no team plays 3 PGs. It didnt work with MJ/CW/HE. One guy will be the odd man out. It just gives us too many guards and adds a less talented player to a position thats already loaded.

But I guess since you used CAPS IT MUST BE RIGHT.

Marbury's being moved to SG.

Crawford would be playing some SG, a good amount of PG.

A Watson or whoever would be playing point for around 20 MPG, and Nate would have 10-15 Min. at SG.


I think you're forgetting one other thing. By placing these guys at a certain position, I'm not trying to cast each player into a certain role. But on paper, that's how it would look.

The point of all this is to ensure that at any given moment, we'd have a defensive presence in the backcourt (Watson or Nate, who'd combine for around 30-35 MPG, still leaving Marbury and Crawford a good 10-15 minutes to be on the court together).

SORRY FOR THE CAPS...

If Marbury moves to SG, then what about Q? He can't get all his minutes at the 3. You still have Tim Thomas and the teams 2 best defenders in Ariza and JYD at the SF. This is disregarding the argument that moving Marbury to SG may not be a good idea and isn't assumption you can make right now.

Marbury isnt a good scorer. He's a gifted scorer. Your downplaying both player's skills. Scoring is never redundant. The best teams in the league have 3 legit scoring options.

You can harp on Det/Spurs like that means something but oth have 3 good scorers in Duncan/Parker/Manu and Sheed/Rip/Billups. Then both have a long perimeter defender and a big athletic body at the 5. If you want to be more like those teams we need a big athletic body and a long perimeter defender. Sorry, but if Watson got smoked by Nash why do we want him? Snow's team didnt make the playoffs.

Hey boobs, wake up and smell the logic. You dont know what the problem with this team is. Getting Miles is a bad idea, a long, skilled athletic 2 way player < 25 years old but getting Snow is what we need? Because he was good with Iverson 4 years ago?

You want to fix the problem with defense? Great... start at SF and PF because thats where we lost the game everynight.

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by bobs3304:

Posted by fishmike:

QUESTION: How did San Antonio and Detroit win last year?

they scored more points than their opponents.

Not to be rude, but:


The answer was DEFENSE numbnuts.

was my answer wrong nancy?

LOL, that's usually how you win games, Fish. Pretty good.

^ That's your opinion.

I like sayin this and I'll say it again:

Well, other than "Booya"

"The proof is in the pudding.....buddy"


I've seen the backcourt...not impressed. Larry will slowly but surely make Crawford and Marbury a bit smarter and slightly more efficient, but that doesn't take away WHO THEY ARE, and that's not pass-first, or defensive presences. You need that, and if you can accomplish that while not stealing minutes from Crawford and Nate, YOU DO IT....period.

Interesting thing is that Watson finish the season with 9.5 assist that is impressive but Marbury is more impressive than those guys because of his 20ppg game, too. The only other player on that list is AI finishing 12, but his ppg is much higher. AI was your 2004-2005 MVP.

[Edited by - pharzeone on 08/05/2005 12:24:15]

Just look what Marbury did to KT with the pick and roll. Marbury penetrates and dish. I think people often blame him for his teammates not finishing plays. KT would have been more effective but doesn't have any post moves which limits his game. Marbury did a great job setting up Sweets (that's why I think Sweets as to work on passing out of the double team). I agree that him and Craw can't co-exist in the backcourt mainly because Craw is not a spot up shooter like a HOuston.

I don't see the point in getting a Watson or Snow either. Lets face it, the only reason Watson even shines is b/c he had a couple of good games against the Knicks this year but that's about all. Everyone seemed to have good games against the Knicks last year. But with talented guys, who are all CAPABLE and more CAPABLE than Snow and Watson on both ends on our team, I just don't see the point in getting them. I have always liked Eric Snow. I really have. He's a nice player to have, but we have better players, younger players with higher ceilings than him, and we already have a veteran point guard named Marbury, and if by small chance we keep Houston, we have his leadership too. So what's really the point? They aren't going to get many minutes unless Q BOMBS.

Back to the point at hand. I agree with fishmike 100% that while defense is beyond important, it's just as important to have guys who can actually put the ball into the bucket at any moment in the game. This is why Detroit and San Antonio have been successful the past 3 years. Parker, Rip, Billups, Duncan, "Weed" and Manu can all put the ball in the basket at any given moment in the game, and they can create for themselves. They also have guys who can distribute and know how to move that ball around.

The Knicks have guys who are capable of this. Jamal and Steph were a really capable backcourt last season, but if the all around defense sucked like it did, and their only other option was Kurt Thomas, than doom was meant to be spelled from the beginning. Light was being shown temporarily once Houston got back, and we moved 3 games over .500, but then as he got more and more hurt, ohh my, a scoring option goes down and so does the team.

Basketball teams NEED scorers just as much as defense. They don't need guys who are freaking selfish as all hell like ohh, Antoine Walker, but the point is made.

Fishmike is absolutely right. Why on Earth we would go for Eric Snow and Earl Watson is strictly tabloid stuff, b/c Larry Brown may like those guys, but he's not stupid.