Of course that's the reason this topic was made. For Nate to play 15 minutes in one playoff game after barely playing for the team since the trade deadline and then someone to come on here and act like Nate Robinson won the series for the Celtics because he hit 2 3-pointers in 90 seconds. Yes, that did the Magic in. They were going to make a comeback had it not been for Nate Robinson hitting a few shots. You know how I know that is true? Stan Van Gundy said so! Praise Stan! It wasn't because Dwight Howard has no semblance of an offensive game and his supporting cast did not show up. No, it was because of Nate Robinson.

I can't believe we let him get away. This great player. This game changer. This playoff performer. This future NBA champion! Look at us fools. D'Antoni does it again. Fire him. I can't deal with watching a marginal player play a 10th man role on a championship team. He could've been OUR 10th man!

Childs2Dudley wrote:So this topic basically turned into D'Antoni haters and supporters arguing amongst themselves and telling eachother that they have agendas. Cool.

Of course that's the reason this topic was made. For Nate to play 15 minutes in one playoff game after barely playing for the team since the trade deadline and then someone to come on here and act like Nate Robinson won the series for the Celtics because he hit 2 3-pointers in 90 seconds. Yes, that did the Magic in. They were going to make a comeback had it not been for Nate Robinson hitting a few shots. You know how I know that is true? Stan Van Gundy said so! Praise Stan! It wasn't because Dwight Howard has no semblance of an offensive game and his supporting cast did not show up. No, it was because of Nate Robinson.

I can't believe we let him get away. This great player. This game changer. This playoff performer. This future NBA champion! Look at us fools. D'Antoni does it again. Fire him. I can't deal with watching a marginal player play a 10th man role on a championship team. He could've been OUR 10th man!

Childs2Dudley wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Childs2Dudley wrote:So this topic basically turned into D'Antoni haters and supporters arguing amongst themselves and telling eachother that they have agendas. Cool.

Of course that's the reason this topic was made. For Nate to play 15 minutes in one playoff game after barely playing for the team since the trade deadline and then someone to come on here and act like Nate Robinson won the series for the Celtics because he hit 2 3-pointers in 90 seconds. Yes, that did the Magic in. They were going to make a comeback had it not been for Nate Robinson hitting a few shots. You know how I know that is true? Stan Van Gundy said so! Praise Stan! It wasn't because Dwight Howard has no semblance of an offensive game and his supporting cast did not show up. No, it was because of Nate Robinson.

I can't believe we let him get away. This great player. This game changer. This playoff performer. This future NBA champion! Look at us fools. D'Antoni does it again. Fire him. I can't deal with watching a marginal player play a 10th man role on a championship team. He could've been OUR 10th man!

Here is an example of a guy who needed coaching, and to develop despite having tremendous talent. Traded four times in his first four seasons and acquired by the fourth team to be a backup this guy got a break when the guy in front of him got injured. He went on to be one of the most respected players in the NBA and a playoff mvp. The guy is Chauncey Billups. He was not a finished product coming out of college and needed time, coaching, experience and maturity before he became the winner that he is. I don't think Nate is going to have the career Chauncey has had but I don't think he is a throwaway or finished product at this point either. He is a guy that needs guidance and coaching because he has the talent. He didn't and wouldn't get that from D'Antoni. Hill didn't get that either and Douglas didn't even get the chance to get experience until the March road trip when Walsh traveled with the team to evaluate the roster and coaching staff.

Okay. But I think he is a finished product. Just like I think Eddy is a finished product. They're both around the same age, right? Do you see either changing their mentality at this point? I don't.

But anyway, why don't you re-visit this topic in a few years and tell everyone "I told you so" (if that's the case, which it most likely wont be)? Why make a topic because he hit some 3's in the only playoff game he really played with the Celtics so far? That, to me, is an agenda. You can say whatever you want about others here defending D'Antoni but what you are doing is the same thing, if not worse. You constantly bash Mike in nearly every topic and use the littlest of examples to try and prove a point.

But, sir, the proof is NOT in the pudding. Nate Robinson hasn't proved you right and D'Antoni (and the rest of us who know what Nate is about) wrong. Not even close. Come back to this topic when he "settles down" like you say. That'll be the day...

Paladin55 wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:I thought it was an odd comment as well. I'm of the belief that my God is omnipotent. Meaning he still able to deal with other problems while listening to my meager prays.

The only "voice" speaking to Nate is his ego.

No offense but you sound ignorant. I respect your views but to question someone else faith shows ignorance and lack of grace.

I respect a person's right to have "views," an opinion, or believe in this or that religion, but I don't have to remain silent or uncritical if I see something hypocritical, inconsistent, illogical, or just downright stupid. Are you able to understand that an individual's view, opinion, and yes, faith, can be a topic of debate, criticized, or examined?

