Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Monday, September 15, 2014

Knicks 2007 Report Card (A to Z): Quentin Richardson

KnickerBlogger: By the numbers, Quentin Richardson’s 2007 season wasn’t all that bad, especially when compared to his 2006 season. Richardson’s rebirth seems to be based on two stats: his rebounding and shooting percentages. Richardson posted the highest per-minute rebounding average of his career (8.7 REB/40), solely due to an increase in his defensive rebounds (7.1 DREB/40). This made him the Knicks third best rebounder last year, which is impressive for a 6-6 swingman. Additionally Richardson had his best shooting season as well. His eFG (50.7%) and TS% (53.2%) were the highest of his career, and his three point percentage (37.6%) was his second best. Quentin lacks the foot speed to beat opponents to the hoop, but he compliments his outside shooting with a post up game. Therefore Richardson doesn’t get a lot of free throws (3.0 FTA/40), and the few he gets aren’t converted at a high rate (69.2% FT%). To the eye Richardson is an average defender, and the Knicks were 1.8 points worse with him on the court. Although the +/- data may be due to the exploits of Renaldo Balkman being a fantastic defensive reserve, Richardson doesn’t look to be better than a solid defender.

Unfortunately there is one more stat of Richardson’s that catches the eye: games played. Over the last 5 years Richardson has surpassed 70 games just once, and as a Knick he has missed 60 games in 2 years. Richardson’s balky back shut him down in mid March. One thing that may have contributed to Richardson’s breakdown is the heavy minutes he played. Quentin averaged 33.1 minutes per game, which may be more than his body can tolerate.

KnickerBlogger’s Grade: Omitting Injury B, Considering Injury C

2008 Outlook: There are two issues to consider with Richardson going into 2008. The first is which position will he play? Let’s assume the Knicks keep Chandler, jettison Fred Jones, and stash Nichols in Europe. The Knicks are likely to have a surplus of small forwards and a dearth of shooting guards. If you take Richardson out of the equation at small forward you can easily divide 48 minutes by Renaldo Balkman, Wilson Chandler, Jared Jeffries, and David Lee. The Knicks will be fine at small forward without Richardson. Shooting guard is another story. The depth chart is Jamal Crawford, Nate Robinson, and occasionally Marbury (assuming that Collins would play the point on offense with any other Knick guard). Even if the Knicks kept Fred Jones, there still isn’t quality depth there. So it makes sense to have Richardson primarily at shooting guard, instead of small forward. Which brings us to our next issue: How many minutes should Richardson play? Considering how much time he has missed, the Knicks would be smart to use the McDyess strategy with Richardson. That is play him sparingly between 20-24 minutes a game. If you took Richardson’s 1621 minutes last year & divided that among 82 games, you’d get 19.8 min/g. I’d much rather have Richardson available for 20 minutes a night for the entire season than have him miss 30+ games.

If you combine the two, Richardson should start the season as the backup shooting guard. In a way this makes a lot of sense. First, moving Richardson to guard will make Balkman the starter at forward. Balkman exceeded expectations last year and had an eye-popping summer league. Stat heads like Balkman due to his phenomenal non-shooting stats, while the casual fans relate to his underdog draft status combined with his blue collar game. Second, putting Q’s name on the shooting guard’s depth chart will drive youngsters like Crawford and Robinson to play better. Isiah can quickly substitute in Richardson for some “veteran leadership” when Crawford launches his patented “22 foot crossover off-balance jumper” or when Nate Robinson decides to play 1 on 5. Richardson’s no nonsense game can be instructional for the two neophytes.

Third, the risk to overplay Richardson will decrease if he’s coming off the pine. If Richardson starts, the temptation will be too great to play him major minutes. Fewer minutes will keep Quentin fresh and ideally, available for a majority of the season. Taught to be tough and confident at every level, most professional athletes don’t like to take a reduced role even to benefit their own health. Being a “player’s coach” Isiah should be able to sell this concept to Richardson. To the public Quentin would be seen as the veteran selflessly sacrificing his personal stats for the good of the team. But behind the cameras Isiah can tell Richardson that this move will allow him to avoid the crippling injuries that an overused and oft-injured professional athlete will suffer in their twilight years.

Dave Crockett: Add to all the stuff KB notes statistically that Q-Rich is easily the Knick least likely to do something stupid with the ball. As much as anything it was comforting to know that the worst you would get from Richardson is a forced shot, and even then he was as likely to run down his own miss as anyone save Lee and Balkman. In the Richardson report card KB gets at precisely what I think is the most critical dilemma facing the team (given its current construction) heading into the 07-08 season. The shooting guard situation is a real concern. Q-Rich has bolted past that point of no return where his usefulness is now largely a function of how his minutes are managed. Given what he brings to the table Q-Rich is probably most valuable playing alongside the other projected starters, particularly if paired with Balkman to allow for defensive cross-switches. But, as KB points out, Richardson would breakdown quickly on starter’s minutes so it makes sense in the abstract to bring him off the bench.

The not-so-abstract downside to benching Richardson is to weaken the starting unit considerably. Jamal Crawford, a worse defender, presumably supplants Q-Rich as the backcourt starter alongside Marbury. This leaves the Knicks (to my mind) overly-dependent on his ability to mature into a reliable starter. I should note that I’m a Crawford fan. I enjoy watching him play as much or more than any Knick but he is clearly not the kind of starting shooting guard this team needs (i.e., a decent defender with a low turnover rate, moderate usage rate, and a good 3pt shooter). Crawford is far better suited to an “instant offense” role coming off the bench and left on a short leash.

It’s unclear how concerned the brass is about the shooting guard situation. Unfortunately, even if they did the Knicks lack clear in-house options to alleviate such concerns (though I’d not rule out the possibility that Nichols might develop into a real option). Additionally, when Reggie Miller and Allan Houston are making comeback overtures that are drawing legitimate interest it’s safe to say the market lacks attractive options.

68 comments on “Knicks 2007 Report Card (A to Z): Quentin Richardson

  1. Gabe

    Richardson surprised me on defense several times, most notably against LBJ. I would guess his not-so-nice +/- is a function of Balkman’s +/- and the team’s overall yucky minus.

  2. Mr. Black

    If (big IF) Richardson’s back is healthy I want him to start at the two. I would rather see Richardson starting at the 2 with Crawford and Robinson as the instant offense guys off the pine. Robinson basically is just a “mini-me” version of Crawford. All offense, no defense, poor shot selection, pockets of brillance, turnover prone. Although Crawford is much more mature than Robinson. But back to Q…

    Richardson’s ability to rebound is quite useful. Frankly, the Knicks need Richardson’s rebounding because Curry’s is so poor. Also, with a second post option in Randolph, Richardson’s skill set is a much better fit than Crawfords. Richardson can stretch the D with his shooting and he brings more non-scoring assets than Crawford, e.g. rebounding and low turnover rate. Richardson’s lack of foot speed (driving to the basket) is a push when compared to Crawford becuase Crawford doesnt use his gifts to get to the basket. Crawford gets his man off balance then pulls the jumper, which is often off balance as well. Though Crawford’s free throw conversion rate is much higher than Richardson’s, when you adjust for technical fouls (Crawford gets them all), they have very similar FT attempts per 40 minute numbers.

    Richardson has always displayed class as a Knick. I think he would accept a bench role. However, if he is healthy, start him at the two and let him play 25-28 minutes a night. Allow Crawford to split the remaing backcourt minutes. Then we can let Balkman start at the three. Balkman’s skill set fits well with the two headed post (Eddy and Zach) and a shot happy backcourt (Q and Steph). Balkman is a much better fit than Jeffries.

  3. TDM

    Has there been any progress reports on Q since his back surgery? I know I heard a report a few months back that he was healthy enough to dunk the ball, which is quite a feat for Q.

    Last season, it appeared that Q was playing with about an extra 20-30 pounds. When he played for the Clips, he was in incredible shape. This extra weight was probably a product of his back issue, but I don’t know.

  4. bmj320

    TDM, I agree Q needs to be at 215-220lbs playing weight he was clearly to heavy last year and it showed with him struggling to get up and down the court. Q should be the starting sg with Craw off the bench. I’m not thrilled with Balkman or Jeffries starting at the sf. One or both of those guys should be able to hit and open 15ft shot neither can. Let’s rule out any notion that Lee will play some sf why because he will get enough mins at backup pf and we want him as close to the basket as possible. Let’s be realistic we have a serious void at sf.

  5. Owen

    KB – I think that “neophyte,” Jamal Crawford, is actually just less than a month older than Q. It’s funny, I also feel for some reason that Q is a grizzled vet, but they were both drafted in 2000.

    Re Craw and Q, Q played really well last year, and a lot of that was his rebounding. His performance was a .192 WP48 for the year, which is way above average for his position. But in 2005-6, he was just a .042, well below average, and Crawford was actually above average .109. I think we should start Q, play em both, and see who performs better next year.

  6. Caleb

    Not sure that limiting minutes will make a big difference, unless you’re talking about 40 minutes per, which he won’t do anyway. I’m guessing Q will miss time no matter what, so I say play ‘em when he can move around.

    The poor plus-minus probably was impacted by Balkman, and the back problems. Still – while I have no evidence for it – I think Q looks like a better defender against small forwards. He’s strong and savvy, but doesn’t seem to have the foot speed of his youth.

    Since someone mentioned Nate, I need to point out that he is not turnover-prone at all, but in fact has one of the lower TO rates in the league, better than any of the Knick guards. On defense, though… oy.

  7. Caleb

    And yeah, we need to get over talking about Crawford like he’s some kind of prospect. He’s a seven-year vet, in the prime of his career. He is what he is.

  8. Sean

    Start him over Crawford this way I dont have to throw the remote at the Tv everytime he takes an asinine shot. I honestly wanted to break his legs but then i felt bad when he had that leg injury

  9. dan

    Q’s not a 2. Can you imagine him chasing Rip hamilton around screens? Face it, Jamal is your starting 2 and Q is your starting 3 as long as he doesn’t break down. Jamal’s a good player and I really don’t understand why he gets so trashed on this board, then again I’m not a stat head. I just see the best (offensive) player on the floor when I watch Jamal.

    But back to Quentin. He’s a prototypical 3 except for the foot speed. He’s strong, he can post, he can rebound and he can shoot the 3. I love Quentin, but NYK needs him to play starters minutes the whole season.

