<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Moo2K4:</div><div class="quote_post">They made the Finals. Wow, who cares. Did they win? No. Therefore, they accomplished nothing. That team was built to win and it didn't. Simple as that. Sorry for that off topic comment, but I felt it should be made. And the Knicks, yea, they do have a good looking team, they might have the best backcourt in all of basketball next year with Crawford and Starbury, but only time can tell if they're going to be good or not.</div> The Lakers didn't accomplish their goal, but they did win the Western Conference Finals and became the Western Conference Champs. It might not mean much to them, but that's still a pretty good accomplishment, just not by Laker standards. It's similar to what happened to the Yankees last year, when they were expected to win the World Series and lost to the Marlins. So if the Knicks made the Finals and lost, would that mean that they accomplished nothing? Just because one team doesn't have the expectations of another team, doesn't make the case any different. Making the NBA Finals is an accomplishment. Winning the NBA Finals is a much bigger accomplishment. When it comes down to it, it's still an accomplishment.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting mrj18:</div><div class="quote_post">If we are talking about points statistically Houston and Marbury are the best backcourt in the regular season. And all of the shooting guards that you mentioned do not have a better shooting game than Houston. Houston is arguably the best shooter in the league no less than top 5. The players you named can't touch Marbury and Houston. Francis career high in apg is 6.6 because him and Wade are natural shooting guards. Stephen Jackson and Lebron James dont have great point guards, and Hamilton is not a threat from 3. Marbury can penetrate and kick it to Houston who can shoot from everywhere and they have Crawford's slashing off the bench. What 3 guard rotation is better than that?</div> well like i said as far as points go they've got a good backcourt...but they arent the healthiest and i doubt they'll gel as well as some of the less skilled backcourts. Houston is a great shooter...but LBJ is a bigger offensive threat. I'd say Rip Hamilton is as good offensively too. And Mobley aint no sluch. Ok, ok, clevelends PG cant match Marbury...but Franchise isnt far off, same with Billups. So its not like these teams are getting dominated. And besides...you can have all the great shooters you want but if you dont have any prescense inside the perimeter defenders dont have to sag off or double down...which means every shooter is gunna have a defender in his face all day long. New York's backcourt is also pretty lack on defense, AND susteptable to injuries. So saying NYK backcourt is one of the best is ridiculous...you cant just look at shooting after making the statement...because i dont think they have a top 3 backcourt..all round game...in the east. But thats my opinion
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post"> well like i said as far as points go they've got a good backcourt...but they arent the healthiest and i doubt they'll gel as well as some of the less skilled backcourts. Houston is a great shooter...but LBJ is a bigger offensive threat. I'd say Rip Hamilton is as good offensively too. And Mobley aint no sluch. Ok, ok, clevelends PG cant match Marbury...but Franchise isnt far off, same with Billups. So its not like these teams are getting dominated. And besides...you can have all the great shooters you want but if you dont have any prescense inside the perimeter defenders dont have to sag off or double down...which means every shooter is gunna have a defender in his face all day long. New York's backcourt is also pretty lack on defense, AND susteptable to injuries. So saying NYK backcourt is one of the best is ridiculous...you cant just look at shooting after making the statement...because i dont think they have a top 3 backcourt..all round game...in the east. But thats my opinion</div> With the exception of Allan Houston the Knicks backcourt is not injury prone. And the Knicks backcourt deffensive stats are not too far off the players you named. The reason why I think the Knicks deffense was not too good last year was because the team never got the chance to gel like Detroit, Cleaveland and the Houston Rockets. None of those teams had changes as signifficant as the Knicks. The reason why those players deffense looks signifficantly better than the Knicks backcourt is because they are playing in overall better defensive teams. The Pistons deffense is the best in the league but that does not mean that Billups D is considerably better than Marbury. And also the teams that you named do not have a 6th man combo guard like Jamal Crawford. Talent wise/skill wise atleast
Knicks are putting a decent team together. I liked the aquasition of Crawford, he is going to help out a lot for this Knicks backcourt. I see Houston and Thomas having pretty big years. Better watch out for NY team.
