Marbury the Cancer

[Rockmaninoff]

As far as "players improving substantially", you don't think that the fact they improved after Marbury left is coincidence do you? It's not.

Yes it is. All of those guys were extremely young when Marbury played with them. Garnett (Garnett's 3rd season was Marbury's last in Minnesota) and Stoudamire (rookie) were straight out of high school and Joe Johnson was basically a rookie (21 year old second year player in Marbury's last year in Phoenix).

I understand that you need to tear people down who don't live up to your lofty ideals, so carry on.

[Rockmaninoff]

[
It seems to me that the Bucks organization did last season, if you were to go off the way he was promoted. Of course, Marbury is more talented, but the have comparable styles.

what are you talking about?

I'm talking about the player introductions and things of that nature. Williams was always last with Mike Redd.

[eagle13]

But yes, let the judging continue. Who am I to interupt the hate fest?

Does that mean your going to stop your moronic logic? If so Thank you.

And yes I am a HATER of how Marbury plays basketball...
And yes I am a HATER of how Marbury is as a teammate...
And yes I am a HATER of how Marbury whines and his ego...

And I am almost sorry for the Knix - almost

[jerrod]

I'm talking about the player introductions and things of that nature. Williams was always last with Mike Redd.

so by your logic then, if being introduced 4th means the team thinks he's a star then every team in the league thinks they have 2 stars.

you're just grasping at straws while you try to defend marbury


but i guess being introduced 2nd to last is better than a team trying to pay you to go away.

[LUKE23]

Yes it is. All of those guys were extremely young when Marbury played with them. Garnett (Garnett's 3rd season was Marbury's last in Minnesota) and Stoudamire (rookie) were straight out of high school and Joe Johnson was basically a rookie (21 year old second year player in Marbury's last year in Phoenix).

I understand that you need to tear people down who don't live up to your lofty ideals, so carry on

I would actually like to see for his career Marbury's teams record with him vs. the record for the first three years after his departure and see how big the discrepancy is. Marbury doesn't make players or teams better, and that is why individuals have improved after he has left, and team W-L has followed suit. I'm not "tearing people down", I'm calling a spade a spade.

You don't think that the fact that all of the Knicks players and the Knicks new coach badly, badly want Marbury gone is telling?

But I'm sure that yahoo article is just a "witch hunt". It's not based in reality at all.

[BuckFan25226]

This thread is hilarious. I didn't know there was anyone other then MBBOT who would actually defend Marbury.

The guy is a unbelievable talent, but for many reasons mentioned earlier, he's a complete cancer.

[Rockmaninoff]

I would actually like to see for his career Marbury's teams record with him vs. the record for the first three years after his departure and see how big the discrepancy is. Marbury doesn't make players or teams better, and that is why individuals have improved after he has left, and team W-L has followed suit. I'm not "tearing people down", I'm calling a spade a spade.

But you're ignoring the fact that all of those eventual franchise players where extremely young and early into their careers when they were playing with Starbury.

You don't think that the fact that all of the Knicks players and the Knicks new coach badly, badly want Marbury gone is telling?

But I'm sure that yahoo article is just a "witch hunt". It's not based in reality at all.

I didn't read any thing from the players, coaches, or management that quoted them as saying they want him 'badly, badly gone'. Can I get a link to an article that provides this? Did you watch the Marbury video I provided in my first post?

It's all relative.

[old skool]

There is no comparison between the productivity of Marbury and Ray Allen.

Marbury drags teams down. Teams improve when he leaves.

Allen elevates teams. They are better when he arrives and falter when he leaves. The difference in impact of these two players is unmistakable.

At best, Marbury has played for marginally successful teams. The kind of teams that barely make the playoffs and get bounced in the first round.

Allen has played for Division and Conference Champions. He has helped teams go deep in the playoffs. Allen has played in more playoff games than Marbury (63 to 18). And his production has been much better. Marbury has stunk in the playoffs, taking 20 shots per game while shooting at a horrendous clip - 36.5% FGA% and 26.7% 3FGA%. Allen takes fewer shots in the playoffs, makes a much higher percentage and score more points per game. Marbury doesn't get it. He thinks that he is a star because he scores a lot during the season.

oLd sKool

[LUKE23]

So there needs to be outright quotes? Haha. Yeah, I'm sure they are going to get their names printed in the media when he's still on the roster, yeah, that sounds like a recipe for success. Of course they aren't going to put anything in print while he's still on the team.

Did you even read the article?

Yep, I'm sure that teams and players only improved because all of the good players Marbury has played with were young at the time.

[redred9]

Marbury is terrible. Absolutely terrible. That quote about wanting to dribble around for 22 secs says it ALL. No wonder every team he's on badly underachieves. Plus he seems to be completely bonkers these days as well.

I can't believe anyone is defending Marbury. By MMBOT's account, the Knicks, with Randolph and Marbury should be title contenders! But oh, that's right, it's actually Curry holding them back..

