Seems silly to pay the gu $22mil and not play him. Doesn't seem like a smart move to me. I can't imagine Steph is overly happy about this either. Personally, I don't really like this treatment of him. While I've never been a huge Marbury fan, I find no reason to keep him around if he's not going to play. If you're going to make him sit and rot, trade him or waive him and give him a chance to play elsewhere. What they're doing isn't right, nor is it justifiable. I don't care how much of a headcase or moron the guy is, he can still help a team that might be a solid PG away from the playoffs (or what have you), so to keep him on your team when you have no plans on playing him is just stupid. Beyond that, it's an absolute waste of money. The only good reason I can come up with for them holding onto him is to have his $22mil come off the books at the end of the year.
I disagree with that. He has zero chance of being back next year for NY. Why take away time from the younger players who will be there in the long run? Sure you will lose a few more but you will set you up better for the draft and the current players development.
Well, if the point is to win, wouldn't you want your best players out on the court? While Marbs isn't their best player, he is certainly better than Duhon. Hell, why not at least get something for him then, if you're just going to sit him. I'm sure someone would be interested in a $22mil expiring contract.
All they could possibly want is young talent. You don't trade young talent for expirings, unless you're giving back bad contracts. I don't think the Knicks want to go through that again.
No, I'm pretty sure the Knicks want to win now, especially with our draft pick being unprotected next year.
I thought Marbury was doing well off the bench during the preseason. I figured he be on his best behavior and D'Antoni would give him a role to succeed to build up his interest and then pull off a deal before the deadline.