  10. Owen

    Dan – Jamal Crawford led the team in shots per 40 and had a true shooting percentage of just 51.7%. And he doesn’t add much anywhere else. Not a great rebounder, passer, or defender. That’s why he gets trashed around here. He had a bad year last year, but was significantly better in 05-06. Hopefully he will get his act together this year.

  11. steve

    I think having the Surgery will be a blessing for Quentin and the Knicks. Scottie Pippin and Vlade Divacs had surgeries early in their careers and they had more than productive careers post surgery. In previous years Larry Johnson and now Tracy Mcgrady tried playing with Herniated Discs in their backs. Larry lost all of his leaping ability, but made up for it with savvy. McGrady misses 15 Games per year with this injury, and plays another 15 games tentatively. I think they should go in another direction…play him short minutes during the season and if they make the playoffs, then let him go all out. The Bulls and Lakers did this with Ron Harper, the Spurs now with Robert Horry. I still think Isiah will find a way to get Nichols on the roster, there are still trade winds blowing.

  12. Danis

    I like Q at two cause it opens up room for Balkman and even Lee at 3 and also Crawford was a very effective 6th man a couple of years back before he began starting. Lets just hope Q’s back holds up.

  13. dan

    Steve,
    Thanks for that. I was wondering about the effect of Qs surgery.

    Owen,
    Thanks for responding. I guess, not being a stat head I thought Jamal was pretty good last season on offense. Streaky, but hot often, and he carried us often. As to the defense, we got killed with threes for much of the season and I guess that’s in his lap.

    As to Jamal coming off the bench, I never thought he thrived in that role. Are there some stats as to his efficiency off the bench?Meanwhile, how much 2 has Quentin ever played as a Knick?

  14. Seth

    I like your idea about playing Q for only 20 minutes or so a game but there were times last year, especially early on, when it seemed like he was the best player on the floor. And unless Dickau becomes part of the rotation, Richardson’s one of the only capable catch-and-shooters on the roster. Especially with Randolph and Curry filling up the middle, we might need as much Richardson as we can get. If his injury really is that much of a problem, though, then I agree wholeheartedly. Better to have some Q than none.

  15. Mike K. (KnickerBlogger) Post author

    “Q?s not a 2. Can you imagine him chasing Rip hamilton around screens? ”

    That’s the beauty of having Balkman play the 3. You can mix & match on defense. Balkman’s athleticism, reach, and recovery is perfect for disrupting catch & shoot guards like Hamilton. You can even do that with Jeffries as well.

    And as an added bonus, who does Rip Hamilton play on defense? If Rip plays Richardson, he’ll get abused on the block. If Rip plays Balkman, he’ll get destroyed on the glass.

  16. KNICK LOVER

    PLAYING Q FOR 20 25 MINUTES A NIGHT IS PERFECT LET THE YOUNG GUYS DEVLOP AND Q PLAYS THE IMPORTANT POSSESIONS DOWN THE STRETCH NEW YORK WOULD LOVE FOR HIM TO COME OF THE BENCH AND SINK 3′S NOT TO MENTION WHEN HES HOT HE DOSE NOT CARE WHO IS IN FRONT OF HIM. ALSO STARTING HIM WITH CRAWFORD THAT WOULD BE TWO BAD SHOT SHOOTERS IN THE LINE UP COUNTING HIM AND CRAWFORD. AND FROM WHAT I HAVE HERD HE LOOKS FANTASTIC AFTER HIS SURGERY AND IS JUMPING OUT OF THE GYM.

  17. Sean

    Q been a Two for the majority of his career he played the @ guard when he was with LA. Odom was the three an after him Maggette

  18. GB

    Charles Oakley on Eddy Curry:

    You mentioned your friend Eddy Curry. How can you help him, specifically?

    I played in Chicago with him. Eddy will listen to me. I worked with him after practice. I’ll tell him this: “You got to get in shape, No. 1. You can’t play basketball if you’re not in shape. You’re not in shape to do what you should for 82 games.” He wasn’t in shape all of last year. Ain’t nobody telling him that. I’m not a friend. I’m going to speak my mind.

  19. Nick

    “And as an added bonus, who does Rip Hamilton play on defense? If Rip plays Richardson, he?ll get abused on the block. If Rip plays Balkman, he?ll get destroyed on the glass.”

    Rip would get abused on the block if he was playing the Richardson of the DePaul and Clippers days. But that Richardson doesn’t exist anymore. That undersized power 3 has been replaced by more of a Donyell Marshall figure who launches threes most of the time. Richardson doesn’t even try to be versatile anymore and it’s a damn shame.

    Also, while in theory, Balkman would own Hamilton on the boards, I don’t think it works that way in reality. It’d still be Balkman against the Bigs on the boards more than against Hamilton. Now if they were playing the PF position against each other, that’d be a different thing. Balkman would get 20 offensive rebounds.

  20. HOZ

    Q will get the comeback player of the yr.award and artest will make the nba all defensive team 4 the knicks after he is traded 2 us on the 28th because that deal is already made under the table

  21. DS

    Why doesn’t anyone on this blog have anything good to say about Q’s defense while there was so much said by the media this season about Q being “arguably the Knicks’ best perimeter defender?”

  22. Owen

    Best Perimeter Defender on the Knick = (insert joke here)

    Somebody help me out here. Where is Ken “the animal” when you need him. That was a funny post you had back there a week or two btw Ken, perhaps underappreciated.

