"This is a team game," Brown said after the game. "I want guys who play hard, try to defend, share the ball and make their teammates better." Most of the attention in New York was focused on Brown and Marbury, who have been feuding in the media over the last few days after Marbury's comments over the weekend that he needed to be more offensive minded because Brown's way wasn't leading to enough wins. Brown responded Monday night by saying he had already given Marbury more freedom than any guard he had ever coached. More harsh words followed Tuesday and Wednesday, with Marbury vowing to fire back as long as Brown did.

"I'm no longer going to allow him to say things about me and I'm not going to say anything back," Marbury said. "I allowed him to drag me the first three or four months in the paper. But I'm not taking it no more." Marbury feels he's tried to play the way Brown wants him to, even though he prefers to play at a quicker tempo. He says he'll continue trying -- but not surprisingly offered no guarantees. "I'm down for what's right," Marbury said. "Like I said, I was committed and I'm still committed to the organization, to doing exactly what he's been asking. "He told me to play the way he wants me to play and if I don't feel like it's the right way just bare with it. And I didn't say yes and I didn't say no."

Brown pulled Marbury out of a film session for their brief chat. "He flexed a real hard juice card, I know that," Marbury said. "So he definitely made me aware of what he can do. But that doesn't scare me at all." "I've always felt in New York, if you ever showed effort and played hard and played with enthusiasm, people would stick by you," Brown said. "And I just felt there was a lot of energy in that building because of the way our kids played."

The four players on the floor with Crawford are the four lowest-paid Knicks, but Brown called them the "team of the future" and added, "I don't think we've got to reward guys because they're big names and they have big contracts. We've got to reward guys that are going to try to do what we ask them to do."

Guard Jamal Crawford asserted after a brief stay-sharp practice at the team's Madison Square Garden Training Center. "But, even though we lost two of those games on the last possession, we take pride in playing so much better ball. Now we've got to keep it going." Comparing the Knicks' style to that of the second-year Bobcats in the Knicks' 116-109 loss Saturday in Charlotte, Marbury said, "No, I don't have that type of freedom. For me, it's a problem. I think I can play under the system, but I think also I've got to play the way I know how to play."

If the Knicks (17-45) were winning by playing Brown's way, Marbury said he would be happy and wouldn't question the coach. "But we're not winning," he said, "so I can't condone that."

"I know I'm used to being the scapegoat, but damn, come on," Marbury said. "When is enough going to be enough?"

Jason Kidd: "Larry is the ultimate coach. He is a true teacher who understands basketball better than anyone else and puts players in the best position to succeed as a team. Larry's teams always perform to the best of their ability and in most cases beyond. Larry blends individuals together to build a cohesive unit that plays as one."

It seems a time that maybe we need a reminder. That one comes courtesy of Jason Kidd, and to pump a book that I was a part of, it comes from the book, "The Perfect Team." In it, besides putting together as the title implies, the NBA's perfect team, each member of the team puts together his own team.

MSG NETWORK

When Steve Francis arrived, Marbury declared that it was time to loosen the reins and let the team run. But Brown insisted it wasn't his intention to stifle the offense - just his belief that any running game needed to start with defense and rebounding. "I've never talked anything about a systems coach in my life," Brown added Monday. "I've been a basketball coach, about guys playing the right way. And I think that's always been what I've said. It's amazing to me that the guys who have wanted to have really prospered, wherever I've been. It's always about the team and that's the only thing that matters."

ISIAH THOMAS

"Again, I'm talking about the coach that we have and the young talent that we have. If it turns out that we have the wrong combination of players chemistry-wise -- we all think we should be doing better -- if it turns out that this is not the right mix, then it's my job to fix that." "My number one wish right now would be that the players and the coaches could find that happy medium," said Thomas. "They haven't quite meshed yet. But when we are talking about chemistry and everything else...well, that may be a problem. If it is a problem of chemistry and personality, that really falls on my desk. I'll make sure to do something about that if I can." "If the players can't get along with the coach, then the players have to go. We're not getting rid of the coach. We are riding with the coach. If the players can't adapt, then I've got to get some other players who can." "If the make-up and the chemistry is not what I hoped it would be, then it's my job to fix it."

Knicks president Isiah Thomas recently indicated that if it ever comes down to a choice between Larry Brown and point guard Stephon Marbury, he'll cast his lot with the coach. Of course, Thomas hopes it doesn't reach that point, and he expressed his faith in Marbury's determination to satisfy Brown's demands. But Thomas said the Knicks no longer are Marbury's team. "No, it's Larry Brown's team," Thomas said in a radio interview. "Make no mistake about it." Flying under the radar while the Knicks were in Atlanta on Friday night, Thomas made his remarks in an interview on WFAN.

FLIP SAUNDERS

Saunders also sees a flaw in Marbury's game.

"His greatest strength is that he thinks he can win a game by himself," he said. "Sometimes he can do that. And sometimes it becomes his greatest weakness."

"I think he just didn't want to shoot the ball. So I thought he'd have 15 or 20 assists. Just one of those nights. (pause). Maybe he didn't feel like he was on. He played 40 minutes, shot 0 for 7 with 3 assists. He got the ball all the time. I ran plenty of stuff for him. He had 3 assists and no steals. By accident, you can get a steal. "

to Marbury's defense that quote about getting a steal by accident was actually addressed to the entire team because we had no steals that night. The papers just spun it to make it look like it was directed at him.

In case I haven't been noticing???????

Thanks for the update. No shiot.

Posted by holfresh:

Posted by Bippity10:

to Marbury's defense that quote about getting a steal by accident was actually addressed to the entire team because we had no steals that night. The papers just spun it to make it look like it was directed at him.

Dude in case you haven't been paying attention...Everything is spun to make it look like it was directed at Marbs...

The Snow article yesterday said at the end it was a direct dig at Marbs...

Paranoia will destroya.

No need to apologize for disagreeing. I understand everything you say about Marbs. We all see it, but he is just another cog in the litany of prolems that is the worst organization if professional sports. The sad part is that our fans are perfectly okay with players when they quit. There have been a billion reasons for our players to get mad at the GM, coach and their teammates. But not one legitimate reason to quit. And yet some fans seem to say it's okay and then are surprised when our team loses.

It's okay to quit, but when my team loses I will come on the website for hours expressing my shock and dismay at my teams record. It's so confusing. OUr standards have dropped so far it's pathetic.

Patrick Ewing played his asse off for 15 years and we boo'd him and then ran him out of town. Now guys quit and we want to keep them and run the coach out of town. IT's a topsy turvy world.

No I have not had a change of heart on Steph. I still think you can win with Steph. But I stand by my belief that in order to win he has to be marginalized and not considered the leader of the franchise and star player like we continue to do. Chicago won with Rodman. Detroit with Rasheed. Malcontents that are good players only hurt a team when you build an organization in which they are running the show. That's what this organization has done, and that's what fans continue to want us to do with Marbs.

I don't blame him for our losing but he is a key part of our problems. But just another piece of a misguided organization that cries for the head of a hall of fame coach and wants to put the reins back in the hands of a player that is nothing more than a talented role player with his own shoe.

I'm not sure what you are getting at blueseats, but hopefully it's saying that those that have not jumped ship on marbs are fans.

Honestly, and I hate saying statements like this on message boards with good conversation going, but...

You are both right.

But I think the main thing for us to do is actually read what Isiah has to say.

"Again, I'm talking about the coach that we have and the young talent that we have. If it turns out that we have the wrong combination of players chemistry-wise -- we all think we should be doing better -- if it turns out that this is not the right mix, then it's my job to fix that." "My number one wish right now would be that the players and the coaches could find that happy medium," said Thomas. "They haven't quite meshed yet. But when we are talking about chemistry and everything else...well, that may be a problem. If it is a problem of chemistry and personality, that really falls on my desk. I'll make sure to do something about that if I can." "If the players can't get along with the coach, then the players have to go. We're not getting rid of the coach. We are riding with the coach. If the players can't adapt, then I've got to get some other players who can." "If the make-up and the chemistry is not what I hoped it would be, then it's my job to fix it."

I'm basically pleading with Larry Brown to Find that happy medium. Stop throwing players under the bus. Let's see if we can win with what we have...I know I'm not in the minority when I say that before the season started, we had a talented roster.

I remember hearing clyde talk about his first year in cleveland where he thought he was doing all the same things, but it just wasn't working for him, then he had a summer to think about it and came back the next year back to where he was.

I just can't understand why this is an impossibility here. With the exception of marbury and crawford, pretty much everyone else is new on the team. Especially when you have a new coach.

I still like this roster. I like a back court of franchise, marbs and crawford manning the 1 and 2. I like JRose and Qwoods and Qrich manning the 2 and 3. I like DLee and Malik Rose manning the 3 and 4 and I like Curry, Frye, MoT and Jerome James (yes, jerome james) manning the center rotation, with a little sprinkling of Jackie B for good measure...jackie b is still pretty raw btw.

Are there one or two players that could be traded for a role player, for sure, but could that role already be filled with the players we have, absolutely.

The youth on the team still has a lot to learn, so no reason to expect them to bring us to the promised land right away.

But the vets on this team (counting curry and crawford as vets) can really do some good things.

My nephew lives out in Seattle and I asked him about Jerome James and he said one thing that was on point:
He showed up out of shape.

Down the line, that applies to pretty much every knick. Not knowing who your coach will be can probably take away from the intensity of your off season workouts (cut to drunk marbs in the wife beater [remember those pics?])

Now look at this summer...everyone knows Brown isn't going anywhere, they know what he expects, if they aren't in shape this year, then I'm shocked and they have to go.

But if LB gets a pass this year, so does everyother knick.

Next year is a different matter altogether.

no doubt

rvhoss: I dont think it's an impossibility here. It can be done. These guys can grow with each other but they have to make the commitment to play for each other and play hard every night for each other. Otherwise it can't work. The moment players accept that it's okay to quit, what are they going to do when the lights are really on you come playoff time and one of your teammates can't stop someone else. Are you going to quit on him, or try to pick him up? I've only seen evidence that we would choose to quit.

