PDA

View Full Version : Could Stephon Marbury still play in the NBA?



NYC
02-09-2013, 07:45 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdvsHII0Gm8

This was last Spring. He sure looks like a guy who can still average 10-15 points for a team. His quickness looks like it's still there as well.

He's 35 now and you see Kidd playing at 39, Nash at 38, I don't see any reason why Marbury still couldn't play in the NBA.

He just has a bad reputation.

onlythisfar41
02-09-2013, 08:03 PM
Yea he probably could play for a team and give them some solid bench minutes. However the man is a cancer and you are playing with fire if you let him on your team. Also as a Knicks fan I have a simple and eloquent opinion of him...


**** STEPHON MARBURY HES AN *******

KnicksR4Real
02-09-2013, 08:03 PM
Honestly yea, there was never a question if he could play, it was his mental side. One of the best talents at the PG position ever IMO.

DallasTrilla23
02-09-2013, 08:18 PM
He still has the ability to play but I'm almost sure he can't get another job in the NBA.

HYFR
02-09-2013, 08:21 PM
Is he better than some nba point guards now? Yes.... Will he get another chance? Don't bet on it.

ILLUSIONIST^248
02-09-2013, 08:38 PM
No, He is trash now.

DumDum
03-11-2013, 04:46 AM
Not even for the lakers

asandhu23
03-11-2013, 05:26 AM
Yea he probably could play for a team and give them some solid bench minutes. However the man is a cancer and you are playing with fire if you let him on your team. Also as a Knicks fan I have a simple and eloquent opinion of him...


**** STEPHON MARBURY HES AN *******

This saying absolutely needs to be banned. You are likening a human being to some of the worst diseases to affect humans and animals alike.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-11-2013, 11:10 AM
As a person whose family has been hit by cancer, I do not mind the poster using that term because I know the poster is not using it to describe the medical condition. The definition of the word cancer could mean any bad thing spreading such as a players bad attitude spreading in the locker room. Hence the term "locker room cancer"


To answer the original question I think Marbury could still put up the statistics he put up as a Celtic but not the 20-8 numbers of his prime.

1-800-STFU
03-11-2013, 11:33 AM
This saying absolutely needs to be banned. You are likening a human being to some of the worst diseases to affect humans and animals alike.

But he is a cancer

NYCkid12
03-11-2013, 11:45 AM
This saying absolutely needs to be banned. You are likening a human being to some of the worst diseases to affect humans and animals alike.

I don't see it as offensive personally

Stinkyoutsider
03-11-2013, 12:42 PM
Marbury could. Mentally though, it wouldn't work out in the long run I think? He tried to conform and play team ball in Boston and Doc Rivers came out and wanted him to score more and take the 2nd unit over.

Guy was so confused with his role.

I wish him, McGrady, and Iverson would come back though. At least to give us fans the opportunity to see them play in the league one last time and to give them a proper sending off. They've been gone so long, it's tough to remember what kind of player they were before they left?

ewing
03-11-2013, 12:49 PM
Yeah, seems like just yesterday he was scoring 3 points a game in 20 mins for the Celtics.

blahblahyoutoo
03-11-2013, 01:40 PM
if jeremy lin is a starting PG for an NBA team, starbury most definitely can.

Blitzace137
03-11-2013, 02:03 PM
if Mario Chalmers is a starting PG for an NBA team, starbury most definitely can.

Fixed

Collings94
03-11-2013, 02:18 PM
As a Celtic fan who witnessed Marbury's last run, the answer is no.

A team that would want to sign a veteran at this stage would be a team looking to make a playoff run. Complementing that, Marbury is not good enough anymore to warrant significant minutes for a good team.

NYCkid12
03-11-2013, 02:45 PM
Only if vaseline is a PED

LeperMessiah
03-11-2013, 03:32 PM
This saying absolutely needs to be banned. You are likening a human being to some of the worst diseases to affect humans and animals alike.

His attitude is a cancerous one.

Jimmer55
03-11-2013, 03:35 PM
There are guys walking the street that could play in the NBA; that doesn't mean they'll ever get the opportunity. There are guys rotting on benches right now in the league that could be great contributors, but politics play a major role in this league.

shep33
03-11-2013, 03:38 PM
I say no chance. But it's not a bad thing for Steph, he's a superstar in China, nothing wrong with that.


Just to add, remember the Celtics run he had? That was a few years ago. Steph is 36 now.

NYCkid12
03-11-2013, 04:08 PM
There are guys walking the street that could play in the NBA; that doesn't mean they'll ever get the opportunity. There are guys rotting on benches right now in the league that could be great contributors, but politics play a major role in this league.

What players are you referring to that are rotting on the bench? And what politics are you refferring to?

Jimmer55
03-11-2013, 04:23 PM
What players are you referring to that are rotting on the bench? And what politics are you refferring to?

How many variable do you want me to list? Coaches not liking certain players? The commissioner wanting to market certain appeal? GMs and owners with hidden agendas? This is the real world, where unjust things happen day in and day out. The world is full of evil. We can use the player in my name if you like. Keith Smart almost made Jeremy Lin retire and he played Acie Law over Stephen Curry. Now, Keith Smart is looking for ANY reason to keep Jimmer Fredette off the court. IMO, Keith Smart is a nepotist and maybe even a racist. It happens all the time in the league. True professionals are hard to come by.

NYCkid12
03-11-2013, 05:07 PM
How many variable do you want me to list? Coaches not liking certain players? The commissioner wanting to market certain appeal? GMs and owners with hidden agendas? This is the real world, where unjust things happen day in and day out. The world is full of evil. We can use the player in my name if you like. Keith Smart almost made Jeremy Lin retire and he played Acie Law over Stephen Curry. Now, Keith Smart is looking for ANY reason to keep Jimmer Fredette off the court. IMO, Keith Smart is a nepotist and maybe even a racist. It happens all the time in the league. True professionals are hard to come by.

Don't agree with the bolded, and I also don't think Keith Smart is a racist...I mean one of the guys you mentioned stephen curry and acie law are both black so I don't get that

I also don't think Jimmer is all that good

Also, why would a GM bury a player that could help his team because of a specific agenda when the GMs job rests soley on the performance of his team...I think you are overplaying the ability of 90% of the guys buried on the bench

Don't get me wrong there are some players who have gotten burried and probably could of been productive if it were not for a particular circumstance but that is the exception not the rule

Jimmer55
03-11-2013, 05:27 PM
Don't agree with the bolded, and I also don't think Keith Smart is a racist...I mean one of the guys you mentioned stephen curry and acie law are both black so I don't get that

I also don't think Jimmer is all that good

Also, why would a GM bury a player that could help his team because of a specific agenda when the GMs job rests soley on the performance of his team...I think you are overplaying the ability of 90% of the guys buried on the bench

Don't get me wrong there are some players who have gotten burried and probably could of been productive if it were not for a particular circumstance but that is the exception not the rule

Okay man, the world is full of unicorns and rainbows and everything happens just the way it should. There, I hope this makes you feel better.

JasonJohnHorn
03-11-2013, 05:32 PM
Yes he could, obviously but the question is not only how effective could he be, but how effective was he in his prime? He was essentially a score-first PG, low FG%, decent 3pt% (nothing to write home about, but respectable) and a decent FT%. His assist-to-turnover ratio was a little better than 2-1. Not that great, but not the worse. The bottom line is that he was an average player at best, even if he posted some nice averages. Look at how well the teams he left did. He leaves Minny... they make it to the conference finals, he leaves NJ, they make it to the finals twice, he leaves Phoenix, they have the best record in the league. Now granted, NJ replaced him with Kidd and Phoenix replaced him with Nash, and those two guys are likely the best two point guards of their generations, but Marbury couldn't even get these teams into the playoffs, let alone the finals, or the best record in the NBA.

Marbury is a very talented player, but his style of game does not translate to wins. It is just that simple. Could he make a roster? I think right now he would struggle to do that, but the bottom line is he wouldn't be making anybody a contender.

When you get guys like Francis, and Marbury and Arenas and Jennings, and to a lesser extend Wall, the teams that get them are generally losing and need a guy that can score the ball. Those guys can do that, but they just can't to it efficiently, so in order for the teams to get better, they usually have to move that PG and bring in somebody else that can make them better, like Kidd or Nash, or Billups or Cassell. When you are losing though, you give the young guys minutes and let them do their best with the hopes that they will get better, and knowing full well that they simply don't have any better options. But when guys like Francis and Marbury and Arenas and Wall and Jennings plateau... the team plateaus as well and they only way to get better is to get a better "TEAM" player in at the PG position.


