# Crawford endorses D'Antoni , pines a bit for Zeke



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

http://cgi.cnnsi.com/2008/basketball/nba/06/11/bc.bkn.knicks.crawford.ap/index.html


> KIRKLAND, Wash. (AP) -- Knicks guard Jamal Crawford has changed his mind when it comes to his new coach.
> 
> A phone call from Mike D'Antoni helped.
> 
> ...


a somewhat fair and even handed article.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Come on Crawford, Isiah was horrible as a coach didn't even run practice on a consistent basis. Good damn riddance.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

LOL, Kitty telling it like it is.


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

I still want Zeke as our drafter! Walsh would be wise to listen to Zeke.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Come on....*

Thomas is overrated as a drafter. He's OK But Lee is the only pick that's vying for time as a starter on one of the worst teams in the league over the past three years. He's missed on as many as he has hit...same as everyone else. Walsh is an astute drafter as well. You afraid he won't draft a streetballer?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Come on....*



alphaorange said:


> Thomas is overrated as a drafter. He's OK But Lee is the only pick that's vying for time as a starter on one of the worst teams in the league over the past three years. He's missed on as many as he has hit...same as everyone else. Walsh is an astute drafter as well. You afraid he won't draft a streetballer?


he really isn't overrated at all.

he has had an 8th , 21st 30th a 22nd a 29th and a #20 selection.

match him up against teams picking in the same range and you'll see he is actually good at drafting players, the only one he really flopped on was frye and even he is saveable in the right enviroment . every1 else is pretty good value Lee especially , there probably hasn't been a #30 in the last 5 years anywhere near him in ability ...guys like david harrison,joel freeman and ,kopenen and lampe, you cant even say there is a player there who could even make the knicks roster for certain.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

*Re: Come on....*



Da Grinch said:


> he really isn't overrated at all.
> 
> he has had an 8th , 21st 30th a 22nd a 29th and a #20 selection.
> 
> match him up against teams picking in the same range and you'll see he is actually good at drafting players, the only one he really flopped on was frye and even he is saveable in the right enviroment . every1 else is pretty good value Lee especially , there probably hasn't been a #30 in the last 5 years anywhere near him in ability ...guys like david harrison,joel freeman and ,kopenen and lampe, you cant even say there is a player there who could even make the knicks roster for certain.


Not to mention Tracy McGrady who is quasi-superstar, Marcus Camby whose the best defensive player in the NBA and an all-star caliber player, and Damon Stoudamire who won rookie of the year and had several very successful seasons before becoming a Blazer with a more limited role. None of those players were suppose to be taken as high as they were and all of them managed to be pretty good NBA players at some point.


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

Zeke drafting > Walsh drafting PERIOD!


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Come off it...*

Camby........no-brainer
Stoudamire...pretty good for a few years, unspectacular
Tmac.........no surprise, he was very highly regarded. LOL...check out who he beat out in the draft at #9(besides he was Glen Grunwalds selection despite IT being GM)

Grinch, you've been hammering at Lee's lack of ability for the last year+, calling him an easily replaceable, high energy bench guy. A guy like that is no steal at 30, the league is full of them. Could it be you were wrong? Either he was a steal and you have been wrong about him, or you were right about him which makes him an ordinary pick at 30. Lets look at the other picks:

Frye.......Most of you don't like him, although I do. Bynum was a better pick, though. He missed.
Nate.......jury is out, looks like a useful pick
Balkman....nothing special
Chandler...ditto, so far
Collins....looks like a bust so far, despite occasional flashes. Too many apparent flaws
Lee........ding, ding, ding a winner
F Jones....at 14? Walsh was GM but it was ITs pick.
Ariza......good second round pick


I believe that is his entire draft history. What part stands out? The guy is pretty ordinary.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Come off it...*



alphaorange said:


> Camby........no-brainer
> Stoudamire...pretty good for a few years, unspectacular
> Tmac.........no surprise, he was very highly regarded. LOL...check out who he beat out in the draft at #9(besides he was Glen Grunwalds selection despite IT being GM)
> 
> ...


your lack of knowledge displayed in your post is extraordinary.

1 i dont hammer Lee , i do have a problem with the way he uses his talents .

he has a decent jumpshot that he is reluctant to use , he is a quick leaper but he doesn't try to block shots and he is gritty but doesn't take many charges either(jamal crawford drew more offensive fouls last season than lee)i think he should play smarter.

2. i wasn't wrong, usually the 30th pick is absolutely useless, he can play , i even pointed that out in my previous post, but somehow you missed it.

3. if you anything about the draft you would know that nearly half of picks from 20-30 wash out of the league when their rookie contract is up , some beforehand , some are not even signed because they aren't deemed good enough when all is said and done. thomas' record is pretty good, most people see thomas' drafting record and realize that , you didn't. he got players that could make it in the league...pick another ordinary drafter and see if thats the case with thomas' regularity especially from where he was drafting at.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*I call BS*

1) Maybe you don't now, but you did. He was always the first guy out in your trade scenarios.

2)I gave Lee as a good pick. There were, however, others picked behind him that have been very productive players as well.

3)Again...BS. Go back to 2001 and check players drafted between 20-31. MORE than half are still playing and some are starters or big contributors on good teams. He has been more pedestrian than prodigy. Despite your insults, YOU are the one that is wrong. The draft record is there for all to see. May I suggest you take a stroll through NBADRAFT.NET?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: I call BS*



alphaorange said:


> 1) Maybe you don't now, but you did. He was always the first guy out in your trade scenarios.
> 
> 2)I gave Lee as a good pick. There were, however, others picked behind him that have been very productive players as well.
> 
> 3)Again...BS. Go back to 2001 and check players drafted between 20-31. MORE than half are still playing and some are starters or big contributors on good teams. He has been more pedestrian than prodigy. Despite your insults, YOU are the one that is wrong. The draft record is there for all to see. May I suggest you take a stroll through NBADRAFT.NET?



i see be B.S. too but its coming from you , who cares whom i say to trade , I use common sense in my draft scenreios meaning sell high buy low , Lee is a player who fits that, for instance i remember putting frye and lee in draft scenerios for tyson chandler because i knew as good as frye and lee seemed tyson would be a better player and a better fit for the knicks . the knicks have alot of energy forwards (balkman jeffries rose0 lee is easily the best of the lot but as he plays now he isn't a starter level player and yes that is replaceable 

2. why did you pickk 2001 Thomas to my knowledge was a head coach in indy at that time he wasn't making draft choices, i thinkk you went well out of your way and out of the course of common sense to pick a year you knew had alot of good choices in that range even though it meant nothing as far as thomas' drafting record because he was a head coach then why not pick thomas' toronto years to make your point?
http://www.nbadraft.net/1997.htm
http://www.nbadraft.net/1996.htm
http://www.nbadraft.net/1995.htm


or did i just make mine?


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Actually...*

I listed his Toronto picks. As I said, they needed a big so Camby was the safe pick . Stoudamire was a safe pick in a very weak draft. And if you do some research on some of the Toronto news sites, you'd find that Grunwald actually called for McGrady. But regardless, McGrady wasn't a reach...he was considered to be that good. You memory of your Lee postings must have faded. You claimed he wasn't good enough to be a starting PF in the league...over and over. So is he..or isn't he? Besides, I already said I'll give Thomas props on Lee. 2001 as a starting point was arbitrary. I listed his whole history..minus the great Dijon Thompson pick. Again...where is the genius? Lots of GMS have drafted as well..or better. The Hawks drafted both Joshs at something like 7(Childress) and 17(Smith). I bet you would trade Frye and Nate for them, wouldn't you? There is NOT ONE SINGLE DEFINING PICK HE HAS MADE that establishes him as a superior drafter...not one.

Fianlly, if you look closely at Torontos picks, you'll see that he passed on multiple players better than Camby....And as I said, Damon was a safe pick in one of the weakest drafts ever...And even if I agree it was IT's idea to pick Tmac, it wasn't a particularly surprising pick since it was another weak draft. Those are not opinions...they are facts.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Actually...*



alphaorange said:


> I listed his Toronto picks. As I said, they needed a big so Camby was the safe pick . Stoudamire was a safe pick in a very weak draft. And if you do some research on some of the Toronto news sites, you'd find that Grunwald actually called for McGrady. But regardless, McGrady wasn't a reach...he was considered to be that good. You memory of your Lee postings must have faded. You claimed he wasn't good enough to be a starting PF in the league...over and over. So is he..or isn't he? Besides, I already said I'll give Thomas props on Lee. 2001 as a starting point was arbitrary. I listed his whole history..minus the great Dijon Thompson pick. Again...where is the genius? Lots of GMS have drafted as well..or better. The Hawks drafted both Joshs at something like 7(Childress) and 17(Smith). I bet you would trade Frye and Nate for them, wouldn't you? There is NOT ONE SINGLE DEFINING PICK HE HAS MADE that establishes him as a superior drafter...not one.
> 
> Fianlly, if you look closely at Torontos picks, you'll see that he passed on multiple players better than Camby....And as I said, Damon was a safe pick in one of the weakest drafts ever...And even if I agree it was IT's idea to pick Tmac, it wasn't a particularly surprising pick since it was another weak draft. Those are not opinions...they are facts.


umm actually unless there is some new rule any pick is basically the decision of the GM that means fred jones belongs to walsh and t-mac belongs to thomas , and thats it , he makes the decision others make recommendations, 

and its your memory thats faded , i say Lee isn't good enough to be a starter the way he plays, his problems are mostly mental , i dont have a problem with his talent but how he uses it...as i often say to you Reading is fundamental, because you fail to understand what is posted...so maybe your memory isn't faded maybe you never understood in the 1st place.

you dont need defining picks to be a good drafter, some guys pretty much take longshots and are very hit and miss , and miss alot but they have defining picks , you need to be able to get players even when most GM's wouldn't at that spot , thats makes you a good drafter


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*blah. blah, blah*

You say nothing. Your posts on Lee are a matter of history and Thomas has really done anything special as a drafter that other guys haven't done. He isn't Dallas at drafting, but he isn't the cream of the crop either. He is great at identifying guys that can be role players that no one else has "discovered".


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: blah. blah, blah*



alphaorange said:


> You say nothing. Your posts on Lee are a matter of history and Thomas has really done anything special as a drafter that other guys haven't done. He isn't Dallas at drafting, but he isn't the cream of the crop either. He is great at identifying guys that can be role players that no one else has "discovered".


you have actually proven nothing , even his most ardent critics say he's a good drafter .

show me some "ordinary" drafters(plural) who consistently get players in the 20's, with no or very few busts .

if you are right this should be very easy.


----------



## Gotham2krazy (Nov 22, 2005)

*Re: blah. blah, blah*



alphaorange said:


> You say nothing. Your posts on Lee are a matter of history and Thomas has really done anything special as a drafter that other guys haven't done. He isn't Dallas at drafting, but he isn't the cream of the crop either. He is great at identifying guys that can be role players that no one else has "discovered".


What do you mean when you say, "he isn't Dallas at drafting" ? While Isiah was in Toronto, he's drafted some great players that play in today's game. He has the eye to see the intangibles and the potential in young talent no one else does. Wilson Chandler and Renaldo Balkman both have shown much potential, while David Lee is inching ever closer to be a damned good player. In due time, I'm sure these players will show their worth, just like Stoudemire, Camby, and McGrady.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*At least half the players selected since 2000*

are still playing. Statistically that would seem to say that most gms are doing pretty good. Collins may not make it and Balkman and Chandler were picked just out of the teens. Between 20-25 the % goes up. He has had 5 picks 29 and later. Dijon is gone.....Collins may be...Lee was a great pick (and in fact was better than IT ever thought he'd be, said so himself)...and Ariza who still fights for time. Like I said, he's good at picking role players that nobody else noticed. I have more respect for Walsh picking the skinny runt out of UCLA at something like 17 and taking a heavily criticized chance on Smits at #2. Picking sleepers who end up role players and/or get cut is less valuable than making your good picks count. He hasn't shown he can do that consistently. Enough....you think he is special as a draft and I don't.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: At least half the players selected since 2000*



alphaorange said:


> are still playing. Statistically that would seem to say that most gms are doing pretty good. Collins may not make it and Balkman and Chandler were picked just out of the teens. Between 20-25 the % goes up. He has had 5 picks 29 and later. Dijon is gone.....Collins may be...Lee was a great pick (and in fact was better than IT ever thought he'd be, said so himself)...and Ariza who still fights for time. Like I said, he's good at picking role players that nobody else noticed. I have more respect for Walsh picking the skinny runt out of UCLA at something like 17 and taking a heavily criticized chance on Smits at #2. Picking sleepers who end up role players and/or get cut is less valuable than making your good picks count. He hasn't shown he can do that consistently. Enough....you think he is special as a draft and I don't.


if you can re-read my posts and find where I used "special" I'll drop this , but until then you are just a guy reaching to make himself think he is right

lets see some drafts this decade 

minnisota lost a pick because of joe smith

Kareem Rush 6-6 214 SG Missouri Jr. *pick traded to LA Lakers
Qyntel Woods 6-9 230 SG/SF Northeast CC So.
Casey Jacobsen 6-6 215 SG Stanford Jr.
Tayshaun Prince 6-9 215 SF Kentucky Sr.
Nenad Krstic 6-11 PF/C Partizan (Yugoslavia) 1983
Frank Williams 6-3 205 PG Illinois Jr. *pick 
John Salmons 6-7 200 PG/SF Miami Sr. *pick 
Chris Jefferies 6-8 220 SF Fresno St. Jr. 
Dan Dickau 6-0 170 PG Gonzaga Sr. *pick 
Steve Logan 6-0 196 PG Cincinnati Sr.

how many of these guys are still members in the league? a year later than 2001 and most of these guys are already gone.

but like i already posted find me some avg. drafting GM's and check their records against Thomas and this will all be over, you are trying to judge Thomas in a vacuum and really there are 29 other GM's drafting , the avg. GM doesn't fare as well as thomas when things are even and thats just a fact

and FYI reggie miller was drafted 11th in the 1987 draft.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*as far as Miller..*

big deal..11th instead of 17th. It doesn't change my point which was that when given a good draft slot, Walsh has made it work out most times.....George McCloud be damned. Nice convenient list you made....

how bout 2003?
21) Diaw
23) Travis Outlaw
24) Brian Cook
25) Carlos Delfino
27) Kendrick Perkins
28) Barbosa
29) Josh Howard + another 5 or 6 guys after that

2004?
20) Jameer Nelson
24) Delonte West
25) Tony Allen
26) Kevin Martin
27) Sasha Vujacic
29) Beno Udrih
30) David Harrison

2001?
20) Brendan Haywood
25) Gerald Wallace
26) Samuel Dalembert
27) Jamaal Tinsley
28) Tony Parker
31) Gilbert Arenas 

I guess the Gms must be doing OK......These guys are still playing and there are more getting time in Europe that WILL be here. Average is better than 50%. 

Gotham....re: Camby: hard to screw up the #2 pick today unless you are Detroit. Still the pick is not without criticism. Stoudamire wasn't a "brilliant" pick, it was a good pick in a weak draft....not many options outside of him at that slot. Tmac would have gotten picked sooner rather than later if IT passed. He was not an unknown. Another good pick but hardly surprising. My Dallas comment was a sad commentary on their very poor draft record. A few hits.....a lot of misses.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: as far as Miller..*



alphaorange said:


> big deal..11th instead of 17th. It doesn't change my point which was that when given a good draft slot, Walsh has made it work out most times.....George McCloud be damned. Nice convenient list you made....
> 
> how bout 2003?
> 21) Diaw
> ...


do you know how jaded you sound .

t-mac at 9 good pick but hardly surprising

but you want to applaud the miller pick a mere 2 spots later.

but i'll just continue to wait for you to name all these avg. drafting GM's with similar drafting records...i know it wont come because it doesn't exist, as usual you made a comment you cant back up ...


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*First....*

Miller was considered a reach while McGrady was considered a somewhat unsurprising pick based on his size and skill at a young age. As far as the "average" gm bit, I'm not going to waste my time seeing who was GM when the picks were made. Statistically, it is insignificant to my position. If so many are picking well, it means one of two things: Either a few guys are unbelievably good at picking, or the average gm gets about half right. Thats the only possibilities. Isiah has not been anything special. There is simply no history to back that up. Raw talent evaluator? Not many better.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: First....*



alphaorange said:


> Miller was considered a reach while McGrady was considered a somewhat unsurprising pick based on his size and skill at a young age. As far as the "average" gm bit, I'm not going to waste my time seeing who was GM when the picks were made. Statistically, it is insignificant to my position. If so many are picking well, it means one of two things: Either a few guys are unbelievably good at picking, or the average gm gets about half right. Thats the only possibilities. Isiah has not been anything special. There is simply no history to back that up. Raw talent evaluator? Not many better.


actually i think we both know you cant name avg. drafting GM's because you were wrong to begin with , all you have to do is name some and you'll see their records ...something tells me you already know and thats why you are ducking the issue.

now to t-mac he was far from a consensus type pick it was only 2 years from garnett drafting high schoolers was still controversal especially that high , he was taken before kobe and oneal of the previous year ...that in itself shows something and how high schoolers were percieved , a few years later you have darius miles going 3rd and the next year you have 3 HSers going in the top 4.

perceptions change , but it took years.


----------

