[ IMAGES: Images OFF turn on | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

notice the past two games crawford sucked and the knicks lost?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Caseloads
Posts: 27725
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/29/2001
Member: #41
1/16/2006  3:22 PM
just a suggestion.
AUTOADVERT
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
1/16/2006  3:25 PM
You beat me to it, I was just about to post this. He strung together 2 good ones after returning from injury and now hes back to his old self.

We need a reliable 2 guard. He's obviously not it.
NYKniCksFan87
Posts: 22170
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/13/2004
Member: #700
1/16/2006  3:29 PM
calm down ppl....players go through slumps too
''We don't have the luxury to take anybody lightly,'' New York's Quentin Richardson said. ''We're not that good.''
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
1/16/2006  3:30 PM
I have to agree. he's too unreliable to be depended on so much. As is Curry & Frye. We need a reliable 6-6/6-7 SG/SF who can hit shots and is an excellent perimeter defender. Gee sounds an awful lot like last year. I'd love to believe Crawford has turned the corner and Nate could stay on guys but it's not happening. Something has to be done or we'll miss the playoffs
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
1/16/2006  3:40 PM
These are Crawfords numbers.
[IMG_block] http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/4001/capture2112005112659pm11620065.png [/IMG_block]

You would expect a player to average less in losses, most players do, but this drop off is less than half!! WTF?

this highlights a high degree of inconsistancy, and also how much we need him to perform well in order for us to win.

The fact that he has averaged 11 points in 22 games is very troubling to me. This guy is like the stock market.
SlimPack
Posts: 23588
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/14/2005
Member: #1009
USA
1/16/2006  3:41 PM
but he did have 9 assists so that was kind'a good, but anyway for reasons that may be illogical Im not ready to give up on crawford. I think he would be better of if he played one position the entire game.
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
1/16/2006  3:41 PM
craw is a very good 6th man. its a good position for him because if hes going well, he can play big minutes and if hes on one of those 2-14's we can stop it with limited minutes and re-inserting starters.

maybe now that q-rich played a couple of decent games, they should look around the league again. is key to get rid of, hes got to be flushed.
RIP Crushalot😞
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
1/16/2006  3:46 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:

craw is a very good 6th man. its a good position for him because if hes going well, he can play big minutes and if hes on one of those 2-14's we can stop it with limited minutes and re-inserting starters.

maybe now that q-rich played a couple of decent games, they should look around the league again. is key to get rid of, hes got to be flushed.


yeah unfortunately we can't plug in a guy when Craw is off because Q has been worse but hopefully he's turning the corner a bit
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/16/2006  4:00 PM
The difference in FTAs for Craw in wins and losses is what bothers me the most. He'll have nights when his shot is off but he CANNOT stop attacking the basket. He needs to be draw MORE, not half as many, fouls and getting to the line more when his shot is off. Jamal would be a good sixth man but he won't be the 2nd leading scorer on a winning team.

The Knicks are still a work in progress. The key will be how Isiah and Larry develop Marbury, Frye, and Curry and whom they surround those players with. Lee and Nate are great role players to surround those three with for the long-term. I haven't decided yet if Crawford is as well.
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
1/16/2006  4:02 PM
Crawford tried to attack but the defense collapsed. He, nate and steph are not going to be able to draw a foul every time. Thats why we need a reliable shooter
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/16/2006  4:06 PM
Posted by gunsnewing:

Crawford tried to attack but the defense collapsed. He, nate and steph are not going to be able to draw a foul every time. Thats why we need a reliable shooter
I'm not talking about this one game; I'm talking about Jamal's whole season. He's gotta attack more, not less, when his shot isn't falling.

Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/16/2006  4:24 PM
maybe now that q-rich played a couple of decent games, they should look around the league again. is key to get rid of, hes got to be flushed.
I don't see trading Q as nearly as high a priority as you do, although I would trade him in the stunning event that we got something decent for him. Q's effort is good, he's playing strong defense, and he's rebounding well. If he keeps this mental approach, then even if he doesn't get his shooting touch back to last year's level, he can be a 15 to 20 mpg bench player on a winning team.
joec32033
Posts: 30528
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
1/16/2006  5:07 PM
^Bonn, I agree with everything but what he will become if he gets his touch back. He gets his touch back and still grabs 7 boards and plays this bulldog D he is a starter at the 2 guard and in the top 15 in two guards...IF he gets his scoring back and keeps up with the changes he made to his game.
~You can't run from who you are.~
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
1/16/2006  5:34 PM
Posted by Killa4luv:


We need a reliable 2 guard. He's obviously not it.

