Page 1 of 3
Which Tandem Do You Prefer?
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 7:22 pm
by StutterStep
Which Tandem Do You Prefer?
If you had a chance to base your team around either of these players?
1) JC and Curry
2) Steph and Zach
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 7:26 pm
by KNEMESIS
The Olsen twins? Before they became all anorexic and shyt...
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 7:28 pm
by Clark_Kent411
Neither...You want to know why? Because they're all one way players who haven't accomplished anything in the NBA.
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 7:30 pm
by NoLayupRule
is one a winning combo?
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 7:32 pm
by chitownsports4ever
How about this combo
JC and Lee
which is by far the best combo and over the past few years the most conducive to the actually winning .
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 7:35 pm
by StutterStep
The point is we need to institute an offensive system based on the play of a guard coupled with a big man.
Once we determine that, then we can put the role players around them.
So who do you prefer?
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 7:57 pm
by chitownsports4ever
JC and Lee
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:03 pm
by StutterStep
chitownsports4ever wrote:JC and Lee
WTF are you talking about?
How is Lee part of a tandem you build your team around? Seriously!!!
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:16 pm
by king_k4life
Steph and Zach by far them running the pick and roll or pick and pop could be deadly
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:20 pm
by god shammgod
steph and curry
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:23 pm
by chitownsports4ever
StutterStep wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
WTF are you talking about?
How is Lee part of a tandem you build your team around? Seriously!!!
because I would be building a "team " and I would be building it around a philosophy or hard work team play and accountability.
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:25 pm
by yungal07
chitownsports4ever wrote:How about this combo
JC and Lee
which is by far the best combo and over the past few years the most conducive to the actually winning .
Any combo with Crawford in it is not conducive to winning. Any team that depends on that guy for anything is doomed to failure.
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:26 pm
by god shammgod
i'm guessing shot selection is not included in your version of accountability. defense neither.
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:27 pm
by chitownsports4ever
yungal07 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Any combo with Crawford in it is not conducive to winning. Any team that depends on that guy for anything is doomed to failure.
I dont know about history has shown that he and Lee are more instrumental to knick wins that any other tandem you could contruct that involves a big and a guard from the current squad .
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:30 pm
by god shammgod
chitownsports4ever wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
I dont know about history has shown that he and Lee are more instrumental to knick wins that any other tandem you could contruct that involves a big and a guard from the current squad .
history ? what history. whenever jc has run the team the knicks have been worse then ever. you're making things up. the record proves otherwise and you know it.
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:32 pm
by chitownsports4ever
god shammgod wrote:i'm guessing shot selection is not included in your version of accountability. defense neither.
It sure is but shot selection is about preference ability .You and I could shoot the same shot from the same spot and while it would be considered a horrible shot for you because you cant shoot it would be considered a great shot for me as my shots like butta
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:36 pm
by chitownsports4ever
god shammgod wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
history ? what history. whenever jc has run the team the knicks have been worse then ever. you're making things up. the record proves otherwise and you know it.
Im not making anything up. Over the past 3 years Crawford and Lee have accounted for more knick wins than Curry ,marbury or Randolph. Just about every positive moment franchise has involved those two. Your in denial .
The record proves that lee and Crawford alone are not enough to overcome Marbury being awol mentally ,Zach or Curry and their attitudes towards the games . Three guys who are essentially considered basketball herpes around the league right now .
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 8:42 pm
by god shammgod
chitownsports4ever wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Im not making anything up. Over the past 3 years Crawford and Lee have accounted for more knick wins than Curry ,marbury or Randolph. Just about every positive moment franchise has involved those two. Your in denial .
The record proves that lee and Crawford alone are not enough to overcome Marbury being awol mentally ,Zach or Curry and their attitudes towards the games . Three guys who are essentially considered basketball herpes around the league right now .
i'm pretty sure steph took the knicks and the suns as the team's best player, as well as the wolves with kg to the playoffs. isn't that more positive then anything crawford's ever done in his career. we're going over the same thing over and over again. why is it without steph in the lineup the knicks win only about 15% of the time. forget it man, lets just agree to disagree, i'm sick of arguing with you.
zach is a much bigger problem then crawford could ever be. happy now.
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 9:16 pm
by Supreme Commander
+
+
music
=
chitownsports4ever's Friday nights.
Posted: Sun Jan 6, 2008 9:58 pm
by knicks742