# E.Curry.



## ballerkingn (Nov 17, 2006)

He's really starint to dominate scoring at least 20 pt's in like 5 or more straight game's.He might be finally getting it.I for 1 though know he had it in him,i just wished he found it in a bulls jersery.


----------



## Smez86 (Jun 29, 2006)

I seem to remember him scoring in a Bulls jersey too.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

He could always score, that was never a problem for curry. His scoring binge is no suprise what so ever, his always had great touch, good foot work and great hands around the basket, with above average moves. But as you can see, no matter how often he scores, the team that his on is BAD. If it means more loses for NY and more points for Curry, im all for it.


----------



## Kapitalistsvin (Mar 30, 2006)

yea, trade still looks good... Knicks don't seem to get better when Curry has a 'great' game in numbers (unlike when Yao goes of for the Rockets).


----------



## ballerkingn (Nov 17, 2006)

yeah he could score but he could never dominate and score at the rate he is now,i cann't remember him scoring 20+ pts in a row so early in the season and also reb the ball.This kid is playing some good ball as of late.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

I get tired of retyping the same thing over and over, so here is a link to my latest response to a similar thread re: Big E.

Yes, his scoring is a positive, but a lot of his flaws negate a lot of the good that he does


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Eddy Curry is a great player to have when you need front court scoring and his defensive faults would have not been so obvious if he would be playing with Ben Wallace upfront. Curry is a great kid, just to bad he doesnt have the drive that would make him a dominant player.


----------



## cima (Nov 6, 2003)

22 and 11 tonight, but they lose again. poor guy, he's ballin but his team still sucks.


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

I'm sorry, I didn't watch Curry tonight. I was too busy watching the Bulls taking a 20 point first quarter lead helped in large part by the fine play of Tyrus Thomas.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

Sham said:


> I'm sorry, I didn't watch Curry tonight. I was too busy watching the Bulls taking a 20 point first quarter lead helped in large part by the fine play of Tyrus Thomas.


tee hee.

He is putting up nice numbers now. He's been in double digit boards a lot more than usual recently. That's good since I've had him in my fantasy lineup to replace another dearly missed former Bull center, Brad Miller. However, he still turns it over about 299185 times per game.

His numbers aren't lifting the Knicks to much success, but it seems like he's more "part of the solution" than "part of the problem" when he's this productive. Granted, I haven't seen the Knicks play much.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

You should catch more Knicks games.

There's this really cool optical illusion they have going on...where after a while of seeing Stephon Marbury dribble, the basketball starts to look like a lottery ball of sorts. With a number 1 on it.

That's the only reason I watch.

It's...sort of...strangely...hypnotizing.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Pay Ton said:


> You should catch more Knicks games.
> 
> There's this really cool optical illusion they have going on...where after a while of seeing Stephon Marbury dribble, the basketball starts to look like a lottery ball of sorts. With a number 1 on it.
> 
> ...


:laugh:


----------



## BeZerker2008 (Jun 29, 2006)

Shoot, he would've had those numbers & possibly more if he had the ball on each possession as IT seems to want to do to try and make his deal worth what they gave.

It'll be interesting to what IT saying that the Knicks are 'his' team to see what that does to curry's head, if he gets an even bigger head than I feel sorry for the Knicks.


----------



## cima (Nov 6, 2003)

A career high 36 tonight a long with 9 boards and a win!


----------



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

He's 23. That means he has only about 8-9 seasons left before he starts declining. Too much of a risk.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

In my opinion, all that has changed for Curry is that he's being played 36 minutes a game come hell or high water. No mind games, no pounding of the square peg into the round hole with the guy.​ 

