Hopefully he puts on weight now........ one of the few people in sports that you care if he puts on muscle or fat because he is sooooo thin.LOL


If you count Q's 10minute DNP as not playing, the knicks are 2-0 when Q has a sore lower back!!!!!

[Edited by - anji on 03-11-2007 12:23 PM]

Posted by bigbeast:

16-16 with Jamal.....wow pop the champange.

Heres the bottom line, Craw needs to go.....to the bench. He's not a legit starting 2 guard on a team that has serious aspirations to win a Chip. He kills us just as much as he helps us. When he's hot you ride him, when he's off you bench him. Problem is, we don't have a solid 2 guard to put in front of him right now.

Stevie aint an issue. No need to compare the 2. Stevie has no part in our future.

To link Eddys struggles directly with Jamals absence isn't being completely objective. Curry's struggles has more to do with the constant doubling (Curry is being doubled from different areas on the court and has to make a new adjustment). Yes, Jamals absence makes the court smaller for Eddy because Jamal can knock down the jay, but Lee's absence also hurts. Lee is a phenomonal interior passer and gets us extra possesions.

If I might site yet another thing, this time with your observations, your little starbury, who was running the show last year ended up with only 23 wins? Yes? Remember? While spending time fighting coach Brown? Yes?

And excuse me, Curry's point started to decline when Crawford went down. They've been steadily climbing just about ever since the season started. And your darn right that the court gets smaller because Crawford isn't there to knock down the J! I mean you acknowledge it yourself, in your own typed words! What's not to get? The Knicks are weak without Crawford. Plain and simple. Broken down Francis hasn't proven anything and hog ball starbury doesn't distribute the ball very well at all when he goes into his starbury mode and tries to take over a game. Crawford a no D show, but he's it when the game is on the line at the offensive side. You can add five wins to our schedule, thanks to him hitting the J!

Francis had 7 turnovers. To top it off these players can't even hit there foul line shots which Jamal is know to knock down.

Yeah, the 56% last night was horrible.

Posted by bigbeast:

4949- First off, where in my post did I mention Marbury? When did he become 'my little Startbury?!'

Okay, sorry for pinning it on you, but you gotta admit, what you just said is hallarious as hell!!!!

I agree with Oohah that this team will probably be better off without Crawford.

Posted by TheGame:

Well, if the choice is between Crawford and Francis, it is Crawford everytime.

Thats an opinion you and Isiah share but doesn't seem justified by his on-court impact, which suffers due to his poor shot-selection and defense. Potential and knees aside, Francis is still more dangerous going to the rim.

Posted by TheGame:

Posted by codeunknown:

Posted by TheGame:

Well, if the choice is between Crawford and Francis, it is Crawford everytime.

Thats an opinion you and Isiah share but doesn't seem justified by his on-court impact, which suffers due to his poor shot-selection and defense. Potential and knees aside, Francis is still more dangerous going to the rim.

Crawford was really starting to gel with the offense. His poor shot selection was not as poor in recent weeks and he really helped facilitate getting the ball to Curry. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that Crawford is a great player, but Francise has not really done anything that Crawford cannot do (other than maybe the rebounding) and Francise does not play well in the offensive flow (too much overdribbling). Moreover, I am not really convinced Francise is better at going to the rim than Crawford. Crawford has a real nice floater and has a better ability to pass in traffic (although Crawford is also turnover prone like Francise). I would rather take my chances with Crawford until we can upgrade.

That is the big difference: Crawford ends up with a floater or an oopdee-doop shot and no foul. Francis goes right at the big man and draws more fouls.

oohah

Posted by Queeniepop:

I think you have to go ooahh...

Good start...

no lee for 7 games, we are 4-3 - does he have to go?

I see you like Jamal very much. Really, you think he is the answer at SG? I am not saying Francis is, but Crawford is a disaster 50% of the time.

Your comparison of Lee to Crawford and their effect on the team is so far off I don't know where to begin, but let's start here: Lee is among the most efficient players in the league and Crawford is about as inefficient as they come.

no jamal for 5 games we are 3-2.

I am looking at the team dynamic not just the record. That is far too small a sample size to judge.

eaxmine this...with Jamal in the SL, we are 16-16

Okay.

with steve we are 6-11...

Yes, Francis started in the beginning of the season during the toughest stretch of games, and when the whole team was playing bad: Marbury, Frye, Curry, everybody was playing bad except Q and Lee. But I guess you are saying it was all Francis' fault!

And if you are not saying it was all Francis' fault, why are you throwing all these won-loss numbers at me with no context?

jamal is part of the future whether you like it or not. he is here to stay esp because of curry. curry is shooting 45% from the field without jamal. i think francis has to go and I pretty much will say, he is GONE by the summer.

I really don't get as personal with my feeling towards the players as you seem to. I root for whoever is on the team and I want to do what will make the team better regardless if I have to lose a player I like or take on one I don't like.

steve francis is a joke and as much as he it the game winning 3- if he hadnt, he pretty much lost the game for us.

I don't know what game you were watching. He brought us back twice with his 3-point shooting, he got the layup and 1 where he missed the free-throw, and of course the game winner.

Speaking of losing games, did you notice how Crawford basically lost several games for us recently with boneheaded plays? I hope you are not trying to argue that Crawford is a smarter player than ANYONE.

see isiah's comments today, "Without Crawford and Lee, I'm impressed with where we've still been able to manage and hang out," Thomas said before the game. "But with Crawford and Lee, going down these last 20 games with those two, with that group? I think we'd be pretty damn good."

I see the comments but what of it? I could have sworn we had a talk a little while ago where you told me how everything Isiah says has only to do with his ego. Now you want to use some off-hand comment as evidence of something.

***

And you really think Curry has been playing worse than average because Crawford is out for a few games? That's the cause? how about Curry's other tough stretches during the season? Jamal was there for those wasn't he? Was he the cause then?

Root for the team and don't get too attached to the players...

oohah





[Edited by - oohah on 11-03-2007 6:45 PM]

I don't think that people look at this the right way... Crawford is playing out of position as a shooting guard, just like Francis is. Crawford hits huge end-of-game shots and feeds the post better than any player on the team. He's tall, albeit lanky, and fast AND quick as hell. He's led the team in scoring 20+ times this season and in assists 20+ times this season, while letting Eddy shine.

The offense runs most effectively when Crawford thinks pass first. If it were my team, I'd jettison Marbury and Francis and give the point to Crawford. I'd draft a SG with a great jumper or try and get someone like Ray Allen. I believe a lineup up of: PG Crawford, SG "Allan Houston", SF Balkman, PF Lee, C Eddy Curry is pretty friggin nasty.

Substitute Marbury or Francis for Crawford and I don't like that lineup nearly as much... two guys who can win a game with a jumper, two guys with hustle and a potent entry pass to a dominant post scorer. That dynamic is as varied as it is explosive.