Well in this post, I said we are not subtracting Curry. However if you think you can subtract 10 wins without Crawford you are crazy. We won 23 games last year. Can we subtract 10 wins from that? What about this year? Can we subtract 10 wins from the wins we have this year?

You do realize that Crawford has never been on a team that has won more than 33 games in a season, this one included?

Crawford is a poor rebounder. He shoots a very low percentage from the field. He turns the ball over a lot compared to his assists. He is a very poor defender. How can this possibly mesh with a guy like Curry that has a lot of the same deficiencies. We need to find much better solutions than Crawful.

So are you going to say that making a team around two very low Iq players amd poor defenders like Curry and Crawford will ever have a winning record?

Posted by EnySpree:


The front court needs a guy better than frye and lee with the same motor and fight that balkman and lee have

THAT GUY IS JOAKIM NOAH...doh!

Realistically, we need a shotblocker pretty badly (intimidating)- if Rasheed wasnt such a head case, I think he would be AWESOME next to Eddy. If Lee could play better D and he is certainly athletic enough to block shots, maybe he could become a little more Boozer-ish. And "underachieving route could be for Drew Gooden and the boring vet PG Eric Snow (reminiscient of LB with Mardy "Mc Kie" Collins and Eric Snow) for Francis (they need a PG like that...a scorer, penetrator and he is a decent rebounder as well).

If Denver would trade us Nene for God knows what, that may be a good thing.

I understand what your saying Enyspree, but we also need someone with skill and D to play next to Eddy...JO is a great choice but both Frye and Lee go in that deal along with Francis for JO, Tinsley or Dunleavy or Murphy. We dont got the goodz for KG.

The knicks need a scorer and all around player at the 3.

THAT GUY IS COREY BREWER or JEFF GREEN...crap!

Realistically, Frye and Malik for Artest...I am VERY afraid but he's the perfect guy. I would also include Gerald Wallace- but we aint got no goodz to get him.


[/quote]

First off-season move, get rid of Crawford???? LOL.............

I'm gonna have to go with Cash on this one and I'll even take it further by saying that Crawfords ability to pass it in the post to Curry is overrated, b/c he's gotton a WHOLE LOT of turnovers attempting to do just that. Yes, the two have chemistry, but what's chemistry worth if they can't win games, don't play defense, Crawford takes horrible shots and Curry can't pass outta the post? If you're gonna build around Curry, you need a superior defender to start next to Curry, who can hit some outside shots, and you need other guard shooters who can defend and pass. This is all simply b/c you have to make up for everything, and it's a lot, that Curry lacks.

Or we can be smart and not build around Curry and make be open to trading him for someone that fits better into the team concept.

Who out there is better than craw? I agree that craw is turnover prone and his shot selection totally gags me. I'm looking around for better alternatives but all I can find are pretty much untouchable players. The only one I can see that could be available is Jason Richardson.

Priorities. The knicks need to get tougher inside first. After that the knicks could look to screw around with the backcourt.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

If we didn't have Curry this season, I think we have the same record. Without Crawford, I think we're a few games worse.

Agreed about Curry. I'm not sure about Crawford though. It would only be a few games at most.


[Edited by - bonn1997 on 04-12-2007 07:48 AM]

Without the injuries? Obviously that skewed the record. This team wasn't going to end up with this many losses if they remained healthy, so why not be fair about it and qualify that statement a bit?

I believe that this team can survive and thrive minus Jamal IF they get the right player to replace him. However despite his inefficient play he does provide a certain aspect that is hard to replace. He can be unstoppable at times, which he showed this season. He was more frequently taking the ball inside against teams and KILLING them with his penetration. If he continued to develop that part of his game, he would've been a VERY key asset in the playoff push this year. Besides Steph, the only other guy we have that can create his own shot in a similar way is Nate. However Nate isn't the passer that Jamal is and he might even be a worse defender, since he misses assignments and takes chances.

I'm torn sometimes when it comes to Jamal. I think we can keep him and improve the team by adding another SG/SF with size who can stroke it for a higher % and defend better. I get the feeling that Isiah is gonna keep Jamal and at most maybe look to move Frye and maybe Nate. The way he treated Frye this year, you get the idea that he's no longer one of his guys. He doesn't do the things that this team needs from a 4. I also get the idea that he doesn't view Lee as a starting 4 either. I think he brought in Morris to see what he's got and see if he's a guy who can bring that tough presence. He's definitely looking for that Oakley type that can get Curry's back.

One route Isiah could take, would be to sign Matt Carroll for part of the MLE and use the draft pick to take Sean Williams.

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by Solace:

If we didn't have Curry this season, I think we have the same record. Without Crawford, I think we're a few games worse.

Agreed about Curry. I'm not sure about Crawford though. It would only be a few games at most.


[Edited by - bonn1997 on 04-12-2007 07:48 AM]

Without the injuries? Obviously that skewed the record. This team wasn't going to end up with this many losses if they remained healthy, so why not be fair about it and qualify that statement a bit?

I believe that this team can survive and thrive minus Jamal IF they get the right player to replace him. However despite his inefficient play he does provide a certain aspect that is hard to replace. He can be unstoppable at times, which he showed this season. He was more frequently taking the ball inside against teams and KILLING them with his penetration. If he continued to develop that part of his game, he would've been a VERY key asset in the playoff push this year. Besides Steph, the only other guy we have that can create his own shot in a similar way is Nate. However Nate isn't the passer that Jamal is and he might even be a worse defender, since he misses assignments and takes chances.

I'm torn sometimes when it comes to Jamal. I think we can keep him and improve the team by adding another SG/SF with size who can stroke it for a higher % and defend better. I get the feeling that Isiah is gonna keep Jamal and at most maybe look to move Frye and maybe Nate. The way he treated Frye this year, you get the idea that he's no longer one of his guys. He doesn't do the things that this team needs from a 4. I also get the idea that he doesn't view Lee as a starting 4 either. I think he brought in Morris to see what he's got and see if he's a guy who can bring that tough presence. He's definitely looking for that Oakley type that can get Curry's back.

One route Isiah could take, would be to sign Matt Carroll for part of the MLE and use the draft pick to take Sean Williams.

That is the bottomline. IT likes Crawford, Marbury likes Crawford, and Curry likes Crawford. Crawford is not going anywhere, unless it is in a trade for a major upgrade, like a Ray Allen or Rashard Lewis or Carter.

I would really like to see if we could get Seattle's pick. I wonder would they consider a trade of Frye, Crawford, Nate, and our pick (and maybe a future protected pick) for Ray Allen and Seattle's 1st round pick. Nate and Crawford are local heroes who would boost attendance and I don't think Seattle can financially afford to pay Lewis and Allen max money. We could then add Brewer and Allen to our team and we instantly become one the top-6 teams in the East. I doubt Seattle would do it, but we can hope.

[Edited by - thegame on 04-12-2007 10:17 AM]

SO let me get this right, we need to get rid of Crawford and Nate, but they are worth in part the sonics pick and Ray allen................LOL, Chicken that lays golden eggs syndrome.

actually you can always move ray allen, crawford addition by substraction, loren woods is weak, and nate is a child, although he can hit a three with consistency. so if we can move someone in the deal besides nate fine, but we need to get rid of crawford......

I would if the hawks are down on josh smith after he threaten to kill a teammate, maybe we can make the move for him