[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

I bet the Bulls wish they had Eddy Curry back
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
11/25/2007  11:11 AM
Posted by nixluva:

I think part of the problem right now is that this team is not getting the kind of solid perimeter play that we need. It's not totally Curry's fault or Zach's for that matter when it comes to the high TO's. We have to get better entry passes and also better shooting from the perimeter than we've been getting. When we don't get that, guys like Zach and Eddy press the issue and make bad decisions. Zach has tried to force the issue a bit too much and I don't think he'd do that if we were getting the kind of shooting from Jamal and Q that we should be. We had low TO's in the 1st 3 games primarily because the perimeter game was strong.

I was taking the Bulls to task last year and I still feel the same way about what Paxson has done. Now tho it's even worse. Joe Smith is not the answer and I don't think Thomas or Noah is either. Ben was old when they got him and really didn't solve any of their post scoring issues. People like to bash Isiah for his redundant moves, but Pax has done an even worse job of rounding out his team. With all his draft picks and Cap space he ended up with ZERO balance on the floor. No Superstar player or All Stars for that matter. Yeah they play hard and overachieve, but the team is fundamentally flawed. Small guards that can really shoot and hustle and athletic forwards that hustle, but no post game. Now with the guards not shooting well, they have nothing to fall back on. In comparison, we have a much easier problem to solve. Good SG's are FAR more plentiful and easy to find than really good bigs. If we can't get what we need from our current guards, we'll be able to find help at some point down the line.

the big question paxson must answer is his selection of tyrus thomas over lamarcus aldridge.
AUTOADVERT
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
11/25/2007  11:15 AM
Posted by Vmart:

I agree BRIGGS Curry isn't the problem with the Knicks. He is steady Eddy. He produces on low shot attempts gets decent amount of rebs. 7 rebounds isn't that aweful at all. can he improve on it yes he can but Rebounds aren't everything. He makes his counterpart work hard on the offensive end.
Now if you want to get to problems with the Knicks you first have to start with peimeter play very lacking in that dept. Q-Rich is finished as an offensive player. He was shooting poorly even before his elbow injury. Crawford seems lost out there and Marbury is a poor perimeter shooter too he and Nate might be their best right now which isn't saying much. Lee, Balkman and Jefferies have the same sort of perimeter game basically nonexistant.

I would like to see Chandler get run at sf as he has a decent midrange game probably better that all the Knicks perimeter players.

Eddy is the least of anyones problems, the problem with NYK fans is that they ofen compare every player to someone of higher skill level in certain dept that Curry doesn't do well in and want those type of players. For instant Camby plays defense well so people on the board want him, but they don't look at the fact that he is a below average offensive player. they want Dalembert over Curry, they see one game where he blocks shot and all of a sudden he is a defensive player of the year but they don't see his inept offensive skills. I like a defensive stand out as much as anyone else here but I guarantee you that you will find life without a scorer miserable not all the shot blocks is gonna convince anyone that they are a good NBA player. Everyone want a Dwight Howard but who is gonna give you one of those players there aren't many like him availabe so I'm happy to have Eddy Curry who might not be Howard but he is good in his own rights.

i think the reasoning is that IF you're gonna have a 1 dimensional center, you'd rather the one dimension be defense.

ok, we have eddy, but what the hell are we doing to maximize his contributions to the team? the zach deal is still one that makes no sense. we don't have shooters to open up the court. and we don't have a point guard that will run the team.

so is eddy a *problem*? nobody individually on the team is a problem. the problem is how they function together. ANYBODY in this league can win...they just have to be in the right situation and on the right team.
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
11/25/2007  11:16 AM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by nixluva:

I think part of the problem right now is that this team is not getting the kind of solid perimeter play that we need. It's not totally Curry's fault or Zach's for that matter when it comes to the high TO's. We have to get better entry passes and also better shooting from the perimeter than we've been getting. When we don't get that, guys like Zach and Eddy press the issue and make bad decisions. Zach has tried to force the issue a bit too much and I don't think he'd do that if we were getting the kind of shooting from Jamal and Q that we should be. We had low TO's in the 1st 3 games primarily because the perimeter game was strong.

