Guess who's back?? Starbury!!! (unconfirmed rumor)

[crownsy]

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

Name him. Name the "bigger PG who can shoot from behind the arc", and I will also include "can bring the ball up the court against pressure and distributes the ball well". Who's left who can do that better than marbury at this point?

There anser? No one. There's no one left in free agency who can do that, so while you can ask for one, it's not going to happen.

One thing no one can deny about Marbury last year is that he really tried hard. His defense improved to passable by the end, and he defintiely showed some short flashes of what his offensive game can bring. He also passed the ball better than house or pruitt ever did, and could bring the ball up in the face of pressure, which house and pruitt could not do.

I want Marbury to come to training camp and get practice in the system in a training camp environment where he can actually learn it. There were obvious times last year when he was trying to hard to stay within the flow of the offense, but had to think to much. When you're thinking, you can't just react and let instinct take over. If he's with us for an entire year, I think he can shake the rust off, get his shot back, and really help out the 2nd unit.

And if you say no to marbury, please list an example of a free agent who is better than him, and will play for the bi annual exemption or less.

We don't know what FAs will play for. But I'd take Rasho, Drew Gooden, Ike Diogu, Udoka, and Joe Smith all over Marbury at the LLE. All better players than Marbury.

they are, but they aren't PG's.

you said you'd like a bigger PG to bring the ball up, ect.

marbury may not be very good, but if he takes the low offer, im fine with him in the backup PG mix, he's the best left at the moment.

(assuming we move pruitt as part of this Daniels thing, we don't need them both)

[Fafnir]

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

Name him. Name the "bigger PG who can shoot from behind the arc", and I will also include "can bring the ball up the court against pressure and distributes the ball well". Who's left who can do that better than marbury at this point?

There anser? No one. There's no one left in free agency who can do that, so while you can ask for one, it's not going to happen.

One thing no one can deny about Marbury last year is that he really tried hard. His defense improved to passable by the end, and he defintiely showed some short flashes of what his offensive game can bring. He also passed the ball better than house or pruitt ever did, and could bring the ball up in the face of pressure, which house and pruitt could not do.

I want Marbury to come to training camp and get practice in the system in a training camp environment where he can actually learn it. There were obvious times last year when he was trying to hard to stay within the flow of the offense, but had to think to much. When you're thinking, you can't just react and let instinct take over. If he's with us for an entire year, I think he can shake the rust off, get his shot back, and really help out the 2nd unit.

And if you say no to marbury, please list an example of a free agent who is better than him, and will play for the bi annual exemption or less.

We don't know what FAs will play for. But I'd take Rasho, Drew Gooden, Ike Diogu, Udoka, and Joe Smith all over Marbury at the LLE. All better players than Marbury.

they are, but they aren't PG's.

you said you'd like a bigger PG to bring the ball up, ect.

marbury may not be very good, but if he takes the low offer, im fine with him in the backup PG mix, he's the best left at the moment.

(assuming we move pruitt as part of this Daniels thing, we don't need them both)

I'm pretty sure I never mentioned about wanting a bigger PG, must be someone else.

When you're talking about the 10+ man on the team I'll take the best players I can get. Eddie can backup the point well enough, the team played better with him out there instead of Marbury.

Plus with Daniels here we can sit Tony Allen and that immediately will help the bench's offensive woes.

I'm okay with him coming back, but I wouldn't want to burn the LLE on him when I think it can get a better overall player. Stephon has more "upside" if he actually gets back to being a decent NBA player. But I don't think we should plan on that.

[Aaron]

I'm not naive enough to think that Marbury is going to be 6th man of the year next season.

But I'm also not foolish enough to think that we can really judge Stephon based on last season.  With the Knicks fiasco and him being thrown into the fire in Boston after not playing for months  and months,  we really didn't get a chance to see the real Marbury.

I for one would welcome him back.  At the very least, I think we can expect some consistency from him this season (assuming he suits up for us).

[crownsy]

my mistake fafnir, i got lost in the qoute box, and thought he was quoting ya when he was actually quoting casp originally.  

anyway, i still maintain that marbury is a decent backup, provided he takes the LLE/ vet min and understands his role is a 8-10 minute a night back up, and that's all.

I believe skills erode with age, but not to the extent steph's did in 2 years. I think he would be just as solid as the other backup PG options left in the FA pool.

[Prof. Clutch]

Excuses, imo. The Ivory Tower called the Interwebz has to be the last place where Stephon Marbury still gets respect.