check out crawford's numbers, too

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD height=7></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR class=yspsctbg><TD class=ysptblhdr colSpan=13 height=18> New York </TD></TR><TR class=ysptblthbody1 align=right><TD class=yspdetailttl align=left width="18%" height=18> Name</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Min</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">FG</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">3Pt</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">FT</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">Off</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Reb</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Ast</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">TO</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Stl</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Blk</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">PF</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">Pts </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> D. Lee</TD><TD>40</TD><TD>6-10</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>13</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>12 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> Q. Richardson</TD><TD>44</TD><TD>6-16</TD><TD>2-6</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>10</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>14 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> E. Curry</TD><TD>40</TD><TD>17-24</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>2-3</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>9</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>6</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>36 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> J. Crawford</TD><TD>42</TD><TD>10-18</TD><TD>3-8</TD><TD>2-3</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>9</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>25 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> S. Marbury</TD><TD>23</TD><TD>1-4</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-2</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>9</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>2 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> N. Robinson</TD><TD>29</TD><TD>8-14</TD><TD>2-3</TD><TD>4-4</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>22 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> R. Balkman</TD><TD>8</TD><TD>1-2</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>2 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> M. Rose</TD><TD>8</TD><TD>1-1</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>2 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> J. James</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> M. Collins</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=middle><TD align=left> K. Cato</TD><TD colSpan=12>DNP - Sore Right Foot</TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=middle><TD align=left> S. Francis</TD><TD colSpan=12>DNP - Right Knee Tendinit</TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=middle><TD align=left> C. Frye</TD><TD colSpan=12>DNP - Coach's Decision</TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=middle><TD align=left> J. Jeffries</TD><TD colSpan=12>DNP - Coach's Decision</TD></TR><TR class=ysptblbdr3><TD colSpan=13 height=1></TD></TR><TR class=ysptblclbg5 align=right><TD align=left height=18> *Totals*</TD><TD>235</TD><TD>50-89</TD><TD>7-17</TD><TD>8-12</TD><TD>17</TD><TD>46</TD><TD>31</TD><TD>14</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>16</TD><TD>115 </TD></TR><TR align=right><TD align=left height=18> *Percentages:*</TD><TD> </TD><TD>.562</TD><TD>.412</TD><TD>.667</TD><TD> </TD><TD align=left colSpan=7>*Team Rebounds:* 4 </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD height=7></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR class=yspsctbg><TD class=ysptblhdr colSpan=13 height=18></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


----------



## Sham (Dec 2, 2002)

Nice line from Jamal. Does that put him over 40% yet?


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

Seems like Curry finally played himself into shape.


----------



## DontBeCows (Apr 22, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> In my opinion, all that has changed for Curry is that he's being played 36 minutes a game come hell or high water. No mind games, no pounding of the square peg into the round hole with the guy.​
> 
> check out crawford's numbers, too
> 
> <TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD height=7></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR class=yspsctbg><TD class=ysptblhdr colSpan=13 height=18> New York </TD></TR><TR class=ysptblthbody1 align=right><TD class=yspdetailttl align=left width="18%" height=18> Name</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Min</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">FG</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">3Pt</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">FT</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">Off</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Reb</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Ast</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">TO</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Stl</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">Blk</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="6%">PF</TD><TD class=yspdetailttl width="8%">Pts </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> D. Lee</TD><TD>40</TD><TD>6-10</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>13</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>12 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> Q. Richardson</TD><TD>44</TD><TD>6-16</TD><TD>2-6</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>10</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>14 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> E. Curry</TD><TD>40</TD><TD>17-24</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>2-3</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>9</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>6</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>36 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> J. Crawford</TD><TD>42</TD><TD>10-18</TD><TD>3-8</TD><TD>2-3</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>9</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>25 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> S. Marbury</TD><TD>23</TD><TD>1-4</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-2</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>9</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>2 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> N. Robinson</TD><TD>29</TD><TD>8-14</TD><TD>2-3</TD><TD>4-4</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>3</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>22 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> R. Balkman</TD><TD>8</TD><TD>1-2</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>2 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> M. Rose</TD><TD>8</TD><TD>1-1</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>2</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>2 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=right><TD align=left> J. James</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>1</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=right><TD align=left> M. Collins</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0-0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0</TD><TD>0 </TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=middle><TD align=left> K. Cato</TD><TD colSpan=12>DNP - Sore Right Foot</TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=middle><TD align=left> S. Francis</TD><TD colSpan=12>DNP - Right Knee Tendinit</TD></TR><TR class=ysprow1 align=middle><TD align=left> C. Frye</TD><TD colSpan=12>DNP - Coach's Decision</TD></TR><TR class=ysprow2 align=middle><TD align=left> J. Jeffries</TD><TD colSpan=12>DNP - Coach's Decision</TD></TR><TR class=ysptblbdr3><TD colSpan=13 height=1></TD></TR><TR class=ysptblclbg5 align=right><TD align=left height=18> *Totals*</TD><TD>235</TD><TD>50-89</TD><TD>7-17</TD><TD>8-12</TD><TD>17</TD><TD>46</TD><TD>31</TD><TD>14</TD><TD>5</TD><TD>4</TD><TD>16</TD><TD>115 </TD></TR><TR align=right><TD align=left height=18> *Percentages:*</TD><TD> </TD><TD>.562</TD><TD>.412</TD><TD>.667</TD><TD> </TD><TD align=left colSpan=7>*Team Rebounds:* 4 </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD height=7></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR class=yspsctbg><TD class=ysptblhdr colSpan=13 height=18></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


