# Has Eddy Curry maxed out?



## NOBLE (Apr 10, 2005)

Do you think that EC could improve to possibly All-Star caliber, or have we pretty much seen the best of him?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

NOBLE said:


> Do you think that EC could improve to possibly All-Star caliber, or have we pretty much seen the best of him?


He's 24 years old and his main problem has not been playing on a high level, it has been stringing those games together. Needless to say, experience seems to be what's missing from this equation and that only comes with time. I think he can be an all-star.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

not at all at worst as he gains experience , he'll get more consistent, but bball IQ generally goes up with experience as does passing skills , which are his major weaknesses, now that he is off of the mandate to stay below 285 and can condition himself in the offseason properly i expect him to be better physically as he goes through his 20's.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Curry's already pretty good at what he does, finishing around the basket. He needs to broaden his game some more, but the skills he needs are ones that can be developed over time (e.g. overall court awareness, passing, defensive positioning). So, no, he hasn't maxed out.


----------



## ERAFF (Jun 27, 2005)

The guy's been on a Flat line for 3 years. Have we seen his best????---We have certainly seen what he IS. There's really just one question---Does Eddie want to be a good player? Question 1a.: Is he willing to do anything about it?


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

This guy's been playing for 5 years now. Experience isn't a factor anymore. I say he's maxed.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Last season was probably the best season of his career, and he wasn't even healthy and was playing on a team that was spiraling out of control. So no, I don't think he has peaked.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Chan said:


> This guy's been playing for 5 years now. Experience isn't a factor anymore. I say he's maxed.


I think it is when the player your refering to is just 24 years old and has not entered his physical or mental prime. In neither aspect is he at his best yet so I'll reserve my judgement until he is at least 27 when that begins to occur.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I think it is when the player your refering to is just 24 years old and has not entered his physical or mental prime. In neither aspect is he at his best yet so I'll reserve my judgement until he is at least 27 when that begins to occur.


Yea, that's one way to put it. But he's been around forever. When you go that long with minimal improvement in stats, and no improvement in playing style, things aren't looking good. This isn't a Jermaine O'Neal case- Curry's a starter, and he's getting his PT. Look at Stromile Swift. Look at Olowokandi. This is probably easier for me to say because the Knicks aren't my #1 team, but the only argument for Curry's further development is his age. Not his improvement, or his attitude, but just the simple fact that he's 24.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Chan said:


> Yea, that's one way to put it. But he's been around forever. When you go that long with minimal improvement in stats, and no improvement in playing style, things aren't looking good. This isn't a Jermaine O'Neal case- Curry's a starter, and he's getting his PT. Look at Stromile Swift. Look at Olowokandi. This is probably easier for me to say because the Knicks aren't my #1 team, but the only argument for Curry's further development is his age. Not his improvement, or his attitude, but just the simple fact that he's 24.


Since we're looking at stats, I feel that it should be noted that Eddy only recieved 16mpg his rookie season and 19mpg his second season. He had a couple of starts in between there and that is likely what attributed to a spike in minutes, so I would not consider those minutes to be the general trend. He never really became a consistent starter until his 3rd year. The following year after that, he showed notable improvement as the season wore on but then came the heart issue that carried into his tenure with the Knicks (since he was not allowed to train for several months). This is why I do not buy into the concept that "he's been around 5 years" as a reason to why he can not improve. 5 years can be decieving if you don't look further into it.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Since we're looking at stats, I feel that it should be noted that Eddy only recieved 16mpg his rookie season and 19mpg his second season. He had a couple of starts in between there and that is likely what attributed to a spike in minutes, so I would not consider those minutes to be the general trend. He never really became a consistent starter until his 3rd year. The following year after that, he showed notable improvement as the season wore on but then came the heart issue that carried into his tenure with the Knicks (since he was not allowed to train for several months). This is why I do not buy into the concept that "he's been around 5 years" as a reason to why he can not improve. 5 years can be decieving if you don't look further into it.


Those are good points, but the important thing to look at what he's done with the PT he received. When he has had the chance to play, he doesn't show that he's gotten any better. He hasn't done anything with his minutes.


----------



## Goubot (Aug 16, 2006)

It's clear where Curry can improve: turnovers, passing, and avoiding fouls. But really, that's been his story for the past five years. His scoring ability has never been in question, but because of those, he can't stay on the floor. Now, I don't think he's peaked, since there still is the hope that he'll improve in those areas, but his lack of progress there throughout his career is telling.


----------



## Cager (Jun 13, 2002)

Great post Goubot. The concern about Eddy has to be that he has not improved the areas where he is weak hardly at all in the last 3 years. Of course he can get better since he is only 24 but there are very few big men that have made significant inprovements after being in the league 5 years regardless of his age. Eddy is a good center in this league but he just doesn't have the fire to be great. And, quite frankly, he has a very low basketball IQ. His anticipation on defense is atrocious. 

If you need Curry to be an all star then you will probably be disappointed. I think the Knick fans need to live with what he is , which isn't bad at all, or face the frustration Bulls fans endured with Eddy. I think to believe that Eddy will ever be consistently good is truly an act of faith because there is no reality in it.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Chan said:


> Those are good points, but the important thing to look at what he's done with the PT he received. When he has had the chance to play, he doesn't show that he's gotten any better. He hasn't done anything with his minutes.


It's kind of hard to figure out what to do with those minutes the way they are so few and far in between. How could you demand consistency out of a player when the minutes you give him to learn to be consistent, are not that?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Cager said:


> Great post Goubot. The concern about Eddy has to be that he has not improved the areas where he is weak hardly at all in the last 3 years. Of course he can get better since he is only 24 but there are very few big men that have made significant inprovements after being in the league 5 years regardless of his age. Eddy is a good center in this league but he just doesn't have the fire to be great. And, quite frankly, he has a very low basketball IQ. His anticipation on defense is atrocious.
> 
> If you need Curry to be an all star then you will probably be disappointed. I think the Knick fans need to live with what he is , which isn't bad at all, or face the frustration Bulls fans endured with Eddy. I think to believe that Eddy will ever be consistently good is truly an act of faith because there is no reality in it.


How is there no reality in believing that Curry can be consistently good? Like I said earlier, he hardly has any real experience playing in the league. The 5 season excuse is severly flawed in my opinion as I mentioned earlier because what is a season if you hardly get time in it? In his first two seasons, Eddy only recieved 16mpg and 19mpg respectively. This kid came into the league out of high school and you expected him to make up the 4 he should have gotten in college in two NBA seasons off the bench? Eddy did not become a consistent starter until his 3rd year in the league and showed notable improvement into his 4th year. That 4th year resulted in him with that heart issue that carried into his season with the Knicks so until he gets an actual shot at naturing his talent in a stable environment, I would not close the door on his potential.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

TwinkieFoot said:


> It's kind of hard to figure out what to do with those minutes the way they are so few and far in between. How could you demand consistency out of a player when the minutes you give him to learn to be consistent, are not that?


Minutes are earned, not given. If he deserves all 5 years worth of PT, he would've gotten it.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Chan said:


> Minutes are earned, not given. If he deserves all 5 years worth of PT, he would've gotten it.


Then you can say those 2 years were him just getting up to NBA standard as so many foreign players use to get acclimated to the NBA. Once he was at least able to perform on a NBA level, it seems as though misfortune kind of derailed the momentum he was getting and it was pretty good. Alot of people make a ruckus about Curry's rebounding but an interesting little tidbit is that Eddy Curry's rebounding is on par with or greater than Pau Gasol, Chris Bosh, Amare Stoudemire, and Troy Murphy to name a few (regarded as the best rebounders in the league). Of course he's not pulling down the same number of boards as they are but he is rebounding at the rate they do but you hardly if ever here those names get criticized for rebounding. That rate has exactly IMPROVED to what it is now but you will never ever here anyone mention it. Eddy's fg% despite being out of shape, IMPROVED with the Knicks but you will never hear much about it. Eddy's willingness challenge players off screen and roll's has IMPROVED but no one will talk about that. People are just so negative about a situation that has been negative that they refuse to dig deeper to see the light. Give him time because he'll more than earn those minutes barring any injuries or setbacks.


----------



## Krstic All-Star (Mar 9, 2005)

Curry's rebounding rate last season was 14.0, good for 77th in the league. It also placed him 6th on the Knicks, behind David Lee (16.3), Matt Barnes (15.8, seriously), Jackie Butler (14.9), Channing Frye (14.4), and Malik Rose (14.1). He was barely ahead of the ancient Antonio Davis (13.8) and even Jerome James grabbed a 13.6.

Pau Gasol was an iffy 13.8, but Bosh was 14.3, and Troy Murphy was far better, at 16.5 - topping David Lee's Knick-best mark. Stoudemire shouldn't count due to his extremely limited time and injury last season, which is funny, since his Rebound Rate was a career-best 17.7 in those games. 

Curry is NOT a good rebounder. It could be argued that he's improving in that regard, since the 14.0 is a career best, but that's not enough for his ability. If he were a shot-blocker, a lower rate would be fine, but he's not. (Less than one bpg over his career) 

The thing about Curry as opposed to a number of other NBA centers is that he *should * be a far better player than he is. There's no reason why he isn't grabbing more rebounds - it's not even as if there are other Knicks that are extraordinarily good rebounders for their positions a la Jason Kidd or Bonzi Wells.

He still needs to get his light bulb switched on. If/when that happens, his size and other abilities will still be there, so it wouldn't be fair to say that he's maxed out. Just on a bit of a plateau for now.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Krstic All Star said:


> Curry's rebounding rate last season was 14.0, good for 77th in the league. It also placed him 6th on the Knicks, behind David Lee (16.3), Matt Barnes (15.8, seriously), Jackie Butler (14.9), Channing Frye (14.4), and Malik Rose (14.1). He was barely ahead of the ancient Antonio Davis (13.8) and even Jerome James grabbed a 13.6.
> 
> Pau Gasol was an iffy 13.8, but Bosh was 14.3, and Troy Murphy was far better, at 16.5 - topping David Lee's Knick-best mark. Stoudemire shouldn't count due to his extremely limited time and injury last season, which is funny, since his Rebound Rate was a career-best 17.7 in those games.
> 
> ...



The mention of Troy Murphy in this conversation was an error on my part but that's about where it ends. I normally do not look at rebounds over the course of 48 minutes but rather the number of rebounds you can secure in a minute. I feel that's a more accurate estimation. Getting back to the topic, I do agree with you that Amare Stoudemire's last year should have not counted and that is exactly why I did not. I was going purely by the stats he had during his MVP caliber season the year before when he was healthy year round and noticed his rebounding rate per minute is just 0.2465 while Curry is 0.2316 . Amare has the inside edge on Curry but then again since so many people like to equate physical gifts to rebounding, Amare should be blowing Curry out of the water. He is not and it is kind of hard to figure out why an aggressive guy that is 6-10 and can touch the top of the back board does not rebound at a higher rate. But it is not just him which is evident by the performances other guys like Pau Gasol and Chris Bosh so maybe they form the level of what is "good" in this league at rebounding the ball. Hell, they might have an advantage on Curry but how many of them can honestly say they had not worked out for several months and manage to rebound at that level? 


As far as the Knicks not having extraordinary rebounders at positions, I believe we have the best rebounding backcourt in the league that helped put us in a position to be a top 6 rebounding team overall in the league.


----------



## Goubot (Aug 16, 2006)

Part of why Curry couldn't get a lot of minutes early on was because he was constantly saddled with foul trouble. He also averaged close to thirty minutes a game his final years in Chicago, so I don't really buy him not having any real experience. Fact is, he's been making the same mistakes for a long time, and they're fairly major pitfalls. This year his rebounding improved, but his passing was worse than ever and he turned the ball over more. I'm not discounting the possibility of him improving, but it's also not wise to close your eyes to five seasons with only minor development. 

I'm not rooting against him or anything. I actually find him to be a pretty interesting, albeit frustrating player.


----------



## ERAFF (Jun 27, 2005)

I can certainly see how some of you might look at Curry positively based on his physical Talent and youth---he presents great possibilities....possibilities that I feel he has been squandering, NOT pursuing.

I CANNOT understand how any of you can defend what he's actually done to-date! Rebounds per minute!!!!!!!!!???????? PUH-LEASE!!!!!!! The guy's game is nowhere near where it could be,,,much less SHOULD be.

So...Quit defending what he IS....debate what he could be!!!...and hope that EDDIE DECIDES TO BE GOOD!


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Chan said:


> Minutes are earned, not given. If he deserves all 5 years worth of PT, he would've gotten it.


That's kind of the point, though. It's not at all unreasonable to expect him to improve his stamina and lower his fouls. That's what has been limiting his minutes so far in his career. Look at how long it has taken Yao Ming to play superstar-type minutes. When he is on the court, Curry is very productive. If healthy, with some good coaching and more experience, he will most likely be able to stay on the court longer.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Krstic All Star said:


> Curry is NOT a good rebounder. It could be argued that he's improving in that regard, since the 14.0 is a career best, but that's not enough for his ability. If he were a shot-blocker, a lower rate would be fine, but he's not. (Less than one bpg over his career)


A rebound rate of 14.1 is OK. Nowitzki's is 14.2. Brand's is 14.8. Brand is considered by many to be a top-10 rebounder.
Also, Curry showed a massive improvement in rebounding from the season before last (RbR of 10.5) to last season. I can't think of a single other player in NBA history who improved his rebound rate by that much in one season without dramatically decreasing his minutes.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Hakeem said:


> That's kind of the point, though. It's not at all unreasonable to expect him to improve his stamina and lower his fouls. That's what has been limiting his minutes so far in his career. Look at how long it has taken Yao Ming to play superstar-type minutes. When he is on the court, Curry is very productive. If healthy, with some good coaching and more experience, he will most likely be able to stay on the court longer.


Stamina and fouls troubles are Curry's problem. It's part of the game, and he's hasn't improved on those areas much. He needs coaching, but not experience. And isn't he around the same age as Yao Ming?


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Chan said:


> Stamina and fouls troubles are Curry's problem. It's part of the game, and he's hasn't improved on those areas much. He needs coaching, but not experience. And isn't he around the same age as Yao Ming?


He does need experience. His fouls per minute have decreased every season except the last one, and that could be attributed to the fact that he actually tried to play some defense last season. A lot of young players are foul prone, and it can take a while to improve there. Hakeem Olajuwon's fouls per minute gradually decreased for ten years before leveling out. Ewing, Kemp and Barkley all took seven years.

And Curry is actually two years younger than Yao. Players can break out at any time. Like Yao last season. Or Ewing in his fifth season. He was 23/9 and everyone was calling him a major disappointment. The next year he exploded for 29/11 and 4 bpg. It can be caused by little things. Confidence, or an improvement in one aspect of the game, or the right coach, or something just clicking mentally...


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Scott Skiles was probaly the only coach that could get Curry to reach his potential, because Skiles actually held Curry accountable, and worked with him everyday to improve his weaknesses. Eddy Curry took his diet pills because he didn't want to do the hard work to get in shape that Skiles demanded, which led to his heart condition. Bottomline is that Eddy just doesn't want to do the work necessary to improve his game, so it'd be shocking if he gets much better from what he has been the past few seasons


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Hakeem said:


> And Curry is actually two years younger than Yao. Players can break out at any time. Like Yao last season. Or Ewing in his fifth season. He was 23/9 and everyone was calling him a major disappointment. The next year he exploded for 29/11 and 4 bpg. It can be caused by little things. Confidence, or an improvement in one aspect of the game, or the right coach, or something just clicking mentally...


