At some point, Steph has to want to p...

At some point, Steph has to want to play, right?

There are 28 comments on the Newsday story from Nov 15, 2008, titled At some point, Steph has to want to play, right?. In it, Newsday reports that:

The only way Stephon Marbury could get further down the bench is if Mike D'Antoni points to the end of it and yells, "Jerome!" There was Marbury on Friday night, nattily clad and seated next to another symbol ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
bones

Newark, NJ

#21 Nov 16, 2008
keep mudabary on the bench. punish him for the trouble he has caused. he is a LOSER
Hebrew Hammer

United States

#22 Nov 16, 2008
I have always been a huge fan of Starbury's talent. His ability to score at will from anywhere on the floor makes him an invaluable asset on the And1 Mixtape Tour in any city in any country of the world. He's bonafide nice. I've never been a fan of his lack of ability to run an NBA team, any NBA team. His distinction as a point guard is misrepresented as it relates to the overall success of the teams he's played for. As the floor general, you run the offense, checking for everyone else's scoring options before your own. The point guard traditionally has been known to be the best on-the-ball defender on the court. Unselfish play and good decision making in transition is the epitome of a point to me. Starbury puts the ball in the bucket. Consistently. That's never been up for debate. It's not unusual for a 1 to be the teams biggest offensive threat. Iverson is probably the league's best and well known scoring point but the difference between the two of them is a willingness to adjust. Iverson spent his first several years in Philly as their only option, focused on scoring, not distributing. When that didn't work, he switched to a 2 and was in a better position to take the majority of the team's shots each night. As his career progressed without that taste of the ultimate success, he went to Denver, set ego aside, cut his shots and took a role as one of many weapons on a good team in need of a crucial missing piece. With knowledge comes wisdom. Starbury is as offensively gifted as he was at The Rucker and then at Georgia Tech, nothing's changed. That's the problem. Nothing has changed. He's still lackadaisical on defense, doesn't get his teammates involved, and takes all the shots. He's a hindrance and not a help in the locker room and has never been able to wrap his head around the concept of "team". I got love for ya' Starbury, I respect the hustle. When this is all over with, analyze the way it all went down and ask yourself if, throughout the course of your career, you could have done things differently.
KevG

East Setauket, NY

#23 Nov 16, 2008
Hey its all on the Knicks, by not playing Steph or buying him out the Kincks are looking like a joke. He is by far the best player on the team, and in this system he was book back at all-star level. If they didn't want him on the team he SHOULD have been gone before the start of the season...so i GOTTA blame the Knicks for all whats going on. By not playing Steph is smart because he is STILL getting his money. He came into camp in shape which was another smart move on his part, and he is NOT saying the wrong thing in the media. Now other teams are just waiting for the Knicks to let him go so that they can pick him up, but they are NOT going to help the Knicks by making a trade.lol Also free agents are looking at this and seeing how they are treating Steph which is NOT a good look on them. They just might 2nd guess playing for this org. So with that said, Steph KEEP getting your money and wait for the Knicks to give-in. EITHER PAY HIM, OR PLAY HIM.
NYStateOfMind

