I don't see that article as harsh. It's a fair assessment. Hindsight is 20/20, but basically all the article is saying is that so far the Knicks haven't been better off since the Marbury trade. It's a fairly obvious assessment. Questioning, "had we gone in a different direction" is not harsh, IMHO.

Posted by diderotn:

Just a dumb article that fails to highlight the truth...Why not write about Houston's inability to play with pain, or the lack of frontcourt presence, or the lack of a defensive presence early on in the season???? Marb is not perfect, he still has a lot to improve on , but we also have to have athletes around him that have the intangibles that he is lacking, such as a back court mate that can defend, a front court that can jump out of the gym and block shots....

I think that the trade is reasonable. Thats the position they wanted to go adn Marbury has played well. They made the Marbury trade knowing what we did, or did not have. I would've bitten the bullet last year or called Pheonix's bluff on the draft picks at the very least. They had to get rid of that money or they were likely stuck with Marbury. I think we overpaid in a situation where we shouldve held them by the balls because of $$$$. Marbury trade *COULDVE* cost us a chance at Howard, because we went 29-24. Instead of trying to be a *buyer* we couldve been a seller, we had a lot of parts expiring, we couldve walked away with 2-3 draft picks upon our own and won 10 more games.

Marbury trade *COULDVE* cost us a chance at Howard, because we went 29-24.

The Knicks had Houston, Van Horn, Frank Williams (playing solidly at the time), Kurt Thomas and were winning about 35% of their games. No way would the team have finished badly enough to get Dwight Howard. Maybe the team would have continued its 35% percentage and gotten about the 8th pick.

Everyone talks about the Knicks record with Marbury and how its worse than before they got him.

But, answer me this hypothetical

What would their record have been without Marbury?

Possibly the same- but instead of loosing by 1 or 2 in the last second of games, maybe they would be getting blown out regularly.

Outside of a couple early stinkers, I think this team has played well.

they traded some OK pieces and got a good player back that has performed well. He hasnt made the team any better and you would think a guy of his "caliber" talent would have a greater impact, especially being that he plays a position where the key to success is making other guys better.

The picks dont even bother me that much. Remember we were playing well with KVH/FW/Deke/Houston showing some chemistry. I'm not sure not making the trade would have really put us in a spot to get Howard or OK4.

I have a couple takes on this...the only assesment you can truly make about this trade is what actually happened....IMO, look at it this way...

By the time Zeke got here, Houston's knees were bad...Powell is talking about the begining of the season like Zeke was here from the start, which he wasn't.

You can trace the decline not only to the trade of Pat but to the Draft where we got McDyess....

If we weren't drafting for Denver, maybe we grab Amare instead of Nene...this mean we have a lineup of

Camby/Doleac
KT/Amare/Harrington
Sprewell/Weatherspoon
Houston/Anderson
Ward/Eisley

the next draft, being set at PF with Amare and probably drafting Higher than 9 (I would say about 17, and this by the way is where ANY hypothetical falls apart) we can focus on a PG. With the way the chips fall the PG's that may have been available might have been Marcus Banks, Reece Gaines, Troy Bell, maybe even Ridnour being available, leaving us with a possible team of

Camby/Doleac/Lampje(?)
Amare/KT/Harrington
Sprewell/Weatherspoon
Houston/Anderson
Banks(?)/Ward/Eisley

For the sake of argument, say that Sprewell is still traded, giving us KVH, I don't remember people knocking down our door for Allan that season. And say when Isiah gets here, he still trades Weatherspoon for Norris.

Camby/Doleac/Lampje
Amare/KT/Harrington
KVH/Harrington(?)
Houston (who is now hurt)/Anderson
Banks/Ward/Eisley/Norris

After the season, Camby, KT (if KT doesn't get the extension), Ward and Eisley are FA's....and we make the KVH and Doleac for Thomas and Nazr trade (do we even do this if we still have Camby??)does that leave us enough money to go after any one player? Given the fact we would have to resign Camby, we would still be close to over the cap, but we would have lower picks in the draft and what looks like perennial first round exits.

Picking around 15-17 in last season's draft we would be looking at a 2 guard without a doubt...

Kirk Snyder, Josh Smith, JR Smith, Dorell Wright, Tony Allan, Sasha,are all available...say, for the sake of argument we pick Josh Smith...

Camby/Nazr
Amare/KT/Harrington
TT/Ariza/Anderson
Josh Smith/Allan Houston(who is still hurt)
Banks/Norris

how does this look?

[Edited by - joec32033 on 03/18/2005 11:25:48]

[Edited by - joec32033 on 03/18/2005 11:26:51]

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by fishmike:

they traded some OK pieces and got a good player back that has performed well. He hasnt made the team any better and you would think a guy of his "caliber" talent would have a greater impact, especially being that he plays a position where the key to success is making other guys better.

It's hard to argue that Marbury didn't make the team substantially better if you looked at the pre- vs. with-Marbury records of the team last year. It's certainly credible, though, to argue that the team took a step backwards this year for reasons outside of Marbury's control (i.e., the east overall improved; TT has put up 5 less PPG and 1.5 less RPG).

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 03/18/2005 11:07:51]

I would adree here. TT has been a joke. Ariza has gotten playing time and so has Sweets. Houston is still out and Penny has been nadda this year. Nazr got tons of playing time, where he is a usually a bench player. Jamal had been expected to come off the bench but has seen starter minutes all along.

Before Isiah came along here, we most certainly did have a chance at grabbing OK4 or Howard, b/c we were losing A LOT. Then suddenly, Isiah comes along, everyone is fighting for their jobs and suddenly, the team is blowing sub .500 teams out of the water as well as Memphis, in Memphis. Then Frankie gets hurt, and we start losing again. If you ask me, I think we absolutely had a slight shot at getting them. However, it's often irresistable to pull the trigger on a Marbury type trade, and I can't blame Zeke for this.

We played much better when Keith and Marbury were playing together IMO. They had a lot of chemistry. The Tim Thomas/Nazr trade clearly made us WORSE that year, however, it netted us Nazr, who could have been a valueable trading piece. We got back 2 late picks and Rose (Whom I love) but I really think we could have done better if Nazr just got healthy.

So in essence, we have talent on this team, but the team isn't any better off. Marbury is having a great offensive season, but he breaks down defensively easily. And the team is STIlL bad, with a little bit better talent. Therefore, trading Mabury shouldn't be out of the question.

I didn't post the article because I agree or disagree - just thought it was a good conversation starter.

I agree that with hindsite it's a lot easier. Marbury has not shown great leadership and does not play good defense. But even with out that he's a nice player. The problem with this type of article is all the assumptions:

1) If you really could have dumped Houston.
2) If the knick really would have played bad enough to get a top
pick.
3) If the knicks would have used the pick wisely.
4) If you knew Houston's knees were going to be as bad as they are.
5) If you know the Knicks weren't going to be able to secure a decent
front court player.

I think Isiah made the trade thinking Houston was going to be able to play at a high-level and he would be able to pull-off something for a decent Center. It looks like a bad plan now that we know what we know but at the time was it that terrible? I don't think so. It didn't work out - with a lousy team you have to take chances and hope they pay off. I don't think Isiah has made terrible (or great choices) they just haven't worked - there are no 100% gaurantees. So far he's rolled the dice and lost more times then he's won. Has he done his best to put the odds in his favor - that's hard to tell. Marbury is a nice player and if in the future some gambles pay off I think he could be a big piece of the puzzle.

I still maintain we we gave up too much. GS just got Baron Davis for Dale Davis and Speedy Claxton. I dont think they gave up any draft picks either.