Method Man
Don't expect Donnie Walsh to act quickly here with Stephon Marbury. Don't expect him to act with emotion or rashness.
Expect a measured, calculated and precise plan of action that follows every letter of the law and exhausts every option he has in this excruciatingly methodical disunion.
Stephon's greatest weakness won't be his defiant stance with that fiery glare that only burned to the ground any standing structures of loyalty and empathy from those who wear the Knicks uniform (in accordance with Quentin Richardson's declaration, we will strike the term "teammate" from the record and hereby object to its use hereafter). Marbury's case has and will continue to crumble because he refuses proper representation -- e.g. an agent -- which in cases such as these would have found an amenable solution to this issue.
An agent would have negotiated a buyout; would have done so only after securing a new and desired destination, a beneficial relocation that would have the potential to allow the client to have a career renaissance in the most opportune seasons of all: the contract year. One solid season of basketball -- and, to quote a Ms. Mary J. Blige, no more drama -- would have easily earned a mult-year contract that most assuredly would have made up for any of the monies lost in the buyout process. A trusted agent would have explained all this.
A trusted agent would have had the perception to prepare an exit strategy when his client was getting the patronizing kudos mixed with the he'll-play-over-my-dead-body vibe during training camp. Anyone who believed the Coach (Mike D'Antoni) had any intentions of giving the Player (Marbury) an important role on this team in this season that is -- as evidenced by the recent trading day -- essentially the demolition stage of a major renovation was terribly mistaken.
But a trusted agent would have protected his client from perpetual inactive status, claiming the club was denying his client's right to earn his wage. An agent would have advised the client to be seen and not heard and simply ride the wave of empathy that could have been a valuable tool: public opinion.
And an agent, along the way, could have negotiated with the club president and also worked backchannels to perhaps find potential trade partners. Exhibit A: The Detroit Pistons made a payroll-motivated move for Allen Iverson ($21.9 million expiring contract) and have since struggled offensively with a shoot-first guard. They are now preparing to fine Iverson for blowing off a Thanksgiving Day practice, which everyone else on the team found the time -- and responsibility -- to attend.
A good agent would call Joe Dumars just to pose the hypothetical of swapping Iverson for Stephon Marbury, who is more of a combo guard that arguably could, at least short-term, fit much better with scorer Rip Hamilton in the backcourt and in the Pistons' pick-and-roll system. The salaries are an exact match. And Iverson would obviously fill the Knicks' needs for a go-to scorer, while Iverson would also step into an offensive system in which he would thrive.
Dumars would likely decline because, despite his allergic reaction to practicing, Iverson is still an elite player in the NBA. Marbury, who appeared in just 24 games last season and hasn't seen a tick this season, is an unknown entity at this point in his career, save for his history of going nuclear on coaches.
But a good agent would also reach out to those deep-pocketed European clubs that are hungry to cherry-pick a named NBA player and convince one team -- be it Greece, Italy or Spain -- to pony up enough one-year guaranteed money to make up the difference that would lead to a more agreeable buyout with the current club (i.e.: $4 million from Greece -- not outragous if the far-less offensively gifted and recognized Josh Childress can get three years and $20 million -- would result in a $17.9 million buyout offer, which is closer to the $15 million the Knicks).
A good agent would have made this a personal priority because the story is such a high-profile situation in the largest media market in the world. And because if you can have a brand renaissance for Starbury the player, it could reap lucrative rewards by July.
Instead, Walsh works essentially pater familias in this case, with Marbury represented by his union lawyers who, in all due respect, are mainly there to ensure all actions follow the exact definitions of the collective bargaining agreement. Walsh, as any club executive should, well understands whatever machinations exist in the CBA that will expedite the impending divorce between player and club to a reasonable settlement.
This won't be a swift slice of the sword. Patrick Ewing, Jr. may have to keep waiting a little longer for that roster spot to open.
Walsh is not done with this chess board yet. He's had the King in sight (we don't mean LeBron....that game's on another board) for some time now, but an aggressive attempt at a game-winning move is always the most precarious choice. So the strategy, instead, was to let the opponent beat himself, which, understandably, can take some time. But endgame started to develop in Milwaukee and brought Walsh to the verge Wednesday in Detroit . . .