He behaved good because it was his definite last chance to play in the NBA. He didn´t play "unselfish", he passed up wide open shots, and when he shot, he was abysmal. I can remember exactly five good minutes from Marbury in green, and that was just offensively.

I think that Marbury showed exactly what I expected from him when we signed him at the deadline (read: nada), so I don´t know why I should change my expectations now. Guys like Marbury don´t get better because of one off-season, you need work ethic and dedication to get back in shape, two things I don´t think of when I hear "Stephon Marbury". Marbury is done, dead and gone, only a shadow of the former (and already overrated) Starbury. 
What do people expect who are pro-Marbury? What does he have to do to convince his fanboys that he´s done?

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

What part of my post were ``excuses´´ for Marbury?  At no point did I defend his play from last year or even encourage his signing in my post.  Do you consider these excuses for his admittedly poor play last season? -

I mean, he didn't have the problems that everyone expected him to last year (big ego, team distraction,) and he showed a real effort to be a team guy.  You weren't even at least a little impressed during the season with the effort he made to share the ball and some of the beautiful passes he made?

Do you disagree with any of that? Was he a headcase problem or more of a team guy?  Did he share the ball and make some nice passes?  Was I off base or dod I defend him with any of the common things that are said (he hadn´t played in a long time/give him a full offseason.)  I didn´t try to use any of those copout excuses.

I was merely trying to get a better understanding as to the mindset of people who are really against Marbury signing.  I would prefer Marbury to the other options out there, but I´m certainly not a ``fanboy´´ and would be perfectly comfortable with the C´s moving forward with someone else or waiting to see what´s there at the deadline.

You state that his good behavior was only to be able to stay in the NBA, though he has stated for years a desire to play in Europe at the tail end of his career.  I don´t think staying in the NBA matters to him as much as you believe it does.  And I tend to believe his behavior was more about redemption and the chance to win a ring than it was about getting another contract.  That´s just an opinion I got from what Marbury himself stated(though I´m sure you don´t believe and disagree with.)

The one thing you ignored in your response is the fact that he did do a good job of setting the table for the team.  He showed to me, at least, that he is still a great passer.  And as I said in the previous post, he won´t be asked to be the same offensive weapon that he was needed to be from last year.  I also thought his defense was adequate and that beyond that he showed a real effort to fit in and make anything work.  I was really proud of that, and I´m always happy to at least give guys another chance.

I truthfully think the problem with the anti-Marbury people is displayed in the following:

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

You guys have already made up your mind.  The answer to my question, ``what would we he need to do´´ is - nothing.  There is nothing he could do, no matter how positive he could possibly be, to make him a good thing.  He´s a bad guy, a bad player, a bad choice no matter what he might do.  That´s a little sad.

Again, I am not an un-abashed Marbury supporter.  I have scratched my head over the years at the things he has done.  I have been put off by his big star, me first attitude.  I have seen and understood his faults.  But I´ve also seen that he made an effort with us to turn that around.  I appreciate how he tried for us and I can´t hate him for his shot not falling consistently as he tried to do everything else right.  

I´m still undecided about what the future might hold for him, but at least I can say I´m keeping an open mind either way, which is more than you can say.

[Green Mountain]

Excuses, imo. The Ivory Tower called the Interwebz has to be the last place where Stephon Marbury still gets respect.

He behaved good because it was his definite last chance to play in the NBA. He didn´t play "unselfish", he passed up wide open shots, and when he shot, he was abysmal. I can remember exactly five good minutes from Marbury in green, and that was just offensively.

I think that Marbury showed exactly what I expected from him when we signed him at the deadline (read: nada), so I don´t know why I should change my expectations now. Guys like Marbury don´t get better because of one off-season, you need work ethic and dedication to get back in shape, two things I don´t think of when I hear "Stephon Marbury". Marbury is done, dead and gone, only a shadow of the former (and already overrated) Starbury. 
What do people expect who are pro-Marbury? What does he have to do to convince his fanboys that he´s done?

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

What part of my post were ``excuses´´ for Marbury?  At no point did I defend his play from last year or even encourage his signing in my post.  Do you consider these excuses for his admittedly poor play last season? -

I mean, he didn't have the problems that everyone expected him to last year (big ego, team distraction,) and he showed a real effort to be a team guy.  You weren't even at least a little impressed during the season with the effort he made to share the ball and some of the beautiful passes he made?

