On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:00:58 -0800 (PST), Glenn Greenstein
<lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote: >On Nov 4, 10:54 am, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote: >> If NYK beat the Pacers, this starting lineup rides. If they lose; look >> for starting lineup #4 to be out there in game five???
>Are you suggesting the players on the Knicks are consistent?
On Nov 4, 1:17 pm, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:00:58 -0800 (PST), Glenn Greenstein
> <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >On Nov 4, 10:54 am, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote: > >> If NYK beat the Pacers, this starting lineup rides. If they lose; look > >> for starting lineup #4 to be out there in game five???
> >Are you suggesting the players on the Knicks are consistent?
On Nov 5, 8:39 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> So far D sucks.
Guys....this entire TEAM sucks. This heap of castoffs and losers is no legitimate test of D'Anotoni's coaching skills. It has to be one of the dumbest ensembles ever to disgrace an NBA court.
<joseph_blo...@yahoo.com> wrote: >On Nov 5, 8:39 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> So far D sucks.
>Guys....this entire TEAM sucks. This heap of castoffs and losers is >no legitimate test of D'Anotoni's coaching skills. It has to be one >of the dumbest ensembles ever to disgrace an NBA court.
So are you echoing Marbury's statement??? Where he said dantoni needs 3 superstars.... If that is the case we may never have 3 superstars. In my opinion what happened to the lowly celtics is quite unusual. Where you have a bonifide all star and then you get 2 more at different positions.
On Nov 5, 6:03 pm, Joe Blow <joseph_blo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 8:39 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > So far D sucks.
> Guys....this entire TEAM sucks. This heap of castoffs and losers is > no legitimate test of D'Anotoni's coaching skills. It has to be one > of the dumbest ensembles ever to disgrace an NBA court.
Agreed and this is why I have not really gotten on D. Look at the players he is saddled with. Phil Jackson couldn't win with this bunch of losers.
On Nov 6, 6:59 am, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:03:44 -0800 (PST), Joe Blow
> <joseph_blo...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >On Nov 5, 8:39 am, Glenn Greenstein <lexa...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> So far D sucks.
> >Guys....this entire TEAM sucks. This heap of castoffs and losers is > >no legitimate test of D'Anotoni's coaching skills. It has to be one > >of the dumbest ensembles ever to disgrace an NBA court.
> So are you echoing Marbury's statement??? Where he said dantoni needs > 3 superstars.... If that is the case we may never have 3 superstars. > In my opinion what happened to the lowly celtics is quite unusual. > Where you have a bonifide all star and then you get 2 more at > different positions.
The Knicks don't need 3, but they do need 2. Honestly Lee is just a complimentary player, he isn't an all star. He is scoring more but he is also letting the other team score more. Defense is one of the things you can teach, but after all this time, Lee just does not get it. I really would have loved for the Knicks to get a defensive minded coach instead of Mr. under 7 seconds.
On Nov 6, 6:59 am, Syfo-Dyas <Syfo-D...@nomail.com> wrote:
> So are you echoing Marbury's statement??? Where he said dantoni needs > 3 superstars.... If that is the case we may never have 3 superstars. > In my opinion what happened to the lowly celtics is quite unusual. > Where you have a bonifide all star and then you get 2 more at > different positions.
The Knicks have ZERO superstars. Zero. That's what I'm saying. And their non-superstars are a bunch of illiterate morons, or at least the name-brand guys (Harrington, Hughes, Robinson, etc). And you want to bury D'Antoni on the basis of how this cast of losers performs?
|
