Fire Kenny Natt

[bench_blob]

To all the posters advocating playing "the kids"... it sounds nice in theory, but the kids stink!

I mean, yeah, they showed flashes here and there, but Hawes can't make a shot anymore, confuses himself more than his defender with his post moves, and is non-existent on the offensive boards.

Jason Thompson takes his shot squarely into the defender, welcoming a shot block, his spin moves leave him out of control, his jumper is decent but he as he does everything else, he rushes himself.

Donte Greene is too in love with the 3 pointer and needs serious work on his ball handling. And with any sort of defensive pressure he is a 33% shooter.

So those are "our beloved kids" and what they have to offer.

Play them 30-40 mintues a game at their current skill level, and as I see it, there's a risk of irreparable damage to their psyche (i.e. Quincy Douby) and shattered confidence when they get tooled all over the court.

 

[bajaden]

Btw, I'm not against playing the vets if the youngsters aren't playing up to par. Hawes deserved to be benched based on his latest performance, and JT is not doing much better. Now is the time to develop good habits and expectations. Giving the kids minutes even when they aren't bringing their 'A' game does more harm than good.

I'am so tired of hearing this crap. Are you seriously going to tell me that the vet's last night played up to par. Are you going to look a rookie in the eye and point to the vet's last night and say, when you can outplay them You'll get your shot. Just as soon as we go down by 40pts!!!!!!! Develop good habits! And what are those. Dribbling the ball for 23 seconds and then throwing up a 3pt shot. Not passing the ball. Not waiting for the offense to set up before jacking up another 3pt shot. Arguing with the ref, instead of getting back on defense. Please, spare me this BS.


This is the biggest load of nonsense I've ever heard. I would suggest to you, that the only time the Kings actually looked like a team that was trying, was after the game was over and the roster on the floor consisted of Hawes, Thompson, Greene, Douby, and Brown. They may not have been great, but they played better than the vets, AND, actually tried to pass the ball and run plays, and do the things that Natt talked about. Hey, maybe they actually listened to him, and maybe he ought to play the players that listen.

 

[Entity]

To all the posters advocating playing "the kids"... it sounds nice in theory, but the kids stink!

I mean, yeah, they showed flashes here and there, but Hawes can't make a shot anymore, confuses himself more than his defender with his post moves, and is non-existent on the offensive boards.

Jason Thompson takes his shot squarely into the defender, welcoming a shot block, his spin moves leave him out of control, his jumper is decent but he as he does everything else, he rushes himself.

Donte Greene is too in love with the 3 pointer and needs serious work on his ball handling. And with any sort of defensive pressure he is a 33% shooter.

So those are "our beloved kids" and what they have to offer.

Play them 30-40 mintues a game at their current skill level, and as I see it, there's a risk of irreparable damage to their psyche (i.e. Quincy Douby) and shattered confidence when they get tooled all over the court.

Interesting post and it would be a solid take on "the kids" IF their numbers weren't better than the vets playing in their place.

Just sticking with your assumptions. #1 Hawes can't shoot. its noted that he is in a slump YET is still right there with Miller in fg% and in the post Miller is nonexistant where Hawes is a factor. your second guess (thats the only word that describes it) Hawes is not a factor on the offensive boards. Well Thompson is #1 and Hawes is #2 on the team. So how does Miller and Moore deserve more time in that aspect?

#2 Jason Thompson and his shooting. Do you really want me to compare the alternative. Jason is right there with Mikki in fg% and he has post moves as Mikki doesn't. I am sure you don't want the rebounding numbers in that matchup.

#1 and #2 in those comparisons. Spencer and Jason could be like Brad and Mikki and just make 15ft jumpers all night. Put Miller and Moore in the post like "the kids" and their numbers won't be as good as "the kids".

#3 Donte Greene hasn't fallen in love with the 3. That is where they position him in the offense. Donte as a 20 year old rookie in the league has a better 3pt% than Bobby Jackson and Beno Udrih and yes Kevin Martin.

In the end if these are your arguments on not playing "the kids" then I am more for playing them now than I was before your post.

You think their confidence will get shattered? I wonder what it does for their confidence when they are benched in favor of guys that are less talented and are not the future of the team.

 

[kingsnation]

To all the posters advocating playing "the kids"... it sounds nice in theory, but the kids stink!

I mean, yeah, they showed flashes here and there, but Hawes can't make a shot anymore, confuses himself more than his defender with his post moves, and is non-existent on the offensive boards.

