When a few of us who liked Crawford and wanted him a few years ago--wanted him as a 6-5 PG. You like the fact that at 6-5 he can see OVER the top of the defender and would usually enjoy that advantage over most PGs in the league. The problem is two-fold--since Marbury's been here --he is the guy who has dominated the ball--putting Crawford into the 2 guard slot--- a position he can't play consistently--this is proven.

Look HOW WELL Crawford played POINT GUARD when Marbury went out last year and at times when Marbury's been down--I think he can be a good PG I still do--but he is a fcking LOUSY 2g and it hurts us. Marbury is a tough MF but hge has NEVER been a GOOD fit for the NY Knicks--it's something that wasnt meant to be.


If we can SLOT Crawford in at full time PG--we could count our core as


C-Curry
F-Frye
F Lee
G Q-Rich
PG Crawford

I'm not in the club that blames Marbury or think he scks--that stupid--he's just not the right player for us. Hes a GREAT player--but it's all done IF we want to move forward.

I think that as a 23 win team---we SHOULDVE made a clear commitment to play both Collins and Balkman---we DID NOT need BOTh Jefferies and Balkman----that was stupid. We shouldve SAVED the $$$$ and just let balkman work through it--and there is no reason NOT to change course. Im not big on Collins--but because he is 6-6 and can play 1--I think that he should be given a chance to play 6-8 minutes


Nate Rob--Nate rob is way better than people think he is. His problem is that he is immature and his brain doesnt move with his body. BUt if you put this kid on Pheonix--I think he would shock the nBA--I think he couldve been what they wanted out of Banks. He can shoot the three with good consistency--he creates problems he can get to the rack at will--but at the end of the day is he the right player for the NY Knicks?


Jefferies--terrible aquisition--I cant believe we threw 30+mm at him

This is where IT has blundered and why I have to question his viability going forward. He's made a lot of good little moves--like Barnes and Ariza who cost nothing--yet throws them into oblivion for a player that costs 20* more and isnt superior. The same goes for Jerome James.

It's not about someone saying dont worry--isnt your money---but thats all about managing a team

one last gripe--someone has to put the gauntlet down with Frye in terms of intensity--bring it every night or find your bags packed in a trade.

can we stop including crawford as a core member and get rid of him, haven't we seen enough of his terrible defense, poor decisions and lack of brain power on the court......

Frye is in that boat as well we need to move him for a wing player, asap

Posted by djsunyc:

well crawford played like CRAP at point guard when marbury went down in january. he clearly wasn't ready to handle the load...but in march and april, he did adapt to the position and he did play much better there. it's obvious the guy needs structure from the coach since he doesn't have any self discipline.

but can he run a team? that's a bigger question none of us know the answer to. and we may find out soon enough. that's why last year i kept harping on getting rid of steph b/c he has no place on this team down the road. so we might as well give the spot to jamal and see if he can do it or not. it's now a year later, and we're in the same boat, not knowing what jamal's long term role on this team is or whether he can play point or not.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 01-24-2007 11:21 AM]

DJ--here are my facts about Crawford--look at his #s from March 15 and on when he was given full time responsibilty at PG----his numbers for a PG are at all star levels

http://www.basketballreference.com/players/playerlog.htm?yr=2005&ilkid=CRAWFJA01

As far as Marb is concerend, Isiah really blundered when Williams fell into his lap. Had Dolan not narrowed the scope of Isiahs vision, maybe he takes Williams, and he could grown along side our youthful frontcourt.

But with Marbs contract, I think we just have to ride it out because I dont see anyone knocking down our doors to take him off our hands. Houston could use a pg, but dont have the contracts or youth to pull a deal. Maybe ATL might be interested.

Posted by BRIGGS:
This is where IT has blundered and why I have to question his viability going forward. He's made a lot of good little moves--like Barnes and Ariza who cost nothing--yet throws them into oblivion for a player that costs 20* more and isnt superior. The same goes for Jerome James.

I agree with this. It is probably my biggest knock of Isiah. The man can draft, and most of our trades brought back the better talent, but both MLEs he has handed out have been a disaster. The coincidence is strange.

Isiah found out who the real James is and now James gets little to no time. I think the same will eventually happen with Jeffries if he doesn't improve his game.

Posted by Anji:

Good stuff. I wouldn't mind JC being the point and alot of games when he has started with Marbury this year, Crawford has had big time assist numbers because early in the game he gets everybody shots. Don't know why people keep saying, "JC is a perfect 6th" when he doesn't perform well of the bench. It's like Starters verus relievers in basball, JC needs time to find the flow of the game. THe only perfect 6th man on the team is Nate, but everybody hates him since the fight even though he shows all the classic traits.

he doesn't perform well off the bench...this year. he was in the running for 6th man of year last season through january.

We need to trade Jeffries asap. He is doing absolutely nothing and Balkman is better than him in almost every facet of the game.

Regarding Crawford, Marbury is a much better PG than Crawford and a better PG for us. He has been playing awesome ball this past month and really makes our team go. Crawford is a better PG than SG only because he takes fewer shots when he plays the PG position. He still has questionable decision-making and suspect defense. Simply put, Crawford is not a starting caliber PG IMHO. He is a good combo guard coming off the bench and in the 4th when you need someone with one-on-one skills, but to ask him to be the starting PG for more than a few games is probably not realistic.

Who would take JJ2 off our hands with the contract we just handed to him?

Posted by TheGame:

We need to trade Jeffries asap. He is doing absolutely nothing and Balkman is better than him in almost every facet of the game.

Regarding Crawford, Marbury is a much better PG than Crawford and a better PG for us. He has been playing awesome ball this past month and really makes our team go. Crawford is a better PG than SG only because he takes fewer shots when he plays the PG position. He still has questionable decision-making and suspect defense. Simply put, Crawford is not a starting caliber PG IMHO. He is a good combo guard coming off the bench and in the 4th when you need someone with one-on-one skills, but to ask him to be the starting PG for more than a few games is probably not realistic.

I was thinking we will have to package him with Frye or Nate at this point. In the right system, I think he can be a solid defensive player so he has some value, but it obviously is not worth 5yr/$30 mil. The only way to trade him is to package him with Frye and/or Nate to a team with interest in one or the other.

Posted by djsunyc:
that's why last year i kept harping on getting rid of steph b/c he has no place on this team down the road. so we might as well give the spot to jamal and see if he can do it or not. it's now a year later, and we're in the same boat, not knowing what jamal's long term role on this team is or whether he can play point or not.

couldn't agree w/u more... how many times have i said on these forums that he plays his best when he's asked to orchestrate & given a structured role rather than given carte blanche to launch up perimeter jumpers whenever he feels like it... i wanna see Jamal given the role over the longterm & see what we have in him... he clearly will never grow into the type of SG that people want to see here... he's a playmaker who has just about the best handle on this team (maybe w/the exception of Nate)... he has the court vision to get the ball to guys in positions to score... he just needs the structure & the defined role to keep him under control & focused.