Not Starting Disappoints Crawford
"Jamal Crawford sounded disappointed and angered that Larry Brown benched him in favor of Quentin Richardson as the starting shooting guard. Crawford looked crushed and didn't seem to understand the move. 'I'll be professional and be ready when my number is called. That's it.'" -- New York Post

I've said it from the beginning.


In the long run.....you can't have BOTH Steph and Jamal.

1 of them has to go eventually.

Crawford stinks
Marbury isn't the classic type of PG that LB demands
Nate isn't a PG

So who's going to run this team the way LB wants because LB won't change his coaching style to fit these players.

I would love to see Andre Miller in NY. The whole Crawford experiment TANKED in Chicago and I'm thinking why should it work here. Send this kid on his way. I was surprised to see him questioning LB about the starting line up.

Might piss of curry, but we should get rid of jamal for a competent defender/decision-maker. I'd sign off on miller

[Edited by - notfrye on 11-03-2005 3:13 PM]

Why was Crawford so upset about not starting? I guess none of you told him that he was given $55M to be a backup.

Posted by EWING33BXNY:

That being said, Crawford is still a good talent and has fair value around the league. I wouldn't ship him out yet. He could make an excellent sixth man. His game has to be refined, though.

A player willing to be the sixth man is the player who will make an excellent sixth man. He should've just known his role, be quiet, and come off the bench BALLIN' instead of BAWLIN'. Its game one and there is no reason any news like that should have been in the papers. CRAW is starting off on the wrong foot.

Absolutely. Hopefully it's not a recurring trend. If it is, I'll certainly retract my comment.

Craw played 37 min.

Q played 22.

Maybe larry wanted to see him right away.

Remember that back thing everybody thought we got over on phx, well he looke like he got wrapped in the second half (back) and might just have problems.

It may work bett4er for a player with back problems to start rather than sit and get stiff.

the reason why i wanted to get bynum was because i felt he could provide a defensive and rebounding anchor for many years, a guy who could play C and in his prime avg 18 pts 14 reb 3.5 blocks. Not Olajuwan, but a guy we could build a foundation of DEFENSE and REBOUNDING around. Even with eddie Curry--and look at the luck that we got him by, a heart problem---I dont know if we have anyone we can count on as a stallworth like thatbecause his weakness are defense and rebounding. Thats why the only plausible solution is to ESTABLISH a FRYE-CURRY frontcourt NOW--take the lumps with it, but establish it--if it WORKS--then the pieces that go around it wont be as hard to put together. Make sure they play the right way--whatever that is--I see it as playing time and making sure they do everything to rebound the ball

this talk about now dropping crawford--this is a bad cycle--because EVERY darn player Isiah gets--people applaud then want out. Thats why I believe Channing is so important, he is CRUCIAL a critical piece that MUST work

One thing I have noticed about isiah, he has only gone after the FANCY offensive player--the guy who can show signs of thrills, but lacks a FULL game--thats why I dont think we have a good match with LB--almost EVERY player on the roster is not his type of guy.

so now we gave up our darn draft picks s pent all of our money--and now the threads pop up tade crawford--if we trade crawford--where the fck is this plan going???? this was a stallworth aquisition from isiah--how can they let him go? Not me, I will keep him