1) Nate can play and Isiah showed last year he isn't afraid to sit the guys who are playing bad. 2) Showcase baby! It's going to be an Artest fire sale. A few more losses for the Kings and I think he can be had for Jamal or Nate and an expiring contract.
oohah
Good luck Mike D'Antoni, 'cause you ain't never seen nothing like this before!
AUTOADVERT
Allanfan20 Posts: 36031
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542 USA
"You put the best people in who are playing well that night," Thomas said. "The focus is that game and winning that night and moving to the next game. I thought Nate was playing well, he had it going. He was playing well in all areas, so it was a judgment call."
"That unit was playing well so I just left them out on the floor," Thomas said. "Then we got into a point where [Cleveland] came back and I wanted to go back to that unit because it had extended and gave us the lead."
Help me understand the bias that Isiah shows towards his boy Marbury.
Help me understand why Marbury's reduced role must be only defined as a "benching" and not doing what's best for the team?
3 1/2 yrs go by and now he's deciding to coach with accountability. This is right up there with giving Marbury for playing defense last yr. I love the schedule we're on when deciding to do things we're supposed to do in the first place.
Thanks!
TrueBlue - 3.5 years as head coach?
c'mon.
once a knick always a knick
Bippity10 Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
