McGrady for Marbury-Doesn't it make sense now?

Marbury hasn't played in like 2 years...
We don't need him.

 

T-Mac's got another year on his contract while Marbury's is expiring. Why would the Knicks want to swallow an extra year when it's unlikely that he'll play for them? Would we really want to include something else (pick, player) to get Marbury?

 

This makes no sense for the Knicks. Marbury's contract expires in a couple of months.

Why would they want to add the extra year of McGrady's contract?

 

does marbury for mcgrady make sense?

it did.

too late now.

 

I'd prefer a backup center since Deke will not play too many minutes. A backup center who can defend, if he can score, that will be a bonus

 

McGrady's contract off our books in 2010 > Marbury

 

I guess the argument is that Marbury's contract off the books soon is > McGradys off the book now....

But he should have trade value next summer and next trade deadline. And if not, getting him off the books at the right time makes sense for 2010.




.... I'm just trying to cover up for the fact that i didn't do my due diligence on realizing Marbury expires so quickly.

 

I doesn't make sense for NY. Why they need to have another year?

 

There's no free agent of note this year. Might as well keep Tmac's contract and see what happens. Besides Starbury is so toxic any team that he signs with is doomed to fail. We just got rid of Juwon Howard curse a year or so ago and you want us to zap ourselves again with something far more potent?

 

BIBBY !!!!

DD

 

No to Starbury. Cancer everywhere he goes. Would not fit with our chemistry. Wants the ball like Franchise.

 

any average player is an upgrade over a KO'd Mcgrady...cancer and all

 

So we are trading heart cancer for brain cancer??