# OT but worthy: Jamal Crawford is Knicks '05/'06 Season MVP



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

:greatjob:



> During a season of chaos and disaster, Crawford has been a constant, never rocking the boat, making game-winning shots, playing hurt, displaying professionalism every day.
> 
> He is more a follower than a leader, but that's OK because he's the one and only Knick with the courage to want the ball in a tie game with the final seconds ticking away. No amount of locker room speeches can ever top that gutsy attribute.
> --
> ...


http://www.nypost.com/sports/knicks/64135.htm


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

That sounds awfully... jibby... to me.
:raised_ey


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Good for him. Always was a nice kid. Good thing Larry finally was able to get the Chicago out of him.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

good for jamal......perpetual losing has a way of reshaping one's attitude. jamal has yet to perform on a team with a .500 record since he's been in the league. it's refreshing to see that maybe he, unlike many of the other knickerbockers, think the coach may actually know more than they do about the game of basketball.

i'm somewhat surprised new york hasn't rode him out on a rail for his inconsistency, but i'm still glad he left.


----------



## knicksfan (Jan 4, 2003)

Jamal finally got the Chicago Bulls greediness out of him and now can listen to coaches who want to help him rather then screw him up and confuse the hell out of him. I have always liked him as a player Bull or Knick but now he's finally starting to " get it"


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

Good for Jamal. Skiles always seems to say nice stuff about him in the press. Glad to see he's getting it.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

knicksfan said:


> Jamal finally got the Chicago Bulls greediness out of him and now can listen to coaches who want to help him rather then screw him up and confuse the hell out of him. I have always liked him as a player Bull or Knick but now he's finally starting to " get it"



He "got it" in 2002, then decided to forget it. I want to see a few of these strung together before I'm deeply impressed.

And contrary to popular media/fan opinion, no one here actually told him to turn into an inefficient chucking machine. He just felt like it.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

Good for Jamal! 

I'm glad he's succeeded individually as much as possible despite the turmoil on the Knicks. He has worked hard and been a good soldier for them.


----------



## charlietyra (Dec 1, 2002)

It really is more evidence of how clueless Paxson is. Most Bulls' fans understood that Crawford may not have been worth $8 million so they supported our (at the time) new GM in his philosophy of obtaining cap space for the future. But what fans forget is that Crawford could have been signed the year before for $6 million over four or five years. I thought he was worth it at that price. 

I miss Jamal and I miss Eddy too. I think both of them were given a bad rap by the the likes of Sam Smith and Paxson. I don't see Gordon as a major upgrade over Jamal (especially at the cost of the third pick in the draft) and Nene or Przybilla (which we can get for about the same price that Curry got) are not going to be upgrades either. 

The Kings seriously improved their team by getting one of the most talented players in the league (Artest) at a bargain because of a perceived bad jib factor. Will Pax ever make the same sort of decision?


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

charlietyra said:


> It really is more evidence of how clueless Paxson is. Most Bulls' fans understood that Crawford may not have been worth $8 million so they supported our (at the time) new GM in his philosophy of obtaining cap space for the future. But what fans forget is that Crawford could have been signed the year before for $6 million over four or five years. I thought he was worth it at that price.
> 
> I miss Jamal and I miss Eddy too. I think both of them were given a bad rap by the the likes of Sam Smith and Paxson. I don't see Gordon as a major upgrade over Jamal (especially at the cost of the third pick in the draft) and Nene or Przybilla (which we can get for about the same price that Curry got) are not going to be upgrades either.
> 
> The Kings seriously improved their team by getting one of the most talented players in the league (Artest) at a bargain because of a perceived bad jib factor. Will Pax ever make the same sort of decision?


I imagine at some point he probably should or is going to have to, but this isn't the time. I hope you're not suggesting we should've gone after Ron Artest. That would've been an awful move for a team of young guys with a disciplinarian for a head coach. Artest and Rick Carlisle didn't exactly get along.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

charlietyra said:


> The Kings seriously improved their team by getting one of the most talented players in the league (Artest) at a bargain because of a perceived bad jib factor. Will Pax ever make the same sort of decision?



_Perceived??_





He singlehandedly destroyed two seasons of Indiana basketball.


----------



## Aesop (Jun 1, 2003)

> But when he's really on, the Knicks almost never lose.