I like this part of your post Hakeem, I remember Ewing being ridiculed at the Garden by some Knick fans. It was so bad they used to toss his posters on the floor and step on them. Then he became our savior with his dirty blue bath robe and all. :biggrin: I'm going to see how well Curry does this season. If I don't see any improvement, then I'm not going to hold my breath on him having any type of break out season after that.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*As a center, Ewing was good*

at doing all the low post stuff....just pretty good. He never developed into the "hoya destroya" at the NBA level. What made his bones in the NBA was the development of his jumper. If he averages 5-7 less per game he is an absolute flop compared to his expectations.

As far as the rebounders Twink mentioned, none are scarey board men. Comparing boards per minute when the minutes vary so widely is idiocy. The more minutes played, the more energy expended, meaning the player has to either pace themselves a bit or get exhausted later in the game. Either way the rebounds per minute will suffer compared to the guy that plays fewer minutes and can go all out all the time. It NEVER ends up translating well. It can give you an idea, but thats it. Real good rebouonders don't get 17 one game and 6 or 7 the next. Real good rebounders are consistent. See Rodman, B wallace, D Howard, etc. You can't keep those guys off the boards.


----------



## Krstic All-Star (Mar 9, 2005)

Hakeem said:


> A rebound rate of 14.1 is OK. Nowitzki's is 14.2. Brand's is 14.8. Brand is considered by many to be a top-10 rebounder.
> Also, Curry showed a massive improvement in rebounding from the season before last (RbR of 10.5) to last season. I can't think of a single other player in NBA history who improved his rebound rate by that much in one season without dramatically decreasing his minutes.


A rate of 14 is ok if there's a dominant rebounder on the team. For Brand, he has Chris Kaman right there grabbing a high percentage (17.1) while Nowitzki has Erick Dampier (19.9) grabbing the lion's share. Unlike those teams, Curry's 6.0 rpg lead the Knicks - which places a larger burden on him as center. 

As far as his improvement goes, that's likely due to not playing with rebounding force Tyson Chandler (9.7 rpg in 04-05, 19.8 rate). David Lee rated 16.3, but only averaged 16.8 mpg. The number went up for Curry, but it's not determinative.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Krstic All Star said:


> *A rate of 14 is ok if there's a dominant rebounder on the team. For Brand, he has Chris Kaman right there grabbing a high percentage (17.1) while Nowitzki has Erick Dampier (19.9) grabbing the lion's share. Unlike those teams, Curry's 6.0 rpg lead the Knicks - which places a larger burden on him as center. *
> As far as his improvement goes, that's likely due to not playing with rebounding force Tyson Chandler (9.7 rpg in 04-05, 19.8 rate). David Lee rated 16.3, but only averaged 16.8 mpg. The number went up for Curry, but it's not determinative.



How long does Erick Dampier really play or has played for the Mavericks to really put a dent in Dirk's averages? Before the Mavericks ever had a dominant rebounder, was Dirk's rebounding ability any better? I'm not to sure about Brand but what about him before Kaman arrived?


----------



## Krstic All-Star (Mar 9, 2005)

TwinkieFoot said:


> How long does Erick Dampier really play or has played for the Mavericks to really put a dent in Dirk's averages? Before the Mavericks ever had a dominant rebounder, was Dirk's rebounding ability any better? I'm not to sure about Brand but what about him before Kaman arrived?


As far as Brand goes, before Kaman came in 03-04, his rate was 16.3, and he grabbed more rebounds when Kaman was out. 

As far as Dampier goes, he averaged a respectable 23.5 mpg, and Diop averaged 18.6, for a rate of 14.9. The season before Dampier arrived, the Mavs had Danny Fortson grabbing a 21.8 rate in his 12 mpg, while the team had a more balanced rebounding ratio overall (Jamison at 11.9, Walker at 13.1, and Howard at 12.6, while Nowitzki was at 12.5)


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: As a center, Ewing was good*



alphadog said:


> at doing all the low post stuff....just pretty good. He never developed into the "hoya destroya" at the NBA level. What made his bones in the NBA was the development of his jumper. If he averages 5-7 less per game he is an absolute flop compared to his expectations.
> 
> *As far as the rebounders Twink mentioned, none are scarey board men. Comparing boards per minute when the minutes vary so widely is idiocy. The more minutes played, the more energy expended, meaning the player has to either pace themselves a bit or get exhausted later in the game. Either way the rebounds per minute will suffer compared to the guy that plays fewer minutes and can go all out all the time. It NEVER ends up translating well. It can give you an idea, but thats it. Real good rebouonders don't get 17 one game and 6 or 7 the next. Real good rebounders are consistent. See Rodman, B wallace, D Howard, etc. You can't keep those guys off the boards*.


