[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Brown takes Shot at Steph (article)
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 2 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
11/13/2005  12:24 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:

(merely one sentence later in the same article!)?


read the article. those 2 quotes were not given back to back. they were in 2 seperate paragraphs. 1 at the beginning of the article talking about the fourth Steph vs Craw/Baron and the other statement containing the "fools gold" quote at the end of the article in response to the game as a whole:

When asked if some of Marbury's baskets were a result of Marbury breaking plays, Brown said: "I think he got some out of the offense and he got some making some plays. But sometimes those things late in games are fool's gold. Right now, we have to spend more time executing, knowing when the shot comes up why you run a play, who's it for, and that takes time. But I'm encouraged because I really believe that we're doing a lot better."


seems to me LB is saying that just because Steph was able to get off certain looks and score early in the game, doesn't mean he will [and hasn't] in crunchtime. This has been the story all along. The old bait and switch. The Defense adjusts, Steph doesn't and becomes very predictable towards the end of games. NY looks inept b/c Steph , the guy who has been controlling the show in 4ths is confused by the new looks. The fact that he doesn't trust his teammates to make plays only furthers the problem.
the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
AUTOADVERT
Knight
Posts: 22775
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/21/2005
Member: #968
11/13/2005  12:28 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
That was HIS response to the question, which was about the criticism that he doesn't make his teammates better. That was how Marbury spun the question. PG's can make their teammates "better" by helping them get good shots and getting them into a rhythm...to name a few things.
I agree they can do all that, but they can't "control" how their teammates play. You can set up Malik Rose perfectly but can't control the fact that he'll be blocked by 6'2" PGs! You can't control that Keith has bad hands and won't catch your passes. Can't control that Kurt can't jump and has turtle slow feet. You can help to improve these players, which Steph obviously has done for many teammates, but you can't control how they play. How well they play is determined by (a) the PG AND (b) many, many factors that the PG can't control

There are other factors involved and that's ALL that Marbury acknowledged, he accepted NONE of the criticism that maybe he didn't get other people involved enough or in the right way. Why not just say, "When I first came into the league I had more of a scoring mindset, as I have matured I've worked on getting my teammates more involved and coach is helping me improve in that area even more." Instead, you get complete denial and excuses--the only reason Marbs thinks he's lost is because of his teammates.
"He only went to Georgia Tech for one year, and that's an engineering school." -LB
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
11/13/2005  12:41 PM
Stephon needs to learn the plays and how they are run and what shots they are run for first. Then he can master when to and when NOT to take advantage of his individual talent based on the looks given when it matters most - in the FOURTH!

sleeping on the playbook doesn't work. the words and diagrams are not going to permeate off the paper thru the pillow and into your brain.

also stop calling Chauncey. call the guy with the key to the gate and the film room! .
the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/13/2005  12:42 PM
Posted by McK1:
Posted by Bonn1997:

(merely one sentence later in the same article!)?


read the article. those 2 quotes were not given back to back. they were in 2 seperate paragraphs.
Sorry, I got the spacing wrong. The two sentences still completely contradict each other.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
11/13/2005  12:43 PM
Why not just say, "When I first came into the league I had more of a scoring mindset, as I have matured I've worked on getting my teammates more involved and coach is helping me improve in that area even more."
He entered the league as a 15PPG, 8APG player (after year 1). Maybe if he felt your statement were accurate, he would have considered saying it.
Knight
Posts: 22775
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 7/21/2005
Member: #968
11/13/2005  12:47 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Why not just say, "When I first came into the league I had more of a scoring mindset, as I have matured I've worked on getting my teammates more involved and coach is helping me improve in that area even more."
He entered the league as a 15PPG, 8APG player (after year 1). Maybe if he felt your statement were accurate, he would have considered saying it.

