I agree with you right there..Marb definitely needs to improve his defense. However, he also needs guys around him that will be willing to let him lead....You can't succeed when you have a bunch of knuckle heads around to cause trouble...Kurt is the biggest knuckle head in the game next to Anderson.. We should have known that Marb was going to have problems with him when he first arrive...I wrote a thread about that early on...Again, before blaming Marb, give him players that he can manage first...We already have a few of them in: Sweet, Ariza, JYD, Crawf, Vinny, Nazr, but the rest has to go....HOuston needs to be let go, buy him out and make space for able bodies. TT and Penny will be off of the book soon, so let's not worry too much about them. However, Kurt and Houston can't perform under the leadership of Marb....

Posted by eViL:

Funny how in a thread that asks "Why is Marb getting all of the blames?????????????", Dildo is putting all the blame on KT.

Meanwhile, I don't think Marbs deserves all the blame, but as the centerpiece of the team - he will get questioned more often than his support players. People need to understand that.

Despite the team around him and all the size we lack up front - I still think Marbury should shoulder most of the responsibility. He's a leader - he should lead. Play some 'D' maybe. Respect your opponent. Hustle all game.

I'm sick of seeing the Dan Dickau's and the Marco Jaric's of the world beat us because he doesn't respect them. There was once a player (whom many considered to be the greatest) who would defend his man fiercely whether it was Clyde Drexler or Craig Ehlo.

Posted by Allanfan20:

Bonn, where have you been? 4 games? We are about 8 or 9 games under .500 right now.

I've been right here allanfan. You just need to get your calculator out. If you're 8 under .500, changing 4 losses to wins, puts you at .500 and I think Duncan, Garnett, or Shaq would do that (to answer TMS's question)

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 02/02/2005 11:56:39]

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Solace:

That makes sense. Miami was barely a .500 team last year. They gave up three of their four best players for Shaq and now they're 33-14.

I'm sure someone like Shaq would be a difference in a little more than four games.

take Wade off the Heat & you think Shaq can single handedly carry them to an above .500 record? just curious.

Yes. I think Shaq with the rest of the Heat team is still an above .500 team. It's been said many times that any team with Shaq is almost a lock for 50 wins. Put Shaq on the Bobcats and they probably win 45 games. It's funny, but whenever Shaq joins a team, automagically, some player he plays with suddenly becomes a superstar.

Put Shaq on the Knicks and someone like Crawford becomes the superstar, even if we had to trade Marbury to get Shaq.

There's one dominant center in the NBA. That means that every night, you know you have a severe advantage at the most important position in the NBA. At the other four positions, teams have to outplay you, in order to win. It's that simple. It's the Shaq-factor.

Posted by TMS:

ok, fair enough...i happen to disagree w/that however...Penny, Kobe & Wade would have been great w/o Shaq on their teams imho...i don't think i can equate someone like Crawford to any of those guys...certainly he'd be a much better player w/Shaq, but i don't see Shaq making an Eddie Jones or Udonis Haslem into allstar calibre players by himself...i find it hard to think 1 player can singlehandedly make his team win consistently.

[Edited by - TMS on 02/02/2005 12:11:26]

Why? Crawford scores almost 20 ppg now. Add Shaq to the team and Crawford has wide open jumpers. Why is it hard to fathom Crawford getting 24+ ppg and guys like Allan Houston, Penny Hardaway, etc... becoming nice pieces, as well? Shaq makes all of his teammates better, because you HAVE to double or triple team Shaq or else he's going to drop 40 on you.

In my mind, the PG position is the most overrated position in the NBA (because the talent gap between great players and good ones isn't obscene), while the center position in the NBA is the most underrated (because the talent gap is purely obscene).

it's not all about scoring bro...Penny, Kobe & Wade were good all around players...Crawford is a chucker...he has tremendous talent, but i can't put him in the same class as any of those other guys...

the argument is whether or not you feel Shaq could single handedly elevate the Heat to an over .500 record w/o Wade...you said you did, i disagree...put Shaq on the Bobcats w/o Okafor & there's no way i think they win 45 games this year...my point is every player, no matter how great, needs a good supporting cast.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by fishmike:

I think if you put Shaq on any team in the NBA they win 50 games.

The Heat minus Wade? Ok.. maybe 48

Sounds about right. (Maybe with the exception of him being put on N.O.)

You don't think a healthy Shaq and Baron Davis would win 50 games?

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by Bonn1997:

Posted by fishmike:

I think if you put Shaq on any team in the NBA they win 50 games.

The Heat minus Wade? Ok.. maybe 48

Sounds about right. (Maybe with the exception of him being put on N.O.)

You don't think a healthy Shaq and Baron Davis would win 50 games?

Solace, the question was what player can singlehandedly bring his team to an over .500 record...you think Shaq could bring the Hornets right now w/o a healthy Magloire, Baron or Mashburn to win 43 games?

[Edited by - TMS on 02/02/2005 14:43:08]

OK, well when you show me what teams are playing the NBA right now 1 vs. 5, then get back to me.

Until then, you'll have to clarify your definition of singlehandedly. A team that has one good player and 11 scrubs on the active roster? That almost never happens.

But, if you want to play that game, fine... if Shaq was a team with Travis Knight, Howard Eisley, Rodney Buford and Oliver Miller, I don't see his team winning 50 games. However, put some decent roleplayers around him (which NO probably doesn't have if they have all those guys injured) and it's possible.

43 wins, I think he could get on that NO team. Depending on the frustration level from playing with those scrubs. Is it realistic to expect NO to have all of their other top players injured for the season, though? :P

[Edited by - Solace on 02/02/2005 15:15:44]

I think Duncan could win the most with the least in the NBA.

If you give Shaq-Duncan-KG the same exact weak supporting cast. Each in seperate seasons. Duncan would win the most games.

I think he could have a 500. season with the N.O. Duncan can bring that team to 42win season if he started out on that team. And if he was put on that team right now. They would go at least 500. throughout.

Only on this board could a thread based around Marbury recieving blame turn into a long debate about how many wins Shaq, Duncan, or KG could get for the Hornets...I love it.

Posted by Solace:

Posted by MaTT4281:

Only on this board could a thread based around Marbury recieving blame turn into a long debate about how many wins Shaq, Duncan, or KG could get for the Hornets...I love it.

OK, new question that's more Knicks-like. How many wins would Howard Eisley singlehandedly get a team? 2? 3?

negative twelve

Posted by TMS:

exactly my point dude...you need a good supporting cast to win in this league...that was my argument all along.

You've pointed out one injury plaqued team that Shaq could possibly not get to .500. Unless you're saying every other team has a "Good Supporting Cast" that hardly makes your point. Shaq would have a good chance of getting even the worst team in the league to .500 if they were not totally destroyed by injuries.

To get back to the original idea of the post - why does Marb take the blame - because he is over rated - at least in his own opinion. If you could trade Marbs and anyone else on the roster for a top 10 player and an average pt guard (I only add this stimulation because our current backups are worse the eisley) and this team is much better then it is now.

Marbs takes the most blame because he has the most talent - and plays further under his talent then anyone on the team who doesn't have the excuse of inexperience.