I guess you must have learned something from our earlier debates. I clearly remember using that same defense against you but not sure if it has a place in this conversation. Curry may not have the same energy to expand as those guys on a consistent basis but when he is given those minutes, his numbers do not look drastically different. We all know that, the question now is whether he can do it on a consistent basis which everyone is asking. The sheer fact that he can find himself having those games 18 and 8 or better has a few people including myself that with his improved conditioning, he can and will now and in the future. I also do not feel his rebounding per minute stat is inaccurate because Curry is hardly a guy that has spurts of energy during the course of the game. The amount of energy whatever he puts him seems to be fairly evenly distrubted over the time that he gets.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Krstic All Star said:


> As far as Brand goes, before Kaman came in 03-04, his rate was 16.3, and he grabbed more rebounds when Kaman was out.
> 
> As far as Dampier goes, he averaged a respectable 23.5 mpg, and Diop averaged 18.6, for a rate of 14.9. The season before Dampier arrived, the Mavs had Danny Fortson grabbing a 21.8 rate in his 12 mpg, while the team had a more balanced rebounding ratio overall (Jamison at 11.9, Walker at 13.1, and Howard at 12.6, while Nowitzki was at 12.5)


I stand corrected. Good find.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

Hakeem said:


> He does need experience. His fouls per minute have decreased every season except the last one, and that could be attributed to the fact that he actually tried to play some defense last season. A lot of young players are foul prone, and it can take a while to improve there. Hakeem Olajuwon's fouls per minute gradually decreased for ten years before leveling out. Ewing, Kemp and Barkley all took seven years.
> 
> And Curry is actually two years younger than Yao. Players can break out at any time. Like Yao last season. Or Ewing in his fifth season. He was 23/9 and everyone was calling him a major disappointment. The next year he exploded for 29/11 and 4 bpg. It can be caused by little things. Confidence, or an improvement in one aspect of the game, or the right coach, or something just clicking mentally...


Good points. But 5 years, even with sporadic PT, is more than anyone else took to break out.


----------



## ERAFF (Jun 27, 2005)

Forget comparing stats---Watch these guys play!!!!

As for anything in comparing Curry to Brand---Dont forget that Brand is a Major Player at BOTH Ends. 2.5 Blocks....2.6 assists....25 pts....a solid 40 minutes of work!!!!...He does a helluva job!---Rebounds per minute my foot!!!!

Eddie has a LOOOOOONG way to go to sniff his sneakers---Lets hope that Eddie wants to be a Player HALF AS BAD as you guys who defend what he' s done(WHAT HE"S DONE!!!) so far!!!


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

alphadog said:


> As far as the rebounders Twink mentioned, none are scarey board men. Comparing boards per minute when the minutes vary so widely is idiocy. The more minutes played, the more energy expended, meaning the player has to either pace themselves a bit or get exhausted later in the game. Either way the rebounds per minute will suffer compared to the guy that plays fewer minutes and can go all out all the time. It NEVER ends up translating well. It can give you an idea, but thats it. Real good rebouonders don't get 17 one game and 6 or 7 the next. Real good rebounders are consistent. See Rodman, B wallace, D Howard, etc. You can't keep those guys off the boards.


Rebounds per minute will suffer with more minutes played. But not so much that looking at rebounds per minute is useless. There was a thread about this recently in NBA General. Erick Dampier grabs 8 rpg in 24 mpg. Do you really think he’d be too exhausted to grab a few more if he played an extra 12 mpg? It's foolish to simply ignore minutes played.
And Dennis Rodman was playing Curry-type minutes when the Pistons won titles. His rebounding was very valuable to that team.

