I believe the only time Marbury was a negative influence on his team was when he was with the Nets. He hated the low fan base. He had no faith in managment, and he had no faith in the talent around him. He didn't play defense and hogged the ball doing his own thing. But he continues to get pidgin held for that.

"Keith's attitude has changed," says veteran guard Kerry Kittles. Van Horn admits his confidence had flagged in recent years as he and other key New Jersey players were ravaged by injuries and the organization struggled through turnovers in ownership, management and coaches. "Maybe some guys in the league don't care about losing, but it hurt me," he says. "I told Rod Thorn that I wanted to be part of a better situation." Van Horn insists, though, that he didn't ask to be traded.

For their part, Thorn and Nets coach Byron Scott remained hopeful that Van Horn could return to his old form, in part because they knew he hadn't regained full strength last year after breaking his fibula in two places. Van Horn worked hard during the off-season. "I feel things are improving," he says. "I feel much more powerful and much more confident.

."

Wanted to show this tidbit to show that KVH felt the same way about what was going on with the Nets before Thorn brought in help like Richard Jefferson & Jarron Collins & Todd Mac and Kittles stay healthy. Marbury was being a negative influence because he wasn't happy. But the Nets at that time was also a poorly run franchise. And that gets pushed to the side and Marbury somehow comes away with the full blame. He deserves blame but don't try and tell me how the Nets failed only because of Marbury the way that this case against him is formed to make people think. Though I admit it didn't help at all.


" Van Horn says. "Jason and Stephon are very different players. Stephon is a great scorer, a good passer. Jason is a great passer who looks to get others involved."

Though that comment appears to disparage Marbury's ability to make his teammates better, Van Horn maintains that he and Marbury never clashed during their three seasons together. "People looked at us and said there must be a problem between Steph and me, but there wasn't. Sometimes you have a great team on paper, but you put it out on the floor and the guys don't play well together."

To be sure, Kidd has weapons at his disposal that Marbury didn't have. Kittles is back, as athletic as ever, after missing last season with a knee injury. The Nets are getting newfound production inside, from former 76ers backup center Todd MacCulloch, who seems worthy of the much-criticized six-year, $34 million free-agent contract Thorn gave him last summer. Sixth man Richard Jefferson (9.8 points per game), the first player Thorn chose after trading No. 7 pick Eddie Griffin to the Rockets for selections Nos. 13, 18 and 23 in last June's draft, is establishing himself as a leading rookie

Great team on paper?? A. Williams, Kmart(rookie who was a weak rebounder at the time, learning the NBA game on offense & defense, raw offensively and had his season cut short by injuries playing 50games. KVH who played 49games, Kittles who played 60+games, and Marbury who played 67games out of 82. With no bench. If healthy they would have been an decent team not great team.

Anyway, people believe that just getting rid of Marbury though he was unhappy and doing his own thing is the reason for the Nets success. And Marbury bringing Suns down because again being pidgin held to what happend in NJ. Im sure Kidd brought a way more positive attitude than Marbury to NJ. A lot of people just ignore the main fact that Thorn added a lot more talent which had way more impact on the win loss column. But I also believe that Kidd is a better PG than Marbury period so they got an upgrade at the position, and leadership experience with Kidd as well as upgrade in talent and more health.

When the comparison becomes unfair is when it becomes the 2001-02 Phoenix Suns versus the 2000-01 incarnation, or the same comparison with the New Jersey Nets. There is no denying that the Nets experienced a dramatic turnaround last season and the Suns drop-off, while probably exaggerated, also can’t be denied.

However, the implication that Kidd or Marbury are wholly, or even mostly responsible for the differences of the teams is completely unfair to Marbury, who had to play with weaker personnel in each location. In addition to Kidd, the Nets made a number of significant additions before the 2001-02 season. They filled their hole at center with Todd MacCulloch, a dramatic improvement compared to an overmatched Aaron Williams or an underwhelming Evan Eschmeyer. Shooting guard saw a similarly huge upgrade, with a healthy Kerry Kittles replacing over-the-hill Kendall Gill and marginally effective Stephen Jackson. Beyond this, the Nets revamped their bench with the additions of rookies Richard Jefferson and Jason Collins as well as a stunning improvement by backup shooting guard Lucious Harris. The final piece of the puzzle was improved health for forward Keith Van Horn, who played in 81 games last season and only 49 the year before.

Add it all up, and the 2001-02 Nets that Jason Kidd had the opportunity to quarterback shared little in common with Marbury’s 2000-01 team. Kidd clearly played a role in New Jersey’s improvement, but to credit all of it to him, as many MVP voters apparently did, is to pretend the contributions of MacCulloch, Kittles, Jefferson, and Collins simply don’t exist.

On the other side of the country, Marbury joined a Suns team that had lost more than Kidd from its 2000-01 nucleus. Starting power forward Clifford Robinson was essentially given to the Detroit Pistons in a luxury tax-motivated move; though he was eventually replaced by Bo Outlaw, Outlaw could not come anywhere close to matching Robinson’s effectiveness. Despite that downgrade, the Marbury-led Suns were still in the thick of the playoff hunt before collapsing in the month of February. That motivated Phoenix management to deal impending free agent forward Rodney Rogers and guard Tony Delk to Boston for a package headlined by then-rookie guard Joe Johnson. With two of the team’s top bench weapons out of the picture, the Suns were unsurprisingly a far worse team down the stretch, leading to an exaggerated gap between their 2000-01 and 2001-02 performances.

None of those facts, however, have helped Marbury, who has had to endure unending criticism of the trade and his style of play. The implication is that Marbury’s shoot-first offensive style is to responsible for the Suns’ failure last season, but that really doesn’t make sense given that they were still a solid team through January. Did Marbury suddenly change his game and become more selfish? I find that proposition a bit difficult to believe


Now again Marbury acted immature during his tenure in Jersey. That everyone agrees. But again he is pidgin held to that time, about what 5yrs ago still to this day. He was unhappy with his situation in Jersey. And I know he is the one that forced his way out of Minny so he got what he asked for. He chased a dream of winning a championship for infront of his home fans. He didn't believe in his teammates or managment. But in Pheniox that wasn't the same senario. He liked Pheniox, liked his situation, liked his team. But still getting accused for things that happend in Jersey

if Marbury wasn’t as effective as the Suns had hoped he’d be last season, he had an easy excuse -- bone spurs in both ankles kept Marbury from playing at 100% for the majority of the season. After Phoenix’s season ended, he had surgery on both ankles. With the new state of health came a new state of mind; Marbury showed his dedication to the team by showing up throughout the summer to team events, such as rookie workouts prior to the Draft. He led his younger teammates like Johnson, forward Shawn Marion, and rookie Amare Stoudemire in voluntary workouts during the month of September that helped foster a greater sense of team unity amongst the Suns. And, to his credit, instead of running from his DUI arrest, Marbury faced it like a man, admitting his guilt and serving his time in jail.

Entering training camp, everything seemed to be in place for a revitalized Marbury to have a fine season, prove his detractors wrong, and maybe even lead Phoenix back to the playoffs. That pretty picture was quickly shattered. Before the Suns had even played a game, the pain returned to Marbury’s left ankle. A visit to a specialist in New York revealed more bone chips, with the expectation that he would undergo surgery. Instead, Marbury decided to play through the pain and started the next night in Phoenix’s exhibition opener against -- who else? -- New Jersey.

I’m not entirely sure what I think of Marbury’s decision. The conventional wisdom is that we should admire him for being able to play through pain, but if Marbury is hurting his team by playing at less than 100%, not having the surgery might actually be selfish. That’s unlikely, however, given the Suns’ poor options to replace him, with Johnson having to serve as point alongside Anfernee Hardaway. Even a Marbury at 85%-90% is a dramatic improvement for the Suns.

Either way, Marbury loses. If he has the surgery, he’s more concerned with his own health than the welfare of his team. If he plays and his stats remain depressed, as they were last season, he gets roundly criticized for not being better. The traditional media can be funny that way. And if the Suns again miss the playoffs, things get even worse. Every season preview article written about Phoenix makes it clear that the media sees the team’s fate as entirely tied to Marbury. If they miss the playoffs, it’s because he’s selfish, immature, and not the player that Kidd is.

From covering the Suns since late May, even if from 1000 miles away, I’ve gained the opinion that Marbury’s attempts to play a larger leadership role are sincere. I also don’t think he’s a selfish player -- at least not any more selfish than Gary Payton, Jason Terry, Steve Francis or any shoot-first point guard. None of those guys have faced the same kind of criticism as Marbury (of course, they’ve never been traded for Kidd either). Why Marbury? I don’t think it’s unfair to say that his maturity might have been lacking during his early years in Minnesota -- he wasn’t old enough to drink when he got there . . . of course he was a little immature! -- but this outdated perception seems to have held on too long.

This might have become the season where Marbury turned things around and became the hero and not the villain. Bone spurs seem to have significantly reduced the chances of that happening


http://www.nba.com/suns/news/marion_marbury_030114.html

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/suns/2002-12-25-resurgence_x.htm

These 2 articles are showing a Marbury lead team actually overachieving to what they were rated. Marion averaging the most pts in his career. Marbury getting along with his coach and focusing on defense.

He was damn near heroic in the Suns’ first-round war with the San Antonio Spurs, leading Phoenix with 22 points and almost 6 assists per game, even winning Game 1 in overtime with a running 3-pointer. For almost the duration of the series, Marbury was battling a slew of injuries that included bone spurs in both ankles (that required offseason surgery), an injured wrist and a severely injured shoulder that Steph says was much worse than anyone really knew. Yet he still logged more than 45 minutes in each game.

“It was so ****ed up,” he says. “I couldn’t even dribble the ball. I had to actually concentrate to make the ball come back to my hand each time. My right arm was basically useless. Every time I went to shoot there was nothing there. Nobody knew how bad it was, and I probably should’ve sat down. But I had been to the playoffs before, and when you’ve been there once, you just want more. I can’t describe the feeling, you just want more.”


Quotes by Marbury on the playoffs vs the Spurs. Suns won 44games that yr and were the 8th seed. While Nets won 49games and were the #2 seed. In the West that yr they had 6 teams have 50wins or more. In the East they had 1 team with 50wins while the highest win margin in the West was 60 and 2 teams had that. What if Suns played in the East that yr vs weaker comp?? Suns pushed the Spurs every game and stole the first in San Antonio where they hardly ever lose. While the Nets got steam rolled when they faced them, and nets had more depth. What if Suns had the easier path that the Nets had in the east?? Maybe Marbury actually leads his team to 50 wins and makes a far push in the playoffs that yr??

Now the next season Suns start off slowly and go 8-13 and they fire there coach Johnson who just had success the yr before and was getting along with Marbury and the other players. Don't know the reason they started slow. But I also feel 21games into the season is kind of early to make that type of personel change. (It worked out in the end though as D'Antoni won coach of the yr the following yr).In the case vs Marbury for the original thread. As for Penny Hardaway talk about how he and Marbury might have not bought into the system.

"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. 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. "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.

