I'd also say that independent of the team around him, Marbury has been playing like crap for the last 2 weeks. He's just in a bad spell, a funk with his play.

but Iverson is a better player. why are we even discussing thing? Still doesn't mean Steph cant win with some help

The problem with marbury is there is more to just handing the ball to his teammats. good decision making is what he lacks which separates him from kidd and nash. He isn't a selfish player like some think. Maybe he was once in only in New Jersey but after the injuries he truly was all alone.

He really needs better players around him. Then he will look great because it's a lot easier too look good when you're passing to Elton Brand(for example) as opposed to Kurt Thomas. If we still loss after we get a franchise bigman then you can say marbury is a loser and can't lead a team. Marbury is not a franchise player but he's an amazing 2nd or even third option. Imagine a team of Ewing, spree and marbury

IMO we need 2 more good players a bigman and another bigman or a SF or a SG. Maybe sweetney, ariza & our #1 pick are those players but we still need a franchise C or PF.

[Edited by - gunsnewing on 01/30/2005 12:44:43]

thing is nyny, that's exactly what he said he'd do when he went on that stretch where he was playing at the top of his game this year...i think it was a few weeks ago, & he said that would be the Stephon Marbury we would see from here on out...it lasted a few games.

if only we could see him play defense for a consistent stretch

Posted by TMS:

if only we could see him play defense for a consistent stretch

I wish as well. He definatly doesn't make enough defensive plays. I don't expect him to shut down every pg but at least make some plays. Though I must give him credit he has broken up a couple 2 on 1s.

He should go for broke next game vs LAC and the rest of the season. Shoot for 40pts.

A few years ago, Iverson was better. Now I'd say they're about comparable. They're both awesome players that nevertheless cannot carry a team single-handedly to an above .500 record. (Elton Brand, Tracy MacGrady, Vince Carter, Paul Pierce and several other players fall into that description too.)

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 01/30/2005 23:40:24]

Posted by Bonn1997:

A few years ago, Iverson was better. Now I'd say they're about comparable. They're both awesome players that nevertheless cannot carry a team single-handedly to an above .500 record. (Elton Brand, Tracy MacGrady, Vince Carter, Paul Pierce and several other players fall into that description too.)

[Edited by - Bonn1997 on 01/30/2005 23:40:24]

what player do you think can carry his team to an above .500 record w/no other good players on his team except a bunch of role players? i'm just curious...is that your definition of a franchise player?

Marbury is playing like a fustated brat.

Earlier in the year when we were above .500 nobody was screaming that steph had no help, we were all harping on TT and Allan, yet we were still winning games.

This team plays the worst defense when it matters the most. They go for a nice little 14 minute stretch at some point in a game, and then totally lose it, and I mean totally.

Then the bickering, and the finger pointing, and the selfish play.

Nazy for all the good that he's done this season doesn't make anyone better but himself.

KT is the only starting PF in the league.. IN THE FU... LEAGUE, that shoots the least amount of FTs.

I'm pretty sure sweetney has shot a few dozen more FTs the KT

I just wish we had Camby playing along side Ariza.