# Marbury in New York.



## Arclite (Nov 2, 2002)

21.5ppg, 9.5apg, 46% fgs, 38% 3pt, 86% fts..

All while leading New York to an above .500 record despite Houston's injury problems, trading Van Horn, and just recently losing four games on a western conference road trip..

Is Jason Kidd still everyone's unanimous #1 at point guard? I think Steph is right there with Jason this year.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Oh wow an "above average .500"

How mighty impressive. But I considered him #1 last yr, and do too this yr.


----------



## Arclite (Nov 2, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JarvisHayes24</b>!
> Oh wow an "above average .500"
> 
> How mighty impressive. But I considered him #1 last yr, and do too this yr.


Without Houston, Steph's supporting cast in New York is extremely lackluster, and Houston's games since coming back from the injury have been: 2-13, 2-13, 5-13, 7-16..

It's not mighty impressive, but its pretty damn good.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Yes he has been terrific and I am glad he has been leading the Knicks. My second favorite player in the league.

Give em' hell Steph.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

He surpassed Jason Kidd last year, in my opinion. His performance in New York only validates my opinion, to me.


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Nah, he's not better than Kidd. A better shooter, sure. A better anything else, no.


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> He surpassed Jason Kidd last year, in my opinion. His performance in New York only validates my opinion, to me.


There were at least a game or two Penny made the winning baskets in the closing moments.

New York has one of the best defensive front line for the bigs in the EAST, why having Penny and KVH and some Allen Houston to help him. He should be leading the team to some 9-1 or 8-2. Having medicore team record just validates my opinion as well, a second tire basketball player.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

Steph is better then Kidd in a lot of facets of the game. Everyone shoots better then Kidd, so thats a given, he penetrates better, he's quicker which allows him to play tougher man to man defense. Kidd may be a better passer but there isn't a large gap like people think it is. Kidd benefitted so much from playing in the East over the last two years that people forgot he couldn't win a thing in the West. It was almost instantly the Knicks started winning when Steph got there, it just goes to show you can take a superstar from the West and put him on a weak East team and next thing you know they are in the playoffs.

Is Steph any better now then he was when he was on Phoenix a few months ago, No, but do people look at him as better because the Knicks are winning, Yes. Steph is a better basketball player then Kidd, and has been for a littly while now.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Just a testament to how tough it is in the West. Marbury had more talent with him in PHX and was going nowhere, put him in the East and he almost single handedly made the Knicks a playoff team. 

This really strengthens my argument on the reason why New Jersey sucked when he was there, there was very little talent and the East was a little tougher. Jason Kidd has been overrated every since the East coast media made him their love child. Now if only Kenyon martin can leave so we can see how much better Kidd makes his teammates


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>MemphisX</b>!
> Just a testament to how tough it is in the West. Marbury had more talent with him in PHX and was going nowhere, put him in the East and he almost single handedly made the Knicks a playoff team.
> 
> This really strengthens my argument on the reason why New Jersey sucked when he was there, there was very little talent and the East was a little tougher. Jason Kidd has been overrated every since the East coast media made him their love child. Now if only Kenyon martin can leave so we can see how much better Kidd makes his teammates


I really don't think that Kenyon is the guy who led this Jersey team to the Finals the past couple years. He's a good player, but not true star who could lead a team like Jason Kidd.


----------



## LionOfJudah (May 27, 2003)

I can't remeber where I heard it but someone said, Kidd won't only get a layup on anyone. He'll get you a layup on anyone. I just feel Kidd still has that edge on Starbury making him more of a real PG, but I'd take Starbury over Kidd because of his youth and his other advantages.

Heres how I'd break it down,

Scoring: Starbury
Passing: Kidd
Athletisim: Starbury
D: Starbury
Court Vision: Kidd
Leadership: Kidd

The only thing Kidd has on Starbury is expirence IMO. (And a fine *** wife )


----------



## Auggie (Mar 7, 2004)

last year gary payton gave j-kidd a run for his money in the play-offs with milwaukee. if a nets-knicks matchup this year i think/hope starbury would win over nets


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> Steph is better then Kidd in a lot of facets of the game. Everyone shoots better then Kidd, so thats a given, he penetrates better, he's quicker which allows him to play tougher man to man defense. Kidd may be a better passer but there isn't a large gap like people think it is. Kidd benefitted so much from playing in the East over the last two years that people forgot he couldn't win a thing in the West. It was almost instantly the Knicks started winning when Steph got there, it just goes to show you can take a superstar from the West and put him on a weak East team and next thing you know they are in the playoffs.
> 
> Is Steph any better now then he was when he was on Phoenix a few months ago, No, but do people look at him as better because the Knicks are winning, Yes. Steph is a better basketball player then Kidd, and has been for a littly while now.


Kidd was making the playoffs year after year in the West, didn't Marbury miss out his first year while a Sun, hence Amare?

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>MemphisX</b>!
> Just a testament to how tough it is in the West. Marbury had more talent with him in PHX and was going nowhere, put him in the East and he almost single handedly made the Knicks a playoff team.
> 
> This really strengthens my argument on the reason why New Jersey sucked when he was there, there was very little talent and the East was a little tougher. Jason Kidd has been overrated every since the East coast media made him their love child. Now if only Kenyon martin can leave so we can see how much better Kidd makes his teammates


Kidd is hurt, so you can see the performance of his teammates now. Look at the last 4 box scores. You'll notice that KMart and RJ are holding their own while others aren't.

Part of why Marbury couldn't do much was because the Nets team was not always healthy, but the Nets team Marbury played with was much much more talented then this team now. Look at the years KVH and Kittles had earlier in their careers.

-Petey


----------



## NYKBaller (Oct 29, 2003)

Marbury is #1 in total assists also....


----------



## Charlie Brown (Oct 22, 2002)

With Marbury, you get more out of one player.

With Kidd, you get more out of five players.

Kidd is the best PG in the NBA.


----------



## Cometsbiggestfan (May 14, 2003)

Both are good and a bit overrated, IMO.


----------



## Kmasonbx (Apr 7, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Petey</b>!
> 
> 
> Kidd was making the playoffs year after year in the West, didn't Marbury miss out his first year while a Sun, hence Amare?
> ...


Steph was 24 at the end of that season, and remember that Suns team lost Rodney Rogers and Tony Delk and didn't replace them so that was 24 points per game they had to try to replace. Saying Steph was the sole reason they went downhill is like saying Kidd is the sole reason why the Nets were good that year. The Suns lost a lot that year while the Nets gained a lot besides Kidd.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kmasonbx</b>!
> 
> 
> Steph was 24 at the end of that season, and remember that Suns team lost Rodney Rogers and Tony Delk and didn't replace them so that was 24 points per game they had to try to replace. Saying Steph was the sole reason they went downhill is like saying Kidd is the sole reason why the Nets were good that year. The Suns lost a lot that year while the Nets gained a lot besides Kidd.


Slow down champ. I thought I said Kidd had been making the playoffs year after year. Had he and his teams had their ups and down? Besides that Nets team Marbury was on, we missed the playoffs the year he was traded to the Nets, while Cassell brought us there the season before. 

-Petey


----------

