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

Is Curry lost without Jamal or is he just having bad games?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 3 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/7/2007  2:31 PM
since the '03-'04 season (when Redd became a 20 ppg scorer), the Bucks are 130W - 172L... that's pretty pathetic, wouldn't you say? if you want to consider him a legitimate franchise player, be my guest... but when you say that he makes his teammates better & can carry a team, all you have to do is look at the W-L records to know that's an invalid argument... he's a 1-dimensional star player... that's all i'm saying.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
AUTOADVERT
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/7/2007  2:32 PM
Posted by MS:

Who do the buck really have right now.....

Mo Williams has played awesome this season, but i am willing to bet you would rather have crawford, TMS?

And Keeping a team at 500 when your starting two second year players, a journyman pg and a sf that everyone wanted to throw away is an accomplishment.....

I actually don't think Curry or Crawford really produce a lot of wins, and if we lost both and had a healthy team besides we wouldn't collapse like the bucks

MS, i only referenced Jamal to show that Redd's assist & rebounding totals aren't anything to write home about... there's no question i'd rather have Redd than Jamal.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
3/7/2007  2:35 PM
Posted by MS:

Who do the buck really have right now.....

Mo Williams has played awesome this season, but i am willing to bet you would rather have crawford, TMS?

And Keeping a team at 500 when your starting two second year players, a journyman pg and a sf that everyone wanted to throw away is an accomplishment.....

I actually don't think Curry or Crawford really produce a lot of wins, and if we lost both and had a healthy team besides we wouldn't collapse like the bucks



Bingo!
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
3/7/2007  2:36 PM
Posted by TMS:

since the '03-'04 season (when Redd became a 20 ppg scorer), the Bucks are 130W - 172L... that's pretty pathetic, wouldn't you say? if you want to consider him a legitimate franchise player, be my guest... but when you say that he makes his teammates better & can carry a team, all you have to do is look at the W-L records to know that's an invalid argument... he's a 1-dimensional star player... that's all i'm saying.


I don't consider him a franchise player. I already said he's 1-dimensional but I also feel Redd>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Curry so that's more damning of the fact that Curry truly isn't a franchise player.

[Edited by - TrueBlue on 03-07-2007 1:37 PM]
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/7/2007  2:40 PM
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by TMS:

since the '03-'04 season (when Redd became a 20 ppg scorer), the Bucks are 130W - 172L... that's pretty pathetic, wouldn't you say? if you want to consider him a legitimate franchise player, be my guest... but when you say that he makes his teammates better & can carry a team, all you have to do is look at the W-L records to know that's an invalid argument... he's a 1-dimensional star player... that's all i'm saying.


I don't consider him a franchise player. I already said he's 1-dimensional but I also feel Redd>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Curry so that's more damning of the fact that Curry truly isn't a franchise player.

when did i ever say Curry was a franchise player? the argument was that Curry doesn't make his teammates better & can't carry a team, but Redd can... i don't see it.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
SlimPack
Posts: 23588
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/14/2005
Member: #1009
USA
3/7/2007  2:58 PM
W/L record isn't an indication of whether or not someone is a franchise player. but regardless I don't think curry is one. I don't see why he would become one either. for it to happen on this team, some MAJOR are needed. so it'll be interesting to see how that plays out. and even then I'm pretty skeptical of it happening. I mean even when you consider that he's still young and will only get better, he just seems too one dimensional to be a franchise player. and usually, although not always, you know for sure whether or not someone is a franchise player or not after 6 years in the league.

[Edited by - slimpack on 03-07-2007 3:00 PM]
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/7/2007  3:02 PM
one player can't carry a team no matter how good they are look at the bucks team over the past couple of years the don't have a lot of guys on the team that are players, although they are moving in the right direction and cap room plus draft pick will vault them way over us
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/7/2007  3:19 PM
i just can't understand the double standards that some fans have when they criticize the players on this team, but don't hold the same line of thinking when it comes to others... that's basically why i even debate this one... it's not because i think Curry's a franchise player.

i happen to think he just needs the right mix of players around him that can accentuate his strengths & minimize his weaknesses, just like any other player needs in order to be successful in a team sport... bring in a shotblocker & a guy who can hit the open 3 pointer, & work w/Curry on his passing out of the double team, his conditioning & his FT shooting... i think next season he'll be an Allstar C w/o a doubt if he can just drop about 15 lbs of excess weight... that doesn't mean he's a franchise player, but i'll take it... we haven't had any low post player worth a damn on this team in a long time, so it's nice to finally have 1 that is.

if there's a trade out there that'll get us a legitimate franchise player then i'm fine w/giving up Curry to do it too... whatever we can do to improve the team is fine with me... it's not a hopeless situation like a lot of you think it is though... we have some good young talent to build with... now we just need the right supplementary pieces to glue it all together & make it work.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/7/2007  3:19 PM
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by MS:

Who do the buck really have right now.....

Mo Williams has played awesome this season, but i am willing to bet you would rather have crawford, TMS?

