Author Topic: Should we consider starting Marbury?  (Read 13807 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Should we consider starting Marbury?
« on: February 27, 2009, 10:27:11 PM »

Offline Toine43

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1352
  • Tommy Points: 219
  • "Spare change?"
Just getting the sarcastic thread out of the way before someone becomes delusional enough to make the actual thread.  ;)


Oh, and so this thread actually has some sort of point to it, I could see Marbury playing a role down down the stretch of games. He allows you to play that small ball offensive lineup without being handicapped by House's defense and ball handling (defense especially). Tonight when the Pacers were fouling the Celts Doc already tried having an offense/defense sub pattern with House in for free throws and Marbury for defense.

It won't be able to be used as frequently as the KG-Posey-PP-Ray-Rondo lineup was last year, because it's just not as conventional, but if for whatever reason we need a change from our starting 5 down the stretch, a KG-Paul-Ray-Marbury-Rondo lineup could work.


One more unrelated thought: Marbury's defense in the first half was worrying - he was getting lit up by Rush. But it may just have been a case of getting his legs under him. As Gorman pointed out, Steph's second half defense was substantially better.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2009, 11:05:10 PM by Toine43 »


Eddie House - for THREEEEEEE!

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #1 on: February 27, 2009, 10:32:07 PM »

Offline illantari

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 741
  • Tommy Points: 112
Whew!  You had me scared there!

On the defensive side-I'm encouraged by the fact that he's even trying.  He's not known for defense, but as far as I can tell he was trying on D. 

If his offensive continues to be this smooth, I'm liking our bench.

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #2 on: February 27, 2009, 10:42:45 PM »

Offline KungPoweChicken

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2101
  • Tommy Points: 228
I don't think Marbury was getting "lit" by Rush. Rush is significantly bigger than Marbury, and he hit some fairly difficult shots.

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #3 on: February 27, 2009, 10:48:51 PM »

Offline RAcker

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3892
  • Tommy Points: 69
  • Law mercy!
I was about to post a resounding "Hellz no!" until I realized that this was a joke.  He's a heck of a 6th man though and I think once he gets properly implemented he and Eddie together can be lethal.  Here's hoping.

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #4 on: February 27, 2009, 10:51:11 PM »

Offline QuinielaBox

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1383
  • Tommy Points: 139
If Rondo calls in sick or blows out his knee. Other than that, no.

I think Stephon will be OK as a bench player and I thought he did really well for not playing in one year and going to a new team.

He'll do what it takes because this is his big break.
Wins are few, times are hard. Here is your bleeping St Patricks Day Card.

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #5 on: February 27, 2009, 10:59:43 PM »

Online celticinorlando

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27989
  • Tommy Points: 638
  • MASTER OF PANIC
nope...but in the playoffs you can always integrate him with the big 3..AND rondo

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #6 on: February 27, 2009, 11:14:06 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Of course he should be starting!!!

heck he's with the team for one game and the PGs on this team are averaging a combined 20 assists per game with Marbury in the PG rotation! That didn't happen when he wasn't here so he must be the reason for the huge increase in assists out of the PG spot.

Start him NOW!!! ::) ;) :D ;D

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #7 on: February 27, 2009, 11:21:37 PM »

Offline e in boulder

  • Jaden Springer
  • Posts: 5
  • Tommy Points: 0
Obviously Rondo will be the starter for the remainder of his tenure here...

but a question...

What do number 20 and 34's stats look like when the opposing team actually has to ...

you know,

cover our point guard?
trying to figure how the heck I'm 'sposed to pay for the rent/
when uncle sam taking 80 percent/
my loot is gone/
i might of exaggerated a bit/but moving on. - astonish.

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #8 on: February 27, 2009, 11:24:01 PM »

Offline Toine43

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1352
  • Tommy Points: 219
  • "Spare change?"
I'm pretty sure several of the people who responded didn't bother to read the actual post and see that it was a joke.

Anyway...

I don't think Marbury was getting "lit" by Rush. Rush is significantly bigger than Marbury, and he hit some fairly difficult shots.

I know Rush is a huge size mismatch for Marbury, so I'm not blaming him (and remember the point of the statement was that Marbury did play good defense in the 2nd half), but I was just stating the facts - he got lit up. Rush was hitting open shot after open shot because Marbury couldn't stay with him. It was Jack who hit a couple of tough shots against Marbury. Marbury was guarding Rush in the 2nd quarter when the Pacers took back the lead with a 10-0 run. Again, not blaming him, but he got torched.


Eddie House - for THREEEEEEE!

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #9 on: February 27, 2009, 11:29:27 PM »

Offline Schupac

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 958
  • Tommy Points: 235
Based off the title I was going to just post "no" and move on... but I read the post unlike some others here  :D

I didn't get to see the game.  Have to wait until Sunday.  But the box score shows Marbury contributing ow we'd like him too.

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #10 on: February 27, 2009, 11:44:36 PM »

Offline Jon

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6499
  • Tommy Points: 385
In all seriousness, if he was in a little better game shape, I'd entertain the idea of starting him until KG got healthy.  But since that's the case, I won't go there. 

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #11 on: February 28, 2009, 12:10:39 AM »

Offline PJ Martinez

  • Oshae Brissett
  • Posts: 74
  • Tommy Points: 6
If I'm not mistaken, Doc at one point had House, Marbury, and Ray in there together for a few minutes -- with Davis and Perkins maybe? It was a weird looking lineup -- a shooting point guard and two off guards. But I seem to remember them doing okay.

And thanks for getting the sarcastic thread up before someone starts a real one...

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #12 on: February 28, 2009, 12:12:59 AM »

Offline indyceltic

  • Joe Mazzulla
  • Posts: 143
  • Tommy Points: 18
You have to start Marbury!  The Celtics are playing 100% with Stephon.  To me it is a no brainer!   :P

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #13 on: February 28, 2009, 12:35:24 AM »

Offline DarkAzcura

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 644
  • Tommy Points: 100
Marbury got lit up by Rush because he wasn't fighting through screens. He went under every single pick and didn't call for help. It probably has to do with the fact that he hasn't played in so long, and he's never played for a defensive oriented team. He'll probably start fighting through those picks more often soon or at least call for help.

Re: Should we consider starting Marbury?
« Reply #14 on: February 28, 2009, 12:46:18 AM »

Offline Steve Weinman

  • Author / Moderator
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2766
  • Tommy Points: 33
  • My alter ego
Marbury got lit up by Rush because he wasn't fighting through screens. He went under every single pick and didn't call for help. It probably has to do with the fact that he hasn't played in so long, and he's never played for a defensive oriented team. He'll probably start fighting through those picks more often soon or at least call for help.

Well said, DA.

-sw


Reggies Ghost: Where artistic genius happens.  Thank you, sir.