[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

if the knicks are really that interested in james jones, why don't they try to workout a S+T for Ger
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
djsunyc
Posts: 44927
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
8/18/2005  11:13 AM
Posted by Andrew:

If I remember correctly Wallace had some attitude problems.

you're mistaken, that's WILLIS from diff'rent strokes
AUTOADVERT
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
8/18/2005  11:15 AM
whatch'you talkin' bout dj? EDIT: spoken in like the little guy himself.

[Edited by - rvhoss on 08-18-2005 11:16 AM]
all kool aid all the time.
nyballer
Posts: 21019
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 9/4/2001
Member: #108
USA
8/18/2005  11:20 AM
Posted by diderotn:

It would be nice to get both Nene and GW....but will Denver even consider trading Nene????
well they have martin and camby for the 4/5 and they have a gaping hole at the 2. Plus I think a any one of their front court players is a better fit than Q in our shceme. We'd have to lose a power forward for sure then, but I think it makes our team more balanced - our front court defense is our biggest weakness in my opinion
"easy like sunday morning..." - walt clyde
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/18/2005  11:46 AM
Posted by fishmike:

so its OK to give a 30 year old that averages 5 points and 4 rebs $30mm and 5 years, but $4.5 is too much for a 23 year old uber athletic defensive wing player with a very solid all around game, thats twice as productive.

Why do I have a feeling the minute Isiah offered him $8mm (Mo Taylor money) you would be gushing about this guy?
It's probably because "uber athletic" 23 yr old SFs are a dime a dozen but 7'1" guys who have stretches like James are not. That said, I have no problem with giving either of them that much money.
bobs3304
Posts: 24827
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 7/5/2005
Member: #948
8/18/2005  11:58 AM
Has anyone noticed how off-key this thread is?

If Isiah is so interested in James Jones, then why don't we work out a S&T for Gerald Wallace......?

Should've read: If Isiah is so interested in James Jones, then why don't we work out a S&T for James Jones

DLee is the best thing to happen to NY in Isiah's 4 year tenure. And that alone, though a positive on the radar, is sad as hell.
fishmike
Posts: 53149
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
8/18/2005  12:01 PM
they are? Then why do you and guys like RV gush over Ariza's potential when your talking about a dime a dozen player? Why not just trade him for a late #1 now since we havea glut there now anyway.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/18/2005  12:19 PM
Posted by fishmike:

they are? Then why do you and guys like RV gush over Ariza's potential when your talking about a dime a dozen player? Why not just trade him for a late #1 now since we havea glut there now anyway.
I said
It's probably because "uber athletic" 23 year oldSFs are a dime a dozen
For Ariza to have some dominant 20/10, 16/8 etc pefromances as a teenager is a different story, one worth being happy about.

fishmike
Posts: 53149
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
8/18/2005  12:53 PM
oh.... my bad

so if GW is a dime a dozen and isnt worth being excited about, tell me again why 25 year old Q is going to shoot over 40% since he hasnt for 3 years, or why a 30 year old JJ is going to magically no longer be in foul trouble.

This is like Bonn physics... rules that only apply to players in your world?
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
8/18/2005  1:12 PM
I thought you said "Ignore those Posts" to another poster.

I would definitely be willing to give Gerald Wallace that kind of contract. If he had attitude problems, big deal, he's friggin' 22. He's gonna be a real good solid NBA player. I would have DEFINITELY given him that kind of contract over Jerome James. PLEASE lets not get stupid. James had a freaking 5 game stretch against the Kings who are one of the worst defensive teams in the NBA and then he sucked against the Spurs again. And don't give that stupid "Well, he would thrive in the East" arguement, b/c the East is starting to rise fast and the balance of power is shifting.

It's amazing that we accept 8/5/1 from a guy who is making 30 mm. Those are scrub stats and KT came close to doubling those stats, besides the blocked shots part. Wallace is definitely a better gamble. In fact, it's not even a gamble, b/c he's already turning into a good player. BETTER than Big Gay Jerome James.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
fishmike
Posts: 53149
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
8/18/2005  1:15 PM
but we needed a center. What are you stupid?
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
8/18/2005  1:21 PM
That's childish name calling! I'm not gonna stand for it you freaking jerk!
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/18/2005  1:24 PM
Posted by fishmike:

oh.... my bad

so if GW is a dime a dozen and isnt worth being excited about, tell me again why 25 year old Q is going to shoot over 40% since he hasnt for 3 years, or why a 30 year old JJ is going to magically no longer be in foul trouble.

This is like Bonn physics... rules that only apply to players in your world?

Q's a 15/6 player from a 62 win team. Gerald Wallace is a 11/5 player from a terrible team. You're right that Q is 25, but I don't know why you're mentioning his age. I'm excited about his skills much more than his age. That said, I've said many times that I think Q is only an *average* starting SG or SF. It is, however, a drastic improvement from the production we got out of SF and SG last year (particularly SF).


[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 08-18-2005 1:26 PM]
Nalod
Posts: 68748
Alba Posts: 154
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
8/18/2005  1:28 PM
Wallace is not as good a player as Ariza. Not now, and not in 4 years when he is wallaces age.

Since wallace is not the missing championship piece, why bother?
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
8/18/2005  1:29 PM
Bonnita you kill me. You have said numerous times before we got Q that Crawford is a better player than Q. I argued with you, but I saw both Craw and Q many times, watched them carefully, b/c like I said, my friend is a Suns fan so I watched a lot of their games. Q is good, but Crawford was much better overall. How can you say Q is so much better? PLEEEEEEASE.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
fishmike
Posts: 53149
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
8/18/2005  1:30 PM
which part? He got 2 more rebounds than TT, but shot the same dreadfull %. That just tells me with Pho he got to jack more shots.

At leastr with Q he has shown he can play D and shoot a solid % because he did oit a few years ago. JJ has never accomplished anything.

Also Cha wasnt terrible. They were actually pretty good, they like most young teams just couldnt finish games for wins. I do remember them smoking us however.
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
fishmike
Posts: 53149
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
8/18/2005  1:30 PM
nevermind
"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/18/2005  1:33 PM
Posted by Allanfan20:

Bonnita you kill me. You have said numerous times before we got Q that Crawford is a better player than Q. I argued with you, but I saw both Craw and Q many times, watched them carefully, b/c like I said, my friend is a Suns fan so I watched a lot of their games. Q is good, but Crawford was much better overall. How can you say Q is so much better? PLEEEEEEASE.
I may have said that when we got Crawford. I can't remember. If I did, I was simply wrong. I have a higher batting percentage than certain posters here, but I don't bat 100%. After seeing both players from last year, I think Q is to this point the better player. Every stat will support that. The biggest difference is decision making, defense, and rebounding. What's with the "PLEEEEEASE"?

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 08-18-2005 1:34 PM]
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
8/18/2005  1:52 PM
B/c I disagree with you and that was my way of being obnoxious. Got a problem with that, punk? Q is not a better player than Crawford. If you wanna look at stats from last year, the only thing Q did better at was rebounds. But look at the games they play. Crawford simply didn't know how to play last year, so he jacked up a lot of shots. But he was much more active on both ends, was STILL a better passer, and only managed to have 2 TOs a game, which is really good for a guard. Truthfully, they are 2 different players b/c at his best, Q is a post up player and Crawford is a penetrator who shoots the midrange. Frankly, I think Crawf would be the better fit overall. The rebounding is a big thing, but hey, that's why I say put Crawf at the one, trade Marbury for a big or maybe a real high draft pick to draft a big, b/c then the rebounding and size wont be a problem in the first place.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
8/18/2005  2:07 PM
Frankly, I think Crawf would be the better fit overall
I think Q is the better fit because we already have one of the best playmakers in the game in Marbury.
If you wanna look at stats from last year, the only thing Q did better at was rebounds
If you want to go by stats, his defense was better than Crawford's (lower FG% for his opponent) and his +/- on vs off court #s were WAY better than Crawford's.
Truthfully, they are 2 different players b/c at his best, Q is a post up player
I agree with that
and Crawford is a penetrator who shoots the midrange.
No, Crawford *should be* a penetrator who shoots the midrange, but he's never done that in his career.
fishmike
Posts: 53149
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 7/19/2002
Member: #298
USA
8/18/2005  2:10 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
I have a higher batting percentage than certain posters here
thank god we established that


"winning is more fun... then fun is fun" -Thibs
Page 2 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
if the knicks are really that interested in james jones, why don't they try to workout a S+T for Ger
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2012 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy