They rather should have kept E.T. for one more year...
Bill Russel: Knicks damaged Starbury psychologically
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]Bill Russell believes Stephon Marbury can continue to help the Celtics in the playoffs - if he's able to get over what the Knicks did to him.
"If it's up to the team, he'll have a positive effect," the 75- year-old NBA legend told The Post yesterday at the NBA Store in midtown.
"But you don't know how much he's been damaged psychologically playing here."
"Here" of course, is with the Knicks, where his rocky tenure came to a disastrous end when it became clear that coach Mike D'Antoni had no intention of playing him and team president Donnie Walsh long refused to buy him out of his $21 million contract.
When asked if he thought the point guard indeed had been "damaged psychologically" by the Knicks, Russell said: "He may have been. No matter how strong you are, that kind of stuff that went on this season was so ridiculous."
After suiting up in the preseason, Marbury was banished to the bench and later told to stay away from the team before finally being bought out and signing with the Celtics on Feb. 27.
"I think what the Knicks did to him, having the whole thing play out in the papers [was wrong]," said Russell, who signed copies of his book about Red Auerbach, Me and Red: My Coach, My Lifelong Friend.
"I think he and the coach had had a relationship in Phoenix and the coach said, 'I don't want you here.' That's the impression I got. The fact that he knew he wasn't wanted, it doesn't matter who started it."
And Russell isn't surprised Marbury has blended in well with his new team. He credited Boston coach Doc Rivers with easing the transition.
"I think Doc did a good job not putting undue pressure on him to go out and be an all-star," Russell said. "I would not put pressure on him to save the ship."
Marbury largely has served as a backup to Rajon Rondo, who helped Boston to the NBA crown last year. While the Celtics are trying to repeat, Russell led them to eight straight titles from 1959-66.
"For us it was routine," said Russell, who won 11 championships in Boston.
Russell realizes it will be a tougher task without Kevin Garnett, out since late in the regular season with a knee injury.
"It's a different team without him," Russell said.
It's different with Marbury, too.
Thats crazy, I've been saying the same thing. Marbury went through alot with the knicks and i think it has had an effect on him psychologically. Bill Russel is a very smart, wise man. He's reading between the lines, he knows what happened here in new york. And nothing was even said about the Isiah era...between Isiah and Mike Antoni, i wouldnt be surprised if it took a toll on marburys confidence. His shot and his confidence are not there, but hes still playing good defense (As just about everyone on fox sports new england has pointed out) and hes making nice passes. It probably makes it even tougher for him to be on a team with all stars like pierce and ray allen...when was the last time he was on a good team?
I've read that Bill Russell article a few days ago. Unless Russell was misquoted he should be drug tested after that comment. The man is losing it. Lots of seniors have memory issues. He should get checked out.
There's no doubt that D'Antoni and Walsh could have handled the Marbury situation better then they did, but Russell or the writer made it sound as if the Knicks refusal to [Start] Marbury was the cause of his mental meltdown. Enough of the excuses. Now its being said that Marbury isn't playing well because he's playing with scrubs. Really? Didn't this team win a championship last season? That's like saying if you get demoted on your job that you wont be able to function, even if the pay is the same. It's time to kill all dick ridery. Put it to bed.
It wasn't the Knicks' refusal to start Marbury, it was the whole situation. All the mind games.
First, they say that he's a part of the team, that they have confidence in him. Even though they have no intention of playing him.
Then, they bench him for Chris Duhon in preseason (which Marbury accepted). Even though Marbury started his entire career, and is obviously the superior talent.
1st game of the regular season, D'antoni decides not to play him at all, without letting Starbury know. He had to sit there like a fool, waiting for D'antoni to put him the game.
D'antoni says he's not part of the future, which is a bull**** excuse, because most of the team isn't part of our future. They wouldn't buy him out, and they wouldn't play him. So he's stuck not playing basketball for half a year because of Walsh's/D'antoni's stubborness.
D'antoni obviously didn't plan on playing Starbury since he got here, seemingly just because he simply doesn't like him. Instead of being upfront from day 1, he strings Starbury along until the first day of the regular season. It was a sneaky move, and it probably did affect Marbury mentally. I think a hall of famer and 11 time champion knows enough about the NBA to be able see this.
Ugh here we go again. Look, this is the point I've made over and over again, and nobody has responded to it: What gives Marbury the RIGHT to be a starter? Every single team in the NBA has a 12th, 13th, 14th and 15th man. Every single team in the NBA allows their COACH to decide who those people are. Marbury was slated as the 12th man, end of story. That's the depth chart our coach went with. As Coach he is given the right to make such a decision. Fact is, Stephon Marbury wanted to be one of the top 5 guys, but sometimes the coach decides that he isn't going to be dissuaded by the name. Look, where I'm from, the COACH decides the depth chart, the COACH decides who plays in each game, not the player, not the reputation. I think Marbury was upset because he was seen as #3 on the NY Knicks, and NOT as Stephon Marbury, he was seen just like any other player, and that's where D'Antoni slated him, at the end of the bench.
Complain all you want about how it's unfair to Marbury, the way I see it, it's unfair to everyone else to have a guy be automatically the starter or automatically getting minutes because of his name. The Coach picked the depth chart, erase the name Marbury from your minds and look at it even-handedly. If Stephon Marbury was named John Doe, and he was slated to be the 12th man, nobody would have a problem, because that's the coach's job, to decide who the 12th man is. But, because it's Marbury, everyone takes issue.
Fact is, reasonable minds CAN differ on the issue, this argument has been posited before, it's gone nowhere. You won't convince me that they were unfair to Marbury just like I won't convince you that they were fair, we're too locked in our own dogma to see it. This is just going to turn into yet another flame war.
This is an ignorant post. Marbury agreed to play off the bench, and Mike D'Antoni wouldn't even do that. Marbury averages 19 points and 7 assists, for his career. He is a 2x All Star. How many career 19 point, 7 assist active players do you see on the inactive list of their team? None.
Seriously, start reading people's posts and stop manipulating and twisting them.
The people who support Marbury are not saying that he should have started, even though he is clearly better than Duhon.
What we are saying is that the management lied to him, when they said they were intending on giving him playing time, which he never got.
I didn't say they thought he should have started. I wrote "omplain all you want about how it's unfair to Marbury, the way I see it, it's unfair to everyone else to have a guy be automatically the starter or automatically getting minutes because of his name." You obviously missed the last half of that sentence, where I said it's unfair to everyone else to AUTOMATICALLY GIVE HIM MINUTES because of his name.
So, you said you wanted him to just get time. That's exactly what I said.
Where exactly did management say they were giving him playing time? Give me one article where it says that? All I've seen is Donnie Walsh (who, by the way, is not the coach), saying everyone was on a clean slate. Mike D'Antoni NEVER said that, despite public opinion on this board to the contrary. Show me where they lied to Marbury.
\
Once again, you manipulate.
"Complain all you want about how it's unfair to Marbury, the way I see it, it's unfair to everyone else to have a guy be automatically the starter or automatically getting minutes because of his name."
These are your words. You were trying to say that Marbury did not deserve to start, just because of his name.
Mike D'Antoni clearly pretended as if he was going to use Marbury.
It is the job of the coach to tell each player what their role is going to be on the team. If D'Antoni did not want to use Marbury, he should have told him. He obviously did not tell him, because Marbury worked hard to get in shape and he was even quoted saying that he was preparing for MIKE D'ANTONI'S SYSTEM. Here's the link:
Marbury played in EVERY preseason game, and he even STARTED on one of the games.
How many NBA players do you know that play in EVERY preaseason game and start ONE game and get placed on the inactive list?
Actually this is an ignorant post. Since when does the player get a choice of when and where they will or will not play? Marbury agreed to play of the bench? I don't think we can definitively know this. Who's to say that Marbury didn't have another temper tantrum when he found out he wasn't going to start, just as he did last season with is good friend and coach Isiah Thomas?
All we know is what we read and what I read was that D'Antoni didn't have any minutes for Marbury. He even said it wouldn't be fair to him to have him come off of the bench. What should have been done at this point was an immediate buyout or trade. But where Marbury was wrong was when he refused to play because he didn't like the circumstances. I don't really see how you can make a logical argument to counter this point. The 'It Aint Fair' argument is weak.
1) There's no link. Even if there was, you are purporting to show that Marbury was ready for D'Antoni's system...Please explain how Marbury being ready for D'Antoni's system means the team lied to him?
2) A lot of players play in every preseason game and even start games and don't even make the teams, the whole point of the preseason is to see what you have.
3) No, you manipulate my words again. What I said was that it's unfair to everyone else to start a guy or give him minutes just because of his name. I didn't say he didn't deserve to start, just because of his name. I said his name shouldn't automatically make him a starter or give him minutes. Keep crying about how I manipulate posts, but it's clear that I haven't been.
Here's the link where Marbury agreed to play off the bench.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Mike D'Antoni commented on the Marbury situation in LATE NOVEMBER.
He did not comment on the situation in the preseason, or even the start of the season.
During the home opener, everyone expected Marbury to play. That's why they were chanting, "We want steph."
Most people were surprised to not see him play. Even Donnie Walsh was surprised.
If D'Antoni was truly honest, nobody would have been surprised, because he would have told the media his intentions of not using Marbury, way before the start of the season, so that Walsh could have negotiated a buyout agreement last summer, instead of this spring.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote