# better without crawford?



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

3-0

we just beat the TIMBERWOLVES! and we blew out a good magic team. and the bobcats that we lost to with crawford in. 

what do you say?


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Maybe. All along I thought TT was the key to this teams success. His turnaround has a lot to do with our recent success. Whether Jamal's injury has helped his TT I don't know. But if TT can keep it up when JC gets back we can make some noise.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> we just beat the TIMBERWOLVES! and we blew out a good magic team. and the bobcats that we lost to with crawford in


Penny,hate to tell you, but if anything,the big difference is Marbury and TT,and throw in Ariza and Sweetney..

H20 cant play a lick of defense,and tonight wasnt one of his better nights shooting so he is NOT the difference.

Marbury has publicly stated that he was going to be aggressive an take control and he has done exactly that.And when JC comes back,he will have to adjust as marbury is not going to defer to himlike he did before.And it will help JC's game as he will be more of a spot up shooter...

Whats really funny is,Marbury called Zeke and told him he was going to be more agressive and take it to the hole.When he asked Zekes opinion,Zeke asked him if he wanted a honest answer.Marbury said yes,and Zeke told him flat out,His offense wasnt the problem..He told Marbury he is one of the WORST defensive guards in the NBA....:no:


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Yeah, the truth is, defensive intensity is the real key to how far we go. When we get our O and D both working together we're a decent team. When effort is lacking on either end we get exposed.

So far I think we've been slightly under achieving, but I expected our chemistry to still be unformed early on, and TT's slump was a killer. But some of that is falling into place, and unlike most in NY fandome I'll actually credit Lenny for that. There are some fragile egos on this team and a more acerbic coach could have made things worse. But now he needs to take us to the next level. he needs to get us to OVER achieve. 

Hey why not, the Suns and Seattle can do it, why not us?


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

oak,the Suns dont suprise me...

Nash
Q
JJ
matrix
Amare

That is a scary offensive squad,and nash makes everyone so much better...

The Sonics???How the #$%^ are they doing it???

Jerome James??
Evans??
Ridinour??
Rashard
Ray

And they have beaten good squads...


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

truth the Suns have talent and I agree about Nash, but c'mon, they're on track to challenge the Bulls' 72 win season. They're not THAT good. And their schedule's gonna get tough soon, so they will be tested.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

*holla!*

suns wont challenge that season. they will take at least 3 more losses vs the spurs, so thats 7. that leaves a margin of 3 losses, which they wont get done.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

no doubt thet are off to an unbelievable start,but at least you can looka at the roster and go hmmmmmmmmmmmm..

i look at Seattle and i think What the @#$$$


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> oak,the Suns dont suprise me...
> 
> Nash
> Q
> ...


Offense, yes. But what about defense? The Suns are one of the better defensive teams in the league. That's not surprising? You don't blow people out every night on offense alone. The Knicks try to do that every night and it doesn't work.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Hey why not, the Suns and Seattle can do it, why not us?


The Suns have Sonics have far more talent than the Knicks.

Marbury = Nash = Allen.

Crawford + Tim Thomas <<<<<<<<<<<<<< Rashard Lewis
Crawford + Tim Thomas <<<<<<<<<<<<<< Shawn Marion
Crawford + Tim Thomas <<<<<<<<<<<<<< Amare Stoudemire
Crawford + Tim Thomas <<<<<<<<<<<<<< Q + JJ

The Sonics are similar to the Knicks in that they have some high volume rebounders (Evans/Fortson) ala Nazr/Sweetney, but they're just more talented and deeper.

Luke Ridnour and Antonio Daniels are more of a help to Ray Allen than Crawford is to Marbury.

There are two Knick teams this year. One is the Stephon "create for everybody else" team. The other is the Jamal "Chicago flashback" team. Let's look at the scoring leaders on the team.

# of times led the team in scoring
Marbury: 11 (7-4 record, 1 loss was tied with freeway)
Crawford: 12 (6-6 record)
Freeway: 4 (1-3 record, adding to the Freeway legacy)
Kurt Thomas: 1 (1-0 record)
Tim Thomas: 1 (1-0 record)
Sweetney: 1 (0-1 record)

Why is it that Kurt Thomas has only led the team in scoring once? He led a lot more last year. Tim Thomas has been in a quote unquote shooting slump, but Kurt certainly has not. Oh wait, I see why. His minutes (+5) and shots are up (+1), but he's only averaging 1 FT per game. He's taken 30 in 29 games. That's ****ing despicable. Houston has taken 18 in 11 games. Why don't they put Kurt inside anymore? He's a good FT shooter. Pound it in, draw fouls, put pressure on the defense, and he hits his FTs. Why does he only get pick and roll jumpers? Because that's all Marbury and Crawford will allow him.

Last year Crawford averaged 16.4 shots per game. This year Crawford is playing with Stephon Marbury and is averaging 17.1 shots per game. How the hell is that possible? You would think playing with Marbury would LOWER his shot total if anything. If you want to wonder why nobody else leads the team in scoring, look no further. You know why Tim Thomas doesn't call more shtos for Thomas? Because getting the ball out of Crawford's hands is nearly impossible.

The Sonics?
Ray Allen: 11 (8-3 record)
Rashard Lewis: 14 (11-3 record, one win tied with Radmanovic)
Danny Fortson: 1 (1-0 record)
Vladimir Radmanovic 1 (1-0 record)

Like was said before, Rashard Lewis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Crawford/Thomas.

The Suns?

Amare Stoudemire: 19 (16-3)
Shawn Marion: 5 (4-1)
Quentin Richardson: 4 (4-0)
Joe Johnson: 3 (3-0)
Steve Nash: 2 (1-1)

All of Q and JJ's leading nights have been in December


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

A couple of issues. First, KT is not a guy that is ever going to draw a lot of fouls. His offensive game is not conducive to it. Secondly, the difference between the winning % when Marbury vs. JC leads in scoring is statistically insignificant because of the small number of samples. ONE game going the other way and they are nearly identical. Nazr is hard to argue with, though, when he leads, we are in trouble.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

> You know why Tim Thomas doesn't call more shots for Thomas? Because getting the ball out of Crawford's hands is nearly impossible.


rashidi,very very true..But I place all the blame on Lenny.When TT screws up he is on the bench immediately.When JC hoists consecutive off balance 28 footers,nothing,nada happens.JC has too much talent,and he falls in love with himself..Its up to Lenny to insure that that his honeymoon with himself ends and he shares the "love"..


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> Secondly, the difference between the winning % when Marbury vs. JC leads in scoring is statistically insignificant because of the small number of samples. ONE game going the other way and they are nearly identical.


Why is it that Marbury and Crawford combine for 12 assists, but another player has led the team in scoring only 6 times?

Non-Amare/Nash players have led the team in scoring 12 times.

The Knicks are only averaging 2 fewer assists than the Suns, who take more shots than the knicks.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I said:



> Yeah, the truth is, defensive intensity is the real key to how far we go. When we get our O and D both working together we're a decent team. When effort is lacking on either end we get exposed.
> 
> So far I think we've been slightly under achieving, but I expected our chemistry to still be unformed early on, and TT's slump was a killer. But some of that is falling into place, and unlike most in NY fandome I'll actually credit Lenny for that. There are some fragile egos on this team and a more acerbic coach could have made things worse. But now he needs to take us to the next level. he needs to get us to OVER achieve.
> 
> Hey why not, the Suns and Seattle can do it, why not us?


To which you replied:



> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> The Suns have Sonics have far more talent than the Knicks.
> ...


Do you not see that I was not comparing the Knicks to the Suns or Sonics, my analysis was about the Knicks. I never suggested that the Knicks could perform at the level of those teams, only that I think we could stand to overachieve a spell, as I feel the Sonics and Suns have. I didn't need to be told why those teams are better.

So listen pal, if you want to _really_ speak to my post, rather than this pretend crap you do just to bash the Knicks, answer me this: do you believe the Suns and Sonics have been overachieving or do you think they'll maintain this pace throughout the season?

Put your opinion into something solid we can come back and check on down the road, would ya?


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

Both teams will win 50+ games. The Suns will probably win 60.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> Both teams will win 50+ games. The Suns will probably win 60.



So you do agree with me. Cause at their current pace the Suns would win 71 games and the Sonics 64.


----------



## BigC (Sep 28, 2004)

We are not better without Jamal. People have to factor in that TT has gotten over his slump. TT has been playing good on both ends of the court. Teams are actually doubling TT in the post. Houston has not been playing well on the defensive end or offensive end. I feel Jamal would be a great help especially when Marbury is setting down. I felt the Boston game that we lost we should have won if Jamal did not get hurt. We will see what happens today. One thing is for sure Jamal normally goes off on VC. We will see how Allan plays against VC.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> We are not better without Jamal. People have to factor in that TT has gotten over his slump.


I'm sure this would have nothing to do with Jamal not taking all his shots anymore.




> Houston has not been playing well on the defensive end or offensive end.


Are you basing this on one game or something? Houston has been so much more effective on offense than Crawford, it isn't even funny. Crawford is taking more shots than Paul Pierce for crying out loud, with worse results, and Pierce is twice the defender that Crawford is as well.



> I feel Jamal would be a great help especially when Marbury is setting down.


Actually, Crawford at the point has been a disaster so far. That's why Moochie Norris is getting minutes off the bench for us.



> I felt the Boston game that we lost we should have won if Jamal did not get hurt.


Pierce abused Houston, and he would have had a field day with Crawford. He's got like 50 pounds on him.



> One thing is for sure Jamal normally goes off on VC. We will see how Allan plays against VC


11/26/00
Crawford: 3 points, 1-3 FG
Carter: 0 points, 0-1 FG

4/8/01
Crawford: 12 points, 5-11 FG
Carter: 33 points, 12-19 FG

11/6/02
Crawford: 0 points, 0-4 FG
Carter: 20 points, 9-20 FG

2/26/03
Crawford: 7 points, 2-6 FG
Carter: 19 points, 7-15 FG

1/25/04
Crawford: 27 points, 9-14 FG
Carter: 14 points, 6-23 FG

2/17/04
Crawford: 25 points, 8-25 FG
Carter: 21 points, 7-20 FG

3/19/04
Crawford: 5 points, 2-9 FG
Carter: 30 points, 11-24 FG

4/11/04
Crawford: 50 points, 18-34 FG
Carter: 30 points, 11-27 FG

That's their matchup history. Carter was never guarding Crawfod though, he was always at SF. Alvin Williams and Rose/Peterson were at the guards.

Houston vs Carter

12/25/01
Houston: 34 points, 13-22 FG
Carter: 15 points, 6-20 FG

1/23/02
Houston: 9 points, 3-5 FG
Carter: 18 points, 6-23 FG

3/23/03
Houston: 20 points, 7-14 FG
Carter: 21 points, 10-21 FG

3/30/03
Houston: 24 points, 9-23 FG
Carter: 28 points, 12-20 FG

12/19/03
Houston: 33 points, 13-29 FG
Carter: 18 points, 5-13 FG

3/5/04
Houston: 16 points, 7-16 FG
Carter: 32 points, 12-25 FG

3/26/04
Houston: 2 points, 1-2 FG
Carter: 40 points, 13-28 FG

11/27/04
Houston: 30 points, 10-21 FG
Carter: 16 points, 7-16 FG

Houston has matched up every bit as well as Crawford.