Do you disagree with any of that? Was he a headcase problem or more of a team guy?  Did he share the ball and make some nice passes?  Was I off base or dod I defend him with any of the common things that are said (he hadn´t played in a long time/give him a full offseason.)  I didn´t try to use any of those copout excuses.

I was merely trying to get a better understanding as to the mindset of people who are really against Marbury signing.  I would prefer Marbury to the other options out there, but I´m certainly not a ``fanboy´´ and would be perfectly comfortable with the C´s moving forward with someone else or waiting to see what´s there at the deadline.

You state that his good behavior was only to be able to stay in the NBA, though he has stated for years a desire to play in Europe at the tail end of his career.  I don´t think staying in the NBA matters to him as much as you believe it does.  And I tend to believe his behavior was more about redemption and the chance to win a ring than it was about getting another contract.  That´s just an opinion I got from what Marbury himself stated(though I´m sure you don´t believe and disagree with.)

The one thing you ignored in your response is the fact that he did do a good job of setting the table for the team.  He showed to me, at least, that he is still a great passer.  And as I said in the previous post, he won´t be asked to be the same offensive weapon that he was needed to be from last year.  I also thought his defense was adequate and that beyond that he showed a real effort to fit in and make anything work.  I was really proud of that, and I´m always happy to at least give guys another chance.

I truthfully think the problem with the anti-Marbury people is displayed in the following:

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

You guys have already made up your mind.  The answer to my question, ``what would we he need to do´´ is - nothing.  There is nothing he could do, no matter how positive he could possibly be, to make him a good thing.  He´s a bad guy, a bad player, a bad choice no matter what he might do.  That´s a little sad.

Again, I am not an un-abashed Marbury supporter.  I have scratched my head over the years at the things he has done.  I have been put off by his big star, me first attitude.  I have seen and understood his faults.  But I´ve also seen that he made an effort with us to turn that around.  I appreciate how he tried for us and I can´t hate him for his shot not falling consistently as he tried to do everything else right.  

I´m still undecided about what the future might hold for him, but at least I can say I´m keeping an open mind either way, which is more than you can say.

My issue isn't resigning Marbury. It's signing him for the LLE. He has done nothing in the last 3 years that would indicate he is anything more than a vet minimum player at this point. If he wants to go play in Europe for a little more money so be it. He won't last the year in Europe. Let him enjoy the world of non guaranteed contracts and quick trigger GM's.

[Casperian]

Excuses, imo. The Ivory Tower called the Interwebz has to be the last place where Stephon Marbury still gets respect.

He behaved good because it was his definite last chance to play in the NBA. He didn´t play "unselfish", he passed up wide open shots, and when he shot, he was abysmal. I can remember exactly five good minutes from Marbury in green, and that was just offensively.

I think that Marbury showed exactly what I expected from him when we signed him at the deadline (read: nada), so I don´t know why I should change my expectations now. Guys like Marbury don´t get better because of one off-season, you need work ethic and dedication to get back in shape, two things I don´t think of when I hear "Stephon Marbury". Marbury is done, dead and gone, only a shadow of the former (and already overrated) Starbury. 
What do people expect who are pro-Marbury? What does he have to do to convince his fanboys that he´s done?

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

What part of my post were ``excuses´´ for Marbury?  At no point did I defend his play from last year or even encourage his signing in my post.  Do you consider these excuses for his admittedly poor play last season?

Yes, I think this is an attempt to rationalize his bad play away. It´s a human reaction, and I don´t think you have an agenda or anything like that, I just think the pro-Marbury camp really "wants" him to succeed, whereas the con-Marbury camp has already given up on him.

I mean, he didn't have the problems that everyone expected him to last year (big ego, team distraction,) and he showed a real effort to be a team guy.  You weren't even at least a little impressed during the season with the effort he made to share the ball and some of the beautiful passes he made?

Do you disagree with any of that? Was he a headcase problem or more of a team guy?  Did he share the ball and make some nice passes?  Was I off base of defending him with any of the common things that are said (he hadn´t played in a long time/

I was merely trying to get a better understanding as to the mindset of people who are really against Marbury signing.  I would prefer Marbury to the other options out there, but I´m certainly not a ``fanboy´´ and would be perfectly comfortable with the C´s moving forward with someone else or waiting to see what´s there at the deadline.

Yes, I disagree, and I think you were off-base. I haven´t seen an unselfish Marbury with beautiful passes, I have seen a rusty player who can´t contribute in any way, which is exactly what I´ve expected 5 months ago when we signed him. I have no intention to change my mind, I feel confirmed.

