Posted by GKFv2:

Can we, like, not talk about Marbury anymore? Who cares about what he does in Boston? Let this topic die and let us slowly move on from the worst era in Knicks basketball.

Posted by BasketballJones:

Posted by GKFv2:

Can we, like, not talk about Marbury anymore? Who cares about what he does in Boston? Let this topic die and let us slowly move on from the worst era in Knicks basketball.

No, we cannot, like not talk about Marbury anymore.

Posted by Solace:

Marbury will be the goat soon enough.

Possibly when KG goes scoreless while Marbury is in because he forgot to pass. Then the next game, Marbury will only pass and not shoot because of the complaints about him taking too many shots. Then he will be benched for being a wiseass. Then he will talk to the media and act all confused, but say that he's happy to be on the team with such a talented tall center power forward point guard like Kevin Garnett. Then he will be confused when he's criticized about this totally reasonable comment, and then mention his sexual relations with his sister while rapping to the beat in his own head. Through all of this, his manager and life coach Pharzeone will always still believe in #3.

Look for Marbury to be a Laker by 2010.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Remember when Cosmic would argue that we had to buy him out because he was such a distraction at home? Ah, the good ol' days.

Posted by Papabear:

Papabear Says

Marburys gone. What did we get for him?? This was handled all wrong. We should have played him and built up his rep and then trade him. What difference would it have made?
We only got 23 wins and it might have made D Lee and Nates value a little lower so we could have made a better resign deal with them. I can't see why everyone is jumping for joy and once again we got screwed again while Marbs just might get a ring and may play against us so who really gets the last laugh?? Marbs does and we can go in denial and dont care when we really do and if we don't care, then thats why we are in the situration we are in today. We give everything away for free just because we are mad and we take back garbage.

[Edited by - Papabear on 02-25-2009 10:14 AM]

Posted by Cosmic:

Posted by oohah:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Remember when Cosmic would argue that we had to buy him out because he was such a distraction at home? Ah, the good ol' days.

What happened to Cosmic?

oohah

I'm around just busy. Missed last night's game. Seems that's a good thing.

And hold up, once too much time passed, and he was exiled, I wasn't arguing that he was still a distraction I just wanted it over with. The distraction ended in roughly late December or early January. After that it was just a question of whether or not Walsh would do the right thing or pull an Isiah and waive him March 1st. He did the right thing and that's good for our franchise's image.

If he should have been handled differently in the beginning of the season in order to "minimize distractions" doesn't it stand to reason that once he was no longer a distraction (Dec/Jan) they should have stayed that course and kept the distraction minimized? If distraction minimalization is the key, then clearly they did the wrong thing by releasing him.

Posted by Cosmic:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Cosmic:

Posted by oohah:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Remember when Cosmic would argue that we had to buy him out because he was such a distraction at home? Ah, the good ol' days.

What happened to Cosmic?

oohah

I'm around just busy. Missed last night's game. Seems that's a good thing.

And hold up, once too much time passed, and he was exiled, I wasn't arguing that he was still a distraction I just wanted it over with. The distraction ended in roughly late December or early January. After that it was just a question of whether or not Walsh would do the right thing or pull an Isiah and waive him March 1st. He did the right thing and that's good for our franchise's image.

If he should have been handled differently in the beginning of the season in order to "minimize distractions" doesn't it stand to reason that once he was no longer a distraction (Dec/Jan) they should have stayed that course and kept the distraction minimized? If distraction minimalization is the key, then clearly they did the wrong thing by releasing him.

They did stay the course. They talked to him a couple of times and nothing came of it and they finally sent him home while they tried to trade him. Post deadline Walsh determined that getting back 1.9M + 1.9M tax was worth it for the team more than to sit him for the rest of the season out of spite.

People just want to punish him when they talk of wanting to sit him all year or wanting to cut him March 1st so he can't be on a playoff roster.

If anyone thinks he can hurt us by playing well for Boston that's just silly. We're crap and not facing Boston again until next season. If fans think that's now a distraction that he's playing for Boston I say that's still a part of them upset he wasn't punished and kept out of action by the Knicks and not a legitimate concern. The Knicks don't care. The talk shows don't care. It's a few fans and maybe Berman who care and want to keep talking about it. Let them it's over with as far as anyone should be concerned.

Thankfully Walsh is professional and not petty and he did the right thing here.

Hindsight it should have been done over the summer but the coach and GM obviously weren't on the same page.

If our goal was to minimize Marbury as a distraction the best course would have been to keep him at home where his presence was virtually forgotten.

Posted by crzymdups:

can you imagine if marbury had accepted d'antoni's offer to be starting SG here in november? if he'd just put his head down and played ball? he would've scored like 25ppg with maybe 5-6apg. he could've been a monster. but i guess now he gets a free pass to the eastern conference finals.