http://www.realgm.com/src_fromtherafters/8..._off_the_bench/ Its an interesting article. It can be a possibility. Marbury hasnt created much shots and may be our starting SG.
First off, this is the most harebrained arguement I've heard in Marbury's defense in some time. Harebrained for many reasons, but I'll list a few. First of all, the resentment Marbury would feel for having his career called "on the brink," and that being a motivating factor for being banished would be reason enough for him to demand a deal. Secondly, if you read the article, you hear a couple things that don't make any sense. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">This will be LB’s biggest challenge of his career on purely a setting the line-up and rotations level. </div> Just plain stupid. How can you say that after his days in Denver and Carolina? Look at his first season as a coach and look how many of those players you can say should start for any team, nevermind a professional one. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Starting Jamal Crawford in his stead will give real responsibility to a talented player that could use it and would surely cherish it. The bode of confidence would spark his play that needs a spark as he has become the lost man during the initial LB days.</div> Fair enough, Crawford is talented. But to base a move that risks alienating an entire group of fans on intangibles is just plain dull. If Crawford were playing his head off and making Marbury look downright bad, go for it. But since he's not, and has no real experience orchestrating an offense, that's stupid. <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The most important reason to bring Marbury off the bench is that it would make him a Ben Gordon super-sub and resuscitate his career from the brink With the deal Marbury option not an option, bringing him off the bench for Quentin Richardson would let him play the off-guard against a tired first unit and part of the second unit. His shooting percentage would undoubtedly increase and his overall feel for the game would come back. </div> The could be said of most offensive-minded starters in the NBA, and I don't see them springing to make this a reality. Say you decide to play Shaquille O'Neal off the bench for a while, until his FG% comes back up. Would this be any different? Not only that, but it's also harebrained in that coaches game plan in the NBA. I know that sounds crazy, but don't you think coaches would ready themselves for a scheme such as that. Seems to me they would unless they actively wanted to lose. Sounds kind of silly doesn't it? <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">His minutes per game wouldn’t decrease whatsoever and he would still be finishing games for the Knicks. It could become the equivalent of when Dennis Eckersley was converted into a closer after he became a totally useless starter, a shadow of his former self. The change in role, the change in mental outlook could be just what Marbury needs.</div> Once again, risking ticket sales for an idea that has utterly no guarantee of anything? Dumb. Risking them for an idea that is based solely on the mental outlook of a nutcase? Even dumber. This is what this writer referred to this idea as: <div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">the one bold move that would get the Knicks an Atlantic Crown</div> Or the one bold move that not only gets a star player traded, but scares away fans (and thusly money), and puts your team in further financial trouble for no discernable reason. As for the Atlantic Crown, I hate to say it, but it's not coming to New York this year. The defense still needs to be addressed, or did this moron just forget that? This move has no bearing on the defense, and as a result, it's half-cocked to begin with. RealGM is such a mockery of a publication, I don't know why people even bother. Looks like they hired some bum off the street to write this article. Perhaps this Reina fella is a national writer trying to stir things up. Perhaps he's just plain dumb. Either way, keep your opinions to yourself. (And yes, I should take my own advice.)
When the Knicks hired Larry Brown, I pictured Marbury having a similar role to Rip Hamilton in Detroit. I figured he'd run around picks all game long and pop the 10-12 footers. The Knicks have the bulk now to set screens to clear players out. Curry can smoother a player, possibly two with his size.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">When the Knicks hired Larry Brown, I pictured Marbury having a similar role to Rip Hamilton in Detroit. I figured he'd run around picks all game long and pop the 10-12 footers. The Knicks have the bulk now to set screens to clear players out. Curry can smoother a player, possibly two with his size.</div> Marbury doesn't have the mid range game to be utilized that way in that system.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting STCBBall3:</div><div class="quote_post">Marbury doesn't have the mid range game to be utilized that way in that system.</div> Sure he does, I just don't think he has the discipline or stamina to make it work. Which is why LB hasn't used him there.
Im not a fan of Marbury at all but I think he is too good to be put on the bench. If Crawford not coming off the bench, there is no way he should. Like someone said before, Im sure if he has to come off the bench, he will be pissed and would want to be traded and I doubt thats what Isiah Thomas or Larry Brown want.
This is stupid like Artest coming off the bench. Marbury is the leader off the team and in now way will he be coming off the bench. Its preposterous to even think about it. How can Crawford play PG when he's averaging close to 3 TO's a game and hasnt play pg for two years? Realgm.com is stupid. They just have the news first.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting GotSkillz92:</div><div class="quote_post">Realgm.com is stupid. They just have the news first.</div> That's because they make it up.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting shapecity:</div><div class="quote_post">Sure he does, I just don't think he has the discipline or stamina to make it work. Which is why LB hasn't used him there.</div> Sure he does? I wouldn't really say that, but its your opinion. His mid range jumper is average, while Rip has one of the top, if not the best, mid range game in the league. Ditto on his stam.discipline. System wouldn't work with Marbury. Marbury needs to dominate the ball. He would not be satisfied playing off the ball, off of screens.
Well it looks like all the trade talk and bench talk got Marbury's attention. I'm just going by the boxscore, but he's having an efficient game. 8/14 from the field, 3 assists, and 0 turnovers.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Say you decide to play Shaquille O'Neal off the bench for a while, until his FG% comes back up. Would this be any different? </div> I can't beleive...you just compared Marbury and Shaq. I for one, HATE shaq, so I'm not coming to his defense, but comparing to players that play completey opposite positions is pointless. The fact that the PG you mentioned was stephon marbury makes the rest of your argument completely pointless. Had you mentioned Jkidd, Nash, hell- even John Stockton (kid doesn't even play anymore) that would've been some-what, kinda acceptable....wow..
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting ilive4ball:</div><div class="quote_post">I can't beleive...you just compared Marbury and Shaq. I for one, HATE shaq, so I'm not coming to his defense, but comparing to players that play completey opposite positions is pointless. The fact that the PG you mentioned was stephon marbury makes the rest of your argument completely pointless. Had you mentioned Jkidd, Nash, hell- even John Stockton (kid doesn't even play anymore) that would've been some-what, kinda acceptable....wow..</div> Actually it does have a point. Those 2 players are the captains of their teams and the leaders of the team. They mean so much to the team that they should be playing 30+ minutes every game. It makes no sense to bench shaq as it does to bench Starbury.
<div class="quote_poster">Quoting ilive4ball:</div><div class="quote_post">I can't beleive...you just compared Marbury and Shaq. I for one, HATE shaq, so I'm not coming to his defense, but comparing to players that play completey opposite positions is pointless. The fact that the PG you mentioned was stephon marbury makes the rest of your argument completely pointless. Had you mentioned Jkidd, Nash, hell- even John Stockton (kid doesn't even play anymore) that would've been some-what, kinda acceptable....wow..</div> My point had nothing to do with positions or even actual comparison. The writer of the article claimed that bringing Marbury off the bench would be good because he would be playing against a tired first unit or a subpar second unit. My point was that if you did that with any good offensive player, it would be the same result. Shaq is a good offensive player, and a regular starter, those are the only two factors I was taking into account. My other point was that it wouldn't work because coaches game plan for ridiculous schemes such as that. If Larry Brown was going to bring Marbury off the bench to play him against a bad second unit, starting point guards would be benched temporarily prior to his arrival, so that they may defend him on fresh legs. Coaches aren't blind, and they have a tendency to adjust to other teams. I wasn't actually comparing Shaq to Marbury, and I dont' care who you hate or not, it doesn't even enter into the conversation. Read the article next time.