And Keeping a team at 500 when your starting two second year players, a journyman pg and a sf that everyone wanted to throw away is an accomplishment.....

I actually don't think Curry or Crawford really produce a lot of wins, and if we lost both and had a healthy team besides we wouldn't collapse like the bucks



Bingo!
Yeah, we could lose Curry or Crawford and still be a .400 team. Lee and Marbury are the only two players who make a big difference in the win column for this team.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/7/2007  3:20 PM
Posted by MS:

one player can't carry a team no matter how good they are look at the bucks team over the past couple of years the don't have a lot of guys on the team that are players, although they are moving in the right direction and cap room plus draft pick will vault them way over us

that's funny cuz in your other post you said the opposite
Well Redd gets his teams wins and can carry a team, even if he doesn't but up big numbers in other departments.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/7/2007  3:26 PM
he has a team of nobodys playing almost 500 ball, something the knicks should have been doing all season.....

Again

Who would you take

Marbury or Mo Williams
Redd obviously
Q or Patterson
Lee or Villeanueava
Curry or Bogut

NY Bench or Bucks Bench

If you don't think 19-22 when he is in the lineup is getting the team wins i don't know what to tell you, there starters have missed some time and they are thin at every position. He has the team at nearly 500 when they play they finished at 40 and 42 last year so i would say he def gets his team wins

What was wade doing without shaq? keeping the team close to 500
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/7/2007  3:41 PM
Posted by MS:

he has a team of nobodys playing almost 500 ball, something the knicks should have been doing all season.....

Again

Who would you take

Marbury or Mo Williams
Redd obviously
Q or Patterson
Lee or Villeanueava
Curry or Bogut

NY Bench or Bucks Bench

If you don't think 19-22 when he is in the lineup is getting the team wins i don't know what to tell you, there starters have missed some time and they are thin at every position. He has the team at nearly 500 when they play they finished at 40 and 42 last year so i would say he def gets his team wins

What was wade doing without shaq? keeping the team close to 500

so what we're talking about here is that you're angry that Curry hasn't been able to convert 3 of the Losses this season into Wins, is that right? (that would bring this team's record to .500)... would that have made you happy? i'm just trying to understand your standards here... you said Redd can carry a team in 1 post, & then said no 1 player can carry a team in the other... so which is it? can 1 player carry a team or not? & if so, do you qualify a 19-22 record as carrying a team under that standard?
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/7/2007  3:45 PM
if that teams doesn't have any other really great players and you have them playing nearly .500 ball then yes.

Curry has lost the team about 3 games already because he never puts his body on the man and forgets that he has to play defense in the final possesion.....

I am saying Lee is one of the more efficient players in the nba, if not the most and is a good player, marbury is a good point guard, q is a nice sf, and we have a good bench, if curry was this tremendous force i would expect him with the combination of players to really help this team reach the next level. He has had over 6 seasons in the nba and the fact that he can't speaks volumes about where the franchise is. How easy was it for him to come over and make the key blk last night, all it took was effort, if chubby put forth the effort the knicks would probably be ahead of the raptors
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/7/2007  4:27 PM
i don't doubt the Knicks would have won a few more games if Curry had put forth more effort... the same can be said about Channing, Marbury (in the beginning of the season) & Francis (i think it's obvious that he can still play, so why he was pretending like he was hurt is a mystery)... this team does have talent, like you just pointed out... weird that you would kill Isiah for putting that talent together in most of your posts though.

about the Bucks, about this time last year people were gushing over Bogut saying he was a can't miss franchise C... so far he's done nothing to bring the level of his team up at all over what Curry's done the past 2 seasons... again, i find these qualifiers of what determines a franchise player pretty arbitrary by some of you... saying Curry should have this team over .500 even though none of you think he's a legitimate franchise player, & yet finding excuses on why other star players haven't been able to get their teams to that level this season seems like some of you are picking & choosing when & where your arguments can apply & where they can't... maybe it's not just Curry's fault, & more reflective of the entire team's shortcomings as to why they haven't been able to win more games this year? just a thought.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
3/7/2007  4:56 PM
Posted by TMS:

i just can't understand the double standards that some fans have when they criticize the players on this team, but don't hold the same line of thinking when it comes to others... that's basically why i even debate this one... it's not because i think Curry's a franchise player.

i happen to think he just needs the right mix of players around him that can accentuate his strengths & minimize his weaknesses, just like any other player needs in order to be successful in a team sport...


I happen to agree with you. For instance, I could imagine Curry doing quite well say on the Spurs next to Duncan and us pining for him.

I've always held that a good team would be able to absorb any of our guys (even Marbury at his worst) but we have been a fragile team who is built almost exclusively of, how shall I say... fugazy types. There's a big difference between being a solid, established team integrating somebody into their system, and us, who is a young, weak team built on a poor foundation of too many unmotivated guys with no clue how to win.

It's pretty tragic when we try to single out any single person, especially when they're low minute scrubs like Shandon or Malik.

