cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Coaches always look great when they have great players, playing well. All their decisions make sense and their rotations are wonderful.

Look at Eric Spoelstra. He went from the coach of teh future, to fired, to coach of the now in 2 short months. We have a crappy bench. The guy is trying to win games. Not sure if Billy Walker and AR is the answer. Now, ultimately he will need to play these guys(or someone we trade for) in order to avoid killing our guys. You and I are in agreement on that. However I'm not of the belief he is as stubborn as we make him out to be. If any of these guys are producing I think they will play.

look bip im all for your uk conquest (pls do not tell A&M) but i draw the line at saying coach doc is having an easy time of it this season, same goes for coach spo. if i was either of these coaches with their situations, i would have been in the fetal position.

coach spo hung tough and came up with a power sharing agreement with his superfriends; that they can do their thizzle as long as times are good, but when times are bad, he will call a time out and draw up plays. coach doc has played i think even the towel boy though i can not prove this, in order to keep his team injured and aging team in the hunt for a fourth quarter finish.

big fan of the minutes management of both coaches. i remember commenting on game thread that it sure must be nice to be able to rest two out of three superfriends. mind you coach spo used to (pre player meeting) not do that, he used to mda the superfriends, now he spells them.

YOu are missing the point
1.) First of all, I never said Doc and Spo have it easy. NO coach has it easy
2.) Every Celtic fan wanted Doc fired, until he had Garnett, Pierce and Allan. Those three had a magical way of making his hockey substitution patterns go away. The reason he was subbing this way was because he had a garbage bench and that was his way of dealing with it, searching for someone anyone that could perform on that particular night. He rarely found it. D'Antoni is the opposite. Instead of playing everyone, he plays the guys he feels he can trust. Either way, there substitution patterns change when they have players that can play.

3.) In 2006-07 D'Antoni had 9 rotation guys play 18 minutes or more. The year before he was at 9 over 10 minutes. He seems comfortable at around 8-9 which is typical for an NBA coach. We are currently playing 6 1/2. I have no doubt if our bench was producing we would be going 9 deep. Summary: I don't like the 6 man rotation. I don't like Amare playing all these minutes. But I think it's wrong to say how stubborn he is on this issue and that he is okay with the current rotation when history tells us otherwise.

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Coaches always look great when they have great players, playing well. All their decisions make sense and their rotations are wonderful.

Look at Eric Spoelstra. He went from the coach of teh future, to fired, to coach of the now in 2 short months. We have a crappy bench. The guy is trying to win games. Not sure if Billy Walker and AR is the answer. Now, ultimately he will need to play these guys(or someone we trade for) in order to avoid killing our guys. You and I are in agreement on that. However I'm not of the belief he is as stubborn as we make him out to be. If any of these guys are producing I think they will play.

look bip im all for your uk conquest (pls do not tell A&M) but i draw the line at saying coach doc is having an easy time of it this season, same goes for coach spo. if i was either of these coaches with their situations, i would have been in the fetal position.

coach spo hung tough and came up with a power sharing agreement with his superfriends; that they can do their thizzle as long as times are good, but when times are bad, he will call a time out and draw up plays. coach doc has played i think even the towel boy though i can not prove this, in order to keep his team injured and aging team in the hunt for a fourth quarter finish.

big fan of the minutes management of both coaches. i remember commenting on game thread that it sure must be nice to be able to rest two out of three superfriends. mind you coach spo used to (pre player meeting) not do that, he used to mda the superfriends, now he spells them.

YOu are missing the point
1.) First of all, I never said Doc and Spo have it easy. NO coach has it easy
2.) Every Celtic fan wanted Doc fired, until he had Garnett, Pierce and Allan. Those three had a magical way of making his hockey substitution patterns go away. The reason he was subbing this way was because he had a garbage bench and that was his way of dealing with it, searching for someone anyone that could perform on that particular night. He rarely found it. D'Antoni is the opposite. Instead of playing everyone, he plays the guys he feels he can trust. Either way, there substitution patterns change when they have players that can play.

3.) In 2006-07 D'Antoni had 9 rotation guys play 18 minutes or more. The year before he was at 9 over 10 minutes. He seems comfortable at around 8-9 which is typical for an NBA coach. We are currently playing 6 1/2. I have no doubt if our bench was producing we would be going 9 deep. Summary: I don't like the 6 man rotation. I don't like Amare playing all these minutes. But I think it's wrong to say how stubborn he is on this issue and that he is okay with the current rotation when history tells us otherwise.

mda has five guys he can trust to bring home a win-- amar'efeltonwilsongallofields. but he needs to understand their very real in-game need of rest. i dont care if the janitor has to suit-up for three minutes. you spell these fives, and play four quarter ball.

in the past i too saw mda switching up rotations looking/looking for guys he trusted, he found them, now its time to help them.

as for doc, he doesnt take the gift of pierce and company for granted. he uses his bench heavy and as pierce said he will call on his top guys to "bring it home." that is all im asking for mda. play four quarter ball use the bench and trust your top five enough to bring it hope as well. i feel donnie should damn near order mda to do so.. im so tired of seeing our players tired.

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Coaches always look great when they have great players, playing well. All their decisions make sense and their rotations are wonderful.

Look at Eric Spoelstra. He went from the coach of teh future, to fired, to coach of the now in 2 short months. We have a crappy bench. The guy is trying to win games. Not sure if Billy Walker and AR is the answer. Now, ultimately he will need to play these guys(or someone we trade for) in order to avoid killing our guys. You and I are in agreement on that. However I'm not of the belief he is as stubborn as we make him out to be. If any of these guys are producing I think they will play.

look bip im all for your uk conquest (pls do not tell A&M) but i draw the line at saying coach doc is having an easy time of it this season, same goes for coach spo. if i was either of these coaches with their situations, i would have been in the fetal position.

coach spo hung tough and came up with a power sharing agreement with his superfriends; that they can do their thizzle as long as times are good, but when times are bad, he will call a time out and draw up plays. coach doc has played i think even the towel boy though i can not prove this, in order to keep his team injured and aging team in the hunt for a fourth quarter finish.

big fan of the minutes management of both coaches. i remember commenting on game thread that it sure must be nice to be able to rest two out of three superfriends. mind you coach spo used to (pre player meeting) not do that, he used to mda the superfriends, now he spells them.

YOu are missing the point
1.) First of all, I never said Doc and Spo have it easy. NO coach has it easy
2.) Every Celtic fan wanted Doc fired, until he had Garnett, Pierce and Allan. Those three had a magical way of making his hockey substitution patterns go away. The reason he was subbing this way was because he had a garbage bench and that was his way of dealing with it, searching for someone anyone that could perform on that particular night. He rarely found it. D'Antoni is the opposite. Instead of playing everyone, he plays the guys he feels he can trust. Either way, there substitution patterns change when they have players that can play.

3.) In 2006-07 D'Antoni had 9 rotation guys play 18 minutes or more. The year before he was at 9 over 10 minutes. He seems comfortable at around 8-9 which is typical for an NBA coach. We are currently playing 6 1/2. I have no doubt if our bench was producing we would be going 9 deep. Summary: I don't like the 6 man rotation. I don't like Amare playing all these minutes. But I think it's wrong to say how stubborn he is on this issue and that he is okay with the current rotation when history tells us otherwise.

mda has five guys he can trust to bring home a win-- amar'efeltonwilsongallofields. but he needs to understand their very real in-game need of rest. i dont care if the janitor has to suit-up for three minutes. you spell these fives, and play four quarter ball.

in the past i too saw mda switching up rotations looking/looking for guys he trusted, he found them, now its time to help them.

as for doc, he doesnt take the gift of pierce and company for granted. he uses his bench heavy and as pierce said he will call on his top guys to "bring it home." that is all im asking for mda. play four quarter ball use the bench and trust your top five enough to bring it hope as well. i feel donnie should damn near order mda to do so.. im so tired of seeing our players tired.

Have you seen his bench? They can all play. He's not bring AR or Billy Walker(who got no time for Doc and was traded)or Mozgov or Mason off his bench. He's bringign Davis, jermaine, Delonte, Daniels, O'neal or Perkins when Perkins returns, and Nate. He's bringing guys that produce into the rotation. It's a lot easier to rest one of your starters when you know your reserve is going to bust someone's ass just like the starter did.

I think D'Antoni realizes just like the rest of us the need to use his bench. I think Donnie Walsh understands that need as well. I aslo think D'Antoni wants to win games and notices how quickly his leads evaporate the moment his starters go to the bench. Tough choices to make under those circumstances. I have no dobut that if Mozgov and Turiaf and Douglas and Williams were busting asse when they came in they'd be getting heavy minutes and the starters would be well rested. I'm pretty sure we would be seeing a little sampling of AR as well. It's all tied in. If you were coach, you would do as he is doing, coach for the present and pray the future(injuries from being overworked) do not present themselves.

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Have you seen his bench? They can all play. He's not bring AR or Billy Walker(who got no time for Doc and was traded)or Mozgov or Mason off his bench. He's bringign Davis, jermaine, Delonte, Daniels, O'neal or Perkins when Perkins returns, and Nate. He's bringing guys that produce into the rotation. It's a lot easier to rest one of your starters when you know your reserve is going to bust someone's ass just like the starter did.

I think D'Antoni realizes just like the rest of us the need to use his bench. I think Donnie Walsh understands that need as well. I aslo think D'Antoni wants to win games and notices how quickly his leads evaporate the moment his starters go to the bench. Tough choices to make under those circumstances. I have no dobut that if Mozgov and Turiaf and Douglas and Williams were busting asse when they came in they'd be getting heavy minutes and the starters would be well rested. I'm pretty sure we would be seeing a little sampling of AR as well. It's all tied in. If you were coach, you would do as he is doing, coach for the present and pray the future(injuries from being overworked) do not present themselves.

