Suns vs Pacers

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,666
Reaction score
10,092
Location
L.A. area
I was happy when Marbury came to the suns and I was happy when he left the suns.

Yes, it is characteristic of many fans that they are always happy with every personnel move their team makes, no matter how much they have to contradict themselves in order to be that way.

I never said that the current team would be as good with Marbury as with Nash. Nash is a much better shooter and a more creative playmaker. However, when Marbury was on the Suns, many people realized that his the "selfish" label he's been saddled with is unfair. I still believe that.
 

Chris_Sanders

Arizona Sports Simp
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
40,811
Reaction score
33,066
Location
Scottsdale, Az
elindholm said:
I was happy when Marbury came to the suns and I was happy when he left the suns.

Yes, it is characteristic of many fans that they are always happy with every personnel move their team makes, no matter how much they have to contradict themselves in order to be that way.

I never said that the current team would be as good with Marbury as with Nash. Nash is a much better shooter and a more creative playmaker. However, when Marbury was on the Suns, many people realized that his the "selfish" label he's been saddled with is unfair. I still believe that.

I agree. Marbury played with a lot of heart and really tried to embrace Phoenix. I wish him well.
 
OP
OP
S

sunsfn

Registered User
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Posts
4,522
Reaction score
0
elindholm said:
I was happy when Marbury came to the suns and I was happy when he left the suns.

Yes, it is characteristic of many fans that they are always happy with every personnel move their team makes, no matter how much they have to contradict themselves in order to be that way.

I never said that the current team would be as good with Marbury as with Nash. Nash is a much better shooter and a more creative playmaker. However, when Marbury was on the Suns, many people realized that his the "selfish" label he's been saddled with is unfair. I still believe that.

This is baloney,,,,,,,,,,,,
----------------------------------
Yes, it is characteristic of many fans that they are always happy with every personnel move their team makes, no matter how much they have to contradict themselves in order to be that way.
------------------------------------------------------
It may be characteristic of you elindholm, but it is not characteristic of me!!!!
And I do not appreciate you saying this!!
-----------------------------------------------------------

The reason I can say I am happy when Marbury came to the suns and happy when he left is...........
The first year he was here I thought he played great, distributed the ball and was shooting great. The next year it appeared he had reverted back to being selfish. If "you" watched the games the 2nd year, he actually refused to give the ball to Amare many times even when Amare ran the floor and got in position to the receive the ball. I used to watch and scream at him on tv and could not understand this plus, he almost always went the wrong way on the screen, it was maddening to watch. He held the ball and dribbled way to much, and He would not pass the ball and give it up on the fast break like he could have, instead trying to make the play himself.
I was watching the game and realized just how selfish he had became one night when a friend of mine said why don't the coaches tell him how to play the pick and roll and go the right way..............it finally dawned on me it was not the coaches fault, it was Marburys fault. He played the way he wanted and to damn with the others. It was so obvious to me after that and it was upsetting to watch him play with the suns.

I have tried to watch the Knicks games this year when they are on tv and sometimes Marbury has a great game and the Knicks win, and then again in some games he reverts to his old self and to hell with the others just to make himself be the most important player on the team. Marbury is not a team player and will never be. Marbury reminds me of Antoine Walker, he can be a great player, but chooses not to be.
I find the poll we had recently about the choice between KJ and Marbury interesting. If the poll had been Nash and Marbury, the one vote for Marbury probably would not have been there.
I do not wish bad things on Marbury, but am glad he is not playing for the suns.
 
Last edited:

Joe Mama

Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
9,501
Reaction score
964
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Chris_Sanders said:
I agree. Marbury played with a lot of heart and really tried to embrace Phoenix. I wish him well.

I hold nothing against Marbury. I really don't see why we would. I was happy when he was traded to the Phoenix Suns mostly because I was not the biggest fan of Jason Kidd's. That said, I was one of the people praising the Suns for trading him.

I thought it was quite obvious that the chemistry between him and Amare was almost nonexistent. Almost as bad as that was Marbury's refusal to push the ball. You could hear the coaches yelling at him constantly.