I was taking the Bulls to task last year and I still feel the same way about what Paxson has done. Now tho it's even worse. Joe Smith is not the answer and I don't think Thomas or Noah is either. Ben was old when they got him and really didn't solve any of their post scoring issues. People like to bash Isiah for his redundant moves, but Pax has done an even worse job of rounding out his team. With all his draft picks and Cap space he ended up with ZERO balance on the floor. No Superstar player or All Stars for that matter. Yeah they play hard and overachieve, but the team is fundamentally flawed. Small guards that can really shoot and hustle and athletic forwards that hustle, but no post game. Now with the guards not shooting well, they have nothing to fall back on. In comparison, we have a much easier problem to solve. Good SG's are FAR more plentiful and easy to find than really good bigs. If we can't get what we need from our current guards, we'll be able to find help at some point down the line.

the big question paxson must answer is his selection of tyrus thomas over lamarcus aldridge.
Yeah that was a rough one! You have a chance to get a big with scoring ability, which you need DESPARATELY and you pass? It's amazing that GM's often come so close to making the choice that puts the cap on a great team or the blunder that keeps them from greatness. I think Pax missed it.
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
11/25/2007  11:20 AM
Posted by nixluva:
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by nixluva:

I think part of the problem right now is that this team is not getting the kind of solid perimeter play that we need. It's not totally Curry's fault or Zach's for that matter when it comes to the high TO's. We have to get better entry passes and also better shooting from the perimeter than we've been getting. When we don't get that, guys like Zach and Eddy press the issue and make bad decisions. Zach has tried to force the issue a bit too much and I don't think he'd do that if we were getting the kind of shooting from Jamal and Q that we should be. We had low TO's in the 1st 3 games primarily because the perimeter game was strong.

I was taking the Bulls to task last year and I still feel the same way about what Paxson has done. Now tho it's even worse. Joe Smith is not the answer and I don't think Thomas or Noah is either. Ben was old when they got him and really didn't solve any of their post scoring issues. People like to bash Isiah for his redundant moves, but Pax has done an even worse job of rounding out his team. With all his draft picks and Cap space he ended up with ZERO balance on the floor. No Superstar player or All Stars for that matter. Yeah they play hard and overachieve, but the team is fundamentally flawed. Small guards that can really shoot and hustle and athletic forwards that hustle, but no post game. Now with the guards not shooting well, they have nothing to fall back on. In comparison, we have a much easier problem to solve. Good SG's are FAR more plentiful and easy to find than really good bigs. If we can't get what we need from our current guards, we'll be able to find help at some point down the line.

the big question paxson must answer is his selection of tyrus thomas over lamarcus aldridge.
Yeah that was a rough one! You have a chance to get a big with scoring ability, which you need DESPARATELY and you pass? It's amazing that GM's often come so close to making the choice that puts the cap on a great team or the blunder that keeps them from greatness. I think Pax missed it.

i think the question with aldridge is whether he could've cut it in chicago. the rumor at the time was that he was totally intimidated by skiles and paxson and they were worried he couldn't hack it. in chicago, playoffs are not only a given, but they have to advance now.

aldridge has zero pressure in portland. the focus was going to all be on oden, and once he got hurt, whatever aldridge did was gravy as the team was not expected to do anything this season.

aldridge may be charles smith of the clippers, but with the bulls, he could've been charles smith of the knicks. we won't know the answer to that.
PresIke
Posts: 27673
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
11/25/2007  11:25 AM
Posted by djsunyc:

eddy's pros: the dude catches the ball within 5 feet of the basket and it's automatic or he draws a foul. he is VERY good in that department. but that's where it ends.

eddy's cons: does not make his teammates better. does not play defense.

the big question, and only real question with him is whether his pros outweigh his cons?

Fair question, but I think this can be said about other players who are praised and some Knick fans envy, like Josh Smith (yet Eddy seems to not receive it as much). I think it would be nice to see him surrounded with pieces that can most strengthen areas he is weak in. Right now that does not seem to be the case, nor does that mean all other players are worthless, as some might attest (like about Zach), either. Perhaps not with Eddy, nor a rotation of guards who are not good at staying in front of quick players.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
Vmart
Posts: 31801
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
11/25/2007  11:29 AM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by Vmart:

I agree BRIGGS Curry isn't the problem with the Knicks. He is steady Eddy. He produces on low shot attempts gets decent amount of rebs. 7 rebounds isn't that aweful at all. can he improve on it yes he can but Rebounds aren't everything. He makes his counterpart work hard on the offensive end.
Now if you want to get to problems with the Knicks you first have to start with peimeter play very lacking in that dept. Q-Rich is finished as an offensive player. He was shooting poorly even before his elbow injury. Crawford seems lost out there and Marbury is a poor perimeter shooter too he and Nate might be their best right now which isn't saying much. Lee, Balkman and Jefferies have the same sort of perimeter game basically nonexistant.

I would like to see Chandler get run at sf as he has a decent midrange game probably better that all the Knicks perimeter players.

Eddy is the least of anyones problems, the problem with NYK fans is that they ofen compare every player to someone of higher skill level in certain dept that Curry doesn't do well in and want those type of players. For instant Camby plays defense well so people on the board want him, but they don't look at the fact that he is a below average offensive player. they want Dalembert over Curry, they see one game where he blocks shot and all of a sudden he is a defensive player of the year but they don't see his inept offensive skills. I like a defensive stand out as much as anyone else here but I guarantee you that you will find life without a scorer miserable not all the shot blocks is gonna convince anyone that they are a good NBA player. Everyone want a Dwight Howard but who is gonna give you one of those players there aren't many like him availabe so I'm happy to have Eddy Curry who might not be Howard but he is good in his own rights.

i think the reasoning is that IF you're gonna have a 1 dimensional center, you'd rather the one dimension be defense.

ok, we have eddy, but what the hell are we doing to maximize his contributions to the team? the zach deal is still one that makes no sense. we don't have shooters to open up the court. and we don't have a point guard that will run the team.

so is eddy a *problem*? nobody individually on the team is a problem. the problem is how they function together. ANYBODY in this league can win...they just have to be in the right situation and on the right team.

I agree with you in that its about a team any player can thrive in the right situation. But if you are going to have a defensive minded center than the Knicks woould seriously need better perimeter shooter than they have. With this current NYK team a defensive center would basically put the Knicks in a bigger ****ter than they are now. The would be totally devoid of offense from the inside and out.
PresIke
Posts: 27673
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
11/25/2007  11:30 AM
Posted by nixluva:

I think part of the problem right now is that this team is not getting the kind of solid perimeter play that we need. It's not totally Curry's fault or Zach's for that matter when it comes to the high TO's. We have to get better entry passes and also better shooting from the perimeter than we've been getting. When we don't get that, guys like Zach and Eddy press the issue and make bad decisions. Zach has tried to force the issue a bit too much and I don't think he'd do that if we were getting the kind of shooting from Jamal and Q that we should be. We had low TO's in the 1st 3 games primarily because the perimeter game was strong.

I was taking the Bulls to task last year and I still feel the same way about what Paxson has done. Now tho it's even worse. Joe Smith is not the answer and I don't think Thomas or Noah is either. Ben was old when they got him and really didn't solve any of their post scoring issues. People like to bash Isiah for his redundant moves, but Pax has done an even worse job of rounding out his team. With all his draft picks and Cap space he ended up with ZERO balance on the floor. No Superstar player or All Stars for that matter. Yeah they play hard and overachieve, but the team is fundamentally flawed. Small guards that can really shoot and hustle and athletic forwards that hustle, but no post game. Now with the guards not shooting well, they have nothing to fall back on. In comparison, we have a much easier problem to solve. Good SG's are FAR more plentiful and easy to find than really good bigs. If we can't get what we need from our current guards, we'll be able to find help at some point down the line.

When I think about it the Bulls are similar to the Knicks of the early-post Ewing years. Strong defensively, but highly dependent upon jump shooting.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/25/2007  11:35 AM
Posted by PresIke:

Not sure how you can say that this was the best trade in Bulls history. Thomas and Noah have not done enough to warrant such praise yet, while they are desperate for low post scoring.
I didn't say it was the best, but rather one of the best. Also, you're relying on *follow-up* decisions to the Curry trade (trading Aldridge for Thomas and drafting Noah) to refute my claim, rather than refuting my claim by analyzing the Curry trade itself. I acknowledged that the Bulls follow-up decisions to the Curry trade were very poor.
PresIke
Posts: 27673
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
11/25/2007  11:37 AM
I like Zach, but it is worth wondering if we can really be successful with a PF/C lineup that doesn't defend well or block shots. I think Zach has shown he can be a better help defender, and his rebounding helps, but those other areas are a problem. One wonders if we had guards who were strong defensively if we could survive more with a Zach-Eddy frontcourt.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/25/2007  11:39 AM
Posted by Vmart:

I agree BRIGGS Curry isn't the problem with the Knicks. He is steady Eddy. He produces on low shot attempts gets decent amount of rebs.
Briggs isn't merely saying that Curry isn't part of the problem. He's made it clear that Curry is the one guy he would build around and he views Curry as a gifted player that you can't pass on. Briggs often makes very smart analyses and generally has made positive comments about only hard-working 2-way players. That's why his view of Curry is so puzzling.

djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
11/25/2007  11:42 AM
Posted by PresIke:

I like Zach, but it is worth wondering if we can really be successful with a PF/C lineup that doesn't defend well or block shots. I think Zach has shown he can be a better help defender, and his rebounding helps, but those other areas are a problem. One wonders if we had guards who were strong defensively if we could survive more with a Zach-Eddy frontcourt.

