I would expect any of larrys teams to do well when he leaves for a time. Why, cuz they got it down. When I leave my office and everthing goes well I know I did a good job. Not, "See, we don't need Nalod!" Friend of mine got kids who changed school. After the first two weeks he was bragging how much better it was for them. It was because they had gotten a real good education in the old school, not what they learned in two weeks. Sometimes the newness or change is good. For Detroit, Carlisle did a good job but could not mold the core. Larry did that. Flip is a hell of a coach and improved on that core. Does that make Larry any less of a coach? Not really. No body said he was the savior unless you starphuched your self to believe it. Knick fans fall into that habit from time to time by the way.

One reason larry leaves after about 4 years in most cases is he knows if he has a core of players they start to tune you out and get comfortable. This is true with most coaches by the way, but larry is a "nudge" and grates on players. For an immature player like "Starbury", it took just a few months.

When Larry leaves a team, in time, they recognize his contributions. Kinda of like that teacher back in school who pushed you to the edge and you hated him. Years later you realized he was helping and might have been one of the 5 most important people in your life!

I think the public comments are way over done and not nearly as important to the players. Steph has never been called out anywhere elese and he pulled a hissy fit. The media in this game is way too on top of anything and the coaches speak and speak. Larry dished out many compliments, but when you win 23 games there are more negatives than positives.

Logic dictates that Steph is a superior basketball player than most but his personality is not condusive to a team sport.

Killa, good job for arguing a point you care about. That I respect.

DJ, just got back from a big lunch featuring a Indian Buffet! One thing for certain, the British contributed nothing to the world regarding pleasure to the palate! THey could have learned a thing or two while in India about cooking. At least when the French occupied Vietnam they created some nice dishes!

Which leads to my Signiture. Maybe it should read:

"Im the seasonist, every team I play for I leave with a bad taste in their mouth. When Im around, Everything tastes like $hit!"

[Edited by - nalod on 04-28-2006 2:33 PM]

I went back and forth on Marbury a couple of times this year. For the most part, historically, I've never much liked him. After that weird passive-aggressive performance in Atlanta, during the winning streak, my subjective impression was that he was with the program and I thought, hey, I don't have to love the guy, but if he can play like this I'll support him.

The team was unable to keep it together after his injury (indication of how important he was at that point?) and he never returned to that form. For some reason, when he came back, he wasn't with the program any more, and his attitude got worse as the season wore on.

I do think Larry Brown deserves part of the blame. I really didn't like the way he dissed the players in public. Maybe he thought that was the only way to get through to them but it really backfired with Marbury, unless his plan was to alienate Marbury all along. But Marbury's response does not reflect well on him either. To hell with both of them.

Maybe Brown is a manipulative and coniving old SOB, but Marbury - his issues have to do with interpersonal relationships. He has a rep for showering disdain on his teammates. Word is he got KVH traded. Maybe he had Wilkens fired. I don't know if those things are true. Not ever player will respond well to negative criticism. We all know KVH is flawed, but so is Marbury. They seemed to be playing well together. Why have him traded? Upon reflection, Wilkens might still have been a better match for this team than Brown... Maybe Isiah erred in giving Marbury everything he wanted...

So with all that, I think it's just time for Marbury to move along and take his 20&8 elsewhere. But to me the Marbury situation is just indicitive of the larger sickness that infects this franchise, so I don't think just getting rid of him is the answer. We really need a voodoo ceremony to chase the evil spirits out of the garden.

Posted by Nalod:

Larry freely admits he did not know how to motivate this team. He said in 33 years he never faced that.

He admits he could have done better.

He admits and regrets some comments.

He accepts some of the blame.

I agree, he should. But I want him back. I have more faith in him than Starbury.

Larry's a much better politician than Marbury is.

Posted by BasketballJones:

I went back and forth on Marbury a couple of times this year. For the most part, historically, I've never much liked him. After that weird passive-aggressive performance in Atlanta, during the winning streak, my subjective impression was that he was with the program and I thought, hey, I don't have to love the guy, but if he can play like this I'll support him.

The team was unable to keep it together after his injury (indication of how important he was at that point?) and he never returned to that form. For some reason, when he came back, he wasn't with the program any more, and his attitude got worse as the season wore on.

It wasn't for some reason, he was playing hurt and he said as much. He said his shoulder would never be 100% for the rest of the season, but he would play hurt. His numbers reflected that, he wasn't nearly as aggressive and no one else stepped up to the plate. Thats how I see it, and thats why I'm not down on him.

