Allanfan20 wrote:One day, people will stop the comparisons and put a hault on declaring a player as the nextcoming Player X... and those people will end up being a lot more satisfied in their lives.

Rubio is a fun player to watch but ease it on the Maravich/Nash/Kidd/Magic stuff. He played 1 game. I say that and I think he'll be good... but come on.

Thank you. The Pistol's game was so far away from where Rubio could ever PRAY to be. It must be the inexperience and name dropping tendancies of youth. The day Rubio lights a team up for 65 points, is the day I move to Minnesota.

But Pete could shoot like few in the HISToRY of the game.

CrushAlot wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:Maybe there were two or three stretches in which he played exceptional, that were short lived, but overall, I saw him jacking up bad shots and falling asleep on defense. Then he was thrown to the bench b/c of this and when he got some more minutes, before the trade, he played overly tentative.

Randolph strikes me as a guy who desperately needed the four years of LSU basketball because if he stayed, I bet we would have been talking about a different player. It's players like Randolph that make me want the NBA to increase the age limit.

Instead, Randolph is a guy who just doesn't know how to play.

He was the youngest guy on the team by several years. He was in a new city and he was coming back from an injury. It was apparent after the coach screamed at him in the Milan game that he wasn't going to fit in and there were threads speculating that he wasn't going to be embraced by the coach as soon as he was acquired. How come Dan D'Antoni worked as a personal tutor with Moz and Randolph was behind Rautins on the depth chart? Randolph is young and is not a finished product but his talent is undeniable. One of my biggest issues with D'Antoni is how he has dealt with some of the young guys, Hill, Douglas, Randolph etc.

Hill was not ready and was traded by the Gm. Randolph was not ready for prime time. Mozzy? Gallo? Fields? Shawn? Wilson? All young guys also.

Nalod wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:Maybe there were two or three stretches in which he played exceptional, that were short lived, but overall, I saw him jacking up bad shots and falling asleep on defense. Then he was thrown to the bench b/c of this and when he got some more minutes, before the trade, he played overly tentative.

Randolph strikes me as a guy who desperately needed the four years of LSU basketball because if he stayed, I bet we would have been talking about a different player. It's players like Randolph that make me want the NBA to increase the age limit.

Instead, Randolph is a guy who just doesn't know how to play.

He was the youngest guy on the team by several years. He was in a new city and he was coming back from an injury. It was apparent after the coach screamed at him in the Milan game that he wasn't going to fit in and there were threads speculating that he wasn't going to be embraced by the coach as soon as he was acquired. How come Dan D'Antoni worked as a personal tutor with Moz and Randolph was behind Rautins on the depth chart? Randolph is young and is not a finished product but his talent is undeniable. One of my biggest issues with D'Antoni is how he has dealt with some of the young guys, Hill, Douglas, Randolph etc.

Douglas is starting......

Hill was not ready and was traded by the Gm. Randolph was not ready for prime time. Mozzy? Gallo? Fields? Shawn? Wilson? All young guys also.

For what its worth, the Knicks won at a higher percentage for the last 20 games when Douglas was in the rotation.

CrushAlot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:Maybe there were two or three stretches in which he played exceptional, that were short lived, but overall, I saw him jacking up bad shots and falling asleep on defense. Then he was thrown to the bench b/c of this and when he got some more minutes, before the trade, he played overly tentative.

Randolph strikes me as a guy who desperately needed the four years of LSU basketball because if he stayed, I bet we would have been talking about a different player. It's players like Randolph that make me want the NBA to increase the age limit.

Instead, Randolph is a guy who just doesn't know how to play.

He was the youngest guy on the team by several years. He was in a new city and he was coming back from an injury. It was apparent after the coach screamed at him in the Milan game that he wasn't going to fit in and there were threads speculating that he wasn't going to be embraced by the coach as soon as he was acquired. How come Dan D'Antoni worked as a personal tutor with Moz and Randolph was behind Rautins on the depth chart? Randolph is young and is not a finished product but his talent is undeniable. One of my biggest issues with D'Antoni is how he has dealt with some of the young guys, Hill, Douglas, Randolph etc.

Douglas is starting......

Hill was not ready and was traded by the Gm. Randolph was not ready for prime time. Mozzy? Gallo? Fields? Shawn? Wilson? All young guys also.

During Douglas's rookie year the team won won 29 games with a bunch of marginal vets with expiring contracts playing ahead of Hill and Douglas. Douglas did not get consistent minutes until the March Texas road trip when Walsh traveled with the team to evaluate the coaching staff and players. The fact that Toney is starting now has more to do with Walsh than D'Antoni in my opinion. Walsh got burned in the McGrady trade and he reacted. He is a class guy and never criticized his coach but that trip coincided with Douglas getting minutes.

I think that has all been hashed out before..........

It appears maybe Walsh went on a road trip to "MAKE" MDA play Douglas.......

Or did Walsh take a road trip to watch him play?

Do you have like a bulletin board up in you bedroom with articles and pictures linked together with string to create a theory and perhaps prove it one day?

The notion that another coach could have done much better is never to be substantiated. Hill may turn out to be a good player. It happens. Ebb and flow of player movement never works out the way we want it. If we kept Frye, he would be perfect for this system now. Same with Reezy. Can't go back.......

This is the knicks with a long history of not being patient about player development and never to enter the crater of lottery because it ruins attendance and we trade our picks.