BTW last year's team was bad before Amare Stoudemire was injured. If you remember he went down Boston or Miami, and Frank Johnson was fired a game after that. They missed Bo outlaw and even Jake Tsakalidis more than I thought they would, and frankly they overachieved and surprised teams in 2002-03.

I think Marbury is a good fit for that New York Knicks team, especially when Houston is healthy. if Isaiah Thomas could have just stopped himself from making moves just for the sake of making moves they would be much better. That Crawford signing was a colossal mistake.

Joe Mama
 

scotsman13

Registered User
Joined
Oct 21, 2002
Posts
1,418
Reaction score
0
Location
salt lake city
i liked marbury as suns player. but then again i liked kidd as a player. who i didnt like was hardaway.

when the trade shipping off marbury happened i was shocked and both sad and glad. i still think marbury is a good player and miss hard work. as far as hardaway i am very happy to see him in new york (i have never like them, since the big fight in 92-93).
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,666
Reaction score
10,092
Location
L.A. area
The first year he was here I thought he played great, distributed the ball and was shooting great. The next year it appeared he had reverted back to being selfish. If "you" watched the games the 2nd year

Yes, I watched most of the games both years. Marbury's play was about the same. He always took some ill-advised shots, and he always did his best passing after drawing the defense with his penetration.

he actually refused to give the ball to Amare many times even when Amare ran the floor and got in position to the receive the ball.

This is utterly false. Stoudemire was injured before the trade. I believe that he and Marbury played no more than five games together in the entire season.

Edit: It was more games than that, maybe 15 or 20. Most of them were at the very start of the season, when the Suns were out of sync in many ways. If you look at Marbury's scoring numbers for November 2003, they were terrible -- but his assists were at 8.8 per game, so it's not like he was just looking out for himself.
 
Last edited:

Chaz

observationist
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Posts
11,327
Reaction score
7
Location
Wandering the Universe
elindholm said:
This is utterly false. Stoudemire was injured before the trade. I believe that he and Marbury played no more than five games together in the entire season.

Edit: It was more games than that, maybe 15 or 20. Most of them were at the very start of the season, when the Suns were out of sync in many ways. If you look at Marbury's scoring numbers for November 2003, they were terrible -- but his assists were at 8.8 per game, so it's not like he was just looking out for himself.


I think you are a little off base here. I agree with sunsfn that Marbury seemed to have some aversion to passing the ball to Amare. Of course in his defense Amare was not very consistant about passing either.

I will not go so far as to say that Marbury was a selfish player when he was here but with Marbury as the point guard they were not an unselfish team.
 

elindholm

edited for content
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
27,666
Reaction score
10,092
Location
L.A. area
I guess everyone's subjective memory is different, but here are some facts for review:

Stoudemire got injured in the December 5 game against the Celtics. The Suns won that game, bringing their record to 8-10. It was not a great first 18 games, but it was hardly a disaster -- after all, they'd made the playoffs the previous year by getting hot in the second half of the season and finishing just a few games over .500.

After Stoudemire's injury, the team collapsed. Marbury was traded before Stoudemire came back healthy, and Stoudemire came back very soon after. The team continued to struggle for the rest of the year.

In an attempt to make sense of the trade, which appeared to be nothing more than a massive salary dump, fans began speculating that there were chemistry problems between Marbury and Stoudemire. No one within the organization has ever made any statement in support of these allegations. (Many have said that the team had "bad chemistry," but that is practically inevitable when Hardaway is on the roster and the coach is an idiot.)

The media also decided to pick up on the "rumor" of a personality conflict between Stoudemire and Marbury, and now it has been repeated so many times that it has taken on the aura of legitimacy.

The Suns had a record of 8-10 in the games that Marbury and Stoudemire played together in the 2003-04 season. Stoudemire was struggling, but Marbury was above his (already high) career average in assists. Those are the facts.
 
Last edited:

Chaz

observationist
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Posts
11,327
Reaction score
7
Location
Wandering the Universe
elindholm said:
I guess everyone's subjective memory is different, but here are some facts for review:

Stoudemire got injured in the December 5 game against the Celtics. The Suns won that game, bringing their record to 8-10. It was not a great first 18 games, but it was hardly a disaster -- after all, they'd made the playoffs the previous year by getting hot in the second half of the season and finishing just a few games over .500.

After Stoudemire's injury, the team collapsed. Marbury was traded before Stoudemire came back healthy, and Stoudemire came back very soon after. The team continued to struggle for the rest of the year.

In attempt to justify the trade, which appeared to be nothing more than a massive salary dump, fans began speculating that there were chemistry problems between Marbury and Stoudemire. No one within the organization has ever made any statement in support of these allegations. (Many have said that the team had "bad chemistry," but that is practically inevitable when Hardaway is on the roster and the coach is an idiot.)

The media also decided to pick up on the "rumor" of a personality conflict between Stoudemire and Marbury, and now it has been repeated so many times that it has taken on the aura of legitimacy.

The Suns had a record of 8-10 in the games that Marbury and Stoudemire played together in the 2003-04 season. Stoudemire was struggling, but Marbury was above his (already high) career average in assists. Those are the facts.


Yea I don't know that I put much credence behind the media reports of a rift between Marbury and Stoudemire. I do know from watching the games both last year and the previous season that an actual successful two man game between them was a rare occurance. I understand it is subjective and only my opinion but many times Amare seemed frustrated that he did not get the ball when open.

I don't think that Marbury really trusted Stoudemire's decision making because of his being a young player that would force shots. We never really saw the offense run through Amare until Marbury left and it has been since then that Amare's game has really taken off. Of course then it jumped to another level now that he has a point guard that is setting him up and looking for him.
 

Chaz

observationist
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Posts
11,327
Reaction score
7
Location
Wandering the Universe
OH BTW.

Great game last night.


"deer in the headlights" was a perfect description of the Pacers performance.


I think the team is really improving and coming together. Should be an interesting and very instructive month of Suns basketball.
 

jibikao

Registered User
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Posts
3,390
Reaction score
0
I wasn't a Suns fan until this year and I did watch last year's playoff game between Nets and Knicks.

Mmmmm, I wans't too impressed with Marbury, let's put it this way. There were times that he should have taken over the game but he just kept passing and didn't really know what to do. Knicks got swept!! I don't think Knicks is a good team but Marbury certainly didn't make his teammates "better".

Jimmy
 

AZZenny

Registered User
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
9,235
Reaction score
2
Location
Cave Creek
Marbury certainly didn't make his teammates "better".

I liked Marbury - but this was the rap on him, and I recall hearing it more related to Joe Johnson than Amare or anyone else, esp after the Marbury trade - that JJ hung back or maybe didn't push himself because of Steph's presence. I do recall hearing Marbury make some rather dismissive comments about CJ while here, too - may have been true, but tactless.

Anyhow - what's fun to watch is how Nash is role-modeling unselfishness and passing to his young teammates - maybe it's just that I'm seeing the game better as I watch more (and learn from you guys here) but it has seemed like all the guys look to pass more readily, and get a genuine charge out of watching one another capitalizing. (Yes, Stevie, you ARE a role model! LOL)
 

Joe Mama

Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
9,501
Reaction score
964
Location
Gilbert, AZ
SirChaz said:
Yea I don't know that I put much credence behind the media reports of a rift between Marbury and Stoudemire. I do know from watching the games both last year and the previous season that an actual successful two man game between them was a rare occurance. I understand it is subjective and only my opinion but many times Amare seemed frustrated that he did not get the ball when open.

I don't think that Marbury really trusted Stoudemire's decision making because of his being a young player that would force shots. We never really saw the offense run through Amare until Marbury left and it has been since then that Amare's game has really taken off. Of course then it jumped to another level now that he has a point guard that is setting him up and looking for him.