But I never new that D'antoni came in after 21games into the season. I thought he started the season with them. And Marbury was traded 13 games later. Marbury also had less fg attempts 17.8, compared to 18.9. More assist 8.3 compared to 8.1. Less TOs 2.9 compared to 3.3. And more stls 1.9 compared to 1.3. In that 34 games he played compared to the season before when they won 44games in the tough west. Marbury seems to have played with more efficency then the season before when they were winning. The losing most likley is what made players complain as it usually leads to that does. But I admit that he didn't get Amare the ball enough as for those 21games Amare averaged 12-13shot attempts per game as the 3rd option. Though he was raw he improved his offensive game. Also when D'Antoni took over Amare only played 3games out of the 13 that Marbury played under D'Antoni. D'Antoni didn't really get to coach Marbury-Marion & Amare for an extended period of time at all. Marbury improved his production & efficency in basically all phases of his game from when he won 44games and only was in D'Antoni's system for 13ggames and didn't have Amare for 10. But yet we are going to discredit Marbury for not buying into D'Antoni's system quick enough. And not buying into his system doesn't mean that he didn't try. How do we know that he tried but was able to make the adjustment for the 13 game sample. And we should just forget the season Marbury had before for a whole season with Johnson for a small portion of time that he didn't work out with D'Antoni. During those 13games Marbury played for D'Antoni (10 without Amare)he averaged 17.3shot attempts, 8.4assist, 1.9stls. As for Marion & Stoudemire's comments. The only thing there telling me is that Nash is a better passer and leader than Marbury. Nothing they said gave me the impression that Marbury is a bad teammate or a cancer to the team and was a bad influence. Which Forward doesn't prefer that. But this isn't the same situation as Jersey. Marbury wasn't acting like the immature person he was in Jersey.

The trade represents a major shakeup for both teams. In exchange for its best player, Phoenix will go under the salary cap next summer and will have at least $8 million to offer to a free agent class that includes Kobe Bryant.

Suns owner Jerry Colangelo confirmed said the Suns will save $20 million to $25 million in salary and luxury tax costs through the 2004-05 season. That will allow the Suns to rebuild a team that was eliminated in the first round of the playoffs last season after missing the postseason the year before.

"This is a big picture kind of move, and a bold move," Colangelo said. "We didn't have flexibility under the cap, and we were hamstrung by some contracts. This allows us to be a player in free agency if we choose to. This is not a talent-for-talent deal."

Marbury, one of the league's best point guards, is averaging a team-high 20.8 points for the Suns, who are in last place in the Pacific Division. He signed a four-year extension, worth approximately $76 million, earlier this season that kicks in with the 2005-06 season and runs through 2008-09. Counting this season, he has six years on his contract and will make $14.625 million next season, then a yet-to-be-determined figure in the first year of the extension.

Hardaway, a former All-Star, has been coming off the bench for the Suns. He has three years left on a deal that will pay him $13.5 million this season, $14.625 million in 2004-05 and $15.75 million in 2005-06.

In a statement released by the Suns, in which Suns coach Mike D'Antoni expressed his appreciation for Marbury's work ethic, he also said: "Are we probably going to take a little step backwards? Yeah, in the beginning. But with the cap room that we now have and with the draft picks we are going to have, along with the core of young players that will get a lot of playing time, we're excited about it. I think that in the long run this is the way to get to a higher level of play. In the short term a little pain, but in the long term we hope there's a big gain."

There are rumors that both Shawn Marion and Stoudemire, two players who have flourished with Nash, fell out of favor with Marbury. Colangelo declined to discuss the issue and wouldn't comment on a rumor that when Marbury first learned of the deal, he took the news hard. Interestingly, Marbury said all along that playing for the Knicks was his dream, but people in the Suns organization insist that Marbury enjoyed playing in Phoenix and never wanted to leave.

Colangelo defended Marbury, pointing out that the Suns won 44 games in 2002-03 with the point guard and gave the eventual champion Spurs a difficult time in the first round. Colangelo added that it was the Suns who gave Marbury a contract extension and saw him as a cornerstone for the future. That was until Thomas made Colangelo an offer he couldn't refuse.

"We loved Steph," Colangelo said. "But we were swimming upstream financially and we got off to a slow start. So we jumped."

