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

The Anti-Kurt Thomas Obsession
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
PresIke
Posts: 27660
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
2/5/2005  4:32 PM
Personally, I don't love Kurt Thomas, nor is he my favorite Knick, but some here seem to be on a KT jihad.

Is his game not exactly what the Knicks currently need from their big men, being the jump shooter that he is? Yes. Does he have no good move to the basket to speak of? Yes. Does he struggle to defend top flight PF's in the league? Yes.

All of that being said, that doesn't mean he sucks, nor does he not belong on this team (he might under the right circumstances). Also, whoever blamed Layden for Kurt Thomas is completely off. He was signed in January 1999 when Earnie Grunfeld was still GM and was a MAJOR contributor to the team's Finals run (especially against Miami). So Layden had nothing to do with his arrival to the Knicks.

Let's address the current criticisms of his game:

Is his mostly one demensional offensive game (15-20 foot jump shoots) a liability to the current team?

One could make that arguement, but there are a number of reasons this is a problem and have NOTHING to do with Kurt.

- One of the major reasons this problem exists is because the MAJORITY of the team is jump shot obsessed. If Crawford (who I like too, but is not without faults) was more willing to take it to the rack than shoot repeated 27 footers off the dribble than KT would be less of a problem.

- If we had a STRONGER INSIDE THREAT AT CENTER than Nazr than Kurt's game would be less of a problem.

- If we had a quality small foward that was good on the offensive glass to balance out KT's lack of offensive rebounding than he would be less of a problem. While Tim Thomas has talent he is a TERRIBLE rebounder making Kurt look worse. However, if Ariza had a more developed offensive game, it would make a lot of sense for him to play aside Kurt because of his offensive rebounding prowess, and energy.

- I would also think that if we had someone else who was truly ready to take the starting reigns from Kurt and he were used as a backup, than he would also be less of a problem and more of a help. I like Sweetney but I am beginning to think he may not be ready to be our starting PF. Could it be that something else like lack of consistent playing time is effecting his performance, or the team's being in the doldrums? Maybe, but none of us know. What we can see is that Sweets has not been playing very well since those first couple of games under Herb. He has been getting in foul trouble and that has effected his minutes, but DON'T BLAME KURT THOMAS because you want Sweetney to start. That's the coach's decision, not Kurt.

Is Kurt's inability to defend top flight PF's a reason he is overrated?

I find this to be an interesting criticism because I also seem to recall THE SAME CRITICISM being made of our beloved Charles Oakley. Charles Barkley, Larry Johnson and Karl Malone used to SCHOOL Oakley whenever we played them, putting up 30pt+ games. Both Oak and Kurt, however, were/are strong defensively against weaker opposition. I find Oak and Thomas to be highly similar players:

Good physical defenders, who could hit a jump shot, but Kurt who is a better jump shooter, has had to be one of the focal points of the Knicks offense while Oak was not, which leads to the general point here.

The general point is that the structure, or coaching of this team is and has been the real problem, not Kurt Thomas's game. Why has and does Kurt Thomas have to be the number 3 and occassionally number 2 option offensively on this team? If we had a team that was structured to compliment his game more, then I think some of you Al-Kurta members would change your tune.

Marbury and he do run the Pick and Roll quite effecively and was one of the things that was helping us early in the season. But teams have been defending that play better now, meaning either the coach or the players need to make adjustments. But because our starting SG and SF do not like physical contact (my suspicion) they tend to take jump shots, making it easier for teams to defend us. Outside of Kurt, the rest of the starters are TERRIBLE defensively as well. Kurt is the closest thing we have to a good defender. I can't even imagine what we would look like if we replaced him with another poor defender. Either the coach has to get the team to defend or we change the personell, both of which are at the root of the problem, in my view.

Am I oppossed to trading Kurt? No. But not for a song. Make a good deal, but I doubt one move is going to fix this team, including a high draft pick. The easiest thing to do would probably be to get someone like Phil Jackson, because then we will really see what this team is made of. There would be very few excuses made for players because of "poor coaching" because of Phil's repuation for getting the most out of his roster. I HOPE he or someone like he comes to the Knicks, but until then I will not point fingers at one player. The problem with the Knicks is far deeper than that.

