Knicks · Knicks Emerging in Jamal Crawford Chase (page 8)

fishmike wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Elite wrote:im not mad at adding Jamal's offense.. what I'm mad about is losing Douglas's defense.. we desperately needed it

we have iman's defense.

this idea that toney is a great defender kinda needs to go away. he plays hard. he doesn't play smart.

Im open in my love for TD.. but what an upgrade Crawford is. Dude would be a stat stuff on this team. You could leave Fields as starting SG but open that job up to Shump if his defense is as good as advertised

agreed. i think jamal is the veteran savvy guard this team needs.

in all honesty, if the deal on the table was to trade billups for crawford, i'd probably say yes. the idea that the knicks might be able to turn chauncey billups and toney douglas into jamal crawford and tyson chandler is almost too good to be true.

crzymdups wrote:

ATrain wrote:Can someone help me understand why Atl would want to pay the luxury tax for Walker, Balkman, and TD?

It'd be a three-way trade. Atlanta would get mainly cap room and a trade exception. Golden State would take the players back.

Gotcha. Thanks

Let me tell ya'll about Dallas if you want to compare the acquisition of Crawford to Terry.

Terry is a better shooter than Crawford.

Carlisle is a better coach, at least defensively, than D'Antoni.

Deshawn Stevenson, Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion and Tyson Chandler were all in the lineup for their defensive prowess.

Terry was the sparkplug off the bench.

The difference with that team (and nearly every championship team) is that they have a good balance of defense and scoring. The Knicks right now are top heavy in scoring with little defense. They have Jeffries, unknown Shumpert, Douglas, Fields and Chandler. Only one (maybe two, if Crawford isn't here) will be starting. Chandler cannot mask the defensive deficiencies of everyone of the court. He'll help Amar'e stay out of foul trouble. He'll make us a better defensive team down low. But he will get in foul trouble when Crawford is constantly letting him man beat him off the dribble and right into the paint. Tyson can't fix that. Guys will need to keep their man in front of them if Tyson is to be effective. Stevenson, Marion and Kidd all did a good job with that. Tyson fed off that and helped them tremendously. The Mavericks, like every other NBA champion, had that right mix of offense and defense. We don't have that mix right now. We need more defense. 100% we need more defense.

Childs2Dudley wrote:Let me tell ya'll about Dallas if you want to compare the acquisition of Crawford to Terry.

Terry is a better shooter than Crawford.

Carlisle is a better coach, at least defensively, than D'Antoni.

Deshawn Stevenson, Jason Kidd, Shawn Marion and Tyson Chandler were all in the lineup for their defensive prowess.

Terry was the sparkplug off the bench.

The difference with that team (and nearly every championship team) is that they have a good balance of defense and scoring. The Knicks right now are top heavy in scoring with little defense. They have Jeffries, unknown Shumpert, Douglas, Fields and Chandler. Only one (maybe two, if Crawford isn't here) will be starting. Chandler cannot mask the defensive deficiencies of everyone of the court. He'll help Amar'e stay out of foul trouble. He'll make us a better defensive team down low. But he will get in foul trouble when Crawford is constantly letting him man beat him off the dribble and right into the paint. Tyson can't fix that. Guys will need to keep their man in front of them if Tyson is to be effective. Stevenson, Marion and Kidd all did a good job with that. Tyson fed off that and helped them tremendously. The Mavericks, like every other NBA champion, had that right mix of offense and defense. We don't have that mix right now. We need more defense. 100% we need more defense.

I don't disagree with what you're saying, which is why I'd really like Shawne Williams back for one thing - he's a very solid defender for the 3/4 positions.

I think the Knicks are putting together a very very good team. But I've always questioned whether they can win it all with Amar'e's and Melo's lack of commitment to defense. Then again, Dirk was NEVER known as a defender and was thought to be a liability in the department. Kidd doesn't have the quickness to cover the many quick PGs in the this league. I agree that certain Mavs played for defense, but I think they had their weak spots defensively, too.

It is about building a balanced team though. And right now I fear the Knicks don't have anyone who can create from the perimeter or penetrate. I think that can lead to a VERY stagnant looking offense, like what we saw against Boston. It broke down to basically Melo isos and then Amare isos. I think Jamal is that third ingredient the offense needs, get penetration, pick and pop to Melo, pick and roll with Amare, drive and dish to Tyson. or just take the open layup when everyone is terrified to leave Amare, Melo, Tyson. Also creates tons of opportunities for Iman or Fields or Shawne Williams.

As for defense, Jamal is a liability. Toney was in his own way, too. He overplayed guys constantly and got beat repeatedly.