Nalod wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:Maybe there were two or three stretches in which he played exceptional, that were short lived, but overall, I saw him jacking up bad shots and falling asleep on defense. Then he was thrown to the bench b/c of this and when he got some more minutes, before the trade, he played overly tentative.

Randolph strikes me as a guy who desperately needed the four years of LSU basketball because if he stayed, I bet we would have been talking about a different player. It's players like Randolph that make me want the NBA to increase the age limit.

Instead, Randolph is a guy who just doesn't know how to play.

He was the youngest guy on the team by several years. He was in a new city and he was coming back from an injury. It was apparent after the coach screamed at him in the Milan game that he wasn't going to fit in and there were threads speculating that he wasn't going to be embraced by the coach as soon as he was acquired. How come Dan D'Antoni worked as a personal tutor with Moz and Randolph was behind Rautins on the depth chart? Randolph is young and is not a finished product but his talent is undeniable. One of my biggest issues with D'Antoni is how he has dealt with some of the young guys, Hill, Douglas, Randolph etc.

Douglas is starting......

Hill was not ready and was traded by the Gm. Randolph was not ready for prime time. Mozzy? Gallo? Fields? Shawn? Wilson? All young guys also.

During Douglas's rookie year the team won won 29 games with a bunch of marginal vets with expiring contracts playing ahead of Hill and Douglas. Douglas did not get consistent minutes until the March Texas road trip when Walsh traveled with the team to evaluate the coaching staff and players. The fact that Toney is starting now has more to do with Walsh than D'Antoni in my opinion. Walsh got burned in the McGrady trade and he reacted. He is a class guy and never criticized his coach but that trip coincided with Douglas getting minutes.

I think that has all been hashed out before..........

It appears maybe Walsh went on a road trip to "MAKE" MDA play Douglas.......

Or did Walsh take a road trip to watch him play?

Do you have like a bulletin board up in you bedroom with articles and pictures linked together with string to create a theory and perhaps prove it one day?

The notion that another coach could have done much better is never to be substantiated. Hill may turn out to be a good player. It happens. Ebb and flow of player movement never works out the way we want it. If we kept Frye, he would be perfect for this system now. Same with Reezy. Can't go back.......

This is the knicks with a long history of not being patient about player development and never to enter the crater of lottery because it ruins attendance and we trade our picks.

CrushAlot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Nalod wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:Maybe there were two or three stretches in which he played exceptional, that were short lived, but overall, I saw him jacking up bad shots and falling asleep on defense. Then he was thrown to the bench b/c of this and when he got some more minutes, before the trade, he played overly tentative.

Randolph strikes me as a guy who desperately needed the four years of LSU basketball because if he stayed, I bet we would have been talking about a different player. It's players like Randolph that make me want the NBA to increase the age limit.

Instead, Randolph is a guy who just doesn't know how to play.

He was the youngest guy on the team by several years. He was in a new city and he was coming back from an injury. It was apparent after the coach screamed at him in the Milan game that he wasn't going to fit in and there were threads speculating that he wasn't going to be embraced by the coach as soon as he was acquired. How come Dan D'Antoni worked as a personal tutor with Moz and Randolph was behind Rautins on the depth chart? Randolph is young and is not a finished product but his talent is undeniable. One of my biggest issues with D'Antoni is how he has dealt with some of the young guys, Hill, Douglas, Randolph etc.

Douglas is starting......

Hill was not ready and was traded by the Gm. Randolph was not ready for prime time. Mozzy? Gallo? Fields? Shawn? Wilson? All young guys also.

During Douglas's rookie year the team won won 29 games with a bunch of marginal vets with expiring contracts playing ahead of Hill and Douglas. Douglas did not get consistent minutes until the March Texas road trip when Walsh traveled with the team to evaluate the coaching staff and players. The fact that Toney is starting now has more to do with Walsh than D'Antoni in my opinion. Walsh got burned in the McGrady trade and he reacted. He is a class guy and never criticized his coach but that trip coincided with Douglas getting minutes.

I think that has all been hashed out before..........

It appears maybe Walsh went on a road trip to "MAKE" MDA play Douglas.......

Or did Walsh take a road trip to watch him play?

Do you have like a bulletin board up in you bedroom with articles and pictures linked together with string to create a theory and perhaps prove it one day?

The notion that another coach could have done much better is never to be substantiated. Hill may turn out to be a good player. It happens. Ebb and flow of player movement never works out the way we want it. If we kept Frye, he would be perfect for this system now. Same with Reezy. Can't go back.......

This is the knicks with a long history of not being patient about player development and never to enter the crater of lottery because it ruins attendance and we trade our picks.

No bulletin board. I do think D'Antoni should have been fired for the way things were handled that year. I am going to respond when people gloss over what really happened with playing time, that roster and some other players that were never given a chance. As far as would another coach have handled things differently, I am almost sure of it. That year was the beginning of a total rebuild. The team had two first round picks and a bunch of expiring contracts on the roster. The team was winning nothing and playing for nothing. I think almost any other coach would have gotten his young players on the court more during a season like that. In regards to player movement, I agree that you can't go back and it generally cannont be controlled. However, the argument at the time of the McGrady trade was that had Hill been given minutes that two first round picks might not have been included along with the teams lottery pick that year.

"sensational!"