tkf wrote:No ewing, and injured LJ, no excuses, sprewell helped deliver... he stimulated change and progress within the NY knicks... he did so by playing with a high level of energy that became infectious , just ask marcus camby, Houston, LJ......

SO yes, I think he was a better knick than carmelo..

the fact that you think that is preposterous is mind boggling, at this point I don't even know if you are worth the keystrokes debating with you.. it is this type of posting that makes having a reasonable debate so hard....

I think you have a very hard time accurately assessing carmelo anthony, which is why I don't see any use debating this topic with you any more.... no offense...

But tkf, seriously, where would you place Melo in the post chip era for the Knicks? Just wondering. Is he a top ten Knick in your book? I won't comment on your answer, I promise.

You've said you'd prefer Marbury over Carmelo. And you really think you have the ability to accurately assess Melo with a statement like that in your arsenal?

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

Take a look at how awfully inefficient Latrell Spreewell was. He certainly had heart and played hard but saying that he is a better player then Carmelo is just plain preposterous and irresponsible.

I am also sure that Bonn would not approve of his horrible .077 Win Shares for his career (.076 in the playoffs).

When you make these assertions, are you going with your heart? Memory? Eyes? Or are you actually doing some research?

When you take a look at his stats, please also take a quick look at his disastrous playoff stats.

If this is being "more dynamic" then I don't really know what "dynamic" is.

LOL you would have thought I opened a bag of anthrax in an elementary school..

please enough with the over the top comments...

first of all an inefficient player is inefficient.. pointing out that sprewell was ineficient when carmelo is inefficient does what? and for the record sprewell didn't shoot a great % at all, but he also didn't take 22 shots per game, he took around 15, he also dished out more assist, played with much more energy and was a hell of a defender...

Again I look at more than scoring... the knicks took on the personality and energy of guys like sprewell, camby and LJ..

When you make these assertions, are you going with your heart? Memory? Eyes? Or are you actually doing some research?

All of the above.. sprewell was a better defender.. do you not agree with that?

sprewell played with more energy? do you not agree with that?

Sprewell was a better intitiator of offense? do you not agree with that?

Sprewell was a key cog in getting the knicks to the finals even with an injured Ewing and LJ, is that not correct?

The only think carmelo did better than sprewell is shoot more... sprewell was a better two way player... and "dynamic" let me explain that for you.. or better yet let me get you a definition.

Dynamic: a force that stimulates change or progress within a system or process.

that is what sprewell did for the knicks.. he came here mid season in 1999 and guess what, he helped lead the knicks to a first round upset vs the heat, a series in which Ewing only played two games, and didn't play again in the playoffs.... and then helped lead the knicks to the finals vs the spurs...

No ewing, and injured LJ, no excuses, sprewell helped deliver... he stimulated change and progress within the NY knicks... he did so by playing with a high level of energy that became infectious , just ask marcus camby, Houston, LJ......

SO yes, I think he was a better knick than carmelo..

the fact that you think that is preposterous is mind boggling, at this point I don't even know if you are worth the keystrokes debating with you.. it is this type of posting that makes having a reasonable debate so hard....

I think you have a very hard time accurately assessing carmelo anthony, which is why I don't see any use debating this topic with you any more.... no offense...

Putting up 15 shots a game when you shoot so damn inefficiently is horrible. He should have shot 5 shots a game and stuck to the things that he did well like passing (4 assists for his usage rate was decent but not good enough to over come his other deficiencies) and playing defense. Having a Felton like TS of 49 that year was awful.

You failed miserably with Iverson, now with Sprewell. I am very fair in my assessment of Carmelo, I am not gaga over him - I think that is why you have such a hard time with my views. I am not just the pom pom Melo guy that others blindly are. But just as those blind pom pom guys do not embrace logic and advanced stats, you are the exact same on the other extreme.

Saying that Sprewell is better than Melo or that Iverson was one of the greats or that Josh Smith is a good player just makes you sound like you are not informed and are not willing to spend the time to do the appropriate research for as much as you post and spew personal venom

You try to align yourself with DK and Bonn but you are nothing like them. At least they attempt to present a consistent and statistical argument. You just tweak as you go so it fits.

Its preposterous. Nobody would hold such an opinion even if they hate a player. Melo has a lot to improve on and I state it all the time. Nobody hates the extra chucking more that me and it does hold him back from cracking the top 10.

Sprewell was more likable. Heck, I like the guy more than Melo just for his heart and fire that Melo seems to lack. I liked Iverson's heart too, but liking heart and grit does not make one a good gm.

