Steph Is Not Untouchable

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
What about Marbury for an expiring contract expiring in 2007?
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Voodoo Child:</div><div class="quote_post">How about showing some respect for other posters? Nobody is picking a fight with you, so don't pick a fight with me.</div>

We'll you'll have to excuse me. I took offense to one or two things you said. But hopefully now we have an understanding.
yay.gif
See... I offer you peace... :beerchug: (best peace smiley I could find).

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">How about a different, more realistic trade involving Marbury?</div>

One possibility even though I'm probably asking for a while lot of trouble by suggesting this is...Marbury to the Lakers for their first round draft pick and their first round 2006 draft pick. Kobe needs some help down in LA and even though Marbury is a "career loser" I'm sure Kobe will be able to lead the Lakers to the playoffs if he had Marbury's help. And how about Marbury for Big Z and someone else? Both teams get what they need.


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post">One possibility even though I'm probably asking for a while lot of trouble by suggesting this is...Marbury to the Lakers for their first round draft pick and their first round 2006 draft pick. Kobe needs some help down in LA and even though Marbury is a "career loser" I'm sure Kobe will be able to lead the Lakers to the playoffs if he had Marbury's help. And how about Marbury for Big Z and someone else? Both teams get what they need.


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.</div>
I think we can get a lot more for Marbury than just 2 first rounders. At least 3. is what we should gvet giving up Marbury. I think getting maybe Brian Grant in the deal would be good too.

Another scenario I think will be interesting is Marbury and Crawford to Dallas for Devin Harris, Shawn Bradley, Tariq Abdul-Wahad and a first round pick or something like that. We would get a legit center for shot blocking (even better in the east) and get a first rounder and a nice young PG.

Also Trading Marbury to L.A. for just Kobe works for me too!
biggrin.gif
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post">We'll you'll have to excuse me. I took offense to one or two things you said. But hopefully now we have an understanding.
yay.gif
See... I offer you peace... :beerchug: (best peace smiley I could find).</div>

:beerchug:

Anyways, as for actual trade possibilities, I like Marbury for Z and Marbury for Laker picks. Here's one that I thought up - Stephon Marbury and JYD for Sam Cassell, Wally Sczerbiak, and Trenton Hassell. This trade doesn't necessarily benefit one team more than another, but it seems both franchises are in need of some kind of change.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post">
One possibility even though I'm probably asking for a while lot of trouble by suggesting this is...Marbury to the Lakers for their first round draft pick and their first round 2006 draft pick. Kobe needs some help down in LA and even though Marbury is a "career loser" I'm sure Kobe will be able to lead the Lakers to the playoffs if he had Marbury's help. And how about Marbury for Big Z and someone else? Both teams get what they need.</div>

If Kobe and Odom couldn't coexist, what makes you think Marbury and Kobe will be able to? It wouldn't happen. They each need the ball to be successful so it really wouldn't work out too well. That's exactly what happened this year with Odom and Kobe, now ya throw and improved Butler and Marbury into the picture, you're just asking for chemistry problems and other on the court issues, cause all of those players will be wanting the ball, and unfortunately, there is only one to go around. Nope, wouldn't work, not a chance.
 
Do the Knicks really want Wallyworld and his contract and his blackhole offense? He's a great shooter, which is what made him a one-time allstar, but still... that defense.... ech!
 
Teams won't be willing to give up 3 first-rounders for Marbury, that type of deal restricts a team for years. I mean the Raps basically gave VC for 2 first-rounders, so I think Marbury could be traded for a pick and an expiring contract.
Portland could be a possibility, cause they never care that much about team chemistry.
Also, with Big Z, isn't contract up at the end of the year? So it would have to be a sign and trade.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting R_ChutneY:</div><div class="quote_post">Teams won't be willing to give up 3 first-rounders for Marbury, that type of deal restricts a team for years. I mean the Raps basically gave VC for 2 first-rounders, so I think Marbury could be traded for a pick and an expiring contract.
Portland could be a possibility, cause they never care that much about team chemistry.
Also, with Big Z, isn't contract up at the end of the year? So it would have to be a sign and trade.</div>
I don't know. The Blazers organization is really high on Telfair. What may work is Marbury playing shooting guard and perhaps Telfair at the PG. I don't think that will work out though.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting R_ChutneY:</div><div class="quote_post">Teams won't be willing to give up 3 first-rounders for Marbury, that type of deal restricts a team for years. I mean the Raps basically gave VC for 2 first-rounders, so I think Marbury could be traded for a pick and an expiring contract.
Portland could be a possibility, cause they never care that much about team chemistry.
Also, with Big Z, isn't contract up at the end of the year? So it would have to be a sign and trade.</div>

Blazers won't trade off to get Marbury. For that matter, I'm thinking the only way that it'd work is if Miles were to be involved, but I'm not totally sure on that aspect. And personally, I don't even think Isiah Thomas is dumb enough to take up that contract.....but ya never know I guess.
 
You guys are going to have to bear with me. I wanted to respond to a few people at once and I decided to quote everybody so there's no confusion.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">If Kobe and Odom couldn't coexist, what makes you think Marbury and Kobe will be able to? It wouldn't happen. They each need the ball to be successful so it really wouldn't work out too well. That's exactly what happened this year with Odom and Kobe, now ya throw and improved Butler and Marbury into the picture, you're just asking for chemistry problems and other on the court issues, cause all of those players will be wanting the ball, and unfortunately, there is only one to go around. Nope, wouldn't work, not a chance.</div>

I see what you're saying. But there's a subtle difference between Kobe playing with Odom and Kobe hypothetically playing with Marbury. I mean with you're line of thinking Hughes, Jamison and Arenas wouldnt work. You're basically saying any team with two big scorers is destined to fail. But that isnt true. Kobe and Odom are players that are looking for their own shot. But Marbury since he is a point guard is looking to make other players better and get other players involved. Odom doesnt do that. You probably dont get what I'm saying(cant really explain it to be honest) but believe me when I say that Kobe and Marbury will get along just fine. Think on it, maybe you'll get what I'm trying to say.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Voodoo Child:</div><div class="quote_post">Anyways, as for actual trade possibilities, I like Marbury for Z and Marbury for Laker picks. Here's one that I thought up - Stephon Marbury and JYD for Sam Cassell, Wally Sczerbiak, and Trenton Hassell. This trade doesn't necessarily benefit one team more than another, but it seems both franchises are in need of some kind of change.</div>

That deal seems solid except for the whole salary thing. One reason why I want to trade Marbury for picks is to clear up salary and in your proposal the Knicks take up more. Plus we're left with a glutton of shooting guards and small forwards. And considering how unattractive the contracts are of some of our players we wont be able to move any of them. Although if we can pick up Big Z...I'd love to have Wally World.

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting R_ChutneY:</div><div class="quote_post">Teams won't be willing to give up 3 first-rounders for Marbury, that type of deal restricts a team for years. I mean the Raps basically gave VC for 2 first-rounders, so I think Marbury could be traded for a pick and an expiring contract.
Portland could be a possibility, cause they never care that much about team chemistry.
Also, with Big Z, isn't contract up at the end of the year? So it would have to be a sign and trade.</div>

They dont have to be first rounders. I'd take this year's and next year's first rounder along with this year's second rounder. Depends on the team if their willing to make that kind of deal and how many draft picks they have. Afterall wasnt K Mart dealt for three first rounders? And yes it would have to be a sign and trade if we trade Marbury for Big Z. I also think the Cavaliers will have to include someone else, I'm not sure who it should be though.


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.
 
If NY really wanted to get rid of Steph badly, Magloire + PJ Brown would work. Only problem is the Hornets would have no frontline and they might just take Chris Paul in the draft to fill their need of a point guard. But New Orleans needs some kind of draw and Steph is one of the better players in the NBA. Actually bad trade because Byron Scott would probably run him out of town like he almost did with Jason Kidd and he did with Baron Davis.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">If NY really wanted to get rid of Steph badly, Magloire + PJ Brown would work. Only problem is the Hornets would have no frontline and they might just take Chris Paul in the draft to fill their need of a point guard. But New Orleans needs some kind of draw and Steph is one of the better players in the NBA. Actually bad trade because Byron Scott would probably run him out of town like he almost did with Jason Kidd and he did with Baron Davis.</div>

Wow, I had a whole post written up about a possible Magloire + Brown for Marbury trade but scrapped it for the T'Wolves idea.
pat.gif


Anyway, the Hornets have time to see what the offseason brings them. If they get the #1 pick, then I think this deal becomes very attractive, as they can just draft Andrew Bogut. Even if they don't get the #1 pick, they still have a possibility to sign a guy like Stromile Swift (Louisianna native) before pulling any triggers.
 
Wow!!

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">If NY really wanted to get rid of Steph badly, Magloire + PJ Brown would work. Only problem is the Hornets would have no frontline and they might just take Chris Paul in the draft to fill their need of a point guard. But New Orleans needs some kind of draw and Steph is one of the better players in the NBA. Actually bad trade because Byron Scott would probably run him out of town like he almost did with Jason Kidd and he did with Baron Davis.</div>

You just managed to disprove your own post!! WOW!! That takes SKILL!! What was the point of posting it when you realized half-way through it was a bad idea?
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting custodianrules2:</div><div class="quote_post">If NY really wanted to get rid of Steph badly, Magloire + PJ Brown would work. Only problem is the Hornets would have no frontline and they might just take Chris Paul in the draft to fill their need of a point guard. But New Orleans needs some kind of draw and Steph is one of the better players in the NBA. Actually bad trade because Byron Scott would probably run him out of town like he almost did with Jason Kidd and he did with Baron Davis.</div>

Now THAT is a trade I might do! That'll give the Knicks more size up front, we'll be able to move Sweetney over to the powerforward spot and add more depth at the big positions. We'll still be able to draft Splitter if want and leave him Europe for a couple more years, move Crawford over to the point guard position...and a whole bunch of other stuff. That's bloody brilliant!! Now why didnt I think of that??? What are the chances that a fool like Isiah will make this kind of deal?