I remember many of us were complaining about this during the games in the chat room and on the messageboard. If you watched Amare Stoudemire he was clearly frustrated with Marbury. And this wasn't just me looking for something. It was obvious. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that their on court relationship or lack thereof was a big factor in the decision to trade Marbury.

I'm not so sure that it was a lack of trust in Amare's decision-making. I just don't think Marbury trusted anyone else to handle the basketball much.

The other big factor I'm sure was Marbury's inability or refusal to push the basketball regularly. He just wouldn't do it.

Joe Mama
 

Joe Mama

Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
9,501
Reaction score
964
Location
Gilbert, AZ
elindholm said:
I guess everyone's subjective memory is different, but here are some facts for review:

Stoudemire got injured in the December 5 game against the Celtics. The Suns won that game, bringing their record to 8-10. It was not a great first 18 games, but it was hardly a disaster -- after all, they'd made the playoffs the previous year by getting hot in the second half of the season and finishing just a few games over .500.

After Stoudemire's injury, the team collapsed. Marbury was traded before Stoudemire came back healthy, and Stoudemire came back very soon after. The team continued to struggle for the rest of the year.

In an attempt to make sense of the trade, which appeared to be nothing more than a massive salary dump, fans began speculating that there were chemistry problems between Marbury and Stoudemire. No one within the organization has ever made any statement in support of these allegations. (Many have said that the team had "bad chemistry," but that is practically inevitable when Hardaway is on the roster and the coach is an idiot.)

The media also decided to pick up on the "rumor" of a personality conflict between Stoudemire and Marbury, and now it has been repeated so many times that it has taken on the aura of legitimacy.

The Suns had a record of 8-10 in the games that Marbury and Stoudemire played together in the 2003-04 season. Stoudemire was struggling, but Marbury was above his (already high) career average in assists. Those are the facts.

I was trying to find the 2002-03 schedule, because the way I remembered it the Suns started out very well, struggled some during the middle of the season, and it took a very strong finish to make the playoffs. When the Phoenix Suns traded Marbury they were figuring that they would never be a championship contender because of the chemistry and salary constraints. I've read quotes from both Bryan Colangelo and Mike D'Antoni about that.

Eric, there were people here talking about possible chemistry between Amare and Marbury well before the trade. Heck I remember people occasionally saying things about it in Amare's rookie season. This wasn't just some excuse cooked up by people trying to rationalize the trade. At one point there were quotes from Amare Stoudemire in an article on AZCentral where he was quite critical of Marbury.

Joe Mama
 

cly2tw

Registered User
Joined
Oct 26, 2002
Posts
5,832
Reaction score
0
There is a saying in German, "aus Not wird Tugend". It applies to the comparison Nash vs. Marbury.

Shaq did not have it necessary at all to kiss Marbury's ass so I assume he meant it when he said that Marbury was the best scoring PG. Nash can penetrate into the paint but he can't finish as strong or quick as Marbury. So, he has to make the best out of his lack of this kind of athletic capacity by circling around after penetration and delaying his decision, which makes the defense out of positions and gives his teammates the best chance to score on open jumpers on his feeds --- "aus Not wird Tugend". In comparision, Marbury is athletically more gifted and thus tends to trust himself to score directly a lot more than letting his teammates do it. But when he decides to pass, he is effective at it because his better athletic ability attracts even more defensive attention than Nash's.

Similar is with CJ's defense. As D'A confirmed what I said before, CJ is always in the right defensive position. He is athleticly not as gifted as JJ, so he compensates it with smart by making the job tougher for the opponents through his positioning, by giving them the less fruitful positions even if they cross pass him from time to time. Again, aus Not wird Tugend.

If Marbury were to mimick Nash's style 40% of the time, he'd be the BEST PG ever. But it's hard for him to do that, to not always use his athletic gift to the maximum.

The same thing goes for Amare too. If with one move he can overpower everybody, why bother to commit yourself to doing other tedious things anyway?
 

George O'Brien

ASFN Icon
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Posts
10,297
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
Marbury was a classic "love him or hate him" type due to his style. I always felt he would have been better off the ball with a big PG, but he would never have accepted that.

