Posted by djsunyc:
Posted by Killa4luv:
Well how about this for a theory.
The Knicks could have more victories but because of LB's lack of a SL, crazy rotation, Craws inconsistancy, Currys injuries, and q's ineptitude, we haven't. Steph has been by far the best and most consistant player on the team. He is frustrated, because he could do more things to help us win, but because of LB's insistance on coaching to his liking as opposed to his personnel he cannot. As a result his infamous body language has appeared to be more pronounced, but hasn't actually worsened, it is just visible more often because we are losing more often. If it indeed has worsened it is in response to our losing and the frustration that comes with that. Not to mention the fact the he is blamed for everything bad that happpens to the knicks whether it is his fault or not.
problem is, every team steph ever played for catered to him and for the most part, has not resulted in any type of success. and in the one situation where it did (phx), the coach and the other 2 good players wanted him gone.
in this situation, lb's way has been proven to work so he's installing his system. i ask this, why was it so hard for steph ("the toughest 10 assists in my life") that he pleaded to be moved to sg? i mean, steph IS the best pg, got frustrated quickly, then asked to be moved to sg. and this AFTER he said on SAS that he can score 30 any night but doesn't want to b/c he wants to be pg.
your take, "b/c he feels like he could help the team with his scoring." my take, "coach, i can't play my game. i want to be iverson so i can play my game the way i want to. i don't like playing pg in your system." which is more likely the case?
i never once blamed steph for ANY loss. i never once blamed steph for anything. i just don't want him around our young kids. i want to let those guys grow together and move on. i want the philosphy of this organization to change.
SU, the newspapers were written for guys like you. Both LB and Steph had gone on record saying that Steph made that request weeks before it was reported in the papers and that it was no big deal. They plaster it on the back page and it becomes a big deal to you. You have responded to each article about the 'drama' between them even before the season started and have concocted one wild theory after another all of them with the same plot: Steph gets traded, Jamal starts at the point. I think the writers are mainly clueless, and you are being sucked in by the hysteria that comes with being a knick fanatic.
You said you would rather us lose and Steph score less points. Thats what YOU said. You don't like him. You think Jamal is the man and see his occasional good play as a clear indication that he is something more than an inconsistant scorer and defensive liability. I think LB's offense is ill-suited, not only for Steph, but for this whole team except Eddy Curry. LB's rigid insistance on there only being one right way is a big part of the reason why this team looks how it does.
It is hard to take anything you say about Marbury seriously when you:
a) think Jamal is better pg than Steph.
b) you take any occasional good game from Jamal as a sign that he should be the starting PG.
c) you & others harp on the 6 or 7 times that the team has done better with Steph on the bench, which can only imply that you think the team is better without him.
d) you actually talk about Steph wearing a towel on his head while he's on the bench.
e) you still think Jamal's preseason PGing is an indication of something grand.
f) you fail to SEE anything that contradicts your pre-concieved notions about Steph and Jamal.
g) you said you would rather have loss the portland game with Steph taking less shots, than won it with Steph going 27 and 7.
h) You want him gone after every loss regardless of how good he plays or how bad others play, and are quiet as mouse when your boy Jamal scores 0 points.
i) You are quiet on Jamals allergic reaction to defense.
I mean, do you watch Jamal out there on defense? I honestly have not seen an imporvement defensively think he more than any other player, is the reason we are losing. He is inconsistant and if he brought it more nights he and Steph could beat teams. Because his defense is probably the worst on our entire team (or maybe ahead of Channing) he doesn't start and when he plays swingmen KILL us! I do not start a million threads bashing him and demanding him to be traded. He plays like he is scared to touch another player on either end of the court. But he seems like a really sweet guy so I guess its ok for him to suck 4 out of every 5 games.
I really can't take any of what you are saying very seriously.
12/28/2005 3:10 PM