Posted by TMS:

D'Antoni decided not to play Steph cuz he doesn't feel he is cut out to be a minor role player... instead of insulting him w/a 5 minute stint he chose to sit him & go w/the guys he felt have a chance of being here beyond this season... that doesn't mean he doesn't feel Marbury's worthy enough to play in this system... this is way beyond a Stephon Marbury issue, it's about the team's future... the sooner some Knicks fans realize that the sooner we'll be able to move on from discussing Marbury after every freakin' Knicks game instead of the positives that came out of a game we WON!

Posted by oohah:

Guys, please stop with the I hate/love B.S. Win Wins Wins. That is all I care about. Marbuy finally gets his. fine. He doesn't get his? Fine too. What is important is that we put the best team on the floor. The rest will all sort itself out.

Posted by BlueSeats:

That's the same philosophy that had Isiah give Steph extended minutes after fleeing and the players voting him out. Got to get past such short term thinking. The outcome of individual games is of minor importance compared to the the strategic direction of the team.

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by oohah:

Guys, please stop with the I hate/love B.S. Win Wins Wins. That is all I care about. Marbuy finally gets his. fine. He doesn't get his? Fine too. What is important is that we put the best team on the floor. The rest will all sort itself out.

Let's let karma, god, or whatever take care of who gets his rightful comeuppance.

I'd rather see Marbury on the court if it makes the team better, and I'd rather see him off the court if it makes the team better (Which I don't believe is true.). What I'd really like to see is Marbury get traded for something that puts us in a better position.

All the rest is high-school stuff.

oohah

ooh aah I'm with you half way. But I don't think this is about who gives you the best chance to win. This is about taking a bad team and building them to be a winner. D'Antoni is not building around Steph. He is not in the plans at this moment. Maybe he earns a role in the plans down the line, but against Miami he wasn't. He has to deal with it. D'Antoni is now teaching the young guys who we will need 3 years from now how to win down the stretch. That is what is best for us. Taking them out to give time to a 10 year vet that won't be with you next year and has never shown any ability to lead us to victories is not a good plan in my view.

Personally a better sub thatn marbs would have been putting in Malik to dive for a lose ball or throw a couple elbows than to see Marbs put his head down and charge to the basket, forgetting about the offense, in his attemp to win, while everyone else stands around and watches. Maybe Marbs dominates the game and we win. But the young guys learn nothing.

Please stop putting that rap on Marbs about thinking about his own shot because he hasn't been that way in years...Getting to the hole is now a bad thing...

You're confusing circumstances with philosophy. The circumstances were different but the philosophy - that we need Steph on the floor to win now, even if it alienates or sets back the rest of the club - was wrong. It shouldn't have been about the now, and it didn't work even if it was. The same considerations hold true today.

I wouldn't say none of this is Marbury's fault, as you imply. Few in the organization care for him, for a multitude of reasons. Time will tell how it all plays out. But fearing any sort of conflict or controversy with Marbury would be allowing oneself to continue to be held hostage by him, and that would be far less acceptable than the press attention we see now.

Posted by oohah:

You're confusing circumstances with philosophy. The circumstances were different but the philosophy - that we need Steph on the floor to win now, even if it alienates or sets back the rest of the club - was wrong. It shouldn't have been about the now, and it didn't work even if it was. The same considerations hold true today.

Circumstances and philosophy are intertwined. A philosophy can only be applied to a circumstance. Philosophy is reasoning applied to a circumstance. The circumstances are different. Marbury was played in preseason. He looked good. He talked good. Nobody said he was going to sit like they did Curry. Coach wants to sit him? Fine. But do it right.

I don't excuse poor behavior by the coach just because he is sticking it to Marbury. That is my philosophy.

I wouldn't say none of this is Marbury's fault, as you imply. Few in the organization care for him, for a multitude of reasons. Time will tell how it all plays out. But fearing any sort of conflict or controversy with Marbury would be allowing oneself to continue to be held hostage by him, and that would be far less acceptable than the press attention we see now.

Fearing any conflict or controversy? That is not what I said at all. It actually does not come into play. They told him he wouldn't start. hat is possible conflict or controversy. No problem.

However, this particular drama is none of Marbury's fault. even the coach admits this. If they are going to sit him for whatever reason it shouldn't be a surprise to everybody in game 1. How we can fault Marbury for this I don't know. I know you don't like Marbury, and neither do a million other people, but this one is not at his feet. He was ready and he did not know. Nobody did but the guy in charge.

Blue, I know you don't like Marbury, however pretend you don't have an opinion. When dealing with humans whatever the cut of their character, there is a right way to do things and a wrong way. The Knicks did it the wrong way and that is why we are discussing him now. The Knicks, not Marbury. And anyway, the Knicks have easily been as despicable as Marbury, just because we have a couple of new figureheads doesn't change that.

oohah

Ooh, the problem here is with regard to what you think we are arguing about. I never said this was the best way to handle the Marbury situation, I simply don't care if his feelings are hurt. What I'm arguing against is your assertion that we need to play Marbury so that we can win every game. Isiah succumbed to that philosophy and it bombed miserably. D'antoni is tring something else. But like you, I would have handled it differently.

D'antoni is tring something else. But like you, I would have handled it differently.

Posted by oohah:

D'antoni is tring something else. But like you, I would have handled it differently.

D'antoni's got no one to blame but himself for any media shytstorm. I saved this one for a separate post so I could explain myself clearly.

Bippity likened what D'Antoni did to the Dog Whisperer. Have you ever seen it?

If you have seen it you would know that Bippity is way off. The Dog Whisperer preaches disciplining or "correcting" a dog when it misbehaves. At the very moment it happens. Not 4 years later, not 12 months later. The Dog Whisperer does not advocate confusing behavior like playing Marbury all preseason, acting like he is part of the team (meanwhile getting good behavior and good play from Marbury) then all of a sudden "correcting" him in public out of the blue.

You have to DISCPLINE AT THE TIME OF INFRACTION. That is a proper correction. Not a year later. That is a very disrespectful attitude, and if you think that is only to Marbury, then I think you are fooling yourself. The other players may think Marbury deserves it, but don't think it doesn't give them pause.

Not disciplining at the proper time was Isiah's mistake. Disciplining at the wrong time is D'Antoni's mistake.

***

Onto winning games. Yes, I do think playing Marbury now would give this team a better chance of winning games. It would also give us a better chance of moving him for something of value, just like I advocate doing with Randolph.

I advocate winning games, not playing games.

It doesn't matter the coach, player, executive or owner. I think you will find me to be very consistent in this respect.

oohah

Oohah, the reason Cesar Millan says that is b/c dogs don't remember things that happened 10 minutes ago. That's why you have to do the discipline at the very moment, and that's why your arguement is flawed. Your other flaw is that unlike a dog, Stephon has a massive ego. If you punish him days later, he'll know why he's being punished, but he'll go above and beyond to show that he's the King of the world and everyone is under him and make things blow up b/c he thinks he never does anything wrong.

Therefore, what blueseats said is right. It's a no win situation with Stephon. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. Give him playing time, and the team play goes down the tubes. Don't give him playing time, and the fans go f'ing crazy as if they know more than Mike D'Antoni and you get the threat of Stephon going on a tyrade. BTW, truth is, we don't know anything about bball, compared to D'Antoni, no matter what Holfresh says.

This is being blown out of proportion. Who cares if Stephon dresses or not? It's only one season, and maybe even less and he's not playing. That's all we should care about.