Posted by s3231:

As much as I like Steph, I have to admit it has come to a point where we basically have to trade him. While I do feel Steph is to blame for some of that, I really can't help but think most of it is Larry's fault for setting up his PG for failure ever since the season started. We have seen that Larry has his unique way of getting what he wants and it seems like he has done it again. By pairing Marbury with easily the "worst" starting unit in the NBA, Steph was doomed for failure. The genius of it is that no one ever thinks to blame the Hall of Fame coach.

Steph was put in a position to fail and he did. He certainly didn't make it better by sulking, not being the team leader he should have been, but, this isn't the same Steph that came to the Knicks and played like he was "the best PG in the league." Larry has broken him down so bad that Steph himself probably wouldn't mind a trade from his hometown franchise.

Its sad because I really think we could have been on to something if we had a coach in the early going that wanted to WIN first. I still believe that Larry is a great teacher and I think that he will help this team a great deal (perhaps more than any other coach) in the long run. However, I really don't know what to think about what he has done to Steph.

Posted by Killa4luv:

Stephs sulking is bad. But I don't know what you guys would do in the same situation. I don't believe in this mystical magnetic force that steph has that makes his teamates miss shots and leave guys open. I can't believe you guys wanna hold him accountable for their poor defense and overall lack luster performances.

Steph is not the emotional leader, but he leads with his play on the court. He plays hard and does everything he can to help his team win. If everyone else on our team did that, we would be winning.

Offensively we scored enough points to win. Defensively, letting vince, rj, and every big man on their team shoot ridiculously high percentages is the reason we lost. I am frustrated by it, I can only imagine how he feels. Is it his fault those guys can't play d? Steph played solid d on whoever he was guarding. Can the same be said for Craw, Ariza, Curry, Frye, Davis, James and so on? No.

This is LB's fault for not being flexible enough to adapt his strategy to his personnel.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by djsunyc:
i think this is where we disagree killa. steph can not be blamed for players missing open shots or team defense in general BUT with that said, he is not "leading" this team on he court. his sulking takes place ON the court as well. and steph was not playing solid d on his guy. the person he was guarding was dribbling into the lane AT WILL. same for every other player we have on the court sans nate (since he's the only one that can stay in front of their man). it's times like these that show what you're made of...and steph is showing that he doesn't care anymore. he's going through the motions. not a good sign and we can't have that from our #1 guy. this could be one huge lavish test from lb and steph is failing it.

it's steph's pattern to fail. it was glaringly obvious in nj. Even in phoenix, which was thought to be steph's high-point in maturity, there was the same pattern. Lets review isiah's thoughts on Steph and why he was available:


"When we got him here in New York, the reason why we were able to get him is because he has flaws," said Isiah Thomas, the Knicks' president, who acquired Marbury in a splashy trade last January. "And you don't correct those flaws in four months. But I look at where he is at today and this year, he's laying a great foundation for him to springboard to success in this league. And it's not easy."

"The type of leader I think he's developing into, he's accepting of his teammates' criticism. Before, it was like nobody could say if he was doing anything wrong. Teammates were afraid. So everybody kind of sniped behind his back, as opposed to trying to help him and teach him."

Thomas speculated that Marbury had tried to lead through intimidation. That certainly seemed to be the case in New Jersey, where Marbury publicly criticized Kerry Kittles and Keith Van Horn; and in Phoenix, where Amare Stoudemire and Shawn Marion reportedly grew weary of his demeanor.


"Steph is really a very unselfish player," a Suns official said. But once divisions arise, he added, "Steph isn't good with breaking it down, with the way he acts."

Guys, this isn't the thoughts of some message board radical fringe, this is common knowledge among coaches and GMs. This is why Steph never settles in and it's just a matter of time before his teams underperform.

That, and that people don't think he's a great PG either:

Coach D'Antoni is a great coach," Hardaway said. "He tried to have us buy into this system when we were here, and we really didn't. There was so much turmoil going on. Steve Nash and Quentin Richardson came in and had the type of game Coach wanted. That's up and down, push the ball, kick it ahead and it doesn't matter who shoots or who scores ... We had enough on the team to get it done, but we just didn't buy into the system."

Hardaway was upset in Phoenix because his playing time was reduced to make way for younger players. [b]Marbury was in the middle of the turmoil that enveloped the Suns.

"It was like guys talking behind each other's backs, guys being selfish, everybody was trying to get their own," Hardaway said. "That leads to trades, and that broke the team up. It doesn't seem like they have any of that going on right now."

Some suggest Marbury may be best suited to play shooting guard, rather than point guard, to maximize his skills and keep him from dominating the ball. [b]"I think a lot of people expect him to be a great point guard, but I don't think that's his main suit," D'Antoni said.

Marion says:

ON HAVING PLAYED WITH THREE ALL-STAR POINT GUARDS: JASON KIDD, STEPHON MARBURY AND STEVE NASH Jason likes to throw the lob, and he's a great rebounder. Steph is a great scoring guard. Steve is a lot like J-Kidd, except for the rebounding and that J-Kidd can guard bigger guys. Steve's so small out there! But they're comparable players. The only adjustments I had to make came when I was playing with Steph. With him I had to create more shots on my own. With Steve and Jason, they create shots for you.

So, not a great PG, terrible attitude. Are undersized SGs really so valuable we need to put up with this turmoil?

Posted by Bippity10:

Do you think Marbs' attitude is any worse than what it has been or do you think we think it's worse because we are harping on it more?