let's put it this way, eddy is shooting 60% from the field from down low.

instead of going after jeffries with the MLE in 2006, what if we signed anthony parker? or we used the MLE on mo pete this summer?
instead of going after zach, let's say we traded for jrich...and then signed someone like brian skinner or made a deal for kenny thomas...

this team would've been so much better...and those moves are totally realistic. but no, we have to go trade for zach b/c oh my gosh, he's a 20/10 player.
MS
Posts: 27065
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
11/25/2007  11:42 AM
Plain and simple the bulls missed the boat last year, eddy curry is not a good player.

right now the bulls should have either of the following.

Chandler
Aldridge
Deng
Gordon
Hinrich

or

they could have taken Rudy Gay and shipped him to the Timberwolves with Noah and Gordon for Garnett and had

Chandler
Garnett
Deng
Shebolosha
Hinrich

Etc, they had all the tools to pull off a big trade and win the east paxson just didn't have te balls to do it. The Bulls are a mess right now but they still have the assets to get better something we do not, because no one wants any of our guys aside from nate, lee, balkman. One has to wonder if the Kings would have taken a package of Frye, Crawford and a pick for Artest or some combination because this frontcourt combination of 8+ turnovers a night is disgraceful
PresIke
Posts: 27673
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
11/25/2007  11:45 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by PresIke:

Not sure how you can say that this was the best trade in Bulls history. Thomas and Noah have not done enough to warrant such praise yet, while they are desperate for low post scoring.
I didn't say it was the best, but rather one of the best. Also, you're relying on *follow-up* decisions to the Curry trade (trading Aldridge for Thomas and drafting Noah) to refute my claim, rather than refuting my claim by analyzing the Curry trade itself. I acknowledged that the Bulls follow-up decisions to the Curry trade were very poor.

You can't take out who the Bulls drafted from the equation. Every team that trades for a draft pick has an opportunity to select a player that will make an impact or less of an impact. That's part of the risk of trading for picks who have never played a game in the NBA, even high picks. All last year and at the start of the season the line was Ty Thomas was a beast, and Eddy sucks. Noah somehow came into the equation as well, as some posters here were saying how they wished they had both those players than Eddy. Were you saying that Thomas and/or Noah were a bad picks when they made them?

Now, that this doesn't fir the "Eddy Sucks" racket anymore, the line is that it was the picks they made were bad, but the trade was a coup for them? You've got to be kidding me.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
11/25/2007  12:05 PM
No, the line since the 2006 draft has been that they could have drafted Aldridge, Gay, Roy or Thomas, whichever fit their needs the best.

What people are saying now is that Paxson didn't use his assets wisely since he had signed Wallace and then used the Knicks picks on 2 more offensively raw power forwards. Plus he's holding onto his cards for too long and can't pull the trigger on a deal. He's accumulated the pieces, he's just not managing them correctly. But there's still hope there and I think yesterday's loss will only spur him on to make a big trade.

Any way you slice it, the Bulls got the better of that deal. Curry is an overweight lazy bastard who can't or won't play defense and only cares about his points. He's a loser.
If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
PresIke
Posts: 27673
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
11/25/2007  12:10 PM
http://ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=23885

http://ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=21625

http://ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=21512
05-11-2007 11:38 AM Show Profile Reply with Quote

quote:Originally posted by Marv:

quote:Originally posted by Bonn1997:

Who cares. We should have Brandon Roy and this year's lottery lottery pick.

well to be fair unless you came out real hard for roy a year ago it's tough to say we "should" have him.


It shouldn't matter who I would draft. I never pretended to be a draft expert. Our GM should be one, though.

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 05-11-2007 11:39 AM]

So what you said was you expect to draft the best player, but the reality is that this is far from the truth when it comes to draft picks. The chances tend to be better when you are drafting so high, but no guarantees.

I could go back further, but this was just going back randomly over the past 6 months or so, and you can clearly see more than a few posters did not hesitate to express anytime Ty Thomas or Noah (as of late) did something well, even one thing in a single game, or how they are "going to be good" yet we still haven't seen it with any kind of consistency. Not saying it couldn't happen, but also the point was this was one of the best trades in Bulls history, yet the verdict isn't even out yet, and right now the Bulls could clearly use Eddy.

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-25-2007 12:10 PM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
islesfan
Posts: 9999
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 7/19/2004
Member: #712
11/25/2007  12:21 PM
The Knicks wouldn't have drafted Thomas in the first place, with Frye and Lee drafted the year before. People are just interested in seeing how he's doing since he happened to be the player that the Bulls drafted with the Knicks pick that year.