Colangelo: A lot of things happened over the course of the summer. A lot of guys that were in early the year before weren’t this year. I think to some degree that we got a little comfortable and we made a chemistry-changing move that altered where we were and that was the (Bo) Outlaw-(Jake) Tsakalidis trade. We also had a coaching change for obvious reasons that we’ve already stated and talked about. We decided to go in a different direction and then you look at where we are from a competitive standpoint with a $66 million payroll in a very difficult Western Conference. It became pretty clear to us that the only way out was to make a move like this, but it had to be a move of this magnitude. It’s staggering when you look at the numbers how it will affect us, not only today but in the future, and that all equates to flexibility and operating with more efficiency, and turning this thing into something we really want to turn it into. It’s crafting it and shaping it and molding it the way we want to do it. We were stuck. We had what we had and we had two players that were injured, who we like a lot and we think certainly they make us better (when they return). But we weren’t going to jump up into the top five in the West. Call us a team of the future – yesterday and today – because that is where we are looking.

more comments on the trade by columnist

Let's start with some facts. This is the fourth time Marbury has been traded, but this time it had nothing to do with an attitude adjustment or clashes within the organization.

Much has been made of Marbury's problems with the Nets when he was with New Jersey, but he has matured, and there were no such problems with Phoenix. True, Suns All-Star small forward Shawn Marion has grumbled about not getting enough shots with Marbury, who tends to dominate the ball. But Marion peaked at 18.1 shots per game last year with Marbury and averaged 14.7 during his last season with Jason Kidd in 2000-01.

And there have been folks whispering to second-year power forward Amare Stoudemire that Marbury was not doing enough to make the big man a cog in the offense. But Stoudemire, for all of his physical gifts, is not yet polished enough to be a featured offensive option.

It's also a fact that having Marbury and Penny Hardaway, who also was sent to the Knicks, was not an easy situation for new coach Mike D'Antoni. Not that Hardaway and Marbury were problems for D'Antoni--he just could not have much of an impact with the two veterans, not with his limited NBA resume.

Even with Marbury, the Suns were last in the West standings and doing poorly at the gate. Now, the team must pitch "economic viability" to its fans, a difficult task. Chants of "De-fense!" at America West Arena will have to be replaced by "Cap space!"

Layden was trying to trade for Marbury right. But he couldn't get the deal done. Now if Marbury was a Cancer to that Suns organization then Suns would have pushed to move Marbury for way less than what they got him for. And Layden would have been able to get him. Just think a CANCER pg owed around what 76 mil for the next 4yrs. The market value for that would have been Dice ending salary and a protected draft pick. But they wanted complete finacial flexability. Thats because Marbury was a cancer that they were just trying to Dump. AGAIN

Colangelo defended Marbury, pointing out that the Suns won 44 games in 2002-03 with the point guard and gave the eventual champion Spurs a difficult time in the first round. Colangelo added that it was the Suns who gave Marbury a contract extension and saw him as a cornerstone for the future. That was until Thomas made Colangelo an offer he couldn't refuse.

"We loved Steph," Colangelo said. "But we were swimming upstream financially and we got off to a slow start. So we jumped

Lets also not forget that the suns were selling the team at the time. And being tied down to those contracts really lowerd the value. Colangelo said it himself. Marbury & Hardaway where owed a TON of money and they weren't winning. But were able to fall back on Johnson, Marion & Stoud gain a ton of prospects and be way under the salary cap.

As for Isiah Thomas comments about being able to land Marbury because he has flaws. Of course he was able to trade him because he has flaws. If he didn't have flaws then he would be untradeable like Tim Duncan and Shaq. If he didn't have flaws then Suns would have been 18-3 instead of 8-13. And for his other comments about not being able to take critism and leading by fear. Was he talking about Pheniox or was he rooting back to Jersey??? Under Johnson when they won 44games and Marbury made the allstar team with Marion. Johnson the coach at the time was praising Marbury for following his instructions, and sacraficing his game in the articles I have posted up above. And D'Antoni only coached Marbury for 13games, 10 without Amare.