Posted by Killa4luv:

It wasn't for some reason, he was playing hurt and he said as much. He said his shoulder would never be 100% for the rest of the season, but he would play hurt. His numbers reflected that, he wasn't nearly as aggressive and no one else stepped up to the plate. Thats how I see it, and thats why I'm not down on him.

I'm sure that's true, but I think it was more than that. But maybe the story of the year was the Knicks inability to get wins without Marbury when he was injured. Maybe all that did was re-inforce Marbury's notion that he's "All alone".

Posted by BasketballJones:
I'm sure that's true, but I think it was more than that. But maybe the story of the year was the Knicks inability to get wins without Marbury when he was injured. Maybe all that did was re-inforce Marbury's notion that he's "All alone".

It's certainly an issue worthy of some exploration and debate but team morale appeared to be at an all-time low at that point. Some may argue that was from missing Steph's "leadership" but my hunch is it was due to the proximity to the trade deadline and so many players felt uncertain about their future. Crawford for instance was rumored in nearly every deal and that is when he bottomed out between his "6th man award caliber play "of earlier in the season and the "team leader' play of the end. And Mo T was talking about feeling like a "piece of meat."

It also fairly closely preceded the "we should run no set plays" mutiny of Marbury's return, which required a team meeting from dolan to assure them that no one was getting fired.

Posted by BlueSeats:

I find it interesting that this thread has drifted into a larry brown referendum. Of all the quotes that begin this post none of them are from or about Larry Brown.

Steph has had 10 coaches and I'd be surprised if they weren't ALL in agreement that he undermines team morale.

When did Flip Saunders, Scott Skiles, or Frank Johnson say something about Marbury. All I ever heard from those guys is how good he was and how he didn't mind shouldering the load. BTW, I find it interesting that Skiles had issues with Kidd and not Marbury. Calipari and Brown are the only 2 coaches that I know had something to say about Marbury. Hell Frank Johnson said without Marbury we don't make the playoffs back in 2003. Wasn't aware that Chaney even formed an opinion on Marbury. I am not sure of Lenny's thoughts on the guard. I am not sure of Herb and Lenny's thoughts on Marbury. I know Herb did say that Marbury played very hard for him even when he was hurt. Something Berman commented about a couple of weeks ago when it was reported that Marbury was going to return for the remainder of the season. I think Scott had to say something after Marbury was traded because of the horrible season. He also attacked KVH for being soft which K-Mart and J-Kidd echoed, and this was long after Marbury was in Arizona. I guess he planted the seeds in K-Mart and J-Kidd minds too.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by BasketballJones:
I'm sure that's true, but I think it was more than that. But maybe the story of the year was the Knicks inability to get wins without Marbury when he was injured. Maybe all that did was re-inforce Marbury's notion that he's "All alone".

It's certainly an issue worthy of some exploration and debate but team morale appeared to be at an all-time low at that point. Some may argue that was from missing Steph's "leadership" but my hunch is it was due to the proximity to the trade deadline and so many players felt uncertain about their future. Crawford for instance was rumored in nearly every deal and that is when he bottomed out between his "6th man award caliber play "of earlier in the season and the "team leader' play of the end. And Mo T was talking about feeling like a "piece of meat."

It also fairly closely preceded the "we should run no set plays" mutiny of Marbury's return, which required a team meeting from dolan to assure them that no one was getting fired.

So it couldn't be that they just couldn't get it done without their best player and 'leader'? Come on man.

Posted by Killa4luv:
So it couldn't be that they just couldn't get it done without their best player and 'leader'? Come on man.

It could be, but I don't think it was. Look at the difference in the level of crawford's play at that time and the end of the year and the difference in wins and losses. if craw was playing as well around the deadline as he did at the end we'd have done a lot better.

Meanwhile we had a 2-15 January the year before WITH steph running the point and WITHOUT Brown.

