RealGM

Some mods and homer posters on our board actually think we have a player that is better than Mike Dunleavy.

Mike Dunleavy....takes smart shots, and makes them at 47.6% and is a great 3 point shooter (above 40%). Is a decent point forward as well. Bad defender.


Jamal Crawford...a chucker with the same career FG% as Jason Kidd (damn Crawford is such a good shooter). Bad defender.

Nate Robinson ....chucker and worse shooter than Dunleavy...bad defense

Zach Randolph...chucker, takes bad shots, turns the ball over, has the Kobe mentality from 04-06 where he refuses to pass to his crappy teammates. Bad defense.

Dunleavy is better, but if we're considering contracts I'd rather have Crawford.

Mike Dunleavy. He puts up better and more efficient numbers on a team with more wins. Easy as that with me.

Dunleavy is easily better than every player on the Knicks even when you consider contracts. Crawford is just a chucker, and Lee has only made minimal improvements since entering the league (don't get me wrong he's the Knicks lone good player, but he just hasn't improved a whole lot since entering the league...)

Dunleavy's contract is about the same as Crawford anyway, except a year longer.

I love how the people who think Knicks are better are not posting in this thread, just voting and leaving. This is because there is no argument that a Knick is better than Dunleavy. No knick even plays better D than him to allow for the argument that Dunleavy is a huge liability on defense.

I'd rather have David Lee. Dunleavy is a salary cap drain, and can only play well on crap teams and/or when outcomes are already decided. He's not a gamer, not a leader, he's soft and a whiner.

Mike and it's not to slight the knicks or pile on I actually like Crawford myself, Mike's just flat out better. Zach was really good in Portland but his attitude is such that I'd save myself the the headache.

Did David Lee die? If not, I'll take him. Then Dunleavy.

David Lee is the worst defender on the Knicks, and can only rebound and make shots within 10 feet of the basket, how the hell coudl you pick him over Dunleavy. I mean it is great Lee hustles which is why everyone loves him, but how many times do people need to watch him get destroyed on defense before they think he is good.

David Lee is the worst defender on the Knicks, and can only rebound and make shots within 10 feet of the basket, how the hell coudl you pick him over Dunleavy. I mean it is great Lee hustles which is why everyone loves him, but how many times do people need to watch him get destroyed on defense before they think he is good.

jamal crawford is better than dunleavy

Allan Houston>Mike Dunleavy

End of Discussion/

A.J. wrote:jamal crawford is better than dunleavy

in what way? By being a worse shooter...Crawford has a TS% of 52.3, Dunleavy has 59.5%, Dunleavy has a per of 17.07, Crawford 15.50...

both are very bad defenders, and both have slight abilities to make plays, even though Crawford should do more since he has the ball in his hands for the majority of time he is on the court.

it is impressive though that Crawford shoots the 4th most shots in the league in order to barely get 20 ppg

Crawford 1.17 points per shot

Dunleavy 1.37 points per shot

hwo the hell is Crawford better? Because he does stupid And-1 moves that make youtube highlights?

Jemini80 wrote:David Lee is the worst defender on the Knicks, and can only rebound and make shots within 10 feet of the basket, how the hell coudl you pick him over Dunleavy. I mean it is great Lee hustles which is why everyone loves him, but how many times do people need to watch him get destroyed on defense before they think he is good.

He gets destroyed on defense because he's on a goddamn island out there. No, he's not a good defender. But Curry, Crawford, Nate, they're not helping him out there. He's not a star, he's a fantastic role player. I'll take the hustling, efficient, rebounding monster over the overpaid, suddenly productive, Dunleavy.

Its not as if Dunleavy can defend anyone either. So using defense as a deciding factor is just silly.

killacalijatt wrote:Allan Houston>Mike Dunleavy

End of Discussion/

We're not talking about past players, obviously.

As to the Jamal vs. Mike contract argument, that's ludicrous. They make almost exactly the same amount, for the same amount of years. Dunleavy is considerably better.

Allan Houston's career numbers are the same as DUnleavy's this year, besides his last season with Detroit where he was playing for a contract, and 1999 with the knicks.

i've always had a soft spot for zach randolph, in fact i think he'd do well on the pacers.

I really don't see how anyone could argue Crawford being better than Dunleavy this year.

I'd take your pick over Dunleavy

i'll say dunleavy