NATE nate is some trash new york let go and boston picked up. (sarcasm)

russian bear doesnt give up matchup problems to the big baby? really.. i think if these two collided it would cause a mini earthquake. o'neal did not suit up for the knicks game. again doc is faced with a injured and aging team this season AND WINNING. props to doc. love nate and ny should have never let him go but i dont think he defeats our entire bench. lol.

bip i dont think d'antoni even see's the bench he has toney tunnel vision when it comes to the bench. when i see mda playing our bench real minutes especially in a celtics game they could have helped WIN. then i will say props to mda.

Are you telling me that lookign down at your bench and seeing Walker, AR, Mozgov, Turiaf and Douglas gives you the same fuzzy feeling that looking at DAvis, Robinson, Daniels, O'Neal and the rest. Come on. It's no where near the same situation. You would trade our bench for theirs in an instant. Plus, the Celtics are a championship team. They can afford to give guys a shot because the rest of the guys can pick up the slack. Guys like Erdin and Bradley don't hurt them the minutes they are on the floor because the rest of their championship level roster picks it up.

We are a team just starting to win. When we go to the bench our leads evaporate. At some point as a coach you ahve to say "I can't keep going to the bench and having my leads evaporate". Instead I'm going to play my starters, to get some wins and hope that my GM can bring me in some help(or someone picks it up and proves they deserve minutes).

Lastly, do you beleive that if Walsh today traded Billy Walker for Chris Duhon and AR for Carl Landry that we would still be going 6 1/2 deep? And if you do believe this, find an example in D'Antoni's past that backs up your assertion.

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Have you seen his bench? They can all play. He's not bring AR or Billy Walker(who got no time for Doc and was traded)or Mozgov or Mason off his bench. He's bringign Davis, jermaine, Delonte, Daniels, O'neal or Perkins when Perkins returns, and Nate. He's bringing guys that produce into the rotation. It's a lot easier to rest one of your starters when you know your reserve is going to bust someone's ass just like the starter did.

I think D'Antoni realizes just like the rest of us the need to use his bench. I think Donnie Walsh understands that need as well. I aslo think D'Antoni wants to win games and notices how quickly his leads evaporate the moment his starters go to the bench. Tough choices to make under those circumstances. I have no dobut that if Mozgov and Turiaf and Douglas and Williams were busting asse when they came in they'd be getting heavy minutes and the starters would be well rested. I'm pretty sure we would be seeing a little sampling of AR as well. It's all tied in. If you were coach, you would do as he is doing, coach for the present and pray the future(injuries from being overworked) do not present themselves.

NATE nate is some trash new york let go and boston picked up. (sarcasm)

russian bear doesnt give up matchup problems to the big baby? really.. i think if these two collided it would cause a mini earthquake. o'neal did not suit up for the knicks game. again doc is faced with a injured and aging team this season AND WINNING. props to doc. love nate and ny should have never let him go but i dont think he defeats our entire bench. lol.

bip i dont think d'antoni even see's the bench he has toney tunnel vision when it comes to the bench. when i see mda playing our bench real minutes especially in a celtics game they could have helped WIN. then i will say props to mda.

Are you telling me that lookign down at your bench and seeing Walker, AR, Mozgov, Turiaf and Douglas gives you the same fuzzy feeling that looking at DAvis, Robinson, Daniels, O'Neal and the rest. Come on. It's no where near the same situation. You would trade our bench for theirs in an instant. Plus, the Celtics are a championship team. They can afford to give guys a shot because the rest of the guys can pick up the slack. Guys like Erdin and Bradley don't hurt them the minutes they are on the floor because the rest of their championship level roster picks it up.

We are a team just starting to win. When we go to the bench our leads evaporate. At some point as a coach you ahve to say "I can't keep going to the bench and having my leads evaporate". Instead I'm going to play my starters, to get some wins and hope that my GM can bring me in some help.

Lastly, do you beleive that if Walsh today traded Billy Walker for Chris Duhon and AR for Carl Landry that we would still be going 6 1/2 deep? And if you do believe this, find an example in D'Antoni's past that backs up your assertion.

i dont care if our bench got traded on a month to month basis, i would still play them to spell our top five.

it is thanks to mda that nate is even playing for the celtics. you want to talk about sending your gm a message, get rid of nate was the wrong message. but that is water under the bridge. i feel mda screwed darko too but that is one hell of a long arguement as well.

donnie as i see it, is trying to put his coach in the best situations to get a W. but mda has a habit of just trashing players while elevating other players to must play status.. our bench is not a big drop off from talent from an injured or healthy toney and turiaf. yet somehow those two are as deep as mda does into the bench.

