<div class="quote_poster">Quoting nextlevelgame:</div><div class="quote_post">This particular arguement I think is moot... not much more can be said that already has been. Either way, if you are going to make me reserve my judgements after a year with Brown, I'll reciprocate with Arenas. I don't think he'll average more thjan 3 TOs next season.</div>
Arenas has always been rather turnover prone throughout his entire career and even averaged 4 last year so I don?t know why It would change all of a sudden. The reason why I want you to reserve your judgments is because Marbury?s career is not over yet. My point is Arenas is not on Marbury?s level because of his turnovers and assists and his decision making. You say it?s because of the Princeton offense and I say what he struggles from is irrelevant; the fact of the matter is he wasn?t as good a point guard as Marbury who put up 8 assists to go along with his 2.8 assists per game.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">That's your definition of elite. I would just say top point gaurds. Hinrich and Marbury are both top point gaurds, but in the grand scheme, I think Hinrich is better.</div>
Hinrich is not on the level of Marbury.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Half is stats, the other half is wins. Oscar won, Marbury still hasn't. I think that's the story.</div>
If half is stats: which Marbury dominates in, and half are wins: which Hinrich recently dominated in, that means they would be even, but you say Hinrich is better.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I thought I already discussed this. Hinrich's game is easier malleable to a team concept. He's more versatile, and a better defender. He's just as good of a passer if not better. The only thing I see Marbury doing better is scoring and flashy plays. Hinrich may not exactly be the consumate point gaurd because he shoots a bit too much, but he definitely is better at Marbury at decision making. If we're arguing whether who's the better basketball player, I might say Marbury, but if we're discussing who's the better point gaurd, it's Hinrich, without a doubt in my mind. I akin this arguement to a JKidd vs. Iverson point gaurd debate. Iverson is the better player, for sure, but the better point gaurd is JKidd without a doubt.</div>
He?s not more versatile. Marbury can play shooting guard, too. Although he started at the two last year, it doesn?t mean he?s more versatile. It just means he has a year of shooting guard under his belt. Better defense is something Hinrich has, but surely that doesn?t make him a better point guard. If he shoots too much, and obviously doesn?t do it efficiently he?s below 40%, that means he?s not a great decision maker as he doesn?t know is own limits. Marbury scores because the Knicks count on him to put points on the board. Who else can do it efficiently? Marbury is a very effective scorer and can balance it out with his passing unlike Hinrich so his decision making is better. How can you say because he?s more versatile and because he?s a better defender, he?s better than Marbury. There?s more to a point guard than that. In terms of decision making, Marbury has the advantage. In assists, Marbury has the advantage. In overall efficiency, Marbury has the advantage.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I don't see how this helps your arguement. Stoudemire played better when Marbury is gone...Marbury is the point gaurd, he should've played worse when your pg leaves.</div>
No, Stoudemire was a young and talented player and those type of players usually get better.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I think that's a poor assessment. Johnson miraculously got better which coincidentally was the same time Marbury left. That's weak, if you ask me.</div>
I already gave the reasons.
A) Johnson improved some aspects of his game on his own such as shooting.
With his main competition, Penny Hardaway, traded to New York, he got more freedom.
C) He played 13 more minutes than he did the previous season.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I think their bottom of the WC record with Marbury had something to do with their choice to rebuild around a player point gaurd, in this case, Nash.</div>
So why did they re-sign him until 2009 after the 02-03 season?