I am also curious why his Win Shares are worse than Felton. Maybe because he took so many shots. I would love to see his Wins Produced but I can't find this stat for retired players.

Btw, did you read the wages of wins article about Iverson? You really should. And, I have many more where that came from.

I am not looking to go at it with you and I respect that fans can have their hate guy. Trust me, I have many but I find that you are all over the place and very inconsistent.

I should probably know better and not start or call you on this stuff but you seem so much smarter than some of your arguments so I find that I can't help myself.

You were right about wanting to trade Melo for Griffin though, I woulda done that in a heartbeat.

yellowboy90 wrote:Don't feel like copying all that but will add that Latrell was inefficient, below league efficiency. Melo is efficient but just not highly efficient. there is a difference. On top of that Melo is efficient at a much higher usg rate than latrell ever had.

also interesting that 2011-2012, by far Melo's worst year here, is usg : ast rate was 1.5 : 1. Way better than his career average, yet his TS was 52.5 percent which is not good.

His efficiency has become better but not because he is passing more, he is actually passing less but because he became deadly from 3.

He should be closer to 60 percent if he would remove those horrible contested shots from his repertoire.

People seem to overrate guys who play with a competitive edge and seem fearless like Spree and Iverson. Their types really connect with fans so the ill informed ones will obviously get blinded.

mreinman wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:Don't feel like copying all that but will add that Latrell was inefficient, below league efficiency. Melo is efficient but just not highly efficient. there is a difference. On top of that Melo is efficient at a much higher usg rate than latrell ever had.

also interesting that 2011-2012, by far Melo's worst year here, is usg : ast rate was 1.5 : 1. Way better than his career average, yet his TS was 52.5 percent which is not good.

His efficiency has become better but not because he is passing more, he is actually passing less but because he became deadly from 3.

He should be closer to 60 percent if he would remove those horrible contested shots from his repertoire.

People seem to overrate guys who play with a competitive edge and seem fearless like Spree and Iverson. Their types really connect with fans so the ill informed ones will obviously get blinded.

gunsnewing wrote:Melo is a 1-2 option

Spree is a 2-3

Hence they are not in the same tear of franchise cornerstones

gunsnewing wrote:How about pairing Melo up with another 1

1 & 1a

That's why I said
1 to 2

Spree
2 to 3

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:Melo is a 1-2 option

Spree is a 2-3

Hence they are not in the same tear of franchise cornerstones

In a league where guys like Lebron, Durant, and Love are #1s on offense and where only 1 team wins a ring, Melo can't possibly be a #1. He doesn't have the passing or shot selection.

He is not a number #1 option on a winning team (playoffs) at this point. Though, if he plays like he did last night (which I believe that he can), he could become a number one option.

The problem with the contested shots is that he does it far worse in the playoffs. When guys like Lebron, battier and george get physical with him, it seems that he needs to show them street ball style and he forces really terrible shots.

Phil will really need to fix that if he decides to keep him.

I am not nearly as high on Love as you are (yet). What has he won? I really like Rubio but he also has holes though 22 point, 15 assists and 10 rebounds the other night!

Flawed but still can build around. Not every team has a Lebron or durant

gunsnewing wrote:Love is another 1-2

Flawed but still can build around. Not every team has a Lebron or durant

jrodmc wrote:

tkf wrote:No ewing, and injured LJ, no excuses, sprewell helped deliver... he stimulated change and progress within the NY knicks... he did so by playing with a high level of energy that became infectious , just ask marcus camby, Houston, LJ......

SO yes, I think he was a better knick than carmelo..

the fact that you think that is preposterous is mind boggling, at this point I don't even know if you are worth the keystrokes debating with you.. it is this type of posting that makes having a reasonable debate so hard....

I think you have a very hard time accurately assessing carmelo anthony, which is why I don't see any use debating this topic with you any more.... no offense...

I loved having Spree on my team. Trading him away for what amounted to less than nothing was one of the low points of this franchise. His game was always electric. Endless motor. Possibly one j away from taking game 5.

But tkf, seriously, where would you place Melo in the post chip era for the Knicks? Just wondering. Is he a top ten Knick in your book? I won't comment on your answer, I promise.

You've said you'd prefer Marbury over Carmelo. And you really think you have the ability to accurately assess Melo with a statement like that in your arsenal?

Can't answer that question....the post chip era for the knicks IMO won't include him... I don't think we win with him.. All I can do is judge what we have now.. and IMO spree was the more complete player, the better player... for what they did, I actually like H20 better than carmelo...