I cant see Marbury playing sg at all. But im curious to see what the line up will look like seeing as Brown doesnt like to play rookies
I myself dont see this relationship working out between them...Brown demands passing, taking the right shots, defense and rebounding...Marbury is a decent passer, but does not play defense, is wild on offense and is egotistical as well...Just look at Brown's past PGs that have been successful with him- Mark jackson, Eric Snow, Chauncey Billups- guards who can score within the flow of the offense, direct and lead a team and play defense (or atleast attempt to play defense in Jackson's case, but he was the ultimate assist man)...I'm not hating, but I just dont see Marbury and Brown working well together or being on the same page...
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Shooter:</div><div class="quote_post">I myself dont see this relationship working out between them...Brown demands passing, taking the right shots, defense and rebounding...Marbury is a decent passer, but does not play defense, is wild on offense and is egotistical as well...Just look at Brown's past PGs that have been successful with him- Mark jackson, Eric Snow, Chauncey Billups- guards who can score within the flow of the offense, direct and lead a team and play defense (or atleast attempt to play defense in Jackson's case, but he was the ultimate assist man)...I'm not hating, but I just dont see Marbury and Brown working well together or being on the same page...</div> Taking the right shots? Marbury shoots 46% from the FG, lol...Chauncey Billups has god awful shot selection he shoots 40% every year FLAT, he shot 39% a year ago. Brown demands passing? Marbury is top 5 in assist per 48 minutes, number 4 in assist per game, and number 2 in total assist...if thats "decent" to you, then tell me whats "good" It doesn't look like you know wha kind of guy Larry Brown is. Larry Brown likes passing in the half court, thats why he got Arroyo off the bench and Billups to play the 2, cause guys like Marbury and Arroyo are creative, very creative on the half court, and produce points, either creating shots for their teammates or scoring themselves. Marbury is the best half court PG in the thats where most of his production comes from, he makes a guy like Kurt Thomas, with no post game, into a servicable consistant offensive player, Nash will do the same also, thats what ELITE passers do, not "decent"....lmao and don't say "Marbury scores too much, he's not a pure point guard" Most of the greatest pointguards of all time were great scorers, that what makes Marbury a top talent, his offense skills are complete, and thats what you don't understand. Eric Snow was a role player, Billups is just a good player, he's no all star like Marbury, Mark Jackson was awesome, but Marbury is better than all these guys, only knock on Marbury is that he doesnt try on defense... lol its kinda pathetic seeing fans from other teams come into the Knicks forum and try to talk about the Knicks when they have zero valid points because they never really see this play more than 5 times...I like how you ended your post with a "..." at the end in confussion
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting SkiptoMyLue11:</div><div class="quote_post">Rasheed bonded with Brown, and before Rasheed came other players on the team had a lot of respect of LB. If Chauncy Billups and Big Ben respect LB, there is no way anyone in the same locker room is gonna disrespect the man.</div> But before, ?Sheed was thought of as unruly and hard to manage similarly to the way everyone feels about Marbury and Crawford although it is definitely as extreme as him, though. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I really don't know Marbury's personality very well. I think he is a tad egotistical by self-proclaiming that he is the best pg in the league. But other than that I really cannot judge him. Hopefully he will see Larry Brown's great ability to coach and effectively run LB's system.</div> It?s not like he went out and just said that; the media came out and asked him ?Do you feel as if you?re the best point guard in the league?? Marbury is not one to degrade his game that?s why he said yes. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I agree, Brown won't leave due to NY's future. However Brown probably will be somewhat frustrated by their cap situation.</div> That is true, but the expiring contracts will be a big help without a doubt. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting VinKanaddy:</div><div class="quote_post">When you say 'they're gone', who are you referring to? I'm hoping Larry Brown isn't included in the word 'they' because there is about 95% chance that Brown will replace Isiah Thomas as the President of Basketball operations / GM down the line.</div> I?m referring to the players who aren?t willing to listen and/or don?t fit in Brown?s system. Yes, I know that. Larry Brown will probably be a big part of the Knicks future down the road and he was not included in ?they?. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Allen Iverson was that way, but that is why Larry Brown played him as a shooting guard and ran Eric Snow at the point. Chauncey Billups, you're talking about a player who was and is a great defensive player. He was never the shot-happy PG under Rick Carlisle and didn't become one under Larry Brown. As great a coach as Brown is, he can't 'make' a bad defender into a defensive player of the year.</div> It?s possible Marbury can become a shooting guard or a point guard depending on Brown, but Marbury is such a good passer that he might just keep at point guard. Billups wasn?t always known as a good defensive player. I find him winning All-Second Team on defense evident to Larry Brown?s teaching. I?m also pretty sure it was Larry Brown who stopped him from jacking up those 3?s in transition all the time. I also remember him saying to Brown I don?t try to change you, so don?t try to change me when Larry told him to stop taking them at first. Put it like this: after Brown coached Billups, he had a career high in points, FG%, 3P%, assists, and made him a much better defender, and a Finals MVP. The same thing happened to Marbury when he coached him in the Olympics. Brown can make a bad defender into a decent one at the least. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The expiring contracts are exactly the reason why Isiah Thomas should and would be replaced by Larry Brown. Knowing Thomas, he will probably trade the expiring contracts for more bloated contracts and that won't do any good to the future of the franchise.</div> Well it depends; what happened to Baron Davis now on the Warriors? There?s also that Shawn Marion rumor going around, too. They all have big contracts, but they also have big games as well and that can be the difference maker in the Knicks being mediocre and the Knicks being contenders. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting Shooter:</div><div class="quote_post">I myself dont see this relationship working out between them...Brown demands passing, taking the right shots, defense and rebounding...Marbury is a decent passer, but does not play defense, is wild on offense and is egotistical as well...Just look at Brown's past PGs that have been successful with him- Mark jackson, Eric Snow, Chauncey Billups- guards who can score within the flow of the offense, direct and lead a team and play defense (or atleast attempt to play defense in Jackson's case, but he was the ultimate assist man)...I'm not hating, but I just dont see Marbury and Brown working well together or being on the same page...</div> Marbury is a good passer who ranks 4th in the league in assists per game. How can you say he?s wild on offense when he shoots 46% from the field and 35% from 3-point range ? his career high. He also shot a career high in FT%, too. It?s not like he?s chucking either, he only attempts 16 shots a game and gets to the line 6.6 times a game. That all adds up to pretty efficient offense. You?re also forgetting the reason why Billups scores within the flow of the game, is because of Larry Brown. Billups used to be one of the wildest guards on offense before Brown, now he?s pretty efficient on offense thanks to him. AI and Billups had some problems with Brown; let?s not forget that, either. They in fact called Marbury up and said to him: Brown is very demanding, but if you do what he says, you?ll be a better player and learn to appreciate him.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">It?s possible Marbury can become a shooting guard or a point guard depending on Brown, but Marbury is such a good passer that he might just keep at point guard. Billups wasn?t always known as a good defensive player. I find him winning All-Second Team on defense evident to Larry Brown?s teaching. I?m also pretty sure it was Larry Brown who stopped him from jacking up those 3?s in transition all the time. I also remember him saying to Brown I don?t try to change you, so don?t try to change me when Larry told him to stop taking them at first. Put it like this: after Brown coached Billups, he had a career high in points, FG%, 3P%, assists, and made him a much better defender, and a Finals MVP. The same thing happened to Marbury when he coached him in the Olympics. Brown can make a bad defender into a decent one at the least. </div> If you move Marbury to SG, that necessiates Nate Robinson to start at PG, which is not good. He isn't a pure PG, but is more of an off-guard trapped in a 5'9" body - which makes him most suitable to come off the bench to provide energy and a scoring punch. Marbury is a good passer, but Iverson was one too, and it didn't do him any favour to play PG under Brown. It's not so much of 'how good a passer is this guy?', it's rather 'is this guy my type of a passer?' If anyone refined Billups' game, it'd be Rick Carlisle. Not Larry Brown. Making the all-defensive second team shouldn't be taken account into separating a good defender from a bad one, because more often than not, all the league PR officials look at are the stats when determining who to put on the team. Stats don't define defense (well.. with the exception of Ben Wallace), and you should know that. Like I said, stats don't do justice when talking about a player, but Chauncey's three point attempts were hardly affected by Larry Brown. It went from 380 attempts under Carlisle to 335 and 387 under Brown, respectively. His stats did improve under Brown, but you must also take into the fact that he played more minutes than in any of his previous seasons, and considering that Rasheed Wallace joined him he should have averaged better assist numbers. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">Well it depends; what happened to Baron Davis now on the Warriors? There?s also that Shawn Marion rumor going around, too. They all have big contracts, but they also have big games as well and that can be the difference maker in the Knicks being mediocre and the Knicks being contenders.</div> What are you going to do with another shoot-first PG and another all-star SF? Even if something like that were to happen, trading Stephon Marbury for Baron Davis is hardly an improvement, if at all. And it makes no sense for the Suns to trade Shawn Marion for an expiring contract, considering that Joe Johnson is as good as gone and therefore Marion would be able to move down to his more natural position at SF. What you guys need right now are small pieces of the puzzle, not the big pieces. Having a starting lineup of 5 all-stars sure sound nice on paper, but egos clash and punches fly - as shown by the dismantled Lakers. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">Marbury is a good passer who ranks 4th in the league in assists per game. How can you say he?s wild on offense when he shoots 46% from the field and 35% from 3-point range ? his career high. He also shot a career high in FT%, too. It?s not like he?s chucking either, he only attempts 16 shots a game and gets to the line 6.6 times a game. That all adds up to pretty efficient offense. You?re also forgetting the reason why Billups scores within the flow of the game, is because of Larry Brown. Billups used to be one of the wildest guards on offense before Brown, now he?s pretty efficient on offense thanks to him. AI and Billups had some problems with Brown; let?s not forget that, either. They in fact called Marbury up and said to him: Brown is very demanding, but if you do what he says, you?ll be a better player and learn to appreciate him. </div> Those shooting percentages would look good on a 2-guard, but when it's a PG taking 16 shots a game that becomes a problem, considering that Ray Allen took 18 shots a game.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting VinKanaddy:</div><div class="quote_post">If you move Marbury to SG, that necessiates Nate Robinson to start at PG, which is not good. He isn't a pure PG, but is more of an off-guard trapped in a 5'9" body - which makes him most suitable to come off the bench to provide energy and a scoring punch. Marbury is a good passer, but Iverson was one too, and it didn't do him any favour to play PG under Brown. It's not so much of 'how good a passer is this guy?', it's rather 'is this guy my type of a passer?'</div> What about Jamal Crawford? Why can?t he play the point? Nate Robinson is fully capable of playing point guard it?s just in Washington, he was playing shooting guard for the Huskies so he has to just adjust a bit. Iverson is a good passer as well, but I don?t know if he?s on Marbury?s level in terms of passing. Marbury averages 2.3 more assists a game and has .5 less turnovers a game than him. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">If anyone refined Billups' game, it'd be Rick Carlisle. Not Larry Brown. Making the all-defensive second team shouldn't be taken account into separating a good defender from a bad one, because more often than not, all the league PR officials look at are the stats when determining who to put on the team. Stats don't define defense (well.. with the exception of Ben Wallace), and you should know that.</div> I don?t know about that. Sure Carlisle helped Billups? game, but Brown had much more positive effects and Billups even said it himself. I don?t know if they look at stats too much when determining defense. What can they look at? Steals and blocks? In steals, Billups only averaged 1.01 a game and .11 blocks a game. That doesn?t really say defense; the only way to determine a good defender is by looking at them. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Like I said, stats don't do justice when talking about a player, but Chauncey's three point attempts were hardly affected by Larry Brown. It went from 380 attempts under Carlisle to 335 and 387 under Brown, respectively. His stats did improve under Brown, but you must also take into the fact that he played more minutes than in any of his previous seasons, and considering that Rasheed Wallace joined him he should have averaged better assist numbers.</div> But the situations in which he took the three?s is why he became a better player. He took open three?s when they came to him instead of forcing up his usual contested three?s in transition. Stats don?t do justices when determining what kinds of shots they took. His minutes improved because he was simply a better player under Brown. He also did have Rasheed Wallace with him, but there isn?t any question that he became a much better passer under Brown. Besides, before Wallace came to the team in the beginning of the 03-04 season, I believe he was putting up 5+ assists per game. Not quite sure, but I think so. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">What are you going to do with another shoot-first PG and another all-star SF? Even if something like that were to happen, trading Stephon Marbury for Baron Davis is hardly an improvement, if at all. And it makes no sense for the Suns to trade Shawn Marion for an expiring contract, considering that Joe Johnson is as good as gone and therefore Marion would be able to move down to his more natural position at SF.</div> No, I didn?t mean a Marbury for Davis trade, I meant a trade with our expiring contract for a player of Davis? caliber. The Warriors gave up Dale Davis ? a 14 million dollar expiring contract for someone who improved them to 19-12 which is a major improvement considering where the Warriors were. The Marion thing is unlikely, but it?s just a rumor floating around. The point was we can nab a star with one of our expiring contracts. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">What you guys need right now are small pieces of the puzzle, not the big pieces. Having a starting lineup of 5 all-stars sure sound nice on paper, but egos clash and punches fly - as shown by the dismantled Lakers.</div> Hey, it doesn?t matter to me. I?d settle for the Finals anyday! <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Those shooting percentages would look good on a 2-guard, but when it's a PG taking 16 shots a game that becomes a problem, considering that Ray Allen took 18 shots a game.</div> 16 shot attempts per game isn?t too many at all. Also don?t forget the Knicks need Marbury to score. No one else can put up 20 points on the board consistently and no one else is as efficient in scoring especially now that Houston?s knee doesn?t seem to be holding up. In 02-03, Jason Kidd took 15.5 shot attempts per game and he?s considered the best point guard in the game.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">What about Jamal Crawford? Why can?t he play the point? Nate Robinson is fully capable of playing point guard it?s just in Washington, he was playing shooting guard for the Huskies so he has to just adjust a bit. Iverson is a good passer as well, but I don?t know if he?s on Marbury?s level in terms of passing. Marbury averages 2.3 more assists a game and has .5 less turnovers a game than him. </div> Crawford is even worse. He's way too trigger happy to play the point. Nate Robinson may be able to play point under any other coaches, but not under Larry Brown. He simply hates the idea of having an undersized guy at the point. Point guard skill isn't directly proportional to assist numbers; LeBron averaged 7.2 apg, is he a great point guard? I would think the answer would be a 'no'. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">I don?t know about that. Sure Carlisle helped Billups? game, but Brown had much more positive effects and Billups even said it himself. I don?t know if they look at stats too much when determining defense. What can they look at? Steals and blocks? In steals, Billups only averaged 1.01 a game and .11 blocks a game. That doesn?t really say defense; the only way to determine a good defender is by looking at them.</div> What do you think Detroit and Indiana have in common? They were and are both great defensive teams under Carlisle. Why do you think Pacers' defense improved so much after Carlisle replaced Isiah Thomas? Come on now, are you going to tell me that the league PR officials are going to look at every single player's game tapes to determine who to put on the roster? I don't think so. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">But the situations in which he took the three?s is why he became a better player. He took open three?s when they came to him instead of forcing up his usual contested three?s in transition. Stats don?t do justices when determining what kinds of shots they took. His minutes improved because he was simply a better player under Brown. He also did have Rasheed Wallace with him, but there isn?t any question that he became a much better passer under Brown. Besides, before Wallace came to the team in the beginning of the 03-04 season, I believe he was putting up 5+ assists per game. Not quite sure, but I think so.</div> He didn't jack up threes under Carlisle either, because there weren't that many transition opportunities to speak of when he coached the Pistons. Carlisle is strictly a half-court setup kind of a coach. I think in this case stats do some justice in determining what kind of shots Billups took, because his three point field goal percentage stayed consistent through 3 years. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">No, I didn?t mean a Marbury for Davis trade, I meant a trade with our expiring contract for a player of Davis? caliber. The Warriors gave up Dale Davis ? a 14 million dollar expiring contract for someone who improved them to 19-12 which is a major improvement considering where the Warriors were. The Marion thing is unlikely, but it?s just a rumor floating around. The point was we can nab a star with one of our expiring contracts. </div> You are going to need another team like the Hornets if you hope to get a star player with an expiring contract, especially when the expiring contracts belong to names like Tim Thomas and Penny Hardaway. You would need to give up some first round picks in the process as well. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">Hey, it doesn?t matter to me. I?d settle for the Finals anyday! </div> That was the best case scenario with names like Shaquille O'Neal, Kobe Bryant, Karl Malone and Gary Payton. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">16 shot attempts per game isn?t too many at all. Also don?t forget the Knicks need Marbury to score. No one else can put up 20 points on the board consistently and no one else is as efficient in scoring especially now that Houston?s knee doesn?t seem to be holding up. In 02-03, Jason Kidd took 15.5 shot attempts per game and he?s considered the best point guard in the game.</div> It doesn't seem like many when you look at it by itself, but when you compare it with superstar shooting guards, it's a lot. Ray Allen: 18 Attempts / Game, Manu Ginobili: 10.5 Attempts / Game, Vince Carter: 18.8 Attempts / Game, Paul Pierce: 14.9 Attempts / Game. The fact that Marbury is capable of scoring 20 ppg points to a thought that he may be better suited as a shooting guard. It's not a bad thing either, because it will essentially be like having a combo guard in Marbury and a PG in Robinson / Crawford (although they are not best suited to play PG) on the starting lineup.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting VinKanaddy:</div><div class="quote_post">Crawford is even worse. He's way too trigger happy to play the point. Nate Robinson may be able to play point under any other coaches, but not under Larry Brown. He simply hates the idea of having an undersized guy at the point. Point guard skill isn't directly proportional to assist numbers; LeBron averaged 7.2 apg, is he a great point guard? I would think the answer would be a 'no'.</div> The reason why he plays this way is because management tried to make him fill in Allan Houston. He was playing shooting guard and he?s a natural point guard so that?s why he took so many shots. The performance of the Knicks is smooth when they have Crawford running the point. James happens to be a very good playmaker and is very suited at point guard, but I see what your saying in terms of the assists numbers. However, it doesn?t apply to Marbury ? he?s always been a pretty good passer all throughout his career. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">What do you think Detroit and Indiana have in common? They were and are both great defensive teams under Carlisle. Why do you think Pacers' defense improved so much after Carlisle replaced Isiah Thomas?</div> There were not too many changes in the roster when Carlisle came, but he made them a great defensive team nonetheless which goes to show you how a great coach can make a team better no matter what kinds of players they have. Now with the Knicks, Brown can do something similar just like Carlisle did with the Pacers. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Come on now, are you going to tell me that the league PR officials are going to look at every single player's game tapes to determine who to put on the roster? I don't think so.</div> No, they can?t do that, but stats don?t determine the whole story. Bruce Bowen didn?t even average one steal but he made it to the first team. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">He didn't jack up threes under Carlisle either, because there weren't that many transition opportunities to speak of when he coached the Pistons. Carlisle is strictly a half-court setup kind of a coach. I think in this case stats do some justice in determining what kind of shots Billups took, because his three point field goal percentage stayed consistent through 3 years.</div> He did jack up plenty of ill-advised three?s, though. That is why once Brown came, he averaged a career high in 3P%. He shot .4 away from 43%. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">You are going to need another team like the Hornets if you hope to get a star player with an expiring contract, especially when the expiring contracts belong to names like Tim Thomas and Penny Hardaway. You would need to give up some first round picks in the process as well.</div> We?ll get what we can take even if it is from the Hornets. 14-16 million dollar expiring contracts are a hot commodity these days. We wouldn?t need to give up a first rounder, the contracts are good enough. Maybe a second round pick. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">That was the best case scenario with names like Shaquille O'Neal, Kobe Bryant, Karl Malone and Gary Payton. </div> Yeah, I forgot about that part. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">It doesn't seem like many when you look at it by itself, but when you compare it with superstar shooting guards, it's a lot. Ray Allen: 18 Attempts / Game, Manu Ginobili: 10.5 Attempts / Game, Vince Carter: 18.8 Attempts / Game, Paul Pierce: 14.9 Attempts / Game. The fact that Marbury is capable of scoring 20 ppg points to a thought that he may be better suited as a shooting guard. It's not a bad thing either, because it will essentially be like having a combo guard in Marbury and a PG in Robinson / Crawford (although they are not best suited to play PG) on the starting lineup.</div> Those are great scorers who for the most part, are needed by their teams to put up around 20 points a game. When Marbury had help from Houston, and Van Horn when he first came to New York, he was dishing out 9.3 assists per game and now that he?s playing under Brown and having more help he should be more passive. But it?s not a bad thing like you said to put Marbury at shooting guard, I would just rather him at point guard passing the ball.