Jason Thompson takes his shot squarely into the defender, welcoming a shot block, his spin moves leave him out of control, his jumper is decent but he as he does everything else, he rushes himself.

Donte Greene is too in love with the 3 pointer and needs serious work on his ball handling. And with any sort of defensive pressure he is a 33% shooter.

So those are "our beloved kids" and what they have to offer.

Play them 30-40 mintues a game at their current skill level, and as I see it, there's a risk of irreparable damage to their psyche (i.e. Quincy Douby) and shattered confidence when they get tooled all over the court.

And you do realize that if they don't get their minutes THIS YEAR... then we are going to repeat this same scenario NEXT YEAR???

To develop your future, you have to do exactly that ---> DEVELOP.

Listen, we all know were not building around a Kobe, Lebron or Wade --- However, Our kids have potential. Hawes, JT, Donte --All first round picks.

Investing in potential isn't seeing what they are today but committing to what they can be tomorrow. and sticking with it.

When Moore, Miller, Salmons etc etc etc play like absolute crap and still get major minutes -- what kind of message is this sending to our young players' mentality?

Because you know what's going to happen if our kids don't get minutes NOW?? Against Boston, Against LA, in clutch situations, in blowout situations. ---If they don't play now, then when we do trade our vets, either later this season or offseason, then our kids will have absolutely no idea what to do or how to play and we will have no choice but to play them then.

And then we will all look back to this moment and say, "Well, at least we boosted our trade bait's rep..."

 

[Larry89]

For some reason I just think it was unfair because Natt didn't seem qualified to be a head coach and it was seemingly forced upon him..

Now it seems his firing is looming and he will be out of a job..

maybe I still have the Christmas spirit or something..

 

[kingsnation]

Unfortunately, I actually do not think he will be fired until the end of the year.

Interims usaully never get fired, just "replaced" at the end of the year, I guess..

Can anyone think of ANY interims in any sport that have been fired mid-season?

 

[bajaden]

Am I wrong in my theory of hiring someone now such as Flip Saunders to get a head start on next season. Build a continuity with the players and insert game play philosophy. I mean isn't that smarter than to wait until next September when camp starts and everybody has to learn something new in a 2 week training camp. Oooooor is it that a coach like that wouldn't come into a situation like this right now.

I think any new (hopefully permanent) coach would want to have the chance to pick his own assistants and to have a training camp to insert his own program. I think the last thing he would want, is to jump into a situation like the current Kings. Who would want to start his job in a hole, trying to dig his way out.

From the Kings prespective, its probably better to wait and see who's going to be available at the end of the season. Go through the interveiw process and make sure you pick the right guy this time.

I know this is tough to watch right now, but its not the time for a knee jerk reaction.

 

[Entity]

I think any new (hopefully permanent) coach would want to have the chance to pick his own assistants and to have a training camp to insert his own program. I think the last thing he would want, is to jump into a situation like the current Kings. Who would want to start his job in a hole, trying to dig his way out.

From the Kings prespective, its probably better to wait and see who's going to be available at the end of the season. Go through the interveiw process and make sure you pick the right guy this time.

I know this is tough to watch right now, but its not the time for a knee jerk reaction.

Its really not a knee jerk. I see what you saying about availability after the season. I was just looking at the rest of the season as a training camp for the new coach if it were to be one that is available now such as Saunders. You do have point though with the assistants. I am sure he wouldnt keep any of ours 2 at the most. The ones he might want are probably currently assisting eslwhere. So that would be the hold up.

I just don't want the rest of this season to be a waste. We should salvage something besides a draft pick.

 

[NoBonus]

Let's just replace him with Wisenant.

 

[fnordius]

You think their confidence will get shattered? I wonder what it does for their confidence when they are benched in favor of guys that are less talented and are not the future of the team.

My thoughts exactly. There is no shame in getting beaten by the Celtics. But having to play behind Mikki?

Play the kids, Gnatt.

On an off-topic note...

 

[Kingster]

To all the posters advocating playing "the kids"... it sounds nice in theory, but the kids stink!

I mean, yeah, they showed flashes here and there, but Hawes can't make a shot anymore, confuses himself more than his defender with his post moves, and is non-existent on the offensive boards.

Jason Thompson takes his shot squarely into the defender, welcoming a shot block, his spin moves leave him out of control, his jumper is decent but he as he does everything else, he rushes himself.