Chances are the Knicks would have drafted Gay or Roy since their need for a SF or SG were much greater. 2 years later they're still desperate for a good SF and SG.
If it didn’t work in Phoenix with Nash and Stoutamire... it’s just not a winning formula. It’s an entertaining formula, but not a winning one. - Derek Harper talking about D'Antoni's System
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
11/25/2007  12:23 PM
Curry is who he is, but on this team when it's gotten the guard situation straight, he'll be a very important piece of the puzzle. He's not a defensive rebounding beast, but he's not garbage either.
If we had better guard play, you'd see how much more effective Eddy and Zach would be. As i've said the strength of this team is our Forwards and Center position.

When Jamal and Q are hitting shots and being aggressive the team looks totally different. Like we looked offensively in the 1st 3 games. Fewer TO's and more assists. In the last 4 games Jamal has had to 2-7 shooting performances and Q has been awful. You can't expect the team to win like that. We simply must get more from those positions. That's what is really killing the team right now.

We know that D is something that should be a constant and we haven't had it, but in addition to that, this team has to get more from the shooters on this team. It's one of the reasons why people want to see Chan and also why letting Nichols go was such a mistake. He may not be 100% ready but at least we'd have someone else with size that could shoot on the team. We're too reliant on Jamal and Q for shooting and they're not consistent enough. Nate is a good shooter, but he's too small for SG.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/25/2007  12:27 PM
Posted by PresIke:

http://ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=23885

http://ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=21625

http://ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=21512
05-11-2007 11:38 AM Show Profile Reply with Quote

quote:Originally posted by Marv:

quote:Originally posted by Bonn1997:

Who cares. We should have Brandon Roy and this year's lottery lottery pick.

well to be fair unless you came out real hard for roy a year ago it's tough to say we "should" have him.


It shouldn't matter who I would draft. I never pretended to be a draft expert. Our GM should be one, though.

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 05-11-2007 11:39 AM]

So what you said was you expect to draft the best player, but the reality is that this is far from the truth when it comes to draft picks. The chances tend to be better when you are drafting so high, but no guarantees.

I could go back further, but this was just going back randomly over the past 6 months or so, and you can clearly see more than a few posters did not hesitate to express anytime Ty Thomas or Noah (as of late) did something well, even one thing in a single game, or how they are "going to be good" yet we still haven't seen it with any kind of consistency. Not saying it couldn't happen, but also the point was this was one of the best trades in Bulls history, yet the verdict isn't even out yet, and right now the Bulls could clearly use Eddy.

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-25-2007 12:10 PM]

Yes, I do expect one of the best players from the draft if our GM is heralded as being a great drafter. You didn't need to search for threads from the previous six months to get that admission from me!

[Edited by - bonn1997 on 11-25-2007 12:28 PM]
Marv
Posts: 35574
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
11/25/2007  12:47 PM
I gotta think the drafting business is tougher than it looks. aldridge was heavily frowned upon coming out of college, seen as channing frye redux. maybe eventually he'll be exposed as charles smith part II as dj says, but for the moment he looks like a collasol error by paxson. a couple of years ago frye looked for 25 games like the next knick all-star. now he couldn't caddy for mike doleac.

l look at it this way - if joe dumars, my favorite gm, could screw the pooch so badly as to take darko over wade, bosh and melo, then any great talent evaluator can be fooled at any time when looking at a college, HS or foreigb player. it's a matter of the ratio of right to wrong evaluations that you make.
Anji
Posts: 25523
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 4/14/2006
Member: #1122
USA
11/25/2007  12:49 PM
I agree Briggs. Curry is what he is. 20-7 is not a terrible thing to have. I think on a better team or one with a leader/point guard, he would play better now. He's rebounding is off by about 2 per game and his help defense is bad against penetration. But he is a 20-24 point guy on 12-14 shots, he is a 7-8 rebound guy and I do feel he plays ok man D. I wonder if you agree or not, but do you notice Curry does stop the guards dribble off the pick and roll when he doesn't have to get back to his man??? I Personally who trap the pick and roll with Curry if I was Isiah, because Curry can jump out in front of the guard and make him pick up his dribble.....But he can't show and get back to his man. Isiah is an ass though.

I think most of the teams and superstar players in the league could use Curry and we should go forward with him. I would start him and Lee, then get a banner backup C/f. The Zach Trade was horrible...bbbb
"Really, all Americans want is a cold beer, warm p***y, and some place to s**t with a door on it." - Mr. Ford
Page 2 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
I bet the Bulls wish they had Eddy Curry back
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy