You say Marbury's teams have never been above .500 and then say we should trade for Abdur-Rahim, who's teams have been perenially worse than those of Marbury's.
To sign Vujanic, who doesn't want to play in NY, would've required the MLE. I wanted nothing to do with him. I'm sad Lampe had to go, so be it. It's in the past, and I don't even think that would've worked financially. McDyess and Ward for Abdur-Rahim and Ratliff, the contracts aren't even. So let's not talk about deals that wouldn't happen.
Marbury needs players to work with. I wouldn't go out on the limb and say he's one of those players, franchise players, who can carry teams. I wouldn't put Kidd on that level either since he only started winning in NJ, when the team was constructed so he could run the fast break.
Get people around Marbury. It's one-on-five. You switch Marbury and Kidd in this series and the Nets are still up 3-0.
#Knickstaps
AUTOADVERT
djsunyc Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
then you must acknowledge that the nets dont have alonzo mourning and that we were down + 20 to the nets with TT on the floor in game 1.
don't use zo. he was not part of the team the last two runs to the finals and he wasn't a part of the team this year. true, game one, the nets were beating us pretty good with TT playing. all i can say is that it is a 7 game series.
OldFan Posts: 21456
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
does it say anything that marbury's teams career win totals are far below .500? he hasnt exactly played with the worst talent--to me it shows that he is a clear tier below NBA superstars and realistically on the level of great player--below the *franchise player* tier. I dont think anyone suggests that Marbury isnt a great player because he is--i would suggest that we mightve done better going in different directions looking for multiple assets. Lets say we took the trade for Rahim and Ratliff which did not consist of any draft pick. We couldve traded Rahim seperately or kept him couldve traded Ratliff seperately or traded him and still kept the rights to vujonic had our first round pick, lampe and a future 1. Rahim with us wouldve continued to put up 20-10+ we wouldve had Ratliff--it was the better move for us because we couldve broken those assets down further.
Hence thats why you can understand -shoving the chips into the middle of the table" instead of acquiring mulpile draft picks/young players for Rahim and Ratliff[and or keeping one of them] and having many more avenues to travel. IF Marbury was a last piece thast one thing--but really he's not.
Briggs - you can complain about the trade that was made. But you're totally speculating with everything else - there may not have been any trade for Rahim and I doubt if you're getting it done without trading a lot of chips.
Mac Posts: 20767
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/8/2003
Member: #470 Japan
You say Marbury's teams have never been above .500 and then say we should trade for Abdur-Rahim, who's teams have been perenially worse than those of Marbury's.
Don't forget to add Elton Brand, Jamison (excluding his 6th man role in Dallas), & Tracy McGrady.
kidd is a unique talent. Marbury on that team would not yield the same running style.
Im not down on marbury, but kidd is run-pass-shoot. Marbs is run-shoot-pass(when no shot).
Cannot remember a better pick and roll option than Kidd and K-mart.
RJ has talent, but its not getting used quite to its potential just yet. The Nets can get better next year. TOo bad about Zo being on the books with no insurance.