Somewhere Jerry Krause is smiling. 

That was his vision for the Bulls that never came true.


----------



## Cocoa Rice Krispies (Oct 10, 2004)

DontBeCows said:


> Somewhere Jerry Krause is smiling.
> 
> That was his vision for the Bulls that never came true.


Given that NY still has a winning percentage in the 300's, I think saying this might be a tad bit premature.


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

The Bucks played no defense last night, and had a chance to win it. Stupidity cost them the game. Ruben Patterson kept blowing by David Lee and Eddy Curry the whole first half and scoring, and the Bucks had him out of the game in the fourth quarter.

As Johny Mac said during the game, Eddy plays a great half game.


----------



## truth (Jul 16, 2002)

You guys have NOT been watching the Knicks if you dont think Curry isnt a vastly improved player..And for the record,i am Eddys biggest critic..

I would like to see what Eddy does against Stoudemire or Howard..Unfortunately,we wont get to see Eddy against yao again...

The biggest changes in Curry is he is in better shape,he has stopped with the ridiculous fouls and he DEMANDS the ball....Believe it or not,he also is beginning to recognise the double team...

As for the Knicks,they are playing without Jeffries,and without Frye...You can say that Jeffries wont make a difference,but it will as in addition thru subtraction...With Jeffries starting,that means FranBury will be broken up,and that is an experiment gone horribly wrong....Not sure if JC starts or not,or if Q slides over to the 2,but the Knick shoudnt be judged until Jeffries and frye are back..

BTW,if the Knicks finish 10 games under .500 but win their division,and the Bulls finish 10 games over .500 but third in their division,who gets the higher draft pick???


----------



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

narek said:


> The Bucks played no defense last night, and had a chance to win it. Stupidity cost them the game. Ruben Patterson kept blowing by David Lee and Eddy Curry the whole first half and scoring, and the Bucks had him out of the game in the fourth quarter.
> 
> As Johny Mac said during the game, Eddy plays a great half game.


If that half-game means 9 straight games of 20+ points, I'll take it, especially during the 3rd quarter where we usually fall even further behind those good teams till someone from the bench checks in. It would be nice to see us not trying as hard to score.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

He must have had a bad first half, because when I saw him in the second half he was kicking some serious ***.


----------



## Philomath (Jan 3, 2003)

His rebounding has also looked a lot better in the box scores. Didn't he have 15 in a game last week? Is he jumping now?


----------



## Thorgal (Feb 1, 2003)

truth said:


> BTW,if the Knicks finish 10 games under .500 but win their division,and the Bulls finish 10 games over .500 but third in their division,who gets the higher draft pick???


If Bulls get into playoffs too (Knicks automatically gets in with division title) - Knicks would have a higher draft pick.

If Bulls don't get into playoffs - Bulls would have a higher draft pick despite the better record.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Thorgal said:


> If Bulls get into playoffs too (Knicks automatically gets in with division title) - Knicks would have a higher draft pick.
> 
> If Bulls don't get into playoffs - Bulls would have a higher draft pick despite the better record.


Now you got me confused. Is pick #1 higher than pick #10? (10 is a higher number than 1)


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

I would think the #1 pick is the higher pick, as it is the better pick. Better = Higher, in my book.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

Thorgal said:


> If Bulls get into playoffs too (Knicks automatically gets in with division title) - Knicks would have a higher draft pick.
> 
> If Bulls don't get into playoffs - Bulls would have a higher draft pick despite the better record.


You seem a tad confused. No matter what happens, we're ending up with the higher draft pick, whether it be our draft pick or the knicks draft pick. Its our option regardless or what happens to swap picks or not..


----------



## Kapitalistsvin (Mar 30, 2006)

But if Curry keeps it up that pick might not even be close to Oden (because Knicks are in a sucker division).

Im impressed for now...


----------



## Kapitalistsvin (Mar 30, 2006)

Impressed with Curry that is... not the Knicks as such.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Kapitalistsvin said:


> But if Curry keeps it up that pick might not even be close to Oden (because Knicks are in a sucker division).
> 
> Im impressed for now...


I don't think we'll get a top 2 pick, which is what I'd be content with. Any other player may not be a franchise player.

Thats not to say that Eddy is, but I do miss his offensive game. He is what we need. Imagine him paired next to Ben Wallace.


----------



## lougehrig (Mar 1, 2005)

theanimal23 said:


> I don't think we'll get a top 2 pick, which is what I'd be content with. Any other player may not be a franchise player.
> 
> Thats not to say that Eddy is, but I do miss his offensive game. He is what we need. Imagine him paired next to Ben Wallace.


We score 99 ppg, which is good for 12th in the NBA. Our offense relies on excellent ball movement and movement off the ball. I am imaginging Eddy Curry with Ben Wallace and I see no ball movement and no offensive flow (sort of like when he was a Bull). Now if Eddy learned how to set screens, or pick and roll or how to hit a 15 footer, I might be more excited. Besides you make it sound like we need more points. We are scoring enough points already. We need more defense, something Eddy does not provide.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

I don't really care for the stats when it comes to how many points our team scores in relation to the rest of the league. When I watch games, I see us struggling to get us the points. Fact is, you don't go far if you are strictly a jump shooting team. For a team that cannot get to the FT line and relies heavily on the 3 point shot, we won't win four seven-game playoff series. I'm not saying with Eddy we would, but we would be one step closer.

How is having Eddy with Wallace any different than having him with Chandler? 

Fact is, our team does not get any easy buckets. We work way to hard to score. Our D should be better. You would think we replace Tyson with Ben, and it'd be an wall of steel. It's not. I dunno what the issue is. But our defensive struggles do lead to our offensive struggles. We don't win unless we play amazing defense that leads to easy buckets. It'd be nice to have a guy who could give us a spark in the 1st and 3rd quarters like he did, so we don't play catch-up a lot. 

Again, I'm not a big PER, PPG, etc stats guys when it comes to rating a player's impact on a game. If you saw the 47 win team, and the team of the past two years, anyone would know what I'm talking about about Eddy's presence as an offensive player. He's no Shaq, but he's no Ben Wallace either.


----------



## kulaz3000 (May 3, 2006)

theanimal23 said:


> I don't really care for the stats when it comes to how many points our team scores in relation to the rest of the league. When I watch games, I see us struggling to get us the points. Fact is, you don't go far if you are strictly a jump shooting team. For a team that cannot get to the FT line and relies heavily on the 3 point shot, we won't win four seven-game playoff series. I'm not saying with Eddy we would, but we would be one step closer.
> 
> How is having Eddy with Wallace any different than having him with Chandler?
> 
> ...


I agree, when the team was on two years ago with Curry it was a thing of beauty to watch. Curry would get the ball on the move to the basket and he would always give us a handful of easy baskets. But you also have to remember he was hardly ever playing in the fourth quarters because of his defensive problems. He has slow reactions, his slow to get back in transition defense, he bites on shot fakes way too much, he fouls too much, and his usually spent by the fourth to make an impact on both defense and the offensive end of the floor. Sure, i agree that i wouldn't mind Curry being on our team one bit, he would definitly help, but he would also detract from our defense.

