Comments on: The Knicks Guard Quandary

By: Jim K

Jim K — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 11:55:18 +0000

While Thomas has a lot more on-court ability at this point than either Baker or Norris, I still think with the Knicks oft going to a 3-guard offense and Ariza developing, that both Davis and Rose are better, steadying influences than Thomas would be, and certainly would be more likely to play 10-15 minutes a game w/o sulking. The team is playing much better lately, despite always falling behind in the first half, and I’d rather Brown figure out the guys he already has than bring in more projects (and Thomas still is one) that will have him starting all over. Say what you want about Brown, it seems to me that if you don’t play hard, you don’t get minutes, and already I see a difference in the guys on the court from last season, even if the results aren’t always pretty.

By: JP

JP — Thu, 01 Dec 2005 05:05:12 +0000

Trading for Tim Thomas is like wanting Vin Baker back or Moochie Norris. He’s a throwaway guy that the team doesn’t need.

By: Young T

Young T — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 22:35:02 +0000

My bad, he can’t be swapped back for Davis. Still, it wouldn’t be a bad move I say to bring him back. His minutes aren’t really going to affect Lee or Frye, and whilst I like Ariza, he can’t score. TT has size, can hit the 3 and is athletic. I think even as Ariza develops, there is a hole at SF, so whilst Penny is only going to stink up the bench, why not swap him? Not much to lose really, TT can still be ditched at the end of the season. Plus the coach likes him, even if TT said their relationship got “real shady” towards the end in Philly.

By: Jim K

Jim K — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 20:16:54 +0000

Alas, it simply ain’t allowed to trade Davis back for Thomas, according at least to the Chicago G.M….

Plus, if the idea is to give young guys more and more minutes, why bring back Thomas? Davis could see less and less minutes as the season progresses if Lee shows continued growth (and when Curry comes back, Frye will still need minutes) and still act as a veteran presence. Thomas, as we see in Chicago, has no interest in being a veteran presence. He would not be happy giving minutes up to Ariza, and I wouldn’t be happy seeing Ariza on the bench for Tim Thomas.

Maybe we should bring back Charles Smith next!

By: Young T

Young T — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:54:24 +0000

I think the Knicks should trade Davis back to Chicago for Tim Thomas. Their contracts are almost identical and are both expiring. It would be preferable to deal Hardaway maybe, but I don’t think the Bulls would do it. I know Thomas is pretty ordinary, but it certainly wouldn’t hurt to have a proper SF, and I think he’d do more good than Davis as we have no depth at all at the 3. TT would be a decent fit at the 3. It makes sense, why not try?

By: Ted Nelson

Ted Nelson — Mon, 28 Nov 2005 00:23:57 +0000

One under the radar guy I wouldn’t mind seeing the Knicks get might be Mateen Cleaves. He’s the prototypical LB PG: strong defender who can’t shoot. He has a higher assist rate and lower turnover rate than any Knick.

Another strong defensive PG who might be a good, cheap free agent target this offseason is Marcus Banks.

By: dave

dave — Fri, 25 Nov 2005 16:17:41 +0000

On Crawford…

One thing I have noticed in a handful of games I have seen where he has played well is that when Crawford plays SG Brown has him coming off screens. That is, Brown is using him more like Richard Hamilton – a move brilliant for its subtlety. It’s the best way to get Crawford high percentage shots without having him overuse the dribble, which he is prone to do. What surprised me is how adept Crawford is at using screens to get good shots. That’s something we rarely saw last season.

Unfortunately, in the last 3-4 games Crawford has had to log more minutes at the point because Robinson has played so poorly. I would love to see the Knicks maybe pick up Darrell Armstrong to play on the 2nd unit. I’d still leave Marbury as the first team point, cut Robinson out of the rotation for right now, and allow both Crawford and Marbury to play some SG.

By: Ed O'Neal

Ed O'Neal — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:33:40 +0000

I think if we got Earl Watson he’d function mainly as a back-up point guard anyway or at most a starter with limited minutes. Whilst there seems to be a cry for the Knicks to go out and trade for him, its worth remembering that his strength is not really playmaking anyway and he is primarily a solid, defensive point. Last night definitely did show we need some cover at the point, no doubt about it.

By: Ted Nelson

Ted Nelson — Wed, 23 Nov 2005 09:30:21 +0000

I?m not sure why getting a PG would piss off Marbury when he went to the coach asking to move off the ball? This season alone Marbury bought the rookies 10 new suits each, donated a ton of money to Katrina survivors, and seems to be trying very hard to adjust his game to Larry Brown’s style. But, yeah, he’s a really terrible, selfish person because the media says so.

Watson is a solid back-up, but I’m not sure Denver would be compelled to move him for Rose. (I don’t think Taylor or Davis would work straight up under the CBA.)

By: Nathan

Nathan — Wed, 23 Nov 2005 02:14:32 +0000

Don’t rush to judgement of Robinson. It’s early in the season, he’s a rookie, and the hype was incredible. I think he’s just adjusting to the NBA game. He’ll catch on soon enough.