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post">Now THAT is a trade I might do! That'll give the Knicks more size up front, we'll be able to move Sweetney over to the powerforward spot and add more depth at the big positions. We'll still be able to draft Splitter if want and leave him Europe for a couple more years, move Crawford over to the point guard position...and a whole bunch of other stuff. That's bloody brilliant!! Now why didnt I think of that??? What are the chances that a fool like Isiah will make this kind of deal?


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.</div>

Crawford at the point? Boy, you never watched him much in Chicago when he ran the point did you. Having him run the point would be almost as big of a mistake as the one you made by signing him to such a huge freakin contract. He's not fit to run the point. He doesn't make teammates better and is far too turnover prone. Why do you think the Bulls drafted Hinrich and put him at the SG spot?
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">Crawford at the point? Boy, you never watched him much in Chicago when he ran the point did you. Having him run the point would be almost as big of a mistake as the one you made by signing him to such a huge freakin contract. He's not fit to run the point. He doesn't make teammates better and is far too turnover prone. Why do you think the Bulls drafted Hinrich and put him at the SG spot?</div>

I know Crawford isnt the ideal guy you want running the point. Believe me I know, I said the exact same thing you just said a few months ago when someone said he was a natural point guard. But he's a failure at the off guard position. I really dont know what else to do with him. It seems he'll be better suited running the point. He doesnt have to be Nash, Kidd or even Francis. With Magloire and Sweetney and TT up front all he'll have to do is bring the ball up and just throw the ball into the low post. He may even be able to post up other point guards. I think Crawford can handle that. Dont you?


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post">I know Crawford isnt the ideal guy you want running the point. Believe me I know, I said the exact same thing you just said a few months ago when someone said he was a natural point guard. But he's a failure at the off guard position. I really dont know what else to do with him. It seems he'll be better suited running the point. He doesnt have to be Nash, Kidd or even Francis. With Magloire and Sweetney and TT up front all he'll have to do is bring the ball up and just throw the ball into the low post. He may even be able to post up other point guards. I think Crawford can handle that. Dont you?


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.</div>

You're right, Crawford isn't your prototypical off guard, but he's more suited there than he is the point. His endeavors at point were short lived for a reason, and that's because he couldn't handle it. Even if he does have a couple of bigs to throw it in to, he's still not ideal. He's bad at handling pressure and he's still selfish. He's a me first type player. If you think about it, they'd be in the same position they're already in with Marbury running the show. A selfish point guard that doesn't make teammates better. They don't need that. They need a player that will make their young talent, such as Sweetney, blossom and become better. Marbury isn't that guy and Crawford isn't that guy. He's stuf as your two guard though. However, he wouldn't be too bad if he didn't jack up so many treys. Couple that with the fact he's a tweener, a whopping 190 at 6'5", you don't have either a point guard or an off guard....you simply have....well....Jamal Crawford. And btw, have I ever mentioned that the Crawford trade was one of the smartest things Pax has ever done, and one of the dumbest things Thomas has done.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">You're right, Crawford isn't your prototypical off guard, but he's more suited there than he is the point. His endeavors at point were short lived for a reason, and that's because he couldn't handle it. Even if he does have a couple of bigs to throw it in to, he's still not ideal. He's bad at handling pressure and he's still selfish. He's a me first type player. If you think about it, they'd be in the same position they're already in with Marbury running the show. A selfish point guard that doesn't make teammates better. They don't need that. They need a player that will make their young talent, such as Sweetney, blossom and become better. Marbury isn't that guy and Crawford isn't that guy. He's stuf as your two guard though. However, he wouldn't be too bad if he didn't jack up so many treys. Couple that with the fact he's a tweener, a whopping 190 at 6'5", you don't have either a point guard or an off guard....you simply have....well....Jamal Crawford. And btw, have I ever mentioned that the Crawford trade was one of the smartest things Pax has ever done, and one of the dumbest things Thomas has done.</div>
I don't think so. Crawford at the 2 gets killed by the bigger guards in the league he faces almost every night. I think some of his ill-advised shots are the only way he can get them off when playing the Finley's or Kobe's of the league. Also Crawford is a natural point guard (I was debating that with you Tribute). Wasn't the reason why Chicago drafted a PG was because of Jay Williams' accident? When Marbury is put on the bench for 10 minutes or so and Crawford plays the PG, the team seems to run much better. I also remember Crawford starting over Williams when he was in Chicago. I think Crawford might be more of a scoring PG, but he knows how to find people.
That wasn't the dumbest thing Isiah's done. Crawford can turn out to be a good player. He's only 25 and has a lot of room to grow. This season was a good lesson for him.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">You're right, Crawford isn't your prototypical off guard, but he's more suited there than he is the point. His endeavors at point were short lived for a reason, and that's because he couldn't handle it. Even if he does have a couple of bigs to throw it in to, he's still not ideal. He's bad at handling pressure and he's still selfish. He's a me first type player. If you think about it, they'd be in the same position they're already in with Marbury running the show. A selfish point guard that doesn't make teammates better. They don't need that. They need a player that will make their young talent, such as Sweetney, blossom and become better. Marbury isn't that guy and Crawford isn't that guy. He's stuf as your two guard though. However, he wouldn't be too bad if he didn't jack up so many treys. Couple that with the fact he's a tweener, a whopping 190 at 6'5", you don't have either a point guard or an off guard....you simply have....well....Jamal Crawford. And btw, have I ever mentioned that the Crawford trade was one of the smartest things Pax has ever done, and one of the dumbest things Thomas has done.</div>