Considering the Knicks' record, this isn't saying much.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Would you Adam and Eve it?

He did it again.

Hero.


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

He sure did. 

Time to root for Charlotte and Portland again.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

I was really happy for Jamal tonight. Second buzzer beater clutch winning shot in a row. Carried around on the team's shoulders. A nice moment in an otherwise miserable team season.

I made a sarcastic reference above to Larry finally getting the Chicago out of him. Really, I think we're finally seeing the Chicago (yes, read jib) starting to surface in the young man. A hint of jib on the unjibbiest team in the NBA.


----------



## TripleDouble (Jul 26, 2002)

Jamal had a really good end of the season a few years ago when the Bulls were as bad as the Knicks.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> I was really happy for Jamal tonight. Second buzzer beater clutch winning shot in a row. Carried around on the team's shoulders. A nice moment in an otherwise miserable team season.
> 
> I made a sarcastic reference above to Larry finally getting the Chicago out of him. Really, I think we're finally seeing the Chicago (yes, read jib) starting to surface in the young man. A hint of jib on the unjibbiest team in the NBA.



He did commit the O foul on the preivous possession. He's not a team carrier.

But is he ever ballsy. That's two in two games, and one just recently vs Detroit. That's some jib there.


----------



## p_s (Jul 21, 2004)

I will forever believe that Jamal was misused as a Bull. The last thing he should have ever been was a full time shooting guard. If he would have been allowed to just be a point guard and the team would have showed some confidence in him at that position, I think that he would be an above average player at the position. He was/is an unselfish player with a good handle and pretty good vision. I am glad he's having a good year.


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

What a week Jamal is having. he killed the cavs, now the pacers. TY Jamal and Isiah aka secret gm of the bulls.

http://download.yousendit.com/7EBF022512FECA4C


----------



## nanokooshball (Jan 22, 2005)

> Jamal Crawford was rattling off the list of his game-winning baskets before the Knicks' game on Friday night.
> 
> Time to update it.
> 
> ...


Crawford? Clutch? I never thought we'd see that. But, I really am happy for him. It's a former Bulls player who is starting to shine on the Knicks, no matter how bad they are.


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

I guess that Im the only one that laughs at Jamal when watching him celebrate that much a winning basket when his team is among the worst teams in the league. I dunno, I watch him in that situations and I say "poor boy".


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Mr Skillz Train had two turnovers tonight and shot under 50%.

Go Pike!


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> Mr Skillz Train had two turnovers tonight and shot under 50%.
> 
> Go Pike!


Am I going to have to drop a Piatkowski mixtape on you?


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

El Chapu said:


> I guess that Im the only one that laughs at Jamal when watching him celebrate that much a winning basket when his team is among the worst teams in the league. I dunno, I watch him in that situations and I say "poor boy".


I think maybe your interpeting his celebrating making the game winning shot the wrong way. He seems pretty aware of whats going on to me .

jamal on the rest of the season 

“We just have to take it one at a time. Even if we do avoid the worst record (in franchise history) we still didn’t make the playoffs and we didn’t have a successful season. We have to show the fans we have a bright future.”


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

nanokooshball said:


> Crawford? Clutch? I never thought we'd see that. But, I really am happy for him. It's a former Bulls player who is starting to shine on the Knicks, no matter how bad they are.


Can't be too clutch on a 20 win team. He stepped up in that role for the Bulls too, remember. He did miss more than he made, so I still wouldn't call him "clutch."

Good for him on his recent stretch and on winning team MVP.

I never disliked him as a person or even as a player as long as he was not in a featured role.


----------



## Bulls4Life (Nov 13, 2002)

Screw Jamal Crawful!:curse:

He's a bum who wasted 4 years of our lives waiting for him to "get it". Now he's MVP of the worst team in the league instead of a mis-used player on the worst team in the league! Either way, his presence on "the worst team in the league" is consistent! :rofl:


Hey, Jamal....:naughty:


----------



## dkg1 (May 31, 2002)

Aesop said:


> Considering the Knicks' record, this isn't saying much.


I would compare being the Knicks MVP in 05-06 to being the tallest midget in a circus show...