Donte Greene is too in love with the 3 pointer and needs serious work on his ball handling. And with any sort of defensive pressure he is a 33% shooter.

So those are "our beloved kids" and what they have to offer.

Play them 30-40 mintues a game at their current skill level, and as I see it, there's a risk of irreparable damage to their psyche (i.e. Quincy Douby) and shattered confidence when they get tooled all over the court.

Patience, patience. The youngins will recover from their pain, just like we will. Look on the bright side, they'll be so motivated not to experience this pain again, they'll work even harder to get better. There is a silver lining. Douby was born Douby; he never had confidence to begin with.

 

[bajaden]

Its really not a knee jerk. I see what you saying about availability after the season. I was just looking at the rest of the season as a training camp for the new coach if it were to be one that is available now such as Saunders. You do have point though with the assistants. I am sure he wouldnt keep any of ours 2 at the most. The ones he might want are probably currently assisting eslwhere. So that would be the hold up.

I just don't want the rest of this season to be a waste. We should salvage something besides a draft pick.

I'm not against the idea, I just don't think it will happen. I don't think the Kings will do it, knowing that Petrie is one of those deep thinkers before making a decision. And I would think that any coach would be reluctant to take over in the middle of a season. But hey, I would be for it.

 

[beb0p]

I'am so tired of hearing this crap. Are you seriously going to tell me that the vet's last night played up to par. Are you going to look a rookie in the eye and point to the vet's last night and say, when you can outplay them You'll get your shot. Just as soon as we go down by 40pts!!!!!!! Develop good habits! And what are those. Dribbling the ball for 23 seconds and then throwing up a 3pt shot. Not passing the ball. Not waiting for the offense to set up before jacking up another 3pt shot. Arguing with the ref, instead of getting back on defense. Please, spare me this BS.


This is the biggest load of nonsense I've ever heard. I would suggest to you, that the only time the Kings actually looked like a team that was trying, was after the game was over and the roster on the floor consisted of Hawes, Thompson, Greene, Douby, and Brown. They may not have been great, but they played better than the vets, AND, actually tried to pass the ball and run plays, and do the things that Natt talked about. Hey, maybe they actually listened to him, and maybe he ought to play the players that listen.

Maybe you can tell this load of crap to Alex English, who said in no uncertain terms that not getting mins in his first two years in the league put a fire in his belly. A HOF career soon followed. He also suggested that had he gotten starter mins right off the bat, he probably wouldn't worked as hard to get better.

I never said don't play the kids. I have always said, very consistently that you should give them at least reasonable mins every game to see how they fare. What I don't want is to play them even when they're stinking up the joint, even when it's obviously they aren't contributing, even on nights when they were doing things wrong. Right now is the time to drill into their heads that good play = more mins, that hard work = more mins, that following the game plan = more mins. If you have a child, you can't spoil him/her with toys and candy when they're failing in school and expect them to turn out alright. You have to instill tough love from the get-go. Want the latest mega-tron toy? You'll have to earn it by doing well in school. Want to play with your friends? Finish your homework first. The same applies to developing rookies. Want more mins? You have to play well, practice hard, and listen to the coach. Not doing all three things = less mins. Sorry rook, but that's how the NBA works.

And lastly, I don't understand all this hyperbole, as if the veterans are getting 40 mins and the youngsters barely got off the bench. Please, be reasonable. Last nite, they ALL stink. So if you look at the boxscore, Miller, Moore, Hawes, and JT all got similar mins. I know the youngsters played a little better last nite, but against who? Gabe Pruitt and Patrick O'Bryant? No offense but our youngsters were playing against their 14th and 15th men. So they actually executed the offense sometimes, nice; now go out there and show that they can do it against players who matter. If they can do well against the 1st team, that's when they've earned the right to start. Until then, I'm fine with juggling between the vets and the youngsters.

I can stomach a 40+ pts loss. What I can't stomach are fans who say, Just give the youngsters 35 mins regardless of whether they've earned it. As if they are plants and PT is water. Sorry, but players get better by practicing, not by playing in games. At this point, games are merely a gauge to what weakness they need to address and how far they're from starting. And the verdict thus far is that they're not far off, but they're not there yet.

 

[Entity]

You kind of made a point later that went against your point earlier in that post. at the end you said that games are a gauge for weaknesses. Early you said sure they looked good against the 14th and 15th men. Now brace youself for this as it goes against everything you just said. BUT wouldn't they be able to gauge their weaknesses and know what to work on by going against the elite? AND don't you think (for instance) Jason Thompson would learn ALOT more by playing against KG rather than playing against Gabe Pruitt?

