# Would you part with Marbury to pick Bogut?



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

Would you part with the face of your team to draft Bogut?

-Petey


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

I know I don't speak for the Knicks but here's what it basically comes down to:

A big man that can play or a scoring PG that are dime a dozen? Hmm...


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

aquaitious said:


> I know I don't speak for the Knicks but here's what it basically comes down to:
> 
> A big man that can play or a scoring PG that are dime a dozen? Hmm...


Dime a dozen?

I'm pretty sure that Marbury is the only PG with 20ppg and 8 apg.

To top it off he has a career average of 20.6ppg and 8.3 apg.

Assumeing his 8 assist are creating 2 point feild goals, he accounts for 36 points a night in some way.

That is huge.

-Petey


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Steve Francis, Allen Iverson (he plays point guard), Baron Davis, Dwyane Wade, Gilbert Arenas, Mike Bibby are a few that are close to that and that come right to mind.


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

I would say, No.
Marbury is a good player and he needs to adjust according to his teammates.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Weasel said:


> I would say, No.
> Marbury is a good player and he needs to adjust according to his teammates.


He's a great player, but imagine having someone to pass to down low? You'd be only the....2nd/3rd team in the east to have that option.


----------



## cpawfan (Jun 20, 2004)

Absolutely. While Marbury produces great stats, I don't believe he helps his team win with those stats, rather he gets them to the detrament of good team play. Plus, if you want Phil Jackson to take over the team, both Zeke and Marbury will have to go.

Phil Jackson + Bogut >> Zeke + Marbury

I must ask though, do you believe any team that has a shot at Bogut would actually trade him for Marbury?


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

aquaitious said:


> Steve Francis, Allen Iverson (he plays point guard), Baron Davis, Dwyane Wade, Gilbert Arenas, Mike Bibby are a few that are close to that and that come right to mind.


Comparing Marbury to Francis is a joke. Within a team of scorers he still puts up 20 ppg, and his low in the last few years has been 19.8 ppg?

Look at last year for Francis, he averaged 16.6 ppg when told to play with Yao...

Nor has Francis had a 8 apg season, while Marbury averages it for his career.

Davis is hurt a bit, Arenas is still green (young), when has Bibby dropped 20 ppg in any season?

Marbury is in a rear class.

-Petey


----------



## inapparent (Jul 2, 2003)

I love what I've seen of Bogut, his extensive array of skills for a big man, his attitude and maturity, but he doesn't scream franchise player. he may be one but it's not obvious--he could easily be another Chris Kaman--good (so far) for 19 and 12 one night but 8 and 6 most others. I wouldn't trade Marbury unless it netted me more than just Bogut--I'd need a promising player already in the NBA as well to consider i, say a Marquis Daniels or Josh Howard type (hint hint Zeke)


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

i dont even like steph and i say no. Boguts a good player, but hes like a third option type


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

inapparent said:


> I love what I've seen of Bogut, his extensive array of skills for a big man, his attitude and maturity, but he doesn't scream franchise player. he may be one but it's not obvious--he could easily be another Chris Kaman--good (so far) for 19 and 12 one night but 8 and 6 most others. I wouldn't trade Marbury unless it netted me more than just Bogut--I'd need a promising player already in the NBA as well to consider i, say a Marquis Daniels or Josh Howard type (hint hint Zeke)


So you would trade Marbury for a high pick and a young player with upside stuck on the bench?

-Petey


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

aquaitious said:


> He's a great player, but imagine having someone to pass to down low? You'd be only the....2nd/3rd team in the east to have that option.


To me I think it is easier to get a decent big than a quality PG. There are plenty of centers that can be picked up and start to help a little, you can't really say that about PG's.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

Weasel said:


> To me I think it is easier to get a decent big than a quality PG. There are plenty of centers that can be picked up and start to help a little, you can't really say that about PG's.


Said the man whose favorite team has Brand... 20/10.

-Petey


----------



## Weasel (Oct 18, 2003)

Petey said:


> Said the man whose favorite team has Brand... 20/10.
> 
> -Petey


Yeah, but the Clips needed a good point guard the past few years, Livingston hast recently stepped in. A team not having a great PG turns out to be a disorganized one with a lot of turnovers.


----------



## MPK (Oct 20, 2002)

I would deal Marbury because of his contract...I like him as a player, but his deal is very onerous...


----------



## J Pops (Sep 13, 2003)

the only glaring stat that disturbs me about steph is taht he has never won or been on a winning team, there comes a time when people have to satrt asking questions about a guys ability to lead the team. sure marbury is a great point guard and star in the league but he just hasnt been able to put thing together and lead a winning team. his supporting cast hasnt been amazing but it has been productive and for him to become indespensible for the knicks he has to start winning. the bottom line is the wins, it doesnt matter if you average 30ppg and 10apg if you cant win your effort counts for nothing. I believe that the mvp votes should also be awarded that way, IMO steve nash should be awarded the MVP this season because of what he did for the suns leading them and turning them around to a WINNING team.


----------



## Rhubarb (Mar 19, 2005)

cpawfan said:


> I must ask though, do you believe any team that has a shot at Bogut would actually trade him for Marbury?


Depends what that team's depth is like.

I love Bogut, but I doubt he has the ability to be the face of a franchise. He'll be a solid player in this league, with perhaps a few All-Star appearances to top things off, but he's by no means that prized of a pick.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

MPK said:


> I would deal Marbury because of his contract...I like him as a player, but his deal is very onerous...


I think Marbury is one of the few players worthy of a max contract.

I don't think there are many PGs in the league better than him in terms of pure production.

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

J Pops said:


> the only glaring stat that disturbs me about steph is taht he has never won or been on a winning team, there comes a time when people have to satrt asking questions about a guys ability to lead the team. sure marbury is a great point guard and star in the league but he just hasnt been able to put thing together and lead a winning team. his supporting cast hasnt been amazing but it has been productive and for him to become indespensible for the knicks he has to start winning. the bottom line is the wins, it doesnt matter if you average 30ppg and 10apg if you cant win your effort counts for nothing. I believe that the mvp votes should also be awarded that way, IMO steve nash should be awarded the MVP this season because of what he did for the suns leading them and turning them around to a WINNING team.


Marbury? He has lead his team to the playoffs. Looking around the league in terms of verus other premium players... he hasn't gotten as far, but nor did KG up until last year.

-Petey


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

I haven't seen all that much of bogut. Seems like a nice player, maybe a brad Miller type of guy. Nice to have but not someone who'll take you to the mountain top. But then neither is Marbury.

I'd do it if it were part of a concerted traditional rebuild effort. You know, move large contracts when possible, allow others to expire, try to accumulate draft picks, be bad next year to get another high lottery pick (Do I hear Greg Oden?), get under the cap to try to sign a significant free agents in 07, like Lebron, Wade, Bosh. That kind of thing.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

son of oakley said:


> I haven't seen all that much of bogut. Seems like a nice player, maybe a brad Miller type of guy. Nice to have but not someone who'll take you to the mountain top. But then neither is Marbury.
> 
> I'd do it if it were part of a concerted traditional rebuild effort. You know, move large contracts when possible, allow others to expire, try to accumulate draft picks, be bad next year to get another high lottery pick (Do I hear Greg Oden?), *get under the cap to try to sign a significant free agents in 07, like Lebron, Wade, Bosh.* That kind of thing.


They will all be restricted Free Agents then, it'll be hard to get a player under that condition, unless the CBA is really altered.

-Petey


----------



## inapparent (Jul 2, 2003)

son of oakley said:


> I haven't seen all that much of bogut. Seems like a nice player, maybe a brad Miller type of guy. Nice to have but not someone who'll take you to the mountain top. But then neither is Marbury.
> 
> I'd do it if it were part of a concerted traditional rebuild effort. You know, move large contracts when possible, allow others to expire, try to accumulate draft picks, be bad next year to get another high lottery pick (Do I hear Greg Oden?), get under the cap to try to sign a significant free agents in 07, like Lebron, Wade, Bosh. That kind of thing.


I agree entirely with this--when you have unlimited payroll and are sitting on a ton of expiring contracts you're actually in a position to do more than *hope* to rebuild--you can look around the league and position yourself for one of the young sure things already out there, the Lebrons and Wades and Stoudemires Oak is talking about. That's basically what Phoenix did even though they went sort of complementary rather than franchise in signing Nash and Q, and it's what Denver did (although I still think, despite their recent success, that Kenyon was a bad sign and he's a different player without Kidd to feed him). I'll be really disappointed if we don't have bonafide sub-27 yr old stud on our team by 2008 bc it's easy to see that it's possible: accumulate draft picks and trade expiring contracts for either a super player or for later expiring contracts in order to have a shot at Wade or Lebron. If moving Marbury helps us get there then fine, but it probably doesn't help...yet. I can see him being part of a package for LJ 2 years from now when Stephon is still excellent and King James is dictating terms to Cleveland and the Cavs have to get something back for him. If we concentrate on Cs and PFs and then get Lebron, well, a pass-first PG who's merely competent wd be plenty.


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Petey said:


> They will all be restricted Free Agents then, it'll be hard to get a player under that condition, unless the CBA is really altered.
> 
> -Petey


Yes, you're right about that, I meant to put the following year, 08 but had it confused. In either case I'm willing to be patient when I think we're going about it the right way. I gotta say I'm becoming a bit impatient now because I'm not a big believer in building around a flakey backcourt, and using expiring contracts which yield flawed overpaid players who aren't fitting in and their owners have the sense to do the rebuild that we don't.

The reason these expiring contracts have value is because every team but us knows the value of getting the payroll down to have FA flexibility. And unlike places like Atlanta and Toronto, NY could be a big FA draw if we could compete financially. Lebron has the Nike deal with incentives as does Kobe. Companies actually want to pay these guys to play in NY and we squander the opportunity to draft the Odens and sign the Lebrons so that we can sell season tickets with guys like Marbury and Penny.

I know this is a big turnaround for me as I invested a lot of energy last season in defending the Marbury trade, but what can I say, I know him better now and I see why he is a difficult player to build around. 

And it doesn't help that both he and Crawford are defensive liabilities. Everybody talks about needing good interior defenders and shot blockers, but the perimeter is the first line of attack and when it's a sieve like ours even Bill Russell will foul out.

Anyway, trading Marbury just for the sake of change probably doesn't make sense yet, but to start over I'd be more than happy.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

son of oakley said:


> Yes, you're right about that, I meant to put the following year, 08 but had it confused. In either case I'm willing to be patient when I think we're going about it the right way. I gotta say I'm becoming a bit impatient now because I'm not a big believer in building around a flakey backcourt, and using expiring contracts which yield flawed overpaid players who aren't fitting in and their owners have the sense to do the rebuild that we don't.
> 
> The reason these expiring contracts have value is because every team but us knows the value of getting the payroll down to have FA flexibility. And unlike places like Atlanta and Toronto, NY could be a big FA draw if we could compete financially. *Lebron has the Nike deal with incentives as does Kobe. Companies actually want to pay these guys to play in NY* and we squander the opportunity to draft the Odens and sign the Lebrons so that we can sell season tickets with guys like Marbury and Penny.
> 
> ...


Wait a minute, this has been confirmed?

-Petey


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Petey said:


> Wait a minute, this has been confirmed?
> 
> -Petey


You know what, I thought it was but on closer read I see it's not:

http://www.nypost.com/sports/knicks/23133.htm 

Portions: 

_Goodwin would neither confirm nor deny if James has a Knick-related sneaker contract clause but told The Post, "When you have a contract like that, you look for every edge, every angle." _

And usually these deals include other major market cities like Chi and LA, so it's not a lock, but I still like NY's chances all things being equal.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Petey said:


> Comparing Marbury to Francis is a joke. Within a team of scorers he still puts up 20 ppg, and his low in the last few years has been 19.8 ppg?
> 
> Look at last year for Francis, he averaged 16.6 ppg when told to play with Yao...
> 
> ...


Francise is one of only 4 players in NBA history that has averaged 15, 5, 5 in each of his first five years of NBA basketball.

And he's doing it for the 6th time too.

Arenas is young? Well who'd you rather have in 10 years? Marbury or Arenas? Bibby on the other hand played with 20 point scoreres his whole career.

Davis might be hurt but he can put those numbers up.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

son of oakley said:


> You know what, I thought it was but on closer read I see it's not:
> 
> http://www.nypost.com/sports/knicks/23133.htm
> 
> ...


I'm pretty sure those clauses will be questioned ethically.

Part of why Kobe is not a Knick today.

-Petey


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

aquaitious said:


> Francise is one of only 4 players in NBA history that has averaged 15, 5, 5 in each of his first five years of NBA basketball.
> 
> And he's doing it for the 6th time too.
> 
> ...


Honestly, they are all excuses. Are they not? 

Or let me rephrase, he's better than people give him credit for... after comparing him to others.


-Petey


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Petey said:


> Honestly, they are all excuses. Are they not?
> 
> Or let me rephrase, he's better than people give him credit for... after comparing him to others.
> 
> ...


Yes and no. Marbury is a talented player, but IMO he's only considered one of the better PGs because of the dearth of talent at that position. What I mean by that is most of the PGs are considered good because of their scoring abilities. 

Consider this, Kidd averages ~14.7 ppg for his career, Nash 13, and in spite of that they are still considered at the top of the heap. But if Marbury were in that range, say a 14 ppg career scorer he'd be playing for the MLE. He's a star because of his points, not his playmaking skills. Good assist totals not with standing.

And I'm not against scoring PGs, The great ones succeed beyond a shadow of a doubt. Isiah, Magic, and Clyde each led their team to a Championship as their teams highest scorer, I just think they were all much better floor generals and leaders than Marbury.

Anyway, if people want to discuss Marbury's pros and cons further I'm willing to pick him apart, but I've learned elsewhere it's not all that welcome on Knicks boards, so let me not do so uninvited.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i would trade marbury for bogut.

the knicks have JC to play pg where he is a better player anyway as opposed to 2 guard.

a good center is hard to get and the knicks have 2 good pg's (marbury is better than JC but crawford is plenty good enough) plus phil jax would and the triangle would be a better fit with a good passing center and a pg who has played the triangle for 3 years .

i think the knicks could trade penny for jalen rose or trade tim thomas for korver and dalembert to fill the sg hole.


----------



## Rhubarb (Mar 19, 2005)

disgruntledKNICKfan said:


> trade tim thomas for korver and dalembert to fill the sg hole.


1. Why would the 76ers even consider trading Korver and Dalembert for Tim Thomas?

2. Korver is a forward


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

disgruntledKNICKfan said:


> i would trade marbury for bogut.
> 
> the knicks have JC to play pg where he is a better player anyway as opposed to 2 guard.
> 
> ...


I think they would offer something more like Mashburn's expiring and a pick of some sort.

-Petey


----------



## The True Essence (May 26, 2003)

id rather let tims contract expire and re sign him for much less then trade him away and lose his bird rights. that way we would still have the mle to spend and you keep a talent like tim. i doubt he commands any more then the mle at his age anyways so we should keep him at about 5 mil per year.....i wouldnt mind trading pennys bigger expiring contract with a draft pick however..


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

PennyHardaway said:


> id rather let tims contract expire and re sign him for much less then trade him away and lose his bird rights. that way we would still have the mle to spend and you keep a talent like tim. i doubt he commands any more then the mle at his age anyways so we should keep him at about 5 mil per year.....i wouldnt mind trading pennys bigger expiring contract with a draft pick however..


I thought Thomas had a bigger expiring for some reason.

-Petey


----------



## son of oakley (Dec 24, 2003)

Next year Penny's salary is 15.75M and Tim's is 13.975M. 

Penny, Tim is only 28, same as Marbury. I doubt he drops as low as the MLE, but if he does I'd re-sign him at that, provided we don't need it for Ariza, which we might. So I guess if we were to keep TT it would be via a contract extension, but I don't know if extensions can drop so drastically. I'm too lazy to look it up.


----------



## Petey (Aug 23, 2002)

son of oakley said:


> Next year Penny's salary is 15.75M and Tim's is 13.975M.
> 
> Penny, Tim is only 28, same as Marbury. I doubt he drops as low as the MLE, but if he does I'd re-sign him at that, provided we don't need it for Ariza, which we might. So I guess if we were to keep TT it would be via a contract extension, but I don't know if extensions can drop so drastically. I'm too lazy to look it up.


You can resign him with his bird rights.

Shocking, I always though Thomas made more than Penny.

-Petey


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Petey said:


> I think they would offer something more like Mashburn's expiring and a pick of some sort.
> 
> -Petey


zeke thomas wouldn't do it , he's basically put his rep on the line his expiring deals , seeing what a dale davis expiring deal gets (baron) for a team looking to drop salary Tim thomas should be worth more than a pick down the road(the 76ers to my knowledge cant trade a pick this year because its gone already and next year because you cant trade picks 2 years in a row) he will most likely have to take on more salary but it should either fill needs( a center being priority #1, a true 2 #2) or be a significant player upgrade, if thomas cant get that he should probably be fired.


----------



## RoyWilliams (May 25, 2003)

disgruntledKNICKfan said:


> i would trade marbury for bogut.
> 
> 
> i think the knicks could trade tim thomas for korver and dalembert to fill the sg hole.


 uke:


----------