Crawford is not a 2. He never was.
the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
nykshaknbake
Posts: 22247
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/15/2003
Member: #492
1/16/2006  6:47 PM
Well Craw has been doing this all season long. When he's good, he's very good, when not well...He may not be a 2 but doesn't make good enough decsions to be a 1 either. Besides, do you think this kind of inconsistency is good if he was our starting point? I don't think it matters what position he plays..this is pretty much how it's gonna be.

We need to find a starting SG. Nate is just too short to have him there. Either Nate or Craw should be traded to the effect of filling the starting SG spot. I like either of them as bench players but bench players but neither of them as starters.
Posted by McK1:
Posted by Killa4luv:


We need a reliable 2 guard. He's obviously not it.

Crawford is not a 2. He never was.
Knicksfan
Posts: 32907
Alba Posts: 27
Joined: 7/5/2004
Member: #691
USA
1/16/2006  7:15 PM
Posted by NYKniCksFan87:

calm down ppl....players go through slumps too

Thats not a slump. He is inconsistent. Has always been...
Knicks_Fan
BRIGGS
Posts: 53275
Alba Posts: 7
Joined: 7/30/2002
Member: #303
1/16/2006  8:39 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
maybe now that q-rich played a couple of decent games, they should look around the league again. is key to get rid of, hes got to be flushed.
I don't see trading Q as nearly as high a priority as you do, although I would trade him in the stunning event that we got something decent for him. Q's effort is good, he's playing strong defense, and he's rebounding well. If he keeps this mental approach, then even if he doesn't get his shooting touch back to last year's level, he can be a 15 to 20 mpg bench player on a winning team.

Q rich is a POC. never liked his game and its worse here. Im laughing at the dudes who think he plays good defense. i guess people just want to believe what they want to believe. I hope that the Knicks can get tissue paper for q and an ending contract.
RIP Crushalot😞
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
1/16/2006  9:07 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
maybe now that q-rich played a couple of decent games, they should look around the league again. is key to get rid of, hes got to be flushed.
I don't see trading Q as nearly as high a priority as you do, although I would trade him in the stunning event that we got something decent for him. Q's effort is good, he's playing strong defense, and he's rebounding well. If he keeps this mental approach, then even if he doesn't get his shooting touch back to last year's level, he can be a 15 to 20 mpg bench player on a winning team.

Q rich is a POC. never liked his game and its worse here. Im laughing at the dudes who think he plays good defense. i guess people just want to believe what they want to believe. I hope that the Knicks can get tissue paper for q and an ending contract.


I wasn't able to watch the game until late in the 3rd because Comcast sux, but he was playing great D on Wally. I'm guessing Crawford was on Wally for most of his 28pts

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 01-16-2006 9:07 PM]
nyk4ever
Posts: 41009
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
1/16/2006  9:37 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
maybe now that q-rich played a couple of decent games, they should look around the league again. is key to get rid of, hes got to be flushed.
I don't see trading Q as nearly as high a priority as you do, although I would trade him in the stunning event that we got something decent for him. Q's effort is good, he's playing strong defense, and he's rebounding well. If he keeps this mental approach, then even if he doesn't get his shooting touch back to last year's level, he can be a 15 to 20 mpg bench player on a winning team.

Q rich is a POC. never liked his game and its worse here. Im laughing at the dudes who think he plays good defense. i guess people just want to believe what they want to believe. I hope that the Knicks can get tissue paper for q and an ending contract.

I agree Briggs. Q was lit up by Jalen Rose the other day, I guess people easily forget about that. Q does nothing for me, he jacks up 3's, thats about it. His back has really hampered his mobility on the court.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
1/16/2006  9:50 PM
Posted by nyk4ever:
Posted by BRIGGS:
Posted by Bonn1997:
maybe now that q-rich played a couple of decent games, they should look around the league again. is key to get rid of, hes got to be flushed.
I don't see trading Q as nearly as high a priority as you do, although I would trade him in the stunning event that we got something decent for him. Q's effort is good, he's playing strong defense, and he's rebounding well. If he keeps this mental approach, then even if he doesn't get his shooting touch back to last year's level, he can be a 15 to 20 mpg bench player on a winning team.

Q rich is a POC. never liked his game and its worse here. Im laughing at the dudes who think he plays good defense. i guess people just want to believe what they want to believe. I hope that the Knicks can get tissue paper for q and an ending contract.

I agree Briggs. Q was lit up by Jalen Rose the other day, I guess people easily forget about that. Q does nothing for me, he jacks up 3's, thats about it. His back has really hampered his mobility on the court.


thats true. he has to be more consistent. but maybe Jalen woke him up because he played great D on Wally. What I wanna know is how did Wally wind up with 28? was it Lee, Crawford or Q's fault? When it started watched it was primarily Hudson who was killing Nate who wouldn't play up on him as Q was doing to Wally

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 01-16-2006 9:51 PM]
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
notice the past two games crawford sucked and the knicks lost?
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