    Jokes aside, I think Balkman is definitely our best perimeter defender.

  23. DS

    Yes, I know it’s not exactly a title that Q can be proud of but I did think he had some decent defensive performances against guys like LeBron. Maybe I was influenced by the times and breen/frazier. I don’t disagree that Balkman is much better.

  24. Z

    I?d give Q the outright grade of B for the season, and that?s after being adjusted for injury. His first season with the Knicks was really bad. For the first half of the year he shot 30%, then he was hurt and it seemed like we were going to have his big contract for four years and get NOTHING out of him.

    Then he was pleasantly surprising in the ?06 part of the ?06-?07 season, finding his shooting touch, playing what looked to me like above average D (but only above the average Knick D I guess, which doesn?t say much?), and was the second best rebounder on the team. He won a few games early with some really big games. When he went down for the season with his bad back he was really just one of many that broke down and had he played out the season with the same productivity as he had early the team probably wouldn?t have won many more games. Lee didn?t have his grade adjusted because of his injury, and he missed close to as many games as Q AND his injury hurt the team a lot more.

    All in all, like grading Curry and Crawford, one?s expectation needs to be a main factor in evaluating the players. My expectation for Q after his first year was low. He easily exceeded them this past year.

    That said, my expectation for him next season is to not play very many games at all. I think we?ll be lucky to get what we got out of him last year and if we do, he should get an A at this time next year.

  25. HOZ THE KNICK

    i heard today the suns might be shopping marion around can u imagine marbury,q,marion,zbo,ecity zeke have to look into that i dont think no team in the atlantic can deal with that type of line up

  26. Caleb

    The back problem has taken away most of his quickness, and his post game (which I don’t totally understand, since he has enough spring in his step to stay an excellent rebounder) – but he’s still a smart savvy player, a decent shooter and strong – stronger than most 2-guards, and strong enough to hold his own defending 3s.

    The most worrisome thing is that his defensive impact was off last year – by the 82games composite ranking he was actually slightly below average (for the league). Hopefully he’ll make enough of a recovery to stay a useful player, and have a long, slow decline a la Larry Johnson – rather than a total flameout.

    I still think we should trade him if we have the chance to get decent value in return, like if he’s healthy around the trade deadline. I like him, but in reality we’ll just be dealing with injuries and lengthy absences, the next few years.

  27. Dennis

    What a joke. Just when I start to get back into the Knicks, Marbury shows his true colors and stands behind Michael Vick. They both are a disgrace to all. No longer will I watch the Knicks. No longer will I go to Knick games. What Michael Vick did was wrong, plain and simple. It has nothing to do with the color of his skin or the fact that he makes a lot of money. The fact that he tourtured animals and funded the operation the way he did shows his true character. For anybody to say “we” have built Vick up only to break him down is ignorant and words of someone who, as always, makes excuses for their own actions. I was finally starting to adjust to having Marbury run point for the Knicks. He played well last year through injuries and even came up with a shoe for low income families. What a great idea! But then to make a statement like this, shows he is, clearly, not ready to be a role model. Perhaps it is time “star”bury do something more than talk trash! Get one of your teams through the first round of the playoffs.

  28. Mike K. (KnickerBlogger) Post author

    As for the grading, I think Lee exceeded expectations much more than Richardson. While his 2006 season was a total wash, Quentin had a decent amount of success earlier in his career. It’s not that Richardson’s 2007 season was out of line with the rest of his career. He played decently well, but missed a good chunk of time. On the other hand, no one expected Lee to be as good as he was. In 2006, he was a bit player, maybe an effective bench player.

    I see your point, but I guess I didn’t really write off Q after that year, and/or I think Lee’s contributions were much more important to the Knicks.

  29. Mike K. (KnickerBlogger) Post author

    Researching Marbury’s Vick comments I found this:

    http://www.newsday.com/sports/basketball/knicks/ny-spmarbury0822,0,5203037.story

    Former Syracuse standout Demetris Nichols, whom the Knicks acquired on draft night from Portland, fired his agent, Bill Duffy, after he learned that Duffy was discussing an agreement with the Knicks to send Nichols to Europe this season. A person with knowledge of the situation said the Knicks were considering that option, mainly because they already have 16 players under contract, which is one more than the NBA limit.

    Nichols, the Big East’s leading scorer who was taken in the second round by Portland, hired Bill Neff as his new agent. First-round pick Wilson Chandler signed last month, but Nichols remains unsigned. If he was to go to Europe, the Knicks would retain his rights and he would not count against the NBA roster.

  30. villainx

    Regarding Marbury’s comment on Vick. They are just dogs, so whatever. I understand people have personal attachments to pets and such, so be nice to your own pet. I don’t have a pet nor would I want to have anything to do with dog fighting. But it seems minor to me. And especially considering the spousal abuse, drug/substance abuse, etc. that some athletes get themselves into.

    Other than that, wow! Q is roughly the same age as Jamal? If Q gets in better shape, it would be something.

    Wasn’t Curry fat when he was under Oaks tutelage?

