Iverson or Marbury?

[Jon]

In Marbury's defense, he did nothing to disrupt the team last year. He accepted his role graciously.

The same cannot be said about AI.

This is true.  You can argue that Marbury was useless, but he certainly wasn't a cancer while he was here. 

Though I'd like neither, I'd take Marbury. 

[Roy Hobbs]

In Marbury's defense, he did nothing to disrupt the team last year. He accepted his role graciously.

The same cannot be said about AI.

Yeah, but we're talking about this year.  After he attacked Paul Pierce in the off-season, I don't think he could come to this team under any circumstances.  Plus, of course, he stinks.

With AI, there's always the issue of perhaps buying into his role if it meant he could win a championship.  Of course, that's extremely doubtful, and I don't want him here, but at least there's a chance he could help a team.  With Starbury, that chance is zero.

[Tai]

In Marbury's defense, he did nothing to disrupt the team last year. He accepted his role graciously.

The same cannot be said about AI.

Very true.  And he didn't have a problem sharing the ball or playing defense.

Still, being happy coming off the bench doesn't really mean much.  Iverson all the way.

Iverson not being happy coming off the bench has equated to him basically "taking his ball and going home", like the article about him leaving said. Iverson probably is a better player than Marbury, but him not wanting to come off the bench as basically meant he's left the team, as far as we know. Are you SURE that doesn't mean much?

[Bahku]

In Marbury's defense, he did nothing to disrupt the team last year. He accepted his role graciously.

The same cannot be said about AI.

Very true.  And he didn't have a problem sharing the ball or playing defense.

Still, being happy coming off the bench doesn't really mean much.  Iverson all the way.

Iverson not being happy coming off the bench has equated to him basically "taking his ball and going home", like the article about him leaving said. Iverson probably is a better player than Marbury, but him not wanting to come off the bench as basically meant he's left the team, as far as we know. Are you SURE that doesn't mean much?

Iverson is probably a better player than Marbury?!? Is that supposed to be irony? You're talking about one of the highest scorers of all time ... it's just amazing to me the amount of people jumping on this "bash Iverson" bandwagon! I mean, the guy has attitude problems and always has, and I wouldn't call him a great fit for this team, but the people saying these things have either never watched him play more than just recently, or had their eyes closed when the did watch him. And what the heck has Marbury ever done to even be compared to AI? We're not comparing apples and oranges here, we're comparing a legitimate superstar to a mediocre player, at best. For those not familiar with what Iverson has accomplished, please take a minute to click on the link below, then PLEASE explain to me how Starbury is even put on the same PAGE with AI!

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/allen_iverson/career_stats.html

[GreenFaith1819]

I would pick Marbury..at least he did try to fit into the Celtic's schemes for a minute.

He even won a game for us (remember that 12 pt 4th qtr explosion against the Magic last year?)

[Tai]

In Marbury's defense, he did nothing to disrupt the team last year. He accepted his role graciously.

The same cannot be said about AI.

Very true.  And he didn't have a problem sharing the ball or playing defense.

Still, being happy coming off the bench doesn't really mean much.  Iverson all the way.

Iverson not being happy coming off the bench has equated to him basically "taking his ball and going home", like the article about him leaving said. Iverson probably is a better player than Marbury, but him not wanting to come off the bench as basically meant he's left the team, as far as we know. Are you SURE that doesn't mean much?

Iverson is probably a better player than Marbury?!? Is that supposed to be irony? You're talking about one of the highest scorers of all time ... it's just amazing to me the amount of people jumping on this "bash Iverson" bandwagon! I mean, the guy has attitude problems and always has, and I wouldn't call him a great fit for this team, but the people saying these things have either never watched him play more than just recently, or had their eyes closed when the did watch him. And what the heck has Marbury ever done to even be compared to AI? We're not comparing apples and oranges here, we're comparing a legitimate superstar to a mediocre player, at best. For those not familiar with what Iverson has accomplished, please take a minute to click on the link below, then PLEASE explain to me how Starbury is even put on the same PAGE with AI!

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/allen_iverson/career_stats.html

You need to chill out. I'm not on a bandwagon that bashes anyone. I'm just saying that clearly AI can't accept that he's not a starter anymore, or at least isn't even willing to try to come off the bench. I certainly hope he comes back for the Grizzlies, but it's not looking good for him.

[nickagneta]

Why does the question have to be phrased, who do you want to be on the Celtics this year? Why can't it be:

Who is a bigger headache?
Who is a better player?
Who needs more psychiatric treatment?
Who has a bigger ego?
Who would win a game of one on one?
Who is more responsible for setting back the reputation of inner city point guards?
Who is a bigger cancer in the locker room?
Who would you rather name as godfather to your child?
Who is more likely to be broke first?
Who would you rather see go away and never come back into the public eye ever again?


