# Video of Delerious Stephon Marbury on Zach Trade..."They Scared Now!"



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

*Video of Delirious Stephon Marbury on Zach Trade..."They Scared Now!"*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYY338_JgvI


"we got a younger youthier player, umm, within zach randolph".

i honestly think dude was high in this.

EDIT: messed up on spelling delirious in the title. im aware.


----------



## Five5even (Jun 15, 2007)

He wont be jubilant once he realizes zach wont play a lick of defense next to eddie curry.


----------



## BenDavis503 (Apr 11, 2007)

I'm sorry but "ignorant (explicit word)" comes to mind when I see this video.

"You think he goin right, but really he goin left."

Well, most teams and players know by now he is left handed.

smh...


----------



## QRICH (Feb 2, 2004)

Scared? Zach and Eddy will get their points but so will opposing frontcourts. This has to be the worst defensive duo in the NBA. You thought Zach was a pathetic defender, Eddy is just as bad.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Wow...

Im so happy we got guys like Roy and Oden to be the face of the franchise.


----------



## Spoolie Gee (Feb 3, 2005)

Oh, and I know people are going to come on and say were just a bunch of hayseeds from Oregon hatin on NY but I dont care...

Youthier? LOL


----------



## spongyfungy (Oct 22, 2003)

youthier...
preach on Stephon.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

When did Stephon Marbury turn into Al Sharpton?


----------



## loyalty4life (Sep 17, 2002)

Youthier... I love that.


----------



## ryanjend22 (Jan 23, 2004)

Sambonius said:


> When did Stephon Marbury turn into Al Sharpton?


after his third blunt.


----------



## alext42083 (Nov 7, 2003)

ryanjend22 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYY338_JgvI
> 
> 
> "we got a younger youthier player, umm, within zach randolph".
> ...


:lol: 
Good gawd... c'mon Stephon. Have some pride, you're better than that.

That's gotta be the funniest thing I've ever heard. The fact that this is the MSG network promoting this -- the Knicks' primary network -- makes it even better.
"YOUTHIER"??? Just stumbling and mumbling over his words at the end, either he was really really giddy, or just on something.

Good stuff. Great find.


----------



## HAAK72 (Jun 18, 2007)

Thanks for the link!!! Classic 'blunted' speech by the "eldier" Marbury...

...maybe to get 1 blocked shot per game EC can give zBO a piggy back ride?


----------



## ilPadrino (May 23, 2003)

:lol:

I am guessing the education level of the Knicks' starting 5 is the lowest in the NBA.


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

With Zach in the fold, I hope NY enjoys their meteoric rise back to mediocrity.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

He's not a public speaker, and I think it's sorta sad that so many people on this board act like a pack of jackals and rip into him for what he's saying. Or, rather, how he's saying it.

The guy is excited... might he be wrong about the impact that Zach will have? Sure.

As a Knicks' fan, though, I would WANT my players to be excited and to be confident and to be energized about the team's potential.

Whether he said "youthier" or not.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> With Zach in the fold, I hope NY enjoys their meteoric rise back to mediocrity.


Heh.

Of course, in the East, mediocrity means a pretty good shot at the Finals. 

Ed O.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

Come on, Starbury. Don't be greedy. Share some of that good stuff you're smokin'.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Randolph is good for the Knicks. Randolph is a good player for bad teams, because he'll score a lot of points and keep the score respectable. But he's not good for good teams, because he doesn't play defense or pass well. 

Now that we are becoming the basketball gods of the NBA, we don't need him around anymore.


----------



## B_&_B (Feb 19, 2004)

Ed O said:


> He's not a public speaker, and I think it's sorta sad that so many people on this board act like a pack of jackals and rip into him for what he's saying. Or, rather, how he's saying it.
> 
> The guy is excited... might he be wrong about the impact that Zach will have? Sure.
> 
> ...


I agree, although Sambonius's post was hilarious.


----------



## andalusian (Jun 29, 2006)

I loved watching Randolph play for Portland - at least on offense, the guy is a cunning low post scorer and a great hustle rebounder. I am sure he will make NY better - and I hope he will be happy there. It will be interesting to see him and Curry together - like everyone else I suspect there will be some issues with them sharing the paint - but Curry is better than Jamal and it could work better than the Jamal/Zach duo in Portland.

Glad to see that the NY players are excited, just as it is good to see that the Portland core is excited about Greg.


----------



## TLo (Dec 27, 2006)

Well, we are a pack of jackals.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Defending against New York is going to be a breeze. Put all 5 men about 10 feet from the basket and dare them to shoot jumpers. Zach will still get his, because he can hit that midrange shot. But the rest of that team? it's going to be ugly. 

I can't imagine Eddy Curry and Zach Randolph working well together. Abdur-Rahim has a far more varied set of offensive skills (including *gasp* occassionally even passing), and he couldn't come close to making it work with Zach. 

Per minute, Curry has fewer assist than practically anybody in the NBA. Astonishing, given how often he sees the ball. 20 games might go by before Curry even gets around to dishing it to Zach. And Randolph has shown that when the offenses get stagnant, he gets stagnant. 