  31. Mel

    as far as the marbury comments , he is essentially right , killing animals under the ruse of it being a sport should be a universal thing , not a pick and choose thing over which is more “humane”…you think the dog or deer cares if they were killed more humanely..personally i think the dog has it better , it at least gets to fight for his life as opposed to a deer who gets murdered coldly by a shot it never saw coming.

    i cant really speak for a dog or deer buti know i’d like at least a chance at surviving .

    not every deer hunter is some civic minded Johnny Do-Right who kills his deer with 1 quick shot and brings the carcas home and eats deerburgers for the next 2 weeks , some just kill them for sport with high powered rifle from 50 meters away.

    and back to basketball, I loved what Richardson brought to the team, defensive stats or not it should be known they are scewed somewhat because he was being backed up bu non-defenders in frye and curry while going up against the best 2/3 on the other team…while balkman generally got to shut down their back up while playing with for the most part superior defensive players.

    any1 with eyes can see he was a good defender last season, better than solid.

  32. Owen

    Mel – I suppose we don’t need to get into an argument about his, it’s a basketball blog and all. But I feel someone needs to point out that there are very valid reasons for drawing a distinction between hunting wild animals and raising domesticated animals to engage in a bloodsport. One is an activity which at it’s root is based on supporting and sustaining human life. The other is purely a sadistic entertainment where people take pleasure from the atavistic thrill of seeing violence and cruelty.

    I agree that dogfighting is not a crime on the level of rape or murder, but there is still a reason it’s a crime, and hunting game animals is not.

    And having been attacked by a fighting dog breed, and having met other people who were also, I can also say that dogfighting has implications for the safety of our fellow human beings that hunting wild animals generally does not.

  33. Mike K. (KnickerBlogger) Post author

    Yeah Owen, I agree. There’s a difference between hunting for sport, hunting for food (or raising livestock), and treating animals cruelly. The RealSports show on dogfighting was a real eye opener. From the Marbury interview, it seemed that he thinks dog fighting is just about two dogs going at it. The problem is the cruel treatment behind that (not that dogs fighting to the death isn’t cruel).

    Dogs that are weak are killed through horrible means: drowning, electrocution, and my least favorite practice for the other dogs. The practice dogs are crippled or hindered from fighting (duct taped mouths), and the fight dogs are taught using them. There was a story of a non-fighting dog being abducted (from an innocent party). This dog had his hip broken before the other dogs were allowed to attack it. It would like taking the average Joe, breaking his knees, and putting him in a ring with Randy Couture. Dogs that are retrieved from these camps are thought to be too dangerous to let into society and are euthanized.

    It’s ironic that someone like Marbury, who does do good things for the community, would make a comment like that. I’m guessing it’s more ignorance of what really goes on rather than being pro-dog fighting.

  34. Frank O.

    Marbury is a moron.
    The dog fighting reflects sadistic tendencies. The brutality is unbelievable. It seems far worse to me also because dogs have been domesticated to love humans, unless trained otherwise. These animals have saved thousands of human lives, whether in daily life, in warfare, everyday they sniff for explosives in airports, etc. The idea that somehow this is okay, reflects poorly on those that shrug it off.

    The fact that Marbury opines on something like this is just again reflective of how ignorant this man is. I thought perhaps he simply had problems articulating points of view, but I’m more and more convinced that this guy is just not intelligent and this is the guy that is supposed to run the Knicks…?
    This comment alone is reason enough in my opinion to move him if possible. It’s just disgusting.

  35. Mel

    Owen – You dont think Deer hunting can be a safety issue?

    Tell that to the guy the Vice president shot while hunting.

    Also dont you think there is a significant number of deer hunters that got their start shooting squirrels , dogs and cats .

    I actually think anytime you kill and didn’t do it purely for survival you are doing it with sadistic tendencies.

    Not every deer hunter is a wonderful guy….

  36. Owen

    The Vice President was quail hunting.

    Hunting accidents do happen, including fatalities. I think that roughly 100 of the 100,000 accidental deaths every year are hunting related. That makes hunting much much safer than many any other recreational activities, boating for instance. And you are much less likely to be seriously injured then when participating in most sports.

    I disagree that “anytime you kill and didn’t do it purely for survival” you are doing it with sadistic tendencies. There is a difference between enjoying a steak, and enjoying seeing a cow electrocuted.

    All of the hunters I know eat what they kill, or make sure it gets eaten.

    And yes, you can probably find the odd hunter who is a pure sadist, who does it simply because he takes pleasure from seeing pain. However, in dogfighting, nearly everyone fits that description.

  37. Carmen2

    As far as Mel’s comments go… I wonder how he would feel if he was put in a ring with a fighting dog coming at him? At least he’d have a fighting chance… As someone who works with animals and has seen victims of fighting dogs (who are only aggressive from being trained to be) it is disgusting and certainly is not a sport.

  38. villainx

    “One is an activity which at it?s root is based on supporting and sustaining human life. The other is purely a sadistic entertainment where people take pleasure from the atavistic thrill of seeing violence and cruelty.”

    I’m sure dog fighting is rooted in supporting and sustaining human life too. I’m sure it goes way back to when I don’t know, men were men, and dogs were dogs and all that jazz.

    Dog fighting is a sport that hasn’t found legal acceptance here.

    But I just think the reaction is overboard. Sports figures do a hell of a lot worse. A player beating the crap out of his girlfriend/wife/prostitute is sadism. Dog fighting ain’t sadism. Fine, you like dogs or animals, so be nice to your pets.