1.) If you played your bench more you might not have won 13 of 14 games because of it. Maybe in the long-run that helps you. Maybe you get fired in the short run and it doesn't. Plus, until you coach you don't know how you would react. Now regardless, if you were to play a bench of 12 deep doese that make your decision automatically right? Or is it simply anotehr way of doing things.

2.) Gettign rid of Nate was the wrong message? Why?

3.) Darko was mistreated? Speculation, not based on anything. As far as you know Darko told D'Antoni and the Knicks to go f themselves the first day he was brought in.

So let's focus on things we do know. We know our bench is consistently getting outplayed. We know that the only change that has increased the production of our bench was when Wilson was on it. Other then that not AR, not Walker, not Turiaf, not Douglas, not one of them have helped us to outproduce the bench of other teams. So at what point does giving minutes to an unproductive unit become more important then doing all you can to win that night's games.

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Have you seen his bench? They can all play. He's not bring AR or Billy Walker(who got no time for Doc and was traded)or Mozgov or Mason off his bench. He's bringign Davis, jermaine, Delonte, Daniels, O'neal or Perkins when Perkins returns, and Nate. He's bringing guys that produce into the rotation. It's a lot easier to rest one of your starters when you know your reserve is going to bust someone's ass just like the starter did.

I think D'Antoni realizes just like the rest of us the need to use his bench. I think Donnie Walsh understands that need as well. I aslo think D'Antoni wants to win games and notices how quickly his leads evaporate the moment his starters go to the bench. Tough choices to make under those circumstances. I have no dobut that if Mozgov and Turiaf and Douglas and Williams were busting asse when they came in they'd be getting heavy minutes and the starters would be well rested. I'm pretty sure we would be seeing a little sampling of AR as well. It's all tied in. If you were coach, you would do as he is doing, coach for the present and pray the future(injuries from being overworked) do not present themselves.

NATE nate is some trash new york let go and boston picked up. (sarcasm)

russian bear doesnt give up matchup problems to the big baby? really.. i think if these two collided it would cause a mini earthquake. o'neal did not suit up for the knicks game. again doc is faced with a injured and aging team this season AND WINNING. props to doc. love nate and ny should have never let him go but i dont think he defeats our entire bench. lol.

bip i dont think d'antoni even see's the bench he has toney tunnel vision when it comes to the bench. when i see mda playing our bench real minutes especially in a celtics game they could have helped WIN. then i will say props to mda.

Are you telling me that lookign down at your bench and seeing Walker, AR, Mozgov, Turiaf and Douglas gives you the same fuzzy feeling that looking at DAvis, Robinson, Daniels, O'Neal and the rest. Come on. It's no where near the same situation. You would trade our bench for theirs in an instant. Plus, the Celtics are a championship team. They can afford to give guys a shot because the rest of the guys can pick up the slack. Guys like Erdin and Bradley don't hurt them the minutes they are on the floor because the rest of their championship level roster picks it up.

We are a team just starting to win. When we go to the bench our leads evaporate. At some point as a coach you ahve to say "I can't keep going to the bench and having my leads evaporate". Instead I'm going to play my starters, to get some wins and hope that my GM can bring me in some help.

Lastly, do you beleive that if Walsh today traded Billy Walker for Chris Duhon and AR for Carl Landry that we would still be going 6 1/2 deep? And if you do believe this, find an example in D'Antoni's past that backs up your assertion.

i dont care if our bench got traded on a month to month basis, i would still play them to spell our top five.

it is thanks to mda that nate is even playing for the celtics. you want to talk about sending your gm a message, get rid of nate was the wrong message. but that is water under the bridge. i feel mda screwed darko too but that is one hell of a long arguement as well.

donnie as i see it, is trying to put his coach in the best situations to get a W. but mda has a habit of just trashing players while elevating other players to must play status.. our bench is not a big drop off from talent from an injured or healthy toney and turiaf. yet somehow those two are as deep as mda does into the bench.

1.) If you played your bench more you might not have won 13 of 14 games because of it. Maybe in the long-run that helps you. Maybe you get fired in the short run and it doesn't. Plus, until you coach you don't know how you would react. Now regardless, if you were to play a bench of 12 deep doese that make your decision automatically right? Or is it simply anotehr way of doing things.

2.) Gettign rid of Nate was the wrong message? Why?
3.) Darko was mistreated? Speculation, not based on anything. As far as you know Darko told D'Antoni and the Knicks to go f themselves the first day he was brought in.

