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.

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

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.

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.

http://www.82games.com/nichols3.htm

http://freedarko.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-favorite.html

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.

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.