the guy can hit 3's from all over.

many players get MLE's and alot of them turn out to be dissapointing.

is $30 mil alot for carroll? of course but the guy can hit the jumper and hit it well. and as briggs said, this guy busts his tail so i don't think you'll see any dip in his production. plus his #'s are on an upward trend as well.

Posted by Cookdcokehop:

Carroll is a great player but will he even be starting next yr? He did most his damage when he was put into the starting line up.

Great??? lets not throw that word around too generously. He has a great outside shot.Hes a decent-good player.

There seem to be different standards for different players on this forum. Randolph and Curry get blasted for playing no D while people are saying Carroll getting his money is justified because he can specialize in hitting 3 points while playing no D. I thought one way, one dimensional players were the same no matter who they were. I guess not.

yea briggs matt was overpaid, but he plays hard and he can shoot. I am happy for the kid, he is very one dimensional but hey, he can do that one thing damn well. He shoots the rock just as well as lewis can and will be making 45 million less....

Damn, way overpaid. Maybe I'd give this guy 3 mil a year. Well we've got some candidates to take on as bad contracts for our next deals.

i hope they didnt release knight just to make room for carroll: http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=22372

Posted by tkf:

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by tkf:

yea briggs matt was overpaid, but he plays hard and he can shoot. I am happy for the kid, he is very one dimensional but hey, he can do that one thing damn well. He shoots the rock just as well as lewis can and will be making 45 million less....

tkf, Lewis was an all-star in the Western Conference. Are you trying to put him on Carroll's level because he knocks down 3 pointers?

no, I am saying that lewis is a player that really doesn't create his own shot, or create for others and pretty much like to camp out and spot up.

I've seen Lewis receive the ball all over the court in the Seattle offense especially in the high post. Alot of his shots he may turn quickly and shoot right over smaller defenders and that is very much different from being the black Matt Carroll.

Posted by Pharzeone:

There seem to be different standards for different players on this forum. Randolph and Curry get blasted for playing no D while people are saying Carroll getting his money is justified because he can specialize in hitting 3 points while playing no D. I thought one way, one dimensional players were the same no matter who they were. I guess not.

Huge differences with your comparison. For one, Curry and Randolph and considerably higher paid than an MLE player. Enough to make that comparison invalid to start with. Secondly, Curry and Randolph are both players that recently were considered the best player on their team, so certainly the standard is higher for players who are supposed to be a team's best player, versus role players. If Curry or Randolph were to take supporting roles on a team with a multi-dimensional core, I think the complaints would be greatly reduced. Also, I'm not sure that Randolph fits in this discussion. Most agree that Randolph is talented in multiple areas (just not defense), but his attitude is the biggest issue. Make sense?