Although the lineup is not set yet, most people seem to think it will look like this. PG: Marbury / Crawford) [Think AI in Philly with Brown], Robinson SG: Crawford / Marbury, Hardaway SF: Richardson, Ariza PF: Taylor, Rose, Davis C: Curry, James We could see Crawford starting PG with Marbury playing the 2. Richardson will be starting the 3 for sure. He's probably their best, most balanced player. All Larry needs to do is get him to play and not let him camp out on the 3 point line like he did in PHX.
I guess the Knicks have already given up on Channing Frye? Or maybe they see him as more of a four... I'm surprised the Bulls didn't try to get him in a trade for Curry. Oh well, I don't think Curry is going to make that much of a difference. He's a back to the basket center and Crawford and Marbury are shoot-first point guards. I don't really see their games integrating well this season. Anyone that saws Crawford is a sharpshooter should check their stats. He shot .398 from the field last year and .361% from three point land. Larry Brown is gonna be tearing his hair out trying to get those knuckleheads to play like Chauncey & Rip.
its pretty sad when the only real positive factor on your team is the coach. i wasnt paying too much attention to the knicks, but looking at your lineup, i thought they had done better than that in the offseason. their roster is slightly improved, but that doesnt say alot. l.b. is good enough to get them into the playoffs, but w/out more roster moves its going to be tough. who do yall think will be better, the magic or the knicks? i say magic.
I agree that the Knicks are going to be very good, but far from great. If I am LB I start practicing a zone so that I could have Curry and James on the floor together. I think their best lineup would be Starbury / Crawford / Q / Curry / James which has a lot of firepower. Steph is a really good player who was overhyped at one time and has since played on crap teams so the perception is that he is not as good as he is. I think that with LB this could be a big year for the Knicks and Stephon. Other than Mia, Ind, Cle, and Det there is no team that I can think of that is head and shoulders better than the Knicks in the east.
I agree, we are talking about a team capable of being on of the last playoff teams, or late lottery team, nothing more. On the eastern conference non-playoff teams, I think they are way behind Cleveland. They are not going to be better than the Heat, Pistons or Pacers by any stretch of the imagination either. That means they will have to beat out two among Boston, Nets, Washington, 6ers or Chicago just to make the playoffs. I'd say 50/50 at best just for a 7th or 8th seed. I think their biggest problem is they don't have a bonified stud team leader. Marbury has to be that guy, but he always seems to alienate others despite his looking great on paper (scoring, assists, a/to).
Bottomline.... The knicks got back more than they gave up, which is a step in the right direction. To bad the Knicks have miles to go....
Hmm, I am not sure that's really their lineup, as many has pointed out. But your starting lineup is not scaring anybody. The guards are ballhogs. The forwards are so old they need crutches on the court. The center's health is still a question. So no, they are not even a good team, let alone being "great."
The NBA writers union has petitioned Stern for at least one guaranteed punchline in the league. Stern's decided to go with Isiah.
their team isn't horrible and their biggest upgrade is the coaching and not their player talent. larry brown will ensure that the knicks don't look like a bunch of douche bags running around but their roster is not good. i want to start breaking down how the knicks are not good but there are so many flaws with them i don't know where to start. 1. curry - the biggest risk with him is not even his heart problem, instead it is his potential to suck up a lot of money from the knicks and develop into nothing. curry has show very little as a big man other than the ability to score. he is a very poor rebounder and a poor defender...those are the 2 things that you DON'T want to see in a big man. 2. davis - his numbers have been declining while his age has been increasing. he averaged career lows in scoring and rebounding last year. granted he did play the fewest mpg in a decade but that is also a function of his age. he is a good guy but he is just too old and also injury riddled. 3. houston - i hope he will come back healthy cuz i like him but you cannot consider him to be reliable anymore. he is the equivalent to jeff bagwell now. makes big dollars but can only be a guy to come off the bench for you. 4. crawford, marbury, q - i like these guys a lot for their scoring and play making ability, but who among them plays any defense at all? 5. robinson, frye - i like robinson as a good energy guy for scoring off the bench, but the knicks don't need more scorers. i also like frye a lot. he is a big guy who can get some boards and block some shots. so you are left with big questions at SF if houston can't go and hardaway isn't someone you can depend on. then you have undersized PFs with rose, and taylor and an old one with davis. then you have a center who you are trying to make a key player on your team who does not rebound or play defense but is a talent post scorer, but has major motivation questions and health questions. do you really think he will continue to stay at this playing weight if he gets a big contract? hell no. however you do have 2 very talented guards with crawford and marbury and a talented 2/3 with q. and overall you have a team that has no good defenders. this is not a great team by any stretch.
i guess the terms 'budgeting', 'paying too much', mean nothing to The Knicks. I just don't understand how your $60,000,000 over the cap and still have a 10th seed team? At least the Yankees overspend and win...
The roster actually doesn't look too horrible, especially with larry at the helm. I anticipate him convincing guys like marbury and richardson to be active on defense--if you remember, richard hamilton was not exactly a defensive star with the wizards. Yet he was forced to play decent d in detroit and succeeded to some degree. curry was a move the knicks had to make, health problems or not. Sure, he's probably lazy and probably loves the game as much as olowokandi, but when you're running the knicks, you have to keep the ship afloat or be fired--no such thing as gutting the roster completely and starting from scratch. Worst case scenario--knicks waste $60 million on curry--drop in the bucket for jim dolan(still owner?). Look at their shameful approach to the salary cap--they don't even acknowledge it. At best, curry gives them a chance to compete for the championship a few years down the road if everything works out perfectly. In my opinion, the problem will be crawford. Sure, everyone's finally acknowledged he's a shooting guard, so he should shoot. But from I've seen, he's not a terribly consistent shooter and it doesn't appear he likes to do anything but shoot. I don't forsee him getting along with marbury too well, for some reason. I agree with previous posters--look for larry to deal him if possible.
The Knicks have a better collection of talent than they have had in recent years, but they don't fit together and suck as a collective unit.
larry brown has led the suffering clippers to the playoffs, the at the time suffering pacers, lowly sixers year after year, then the team of misfits that no one wanted in the pistons into a championship team. billups, rejected around the league rasheed, bad boy poster child big ben, undrafted, thrown in as garbage in the grant hill sign and trade tayshaun, who honestly thought hed be good? hamilton: skinny, soft, no defense shooter from the wizards his system is proven to work... and i think it will again
thats fine if you want to argue that brown will have another amazing coaching year but if you want to argue that the knicks roster actually looks good then yeah you are crazy
Uh, the Mavs went to the WCF a few years ago. That qualifies as better than 1st or 2nd round material. Get off the Mavs hate parade and try to be objective please.
You Mavs haters need to think a little. What depth exactly has the Mavs lost? The Mavs had a logjam at Finley's postion and still do. The only player the Mavs lost was Finley and his skills are fading fast. He is only a spot up shooter now and those guys are a dime a dozen. The Mavs need to play guys at Finley's old position that will help with defense and rebounding. Also, the Mavs went on a huge run late last year with Avery as the coach. Which guy did Avery get rid of? Keep in mind, the Mavs dumped Finley, he didn't leave on his own like Nash. So now Avery basically has the same team as late last year with Christi substituted for Finley and the young guys are a year older and wiser. I watched the Mavs - Suns game 6 the other day and Finley didn't even sniff the floor for the final 9 minutes of the game! I guess Avery figured out that Finley would have 6 lousy games with a good one sandwiched in between those 6. Game 6 was one of his lousy ones.
