Posted by nixluva:

OK let's just remember that you're talking about 3 years from now or in the case of Payton who is 38, that's 8 YEARS FROM NOW! I don't think any of us know what this team is gonna do over the next 2 years. Perhaps the team is playing into the 2nd or 3rd round at that time. We don't know. All i'm saying is that he's likely to be a useful player well beyond the next 2 years. Just how much of an impact is hard to predict for anyone. I'm just showing you that there are examples of guys namely Kidd, Nash and Payton, who have been effective late in their careers. Didn't Stockton play for a long time too?

If you assume that Steph won't be a better option for backup at that point in his career than many younger but less experienced players, this is hard to determine at this point. Riley figures that Payton is a smart and reliable player even at this late stage and he trusts him. Steph could be that same kind of influence at that point.

[Edited by - nixluva on 03-30-2007 09:51 AM]

Nixluva, you're not quite getting the point. If Marbury is a role player in 2008, as some might contend he is already, and we still don't have the superstar we're looking for, you would rather stay the course? And continue with a pattern that has catupulted us to this level of fantastic mediocrity? Signing Marbury extends our payroll at a moment when we FINALLY have a chance to sign free agents above the premier caliber of Jared Jeffries. So far, I've accepted your premise that we are a 2nd round playoff team at that point - perhaps a player away from a finals appearance. Even then, Marbury will likely be a poor bargain that restricts our capacity to improve the roster. But, in my opinion, these are the likely circumstances in 2008: 1) Marbury wants 1 final large contract, 2) His production will drop off as his shooting is sub-par and his athleticism will further decline 3) We are NOT a contender (Call me Islesfan, but I'm going to go cartwheel outside of the box and make this prediction). If you indulge me for a second, you'll see that signing Marbury will make us marginally better. Just enough to worsen our picks and keep our salaries exceeding the cap. Ironically enough, thats where we are now.

With regarg to Kidd, Nash and Stockton, they are a different breed of player. So its unclear why you bring them up. Their ability to execute a play and exploit defensive lapses has earned each of them MVP consideration. Marbury's production is a function of his first-step. Given those two abilities, which do you feel is most like to deteriorate over time?

Just enough to worsen our picks and keep our salaries exceeding the cap. Ironically enough, thats where we are now.

What picks are talking about, are you some how beliving that our roster is bad enough to have us lottery bound anytime soon.

I Doubt that seriously. But the knicks do have enough assets now ( curry, fry, nate, craw, francis) to uprade for a superstar such as Oneal or Gasol.
but that would mean giving up on curry, and Im not sure that's a good idea.

Getting a primary perimeter threat relieves Curry and Stephs load, makes them better, and keeps things in tact. Steph, (as we have seen at times this season) is willing to do what ever it takes to win, even becoming a 3rd option. Your not going to get much takers after next season, unless it's for cap reasons.

IMO if this happens it will be right in line with his career moves. The knicks will be even better next season, and with the right trade, can be east contenders. If that trade happens and steph is involve, it would be the same ol story..( team gets better after steph leaves) and thats without putting things into its proper perspective.

Depression is one of those things...

If unchecked, it spreads to anyone nearby.

Have you ever played pick-up with one of those cats who just has to complain every time his man touches him with a pinky? Makes a loud-*** federal case, stopping the momentum every possession? I hate that, makes me wanna go to another court...

Anyway, Steph is NOT evil. Yes, his grammar sucks badly. Too street to be GHill or even Kobe (who knows how to be bi-lingual), and I can overlook the speech, as I did with Barkley...

But if he's a rain-cloud, like it or not, then it's bad for a team.

But I'm not in the locker room though, gotta ask Channing about it.

Posted by knicks1248:

Just enough to worsen our picks and keep our salaries exceeding the cap. Ironically enough, thats where we are now.

What picks are talking about, are you some how beliving that our roster is bad enough to have us lottery bound anytime soon.

\

I'm talking about picks, regardless of their range. Its probably not a good idea for you to so easily dismiss the possibility of more lottery seasons either.

anyone who has the courage to go up against the voracious profit agendas of companies like Nike to make basketball shoes affordable, and put his name behind the product, so that kids from "regular-income" families have an alternative to being judged by the price of their shoes...

... can't be all bad.

[Edited by - misterearl on 03-30-2007 7:32 PM]

Posted by misterearl:

TMS - There is nothing "hip-hop thug" about Allan Iverson

That's sarcasm, correct?

"Come to me with those faggot tendencies and you'll be sleeping where the maggots be."

[Edited by - mythfaze on 03-30-2007 8:23 PM]

Stephon working his azz off in the first half.

Good for him.

Posted by misterearl:

>>Really, who's kidding who here?

code - if the Knicks mean nothing but frustration for you, why do you even bother?

Misterearl, if you can't post anything constructive, why do you even bother?

I'm just a Knicks fan

Posted by misterearl:

I'm just a Knicks fan

KT doesn't think so.

Not racist, by definition, in any regard Solace

check the dictionary