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

charlietyra said:


> It really is more evidence of how clueless Paxson is. Most Bulls' fans understood that Crawford may not have been worth $8 million so they supported our (at the time) new GM in his philosophy of obtaining cap space for the future. But what fans forget is that Crawford could have been signed the year before for $6 million over four or five years. I thought he was worth it at that price.
> 
> I miss Jamal and I miss Eddy too. I think both of them were given a bad rap by the the likes of Sam Smith and Paxson. I don't see Gordon as a major upgrade over Jamal (especially at the cost of the third pick in the draft) and Nene or Przybilla (which we can get for about the same price that Curry got) are not going to be upgrades either.
> 
> * The Kings seriously improved their team by getting one of the most talented players in the league (Artest) at a bargain because of a perceived bad jib factor. Will Pax ever make the same sort of decision?*


The kings also got rid of Webber and Peja in the process. Could Curry and Jamal be our Webber and Peja? 

I have to defend John a little bit. In his recent interview on score he talked a lot about character. e said in no uncertain terms that we need a star. UNTIL we get such a star, character is important. I took that to mean, when the team is ready he will add a star. Does not matter about their past as long as they produce. 

I also agree with the poster that mentioned the last two years thatRon played at Indy. 

I am happy for Jamal. Really I am. But I feel for him in a way. He went to NY and called them a "real organization" before he played even one game there. A shot at Chicago. Since then the team went downhill. I do not blame it all on him. Not at all.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I'm happy for Jamal because he dropped a bomb on the Pacers, who we're very close to stealing a playoff spot from. I'm also pleased that Jamal has seen to it that we get a top 4 draft pick. Other than that, as a Bulls fan, I could really care less. He's one of those guys who mostly flashed potential, but the only thing he's ever proven is that he can't make a major difference for a team. I'd take him on the Bulls for 3-4 years, $18-22M, as a backup combo guard playing 15-20 minutes per game. Not enough playmaking ability for a starting 1, not enough consistency or defensive ability for a starting 2.


----------



## 7RINGS? (Sep 28, 2004)

I'm just being honest,on that team it doesn't say too much to me.I think the towl boy finished in second place behind him.Crawford is a good player and all but I would have giving that award to the towl boy IMO.He deserved it.You can't say over the span of 70+ games that he didn't do his job!! Those kids put up with alot!!! TOWL BOY N.Y.KNICKS M.V.P. :biggrin: :clap: :banana:


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

dkg1 said:


> I would compare being the Knicks MVP in 05-06 to being the tallest midget in a circus show...


What would you compare making the playoffs with a losing record to?


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> What would you compare making the playoffs with a losing record to?


I'd compare it to making the playoffs with a winning record. If you are getting in as a 7th seed or an 8th seed,7th seed is 7th seed, 8th seed is 8th seed. Regular season no longer will matter.

How about you?


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> What would you compare making the playoffs with a losing record to?


Happy thoughts.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> What would you compare making the playoffs with a losing record to?


Jumping on a subway just as the doors are closing. You might not get the best seat, or have to sit next to the obnoxious person with the wet groceries. But you are on the train for the ride just like everyone else!


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> I'd compare it to making the playoffs with a winning record. If you are getting in as a 7th seed or an 8th seed,7th seed is 7th seed, 8th seed is 8th seed. Regular season no longer will matter.
> 
> How about you?




Bingo!


:clap:


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> What would you compare making the playoffs with a losing record to?


A wise man once said, all that matters is your position relative to the rest of the league. Oh wait, I think that was YOU! :biggrin:


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> What would you compare making the playoffs with a losing record to?


C'mon k4e, I thought you don't do nothin halfway, don't believe in maybe.
Where's the spirit??


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> I'd compare it to making the playoffs with a winning record. If you are getting in as a 7th seed or an 8th seed,7th seed is 7th seed, 8th seed is 8th seed. Regular season no longer will matter.
> 
> How about you?


I'd compare it to the last teams to make the playoffs with a sub-.500 record (and the only ones this decade), the 2003-2004 Knicks and the 2003-2004 Celtics.

Both were swept out in the first round. 

Three years later one team is brutal and the other is around where we are now.

I hope this Bull story plays out differently.

It seems pretty rare to make the playoffs with a losing record.... that being said... I hope the Bulls manage to squeak in... and maybe even get to .500..


