Hes versitle and dont have a huge contract but he sucks? You would rather add older guys with fat contracts? Not sure i understand you. Crawford and Richardson seem to fit Antonis style of run and gun. I could see Randolf being available. Dont know if hes the right type of player to put next to Ming or not.
1st of all, if he is our starting point guard then we have lots of problems. He may have better skills then rafer, but throughout his whole career he has never showed leadership or the ability to run a team. At least rafer is able to run the show here in Houston. 2nd point. He would make a really good back up pg, but I highly doubt that he would play 2nd fiddle to anyone. Not too long ago he proclaimed himself as the best pg behind steve nash. He threw a temper tantrum when he was benched last year. No thanks to the crappy attitude. I'll take ron artest over this guy and I'm not that big on ron ron, I just really dislike starbury
ok, if he is bought out and we get him for cheap....get him he is a talent and we need talent. and if he is cheap it's a no brainer. If he doesn't work out then it's just like Francis or Bonzi the year before. c'mon guys, i dont' how much of a cancer he is, if we get him at Francis dollars it is a gamble worth taking.
I think Rick and I would have the same response to news of obtaining Marbury. You cannot get Marbury running Adelman's offensive sets. I just don't see it. Read and react from Mr. screw loose? not a good idea.
Hate to use the word, but ditto. As it is, we're going to have Francis on the roster, Brooks, Jackson, and Rafer. If we're going to trade Rafer, Jackson, or Brooks (Francis is a big unknown... can't count on getting anything there and he probably wouldn't help close a deal during the preseason), I'd rather get a point guard other than Marbury. Please. Why doesn't Rick grow back his beard? I like it!
Tough to say if a player has a resurgence or not, but I don't think you want Marbury the player. Marbury the contract would be enticing to someone looking to rebuild/reload so you would think they would be patient. Interesting that the Knicks are looking for cap space in 2010 since I'm guessing that is when we will be a player also (T-Mac and Rafer both expiring).
Ya know, Clutch posted that Francis just took the extra year for the $. That's no knock on him, but Clutch seemed to authoritatively say Francis is truly done. That squares with all the data we have from this year, so I guess we should expect zero henceforth from the Franchise, or treat any contribution as a surprise gift. I don't even think we can use Francis in a trade, given that he basically can't play now.
My thoughts on Jared Jeffries were that I think he is a player that Dantoni could still use. He is a long atheletic SF player who could flourish playing a big position in that offense and his contract isn't that bad. In our offense and most others he sucks, though. My thoughts on the other guys is that they are much better players and since the knicks are trying to get under the cap, some of those guys will probably go for cheap. Its never about who we want and who we don't want. It is and should always be what's the best we can get while giving up as little of our assets as possible.
I thought the thread was about if the knicks bought out Marbury. Why would the knicks trade Marbury when they need his same contract for their own race for cap space in 2010? I don't know that we'll be a big player in that offseason anyways. What would we have that's more appealing to Lebron than playing for his hometown or playing in a huge market like NY? I think most of those other FA's will end up with their same teams anyways cause they can give them the most possible money. I think that was the ultimate reason they signed those shorter contracts.
NO CHAMPIONSHIP FOR YOU I SEE. You sometime have to gamble and that is what an artest is a gamble. I really think the artest deal would be great for this team and if you can some how manage to bring mike miller here to come off the bench would make it even better. Starbury is up in the air, if he could come and act right i would take him any day of the week. He would be an improvement over rafer that is for sure so it is not all bad as you all think promise that one.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eZZ1Hh3zD_8&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eZZ1Hh3zD_8&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Even if he's willing to came here on the cheap, I would rather spend the MLE money (expiring contracts, trade exception, ect.) on Barnes, Peitrius or aggressively pursuing Artest than signing Marbury. We need size at the shooting guard position, not another streaky gunner at the point. He is a nominal upgrade (talent wise) over Rafer but he is not smart enough to run this offense and his defense is terrible. Pass.
Is it true he played in only 24 games this season? He is more talented than Skip but I feel he wouldn't be more than a marginal upgrade if he was physically and mentally healthy. I would be worried about his ability to run our team and he could cause chemistry problems. Pass up on him.
I understand what you're saying, but I don't think these two situations are comparable at all. First, Alston wasn't on perennial cellar dwellers his entire career. I've read your justifications for Marbury's career - I just don't think they're valid. That guy destroys teams. Second, and more importantly, have you seen Alston interviewed? He is clearly a very intelligent player. Marbury, on the other hand, is quite possibly the stupidest person in the NBA - and that's quite the achievement. I honestly believe that Marbury is only a mere IQ point or two tops over the mentally r****ded level. I'm serious. He's that stupid. And I think all of his problems in the NBA are directly attributable to that stupidity. I really don't believe he refused to play within Larry Brown's system because he was intent on "playing like Starbury". I think that's the only way he can play because he isn't smart enough to grasp even the most basic of systems. That said, I'd be interested in him for the minimum if a.) he was willing to play for that and b.) he had no problem with coming off the bench and playing a limited role. I sincerely doubt he'd be willing to do either. He would probably be pretty fantastic as a scorer and pace changer off the bench. It wouldn't even matter if he couldn't grasp Adelman's system. You would just throw him in when T-Mac was off the floor and let him "play like Starbury" until T-Mac was ready to return. I'd be fine with that. Unfortunately, Starbury wouldn't be.