Posted by Killa4luv:

Beat me too it. Then Marbs gets blasted for getting Lenny fired. Lenny "resigned" alright?!
But J. Kidd gets Byron Scott fired after they reach the finals twice AND he beats his wife!!! Not to mention him and Scott Skiles are sworn enemies. Him and Jim Jackson hated each other in Dallas. I don't get that. But J.Kidd is a class act with his own show, "Everybody loves Jason." J. Kidd wasnt a winner until late in his career, but no one remembers that. Winning cures everything, I just hope my Knicks win next season.

that's exactly it Killa... winning DOES cure everything... until Stephon Marbury can prove that he can be a driving force behind a winning team on a consistent basis, he's going to be stuck w/that stigma of being a selfish player that doesn't make his teammates better... that just comes w/the territory of being a star player in the NBA... he's not the only one who has that stigma, btw... players like Kobe, KG & AI have shared the same from their own detractors for years... only difference is all of those guys are way more talented... Marbury's only on their level in his own mind... he needs to step up his game & his mental approach to the game... he hasn't done that yet, & from all signs, doesn't seem like he ever will.

I'm a little late to the "Yet another reason to hate Marbs and Why it's all Marbs fault" party...But you know what they say, better late than never...It's funny that Matrix is complaining about Marbs because the last time Matrix made the All Star team was with Marbs' help...The numbers seems the same when playing with both but I guess he's bitching because he had to work harder for his shot...Looking at both teams, that seems more to do with offensive schemes than anything else but there is no doubt that Nash is a better passer than Marbs...


I tend not to swallow most of what is written like most of you do...Like Killa, I tend for form my opinion from what I see on the court...That being said, it is certainly more interesting when I see DJ and BlueSeats add their personal commentary and spin to these slanted comments and direct these thoughts to where they perceive these comments should go...I could sit here and try to defend Marbs as I usually do by putting up his numbers or site particular instances during the season when Marbs were solely responsible for the positives this year on the court...But I'll do something different this time...Lets look at what the Sun's website had to say about Marbs after he was credited for turning around the Suns and taking them to the playoffs after the Jason Kidd trade...


2002-03 Season Recap
Surprising Suns Prove Critics Wrong

Honor Roll | Highlights

FOR A TEAM THAT WAS PICKED to finish as low as 28th out of 29 teams by one national sports publication, the Phoenix Suns had one incredible season in 2002-03.

The Suns reemerged as playoff contenders after missing the postseason for the first time in 14 seasons in '01-02 (36-46) by finishing with a 46-36 record and securing the eighth and final seed in the competitive Western Conference in the final week of the regular season.

“You have to look back at what’s transpired in the past 12 months and say a lot’s been accomplished,” Suns’ CEO Jerry Colangelo said of the team’s improvement. “We righted the ship; we put things back on course.”

The Suns weren't just content with being back on their playoff course, though. The young squad put a scare into the NBA’s top team, the San Antonio Spurs, by stealing two victories in their first-round series thanks to a couple of improbable game-winning shots by Stephon Marbury in Game 1 and Jake Voskuhl in Game 4.

“We gave the Spurs a run for their money,” Voskuhl said after San Antonio defeated Phoenix 4-2, en route to the Conference Finals. “They didn’t walk over us. From where we started to where we finished was really awesome.”

Not many outside the Suns’ locker room thought the club would be in contention for anything other than a spot in the lottery. The Suns departed for training camp in Flagstaff seven months earlier with several question marks hanging over them.

Most notably, who would emerge as the team’s leader? What, if any, immediate help would rookie high school phenom Amaré Stoudemire give the Suns? Would Penny Hardaway accept a lesser role behind the team’s two emerging superstars in Marbury and forward Shawn Marion? Could Frank Johnson guide an inexperienced, but talented club to the playoffs in his first full season as head coach?

The Suns have a lot of reasons to believe they are indeed headed in the right direction, but maybe none as significant as the emergence of Marbury as the team’s leader in only his second season in the Valley of the Sun.

The 26-year-old playmaker came to the Suns in a much-debated blockbuster trade with New Jersey for perennial All-Star guard Jason Kidd in the summer of 2001. While “Starbury” posted solid numbers in his first season in Phoenix (20.4 points, 8.1 assists), the resurgent Nets were considered the clear-cut early victors in the deal, particularly after New Jersey advanced to the 2002 NBA Finals. One year later, though, few share that same assessment.

Through his play and his actions on and off the court, Marbury began to exhibit leadership skills on a team that was desperately searching for someone to step up after a lackluster 2001-02 campaign.

Marbury’s metamorphosis actually began before the '02-03 season kicked off. Bothered by bone spurs in the preseason, the Suns’ go-to player in the clutch decided to delay ankle surgery until after the season was completed. The surgery would have sidelined him for nearly two months and likely would have doomed the Suns’ chances of having a winning season.