 

[beb0p]

You kind of made a point later that went against your point earlier in that post. at the end you said that games are a gauge for weaknesses. Early you said sure they looked good against the 14th and 15th men. Now brace youself for this as it goes against everything you just said. BUT wouldn't they be able to gauge their weaknesses and know what to work on by going against the elite? AND don't you think (for instance) Jason Thompson would learn ALOT more by playing against KG rather than playing against Gabe Pruitt?

I guess there's a difference between reading my entire post versus just a section of it.

Nowhere did I say I didn't want the kids to face the elite. In fact, I said they should be given mins every game just to see how they fare. I repeat: I want the kids to play every game, against the best competition they deserve to face, in order to gauge where they stand. And if they stink against the elite, well play them against the second team, and so on. I want to see them play, what I don't want to see, is that they play when they didn't deserve to play. That means when one is shooting terribly like Hawes, then it's ok to relieve him of starter status. In fact, I said very specifically that the kids need to produce results against the 1st teams in order to earn that starter status that so many of you are so eager to bestow on them right now.

There's always a gap between what one say and what people want to hear. I said I want the kids to earn the mins, and many people somehow take that to mean I don't want to play the kids. I said playing against the scrubs of scrubs is no proper way to gauge the kids' progress, and people like you think this is an anti-advocation of giving the kids meaningful minutes at all!

 

[VF21]

Just a request - This has been a very interesting discussion so far. Please keep it civil, okay?

Thanks...

 

[Uncia03]

I never said don't play the kids. I have always said, very consistently that you should give them at least reasonable mins every game to see how they fare. What I don't want is to play them even when they're stinking up the joint, even when it's obviously they aren't contributing, even on nights when they were doing things wrong. Right now is the time to drill into their heads that good play = more mins, that hard work = more mins, that following the game plan = more mins.

....

Not doing all three things = less mins. Sorry rook, but that's how the NBA works.

I really wanted to quote this entire post, but to keep things brief I'll just focus on this point.
What you are advocating goes almost completely against what this team needs at this time. This perspective is perfectly justified in numerous other situations, but not the one our Kings find themselves in right now.

In fact, this perspective hurts the development of our kids.

You are saying that when the Kids don't play well and are pulled off the court they will learn that good play = more time. However, this is what the Kids are currently seeing:


If I don't play well I don't get time. If the Vet's don't play well, they are allowed to 'play through their struggles' to the tune of getting our team down by 40 points. It doesn't matter if I play well or not because I'm not allowed to play through my struggles because I'm not a vet, so I'll get what ever minutes a rookie is allowed. So what really matters is not my play, but whether I've been in the league for a good period of time.

Your points might have some merit if we were discussing a different team. In fact, I would agree with you completely if we were having this discussion a few years ago when we were competing for a championship, because our goal at that time wasn't to try and develop the young guys as quickly possible. Our goal at that time was to win every game we could.

But on this team, at this time, when the progression of our Kids is everything, and especially since the young guys have regularly performed at a higher standard than the vets, your argument collapses.

One more thing. In an earlier post you stated,

"To all the posters advocating playing "the kids"... it sounds nice in theory, but the kids stink!"

So since you've already seemed to make up your mind on the potential for our 2 20 year olds, and 1 22 year old, of course you're going to be of the opinion that they should not be getting the playing time they need to grow this team back into contention.
I would contend that your opinion on the Kids is in the minority, and that most here are extremely excited regarding the potential of our Kids and what we might have 2-3 years down the line.
I'm extremely excited about our prospects and am utterly dismayed at the lack of foresight being used by our coach to help develop what will be our Future.

 

[Uncia03]

Unfortunately, I do not see Kenny Natt being fired.
Well, I'm not certain if I would use the word 'Unfortunately'.

I don't have anything against him personally, but to me the primary reason for firing a coach is to go in a different direction. I don't like a coach getting fired as the sacrificial lamb. So in my mind, if we don't go in a new direction by making the Kids the Centerpiece of this team, then the firing of Theus was pointless.
No coach was going to be able to help this team win significantly more games.

Now the question comes: Is Kenny Natt his own man?
Is he setting the rotation/minutes or is he getting his direction from the front office?

You would think that as an Interim coach, you would basically be a Yes-Man, and do whatever the Front Office told you to do.
So if Natt is getting his marching orders, and those orders say to play the Vets, then his job for the season is safe.
If the Front Office wants to play the Vets to help facilitate a trade, I can bear that for a bit longer. But if they want to play the Vets to win more games, and if this 'play the Vet' mentality persists after the trade deadline and through the remainder of the season with no trades...then I will finally have to turn the corner and believe that our Front Office really is destroying this team.

 

[VF21]

If the Front Office wants to play the Vets to help facilitate a trade, I can bear that for a bit longer. But if they want to play the Vets to win more games, and if this 'play the Vet' mentality persists after the trade deadline and through the remainder of the season with no trades...then I will finally have to turn the corner and believe that our Front Office really is destroying this team.

The only fallacy with your logic is that playing the vets hasn't won us any more games... And I'm pretty sure the front office is as painfully aware of that as we are.

My guess is that they want to bring the kids along BUT they do not want to completely throw caution to the winds and give them minutes regardless of their performance.

It's truly a puzzle, however, and I strongly suspect we'll still be having this discussion for at least a while longer.

 

[kingsnation]

I want to see them play, what I don't want to see, is that they play when they didn't deserve to play.

So, Who actually deserves to play? Has Mikki played any better than Hawes? Has he deserved to start? Has he deserved to be rewarded with playing time?

Listen, Spence and JT are in slumps right now -- BUT Mikki has been in a season-long slump.

 

[Uncia03]

The only fallacy with your logic is that playing the vets hasn't won us any more games... And I'm pretty sure the front office is as painfully aware of that as we are.

My guess is that they want to bring the kids along BUT they do not want to completely throw caution to the winds and give them minutes regardless of their performance.

It's truly a puzzle, however, and I strongly suspect we'll still be having this discussion for at least a while longer.

I stated earlier in this thread that I know we can't win with our vets. I also know that we can't win with our kids as they are now.

Put simply, we are not going to be winning many games period, regardless of who is our coach or who we put out on the court.

So if we are not going to be winning games, then we have to look at the goals we can accomplish this year. And really, I only see two goals.

Primary Goal: The development of the Kids.
Secondary Goal: Showcase Veterans for potential trading opportunities.

So, if the Front Office is playing the Vets in the hopes to showcase them for a trade, I can survive it. But, once the trade deadline passes, really we are left with one realistic goal, and that is the development of the kids.

To me, a great amount of insight will be gleamed regarding the direction/handling by the Front Office by the way the Kids are played after the trade deadline. I'm still hoping that there will be positive signs.

As to the notion of better play = more time, again I'm all for that in many situations. But in our situation is is counter productive, because we are benching the Kids who then get to watch players less productive than them get all the minutes just because they've been around the league longer. That sets a very bad precedent.

 

[VF21]

...Put simply, we are not going to be winning many games period, regardless of who is our coach or who we put out on the court.

So if we are not going to be winning games, then we have to look at the goals we can accomplish this year. And really, I only see two goals.

Primary Goal: The development of the Kids.
Secondary Goal: Showcase Veterans for potential trading opportunities.

So, if the Front Office is playing the Vets in the hopes to showcase them for a trade, I can survive it. But, once the trade deadline passes, really we are left with one realistic goal, and that is the development of the kids.

I can buy into the primary goal. The second goal, however, sounds good until you look at the performance of the veterans. To me, it more often seems as though the only thing they're showcasing themselves for is early retirement.

 

[beb0p]

If I don't play well I don't get time. If the Vet's don't play well, they are allowed to 'play through their struggles' to the tune of getting our team down by 40 points. It doesn't matter if I play well or not because I'm not allowed to play through my struggles because I'm not a vet, so I'll get what ever minutes a rookie is allowed. So what really matters is not my play, but whether I've been in the league for a good period of time.

Again, I don't see the vets getting preferred treatment. What the kids do see is the vets played poorly and they were yanked. Show me where the vets were allowed to stink up the joint without consequence.

My point is that it's all fair and square, whoever plays better, starts. Moore played poorly and lost his starting job to Hawes. Then Hawes played poorly and prompted another change. It's fair. Miller, despite being in a mental vacation, still performs better than all other big men... sadly, so he gets to start. I don't see that the vets were allowed to play thru their struggle while the youngsters were not. In fact, Hawes were allowed to play thru his struggle, he who couldn't hit water falling out of a boat were allowed to keep his starting job for five games so he can work thru his struggle but utimately he couldn't and he lost the starter spot. Again, it's fair.