So let's focus on things we do know. We know our bench is consistently getting outplayed. We know that the only change that has increased the production of our bench was when Wilson was on it. Other then that not AR, not Walker, not Turiaf, not Douglas, not one of them have helped us to outproduce the bench of other teams. So at what point does winning not become important?

bipolar much you just gave nate props then you say that.

and im not saying darko is a saint but ffs why tell a guy go be with his wife (for the baby) then when he comes back out of shape a new dad. you say ok i dont understand this.. DNP. hell man you was just understanding now you not wtf coach.

all getting rid of nate and darko did was make us look at their play on other teams and wish they were still playing in orange and blue.

again im all for playing the bench i dont want to be stuck with another houston-like yearly knees drama come second season. two teams passed on going all in on amar'e because of his knees, cavs and suns. ny didnt pass on amar'e because we needed to take the gamble. so donnie signed him even though ny could not insure his contract. gamble paid off.. but we got five years to go.

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Have you seen his bench? They can all play. He's not bring AR or Billy Walker(who got no time for Doc and was traded)or Mozgov or Mason off his bench. He's bringign Davis, jermaine, Delonte, Daniels, O'neal or Perkins when Perkins returns, and Nate. He's bringing guys that produce into the rotation. It's a lot easier to rest one of your starters when you know your reserve is going to bust someone's ass just like the starter did.

I think D'Antoni realizes just like the rest of us the need to use his bench. I think Donnie Walsh understands that need as well. I aslo think D'Antoni wants to win games and notices how quickly his leads evaporate the moment his starters go to the bench. Tough choices to make under those circumstances. I have no dobut that if Mozgov and Turiaf and Douglas and Williams were busting asse when they came in they'd be getting heavy minutes and the starters would be well rested. I'm pretty sure we would be seeing a little sampling of AR as well. It's all tied in. If you were coach, you would do as he is doing, coach for the present and pray the future(injuries from being overworked) do not present themselves.

NATE nate is some trash new york let go and boston picked up. (sarcasm)

russian bear doesnt give up matchup problems to the big baby? really.. i think if these two collided it would cause a mini earthquake. o'neal did not suit up for the knicks game. again doc is faced with a injured and aging team this season AND WINNING. props to doc. love nate and ny should have never let him go but i dont think he defeats our entire bench. lol.

bip i dont think d'antoni even see's the bench he has toney tunnel vision when it comes to the bench. when i see mda playing our bench real minutes especially in a celtics game they could have helped WIN. then i will say props to mda.

Are you telling me that lookign down at your bench and seeing Walker, AR, Mozgov, Turiaf and Douglas gives you the same fuzzy feeling that looking at DAvis, Robinson, Daniels, O'Neal and the rest. Come on. It's no where near the same situation. You would trade our bench for theirs in an instant. Plus, the Celtics are a championship team. They can afford to give guys a shot because the rest of the guys can pick up the slack. Guys like Erdin and Bradley don't hurt them the minutes they are on the floor because the rest of their championship level roster picks it up.

We are a team just starting to win. When we go to the bench our leads evaporate. At some point as a coach you ahve to say "I can't keep going to the bench and having my leads evaporate". Instead I'm going to play my starters, to get some wins and hope that my GM can bring me in some help.

Lastly, do you beleive that if Walsh today traded Billy Walker for Chris Duhon and AR for Carl Landry that we would still be going 6 1/2 deep? And if you do believe this, find an example in D'Antoni's past that backs up your assertion.

i dont care if our bench got traded on a month to month basis, i would still play them to spell our top five.

it is thanks to mda that nate is even playing for the celtics. you want to talk about sending your gm a message, get rid of nate was the wrong message. but that is water under the bridge. i feel mda screwed darko too but that is one hell of a long arguement as well.

donnie as i see it, is trying to put his coach in the best situations to get a W. but mda has a habit of just trashing players while elevating other players to must play status.. our bench is not a big drop off from talent from an injured or healthy toney and turiaf. yet somehow those two are as deep as mda does into the bench.

1.) If you played your bench more you might not have won 13 of 14 games because of it. Maybe in the long-run that helps you. Maybe you get fired in the short run and it doesn't. Plus, until you coach you don't know how you would react. Now regardless, if you were to play a bench of 12 deep doese that make your decision automatically right? Or is it simply anotehr way of doing things.

2.) Gettign rid of Nate was the wrong message? Why?
3.) Darko was mistreated? Speculation, not based on anything. As far as you know Darko told D'Antoni and the Knicks to go f themselves the first day he was brought in.

So let's focus on things we do know. We know our bench is consistently getting outplayed. We know that the only change that has increased the production of our bench was when Wilson was on it. Other then that not AR, not Walker, not Turiaf, not Douglas, not one of them have helped us to outproduce the bench of other teams. So at what point does winning not become important?

bipolar much you just gave nate props then you say that.

and im not saying darko is a saint but ffs why tell a guy go be with his wife (for the baby) then when he comes back out of shape a new dad. you say ok i dont understand this.. DNP. hell man you was just understanding now you not wtf coach.

all getting rid of nate and darko did was make us look at their play on other teams and wish they were still playing in orange and blue.

again im all for playing the bench i dont want to be stuck with another houston-like yearly knees drama come second season. two teams passed on going all in on amar'e because of his knees, cavs and suns. ny didnt pass on amar'e because we needed to take the gamble. so donnie signed him even though ny could not insure his contract. gamble paid off.. but we got five years to go.