  39. villainx

    “It?s ironic that someone like Marbury, who does do good things for the community, would make a comment like that. I?m guessing it?s more ignorance of what really goes on rather than being pro-dog fighting.”

    Also, I think an off the cuff statement at an event (that is what it seems like from the video clips) probably on a question about Michael Vick and not about dog fighting is different from having a conversation with Marbury regarding his feelings about dog fighting.

  40. xduckshoex

    “Oh, I wish Dickau had a chance to play for the Knicks. But hopefully he catches on somewhere.”

    I don’t know if he will. He has a nice enough offensive game, but I think most of the people who post here could probably drop 25 on him.

  41. Mike C

    just wondering if you guys were gonna talk about the FIBA games at all? USA was fun to watch, and Mexico Puerto Rico was like watching a really good high school game. I gotta take my bball fix where i can get it

  42. Ken "The Animal" Bannister

    Look,

    I enjoy a nice T-Bone as much as the next guy, but go watch some videos of say, chickens that are genetically bred so their legs can’t support their weight (bigger breat meat, natch) – they live their entire lives in small pens, which if they’re not properly spaced, half the flock will die because they peck each other to death.

    Or take a tour of your average slaughterhouse.

    Or head over to Case Western University in Ohio, the foremost center for plastic surgery research in the nation, where they do experimental plastic surgery on monkeys (b/c their skull structure is more or less the same as a human’s). They do surgery after surgery onthe same monkey, and when it can’t take any more, they put them to sleep.

    Or the perfumes/cosmetics/cleaners they drip in to rabbit’s eyes to see what’s/what’s not toxic, blinding them in most cases.

    I can go on and on, but we humans enact all kinds of torture of animals to improve our ‘lifestyle’, not survival. No one NEEDS to eat meat. We just like it (myself included). I’m willing to accept torture in order to make my life somewhat more pleasant but I’m not going to try to make myself feel better w/some ludicrous rationalization like “hunting is based in survival”. And if you don’t want to call it ‘sadism’ that’s fine. But it’s pretty brutal.

    It’s like the old saying, “everyone enjoys sausage but no one wants to see how it’s made”

  43. Luke

    Why do people wanna waste so much time every November starting player X in front of Crawford and then they stink the joint up for 6 weeks before a change is made.That only holds the team back.

    Why would Crawford consider Q a threat at sg ? Hes outplayed Q since the moment Q arrived in NY.

    Q is not a better player than Crawford and is definitely not a sg. He is a much more physical defender than Crawford but that doesnt make him better.Im not gonna knock Q because I think the guys a warrior and lays itall on the line when healthy

    Owen: where do you come up with this stuff ? Crawford isnt a very good passer ? Who are you comparing him too ? How are you comparing them ? hes more of a 1-2 than a 2-3 so you wouldnt expect him to be high on the rebounding charts for a guard but high on the assist chart which he is for a sg.

    People call Crawford streaky but look at Q’s career numbers and then Crawfords and tell me whats so different about them ?

    Jamal led the team in shots per 40 but so what ? Did you ever bother to ask why ? or incorporate actual team conditions into the equation ? With the suspensions,injuries and slumps some of our key players started the year with I cant even believe someone would try and make an issue out of it.

    Mr.Black: So is Marbury turnover prone ? Since when is 2.7 to’s a game for someone with scoring and ball handling duties causes them to be considered turnover prone ? There are guys averaging 4 a game easy and Crawford isnt even in the top ten in to’s among sg’s but you consider that to be turnover prone . Our offense requires TWO ball handlers and creators Do we really want Q 25 feet from the basket trying to create something ?
    The sg position of the knicks is unique in that it has ample opportunities in it for the pg to play off the ball and look to score.Isiah will not sacrifice all of his scoring and offensive creativity for marginal defensive gains .

    Youre not talking about inserting a Bowen or Artest but a Qrich who is a physical,tough defender but by no means a lockdown guy.He does well against the bangers who like to post up and drive using one or two dribbles abut struggles against true perimeter players who use alot of screens or dribbles as he doesnt have the footspeed.

    I think they both are the best the knicks have at there prospective positions and should start.I just hope Q can get back to 100% before camp and we can get a full season out of him.

  44. Mike K. (KnickerBlogger) Post author

    People call Crawford streaky but look at Q?s career numbers and then Crawfords and tell me whats so different about them ? … Jamal led the team in shots per 40 but so what ?

    To rehash for the 40th time this summer… It’s very simple. Crawford’s shooting percentage (46% eFG) is well below the league average, whereas Q’s (51% eFG) is right about the league average. Throw in his high shot per minute, and it means Jamal is missing a lot of shots, which hurts the Knick offense. To use a baseball metaphor, it’s like batting Doug Mientkiewicz cleanup.

  45. HOZ THE KNICK

    WE HAVE 4 DAYS UNTIL THE 28TH I THINK SOMETHING IS IN THE AIR ISIAH DOSENT SEEMS TO SURPRISE ME ANYMORE AND DONT BE SURPRISE IF HE AQUIRRE A PLAYER NOT NAME ARTEST

    LETS GO KNICKS!

  46. DS

    For an additional examples of just how stupid Marbury is, Google “YOUTHIER” and check out Gilbert Arenas’ latest blog on NBA.com.