Ridgewood, NY

#24 Nov 16, 2008
Hebrew Hammer wrote:
I have always been a huge fan of Starbury's talent. His ability to score at will from anywhere on the floor makes him an invaluable asset on the And1 Mixtape Tour in any city in any country of the world. He's bonafide nice. I've never been a fan of his lack of ability to run an NBA team, any NBA team. His distinction as a point guard is misrepresented as it relates to the overall success of the teams he's played for. As the floor general, you run the offense, checking for everyone else's scoring options before your own. The point guard traditionally has been known to be the best on-the-ball defender on the court. Unselfish play and good decision making in transition is the epitome of a point to me. Starbury puts the ball in the bucket. Consistently. That's never been up for debate. It's not unusual for a 1 to be the teams biggest offensive threat. Iverson is probably the league's best and well known scoring point but the difference between the two of them is a willingness to adjust. Iverson spent his first several years in Philly as their only option, focused on scoring, not distributing. When that didn't work, he switched to a 2 and was in a better position to take the majority of the team's shots each night. As his career progressed without that taste of the ultimate success, he went to Denver, set ego aside, cut his shots and took a role as one of many weapons on a good team in need of a crucial missing piece. With knowledge comes wisdom. Starbury is as offensively gifted as he was at The Rucker and then at Georgia Tech, nothing's changed. That's the problem. Nothing has changed. He's still lackadaisical on defense, doesn't get his teammates involved, and takes all the shots. He's a hindrance and not a help in the locker room and has never been able to wrap his head around the concept of "team". I got love for ya' Starbury, I respect the hustle. When this is all over with, analyze the way it all went down and ask yourself if, throughout the course of your career, you could have done things differently.
There's a distinct difference between AI and Steph:quickness. If Steph had AI's quickness, they would be mentioned in the same breath. AI can get his shot ANYTIME HE WANTS. Steph, with all his skills, doesn't shoot off the dibble as well as AI...

Steph could've OWNED this city. If only he could've realized this early on...
Money for nothing

Trenton, NJ

#25 Nov 16, 2008
I must be missing something. He's making 21 million dollars for doing nothing and he's only 31 years old. Even if he doesn't play ever again that's more then most people will ever make. And if the Knicks release him next year and no one in the NBA wants him I'm sure someone in Europe will pay him millions (and he stated previously he's willing to go). Life isn't great for Steph, but it's far from horrible.
MrRight

Tampa, FL

#26 Nov 17, 2008
Frankly he has a contract. If I were Stephan I would line up a deal with a Men's Clothier and showcase new duds every game. If the Knicks are done with him, either pay him what is owed and trade him or watch the fashion show every game. When the Knicks come to their senses, Stephan will probably wind up in Europe making bigger bucks.
NYY

Since: Sep 07

Location hidden

#27 Nov 17, 2008
MrRight wrote:
Frankly he has a contract. If I were Stephan I would line up a deal with a Men's Clothier and showcase new duds every game. If the Knicks are done with him, either pay him what is owed and trade him or watch the fashion show every game. When the Knicks come to their senses, Stephan will probably wind up in Europe making bigger bucks.
Not a Marbury fan at all but this is a good post.
knicks blow

Frederick, MD

#28 Nov 17, 2008
hey knicksfan231 you dumb idiot...i hope you mike d'antoni and those shitty ass crusty knicks burn all in hell this year...your team sucks and so do you. you start talking about last year being 3-27 against the west?! lmfao....ok...now go research exactly how many of those games where they went 3-27 that marbury played in you freakin BUM....and are they really 3-1 vs the west....i think 3-2...once again you are wrong...they couldnt even beat the spurs without tony parker or ginobli.....they couldnt even beat the MAVs, they beat the JAZZ without deron williams....big whoopie....then who else have they beat? the THUNDER?WIZARDS?GRIZZLIES?LMAO ...should i go on?i mean you even lost to the BUCKS!!! haha....6-4 but a crappy ass 6-4....forgot you beat the HEAT....i still dont think ive mentioned a team you beat that is GOOD....pathetic...good luck when you have to play boston....cleveland...chicago. ...toronto...philly....
detroit....orlando...atlanta.. .houston...new orleans...lakers....suns....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jerome James Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Knicks on the 'pay no mind' list (Feb '08) Mar '12 terrome porter 21
News Isaiah Rider (Apr '10) Apr '10 BD Gopherfan 1
News Is Morris the real deal? - AM New York (Mar '07) Jan '10 glen wildeforde 3
News Phoenix Suns: Amare, Nash, Shaq And The Draft (Jun '09) Jun '09 col 3
News Knicks' new guys could face Raptors (Feb '09) Feb '09 Tiffany 12
News Chicago Bulls trade Larry Hughes to Knicks for ... (Feb '09) Feb '09 Jeebs 223
News Knicks turn down Nate Robinson trade, pick up L... (Feb '09) Feb '09 Tiffany 28
More from around the web