1.) Bi-polar much? What do you mean. Nate was not a fit for this team and what we were looking to do. We could not handle his antics as we were trying to build. However if you use the search button you will find that last year I said several times, "Nate does not belong with the knicks and would probably be a good fit for a veteran team that can handle him. LIKE THE CELTICS" So again, what was the bad message that was sent? Please expand on your point. Winning teams, win because of chemistry. Nate was not a part of the chemistry we were trying to build here. Has nothing to do with whetehr he can play or not.

2.) Stop coveting other players. Situations are different every where. There are many players that will shine in Minnesota or Oklahoma or Miami and then bomb in NY and vice versa. Move on from the what could have been stuff. We have no idea what Darko's attitude was here so why speculate? This shouldn't even be a discussion. As for Nate. He is playing in Boston exactly like he played in NY. There are no suprises. Except it was time for him to go. We had to turn the page on those that did not want to play D'Antoni's style. He was one of them.

3.) Again, I do not think anyone associated with the Knicks wants 42 minutes a night from Amare to be a long-time solution. We all get it. It's not news. D'Antoni and Walsh both get it. But 4 weeks ago, we were calling for D'Antoni's head. And now we expect him to play a bench that gets dramatically outplayed everyngith and risk losing games today? Talk about Bi-polar.

Keep this up and I won't even bring up your post count any more. Great post.

loweyecue wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Have you seen his bench? They can all play. He's not bring AR or Billy Walker(who got no time for Doc and was traded)or Mozgov or Mason off his bench. He's bringign Davis, jermaine, Delonte, Daniels, O'neal or Perkins when Perkins returns, and Nate. He's bringing guys that produce into the rotation. It's a lot easier to rest one of your starters when you know your reserve is going to bust someone's ass just like the starter did.

I think D'Antoni realizes just like the rest of us the need to use his bench. I think Donnie Walsh understands that need as well. I aslo think D'Antoni wants to win games and notices how quickly his leads evaporate the moment his starters go to the bench. Tough choices to make under those circumstances. I have no dobut that if Mozgov and Turiaf and Douglas and Williams were busting asse when they came in they'd be getting heavy minutes and the starters would be well rested. I'm pretty sure we would be seeing a little sampling of AR as well. It's all tied in. If you were coach, you would do as he is doing, coach for the present and pray the future(injuries from being overworked) do not present themselves.

NATE nate is some trash new york let go and boston picked up. (sarcasm)

russian bear doesnt give up matchup problems to the big baby? really.. i think if these two collided it would cause a mini earthquake. o'neal did not suit up for the knicks game. again doc is faced with a injured and aging team this season AND WINNING. props to doc. love nate and ny should have never let him go but i dont think he defeats our entire bench. lol.

bip i dont think d'antoni even see's the bench he has toney tunnel vision when it comes to the bench. when i see mda playing our bench real minutes especially in a celtics game they could have helped WIN. then i will say props to mda.

Are you telling me that lookign down at your bench and seeing Walker, AR, Mozgov, Turiaf and Douglas gives you the same fuzzy feeling that looking at DAvis, Robinson, Daniels, O'Neal and the rest. Come on. It's no where near the same situation. You would trade our bench for theirs in an instant. Plus, the Celtics are a championship team. They can afford to give guys a shot because the rest of the guys can pick up the slack. Guys like Erdin and Bradley don't hurt them the minutes they are on the floor because the rest of their championship level roster picks it up.

We are a team just starting to win. When we go to the bench our leads evaporate. At some point as a coach you ahve to say "I can't keep going to the bench and having my leads evaporate". Instead I'm going to play my starters, to get some wins and hope that my GM can bring me in some help.

Lastly, do you beleive that if Walsh today traded Billy Walker for Chris Duhon and AR for Carl Landry that we would still be going 6 1/2 deep? And if you do believe this, find an example in D'Antoni's past that backs up your assertion.

i dont care if our bench got traded on a month to month basis, i would still play them to spell our top five.

it is thanks to mda that nate is even playing for the celtics. you want to talk about sending your gm a message, get rid of nate was the wrong message. but that is water under the bridge. i feel mda screwed darko too but that is one hell of a long arguement as well.

donnie as i see it, is trying to put his coach in the best situations to get a W. but mda has a habit of just trashing players while elevating other players to must play status.. our bench is not a big drop off from talent from an injured or healthy toney and turiaf. yet somehow those two are as deep as mda does into the bench.

1.) If you played your bench more you might not have won 13 of 14 games because of it. Maybe in the long-run that helps you. Maybe you get fired in the short run and it doesn't. Plus, until you coach you don't know how you would react. Now regardless, if you were to play a bench of 12 deep doese that make your decision automatically right? Or is it simply anotehr way of doing things.