----------



## jbulls (Aug 31, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> I'd compare it to the last teams to make the playoffs with a sub-.500 record (and the only ones this decade), the 2003-2004 Knicks and the 2003-2004 Celtics.
> 
> Both were swept out in the first round.
> 
> ...


You'd compare us potentially making the playoffs with a losing record to other teams that have made the playoffs with losing records? That's not a very creative analogy.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> I'd compare it to the last teams to make the playoffs with a sub-.500 record (and the only ones this decade), the 2003-2004 Knicks and the 2003-2004 Celtics.
> 
> Both were swept out in the first round.
> 
> ...


This is different. Those two teams didn't have to adjust to losing Tim Thomas early in the season. We're overcoming much bigger odds.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> _Perceived??_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ChiBulls2315 (Aug 11, 2002)

charlietyra said:


> But what fans forget is that Crawford could have been signed the year before for $6 million over four or five years. I thought he was worth it at that price.


No he couldn't have. Jamal was coming off an impressive end of the season and in the meantime, Gilbert Arenas had signed a 6 year, 65 million dollar deal with the Wizards. Jamal was looking for something in that capacity because at the time, it looked like he was going to get that much at the end of his 4th season if he had continued to improve like he had in the last 20 games of the 2003 season.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

ChiBulls2315 said:


> No he couldn't have. Jamal was coming off an impressive end of the season and in the meantime, Gilbert Arenas had signed a 6 year, 65 million dollar deal with the Wizards. Jamal was looking for something in that capacity because at the time, it looked like he was going to get that much at the end of his 4th season if he had continued to improve like he had in the last 20 games of the 2003 season.


I don't disagree that JC may have been hard to sign the summer b/f he was RFA. But clearly Pax could have played hardball with JC instead of trading him to the Knicks. Very likely Pax could have gotten JC for the MLE.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

If price were no factor, would you rather have:
1) Gordon+Deng
2) Crawford+Iggy+Deng

?

I'm assuming that Paxson wouldn't have drafted yet another short PG type if Crawford was on the roster.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Ok. This thread has served it's purpose and the conversation has changed (degenerated?) into one that has been repeated ad nauseum in other threads.

It can be locked. (Yes, I'm the OP)


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

DaBullz said:


> If price were no factor, would you rather have:
> 1) Gordon+Deng
> 2) Crawford+Iggy+Deng
> 
> ...


That was pretty much my line of thinking - that 2) was the way to go. We'd have an extremely versatile lineup with Crawford/Iggy/Deng and Kirk. Put in Duhon as the 4th guard and Noc as the third forward - also playing at the 4 just like he does now - and we'd have the ability to do a lot of different things. That's what I like in a team.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> I'd compare it to the last teams to make the playoffs with a sub-.500 record (and the only ones this decade), the 2003-2004 Knicks and the 2003-2004 Celtics.
> 
> Both were swept out in the first round.
> 
> ...


I don't think we really disagree, except in the parcing of words. Even if we make the playoffs, we are likely going to have a rough go of it and are unlikely to get out of the first round. I concede it is unlikely we make much of a series of it against our likely opponents.

I'd just point out that last year we were the 3 seed. We won 2 and then got swept the next 4.

Like you, it would have been my preference to do better this year than last, or at least maintain. However, I still believe this is a one year setback and not trending back downward longterm, so I am not too worried about the Knicks/Celts comparison. 

I don't know what the summer will bring in therms of the draft, trades and FA, but I am going out on a limb and predicting right now that barring serious injuries, in 06-7, we will be well over .500 and won't be sweating whether we make the playoffs, only where.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> I don't know what the summer will bring in therms of the draft, trades and FA, but I am going out on a limb and predicting right now that barring serious injuries, in 06-7, we will be well over .500 and won't be sweating whether we make the playoffs, only where.


The sad thing to me is that your statement is considered going out on a limb, based on our success last season.

If the Bulls in year 4 under Paxson, with the 3 year Cap Space building plan in the rear view mirror and the unexpected benefit of a top 6 Knicks pick, are not one of the top teams in the East its time for heads to roll, IMO.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

Ya'll have to give some credit to Jamal. 

Jamal Crawford MVP of a team that has Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury

The latter few have been considered top point guards at one point in their careers and they're not exactly aging vegetable veterans right now.

Can anyone say that they would've expected Jamal to be a team MVP when there's clearly better and more aggressive talent than he ?