  47. Luke

    Mike K. : To rehash for the 40th time this summer? It?s very simple. Crawford?s shooting percentage (46% eFG) is well below the league average, whereas Q?s (51% eFG) is right about the league average. Throw in his high shot per minute, and it means Jamal is missing a lot of shots, which hurts the Knick offense. To use a baseball metaphor, it?s like batting Doug Mientkiewicz cleanup.

    Again attempt at using stats without applying the roles each player are used in to the situation.

    Q would never be asked to do some of the things Jamal is asked to because hes simply is just not capable. Hes not gonna be given the ball to beat the clock or asked to create offense with so few set plays called for him.

    Crawford was much better as a starter last season than hes given credit for.For instance overall his efficiency was 13.8 and oh man thats awful as it puts him in the bottom of the top 30 among sg’s .

    However if you look deeper you see that off the bench his efficiency rating was a 9.4 which is horrible but as a starter its 16.6 which puts him right up there in with Gordon,Rip,R.Davis,Terry in terms of efficiency and thats without playing next to all star players or the benefit of being the focal point of a set offense.Q’s rating by the way is 14.6.

    I think he took too many shots but I can see the reason why he had to take so many especially the first half of the season but after the new year when Marbury started to come around he became much more selective and really started to move the ball and had several high assists games.

    I think a healthy productive frontline would go a long way towards allowing him to play more of a all around game than the bail out volume shooter that we saw last year. I fully expect a career high in fg% this season and 5+ assists per game .

  48. xduckshoex

    “Hes not gonna be given the ball to beat the clock or asked to create offense with so few set plays called for him.”

    Wait a second here…are you saying that Crawford is ASKED to take shots outside of the offense that the Knicks are running?

    ‘Ok guys, run this set…and while you’re doing that, Crawford is just going do his own thing.’

    Simple logic dictates that if he was supposed to be taking as many shots as he does, he would have more set plays run for him, as it makes getting clean looks a lot easier.

  49. dave crockett

    KB said:
    …The RealSports show on dogfighting was a real eye opener. From the Marbury interview, it seemed that he thinks dog fighting is just about two dogs going at it. The problem is the cruel treatment behind that (not that dogs fighting to the death isn?t cruel).

    Sorry for being two days late on this KB, but I feel compelled to add that if anything the behind-the-scenes activity actually narrows any difference between dog-fighting and some other animal bloodsports. I think the basic tenor of Marbury’s comments is correct?though hunting is the wrong comparison sport because the scale is different. His basic point is that the media and public are pretty fickle and arbitrary about what constitutes animal (even dog) cruelty?and not in some philosophical, metaphysical way either?and to whom it directs outrage. Despite years of evidence documenting similar cruelty to greyhound racing dogs the media has steadfastly refused to allow this story to advance beyond Vick and become about dogs that are mistreated. Everything in the Vick indictment happens regularly in greyhound racing behind-the-scenes, obviously other than the fighting itself. Check any local greyhound rescue organization (e.g., greyhound.org). Rather, at a historical moment when every serious, respected constitutional scholar has made it clear that our government is currently ripping our constitution to absolute shreds we get a columnist for the Washington Post?not the NY Post?labeling Vick a fascist. A fascist!?

    I have no taste for absolving Vick of criminal culpability for his involvement in a criminal enterprise but this story has taken on a bizarre quality that is positively Orwellian.

  50. Caleb

    Weighing in from Atlanta, as a dogowner…

    You don’t have to accept dogfighting to think the anger against Vick is out of proportion. I think that’s all Marbury was trying to say.

    I mean – before the plea they were talking about RICO charges, 20 years in prison and a lifetime ban from the NFL. Also here in Atlanta, Ray Lewis – in the nicest way to put it – stood around watching his two best friends stab two men to death. He got what, a few days in jail? A few games suspension?

    As for Marbury, he might not win any spelling bees, or be the greatest point guard in the NBA – but of all the commenters calling him a horrible human being, how many of you have Latrell Sprewell jerseys in your closet? Everyone’s favorite Knick has physically assaulted other human beings on multiple occasions. How many of you have fond memories of Anthony Mason? I do, but put the jersey in mothballs after he basically admitted porking a 12-year-old. (13?)

    I guess Vick (and even Marbury) are a good reminder that for all the passion we put into sports, you’re on thin ice when you put another person on a pedastal – especially when most of what you know about them involves shooting, running, pitching, etc.

    I think Marbur was also saying that a lot of people have skeletons in their closet, so he doesn’t want to pile on #7 because his came to light.

    p.s. Gilbert’s blog on the Miked up interview is hilarious.

  51. jon abbey

    I don’t think anyone’s calling Marbury a horrible human being, we’re just constantly reminded that he’s an idiot, which is relevant because he’s just as stupid on the court.

  52. Frank

    Just weighing in on the Vick thing — it doesn’t bother me so much that he’s into dogfighting. I mean it does bother me a lot as the owner of a great little beagle– but what really gets me is the fact that he basically tortured these dogs if they didn’t do what he wanted. Slamming them to the ground? Electrocuting them? Hanging them? This is sick and twisted stuff. This is serial killer stuff right? Isn’t one of the signs of an early serial killer the fascination with torturing animals? Yeeech.

