hey knickfan420 watch your mouth son, you probably didnt understand what i was saying. there are no kids in this forum, you look silly cursing at someone you will never see in your life. lets keep our foucus on the knicks.
hey knickfan420 watch your mouth son, you probably didnt understand what i was saying. there are no kids in this forum, you look silly cursing at someone you will never see in your life. lets keep our foucus on the knicks.
Chauncey Billups is clutch and plays excellent on the ball Defense. He's also 6-3.
Jason Kidd has always been an amazing passer, and has worked hard on his shooting. He's also a good rebounder, and can score when he needs to. He's 6-4.
Marbury has something that neither of those players does - the belief that he's SUPPOSED to play the way he does. Marbury hasn't changed a single thing about his game since he came in the league. Those other 2 have. Jason Kidd added shooting, Billups added poise and defense. What has Marbury added to his game??? Nothing.
That's right, I'VE explained, and you're simply repearting the words - you're wrong. Truth is - you are buddy. But it's OK, I can understand why you'd jock a fan-favorite that plays hard injured or not. But that's just blinding you from the truth...
U look stupid thinking we need to draft a pg when we JUST GOT ONE......
ur a ****ing moron who knows nothing about the knicks......before u put input in a topic make sure u no wtf your talking about......
and i will not watch my mouth
Stop snapping at each other and talk ball, kids. It becomes a pain in the ass to want to read intelligent discussion, but you have to wade through insults and arguments to get to it. Maybe you guys could settle your problems in a different part of the forums..
Sorry for the off topic, but i'm getting tired of the constant bickering from thread to thread.
Bob: Here's why you're wrong.
First of all Marbury has certainly improved since he came into the league at 19.
But anyway. I was taking this for granted in my head the whole time and arguing about stupid peripheral points.
NO ONE WANTS MARBURY.
How do you trade a player to no one.
As much as you've gone on about how no one understands trades but you, you forgot the biggest thing. It takes two to tango. Atlanta does not want him. They're in a great situation to slowly rebuild I doubt they're gonna throw it away for Marbury. Philly probably doesn't want him either. Maybe Mark Cuban will return to his old ways but I think he's really matured.
You will not get a "legit" big or good picks for him. If you could get a "legit" big I would do it in a second.
If you think trading Marbury is a good idea tell me who wants him? What do you do with this cap space? When do you win? Any team that I can think of who got a ton of cap space stunk for a very long time. If you can think of examples to the contrary, Im sure there are, let me know.
Spurs don't count as a team that "got" a bunch of cap space by the way. They were a championship team who managed the cap well. If we dump cap room and are far enough under to really do something we're probably going to have to add almost no new contracts and have a skeleton roster.
And LeBron doesn't count as a plan. He won't leave Cleveland. Esp. to play on a loser.
So you've gone from "Marbury can't and won't be traded, end of story".......to "Marbury might be traded but he's improved since he was 19"......to "Well, so what if he should be traded, no one wants him."
I beg to differ. Marbury SHOULD be traded, for every reason I mentioned, or any single one. And please, we ALL know he most definitely CAN be traded. Atlanta would have more than 20 Million left AFTER taking on Marbury's salary.
Listen, be a bigger man and admit that it's simply not a good idea to keep Steph. Plain and simple...
Actually, the Spurs have no interest in Marbury. Use some common sense.
And you better believe if Cleveland can't land Hughes or JJ, they will end up sucking just as much as they did last year, and Lebron will easily be led to sign with another team come 07. With cap space, I can't see him NOT signing with NY...
Once again, on this particular issue, I'm right. End of story.
My point when I always say that cap space is BS is that it's a riskier avenue then slowly rebuilding and letting a core play together and get comfortavble and make changes till you se your golden opp. like trading for Rasheedfor the Pistons. THat's the avenue most teams take, and I think its for good reason.
No one ever brought up, I should have before, that this Knicks core was completely unfamiliar with each other.
I never said the Spurs had interest I said in thinking of a team that cleared the cap and rebuilt that way the Spurs dont count.
The Cavs just missed the playoffs. I dont know what your def. of sucking is.
No your not right. Who wants him????????????? Let me know.
Who are you George Bush you think you can win arguments just by saying I'm right over and over. I don't disagree that if you get a good deal moving Marbury is smart. I just say that clearing the cap never works as far as I can rmember. Tell me when it has and Ill listen a little more to your point
I've also been trying to look at the Knicks roster optimistically. Optimistically we catch some breaks some guys step up someone coaches Marbury and we're a playoff team. Of course no one could step up and we could suck. This is why the game is played on the court not forums.
Listen carefully.....please.
