when the fact is that players who attempt as many shots as Crawford, in such clutch, difficult, and well-defended, situations would likely shoot far less than 40. Crawford's got heart, he takes shots that a guy like Mike Miller, who shoots over 50 percent from the field, would never take, and I don't think any Knick fan would take Miller over Crawford, regardless of FG%, for that very fact. Haters also talk about Crawford's failure to make the playoffs, something that can't be blamed on him, simply because he's played on unstable teams, with poor leadership and weak inside players: Curry, mainly, who has followed him for his entire career.
They're also delusional, when arguing against Crawford's exceptional skills, which is evident when reading their crazy comments about Quentin Richardson being a better player than Crawford. Crawford is the best 2 guard, after Houston, that we've had in contemporary Knick times, better than Starks and Sprewell, who both benefited from playing on teams with the greatest knick ever, Patrick Ewing. Imagine Patrick Ewing with a guy like Crawford on his side, in, let's say, the 93-94 playoff run.
Let's look at what attributes make him, in my opinion, the best Knick on the current team. First of all, he can score in bunches, much more efficiently, and explosively, than any other current Knick, something which is key in breaking teams' will power. Secondly, he's clutch and can regularly score impact points, at key points in games, something many Knicks are not consistently capable of. Guys like Starks and Sprewell, for example, could not regularly do that, which is why I believe he's better than they were.
Crawford's biggest weakness is probably his defense, though I haven't seen him get exploited like he did last year. If D'Antoni starts running some real plays: screens, high post cuts, etc., for Crawford, look for our SG to really take us to the next level: I'm talking playoffs.
I don't know what these haters are seeing, when Crawford's in the game: he's a good player, one of the few bright spots we've had, over the years. As a former player and high school assistant basketball coach, for the PSAL, I know how much the lack of a good big man can hurt a team, and this is what I feel has held the knicks back, not Marbury or Crawford.
Anyway, maybe some of you can put up some statistics, and cover anything I missed, to back Crawford up, against the guaranteed coming backlash against this thread.