Posted by Bippity10:

Instead we blame the one guy who actually wants to change the culture.

Posted by Bippity10:

I just want to like the players on my team, is that so wrong?

Posted by martin:

Posted by EnySpree:

Posted by martin:

Posted by EnySpree:

Posted by martin:

Posted by EnySpree:

Brown:"But do you write that Nate got 34 and Allen Iverson got 47?" Brown said. "People don't see that. They see 34 points. I love the fans loving him. There's not a lot of things that've been real positive. They like that enthusiasm and stuff like that. I would rather have us try to win a game and do the right thing."

So next time Nate should try to hold Iverson to what? 33pts (season average)?....and then don't take a shot even if he's hot to Mo Taylor so he can hold it for 5 seconds? If a guy is averaging 33pts per he is gonna get 40-50 points alot during the year. Nothing you can do about it.

If Brown wants to win the game....then get his players to play his way already. Take control. Win. The players are doing their own thing because Brown has not even tried to get them on the same page.......After 70 plus games the Knicks still look like they just met each other at the YMCA for a pick up game.

you've convinced me. Brown has not tried to get the players to win the game. Or tried to get his players to play his way already. Nor has he tried to take control. Or win. In less than 365 days all has been lost on the old guy. The players have nothing to do with it.

That's where you are wrong again......I have always said the players deserve what they get......but you refuse to except the fact Larry has been a bust this year because of what he did way back in 1988!

Let me know where I have said that Larry has not been a bust. And why change the topic of arguement? I thought we were talking about MoT or Nate's preening.

LB could have coached this team for a few more wins. Part of that would have been limiting Nate's and the other rookies minutes. Would you want that?

Read the signature.....

so you are telling me that if we had Curry, AD (or Malik), Barnes, Q, Marb for the entire year with nary a sight of Nate, Lee, Bulter and a set rotation, you would be happy?

Tell me, how many of those 40 lineups were the result of injuries? And what is the average number is lineup changes for a team that is, say, 0.400 over the past few years. I bet it would be close the the Knicks' numbers (plus or minus the start-in-your-hometown thing).

Also, why haven't we heard the players complain directly about the start-in-hometown thing? Either it hasn't gotten to the beat writers or perhaps it don't really matter.