Bonn1997 wrote:Houston was a versatile scorer but I don't object to Durozo's point: Houston excelled in only one of the major statistical categories (PPG) and was below average in the rest. He's a guy who we've glorified but most NBA fans forgotten about by now.

Wow hate to say it, but I actually agree with you Bonn!

Starks made All Defensive Team (2nd team) in '92-'93. Don't think Houston's made any all nba teams, just a terrific jumpshooter and scorer, nothing else.

Sprewell, Shumpert, Brewer, Anthony Chandler would be a helluva line up as well

ChuckBuck wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Houston was a versatile scorer but I don't object to Durozo's point: Houston excelled in only one of the major statistical categories (PPG) and was below average in the rest. He's a guy who we've glorified but most NBA fans forgotten about by now.

Wow hate to say it, but I actually agree with you Bonn!

Starks made All Defensive Team (2nd team) in '92-'93. Don't think Houston's made any all nba teams, just a terrific jumpshooter and scorer, nothing else.

I remember John Starks getting repeatedly torched by Reggie Miller, Michael Jordan, Steve Smith, Glen Rice , Penny Hardaway and every other shooting guard of SF over 6'4, Starks was undersized at the SG position even though he was listed at 6'5 he was actually 6'3 so lets not act like he was Bruce Bowen, he played hard and I loved him but Houston had size and a beautiful all around offensive game and I would rather have him on my team if I was trying to win a championship.

Allanfan20 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:I have been watching likely longer than you have been alive....I said that already. Also, Novak camps out on the 3 but, he's not just a 3 point shooter, its just how we utilized him. He has a mid-range jump shot. The only real difference is that Houston can get his own shot off. He wasn't a slasher or anything like that so, as I said, you still haven't answered my question unless your saying the difference is that Houston took a lot more midrange jump shots. He was never really that big about moving without the ball, you must be confusing him with Miller. Yeah, that's a huge difference.

With this post, I'm not argueing with you anymore because you're obviously trolling. Either that, or you come up with things very deep from the abyss of your arshole. I did answer your question and you obviously haven't been watching the Knicks much. In fact, you obviously don't watch the Knicks now. There has not been one time in Novaks pro career where he was utilized as a mid range player. If he had a midrange game, believe me, he would have been used because in this era, finding a mid range player is almost like hitting the lotto. There just aren't anymore of those players who are efficient like how Allan, Ray, Rip Hamilton, and Miller were.

Durzo, there are a lot of old Knicks games on Youtube now. If you don't want to trust my word that Allan didn't move without the ball then feel free to check out some of those games. You're point has already been proven wrong but now you'll be able to actually watch it.

Enjoy the boards and hopefully you can start making posts a lot better than what you have. This wasn't your best showing.

Just because we disagree or can't come to a common ground does not make me a troll...it makes me an individual! Sometimes people need to learn to agree to disagree and respect each others opinion. I don't have a problem with you seeing things differently.

Don't mean to disrespect your opinion at all. I was just trying to portray that Allan was more than just a shooter and it seemed to go through one ear and out the other. Yes, I agree that most of his scoring came from shooting, but he was a solid passer despite the low assist numbers and he was a better man to man defender than people think. He was decent, not bad.

And yes, he was a good post up guard.

H20 gets a lot of hate because Dolan gave him as much as he could. But the dude could flat out ball and what he offered offensively is the definition of what you want from a 2. I was fortunate enough to go to the Garden for many of the big games during his career... and it was crazy how many 'quiet' 20+ point games he would have. That probably contributes to his lack of props too, but when you think about it, it means he was incredibly efficient and never forced the action. If you put him on the 94 Finals team, the Knicks easily win the championship

93BUICK wrote:I would take Sprewell-

depends on the day for me... I'm torn between Spree and Houston. Always loved Starks and his heart but he was always undersized and elites 2s chewed him up. I remember when Pat the Rat used to alternate between Starks and Mason on Jordan. starks also had a talent for bringing out the best in Reggie

Mray20 wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Houston was a versatile scorer but I don't object to Durozo's point: Houston excelled in only one of the major statistical categories (PPG) and was below average in the rest. He's a guy who we've glorified but most NBA fans forgotten about by now.

Wow hate to say it, but I actually agree with you Bonn!

Starks made All Defensive Team (2nd team) in '92-'93. Don't think Houston's made any all nba teams, just a terrific jumpshooter and scorer, nothing else.

I remember John Starks getting repeatedly torched by Reggie Miller, Michael Jordan, Steve Smith, Glen Rice , Penny Hardaway and every other shooting guard of SF over 6'4, Starks was undersized at the SG position even though he was listed at 6'5 he was actually 6'3 so lets not act like he was Bruce Bowen, he played hard and I loved him but Houston had size and a beautiful all around offensive game and I would rather have him on my team if I was trying to win a championship.

I know you guys love Houston, but he was a way worse defender than Starks. Starks played against a ton of great shooting guards, something Houston's era lacked. Going against Jordan, Mitch Richmond, Steve Smith, Hersey Hawkins, Glenn Rice, Jeff Hornacek, etc is no easy task. True Starks was undersized, but he played great man to man, as well as, team defense evident by his '93 All Defensive team. Houston would be a liability in today's NBA, sorta like a Novak, can't use him extensively because his guy would always torch him. Tell me who didn't get torched by Miller or Jordan in their primes LOL. Another thing Starks teams won way way more than Houston's teams ever did, so I'd take him getting torched individually for more overall team success.

knicks1248 wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

Mray20 wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Houston was a versatile scorer but I don't object to Durozo's point: Houston excelled in only one of the major statistical categories (PPG) and was below average in the rest. He's a guy who we've glorified but most NBA fans forgotten about by now.

Wow hate to say it, but I actually agree with you Bonn!

Starks made All Defensive Team (2nd team) in '92-'93. Don't think Houston's made any all nba teams, just a terrific jumpshooter and scorer, nothing else.

I remember John Starks getting repeatedly torched by Reggie Miller, Michael Jordan, Steve Smith, Glen Rice , Penny Hardaway and every other shooting guard of SF over 6'4, Starks was undersized at the SG position even though he was listed at 6'5 he was actually 6'3 so lets not act like he was Bruce Bowen, he played hard and I loved him but Houston had size and a beautiful all around offensive game and I would rather have him on my team if I was trying to win a championship.

I know you guys love Houston, but he was a way worse defender than Starks. Starks played against a ton of great shooting guards, something Houston's era lacked. Going against Jordan, Mitch Richmond, Steve Smith, Hersey Hawkins, Glenn Rice, Jeff Hornacek, etc is no easy task. True Starks was undersized, but he played great man to man, as well as, team defense evident by his '93 All Defensive team. Houston would be a liability in today's NBA, sorta like a Novak, can't use him extensively because his guy would always torch him. Tell me who didn't get torched by Miller or Jordan in their primes LOL. Another thing Starks teams won way way more than Houston's teams ever did, so I'd take him getting torched individually for more overall team success.

When your playing with hard nose defensive players like Oak, Ewing, mase, kt, X danial..Your guards can be avg defenders, not to mention having a defensive minded coach.

I just finish watching some video on sprewell (who will always be my favorite knick) and I think it's really a toss between him and allan..sprees 48 point game against his home team the bucks, was so impressive.. but the what seperates starks and spree from allan..Those 2 guys were as streaky as hell..The 48 point game spree had, well he was 1-9 at the half with 6 points..

I would definitely give Spree the edge over Houston, not because of his scoring ability, but because his defense and all around game.