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.

Its funny as we can't get quotes at all about them saying anything other than how Marbury is a scoring guard and they prefer a PG that passes. But everyone seems to talk for them. I won't just discount it though. He most likley did that in Jersey butthen again trying to link his actions in Jersey with how he was in Pheniox. Give me quotes from Amare & Marion talking about how Marbury was a problem for them in the locker room. I believe they had spats with Marbury over touches when they were losing though just like 95% of the teams do when they are slumping.


[iLike last night, we’re coming from the road trip and we’re on the plane, just sitting up with the coaches. Barbosa’s watching the game, talking with one coach about his play, then we had Shawn Marion’s up with another coach talking about his play, then we had Jake Voskuhl with another coach looking at his game. And Lampe’s up there just watching the whole scene. That didn’t happen before. There were a lot of expectations and things were going bad. It’s hard for a player to blame himself, so they were either blaming each other or us and it was a negative. Now that is lifted and people are stepping out and taking responsibility and they understand where we can go if we do it right. We’re just trying to lay a foundation on how want to play ]

Anyone notice any similarities to here? And his Nets situation was even worse. I wont get exhaustive on that but here's one blurb:[/i]

D'Antoni saying they loved Marbury's work ethic yet is forgotten. Or the fact that Marbury got Joe Johnson, Marion & Stoud to come in for early voulentary workouts is forgotten. Losing the season before usually makes players want to work harder the following season. After this bad season Eddie Curry & Frye were talking about how hard they were going to work on there games in the summer to get better. And we didn't trade Marbury for Kidd & or Nash for them to say so. I don't get how this is Marbury's fault that the season before Marion wasn't talking with his coaches. Or why Barbosa wasn't talking with his coaches. Way to much put on Marbury's shoulders.

I really like how you put the Jersey situation at the end to finish it of to make it seem more recent than it was. Thats probably excatly how Marbury was in Jersey. Though you could say look at the source with Martin. I do wonder though when Killa posted Malik Rose's comments on how he felt Marbury tried to do everything Brown told him to do it was brushed off. I guess when its positive there just being politically correct because there is no way that Marbury could have ever tried to do something positive right. Or when he posted Brown talking about how he felt Marbury was doing everything he wanted that was brushed off as well as it don't go with what the majority wants to hear. But I don't want to discredit the fact that after Marbury left in Jersey & Pheniox they both brought up how they were more focused on improving themselves.

In the end none of that past stuff matters. If Marbury was the perfect teammate and someone came to us and became a cancer nobody would be caring that he was the perfect teammate 5yrs ago. What matters is what he had done with the knicks currently. And going by last season he just didn't get it done. We all know Marbury Isn't cappable of putting a team on his back and caring them through any set back. He is a good scoring but he hasn't shown any clutch ability here like a scorer like Arenas or Bibby or Cassell have with there teams. If your a scoring guard that is a must. And his defesne though he tried in the begining of the yr he just isn't getting it done either. Now if he had the tough relentless defense to to with the 20-8 then that would be able to work with him being a good scoring but not a clutch scorer. But he hasn't shown it here. And he is owed a lot of money. I think the Knicks should shop him and see what they could get. But don't take any weak offers like some of the ones posted here. And if there is nothing out there. Then bring him back and hope that the talk at the end of the season is the real deal. Unless Marbury starts coming through in the clutch and playing defense the way he was when they won 44games and pushed the Spurs in the playoffs then he is expendable.

PS. Marbury got his the name Starbury from the newspaper because when he was in school he was allways on TV, radio, or newspaper. I don't know if he meant that he made it up that way or that a newspaper wrote Starbury in the paper and he got it from that.

