PDA

View Full Version : Marbury and Garnett to reunite in Boston?



idioteque
01-02-2009, 10:25 AM
Wouldn't that be interesting. I loved that combo in the late 1990's before Marbury went crazy and broke it up.

Marc Stein
ESPN.com
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3804977



Nearly one year since Stephon Marbury (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=509) last played in a regular-season game, signals are getting stronger that the New York Knicks' outcast will eventually make his comeback with the Boston Celtics (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=bos).


That still depends largely on Marbury's ability to negotiate his release from the Knicks after weeks of fruitless and oft-contentious buyout talks, but sources with knowledge of the situation told ESPN.com this week that Boston is Marbury's preferred destination if he manages to become a free agent and that the Celtics are indeed hopeful of signing him.


Celtics general manager Danny Ainge (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3622) did not immediately respond to a request for comment on a New Year's Day holiday for the entire league and has generally refused to address the possibility of signing Marbury. Yet it's believed that the Celtics' concerns about their depth, after losing James Posey (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=671) and P.J. Brown (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=99) from last season's title team, have swelled noticeably since they followed up the best 29-game start in NBA history at 27-2 by losing three of the next four games on the road.


With Brown telling the New Orleans Times-Picayune on Wednesday that he is "officially retired" and Dikembe Mutombo (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=588) having re-signed earlier this week with the Houston Rockets (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=hou), Marbury easily ranks as the most accomplished low-cost veteran that the Celtics can add to their bench in-season. Boston also knows it would have the option to simply release Marbury without significant salary-cap consequences if he fails to click as a backup or proves unwilling to accept a secondary role.
It appears that the biggest obstacle to such a move is Marbury actually securing a buyout from the Knicks in a timely fashion as opposed to reservations Boston might have about Marbury's impact on team chemistry.
Although it has been widely assumed that Celtics forward Kevin Garnett (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=261) would resist a reunion with the controversial point guard -- after Marbury broke up their Minnesota parternship in less than three seasons together by forcing a trade to New Jersey -- one Celtics source insists that Garnett has voiced no opposition to the idea of signing Marbury for the rest of the season to strengthen Boston's backcourt depth behind starters Rajon Rondo (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3026) and Ray Allen (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=9).


When asked specifically about the likelihood of Marbury joining the Celtics this season, the source predicted that "it will happen."
Joining the NBA's reigning champions would certainly back up Marbury's recent claim at halftime of a Knicks-Lakers game in Los Angeles that "the team I'm going to go to, a lot of people will be shocked." The 31-year-old hasn't officially played for New York since Jan. 11 of last season and began this season on the inactive list while awaiting a buyout. Marbury was then barred from contact with the team in late November after a dispute over Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni's offering him the chance to start playing again following the Knicks' two trades on Nov. 21, which left them short of available players.


The Celtics lack size more than anything off the bench, which should explain their interest in Brown and Mutombo. But Marbury -- when he's right -- is a proven scoring threat who can also handle pressure on the ball, freeing up Eddie House (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=348) to focus on his preferred role of designated shooter. The Celtics also clearly have the strong team culture -- with Garnett, Paul Pierce (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=662), Ray Allen and coach Doc Rivers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=1579) -- to take on the various challenges of a Marbury dice roll.


"All the people who say nobody wants me on their team, [that] I'm all different things -- a cancer -- that's not what's going on," Marbury said at the game in L.A. earlier this month when surrounded by reporters.
One source close to Marbury cautioned that it would be premature to say that he's narrowed his wish list down to the Celtics, but one Western Conference executive said of the notion that Marbury is Boston-bound: "I've heard the exact same thing."


The fact remains, though, that Marbury has to extricate himself from the Knicks before he can make any firm future plans. Media outlets in New York have reported in recent days that Knicks president Donnie Walsh is planning to seriously rekindle buyout talks now that the calendar has flipped to 2009, but one theory in circulation holds that the Knicks have dragged out Marbury's release this long in part because they don't want to see him wind up as a contributor in a championship race with a team from the same division.


The Celtics have also yet to make either of their two scheduled regular-season visits to Madison Square Garden. The first is Sunday and the second is Feb. 6.


In buyout negotiations to date, Marbury has refused to surrender more than $1 million of his $20.8 million salary and, at last report, was no longer offering to give back that much. The Knicks have reportedly asked Marbury to give up at least $3 million for the right to choose his next team, although they could be moved to lower those demands if a trade materializes that requires New York to open Marbury's roster spot.
Assuming that Marbury does eventually secure a buyout from the Knicks, it would appear that his options are scarce should the Celtics ultimately decide not to take the gamble.


