I was just looking over the FA list for 2009 and came across Stephon Marbury. He's due to be paid 19mil this year. Given our recent salary changes, we could obviously take on his salary, especially if we made a trade (say, Harrington for Marbury). I know what you're thinking: he's a selfish, overpaid, injury-prone, shoot-first player who has done nothing but bitch and moan about his situation in NY. Hey, sounds just like Baron Davis before he landed in GS! He's got similar build and skill as Baron Davis, but just a tad older. The dude is about to be cut by the Knicks, who just signed Duhon. He NEEDS a place to play. This is his contract year. This is his final chance to redeem himself and shed his reputation as a total loser. If the Warriors don't end up with Brand or Josh Smith, I think it would be a low-risk one-year experiment that would help the Warrior youngs develop, including Monta, and sell more tickets. I don't know if we'd be able to pick him up off waivers (since it's reported the Knicks are just going to cut him) or if we can trade for him. Either way, I think it could work out. Am I missing something?
Wow, I really hope not, I think we could do better for much less. Plus, if we did sign Brand or Smith, that would put us right back against the cap, wouldn't it? Assuming we resign Ellis and Biedrins.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (HiRez @ Jul 7 2008, 01:51 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Wow, I really hope not, I think we could do better for much less. Plus, if we did sign Brand or Smith, that would put us right back against the cap, wouldn't it? Assuming we resign Ellis and Biedrins.</div> This is assuming we don't sign any of the high-profiled FA's that are being named: Brand, Smith, Igoudala, Maggette... This would only be for one-year. There will be a bigger crop of FA's in 2009 that we could go after, but no PG's that seem outstanding. But, giving us one more year of competitive basketball and weighing our options afterwards rather than tanking another season to rebuild seems better to me.
BTW, for those advocating Hinrich, he has 4-years left on his contract, so signing Marbury to one-year would be less of a risk. http://hoopshype.com/salaries/chicago.htm
I don't understand why Hinrich is treated as a risk... He's a much better player than Marbury. Plus, doesn't anyone think that teams will scramble to lock up their best player that we would want? Plus, competent, quick point guards who can both shoot and defend are hard to come by. I wouldn't go with Starbury at all... He's just too weird these past few years. But he is entertaining personality. I like how he referred to his wife, "My better half, my better whole" and "better whole" came out as "better ho." When it comes to Starbury's game, I like his game. He's one of the better guards in the league. If he wants a career reboot, maybe the Warriors could be a fit. He just can't be a team distraction, though.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Custodianrules2 @ Jul 7 2008, 02:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why Hinrich is treated as a risk... He's a much better player than Marbury. Plus, doesn't anyone think that teams will scramble to lock up their best player that we would want? Plus, competent, quick point guards who can both shoot and defend are hard to come by. I wouldn't go with Starbury at all... He's just too weird these past few years. But he is entertaining personality. I like how he referred to his wife, "My better half, my better whole" and "better whole" came out as "better ho." </div> If you don't think 10mil/year for 4 years isn't a risk, then okay. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Hinrich on the Warriors. I just have this feeling that Nellie would get the best out of Marbury in his contract year for just one year.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Custodianrules2 @ Jul 7 2008, 02:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>When it comes to Starbury's game, I like his game. He's one of the better guards in the league. If he wants a career reboot, maybe the Warriors could be a fit. He just can't be a team distraction, though.</div> I totally agree. If the Warriors entertain the thought of bringing Marbury aboard, they'd best do their due diligence and make sure he is the right fit and that the rest of the team would accept him, especially Nellie. Nellie just seems so "at peace" these days that he can deal with any type of player and make them work towards a team goal.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kensaku @ Jul 7 2008, 05:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Custodianrules2 @ Jul 7 2008, 02:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why Hinrich is treated as a risk... He's a much better player than Marbury. Plus, doesn't anyone think that teams will scramble to lock up their best player that we would want? Plus, competent, quick point guards who can both shoot and defend are hard to come by. I wouldn't go with Starbury at all... He's just too weird these past few years. But he is entertaining personality. I like how he referred to his wife, "My better half, my better whole" and "better whole" came out as "better ho." </div> If you don't think 10mil/year for 4 years isn't a risk, then okay. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Hinrich on the Warriors. I just have this feeling that Nellie would get the best out of Marbury in his contract year for just one year. </div> He's not even making 10 mil a year though. It's not even a sum of 40 mil. He's only making 8 mil in his 4th year because it decreases by 500k every year then by 1 mil in the final year. That's pretty good team salary for a player with all-star upside and a more than decent base set of skills, plus <u>leadership</u> (Marbury ain't no leader). Plus, we get continuity and the defense we know that Marbury won't play. Plus Heinrich wouldn't be a risk to be distraction off the court with the Michael Vick comments or embarrassing tv moments. It'd be hard to get Heinrich considering the bulls might covet him more than Gordon.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I know what you're thinking: he's a selfish, overpaid, injury-prone, shoot-first player who has done nothing but bitch and moan about his situation in NY. Hey, sounds just like Baron Davis before he landed in GS!</div> I think the difference is that Baron proved those labels wrong when he was given that other opportunity, whereas 3 separate teams have all been screwed over by thinking that Marbury could do the same.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Custodianrules2 @ Jul 7 2008, 04:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kensaku @ Jul 7 2008, 05:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Custodianrules2 @ Jul 7 2008, 02:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand why Hinrich is treated as a risk... He's a much better player than Marbury. Plus, doesn't anyone think that teams will scramble to lock up their best player that we would want? Plus, competent, quick point guards who can both shoot and defend are hard to come by. I wouldn't go with Starbury at all... He's just too weird these past few years. But he is entertaining personality. I like how he referred to his wife, "My better half, my better whole" and "better whole" came out as "better ho." </div> If you don't think 10mil/year for 4 years isn't a risk, then okay. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Hinrich on the Warriors. I just have this feeling that Nellie would get the best out of Marbury in his contract year for just one year. </div> He's not even making 10 mil a year though. It's not even a sum of 40 mil. He's only making 8 mil in his 4th year because it decreases by 500k every year then by 1 mil in the final year. That's pretty good team salary for a player with all-star upside and a more than decent base set of skills, plus <u>leadership</u> (Marbury ain't no leader). Plus, we get continuity and the defense we know that Marbury won't play. Plus Heinrich wouldn't be a risk to be distraction off the court with the Michael Vick comments or embarrassing tv moments. It'd be hard to get Heinrich considering the bulls might covet him more than Gordon. </div> Come on, close enough!!! $10,000,000 $9,500,000 $9,000,000 $8,000,000 Like I said, I'd be happy if we land Hinrich (HINRICH, with an I no E). I was purely entertaining the thought of other PG possibilities. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Jul 7 2008, 04:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I know what you're thinking: he's a selfish, overpaid, injury-prone, shoot-first player who has done nothing but bitch and moan about his situation in NY. Hey, sounds just like Baron Davis before he landed in GS!</div> I think the difference is that Baron proved those labels wrong when he was given that other opportunity, whereas 3 separate teams have all been screwed over by thinking that Marbury could do the same. </div> Good point. I'm not saying their situations are exact, but similar enough where he could potentially shed those labels under Nellie.
He doesn't necessarily make his teammates better like a Paul, Williams, or a Kidd, but he's a serviceable PG that can find the open man. I thought he got a little too much criticism because of his contract. It was more Isiah Thomas' fault for not assembling a team that meshed. As for his game, I never understood why he was called selfish. Most of the players that called him selfish were not good. How is Marbury supposed to give Curry the ball when he fails to establish good positioning? He never shot over 16 shots per game during his entire Knick tenure but people say he shoots to much. Tim Thomas was also vocal about Marbury being selfish, but he was terrible. Basically, Marbury was supposed to make career underachievers better and was criticized when he couldn't. If you can get Marbury for a cheap price, I don't see why not. If it doesn't work out you can always get rid of him. He will be a no-risk, high-reward opportunity.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kensaku)</div><div class='quotemain'>Good point. I'm not saying their situations are exact, but similar enough where he could potentially shed those labels under Nellie.</div> Nellie certainly deserves that kind of trust, given what he's done with this team so far. But I think extending that to Marbury may be overrating how much one man can do. Stephon's always been a huge wild card that I never thought was worth taking a risk on, but what makes me more skeptical nowadays, is that he seems more irrational and oblivious to it all than he ever has before. Usually you expect a player to mature in some capacity as they continue along their career, but Marbury's moved in exactly the opposite direction. And the worst-case scenario would be especially terrible for a young, developing team like the Warriors.
