Knicks · If all 3 where in their prime who would you want on this team today Starks,Houston or spree (page 2)

Allan and Derek Harper are my favorite pro players of all time. This video is an example. Seemed like he was at his peak at age 32 with the two 50 point games before injuries cut his career way too short. He probably had a few great seasons left and could have played until his late 30's to near 40 if not for those injuries. The assortment of moves as one poster pointed out along with his amazing footwork and willingness to sacrifice and take on any role to win was sensational.

Swishfm3 wrote:

martin wrote:

AnubisADL wrote:

man forgot how good a shooter he was.

Forgot how good of a player he was...that back injury really limited him

Probably Starks but only Knicks fans even remember these guys.

mrKnickShot wrote:Loved Spree's defense.

if Spree were allowed to play his natural position, he'd would outshine Houston. Houston only outpointed Spree by like 1 or 2 points a game. If Spree was guarded by 2's like Alan was he'd likely would have averaged 20pts a game for the Knicks.

Spree had the better all around game, was a better passer and you can't say Houston and defense in the same sentence.

People give Houston props for that last second basket in Miami but, if Spree hadn't gotten that steal, there would have been no last second shot. Alan couldn't hold Spree's jockstrap.

You put Shump and Spree on the floor at the same time, opposing guard will be shook for real. Houston would take shots from Melo while Spree even if he had a bad shooting night still would still be effective. Houston on a bad shooting night is a stationary cardboard cutout.

Houston WA only effective if he was placed in isolation. He needs the ball to create his own offense.

Starks would be the ultimate teammate for the knicks. So if rather have him in Jr smiths role and start Sprewell at the shooting guard spot. Spree was deadly in the open floor the same way wade and Lebron are. He could shoot, create, pass and defend everyone.

Spree all day with Starks on the side.

Is the question who is better or who is a better fit for this team?

To me H20 fills a need that opens the paint up for Amare and Melo to play closer to the basket. Felton is decent penetrator. The kick out to Allans jumpshot fills the need. Spree and Starks play a great energy game. Spree is far better than Starks.

Love the things the Underdog Starks did as a knick.

Nalod wrote:Is the question who is better or who is a better fit for this team?

To me H20 fills a need that opens the paint up for Amare and Melo to play closer to the basket. Felton is decent penetrator. The kick out to Allans jumpshot fills the need. Spree and Starks play a great energy game. Spree is far better than Starks.

Love the things the Underdog Starks did as a knick.

Houston would be a defensive liability forcing Tyson and our bigs to switch which, would only hurt our defense. The philosophy going forward is defense, remember :)

Plus, Alan is/was too one dimensional. As I said, if his shot wasn't falling, Dude was totally useless.

As said above, Spree and then Starks.

A shooting guard like Houston is EXACTLY what this team needs.

Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

Mray20 wrote:Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

and he did Nothing else. We don't need another Novak, but we could use another ALL around guard like Spree who could facilitate, defend and was a decent re bounder.

DurzoBlint wrote:

Mray20 wrote:Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

and he did Nothing else. We don't need another Novak, but we could use another ALL around guard like Spree who could facilitate, defend and was a decent re bounder.

Comparing Houston to Novak is like comparing apples to brocolli. They are two completely different players.

While allans D has always been sort of suspect, the knicks as a team was still a top defensive team..I don't recall reggie being any kind of threat on defense , that goes for ray allen as well..

Comparing allan to novak makes you look like you started watching basketball last season..

DurzoBlint wrote:

Mray20 wrote:Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

and he did Nothing else. We don't need another Novak, but we could use another ALL around guard like Spree who could facilitate, defend and was a decent re bounder.

Another Novak? Come one man. That's like comparing James White to Lebron James because they can both jump high. You couldn't be further off. Houston would be incredible playing off of Melo. The ideal SG for this team. Love Sprewell, but i see Shumpert being that type of player for us down the line.

Allanfan20 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

Mray20 wrote:Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

and he did Nothing else. We don't need another Novak, but we could use another ALL around guard like Spree who could facilitate, defend and was a decent re bounder.

Comparing Houston to Novak is like comparing apples to brocolli. They are two completely different players.

How so. They both do NOTHING but shoot. Neither were good at Anything else. What else was Houston good at? He wasn't a good passer or rebounder (spree was better at both)

DurzoBlint wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

Mray20 wrote:Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

and he did Nothing else. We don't need another Novak, but we could use another ALL around guard like Spree who could facilitate, defend and was a decent re bounder.

Comparing Houston to Novak is like comparing apples to brocolli. They are two completely different players.

