NUPE wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:JrZyHuStLa wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:JrZyHuStLa wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:newyorknewyork wrote:Bonn1997 wrote:Why? They look better (or less bad) with MDA than with Mike Brown. Before MDA, it looked like this was a group of players whose time has passed.
They just lost to the Orlando Magic and have some bad losses to the Kings, Pacers, and now Orlando over the last 8 games.
That doesn't contradict anything I wrote
Sure it does.
You posted as if Mike D'antoni has righted the ship.
He's officially sunken it now.
Calling things "less bad" means the ship is righted?
"Just as bad" or "even worse" is probably more appropriate.
So 3-4 is even worse than 1-4 (2-12 with preseason)!
This boils down to a simpler question: What # is bigger - 3 or 1?
Knicks go 6-0 and people claim sample size is too small.
Dantoni goes 3-4 and that is sufficient sample size. How is sub .500 after 7 games even acceptable with that roster?!?!?!
LoL!
Exactly. When your only goal is the Championship with a "win now" team with 4 future hall of famers, there are no valid excuses. Even minus 1, 3 hall of famers should be enough.
On the flip side, Knicks currently only have 2 hall of famers in the starting lineup and are thriving.
Guess good coaching is everything...