Further proof of Marbury’s new-found leadership was evident when he spoke on behalf of the team to coach Johnson, suggesting that the Suns should rely less on the team’s new “motion” offense in favor of a more structured offense. Phoenix averaged 84.4 points per game over its first 15 games (8-7 record), but totaled 96.8 points over the next 16 games (11-5) as the Suns climbed up the standings, as high as fourth in the Western Conference at one point.

“As far as my leadership role, I think it definitely changed totally,” Marbury admitted. “I did what I said I was going to do at the beginning of the year. I empowered my teammates to do things that sometimes they might not want to do, but they did them. It was hard. It wasn’t easy.

“You’ve got 12 rich guys in the locker room and they all have their own personalities and their own ways on how they feel they play the game. Whenever you can get them all to listen to you when you talk, you know that’s something.”

Marbury finished with one of his best all-around seasons in his seven-year pro career and was the only player in the NBA to rank in the top 12 in points (12th, 22.3) and assists (4th , 8.1). He was also named to the All-NBA Third Team.

“If you look at the talent, there’s a great story in what Marbury accomplished this year in terms of not just his statistics, but in terms of his perception,” Colangelo observed. “What we’ve witnessed is the maturing of Stephon Marbury in my opinion. That’s a great credit to him.”

Perhaps, just as significant as Marbury’s breakthrough season, was the sudden and immediate impact of the Suns’ top choice in the 2002 NBA Draft. Stoudemire, the ninth overall pick and the only high schooler drafted, became the third Suns player to win the Rookie of the Year award (Alvan Adams, ’75-76, Walter Davis, ’77-78).

“When you look at what he’s accomplished in one year, it’s an amazing story for a 20 year old kid,” Colangelo said.

The power forward’s season really took off after he exploded for a career-high 38 points and 14 rebounds in only his 33rd game as a pro. The point total was the most in NBA history by a rookie who had made the jump from high school.

“I think that was an eye-opener for me and it gave me confidence going into the next game,” said Stoudemire, who followed a stellar rookie season (13.4 points, 8.8 rebounds) with an equally impressive postseason (14.2 points, 7.8 rebounds, .523 FG%), giving the Suns the inside presence they've lacked since Charles Barkley was traded in 1996.

“He’s the reason why we’re in the playoffs,” Marbury said of Stoudemire, who was one of two rookies (guard Casey Jacobsen) on the Suns’ roster. “I mean, without an inside presence you can’t do anything. I don’t care what anybody says. It starts down in the post and then out. You have to be able to play inside and out.”

Another key reason the Suns exceeded most expectations was the steadying influence Hardaway had on the Suns. This was never more evident than when the veteran guard underwent right thumb surgery and missed 24 games from Jan. 10 - March 4. Phoenix went 10-14 without him in the lineup, but were 34-24 with him. Many believe the Suns wouldn’t have had to face the top-seeded Spurs if the four-time All-Star didn’t get hurt.

“Penny made a huge improvement this season, because of his impact on the team compared to just one year ago,” Bryan Colangelo said of Hardaway, who averaged 10.6 points, 4.4 rebounds and 4.1 assists in 2002-03.

With Hardaway playing more of a supporting role in the Suns’ offense, Marion earned his first All-Star bid and joined Marbury at the 2003 All-Star Weekend in Atlanta. “The Matrix” was the only player in the league ranked in the top 20 in points (17th, 21.2) and top 10 in rebounds (8th, 9.5) and steals (3rd, 2.28).

Then there was “Fourth Quarter Frank,” who guided the Suns into the NBA’s "second" season in what was supposed to be a rebuilding year, despite critical injuries to three-fifth’s of the team’s Opening Night starting lineup – Jake Tsakalidis, Tom Gugliotta and Hardaway.

Prior to clinching a playoff berth, Johnson was named Western Conference NBA Coach of the Month for December when the Suns went 11-5, including 9-2 over their last 11 games. Johnson was the Suns' first Coach of the Month since December 1992 when Paul Westphal earned the honor after a 14-0 month.

“Coach did a great job,” Marbury said of Johnson, who was a candidate for NBA Coach of the Year as a result of the Suns’ 10-game improvement over '01-02. “For myself, I feel like coach was the main reason why my leadership role and the way I play, totally changed.”

Now, Phoenix heads into the offseason with much different expectations than one year ago. With most of the team’s nucleus expected to return, the Suns will be expected to build on a successful 2002-03 season.

“The only thing we can do is get better,” Marbury added. “Last year, I felt like we were at the bottom. The only place we can go now is up.”