Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 41

Thread: lmao @ everyone who said knicks would be better w/o Marbury

  1. #1
    The Gold Mac MSGKnickz33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    4,474
    Rep Power
    13

    Default lmao @ everyone who said knicks would be better w/o Marbury

    The Knicks mite not even win 23 games, which is what they won the year larry brown coached.

    After the announcement that Marbury was out with an injury for the season there were several posters on here saying "we are a better team without him." I hope no none still feels this way. Im not looking for opinions about marbury but it cant be argued that were better without Marbury. This just proves that alot of the marbury hate is unfair and comes from biased *******s who will always feel a certain way about marbury no matter what he does.

  2. #2
    Veteran LJ4ptplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ft. Collins, CO
    Posts
    2,950
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Why are you trying to start another Marbury war. It's the last thing this site needs.

  3. #3
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,053
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    What does how games we won LB's only season with the Knicks have to do with how many game we won THIS season with or without Steph??? NOTHING. The only stat that matters is how many games we won before Steph's injury to how many games since he has been out. When the dust settles its probably gonna be about the same so we are no better or worse with or without Steph. So why pay Steph 20 mil a year??? I still say we are a better TEAM without Steph because he is a big distraction and a national embarrassment. The last Knicks/Bulls pre-game instead of talking about Eddy coming home or Jamal's development, Norm Van Lear spent the entire pre-game ripping Steph and Isiah's handling of the whole situation. If expecting our "best player" to show up for work and make an effort for his 20 mil a year makes me a bias *******, I guess I am then.

  4. #4
    Member BleedOrange&Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    354
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    This story is dead Marbury is the Knicks Best player period. Stop bringing it up cause everybody knows already. And the people who hate on Marbury shut the hell up cuz you don't know a damn thing about basketball.

  5. #5
    The Gold Mac MSGKnickz33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    4,474
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Originally Posted by jimkcchief88
    What does how games we won LB's only season with the Knicks have to do with how many game we won THIS season with or without Steph??? NOTHING. The only stat that matters is how many games we won before Steph's injury to how many games since he has been out. When the dust settles its probably gonna be about the same so we are no better or worse with or without Steph. So why pay Steph 20 mil a year??? I still say we are a better TEAM without Steph because he is a big distraction and a national embarrassment. The last Knicks/Bulls pre-game instead of talking about Eddy coming home or Jamal's development, Norm Van Lear spent the entire pre-game ripping Steph and Isiah's handling of the whole situation. If expecting our "best player" to show up for work and make an effort for his 20 mil a year makes me a bias *******, I guess I am then.


    **Attention to new posters, dont waste time talking to jimmy. I have proved in the past that he cant read.

  6. #6
    The Gold Mac MSGKnickz33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    4,474
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Originally Posted by BleedOrange&Blue
    This story is dead Marbury is the Knicks Best player period. Stop bringing it up cause everybody knows already. And the people who hate on Marbury shut the hell up cuz you don't know a damn thing about basketball.
    co-sign, thats more like it

  7. #7
    Member knicksfancris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    250
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    nop i dont agree hell no marbury is the best player the knicks ever had **** where u leave patrick ewing and yes the knicks would be a better team if marburys is there he is good but i am a knicks fan and if u not doing you job you get booed and he did not do his job i think nate did better then him comparing what nate did in the middle in this season with what marbury did at the beging of this season but i do agree he need a chance to prove himself if we get a new coach beacuse they could not ne more excuses like he does not like the coach of something but if walsh says we staying with isiah which that will make me shoot myself i will trade him because i want the team to improve and marbury and thomas beef is never going to finish and so what if he does bad this season he only has a year left and if he is doing bad we got nate to back him up

  8. #8
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,053
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Originally Posted by MSGKnickz33


    **Attention to new posters, dont waste time talking to jimmy. I have proved in the past that he cant read.
    Repeat after me Mr. Video: R.I.F. (Reading is Fundamental)

  9. #9
    Member BleedOrange&Blue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    354
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Nobody ever said he was the best Knick ever, you misread: He is the Best knick.

  10. #10
    Veteran LJ4ptplay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ft. Collins, CO
    Posts
    2,950
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    He is the worst Knick.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    48
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally Posted by LJ4ptplay
    He is the worst Knick.

    hey man that aint true me nd MSG suk his d*k everyday, and im tellin u hes a good player, how can u say he is the worst knick?

  12. #12
    KnicksonLIN.com
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,073
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Excellent thread, MSG. I give it 5 stars. Here are the facts for all the Marbury haters:
    2007-2008 season
    Knicks' record without Marbury: 14-41
    Knicks' record with Marbury out of the starting lineup: 14-46

    2006-2007 season
    Knicks' record without Marbury: 2-6

    2005-2006 season
    Knicks' record without Marbury: 3-19

    Knicks' playoff appearances, with Marbury as the star: 1
    Knicks' playoff appearances, with Curry as the star: 0
    Knicks' playoff appearances, with Crawford as the star: 0

  13. #13
    Veteran GetRealistic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,370
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    What is the point of starting this thread? This is such a waste. I'm really getting tired of this pointless nonsense on here. Knicks suck with or without Marbury. Marbury was part of a 23 win team and he quit on this years team.

    It's a new era of Knicks basketball and worse case scenario that means one more season of seeing towelhead. But my guess would be Donnie is smart enough to just by him out. Or better yet keep him on injured reserve all season.

  14. #14
    The Gold Mac MSGKnickz33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    4,474
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Originally Posted by abcd
    Excellent thread, MSG. I give it 5 stars. Here are the facts for all the Marbury haters:
    2007-2008 season
    Knicks' record without Marbury: 14-41
    Knicks' record with Marbury out of the starting lineup: 14-46

    2006-2007 season
    Knicks' record without Marbury: 2-6

    2005-2006 season
    Knicks' record without Marbury: 3-19

    Knicks' playoff appearances, with Marbury as the star: 1
    Knicks' playoff appearances, with Curry as the star: 0
    Knicks' playoff appearances, with Crawford as the star: 0
    Another great post by ABCD. I thank you for giving my thread 5 stars, im sure this thread will be popular.

    Originally Posted by GetRealistic
    What is the point of starting this thread? This is such a waste. I'm really getting tired of this pointless nonsense on here. Knicks suck with or without Marbury. Marbury was part of a 23 win team and he quit on this years team.

    It's a new era of Knicks basketball and worse case scenario that means one more season of seeing towelhead. But my guess would be Donnie is smart enough to just by him out. Or better yet keep him on injured reserve all season.
    I think its funny that you called Marbury a towel head. I thought you liked it when basketball players put towels on their heads, take a look at your avi. This thread is not a waste, several people on here thought we would be a different team without him (in a good way).

  15. #15

    Default

    With or without Steph we stink. That's the most important thing to remember.

Similar Threads

  1. Looking back on the 2003-04 Knicks season
    By metrocard in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: Jun 28, 2008, 21:10
  2. Stephon Marbury Banned From MSG!!!!
    By MSGKnickz33 in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: Mar 24, 2008, 18:28
  3. Marbury back 4 2008
    By Kennedy Curse in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: Jan 11, 2008, 13:51
  4. If the Knicks want Brown, get rid of Marbury
    By Cakalusa in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Jul 29, 2005, 21:04
  5. newspaper article request
    By NY all day BABY in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Dec 28, 2004, 12:04

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •