the knicks played one on one ball tonight against a team that was also playing one on one ball and they won. they won't always win playing this way. it's fools gold.

crzymdups wrote:and if you think the way nate was playing in november was for the good of the team i don't know what to tell you.

It was the same way he was playing today and last season, scoring a lot, putting pressure on the other team and generally wreaking havoc on the other team's defensive scheme.

Not only that, Robinson was getting a decent amount of assists and steal!

And here is where you argument really falls apart: Robinson was hurt for 6 games in November and the knicks were 1 and 5 during that time.

But you know who was really sucking bad during November and costing the Knicks games?

Duhon.

oohah

crzymdups wrote:my argument is team defense led to wins and nate is not good at defense. if that is fallacious why did his benching coincide with the first time the knicks have held opponents to under 100 points in a row for the entire time nate has been in the NBA?

the knicks played one on one ball tonight against a team that was also playing one on one ball and they won. they won't always win playing this way.

Nate Robinson's benching coincided with a slowdown of the offensive tempo. That is why the opponent's score dropped dramatically. The Knicks were not great on defense in December. There were less possessions. They changed the pace because Duhon has trouble making plays in transition.

crzymdups wrote:it's fools gold.

Fools gold is thinking the Knicks will have sustained success with their most explosive player sitting. Or riding Duhon as your starting PG.

oohah

oohah wrote:

crzymdups wrote:and if you think the way nate was playing in november was for the good of the team i don't know what to tell you.

It was the same way he was playing today and last season, scoring a lot, putting pressure on the other team and generally wreaking havoc on the other team's defensive scheme.

Not only that, Robinson was getting a decent amount of assists and steal!

And here is where you argument really falls apart: Robinson was hurt for 6 games in November and the knicks were 1 and 5 during that time.

But you know who was really sucking bad during November and costing the Knicks games?

Duhon.

oohah

my argument doesn't fall apart because my argument is that when he benched nate he changed the defensive scheme and it worked.

duhon is not a good point guard - we need some who can penetrate the defense and still keep the rest of the team involved. nate can penetrate but can he keep the team involved? and can he play within the team's defensive scheme? those are the big questions.

because as great at disrupting other team's defenses as nate clearly is, he is just as disruptive to the knicks offense and defense. nate is not going to shoot 75% and score 40ppg this year so hopefully he learns some of this other stuff.

crzymdups wrote:
my argument doesn't fall apart because my argument is that when he benched nate he changed the defensive scheme and it worked.

duhon is not a good point guard - we need some who can penetrate the defense and still keep the rest of the team involved. nate can penetrate but can he keep the team involved? and can he play within the team's defensive scheme? those are the big questions.

because as great at disrupting other team's defenses as nate clearly is, he is just as disruptive to the knicks offense and defense. nate is not going to shoot 75% and score 40ppg this year so hopefully he learns some of this other stuff.

Robinson is disruptive? Have you seen the momentum-killing shots hoisted by Duhon, Harrington and to a lesser degree Gallinari?

I'm all for equal treatment and if that is true then some more benchings are in order.

Remember previously that the reason was that Robinson was socializing too much before games, but did anyone see David Lee yukking it up with Joakim Noah before that loss?

oohah

crzymdups wrote:
duhon still costs us games. but he also helps win them because he plays within the coach's scheme on both offense and defense. something nate does not do. it is not personal with coaching it is about finding guys who will be coached.

if nate does not get that he will be benched again. i'm sorry you guys don't get it. i'm done trying to explain it to you.

Right so Duhon helps the Knicks lose and win some. Isn't the same thing true about Robinson? How many games does Duhon take over and win for the team?

You just want to believe what you want to. You're working with "truthiness" as opposed to looking at the facts. Now Robinson "won't be coached". Made up. If you have to straight up make things up to back your argument, you should consider revising your argument.

oohah

He used PT to make clear that he will play guys that do what he wants and it's never personal. The only thing that matters is WINS.

u just contradicted ur point with that statement... sitting guys to teach them some kind of lesson IS making it personal, don't u get it? sitting ur most talented players & allowing scrubs like Bender see time is NOT making it all about wins my friend... that BS statement about being willing to play Satan if it meant he could get a win is just more BS that he's spoon feeding to you... let's face it, MDA can't handle players that cause friction for him... i'm sorry if u think that's STUPID, but it's the truth.

TMS wrote:please, if Bender was able to go tonight & Hughes wasn't playing like garbage in recent games, Nate would still have been planted on the bench & you'd still be making up excuses to justify the benching... apparently MDA can do no wrong in your eyes... not all fans share your rose colored view of this franchise & aren't afraid to call someone out for something that they find disagreeable.

He used PT to make clear that he will play guys that do what he wants and it's never personal. The only thing that matters is WINS.

u just contradicted ur point with that statement... sitting guys to teach them some kind of lesson IS making it personal, don't u get it? sitting ur most talented players & allowing scrubs like Bender see time is NOT making it all about wins my friend... that BS statement about being willing to play Satan if it meant he could get a win is just more BS that he's spoon feeding to you... let's face it, MDA can't handle players that cause friction for him... i'm sorry if u think that's STUPID, but it's the truth.

didnt he kinda "give up" with shaq/kerr? all sorts of ways to spin that exit from the suns for sure.

TMS wrote:please, if Bender was able to go tonight & Hughes wasn't playing like garbage in recent games, Nate would still have been planted on the bench & you'd still be making up excuses to justify the benching... apparently MDA can do no wrong in your eyes... not all fans share your rose colored view of this franchise & aren't afraid to call someone out for something that they find disagreeable.

He used PT to make clear that he will play guys that do what he wants and it's never personal. The only thing that matters is WINS.

u just contradicted ur point with that statement... sitting guys to teach them some kind of lesson IS making it personal, don't u get it? sitting ur most talented players & allowing scrubs like Bender see time is NOT making it all about wins my friend... that BS statement about being willing to play Satan if it meant he could get a win is just more BS that he's spoon feeding to you... let's face it, MDA can't handle players that cause friction for him... i'm sorry if u think that's STUPID, but it's the truth.

TMS I can't believe that you think it's not in a coaches prerogative to decide plating time based on on court or off court behavior. It's not that MDA can do no wrong, but in this case HE DIDN"T do anything wrong, cuz it's always up to the coach who he wants to play or not. MDA never said that Nate would never play for him again. He also hasn't changed his coaching style either, since it's a well known fact that MDA is slow to reintroduce players once they are out of his rotation. Part of that has to do with the results we got with the rotation he had been playing. He evaluated the situation and felt the team could use what Nate does. Now you don't have to like his decisions which you clearly don't, but do you really think that this is a flaw in MDA's coaching ability? The guy is getting results, so what are you using to judge him? Is he supposed to go undefeated in order to please you? 9-6 for this team is a very good month. Maybe we win a game or two more or maybe we lose a game or two more playing Nate sooner. All I know is that MDA has the right to play who he feels gives him the best chance to win. He also has the right to sit guys if they act like jerks and don't defend or play under control. I fail to see your point in any of this.

oohah

crzymdups wrote:my argument is team defense led to wins and nate is not good at defense. if that is fallacious why did his benching coincide with the first time the knicks have held opponents to under 100 points in a row for the entire time nate has been in the NBA?

the knicks played one on one ball tonight against a team that was also playing one on one ball and they won. they won't always win playing this way. it's fools gold.

I disagree...we had 4 players playing the best ball of their lives....Count them, 4...