Orlando and Phoenix are among the top teams needing guard help which have publicly declared their intent to steer clear of Marbury. Miami is often mentioned as a possible destination, but the luxury-tax implications from signing Marbury and the Heat's status as a rebuilding team make it a questionable fit. It is unclear whether the Los Angeles Lakers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/clubhouse?team=lal) -- who recently lost backup point guard Jordan Farmar (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=3002) until mid-February at the earliest because of knee surgery -- would be a Marbury bidder.
ESPN.com reported in mid-November that Dallas planned to investigate the possibility of signing Marbury if he became available -- with Mavericks owner Mark Cuban and Marbury having built a casual friendship over the years -- but that was before J.J. Barea emerged as a reliable contributor off the Mavs' bench. Club sources, meanwhile, have maintained from the start that the Mavs would likely pass on the tricky prospect of bringing in Marbury to back up Jason Kidd (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=429), given what happened after those two were traded for each other in the summer of 2001. Kidd led New Jersey to back-to-back appearances in the NBA Finals in 2002 and 2003; Marbury experienced only moderate success in 2 seasons with Phoenix before a 2004 trade to the Knicks which has delivered little beyond a steadily deteriorating relationship with his hometown team.


In a first-person weblog entry for the New York Post on Wednesday, Marbury discussed his ongoing exile from the Knicks.
"People who know me know I'm in the best shape of my life," Marbury wrote. ". . . Bottom line, I came to camp with the right attitude, in shape and ready to play. I didn't come to be a distraction.



"I didn't want to be a distraction for the team first and me second. I honestly came to help the team win. Real talk. I was willing to put in the work necessary to earn my starting spot and humble enough to accept coming off of the bench.


"It was unfortunate that the coach wanted to go in a different direction and didn't want me to be part of the team. I just wish it had been handled correctly from jump. I could understand the fact they didn't want Chris Duhon (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=2377) looking over his shoulder, but if you don't want me just pay me and let me go. I just want to play basketball."


Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here (http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/mailbagESPN?event_id=3033).

duke dynamite
01-02-2009, 10:43 AM
They'll grab anybody!

Brad8888
01-02-2009, 11:44 AM
Wouldn't JT be a cheaper backup for Rondo than Starbury? Wouldn't JT also be less of a distraction in he media as well? If there is any truth to this at all, wouldn't JT be a viable alternative if he has kept himself in any kind of shape?

Would the Celtics risk destroying their chemistry with EITHER of them? While I hope so, I really doubt that it would happen.

jhondog28
01-02-2009, 11:52 AM
i read this article this morning and I was shocked that the Celts would do this. I honestly cannot believe they would risk bringing in someone that has NEVER played a team game. I do not even care if he is going to be third string, they are the defending champs and they want to screw it up by bringing in this head case. It seemed as if they just want to add depth. I am sure they could find someone in the development leagues versus bringing in Marbury. At least the development league player would play a team game and play with his heart.

Wu-Gambino
01-02-2009, 12:32 PM
Please, God, make this happen. I can't stand the Celtics, and adding Marbury would at least give some hope that the Celtics do not win another championship.

MrSparko
01-02-2009, 01:36 PM
Please, God, make this happen. I can't stand the Celtics, and adding Marbury would at least give some hope that the Celtics do not win another championship.

They may need Tinsley.

Major Cold
01-02-2009, 01:40 PM
This is absurd. Why would they bring someone in who could mess up the winning atmosphere. Marbury has never been on a contending team for a reason.

CableKC
01-02-2009, 01:52 PM
They'll grab anybody!
Unfortunately for any team besides the Lakers and Celtics, they don't have to grab anyone.......Players such as Marbury are the ones choosing to go to the Lakers or Celtics cuz it's the quickest route to a Championship.

CableKC
01-02-2009, 01:54 PM
Please, God, make this happen. I can't stand the Celtics, and adding Marbury would at least give some hope that the Celtics do not win another championship.


This is absurd. Why would they bring someone in who could mess up the winning atmosphere. Marbury has never been on a contending team for a reason.
If that is the case, I would much rather have Marbury end up in LakerTown rather then BeanTown. :D

Mourning
01-02-2009, 02:14 PM
Hold on... Marbury REFUSES to give up even something above ONE million of his TWENTY DOT EIGHT million "salary" that he just gets this season for doing exactly.... nothing....? What a moron.

I think the Knicks should hold on to him until he drops his demands on the salary part significantly. The trade deadline hasn't come very close yet and Marbury has the most to win in a trade.

