<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kensaku @ Jul 8 2008, 05:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><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. </div> I admire your faith in humans but you've picked the wrong person for redemption. SJax is totally different; that guy was a starter with the Spurs and won a ring and to this day Duncan calls him "the best teammate". See, if Starbury gave any signs of seeking redemption, maybe, but nothing. Yeah it is a perfect time for redemption but its just more of the same to me.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (philsmith75 @ Jul 8 2008, 04:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kensaku @ Jul 8 2008, 05:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><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. </div> I admire your faith in humans but you've picked the wrong person for redemption. SJax is totally different; that guy was a starter with the Spurs and won a ring and to this day Duncan calls him "the best teammate". See, if Starbury gave any signs of seeking redemption, maybe, but nothing. Yeah it is a perfect time for redemption but its just more of the same to me. </div> Hey, I don't doubt what you're saying. And I doubt the Warriors would pursue Marbury, but you never know.
Not that fans care much about Cohan's pocket, but if you are Cohan, why would you pay $19 mils to gamble on somebody, who has been broken down for last few years? Marbury may be good in different situation, but it's simply too costly. I would rather gamble on Francis, who should not cost more than minimum...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kwan1031 @ Jul 8 2008, 07:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Not that fans care much about Cohan's pocket, but if you are Cohan, why would you pay $19 mils to gamble on somebody, who has been broken down for last few years? Marbury may be good in different situation, but it's simply too costly. I would rather gamble on Francis, who should not cost more than minimum...</div> Because it's one-year and he took a gamble on Baron Davis when he was injured and broken down. Steve Francis? Not that Marbury is an excellent distributor but Steve Francis' career assist average is 6 apg while Marbury is 7.8
When we traded Davis, he was younger, and much better player than Marbury right now. Also, if Davis regained his former form, he could be a gold mine for us (which he did). In contrast, Marbury is 31 years old, and even in the best scenario, we are looking at a decent PG, who will not lead this team to anywhere. Also, throughout his 12 years career/4 teams, he couldn't advance his team to PO once. I don't think he is a good fit for a young team. I just brought Francis' name for one of 'has been' PGs like Knight, Livingstone and ect. I would rather spend $ on number of those 'has been' PGs for bargain price than spend $19 mils on Marbury...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kwan1031 @ Jul 8 2008, 07:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>When we traded Davis, he was younger, and much better player than Marbury right now. Also, if Davis regained his former form, he could be a gold mine for us (which he did). In contrast, Marbury is 31 years old, and even in the best scenario, we are looking at a decent PG, who will not lead this team to anywhere. Also, throughout his 12 years career/4 teams, he couldn't advance his team to PO once. I don't think he is a good fit for a young team. I just brought Francis' name for one of 'has been' PGs like Knight, Livingstone and ect. I would rather spend $ on number of those 'has been' PGs for bargain price than spend $19 mils on Marbury...</div> I understand, but you're missing my point. I think at 31, he could still produce better than a lot of PG's in the league due to his circumstance. That's all. Yes, it's a total prediction on my part and I wouldn't count on it. Most of you are missing the point. I'm talking about a player who could POTENTIALLY turn his career around because he has a lot to lose and a lot to prove. Just a thought.
You're beating a dead horse. If the Knicks buyout Marbury's massive and ridiculous contract, then the Warriors have a chance to sign him to a minimum contract. At this point (no pun intended), what is the risk? It's clear that our PG position SUCKS. I'm reading comments on other boards that people want Baron Davis to be traded back to the Warriors. What is the risk of signing Marbury to a small, one-year deal? If you take a glass is half full approach, you can say that Marbury is hungry to prove himself (for a bigger, long-term contract) and may flourish in Nellie's free flowing system. Tell me again, what is the risk? If he acts up, we cut him, plain and simple. Again, what is the risk when every PG we have is a borderline backup on a good team.
At a minimum contract, I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea. It gives Monta a year to get his legs under him again, and you can split the 1 3 ways between Marbury, CJ, and Monta. I don't like either of the other 2 youngsters.
I doubt that would happen given how much he has to lose. I think his reputation is much worse than it really should be. A lot of NBA players do exactly what Marbury has done (negative things) but the only difference is Marbury makes a ton more money. Take that factor away and you've got a low-risk solution at PG, who has the potential to make his teammates better, unlike Watson and Nelson (haven't seen enough of M. Williams and don't think we really will). That's my take and I'm standing by it.