Anyway, this goes with the point that Curry needs to improve his stamina so that he can rebound at the same rate while playing more minutes.


----------



## Hakeem (Aug 12, 2004)

Krstic All Star said:


> A rate of 14 is ok if there's a dominant rebounder on the team. For Brand, he has Chris Kaman right there grabbing a high percentage (17.1) while Nowitzki has Erick Dampier (19.9) grabbing the lion's share. Unlike those teams, Curry's 6.0 rpg lead the Knicks - which places a larger burden on him as center.


It's more important to look at how good the team as a whole is at rebounding, rather than looking for the presence of a single dominant rebounder. All teammates contribute to taking rebounds away. Not just one guy.

The Knicks were an above-average rebounding team last season. Frye, Richardson, Lee, Rose, Davis, Robinson... all of these guys are pretty decent rebounders for their positions and took a good amount of rebounds away from Curry. 
The Clippers were about as good a rebounding side as the Knicks. While the Knicks have several above-average rebounders, the Clippers have one dominant rebounder mixed in with a few ordinary rebounders. So Brand would have suffered similar effects to Curry in terms of losing rebounds to teammates.

Something I just checked up: statistically, Curry was probably the best in the league at boxing out opponents to help teammates get rebounds. The opposing center when Curry was on the floor averaged only 10.6 rebounds per 48 minutes. That puts Curry equal with Yao Ming, and only Dwight Howard held his opponents to lower than that (10.4 for him). But since Yao and Howard are both significantly better rebounders than Curry themselves, we can infer that Curry was better than them at helping teammates get rebounds. This probably contributed to the Knicks being a surprisingly good rebounding side last season.



> As far as his improvement goes, that's likely due to not playing with rebounding force Tyson Chandler (9.7 rpg in 04-05, 19.8 rate). David Lee rated 16.3, but only averaged 16.8 mpg. The number went up for Curry, but it's not determinative.


Good point. But his rebound rate increased by more than a third. A tremendous improvement. And in 2003-04, when Chandler played only 35 games with 22 mpg, Curry's rebound rate was still only 11.4. So while I agree that part of the reason for Curry's improvement is that he is no longer playing with Chandler, I think it's a relatively small factor.
It will be interesting to see how Curry does this season, so we can see if last season was a fluke.


----------



## Cager (Jun 13, 2002)

Curry is a sub par rebounder and you don't need statistics to tell you that. Just watch him play. Last night was not atypical. You can wish all you want and try to make stats prove something but unless you aggressively go after the ball, you are not a good rebounder. You have to have some fire and Eddy has that only on occasion. Just accept who he is and don't lose sleep over what he could be. He has yet to show he really understands how you get better. He will show flashes and sometimes those flashes can last 10-15 games but he has always returned to what he is.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Cager said:


> Curry is a sub par rebounder and you don't need statistics to tell you that. Just watch him play. Last night was not atypical. You can wish all you want and try to make stats prove something but unless you aggressively go after the ball, you are not a good rebounder. You have to have some fire and Eddy has that only on occasion. Just accept who he is and don't lose sleep over what he could be. He has yet to show he really understands how you get better. He will show flashes and sometimes those flashes can last 10-15 games but he has always returned to what he is.


over the course of last season he actually outrebounded his center counterparts.(11.4 to 10.6 per 48) minutes.

that he does it over the course of the season says that is doing it consistently.

and it also shows despite what you post he can improve as with the bulls opposing centers when matched up with outrebounded him 11.7 to 9.0.

the bulls with curry outrebounded opponents by 1.1 a game and without him last season outrebounded opponents by the same margin 1.1.

the knicks went from -2.0 boards to 2.8 in the black in rebounding, a 4.8 swing, you cant do this without a serious upgrade at the center position

maybe you need to re-evaluates your opinion of curry's rebounding, it seems off.


----------



## frank9007 (Jul 4, 2006)

23 year old young center with TONS OF POTENTIAL maxed out? LMAO

:rotf:


----------