It wasnt a dumb move on Isiah's part(trading Van Horn was the dumbest he's done for the Knicks). I liked it for the Bulls but I thought the move was quite solid for the Knicks. We needed insurance for Houston in case he wasnt healthy(and he wasnt). Crawford isnt really selfish. He just doesnt know when to pass and when to shoot. If we put him at the point maybe he wont be so confused as to what he should do. The truth is he isnt ideal at either position so if we trade Marbury we might as well just let him run the point since we wont have a point guard. Besides like mrj18 said he's enjoyed some success running the point for us. And it cant be any worse than seeing Sprewell and Houston bringing the ball up during the Glen Rice experiment(that burned my eyes). Another option if we trade Marbury is to just draft a point guard with Pheonix's or Houston's pick and leave Crawford at the two.


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post">Crawford isnt really selfish. He just doesnt know when to pass and when to shoot. If we put him at the point maybe he wont be so confused as to what he should do.</div>

I'm confused....what's the difference between that and selfish? Delve into this, explain to me. Cause to me, not knowing when to shoot or pass means you're likely going to shoot mroe, which equals selfish. And if you don't know when to shoot or pass, how in gods name can you be a point guard? That doesn't make sense at all. Again I say, there was a reason why the Bulls drafted Kirk Hinrich in '03, and that's because they knew that Crawford couldn't handle running the point. If you're going to trade off Marbury, you might want to consider finding a point guard in the draft at some point, cause Crawford won't do too well for ya.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm confused....what's the difference between that and selfish? Delve into this, explain to me. Cause to me, not knowing when to shoot or pass means you're likely going to shoot mroe, which equals selfish. And if you don't know when to shoot or pass, how in gods name can you be a point guard? That doesn't make sense at all. Again I say, there was a reason why the Bulls drafted Kirk Hinrich in '03, and that's because they knew that Crawford couldn't handle running the point. If you're going to trade off Marbury, you might want to consider finding a point guard in the draft at some point, cause Crawford won't do too well for ya.</div>
Because the Knicks put him at the SG even though he was a PG. Houston was supposed to be here longer so he was only supposed to be a SG for a little while. But when Houston got injured, Crawford was forced to take more of a scoring role. His insticts were telling him to pass, while his mind was telling him to score. He was a bit confused on his role.

I thought the reason they drafted a PG was because their original future franchise player, Jay Williams had that nasty fall. Around that time, Williams was getting the minutes, but Crawford was doing his thing off the bench so well, they felt the need to start him.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post">Because the Knicks put him at the SG even though he was a PG. Houston was supposed to be here longer so he was only supposed to be a SG for a little while. But when Houston got injured, Crawford was forced to take more of a scoring role. His insticts were telling him to pass, while his mind was telling him to score. He was a bit confused on his role.

I thought the reason they drafted a PG was because their original future franchise player, Jay Williams had that nasty fall. Around that time, Williams was getting the minutes, but Crawford was doing his thing off the bench so well, they felt the need to start him.</div>

Forgot about the Jay Williams thing...however, the lack of a true point guard is the reason why they drafted Kirk I believe. Jay was still more of a shooting guard than a point guard. He was a scorer first, passer second.

Crawford has always been a scorer first. Passing takes a back seat to him when it comes to scoring. He's always been a scoring guard. His instincts don't tell him to pass, they never really have. He is a scorer. When you're a scorer, you're going to shoot. He didn't start shooting more because the Knicks needed him to, he shot more because that's what he does. You want a prime example, look at Chicago last year. They had two other people capable of scoring in Kirk and Eddy (at one point also had Donyell and Rose), and Crawford was still taking the bulk of the shots. He's never going to be a pass first player. No matter where he goes, he's going to be a scorer in his mind.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Tribute to H2O:</div><div class="quote_post"> Another option if we trade Marbury is to just draft a point guard with Pheonix's or Houston's pick and leave Crawford at the two.


