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

Mike Breen went out of his way to talk about the trade dealine
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 4 of 5 « First‹ Previous 2  3  4  5 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Knicksfan
Posts: 32907
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 7/5/2004
Member: #691
USA
12/13/2005  1:26 PM
Curry and Frye, we should keep. Crawford or Marb, if its the right deal we should make. Everything the mighty Yoda knows!
Knicks_Fan
AUTOADVERT
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
12/13/2005  1:27 PM
Crawford or Marb, if its the right deal we should make.
There's no such thing as "the right deal" if you're giving up a star like Marbury for a star with his head screwed on backwards who's talking about retirement at age 25 (unless JO is being included).
Knicksfan
Posts: 32907
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 7/5/2004
Member: #691
USA
12/13/2005  1:33 PM
Marbury isn't exactly a star, and he is playing less and less like that for us. The right deal is to get something valuable for him. That is, if we do want to trade him...
Knicks_Fan
Knight
Posts: 22775
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/21/2005
Member: #968
12/13/2005  1:34 PM
Posted by Knicksfan:

Marbury isn't exactly a star, and he is playing less and less like that for us. The right deal is to get something valuable for him. That is, if we do want to trade him...

LB has all but shouted out that Marbury is not a good point guard for us and he is too small to be a two guard--so he will be traded soon if we can get back value.
"He only went to Georgia Tech for one year, and that's an engineering school." -LB
Knicksfan
Posts: 32907
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 7/5/2004
Member: #691
USA
12/13/2005  1:55 PM
He may be too small to play SG, but I don't think it will be easy to move him so the best option for us will be to play him there and trade for a PG.
Knicks_Fan
LBeast
Posts: 20319
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/29/2005
Member: #994
12/13/2005  2:38 PM
BTW, it's not a trade deadline. Players can be dealy RIGHT NOW. Its free agent signees that cant be dealt until the 15th.
Knicksfan
Posts: 32907
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 7/5/2004
Member: #691
USA
12/13/2005  3:50 PM
Posted by LBeast:

BTW, it's not a trade deadline. Players can be dealy RIGHT NOW. Its free agent signees that cant be dealt until the 15th.

The thing is that once those players can be traded there will be a lot of movement around the league...
Knicks_Fan
jaydh
Posts: 22848
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/16/2001
Member: #96
12/13/2005  4:08 PM
Posted by bobs3304:

Channing, Nate, Curry, and Crawford shouldn't be traded IMO.

Everyone else is fair game...

i see no reason to have JC protected, but the other 3 i agree with.
djsunyc
Posts: 44927
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
12/13/2005  4:13 PM
at this point, i don't think any of us have a clue about who ranks where on lb's totem pole.

but starting nate over crawford could be viewed as a showcase for nate (like killa said). again, lb reiterated that nate was not a point guard. so why does he play him there...let alone start?
Knicksfan
Posts: 32907
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 7/5/2004
Member: #691
USA
12/13/2005  4:13 PM
Posted by jaydh:
Posted by bobs3304:

Channing, Nate, Curry, and Crawford shouldn't be traded IMO.

Everyone else is fair game...

i see no reason to have JC protected, but the other 3 i agree with.

Me neither. Its night and day with JC...
Knicks_Fan
jaydh
Posts: 22848
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/16/2001
Member: #96
12/13/2005  4:15 PM
Posted by fishmike:

that deal is terrible for Sac.. too much? Too much what?

The best thing we can offer them is huge financial room
AD+ Penny for Bender, Croshere, Artest and Pollard. Give them Lee or ARiza or Butler if its a deal breaker


and if they want to keep pollard, they can substitute reggie miller's contract..but that is the deal i suggested and would obviously give indy a lot of financial relief. ariza,lee,butler can be thrown in, along with cash, or a 1st or 2nd.
Knicksfan
Posts: 32907
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 7/5/2004
Member: #691
USA
12/13/2005  4:16 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

at this point, i don't think any of us have a clue about who ranks where on lb's totem pole.

but starting nate over crawford could be viewed as a showcase for nate (like killa said). again, lb reiterated that nate was not a point guard. so why does he play him there...let alone start?

I don't think so. I think Larry is well aware that Nate is not a PG, but other than to make him learn the position, I think he starts him because he likes the intensity he brings and at the same time prefers to bring Craw off the bench with his scoring and his ability to play both positions. The other night it worked to perfection. Last game it didn't...
Knicks_Fan
djsunyc
Posts: 44927
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
12/13/2005  4:21 PM
Posted by Knicksfan:
Posted by djsunyc:

at this point, i don't think any of us have a clue about who ranks where on lb's totem pole.

but starting nate over crawford could be viewed as a showcase for nate (like killa said). again, lb reiterated that nate was not a point guard. so why does he play him there...let alone start?

