Signing Marbury is a low risk, high reward proposition, because despite the tattoos on his head, he can really play.
Theorically, he should be fresh. Because he hasn't "really" played since he signed his last contract.
The tattoos made Marbury a caracature of Marbury. His game is a caracature of a team concept. Or the antithesis of it.
He has never been on a team with this kind of talent. Every other team he has played with he was the #1 option. On this team he would be the 4th or 5th option. I know he wasn't a model citizen in New York, but he shouldn't be blamed for all the problems the Knicks have had over the past few years. Isah Thomas had a lot to do with that. I just don't see it being a big risk signing a guy who has averaged 20 ppg and 8 apg for his career to the Vet Minimum. We clearly need some scoring off the bench and someone who can get our other bench player involved on offense when Rondo is out of the game.
I was among the people who were the most dissappointed in Pierce the three seasons prior to last year when he, our franchise player, showed no leadership. Particularly defensively.
I have no problem pinning most of the blame on Marbury for the Knicks' malaises. His behavior has been pathetic. He's had great coaches, average coaches, and bad coaches. He's been consistent under all of them.
It comes with the territory when you're the team's cornerstone, highest paid, and best player.