[Edited by - presike on 02/05/2005 16:33:26]

[Edited by - presike on 02/05/2005 16:34:42]

[Edited by - presike on 02/05/2005 16:35:37]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
AUTOADVERT
nykdunk
Posts: 20629
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/23/2004
Member: #570
USA
2/5/2005  7:58 PM
The one problem I have with Kurt is that he thinks he is better than he is. He is not a leader and shouldn't have been made one. There is no reason for him to be becoming a cancer in the lockerroom. Marbury may not be playing up to standards, but Kurt needs to encourage him, not verbally attack him. Let the coach do the insulting if it needs to be done.

That said, you had an excellent take. Getting rid of him isn't going to magically make us better. I laughed when he stated that he wasn't worried about losing his starting spot in preseason, but he has more than backed up his title as the best PF on this team.

Sweetney has not progressed at all this year for whatever the reason may be. In fact, he has regressed, making Kurt more important. I don't necessary agree that playing time must be earned, but Sweet's defense really is lousy, and his propensity for fouls makes it impossible for him to stay on the court for big minutes. But don't blame it on KT. One player isn't making us lose!
djsunyc
Posts: 44927
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
2/5/2005  8:13 PM
i have ZERO problems with kurt. he's a hard worker and he's a pretty good player. he is a pretty reliable jumpshooter - a skill that many of his peers do not possess.

i do have a problem with kurt on this team b/c he doesn't fit with this squad. think of it this way, with micheal jordan, bj armstrong was a good player b/c all he had to do was wait for the ball and take a wide open jumper. but without jordan, when those wide open shots weren't there, he was not a good player. same with kurt. you put him next to a low post big man like duncan, kg, and shaq, kurt will look like gold. but put him next to a center like nazr and he's not what you're looking for from that position.

he would excel with the 2nd unit b/c he's 10x better than any PF coming off the bench on the opposing team but when you're the starting PF with nazr at C, you get outplayed on a consistent basis.

i don't think anybody hates kurt or hates his game. i think we all know that he just doesn't fit with our squad and where we want to go. that's all.
OldFan
Posts: 21453
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
2/6/2005  5:42 AM
Posted by djsunyc:

i have ZERO problems with kurt. he's a hard worker and he's a pretty good player. he is a pretty reliable jumpshooter - a skill that many of his peers do not possess.

i do have a problem with kurt on this team b/c he doesn't fit with this squad. think of it this way, with micheal jordan, bj armstrong was a good player b/c all he had to do was wait for the ball and take a wide open jumper. but without jordan, when those wide open shots weren't there, he was not a good player. same with kurt. you put him next to a low post big man like duncan, kg, and shaq, kurt will look like gold. but put him next to a center like nazr and he's not what you're looking for from that position.

he would excel with the 2nd unit b/c he's 10x better than any PF coming off the bench on the opposing team but when you're the starting PF with nazr at C, you get outplayed on a consistent basis.

i don't think anybody hates kurt or hates his game. i think we all know that he just doesn't fit with our squad and where we want to go. that's all.

My only problem with this argument is:

Who fits on this squad?

With a squad that is playing so bad, where none of the skills seem to match, how do so many people decide KT is the ONE who does not fit?

Obviously this squad needs to be remade. The question for the architect of this team is which of the disjoint pieces of this team are going to fit his future vision?

Trade KT if you can get value and get a piece that fits better. But in my view this team has no identity and no cohesiveness so I can't blame KT for not fitting any more then every other player.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
2/6/2005  7:46 AM
Is Kurt's inability to defend top flight PF's a reason he is overrated?
Actually his inability to defend even the worst PFs is the reason he's overrated. They're shooting about 55% against him.
franco12
Posts: 33215
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
2/6/2005  9:22 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Is Kurt's inability to defend top flight PF's a reason he is overrated?
Actually his inability to defend even the worst PFs is the reason he's overrated. They're shooting about 55% against him.

I suppose Isiah signed him to an extension for this outstanding ability?
MaTT4281
Posts: 33797
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
2/6/2005  9:44 AM
Not really Anti-Kurt, just more Pro-Sweetney.
Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
2/6/2005  10:37 AM
The issue is: Should the Knicks keep a 32 year player who has marginal skills and a long term contract on a team that is rebuilding, or should they trade him while he still has value to contending teams?