Even as a Jamal fan, I didn't. I thought he'd be buried down the bench and would've been mis-used again.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> The sad thing to me is that your statement is considered going out on a limb, based on our success last season.
> 
> If the Bulls in year 4 under Paxson, with the 3 year Cap Space building plan in the rear view mirror and the unexpected benefit of a top 6 Knicks pick, are not one of the top teams in the East its time for heads to roll, IMO.


I think by next year we will be a solid playoff team. I don't think they necessarily have to be one of the very top teams by next year for "heads to roll."


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> I think by next year we will be a solid playoff team. I don't think they necessarily have to be one of the very top teams by next year for "heads to roll."


why not?
the bulls were a rising team 3 years ago when pax took over.

they were a 30 win team then ...3 years later they are on pace for 37-38 wins ....thats not much progress when you consider he inherited the nba's youngest team or close to it and has had 3 lotto picks plus (up to 5 by next offseason ) and 4 offseasons in which to garner talent .

in the 3 offseasons he has not gotten 1 starter quality player through free agency, he traded j rose jcraw eddy curry 3 starters he inherited and as of now the best player he has for those 3 is mike sweetney, who is not as good as any of them right now.

this team has been pretty healthy and is barely hanging on to a playoff spot, in which they will either not make or be swept by the pistons because they will be overwhelmed inside by the wallaces and mcdyess inside.

i would say he needs to improve this team this offseason significantly or he should be in the hot seat.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> The sad thing to me is that your statement is considered going out on a limb, based on our success last season.
> 
> If the Bulls in year 4 under Paxson, with the 3 year Cap Space building plan in the rear view mirror and the unexpected benefit of a top 6 Knicks pick, are not one of the top teams in the East its time for heads to roll, IMO.


Considering what he was given, I can't think of another GM that could have done the job "better".

I can't remember the last time a franchise turned it around with some sustained success like Paxson has done with this franchise. You can point at all his mistakes and say that you would have done differently, but you're not really a candidate for the GM job. When we look at the other GM's out there, I can't think of one that really flipped a completely terrible team around so quickly.

The guys that come closest are Kiki and Jerry CoAngelo. And only CoAngelo has actually developed a real contender. So if you want to say, Jerry CoAngelo and Kiki Vandeweghe could have done a better job than John Paxson and therefore Paxson should be fired in favor of those guys, fine. No sarcasm at all, I can't say I'd disagree with the sentiment expressed in such a statement.

But to say that somehow the GM of the team must meet an unreasonable standard and narrow margin of error imposed by fans, even when 93% of the rest of the league's GM's would probably have done worse (in my opinion), that's a bit much. By your reasoning, you'd fire Jerry West, Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, definitely Elgin Baylor in any year up til this one, and a host of other GM's that have had the time and the flexibility to create a contender but have not done so.


----------



## The Truth (Jul 22, 2002)

The 6ft Hurdle said:


> Ya'll have to give some credit to Jamal.
> 
> Jamal Crawford MVP of a team that has Steve Francis, Stephon Marbury
> 
> ...


Can you say MVP by default?

If Marbury and Francis are such great players, why are the Knicks so pathetic?


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> _*Posted by Showtyme:
> *_
> Considering what he was given, I can't think of another GM that could have done the job "better".
> 
> I can't remember the last time a franchise turned it around with some sustained success like Paxson has done with this franchise. You can point at all his mistakes and say that you would have done differently, but you're not really a candidate for the GM job. When we look at the other GM's out there, I can't think of one that really flipped a completely terrible team around so quickly.


Sustained success....?

I'm sorry, but 105-135 in 3 years isn't really my definition of success.... 

I want to believe otherwise, but honestly, is it really that hard to go from averaging about 25 wins (post dynasty) to 35 wins (Paxon era).... I mean come on, we went from bad to average. To me, thats not worthy of the amount of praise Paxon gets. He's not a good job making us just better then bad/average, but he hasn't yet shown he has the 'huevos' to put the Bulls over the top. Until he does, I'm not ready to heap the kudos on him.