The organization has to make a decision. Do we give this roster one more shot, or do we gut it. That's a personal decision that can only be proven by the results. Siome here may say give it another shot and that's fine. That's just the choice that they would make if they were GM and is not right or wrong. I'm personally of the belief that once a quitter always a quitter. Not right or wrong either, I've just had too many experiences with quitters.

I don't care who is here. I just want guys that are willing to listen to the coach and play to honor their uniforms. Doesn't matter to me if the coach is LB or Donald Duck. Doesn't matter if the players are the one's we have today or PS132. Doesn't matter. I'm just sick of this atmosphere that says it's okay to quit, we'lll just blame someone else.

Blueseats I think the issue is that you don't read my posts. You take snippets and then draw conclusions. I still stand by the same thing I've been saying for months. Marbs is a malcontent. He is not a leader. He has never been a leader. He is not a franchise player just like I said the day we traded for him. There are less than 5 guys in the league I consider franchise guys. The rest are just players that have talents that can be helpful. You can win with anyone on your roster. But he is not to blame for our problems and we can keep him on this team and still win. He is part of the problem just like LB(I'm sure someone will say I've never said that before and Zeke. It is an organizational issue that is killing us. That has not changed. I keep typing the same things over and over again.

My beef with the fans has also not changed. Our problem is we continue to pick out a different person every year to blame for our problems thinking things will change each time we do. Then management fires or trades that person and we hop on the bandwagon supporting that guy until he can't turn it around and then we turn on him and boo him and blame him. What we need to do is stop pointing fingers at individuals and force this organization to get a philosophy and a plan and stick to it for once!!!!!

How can I make this point more clear? I type the same thing every day I come here. The same friggin post, I'm starting to sound like isles and his constant Isiah rants.

What is this? Is this propaganda spun by Larry's number one fan or what? Enough already. We all read the papers and can draw our own conclusions without your editing that forgets about the quotes that actually critique Brown. We know what side of the road you are on. What is your point? We should suffer through another year of misery with this old man who wants so desperately to control everyone yet can't get anyone to play for him anymore. Look in the mirror LB. It begins and ends with your ego and refusal to bend and meet people half way. This team sucks and it didn't have to be so.

Blueseats you are to Marbury as Holfresh and oohaah are to Larry Brown. Someone has to be on the extremes. You can't be disappointed in a player and like the player at the same time. You either love them and want to bare their children, or you hate them.

My point on Marbury once again has never changed. If you want to start the argument that Marbs is to blame for this mess we can start up again, and you will hear me make the same points I made as to why this is not LB's fault either. It is not one individual. We can trade them or keep them and it won't make a difference unless we change the direction of the franchise. We can win by dumping Steph and we can win by keeping him here at the same time, it's all in how our team is constructed. You and I agree on this 100%. But my point for the last 7 years has been until we stick with a plan, stop firing coaches and GM's and figure out which direction we are going it is impossible to determine whether Steph can help or not. YOu are sold on him not being able to ever help a team win. I am not. That is where we differ.

Once again I will make the same arguments I made about Stephon 2 years ago when the world was aglow with the trade. Most people either loved it and thought he would bring us a title or they hated it and thought he would drag us down. I said the following(and am still saying it)......................

We as an organization are making the same mistake we made with Latrell Sprewell. We are building our team and giving the face of the franchise to a guy that has never led anyone anywhere. If we do that with Marbs he will not lead us. He is not a leader and only a bad organization would make a move that makes him a leader. But if you want to get true value from Marbs you have to build around him with a veteran team and develop a culture of winning. With that you can take advantage of his talents and minimize anything else. It's the same thing we should have done with Latrell Sprewell but did not. Of course not, he was our "heart and soul". But I in no way think that this organization can't win with him as part of it. Once again it comes down to the direction of the franchise. A direction that is yet to be determined, and one in which some fans want to fire the coach an then start a new direction once again leaving us unable to figure out who can help us.

Booing him and pointing blame at him does nothing for our team or our franchise. He is not to blame, our organizational structure, lack of a plan and building a team around saviors is what leads to this nonsense. The same thing has been happening for so long that the names don't matter anymore. Don't you guys get it. Look at the pattern.

Latrell=Stephon(franchise guys that never should have been)
LB=Lenny=Herb=Don(coach's blamed for asinine player signings)
Stephon=Patrick=Allan(stars boo'd and blamed)
Layden=Zeke(GM's praying to sign the savior)
Stephon=Dice=Allan(big contract players miscast as saviors. I've never once blamed these guys because I never thought they were saviors in the first place)

The names change but everything else stays the same. Our arguments have never been about whether Marbs can lead the franchise, it's always been about is he to blame for the losing. And I still stand by my words. NO! Do we want to start the argument again. It has to start with an organizational change, a change of philosophy. That can include Marbs if we go in one direction or not include him if we go in another. Either way I don't care. I just want us to get a direction FIRST, then we can worry about who can help us, including, Stephon Marbury.