This could be good news in the long-run. If the reason he was no longer able to be an explosive player was simply an injury rather than aging, then maybe after surgery (even if it's not 'til next year), he'll be a lot better.

Posted by babyKnicks:

This is great news...I mean, I love francis, but he was an extra, albeit talented, body out there that was redundant...if Nate continues to emerge on defense and continues to hit the open jumper within the offense, and crawford continues his chemistry with Curry, francis is expendable.

Marbury is slowly rounding into 16/6 form and that's pretty good considering.

If/when qrich slides to the 2 and frye returns to the starting lineup, we will have that 7 foot low post zone defensive presence that the college style coaching philosophy will embrace.

Lee bounding off the bench to replace any of our three 7 footers is money in the bank.

I agree. This solves the PT dilema and we don't have to play Marbury and Francis (both of whom are suspect defenders). I would like Nate to get more PT. He is a better outside shooter and when focused, can be a better defender.

woulda been much better news had Marbury been the one who required surgery imo... not that i wish injury on any player, but i think the team plays better w/Francis on the floor rather than Marbs.

I personally don't like when either is on the floor. They'll both have big moment, but I think that if neither can be a go to player, then they are both virtually useless. Jamal has been handling the PG duties, Eddie Curry is the go to guy now, and now that he's playing well, he's getting the ball A LOT more. I don't think Franbury has the capability of not being the top option.

interesting article on the same point:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/jack_mccallum/12/12/three.knicks/index.html
Marbury, Francis or Crawford
Which of these Knicks backcourt players do you want?

Let's say you're Isiah Thomas. Never mind -- no need to get all depressed with Christmas so close. Just make this a hypothetical. Let's say you can keep only one of the high-priced New York Knicks guards. Would Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis or Jamal Crawford be your choice?

It's interesting that this dialectic can even be aired. Not too long ago, Marbury (the fourth pick in the '96 draft) and Francis (the second in '99) were considered elite players, far better known than Crawford, the eighth pick in 2000. But the playing reps of both Francis and Marbury have suffered over the years, and the Knicks' shaky start has only highlighted that. While Thomas generally starts Marbury and Francis and brings Crawford off the bench, the latter is averaging about the same minutes per game (33) as Marbury and considerably more than Francis (28).

There is little to choose among the three of them stat-wise. Crawford is averaging 15.7 points, more than Francis' 11 and Marbury's surprisingly low 10.8. But Crawford is also shooting more and poorer with a field goal percentage below 40 and a three-point percentage below 30. Marbury and Francis get more assists than Crawford, but they are looked on more as distributors. All three turn the ball over at about the same rate.

So what's to choose between them?

"Individually, they're all good players," says one Eastern Conference assistant coach, "but they're dying together in New York. None of them plays off the other real well. I wouldn't know which one to pick, frankly."

Well, I have to pick one, and I'm taking money out of the equation -- the Knicks would almost certainly love to lighten their salary-cap load by ditching Marbury (who is owed $57 million through '09) or Francis ($49.3 million through '09). Crawford, by that standard, is a bargain at $24 million through '09 (he has two more years and $19.4 million left on his contract after that), but I'm going to eliminate him on the basis of his extremely questionable shot selection.

Both Marbury and Francis are tweeners (not quite point, not quite shooting guard) whose best days seem behind them, but I'm going to cast a reluctant vote for FRANCIS. Marbury seems too deep in the doldrums to reclaim his status as an elite player and Francis does not. If that is to damn him with faint praise, so be it.

what's the upside on Francis vs the upside on Marbs? I'll take Marbs. He just needs to shake out the cobwebs and start playing the way he's capable. Francis will never lose that flat shot.

Fran down, Bury to go.

Posted by Swishfm3:

man TMS, you're really hating on Marbury. The guy catch a break here.

how do you figure the Knicks play better with Francis? he has done absolutely nothing as a Knick

i've been saying all along i want Jamal starting games at the PG position... Francis at least would be more open to playing a role off the bench for this team... he hasn't made a stink about it & i've noticed him trying to take on a leadership role on this team all year long... Marbury would never accept a bench assignment... he's way too proud & his overly inflated self image he has of himself would not allow him to be accepting of a role off the bench... & forget about expecting any type of leadership to come out of Marbury anytime soon... he doesn't have it in him to be one... Marbury's had a couple games where he's played better recently, but his offensive production doesn't nearly justify the dropoff in defense & complete lack of leadership intangibles when he comes on the floor imo... i feel that his mere presence on this team is a negative presence that they really could do without... call that hate if you want, but to me it's a realistic observation based on watching this guy play for the past few years... i used to actually like the guy, believe it or not.

Hang on to Francis and trade Crawford?????