Hes most fit to come off a teams bench as a 6th man backing up the 2 and 1 positions. (thats why I feel nate was a wasted pick) but thats another story. Bottom line is alot of people hate steph because he doesent have the wins he should be alot of stars dont he has never found that group around him that gels with his play style. IMO this year he will.

where have Steph led teams traditionally ranked in terms of team assists?

NY as a team shot 45% from the field last season. making shotswasn't as huge a problem as most like to make it seem.

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by bobs3304:

That's an asenine arguement my friend.

The ONLY thing you can say about Steph is the following:

A.) He's an efficient scorer by himself

B.) When commanding the ball for enough MPG...his assist numbers are high.


So what's your point?

Is that what you expect out of your PG?

All you need out of him is padded stats?

Steph played the MOST minutes out of anyone in the league last year.....NO FUCKIN SHIT his numbers are so high. He IS efficient, but Crawford could average close to 20 and 8 with 40+ MPG. So could Nate.

Like I keep saying, those that back Marbury are basically blind. The offense is STAGNANT when he runs it like he did last year. Granted, you can say things like "Nazr dropped passes", and guess what -- I don't blame Steph for that... But how do you know J Kidd wouldn't be able to set him up better? How do you know J Kidd or Nash wouldn't have orchestrated the offense so that everyone got touches and Nazr would be left wide open under the basket.

The thing about Marbury is is that he's a scorer...plain and simple. He can pass, but he's not a passer. Making the extra pass, getting your teammates in the position so that they can create for themselves is what your PG is supposed to do, and Steph doesnt.

If Steph isn't scoring...he's useless b/c he doesn't do the other things that makes this team better. And right now...the last thing we need is scoring from our backcourt. I have confidence in Crawford, unlike most of you......your basing his career on the fact that he's a bad shooter. I base MY confidence on the fact that he's starting to find his niche at the point...where he DOESN'T rely on shooting.

End of story. I can't be wrong...unless Colangelo, McHale, and Thorn are all wrong too.

McHale didn't trade Marbury becuase he thought the team was going to be better, he traded Marbury becuase Marbury wanted out, a selfish and immauture move but that was what, 8 years ago now? So take him out of your argument, I agree with you about Thorn and Colangelo. I ask you this Bobs, you say we 'blindly' follow Marbury which is totally false because before he got to the Knicks, I thought of him the same that you do yet I was able to watch him and I realized that it's not Stephs fault that the Knicks aren't winning. They have no capable front-court scoring and your starting PF and C routinely drop passes that were easy dunks, add that in with a starting SG who is Jamal Crawford, who is overmatched physically by his opponent on a nightly basis and that isn't going to take your team anywhere. Your just not going to win too many games with that mixture and that is in noway Steph's fault.

Now I've seen Crawford play PG, he's done with the Bulls and he's done it in college. With the Bulls he was a terrible PG, they gave him 2 years to show that he was capable of playing in the NBA and then they drafted Heinrich another PG. Now why did the Bulls do that? Becuase they found out that Jamal Crawford in NO WAY was a capable starting PG even after playing with guys on the front-line such as Elton Brand, Brad Miller, Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler. Crawford has had his chances to play PG and with good players and everytime he has showed that he CAN NOT make the decisions that are required of a starting PG on a good team in the NBA. I've never seen anything from Crawford besides being a chucker, he has not yet begun to learn the term shot-selection, maybe Larry can teach him but I still havent seen it. Since you guys love to rip Marbury for his terrible game yesterday then I'm going to use Pre-Season stats as well(even though I think its totally ridiculous) Crawford is shooting 40% from the field and a dismal 33% from 3 point land. This shows me that he STILL hasn't learned the value of shot-selection and if he can't do that then why should he be this teams starting PG. Learning shot-selection for a player like Jamal is something that is important becuase if he's showing he can't determine when to shoot the ball then that tells me he still doesn't know when to pass the ball. Like I said before, if Crawford ends up playing a very good PG this year then I'll be the FIRST PERSON to eat crow on this board but I think Patrick Ewing has a better chance of suiting up and starting at center for the Knicks this year.

great post. You hit the nail right on the head regarding Crawford! He is not a PG!!! nor is he a SG!!!! he is a 6th man combo guard off the bench for the gazillionth time! He is not the superstar the Knicks are trying to sell to us as being in order to get us to buy tickets! Either he will be moved to the bench by Larry or he will be traded if at all possible. Crawford did get his chances and not making Brand, Brad, Curry & Chandler better players and not having any success in college is enough proof that Crawford is never going to be a superstar!

