The problem is we have many other poor defenders that only magnify Curry’s weaknesses.

I do think we have good perimeter defenders (Balkman, Richardson, Chandler, Jones, Jeffries, Collins and sometimes Nate) so if we want we can surround our weak inside defense with good perimeter defense. I think for this reason a Curry/Lee frontcourt or even a Randolph/Lee frontcourt can be solid enough defensivly as long as our poor defenders like Crawford and Marbury(although Marbury sometimes steps up his defense) are out there less and never together. Also Curry and Randolph should not start together because they are bad on defense and together they would be unbearable.

Unfortunatly it looks like Isiah wants to put our two worst perimeter defenders and our two worst inside defenders all on the court at the same time.

Crawford shouldn’t be starting for us, he was a good 6th man a couple of years back, and Lee shouldnt start at SF as he wasnt that productive there. Isiah seems pretty set on the the other big man to start anyway.

BTW regarding Curry’s defense, while he is adequate manning up in the paint, he suffers tremendously against centers that can shoot from 15 feet or more. He’s also pretty bad against the pick & roll as well.

So if you look at Curry’s defense, he’s OK in one area, and poor in many others. And if you look at how many times a game he has to defend against penetrators in the lane, the pick and roll, a center that can hit from the outside vs. the times he has to defend against a low post center – the ultimate sum is a negative effect on the defense.

As the Knicks work hard to improve the perimeter D in half court sets, some teams may just try to run us.

So on our frontcourt, I think it has definite potential but I would actually love to see Randolph shipped out for a good starter at SG. But alas that is not going to happen so we will see Curry, Randolph and Lee splitting the time.

As the only Curry apoligist I actually think we have two above average and one great frontcourt player (Lee is the great one). I would love to see Lee getting the majority of minutes because our frontcourt will only get so many shots so the fact that Lee is low usage does not hurt us. You do not want two low usage frontcourt players but having one does not hurt. Lee is the most efficient and helps the offense by keeping the ball moving and getting lots of offensive rebounds so he should get the most minutes. (Unfortunatly he won’t)

I would love to see Randolph taking a sixth man role much like what Jamison did in Dallas or McCale in Boston. Curry was good last year (on offense) but next to Lee he was dominant.

While Lee was on the floor, Curry per 40:
25.1 pts 64.2% TS% 4.1 TO’s 7.6 Rbs
vs
When Lee was not on the floor, Curry per 40:
20.6 pts 57.7% TS% 4.1 TO’s 8.3 Rbs

Also Curry was the only Knick (who played the 4 or 5) to not see a signifigant decrease in rebounding, just 0.7 rebounds per 40, while playing next to Lee. In fact no other Knick (who played the 4 or 5) averaged more rebounds per 40, while playing next to Lee, than Curry.

So since playing next to Lee makes Curry much better we need to make sure they play as many minutes together as possible. Also I believe that this year Lee and Randolph will steal rebounds from each other. In fact I would not be surprised at all if there is only a little difference in rebounding between the Lee/Curry frontcourt and the Lee/Randolph frontcourt.

So I would start Curry and Lee and let Randolph get 30 minutes off the bench. I think Randolph is better suited to come off the bench than Curry because I think Curry needs to start to maintain his focus and confidence.

As for defense I think we are poor at the 4 and 5 but to call us Milwaukee bad is a bit much. In my opinion: Lee is average at defense (both on his man and at help defense) Curry is average at defending his man but very poor at help defense. Randolph is unfortunatly bad at both though better at help defense than Curry.

So I think we can aspire to be slightly below average at frontcourt defense as long as our perimeter defenders do their job, if they fail at their job, like they have in the past, then our frontcourt defense becomes much worse and starts slipping into Milwaukee territory.

Also Mike K. I want to thank you for running the best Knick website I have found. I do not think it can be said enough. The discussions are always well informed and alot of fun.

9 minutes, 0 for 3 from the field, 2 fouls, but at least two board (one offensive, even!).

Knicks’ point guards underperform their opponents at 8 of 11 categories.

FGA eFG% FTA iFG Reb Ast T/O Blk PF Pts PER*
0.8 -.023 1.6 11% -0.5 -2.5 -0.2 -0.1 -0.1 1.0 -2.0

I can’t stand it.

Maybe I’m overreacting, but holy crap! There are still people who are like Crawford is great! and Marbury is misunderstood!

Look at their statistics. They are at the bottom for their positions at key areas of their games:
Assists, TOs, rebounds, steals, and blocks.

They do one thing: score, but at a very low shooting percentage.

That spells failure for the Knicks if the status quo continues.

If I could make one semi-feasible move to improve the team – it would be finding a pass-first point guard who can defend a little bit. I’m thinking of guys like Calderon, Jarrett Jack, Chris Duhon… Marbury could move to the 2, to be a scorer and not have to chase quick PGs on his bad knees. Nate would be a potent 3rd guard. If they weren’t gone in the trade (good luck getting anyone to take them), Q would still get minutes at the 2 and 3 and Crawford would take notes.

I would make pretty much anyone on our roster available, depending on the quality of the PG coming back. A better option may be waiting until the draft, and getting our PG of the future in that 10-15 range.