nixluva wrote:The thing is that we weren't winning with Nate! Our record is better not playing him. Now we do struggle to score at times but our D is much better and it's keeping us in games. Perhaps MDA will figure out how to work Nate in but it's not so cut n dry as putting Nate in and we all of a sudden play better. MDA has eyes and I'm sure he's considering ALL OPTIONS. We just need to get two of the next 3.

Papabear Says

Come on Nix love!! We all know that this is personal against Nate. And don't blame Nate for those losses. Davis Lee was letting players blow buy him and he is not getting benched. David Lee has no intentions of comming back to New york. Just watch and see. Players from other teams are beginging to talk about this Nate dear. Even Wade and James.

martin wrote:enough of this Nate could have helped! Toney Douglas could have helped!

Papabear Says

What is it Martin you don't like Nate?? You don't feel that this kid should be given another chance?? or should we just waive the kid??

Papabear wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:What's horrible about it, NJ? I am not being jerk, just wondering what you saw as bad coaching.

Papabear Says

Bad coaching is when you keep a man on the bench who could maybe help this team and you put some one else in who haven't played in 5 years. Bad coaching is when you see that the shooters on the floor has gone cold and the one person on the bench who might be able to give us some quick fire power is being ignored just because of a personal situration.

What's personal about it? It's personal that MDA praised him and his potential all last season? It's personal that MDA played him and trusted him for a whole season? It's personal that MDA gave him about 1000000 chances to shape up?

You be talkin' like MDA is a second grader, and Nate gave him cooties or something. MDA is a pro coach, he wants to win. Obviously, Nate cannot help towards that goal. Simple.

Yea, it's real ****ing personal. Get the heck out of here, give break to me.

Papabear wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

Papabear wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:What's horrible about it, NJ? I am not being jerk, just wondering what you saw as bad coaching.

Papabear Says

Bad coaching is when you keep a man on the bench who could maybe help this team and you put some one else in who haven't played. Bad coaching is when you see that the shooters on the floor has gone cold and the one person on the bench who might be able to give us some quick fire power just because of a personal situration.

So what's good coaching to you? Isiah Thomas is hall of fame coach?

Nate CAN"T help, get that through your head. He has hurt this team more than helped. Just because a player puts up 17 ppg doesn't mean he's good or worthy of playing time. Tony Campbell put up 20 ppg back in 91 for the Wolves. He sucked.

Papabear Says

So Nate was to blame for all those losses. Thanks for telling me. Let's just see what happens in the next 10 games. Nate might have been a clown but he surely is not to blame for the Knicks failures. Maybe it just make you feel better by saying that.

He's not to blame, but he didn't help them win, either. Nate is a highly overrated player by a lot of weak fans in this area. People who prefer to watch basketball and not some WWF spinoff do not enjoy watching Nate goof off constantly.

Nate is welcome on the team and if he shows that he has changed his stupid ways and if there is an opportunity or a need for him to come in, he will come in and be given yet another chance. We wait until then. Personally, I don't really want to see him play for the Knicks again, but if the situation makes that necessary and he can prove his change then all is ok.

orangeblobman wrote:

Papabear wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

Papabear wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:What's horrible about it, NJ? I am not being jerk, just wondering what you saw as bad coaching.

Papabear Says

Bad coaching is when you keep a man on the bench who could maybe help this team and you put some one else in who haven't played. Bad coaching is when you see that the shooters on the floor has gone cold and the one person on the bench who might be able to give us some quick fire power just because of a personal situration.

So what's good coaching to you? Isiah Thomas is hall of fame coach?

Nate CAN"T help, get that through your head. He has hurt this team more than helped. Just because a player puts up 17 ppg doesn't mean he's good or worthy of playing time. Tony Campbell put up 20 ppg back in 91 for the Wolves. He sucked.

Papabear Says

So Nate was to blame for all those losses. Thanks for telling me. Let's just see what happens in the next 10 games. Nate might have been a clown but he surely is not to blame for the Knicks failures. Maybe it just make you feel better by saying that.