Its an interesting situation, I could see us acquiring him in two scenarios that go as follows; 1) IF we get Brand: Hypothetically speaking, if Brand does come up to play by the bay we'd have a hole at PG. FA options aren't very promising and having Monta at point while we're trying to win probably isn't the best idea. In this scenario I would be interested in taking on Marbury after hes been cut/bought out as long as he came on a one year deal. Hes been a complete nutcase the last few years but I think we've got the leadership to keep him in line with Nellie, Brand, Jack, and maybe some Croshere-esque end of the bench veterans. although hes fallen off quite a bit his talent is still undeniable. Also I agree with Kensaku that Nellie could make him pretty damn servicable here. Hes going to want to prove he can keep his head on straight and he can play on a winner, play the way a coach wants him to. He'd be a pass-first PG here if he bought into Nellie's scheme, he'd be the 4th option behind Brand, Monta, Jack and ideally this would vastly improve his assist numbers and FG%. Lets say he does come here, he starts and averages 13 pts, 8 assists on 45% FGs. IMO that's certainly still within his capabilities and putting up those numbers alongside Brand, Monta, Jack, Beans would make for a damn good starting 5 from top to bottom. As I mentioned before, attitude and off-the-court issues are a risk but if hes on a one year deal we can cut him without even thinking about it. No way Nellie, Brand, and Jack let him get away with any BS in the locker room. Plus, like I said earlier, no ones going to offer him more than one year. Hes going to want to prove hes not a complete fugg up, can be on a winning team, can get along with teammates and coaches, and can carry himself properly. What better scenario than a W's team thats set at every position but PG, has a great coach, is a winning team and figures to be a winner again in 08 (mind you this is assuming we get Brand)? Mullin seems to have a fascination with players with troubled pasts, he likes to give guys second chances, he loves New Yorkers. I think it would be a low risk-high potential signing here. Worst case scenario we cut him. Best case hes a very cheap legit starting PG and a poor man's Baron that helps this team win. 2) If we don't get Brand: NY is desperate to get him off the team, they'd prefer to get rid of his monster contract all at once than to cut him or waive him. If we don't get Brand, we'll be a rebuilding team with a ton of cap room. I wouldn't mind trading with NY in a deal in which we take Marbs' contract and one of their young prospects (Lee? Balkman? Robinson?). Maybe we can even pawn Harrington off to them as well? Then we tell Marbury to stay home, we have a GIGANTIC expiring contract to give to a team in a trade, and we're one young prospect richer.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Jul 7 2008, 07:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I know what you're thinking: he's a selfish, overpaid, injury-prone, shoot-first player who has done nothing but bitch and moan about his situation in NY. Hey, sounds just like Baron Davis before he landed in GS!</div> I think the difference is that Baron proved those labels wrong when he was given that other opportunity, whereas 3 separate teams have all been screwed over by thinking that Marbury could do the same. </div> I disagree. At least in the Knicks situation, I blame Isiah Thomas 100% for the Knicks struggles since he built the team. Remember, the Knicks were meshing well and were actually making some noise in the east. Then, Isiah Thomas traded for Tim Thomas, Crawford, Curry, Randolph, signed Jerome James, etc. not to mention the Knicks have had five coaches coaching Marbury. The whole team was a mess. He also played well with the Suns. He took them to the playoffs and they had a good series against the Spurs, who went on to win it all. The Suns weren't exactly screwed. In fact, after the series they went on and gave Marbury that huge extension he's still signed to. After that they decided to change the direction and shed salary. You can make an argument for the Nets being screwed, though I would say their team was also bad and often injured. I'm not making excuses for Marbury. I think his mouth is the issue many fans/media point to. He might not be the PG that Kidd, Nash, etc. are but he will be more than serviceable for the Warriors at a low price.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Run BJM @ Jul 7 2008, 04:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Its an interesting situation, I could see us acquiring him in two scenarios that go as follows; 1) IF we get Brand: Hypothetically speaking, if Brand does come up to play by the bay we'd have a hole at PG. FA options aren't very promising and having Monta at point while we're trying to win probably isn't the best idea. In this scenario I would be interested in taking on Marbury after hes been cut/bought out as long as he came on a one year deal. Hes been a complete nutcase the last few years but I think we've got the leadership to keep him in line with Nellie, Brand, Jack, and maybe some Croshere-esque end of the bench veterans. although hes fallen off quite a bit his talent is still undeniable. Also I agree with Kensaku that Nellie could make him pretty damn servicable here. Hes going to want to prove he can keep his head on straight and he can play on a winner, play the way a coach wants him to. He'd be a pass-first PG here if he bought into Nellie's scheme, he'd be the 4th option behind Brand, Monta, Jack and ideally this would vastly improve his assist numbers and FG%. Lets say he does come here, he starts and averages 13 pts, 8 assists on 45% FGs. IMO that's certainly still within his capabilities and putting up those numbers alongside Brand, Monta, Jack, Beans would make for a damn good starting 