Posted by rvhoss:
I forget, why would we rather patterson over Rose? Rose has finally found his nitch and it's as a gritty SF and not a undersized PF.
Looking at what's best for the knicks...I think rose is 1 year older, but with patterson getting 20 minutes a game (5 more than Rose) he's mustering 1.5 fewer rebounds...
At this point, and considering Rose's slow start, he's a better play than patterson (even if you hate the guy).
If we attempt to ignore the musical lineups that brown was playing for the first 6 games and go with what looks to be his lineup and minute distribution (barring foul trouble), over the last 5 games where the knicks went 3 - 2, Rose has put up 4/6, while not spectacular by any stretch of the imagination, watching the games, he's playing defense. Dare I say as well as patterson.
Looked at Fishy's link and Rose still keeps us in games, and you have to admit, he's hitting that baseline jumper now.
Also, he's got a ring and he's a model citizen.
I say we don't need 'em.
Thoughts?
[Edited by - rvhoss on 11-22-2005 3:59 PM]
I say perfect post RV. No need for Paterson, he's not going to make or break the Knicks, plus he's a bonafide headcase. Yeah yeah, Rasheed left Portland and isn't a headcase but Rasheed is a much better play and a player you have to take a chance on. I'll keep my distance from Ruben, what this team needs much more is a true PG, I'd rather save our chips for that.