Short answer no. Long answer is who are you to judge? You used the term "only". Which indicates absolution. That's not reasoning. That's assumption. You reason over your own beliefs. If you have children then at a point you may reason over theirs. But to think you can determine whether a person's faith is right or wrong, inconsistent, illogical or in your words downright stupid shows a lack of ignorance. No matter how you may try to frame it. What's the difference of someone going out saying to practice Judaism is downright ridiculous because everyone knows Christ already came. Wouldn't you consider that an ignorant statement whether they have the freedom to say it or not?

How does questioning another's "faith" show "ignorance"(which means lacking education or knowledge) or a lack of "grace?" Do you think that a person can't be criticized because the invocation of "faith" is like some sort of intellectual "get out of jail free" card that forces us to suspend our capacity to look at something or someone in a critical way, and/or completely forget a person's past behavior?

Once again. Even courts acknowledge that a person's faith has nothing to with their actions. We have free will. A condemn man can still find 'religion' How do you know what's in their heart? Who are you to assume what is or isn't guiding them in their lives. Or that the man doesn't ask for forgiveness in his transgressions. Just because you watch them for a few hours a day on TV?

Nate is fair game because we have watched him as a player for many years and seen his childishness, crude behavior (A lack or grace??) on the court, and inability to grow as a player (Is this ignorance?). He has been a good teammate, and showed some restraint when he was going through hard times this past season, but he has consistently shown a lack of class with his trash talking and childish behavior on the court, and his manner of dealing with referees.

So his mannerisms at work or your perception of him is how you judge his faith? Do you often want people to judge you as a person and your beliefs by what you do for a few hours a day in a stressful environment?

My undergrad degree was in Philosophy, the book I am looking through now is Charles Freeman's The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason, and the next movie I plan to see is Agora, a movie about the 5th century female mathematician, Hypatia, a pagan of Alexandria, Egypt, who was ripped apart by Christian fanatics in 415 A.D.. From this you might be able to understand that I have a somewhat critical, but hardly "ignorant" view toward religion, faith, and their influence in society and history, but I am not going to go into a diatribe about the role religion and faith have played in making this world a worse place to live in.

I am going to say, however, that Nate's religious statement, given his past history, is fair game for comment and criticism.

As I stated before. I respect your rights to your own beliefs. This is still United States of America no matter what they tell you. Agnostics have the freedom to their beliefs as any other person. My issue with you is that stated with absolute about someone else belief. That is ignorant. And yes educators and men of reason are capable of ignorance. Just like anyone else.

Of course I'm talking about the NY football Giants.

Seriously... I bet the dude could be the nickel back right now. Giants could really use another cover guy. He would be a great gunner on special teams. He was a hell of a good college football player.

How a good game turns into a D'Antoni/Nate bash fest is beyond me. Nate is a good player. He has the ability to take over a game. He did that possibly more then any player on our team over the last 3 or 4 years. This is nothing new or amazing. He was benched in Boston for the last few weeks of the season for the same reasons he was benched here. He played and took over the game for the same reasons he was able to do it on occassion for us as well. Regardless the Knicks are not the Celtics. We cannot wait for players to "get it". We need guys that are on board right now and ready to go. The Celtics can afford it because if Nate goes in the tank they just bench him and move on like nothign happened.

So please can we stop using these moments to help our own personal agendas. When can we get past this idea that the players here have been great it's just our awful coaches that cannot coach. It's much more nuanced then that. Nate can be a solid player for a good team, but for our situation he was not a fit. It was time to move on. NO regrets. I personally am more concerned with how Bill Walker grows then I am with how Nate does on the Celtics.

Yeesh!!

Bippity10 wrote:1.) Doc sat nate longer then D'Antoni did
2.) Nate had better games for the KNicks under D'Antoni then he did for the Celtics
3.) Nate sat on the bench and returned for D'Antoni and scored 41 points. He is benched by Doc and scores 13. Yet somehow the 13 points for Doc was the result of coaching and the 41 for D'Antoni was in spite of coaching. You people are all insane.

How a good game turns into a D'Antoni/Nate bash fest is beyond me. Nate is a good player. He has the ability to take over a game. He did that possibly more then any player on our team over the last 3 or 4 years. This is nothing new or amazing. He was benched in Boston for the last few weeks of the season for the same reasons he was benched here. He played and took over the game for the same reasons he was able to do it on occassion for us as well. Regardless the Knicks are not the Celtics. We cannot wait for players to "get it". We need guys that are on board right now and ready to go. The Celtics can afford it because if Nate goes in the tank they just bench him and move on like nothign happened.

So please can we stop using these moments to help our own personal agendas. When can we get past this idea that the players here have been great it's just our awful coaches that cannot coach. It's much more nuanced then that. Nate can be a solid player for a good team, but for our situation he was not a fit. It was time to move on. NO regrets. I personally am more concerned with how Bill Walker grows then I am with how Nate does on the Celtics.

Yeesh!!

Excellent post......totally agree...

martin wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:1.) Doc sat nate longer then D'Antoni did
2.) Nate had better games for the KNicks under D'Antoni then he did for the Celtics
3.) Nate sat on the bench and returned for D'Antoni and scored 41 points. He is benched by Doc and scores 13. Yet somehow the 13 points for Doc was the result of coaching and the 41 for D'Antoni was in spite of coaching. You people are all insane.

How a good game turns into a D'Antoni/Nate bash fest is beyond me. Nate is a good player. He has the ability to take over a game. He did that possibly more then any player on our team over the last 3 or 4 years. This is nothing new or amazing. He was benched in Boston for the last few weeks of the season for the same reasons he was benched here. He played and took over the game for the same reasons he was able to do it on occassion for us as well. Regardless the Knicks are not the Celtics. We cannot wait for players to "get it". We need guys that are on board right now and ready to go. The Celtics can afford it because if Nate goes in the tank they just bench him and move on like nothign happened.

So please can we stop using these moments to help our own personal agendas. When can we get past this idea that the players here have been great it's just our awful coaches that cannot coach. It's much more nuanced then that. Nate can be a solid player for a good team, but for our situation he was not a fit. It was time to move on. NO regrets. I personally am more concerned with how Bill Walker grows then I am with how Nate does on the Celtics.

Yeesh!!

what does this have to do with God or being Special?

Sorry

Pharzeone wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:

Paladin55 wrote:

Pharzeone wrote:I thought it was an odd comment as well. I'm of the belief that my God is omnipotent. Meaning he still able to deal with other problems while listening to my meager prays.

The only "voice" speaking to Nate is his ego.

No offense but you sound ignorant. I respect your views but to question someone else faith shows ignorance and lack of grace.

I respect a person's right to have "views," an opinion, or believe in this or that religion, but I don't have to remain silent or uncritical if I see something hypocritical, inconsistent, illogical, or just downright stupid. Are you able to understand that an individual's view, opinion, and yes, faith, can be a topic of debate, criticized, or examined?

Short answer no. Long answer is who are you to judge? You used the term "only". Which indicates absolution. That's not reasoning. That's assumption. You reason over your own beliefs. If you have children then at a point you may reason over theirs. But to think you can determine whether a person's faith is right or wrong, inconsistent, illogical or in your words downright stupid shows a lack of ignorance. No matter how you may try to frame it. What's the difference of someone going out saying to practice Judaism is downright ridiculous because everyone knows Christ already came. Wouldn't you consider that an ignorant statement whether they have the freedom to say it or not?

How does questioning another's "faith" show "ignorance"(which means lacking education or knowledge) or a lack of "grace?" Do you think that a person can't be criticized because the invocation of "faith" is like some sort of intellectual "get out of jail free" card that forces us to suspend our capacity to look at something or someone in a critical way, and/or completely forget a person's past behavior?

Once again. Even courts acknowledge that a person's faith has nothing to with their actions. We have free will. A condemn man can still find 'religion' How do you know what's in their heart? Who are you to assume what is or isn't guiding them in their lives. Or that the man doesn't ask for forgiveness in his transgressions. Just because you watch them for a few hours a day on TV?

Nate is fair game because we have watched him as a player for many years and seen his childishness, crude behavior (A lack or grace??) on the court, and inability to grow as a player (Is this ignorance?). He has been a good teammate, and showed some restraint when he was going through hard times this past season, but he has consistently shown a lack of class with his trash talking and childish behavior on the court, and his manner of dealing with referees.

So his mannerisms at work or your perception of him is how you judge his faith? Do you often want people to judge you as a person and your beliefs by what you do for a few hours a day in a stressful environment?

My undergrad degree was in Philosophy, the book I am looking through now is Charles Freeman's The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason, and the next movie I plan to see is Agora, a movie about the 5th century female mathematician, Hypatia, a pagan of Alexandria, Egypt, who was ripped apart by Christian fanatics in 415 A.D.. From this you might be able to understand that I have a somewhat critical, but hardly "ignorant" view toward religion, faith, and their influence in society and history, but I am not going to go into a diatribe about the role religion and faith have played in making this world a worse place to live in.

I am going to say, however, that Nate's religious statement, given his past history, is fair game for comment and criticism.

As I stated before. I respect your rights to your own beliefs. This is still United States of America no matter what they tell you. Agnostics have the freedom to their beliefs as any other person. My issue with you is that stated with absolute about someone else belief. That is ignorant. And yes educators and men of reason are capable of ignorance. Just like anyone else.

Why complicate things. God is everything and everything and everybody are god.
Naming him is not changing anything. Nate may tolk with anybody and it was god.
At the end we all just listen to same voice inside our soul.
Religions are not diferent, only priests are.