Anyway I think Isiah Thomas should be fired.</div>



quick add in, Houston has the Knicks second rounder, it was part of the trade to get Taylor.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting 02civic:</div><div class="quote_post">quick add in, Houston has the Knicks second rounder, it was part of the trade to get Taylor.</div>
No, this year our second rounder belongs to L.A. It was originally the Hawks in the Nazr deal but I guess they dealt it to the Hawks. There's some move we did a long time ago and we have Houston's second rounder I'm not quite sure what it is though.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">Forgot about the Jay Williams thing...however, the lack of a true point guard is the reason why they drafted Kirk I believe. Jay was still more of a shooting guard than a point guard. He was a scorer first, passer second.</div>
I honestly don't think if Chicago had Williams and Crawford, they would have drafted a 3rd PG in Hinrich.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Crawford has always been a scorer first. Passing takes a back seat to him when it comes to scoring. He's always been a scoring guard. His instincts don't tell him to pass, they never really have. He is a scorer. When you're a scorer, you're going to shoot. He didn't start shooting more because the Knicks needed him to, he shot more because that's what he does. You want a prime example, look at Chicago last year. They had two other people capable of scoring in Kirk and Eddy (at one point also had Donyell and Rose), and Crawford was still taking the bulk of the shots. He's never going to be a pass first player. No matter where he goes, he's going to be a scorer in his mind.</div>
I vast majority of the NBA's floor generals have a shoot first/pass second mentality. That doesn't mean that they aren't good, or shouldn't be a PG. Crawford can find his teammates well. Many of the times, such as last year, and this season, he has been playing more SG. An interesting statistic is when Crawford was playing PG in the begining of his career, he increased his assists per game from 2.4 to 4.2 in just 4 more minutes of play.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post">
I vast majority of the NBA's floor generals have a shoot first/pass second mentality. That doesn't mean that they aren't good, or shouldn't be a PG. Crawford can find his teammates well. Many of the times, such as last year, and this season, he has been playing more SG. An interesting statistic is when Crawford was playing PG in the begining of his career, he increased his assists per game from 2.4 to 4.2 in just 4 more minutes of play.</div>

I have a nice little stat for you....well....a couple actually. First and foremost, Crawford averaged 2.11 turnovers per game at the SG spot. Meaning, he turns the ball over a lot, despite it not always being in his hands. Now imagine him having the ball everytime down the court, that might not be too pretty.

You point out that his assists went up with just an additional 4 mpg. For one, the season before he only played 23 games, and anything could have happened in those additional 59 that he missed. Another thing to note that, is in that year that he did average 4.2 apg, he wasn't asked to score a lot at that time. That year they had players like Jalen Rose (22.2 ppg), Donyell Marshall (13.4 ppg), Eddy Curry (10.5 ppg), Tyson Chandler (9.2 ppg), and Jay Williams (9.5 ppg), so him scoring wasn't an absolute necessity. The next year, they traded away Jalen Rose and Donyell for JYD and AD out of Toronto. Jay Williams had the horrendus accident. Tyson was hurt and never really figured out his role when he wasn't. Curry still was developing. And to top it all off, Hinrich was drafted to relieve Crawford of potential point guard duties. He was never going to be the point guard though, assuming that Jay had never been hurt (hence why they used their pick on him that year). It's highly unlikely they'd have started him over someone like Jay who was more fit to do the job. Once he was gone though and they traded all those guys away and drafted Kirk, he was moved to the SG where he was asked to be a scorer because that's what he had always done best, his contributions were just never needed as much.

Then he comes to New York with his nice $60 million contract (can you say overpaid?). What does he do? Averages a career high in points in 17.7 ppg. Sure, that's good. But then you see his 39.8% from the floor and jacks up 512 treys and only attempted 1097 fgs. Almost half of his shots were from behind the arc. So, are you going to sit there and tell me that he's not selfish with stats like that. He's not fit to play point. He's too erratic. He's three point happy. He turns the ball over too much. He's selfish. And beyond all that, he just doesn't know how to play it. So, aside from his 1.8 apg increase between a year he was hurt and the next year where scoring wasn't a necessity from him, that will prove he can and knows how to play point, I'd like to see it. Cause all facts and stats show that he doesn't know how to play point if his life depended on it. All he knows how to do is shoot (15.7 attempts per game) and jack up threes. So please, go for it, show me something that proves he knows how to play the point, cause I don't see anything that points towards that direction.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">I have a nice little stat for you....well....a couple actually. First and foremost, Crawford averaged 2.11 turnovers per game at the SG spot. Meaning, he turns the ball over a lot, despite it not always being in his hands. Now imagine him having the ball everytime down the court, that might not be too pretty.</div>
Well the ball is in Crawford's hands a lot. It's not like he is set up for jumpshots most of the times. Also his turnovers are in part due to his minutes that he gets. There are few players I know who play 35+ minutes who don't turn the ball over twice a game.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">You point out that his assists went up with just an additional 4 mpg. For one, the season before he only played 23 games, and anything could have happened in those additional 59 that he missed. Another thing to note that, is in that year that he did average 4.2 apg, he wasn't asked to score a lot at that time. That year they had players like Jalen Rose (22.2 ppg), Donyell Marshall (13.4 ppg), Eddy Curry (10.5 ppg), Tyson Chandler (9.2 ppg), and Jay Williams (9.5 ppg), so him scoring wasn't an absolute necessity.</div>
True, but his rookie year there was an improvement from there as well. The point I'm trying to make is he plays much better when playing PG. Exactly, he wasn't asked to score, and when he wasn't, he gave you 4.2 assists in 25 minutes. On the Knicks, he was asked to pick up the slack for Houston.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">
The next year, they traded away Jalen Rose and Donyell for JYD and AD out of Toronto. Jay Williams had the horrendus accident. Tyson was hurt and never really figured out his role when he wasn't. Curry still was developing. And to top it all off, Hinrich was drafted to relieve Crawford of potential point guard duties. He was never going to be the point guard though, assuming that Jay had never been hurt (hence why they used their pick on him that year). It's highly unlikely they'd have started him over someone like Jay who was more fit to do the job. Once he was gone though and they traded all those guys away and drafted Kirk, he was moved to the SG where he was asked to be a scorer because that's what he had always done best, his contributions were just never needed as much.</div>
You're right again. Crawford was taken out of his natural position at the PG to be a scorer. I also remember Jay Williams losing his spot to Jamal Crawford that season too. Let me ask you this: Do you think Williams was a player suited for the PG position?