I think the later option makes more sense.
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
2/6/2005  11:34 AM
KT sucks and there is no looking around it. He is no Oakley. Oak was an intimidator and got into peoples face. They are not the least similar, KT is soft. Kurt is a jump shooting PF and that is a no no. He doesn't pick up fouls and rarely goes to the line. His defense is overrated. He is unathletic. If the Knicks want to become an up tempo team then KT has to go. Now going back to the point that you think he is similar to Oakley. Grunfeld traded Oak away why? because he wanted to get Camby in and what did that do for the kNicks it got them to the finals. would the Knicks have made the finals with Oak as much as I liked Oaks force and intimidation I don't think the team would have made it to the finals.

I think KT at best is a bench player that is being treated as a superstar player, he is not a superstar player he at best is a role player that belongs on a team that has a Shaq for center then maybe his contribution will be appreciated but on this team he isn't the force that people make him out to be. The faster the kNicks move away from him the better they will be off for their future. If that mean placing him on the bench and getting Sweetney in there to let him know that he better get in shape because you are the man now then so be it. The only double edge I see with the departure of KT right now is that it may hurt the NYK lottery position. Switching to Sweetney might actually result in wins that may give the Knicks a lower pick in the lottery. This team will not win with KT ther is no way around I have watched this team over the years and from the begining I have never liked KT being in the starting lineup, never. I didn't mind him coming off the bench but starting man the Knicks really don't know **** about basketball. This guy isn't starting material and there is no way he would be starter on most teams in the NBA. Everyones says there is demand for KT there is no demand for him because finding a KT like player is very simple they are dime a dozen. You take any scrub and give him KT's minutes and i guarantee they give about the same number if not better numbers than KT. People point ot his double double. that ain't **** its not like he is going out ther and giveing 18-10 or for that matter 15-10 this guy is giveing 10-10 this not great Like I said put a scrub in there and he will give you 10-7 right off the bat.
teslawlo
Posts: 21482
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/13/2004
Member: #699
USA
2/6/2005  11:57 AM
Posted by Vmart:

KT sucks and there is no looking around it. He is no Oakley. Oak was an intimidator and got into peoples face. They are not the least similar, KT is soft. Kurt is a jump shooting PF and that is a no no. He doesn't pick up fouls and rarely goes to the line. His defense is overrated. He is unathletic. If the Knicks want to become an up tempo team then KT has to go. Now going back to the point that you think he is similar to Oakley. Grunfeld traded Oak away why? because he wanted to get Camby in and what did that do for the kNicks it got them to the finals. would the Knicks have made the finals with Oak as much as I liked Oaks force and intimidation I don't think the team would have made it to the finals.

I think KT at best is a bench player that is being treated as a superstar player, he is not a superstar player he at best is a role player that belongs on a team that has a Shaq for center then maybe his contribution will be appreciated but on this team he isn't the force that people make him out to be. The faster the kNicks move away from him the better they will be off for their future. If that mean placing him on the bench and getting Sweetney in there to let him know that he better get in shape because you are the man now then so be it. The only double edge I see with the departure of KT right now is that it may hurt the NYK lottery position. Switching to Sweetney might actually result in wins that may give the Knicks a lower pick in the lottery. This team will not win with KT ther is no way around I have watched this team over the years and from the begining I have never liked KT being in the starting lineup, never. I didn't mind him coming off the bench but starting man the Knicks really don't know **** about basketball. This guy isn't starting material and there is no way he would be starter on most teams in the NBA. Everyones says there is demand for KT there is no demand for him because finding a KT like player is very simple they are dime a dozen. You take any scrub and give him KT's minutes and i guarantee they give about the same number if not better numbers than KT. People point ot his double double. that ain't **** its not like he is going out ther and giveing 18-10 or for that matter 15-10 this guy is giveing 10-10 this not great Like I said put a scrub in there and he will give you 10-7 right off the bat.
I completely agree, and the only thing that KT has over sweetney is an accurate jumpshot.
http://allknicks.com
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
2/6/2005  12:02 PM
Posted by Vmart:

KT sucks and there is no looking around it. He is no Oakley. Oak was an intimidator and got into peoples face. They are not the least similar, KT is soft. Kurt is a jump shooting PF and that is a no no. He doesn't pick up fouls and rarely goes to the line. His defense is overrated. He is unathletic. If the Knicks want to become an up tempo team then KT has to go. Now going back to the point that you think he is similar to Oakley. Grunfeld traded Oak away why? because he wanted to get Camby in and what did that do for the kNicks it got them to the finals. would the Knicks have made the finals with Oak as much as I liked Oaks force and intimidation I don't think the team would have made it to the finals.

