# Q is Damaged Goods



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Yes we got Nate out of this deal, but boy did we get played when we acquired Q. His back is killing him, and his shooting percentage is the result of it. This isn't the first nor the last time this organization got played on a deal that resulted in either a player having to retire or just not living up to their expectations due to injury. When will the madness stop! [End of Rant]. OK I feel better now, well actually I don't. :nonono:


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Kitty, how did we get played?*

..We knew about his back. Infact, it was so bad we couldn't insure his contract. If you want to blame anyone, blame the NY medical staff. Bad judgement on IT's part. If nate pans out, we'll be OK.


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

Q is a waste. He should have a seat with his name on it right next to JJ,Ad and rose.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

*Re: Kitty, how did we get played?*



alphadog said:


> ..We knew about his back. Infact, it was so bad we couldn't insure his contract. If you want to blame anyone, blame the NY medical staff. Bad judgement on IT's part. If nate pans out, we'll be OK.


Who does the NY medical staff reports to? Zeke, which in turn reports to Mills/Dolan, so yes I'm blaming the Knicks organization for once again taking on a player who has a history of back problems. Everyone had their hand in this mess. If Nate pans out that's not the issue, we still have a big hole at the SF position which we thought was solved by acquiring Q. Guess not....


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

tough fricking break. healthy he's 15 ppg easy, but this year he just can't shoot.

the Knicks are the biggest mystery to me in the NBA.


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

Nothing ever works out for the knicks anymore. It the patrick ewing curse :boohoo:


----------



## chapi (Apr 4, 2003)

the knicks medical staff suxx.. they dis'nt help at all or even worsen the injuries to Houston, johnson, ewing, ward, penny, camby, mcdyess and now Q. damn


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Truknicksfan said:


> Nothing ever works out for the knicks anymore. It the patrick ewing curse :boohoo:


Tru, that statement is right on the money, we haven't been successful since we made that costly move.


----------



## Truknicksfan (Mar 25, 2005)

Ever bounce on the rim, every call be the refs, ever trade by the team, every seems to go against the knicks the past few years.
Right donw to Q not being able to stay healthy and hit a few open threes once in a blue moon.


----------



## BIGsHOTBOY12345 (Aug 24, 2005)

Cuz thats how stupid isiah thomas is at making decisions............he gave away probably our only perimeter shooter in kurt thomas, now who's are only perimeter shooter? Frye.


----------



## Brolic (Aug 6, 2005)

Q would have been better if he was on the team last year more running and a coach that would give him the green light he doesn't fit in now in IT defense he didn't have a coach when he traded Kurt Thomas


----------



## Sixerfanforlife (Jun 23, 2005)

Woah I'll simplify that message for Knick fans: Quentin Richardson suceeded in Phoenix, it DID NOT mean he would suceed in NY, and whom would think he WOULD suceed under LB who I described earlier HATES 3 point shooting. Just another stupid deal, from the poor man of Isiah Thomas.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Kitty*

When you say we got played, I assumed you meant "we" as in the Knicks. If you did, I'll stick to my original response. If you meant "we" as in fans, I'd have to agree. Which was it?

Bigshot...KT wouldn't be doing anything except taking time from the kids. We would still suck and they would be further behind at the end of this dismal season. Given we have so many bigs, i would be tempted to take Nate over KT anyway (disregarding Q). Only problem is the salary against the cap....but we had KT's anyway.


----------



## 85 lakers (Dec 22, 2005)

Q probably had more looks in five games last year than he's had in 30 games so far this year.
He can't create his own shot (something everyone knows), and he doesn't play good defense (also known). This is not a good combination for your starting 2. 

I don't think the deal was awful - at the time, I thought the Knicks got the better end - but let's give Q more than 30 games to prove himself.

On a run-and-gun team he's great; by when you have to play in the halfcourt set, he's nearly a liability.

The Knicks do not have a 2 guard on the roster.


----------



## dynamiks (Aug 15, 2005)

What Q need to do is relax for a year and take it easy. He needs to enter rehab to stregthen his back. By next year he will be real explosive. A great example TJ Ford. So lets follow that example and see if it works out. (The Clippers should follow this with pg Shaun Livingston who also has back problems)


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

Q is also dealing with break up with Brandy (so I hear) and oh his brother's death. Add that to the injuries, it's going to affect him.

Give the guy a break. 


I still question why you guys even made this deal with the backcourt you had. But I like the addition of Kurt Thomas though.

Nate Robinson wouldn't have been our pick if we made it but yeah at least you guys got him out of it I guess.


----------



## Rashidi (Oct 2, 2003)

The Knicks got played anyway. Nate was going to go in the second round. If they really wanted him, they could have gotten him at 30 rather than drafting ANOTHER marginal PF. Instead, they threw away the pick by drafting the other last thing they needed, another undersized SG. Nevermind that an actual PG was available in Jarrett Jack. Or that a better undersized SG was also available in Luther Head.


----------



## tempe85 (Jan 7, 2005)

dissonance19 said:


> Q is also dealing with break up with Brandy (so I hear) and oh his brother's death. Add that to the injuries, it's going to affect him.
> 
> Give the guy a break.
> 
> ...


From what I heard the Suns probably would have got Francisco Garcia.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Rashidi....*

It was said that the Sonics would have taken Nate.


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

tempe85 said:


> From what I heard the Suns probably would have got Francisco Garcia.


yeah I heard that too. Not too sure how much I would have liked the pick.


----------