Also, his always been a emotional player, playing in his hometown Chicago has always been a burden to him, and i don't think that would change. His not much of a pressure player, just look at the Knicks, they have barely got their heads above the water, and they are playing with hardly any pressure. Any wins above last years wins would be hailed an improvement for the knicks, so they are playing with no pressure, and Curry thrives on situations where he doesn't have any pressure and he plays well. He is in a situation where is pampered and force feed, lets put him on a playoff team and veterans and see how he survives. 

I wouldn't mind his low post moves, but i don't miss him that much to think about him more beyond this post.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

Full Story

Living up to potential, Curry's making good things happen down low

BY ALAN HAHN
Newsday Staff Correspondent

Published December 11 2006


GREENBURGH, N.Y. - Among the collection of body art that meanders over seemingly every visible inch of Eddy Curry's skin is a tattoo on his left forearm. It is mostly inconspicuous among the pictures, sayings, dedications and Chinese symbols, but it perhaps says the most about Curry as a basketball player. 

It is an image of the NBA logo between the words "Ready or Not."


Five years after entering the league as an 18-year-old man-child out of high school, Curry finally appears to be ready to live up to the hype. Raw has developed into refined. Big has turned into powerful. Potential no longer is something that dogs him but drives him. 

Said the 6-11, 285-pound Curry, "I definitely think the way I'm playing now, it's going to take a team effort to stop me."

He enters tonight's game against the Celtics riding a nine-game streak of scoring at least 20 points. The Knicks haven't had a player put up that kind of consistency since Allan Houston scored at least 20 in 10 straight games in early 1998. 

In the nine games, Curry is averaging 24.9 points and 9.0 rebounds a game, hitting 61.3 percent of his shots from the field and 53.8 percent from the foul line. In the last seven, he's averaging 26.1 points per game.

For the season, he's at 17.7 points and 7.4 rebounds in just over 32 minutes per game, shooting 55.9 percent from the field and 55.5 percent from the line.

Has it translated into instant success for the desperate Knicks? Not quite, but it is worth noting that the team is 4-5 during Curry's streak. Compare that with the team's 8-14 overall record and it seems clear that the emergence of Curry as a go-to guy has the Knicks headed in the right direction.

"He's been so good lately that whenever he's not in the game, quickly you notice that he's not there," coach Isiah Thomas said. "That's a huge plus for him because he's gone from a guy who you kind of wonder where he was and now the second he's not in the game, there's a huge void in the middle. His presence has been pretty much overwhelming."

It has been an ongoing project since the day Thomas took the risk of acquiring Curry from the Chicago Bulls on Oct. 4, 2005. The biggest assets Thomas gave up in the deal were the right for the Bulls to flip first-round draft picks with the Knicks in 2006 and '07. They snatched the Knicks' lottery pick last summer and came away with 6-9 forward Tyrus Thomas from LSU at fourth overall. If the Knicks fall to the lottery again this year, the Bulls will be able to swap picks again.

Perhaps it's fitting that the Knicks' best chance to avoid yet another lottery appearance is in Curry's hands. After realizing his team wasn't going to survive on the perimeter games of fading stars Stephon Marbury and Steve Francis, Thomas late last month turned the focus of the offense toward Curry, who turned 24 last Tuesday. The coaching staff started demanding that the shoot-first guards get the ball down low. Everything would run out of the low post and through Curry.

"I think he blossomed a little quicker," assistant coach Mark Aguirre said. "I didn't know he could take instruction from practice to the court as well as he did, because he didn't show any indication of that last year ... You can almost guide him the way you want to now. He's understanding not just the verbal part of it but the physical part of it. That's amazing to me."

Since the summer, Aguirre and fellow assistant Herb Williams have worked closely with Curry on post play. Thomas worked on the officials, who he felt were letting too much go against Curry under the basket. Thomas also challenged Curry to show more "manliness" in his game and let people know they shouldn't mess with Eddy.

It also took some work by the rest of the guard-oriented team, which at first seemed reluctant to start pounding the ball inside. Curry's teammates were used to him disappearing in games and often were frustrated that he would drop drive-and-dish passes. But as Curry began to consistently overpower his defenders, his teammates began to believe.