Marbury was a great talent, and one-on-one, on his best day he could probably beat anybody in the league, but basketball is a team sport, and his style of game simply does not translate to wins. No contender is going to give him minutes in a rotation.


Ask yourself this: Who you rather have: Cassell or Marbury? Billups or Wall? Fisher or Arenas? these aren't really "all-star" pgs I'm comparing these guys to, but essentially, guys liek Cassell, Fisher and Billups help a team win, while guys like Marbury, Arenas, Francis, Wall, and Jennings don't.

NYCkid12
03-11-2013, 08:10 PM
Okay man, the world is full of unicorns and rainbows and everything happens just the way it should. There, I hope this makes you feel better.

It's def not....not everything in the world is a conspiracy either , it lands somewhere in the middle

Care to explain why Smart is a racist?? Or do you just throw that around without any reason , just to try and prove a point??

Care to explain why a general manager would risk his job for an alterior motive which you still haven't explained what it is ??

Or are you just going to side step every question like always with a stupid remark

ManRam
03-11-2013, 08:22 PM
Dude SUCKED his last two years in the NBA. He didn't score 15 a game in 2008, why the HELL do you think he could do so 5 years later? :laugh:


Shot 41% his last three years. Barely a 2:1 assist/TO ratio.

DumDum
03-31-2013, 02:58 AM
Not even a New York min

KingPosey
03-31-2013, 03:17 AM
This saying absolutely needs to be banned. You are likening a human being to some of the worst diseases to affect humans and animals alike.

Stop it man, it's an expression. People being hyper sensitive is what needs to stop.

javaid64
03-31-2013, 04:56 AM
Yes he could, obviously but the question is not only how effective could he be, but how effective was he in his prime? He was essentially a score-first PG, low FG%, decent 3pt% (nothing to write home about, but respectable) and a decent FT%. His assist-to-turnover ratio was a little better than 2-1. Not that great, but not the worse. The bottom line is that he was an average player at best, even if he posted some nice averages. Look at how well the teams he left did. He leaves Minny... they make it to the conference finals, he leaves NJ, they make it to the finals twice, he leaves Phoenix, they have the best record in the league. Now granted, NJ replaced him with Kidd and Phoenix replaced him with Nash, and those two guys are likely the best two point guards of their generations, but Marbury couldn't even get these teams into the playoffs, let alone the finals, or the best record in the NBA.

Marbury is a very talented player, but his style of game does not translate to wins. It is just that simple. Could he make a roster? I think right now he would struggle to do that, but the bottom line is he wouldn't be making anybody a contender.

When you get guys like Francis, and Marbury and Arenas and Jennings, and to a lesser extend Wall, the teams that get them are generally losing and need a guy that can score the ball. Those guys can do that, but they just can't to it efficiently, so in order for the teams to get better, they usually have to move that PG and bring in somebody else that can make them better, like Kidd or Nash, or Billups or Cassell. When you are losing though, you give the young guys minutes and let them do their best with the hopes that they will get better, and knowing full well that they simply don't have any better options. But when guys like Francis and Marbury and Arenas and Wall and Jennings plateau... the team plateaus as well and they only way to get better is to get a better "TEAM" player in at the PG position.


Marbury was a great talent, and one-on-one, on his best day he could probably beat anybody in the league, but basketball is a team sport, and his style of game simply does not translate to wins. No contender is going to give him minutes in a rotation.


Ask yourself this: Who you rather have: Cassell or Marbury? Billups or Wall? Fisher or Arenas? these aren't really "all-star" pgs I'm comparing these guys to, but essentially, guys liek Cassell, Fisher and Billups help a team win, while guys like Marbury, Arenas, Francis, Wall, and Jennings don't.

ur argument has serious flaws, marbury like francis and the rest weren't put in the ideal situations such as iverson, westbrook, and to a certain extent Drose. all those players had similar styles of play, albeit with different results in terms of winning. now u brought up Cassel/billups/fishers who really weren't asked to carry the teams like marbs francis were. And as for arenes, guy was playing super well and was still in prime and could have gotten better if not for injuries and questionable decisions.

and please dont lump fisher into the argument, he a career role players and doesn't even belong in the conversation if u are talking about basketball skill.

you make some good points but i dont agree with what ur saying. the success of the style of play is just dependent on the situation they were placed in.

one teams cancer is another teams gold mine