I feel bad for Marbury, having to carry the Celtics

[KBlack25]

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.

Right, because it makes sense for every coach to tell every single person, newspaper and essentially anyone that asks his game plan. Why should D'Antoni HAVE to tell the media ANYTHING? Please explain...

It's my OPINION that the coach shouldn't have to tell the media anything he doesn't want to tell the media, he is entitled in his role as NYK coach to not disclose certain aspects of his gameplan and depth chart to the media.

Even if Marbury AGREED to play off the bench, that STILL doesn't mean the team lied to him. I'm sure Jerome James AGREED to play off the bench, that doesn't mean he was entitled to minutes.

[donchris]

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.

You presume that D'Antoni was dishonest. I don't come to the same conclusion. I believe D'Antoni made a decision of giving minutes to Duhon/Robinson rather then Marbury. Obviously this is an opinion post but let's face it, D'Antoni is respected by players throughout the league and Marbury is, for the most part, not. So I find it hard to believe that D'Antoni will intentionally lie or screw a player over. I find it much easier to believe that Marbury made an issue out of coming off of the bench, regardless of what he told the papers. Even the writer had doubts of his sincerity.

The thing that we don't know is what went on in the locker room. Let's say you're right, that Marbury would have accepted a bench role. Who is to say that this was ever offered to him? This was a general question from a reporter. Again, playing Marbury would have meant no minutes for Robinson. Disagreeing with this decision because you're a fan of Marbury I can understand but it's time to move on.

[abcd]

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.

"I changed my whole workout regimen to get ready for him," Marbury said. "I've been doing what [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] did, running up the mountains. I think from watching how the Suns play and the way he allowed [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] to orchestrate certain situations, I could see myself fitting into that."

Read more: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

So you are telling me that a basketball player would prepare for a system they knew they were not going to play for?

If Mike D'Antoni was honest, Marbury would have been bought out last summer, instead of this spring, because Donnie Walsh would have been given the heads up that Marbury was not in the team's future.

Even Donnie Walsh was surprised at the fact that Marbury was not playing.
Why would the GM of a team be surprised at something, if the coach was being honest?

link: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Donnie Walsh's own words: "I haven't talked it out with anybody. I want to talk to Mike, see where this is going to go because I'm unclear, I think like everybody is," Walsh said.

In other words, D'Antoni did not tell Walsh he was going to put Marbury on the inactive list. In other words, D'Antoni lied.

[JayJ44]

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.

It's not so much his name that gives Marbury the right to minutes/starting, it's the fact that he was by far the best player on this team. One would think the best player on a team deserves minutes. Usually, a players spot in the rotation is determined by how they play. In this case, it was obvious that D'antoni's decision to bench him had nothing to do with basketball. As fans, we deserve to see the best product possible out on the floor. Mike D'antoni did not put out the best possible team, because of a personal vendetta.

If John Doe was a 2 time all-star, had career averages of 19 and 8, and was the best player on his team, I think most people would take issue with him being a 12th man on a team full of scrubs.

[skelos]

the decision to bench marbury will be known by dantoni and dantoni alone. Marbury could say he was getting in shape to ply in the system. jerome james could have also been preparing for the coachs system doesnt mean hes gonna play. marbury was by far a better pick to run th point than duhon on paper but who knows if the veterans on the team will respond the same way with marbury at point than with duhon at point. with all thats happen over the last couple of years some players could be tired of marbury and dont want to play with him. it doesnt matter what they say to the press they dont want to start another controversy but behind closed doors noone will know what was said to the coach. if i remembered correctly the team voted for marbury to be benched after what happen between him and thomas in phoenix. also marbury prob wasnt played because his contract expires at the end. if his contract ran through 2010 he would have gotten alot of playing time

[KBlack25]

"I changed my whole workout regimen to get ready for him," Marbury said. "I've been doing what [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] did, running up the mountains. I think from watching how the Suns play and the way he allowed [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] to orchestrate certain situations, I could see myself fitting into that."

Read more: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

So you are telling me that a basketball player would prepare for a system they knew they were not going to play for?

If Mike D'Antoni was honest, Marbury would have been bought out last summer, instead of this spring, because Donnie Walsh would have been given the heads up that Marbury was not in the team's future.

Even Donnie Walsh was surprised at the fact that Marbury was not playing.
Why would the GM of a team be surprised at something, if the coach was being honest?

link: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Donnie Walsh's own words: "I haven't talked it out with anybody. I want to talk to Mike, see where this is going to go because I'm unclear, I think like everybody is," Walsh said.