Houston in the 00-01 playoff series vs Toronto
20.8 ppg
.594 FG% (32-53 2pt)
.545 3pt% (6-11)
1.000 FT% (22-22)
1.8 rpg
1.4 apg
1.0 spg
0.2 bpg
2.0 tpg

I think it's fair to say Houston wasn't the reason they lost that series.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

Rashidi, where do you see the knicks ending up, and their final record? you never seem to say anything about the knicks, just other teams.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Rashidi...*

you simply can't use numbers to evaluate everything. The Knick style of offense is very different from the Sun's. NY is guard oriented with most of the "o" coming from those spots. Marion is another of the Sun's primary options. Of those 12 times, how many did he have? I have a suspicion you are playing fast and loose with the stats again. It really ruins your credibility. The fact is this: if the Knicks play with great defensive effort, they are as tough as anyone and better than most, provided they are healthy.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rashidi</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm sure this would have nothing to do with Jamal not taking all his shots anymore.
> ...



You're a pill, Rashidi, but hats off to anyone who works as hard as you do.


----------



## BigC (Sep 28, 2004)

Rashidi

You want to point out Jamal history against VC since 2000 and 2001? We all know that Jamal did not get playing time during those years, and did not start showing his real talent since last year. Why don't you included the minutes Jamal played in those games? You also forgot that Jamal drop 30 against VC this year. I like Houston too, however I would rather have both of them instead of saying we are better without Jamal. You said Jamal is a disaster. How is Jamal a disaster? A disaster is the Magics record last year. A disaster is the Bulls organization post Jordan! Both of those players can be helpful to our team.

You said Houston had 30 on 11-27-04 when that was Jamal that went 11-21 in that game! Houston's first game was 12-10-04!


----------



## MizzStoudemire (Jan 1, 2005)

Wow. first post.

Knicks are def. better without Crawford. Knicks are looking for the better shot, using up all 24 secs. If you pay attention closely, the KNicks prolly use on an average of 19 secs every posession while Crawford isn't around. I hate when Crawford has the rock and he dribble's and out of nowhere pulls up a random off balance shot. I don't mind Marbury's occasional 3s but i mind Crawford's random jumpers. 

Koopa Troopa im here, where u at man.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

^i made the topic!


----------



## MizzStoudemire (Jan 1, 2005)

> Originally posted by <b>PennyHardaway</b>!
> ^i made the topic!


I know man. Don't worry im not trying to take your credit. I was talking about myself. My first post because i'm a newb.


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MizzStoudemire</b>!
> Koopa Troopa im here, where u at man.





> ^i made the topic!


get itttttttt


----------



## MizzStoudemire (Jan 1, 2005)

HAHA now i do...  sorry for the slowness there.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

> if the Knicks play with great defensive effort, they are as tough as anyone and better than most, provided they are healthy.


And if the Hawks played with great defensive effort, they'd be pretty good too. But as I pointed out in another topic, the Knicks are the worst defensive team of any of the 16 playoff teams. Provided they are healthy? 



> You also forgot that Jamal drop 30 against VC this year.


Crawford: 30 points, 11-22 FG
Carter: 19 points, 6-14 FG

The entire Knick team couldn't miss against the Raptors, not just Crawford. Crawford shot .500 and the team shot .511.

[]I like Houston too, however I would rather have both of them instead of saying we are better without Jamal. 



> You said Jamal is a disaster. How is Jamal a disaster?


I said Jamal at PG when Marbury goes to the bench is a disaster. Learn how to read.




> You said Houston had 30 on 11-27-04 when that was Jamal that went 11-21 in that game! Houston's first game was 12-10-04!


LiEk OmG TyPo. I make maybe one per month. That means the game was 11/27/03. As if the specific date these games happened acutally makes a difference. You better look up all those box scores. Maybe that 12/19/03 game was played on 21/91/30.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

Poetry,did i just see a positive post regarding JC????????????

You better start liking him,cause H20 is shot....


----------