And now checkmate awaits.
....Upside downside inside and outside
Hittin you from every angle there's no doubt
I am, the one and only Method Man
The master of the plan wrappin s--- like Saran....
E-mail
Facebook
Digg
Delicious
Comments (16)
great post alan, completely agree about marbury's reluctance to hire an agent. he doesn't get it.
i will continue to wear the starburys because i am a fan of the kicks, but marbury in my eyes is not and should not be a knick. he doesn't deserve the honor of wearing orange and blue.
Any news on the Steph for Matrix swap that's on the table for Miami?
Marion doesn't want to be there and Mia needs a PG.
Why not make the deal if your Rat Riley?
He would actually also be saving more money on the cap as Marbury makes more than Matrix.
Just thinking out loud.
Alan, your blog security sucks. Change the filtering system please.
I am tired of all this agent BS. What can an agent do for someone who's been in the league for 12 years. The agent's not going to get his client extra money, signing bonuses or incentives in the contract. NBA contracts are GUARANTEED contracts so what would you need an agent for after your value(monetarily) has already be established? To take 3-5% of something you could've done own your own.
It seems clear to me even though people try to diss Steph for his smarts, he's done pretty damn good for himself on the business side. I'm sure he has a business manager and a lawyer to help him in all legal and business matters. He knows what teams would possibly be interested in signing or not signing him period. He doesn't need an agent to know that. The Knicks are stalling so he won't go to another team this early in the season and develop with them. Donnie Walsh is meticulous enough in his dealings to know this.
Furthermore if Steph had done as D'Antoni said and refused to play he'd of been suspended, fined and ostracized more than he already is. The Knicks didn't waste anytime fining him last year when 'he left' the team in Phoenix or banishing him from MSG. So it seems clear both sides don't want anything to do with one another then let the man go. Stop with all the BS talk well if he had an agent he'd be gone by now. I mean Jamaal Tinsley has an agent and he's still exiled from the Pacers, T.O. had an agent when he was exiled from the Eagles. Their agents didn't get them moved, so agents don't do or get done things teams don't want to do. Obviously the Knicks brass (Dolan & D'Antoni) have an agenda.
Wow. Very nice post.
Although, it does not read like Alan (not a knock because I like much of AH's work) and it sounds like a "Newsday which is owned by Cablevision which just bought the Knicks" piece, it is really good and informative. Thanks.
It is also a great take on the situation. I agree 100% on how an player's agent works and "could" be helpful for both sides in this matter. However, if you are right then Walsh, like Marbury, is a man big on gambits when it appears that he doesn't need to be. Note that Iverson was fined immediately. Dumars took immediate control. Why not Walsh? Why not cut to the chase and address the problem immediately.
So, I wonder if getting rid of Marbury is checkmate, why is he still here? Is it because Walsh and Marbury are making this fight about the exact same thing -- $6- $10 million dollars? So is checkmate Marbury off the team for less than $21 million without any other prospects? Does Walsh stop him from being picked up by teams such as Dallas, Boston (is there proof Boston won't go there in favor of coach-to-be SamIAm for the playoffs), Los Angeles or Miami? Is checkmate keeping Marbury off the bench but paying him his full freight? Is checkmate making sure that Marbury never plays again this season and still loses ten million? What is checkmate in Walsh's eyes? I am really curious.
We already know that checkmate for Marbury is simply getting all of his money without lifting a finger in favor of the Knicks.
Gambits can be a sweet way to checkmate, especially when you are playing a novice or someone who doesn't study the game. But sometimes gambits are not necessary. Was it necessary for Walsh to keep Marbs around and surrender some of his own managerial credibility; surrender control over trades which forced him into a position to overpay for a decent but back-up point guard; release Patrick Ewing, Jr. against his stated wishes and forcing the kid to hide from reporters while practicing with the team; hold up the Crawford trade in order to trade for a player with a bad heart to avoid the embarrassment of playing Marbs (see how that worked out); and, like Marbury, waste considerable capital in public opinion; look spiteful and incompetent to many of the players around the league. Was that gambit necessary in this situation, in the name of patience? In 1954, they called that strategy, “With all deliberate speed.” Deliberate speed doesn’t always work out the way people claim it will.