Stephon's play on the Olympic team was typical of his career with the Suns. He would shoot a lot of three pointers even though he was not a consistently good three point shooter. He would walk the ball up rather than push. He would dribble around trying to break his man down rather than look for someone to pass to before there were two seconds on the clock.

But against Spain, he almost single handedly defeated one of the best teams in the world. When "on", he can be absolutely incredible. Other times...
 

thegrahamcrackr

Registered User
Joined
Nov 19, 2002
Posts
6,168
Reaction score
0
Location
Scottsdale, Az
AZZenny said:
I do recall hearing Marbury make some rather dismissive comments about CJ while here, too - may have been true, but tactless.


Weird. When Marbury talked to Gambo right after the trade, he said he was going to miss the guys the most. The 2 people who he mentioned were Marion and Casey.

Anyways, you cannot call Marbury a selfish basketball player. You cannot average over 8 apg and be selfish with the ball, it just doesn't happen. He dominated the ball often, but it was usually in an effort to penetrate and dish. It made him look like a ballhog, when he was actually setting up his players to the best of his ability.

It was clear that there was on court chemestry issues, but that wasn't Marbury's fault. The play styles were far to different to work. At that point in Amare's career, he was not a reliable post option. He had a limited jumper, so teams would constantly sag off him and double. He almost always went right, so he was very easy to guard. The only reason he still scored was due to his strength around the basket. Amare excelled in transition, and Marbury floundered in it.

Also, the Suns did not trade Marbury for these reasons. You do not trade a top 2 pg because the team doesn't fit him, especially without a backup plan. If you recall, the teams Kidd had while he was here never fit his style either. Funny enough, we had two top tier PGs with opposite styles and unfortunately they had the exact wrong supporting cast each time.

The Suns traded Marbury simply for the salary dump. It was a once in a decade chance to shed over 130 million in salary on an underachieving team. As Sarver said the other day, he would not have bought the team had the trade not gone down. Financially it didnt make any sense. From what I have heard, the Suns lost over 200 million in the past 5 years. At that point management knew a sale was going to happen, so they needed to clear the path for it. They most likely had Nash on their radar the entire time, but no one actually believed they would pull it off.
 

F-Dog

lurker
Joined
Aug 27, 2003
Posts
3,637
Reaction score
0
Location
Tucson
I was disappointed in the Marbury trade when it happened--I didn't like to see him go, because he's a great player, and he's in the same age range as Marion and Amare. Also, there was no question that saving money played a part in the deal (the question was how much of a part it played), and there was no guarantee that the Suns would do as well as they did in the FA market.

The question with Marbury was whether he could keep growing, and whether he could change his game to run more, to be more of a team player, to fit with Amare. IMO the Suns gave up on him awfully quick, and money was the reason. Now Marbury will never get a chance to win a championship, which is too bad. I'll keep rooting for him regardless.


I could see what Marbury was saying when he proclaimed himself the "best point guard"--he's a guy who will win the matchup at the PG position 95% of the time. We've already seen Nash lose individual battles, and it seems to take him out of his game: he's better off ignoring it when the other guy is killing him, and focusing on the team game, which is his strength anyway.

The only time I really missed Marbury was in the Spurs game--he might be the preeminent Spurs-killer in the league. It's going to be tough to beat those guys in a seven-game series without him. :(
 

SirStefan32

Krycek, Alex Krycek
Joined
Oct 15, 2002
Posts
18,507
Reaction score
4,946
Location
Harrisburg, PA
George O'Brien said:
I thought Hunter looked great tonight. He went 5 of 5 from the field, had 5 rebounds, and 4 blocks in just 15 minutes. He is becoming a fantastic pick and roll offensive player to go with his shock blocking.

I will admit he is proving to be a lot better than expected. We had one Magic fan write that Hunter was a lot better than his stats, but most others were very down on him. What was obvious was that he is one of the most athletic seven footers out there.

Congratulations to the Suns coaching staff. They helped him become a very important contributor to this team.

