Posted by TMS:

Posted by Bonn1997:

I'm one of the few here who is humble enough to admit when he was wrong and I was dead wrong about Tim Thomas. (That was back when in my days where I supported almost everything Isiah did.) When someone points out that I changed my view, I'll simply admit that I did and that those who were right from the beginning knew a lot more than I did. Many here can't bring themselves to such an admission about Isiah and/or Curry.

this has nothing to do w/being humble or admitting being wrong about anything... if u're inferring i'm too stubborn or not humble enough to admit being wrong about something ur way off base... i'm sure plenty of posters here have seen me man up to being wrong about things in the past... btw, it's funny that the guy giving you a standing ovation here is 1 of the worst offenders on this board when it comes to what you're talking about, but i digress.

i thought i just got done acknowledging the fact that we gave up too much for Curry in hindsight... i still think that looking back i understand why Isiah made the deal... does that mean i think Curry has lived up to expectations? not the same thing is it.

we needed a low post scorer in a bad way & once again, no one could have predicted this team would tank the way it did after that deal was made... my definition on what i consider to be "garbage" as you so liberally use the term to describe players has been clearly laid out for you here... i don't consider Curry to be "completely worthless" like you do... i've never felt that way about Fugazy either & he's probably the player i despise the most in the NBA outside of Mebury... i think the issue here is we have differing definitions on what a true scrub really is.

Posted by Bonn1997:
Anyone who's lazy, out of shape, won't do the hard work to help his team, and hurts the teams he's played for is garbage IMO.

Posted by nixluva:

Yeah he's fat and lazy, but you can get him to play hard if you feed him the ball as we should.

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Bonn1997:
Anyone who's lazy, out of shape, won't do the hard work to help his team, and hurts the teams he's played for is garbage IMO.

what about Shaq... is he garbage?

Wow, talk about a question from left field! Anyway, career wise, of course not. This year I haven't watched him enough to answer that question.

this year he fits every description of your definition, which is why i bring up his name to begin with... obviously career wise he's not garbage... i didn't think that even needed to be stated.

In a directly related note. The New York Times’ Howard Beck (New York’s best Knick beat writer) begins his article: Randolph Returns; Losing Never Left with this:

"The question [to Isiah] was a little convoluted and complex, but the premise was clear enough: how could the Knicks play so well against the San Antonio Spurs on Friday, add a highly productive Zach Randolph on Saturday and yet be soundly beaten by a lesser Houston Rockets team?"

Isiah either wasn’t prepared to answer the question or wasn’t prepared to alienate his players with a truthful response, but we will. The symbolic answer comes at 3:50 in the third quarter of last night’s game. At that time Zach did one of his patented spin moves as three Houston defenders converged on him. Many of the other open but just KNEW that the ball would not be passed. At the very top of the screen you can see a never more open and, perhaps, never more naive Stephon Marbury waving his hands up and down at the 3-point line hoping to catch the corner of Zach’s determined eye. The pass out to Marbury had a perfectly clear lane. Zach with head down as usual, either didn’t see him or just plain ignored him. Before the screen shifted you could see Marbury’s arms come down as his shoulders visibly shrugged in disappointment as the play unfolded. Zach went on to miss the shot, and grab one of his own season high 22 rebounds, then get fouled, and get two of his 18 points at the line. Zach believes he has done a good job. After all, the stat sheet proves it, doesn’t it? However, four teamates felt alienation. When Zach learns to pass that ball – EVEN if it results in a miss — then the Knicks might start winning consistently. Everybody at work has a colleague like Zach who individually excels, but seems to bring the overall work environment down. Zach is that guy.

Most Knick fans deciding between keeping Curry or Zach want to keep Zach because of his considerable rebounding prowess that bests the one-trick-pony that is Curry. I prefer Curry next to a solid dirty work defender and Lee off the bench. Neither Zach or Curry pass out of the double-team very well, but there are two distinctions. One, Curry is already down on the low block when he takes on multiple defenders and Zach is out on the perimeter — hence Curry’s higher shooting percentage. But the main difference is that, Curry — after being routinely double-teamed for the first time last year — hasn’t LEARNED how to effectively pass out of it. On the other hand Zach doesn’t WANT to pass out of it. Besides a few games when he tried to play team ball, Zach is straight-up selfish about his stats. He wants that "20-10" tag, but the Knicks need a "10-10-4 + defense" from that position. Perhaps if I watched a few Portland games the last few years, it would not have taken this long to draw this conclusion that so many others already talked about. My bad. Curry will not stop growth and development of other players, but Zach seems to do that as the ball always seems to stop on the perimeter when it touches his hands. I only see Zach as valuable on a contending team that defines his role upon arrival (see Adrian Dantley to Pistons or Antoine Walker to Heat). …but maybe I’m wrong… or maybe we have all played enough full court pick-up games to know EXACTY what Marbury felt when he shrugged his shoulders and what enough of those shrugs can do to a team…

Posted by tkf:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Klytus:

I can't believe what I'm reading. How can you defend and want Eddy Curry? Are some of you drunk?