Nevertheless, you sound like you got the inside track on this one because you are leaving out some salacious details, I think.
In any event Alan, I think this is one of your top three posts, if it is you. If it is not, you have a good teammate (or generous employer). Thanks either way. It was a fun read.
Even if Steph had an agent who provided him with the spot-on advice outlined in this article, Steph would still be in the career destroying situation he is now. Why? Because Steph knows best, and there is no way he would listen to an agents advice, regardless of how logical and beneficial it was.
Marbury has no business sense.
If he did he'd realize taking a $5 mil paycut in a buyout will allow him to play for another team and potentially further his career to make another possible $15 -20 mil throughout the course of the couple years in his career that he has left.
By not playing this year, teams will be less willing to take a chance on Marbury, and less willing to pay him according to his talent and skill level. Its truly Marbury who has the agenda, Knicks would love to buy him out (not for $21 mil though), but he is hellbent on "getting every penny" or as close to it as possible. Thing is, if he gets every penny and doesn't play a second this season, he's really only screwing himself as he is severely hindering any potential future deals after this year.
His talent could(and should) get him mid-level exception money after this year, but for the risks involved (locker room distractions, can he still play at a high-level consistently?) he won't get anything more than the veteran's minimum. And you wouldn't be able to blame any team for offering someone with so much talent as little as they possibly could (especially after proving nothing in a contract year, other than giving credence to a lot the negative things that have been said about him).
First, DJ is right. It is very difficult to get on this site these days. What happened?
Second, another WOW. I just read Newsday's and Berman's articles on this situation. FOr those interested in the truth, I suggest that you read both articles and ignore the personal biased commentary in each.
We already know what to expect from Bermy with his inside umbilical connect to Marbury. However, in this case, he provides some good inside info into what is actually going on and more insight into what Walsh considers to be good chess moves in this instance. It's soap opera deep.
On the other hand, I was very surprised that Newsday's news article contained more conjecture, opinionating and posturing than normal.
About Marbury's refusal to play, Newsday writes "he lost whatever shreds of empathy remained from his teammates." Then the article uses Q's quote as evidence that Marbury lost something we all know he didn't have since last year. Switch to the Berman article, and Marbury reveals that D'Antoni told Q right before the Miami game that Marbs was on his way out and would not play w/o telling Marbury. If you don't like Marbury, you'll say he's lying. But if you are paying attention, isn't it clear (as it was last year) that Marbs was not in the plans, except to be set up for a fall.
Then Newsday writes "This has mostly been a battle of wills between Marbury and - who else - his coach," which is only partially true, because it is a battle between Walsh and Marbs. D'Antoni is only the pawn (or Knight, Rook or Queen) to be used to set Marbury up. Hence, the offer to start for the rest of the season. Marbury admits the offer but denies he was told to play. He knows what insubordination is. And the Union which has been representing and adising him, knows too. See the union rep quote in Bermy's piece.
And finally our favorite Newspaper throws in "latest episode, it is doubtful that any team would be interested in adding him to their locker room at midseason. Who's doubt? Does anyone believe that all execs for all 29 teams have expressed that they would not pick up Marbury? Do you really believe that the execs for all 29 teams were contacted to express doubt? Do you believe that all execs for the 29 teams believe that Marbury is solely at fault for this debacle?
Normally, I would not take the time to break down a news article like that but I am becoming a little suspicious about Newsday's role in this chess match. I know several posters warned us that Newsday would be in a difficult position as a tool for Knicks management -- why else buy a paper if you can't use it in your favor? (You go Dolan). Still, the benefit of the doubt should favor the writers who have shown us they care about journalistic integrity. But today's Post and Article sounds like the Knick Management counterweight to Steph's New York Post connects. I apologize but I am very suspicious that Newsday is one of Walsh's tools in this public relations war because the slant of the article and this great insider post raises questions for me.
