Jenneral Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 Jerry Stackhouse was very critical of Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni recently. Stackhouse, who tried out for the Knicks this past summer but didn't receive a contract off, blasted D'Antoni for being stubborn and his treatment of guard Nate Robinson. "I know Nate has to be obviously frustrated," Stackhouse said on his regular spot on Sirius Radio with Chris Russo. "To be an NBA coach, you're a control freak. You really are a control freak just because you think about all the things coaches have to manage – from the players, to practice, to the media..." "And with any type of personality, you have your extremists. And I think D'Antoni is just an extremist. He's just a guy who's so stubborn, such a control freak and wants to make an example of this kid (Robinson). It's not fair to him."RealGM Never would've guessed that. They're wasting so much talent by just having him sit the bench. I think he could be a good starter for a handful of teams let alone be a role player for almost every other (yes, that includes the Knicks). I just hope Nate finds a team that wants to use his skill set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MainEv3nt Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 jerry stackhouse is my role model Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Check my Stats Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 Ever since he ran Marbury, who seemed to be doing everything right, out of town I have questioned this dude. I have always thought he was overrated as a coach anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fish7718 Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 I can understand a few games or maybe even a couple weeks but this is becoming absolutley ridiculous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleveland's Finest Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Well they are 7-3 and with no Nate, what's the reason to put him in. If he's acting the way he reportedly had been and the Knicks are winning, who cares if he plays or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 I guarantee that his system will never win anything meaningful for any team he coaches. I've never thought he was a great coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fish7718 Posted December 26, 2009 Report Share Posted December 26, 2009 Well they are 7-3 and with no Nate, what's the reason to put him in. If he's acting the way he reportedly had been and the Knicks are winning, who cares if he plays or not.Half of the games we almost blew because we had no energy at the end of the games. Adding Nate could only help the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Check my Stats Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Nate is a top player on the Knicks. If they are better without him that could have a lot to do with D'Antoni not being able to properly incorporate Nate into the team as an energy player, not able to utilize all his weapons. A player like Nate isn't a team ruiner IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Just trade him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonah Posted December 27, 2009 Report Share Posted December 27, 2009 Nobody would sign him as a FA, nobody really wants to give another player or money up for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celtics3420 Posted December 28, 2009 Report Share Posted December 28, 2009 I doubt anyone trades for Nate, but i guarantee you a few teams would most definitely sign him. Dude has talent and can help any team with his scoring/energy off the bench. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bravenewworld Posted December 29, 2009 Report Share Posted December 29, 2009 I doubt anyone trades for Nate, but i guarantee you a few teams would most definitely sign him. Dude has talent and can help any team with his scoring/energy off the bench. Problem is that is about all he can do. Provide a bit of scoring off the bench. It would be better if he was a bit more versatile of a player, or had better size to play multiple positions, or if he was a leader of any kind. Nate is garbage in my book and will never be a part of a winning team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newman Posted December 29, 2009 Report Share Posted December 29, 2009 Size is a big factor. That's why Earl Boykins couldn't find a team despite being able to score 10+ points in a team until recently. When average guys can post you up easily for 15 points, the team is still losing points with him playing. Nate has potential, but the best he can do is being a Flip Murray - Sonics era type of player. Scoring when others are injured/ice cold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fish7718 Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 Nate just continues to get screwed. He hinted on his twitter that he was about to get court time. Wednesday he took off his warm ups like he was about to get in and didn't go in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teletopez Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 Stackhouse also made some comments a couple years ago about how hard it was to play under Byron Scott. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOhLgApNrgMThis was from last month. Maybe things have happened off the court along with this that have caused Nate to stay on the bench. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.