Originally Posted by Da KO King
Yeah, cause Marbury being one of the only capable scorers on many of his past teams had no effect on Marbury's game. Marbury went from being a Kenny Anderson/Rod Strickland type PG to a Calvin Murphy type guy magically.
Kenny and Rod were not the same type of player, but we won't get into that period, plus comparing Marbury to Kenny just because of the GT connection is a dis to Marbs.
Just do the research and you'll learn that: a) both the NJ Nets and Phoenix Suns were extremely injury-plagued; b) neither team was as strongly contructed as they are now.
No...I want you to do the research and you will find that amazingly the teams that Marbs got traded from got [b]Immediately [/] better because of the point guard they acquired. Some of the same players Marbs played with in Phoenix are still there now. With Nash they instantly excelled.
A side note for New Jersey, look at their record when Marbs got shipped out for Kidd. The went from perrenial losers to instant
NBA finalists. If that doesn't give you an indicator on the importance of having a real PG who is a floor general as is Kidd is then there is no convincing you.
The Nets went to the finals with virtually the same team. Unless your counting a young RJ as the difference maker.
No the difference is that Marbury makes no one better as the main distributor.
Yes he can score, but don't dare say that Marbs didn't have any help, therefore that's why he lost. He has had help his whole career.
But the point is as I will say again, the Job of the PG is to distribute that ball.
Great PG's makes player better, helping them to score easy baskets.
Marbury refuses to do that.
But I have a question for you.....How many PG's can you think of in the L during Marbury's career has been as notorious for giving up his dribble as he does.
And you know just as well as I do that the Knicks will not be relevant until the day Marbury takes that hike. History around Marbury dictates this.