I think KT at best is a bench player that is being treated as a superstar player, he is not a superstar player he at best is a role player that belongs on a team that has a Shaq for center then maybe his contribution will be appreciated but on this team he isn't the force that people make him out to be. The faster the kNicks move away from him the better they will be off for their future. If that mean placing him on the bench and getting Sweetney in there to let him know that he better get in shape because you are the man now then so be it. The only double edge I see with the departure of KT right now is that it may hurt the NYK lottery position. Switching to Sweetney might actually result in wins that may give the Knicks a lower pick in the lottery. This team will not win with KT ther is no way around I have watched this team over the years and from the begining I have never liked KT being in the starting lineup, never. I didn't mind him coming off the bench but starting man the Knicks really don't know **** about basketball. This guy isn't starting material and there is no way he would be starter on most teams in the NBA. Everyones says there is demand for KT there is no demand for him because finding a KT like player is very simple they are dime a dozen. You take any scrub and give him KT's minutes and i guarantee they give about the same number if not better numbers than KT. People point ot his double double. that ain't **** its not like he is going out ther and giveing 18-10 or for that matter 15-10 this guy is giveing 10-10 this not great Like I said put a scrub in there and he will give you 10-7 right off the bat.

beautifully said! I loved reading your post. I agree 100%
except they did go to the finals with Oak and an old Oakley is better than a 32 year old Kurt Thomas.

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 02/06/2005 12:03:46]
OldFan
Posts: 21453
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
2/6/2005  12:56 PM
Ok I get it a lot of people don't like Kurt. But to worry about Sweeney ruining our chances for a high draft pick is a joke.

-He has been playing a lot against second stringers and still manages to be in foul trouble consistently - almost 7 fouls per 48 minutes.

-He has been playing in short spurts saving him the embarassment of passing out on the court. (People complain about KTs lack of heart?)

- His assist to turnover ratio is less then .5. Leading players in the rotation in TOs per minute.

- Let him start against the PFs in the league and you'll start thinking KTs defense ain't that bad.

He is a good offensive rebounder and great at getting to the line. If you think starting him will help him develop him I disagree but no big beef. But to worry about him ruining our draft position is wishful thinking.

Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
2/6/2005  1:12 PM
When Sweetney is in the game its usaually to guard the opposing Center. When KT does that the centers go off on him at a 57% fg. Sweetney picks up fouls yes he does but wasn't KT allowed the luxury of starting when he was a hacking fool. Why does Sweetney deserve any different treatment. I for one am not in fear of change why because if KT is as good as you think he is then Sweetney has no worries if he gets into foul trouble because KT will be there to back him up. What is the harm in making the change, I really don't see any upside of KT starting asides from possibly that they might win some games if Sweetney starts in a lost season. But I do see an upside of Sweetney starting experience, increase in stamina, increase in production, learning to stay in the game, become more of an offensive force. These are thing that can be of benefit not so much for this season but for next season. To tell you the truth you don't know and I don't know what kind of impact a starting position might have on Sweetney. This is an opportunity for the Knicks to find out if Sweetney is the man. If he shows no improvement then it is something the Knicks might have to look at in the draft, drafting a PF might be a possibility. If he shows improvement then they know not to look at a PF in the draft. This is the sound strategy, I know people hate change, but this needs to be done for the future of the organization.
gunsnewing
Posts: 55076
Alba Posts: 5
Joined: 2/24/2002
Member: #215
USA
2/6/2005  1:24 PM
I do see an upside in starting Kurt right now onl because it improves his trade value. Either he'll be traded by the deadline on the 24th or he'll be benched and Sweetney will finish the year as starter and therefore be better ready next year since this year is a lost cause.
mythfaze
Posts: 20955
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 9/3/2001
Member: #106
2/6/2005  1:53 PM
Just a couple things I've noticed from this thread...

1. "Kurt is being treated/thinks he's a superstar"
I just don't understand that comment. What has Kurt ever said or done that shows he thinks he's a superstar? He's just our starting PF. That's all he thinks he is.

2. "Kurt is cancer in the locker room"
Yeah, that's right, he sure is. That's why... uh... none of his team mates have ever complained about him. What evidence to you have to back up that claim? Stop making ridiculous statements with absolutely no facts to back it up. And don't say "He yelled at our god of a point guard marbury..." that was actually a good thing. It's nice to see players getting upset over what happens on the court.

