martin wrote:

TMS wrote:martin, i know what occurred, i don't need you to point it out for me... you're telling me i'm not considering any counterpoints... i just don't think any counterpoints presented justify MDA's decision... it's OK not to agree with your line of thinking.

btw, the Knicks went 9W-16L in games where Bender got minutes, so let's not get carried away here.

yeah, and by pointing out the 9-16 you sidestep anything that I have put out and dont answer any questions above. Near .500 ball when he was first playing for the Knicks and got the bulk of his minutes. Spattering of games and minutes when there was a bunch of other losses, so who cares.

So when a new guy for the team is in the mix when your team is playing the best ball of the season, do you let it play out or change it immediately?

after the team is pretty much out of the playoff hunt, i start playing my #8 lottery pick big minutes & let him learn on the fly... does that answer your question?

now how about you answer my question... why was MDA playing an over the hill, washed up veteran that had no future on this team over a #8 lottery pick? or do you wanna side step that one like you always do? do you even have an opinion on this matter or are you just trying to be argumentative? you say you're not trying to justify MDA's reasoning to play Bender over Hill but you seem to think i'm wrong to disagree w/it... when you're ready to make a point i'm ready to listen.

Allanfan20 wrote:Lets look at it like this. With Hills skills and potential, if he DID play hard all the time, do you really think he wouldn't be playing a lot? I am thinking he would be, especially considering we had a weak frontcourt.

However, when you're on a losing team, you don't get much playing time, and then you get called on to play, and you're not putting forth your best effort, it's hard to take you seriously as a player. I'd rather go to the lesser skilled guy who's going all out.

Bender was going all out? he could barely run up the court. when Hill was getting minutes i saw him hustling for loose balls & putting forth a lot of energy... not sure what you were watching.

nixluva wrote:

TMS wrote:

Allanfan20 wrote:Lets look at it like this. With Hills skills and potential, if he DID play hard all the time, do you really think he wouldn't be playing a lot? I am thinking he would be, especially considering we had a weak frontcourt.

However, when you're on a losing team, you don't get much playing time, and then you get called on to play, and you're not putting forth your best effort, it's hard to take you seriously as a player. I'd rather go to the lesser skilled guy who's going all out.

Bender was going all out? he could barely run up the court. when Hill was getting minutes i saw him hustling for loose balls & putting forth a lot of energy... not sure what you were watching.

See what you're doing is confusing cuz you're ignoring that Hill had PF's ahead of him and Bender wasn't even playing in the spot that Hill was looking to crack into. This is why some of us don't like the comparison. Even if Hill did play a few more minutes per game I highly doubt that it would make that much difference. He's a nice prospect and I wish him well, but I think Mike had a much better look at the kid than we did and something he and the coaches noticed didn't rub him the right way. Same with Darko. It really doesn't matter what those guys do on their new teams. Right now Mike and Donnie got together and brought in guys that IMO are even better suited to what we want to do than those 2 and I think he's gonna use those assets. His track record is that Mike has actually helped players to get better and get bigger contracts than they likely would have if not for playing under him. He's got a good track record and Darko and Hill aren't enough to outweigh his good record in that regard. They're a weak argument against him.

Bender had SF's playing ahead of him too... please tell me what the difference is here... how can you possibly tell me that playing time for a rookie wouldn't have done him much good? maybe not in terms of instantaneous production but in terms of growth & maturation i contend that playing time is invaluable to any rookie's experience... when your team is no good & you used a high lottery pick to draft a kid who your franchise obviously thinks can be a big part of your franchise's future, then in my eyes it makes every bit of sense to play him as much as possible, especially when your team is out of playoff contention.

don't talk to me about track records here, this is a separate issue we're debating... i don't want to see washed up veterans getting playing time over younger guys who have more upside to help this team down the road... this is why i brought up the issue on this thread, i hope to see Mozgov get every bit of a chance to show his skills & not be left languishing on the bench in favor of some retread that gets brought in on some non-guaranteed contract... fortunately we don't have any guys like that on this team at the current moment.