5 from top to bottom. As I mentioned before, attitude and off-the-court issues are a risk but if hes on a one year deal we can cut him without even thinking about it. No way Nellie, Brand, and Jack let him get away with any BS in the locker room. Plus, like I said earlier, no ones going to offer him more than one year. Hes going to want to prove hes not a complete fugg up, can be on a winning team, can get along with teammates and coaches, and can carry himself properly. What better scenario than a W's team thats set at every position but PG, has a great coach, is a winning team and figures to be a winner again in 08 (mind you this is assuming we get Brand)? Mullin seems to have a fascination with players with troubled pasts, he likes to give guys second chances, he loves New Yorkers. I think it would be a low risk-high potential signing here. Worst case scenario we cut him. Best case hes a very cheap legit starting PG and a poor man's Baron that helps this team win. 2) If we don't get Brand: NY is desperate to get him off the team, they'd prefer to get rid of his monster contract all at once than to cut him or waive him. If we don't get Brand, we'll be a rebuilding team with a ton of cap room. I wouldn't mind trading with NY in a deal in which we take Marbs' contract and one of their young prospects (Lee? Balkman? Robinson?). Maybe we can even pawn Harrington off to them as well? Then we tell Marbury to stay home, we have a GIGANTIC expiring contract to give to a team in a trade, and we're one young prospect richer.</div> Great follow-up post, Run. I guess the argument here would be, if we could land Hinrich, would the Warriors be better off in both the immediate and long-term future than if we landed Marbury? I think if we are unable to land Hinrich or Marbury, the next viable option would be to go after Raymond Felton. If none of the above pans out, which is just as likely as the Warriors landing Brand, I guess we have no choice but to try Monta at PG. <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Mr. J @ Jul 7 2008, 04:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Jul 7 2008, 07:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I know what you're thinking: he's a selfish, overpaid, injury-prone, shoot-first player who has done nothing but bitch and moan about his situation in NY. Hey, sounds just like Baron Davis before he landed in GS!</div> I think the difference is that Baron proved those labels wrong when he was given that other opportunity, whereas 3 separate teams have all been screwed over by thinking that Marbury could do the same. </div> I disagree. At least in the Knicks situation, I blame Isiah Thomas 100% for the Knicks struggles since he built the team. Remember, the Knicks were meshing well and were actually making some noise in the east. Then, Isiah Thomas traded for Tim Thomas, Crawford, Curry, Randolph, signed Jerome James, etc. not to mention the Knicks have had five coaches coaching Marbury. The whole team was a mess. He also played well with the Suns. He took them to the playoffs and they had a good series against the Spurs, who went on to win it all. The Suns weren't exactly screwed. In fact, after the series they went on and gave Marbury that huge extension he's still signed to. After that they decided to change the direction and shed salary. You can make an argument for the Nets being screwed, though I would say their team was also bad and often injured. I'm not making excuses for Marbury. I think his mouth is the issue many fans/media point to. He might not be the PG that Kidd, Nash, etc. are but he will be more than serviceable for the Warriors at a low price. </div> Yeah, Stephon has been in some unfavorable situations. Given his proven talent level, I think he deserves at least one more chance to be put in the right situation, regardless of his reputation and how much he's being paid.
Please watch one of these two videos: Marbury Interview [video=youtube;zWxgbyYrT5A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWxgbyYrT5A[/video] Commentary on the Marbury Interview: [video=youtube;h_1P0WdOOiQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_1P0WdOOiQ[/video] Both are a good source of laughs.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jason voorhees @ Jul 8 2008, 04:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AlleyOop @ Jul 7 2008, 08:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Please watch one of these two videos: Marbury Interview [video=youtube;zWxgbyYrT5A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWxgbyYrT5A[/video] Commentary on the Marbury Interview: [video=youtube;h_1P0WdOOiQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_1P0WdOOiQ[/video] Both are a good source of laughs.</div> LOL. In the interview, I was wondering what Starbury was high on and then started laughing louder when I stopped understanding what he was saying. I said this is one of those situations when we need a translator to figure out what a black person is saying and sure enough they got a translator in the commentary. But Starbury fooled them all when even the translator couldn't figure out what he was saying. W's need to pass on Marbury at any price if he's like that all the time. </div> Nah, they don't need a translator to figure out what a black person is saying, they need a translator to figure out just what Starbury is saying. Dude doesn't make any sense to nobody black or white or anyone in between. He needs the Marbury-speak version of Colin Pine. P.S. If that dude ain't on drugs or alcohol, he must've been getting like zero sleep before doing that show. He's probably not in his prime anymore, but the guy is a smart basketball player and he's fast and strong. He's better than your average combo guard when it comes to playmaking. Is he clutch? Well, not anymore. He just needs to create offense and do his best to draw double teams.
No on Starbury. He's got an inflated sense of himself; always has. He was the one who demanded out of Minny with KG, he was disgruntled in Jersey, Phx, and NY. He's got a sense of entitlement that the Warriors simply do not need. He's a team killer. Its not that far from everyday life, how many times you see someone who is clearly the best but is not a team player, do the teammates want to play with him? Do they play hard? Or do they play half hearted? That is who Marbury is, that guy.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (philsmith75 @ Jul 8 2008, 11:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No on Starbury. He's got an inflated sense of himself; always has. He was the one who demanded out of Minny with KG, he was disgruntled in Jersey, Phx, and NY. He's got a sense of entitlement that the Warriors simply do not need. He's a team killer. Its not that far from everyday life, how many times you see someone who is clearly the best but is not a team player, do the teammates want to play with him? Do they play hard? Or do they play half hearted? That is who Marbury is, that guy.</div> Right, but you guys are missing the point. Despite of all of his transgressions, look where he is at this point of his life/career. He's 31, in the final year of his contract, yet the Knicks are considering just waiving him and paying 19mil for nothing. It's a real desperate situation for him. I mean, if he's THAT stupid to not try to work with other people, then yeah, I don't think it would work. But he's human and perhaps misunderstood...just like Stephan Jackson was misunderstood. A guy of that skill level deserves a chance to redeem himself, whatever team it may be. My point is not dismissing his flaws as a player and a person, but given his current situation, this is a perfect time for him to shed all those labels and become a new player. Ambitious? Yes. Plausible? I wouldn't be posting this if I didn't think so.
See this: http://www.nypost.com/seven/07082008/sport...oint_118998.htm <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Despite reports of his impending doom, an unfazed Stephon Marbury Stephon Marbury said he will not change plans and is heading to Las Vegas Friday to work out with Knicks New York Knicks veterans at a voluntary minicamp coinciding with summer league. New hire Chris Duhon and Marbury's potential point-guard successor is also expected to work out with Marbury in Vegas, where the Knicks summer-league team will hold its first practice Friday night. Can you say awkward? Marbury was in the Bahamas vacationing with his family on July 4 when Duhon agreed to terms with the Knicks on a two-year contract, after which his agent, Kevin Bradbury, labeled Duhon the Knicks starting point guard. Knicks: MORE: Knicks Blog That further fueled speculation Marbury's Knicks' career was over. "We will see how everything plays out in time," Marbury wrote in an e-mail to The Post yesterday from Los Angeles, where he is training in the Hollywood Hills. A source aware of Marbury's status claims a decision won't be made on his future until August, at the earliest, after Knicks president Donnie Walsh plays the trade market. The Knicks want to see what more they can do before deciding whether to waive Marbury. Walsh also wants to evaluate disappointing second-year point guard Mardy Collins Mardy Collins and combo guard Nate Robinson during summer league. Walsh told a confidant last week he wants Duhon to push Marbury in training camp. But Walsh, a lawyer, has made misleading statements before during his brief Knicks reign. "It's premature," one source said of Marbury's release. "That hasn't been decided. There are other things that can happen." Despite the company line of evaluating the roster in August, this doesn't reek of a basketball decision. Marbury is better than any PG the Knicks have, but it seems the team wants Marbury back only as a last resort. Marbury will perhaps become the scapegoat for last year's sexual harassment defeat, or his exit could become a symbol of next season's "fresh start." Despite attempts, it's unlikely Marbury can be traded because they'd have to take back $21 million of contracts that expire before 2010. Jamal Crawford, being shopped because his contract goes into 2010, could be traded, creating a stronger need for Marbury, whom Mike D'Antoni hasn't discounted playing alongside Duhon. His friends say Marbury isn't worried about future employment if released. The Celtics would be on his radar, considering they need point-guard help and former teammate Kevin Garnett respects his game more than anyone. But on another level Marbury would be devastated at not getting a chance to reverse a tragic 2007-08 season where he played in just 24 games. Marbury lost his father, Donald, and lost his father figure, Isiah Thomas, in a feud that started in November, and his health, succumbing to another ankle surgery. The Post reported last month Thomas sent Marbury home from Phoenix to be bought out of his contract. Sources believe Thomas turned on Marbury, irate at his overly blunt testimony during the trial regarding his affair with a club intern.</div>