Why can't we have a question like one of those? Why do we need a question that has to make my mind even wander in the direction of thinking of one of these dolts in Celtic Green? Why? Oh, why? My head hurts just thinking about it.

[LB3533]

Marbury was a huge distraction to the Knicks. His time with the Celtics was just him "on good behavior".

Had the Celtics signed Marbury again, told him he wasn't going to be a bench player, and then sat him...you can bet Marbury would complain and whine just like AI has done in Memphis.

[RebusRankin]

Neither.

[Bahku]

In Marbury's defense, he did nothing to disrupt the team last year. He accepted his role graciously.

The same cannot be said about AI.

Very true.  And he didn't have a problem sharing the ball or playing defense.

Still, being happy coming off the bench doesn't really mean much.  Iverson all the way.

Iverson not being happy coming off the bench has equated to him basically "taking his ball and going home", like the article about him leaving said. Iverson probably is a better player than Marbury, but him not wanting to come off the bench as basically meant he's left the team, as far as we know. Are you SURE that doesn't mean much?

Iverson is probably a better player than Marbury?!? Is that supposed to be irony? You're talking about one of the highest scorers of all time ... it's just amazing to me the amount of people jumping on this "bash Iverson" bandwagon! I mean, the guy has attitude problems and always has, and I wouldn't call him a great fit for this team, but the people saying these things have either never watched him play more than just recently, or had their eyes closed when the did watch him. And what the heck has Marbury ever done to even be compared to AI? We're not comparing apples and oranges here, we're comparing a legitimate superstar to a mediocre player, at best. For those not familiar with what Iverson has accomplished, please take a minute to click on the link below, then PLEASE explain to me how Starbury is even put on the same PAGE with AI!

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/allen_iverson/career_stats.html

You need to chill out. I'm not on a bandwagon that bashes anyone. I'm just saying that clearly AI can't accept that he's not a starter anymore, or at least isn't even willing to try to come off the bench. I certainly hope he comes back for the Grizzlies, but it's not looking good for him.

As far as "chilling out", I think I can make my own judgements pertaining to my responses and the emotion behind them, and I wasn't accusing YOU of that in the first place. The fact that yours was the most recent comment I quoted was just the way it was, and if I had been referring to you specifically, I would have said so. The quote of yours that I had exception to was that AI was "probably" better than Marbury, and that is an understatement, as Stephon doesn't deserve to be on the same page with Iverson when it comes to playing basketball. I'm sorry you felt personally attacked by what I said, because those who know me here know that's not me. I took exception to that comment and said so, and did so without angst or negative intent ... the "need to chill out" comment was not called for. A blog is about discussion, and discussion is about words and statements, and I was responding to the huge amount of negative comments about AI's game, not his attitude, as I specified, and the absurd comparisons to Marbury. I wouldn't want either one of them here, but at the very least, AI would be WORTH something ... Marbury is not. I'll agree to disagree and TP you for the good discussion, because I respect your opinions ... regardless of the "chill out" thing.

[Eja117]

Why does the question have to be phrased, who do you want to be on the Celtics this year? Why can't it be:

Who is a bigger headache?
Who is a better player?
Who needs more psychiatric treatment?
Who has a bigger ego?
Who would win a game of one on one?
Who is more responsible for setting back the reputation of inner city point guards?
Who is a bigger cancer in the locker room?
Who would you rather name as godfather to your child?
Who is more likely to be broke first?
Who would you rather see go away and never come back into the public eye ever again?


Why can't we have a question like one of those? Why do we need a question that has to make my mind even wander in the direction of thinking of one of these dolts in Celtic Green? Why? Oh, why? My head hurts just thinking about it.

Wow nick. The Godfather one really hit the spot. TP.

I resist the doom and gloom end of the world scenario here because we actually had one of these guys and it wasn't that bad. It didn't help a lot, but it didn't hurt either.

I think AI is much better and I'd rather see him here than JR Giddens and I'm not sure he's so much less mature than Glen Davis.

It's just a matter of whether he buys in or not.

[Eja117]

Strychine vs arsenic.  You are just as dead either way.

See I'd go with strychnine, because Madame Bovary used arsenic and I didn't like that book. 

[LB3533]

Judging by what AI said in the papers, the stuff that nobody seems to pay attention to, is the fact if AI were in a winning situation he would be the "good soldier".

So I have confidence that if AI were explained his role off the Celtics bench, that he would have no issues and would cause zero problems for the squad.

[mjohnson]

M. Daniels is better.
Better fit for BOSTON CELTICS 2009-2010.
We don't need scorers, we need role players.

[Eja117]

If Ray goes down for any length of time I wouldn't mind having Iverson around