For the Celtics I can see why they would do it. More quality depth and offensive punch. You might not like him, I know I don't like him, but he adds tremendous offensive scoring power, ball handling, speed and penetration to any second unit and might work decently on their starting squad aswell if they can keep him from trying to do it all alone and I think Garnett, Pierce, Allen are capable of keeping him in his place as a trio.

I don't see them even allowing to poison the atmosphere in the lockerroom and with the (relatively for us) low salary Marbury will get in Boston he could be easily dispended aswell, so he offers them a low-risk and high reward.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:

Anthem
01-02-2009, 02:54 PM
Hold on... Marbury REFUSES to give up even something above ONE million of his TWENTY DOT EIGHT million "salary" that he just gets this season
Yeah, that's what I noticed as well. Those folks that think Tinsley is going to accept a buyout at 50% are living a pipe dream. Marbury's not willing to give up 5%.

count55
01-02-2009, 02:59 PM
Yeah, that's what I noticed as well. Those folks that think Tinsley is going to accept a buyout at 50% are living a pipe dream. Marbury's not willing to give up 5%.

I agree, and have always thought a 50% buyout not reasonable, Marbury is in a significantly different situation than Tinsley. He need only wait four more months to be free, and it's not like his reputation can become any more damaged. I'm sure he's currently tracking the league min (pro-rated) for vets, and telling the Knicks that he'll discount by that much. In his situation, he's basically keeping himself whole, from a monetary perspective. It is unlikely that he'll ever get big dollars again, so why should he give more away than he's sure he can get back at this point?

Tinsley, on the other hand, is staring at three years of inactivity. I still think the right buyout amount is in the 80-85% range (NPV), but he may have a little more motivation to make a deal than Marbury has.

MillerTime
01-02-2009, 03:13 PM
Theres not going to be a buyout. Marbury wants 100% of his salary. Which GM would pay a player 100% of their salary in a buyout? Its just stupid. I dont blame Walsh. If theyre going to make a deal if has to be fair for both sides

Mourning
01-02-2009, 03:23 PM
Because he might want to get that "free-ride" on one of the absolute legit title contenders? :dunno:

He's a moron if he isn't willing to basically buy his way to that chance. He gets a decent chance to become a "champion" and only has to give up $2.5mln (I severely doubt the Knicks wouldn't take that) of his what is it now? $140mln in total contract earnings since he started his career (leaving his other associated commercial activities out of it)? It's dumb, unless you are a total money whore, which wouldn't surprise me the least either.

Regards,

Mourning :cool:


I agree, and have always thought a 50% buyout not reasonable, Marbury is in a significantly different situation than Tinsley. He need only wait four more months to be free, and it's not like his reputation can become any more damaged. I'm sure he's currently tracking the league min (pro-rated) for vets, and telling the Knicks that he'll discount by that much. In his situation, he's basically keeping himself whole, from a monetary perspective. It is unlikely that he'll ever get big dollars again, so why should he give more away than he's sure he can get back at this point?

BRushWithDeath
01-02-2009, 03:24 PM
Wouldn't JT be a cheaper backup for Rondo than Starbury?

No, because JT won't be bought out.

d_c
01-02-2009, 03:25 PM
Wouldn't JT be a cheaper backup for Rondo than Starbury?

The Celtics aren't going to trade for either Tinsley or Marbury. However, they would sign either of these guys if their current teams buy them out or waive them outright (unlikely in Tinsley's case).

Will Galen
01-02-2009, 08:35 PM
"the source predicted that "it will happen." Nonsense, the source doesn't know anything. A buyout hasn't happened yet.

As for going to the Celtics remember when Starbury was susposed to go to Miami and then there were reports the Knicks were going to require Starbury to go West if they bought him out. Who's to say they won't still require that?

I take everything I read with a grain of salt, except if it's about NY, or if it's news coming out of NY, then I just don't believe it until it happens.

GrangerThanFiction
01-03-2009, 12:37 AM
As odd as it sounds, I don't see Marbury ruining the chemistry in Boston should this signing go down. Instead, his signing could play out like Moss going to the Patriots. Back then, analysts were questioning why a disciplined team like the Pats would take on such a team-poisoning figure. Like Stephon, Moss was still known to put up numbers, albeit when he felt like it.

My amateur conclusion is that people like Marbury and Moss play out of spite. Marbury will not pull any antics because he knows the Celtics are one of the league's elite and that his excuses will fall on deaf ears. Should an incident occur, he'll just prove his critics right and that's the last thing that he wants.

Throughout Marbury's tumultuous career, he could always make the case that he wasn't getting enough minutes or touches or whatever, but I think even he knows that will not happen in the locker room of the defending champs. He'll morph into the company man, pronto.