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

Sean Williams @ 23
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Elite
Posts: 26372
Alba Posts: 23
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #510
6/4/2007  10:20 AM
Possibly the best shot blocker in the draft - what more is there to say? IMO that is one of our biggest needs. This would also make Frye extreemly expendable we could trade Channing for a nice young outside shooter.
AUTOADVERT
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
6/4/2007  10:30 AM
I think trading crawford for the 22nd pick makes a lot of sense, if you want to solve two needs. One is drafting Almond, the other is taking Williams.

If we look at his value around the league and no one will bite i think its a good idea to move his contract, considering he hasn't shown much if any improvement
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
6/4/2007  10:38 AM
I think our greatest need is outside shooting, but if williams slips, he is certainly an intriguing option you have to look at.
subzero0
Posts: 21245
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/24/2003
Member: #410
6/4/2007  10:55 AM
Posted by MS:

I think trading crawford for the 22nd pick makes a lot of sense, if you want to solve two needs. One is drafting Almond, the other is taking Williams.
22 Thats all Crawford is worth?????
If we look at his value around the league and no one will bite i think its a good idea to move his contract, considering he hasn't shown much if any improvement

Yea I guess hitting game winner after game winner isnt important. Dropping 50, doesnt show improvement and adds to the fact that he cant help us. Oh, if only we can find someone to take him off our hands so we can roll the dice on marginal-at-best shooters, then we can show how intelligent we are.


Anji
Posts: 25523
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 4/14/2006
Member: #1122
USA
6/4/2007  11:03 AM
Sean Williams will be going to the Wizards or Nets. He is the best big outside of the lottery hands down. The sixers and Bobcats being on their seconds picks, plus likely picking swing players with there first picks pretty much puts the chances of Williams falling to 23 at zero.


"Really, all Americans want is a cold beer, warm p***y, and some place to s**t with a door on it." - Mr. Ford
JohnWallace44
Posts: 25119
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 6/14/2005
Member: #910
USA
6/4/2007  11:09 AM
I would think you would have to take back something bad to get a pick for Crawford.

He's likely more valuable to us than to other teams because he can feed the Curry monster better than others as well.
Alan Hahn: Nate Robinson has been on a ridonkulous scoring tear lately (remember when he couldn't hit Jerome James with a Big Mac in early January?)
MaTT4281
Posts: 35352
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
6/4/2007  11:12 AM
Posted by subzero0:
Posted by MS:

I think trading crawford for the 22nd pick makes a lot of sense, if you want to solve two needs. One is drafting Almond, the other is taking Williams.
22 Thats all Crawford is worth?????
If we look at his value around the league and no one will bite i think its a good idea to move his contract, considering he hasn't shown much if any improvement

Yea I guess hitting game winner after game winner isnt important. Dropping 50, doesnt show improvement and adds to the fact that he cant help us. Oh, if only we can find someone to take him off our hands so we can roll the dice on marginal-at-best shooters, then we can show how intelligent we are.



Are you really surprised MS wants to get rid of Crawford? There's a new trade shipping Jamal out of town every week.
martin
Posts: 80980
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/4/2007  11:13 AM
Posted by subzero0:
Posted by MS:

I think trading crawford for the 22nd pick makes a lot of sense, if you want to solve two needs. One is drafting Almond, the other is taking Williams.
22 Thats all Crawford is worth?????
If we look at his value around the league and no one will bite i think its a good idea to move his contract, considering he hasn't shown much if any improvement

Yea I guess hitting game winner after game winner isnt important. Dropping 50, doesnt show improvement and adds to the fact that he cant help us. Oh, if only we can find someone to take him off our hands so we can roll the dice on marginal-at-best shooters, then we can show how intelligent we are.


this type of comparison is strange to me - it should never be one-to-one.

Trading Craw for a pick also means dropping his really bad contract, which is HUGE.

Has Craw shown ANY improvement to play defense? Has he shown improvement in cutting the TOs? Knowing when to shoot?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
6/4/2007  11:35 AM
Some of you are just dumb to believe Jamal is this tremendous assets. We have won 33, 23, 33 games since he has been here. He has an awful contract for a player that shoots 40% turns it over and doesn't play a team game........

We are looking to get rid of contracts and start to build, if we lose him are we worse? Not with the emergence of Collins. You give him the same number of attempts he will get you a few points less not to mention how many points he gives up off of transition opps for his horrific shooting and lack luster defense.....

Why is crawford worth so much? Game winner after game winner, do you ever look at a game log, if you want someone to be a big part of the team that is off 41 games a year and i mean off your never winning anything......

With a little added health from q and lee and better rotations from isiah the team will show improvement.

We have JJ's, Q, and Malik contract we need to get rid of as well. And hanging onto players is never a smart idea especially when they don't produce wins....Game winners are needed, but they are needed because of the way he plays the first three quarters of the game.....
subzero0
Posts: 21245
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/24/2003
Member: #410
6/4/2007  12:34 PM
You have got to be out of your mind if you think moving Jamal Crawford for a 22 will help us, IN ANY WAY! Stephon Marbury cried when he heard Crawford was out. Our playoff chances were up because we lost the guy. Those of you who are proud to point to our win record and say that Crawford was the one that caused it really should go back and watch those games again. Jamal Crawford was absent from the games that most contributed to our season going down the drain. The dribble penetration, the lane drive-and-kick assists, the points in the paint, the points when the game mattered, the steals were all given to us by Crawford. There was an obvious difference in our play when he was off the court. And please dont tell me that Collins getting better negates Crawfords assets to the team. Everybody say this with me, "Collins is a point guard, Jamal Crawford is a shooting guard". Again kids, for emphasis, "Collins is a point guard, Jamal Crawford is a shooting guard".

