Kiyaman

That's it! you cant WIN with Marbury & Curry, and you cant WIN without Marbury & Curry.
So it boils down to the Head Coach and his coaching staff that can't WIN.

Last year this time when Q.Richardson gave the Knicks two months (Oct. & Nov.) of decent B-Ball performance (and thats all he gave since his arrival in June 2005), the best lineup that the Knicks put out on the court were "PG-Nate, SG-Crawford, SF-Q.Rich, PF-Balkman, and C-Lee". There are actually 3-SF in that lineup.
A very small lineup which never stop moving without the ball on both ends of the court.
That lineup did not have any shotblockers or Star-Scorers but they defended the passing-lane just as good as the best defenders in the league to get easy baskets, inwhich we Knick-Fans called them the "Energy Hustle Players" off the bench.
What made that lineup so defying was having Three Rebounding SF (Balkman, Q.Rich, and Lee) that could switch positions at anytime on the court (like the 5-0 Summer League Knicks with three 6.8 players "Balkman, Chandler, and D-Nichols" in the 5-Man lineup).

The Knicks Head Coach and his coaching staff has been going about everything wrong using a Three-Guard Lineup for the last three seasons as if the NBA league is still the sameway it was before the "Jordan Era".
When Chicago Bulls Head Coach Phil Jackson changed the WINNING philosophy of the NBA league with the "TRIANGLE" (3-SF) in "Jordan, Pippin, and Paxon" (3-Championship Rings). Then topped his own Triangle for another 3-Championship Rings with "Jordan, Pippin, Harper, and Kuko," using four-SF in his playbook Triangle method.

Head Coach Phil Jackson came up with that "Triangle" philosophy (3-SF) just to beat Isiah Thomas Detroit Pistons 2-Championship Rings 3-Guard lineup.
Which changed the overall WINNING philosophy of the NBA League in the 1990's.
Take a look at Head Coach Phil Jackson first 2 Championship Rings with the L.A. Lakers using 3-SF in the Starting lineup (PG-6.6 Ron Harper, SG-6.6 Kobe Bryant, SF-6.7 Defensive Player ??? forgot name).

If we pay attention to what Lakers Coach Phil Jackson is doing now in aquiring 6.7 Trevor Ariza whom look to be just a one season Laker project as an above the rim defensive SF/SG that can score on easy baskets, plus overall talents adds pts, ast, stl, and rbds. What is going to happen when Coach Jax assign a personal coach for Trevor Ariza peremeter shooting this offseason?

The Knicks President/Coach and coaching staff are stuck on the 1970's coaching style (3-small Guards) when the NBA League moved up an advanced to BIG-Guard Tandems, or one small fast running PG in the 1990's to outrun oponents on offense. Example:
Spurs small 6.2 PG-Parker has 6.6, 6.7, and 6.8 SG & SF on the court with him at all times.

The Knicks have weapons in using 6.6 Q.Richardson, 6.8 Chandler, 6.8 Balkman, 6.11 Jefferies, and 6.9 David Lee at the SF-position as a Three-SF triangle lineup to compete in this league (having 5-SF on this Knick-Roster makes this a .500 NBA Team.).
If Marbury & Curry can not compete alongside of a three SF-Unit then it is best to look for another team for these two players. But first shop Q.Richardson for anything you can get because he is the number-one cancer on this Knick Team. Because if Q.Richardson dont start he brings havoc to all the rest of his teammates performance just sitting on the bench.

LetsGo!

I agree with you whole heartedly about Q, he's got to go. The problem is his contract and statistics are both so bad it is nearly impossible to get rid out of him at this time. I also agree that the Knicks coaching staff does not do a good enough of job of balancing the talent on this team. First off, why do we insist on starting games with both Randolph and Curry on the floor? They do the same things , which is score, so starting with them cancels out their individual effectivness (as they are both individual players, devoid of any team concept, no matter how talented the scorer). Lee should be inserted into the lineup (which if you look back I was saying before this season started) because of his rebounding and ability to play without the ball. Now, at the guards whether it is Steph, Jamal, or Nate, they all need the rock to be effective. So ok, start Steph and Jamal if Steph comes back, that provides a guy who get to the rim and the line in Marbury and a streak shooter in Crawford. There is no way, no how, a need for Q-Rich, whose supposed defensive prowess is confused with fiery demeanor to be playing alongside these guys as well. Q is another guy who needs to shoot shoot shoot to have any type of role of offense. Why not go with Balkman to guard opposing teams best wing guy and get the break going a little. Even if you gotta start Steph and Fred with Q, its better to break up the 3, as they have lacked chemistry for the get go. If you had Nate, Curry, Q, and Jeffries coming off the bench, you would get a spark offensively (Nate, Curry) and the defensive side of the ball (Q will atleast get in guys faces on D, when he is not sulking, and Jeffries length and activity). I mean its not even 08, and the season is bout done, so do the fans deserve a little shake up hear to maybe reclam a little interest? We arent the only ones clamoring for change!

