Wait. Jason Kidd hit 8 three pointers in a game?
Gonna ignore the bad names on this list and say that Keegan has done something only Ant, Lauri, and Jason Kidd have done before.
Gonna ignore the bad names on this list and say that Keegan has done something only Ant, Lauri, and Jason Kidd have done before.
Keegan's shooting percentage still being this high despite him forgetting how to shoot for the three games before this one is something.
Wait. Jason Kidd hit 8 three pointers in a game?
Murray was averaging 2.4 per game before tonight, so he's on pace to break that record.
None. The kid is good. It's as simple as that.Any questions?
I'll add that he's lucky to be surrounded by our current roster which is good enough of a group to not have to rely heavily on his contribution night in and night out. If he was a semi-permanent 1st option for us like how some of our rookies had been, his margin of error would've not been as big for him to actually make mistakes and learn without worrying about a fluctuated play time that'd make it harder to get in a groove.None. The kid is good. It's as simple as that.
You call it lucky...The rest of us call it fortunate...I'll add that he's lucky to be surrounded by our current roster which is good enough of a group to not have to rely heavily on his contribution night in and night out. If he was a semi-permanent 1st option for us like how some of our rookies had been, his margin of error would've not been as big for him to actually make mistakes and learn without worrying about a fluctuated play time that'd make it harder to get in a groove.
Maybe I am reading this wrong, but feels like a weird take. The fact that the rest of the team is great enough to be in 3rd place in the conference, and this team is the best team we've seen in 17+ seasons (maybe closer to 20) and a rookie can contribute and maintain a starting spot - is not "he's lucky" at all. We're lucky.I'll add that he's lucky to be surrounded by our current roster which is good enough of a group to not have to rely heavily on his contribution night in and night out. If he was a semi-permanent 1st option for us like how some of our rookies had been, his margin of error would've not been as big for him to actually make mistakes and learn without worrying about a fluctuated play time that'd make it harder to get in a groove.
Maybe I am reading this wrong, but feels like a weird take. The fact that the rest of the team is great enough to be in 3rd place in the conference, and this team is the best team we've seen in 17+ seasons (maybe closer to 20) and a rookie can contribute and maintain a starting spot - is not "he's lucky" at all. We're lucky.