Those stats don't tell you that he was a team oriented player...he has always been a scorer first and foremost.
"He only went to Georgia Tech for one year, and that's an engineering school." -LB
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
11/13/2005  12:48 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
His impact is too low relative to his stats. He's just not a SMART PG. He doesn't do the right thing at the right time.
Give us some concrete examples

I really don't have the best memory for in-game situations, but remembering Steph's 31 point Olympics performance. That is an example of the best of Steph, and not because of all those points, but because he got them in the flow of the offense.

All too often before that, and even after that as a Knick, he'd go into modes of behavior. In the distributor mode that's all he looked to do, he didn't use his own shot for deception or to collapse the D. In that mode he played slower and with less zeal. When that failed, to whatever degree it would (our record was better when he distributed more, but still not good) he'd get into his "man possessed" scoring more. There you see his eyes lit up, he;'s sweating again, he's on his toes and penetrating and looking alive. But not looking to distribute, and other players tune out. I call it his Dr Stephyll and Mr Hyde routine.

In contrast, the better PGs play with a consistent style and fervor throughout. Sure, some games guys like Kidd and Nash will take more shots than others, but you don't see their styles and energy shift radically from game to game or half to half. For Steph, I take it as an indication of his lack of confidence and an inability to integrate his alter egos.

And then of course there are bonehead plays like the 8 second rule of last year, playing hot potato with the ball on the perimeter as the shot clock winds down, dribbling the ball off his foot last game and sloppy cross court passes in the crunch. No points or assist in the last 5 mins of the game. A better memory than mine could really do a number on the guy, but what's the point. If you think Steph knows how and when to control tempo, when to give the right guy the ball and where he likes it, how to feed the interior, how to give guys easy transition buckets, backdoor passes and alley oops, how to take the ball under the basket or to the baseline for a DISH (have you ever seen an under the basket or baseline dish from Steph? Only time I ever see him leave the center of the court is when he's playing SG), how to take a game winner himself, or hit game winning free throws, or make a game winning assist.... etc...

Then please let me turn the tables on you. Please give us concrete examples, and I hope you have more than one or two from the 120+ games he's played with us so far. Seriously, most teams, probably including ours, who have guys at positions OTHER THAN PG who in that same span have more good setups and defining plays than Steph. Which really ins't good commentary on Steph as a PG or a max contract "franchise" player.
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
11/13/2005  12:49 PM
Posted by BlueSeats:
Posted by EnySpree:
Steph is more like Kevin Johnson. Actually they are exactly alike. KJ was about taking his man off the dribble and scoring....later on he became a three point shooter. He had huge passing numbers like Marbs does now but not just like Marbs he was not a passer.

Whenever Steph is knocked as a playmaker people always point to his 8 apg, but when KJ was healthy he was upwards of an 11 - 12 apg guy.

Other times people will knock Steph as a guy who shoots too much. To the best of my recollection he only took about 15 shots per game last year - that is not too much. But what Larry is talking about is what Steph's problem is. His impact is too low relative to his stats. He's just not a SMART PG. He doesn't do the right thing at the right time. He doesn't know how to control a game, especially from start to finish.


excellent point blueseats, and I am just appalled at how people are not telling larry to shut up... Yea I forgot, lets blame larry, a man who has been a winner all his life... Just silly.. I will give you an example of what LB means here..

with the game tied, Jamal crawford got the ball with 1:37 on the clock, now jamal came off a screen, could of jacked up a shot, rushed a shot, or pass it back out. Instead, he drove to the lane, drew the double team, and found AD open for the go ahead basket. That is creative basketball. This is the type of ball LB is saying steph needs to play, then people blame crawford for the last play of the game, well I say at least he made a move to the basket, something he would not have done last year, people say craw has low bbIQ, I say he has a high bball IQ, and is showing that by the way he plays now, he actually played a really good game friday, he is adapting so far.... Steph had a good first half and then dissapeared, why? I don't know...

Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
JUNKMEIN
Posts: 20401
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/14/2004
Member: #797
11/13/2005  12:51 PM
This entire statement by LB comes from one thing and one thing only. He didn't like at all when Steph jacked up that 3 pointer early in the shot clock with 2 minutes left and us up. Then GS scored off of the rebound and LB got a quick timeout. He was screaming at him the whole time he was walking back to the bench. On at least 3 occasions afterwards when LB was hollering instructions LB straight up ignored him with the nonresponse. That's what this whole thing branches from.

Me, I am leaning towards LB's position on that (Steph jacking up the 3 at that moment not being good). At the same time however if it had went in....thusly, Larry's fool's gold comment.

Otherwise, LB's Curry for Malik swap just out and out SUCKED

[Edited by - Junkmein on 11-13-2005 12:52 PM]
McK1
Posts: 26527
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/16/2005
Member: #964
11/13/2005  12:52 PM
Posted by tkf:
Posted by BlueSeats:
Posted by EnySpree:
Steph is more like Kevin Johnson. Actually they are exactly alike. KJ was about taking his man off the dribble and scoring....later on he became a three point shooter. He had huge passing numbers like Marbs does now but not just like Marbs he was not a passer.

Whenever Steph is knocked as a playmaker people always point to his 8 apg, but when KJ was healthy he was upwards of an 11 - 12 apg guy.

Other times people will knock Steph as a guy who shoots too much. To the best of my recollection he only took about 15 shots per game last year - that is not too much. But what Larry is talking about is what Steph's problem is. His impact is too low relative to his stats. He's just not a SMART PG. He doesn't do the right thing at the right time. He doesn't know how to control a game, especially from start to finish.


excellent point blueseats, and I am just appalled at how people are not telling larry to shut up... Yea I forgot, lets blame larry, a man who has been a winner all his life... Just silly.. I will give you an example of what LB means here..

with the game tied, Jamal crawford got the ball with 1:37 on the clock, now jamal came off a screen, could of jacked up a shot, rushed a shot, or pass it back out. Instead, he drove to the lane, drew the double team, and found AD open for the go ahead basket. That is creative basketball. This is the type of ball LB is saying steph needs to play, then people blame crawford for the last play of the game, well I say at least he made a move to the basket, something he would not have done last year, people say craw has low bbIQ, I say he has a high bball IQ, and is showing that by the way he plays now, he actually played a really good game friday, he is adapting so far.... Steph had a good first half and then dissapeared, why? I don't know...


1 guy is calling on himself to get it. the other guy is calling on Chauncey.
the stop underrating David Lee movement 1. FIRE MIKE 2. HIRE MULLIN 3. PAY AVERY 4. FREE NATE!!!
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
11/13/2005  12:53 PM
Posted by BlueSeats:
Posted by Bonn1997:
His impact is too low relative to his stats. He's just not a SMART PG. He doesn't do the right thing at the right time.
Give us some concrete examples

I really don't have the best memory for in-game situations, but remembering Steph's 31 point Olympics performance. That is an example of the best of Steph, and not because of all those points, but because he got them in the flow of the offense.

All too often before that, and even after that as a Knick, he'd go into modes of behavior. In the distributor mode that's all he looked to do, he didn't use his own shot for deception or to collapse the D. In that mode he played slower and with less zeal. When that failed, to whatever degree it would (our record was better when he distributed more, but still not good) he'd get into his "man possessed" scoring more. There you see his eyes lit up, he;'s sweating again, he's on his toes and penetrating and looking alive. But not looking to distribute, and other players tune out. I call it his Dr Stephyll and Mr Hyde routine.

In contrast, the better PGs play with a consistent style and fervor throughout. Sure, some games guys like Kidd and Nash will take more shots than others, but you don't see their styles and energy shift radically from game to game or half to half. For Steph, I take it as an indication of his lack of confidence and an inability to integrate his alter egos.

And then of course there are bonehead plays like the 8 second rule of last year, playing hot potato with the ball on the perimeter as the shot clock winds down, dribbling the ball off his foot last game and sloppy cross court passes in the crunch. No points or assist in the last 5 mins of the game. A better memory than mine could really do a number on the guy, but what's the point. If you think Steph knows how and when to control tempo, when to give the right guy the ball and where he likes it, how to feed the interior, how to give guys easy transition buckets, backdoor passes and alley oops, how to take the ball under the basket or to the baseline for a DISH (have you ever seen an under the basket or baseline dish from Steph? Only time I ever see him leave the center of the court is when he's playing SG), how to take a game winner himself, or hit game winning free throws, or make a game winning assist.... etc...

Then please let me turn the tables on you. Please give us concrete examples, and I hope you have more than one or two from the 120+ games he's played with us so far. Seriously, most teams, probably including ours, who have guys at positions OTHER THAN PG who in that same span have more good setups and defining plays than Steph. Which really ins't good commentary on Steph as a PG or a max contract "franchise" player.


I will give you one blue. Last game and the infamous 3 point shot... The knicks were up by two, with a chance to extend the lead to two posessions, that would of been huge..crawford was shooting well, and curry was unguardable down low. steph should have called a play or worked the ball down to curry, put the pressure on the warriors to make a key stop, instead he bailed them out by firing up a 3 early in the shot clock, that is bad decision making, just bad...
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
11/13/2005  12:54 PM
Posted by McK1:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by BlueSeats:
Posted by EnySpree:
Steph is more like Kevin Johnson. Actually they are exactly alike. KJ was about taking his man off the dribble and scoring....later on he became a three point shooter. He had huge passing numbers like Marbs does now but not just like Marbs he was not a passer.

Whenever Steph is knocked as a playmaker people always point to his 8 apg, but when KJ was healthy he was upwards of an 11 - 12 apg guy.

Other times people will knock Steph as a guy who shoots too much. To the best of my recollection he only took about 15 shots per game last year - that is not too much. But what Larry is talking about is what Steph's problem is. His impact is too low relative to his stats. He's just not a SMART PG. He doesn't do the right thing at the right time. He doesn't know how to control a game, especially from start to finish.


excellent point blueseats, and I am just appalled at how people are not telling larry to shut up... Yea I forgot, lets blame larry, a man who has been a winner all his life... Just silly.. I will give you an example of what LB means here..

with the game tied, Jamal crawford got the ball with 1:37 on the clock, now jamal came off a screen, could of jacked up a shot, rushed a shot, or pass it back out. Instead, he drove to the lane, drew the double team, and found AD open for the go ahead basket. That is creative basketball. This is the type of ball LB is saying steph needs to play, then people blame crawford for the last play of the game, well I say at least he made a move to the basket, something he would not have done last year, people say craw has low bbIQ, I say he has a high bball IQ, and is showing that by the way he plays now, he actually played a really good game friday, he is adapting so far.... Steph had a good first half and then dissapeared, why? I don't know...


1 guy is calling on himself to get it. the other guy is calling on Chauncey.


hahahaha, that is cold man...LOL..

Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
11/13/2005  1:03 PM
Posted by tkf:
I will give you one blue. Last game and the infamous 3 point shot... The knicks were up by two, with a chance to extend the lead to two posessions, that would of been huge..crawford was shooting well, and curry was unguardable down low. steph should have called a play or worked the ball down to curry, put the pressure on the warriors to make a key stop, instead he bailed them out by firing up a 3 early in the shot clock, that is bad decision making, just bad...

That's exactly why and when I began to lose belief in Steph, but way back in our playoffs against the Nets. Now they clearly out manned us, especially when TT went down, so I'm not surprised we lost or got swept, but I can remember in those last two games at the garden when we were actually playing with zeal and competitive, at the end of games Steph got lazy and took and missed early in the clock chucks in crunch time that cost us those games.

Now people will check boxscores and see he carried us and tell us he's the one keeping us in those games at all. I agree, when he puts up huge 3rd quarter points on a bad team it gives them something, but when you see him through it away on bad decision making in closing minutes it just destroys confidence that we'll ever get OVER the hump.

He's just too mechanical and unintuitive as a PG. Very inventive as a penetrator. a good passer, but his mind is not expansive enough to be an architect of an offense. Craftsman or artisan, yes. Foreman, architect or engineer, no. Not a "big picture" kinda guy.
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
11/13/2005  1:12 PM
if the newspapers would stop going bonkers with every LB quote, then it'd be just like a regular season where the knicks lose, not even wondering if marbs contract was tradeable.

I think LB is deflecting critics from his haphazard substitution patterns, especially at the end of games, but he's a teacher, and he'll take a loss to prove a point (subbing curry with rose)
Posted by Ray15:


Posted by crzymdups:


Larry Brown can shut the hell up anytime now. I'm glad he realized Foyle had something to do with the game. I wonder if he noticed who was guarding Foyle and if he noticed that he put that person in the game to guard him? I wonder if he'll ever look at the players he puts around Steph. It's not like Baron Davis "took over the game" with two backups at the C and PF. He "took over" because GSW's best players were on the floor in crunch time. Larry Brown is a simpering, egotistic douche bag. Just leave, Larry.

[/quote]


And people think it's possible to rebuild in NY? Are you nuts? -- Everybody claims to have the patience but when we finally make an effort to change the culture of this team, you can't handle it. Larry Brown has already taught this team to be tough. He's taught them how to defend and give effort on both sides of the ball. We've had a chance to win every single game we've played and it's a work in progress to teach them how to win games in the final two mins. Look at what Skiles did for the Bulls last year -- he added a toughness and a defensive mentality that changed the culture of the team. Look what Coughlin has done for the Giants -- again changed the culture of the team and created a winning mentality. This is the exact thing Larry Brown is doing, but it will take time. I would be willing to bet we make the playoffs this year -- We've improved every game and once we start winning the close ones, we'll be a very tough team to play.
[/quote]


all kool aid all the time.
NYKniCksFan87
Posts: 22170
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/13/2004
Member: #700
11/13/2005  2:13 PM
^^what he said,

people are too freakin impatient
''We don't have the luxury to take anybody lightly,'' New York's Quentin Richardson said. ''We're not that good.''
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
11/13/2005  3:42 PM
funn, crawford 16 ppg last year, curry 17 ppg last year, marbs 19 ppg last year...this year they are way off, however, the GS game showed them getting towards those numbers.

The team has improved every game. LB is getting to know his players.

If we keep improving, when we start winning, we will continue winning, because we just keep getting better.
all kool aid all the time.
newyorknewyork
Posts: 30255
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #541
11/13/2005  4:50 PM
When does Q get held Accountable for averaging 6.8pts a game on 33%. When does Curry get held accountable for getting in foul trouble though they are depended on as much as Marbury. Fyre, Lee have outplayed Davis & Rose & Taylor but get less time. Davis is averaging 4pts 7rebs in 28min. Frye is averaging 8pts 6rebs in 19, and Lee is averaging 7pts 8.5rebs 2assist on 66.7% in 15.5mins. And they make bigger impact. Frye should start, Lee should back him up, Davis should get the backup center mins. And Taylor should play when one of the guys are in foul trouble. They would help Marbury win more than the other guys. When are the others held accountable for there own play.

Marbury deserves blame for missing FTs. And looking lost on offense at times. But none of the negatives Marbury has done is the main reason why we have lost games. Its just part of all these things that combine together have hurt us. I don't see how any of the negatives so far with Marbury during the game have a worse impact than Curry being in foul trouble though he very much needed as our low post presence and Q rich #s though he is counted on to be a 15pts 6rebs type guy.

When Crawford got in the starting lineup and decided to put it on himself to play better defense and take the mid range jumper rather than the 3 and stop taking bad shots we became a better team. Does Marbury get the credit for Crawford's success since he get blamed for everyone's failure?? Should Marbury take blame for Jerome James not being a force?? When Q Rich decides to step his game up to we will be an even better team. And we Larry Brown finally decides that Frye and Lee have outplayed the other guys and let them get more burn we will be an even better team.
https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
11/13/2005  5:55 PM
Posted by newyorknewyork:

When does Q get held Accountable for averaging 6.8pts a game on 33%. When does Curry get held accountable for getting in foul trouble though they are depended on as much as Marbury. Fyre, Lee have outplayed Davis & Rose & Taylor but get less time. Davis is averaging 4pts 7rebs in 28min. Frye is averaging 8pts 6rebs in 19, and Lee is averaging 7pts 8.5rebs 2assist on 66.7% in 15.5mins. And they make bigger impact. Frye should start, Lee should back him up, Davis should get the backup center mins. And Taylor should play when one of the guys are in foul trouble. They would help Marbury win more than the other guys. When are the others held accountable for there own play.

Marbury deserves blame for missing FTs. And looking lost on offense at times. But none of the negatives Marbury has done is the main reason why we have lost games. Its just part of all these things that combine together have hurt us. I don't see how any of the negatives so far with Marbury during the game have a worse impact than Curry being in foul trouble though he very much needed as our low post presence and Q rich #s though he is counted on to be a 15pts 6rebs type guy.

When Crawford got in the starting lineup and decided to put it on himself to play better defense and take the mid range jumper rather than the 3 and stop taking bad shots we became a better team. Does Marbury get the credit for Crawford's success since he get blamed for everyone's failure?? Should Marbury take blame for Jerome James not being a force?? When Q Rich decides to step his game up to we will be an even better team. And we Larry Brown finally decides that Frye and Lee have outplayed the other guys and let them get more burn we will be an even better team.

These are all good points, and in other threads I do see posters busting on these guys for their failings, as does Brown. But in this particular case Steph was getting his for not understanding how to close out games, for not elevating his game in the closing minutes, not understanding how to bring out his best when it counts, not getting how to be a leader and someone LB can count on.

Now if you want Steph held to the same accountability as any other player in the league, who is perhaps a third tier player, maybe even a role player, then fine. Lets pay Steph like that, take the ball and decision making functions out of his hands, make him our third option or perhaps even a 6th man, expect him to be a towel waiver on the bench and a butt-patter when the big boys, who are willing to be held accountable, come off the floor etc, fine, I"ll happily relate to him as such.

But as our franchise guy, "The Best" PG in the game, the guy who wants max money, max minutes, max ball handling, max involvement, max decision making, etc, SOME measure of accountability needs to come with that.

Problem is, far too often, when Steph is held accountable for what is his, guys jump in and say "So this is all Steph's fault? Stop blaming Steph for everything." Which is a way of dodging the rightful criticisms, and in essence saying Steph shouldn't be held accountable for anything.

So which is it, is Steph the 10 yr veteran in his prime, Da Man, The Best, the stud that's going to lead us somewhere; or is he just another guy learning how to play defense and to play his position, whichever position that may be? He's the 5th highest paid player in the league, with formerly, or supposedly even presently (if you believe Isiah and how "they roll") untouchable status, So what exactly do we have a right to expect of Steph, if not to do the little things that actually win us close games?
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
11/13/2005  6:12 PM
Posted by BlueSeats:

These are all good points, and in other threads I do see posters busting on these guys for their failings, as does Brown. But in this particular case Steph was getting his for not understanding how to close out games, for not elevating his game in the closing minutes, not understanding how to bring out his best when it counts, not getting how to be a leader and someone LB can count on.

Now if you want Steph held to the same accountability as any other player in the league, who is perhaps a third tier player, maybe even a role player, then fine. Lets pay Steph like that, take the ball and decision making functions out of his hands, make him our third option or perhaps even a 6th man, expect him to be a towel waiver on the bench and a butt-patter when the big boys, who are willing to be held accountable, come off the floor etc, fine, I"ll happily relate to him as such.

But as our franchise guy, "The Best" PG in the game, the guy who wants max money, max minutes, max ball handling, max involvement, max decision making, etc, SOME measure of accountability needs to come with that.

