# Rumor: Quentin Richardson On The Trading Block?



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

> It's well-known throughout the league that the Knicks are trying to trade Richardson. Denver might be a possibility because Nuggets assistant GM Jeff Weltman drafted Richardson, and the Knicks are interested in backup point guard Earl Watson. But their salaries don't quite match this season, and even though both are signed for five more years Richardson's contract is valued at $42.9 million compared to $29 million for Watson, making it difficult for the Nuggets to take back that much money, according to one NBA personnel expert.


http://www.newsday.com/sports/basketball/knicks/ny-spknix054575758jan05,0,1774207.story?coll=ny-knicks-bigpix


----------



## KVIP112 (Oct 31, 2005)

we better not trade him, i still have faith in q, even though his numbers are low i still think he can turn it around and be the q that he was last year and the year before.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

I feel bad for Q. I don't think that he's a half court type of player who will ever succeed in a Larry Brown system. He does have a post up game, but it is rarely utilized. With his contract and with everything that has happened to him lately, I find it hard to believe a team will take him on. I'd love to see him on another running team...


----------



## dynamiks (Aug 15, 2005)

Q needs to take it easy this year in order to make a comeback look at TJ Ford. This may work if not we should trade him.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Not that good....*

Qis not really suited for a uptempo game. The fact that he did well in Phoenix is due more to the fact that they let him chuck. They weren't mostly on the break...they were whenever he was open. He is really lacking in defense and his best suit is his power game. If he was a better defender, he'd be better suited to a half court game where he was a focus.


----------



## Chinatownballer (Oct 13, 2005)

What's wrong with chucking? The Suns are a chucking team and it works for them, the old Knicks in the 90s were a chucking team, why not let our players shoot? I think that other than our centers we are a team capable of running and playing a fast paced chucking game.


----------



## ShuHanGuanYu (Feb 3, 2005)

*Re: Not that good....*



alphadog said:


> Qis not really suited for a uptempo game. The fact that he did well in Phoenix is due more to the fact that they let him chuck. They weren't mostly on the break...they were whenever he was open. He is really lacking in defense and his best suit is his power game. If he was a better defender, he'd be better suited to a half court game where he was a focus.


Actually, a lot of them came from the running game of the Suns. He had the green light, true. But I don't think anyone that has big men, especially the Knicks, are going to use his post up game. Q thrives in a fast paced offense because he can get into a rhythm much more quickly and hoist up a few shots in a row. He would be able to nail 4 threes in a row because the system continually got him good shots. In the half court offense, you pass it around and hope it comes back to you for an open shot. In Phoenix, the fastbreak offense continually gets you open three point shots. If Q didn't start the season so horribly in Phoenix (shot under 32% total FG% for awhile), he would have been around the 42-44% mark for three point FG% because of all the open shots he gets. In a half court offense he's going to see a hand in his face on most occasions.


----------



## KVIP112 (Oct 31, 2005)

*Re: Not that good....*



alphadog said:


> Qis not really suited for a uptempo game. The fact that he did well in Phoenix is due more to the fact that they let him chuck. They weren't mostly on the break...they were whenever he was open. He is really lacking in defense and his best suit is his power game. If he was a better defender, he'd be better suited to a half court game where he was a focus.


why did i just read that?


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

Uh..I dunno...maybe you wanted to learn something? Let's see...Q is a CAREER 40%fg guy....a CAREER 35% guy from three, and a 70% ft guy with a CAREER PPG of 12.3. Tell me again why I am wrong and you guys are right? On top of that, he plays poor defense. I know...he led the league in 3's...whoopty damn do. Anybody who also led the league in attempts should. Twenty four out of the top 50 scorers are shooting the 3 better than his career % right now...thats ALMOST HALF for you mathematically impaired. Same with 26-50.

Q will never shoot 40% from 3 for an extended time...never. 


Chucking works for the Suns because they have a very athletic team but they would have been better with any number of shooters over Qrich. If they didn't also think so, they never would have traded him.


----------



## chrisr87 (Jul 3, 2005)

Basketball isn't all about stats. Why don't you watch some games? Q-Rich DID win the 3pt shootout. You act like he's a horrible shooter. If he's open, he can hit the shot. And the Suns offense allowed him to be open. For someone that posts on the Knicks board a lot, you sure resemble a hater.


----------



## alphadog (Jan 2, 2004)

*Why don't you*

learn something about the game. Any idiot can tell you that the 3pt contest is more about who gets in a rythm rather than who is a good shooter in a game. Some guys are just natural shooters at anytime.......Qrich ain't one of them. I don't recall Reggie ever winning a 3pt shootout but there is no better game shooter from 3 in the history of the league other than Bird, maybe. ALL I've seen from Qrich as far as long distance dialing is streak shooting and that is no great quality. I am keenly aware of the liabilities of stats but Qrich has done nothing contrary to his.....and I don't act anyway about him. He is what he is.....a mediocre shooter with a forwards body who is a defensive liability, and who remains idolized by the uneducated masses. Class dismissed.


----------



## SLAM (Jan 1, 2003)

What about a trade between the Knicks and Portland that swaps Q and Antonio for Theo and Ruben Patterson? Seems like a deal that could really benefit both teams.


----------



## KVIP112 (Oct 31, 2005)

we dont need anymore guys that will need a walker in a couple years, we have our own elders


----------



## Chinatownballer (Oct 13, 2005)

As far as Q is concerned, the Larry Brown Knicks need high percentage shooting from their guards since they won't get as many looks as say Q got in Phoenix. Q is good is he can shoot at will. No one simply shoots at will in LB's system. Q is a good shooter after getting up a certain amount of shots in a game. He isn't going to get that many shots on "extra pass" Knicks so we'd might as well trade him for someone who can shoot reliably however many attempts he gets.


----------



## ERAFF (Jun 27, 2005)

Look...the REAL problem with Q is NOT on the offensive side of the floor. The problem is that THERE IS NOBODY FOR HIM TO GUARD!!!!. He's a turnstile versus 2's, and a speedbump versus 3's. He is PURELY a Situational Offensive player in this league. He is not good enuff to structure your team around hiding him on defense to keep him on the floor.

Reality!!!!!


----------



## SLAM (Jan 1, 2003)

KVIP112 said:


> we dont need anymore guys that will need a walker in a couple years, we have our own elders


Yeah, that's fair in regards to Theo. But Ruben, he's got more energy than anyone else on the Blazers, and we're one of the youngest squads in the league. Dude is the energizer bunny.


----------



## ForeverWar (Oct 12, 2005)

Would be kinda nice if the guy got traded (let's face facts: he's added NOTHING to the Knicks, while he was a good role player (if not more) for the Suns) and we got a real guard back...


----------

