D'antoni says Steph refused to play

metrocard said:

You still depressed man?
Take it easy on yourself.
Don't focus so much on your stress and frustration.
It'll be okay.

Click to expand...

tiger0330 said:

I was wondering why D'antoni didn't play Steph since they were so shorthanded. Thought it was D'ants decision but turns out Steph was offered 35 minutes today, he refused to play. What an ass, just wants to
sit on his ass and make that big money. Starbury sux, don't know what the guys that are all over his nuts see in him, he's the ultimate prima donna.

Click to expand...

metrocard said:

I ain't got shit so I gotta come with this weak ass fag callin. I'm awesome though cuz I know spanish

Click to expand...

Starks said:

shit for 21.9 million dollars...if I'm running the show I say I don't give a rats ass if your feelings are hurt, it's your damn job to play basketball and I'm demanding you to suit and play. If not, get the hell outa my face. Your fired.

Click to expand...

Marbury Given Chance to Play, but Declines
By HOWARD BECK
Published: November 21, 2008

MILWAUKEE — Their roster depleted by trades and injuries, the Knicks finally needed Stephon Marbury to play Friday night. But when they asked, Marbury refused, driving a deeper wedge between him and Coach Mike D’Antoni.

The Knicks had only eight players healthy and present for their game against the Milwaukee Bucks — the minimum number allowed under N.B.A. rules. Marbury had to dress just to avoid a forfeit.

D’Antoni offered Marbury more than that. After the Knicks traded guard Jamal Crawford and two other players in the afternoon, D’Antoni said he approached Marbury and offered him 30 to 35 minutes of playing time. Marbury, who had spent 10 straight games on the inactive list, declined.

“When the trades went down this afternoon, I said, ‘Look Steph, one of the principals are gone, Jamal Crawford. There’s 30-35 minutes out there, and they’re yours if you want them. Are you ready to go?’ ” D’Antoni said.

According to D’Antoni, Marbury replied that he “wasn’t comfortable with the situation, and he did not want to play. So at that point, I go, ‘O.K., that’s your decision, and that’s fine.’ That’s it.”

The Knicks kept the game close for one half Friday but fatigue set in and they were routed, 104-87, and fell to 6-6.

D’Antoni seemed perturbed by Marbury’s decision. For the first time, he referred to the Marbury saga as a distraction.

Marbury was vague, but he did not deny D’Antoni’s version of the events.

“The only thing I’m at liberty to say is that I was told that they were moving forward and” — Marbury then took a long pause — “I’m not the person that chooses who plays and who doesn’t. That’s the only thing that I’m able to say.”

Asked if he refused to play, Marbury repeated, “That’s the only thing that I’m able to say.”

The consequences of Marbury’s refusal are not yet clear. D’Antoni said he did not consider it insubordination and insisted, “I’m not mad at Steph; I understand.”

But the episode might prompt team officials to banish Marbury from games and practices until his fate is settled. Marbury has had preliminary talks with the team president Donnie Walsh about a buyout, but no deal is imminent.

Marbury has been fuming since opening night, when he was on the active roster but did not play. He went on the inactive list two nights later — at his own request, according to D’Antoni — and remained there until Friday.

“I thought it was an opportunity for him to play, and I was kind of hoping,” D’Antoni said. “But at the same time, there’s consideration of a lot of guys in that locker room that are giving their hearts out. And those are the guys that I’m going to go on with, and those are the guys that I’m going to love, and those are the guys that are going to compete every night.”

Click to expand...

LJ4ptplay said:

Mebury refused to play. Yesterday was a day of celebration for Knick fans, and Mebury ruins it again.

What the hell is wrong with Cancerburians? They whine and bitch at D'Antoni for not playing him, then when D'Antoni gives him a chance to play and prove everyone wrong, Mebury refuses and Cancerburians bitch at D'Antoni again and say Mebury was right for not playing. When they thought D'Antoni didn't let Mebury play, Mike D was wrong and Mebury was right, then when they find out that it was Mebury who didn't want to play, D'Antoni was wrong for disrespecting him and Mebury was right for taking a stand. Completely hypocrtical.

I think Cancerburians are finally beginning to see they were wrong about Mebury and are desperately clinging to anything. It must be difficult to realize your hero is a loser.

Click to expand...

LJ4ptplay said:

Mebury refused to play. Yesterday was a day of celebration for Knick fans, and Mebury ruins it again.

What the hell is wrong with Cancerburians? They whine and bitch at D'Antoni for not playing him, then when D'Antoni gives him a chance to play and prove everyone wrong, Mebury refuses and Cancerburians bitch at D'Antoni again and say Mebury was right for not playing. When they thought D'Antoni didn't let Mebury play, Mike D was wrong and Mebury was right, then when they find out that it was Mebury who didn't want to play, D'Antoni was wrong for disrespecting him and Mebury was right for taking a stand. Completely hypocrtical.

I think Cancerburians are finally beginning to see they lost and are desperately clinging to anything. It must be difficult to realize your hero is a loser.

Click to expand...

OGKnickfan said:

You people don't really know what you're talking about. Sure, Marbury's rich, etc., etc., but he's a human being, not a door mat. Why would he play for a coach who's jerked him around, promising to give him a chance to play, when he clearly wasn't serious about it? Why would he play for a guy that tosses out two of his long time teammates, during a successful stretch, for a possible, not even likely, chance at Lebron, two years down the road? Marbury wasn't even asking to start, from what I understand, he just wanted playing time.

If D'Antoni had shown Marbury the respect to tell him that he wanted to go in a new direction, from day one, I would have been okay with it. But, to manipulate and play with Marbury's head, is wrong and, though Marbury sat on the bench quietly, is the reason why Marbury's had what is clearly a month or two of animosity towards D'Antoni.

Was it the right thing to do, on Marbury's part? No. Clearly, he should have suited up, supported his teammates. However, when one is in a situation that's not treated with professionalism, sensitivity or respect, there's a big chance one might act rashly, out of anger and frustration. Marbury is only human. If you've seen people lash out their bosses, authority figures, etc., you should understand where he's coming from. I know I do.

And about Lebron, and the possibility that he might be the Knicks' saviour, that stinks of Isiah-ology: the belief that getting big names is going to equate with success. You don't get better by just going out there and signing big names, you get better by studying prospects carefully, finding a combination of smart veterans and hungry new talent. Along the way, some get waived and some are kept, until you end up with something like what Chicago or Orlando have. This idea that you can buy success has been proven wrong, at least in the NBA. If you look at the Spurs, Nets, Chicago, Orlando, Detroit, Philly, and lots of the other successful teams, they've proved that. They got to where they are slowly, by drafting and signing players intelligently.

Click to expand...

OGKnickfan said:

Mira, en primer lugar, marica, cuando tu pare du chupar le el bicho a tu marido, msg33, entonces hablamos de quien es maricon.

Secondly, faggotcard, you don't know nothing about me, you mom does, but that's another story, between her, me and the dry cleaner's.

And again, bitch, I have nothing to prove to you, and I feel no need to. Case closed, move on.

Click to expand...