I am really impressed with Hunter. Every single game he just looks better and better. I loved three blocks that he got in about 2 minutes.

As far as Marbury/ Nash thing goes... I think that Stephon is a much better player, but Nash is a much better fit for this team.
 

Errntknght

Registered User
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Posts
6,342
Reaction score
319
Location
Phoenix
Marbury is what he is and that does not include an ability to run the fast break. He doesn't have the court vision to be a creative passer though, now and then, he made a spectacular pass. He's the best pentrating guard in the league and could 'barrel' through defenses stacked against him, take four hits and still get off a decent shot at close range.

If you want to succeed with him on your team you'd better plan on putting the right kind of players around him. 1) A high post center to run the pick & (no)roll with - one that can shoot effectively from the spot where he sets the pick. 2) Another player who can run the rest of the offense - Hardaway was good for that but, unfortunately, he was a cancer and a defensive liability. 3) As many spot up shooters as you can find. What amazes me is that no one has ever put a team resembling that around him. BC didn't seem to have a clue and Isaiah immediately got rid of van Horn, who was a very good fit with Steph. Crawford might be enough of a PG to work well with Marbury but there's a position conflict with Houston, who's their best spot up shooter.
 

thegrahamcrackr

Registered User
Joined
Nov 19, 2002
Posts
6,168
Reaction score
0
Location
Scottsdale, Az
You are exactly right about the supporting cast. That is what I was alluding to when I mentioned how Kidd and Marbury had the opposite role players.

Kidd had a bunch of spot up shooters/half court offense guys when he could barely intiate a half court set. Marbury had a team of finishers who didn't have the fundamentals to play a good half court set.

BTW, I do not think that BC was clueless to this fact. His hands were simply tied. He had already locked Marion into a long term deal, and drafted Amare as what turns out to be a no brainer choice. We never had the cash to spend on a decent player for the MLE either.

He actually made the deal for JJ who now would take the role you described for Hardaway.
 

George O'Brien

ASFN Icon
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Posts
10,297
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
Errntknght said:
Marbury is what he is and that does not include an ability to run the fast break. He doesn't have the court vision to be a creative passer though, now and then, he made a spectacular pass. He's the best pentrating guard in the league and could 'barrel' through defenses stacked against him, take four hits and still get off a decent shot at close range.

If you want to succeed with him on your team you'd better plan on putting the right kind of players around him. 1) A high post center to run the pick & (no)roll with - one that can shoot effectively from the spot where he sets the pick. 2) Another player who can run the rest of the offense - Hardaway was good for that but, unfortunately, he was a cancer and a defensive liability. 3) As many spot up shooters as you can find. What amazes me is that no one has ever put a team resembling that around him. BC didn't seem to have a clue and Isaiah immediately got rid of van Horn, who was a very good fit with Steph. Crawford might be enough of a PG to work well with Marbury but there's a position conflict with Houston, who's their best spot up shooter.

I agree completely. For some reason everyone looks at how athletic Marbury is and assumes he's a run PG. I think the Suns made the same mistake the Knicks did and assumed he would learn.
 

Joe Mama

Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
9,501
Reaction score
964
Location
Gilbert, AZ
thegrahamcrackr said:
Weird. When Marbury talked to Gambo right after the trade, he said he was going to miss the guys the most. The 2 people who he mentioned were Marion and Casey.

Anyways, you cannot call Marbury a selfish basketball player. You cannot average over 8 apg and be selfish with the ball, it just doesn't happen. He dominated the ball often, but it was usually in an effort to penetrate and dish. It made him look like a ballhog, when he was actually setting up his players to the best of his ability.

That's right. Some people would call dominating the ball for three quarters of the shot clock of being a "ball hog". I figure if he had tried to finish it himself every time or even most of the time that would be an accurate label. we have talked about this many times before. If we could have somehow switched the teams that were placed around Jason Kidd and Marbury those two guys and their respective Suns teams would have then much more successful.


thegrahamcrackr said:
It was clear that there was on court chemestry issues, but that wasn't Marbury's fault. The play styles were far to different to work. At that point in Amare's career, he was not a reliable post option. He had a limited jumper, so teams would constantly sag off him and double. He almost always went right, so he was very easy to guard. The only reason he still scored was due to his strength around the basket. Amare excelled in transition, and Marbury floundered in it.

