Posted by Paladin55:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by Paladin55:

I have to admit that I am amazed when I read that people think we are "tanking."

Is it possible that some folks are unaware that a guy like MDA hates to lose, and is not going to do anything to intentionally lose a game??!!

There may come a a time when we've reached a point where we have no chance at all for a playoff spot, and thinking about the future, MDA, (with a "go ahead" from Walsh) decides to guarantee Chandler and Gallinari 35 MPG at the expense of players who might give us a better chance to win NOW. He might let a guy like Samb play some significant minutes to see if he might be worthy of a contract that extends through the summer. These will be lineup changes made with the approval of Walsh in consultation with MDA, and they will be made well ahead of game time.

But he is not going to make in game decisions with the intent of losing a game. Not now, not never.

And I have to admit that I am amazed when I read that people think that "tanking" means throwing games.

Who said anything about D'Antoni making in game decisions with the intent of losing games??!! He can, and I'm sure he will, try to win games, but he can do it with Chandler and Gallinari getting more minutes and in crunch time. Also with Nichols and Samb getting as many minutes as they can handle to see what they have in them. Why does he have to do it with Hughes and Harrington trying to score as much as they can?

If you want to use the word "tanking," try to know what it means.

Main Entry: tank
Function: verb
Date: 1863

transitive verb
1 : to place, store, or treat in a tank
2 : to make no effort to win : lose intentionally <tanked the match>
intransitive verb
1 : to lose intentionally : give up in competition

there are no subtleties?

Posted by Paladin55:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by Paladin55:

I have to admit that I am amazed when I read that people think we are "tanking."

Is it possible that some folks are unaware that a guy like MDA hates to lose, and is not going to do anything to intentionally lose a game??!!

There may come a a time when we've reached a point where we have no chance at all for a playoff spot, and thinking about the future, MDA, (with a "go ahead" from Walsh) decides to guarantee Chandler and Gallinari 35 MPG at the expense of players who might give us a better chance to win NOW. He might let a guy like Samb play some significant minutes to see if he might be worthy of a contract that extends through the summer. These will be lineup changes made with the approval of Walsh in consultation with MDA, and they will be made well ahead of game time.

But he is not going to make in game decisions with the intent of losing a game. Not now, not never.

And I have to admit that I am amazed when I read that people think that "tanking" means throwing games.

Who said anything about D'Antoni making in game decisions with the intent of losing games??!! He can, and I'm sure he will, try to win games, but he can do it with Chandler and Gallinari getting more minutes and in crunch time. Also with Nichols and Samb getting as many minutes as they can handle to see what they have in them. Why does he have to do it with Hughes and Harrington trying to score as much as they can?

If you want to use the word "tanking," try to know what it means.

Main Entry: tank
Function: verb
Date: 1863

transitive verb
1 : to place, store, or treat in a tank
2 : to make no effort to win : lose intentionally <tanked the match>
intransitive verb
1 : to lose intentionally : give up in competition

LOL Yeah, because that's how people on this board have been using the word.

Go find me where anybody said they wanted D'Antoni or the players to intentionally lose games and used that strict definition of "tanking".

Posted by JohnWallace44:

Last game versus the Nets... I really don't think I've seen a more obvious intentional loss than what the Knicks did down the stretch.

We were three games out and behind a five teams for the 8th spot and I was mad, but I was thinking, ok, I get it, we're going for Lottery positioning... it's time.

Nate and Al sat for all of the critical minutes, the team looked rudderless and we didn't put up a fight in the final minutes of the game.

Now... against the Bucks, we look like were playing for a critical win... I was actually rooting against my own team in the final minutes. I'm lost. I don't know what we're doing anymore.

In the Tank Standings, here's where we're at;

Minnesota - 6th - 18 wins
Golden State - 7th - 21 wins
Toronto - 8th - 23 wins
Knicks - 9th - 26 wins
Indiana - 10th - 28 wins
Charlotte - 11th - 28 wins
New Jersey - 12th - 28 wins
Milwaukee - 13th - 30 wins
Chicago - 14th - 29 wins - 8th spot in East
Philly - 15th - 20 wins - 7th spot in East

I'm not worried about catching Chicago anymore. I'm worried about catching Golden State.

What happened tonight makes me really confused about what happened against NJ.

Anyone have any thoughts?

Nate and Al were benched against the Nets for playing immature & selfish basketball it had nothing to do with tanking.

Walsh may be rooting for the lottery but I don't think so and D'Antoni is sure as hell trying to win games. He was screaming at people in Milwaukee. He must have lit into Nate and Lee at halftime because both guys came out particularly strong in the 2nd half. I wonder if he challenged them and called them losers....never know.

Posted by JohnWallace44:


What happened tonight makes me really confused about what happened against NJ.

Anyone have any thoughts?

It would appear Mike was trying to teach Al and Nate a lesson. For worse for certain as we probably win the game if they play. Yet he did what he did. Coaches do that sometimes - and for worse for sure that night. Nothing else to it. There is no tanking or purposeful losing going on. We've gone what 4-12 now? That's not on purpose that's because we stink that bad.

Don't go looking for something that is not there. Usually the simple explanation is the correct one and in this case the simple explanation is we STINK.

Posted by JohnWallace44:

If it was tanking then that was just a terrible coaching move. You can't bench Al AND Nate in a critical game like that.