That's BS attaboy. Ewing's leadership was always questioned. He was called a ballhog and selfish and unwilling to sacrifice his game so that his team can take it to the next level. It's all the same. We Knick fans destroy our stars and then wonder why free-agents say they want to sign here for less and then go elsewhere.

No free-agent is ever going to want to play for us when we are losing. This notion that we can cut cap space and sign a couple free-agents is ridiculous. REad the papers. Listen to the fans. What star is going to sign in NY in a rebuilding situation when he knows he is going to get the blame for everything that happens. It's a fallacy in NY that we fans grasp onto because it's never happened we still believe that it will.

please...how can you guys say this about bball? we have NEVER been under the cap. and the only time we were, we targeted houston, and guess what, we got him.

if we were under the cap 2 years ago, we'd have shaq or kobe.

there is no basis for argument, IN BASKETBALL, about a free agent and whether he would come here or not as we have not been under the cap in 8 years.

just b/c it doesn't look like we're trying to shed salaries doesn't mean we have to agree with it. it's like you have a kid and he does nothing but hang out with the wrong group of kids. you're going to keep on him to stop and keep punishing him and screaming at him until he listens. this is not a situation where you sympathize with the kid and let him keep hanging out with these kids as he will end up in a bad place. we have proven YEAR AFTER YEAR that we can not win by spending money like it's nothing. does the other way work? not all the time but it does more often than not.

this is clearly an issue with two sides and a clear cut line and i stand on one side of it.

Posted by djsunyc:

please...how can you guys say this about bball? we have NEVER been under the cap. and the only time we were, we targeted houston, and guess what, we got him.

if we were under the cap 2 years ago, we'd have shaq or kobe.

there is no basis for argument, IN BASKETBALL, about a free agent and whether he would come here or not as we have not been under the cap in 8 years.

just b/c it doesn't look like we're trying to shed salaries doesn't mean we have to agree with it. it's like you have a kid and he does nothing but hang out with the wrong group of kids. you're going to keep on him to stop and keep punishing him and screaming at him until he listens. this is not a situation where you sympathize with the kid and let him keep hanging out with these kids as he will end up in a bad place. we have proven YEAR AFTER YEAR that we can not win by spending money like it's nothing. does the other way work? not all the time but it does more often than not.

this is clearly an issue with two sides and a clear cut line and i stand on one side of it.

DJ what major flaw to your post. When we signed Houston/Childs there was no salary cap. All we had to do was keep raising the figure until noone else could match. Now there are usually at least 2 or 3 teams that can match your best offer. Now you have to have other things that players want. Amenities if you will. We have everything that these players want. We can offer more "amenities" than anyone. But still players continue to use us to sign elsewhere. Because there is one major flaw. When we lose a few games we fire the coach and blame the star. Then we sign a new coach and fire him. We give up on plans 2 years into them. Not many players want to come into that situation.

NY is great when we are winning but it's hell when we are losing. Ask yourself a question. Other than accepting a salary that was offered to him(that noone on earth would have said no to) what did Allan HOuston ever do to deserve the abuse he got? Anything?

Both things can be true (and probablly are)

• Marbury plays in New York where fans don't have much patience with their star players (or their teams) when they lose


• Marbury has been traded three times and has a reputation for lacking leadership ability.

(Did Marbury have KVH traded? Did he have KT traded? Has he ever been part of getting a coach he didn't like fired? I don't know. A lot of what we see in the media is proabably exaggerated, but these types of actions would be troubling if true - at least so far as the "leadership" issue goes, especially when you consider that Marbury himself is less than perfect.)

I've never been a big Marbury fan, but personally I'm willing to give him a chance to prove that the negative things aren't true, or that he has changed, just like I'm willling to give the whole organization a chance to get its act together.



[Edited by - BASKETBALLJONES on 12-19-2005 1:24 PM]

[Edited by - BASKETBALLJONES on 12-19-2005 1:25 PM]

Posted by Nalod:

This team less marbs would not be better. Who then at the point?

Marbs at the point might not be the future, but we need a point more than we DON"T need Marbs.

I disagree. I think we'd see a lot more enthusiasm and cohesiveness from this group if Steph were gone. I think his negative energy and discontent with Brown are distinct distractions to the team.

I also disagree with the basic premise that he's a good PG.

Steph in the league hasn't done anything but 20 and 8. He is not a leader and @ 29 yrs of age, will soon be declining.. It's sad to say but he'll never get where he wants to be..

As for Patrick Ewing, he's a hall of famer who got the knicks to the playoffs for many consecutive yrs.. He probably didn't show any kind of leadership vocally but he was a true warrior that put in 110% of effort day and day out..

Cannot compare Steph and Ewing situations.. totally different.. Ewing got his ballclub to the finals, twice.. Steph so far hasn't gotten out of the 1st round..

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Bippity10:
DJ what major flaw to your post. When we signed Houston/Childs there was no salary cap. All we had to do was keep raising the figure until noone else could match.

Incorrect:

History

The NBA had a salary cap in the mid-1940's, but abolished it after only one season. The League continued play without such a cap until 1984-85, when the current incarnation of the salary cap was instituted in an attempt to level the playing field among all of the NBA's teams and ensure competitive balance for the League in the future. Before the cap was reinstated, teams could spend whatever amount of money they wanted on players, but in the first season under the new cap, teams were limited to $3.6 million in total payroll.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Salary_Cap#History

So your saying that the situation during the Childs/HOuston years was the same as today. Poop. WE outbid for those two guys end of story.

Posted by djsunyc:

Posted by Bippity10:

NY is great when we are winning but it's hell when we are losing. Ask yourself a question. Other than accepting a salary that was offered to him(that noone on earth would have said no to) what did Allan HOuston ever do to deserve the abuse he got? Anything?

but how do you KNOW this to be true as we really were never in the running in signing anybody outright b/c we were never under the cap? that's my point. we don't know b/c it's hasn't happened over the past 5 years (at least). we always relied on other teams for sign and trades...and paid dearly for it. but IF we're ever under the cap, i think we have a GREAT shot at getting whomever we wanted. who used us? grant hill? brian grant? they come here to get wined and dined even tho they know there's no real way to come to nyc without having a sign and trade. it was our organization doing due dilligence as a PR move for it's fanbase. they knew there was no realistic shot at getting them. so let's get under the cap and see if somebody signs or not. until then, i don't see how we can really comment one way or the other.

Before the institution of the current bargaining agreement when NY was the only team that could throw money around, can you name a franchise player we have been able to sign as a free-agent?

Is there a reason behind this?

Posted by Bippity10:
So your saying that the situation during the Childs/HOuston years was the same as today.

More similar than different, as you just read.

Poop. WE outbid for those two guys end of story.

Boy, people blame the fans and media for being fickle with their stars but it doesn't compare to the people who are fickle about going to the finals, which we did with Houston and LJ.

But the way, when we got Houston he was very inexpensive, it was when Layden bid against himself to re-signed him that we outbid ourselves.

And LJ was the acknowledged team leader.