In fact, what the kids and the vets do see is this: If I play well, I get to start. If I don't, I sit. AndI think it's a very good motto to have, for any team in any situation.
I think there's this misconception that bad NBA teams spoils their prized rookies with free hand-out of PT when the opposite is true. You think Kevin Love and Brandon Rush are having free rides out there? Hell no. They're stuck behind vets just like JT is stuck behind vets. That's because all of them haven't played well enough to warrant starter status.

If Hawes and JT want to start again, it's simple. Play better. That's it. Anyone thinks it's too much to ask for?

One more thing. In an earlier post you stated,

To all the posters advocating playing "the kids"... it sounds nice in theory, but the kids stink!

Sorry, the above quote is by Bench_Blob. Not me.

 

[Nighthawk1]

I can buy into the primary goal. The second goal, however, sounds good until you look at the performance of the veterans. To me, it more often seems as though the only thing they're showcasing themselves for is early retirement.

This is an interesting point, because lately it seems like they're almost hurting their trade values with their seemingly lack of effort/care/will to win. That being said - if it persists why wouldn't we start our younger players in their place? Give them the minutes to develop and give us some good hard evidence on how to gauge them vs. the best. If they can't get motivated to play against the best then we probably don't need those types of individuals on our team anyways. It'll be hard, probably just as hard losing as it is now for them - but at least they should progress once we have a focus on helping them get to where they need to be.

 

[beb0p]

So, Who actually deserves to play? Has Mikki played any better than Hawes? Has he deserved to start? Has he deserved to be rewarded with playing time?

Listen, Spence and JT are in slumps right now -- BUT Mikki has been in a season-long slump.

No one deserves to play. This team is plain horrible. But someone has to start and so we have this situation where the coach juggles Hawes and Moore in and out of the starting lineup hoping one of them would cement the spot but none did.

If Hawes and Moore continue to stuggle, I'm all for starting JT just to see. In fact, I think he should be given the chance to be the starter beginning with the next game.

 

[Entity]

So, Who actually deserves to play? Has Mikki played any better than Hawes? Has he deserved to start? Has he deserved to be rewarded with playing time?

Listen, Spence and JT are in slumps right now -- BUT Mikki has been in a season-long slump.

more like a career slump.

Mikki Moore career 6pts 4reb

Jason Thompson rookie 9pts 6reb

Spencer Hawes 20 yr. old 11pts 7reb

(this last part not for you kingsnatoin)

Where in the hell does mikki DESERVE min. How has he EARNED them?

 

[Entity]

To drive the stat line point home here is Mikki moores BEST numbers for his entire career

9.8pts 6reb 1ast 1.1blks

That is his career BEST in each category

Sorry for this edit I just can't leave it alone

JT and Spence in slumps are better than the best mikki has to offer. LOL HAHA AND HOLY CRAP and other stuff

 

[VF21]

Am I the only one who has a problem with Hawes, our future center, starting at power forward? I would much rather see Hawes start at the 5 with Moore at the 4 if need be, and have Jason come in at the 4 so they can start to learn to play together. I'm beyond tired of seeing our players forced out of position to fit a temporary lineup of convenience. Bench Miller, especially if he's going to phone it in anyway and let Spencer start at his rightful position. Build around that and I'd be much happier...

 

[Nighthawk1]

Am I the only one who has a problem with Hawes, our future center, starting at power forward? I would much rather see Hawes start at the 5 with Moore at the 4 if need be, and have Jason come in at the 4 so they can start to learn to play together. I'm beyond tired of seeing our players forced out of position to fit a temporary lineup of convenience. Bench Miller, especially if he's going to phone it in anyway and let Spencer start at his rightful position. Build around that and I'd be much happier...

Agree 100%, I can't add much more to your statement it's how I think a lot of us feel or at least should feel! If we're going to shop Brad I don't see the need for Brad to keep starting...

 

[beb0p]

To drive the stat line point home here is Mikki moores BEST numbers for his entire career

9.8pts 6reb 1ast 1.1blks

That is his career BEST in each category

If the point is that Moore sucks, I think we all know that.

If the point is that our prized #1 draft picks couldn't even beat out this scrub in the starting lineup, what does that say about how underwhelming they have been? Then it's been my point all along - if they can't even beat out this scrub, then they get no sympathy from me.