But I think the biggest questions/issues on defense are still gonna be - how much effort do Amar'e and Melo put in. IF they put in the effort, this can be a GREAT team. If not, the Knicks are a 4 seed who gets to the second round and gets beat around by Chicago or Miami.

Toney is a better defensive player than Crawford. No comparison there.

Childs2Dudley wrote:Toney is a better defensive player than Crawford. No comparison there.

Toney got absolutely schooled by Rondo and Ray Allen in the Boston series. He just got abused. He was injured and he can get better.

Big difference with Jamal is that Jamal could abuse Ray Allen on the other end, he abused DWade repeatedly. That counts for something, too.

Toney always has that deer in the headlights look when he's running the point. I just don't feel like he's ever gonna get it.

doesn't sound like the crawford thing is a done deal at all anyway. i'd love for it to happen, but it does seem almost too good to be true.

daldridgetnt David Aldridge
Can confirm multiple NY reports that Knicks are in pursuit of @JCrossover. Hawks initially balked at sign/trade Sat., but are reassessing.
7 minutes ago

crzymdups wrote:

Childs2Dudley wrote:Toney is a better defensive player than Crawford. No comparison there.

Toney got absolutely schooled by Rondo and Ray Allen in the Boston series. He just got abused. He was injured and he can get better.

Big difference with Jamal is that Jamal could abuse Ray Allen on the other end, he abused DWade repeatedly. That counts for something, too.

Toney always has that deer in the headlights look when he's running the point. I just don't feel like he's ever gonna get it.

Okay. I guess Jamal Crawford can do no wrong. You have your opinion. You haven't moved off of it at all. No point in discussing this any further.

Only thing I have left to say is, I hope this trade does not happen.

Melo and STAT in particular have been spewing a lot of rhetoric regarding being a great defensive unit. All of this potential means nothing if they don't commit. I think they can do it. That's why we hired a defensive coordinator. Not to make everyone better 1 on 1 defenders, but to improve our team defense. If everyone commits and decides its ok to score 102 ppg rather than 108 as long as the extra effort is there on D, we'll be very dangerous.

I hope we don't get him- he's probably going to start declining over the next few years, and with his type of game he'll probably decline fast. I really like Jamal as a person, but I do think people are being a bit nostalgic because of that- I remember when he was on our team, there was almost constant criticism of him- we hated the way he played! Hot and cold, no defence, chucking up bad shots- honestly, look at message boards from back then. But he was always a class act, and was very coachable (even Larry Brown liked him and that says a lot about his character since his game is the type that Larry Brown hates).

I wouldn't give up TD for him, I just don't think he'll fit with melo and Stat (though I haven't seen him play the past few years so he may have become a wiser player).

I do have a question though- has anyone watched Jamal these past couple of years on the Hawks? if so how has his game changed, or is he pretty much the same player he always was? TKB, do you know?

Childs2Dudley wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Childs2Dudley wrote:Toney is a better defensive player than Crawford. No comparison there.

Toney got absolutely schooled by Rondo and Ray Allen in the Boston series. He just got abused. He was injured and he can get better.

Big difference with Jamal is that Jamal could abuse Ray Allen on the other end, he abused DWade repeatedly. That counts for something, too.

Toney always has that deer in the headlights look when he's running the point. I just don't feel like he's ever gonna get it.

Okay. I guess Jamal Crawford can do no wrong. You have your opinion. You haven't moved off of it at all. No point in discussing this any further.

Only thing I have left to say is, I hope this trade does not happen.

I'm with you about Crawford. His game is not what we need unless he miraculously decides to be a facilitator. He's a great penetrator and passer. But he's a chucker. I'd live with his defensive deficiencies if he sacrificed chucking for facilitating. But there's too much of a sample size with him to think he could do that.

The only way I'd bring in Crawford is as 6th man. I don't want to see melo/amare/crawford together unless its towards the end of the game. Also wouldn't trade Shumpert or TD

gunsnewing wrote:The only way I'd bring in Crawford is as 6th man. I don't want to see melo/amare/crawford together unless its towards the end of the game. Also wouldn't trade Shumpert or TD

No way they include Shump. But TD is gone in this deal.

The one big interesting caveat for me in the whole pursuit of both Jamal and Bibby is this: Mike Woodson. He's the defensive assistant coach who had both of those guys on his bench over the past years and he seemingly is for these moves. Perhaps he knows something we don't.

Oh God, would love this move if it happens and I never thought I would say that about potentially bringing back Jamal Crawford. If Douglas is the only asset of value that we are giving up, I think it is a no-brainer.

The last time we had him here, it was just the wrong situation and even though he thrived in the few games that he played under D'Antoni, Walsh did the right thing by selling high and getting us under the cap to get our stars.