In other words, D'Antoni did not tell Walsh he was going to put Marbury on the inactive list. In other words, D'Antoni lied.

No, you're wrong.

1) Marbury did NOT KNOW whether or not he would play in the system. OF COURSE he got prepared for the system. Obviously he would, that's his coach.

2) Not telling somebody something does not equal lying to them. If you think that's true, you need to head back to first grade. Mike D'Antoni didn't SAY ANYTHING, which means he COULD NOT HAVE LIED. Saying he lied implies he told Donnie Walsh, "I'm not going to put Marbury on the inactive list," and then DID that.

This is what actually happened:

D'Antoni: (says nothing)
:: D'Antoni puts Marbury on the Inactive List ::
abcd: SEE HE SAID NOTHING SO HE LIED!

Saying nothing is different from lying. Saying nothing does not make you dishonest, saying something false does.

[KBlack25]

It's not so much his name that gives Marbury the right to minutes/starting, it's the fact that he was by far the best player on this team. One would think the best player on a team deserves minutes. Usually, a players spot in the rotation is determined by how they play. In this case, it was obvious that D'antoni's decision to bench him had nothing to do with basketball. As fans, we deserve to see the best product possible out on the floor. Mike D'antoni did not put out the best possible team, because of a personal vendetta.

If John Doe was a 2 time all-star, had career averages of 19 and 8, and was the best player on his team, I think most people would take issue with him being a 12th man on a team full of scrubs.

Well, reasonable minds can differ on who was the best player on the team and who was the best player FOR the team...

Look, the fact is, the whole "clean slate" issue is a bunch of bull**** everyone is positing here. Wouldn't "clean slate" mean "clean slate"? That is, ignoring whatever the past was (including Marbury's two all-star appearances) and focusing on the situation at hand? None of us were in the locker room, none of us know what was going on, but maybe, just maybe Marbury DID get a COMPLETELY CLEAN SLATE.

That is, Anthony Roberson started in the same position as Stephon Marbury. Past all star appearances didn't matter. Past statistics didn't matter. Everyone was graded on what they brought to the table THAT DAY. There were many reports that many on the team did not like Marbury, that the tension between him and his teammates was palpable. So, based on what Stephon Marbury brought to the team THAT DAY and THAT VERY SECOND, he just didn't fit in with what Mike D'Antoni wanted.

Chris Webber is a borderline hall of famer, he barely saw minutes in Golden State, a straight up terrible team. **** happens, talent fades, what they bring to the table disappears.

MAYBE D'Antoni preferred starting his young guys and getting them minutes over putting a guy out there who wouldn't be on the team in 2009-10. MAYBE D'Antoni didn't like what he saw from Marbury in terms of his attitude or even his play in the preseason and as a "clean slate" person, he missed out on playing time. MAYBE D'Antoni saw Marbury jawing with Eddie House, thought "This guy hasn't changed since Phoenix," and didn't want Marbury representing NY or him on the court. But none of us know D'Antoni's motivation, because as it has been said over and over and over again...

D'ANTONI DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING, NOT TO THE MEDIA, NOT TO WALSH, NOT TO ANYBODY THAT DIDN'T NEED TO KNOW.

But apparently saying nothing makes you a liar.

[TunerAddict]

Well, reasonable minds can differ on who was the best player on the team and who was the best player FOR the team...

Look, the fact is, the whole "clean slate" issue is a bunch of bull**** everyone is positing here. Wouldn't "clean slate" mean "clean slate"? That is, ignoring whatever the past was (including Marbury's two all-star appearances) and focusing on the situation at hand? None of us were in the locker room, none of us know what was going on, but maybe, just maybe Marbury DID get a COMPLETELY CLEAN SLATE.

That is, Anthony Roberson started in the same position as Stephon Marbury. Past all star appearances didn't matter. Past statistics didn't matter. Everyone was graded on what they brought to the table THAT DAY. There were many reports that many on the team did not like Marbury, that the tension between him and his teammates was palpable. So, based on what Stephon Marbury brought to the team THAT DAY and THAT VERY SECOND, he just didn't fit in with what Mike D'Antoni wanted.

Chris Webber is a borderline hall of famer, he barely saw minutes in Golden State, a straight up terrible team. **** happens, talent fades, what they bring to the table disappears.

MAYBE D'Antoni preferred starting his young guys and getting them minutes over putting a guy out there who wouldn't be on the team in 2009-10. MAYBE D'Antoni didn't like what he saw from Marbury in terms of his attitude or even his play in the preseason and as a "clean slate" person, he missed out on playing time. MAYBE D'Antoni saw Marbury jawing with Eddie House, thought "This guy hasn't changed since Phoenix," and didn't want Marbury representing NY or him on the court. But none of us know D'Antoni's motivation, because as it has been said over and over and over again...