3. "Start Sweetney and we may just ruin our good draft position!"
...Right. Try, not at all. Sweetney is not better than KT, ESPECIALLY not defensively. Maybe he will be one day, but not now and not this season. His biggest problem is his weight. He's too slow and that kills him on defense. If he were a few inches taller he could get away with his weight, but his lack of height + extra weight = problems.
OldFan
Posts: 21453
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
2/6/2005  3:02 PM
Posted by Vmart:

When Sweetney is in the game its usaually to guard the opposing Center. When KT does that the centers go off on him at a 57% fg. Sweetney picks up fouls yes he does but wasn't KT allowed the luxury of starting when he was a hacking fool. Why does Sweetney deserve any different treatment. I for one am not in fear of change why because if KT is as good as you think he is then Sweetney has no worries if he gets into foul trouble because KT will be there to back him up. What is the harm in making the change, I really don't see any upside of KT starting asides from possibly that they might win some games if Sweetney starts in a lost season. But I do see an upside of Sweetney starting experience, increase in stamina, increase in production, learning to stay in the game, become more of an offensive force. These are thing that can be of benefit not so much for this season but for next season. To tell you the truth you don't know and I don't know what kind of impact a starting position might have on Sweetney. This is an opportunity for the Knicks to find out if Sweetney is the man. If he shows no improvement then it is something the Knicks might have to look at in the draft, drafting a PF might be a possibility. If he shows improvement then they know not to look at a PF in the draft. This is the sound strategy, I know people hate change, but this needs to be done for the future of the organization.

Where are you getting these statistics? (this is not a wise a*& question)

I thought KT played pretty well as an undersized center last year.

Sweeney is in the rotation which is how most players EARN their way into the starting lineup. Like I said I don't have a big beef with starting him but in my opinion KT is the superior player. Either Chaney, Wilkens, Herb Williams and probably Isiah agree or they think rewarding Sweeney for being out shape is not a good message to send.

Hey, I'd like to believe Sweeney is everything this board seems to think he is I just don't see it.
PresIke
Posts: 27660
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
2/6/2005  4:36 PM
Posted by Vmart:

KT sucks and there is no looking around it. He is no Oakley. Oak was an intimidator and got into peoples face. They are not the least similar, KT is soft. Kurt is a jump shooting PF and that is a no no. He doesn't pick up fouls and rarely goes to the line. His defense is overrated. He is unathletic. If the Knicks want to become an up tempo team then KT has to go. Now going back to the point that you think he is similar to Oakley. Grunfeld traded Oak away why? because he wanted to get Camby in and what did that do for the kNicks it got them to the finals. would the Knicks have made the finals with Oak as much as I liked Oaks force and intimidation I don't think the team would have made it to the finals.

I think KT at best is a bench player that is being treated as a superstar player, he is not a superstar player he at best is a role player that belongs on a team that has a Shaq for center then maybe his contribution will be appreciated but on this team he isn't the force that people make him out to be. The faster the kNicks move away from him the better they will be off for their future. If that mean placing him on the bench and getting Sweetney in there to let him know that he better get in shape because you are the man now then so be it. The only double edge I see with the departure of KT right now is that it may hurt the NYK lottery position. Switching to Sweetney might actually result in wins that may give the Knicks a lower pick in the lottery. This team will not win with KT ther is no way around I have watched this team over the years and from the begining I have never liked KT being in the starting lineup, never. I didn't mind him coming off the bench but starting man the Knicks really don't know **** about basketball. This guy isn't starting material and there is no way he would be starter on most teams in the NBA. Everyones says there is demand for KT there is no demand for him because finding a KT like player is very simple they are dime a dozen. You take any scrub and give him KT's minutes and i guarantee they give about the same number if not better numbers than KT. People point ot his double double. that ain't **** its not like he is going out ther and giveing 18-10 or for that matter 15-10 this guy is giveing 10-10 this not great Like I said put a scrub in there and he will give you 10-7 right off the bat.

Based upon what evidence can you convince anyone that he "sucks and there is no way around it"? I think some of you should just admit that your view is not based strongly on sufficient evidence other than "he sucks" which comes across like some kind of personal grudge. As Oldfan has indicated I think some of you just hate Kurt Thomas, for whatever reason.