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 10-22-2005 4:57 PM]

Posted by bobs3304:

From what I've SEEN from Crawford...he looks like he's finding his niche at the point.

I don't even need to use stats here.

And a previous poster just said what I've been saying all along -- our TEAM assists have always been low with Steph running the point.

The offense is STAGNANT. How can you deny that?

And even if Crawford ends up being a taller, less efficient version of Marbury (which I don't think is the case), then atleast he'll be making close to a 1/3 of what Steph is making.

What's really gay IMO is that Steph probly won't get traded b/c Dolan is too "ascurred" that jeresey sales will kill them.


Whatever.

Posted by Killa4luv:

Ball movement in the way you mention it, has to do with coaching and offensive schemes, things which are not in Steph's job description. Look at the style of play in Phoenix and NJ and they have coaches who demand ball movement and player movement. Look at the Knicks now, players are moving and cutting all over the place. Coaching was a huge part of the problem, but it isn't anymore.

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by bobs3304:

From what I've SEEN from Crawford...he looks like he's finding his niche at the point.

I don't even need to use stats here.

And a previous poster just said what I've been saying all along -- our TEAM assists have always been low with Steph running the point.

The offense is STAGNANT. How can you deny that?

And even if Crawford ends up being a taller, less efficient version of Marbury (which I don't think is the case), then atleast he'll be making close to a 1/3 of what Steph is making.

What's really gay IMO is that Steph probly won't get traded b/c Dolan is too "ascurred" that jeresey sales will kill them.


Whatever.

I don't think we're ever going to agree and that's fine, that is what makes this board so good because its a smart discussion, whether we like what the other is saying or not.

Regarding the offense is stagnant quote, there aren't very many offenses in the NBA that deal with a TON of motion. You have the Nets and the Sun who rely on a fun and gun style which in my opinion will NEVER win a championship, especially the Suns. Defense wins. Back on point now, I honestly see the Knicks offense this year being very similar to the Heat offense last year and I dont think many people can say that doesnt work. I can see Marbury bringing the ball up and looking downlow to Curry, if Curry is there then he dumps it down to him and cuts through the lane and Curry either shoots or sets someone else up for a shot. If Marbury holds onto the ball he's going to drive and dish, too me thats not stagnant its just a offense designed to feature a big man that plays his game down in the blocks.

Posted by AkiliNYK:

Posted by gunsnewing:

Hes most fit to come off a teams bench as a 6th man backing up the 2 and 1 positions. (thats why I feel nate was a wasted pick) but thats another story. Bottom line is alot of people hate steph because he doesent have the wins he should be alot of stars dont he has never found that group around him that gels with his play style. IMO this year he will.

I agree, that is exactly what Crawford is. Nate wasn't a wasted pick because either crawford or marbury will be traded at some point in order to take the team to the next level

I agree with you up untill the crawford/marbury will be traded away for nate robinson as much as I love the guy hes a novilty act hes a 5'6 combo gaurd there are only certin team we can play and this guy not get abused on Defence. Its showing now in preseason games if it wasent for his energy he would be a lost cause, but because of his heart he is becomming a fan favoret. I love his attitude as well but any gaurd over 6'0 will shoot over him easly. Also hes not and probably wont ever be better than marbury and dosent have the same combo gaurd advantages as JC so there is no need to trade off either of those two. In short we should have used the 21's pick on a swing man.

good point. I only said one of them would be traded so i wouldn't hand the starting PG job to nate right away unless he proves he is strong enough to play defense which he has so far.

Crawford because he'll never figured it out or Marbury for defense, young players and picks. We'll take a step back and a HUGE step forward