I certainly did my share of that with Marbury, but that's because A) he was the team leader (by default) and face of the franchise; thus a clear tone setter, and B) in bed with the GM, who catered to him.

in short, none of the guys on this team are of themselves worthy of some of the abuse they take, but nor are many (any) worthy of "foundation" status. There's not a one in the bunch I trust day in and out short of Lee, and we need to be realistic of his ceiling and limitations. When a "glue" guy is your team's MVP they've got a long way to go to establishing dominance, and are probably more than a piece or two away, unless those pieces are pretty elite players.

This is a bit of a departure but I remember being shocked when one of the more knowledgeable "homers" on realgm told me in the summer of '05 (LB's pre-season) that he liked our team's chances in the playoffs because he liked our bench. He admitted our starters were weak but he thought we had the best bench in the league. When you rely on your bench to take you places your starters can't you probably need too many pieces.
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/7/2007  5:09 PM
There is talent on this team its just the wrong talent, they aren't mentally tough and a smart gm could have just found role players or waited for other teams to buyout players....

For instance Matt Carroll we need a shooter he is dirt cheap, we need a defensive presence Stevenson for under 1 million, cato give us what james does for 1 million and no years, a player like anthony johnson or darrell armstrong could give steph a rest....

I think Isiah has brought in a ton of redudant talent and its caused problems, Larry had them (one of his many) now isiah has them, imagine if he didn't buy out taylor and rose? Being a GM is not brain surgery you don't sign or trade for risks and you can make do with lower level players and you don't give out five year deals to ****ty players....
joec32033
Posts: 30641
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
3/8/2007  5:30 AM
Posted by eViL:

The team has emphasized Eddy less and less since the all-star break. It's almost as if Isiah was really pushing to get Eddy in as an all-star and when that endeavor failed -- Isiah just switched it up and told Marbury he has the green light to do whatever he wants.

LOL. Looking back to the beginning of the season our team philosophy went from:

"Quick" offense, running offense, Eddy Curry centered, Stephon Marbury centered....I think Isiah is on plan Q right about now.

BTW, I liked the Eddy Curry centered offense the best.
~You can't run from who you are.~
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/8/2007  7:06 AM
Posted by joec32033:
Posted by eViL:

The team has emphasized Eddy less and less since the all-star break. It's almost as if Isiah was really pushing to get Eddy in as an all-star and when that endeavor failed -- Isiah just switched it up and told Marbury he has the green light to do whatever he wants.

LOL. Looking back to the beginning of the season our team philosophy went from:

"Quick" offense, running offense, Eddy Curry centered, Stephon Marbury centered....I think Isiah is on plan Q right about now.
Plan Q-Rich?
misterearl
Posts: 38786
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/16/2004
Member: #799
USA
3/8/2007  7:16 AM
Whatever the persoanl biases in favor of, or against, Jamal, the fact remains - when you lose a player who contributes both scoring and assists - the balance is disrupted.

In the case of David Lee, the Knicks miss his rebounding and passing ability.

The roles for all the remaining players cahnge in some form. It's like dominoes. Everyone is forced to adjust their game accordingly to compensate. Players who were not seeing any light, like Mardy Collins, are suddenly thrust into roles of responsibility.

The Knicks miss both Crawford and Lee more than some are willing to admit.

The players know. The coach knows.
once a knick always a knick
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
3/8/2007  9:13 PM
Posted by misterearl:

Whatever the persoanl biases in favor of, or against, Jamal, the fact remains - when you lose a player who contributes both scoring and assists - the balance is disrupted.

In the case of David Lee, the Knicks miss his rebounding and passing ability.

The roles for all the remaining players cahnge in some form. It's like dominoes. Everyone is forced to adjust their game accordingly to compensate. Players who were not seeing any light, like Mardy Collins, are suddenly thrust into roles of responsibility.

The Knicks miss both Crawford and Lee more than some are willing to admit.

The players know. The coach knows.

i agree with this. the knicks lost two 40 minute players. 99.99% of teams will need some time to adjust, let alone a team that's not that strong to begin with. some teams seem to pick up the pieces and keep motoring on (the suns from last season). and what that says is they have a well built DEEP team full of guys that are capable of stepping right in. we are nowhere close to that. hence require some time to adjust...if we adjust.

personally speaking, once crawford went down (as well as lee), i have stopped looking at this team critically. all year long, isiah tried to pound it down low to eddy and work an offense in that manner. now you take away the guy that got him the ball 90% of the time and you take away the team's best rebounder and "intangibles" guy...what is this team supposed to do? i don't have that high an opinion of marbury in terms of leadership and lifting or galvanizing a team. and i realize that the other parts have not been put in this situation before so jumping in midstream is a tough challenge for them. if some step up, then tells me they may be worth something. if some start to wilt or regress, then that's also telling.

the objective right now is clear, do whatever it takes to win. it doesn't matter who scores. it doesn't matter who doesn't. everything is abandoned except for what's working on a particular night. and i don't really disagree with that for THIS particular team THIS season (looking at it from the organization and isiah's point of view).

[Edited by - djsunyc on 03-08-2007 9:14 PM]
Page 3 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Is Curry lost without Jamal or is he just having bad games?
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