At that point Amare Stoudemire was every bit as reliable as he was later in the season when he averaged around 25 points and 10 rebounds per game. Obviously he's even better this season, but at that point he was still very difficult for most opponents to guard. I don't think anybody is saying that they needed to go to him every time. However there were long stretches where Marbury basically froze him out play after play. I don't think he did it intentionally. I just don't think Marbury was very good at getting the ball to guys that were rolling to the basket when he would get double teamed. A guy like Steve Nash kills you almost every time by hitting the rolling player in that situation.

I really don't buy into this idea that Marbury didn't want to give Amare Stoudemire the ball because Amare wasn't ready for it yet. IMO it was about Marbury's inability in a lot of situations to get the ball to Amare, and Marbury's desire/nature to create almost everything off his own dribble and penetration. It's easy to say that they were just a bad fit together at that point, but at some point a great player has to adapt a little to help the team. Marbury did not do it.

thegrahamcrackr said:
Also, the Suns did not trade Marbury for these reasons. You do not trade a top 2 pg because the team doesn't fit him, especially without a backup plan. If you recall, the teams Kidd had while he was here never fit his style either. Funny enough, we had two top tier PGs with opposite styles and unfortunately they had the exact wrong supporting cast each time.

The Suns traded Marbury simply for the salary dump. It was a once in a decade chance to shed over 130 million in salary on an underachieving team. As Sarver said the other day, he would not have bought the team had the trade not gone down. Financially it didnt make any sense. From what I have heard, the Suns lost over 200 million in the past 5 years. At that point management knew a sale was going to happen, so they needed to clear the path for it. They most likely had Nash on their radar the entire time, but no one actually believed they would pull it off.

isn't it possible that there was more than one reason for making that Marbury trade? Certainly the salary dump was one of if not THE biggest factor. I don't think they would have made that trade though if the team was doing well, and all of the players were working well together. I figured the Suns knew that Amare Stoudemire was the guy they wanted to build their team around. This really isn't subject to debate. As you and others have said the chemistry was not good with Marbury. There was no way in hell they were going to trade Amare Stoudemire, so they traded Marbury.

Basically I believe that Marbury would have been traded eventually even if the Phoenix Suns had not been able to dump so much salary in the deal. the coaching staff and management were convinced by the time they traded him that his style did not fit the type of basketball they wanted to play. BC and D'Antoni have said this several times. Now I don't believe that the Phoenix Suns would have made that trade if the team had been playing good basketball (even if it had only been before Amare's injury), the team chemistry was great, the coaches were happy with the way they were playing, and there were no complaints from players like Amare.

Somewhere in this thread or another someone was saying that Marbury's extension was a big mistake. I don't agree with this. Bryan Colangelo has explained several times that they had to sign him to an extension. They figured someone would have given him that much money to leave the Suns if they wanted to keep him. If they wanted to trade him they needed that extension to get his value in the trade. He said they would not have been able to get nearly as much out of New York without the extension. He said dealing Marbury to New York had been an option for almost the entire time he was with Phoenix. Bryan Colangelo also explained that one reason they dealt Marbury and others when they did was because they feared Thomas would make other deals giving away some of the assets the Phoenix Suns would want.

Joe Mama
 

George O'Brien

ASFN Icon
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Posts
10,297
Reaction score
0
Location
Sun City
Marbury was already getting max type money before the extension. At the time I noted that the contract Kidd got was what set the market. My guess is that the Suns could have traded Marbury for value to a number of teams, so his contract was not excessive.

The fact that the Knicks took not only Marbury but also Hardaway would suggest Marbury's contract was not excessive. Of course, it was the Knicks so, oh never mind. :D
 
Top