[InsideOut]

I give you credit Rock, I've never seen anyone defend Marbury before. All the bases have been covered. The guy is about as far from a winner as you can get. Teams and players get better when he leaves and his new teams never seems to go anywhere. The biggest telling factor for me is how teams want to get rid of him. I mean if the guy is so great then why do teams want to keep getting rid of him? You'd think they'd be looking to lock him up and keep him instead of trying to move him.

[bucksbrewerspackersfan]

Yeah it is all Eddie Curry's fault... I am kidding it is the whole team from Marbury to Curry on why the Knicks are so bad. Marbury is to much of a me first player kind of reminds of Derrick Coleman a lot of potiental only Coleman was just lazy and Marbury is just plan out for himself and not the team. You can try and convince other people but I can say this much Marbury does not get no love because he never gave any love in a easy to put it. If he put the love of the team first the team would be a lot better. But he can't because look at how he got traded out of each team he was on. It could be funny to watch the great loser team of all time Marbury, DC, Z-Bo, Eddy Curry, and Steve Hensen

[Nowak008]

Would Starberry been any worse then Ivey or Blake when they were here? I honestly think that we would have been better (marginaly) with a healthy Marrbery on our team last year. Sure he is a cancer, but we had like 5 cancers on our team last year whats one more?

[/making an arguement just because]

[emunney]

I'm hungry. I think I'll have some raspburys. Maybe some strawburys.

Uh oh. I had too many. I'm dead. You'll have to berry me.

[BuckFan25226]

I also think the quote in regards to Nash dribbling around for 22 seconds is hilarious because Marbury should never be mentioned in the same sentence as Steve Nash. For one, Steve Nash is one of the rare people that is allowed to do that because of his rare and exceptional ability to create for not only himself, but for his teammates. Also, add in the fact his FG% and 3P% are miles ahead of Marbury's.

[vincecarter4pres]

Rockmaninoff wrote:But you're ignoring the fact that all of those eventual franchise players where extremely young and early into their careers when they were playing with Starbury.

Dude your argument holds no water. You are proving yourself wrong.

Weren't these same players no seasons more experienced when Kidd came and took them over?
Didn't Jason Kidd also have 2 flatout rookies as major contributors?

And wasn't the team Nash inherited but one year younger when he turned them into a contender?

What about Minny?
I could be wrong here, because I did not check it, but wasn't the year after Marbury was traded was the same year Terrel Brandon came to Minnesota and they improved?

And the Knicks?
I can't squarely put blame on Marbury's shoulders, for that team had a plethora of problems starting at the top with severe poorly made personell descions, but a lot, a lot of the fault is on Marbury as the self proclaimed and rightly so, supposed leader of that motley crew of castoffs and derelicts.

Face it, he is an unbelievable talent that makes people around him worse.

I am also not judging him when I say he is crazy, I am just stating the obvious.

Would anyone disagree with me that Steve O, Ron Artest or Britney Spears are crazy?
Probably not, cause it's pretty obvious.

[jr lucosa]

He was good for 20 and 9 every year and you guys are talking as if hes the most selfish player in the history of the NBA, who was the last bucks player to average 9 assists a game throughout a season? I would agree he's gotten selfish and has gone a little nuts, but I disagree that hes a cancer, that word is so overused these days that its getting rediculous.

[Basti]

Rockmaninoff wrote:But you're ignoring the fact that all of those eventual franchise players where extremely young and early into their careers when they were playing with Starbury.

Dude your argument holds no water. You are proving yourself wrong.

Weren't these same players no seasons more experienced when Kidd came and took them over?
Didn't Jason Kidd also have 2 flatout rookies as major contributors?

And wasn't the team Nash inherited but one year younger when he turned them into a contender?

What about Minny?
I could be wrong here, because I did not check it, but wasn't the year after Marbury was traded was the same year Terrel Brandon came to Minnesota and they improved?

And the Knicks?
I can't squarely put blame on Marbury's shoulders, for that team had a plethora of problems starting at the top with severe poorly made personell descions, but a lot, a lot of the fault is on Marbury as the self proclaimed and rightly so, supposed leader of that motley crew of castoffs and derelicts.

Face it, he is an unbelievable talent that makes people around him worse.

I am also not judging him when I say he is crazy, I am just stating the obvious.

Would anyone disagree with me that Steve O, Ron Artest or Britney Spears are crazy?
Probably not, cause it's pretty obvious.

yep Minny got Terrel Brandon and a lottery pick for a disgruntled Marbury. then again, I wish we would have never traded for Marbury and would have kept Allen instead.

[emunney]

He was good for 20 and 9 every year and you guys are talking as if hes the most selfish player in the history of the NBA, who was the last bucks player to average 9 assists a game throughout a season? I would agree he's gotten selfish and has gone a little nuts, but I disagree that hes a cancer, that word is so overused these days that its getting rediculous.

By "every year" do you mean "never"?

[trwi7]

who was the last bucks player to average 9 assists a game throughout a season?

Sam Cassell.