The only real problem is that now I suggest you also read the Post and Newsday on this developing story to make sure you have all angles covered.
Wow great post. It is amazing to me that we truly only hear the corporate side of the situation. Only because if Steph truly speaks out it will cost him money..THe co. can say anything they want and diminish his future earnings and are taking every step to do so. This is blatant hatred at its best. Why would the coach ask a player do you want to play. Tell him to suit up and get in the game. They are truly setting him up and it is working. Now everyone is quickly jumping to the steph is no good by leaving his teamates out there, but one of the articles suggests that when questioned teh team veterans were not in favor of steph playing. So if that is true then why would he play for a coach that doesn't want him to play and with guys in a locker room who don't want to play with him. This all does not make any sense other than for the NY Knicks--who are owned by Cablevision which also own newsday. As an aside Steph needs to go, but lets stop teh BS and end the whole thing. Teams are interested in him and he should be able to earn a future living. I truly hope for integrity sake teams do not view him as the only cause of this problem, because for this year only "It ain't his fault"
A good GM and Head Coach wouldn't have let this become the distraction that it is. This should have been taken care of in the offseason or at latest the preseason.
@Lives - Clearly, your opinion is that unless I write over-the-top pro-Marbury, I am merely writing from a "house paper" perspective. So where does the Daily News fit in this equation? Are they the proverbial "tie-breaker" when it comes to truth?
The above post came from yours truly (why so amazed that I can sometimes write straightforward analysis?) after digesting the facts that I am aware of along with Thanksgiving dinner. Six a.m. flights allow for plenty of meditation time on topics you know need to be handled with care. I admit I don't have speeddial access to Stephon, but I have only pointed to the evidence -- i.e. his history of issues with coaches, which can NOT be ignored as it is in the aforementioned rival tabloid. Honestly, how is THIS not something discussed more? Are we to just concede that Lenny, Larry, Isiah and Mike were wrong each time? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me thrice, shame on the fourth coach who came along.
Marbury suspended one game
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3731403
Your move, Steph
Walsh is looking very very bad/inept. He should have met with D'A befofre the 1st game and after hearing that Starbs would not be playing put him on the inactive list and tried to buy him out. If Starbs refuses to negotiate, Walsh should demand that Stern take over. If Stern says it's not the league's job, then the Player's Union should broker the divorce. Instead, we have a childish stinker of a mess with each party playing chicken. Get a backbone, Mr. Walsh -- end it by Monday.
DTR
@Alan - You have nailed it with "Lives!" He will not even acknowledge any argument that does not totally support his perspective. My recent "debate" with him (see "Marbury Passes On Playing Again") illustrates this quite well. Thank you for yet another informative read.
Ahhh. I can see Marbury laying out his week's worth of designer duds. Looks in the mirror, practices one surly scowl after another and finds one that fetches his approval. That's it! This is the sourpuss look I will wear tonight to protect my "respect" to show my worshipers I am not to be messed with.
Ignore this player. Stop writing about him. He adores the rancorous attention -- always have. NJ, Minnesota, Phoenix, the Knicks and next Miami.
Cancer - the man is malignant. Walsh and the Coach have my full support on this one.
Good post Alan your dead on, Walsh is dotting all i's and crossing the T's. This is not as easy as everyone thinks, Knicks must to this carefully so Mr. "I Love New York" has no legal recourse.
Keep going at your own pace Donnie, looks like things are going to be done his way. This Knick fan finally believes that there is someone who knows what he is doing in charge.
I never cared much for Q, but I respect him now for finally speaking up on this. Oak & Ewing would have never let Malbury pull this nonsense on the team. This is what the Knicks lack leaders, stars who play hard & play hurt.
Plus Wilson Candler ejected?? When quiet Wilson get's ejected you know this team is pissed and fed up! Keep playing hard guys, a better day is coming.
Hard to believe a man who has been so smart all season long all of a sudden gets stupid a five minutes before his midnight....Want the truth:
1. Have D'Antoni and Steph take a lie detector test...or
2. Ask Herb Williams what happened