Also I found an interesting article on Marbury from Dimemag

http://www.dimemag.com/feature.asp?id=1830

I don't plan on getting any deeper into the Marbury debate but just wanted to make a contribution.

no doubt...thanks new york, ny

That Dime mag article was a hoot!

Steph in Jail for 10 days changed his life.

The guys saying he watches game tape all nite long!

Just too damm funny.

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by simrud:

Yeah I like the analysis, too.

But I also believe that you can't win with a scoring PG. You need your primary scorer to be someone other then your PG. I know thast an opinion, but history seems suppor it (not prove cause things happen for the first time sometime).

That and the fact that if I have to pick between Marbury and Brown, I'm pickin Brown because he has won before. And I don't like how Marbury is a big choker as well. Those are all subjective things ofcourse, but hey, everybody's got an opinon.

In the end with sports, it comes down to opinions and luck really. Nothing is an exact sciene.

Ever heard of a guy named Isiah Thomas? But I hear ya man, this is not exact at all. If it were there'd be no need for these forums and we'd have nothing to argue about.

Gus Williams, Kevin Johnson ( who never won a Championship but was always amoung the leading scorers on his squad)...At that time Phoenix was always considered one of the better teams in the NBA...

Posted by holfresh:

Posted by Killa4luv:

Posted by simrud:

Yeah I like the analysis, too.

But I also believe that you can't win with a scoring PG. You need your primary scorer to be someone other then your PG. I know thast an opinion, but history seems suppor it (not prove cause things happen for the first time sometime).

That and the fact that if I have to pick between Marbury and Brown, I'm pickin Brown because he has won before. And I don't like how Marbury is a big choker as well. Those are all subjective things ofcourse, but hey, everybody's got an opinon.

In the end with sports, it comes down to opinions and luck really. Nothing is an exact sciene.

Ever heard of a guy named Isiah Thomas? But I hear ya man, this is not exact at all. If it were there'd be no need for these forums and we'd have nothing to argue about.

Gus Williams, Kevin Johnson ( who never won a Championship but was always amoung the leading scorers on his squad)...At that time Phoenix was always considered one of the better teams in the NBA...

Isiah, Magic and Clyde have all won a championship in a season where they were their team's leading scorer.

They just happen to be very good, if not great, playmakers and leaders in addition to scorers.

Well this should immortalize me as a Marbury stalker assassin but I actually emailed the dude who wrote the 2002 piece entitled "Poor Marbury" that newyork built the brunt of his case from.

I wrote:

> I've recently read your 2002 article entitled "Poor Marbury", and I wonder
> if you still consider him an unfortunate victim of circumstances, for lack
> of a better term, in his treatment by fans and the media.
>
> Since the time tof your article we've seen him choose to not buy
> into D'Antoni's system, Marion and Amare were said to have tired of his
> demeanor, we've heard of him struggling with teammates and coaches in
> NY....
> Has the guy ever matured? Doesn't he seem to have an innate way of
> splintering teams?
>
> Anyway, let me not belabor my feelings, I was just curious of yours.

He replied with brevity:

on 5/1/06 11:04 AM, kpelton@hoopsworld.com wrote:
I think it's safe to say I've changed my mind with more information.

Later boys...

Posted by eViL:

Ouch. But, that still doesn't defeat the case that Marbury is the victim of league-wide conspiracy concocted by all the players and coaches of his current and former teams. What do you have to say about that?

this is lazy thinking.

Posted by eViL:

Ouch. But, that still doesn't defeat the case that Marbury is the victim of league-wide conspiracy concocted by all the players and coaches of his current and former teams. What do you have to say about that?

Don't forget detective Mark Furman. He planted the evidence.

He is paid a kings ransom, is not clutch, and does not play defense. He is not liked by his mates.

Maggot, Parasite, cancer, termite, virus, kill joy, party pooper, bad egg, bad seed, malcontent, maladjusted and egocentric.

Take your pick.