D'ANTONI DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING, NOT TO THE MEDIA, NOT TO WALSH, NOT TO ANYBODY THAT DIDN'T NEED TO KNOW.

But apparently saying nothing makes you a liar.

Its over.

Everything was addressed.

Game over. You can't come back from having KBlack address every flaw in the arguments being made.

Post of the year.

[OGKnickfan]

Wow, another example of kblack's cheap manipulation tactics and tuneraddict's cheerleading.

First of all, your logic is completely based on omission, interspersed with manipulation, of reality. Is this what they teach you in "law" school? What law school do you go to, exactly, Everest College School of Law?

I'll break it down, just for the sake of truth and the integrity of the site, insofar as posting of objective Knicks info. is concerned. Marbury, in the summer of 2008, arrived at training camp, ready to work with D'Antoni. D'Antoni, when asked by the media, stated, on numerous occasions, that Marbury had a "clean slate," and that's a fact. When asked about playing time, he said that players would have to earn their spots.

Well, after Marbury showed his willingness to play as a back up for Duhon, something I'm sure D'Antoni expected would have caused Marbury to beg for a buyout, and did a great job as a backup, even according to D'Antoni, he was still pulled out of the rotation, with D'Antoni saying that Marbury was not in the team's future. This took place, despite D'Antoni having said that Marbury had a clean slate and was playing well, i.e. having "earned his spot," according to D'Antoni's own standard.

D'Antoni later said that he did not want to insult a player of Marbury's caliber with minutes that should go to rookies, and developing players, like Mardy Collins and Roberson.

Later on, with the decision made to pull Marbury being questioned, by surprised reporters, who were clearly surprised, for an actual reason: deceptive, mixed messages, he would say, it's "nothing he did," "he didn't do anything wrong." So... it wasn't about earning a spot? It wasn't anything he did? He lost any sort of meaningful spot, despite the so-called clean slate that all of the players supposedly had? No wonder guys like Mark Jackson and Chris
Webber were defending Marbury's attitude towards the situation

And who do we have to tell us that this is not lying? Two inexperienced, self-righteous *******s, with no real world experience, riding the jock of some corporate, lying dickhead. D'Antoni is a dime a dozen. The same thing he did to Marbury is done to regular folks, every day, by guys that are just as manipulative, underhanded and self-interested as D'Antoni. When you venture into the real world, and a guy like D'Antoni shafts you, as will inevitably occur, I hope you guys run into a couple of self-righteous, insensitive people like yourselves, who think they know everything.

[Crazy⑧s]

Wow, another example of kblack's cheap manipulation tactics and tuneraddict's cheerleading.

First of all, your logic is completely based on omission, interspersed with manipulation, of reality. Is this what they teach you in "law" school? What law school do you go to, exactly, Everest College School of Law?

I'll break it down, just for the sake of truth and the integrity of the site, insofar as posting of objective Knicks info. is concerned. Marbury, in the summer of 2008, arrived at training camp, ready to work with D'Antoni. D'Antoni, when asked by the media, stated, on numerous occasions, that Marbury had a "clean slate," and that's a fact. When asked about playing time, he said that players would have to earn their spots.

Well, after Marbury showed his willingness to play as a back up for Duhon, something I'm sure D'Antoni expected would have caused Marbury to beg for a buyout, and did a great job as a backup, even according to D'Antoni, he was still pulled out of the rotation, with D'Antoni saying that Marbury was not in the team's future. This took place, despite D'Antoni having said that Marbury had a clean slate and was playing well, i.e. having "earned his spot," according to D'Antoni's own standard.

D'Antoni later said that he did not want to insult a player of Marbury's caliber with minutes that should go to rookies, and developing players, like Mardy Collins and Roberson.

Later on, with the decision made to pull Marbury being questioned, by surprised reporters, who were clearly surprised, for an actual reason: deceptive, mixed messages, he would say, it's "nothing he did," "he didn't do anything wrong." So... it wasn't about earning a spot? It wasn't anything he did? He lost any sort of meaningful spot, despite the so-called clean slate that all of the players supposedly had? No wonder guys like Mark Jackson and Chris
Webber were defending Marbury's attitude towards the situation

And who do we have to tell us that this is not lying? Two inexperienced, self-righteous *******s, with no real world experience, riding the jock of some corporate, lying dickhead. D'Antoni is a dime a dozen. The same thing he did to Marbury is done to regular folks, every day, by guys that are just as manipulative, underhanded and self-interested as D'Antoni. When you venture into the real world, and a guy like D'Antoni shafts you, as will inevitably occur, I hope you guys run into a couple of self-righteous, insensitive people like yourselves, who think they know everything.