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">They could have gotten Q without trading Marbury.</div>
I don?t think they could have. They just threw 60 million at Nash I don?t know if they could throw more at Q without giving up Marbury.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">The same reason he doesn't make the playoffs every year. They let him do his thing, but at the end of the game his team loses.</div>
I?m sure if Marbury never dealt with constant injuries, I?m sure his teams would do better.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Your point? The East has been horrible since Jordan left. It still is. Pretty much after Miami, Detroit, and Indiana it's anyone's game. That is 5 teams who can still make the playoffs and given how bad the Atlantic was last season the Knicks had a more than probable chance of making it.</div>
My point was you were wrong when you said this: ?It's not a coincidental trend that teams do really well the first season he gets there (the Knicks even had a playoff season), and then completely tank the following.? The East was much worse than they were last year. There was a 6 game difference between the 8th seeds last year.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">No. I don't think MVPs, DPOYs, All first NBA teams and defensive teams makes any player worse.</div>
I didn?t say that. These are MVP?s, etc. and the fact that they haven?t gotten out of the first round until they were around Marbury?s age would make it even worse.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Jordan, David Robinson, and KG didn't have much individual success? Are you following the same NBA I am?</div>
Until Duncan and Spree/Cassell, none of them got far in their careers.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm saying, atleast MJ, KG, and Drobb made it to the playoffs CONSISTENTLY. Not every two years or whatever Marbury's streak is. They've made it to the CF, Drobb and MJ went to the finals. Marbury is older than KG was when KG made the WCF. MJ already had championships. There's a very very very very big gap between Marbury and these guys.</div>
But they started doing much better towards the end of their careers, right? So, why give up on Marbury then?
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">MJ, Robinson, and KG were never chronic losers. Maybe a case for KG could be made, but definitely not MJ or DRobb. There's a reason why they were HOFers before their first championship. Brand, Reef, Francis, and Terry and Marbury are chronic losers. They are a fantasy basketball players. They get stats but they don't translate any wins in real life. MJ, Drobb, KG all won more than they lost. They've had consistnetly over .500 seasons. There's no way in hell you can even compare Marbury, Brand, Reef or anybody to these players.</div>
I?m comparing their success which is something I can do. I already know Marbury and co. aren?t on their level. It?s not news to me; I?m saying being a loser doesn?t mean you are any less of a player.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Do you want me to go further? Are you trying to tell me that not every team has to deal with injuries and off-court troubles?</div>
No, not at all. What I?m saying is Marbury always has some bad luck throughout his career with injuries and things of that nature.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Miami had injuries to Shaq and Wade. Haslem's finger was a problem. Alonzo has a medical bill the size of a football field. They dealt with it.</div>
I?m not talking about the postseason.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Detroit dealt with suspensions. Rasheed's foot was bothering him. Ben Wallace, along with suspensions was battling his own injuries that took him out of games. Rip was wearing his mask.</div>
I?m not even talking about playing through injuries because of that were the case, I would have said New York?s injuries as well.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Chicago lost two key starters towards the end of the season, before they were garunteed a playoff spot.</div>
Not too major at all. This was very late in the season.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Washington had fall outs with Kwame Brown. Jarvis Hayes injured himsself.</div>
Not as good nor important as Houston and Hardaway are to New York.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Philly just got Webber, which arguably made them a worse team and he was dealing with his own injuries. They traded the bulk of their frontline for him too. THey were still learning how to mesh and play with Webber. Webber had off-court troubles with OBrien but they still made the playoffs.</div>
Knicks did the same thing too with the Nazr trade.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">This is jus the Eastern teams. I can go on with the Western. EVERY team has problems and the Knicks are not special to that. Everyone is hurting and bruising at the end of the season so it is never an excuse to say that injuries were the reason a team doesn't win.</div>
Some teams have more problems than others. Agreed?
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">And that's what top players do. I guess Marbury isn't that.</div>
But he hasn?t been to the playoffs consistently nor has he been far.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Isn't that Marbury's job? I mean, if VC could do it, why couldn't another "elite" player like Marbury do it?</div>
Not as much help as Marbury does.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">You just said Vince Carter and I quote, "single-handily" did it.</div>
I just realized I made a mistake. Kidd was a big factor as well.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Oh, so he could ride the success of the team and not contribute?</div>
I never said that. Where do you get that?
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I don't think anyone would have called Jamison or Hughes an all-star caliber player before last season. Arenas did that for them.</div>
Hughes you can make a case for, but Jamison? He had a 25/9/2 season before and had 2 consecutive 50-point games. He?s had plenty of all-star caliber seasons.
<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Seems like you're settling with Marbury's mediocrity.</div>
No, I?m not.