"He used to fade out in the game," Jamal Crawford said, "but now he is asserting himself the whole game."

Curry and the Knicks still have a few things to figure out before he can dominate like a true first-option big man should. He must improve on his abysmal shooting from the foul line, improve his passing out of double-teams and keep his turnover numbers in check now that he's handling the ball more than ever. And down the stretch in games, he needs to continue to get the ball. Too often this season - including Saturday night's victory over the Bucks, in which he had 32 of his career-high 36 points through three quarters - the Knicks stopped going inside to Curry. As a result, the offense lost its focus.

Though his massive body is cut from a similar mold, personality-wise, Curry probably will never be another Shaquille O'Neal. His charisma stops at the tattoos, headband and cornrows. He is a thoughtful conversationalist who is candid but not confrontational. 

It is on the court where the Knicks need Curry to be "a monster," which is how Bucks coach Terry Stotts referred to him Saturday night. The NBA is loaded with skilled big men who play a perimeter game. Curry plays a big man's power game from a previous era - dunks, layups, jump hooks, good footwork inside.

"I think he's starting to want to be that good," Quentin Richardson said. "He's starting to demand the ball more ... It's all positive for us."

O'Neal once said Curry had "plenty of time to get to the 'Shogun' level." He added, "By that time, I'll be done."


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

http://www.basketballforum.com/showthread.php?p=4276949

NEW YORK (Ticker) -- New York center Eddy Curry has enjoyed a
rebirth in New York, and looks to keep it going as the Knicks
host the Boston Celtics on Monday.

Curry has registered nine straight 20-point games and four
straight double-doubles, and is averaging 24.9 points-per-game
during the stretch. Unfortunately, the Knicks have not been able
to ride his wave, as they have gone 4-5 during his hot streak.

In a 115-107 win over the Milwaukee Bucks on Saturday, Curry
scored a carer-high 36 points and finished with nine rebounds
while shooting 17-of-24 from the field.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

It seems like IT is making a conscious effort to develop Curry and get him good looks.

Seems like its been a smart move to this point.

Many of the negatives are still there. But why foolishly choose to focus on those, when the positives look so good?


----------



## cima (Nov 6, 2003)

Eddy ****ING Curry! 30 and 12...but another loss.


----------



## rosenthall (Aug 1, 2002)

Eddy's play has been impressive of late, to say the least. He's arguably been the best center in basketball in the last 10 games, and he's been good enough to make me nervous, about the Knicks' ability to turn things around, and even more nervous about the fact that they're playing in what seems like the worst division in all of pro sports, and despite being 8-15, are actually closer to leading their division than we are. 

Hopefully they'll get this homestand out of the way and start to fade off.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

p...p...p...p...p...p...production


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> It seems like <b>IT</b> is making a <b>conscious</b> effort to develop Curry and get him good looks.
> 
> Seems like its been a smart move to this point.
> 
> Many of the negatives are still there. But why foolishly choose to focus on those, when the positives look so good?


Hmm..."IT" and "conscious" in the same sentence?


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

kukoc4ever said:


> p...p...p...p...p...p...production



????

I only watched the first half, but in that half he scored 12 points, and gave up at least 8 between turnovers and allowing guards to run layup drills past him.

I continue to maintain that most of what he does right, while impressive, gets negated by what he does wrong.

In other words, more often than not, its only really "p...p...p...p...p...p...production" if you are just working off the b...b...b...b...b...b...boxscore.

On the other hand, after the whole Knicks squad almost literally sleepwalked through the entire first half, it looks like in the second half they woke up and tried to make a game out of it.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> ????
> 
> I only watched the first half, but in that half he scored 12 points, and gave up at least 8 between turnovers and allowing guards to run layup drills past him.
> 
> ...


I stubbornly maintain this theory as well. I've watched most of the Knicks' games this season, including many of them in Eddy's current 10 game run, and while I'd be a lying fool if I said he wasn't improving, the vast majority of what he does right is negated by what he does wrong. 

You get to the paint against the Knicks, you score. Eddy is always out of position and the times he realizes it, he's slow to react. And despite his impressive raw numbers, he isn't making a difference to the outcome. 