I apologize if you feel attacked by the term fanboy, but I hear the pro-Marbury arguments for 1/2 year now, and have to wonder if I´ve seen the same games as they have. As I said, I think most people just really want this to work out, so they overlook the simple fact that he didn´t had a good game in 3 years. Rusty or not, that´s 3 years of no evidence that he could help this team, but 64% on the frontpage poll want him back. How would you call that?

The one thing you ignored in your response is the fact that he did do a good job of setting the table for the team.  He showed to me, at least, that he is still a great passer.  And as I said in the previous post, he won´t be asked to be the same offensive weapon that he was needed to be from last year.  I also thought his defense was adequate and that beyond that he showed a real effort to fit in and make anything work.  I was really proud of that, and I´m always happy to at least give guys another chance.

See, I have no idea how you come to this conclusion. He wasn´t good as a passer, playmaker, shooter or defender, imo. Agree to disagree, I guess.

You guys have already made up your mind.  The answer to my question, ``what would we he need to do´´ is - nothing.  There is nothing he could do, no matter how positive he could possibly be, to make him a good thing.  That´s a little sad.

Your question is simply wrong. The real question is, "how much does he have to suck until people realize he´s done?"
Shoot abysmal percentages from the floor? Check.
Can´t defend a chair? Check.
Looks timid and rusty,doesn´t provide leadership, experience or confidence? Check.

Again, I am not an un-abashed Marbury supporter.  I have scratched my head over the years at the things he has done.  I have been put off by his big star, me first attitude.  I have seen and understood his faults.  But I´ve also seen that he made an effort with us to turn that around.  I appreciate how he tried for us and I can´t hate him for his shot not falling consistently as he tried to do everything else right.  I´m still undecided about what the future might hold for him, but at least I can say I´m keeping an open mind either way.

Again, excuses, imo. Rationalization. If you truly believe that Stephon Marbury "has seen the light", you are obviously a blind optimist. I will stick to the conclusions I´ve made based on the things I´ve seen in the last three years.

[QuinielaBox]

It would not surprise me if Marbury came back to the Celtics. I wouldn't have a problem with it actually. He is the most talented Veteran backup PG out there right now. It makes prudent business sense to shop around for your best opportunity and right now, playing in Boston represents your best bet to play a championship team.

As far as bloggers with "inside scoop", they are just attention getters. I think I will let the pros at ESPN and NESN do their job and react from there.

I read over the debate here on whether you want Stephon back and I think there is more good than bad points about him. The situation in New York and with Isiah Thomas was very damaging if not catastrophic for Stephon. He was lucky that Danny Ainge picked him up for a trial in Boston. His 12 points in Game 5 against Orlando was critical in getting us a 3-2 lead with a chance to win a series we had absolutely no business winning.

[Jon]

I think a lot of this argument comes down to who you'd rather have if it isn't Marbury.  The only other viable backup PG options seem to me to be Anthony Cater or Tyronn Lue.  Personally, I'd be satisfied with either of those two guys, though you'd think that if either could be easily had, they probably would be on the team already. 

Still, Marbury certainly has more upside than either.  And while it's also conceivable he could self-destruct, it's also conceivable that if Rondo went down for the year (knock on wood), that he could be good enough to pilot this team to #18.  And you can't say that about Carter and Lue. 

I tend to like re-signing Marbury for that reason.  If Rondo's healthy, it's not going to matter who we have backing up up for the 10-15 mpg during the regular season and the 5-8 mpg in the playoffs.  So, if Marbury has a breakdown, I don't think we're all that much worse off with House backing up Rondo than we are with Lue or Carter.  However, if Rondo goes down, Marbury is really the only one out of that group who has any chance of piloting us to #18. 

[JHTruth]

Last year Marbs was asked to save a garbage bench. This year he would just be rounding out a stacked bench. Big difference..

[Pucaccia]

(Unconfirmed Rumor)... You can start up a successful blog by stating a bunch of "unconfirmed rumors".  Though I would like to see this happen, and it makes sense, you can't go overboard from a blog making a statement like this.

[Fafnir]

Last year Marbs was asked to save a garbage bench. This year he would just be rounding out a stacked bench. Big difference..

Not really, he was asked to be a quality player. He wasn't by any measure.

[lostjumper]

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

Name him. Name the "bigger PG who can shoot from behind the arc", and I will also include "can bring the ball up the court against pressure and distributes the ball well". Who's left who can do that better than marbury at this point?

...

So, is this a "pick your poison" game?
If there´s noone good available, then just don´t take anyone. Wait what you can get at the trade deadline for our expirings. I´m not concerned about our backup PG situation for the regular season, we won it all in 07/08 with Eddie House and Sam Cassell as backup PGs.
If you can´t get a tall PG, a SG and Eddie at the 1 would do it, too. What we definitly need is another good shooter from behind the arc.

Do you think that house and pruitt are capable of bringing the ball up the court against full court pressure? I do not, so I think we need another PG. If you do, then you need to watch some of the games before marbury got here. There were several games where as soon as our 2nd unit came out, the opposing team immediately put pressure on the ball handler that resulted in numerous turnovers. Thats why so many people on this board wanted to bring in Grant Hill. He would have been the primary ball handler on the 2nd unit. As it is, that person would be Daniels right now, and I think Marbury would protect the ball better than Daniels.

[Jon]

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

Name him. Name the "bigger PG who can shoot from behind the arc", and I will also include "can bring the ball up the court against pressure and distributes the ball well". Who's left who can do that better than marbury at this point?

...

So, is this a "pick your poison" game?
If there´s noone good available, then just don´t take anyone. Wait what you can get at the trade deadline for our expirings. I´m not concerned about our backup PG situation for the regular season, we won it all in 07/08 with Eddie House and Sam Cassell as backup PGs.
If you can´t get a tall PG, a SG and Eddie at the 1 would do it, too. What we definitly need is another good shooter from behind the arc.

Do you think that house and pruitt are capable of bringing the ball up the court against full court pressure? I do not, so I think we need another PG. If you do, then you need to watch some of the games before marbury got here. There were several games where as soon as our 2nd unit came out, the opposing team immediately put pressure on the ball handler that resulted in numerous turnovers. Thats why so many people on this board wanted to bring in Grant Hill. He would have been the primary ball handler on the 2nd unit. As it is, that person would be Daniels right now, and I think Marbury would protect the ball better than Daniels.

Two years ago I would've agreed with you.  In an ideal world, I still agree with you.  I would like another PG.  However, I don't think it's that big of a deal.  Teams don't tend to full court press all that much during the bulk of regular season games.  If you recall, it only became a huge problem for Eddie during the Detroit series two years ago, when they made a point to press him game after game.  Eddie really didn't come into too much trouble with it during the regular season.  Now that Rondo has established himself, he's going to play 40+ mpg in the playoffs, so House isn't likely to see more than 5-10 mpg, and likely no minutes in the waning minutes of a close game.  Given that fact, I don't think it would be catastrophic if we had Ray, Paul, or even KG bring the ball up the court for those whopping 5-10 mpg. 

[Birdbrain]

What we need is a bigger PG who can shoot the ball from behind the arc, not a once talented do-it-all has-been headcase who didn´t play a good game in three years.

Name him. Name the "bigger PG who can shoot from behind the arc", and I will also include "can bring the ball up the court against pressure and distributes the ball well". Who's left who can do that better than marbury at this point?

...

So, is this a "pick your poison" game?
If there´s noone good available, then just don´t take anyone. Wait what you can get at the trade deadline for our expirings. I´m not concerned about our backup PG situation for the regular season, we won it all in 07/08 with Eddie House and Sam Cassell as backup PGs.
If you can´t get a tall PG, a SG and Eddie at the 1 would do it, too. What we definitly need is another good shooter from behind the arc.

Do you think that house and pruitt are capable of bringing the ball up the court against full court pressure? I do not, so I think we need another PG. If you do, then you need to watch some of the games before marbury got here. There were several games where as soon as our 2nd unit came out, the opposing team immediately put pressure on the ball handler that resulted in numerous turnovers. Thats why so many people on this board wanted to bring in Grant Hill. He would have been the primary ball handler on the 2nd unit. As it is, that person would be Daniels right now, and I think Marbury would protect the ball better than Daniels.

This remind of the angst the C's fans had concerning Lindsey Hunter and his ball hawking skills.  I would love to see a breakdown of the ' numerous ' turnovers you mention. If Pruitt is around he's more than capable of bringing the ball over 1/2 court.  If not why is he in the NBA?  They sure don't ' need ' Marbury but, for the vet minimum he's a nice bench player.  Anything more and he's overpaid.