Posted by McK1:

Isiah has traded for Norris Marbury Crawford Nate and NY still doesn't have a point guard. Thats why when you're a cellar team you build through the draft, especially when trying to fill the QB position.

over the last 2 seasons:

Livingston, Harris, Telfair, Nelson, Paul, Williams, Felton
you could even argue he was haste in his assessment of Frank's talent and ability to contribute.

If getting a distributor next to Houston was the aim, all would have extended his career.

Posted by tkf:

Posted by McK1:

Isiah has traded for Norris Marbury Crawford Nate and NY still doesn't have a point guard. Thats why when you're a cellar team you build through the draft, especially when trying to fill the QB position.over the last 2 seasons:

Livingston, Harris, Telfair, Nelson, Paul, Williams, Felton
you could even argue he was haste in his assessment of Frank's talent and ability to contribute.

If getting a distributor next to Houston was the aim, all would have extended his career.

you know that is one interesting point. The hawks were and are a cellar team, had a high lottery pick, and instead of taking paul they took marvin williams and the hawks needed a PG desperately. Makes you wonder sometimes.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Bippity10:
That's my point. Most people hate Marbury so they see what they want to see. they just want him out so they see Craw as being better.

But you've yet to establish that it isn't you seeing what you want of Marbury. You're entire argument seems to hinge on Jamals poor assist/TO ratio while ignoring his much better PER, +/-, and overall team success stats at the position. It looks like you've found one stat in Steph's favor and are hinging your entire defense on it.

Well as much as people want to blame marbury's poor +/- stats on playing with AD, I'd suggest that Crawford's TOs are equally or more so biased by playing most of his time with rookies. One guy (AD) isn't going to affect ones numbers to the same degree that 4 kids will.

I'd also like to point out that Steph himself currently ranks 28th in A/TO among PGs. He's not exactly been stellar.

Lastly, if current TOs are the be-all/end-all of performance I guess you're in the camp who'd prefer that Rose should start over Frye since Frye averages 66% more per game?

Listen, if it were any other player I'd be more open to the suggestion that brown is doing what he's doing because it's his personal preference, but in the case of steph there are two components that compromise that perspective.

1) He's a functional veteran. If Ad and Malik were functional they too would be, and to a certain extent still are, starting over guys like Frye, Lee and sometimes Curry. Just being 28/29 gives Steph priority whether he's outplaying Jamal or not.

2) Steph is the GMs pet project. You can be sure he's going to be given every opportunity to succeed.

3) Steph has an enormous contract such that if he isn't rehabilitated he will little more than an albatross for the organization until it's expiring. He has to be made to work out.

I believe all those factors are at least as compelling to Browns motives as Jamal's TOs.

Posted by McK1:

Paul is the face of NOK. Scott runs an offense that needs a physical baseline to baseline attacking point guard to power it. He was there pick from day 1. Just b/c they can't get Paul doesn't mean they don't have the assets to get anyone.

I don't know really what you are trying to say here, but what I think you might have missed in my post, is that when you get the guy you want, it is worth a pick or two or even 3 if need be, and you are right paul is the face of that franchise and the same will be with frye and curry with the knicks, therefore trading the picks for curry was something IT thought was worth it... Simply because there are no big men available in the draft or via trade that is young and has the potential that curry has....

Just b/c they can't get Paul doesn't mean they don't have the assets to get anyone.

Posted by McK1:

Posted by tkf:

Posted by McK1:

Paul is the face of NOK. Scott runs an offense that needs a physical baseline to baseline attacking point guard to power it. He was there pick from day 1. Just b/c they can't get Paul doesn't mean they don't have the assets to get anyone.

I don't know really what you are trying to say here, but what I think you might have missed in my post, is that when you get the guy you want, it is worth a pick or two or even 3 if need be, and you are right paul is the face of that franchise and the same will be with frye and curry with the knicks, therefore trading the picks for curry was something IT thought was worth it... Simply because there are no big men available in the draft or via trade that is young and has the potential that curry has....

Just b/c they can't get Paul doesn't mean they don't have the assets to get anyone.

missed the NY end of it.

I think the construct of that Pistons team left a permanent impression on Brown and he prefers an skilled athlete at the 5 like Aldridge over a guy like Curry who although is a huge talent offensively, brings nothing in terms of pressuring the ball and transition scoring.

let me ask you this, let say the knicks didn't make the trade and finished 30-52, and got the 5th pick in the lottey, no Aldridge, no gay or morrison, now what? this was a very likely scenario, look at the past few times in the lottery I don't think we finished higher than 6 the past few times. so what then, I know, we go on blaming It for not fixing the lottery right? So we would have no gay, no morrison and no aldridge, and no curry with JJ starting at center.. Great....