10-30-2005, 11:25 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
Sexy Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 11,761
|
Re: We don't need a franchise player
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alphadog
The term is way overused. Detroit also has none but won a title. You need a group of players working together as a TEAM both on defense and offense. We have a great group of young guys and role players that MAY gel into a very good team by next year. Anyone looking to win this year is setting themselves up for disappointment.
For those of you that think Marbury is long for this team, I think you will be suprised.....the team just does not function as well with the young guys out and the vets in and he still plays horrendous D. I get a kick out of the posters saying that he can handle other PGs on defense...yeah, never. Crawford has shown himself to be a willing student of Browns and I think he sticks. Ariza and Barnes both stick as does Lee, Frye, and Nate. I think Penny gets traded along with a big (we have too many, now), but don't look for a trade to get us a star on any level. It'll more likely get us a guyu that Brown trusts and that can help teach the young guys.
For those that are critical of LB already.....you guys need to be committed to a halfway house. The team is young, playing very hard at both ends (most, anyway), is coachable, intelligent, and becoming disciplined and you guys want to pick on Brown while defending Marbury. You also lust after PFs using our young guys as trade bait? Thank God you have no say...you would ruin what is an improving situation. Frye may very well end up that PF that you covet, while Lee may end up the foward off the bench tht every good team has.
|
Good post, I for one is guilty of getting excited thinking we can at least get to the 2nd round with this ball club.
__________________
Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.
PLEASE BEWARE THIS POSTER MAY GO ON THE DEEP END AT ANY GIVEN TIME. Use Caution!
|
|
|