> _*Posted by Showtyme:
> *_
> But to say that somehow the GM of the team must meet an unreasonable standard and narrow margin of error imposed by fans, even when 93% of the rest of the league's GM's would probably have done worse (in my opinion)



I can't agree even for a second that Paxon is in the top 7% of GMs. Thats as ridiculous a statement as I've ever heard. I hope you were exagerrating, and presuming you were, thats still a BIG stretch.

Though the bottom line is, this offseason is it. If the team next year is floating at/below .500, it's time to move in a new direction...


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

Jamal has had 3 weeks of a good season and that is it. He was struggling mightily before Mid-March. Excuse for not carrying the Jamal banner since he is playing well late in the season. Jamal playing well late in the season is his M.O.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

remlover said:


> Jamal playing well late in the season is his M.O.


I wish some of the Bulls would have adopted this M.O. last night.

I hope they adopt this M.O. going forward.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> I wish some of the Bulls would have adopted this M.O. last night.
> 
> I hope they adopt this M.O. going forward.




You want the Bulls to play badly for 85% of the season and then play well at the end when the games are virtually meaningless? Curious.


----------



## NormVanQeer (Mar 17, 2006)

ANYONE THAT WANTS TO BRING THIS THUG BACK TO TOWN IS JUST RIDICULOUS! He's worthless and his attitude makes me want to puke. We need to avoid having thugs on the Bulls, they just ruin teams. 










THAT GUY IS NO THUG THOUGH!

RIGHT?!

RIGHT!! :banana:


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

NormVanQeer said:


> ANYONE THAT WANTS TO BRING THIS THUG BACK TO TOWN IS JUST RIDICULOUS! He's worthless and his attitude makes me want to puke. We need to avoid having thugs on the Bulls, they just ruin teams.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Enough with the pointless animal pictures already, Norm.

Also, I don't think it's accurate or appropriate to refer to Jamal as a thug.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> You want the Bulls to play badly for 85% of the season and then play well at the end when the games are virtually meaningless? Curious.


Where did I say this?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> Where did I say this?



You were distorting remlover's point, and I was calling you on it. His point, whether it's accurate or not, was that Crawford normally plays poorly for most of the season and turns it on at the end. You said you wish the current Bulls players could turn it on at the end. Well, sure, but that's being obtuse. His point was that playing well only at the very end of the season is a bad thing. That's what you should have addressed if you were going to quote him.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

Typical K4E. When the Bulls are playing quality bball for the past 2 weeks he is silent, but they lose a big game last night and he is chirping and pointing out the negatives of the team. 

I assume we will read a lot of posts from you after the Bulls get bounced from the playoffs and you are calling this a losing season.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

I don't feel Jamal would have the success he is right now with the Knicks if he had stayed with the Bulls. It's clear that he respects Larry Brown a great deal and looks to obey his orders (especially apparent early in the season when he was always tentative about what to do). Larry Brown, despite his off-court drama queen mentality, has improved many guards throughout their career, such as Chauncey Billups, and Jamal Crawford is not a fluke. Put this new Crawford on the Bulls and he would be drastically improved from the old Crawford.

Also, keep in mind that Crawford has only recently come around to understanding the game. A few months ago, he was rumored to be a part of the Steve Francis deal. IIRC, reports were that the Magic did _not_ Crawford because of his low basketball IQ and chucking mentality (at times). Only of late has Crawford become the best player on the Knicks.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

Reading the last couple pages was like reading the debate on a poltical forum.

Poster 1: " George Bush is flying in the face of the Constitution by (insert whatever Bush is supposed to be doing that particular day)"
Poster: "Thats no worse than what Clinton did when he (insert some transgression, real or imagined)" 

:clap: :banana: :cheers:


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> You were distorting remlover's point, and I was calling you on it. His point, whether it's accurate or not, was that Crawford normally plays poorly for most of the season and turns it on at the end. You said you wish the current Bulls players could turn it on at the end. Well, sure, but that's being obtuse. His point was that playing well only at the very end of the season is a bad thing. That's what you should have addressed if you were going to quote him.


Please don't put words in my mouth, regardless of how obtuse you feel the post is.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

kukoc4ever said:


> Please don't put words in my mouth, regardless of how obtuse you feel the post is.



Pot, meet the kettle.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)




----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

remlover said:


> Jamal has had 3 weeks of a good season and that is it. He was struggling mightily before Mid-March. Excuse for not carrying the Jamal banner since he is playing well late in the season. Jamal playing well late in the season is his M.O.