I had a similar conversation years ago with this one idiot who thought getting rid of Ewing would be good for the Knicks. Yea that sure worked out.
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
6/4/2007  12:46 PM
A fair comparison? Getting rid of ewing was not the problem, it was getting something for ewing? Like Jermaine Oneal which was on the table before they moved him for dale davis?

And during that stretch we were missing Lee and Q as well, we were missing the playoffs with crawford at the helm. And Marbury cried, thats pathetic, this false sense of making the playoffs is disgraceful and the players bought into making excuses, when a slew of teams were more injured and didn't have to bring it up every chance they got.....
martin
Posts: 80980
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/4/2007  1:03 PM
Posted by subzero0:

You have got to be out of your mind if you think moving Jamal Crawford for a 22 will help us, IN ANY WAY! Stephon Marbury cried when he heard Crawford was out. Our playoff chances were up because we lost the guy. Those of you who are proud to point to our win record and say that Crawford was the one that caused it really should go back and watch those games again. Jamal Crawford was absent from the games that most contributed to our season going down the drain. The dribble penetration, the lane drive-and-kick assists, the points in the paint, the points when the game mattered, the steals were all given to us by Crawford. There was an obvious difference in our play when he was off the court. And please dont tell me that Collins getting better negates Crawfords assets to the team. Everybody say this with me, "Collins is a point guard, Jamal Crawford is a shooting guard". Again kids, for emphasis, "Collins is a point guard, Jamal Crawford is a shooting guard".

I had a similar conversation years ago with this one idiot who thought getting rid of Ewing would be good for the Knicks. Yea that sure worked out.

The Knicks biggest weaknesses are: perimeter defense, perimeter shooting, defense in the lane/help D. If the Knicks could get players that solve those problems in the draft or by trades, they could be considered to be getting better. If they could do it by trading for a short contract while also getting rid of a long one, the team is much better off in the future.

If the Knicks could swap Crawford for the 22nd pick with a shorter contract, and it's a big IF, and then followed by drafting a shot-blocker and perimeter shots and/or perimeter defense, how could this NOT be considered a good thing?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Elite
Posts: 26372
Alba Posts: 23
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #510
6/4/2007  1:06 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by subzero0:

You have got to be out of your mind if you think moving Jamal Crawford for a 22 will help us, IN ANY WAY! Stephon Marbury cried when he heard Crawford was out. Our playoff chances were up because we lost the guy. Those of you who are proud to point to our win record and say that Crawford was the one that caused it really should go back and watch those games again. Jamal Crawford was absent from the games that most contributed to our season going down the drain. The dribble penetration, the lane drive-and-kick assists, the points in the paint, the points when the game mattered, the steals were all given to us by Crawford. There was an obvious difference in our play when he was off the court. And please dont tell me that Collins getting better negates Crawfords assets to the team. Everybody say this with me, "Collins is a point guard, Jamal Crawford is a shooting guard". Again kids, for emphasis, "Collins is a point guard, Jamal Crawford is a shooting guard".

I had a similar conversation years ago with this one idiot who thought getting rid of Ewing would be good for the Knicks. Yea that sure worked out.

The Knicks biggest weaknesses are: perimeter defense, perimeter shooting, defense in the lane/help D. If the Knicks could get players that solve those problems in the draft or by trades, they could be considered to be getting better. If they could do it by trading for a short contract while also getting rid of a long one, the team is much better off in the future.

If the Knicks could swap Crawford for the 22nd pick with a shorter contract, and it's a big IF, and then followed by drafting a shot-blocker and perimeter shots and/or perimeter defense, how could this NOT be considered a good thing?

sounds good to me martin
subzero0
Posts: 21245
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/24/2003
Member: #410
6/5/2007  1:51 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by subzero0:

You have got to be out of your mind if you think moving Jamal Crawford for a 22 will help us, IN ANY WAY! Stephon Marbury cried when he heard Crawford was out. Our playoff chances were up because we lost the guy. Those of you who are proud to point to our win record and say that Crawford was the one that caused it really should go back and watch those games again. Jamal Crawford was absent from the games that most contributed to our season going down the drain. The dribble penetration, the lane drive-and-kick assists, the points in the paint, the points when the game mattered, the steals were all given to us by Crawford. There was an obvious difference in our play when he was off the court. And please dont tell me that Collins getting better negates Crawfords assets to the team. Everybody say this with me, "Collins is a point guard, Jamal Crawford is a shooting guard". Again kids, for emphasis, "Collins is a point guard, Jamal Crawford is a shooting guard".

I had a similar conversation years ago with this one idiot who thought getting rid of Ewing would be good for the Knicks. Yea that sure worked out.

The Knicks biggest weaknesses are: perimeter defense, perimeter shooting, defense in the lane/help D. If the Knicks could get players that solve those problems in the draft or by trades, they could be considered to be getting better. If they could do it by trading for a short contract while also getting rid of a long one, the team is much better off in the future.

If the Knicks could swap Crawford for the 22nd pick with a shorter contract, and it's a big IF, and then followed by drafting a shot-blocker and perimeter shots and/or perimeter defense, how could this NOT be considered a good thing?

Its NOT a good thing because Crawford is worth more than a 22 bro. But your right, dont mention Crawfords shot making ability in this argument. Making clutch shots when the game is on the line isnt important, right? Unless your taking back someone who can create off the dribble and bury the shot when you need one then trading Crawford is a no no. You likely wont find a guy like that at 22. Talking about moving the guy is a waste of time because we're not moving Crawford for a 22, no one is stupid enough to do that. NO ONE.
« Reply To Topic
Sean Williams @ 23
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 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