He's not to blame, but he didn't help them win, either. Nate is a highly overrated player by a lot of weak fans in this area. People who prefer to watch basketball and not some WWF spinoff do not enjoy watching Nate goof off constantly.

Nate is welcome on the team and if he shows that he has changed his stupid ways and if there is an opportunity or a need for him to come in, he will come in and be given yet another chance. We wait until then. Personally, I don't really want to see him play for the Knicks again, but if the situation makes that necessary and he can prove his change then all is ok.

Papabear Says

Nate is who he is and he can help this team win games, but the problem is not Nate. It's the whole team. There is no consistancy. We have no go to guy in the crunch. And don't tell me about Gallo because he ain't there yet. The best go to guy this team have when they are in a crunch is Nate. He can hit the 3, he can hit the 20 ft jumper, and he can drive to the basket.
You probably wouldn't care if we got back nothing for even trading Nate, or Curry.

Papabear wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

Papabear wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:

Papabear wrote:

orangeblobman wrote:What's horrible about it, NJ? I am not being jerk, just wondering what you saw as bad coaching.

Papabear Says

Bad coaching is when you keep a man on the bench who could maybe help this team and you put some one else in who haven't played. Bad coaching is when you see that the shooters on the floor has gone cold and the one person on the bench who might be able to give us some quick fire power just because of a personal situration.

So what's good coaching to you? Isiah Thomas is hall of fame coach?

Nate CAN"T help, get that through your head. He has hurt this team more than helped. Just because a player puts up 17 ppg doesn't mean he's good or worthy of playing time. Tony Campbell put up 20 ppg back in 91 for the Wolves. He sucked.

Papabear Says

So Nate was to blame for all those losses. Thanks for telling me. Let's just see what happens in the next 10 games. Nate might have been a clown but he surely is not to blame for the Knicks failures. Maybe it just make you feel better by saying that.

He's not to blame, but he didn't help them win, either. Nate is a highly overrated player by a lot of weak fans in this area. People who prefer to watch basketball and not some WWF spinoff do not enjoy watching Nate goof off constantly.

Nate is welcome on the team and if he shows that he has changed his stupid ways and if there is an opportunity or a need for him to come in, he will come in and be given yet another chance. We wait until then. Personally, I don't really want to see him play for the Knicks again, but if the situation makes that necessary and he can prove his change then all is ok.

Papabear Says

Nate is who he is and he can help this team win games, but the problem is not Nate. It's the whole team. There is no consistancy. We have no go to guy in the crunch. And don't tell me about Gallo because he ain't there yet. The best go to guy this team have when they are in a crunch is Nate. He can hit the 3, he can hit the 20 ft jumper, and he can drive to the basket.
You probably wouldn't care if we got back nothing for even trading Nate, or Curry.

This is the bottom line I feel:

It's ALL on Nate to shape up and earn his share. It is NOT on MDA to baby Nate into doing this. If Nate cannot shape up, he has no place on the Knicks and he will not find a place in the league. Circumstances don't make the man, they reveal him to himself, and Nate has been revealed as a damned fool.

nixluva wrote:I think MDA is more willing to play guys he feels will be solid two way players and fit in without blowing up the defensive chemistry. Remember he sees how guys play in practice and he can evaluate things we can't see. None of us knows what Nate is doing in practice.

if MDA prefers 2 way players why is Fishlips seeing so much burn? let's face it, MDA plays his guys, that's the bottom line... he's already made the decision that Nate is a lost cause... MDA said it was nothing personal against Dinglebury last year, is there anyone here that believed it? I was in total agreement w/MDA last year, Dinglebury was clearly washed up & Nate was a better option than he was at that point... i don't see much of a justification for Nate's complete phase out this year tho... discipline was administered & the point was made... it's time we moved on from this & thought about what's best for the Knicks' franchise rather than what's best for MDA's personal agenda... yes, the team's been playing well for the most part since Nate's benching, but tonight we definitely could have used him w/Hughes, Duhon, Bender & Chandler providing little offense at all, but MDA refused to do it.