Now, a very fair point can be made that the Bulls' superior perimeter defense would lessen the impact of Eddy's soft spots and what he does on the Knicks does not equate with what he could do for the Bulls. Its hard to disagree with that line of thinking.

But it goes two ways. He wouldn't be getting inflated, force fed stats on the Bulls either. 

Anyway, I was hoping he wouldn't show any real improvement until next season. But it appears that dream is dead. Regardless, I'd still take Ben Wallace, Tyrus and what looks like a top 6 pick in a stacked draft every day of the week and twice on Sundays. 

Its going to take a lot to make me regret the Curry trade. The Chandler trade? Perhaps not so much.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

This is a pretty interesting and even-handed discussion of Curry's recent run, if anyone is interested.

http://www.knickerblogger.net/?p=437


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

I read it and did find it to be an interesting and intelligent discussion.

From the anti-Curry side, I thought the points about his inconsistency in maintianing high level performance ware well stated.

From the pro-Curry perspective, the fact that he is doing a better job of altering shots, which doesn't necessarily show up on the stat sheet, was a good point. Layup drills past him and other help defense aside, he continues to do a halfway decent job as a man defender.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Yeah, I think this whole thing is a bust.

Eddy Curry+Tyson Chandler > Tyrus Thomas and Ben Wallace.

If Paxson didn't have his stupid pride, and had just been willing to keep remnants of the Krause era, we'd be a top team in the league. It was obvious, Eddy was always one of the hardest workers on our team when he was here, he always did what he was told, very coachable.

We'd be atop the East right now, and by a wide margin if we had just kept the 04-05 team together.

That team was way too well balanced, and well come on, common sense, a 47 win team with all the main guys still on their rookie contracts, they would have undoubtedly improved, and they'd probably be on their way to a 60+ win season this year.

Anyhow, we are where we were last year, no post game to speak of. Ben Wallace doesn't do much for us, he is a liability on defense. He gets his little blocked shots here and there, but he's too old, so he can't just jump up, so he's not altering too many shots. With that weak of interior defense, its no mystery why our defense looks like crap. Thats where Tyson Chandler comes in, we are just plain too short right now. Chandler is a better defender than Wallace, he alters way more shots than Wallace does. At this point, it appears Wallace is going to just be little more than a name on our roste,r who has a good game every 5 games or so. 

Anyhow, Antonio Davis, Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, guys that can rebound/boxout, and are just plain old big players that cause havoc in the lane defensively.

Very dissapointing, besides the 04' draft/free agency, Paxson hasn't done anything too impressive as a GM. Not sure why people call him a genius.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

We still would have had the cap space to sign Wallace even if we'd kept curry. We couldn't have front loaded his contract, but we could have still signed him for the same total amount. Thus, Wallace is not part of the discussion.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

MikeDC said:


> We still would have had the cap space to sign Wallace even if we'd kept curry. We couldn't have front loaded his contract, but we could have still signed him for the same total amount. Thus, Wallace is not part of the discussion.


Right. Because when you have a $60 million center you'd naturally target another $60 million center in free agency. 

On a sheet of paper calculating capspace Wallace is not part of the discussion, but in the real world with real live breathing human beings he is.

And even if you are right (you aren't), I'm still delighted with the Curry trade.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> Right. Because when you have a $60 million center you'd naturally target another $60 million center in free agency.
> 
> On a sheet of paper calculating capspace Wallace is not part of the discussion, but in the real world with real live breathing human beings he is.
> 
> And even if you are right (you aren't), I'm still delighted with the Curry trade.


What would you place the odds (this year):
1) Wallace makes the all-star team
2) Wallace is DPOY
3) Wallace is 1st-team All-NBA Defense

Seems to me those three things are what we paid top dollar for, instead of something less than top dollar.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

Ron Cey said:


> Right. Because when you have a $60 million center you'd naturally target another $60 million center in free agency.
> 
> On a sheet of paper calculating capspace Wallace is not part of the discussion, but in the real world with real live breathing human beings he is.
> 
> And even if you are right (you aren't), I'm still delighted with the Curry trade.


:lol:


----------