Actually that couldnt be farther from the truth . jamal was playing pretty good ball up until Marbury got hurt at which time he was asked to play pg full time and admitedly by Browns own word tried too hard to be a pass first pg. Before Marbury went down Crawford was one of the top 3 candidates for the 6th man award . His shot selection has been improved since day one of this season and his defense has steadily improved. While hes no lockdown defender his defensive intensity is much higher as well as his recognition. 

Hes up over 300 fta this year and none of our guards have that many . Did he get all of thoise within the last three weeks ?

Im not gonna debate whether or not that jamal finally gets it because honestly who really knows ? But the things that people wanted him to improve on over the past couple of years hes done it if he can keep doing it he may fulfill some of that potential.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

TRUTHHURTS said:


> Actually that couldnt be farther from the truth . jamal was playing pretty good ball up until Marbury got hurt at which time he was asked to play pg full time and admitedly by Browns own word tried too hard to be a pass first pg. Before Marbury went down Crawford was one of the top 3 candidates for the 6th man award . His shot selection has been improved since day one of this season and his defense has steadily improved. While hes no lockdown defender his defensive intensity is much higher as well as his recognition.
> 
> Hes up over 300 fta this year and none of our guards have that many . Did he get all of thoise within the last three weeks ?
> 
> Im not gonna debate whether or not that jamal finally gets it because honestly who really knows ? But the things that people wanted him to improve on over the past couple of years hes done it if he can keep doing it he may fulfill some of that potential.


Jamal was playing decent in November and in early december and when Marbury went out in late december/early jan. Jamal went downhill. He had 2 bad months. Knicks were tryign to trade Crawford but Orlando perferred the cap space. 

I am not saying Jamal is a horrid player, but again i am not getting excited over a slightly above average player.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Jamal, to an extent, has "got it". He's not half as reckless as he was, for whatever reason. And good for him.

However, as a result, he is now completely unremarkable.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

TRUTHHURTS said:


> Hes up over 300 fta this year and none of our guards have that many . Did he get all of thoise within the last three weeks ?


Back to the topic at hand:

As a guy who always liked Jamal's game, I try to watch Knicks games when I can... and the one area where he has made just amazing improvement is getting to the line. During his time post-surgery, he always seemed to shy away from contact in the paint, but this year (especially post all-star break), he has really not been scared of getting knocked down, if it gets him to the line. And being a 90% or so free throw shooter, that means easy points.

350+ FT attempts is very good (thats about 100 more then he's had before, and more then anyone on the Bulls currently).

Whats done is done, he's not in Chicago anymore, but I still say Crawford has some greatness in him. Maybe he is along the same path as Billups.... bounces around a bit and then finally the talent meets the experience and BAM... you have a really, really good player. I wish him the best of luck, hell he can even have good games against the Bulls (so long as they win!)...


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

while all the debate has been fun reading the arguments, the missed points and the extreme exaggerations , the fact of the matter is crawford has become a pretty good player , and his improvement has been steady throughout his career. 

anyone who disagrees with that , it says more about the poster than anything else .

this year like curry his improvement has been more on the defensive side of the ball and his mentality, if it makes people happy to say he's a thug or a bad jib player then whatever .

he's the knick's mvp more because he is the one doing what larry brown wants more than anyone else on their roster and for larry brown who considers himself a teacher more than a coachj, that is enough in itself for crawford to be the team's mvp.

sidenote knicks win again 2day and crawford was once again the main guy 31 points 11 boards 5 ast. 3 steals.


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

Well well well......a night out for the Curry-Crawford lovers


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

We all know jamal has had some great end of the year stats but this time its not about his stats . His game is really maturing and today he kept the knicks focused and they executed very well. Even though the Celts led the entire game and the knicks would have have break downs or miss open looks.He had them in their offense for the most part and they executed until they started hitting while the celts freelanced and then started missing. One thing I did notice is that now he misses a jumpshot and he goes to the basket on his next attempt and tries to get to the foul line.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

Crawford Update Thread 2.0

NEW AND IMPROVED!!!!


----------



## Electric Slim (Jul 31, 2002)

Now Jamalites have a reason to rejoice without annoying me. Congrats Jamal! But please, stop hurting our pick. :clown:


----------