2.) Gettign rid of Nate was the wrong message? Why?
3.) Darko was mistreated? Speculation, not based on anything. As far as you know Darko told D'Antoni and the Knicks to go f themselves the first day he was brought in.

So let's focus on things we do know. We know our bench is consistently getting outplayed. We know that the only change that has increased the production of our bench was when Wilson was on it. Other then that not AR, not Walker, not Turiaf, not Douglas, not one of them have helped us to outproduce the bench of other teams. So at what point does winning not become important?

bipolar much you just gave nate props then you say that.

and im not saying darko is a saint but ffs why tell a guy go be with his wife (for the baby) then when he comes back out of shape a new dad. you say ok i dont understand this.. DNP. hell man you was just understanding now you not wtf coach.

all getting rid of nate and darko did was make us look at their play on other teams and wish they were still playing in orange and blue.

again im all for playing the bench i dont want to be stuck with another houston-like yearly knees drama come second season. two teams passed on going all in on amar'e because of his knees, cavs and suns. ny didnt pass on amar'e because we needed to take the gamble. so donnie signed him even though ny could not insure his contract. gamble paid off.. but we got five years to go.

1.) Bi-polar much? What do you mean. Nate was not a fit for this team and what we were looking to do. We could not handle his antics as we were trying to build. However if you use the search button you will find that last year I said several times, "Nate does not belong with the knicks and would probably be a good fit for a veteran team that can handle him. LIKE THE CELTICS" So again, what was the bad message that was sent? Please expand on your point. Winning teams, win because of chemistry. Nate was not a part of the chemistry we were trying to build here. Has nothing to do with whetehr he can play or not.

2.) Stop coveting other players. Situations are different every where. There are many players that will shine in Minnesota or Oklahoma or Miami and then bomb in NY and vice versa. Move on from the what could have been stuff. We have no idea what Darko's attitude was here so why speculate? This shouldn't even be a discussion. As for Nate. He is playing in Boston exactly like he played in NY. There are no suprises. Except it was time for him to go. We had to turn the page on those that did not want to play D'Antoni's style. He was one of them.

3.) Again, I do not think anyone associated with the Knicks wants 42 minutes a night from Amare to be a long-time solution. We all get it. It's not news. D'Antoni and Walsh both get it. But 4 weeks ago, we were calling for D'Antoni's head. And now we expect him to play a bench that gets dramatically outplayed everyngith and risk losing games today? Talk about Bi-polar.

Keep this up and I won't even bring up your post count any more. Great post.

what was said that was soo bippy? mda right now is becoming a chemistry killer. mda favoring dnp, rather working on his coach/player chemistry, is not cute. i am coveting players that used to play for new york.. a growing list, that are showing themselves to be useful on other teams. is ar soon to join that growing list of mda rejects to covet?

cheers wrote:

loweyecue wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:

cheers wrote:

Bippity10 wrote:Have you seen his bench? They can all play. He's not bring AR or Billy Walker(who got no time for Doc and was traded)or Mozgov or Mason off his bench. He's bringign Davis, jermaine, Delonte, Daniels, O'neal or Perkins when Perkins returns, and Nate. He's bringing guys that produce into the rotation. It's a lot easier to rest one of your starters when you know your reserve is going to bust someone's ass just like the starter did.

I think D'Antoni realizes just like the rest of us the need to use his bench. I think Donnie Walsh understands that need as well. I aslo think D'Antoni wants to win games and notices how quickly his leads evaporate the moment his starters go to the bench. Tough choices to make under those circumstances. I have no dobut that if Mozgov and Turiaf and Douglas and Williams were busting asse when they came in they'd be getting heavy minutes and the starters would be well rested. I'm pretty sure we would be seeing a little sampling of AR as well. It's all tied in. If you were coach, you would do as he is doing, coach for the present and pray the future(injuries from being overworked) do not present themselves.

NATE nate is some trash new york let go and boston picked up. (sarcasm)

russian bear doesnt give up matchup problems to the big baby? really.. i think if these two collided it would cause a mini earthquake. o'neal did not suit up for the knicks game. again doc is faced with a injured and aging team this season AND WINNING. props to doc. love nate and ny should have never let him go but i dont think he defeats our entire bench. lol.

bip i dont think d'antoni even see's the bench he has toney tunnel vision when it comes to the bench. when i see mda playing our bench real minutes especially in a celtics game they could have helped WIN. then i will say props to mda.

Are you telling me that lookign down at your bench and seeing Walker, AR, Mozgov, Turiaf and Douglas gives you the same fuzzy feeling that looking at DAvis, Robinson, Daniels, O'Neal and the rest. Come on. It's no where near the same situation. You would trade our bench for theirs in an instant. Plus, the Celtics are a championship team. They can afford to give guys a shot because the rest of the guys can pick up the slack. Guys like Erdin and Bradley don't hurt them the minutes they are on the floor because the rest of their championship level roster picks it up.