Curry is everything I hate in a player. He's lazy, has no energy and he's heartless. Enough about him being young. This is his 7th season!! He's not going to get better. Enough about him being dominant on offense!! That's just crazy!! By Curry being your go-to-guy, you run a stagnant offense and will have a ton of turnovers and you will shoot a lot of bad shots against the shot clock. And defensively, Curry is the worst Center in the entire league. Your Center is supposed to be the backbone and anchor on D. And Curry provides absolutely no help. None!! And to top it all off, Curry would be stuffing his face with pizza and beer in his parents basement if he was a few inches shorter. He has no motivation!! None!! Every damn year he comes into camp in worse shape!! The guy is such a loser too!! Celebrating last nights loss!! Talking about how it felt like last year. They won 33 games!!

I cannot root for Curry. I just cannot. It's like rooting for a thief to succeed in life.

what about anything i've said on this thread suggests to u that i'm blindly rooting for the guy w/o considering the reality of his laziness as a player? i don't root for Curry... i root for the Knicks... this has nothing to do w/who i do or don't root for... it's being realistic & not closing the blinds & posting emotionally like certain others on this thread by saying the guy is complete garbage when you damn well know he's got a lot more talent & ability than players who we would classify as true scrubs in this league... it's sad that some of you can't post without taking the hyperbole over the top when it concerns some of the players on this roster... to listen to some of you you'd think no one on this team has any business playing in the NBA.

I agree, but if you give any player any shred of credit, then guys like majorleads will call you a flip flopper( sorry major, but this is true, I am not trying to start a flame war) or a lover.... The knicks are bad, but not every player is bad or a non-NBA talent....

Posted by Anji:

In a directly related note. The New York Times’ Howard Beck (New York’s best Knick beat writer) begins his article: Randolph Returns; Losing Never Left with this:

"The question [to Isiah] was a little convoluted and complex, but the premise was clear enough: how could the Knicks play so well against the San Antonio Spurs on Friday, add a highly productive Zach Randolph on Saturday and yet be soundly beaten by a lesser Houston Rockets team?"

Isiah either wasn’t prepared to answer the question or wasn’t prepared to alienate his players with a truthful response, but we will. The symbolic answer comes at 3:50 in the third quarter of last night’s game. At that time Zach did one of his patented spin moves as three Houston defenders converged on him. Many of the other open but just KNEW that the ball would not be passed. At the very top of the screen you can see a never more open and, perhaps, never more naive Stephon Marbury waving his hands up and down at the 3-point line hoping to catch the corner of Zach’s determined eye. The pass out to Marbury had a perfectly clear lane. Zach with head down as usual, either didn’t see him or just plain ignored him. Before the screen shifted you could see Marbury’s arms come down as his shoulders visibly shrugged in disappointment as the play unfolded. Zach went on to miss the shot, and grab one of his own season high 22 rebounds, then get fouled, and get two of his 18 points at the line. Zach believes he has done a good job. After all, the stat sheet proves it, doesn’t it? However, four teamates felt alienation. When Zach learns to pass that ball – EVEN if it results in a miss — then the Knicks might start winning consistently. Everybody at work has a colleague like Zach who individually excels, but seems to bring the overall work environment down. Zach is that guy.

Most Knick fans deciding between keeping Curry or Zach want to keep Zach because of his considerable rebounding prowess that bests the one-trick-pony that is Curry. I prefer Curry next to a solid dirty work defender and Lee off the bench. Neither Zach or Curry pass out of the double-team very well, but there are two distinctions. One, Curry is already down on the low block when he takes on multiple defenders and Zach is out on the perimeter — hence Curry’s higher shooting percentage. But the main difference is that, Curry — after being routinely double-teamed for the first time last year — hasn’t LEARNED how to effectively pass out of it. On the other hand Zach doesn’t WANT to pass out of it. Besides a few games when he tried to play team ball, Zach is straight-up selfish about his stats. He wants that "20-10" tag, but the Knicks need a "10-10-4 + defense" from that position. Perhaps if I watched a few Portland games the last few years, it would not have taken this long to draw this conclusion that so many others already talked about. My bad. Curry will not stop growth and development of other players, but Zach seems to do that as the ball always seems to stop on the perimeter when it touches his hands. I only see Zach as valuable on a contending team that defines his role upon arrival (see Adrian Dantley to Pistons or Antoine Walker to Heat). …but maybe I’m wrong… or maybe we have all played enough full court pick-up games to know EXACTY what Marbury felt when he shrugged his shoulders and what enough of those shrugs can do to a team…

That's a good take on the Curry/Zach situation. I still believe CUrry can be a very productive player for the knicks in the future. He is averaging 22 and 8 boards when Zach has been out, and that's kind of the player I though Curry would be after putting up 19 and 7 last year. Curry is better at passing out of the post, he is chasing more players off of layups or manying them make tougher layups and he is an average 1 on 1 defender. A gm can still make this a pretty good team with a more defensive Power Forward and a Real small forward. I don't believe the whole team has to be scraped.

When need to dump Zach, get a point guard and a legit small forward into the starting line up and find a guy like ronnie turiaf.