I don't think so. I think Larry is well aware that Nate is not a PG, but other than to make him learn the position, I think he starts him because he likes the intensity he brings and at the same time prefers to bring Craw off the bench with his scoring and his ability to play both positions. The other night it worked to perfection. Last game it didn't...

but starting him is still at the behest of losing. steph needs help out there, and the only guy that can help him legitimately in the backcourt is craw.
Knight
Posts: 22775
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/21/2005
Member: #968
12/13/2005  4:23 PM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by Knicksfan:
Posted by djsunyc:

at this point, i don't think any of us have a clue about who ranks where on lb's totem pole.

but starting nate over crawford could be viewed as a showcase for nate (like killa said). again, lb reiterated that nate was not a point guard. so why does he play him there...let alone start?

I don't think so. I think Larry is well aware that Nate is not a PG, but other than to make him learn the position, I think he starts him because he likes the intensity he brings and at the same time prefers to bring Craw off the bench with his scoring and his ability to play both positions. The other night it worked to perfection. Last game it didn't...

but starting him is still at the behest of losing. steph needs help out there, and the only guy that can help him legitimately in the backcourt is craw.

You mean like Craw helped Steph last year? Those two were awesome together, unstoppable.
"He only went to Georgia Tech for one year, and that's an engineering school." -LB
jaydh
Posts: 22848
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/16/2001
Member: #96
12/13/2005  4:32 PM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by Knicksfan:
Posted by djsunyc:

at this point, i don't think any of us have a clue about who ranks where on lb's totem pole.

but starting nate over crawford could be viewed as a showcase for nate (like killa said). again, lb reiterated that nate was not a point guard. so why does he play him there...let alone start?

I don't think so. I think Larry is well aware that Nate is not a PG, but other than to make him learn the position, I think he starts him because he likes the intensity he brings and at the same time prefers to bring Craw off the bench with his scoring and his ability to play both positions. The other night it worked to perfection. Last game it didn't...

but starting him is still at the behest of losing. steph needs help out there, and the only guy that can help him legitimately in the backcourt is craw.


crawford isnt consistent enough to make anything legitimate. but this helps me understand more why you want steph gone, you have some infatuation with JC.
djsunyc
Posts: 44927
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
12/13/2005  4:43 PM
Posted by jaydh:
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by Knicksfan:
Posted by djsunyc:

at this point, i don't think any of us have a clue about who ranks where on lb's totem pole.

but starting nate over crawford could be viewed as a showcase for nate (like killa said). again, lb reiterated that nate was not a point guard. so why does he play him there...let alone start?

I don't think so. I think Larry is well aware that Nate is not a PG, but other than to make him learn the position, I think he starts him because he likes the intensity he brings and at the same time prefers to bring Craw off the bench with his scoring and his ability to play both positions. The other night it worked to perfection. Last game it didn't...

but starting him is still at the behest of losing. steph needs help out there, and the only guy that can help him legitimately in the backcourt is craw.


crawford isnt consistent enough to make anything legitimate. but this helps me understand more why you want steph gone, you have some infatuation with JC.

crawford started with marbury last year. isn't it logical to think he would start over nate? infatuation with JC? all i'm saying is give him a chance. if he can't cut the mustard, then see ya later. i ain't attached to anybody on this team. but if there's one guy that isn't going anywhere it's frye with curry a close 2nd. everybody else is up for discussion.
jaydh
Posts: 22848
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 8/16/2001
Member: #96
12/13/2005  4:49 PM
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by jaydh:
Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by Knicksfan:
Posted by djsunyc:

at this point, i don't think any of us have a clue about who ranks where on lb's totem pole.

but starting nate over crawford could be viewed as a showcase for nate (like killa said). again, lb reiterated that nate was not a point guard. so why does he play him there...let alone start?

I don't think so. I think Larry is well aware that Nate is not a PG, but other than to make him learn the position, I think he starts him because he likes the intensity he brings and at the same time prefers to bring Craw off the bench with his scoring and his ability to play both positions. The other night it worked to perfection. Last game it didn't...

but starting him is still at the behest of losing. steph needs help out there, and the only guy that can help him legitimately in the backcourt is craw.


crawford isnt consistent enough to make anything legitimate. but this helps me understand more why you want steph gone, you have some infatuation with JC.

crawford started with marbury last year. isn't it logical to think he would start over nate? infatuation with JC? all i'm saying is give him a chance. if he can't cut the mustard, then see ya later. i ain't attached to anybody on this team. but if there's one guy that isn't going anywhere it's frye with curry a close 2nd. everybody else is up for discussion.

i'm not sure i'd want JC starting over Nate. I am very impressed with how Nate is improving(already). Nate seems to be learning more(from the coaches), and is showing it on the court, while i see little improvement or changes in JC's game.
bobs3304
Posts: 24827
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 7/5/2005
Member: #948
12/13/2005  6:03 PM
Ya, I can see your guys' point about Crawford, that he's inconsistent, but when he's on.....he's ON.

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.
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
12/13/2005  6:39 PM
Posted by bobs3304:

Ya, I can see your guys' point about Crawford, that he's inconsistent, but when he's on.....he's ON.

indeed.
Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
12/13/2005  6:52 PM
Posted by NewYorkSoul:

I have a feeling Channing will go if we get Artest


NFW
Page 4 of 5 « First‹ Previous 2  3  4  5 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Mike Breen went out of his way to talk about the trade dealine
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