The Official Thread: Jamaal Crawford For Al Harrington

feetoe

Benchwarmer
what is this like the 80th thread on this trade?

my only thoughts is that you need to revise your avatar.
 

JRG3

Benchwarmer
OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG i cant believe we would trade crawford away... harrington sucks and has mental problems...he suffers from a disease that makes him believe hes better than what he is
 

Knicker23

Benchwarmer
I don't know enough about Harrington to make a good judgment...but it seems like moving crawford out is like taking the one player, besides z, who we look to for certain plays and stuff..i mean comon Qrich? the guy's got stronger but he still ain't nothing special as far as i'm concerned..nate is good but he's still young..duhon? good D i guess.. Crawford took some wild shots but his 3 point play has been pretty good lately, i'm not sure i understand why they'd trade him for Harrington. but i'm hopefull. new faces are always good
 

Toons

is the Bo$$
This is a good move by walsh once again. It really sux that we lose a good ofensive weapon. Crawford would have accepted any role on the team, he is definitely 6th MOY material. I like this move because it agrees with our 2010 plan. I wish we could have gotten bellinelli out of the deal as well, but i guess gs would have wanted expirings (which we want to keep). Harrington is overraetd, and has to prove himself the knick fans (not an easy task). Walsh maintained his patience, and allowed crawfords trade value to rise, and then he traded him. I feel that randolph is next.
 

Knicker23

Benchwarmer
Crawford is clearly a better scorer...i mean do the knicks think there going to be bettered so much by harringtons defense that it will make up for the points they'll be missing with crawford? i don't want to jump to conclusions on how harrington will be, if he's like Z we'll do well, but the numbers when comparing Harrington and Craw speak for themselves...

i don't think this is anything more then the knicks wanting to get rid of another contract....we better be getting LJ with all these people were getting rid of

I feel that randolph is next.

I don't get it. at what point do you stop getting players to make them good so they could be traded? I don't understand why we feel the need to trade our players once that get reasonably good. I mean the knicks don't have a go to guy right now...who are you going to go to for the three when were down 2 with 8 seconds left?? you gona let Qrich throw some shot up? Nate?? i don't get it
 

Starks

Starter
This move is fine by me. The gameplan is to get under the cap for the big LeBron offseason, so this measures up.

The Knicks don't have a problem scoring, so I dont think losing Jamal is that big of an issue, but the Knicks have depended on him when he's hot for such a long time that it will be intersting to see who they rely on in crunch time.

Nate Robinson's stats are going to explode now that he is starting. If you have a fantasy team, pick him up right now
 

Starks

Starter
theres another trade on the way it seems. Soemthing with the Clippers. The Knicks just activated Marbury so that they don't get fined for not having enough players dressed.
 

LJ4ptplay

Starter
36.gif
 

Oldtimer

Rotation player
Crawford Gone

If Crawford is indeed gone for Harrington, it proves that Walsh is dead serious about getting under the cap for 2010.
If he traded Crawford for Harrington, I fully expect he will trade Z-Bo for almost anything that will get him under the cap in 2010. Crawford's 2010 contract is about $7M less than Z-Bo's.

This is not about making the team better this year.
 

DANUTZ39

Benchwarmer
If Nate will be our starting sg I dont think we lost anything.
Nate is a better (younger too)player then J C and now that he will start and he s minutes increase so should his stats.
So anytime you shed so much salary witch will be esential in 2 years, have same or better option at that position and get Al Harington in the process
you just made a pretty good trade

GOOD MOVE WALSH
 

clumsy

Rotation player
This helps my fantasy team immensely. I have nate and chandler.

I honestly think if we get rid of zach we will be worse (where is the scoring gonna come from). But, it certainly means we are landing a big free agent in 10
 

knicklover

Benchwarmer
This helps my fantasy team immensely. I have nate and chandler.

I honestly think if we get rid of zach we will be worse (where is the scoring gonna come from). But, it certainly means we are landing a big free agent in 10

We are almost certainly going to be worse if we trade Randolph because we are unlikely to get as much player back (he is overpaid so you almost have to take a worse player back). But if we add a serviceable SG or get a big man, start Nate, and put Harrington where ZBO was, we may come out of it OK and get rid of all that salary. That would make it a great deal long term.
 

datruth

Your Best Bet is B Ez
This helps my fantasy team immensely. I have nate and chandler.

I honestly think if we get rid of zach we will be worse (where is the scoring gonna come from). But, it certainly means we are landing a big free agent in 10

what makes u so sure that a big free agent is actually gonna opt out of his contract?? i really hope so but man this shyt can bite us in the ass
 

clumsy

Rotation player
what makes u so sure that a big free agent is actually gonna opt out of his contract?? i really hope so but man this shyt can bite us in the ass

mainly that NY is the "best" city on earth. Either way, with cap room we have many options.
 
Top