<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Then he comes to New York with his nice $60 million contract (can you say overpaid?). What does he do? Averages a career high in points in 17.7 ppg. Sure, that's good. But then you see his 39.8% from the floor and jacks up 512 treys and only attempted 1097 fgs. Almost half of his shots were from behind the arc. So, are you going to sit there and tell me that he's not selfish with stats like that. He's not fit to play point. He's too erratic. He's three point happy. He turns the ball over too much. He's selfish. And beyond all that, he just doesn't know how to play it. So, aside from his 1.8 apg increase between a year he was hurt and the next year where scoring wasn't a necessity from him, that will prove he can and knows how to play point, I'd like to see it. Cause all facts and stats show that he doesn't know how to play point if his life depended on it. All he knows how to do is shoot (15.7 attempts per game) and jack up threes. So please, go for it, show me something that proves he knows how to play the point, cause I don't see anything that points towards that direction.</div>
I don?t think he?s overpaid. He?s got a good upside and all because he had a bad year, that doesn?t make up for the other 6 years he can have great years. Well as I said before, he?s playing out of position. He?s 6?5 at a generous 190 forced to play bigger and stronger guards on a regular basis. Many of the shots he takes are bad ones because sometimes that?s the only way to get them off playing against bigger players. Despite the treys he jacks up, he makes sure to hit 36.1% of them which I believe is above the league average. That?s pretty solid. Although he is nowhere near to being as clutch as Houston was, he has helped us during crunch time here and there. It also appears as if you?re blinded by the stat sheet. To determine selfishness you don?t look at the boxscore, you watch the players. You yourself called Stephon Marbury selfish when he averages 8.1 assists on a more than solid 46.2% from the field. If that?s the case, than Jason Kidd must be somewhat selfish as well. He averages 14.4 points 8.3 assists and shoots the same percentage as Crawford. While Crawford is forced to play out of position just to try and put points on the board, Kidd isn?t and is putting up that horrible percentage. You?re stats are based on a year he was playing mostly SG and than calling him selfish based on some of the tough shots that he takes. All I can say is from what I?ve seen from Knick games and I?ve seen an unselfish player. When he does get time at the PG every now and then, the team runs smoothly and he finds his teammates.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post">
You're right again. Crawford was taken out of his natural position at the PG to be a scorer. I also remember Jay Williams losing his spot to Jamal Crawford that season too. Let me ask you this: Do you think Williams was a player suited for the PG position?</div>

Yes, I do believe that Jay Williams was better suited for the point guard spot there. He averaged a stellar 4.7 apg as a rookie while splitting time with Crawford that year. Beyond that, in college (yea, I know, it's JUST college) he averaged 6.0 apg in 108 games at Duke. The other thing I note about Crawford is that, between this year and last year, his assists went down even though he was actually asked to do LESS scoring. In Chicago, he was the top option. There were no ifs, ands, or buts about it, he was the #1 man there. Then he goes to NY, asked to score less, instead however, his assists go down and points and minutes increase. To me, that shows a selfish player. However, it's unfortunate that to this day we have not seen what kind of point guard Jay could actually have been because of that accident. We may find out soon enough if someone gives him the chance, but it's not likely he's going to be what he once was. So, to really answer that question any better is very difficult, seeing as how he's only played one year.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">True, but his rookie year there was an improvement from there as well. The point I'm trying to make is he plays much better when playing PG. Exactly, he wasn't asked to score, and when he wasn't, he gave you 4.2 assists in 25 minutes. On the Knicks, he was asked to pick up the slack for Houston</div>

Of course it's going to go up when you only get 17 mpg as a rookie. An increase of almost 8 mpg is quite a bit of time to get in a couple more assists.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I don?t think he?s overpaid. He?s got a good upside and all because he had a bad year, that doesn?t make up for the other 6 years he can have great years. Well as I said before, he?s playing out of position. He?s 6?5 at a generous 190 forced to play bigger and stronger guards on a regular basis. Many of the shots he takes are bad ones because sometimes that?s the only way to get them off playing against bigger players. Despite the treys he jacks up, he makes sure to hit 36.1% of them which I believe is above the league average. That?s pretty solid. Although he is nowhere near to being as clutch as Houston was, he has helped us during crunch time here and there. It also appears as if you?re blinded by the stat sheet. To determine selfishness you don?t look at the boxscore, you watch the players. You yourself called Stephon Marbury selfish when he averages 8.1 assists on a more than solid 46.2% from the field. If that?s the case, than Jason Kidd must be somewhat selfish as well. He averages 14.4 points 8.3 assists and shoots the same percentage as Crawford. While Crawford is forced to play out of position just to try and put points on the board, Kidd isn?t and is putting up that horrible percentage. You?re stats are based on a year he was playing mostly SG and than calling him selfish based on some of the tough shots that he takes. All I can say is from what I?ve seen from Knick games and I?ve seen an unselfish player. When he does get time at the PG every now and then, the team runs smoothly and he finds his teammates.</div>

Explain to me how he's not overpaid? To me, he's not really done much of anything to deserve that $10 mil he makes every year. No team he's ever been on has been a winner. He takes a lot of bad shots. He doesn't even hit 40% of what he takes. I don't see what's so great about him personally.

And by the way, Crawford does not have to take bad shots. I don't believe there is any rule stating this. He takes them because he chooses to. He's not a good decision maker at all, which is another reason why he would make a terrible point guard. He doesn't have to jack up those shots though. He could just as easily dish the ball to someone else instead of forcing up a long jumper. That's why I call him selfish. To me, when you jack up an unnecessary bad shot, that's selfishness. You can just as easily pass it up as you can shoot it, hell, sometimes passing might actually take less effort. But that's what I don't get, you think he's so great and unselfish, yet you openly admit he takes a lot of bad shots, and beyond that, hardly makes any of them. A sign of a selfish player is not always the amount of shots you take, but the quality of the ones you take. He never takes many good ones. Instead of creating with dribble drives, which he's more than capable and quick enough to do, he jacks up stupid jump shots. To me, that's selfish.
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">Yes, I do believe that Jay Williams was better suited for the point guard spot there. He averaged a stellar 4.7 apg as a rookie while splitting time with Crawford that year. Beyond that, in college (yea, I know, it's JUST college) he averaged 6.0 apg in 108 games at Duke. The other thing I note about Crawford is that, between this year and last year, his assists went down even though he was actually asked to do LESS scoring. In Chicago, he was the top option. There were no ifs, ands, or buts about it, he was the #1 man there. Then he goes to NY, asked to score less, instead however, his assists go down and points and minutes increase. To me, that shows a selfish player. However, it's unfortunate that to this day we have not seen what kind of point guard Jay could actually have been because of that accident. We may find out soon enough if someone gives him the chance, but it's not likely he's going to be what he once was. So, to really answer that question any better is very difficult, seeing as how he's only played one year.</div>
But Williams shot only one less attempt per game than Jamal Crawford and on top of that, he averaged an even lower percentage. He failed to shoot over 39.9% from the field. Also since you like bringing up turnovers so much, he averaged 2.28 turnovers in 26.1 minutes per game. How was Crawford asked to do less scoring if he was playing SG? Originally, Crawford was supposed to be a 6th man. When Houston went down for the whole season, he was asked to pick up the slack. How would his assists numbers go up if he is rarely playing PG and he already has Marbury dishing out 8.1 assists per game? If anything if you manage to get 4.3 assists per game playing out of position and have Marbury dishing out almost half of the teams assists, it?s a good thing. I liked Jay Williams a lot and it was indeed unfortunate what happened to him. I wish him the best and hopefully he can recover and although he might not be on the level he once was on, I think he can still make a difference on a team.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Explain to me how he's not overpaid? To me, he's not really done much of anything to deserve that $10 mil he makes every year. No team he's ever been on has been a winner. He takes a lot of bad shots. He doesn't even hit 40% of what he takes. I don't see what's so great about him personally.</div>
He doesn?t get 10 million until the last year of his contract. So it?s not that much. Jamal Crawford has potential and all he needs is time and I think he can be an all-star in the near future. He has shown us flashes of potential for example when he dropped 50 points on the Raptors last season, or when he had two 40 point games this season. Also he is constantly learning and thrives off criticism of his game by the coaches. The only time Crawford has had a full season at the point was when he was in his 3rd year in Chicago and managed to average 10.7 points and 4.2 assists in 24.9 minutes. That?s pretty solid and he was only going to get better. If Marbury gets traded and Crawford has full floor general duties, than I think he will put up better numbers.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">And by the way, Crawford does not have to take bad shots. I don't believe there is any rule stating this. He takes them because he chooses to. He's not a good decision maker at all, which is another reason why he would make a terrible point guard. He doesn't have to jack up those shots though. He could just as easily dish the ball to someone else instead of forcing up a long jumper. That's why I call him selfish. To me, when you jack up an unnecessary bad shot, that's selfishness. You can just as easily pass it up as you can shoot it, hell, sometimes passing might actually take less effort. But that's what I don't get, you think he's so great and unselfish, yet you openly admit he takes a lot of bad shots, and beyond that, hardly makes any of them. A sign of a selfish player is not always the amount of shots you take, but the quality of the ones you take. He never takes many good ones. Instead of creating with dribble drives, which he's more than capable and quick enough to do, he jacks up stupid jump shots. To me, that's selfish.</div>
But many of the time Crawford has bigger and stronger players on him. What else can he do? Try shooting it over the player and getting it blocked? Sometimes those little jukes are the only way he can score. He?s 6?5, 190 pounds! Crawford was a bit confused with his role. He tried his best to put points on the board, but most of the nights he was at a disadvantage. I think him taking some bad shots shows he?s trying to do too much. I don?t think it shows a sign of selfishness, but a desire to win. Despite him fitting into your selfishness categories, whenever we put him at the PG, he?s done a good job for us and that?s the only thing that matters, right?
 
