owl troutwig
Banned
- 1,805
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2007
He's absolutely right. Both sides (Knicks coaching staff and Marbury) are being capricious like little kids or jilted ex loves. They're both at fault.
Q. Richardson rips Stephon Marbury (update pg 7: Steph responds to coach & teammates)
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by bullsrepeat3peat,
- Start date
- 916
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2001
why should Steph play? Having him train all summer to get in the best condition as possible and then not play him but then when you trade your best guard andNate gets hurt, you want him back. And if Steph does come back, and the team starts losing, there gonna put the blame on him again when it's not his faultwe traded away our 2 most consistant scorers.
Q is a bum. Dude is a chucker like someone said in the post. If anything, i'd want him out of NY.
Q is a bum. Dude is a chucker like someone said in the post. If anything, i'd want him out of NY.
- 6,702
- 943
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2004
His job is to train year round to stay in top shape....
He is a PROFESSIONAL BASKETBALL PLAYER
- 2,612
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2007
Stephon did what the coaches told him to for a whole summer man! He's a team player! The knicks don't deserve him!
to that sentiment.
- 43,087
- 27,962
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
I don't know how some of y'all can defend him.
There comes a point where you have to be an adult and do your job. Sulking because your team wants to go in another direction gives no one the right to justsay "nah, I don't think I want to work for you today". You signed that contract, now honor it.
Dudes are really like "well, they didn't play him before, so he doesn't have to play now if he doesn't want to". Yes he does! He'sstill under contract and on the roster. What really gives him the right to just diss his teammates and the fans.
He's just digging himself a deeper ditch. Screw the guy. I used to pull for him as hard as anyone, but I can't defend refusing to play because he hassome sort of elementary grudge with the organization. So what he got dissed. Sometimes you gotta tighten up your tie and shine your shoes and head to theoffice, even when you don't want to. But god forbid the guy do something as hard as playing a game of basketball.
There comes a point where you have to be an adult and do your job. Sulking because your team wants to go in another direction gives no one the right to justsay "nah, I don't think I want to work for you today". You signed that contract, now honor it.
Dudes are really like "well, they didn't play him before, so he doesn't have to play now if he doesn't want to". Yes he does! He'sstill under contract and on the roster. What really gives him the right to just diss his teammates and the fans.
He's just digging himself a deeper ditch. Screw the guy. I used to pull for him as hard as anyone, but I can't defend refusing to play because he hassome sort of elementary grudge with the organization. So what he got dissed. Sometimes you gotta tighten up your tie and shine your shoes and head to theoffice, even when you don't want to. But god forbid the guy do something as hard as playing a game of basketball.
- 21,947
- 1,374
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2003
No its not sir.
Breach of contract would be if he was getting paid and dude doesnt want to step out onto the court, ala Scottie Pippen when Phil Jackson pout Kukoc out therefor a final play.
D'Antoni refused to use Steph all season long for his own personal reasons, and with 8 men out there after the trades "ASKED" huim if he'dlike to play since there is 30 minutes available.....that is a straight up slap in the face.
- 14,133
- 285
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2004
Like yall said, he won't be here next year anyway so why are yall mad?
We're looking at the future right?
He's under contract he should play, right?
Duhon's that dude anyway, right?
We can still make the playoffs right?
We can't give him spot minutes, right?
We're looking at the future right?
He's under contract he should play, right?
Duhon's that dude anyway, right?
We can still make the playoffs right?
We can't give him spot minutes, right?
- 25,458
- 644
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2004
i dont even see the points of taken shots and marbury when he cant even say %%*@(i think someone on ESPN said knicks can void his contract if he comes outyacking since they looking for ways not to pay him)
- 43,087
- 27,962
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
We really need to move on from this crap and be happy that we're actually in fair shape as a team for the first time in almost 10 years.
dr 715
Banned
- 976
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2008
You're acting like Marbury ...Originally Posted by true 3 blue
Like yall said, he won't be here next year anyway so why are yall mad?
We're looking at the future right?
He's under contract he should play, right?
Duhon's that dude anyway, right?
We can still make the playoffs right?
We can't give him spot minutes, right?
- 104
- 39
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2001
[h1]Time for Knicks to get tougher with Marbury[/h1]
[h2]by Mike Vaccaro, New York Post[/h2]
Listen, we've all been where Stephon Marbury is, OK? We've all had bosses we didn't get along with. We've all worked for people who, in our view, treated us miserably, with disrespect, without a care for our feelings or emotions.
And you know what?
In our world, in the real world, we have two options when things reach a point close to intolerable. We either keep our mouths shut, grind through life onemiserable eight-hour shift at a time, come home and pound our fists against the walls. Or we quit.
We'd all like to take the third option, which doesn't exist in any precinct of the real world, the option where we choose insolence andinsubordination and aren't asked to pay consequences for taking that path. But in our world, in the real world, that isn't an option. It was JohnnyPaycheck who summed up perfectly the laments of workers everywhere, for all time.
Most of us just stick to singing "Take This Job and Shove It."
We don't actually say it. Wednesday night, for the second time in a week -- and for what has to be, has to be, the last time in his career as a Knick --Marbury was asked to suit up and play after spending the season decked out in street clothes, inactive -- and, according to two sources, he refused.
Last week, in Milwaukee, Marbury tried to spin the story differently than Mike D'Antoni did, claimed the opportunity that night wasn't as clear cutand obvious as D'Antoni said it was. It was difficult to give Marbury the benefit of the doubt then, because he hasn't exactly built a firm wall ofcredibility in his time in New York.
It is impossible to do so now, because he did it again, because he turned down what amounts to an olive branch from D'Antoni that couldn't have beeneasy for the coach to extend, the opportunity to be the Knicks' starting shooting guard the rest of the season.
D'Antoni believed it was the best way to salvage what had devolved into a hideous situation: The guard-strapped Knicks would add a former All-Star totheir rotation, and Marbury could prove to the eyes of league scouts that he still had enough game left for one last contract. He tried to make win-win out oflose-lose.
This was Marbury's final chance to seize any swatch of high ground in this debate, and in his Knick career. Marbury never has been the perfect soldieras a Knick, not even close.
Still, as wonderful as it has been to see D'Antoni's work under trying times here so far, as gratifying as it is to see a professional working thesidelines on game night, it's hard to believe he could have handled this Marbury situation any worse, waiting until opening night to define Marbury'srole -- or lack of it -- with the team.
Fair enough.
Here's the thing, though: Whether Marbury likes it, D'Antoni is his boss, regardless of the fact that he'll make about $16 million more than thecoach this year. Maybe Marbury just got used to being able to rule Isiah Thomas' playground, stomping his feet until he got whatever he wanted, or maybethis is simply the sad climax of a coddled athlete who's been irretrievably enabled going all the way back to Lincoln High.
Whatever. This is the end. This is the final straw, the straw that breaks forever whatever emotional, ethereal ties Marbury has to the Knicks, and theKnicks to Marbury.
Donnie Walsh has to act quickly and firmly, needs to fine Marbury for every game he refuses to play, needs to expedite making him an ex-Knick. Enough isenough.
The Knicks are desperately trying to move on, to limp into their future, to patch something credible between now and July 1, 2010.
They need to shed this albatross in order to make it happen. It's time. It's past time. It's beyond past time.
[h2]by Mike Vaccaro, New York Post[/h2]
Listen, we've all been where Stephon Marbury is, OK? We've all had bosses we didn't get along with. We've all worked for people who, in our view, treated us miserably, with disrespect, without a care for our feelings or emotions.
And you know what?
In our world, in the real world, we have two options when things reach a point close to intolerable. We either keep our mouths shut, grind through life onemiserable eight-hour shift at a time, come home and pound our fists against the walls. Or we quit.
We'd all like to take the third option, which doesn't exist in any precinct of the real world, the option where we choose insolence andinsubordination and aren't asked to pay consequences for taking that path. But in our world, in the real world, that isn't an option. It was JohnnyPaycheck who summed up perfectly the laments of workers everywhere, for all time.
Most of us just stick to singing "Take This Job and Shove It."
We don't actually say it. Wednesday night, for the second time in a week -- and for what has to be, has to be, the last time in his career as a Knick --Marbury was asked to suit up and play after spending the season decked out in street clothes, inactive -- and, according to two sources, he refused.
Last week, in Milwaukee, Marbury tried to spin the story differently than Mike D'Antoni did, claimed the opportunity that night wasn't as clear cutand obvious as D'Antoni said it was. It was difficult to give Marbury the benefit of the doubt then, because he hasn't exactly built a firm wall ofcredibility in his time in New York.
It is impossible to do so now, because he did it again, because he turned down what amounts to an olive branch from D'Antoni that couldn't have beeneasy for the coach to extend, the opportunity to be the Knicks' starting shooting guard the rest of the season.
D'Antoni believed it was the best way to salvage what had devolved into a hideous situation: The guard-strapped Knicks would add a former All-Star totheir rotation, and Marbury could prove to the eyes of league scouts that he still had enough game left for one last contract. He tried to make win-win out oflose-lose.
This was Marbury's final chance to seize any swatch of high ground in this debate, and in his Knick career. Marbury never has been the perfect soldieras a Knick, not even close.
Still, as wonderful as it has been to see D'Antoni's work under trying times here so far, as gratifying as it is to see a professional working thesidelines on game night, it's hard to believe he could have handled this Marbury situation any worse, waiting until opening night to define Marbury'srole -- or lack of it -- with the team.
Fair enough.
Here's the thing, though: Whether Marbury likes it, D'Antoni is his boss, regardless of the fact that he'll make about $16 million more than thecoach this year. Maybe Marbury just got used to being able to rule Isiah Thomas' playground, stomping his feet until he got whatever he wanted, or maybethis is simply the sad climax of a coddled athlete who's been irretrievably enabled going all the way back to Lincoln High.
Whatever. This is the end. This is the final straw, the straw that breaks forever whatever emotional, ethereal ties Marbury has to the Knicks, and theKnicks to Marbury.
Donnie Walsh has to act quickly and firmly, needs to fine Marbury for every game he refuses to play, needs to expedite making him an ex-Knick. Enough isenough.
The Knicks are desperately trying to move on, to limp into their future, to patch something credible between now and July 1, 2010.
They need to shed this albatross in order to make it happen. It's time. It's past time. It's beyond past time.
- 6,702
- 943
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2004
Originally Posted by Dr 715
You're acting like Marbury ...Originally Posted by true 3 blue
Like yall said, he won't be here next year anyway so why are yall mad?
We're looking at the future right?
He's under contract he should play, right?
Duhon's that dude anyway, right?
We can still make the playoffs right?
We can't give him spot minutes, right?
- 2,612
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2007
And dude didn't want to step out on the court.
Thanks for clearing that up
- 6,104
- 51
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
Originally Posted by GUNNA GET IT
good stuff Q.
- 53,383
- 30,844
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2002
it's got to feel weird coming to work and being the most hated guy
but 20 plus million isn't bad either
it's not really dantoni's fault, he probably expected steph to be gone by the time the season started
i don't understand why the knicks organization just don't buy him out like they did to other players and coaches
get rid of him, wait for 2010
but 20 plus million isn't bad either
it's not really dantoni's fault, he probably expected steph to be gone by the time the season started
i don't understand why the knicks organization just don't buy him out like they did to other players and coaches
get rid of him, wait for 2010
- 43,087
- 27,962
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
Man, he was called on when they needed him.
Damn, that's straight disrespectful.
Man, the team is moving in another direction, but when they're in trouble they call on one of the players on the roster to help his team. Straight smack inthe face.
Poor Steph, after all he's done for this franchise, and franchises in the past (Phoenix, New Jersey) he deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Gimme a break.
Damn, that's straight disrespectful.
Man, the team is moving in another direction, but when they're in trouble they call on one of the players on the roster to help his team. Straight smack inthe face.
Poor Steph, after all he's done for this franchise, and franchises in the past (Phoenix, New Jersey) he deserves the benefit of the doubt.
Gimme a break.
- 2,388
- 11
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2007
I'm w/ steph on this one....they've been embarrassing him all year and now all of the sudden they want to play him when the team is depleted....i dontknow why its a big issue because management doesnt care about winning this year, all they care about is 2010.
Why didnt Q say anything when steph was perfectly healthy and D'Antoni activated an injured Eddy Curry so he could have a minimum # of players on theroster???
The Knicks are trying to hold him hostage, they dont want to buy him out but they'd rather pay him to sit on the bench in dress clothes and make it a soapopera.....Why not just call it a loss and send him on his way.
They know he's the best player on the team and they know he'll go to another team and give them work...
Why didnt Q say anything when steph was perfectly healthy and D'Antoni activated an injured Eddy Curry so he could have a minimum # of players on theroster???
The Knicks are trying to hold him hostage, they dont want to buy him out but they'd rather pay him to sit on the bench in dress clothes and make it a soapopera.....Why not just call it a loss and send him on his way.
They know he's the best player on the team and they know he'll go to another team and give them work...
- 14,133
- 285
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2004
Dudes just don't get it.
Business should never be personal. And that's what Dantoni did.
End of story.
Business should never be personal. And that's what Dantoni did.
End of story.
- 21,947
- 1,374
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2003
You didn't clear anything up though.
Pippen after he wasn't put in for a last minute play, didn't want to play the next game and threw a tantrum.
Marbury was not used all season long, and D'Antoni has no plans to for whatever reasons (he is pretty much going to rot on the bench and not play at allbased on what the coach is doing, not because Marbs doesn't want to play...he was ready at training camp and in shape).....so saying there is 35 minutesavailable for just one game and you can play IF YOU'D LIKE....is not a breach of contract. its not the same thing at all. I wouldn't take those minuteseither.
...and I'm not even defending Marbs, its wrong all around.
Pippen after he wasn't put in for a last minute play, didn't want to play the next game and threw a tantrum.
Marbury was not used all season long, and D'Antoni has no plans to for whatever reasons (he is pretty much going to rot on the bench and not play at allbased on what the coach is doing, not because Marbs doesn't want to play...he was ready at training camp and in shape).....so saying there is 35 minutesavailable for just one game and you can play IF YOU'D LIKE....is not a breach of contract. its not the same thing at all. I wouldn't take those minuteseither.
...and I'm not even defending Marbs, its wrong all around.
- 753
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2006
knicks please just buy out his full contract... you guys dont want him, he doesnt want you... he wants the money... give it to him... the sooner he leaves thesooner you guys dont have him as a distraction... imo its as simple as that...
both parties were wrong on handling this situation... from marbury getting told to get into shape in the summer and then dantoni benching him and saying thatmarbury will not be part of the team in the future... imagine getting told that... you will not be part of the team in the future... how would you feel as aplayer... and all of a sudden they want him to play... for what? to help a team who doesnt want him in the future... just pay the him and move on please....
both parties were wrong on handling this situation... from marbury getting told to get into shape in the summer and then dantoni benching him and saying thatmarbury will not be part of the team in the future... imagine getting told that... you will not be part of the team in the future... how would you feel as aplayer... and all of a sudden they want him to play... for what? to help a team who doesnt want him in the future... just pay the him and move on please....
- 104
- 39
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2001
[h1]Marbury one Steph from gone[/h1]
BY FRANK ISOLA
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER
Thursday, November 27th 2008, 3:06 AM
AUBURN HILLS - Stephon Marbury's refusal to play for the injury-depleted Knicks for the second time in six days will likely mean the end to his Knicks' career sooner rather than later.
According to a team source, Marbury will either be ordered to stay home indefinitely or released. The move could come as early as this weekend, whichsuggests that the guard will likely be asked to leave the team until he is either traded or a buyout is reached.
"Something is going to happen," said the source. "This has got to end."
The same source indicated that Knicks coach Mike D'Antoniconsidered sending Marbury home Wednesday after the veteran point guard declined the opportunity to play Wednesday night against the Pistons.
Without Marbury, the Knicks are down to two healthy guards - Chris Duhon andAnthony Roberson. Nate Robinson missed Wednesday night's game due to a groin injury and newlyacquired guard Cuttino Mobley has not been cleared by Knicks doctors.Mobley is not expected to be available Saturday against GoldenState.
Marbury was not on the team bus when it arrived at the Palace at Auburn Hills, and the buzz in the Knicks' locker room was that he had already been sent home. However, Marburyrushed in at 6:34 p.m. and informed team officials that he had overslept.
Knicks president Donnie Walsh did not accompany the team to Michigan and was unavailable for comment. D'Antoni also failed to shed any light on thelatest development.
"It's status quo," D'Antoni said. "It hasn't changed any from the last time. Again, I don't want to keep talking aboutit."
Marbury is the league's second-highest paid player, earning $21.9 million this season.
D'Antoni angered Marbury by benching him in the Knicks' season-opening victory over Miami. D'Antoni then decided to place Marbury on the inactive list and said that the Knicks were going in a different direction.
When the Knicks traded Jamal Crawford, Zach Randolph and Mardy Collins last Friday and were down to seven players, D'Antoni asked Marbury if he wanted to play against the Bucks. But when Marbury was also told that he no longer is part of theKnicks' future, he declined. He was in uniform that night because NBA rules require that teams dress eight players.
Marbury was back on the inactive list Wednesday night and when asked if he would play, he pointed to his locker and said he didn't have a uniform.
"They're going to do what they're going to do," he said. "That's what they've been doing."
Marbury and lawyers from the Players'Association met with Walsh two weeks ago to discuss a buyout. One front-office source indicated that if the Knicks buy out Marbury, it won't happenuntil after Jan. 1.
HAVE A HEART: A league source says that Mobley, who is being examined by doctors for a preexisting heart condition, signed a waiver withthe Houston Rockets eight years ago acknowledging that he has a problembut that he still wanted to play.
There is a possibility that the Knicks will be asked for a similar agreement from Mobley before they allow him to play.
BY FRANK ISOLA
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER
Thursday, November 27th 2008, 3:06 AM
AUBURN HILLS - Stephon Marbury's refusal to play for the injury-depleted Knicks for the second time in six days will likely mean the end to his Knicks' career sooner rather than later.
According to a team source, Marbury will either be ordered to stay home indefinitely or released. The move could come as early as this weekend, whichsuggests that the guard will likely be asked to leave the team until he is either traded or a buyout is reached.
"Something is going to happen," said the source. "This has got to end."
The same source indicated that Knicks coach Mike D'Antoniconsidered sending Marbury home Wednesday after the veteran point guard declined the opportunity to play Wednesday night against the Pistons.
Without Marbury, the Knicks are down to two healthy guards - Chris Duhon andAnthony Roberson. Nate Robinson missed Wednesday night's game due to a groin injury and newlyacquired guard Cuttino Mobley has not been cleared by Knicks doctors.Mobley is not expected to be available Saturday against GoldenState.
Marbury was not on the team bus when it arrived at the Palace at Auburn Hills, and the buzz in the Knicks' locker room was that he had already been sent home. However, Marburyrushed in at 6:34 p.m. and informed team officials that he had overslept.
Knicks president Donnie Walsh did not accompany the team to Michigan and was unavailable for comment. D'Antoni also failed to shed any light on thelatest development.
"It's status quo," D'Antoni said. "It hasn't changed any from the last time. Again, I don't want to keep talking aboutit."
Marbury is the league's second-highest paid player, earning $21.9 million this season.
D'Antoni angered Marbury by benching him in the Knicks' season-opening victory over Miami. D'Antoni then decided to place Marbury on the inactive list and said that the Knicks were going in a different direction.
When the Knicks traded Jamal Crawford, Zach Randolph and Mardy Collins last Friday and were down to seven players, D'Antoni asked Marbury if he wanted to play against the Bucks. But when Marbury was also told that he no longer is part of theKnicks' future, he declined. He was in uniform that night because NBA rules require that teams dress eight players.
Marbury was back on the inactive list Wednesday night and when asked if he would play, he pointed to his locker and said he didn't have a uniform.
"They're going to do what they're going to do," he said. "That's what they've been doing."
Marbury and lawyers from the Players'Association met with Walsh two weeks ago to discuss a buyout. One front-office source indicated that if the Knicks buy out Marbury, it won't happenuntil after Jan. 1.
HAVE A HEART: A league source says that Mobley, who is being examined by doctors for a preexisting heart condition, signed a waiver withthe Houston Rockets eight years ago acknowledging that he has a problembut that he still wanted to play.
There is a possibility that the Knicks will be asked for a similar agreement from Mobley before they allow him to play.
- 43,087
- 27,962
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
"There wouldn't be no negotiation," Marbury said. "They're going to give me all my money. ... If they want to waive me and give me allmy money, fine."
- 4,409
- 11
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2003
Didn't the players basically throw Marbs under the bus? Q really thinks he owes them anything?
- 21,151
- 37
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2004
Q is 100% right....Marbury is going to get paid regardless of the outcome. He can have his differences with the FO, organization, or coach....but, don'tleave your teammates out to dry when they really need you. These are the dudes that you go to battle with, and his pettiness is destroying whateverrelationships he had left with his team.
- 43,087
- 27,962
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2003
When?