Kiyaman

Here we go again, at the post game loss to the Lakers 90-95 yesterday afternoon, Isiah Thomas said there will be some big lineup changes. Yeah Right! he said the samething at the end of November.

Via NY Post

November 30, 2007 -- BOSTON - Isiah Thomas promised a lineup shakeup if the Knicks do not respond from last night's Boston massacre and beat the Bucks tonight at the Garden. Struggling center Eddy Curry (four points, 2-for-11, three rebounds), after one of his worst outings as a Knick in the 104-59 catastrophe, could be headed to the bench, or even Stephon Marbury . . . again.
Thomas didn't hear TNT's Charles Barkley's prediction that he will get fired if the Knicks lose to Milwaukee tonight, but he sure sounded like a man desperate for a victory.

"We'll see (tonight)," Thomas said about a lineup change. "It will be an interesting game for us. We can end up winning three of our last four or take another step backwards.

"Let's see how we respond. It's depending on how we play (tonight)."

The bond between Thomas and Marbury still seems strained with Thomas saying they have only a "coach-player relationship" now
Altering the Knicks lineup

Isiah Thomas should've Started David Lee at the start of the season alongside Curry.
This would've made Curry become an offensive Factor in the first quarter by putting the Knicks oposition starters in early foul trouble, before they put him in early foul trouble (Zach performance dont compliment or help Curry on either side of the court) .
Starting Lee also would've been a chance for "Balkman" to get some chemistry playingtime with the starters if Bum Q.Richardson peremeter shooting cant score in the first quarter, plus it also would've gave Balkman a hustling chance to challenge Zach & Nate for the 6th-Man award on this Knick Team.
Zach Randolph should have never been put as a Starter on this Knick Team so soon, even "if" he would've had great chemistry with Curry, that should've been used as a weapon in the second half of the game for the WIN. Coach Isiah Thomas has NO 2nd half strategy for this Knick Team.

Marbury bereavement showed us Knick-Fans where Coach Isiah Thomas head is at with his (lastseason) players, by putting both new aquired offseason players in the Starting Lineup (Zach & Jones) as if none of the Knicks lastseason players learned to co-exist with their teammates after playing a 82 game season with them.

There is not one reason that President/Coach Isiah Thomas could give to any of the Knick-Fans why after 20 games this season with a losing 6-14 record he did not "Alter the Starting-5 lineup" by putting "PG/SG-Nate Robinson and PF/SF-David Lee" in the Starting-5 lineup to be the Knicks Starters & Finishers of the next 20 games?
This is why I say Isiah Thomas "SAVE-FACE" coaching style is the number one reason for the Knicks losing seasons.
Isiah Thomas forcing Coach Larry Brown to Start (So-call Franchise Players) "Marbury & Curry" for 82 games lead to a 23-59 season. That is "SAVE-FACE" coaching when "Marbury & Curry" did not co-exist together on court then, and two season later the two players still dont co-exist together on either side of the court.

So far this season (8-19) we witness "Nate & Balkman" being Benched getting garbage-playingtime alongside of teammates that also get garbage playingtime, while "Fred Jones & Jefferies" has been getting their playingtime alongside of the Knicks first 6 players on the court to gain chemistry.

Here's the Stat-Performance that was showed at the end of the Knicks 2006-7 season Bench Players:

Marty Collins showed if he was to get steady playingtime with the same 5 to 6 players that his chemistry with them on both sides of the court will come in a matter of time depending on how much playingtime given to them vs oposing teams this season. He is a Big 6.6 defensive PG that has a great passing game when put alongside of a scoring SG or SF that Slash or could shoot from the peremeter, or a C/PF whom have a low post presence. But he need to play against oposing teams with the same players in a system so he could get familiar with NBA B-BALL.

Renaldo Balkman showed he could fit in well for 15 to 26 minutes with the same 6 to 7 players on the court with him each game in his second season in the NBA.

Nate Robinson showed big promise as the 6th-Man Combo Guard coming off the bench for 20 to 30 MPG in a 8-Man Rotation.

David Lee showed with his complimentary performance that he was the Knicks Starter & Finisher in his 3rd season in the NBA.

Jared Jefferies showed that he was a Defensive Role-Player for 12 minutes of playingtime in the second half of a game to put on oposing team top scorers.

Malik Rose is the Knicks Role Playing Bouncer in the second half of the game to stablize any oposing team strong frontcourt players.