Isiah Thomas has really just swapped problems. He went from having two shoot-first combo guards who play lousy defense to two black holes in the post who play lousy defense. It's definitely an upgrade, but it's far from ideal. The HAVE to move Curry.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Hate to break it to you, Stephon, but Channing Frye is 24 and Zach Randolph is almost 26. So technically, Frye is youthier than Randolph.

That's wassup.

-Pop


----------



## Ruff Draft (Nov 21, 2004)

SodaPopinski said:


> Hate to break it to you, Stephon, but Channing Frye is 24 and Zach Randolph is almost 26. So technically, Frye is youthier than Randolph.
> 
> That's wassup.
> 
> -Pop


Oh man. You got it before I did...


----------



## YardApe (Mar 10, 2005)

After watching this I now have Randolph in major trouble down to 4 months. Any takers? If this is their leader, I feel that scary times are ahead for the NYC. Forget on the court! Imagine Stephan, Zach and Eddie out on the town together? 

Glad he's gone!


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Ed O said:


> He's not a public speaker, and I think it's sorta sad that so many people on this board act like a pack of jackals and rip into him for what he's saying. Or, rather, how he's saying it.
> 
> The guy is excited... might he be wrong about the impact that Zach will have? Sure.
> 
> ...


That isn't a very Youthier attitude to take Ed O!:biggrin:


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

That was fun. Marbury seemed both extremely pleased and excited to have Zach on the team, and stoned. Good for him! 

And good for us. Zach definitely has talent, but I think our offensive flow and chemistry, and our defense, will be better next year. We have other players to pick up both his scoring and his rebounding, so I don't think he'll be missed. 

Glad everyone is happy! 

:cheers:


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

SodaPopinski said:


> Hate to break it to you, Stephon, but Channing Frye is 24 and Zach Randolph is almost 26. So technically, Frye is youthier than Randolph.
> 
> That's wassup.


That's true, but I would imagine that Stephon is excited about it because Frye doesn't matter to Marbury. He's just not that good, and after being with him a couple of years, it appears that Stephon is more than a little psyched to be getting an impact player to replace Channing.

Ed O.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Marbury isn't a great speaker, but seems to be a good guy. Anyone catch last night's _60 Minutes_ segment on Marbury and his inexpensive but quality athletic shoes? They're apparently of similar quality and build to Air Jordans, but a fraction of the price, to allow poorer kids to afford good shoes.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Minstrel said:


> Marbury isn't a great speaker, but seems to be a good guy. Anyone catch last night's _60 Minutes_ segment on Marbury and his inexpensive but quality athletic shoes? They're apparently of similar quality and build to Air Jordans, but a fraction of the price, to allow poorer kids to afford good shoes.


Hmmm. Third World sweatshops?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

e_blazer1 said:


> Hmmm. Third World sweatshops?


Yes, Air Jordan use those quite a bit.


----------



## stupendous (Feb 17, 2003)

Oh my goodness...if he only had a clue.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Ed O said:


> He's not a public speaker, and I think it's sorta sad that so many people on this board act like a pack of jackals and rip into him for what he's saying. Or, rather, how he's saying it.
> 
> The guy is excited... might he be wrong about the impact that Zach will have? Sure.
> 
> ...


For God's sake, Ed, I know you like to be contrarian, but let's call a spade a spade. Marbury comes off sounding about as ignorant as they come, and his "public speaking ability" has nothing to do with it. This is obviously how the guy speaks all the time, as painful as that is to realize. 

Yeah, "they be scared," all right. Marbury is going to bop them over the head with a fractured sentence.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Talkhard said:


> For God's sake, Ed, I know you like to be contrarian, but let's call a spade a spade. Marbury comes off sounding about as ignorant as they come, and his "public speaking ability" has nothing to do with it. This is obviously how the guy speaks all the time, as painful as that is to realize.
> 
> Yeah, "they be scared," all right. Marbury is going to bop them over the head with a fractured sentence.


I wasn't claiming that he was speaking more poorly than normal because it was in public... I'm pointing out that he's not paid to be a public speaker.

So he speaks nonstandard English... so what? I don't find it amusing to put down how he speaks any more than I would to put down a politician or author for how they play basketball.

Ed O.


----------



## stupendous (Feb 17, 2003)

Not a good public speaker?? The guy has his own talk show!


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Ed O said:


> it appears that Stephon is more than a little psyched to be getting an impact player to replace Channing.
> 
> Ed O.


Meth can certainly do that to you.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Sambonius said:


> Meth can certainly do that to you.


Just when it seems the conversation has reached it's lowest point... 

Marbury is tied to the hip with Isiah so I'd expect him to defend his GM's big move. Though I didn't grow up in a ghetto like he did, if I were a Knick fan I'd be excited and wanting to talk about the club's improvement too. 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see ZR dominate in the east, especially since he's no longer the established 1st option. Here's guessing he goes back to doing what he does best, cleaning up offensive boards.

STOMP


----------



## urwhatueati8god (May 27, 2003)

Loyalty4Life said:


> Youthier... I love that.


Clearly he was practicing writing a Bush speech.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

urwhatueati8god said:


> Clearly he was practicing writing a Bush speech.


Yup, that's his next career: speechwriter!


----------



## yakbladder (Sep 13, 2003)

urwhatueati8god said:


> Clearly he was practicing writing a Bush speech.


Funniest thing I've read all day.

But if we're going to hack on the guy, hack on him because he's a poor basketball player, not because he's excited about Zach Randolph. He's communicating in a way that will be understood and appreciated by plenty of NY fans. He's just excited... But he's still a crappy player.


----------



## Talkhard (May 13, 2003)

Ed O said:


> So he speaks nonstandard English... so what? I don't find it amusing to put down how he speaks any more than I would to put down a politician or author for how they play basketball.


Speaking English is not a hobby or somethng you do on the side. It's something everyone in this country should be able to do, regardless of how he or she makes a living.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

well, not like NY lost anything in the trade....a PF that didn't produce much and a career cancer shooting guard chucker who has left a path of destruction on every franchise he's been on. 

Legit low post offense and rebounding on the block in NYC and the weak east. Hope it works out. 

Go Zach.


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

Talkhard said:


> Speaking English is not a hobby or somethng you do on the side. It's something everyone in this country should be able to do, regardless of how he or she makes a living.


Lou Dobbs is that you?


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

STOMP said:


> Just when it seems the conversation has reached it's lowest point...
> 
> STOMP


The classiest of all the posters in the world. I wonder how the royal Queen feels about you? Remember, don't look directly in her eyes... Dude, step up your personal attacks, they're quite lame.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

well at least he speaks well FOR A NEW YORKER without going on about FOLDING PIZZA, NO GOOD BAGELS ANYWHERE BUT NEW YAAAAWK and KULTCHAAAAAAAAAAAAAH! 


HE WAS AT AN OUTDOOR GAME...better than Kobe's video about the state of his team.


----------



## ProZach (Oct 13, 2005)

http://www.nba.com/nba_news/knicks_welcomerandolph.html


> But [Randolph's] record on the court often gets overlooked because of the one he's built off it with a number of legal problems. But Jones thinks that will all change with Randolph out of Portland, where the Blazers were the only game in town and couldn't hide from the spotlight.


:thinking2: Is he implying that the New York media of all things is going to be easier on Randolph than Portland??? Talk about not being able to hide from the spotlight... Jeesh.



> "I don't think he got all the stuff for his game because of all the stuff that people have portrayed of him off the court. So that was the problem in Portland." *Some* of it was Randolph's own doing.


Some... Which begs the question, who was responsible for the rest of his off-court issues. :whoknows: 

At any rate I wish him the best of luck in their youthier endevour.


----------



## Xericx (Oct 29, 2004)

if he produces, New York media won't care. They gave spreewell a second chance and loved him in NYC.


----------



## STOMP (Jan 1, 2003)

Sambonius said:


> Dude, step up your personal attacks, they're quite lame.


Since I didn't/don't make personal attack(s), I'd have to agree with you about the lameness of my attack(s). 

By the rules here it's OK to attack the post, but not the poster. Throwing out a baseless claim that Marbury is on Meth is plain stupid and adds nothing. I'm sure you're capable of more then that.

STOMP


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

ProZach said:


> At any rate I wish him the best of luck in their youthier endevour.


You butcher "endeavor" like that, but feel qualified to make fun of "youthier"?

Man... people are funny.

Ed O.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Ed O said:


> You butcher "endeavor" like that, but feel qualified to make fun of "youthier"?
> 
> Man... people are funny.
> 
> Ed O.


Spelling something incorrectly is not nearly as funny as a grown man making up a word that nobody would have any reason to believe exists in the English language. I could almost justify it if he were at a loss for words and for some reason couldn't think of the word "younger," but Marbury says "youthier" right after he says "younger" as if he quickly decided the word "younger" just wasn't enough to describe just how "youthy" the Knicks are going to be now. Not to mention he later follows it up with the word "buhfim," which I can only imagine somehow is closely related to "within."

"We just got a younger, youthier player within young ... um ... buhfim Zach Randolph."

-Pop


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

SodaPopinski said:


> Spelling something incorrectly is not nearly as funny as a grown man making up a word that nobody would have any reason to believe exists in the English language.


Actually, neither is that funny except to people who revel in the ignorance of others.

Ed O.


----------



## SodaPopinski (Aug 10, 2004)

Ed O said:


> Actually, neither is that funny except to people who revel in the ignorance of others.
> 
> Ed O.


:allhail:​
Oh yes, King Ed, us peons and simpletons with our rudimentary humor. How amusing.

Get over yourself.

-Pop


----------



## Sambonius (May 21, 2003)

STOMP said:


> Since I didn't/don't make personal attack(s), I'd have to agree with you about the lameness of my attack(s).
> 
> By the rules here it's OK to attack the post, but not the poster. Throwing out a baseless claim that Marbury is on Meth is plain stupid and adds nothing. I'm sure you're capable of more then that.
> 
> STOMP


What level of reading did you not exceed for you to conclude that I'm inferring that Marbury was on meth? 'Lotta good that budget education got you buddy...


----------