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">The reason why he plays this way is because management tried to make him fill in Allan Houston. He was playing shooting guard and he?s a natural point guard so that?s why he took so many shots. The performance of the Knicks is smooth when they have Crawford running the point. James happens to be a very good playmaker and is very suited at point guard, but I see what your saying in terms of the assists numbers. However, it doesn?t apply to Marbury ? he?s always been a pretty good passer all throughout his career.</div> Crawford isn't anything close to a natural point guard. He's always been a streaky shooter since his days in Michigan and it hasn't changed much. LeBron isn't suited to play the point, as we've all witnessed during his rookie season when he tried playing at the point trying to mimic Scottie Pippen; it wasn't pretty. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">He did jack up plenty of ill-advised three?s, though. That is why once Brown came, he averaged a career high in 3P%. He shot .4 away from 43%.</div> That is merely a 3.8% change. It isn't much to speak of, considering he had both the Wallaces and McDyess to run the pick-and-pop off of. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">We?ll get what we can take even if it is from the Hornets. 14-16 million dollar expiring contracts are a hot commodity these days. We wouldn?t need to give up a first rounder, the contracts are good enough. Maybe a second round pick.</div> From the Knicks point of view, the contracts would seem good enough. But you have to factor in that the team you would be trading with would most likely be rebuilding, and will demand that first round picks to be included in the deal. <div class="quote_poster">Quoting MrJ:</div><div class="quote_post">Those are great scorers who for the most part, are needed by their teams to put up around 20 points a game. When Marbury had help from Houston, and Van Horn when he first came to New York, he was dishing out 9.3 assists per game and now that he?s playing under Brown and having more help he should be more passive. But it?s not a bad thing like you said to put Marbury at shooting guard, I would just rather him at point guard passing the ball.</div> They are great scorers and some of them attempted even fewer number of shots than Marbury, which further supports my point that Marbury is a scorer. It is exactly what happened with Richard Hamilton. He entered the league as more of a combo guard, but his style of play proved that he was a 2-guard.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting VinKanaddy:</div><div class="quote_post">Crawford isn't anything close to a natural point guard. He's always been a streaky shooter since his days in Michigan and it hasn't changed much. LeBron isn't suited to play the point, as we've all witnessed during his rookie season when he tried playing at the point trying to mimic Scottie Pippen; it wasn't pretty.</div> He really is. The reason why he doesn?t look like it is because he was placed at shooting guard for the past two year and he isn?t one. When the Knicks play with Crawford under the point guard, the team runs much smoother. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">That is merely a 3.8% change. It isn't much to speak of, considering he had both the Wallaces and McDyess to run the pick-and-pop off of.</div> That?s almost 4% - of course it is something big. 4% in a FG% is a very big difference why would it be mere? <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">From the Knicks point of view, the contracts would seem good enough. But you have to factor in that the team you would be trading with would most likely be rebuilding, and will demand that first round picks to be included in the deal.</div> Not necessarily. The Warriors didn?t give up a first rounder in their deal. Even if the Knicks had to give up a pick, they have two next year. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">They are great scorers and some of them attempted even fewer number of shots than Marbury, which further supports my point that Marbury is a scorer. It is exactly what happened with Richard Hamilton. He entered the league as more of a combo guard, but his style of play proved that he was a 2-guard.</div> The reason why he is a scorer is because the Knicks need him to be a scorer. He is a shoot-first point guard, but he can be as much of a passer as he is a scorer if surrounded by better offensive players.
When I started this thread, I hadn't heard about Marbury's end of the year comments. I'm hoping that he lives up to his word, because he's going to need to change his game for Brown. If he is willing to change his game, then I think this can turn into a Billups situation. However, if its all just talk and we end up with same Marbury from last season, then I think his ego will stop him from changing like Billups. Billups was a desperate player looking to keep a starting job and was willing to change his game after a while. Marbury, if he isn't truthful, knows he will always be a starter and has gone so far as to question Brown's offense during the Olympics. If Marbury is put at the 2 like Iverson was, I don't think it will work out. I think SG will bring out the worst traits of his game (selfishness, shot selection), and if he is no longer responsible for distributing the ball, he won't be kept in check. Also, he will have an even harder time guarding bigger, faster, more athletic shooting guards on a regular basis. Playing Crawford at PG, IMO, is a downgrade than Marbury. If Brown can't work with Marbury at the point, then he should be traded.
