<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
I used to work with a guy that was a huge Seattle Mariners fan. <\/span>In 2001 we went to an Angels-Mariners game together and while at the game he says, “We got rid of Griffey and we got better. <\/span>We got rid of Randy Johnson and we got better. <\/span>We got rid of A-Rod and we got better. <\/span>If we trade Ichiro, we’re gonna go undefeated.” <\/span>Clearly there was something wrong with this logic but the fact remained <\/span>that the Mariners had just lost the best player in baseball (Alex Rodriguez), and without A-Rod they went on to tie the all-time regular season win record. <\/span>Championship teams aren’t just about who has the most talent—just ask Yankee fans. <\/span>Instead, winning teams are about the right mix of good players, role players, coaching, and desire. <\/span>We call this mix Chemistry—presumably because, like chemistry, no one actually understands it. <\/span>This winning formula is so fragile that some players just have an innate ability to destroy a team, no matter how talented they may be. <\/span>These players have long been nicknamed “cancers,” but I have a different name for them: “anchors.” <\/span>Across all sports, absolutely nothing will drag a team down like a clubhouse anchor. <\/span>What does this have to do with Stephon Marbury? <\/span>And why, as a Lakers fan, would I want the Celtics to bolster their bench (their one major weakness) with a two-time All-Star? <\/span>One reason: <\/span>Marbury is the quintessential clubhouse anchor, and he can single-handedly destroy the Boston Celtics. <\/span><\/p>\n There is a delicate balance to being a true anchor: you need to 1) be an above-average talent and 2) you have to be highly-paid. <\/span>Marbury, with career averages of nearly 20 points and nearly 8 assists, meets both requirements since he’s currently being paid nearly $22 million… to not play for the Knicks. <\/span>And that is New York’s best personnel decision this year. <\/span>But now they are considering taking the next step and cutting Marbury—which would allow him to sign with any other team (even a division rival like Boston). <\/span>The Boston Celtics could definitely use a guard, particularly a ball-handler who can score, to come off the bench. <\/span>They believe that their team chemistry is so strong they can handle anyone. <\/span>And maybe they are right. <\/span>Everyone on the Celtics is terrified of letting this team down; particularly because if they do they won’t be able to fall asleep for a week for fear that Kevin Garnett would slit their throat and dump the body on the next road trip through Cleveland. <\/span>Heck even Doc Rivers has to be scared of KG. <\/span>And that might be enough to get something out of Marbury, but I think the Celtics might be seriously underestimating his power to sink a team. <\/p>\n This is Marbury’s 11th<\/sup> season, and he’s has never won a playoff series (his career playoff record is 3-15). <\/span>In fact he has played for a team with a winning record only twice, but has played for a team that has lost at least 50 games four different times (in three different cities no less). <\/span>But what is most remarkable about Stephon Marbury is his ability to kill a good team, as demonstrated by the fact that teams seem to immediately improve as soon as Marbury’s gone. <\/span>There is a clear trail of destruction behind him. <\/span>There was the Minnesota Timberwolves who set their franchise record for wins the year after they traded away Marbury. <\/span>There was New Jersey who went from winning 52% of their games the year before Marbury to winning 32% his first year. <\/span>The year after they got rid of Marbury, the Nets doubled their win total and made it to the NBA finals. <\/span>He then moved on to destroy the Phoenix Suns, who saw a 15-win decrease in Marbury’s first year; they traded him a few years later and saw a 33-game improvement the first full year without him (33-game improvement in one season!). <\/span>For the last few years Marbury has been wreaking havoc on the New York Knicks—who have gone 112-212 in their four full seasons with him. <\/span>And looking back it turns out the “Marbury bump” (copyright pending) started right away. <\/span>In the ’96 draft the Milwaukee Bucks drafted Marbury and then immediately traded him to Minnesota. <\/span>Milwaukee would improve by 8 wins the following season. <\/span>Marbury doesn’t even need to play for a team to improve them just by leaving. <\/span>Unfortunately for American basketball, Marbury’s destructive power has also affected our Olympic team too. <\/span>In 2000, USA wins the gold (as, you know, they are supposed to). <\/span>In ’04, they add Marbury and barely get the bronze. <\/span>In ’08, without Marbury, they get gold again. <\/span>I’m not saying getting rid of Marbury solved all the problems; I’m just saying it helped.<\/p>\n This year’s Knicks team has benched and banished Stephon Marbury and are on pace for about 34 wins—which would be their most wins since they traded for Marbury in 2004. <\/span>34 wins is a pretty crummy total but the bar is quite low for what the Knicks could define as a successful season. <\/span>Of course the Knicks are so terrible because (their former-GM) Isiah Thomas went after every Anchor possible. <\/span>Thomas’ goal could only have been to create a Frankenteam of the most-overpriced players available. <\/span>But the real tragedy is that with Thomas now gone the Knicks have been slowly trying to get rid of those terrible players; almost like a front yard whose dandelions have gone to seed, the Knicks are now blowing away and infecting every other house on the block. <\/span>It used to be that adequate players with terrible contracts could be quarantined on the Knicks, but now nobody’s safe. <\/span>In this new, more frightening NBA, your team could end up with Steve Francis, Jerome James, or (Heaven-forbid) Eddy Curry. <\/span>The Knicks have found the quickest way to the playoffs, and it’s to get rid Stephon Marbury. <\/span><\/p>\n Before their Christmas day loss to the Lakers, the Celtics were 27-2 and looked unstoppable. <\/span>But since then two things have happened: the C’s have lost 4 of 6 games and they have openly talked about bringing Stephon Marbury in. <\/span>Coincidence? <\/span>Well, probably; but the fact remains if the Lakers are going to beat the Celtics in June, they need Marbury to help take down Boston from the inside. <\/span>Last year the Celtics felt that Rajon Rondo wasn’t ready for a playoff run and so when a veteran shot-first point guard became available mid-season, Boston jumped at the chance to add Sam Cassell to their roster. <\/span>Cassell came in, and was terrible, forcing Boston to become even more reliant on Rondo during the playoffs. <\/span>Marbury is younger than Cassell, but just as much of a liability. <\/span>Then again, Danny Ainge has made all the right moves the last few years so maybe this move could work out for them. <\/span>Or maybe he is two steps ahead of everybody else and he knows that when a team is struggling the best thing it can do is get rid of Stephon Marbury.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n