Do we not recall the days when he was called Psycho Kurt? I never said the guy was exactly the same as Oak, but to say he is a terrible defender is a rather assinine statement.

Statistics can tell us a lot of things, but they don't tell the entire story. Kevin Garnett, who is considered one of the best defenders in the NBA is "giving up" a 50% FG against his opponents. How can that be? I wonder if some of you Al-Kurta members got your information from the writer of KnickerBlogger.com who loves statistics, but relies on them a bit much when supporting some of his arguments.

Here are links to 2 articles he wrote regarding PF defenders, one of which is specifically about Kurt Thomas.

Dirk, The Daring Defender? - http://www.knickerblogger.net/archive/2005_01_23_kb.htm

My Post vs. NY Post - http://www.knickerblogger.net/archive/2004_12_26_kb.htm

While 82games.com is a fantastic site, we can probe deeper and see that these statistics can lie (like the famous book "How to Lie With Statistics"). A lot of these statistics are strongly based upon coaching and one's teamates' ability to defend. Duncan (who the author refers as the "best defender") may be a great defender, but the Spurs are also run like a machine. The entire team is excellent defensively. Bruce Bowen and Ginobli are very strong perimeter defenders preventing Duncan from having to constantly come off of his man, and Malik Rose is also good.

Instead Kurt is surrounded by HORRIBLE defenders making him look weaker, as I mentioned in the initial post. Marbury and Jamal allow an incredible amount of lane penetration from their opponents. This forces the Knicks' fowards and centers to come off their men and help, which is one of the reasons he and Nazr foul so much and allow their men open looks...leading to higher FG percentages.

If you ACTUALLY WATCH THE GAMES, as has been commented on by several professional observers during games (i.e. Mike Breen who can be critical of players as well), Kurt is a strong one on one defender most of the time. Is he athletic? No. But he is physical. I don't see how you can argue that he is "soft." Where is your evidence to support this point? Have watched the Knicks over the years, man? Remember his play against Alonzo Mourning in the 1999 Miami series?

If you also read my post carefully you would have noticed that I mentioned one of the reasons his jump shooting hurts the team is because we don't have a strong inside presence. Your point about us not having "Shaq" is exactly the same point I made. But that doesn't mean he sucks. He is a very good defensive rebounder, and on a team designed to play off his strengths he would be of great help. Who EVER said he was a "Superstar?" I never indicated that at any point. I even said that I don't think he is that great, suggesting that he is a role player who has had to play a larger one due to the teams' deficiencies.

Also, based on your point about throwing any "scrub" in there, we could just put Bruno Sondov in for Kurt and he would do just as well, correct? Do you really believe your own words then? Again, Bruno or any other "scrub" might put up better numbers as you have suggested (you said 10 and 7) but that doesn't mean they are helping the team win? This is why statistics are a flawed way to judge players. Case in point is JYD. He doesn't put up big numbers, but when he is on the floor you can see a difference out there.

[Edited by - presike on 02/06/2005 16:37:32]

[Edited by - presike on 02/06/2005 16:38:19]

[Edited by - presike on 02/06/2005 16:41:04]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
newyorknewyork
Posts: 29869
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #541
2/6/2005  4:41 PM
Remember when the ball was tiped into the half court vs Suns and Jamal Crawford got the ball and launched a 3 from half court before the time ran out. And the ball bounced off the rim and into Kurt hands. Kurt now has 2 steps to take for an easy dunk. But instead he gets fouled with no basket. If KT had any type of athletism that would have been a dunk. If that was Amare that would have been a dunk and a foul.
https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
OldFan
Posts: 21453
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
2/6/2005  10:24 PM
Posted by newyorknewyork:

Remember when the ball was tiped into the half court vs Suns and Jamal Crawford got the ball and launched a 3 from half court before the time ran out. And the ball bounced off the rim and into Kurt hands. Kurt now has 2 steps to take for an easy dunk. But instead he gets fouled with no basket. If KT had any type of athletism that would have been a dunk. If that was Amare that would have been a dunk and a foul.

The choice isn't Amare or Kt it's Kt or Vin or Kt or Sweeney. Neither of whom is athletic.
Michael6835
Posts: 21319
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 12/12/2004
Member: #828
2/6/2005  10:37 PM
Excellent Post PresIke

I agree with this assessment 100%.
M
Page 1 of 2  1  2 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
The Anti-Kurt Thomas Obsession
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