    Not to give anyone like Ray Lewis or the numerous wife-beating athletes out there a pass in the least, but I actually think Vick is much sicker in the head than those guys. Spousal abuse, drug abuse, assault — all terrible things that should never be tolerated. But torture and bizarre killing rituals? That is messed up.

    And for the record — I think hunting is nearly as bad as dogfighting. At least in dogfighting the dogs have a chance, cruel as it is. In hunting it’s a duck or deer minding its own business, suddenly put in a no-win fight against a shotgun or assault rifle or whatever they use now. That’s just ridiculous and pointless.

    Sorry, don’t mean to editorialize too much in a basketball forum.

  53. xduckshoex

    “I think hunting is nearly as bad as dogfighting. At least in dogfighting the dogs have a chance, cruel as it is.”

    Excellent post, but I disagree with this on the grounds that dog fighting does not end when the match is over. There is a lot of cruelty involved in raising a dog to be a killer. The dogs have a fighting chance only in the ring; in the grand scheme of things, the dog does not have a chance to be anything more than a vicious killing machine for the entertainment of others, and if it does not perform up to par it is killed without having a fighting chance.

    I see hunting as a quick kill, which is admittedly bad, but I think most of us would prefer it to a lifetime of torture and abuse.

    And hunting also serves some legitimate purposes, like population control. There are areas of the United States where hunting is the only thing that controls the deer population because we’ve already gotten rid of most of their predators. So if it’s an evil, then it is a necessary one at this point in time.

  54. Owen

    Yeah, it’s not worth arguing here, but definitely, there is no comparison between hunting a wild animal and raising dogs to kill each other. Apples and oranges.

  55. xduckshoex

    That interview gets better every time I watch it. I can’t wait for Marbury to average 12-13 dimes and 2-3 assists on top of that.

  56. Luke

    xduckshoex Said:

    Wait a second here?are you saying that Crawford is ASKED to take shots outside of the offense that the Knicks are running?

    ?Ok guys, run this set?and while you?re doing that, Crawford is just going do his own thing.?

    Simple logic dictates that if he was supposed to be taking as many shots as he does, he would have more set plays run for him, as it makes getting clean looks a lot easier.

    No he was not asked to take shots outside the offense however the knicks offense consisted of dumping the ball inside to Curry most of the most of the game.The ball normally ended up in Crawfords hands when the clock was under 5 seconds and the knicks HAD to get some type of shot off.

    The majority of Crawfords shots came in the 4th quarter.He’d have 6 fga at halftime but come 4th quarter when the knicks were down Isiah would try and ride him in hopes he would get hot and maybe spark a comeback.Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didnt.

    I think the majority like the way Crawford played
    under brown but forget just how many curls and screen plays Brown called for Crawford. How many do you recall being called by Isiah last year? Once the offense started going through Curry you really saw very few curls or screen plays and instead when Isiah wanted to get Crawford the ball he would do a clear out or put him at point and run a screen and rolls.

    I think what is really getting missed is that in Dec and Jan he averaged over 5 apg.Also in Jan he averaged 20 ppg and shot 42% but we dont know exactly when he hurt himself only that it was weeks before he finally sat down.

    I think Isiah will get him to focus on getting the ball inside more but I also feel he was already doing that anyway but the knicks only had one big that produced and that was Curry and Eddy averaged 20 ppg with Crawford in the starting lineup.Zach stepping into Frye’s spot only should make Crawford and Marburys passing abilities stand out more.

  57. xduckshoex

    “The ball normally ended up in Crawfords hands when the clock was under 5 seconds and the knicks HAD to get some type of shot off.”

    Crawford did not take a disproportionately large percentage of his shots late in the shot clock when compared to the other Knicks guards, though a much lower percentage of his buckets were assisted on. That clearly suggests that his freelancing was NOT by design and that it hurt the Knicks offense.

  58. Brian Cronin

    Yeah, the comparisons between Marbury and Tracy Jordan (Tracy Morgan’s 30 Rock character) seem quite apt.

    Both seem to be nice enough fellows, just so dumb that they appear borderline crazy.

  59. Ben R

    I am coming to this discussion late because I have been away, but there are a few things I would like to add.

    I believe that Q is a much better player than Crawford but as has been discussed he has back problems and can not be counted on to be availiable every game. Because he will not always be availiable we need him to come off the bench so his absence when his back acts up won’t hurt the Knicks as much. 20-25 minutes off the bench seems the best plan.

    Also Crawford plays better when he starts so he should be our starting 2 but I think it is our weakest position and we should really look to improve it. (hopefully by trading Zach and allowing Lee to start, wishful thinking I know) I do not want Crawford as our long term starter but he seems the best option right now.

    On the Marbury comments, I think it was a very unwise thing for him to say, but in a way he has a point. Not the hunting comment but the comparisons to the crimes of other players.

    Dogfighting is a terrible thing and Vick deserves every minute he spends in prison and probably many more but is it really worse than many of the other things that players seem to skate on.

    I have a much bigger problem with the admitted wife beaters, Ruben Patterson’s “sexual assault”, Mason’s sex with a 12-13 year old, Kobe’s rape charge, etc. Kobe was allowed to play during his rape trial, yet Vick was not going to be allowed to play during his dogfighting trial. Why are crimes against women more acceptable than crimes against dogs.

    Vick should be punished but so should many other atheletes.

Comments are closed.