That's a good post, but KBlack didn't once talk like he was speaking or referring to fact, as you seem to be doing. You are so convinced you're correct.

Please provide the facts to back your retorts for the sake of better reading.

Quotes, dates & so forth. Or were you actually there? You sound like you were hiding in Stephony's handbag stealthily jotting down each grossly unfair action made by the malicious D'Antoni.

I'm pretty sure that is about the only way you could be SO adamant about what seems like nothing more than presumptions......Again.

[OGKnickfan]

That's a good post, but KBlack didn't once talk like he was speaking or referring to fact, as you seem to be doing. You are so convinced you're correct.

Please provide the facts to back your retorts for the sake of better reading.

Quotes, dates & so forth. Or were you actually there? You sound like you were hiding in Stephony's handbag stealthily jotting down each grossly unfair action made by the malicious D'Antoni.

I'm pretty sure that is about the only way you could be SO adamant about what seems like nothing more than presumptions......Again.

If you don't watch the Knicks, buy the post or daily news, then I'm sorry that these are new facts to you, ones that YOU will have to research on your own. I'm not going to spend extra time looking for links, and all the rest, when anyone who watches MSG and reads the local papers knows that these are all facts. Google D'Antoni+clean+slate, google the other facts, try to find the video, or articles that mention them, where D'Antoni, repeatedly tells the press, yes, the press, that "it's nothing he did, he's done everything we've asked of him..." bla, bla, bla. Do the same with D'Antoni saying that Marbury is playing well. Google D'Antoni saying that he's not in the Knicks' future. I mean, I can't teach you a course on things that I've listed. You shouldn't take anyone's word for anything, even if they have links. Get off your ass and search out the assertions made for yourself, if you don't trust them.

Bottom line: D'Antoni violated his own standard. If he's not a liar, he's pretty close to one, by not keeping his word, violating his own standard, and playing with another person's head, by making promises he clearly wasn't intent on keeping: it was no coincidence that it was Marbury that ended up the odd man out. I'm not against buying out Marbury, by the way, but lying, dishonesty, and playing games, is not something I'll ever defend.

[Toons]

It's not so much his name that gives Marbury the right to minutes/starting, it's the fact that he was by far the best player on this team. One would think the best player on a team deserves minutes. Usually, a players spot in the rotation is determined by how they play. In this case, it was obvious that D'antoni's decision to bench him had nothing to do with basketball. As fans, we deserve to see the best product possible out on the floor. Mike D'antoni did not put out the best possible team, because of a personal vendetta.

If John Doe was a 2 time all-star, had career averages of 19 and 8, and was the best player on his team, I think most people would take issue with him being a 12th man on a team full of scrubs.

As a knick, marbury averaged about 15 n 6....you dont start players because of career averages. his 'ALL STAR' numbers are worse, a 8 and 5 averages.

[Toons]

i dont see why this is an arguement. yes the situation was handled poorly, and the new york media asdded fuel to the fire, yes marbusry was shafted, yes marbury got swung out of a deal, yes marbury was ready for training camp and ready to be a starter. yes. yes. yes.

but question, where is our loyalty? if the coach wanted to get rid of a player who also siad to the media 'after this season, im going to play in europe', why is this an issue? the hard core marbury fan (msg) would be upset by this, because marbury is his favorite player. Lebron in mine, and if the cavs ****ted on him like the knicks ****ted on marbury, i would battle all of you as well. the reason i dont care, is that marbury deserves a lot of the **** he's bin through imo.

lets just say we played marbury, how much difference would it have made? how many more games would have been won or lost? if he played well, do we renew his contract? let him leave to go to europe? forget about 2010? sign him for a vets minimum? (which he would only do on a championship contender and no the team he grew up playing and cheering for) really and truly....what is the point of talking about him? hes gone, been gone, he's not coming back, he is now an enimy

[smokes]

Another big night for Marbs, 2 points on 25% shooting, 1 assist and 1 to in 7 minutes. The guy is on fire!

[LJ4ptplay]

Another big night for Marbs, 2 points on 25% shooting, 1 assist and 1 to in 7 minutes. The guy is on fire!

Why are we still talking about Mebury? He's the worst player on the Celtics and the worst player in Knick franchise history. Mebury Lovers are just sore losers.