About replacing Marbury....

[Bankshot]

One better option:  Anthony Carter, who I believe earned a minimum salary this season.

I would not really call him an option. I can not see a circumastance in which he would choose to leave Orlando to come to Boston.

You're thinking of Anthony Johnson.  Anthony Carter plays for Denver. 

[Bankshot]

It takes a lot of dislike for Marbury to claim Anthony Carter is better than him ****.

Carter has been an incredibly consistent PG over the last two years.  He isn't great at any one thing, but he does everything well. 

Marbury on the other hand was very inconsistent in the time he was here.  Personally, I think he will be much better with a full season with a team, but based on the evidence of their performances this past year, Carter is the better backup PG right now.

Exactly.  Statistically, Starbury was one of the very worst players in the entire NBA last season, whereas Carter has been very solid recently.

Which player would you rather have (per 36 minutes)?

Player A: 8.3 pts, 7.3 ast, 43.3% FG%, 1.9 stl, 3.1 to

Player B: 7.7 pts, 6.5 ast, 34.2% FG%, 0.9 stl, 3.2 to

I'll go with Player A, even without considering Player B's history of disruptive behavior, both with coaches and teammates.

I'd still take Marbury.  I think he'll be better with a full training camp.  Plus, he hadn't played in more than a year before he signed with us, so I doubt he'd be as bad as he was last year.

BTW, I'd rather have Anthony Johnson or Marbury over Anthony Carter.

[Chris]

It takes a lot of dislike for Marbury to claim Anthony Carter is better than him ****.

Carter has been an incredibly consistent PG over the last two years.  He isn't great at any one thing, but he does everything well. 

Marbury on the other hand was very inconsistent in the time he was here.  Personally, I think he will be much better with a full season with a team, but based on the evidence of their performances this past year, Carter is the better backup PG right now.

Exactly.  Statistically, Starbury was one of the very worst players in the entire NBA last season, whereas Carter has been very solid recently.

Which player would you rather have (per 36 minutes)?

Player A: 8.3 pts, 7.3 ast, 43.3% FG%, 1.9 stl, 3.1 to

Player B: 7.7 pts, 6.5 ast, 34.2% FG%, 0.9 stl, 3.2 to

I'll go with Player A, even without considering Player B's history of disruptive behavior, both with coaches and teammates.

I'd still take Marbury.  I think he'll be better with a full training camp.  Plus, he hadn't played in more than a year before he signed with us, so I doubt he'd be as bad as he was last year.

BTW, I'd rather have Anthony Johnson or Marbury over Anthony Carter.

I don't totally disagree, although I am still on the fence, I would probably pick Marbury over Carter.  I was just making the point that the snarky comment wasn't necessary, because Anthony Carter WAS better than Marbury this year.  Next year could be a completely different story though, we will have to see.

[Roy Hobbs]

It takes a lot of dislike for Marbury to claim Anthony Carter is better than him ****.

Carter has been an incredibly consistent PG over the last two years.  He isn't great at any one thing, but he does everything well. 

Marbury on the other hand was very inconsistent in the time he was here.  Personally, I think he will be much better with a full season with a team, but based on the evidence of their performances this past year, Carter is the better backup PG right now.

Exactly.  Statistically, Starbury was one of the very worst players in the entire NBA last season, whereas Carter has been very solid recently.

Which player would you rather have (per 36 minutes)?

Player A: 8.3 pts, 7.3 ast, 43.3% FG%, 1.9 stl, 3.1 to

Player B: 7.7 pts, 6.5 ast, 34.2% FG%, 0.9 stl, 3.2 to

I'll go with Player A, even without considering Player B's history of disruptive behavior, both with coaches and teammates.

I'd still take Marbury.  I think he'll be better with a full training camp.  Plus, he hadn't played in more than a year before he signed with us, so I doubt he'd be as bad as he was last year.

BTW, I'd rather have Anthony Johnson or Marbury over Anthony Carter.

I don't totally disagree, although I am still on the fence, I would probably pick Marbury over Carter.  I was just making the point that the snarky comment wasn't necessary, because Anthony Carter WAS better than Marbury this year.  Next year could be a completely different story though, we will have to see.

Starbury is more talented than Carter, but Carter has been a better teammate throughout his career.  Talent isn't everything, especially when Starbury is already talking about wanting more minutes.

[hpantazo]

our backup point guard needs to be able to do two things: hit threes and defend. House can do only one of those two things well. Marbury couldn't hit the broadside of a barn and didn't even want to shoot which killed the flow of the offense, With Rondo as the starting pg, all we need is a guy who can come in and hit jumpers when the opposing teams leave rondo open too much, Pierce and/or Ray can bring up the ball, it works well. None of us have seen enough of Pruitt to know what he can really do (unless any of you guys have been watching through the windows at waltham), and apparently doc and danny don't think he can do much. I say keep House as the backup pg, and add whichever FA is available for cheap who can shoot. Marbury doesn't fit, and our priority is to get 2 big men and a SF anyway. Also, if marbury gets a guaranteed deal, he may feel secure enough to truly express himself which could get ugly.

[cordobes]

He is not a point guard. Hes a shooting guard in a Point guards body. Do not let him keep fooling you into thinking that he can dribble and pass well. He shoots 3's end of story.