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">But Williams shot only one less attempt per game than Jamal Crawford and on top of that, he averaged an even lower percentage. He failed to shoot over 39.9% from the field. Also since you like bringing up turnovers so much, he averaged 2.28 turnovers in 26.1 minutes per game. How was Crawford asked to do less scoring if he was playing SG? Originally, Crawford was supposed to be a 6th man. When Houston went down for the whole season, he was asked to pick up the slack. How would his assists numbers go up if he is rarely playing PG and he already has Marbury dishing out 8.1 assists per game? If anything if you manage to get 4.3 assists per game playing out of position and have Marbury dishing out almost half of the teams assists, it?s a good thing. I liked Jay Williams a lot and it was indeed unfortunate what happened to him. I wish him the best and hopefully he can recover and although he might not be on the level he once was on, I think he can still make a difference on a team.</div>

I highly doubt that he was brought over to be the 6th man. You're not going to shell out $60 mil for a player to come off the bench for you. That doesn't make sense. I think they brought him over because they realized that Houston is nearing the end of his career. He's lost a step and he hasn't been healthy over the last 2 seasons (played in only 70 games out of 164). They brought him over to add youth and to replace an Allan Houston who is becoming less and less effective. And if not, they at least had intentions of starting him at the shooting guard and moving Allan over to the small forward. Either way though, he was going to start. You don't pay someone that much money to sit on the bench.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">He doesn?t get 10 million until the last year of his contract. So it?s not that much. Jamal Crawford has potential and all he needs is time and I think he can be an all-star in the near future. He has shown us flashes of potential for example when he dropped 50 points on the Raptors last season, or when he had two 40 point games this season. Also he is constantly learning and thrives off criticism of his game by the coaches. The only time Crawford has had a full season at the point was when he was in his 3rd year in Chicago and managed to average 10.7 points and 4.2 assists in 24.9 minutes. That?s pretty solid and he was only going to get better. If Marbury gets traded and Crawford has full floor general duties, than I think he will put up better numbers.</div>

Crawford has had a lot of time. He's been a full time starter the last two years and was the 6th man in his first few years. How much more time does he really need? He's on 5 years of experience now. He's 25. He's not going to get much better, even though he is still young. And you're right, he has shown flashes. He has had some good games. However, he's inconsistent. In his game with 41 earlier this year, he followed that with a 17 pt game (5/18 fgs), then an 8 pt game (2/10 fgs), a 10 pt game (4/12 fgs), before he finally had another solid night, scoring and shooting, with 31 pts (11/19 fgs). That's my big problem with him. He's been like that his entire career. Explode one night than disappear for countless nights in a row. Until he learns how to be consistent, he's never going to be a great player or an all star.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">But many of the time Crawford has bigger and stronger players on him. What else can he do? Try shooting it over the player and getting it blocked? Sometimes those little jukes are the only way he can score. He?s 6?5, 190 pounds! Crawford was a bit confused with his role. He tried his best to put points on the board, but most of the nights he was at a disadvantage. I think him taking some bad shots shows he?s trying to do too much. I don?t think it shows a sign of selfishness, but a desire to win. Despite him fitting into your selfishness categories, whenever we put him at the PG, he?s done a good job for us and that?s the only thing that matters, right?</div>

I have a thought for you. You claim here that the reason why Crawford takes bad shots is because those are the only ones he can get with his size. Well, Rip Hamilton is the same size roughly, has about 2 inches on him but only weighs in at 193. He however, shoots closer to 45%, which is very good for a guard in this league. You know why? Cause he doesn't take bad shots. He works off the ball to get his. He works off screens and picks to get openings. He doesn't try to use his quickness to get everything like Crawford. And, if he doesn't have the shot, he doesn't always take it. He knows how to make good decisions. Crawford should take a look at him to see how to get openings. So that in itself shows that, just because you're underweight, it doesn't mean a damn thing. You don't have to continually try to create and just jack up a bad shot even if you don't get an open one. So I really don't buy you're "he's at a disadvantage cause of his weight" argument. Hamilton is at a disadvantage every night because of it, but you don't see him jacking up a three or any other shot every time down the court even if he isn't open.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top