For the current situation though, he would be a perfect fit. You can never have enough playmakers and Crawford would be deadly on this team because of the attention that Melo/Amare get on a nightly basis. We need to surround our stars with guys that can hit the 3 and Crawford not only does that, but brings along the ability to go off on any night which is obviously a huge bonus.

On top of that, when you consider that Amare is still very much an injury risk, having another significant weapon on offense like J-Craw is a good insurance policy to get through the season. And if we are at full strength, it should be fun to watch other teams trying to guard us in the playoffs when we have multiple weapons on offense and the best offensive coach in the game.

From a defensive perspective, I think people are reading too much into letting Douglas go for Crawford. With Amare/Melo in our starting lineup, we'll probably never be a top 5 defensive team and there is nothing wrong with that. If our offensive is as good as it can be, then our D just needs to be good, not great. Adding Chandler was obviously huge in helping us become a better defensive team and eventually if Shumpert develops, we could potentially use him as our defensive anchor on the perimeter. Douglas isn't a good enough player right now (even on D) for us to withhold him from any potential Crawford deal. Especially not when we just drafted a rookie that will most likely be able to give us the same production eventually, if not more.

I really like how creative the knicks are being right now. I just hope we don't dump all of our young talent. I'm fine with trading douglas, but leave shump. If there is a way we can get Crawford and Barrea, even better. TD is not the one to lead this team at PG, let's face it.

I respect your point, Martin. Perhaps Woodson is driving some of these moves. Either way, I'm glad we got off the CP3 train and focused on pieces to make this team better and more copetitive.

I like Jamal a lot and hope he does come. I was also sad to see him go. His TOs seemed to have gone down a little and his FG% has gone up a tad the past few seasons. I don't think we would have to worry about the chucking so much anymore, although everyone does take bad shots now and then. He's a scorer though, so anyone who expects him to be a facilitator is kidding themselves.

i strongly agree with both of these statements:

HPbasketball Hardwood Paroxysm
By the way, Crawford's defense overall is not good, but last year, especially in the playoffs I was impressed.
8 minutes ago

HPbasketball Hardwood Paroxysm
Key with Crawford for me, you double Melo or Amar'e, you pay. That's the objective.
6 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

Allanfan20 wrote:I like Jamal a lot and hope he does come. I was also sad to see him go. His TOs seemed to have gone down a little and his FG% has gone up a tad the past few seasons. I don't think we would have to worry about the chucking so much anymore, although everyone does take bad shots now and then. He's a scorer though, so anyone who expects him to be a facilitator is kidding themselves.

I see no way that Jamal doesn't pass to STAT, Melo or Tyson. I predict lots of sweet Alleyoops and dishes on cuts to the basket. When you play with All Stars it's a lot easier to think pass and to make them. They'd gang together and kill Jamal if he didn't pass enough.

If you want a consistent shooter to hold down the SG spot Jamal is not your man. I think FIelds better fits that role and his shooting %s for last season are way better than Crawford's. Bibby, TD and fields should be enough offensive bunch at the guard spots.

blkexec wrote:

Knicksfan wrote:If we can somehow land Barea and still can make a deal like this, we would've improved the team. Still, Im a little iffy about getting Crawford back. I'd rather we pursue Anthony Parker as a 2-guard or simply focus on getting a pure starting one. I know his name is always thrown out to the Knicks by fans while nothing gets insinuated in the media, but I'd happily trade for Sessions as I think he would be a solid starting PG and would make it easier to rotate the 1 and 2, as I think Iman Shumpert can be the backup to both positions, while we would have Bibby to be the third string PG and Walker as 3rd string shooting guard.

I still see two holes we needed to fill....PG and SG

You may not like Bibby, I don't either....But I think TD and Bibby, with Shump can hold down the PG rotation.

The reason why I liked the JC trade was because he fills that consistent outside 3 pt threat to help spread the floor. Anthony Parker would fill that same need. JC is a special case, because he can also bring the ball down at the PG position.

We have jump shooters, but not consistent shooters....Bibby is going to be our best outside shooter right now.....If Shump can run the point, then I can see Bibby and TD as that outside threat.

crzy, why do you keep insisting Jamal creates for others? A highlight reel really tells the story too.

crzymdups wrote:i can't believe people don't see the value in bringing jamal here. the guy can penetrate from the perimeter and get to the rim, run the pick and roll, get our bigs easy easy shots. he's a playmaker. unlike anyone we have here. comparing toney douglas to jamal crawford is just not accurate. jamal has a mid-range game. he's a perfect perfect fit here.

look at the passing and playmaking in this mix. not to mention all the buzzerbeaters. if we're in win now mode, there are aren't going to be too many players better than jamal we can add.