Originally Posted by knicklover
I don't think the team is better without Marbury, but I think the chemistry is better without Marbury.

What I am suggesting is that his teamates don't feel the same way about him as they do about each other. Last year there was actually some good chemisty between the players and between the players and Isiah. They liked each other. They respected each other. They played hard. The problem was the talent level, some of the young players needed more development, etc...

This year there has been a deterioration of the chemistry between the players and the players and the coach.

It started with the Marbury benching and his flight home and got worse as the team started losing. Since then we've had other issues with Zach's role, Curry's role, etc...

In any event, I think the players are trying to give Zach a chance to fit in and Zach is trying hard to fit in. I don't think the team feels similary about Marbury. They may not be a better team without him, but they are more of a family, more dedicated, more team oriented etc.... when he's out.
I partially agree but I think if we never got Zach Randolph none of this would have happened and we would be holdin down that #8 spot. I think Marbury really came around last year and re-became part of the team. In 03-04 he led an ok team to the playoffs that did get swept by New Jersey. After that Isiah made too many trades and most pg's would have had problems. But last year everyone on the team had chemistry and Marbury played great from Jan. to early April. You seen my stats already. The addition of Randolph destroyed last years chemistry.

The question should be had Isiah never traded for Zach Randolph, how much better would the knicks be this year?