How so. They both do NOTHING but shoot. Neither were good at Anything else. What else was Houston good at? He wasn't a good passer or rebounder (spree was better at both)

He was was a avg in every other area of his game, but as a shooting guard, your paid to too shoot (although he was over paid) he was in the top 10 in the league at his position

DurzoBlint wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

Mray20 wrote:Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

and he did Nothing else. We don't need another Novak, but we could use another ALL around guard like Spree who could facilitate, defend and was a decent re bounder.

Comparing Houston to Novak is like comparing apples to brocolli. They are two completely different players.

How so. They both do NOTHING but shoot. Neither were good at Anything else. What else was Houston good at? He wasn't a good passer or rebounder (spree was better at both)

Did you ever see Allan Houston play? He was more than a spot up 3pt shooter. He would score from anywhere on the floor. He would score on anyone. You don't see that looking at rebound and assists stats

Of the three Spree was the best player by far, I'd go with him, even though he doesn't fit with the team.

I agree Spree is the better player. H20 would be the better fit since we already have shump, brewer & JR. Starks is JR with better defensive instincts and slightly better decision maker with the ball. Doesn't settle for long contested jumpers as much as JR. And Starks was a better passer

gunsnewing wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

Mray20 wrote:Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

and he did Nothing else. We don't need another Novak, but we could use another ALL around guard like Spree who could facilitate, defend and was a decent re bounder.

Comparing Houston to Novak is like comparing apples to brocolli. They are two completely different players.

How so. They both do NOTHING but shoot. Neither were good at Anything else. What else was Houston good at? He wasn't a good passer or rebounder (spree was better at both)

Did you ever see Allan Houston play? He was more than a spot up 3pt shooter. He would score from anywhere on the floor. He would score on anyone. You don't see that looking at rebound and assists stats

Yeah he must have never watched Houston play. Houston was deadly in the high post, facing the basket or with his back to the basket. He could score many different ways, and was very smooth. He was average in all other areas. Only major issue i ever had with Houston was he had a tendency to disappear during games. But as far as pure shooters go, he was one of the most complete players in the league.

Still would pick Starks over Houston and Spree. Houston was one dimensional and would get toasted repeatedly by the Wades, Kobe's, Gordon's, Thornton's etc of the league. Spree was exciting, but he had his greatest success with the Knicks playing the small forward spot out of position. That wouldn't work against the Lebrons and Durants of the world, and Spree was mostly effective in ISO, so can't use him at the 2. Starks was Lin when Jeremy Lin was in diapers. From bagging groceries in Oklahoma to being undrafted, to cut by Golden State, to the CBA, to making every minute count for his chance with the Knicks for an entire season. Fans may know Starks by "The Dunk" or his 3 point chucking, but not many fans knew he averaged over 5 assists a game for 3 straight seasons with the Knicks during his prime. Not only that, but he averaged a steal a game for his entire career. Another thing to point out, was Starks thrived in a 6th man role(6th man of the year 1997), so you can start or bring him off the bench, either way. Besides the dubious 2-18 Game 7 against the Rockets in the '94 Finals, Starks bled Blue and Orange for 8 years, and thrived in his role as Patrick Ewing's sidekick. Their team in '93 is the only Knicks team in recent memory to get the #1 seed in the Eastern conference. For as thrilling and improbable Houston's and Spree's Knicks were, especially in '99, nothing tops the Ewing/Starks/Oakley/Mason/Harper Knicks. Starks and that unit were battle tested and brought us oh so close to that elusive Championship.

Knixkik wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:

Mray20 wrote:Allan Houston hands down, he wasn't a high volume or streak shooter like Sprewell or even Starks for that matter, He could come of screens or create his own shot , he would be perfect inside out with Amare or Melo, he wasn't a great defender but he defiantly tried hard.

and he did Nothing else. We don't need another Novak, but we could use another ALL around guard like Spree who could facilitate, defend and was a decent re bounder.

Comparing Houston to Novak is like comparing apples to brocolli. They are two completely different players.

How so. They both do NOTHING but shoot. Neither were good at Anything else. What else was Houston good at? He wasn't a good passer or rebounder (spree was better at both)

Did you ever see Allan Houston play? He was more than a spot up 3pt shooter. He would score from anywhere on the floor. He would score on anyone. You don't see that looking at rebound and assists stats

Yeah he must have never watched Houston play. Houston was deadly in the high post, facing the basket or with his back to the basket. He could score many different ways, and was very smooth. He was average in all other areas. Only major issue i ever had with Houston was he had a tendency to disappear during games. But as far as pure shooters go, he was one of the most complete players in the league.

Exactly. Allan Houston was the epitome of what a shooting guard should be. No one will ever say Houston was a great all-around player, but not sure there is a team in the league that would not love to have a player like him as their starting shooting guard. Comparing him to Novak really is absurd. Novak is a role player; Houston was a top-tier shooting guard and a two-time All-Star.