He dribbles and passes well enough. He's not worse than Steve Kerr. A shooting guard in a point guard body is point-guard, unless you have a point-guard in a shooting-guard body to pair with him. There are plenty of PGs in the NBA who are similar to House. The C's can afford to play a backup PG like House - they have plenty of playmakers in other positions. Heck, they won a ring doing it. And they definitely need an elite 3 pt shooter at the position. What they possibly can't afford is to pair House with PGs like Marbury or Carter, at least during the playoffs.

Carter would be a downgrade from House. Re-signing Marbury would mean banking on an improbable major improvement from him. That kind of risky bet didn't work last season.

[housecall]

 I would take "Old Head"anyday over A.Carter and Marbury...Old Head has played in a few championship runs(experience) before and is a bigger pg who can man up when needed to.

[wdleehi]

Marbury probably has the most talent of any potential backup PG.


But he needs to go.  I don't trust him over a full season.





Plus, every team he leaves is better the next year.  Sure way to make sure the Celtics go back and win the finals, get rid of Marbury.

[housecall]

Marbury probably has the most talent of any potential backup PG.


But he needs to go.  I don't trust him over a full season.





Plus, every team he leaves is better the next year.  Sure way to make sure the Celtics go back and win the finals, get rid of Marbury.

Agreed..tp

[vagrantwade]

Marbury probably has the most talent of any potential backup PG.


But he needs to go.  I don't trust him over a full season.





Plus, every team he leaves is better the next year.  Sure way to make sure the Celtics go back and win the finals, get rid of Marbury.

You can only argue that 1 team Marbury left has actually gotten better. That would be the Nets.

Unless of course you think the 2009-10 Knicks are going to do something special.

I trust him more than I trust Boston fans . I am just glad I am not a Patriots/Red Sox fan.

[ballaholic]

Forget about (Anthony) Carter and Johnson. Carter is gonna re-sign with Denver, no doubt and Johnson is going to pick up his player-option.
To me, that leaves us with three guys:
1. Jason Kidd, but only if he takes the MLE or in the best scenario the vet min
2. Stephon Marbury, good handler, good defender (yeah!) and I believe he'd get his shot back during the training camp
3. Juan Dixon, as a combo-guard he'd be able to score and he'd be cheap as well.

[wdleehi]

Marbury probably has the most talent of any potential backup PG.


But he needs to go.  I don't trust him over a full season.





Plus, every team he leaves is better the next year.  Sure way to make sure the Celtics go back and win the finals, get rid of Marbury.

You can only argue that 1 team Marbury left has actually gotten better. That would be the Nets.

Unless of course you think the 2009-10 Knicks are going to do something special.

I trust him more than I trust Boston fans . I am just glad I am not a Patriots/Red Sox fan.

Phoenix went from a lotto team to a play off team.

[Vermont Green]

our backup point guard needs to be able to do two things: hit threes and defend. House can do only one of those two things well. Marbury couldn't hit the broadside of a barn and didn't even want to shoot which killed the flow of the offense, With Rondo as the starting pg, all we need is a guy who can come in and hit jumpers when the opposing teams leave rondo open too much, Pierce and/or Ray can bring up the ball, it works well. None of us have seen enough of Pruitt to know what he can really do (unless any of you guys have been watching through the windows at waltham), and apparently doc and danny don't think he can do much. I say keep House as the backup pg, and add whichever FA is available for cheap who can shoot. Marbury doesn't fit, and our priority is to get 2 big men and a SF anyway. Also, if marbury gets a guaranteed deal, he may feel secure enough to truly express himself which could get ugly.

Actually I think the back-up point guard should be able to dribble the ball up the court against a defender and then make a pass to start the offence,  Eddie defends the opposing PG and shoots just fine but he can't be the point guard (handle the ball) and he can't defend the the opposing SG.  That is why it would be so nice if Pruitt got it together.  If he could be relied on to handle the ball and shoot sometimes, then he could be on the court with Eddie and cover the usually taller SG and let Eddie shoot an cover the opposing PG.

[Goldstar88]

He is not a point guard. Hes a shooting guard in a Point guards body. Do not let him keep fooling you into thinking that he can dribble and pass well. He shoots 3's end of story.

He dribbles and passes well enough. He's not worse than Steve Kerr. A shooting guard in a point guard body is point-guard, unless you have a point-guard in a shooting-guard body to pair with him. There are plenty of PGs in the NBA who are similar to House. The C's can afford to play a backup PG like House - they have plenty of playmakers in other positions. Heck, they won a ring doing it. And they definitely need an elite 3 pt shooter at the position. What they possibly can't afford is to pair House with PGs like Marbury or Carter, at least during the playoffs.

Carter would be a downgrade from House. Re-signing Marbury would mean banking on an improbable major improvement from him. That kind of risky bet didn't work last season.

He averaged 1 assist for ever 18mins played during the regular season, and less than 1 assist a game in the playoffs. He can not pass. In the postseason there were numerous times when he was taken out of the game because he could not handle the ball when pressured. Guess who replaced him, Marbury. He could not guard opposing shooting guards during the playoffs and Marbury replaced him for defensive purposes. If House could get the job done as "PG" there would have been no need to get Marbury in the first place.

[Finkelskyhook]

Considering the quality of Marbury's play, he could be replaced with Orien Greene.

Not much difference in shooting percentages and defense between the two.

I know how keen everybody in here was on Greene.