Here's my point, for the very last time. Think this over before responding. It's important you understand every facet to this arguement:
1.) Marbury is Overpaid. Due 76 Million in the next 4 years. He is nearing 30 years old, and it's no secret that his knee is starting to degenerate. Playing 80 games at the minutes he does doesn't help. If we keep him, the only way to ensure that his knee doesn't blow out is by limiting his minutes, which, in turn, hurts our chances of winning, seeing as how we've become accustomed to having him be our go-to-guy in the 1st 3 quarters of games...
2.) Marbury has not been voted an All-Star in a few years. Therefore how well his jersey sells is misleading, and to be honest, unimportant.
3.) Marbury is a fan-favorite, and the face of the franchise. But while he has refined his talents since he was 19, he hasn't ADDED anything to his game. The skills he came into the league with or the same he has now, only slightly sharpened.
4.) Marbury is incredibly talented, but he's a SG stuck in a PG's body.
5.) Marbury is not clutch, and shys away from taking big shots. His defense is just as average as it was when he came into the league. If anything, it's slowly gotten worse.
6.) Keeping Marbury on the team, even if we slightly limit his minutes as mentioned before, will STEAL minutes from the development of Nate Robinson, who is a great talent, and from Crawford and Ariza. Why you ask? B/c Q's natural position is a borderline G/F, and with the roster the way it is now, there are too many players needing minutes. Ariza and Nate will be the odd men out, with Timmy and Q using up most of the minutes at SF, and Crawford, Marbury, and Q spending pretty much all the time at SG. Keeping Marbury means Crawford will be asked to play PG whenever he gets the chance (to add to his minutes), meaning Nate will get nearly zero playing time.
7.) Nate Robinson, as I've said recently, is very similar in style, talent, and build as Marbury. He's smaller, but just as explosive, can push the ball up and play solid Defense, and is the same type of Offensive PG as Steph. Having both is redundant, and Nate certainly won't be dealt...
8.) The offense is stagnant with Marbury running the point. He's become so accustomed to Pick and Rolls that he relies on it almost single-handedly. The rest of the players on the floor stand around, and there's no movement within the offense. This is part of the reason why Crawford is a chucker. There are no plays per say designed for him...
9.) The offense runs more smoothly with Crawford running the point. Guys like Ariza respond better to him, and he pushes the ball and is taller, thus creating more matchup problems. This is exactly why Isiah got him...b/c when we played AGAINST him when he was with Chicago, he'd light us up and get their offense flowing.
10.) If Isiah is willing to trade Marbury, then it will get done. Don't give me this "No teams want Marbury" crap. Atlanta would easily make that trade. I can see Dallas possibly doing it, as well Cleveland (b/c it doesn't look like they'll land Hughes or JJ), and a number of other teams. That's the least of my worries. My single worry is that it's too late, and that Isiah doesn't have the balls to make such a bold move...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Let the next words out of your mouth be nothing, or "I agree"....
Peace.
Re: Optimism 4 2005
I've wasted the last three days and I apologize for getting caught up in a pointless argument. This is a great post and actually constructive can't believe I missed it in wasting everyone's time arguing.Originally Posted by furious lord
1. Nazr is a great piece for the Spurs but does nothing on a lotto team. The only Isiah move I really take exception to was Mo Taylor. He's a good 12th man but that salary is out of this world. For 900,000 ok but 9 mill? It's also significantly longer than Vin and Mooch. But Zeke is clearly more interested in what someone brings on the court than on the payroll,which I respect. I would have built around defense and team play and character but NBA teams aren't exactly knocking down my door to be their GM. Zeke should get us to respectability and then if he can manage to rebuild while winning a little I'd be thoroughly impressed
2. I was very skeptical of Q at first, but him and Jamal and TT next to Marbury is a lot of talent. A good coach could might motivate them.
3. Also more excited about Nate than Frye. Mostly cause I'm always skeptial of bigmen in the draft. Nate is a great fit and could be the catalyst to getting us in the playoffs.
4. Marury will not be traded. Thank you for saying that he also should not be traded unless something decent is on the table. If Crawford is really as good a creator as people seem to think he is, he can do it next to Marbury is a coach can convince Marbury that he can't win unless he plays in a system.
5 Also a good point. Layden couldn't have us in this position. Really people have been overcritical of Zeke and he has had the balls to shake things up and try and win at the sme time. If he pulls it off he's one of the leagues better execs.
Dear Ted,
Thank you for being a ***** and not responding whatsoever to my most recent post, which was my last attempt at explaining why he CAN AND SHOULD be dealt. You obviously have alot of confidence in your own opionions, seeing as how you feel the need to quote someone else.
Love,
Bobs3304
Posting Permissions