We are a team just starting to win. When we go to the bench our leads evaporate. At some point as a coach you ahve to say "I can't keep going to the bench and having my leads evaporate". Instead I'm going to play my starters, to get some wins and hope that my GM can bring me in some help.

Lastly, do you beleive that if Walsh today traded Billy Walker for Chris Duhon and AR for Carl Landry that we would still be going 6 1/2 deep? And if you do believe this, find an example in D'Antoni's past that backs up your assertion.

i dont care if our bench got traded on a month to month basis, i would still play them to spell our top five.

it is thanks to mda that nate is even playing for the celtics. you want to talk about sending your gm a message, get rid of nate was the wrong message. but that is water under the bridge. i feel mda screwed darko too but that is one hell of a long arguement as well.

donnie as i see it, is trying to put his coach in the best situations to get a W. but mda has a habit of just trashing players while elevating other players to must play status.. our bench is not a big drop off from talent from an injured or healthy toney and turiaf. yet somehow those two are as deep as mda does into the bench.

1.) If you played your bench more you might not have won 13 of 14 games because of it. Maybe in the long-run that helps you. Maybe you get fired in the short run and it doesn't. Plus, until you coach you don't know how you would react. Now regardless, if you were to play a bench of 12 deep doese that make your decision automatically right? Or is it simply anotehr way of doing things.

2.) Gettign rid of Nate was the wrong message? Why?
3.) Darko was mistreated? Speculation, not based on anything. As far as you know Darko told D'Antoni and the Knicks to go f themselves the first day he was brought in.

So let's focus on things we do know. We know our bench is consistently getting outplayed. We know that the only change that has increased the production of our bench was when Wilson was on it. Other then that not AR, not Walker, not Turiaf, not Douglas, not one of them have helped us to outproduce the bench of other teams. So at what point does winning not become important?

bipolar much you just gave nate props then you say that.

and im not saying darko is a saint but ffs why tell a guy go be with his wife (for the baby) then when he comes back out of shape a new dad. you say ok i dont understand this.. DNP. hell man you was just understanding now you not wtf coach.

all getting rid of nate and darko did was make us look at their play on other teams and wish they were still playing in orange and blue.

again im all for playing the bench i dont want to be stuck with another houston-like yearly knees drama come second season. two teams passed on going all in on amar'e because of his knees, cavs and suns. ny didnt pass on amar'e because we needed to take the gamble. so donnie signed him even though ny could not insure his contract. gamble paid off.. but we got five years to go.

1.) Bi-polar much? What do you mean. Nate was not a fit for this team and what we were looking to do. We could not handle his antics as we were trying to build. However if you use the search button you will find that last year I said several times, "Nate does not belong with the knicks and would probably be a good fit for a veteran team that can handle him. LIKE THE CELTICS" So again, what was the bad message that was sent? Please expand on your point. Winning teams, win because of chemistry. Nate was not a part of the chemistry we were trying to build here. Has nothing to do with whetehr he can play or not.

2.) Stop coveting other players. Situations are different every where. There are many players that will shine in Minnesota or Oklahoma or Miami and then bomb in NY and vice versa. Move on from the what could have been stuff. We have no idea what Darko's attitude was here so why speculate? This shouldn't even be a discussion. As for Nate. He is playing in Boston exactly like he played in NY. There are no suprises. Except it was time for him to go. We had to turn the page on those that did not want to play D'Antoni's style. He was one of them.

3.) Again, I do not think anyone associated with the Knicks wants 42 minutes a night from Amare to be a long-time solution. We all get it. It's not news. D'Antoni and Walsh both get it. But 4 weeks ago, we were calling for D'Antoni's head. And now we expect him to play a bench that gets dramatically outplayed everyngith and risk losing games today? Talk about Bi-polar.

Keep this up and I won't even bring up your post count any more. Great post.

what was said that was soo bippy? mda right now is becoming a chemistry killer. mda favoring dnp, rather working on his coach/player chemistry, is not cute. i am coveting players that used to play for new york.. a growing list, that are showing themselves to be useful on other teams. is ar soon to join that growing list of mda rejects to covet?

Yeah, well I am NOT. Like he pointed out role players look good when they are put into a great situation, the Celts just worked out that way for Nate. And a couple of other examples out there. A player with all teh issues of nate has no place on a team trying to build its identity.

Resting our top guys isn't the only answer, cuz what happens when our best guys sit down? We start losing possession by possession. The evidence is all there in B&W.

knicks1248 wrote:
Amare is right when he said the other night after the cavs loss...How can a pg play 23 minutes and not have 1 ast...OUCH!! I'm not sure he was directing that at the shots they miss, or just not getting the basketball in good position, which ever the case, it sounded like it was aim at TD

well when amar'e was mic'd up last game he did tell td.. you know brandon jennings would get me the ball.