Problem is, far too often, when Steph is held accountable for what is his, guys jump in and say "So this is all Steph's fault? Stop blaming Steph for everything." Which is a way of dodging the rightful criticisms, and in essence saying Steph shouldn't be held accountable for anything.

So which is it, is Steph the 10 yr veteran in his prime, Da Man, The Best, the stud that's going to lead us somewhere; or is he just another guy learning how to play defense and to play his position, whichever position that may be? He's the 5th highest paid player in the league, with formerly, or supposedly even presently (if you believe Isiah and how "they roll") untouchable status, So what exactly do we have a right to expect of Steph, if not to do the little things that actually win us close games?


Very well said.
https:// It's not so hard.
newyorknewyork
Posts: 30255
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #541
11/14/2005  3:38 PM
Posted by BlueSeats:

These are all good points, and in other threads I do see posters busting on these guys for their failings, as does Brown. But in this particular case Steph was getting his for not understanding how to close out games, for not elevating his game in the closing minutes, not understanding how to bring out his best when it counts, not getting how to be a leader and someone LB can count on.

Now if you want Steph held to the same accountability as any other player in the league, who is perhaps a third tier player, maybe even a role player, then fine. Lets pay Steph like that, take the ball and decision making functions out of his hands, make him our third option or perhaps even a 6th man, expect him to be a towel waiver on the bench and a butt-patter when the big boys, who are willing to be held accountable, come off the floor etc, fine, I"ll happily relate to him as such.

But as our franchise guy, "The Best" PG in the game, the guy who wants max money, max minutes, max ball handling, max involvement, max decision making, etc, SOME measure of accountability needs to come with that.

Problem is, far too often, when Steph is held accountable for what is his, guys jump in and say "So this is all Steph's fault? Stop blaming Steph for everything." Which is a way of dodging the rightful criticisms, and in essence saying Steph shouldn't be held accountable for anything.

So which is it, is Steph the 10 yr veteran in his prime, Da Man, The Best, the stud that's going to lead us somewhere; or is he just another guy learning how to play defense and to play his position, whichever position that may be? He's the 5th highest paid player in the league, with formerly, or supposedly even presently (if you believe Isiah and how "they roll") untouchable status, So what exactly do we have a right to expect of Steph, if not to do the little things that actually win us close games?


Thats because people have overblown his negatives so much it makes people also over defend. Which forms people to overblow some more which forms people to over defend some more.

Marbury doesn't get 20mil just for his basketball skills. Marbury gets 20mil for also being a HUGE crowd draw. Last season the Knicks sold out every game or close to it though they only won 33games. Marbury also is one of the top jersey sellers. As fans we don't think about those type of things when we only look at a players production on the court and paycheck. If Marbury didn't do those things then he wouldn't get paid less money. And Marbury does produce well too, stats anyway. And I stated in one of the paragraphs you quoted that Marbury should be held accountable for his negatives as well, just not over do it. You think that all the other players don't want max money, max mins, ball handling, decision making etc.. The reason Marbury gets it is because he has proven already he could make it happen.

If Marbury makes all the big plays down the stretch we might have won the game. If the other players who have been struggling stepped up and did what was expected then we might have won. Which one sounds better. Asking your star player to be perfect but letting like 4 others underachieve. Or Asking 4 other players to not underachieve and do what is expected, So that your star player doesn't have to play perfect basketball for 40mins to win the game. But if he does that as well as having his teammates do what is expected we win more games and by a bigger margin.

This Sac game was a good example of what happends when the other players deciding to step up there games. Instead of play poorly and us expecting Marbury to do all the work. Ariza stepped up, Frye stepped up, Q played better, Crawford played well, Curry played very solid. Marbury played well, struggled with TOs, and we end up beating a good team if Marbury played the same way but the other guys don't step up you can bet all of a sudden Marburys TOs turn into the reason we lost that game.
https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
Page 2 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Brown takes Shot at Steph (article)
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy