Schedule to Get Tougher

It was an opportunity to at least dig their way out of the Eastern Conference basement. But in losing seven of their last eight, the Wizards have wasted the easiest portion of their schedule. Tomorrow's game at Sacramento will conclude a stretch of eight consecutive games against teams with losing records, and then it gets tough.

The Wizards play in Los Angeles against the Lakers Thursday night, at Portland Saturday night and then return home to face Phoenix before going to Miami and then suddenly hot Philadelphia.

From being in the locker room and around the team on a daily basis, I don't yet get the sense that guys are throwing in the towel or turning selfish, but if the losing keeps up, interim coach Ed Tapscott's job will only get tougher. At some point, good old fashioned pride is going to have to kick in. Whether that's enough, we'll have to see.

"We're all sick of losing, I can tell you that," point guard Mike James said. "Every win is relief and every loss is like taking two steps backwards."

Said Antawn Jamison: "It's tough. None of us signed up for this and we may not like it, but we still have a lot of games to play and a job to do so we have to find a way to keep fighting."

By Ivan Carter |  January 20, 2009; 2:25 PM ET
Previous: McGee Still Seeing Limited Minutes | Next: The Other Side: Sacramento Kings

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Oh well, I guess from those comments it means more of AJ, CB, James, and Song. getting 35 to 40 minutes a game. The west coast teams are going to run these vets off of the floor and Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott will still believe he is playing the right guys. Look for 20 to 30 point routs..........

Posted by: BulletsFever | January 20, 2009 2:44 PM

I would like to see Ernie hire Avery Johnson as next coach. Yes I would like to sign him now and get him started but most coaches will not want to come in the middle of the year racking up L's messing up their record.

They would want to evaluate the team first and then start the season off at the beginning instead of the middle. I would suggest that Ernie sign Avery as a "special consultant" and let him sit on the bench and evaluate the team for the remainder of the season.

That way he can have a bead on what he has and then he can plan accordingly. With Avery you would be getting a coach who knows how to coach defense and one who would not be afraid of the veterans and putting the best 5 out on the floor.

Posted by: BulletsFever | January 20, 2009 2:46 PM

Clearly, the only good option for turning this thing around is to play Butler, Blatche, Jamison, James and McGuire 48 minutes a game each. OK, maybe 24 minutes for McGuire and 24 for Songalia.

Posted by: disgruntledfan | January 20, 2009 2:59 PM

While I think that Avery would be a successful coach for the Wizards, I don't like the fact that he did not win a championship at Dallas. He should have, but something went awry.

When Avery won his ring as a player in San Antonio the offense of that team stayed consistent and Avery was a part of it. And there defense was tough also.

But it seemed when he coached at Dallas, he tempered the offense for the sake of what he thought made them a better team. He was right to make Dallas better defensely, but in the final analysis, it was the lack of offense that caused his firing.

Mark Jackson does not bring the qualifications that Avery has, but I think like Mark better as a fit for this Team than Avery.

For some reason I think Mark would do a better job of meshing the whole Team concept in which Avery did not do with Dalls.

However, that being said, Avery or Mark, as I have said before, the Wizards, as BulletsFever rightfully says need to do something right now. They should not wait till the end of the season.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | January 20, 2009 3:32 PM

OK. The players themselves underscored the point I made in the previous blog entry. They also completely invalidated Taps' argument for playing the veterans so many minutes. Tap suggested that we need to win for the sake of winning so that it becomes something that we strive for and that somehow we can learn only when we win games.

I completely disagree. Negative reinforcement (experiences) teach us faster than positive reinforcement. Are you gonna learn not to put your hand in a flame faster if you do it and get burned or if you get praise for not doing it in the first place?
The young players need to get in games and get burned so that they learn how NOT to get burned the 2nd time. Contrary to what some people seem to think, real games are not just about implementing what you learned in practice. Games are excellent opportunities to learn on the fly particularly when there's nothing to lose because the team has no postseason aspirations. As others have stated, you can't hide or take plays off during a game like you can in practice.

If you talk to runners, they will tell you that running 10 miles a day is great for endurance and all but the only way to get prepared to run a marathon is to run a marathon. The same applies to our young players. Simulation is good but actuation of those skills in a real situation is the best way to learn them.

Posted by: original_mark | January 20, 2009 3:49 PM

Throwing out all other arguments, common sense says that the fans want to see NY, JM, etc. play. If for no other reason, play the young guys to give us a highlight or two each night and to give us a reason to watch and hope for the future of this team.

Everytime there's a highlight or spectacular play from this team, it involves NY or JM. Sportscenter plays aren't everything but it's a pretty solid indication that we have some decent young talent if those guys are the only ones on our team consistently generating enough interest around the country to air their highlights.

Abe, EG, Tap....

Give me one good reason why I should continue to watch or attend a Wizards game this season. And don't say that because I'm a fan I should support them even when they're down. I have an obligation to myself and my family to use my money judiciously and my time is valuable.

Why would I spend time or money to watch this team?

The only possible reason I can think of is because there's a glimpse of hope for the future. That reason is being negated by the coaches' refusal to play the young players significant minutes consistently.

Posted by: original_mark | January 20, 2009 3:57 PM

"Negative reinforcement (experiences) teach us faster than positive reinforcement. Are you gonna learn not to put your hand in a flame faster if you do it and get burned or if you get praise for not doing it in the first place?"

That may be a valid argument if you're trying to teach a 3-year-old not to play with fire (you must make a great babysitter, BTW) but it's a lousy way to teach a pro team full of young players how to win. The history of losing sports teams and organizations (including this one, prior to the Grunfeld/Jordan regime) proves the truth of that in very stark terms.

Teams that get into a habit of losing, get used to losing, and eventually come to expect to lose. Once they get to that point, turning them around takes a grand, sometimes Herculean effort. Every coach, GM, owner, and player will tell you as much. The last thing any team wants to do is get into the habit of losing, because the only lessons you learn from it is how to lose, and that's not a lesson any coach wants to teach his team.

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 20, 2009 3:59 PM

Obviously the argument could be (and has been) made that they're losing anyway, so what difference would it make? Well, it wouldn't make any difference to the win/loss column, but it very well could make a difference to the psyches and habits of the young guys who the team will be counting on in the future. Veterans, esp. veterans who have tasted some relative success with the same team/organization aren't nearly as likely to lapse into acceptance of losing in this situation. But youngsters who have no other frame of reference, and who really have no experience or background of winning at this level to fall back on, are more likely to fall prey to a losing mindset, which is just what the organization wants to avoid.

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 20, 2009 4:29 PM

I think you hit the nail on the head, kal. We're arguing that since we're losing anyway, we may as well be learning and I can't see how the young players learn by watching the veterans lose.
A losing environment can be contagious. I can see your point there. I just believe that not only would we have a better chance of winning with some 'proper' substitutions but we could teach and learn in the process. I find it hard to believe that the veterans are 'getting it' by playing. I want to see the future 'get it', not the past.

Posted by: original_mark | January 20, 2009 4:37 PM

Free Pech ...for more than 2 minutes or so.

Posted by: original_mark | January 20, 2009 4:38 PM

As for the mindset, do you really think that these kids are learning how not to get into a losing mindset by watching the veterans lose and get mad about it?
You made a statement that I agree with 100%.

We're losing anyway. Actually, I think losing hurts more if you have a hand in it. I'm pretty sure that NY and JM (and maybe others) are sitting there thinking that they could have made a difference and perhaps helped us win some of the games that we lost. The losses are probably not quite as painful if you only watch as opposed to if you played and lost.

I don't see a downside to playing the young players. If we 'ruin' a young guy's confidence by throwing him in there, then he's not mentally strong enough to play for us or any other NBA team anyway.
I know there's no way to quantify or prve this but for every player that has been ruined by throwing him to the wolves too soon, there are others who have benefited from it. I think that apologists who say Kwame would have been a good player if he'd been groomed properly are off base. Gus like him are weak mentally and wouldn't have panned out no matter how much time you took to develop him.

That which does not kill us makes us stronger - Friedrich Nietzsche

Posted by: original_mark | January 20, 2009 4:49 PM

The new POTUS, B.U.O. is a bad man. Smart, Charismatic, Learned, Intelligent and Wise. He will not torelate foolishness, and idealistic stubborness.

I think the Wizards ought to take note.

larryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | January 20, 2009 4:59 PM

Wouldn't what the Wiz have been doing so far this year qualify as getting in the habit of losing?

Posted by: flohrtv | January 20, 2009 5:03 PM

Original_Mark and Kalo_rama, you both make valid points and I think you guys agree on the important issues.

But Kalo, I agree with a lot of what you say, but it seems you call bloggers out when in actuality you actually agree with them. Your adept analysis is more inclusive than you might think.

So Kalo, think about blogging with honey rather than vinegar.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | January 20, 2009 5:17 PM

"yes we can"


- Tap to EG when asked if we can blow the season by playing Songaila at the 5.

...and you guys thought I was quoting Obama.

Posted by: original_mark | January 20, 2009 5:24 PM

Mike,

The schedule means nothing when your toughest foe is your own bad, inept coaching philosophy.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | January 20, 2009 5:36 PM

As far as coaching hires,I like Avery but not sure he fits with this bunch i mean unless you're going to overhaul the team amd i think it would be an eventual power struggle between EG and Avery not right away mind you but down the road. The serial skirt chaser would chafe under Coach Johnson if he had a problem with EJ then Blatche would be looking to get outta DC in warp speed Mr.Soolu!!! that being said Avery Johnson would bring a defensive mindset not seen since the day's of Dick Motta and that might not be a bad thing. Mark Jackson hasn't done a lick of due dilligence(has he been an asst. anywhere?) so where does he get off wanting to be a head coach this is a league wide issue at least for me as a fan when you've got coach's with no experience basically experimenting, and then when it blow's up the fan's and the player's are the one's to suffer! ARE YOU LISTENING ERNIE?

Posted by: dargregmag | January 20, 2009 5:47 PM

Are there any NBA rules stopping the Wizards from hiring another interim HC?

Posted by: charley42 | January 20, 2009 6:09 PM

I juat watched the 2nd quarter of the GS game again ( I had it taped) because I wanted to isolate on Songaila to see whether my criticism is justified. This is what i saw...

First offensive possesion, Song made a nice pass to a cutting AJ for a layup. Back downcourt, Maggette just runs by Aj for a layup. Song is playing center and stands there and watches. Next possesion, Maggete again runs by Aj and Song is there but just watches and doesn't even jump.
2 possesions later, Song gets a nice pass from Aj and misses the layup..ball goes out of bounds off us. Next time down, Aj, aware that he has no help, plays off of Maggette who hits an open jumper.Next possesion, Songaila fumbles a pss fro AJ because he isnt expecting it and fumbles it out of bounds. Next time down, Somngiala aggressively comes out to challenge on a pick and roll. Stephen Jackson splits it because Song comes out too far and gets a layup.

Timeout

No significant plays for Soomg for 3 plays. Next time down , Maggette again drives by Aj and Song comes over. Maggete goes up unchallenged for the layup. Song doesn't jump or foul him.

Song comes out.

@ possesion slater, Maggete drives and misses because he's challenged by Mcgee. Turiaf gets the rebound and gets his shot blocked by JM. Azebuike gets the rebound and gets HIS shot blocked by goaltending is called.


This sums up the whole argument for me. I can't watch anymore of this.

Posted by: original_mark | January 20, 2009 6:14 PM

The serial skirt chaser would chafe under Coach Johnson if he had a problem with EJ then Blatche would be looking to get outta DC in warp speed Mr.Soolu!!! that being said Avery Johnson would bring a defensive mindset not seen since the day's of Dick Motta and that might not be a bad thing. Mark Jackson hasn't done a lick of due dilligence(has he been an asst. anywhere?) so where does he get off wanting to be a head coach this is a league wide issue at least for me as a fan when you've got coach's with no experience basically experimenting, and then when it blow's up the fan's and the player's are the one's to suffer! ARE YOU LISTENING ERNIE?

Posted by: dargregmag | January 20, 2009 5:47 PM

dargregmag - it looks like we can finally agree, although I still do not know why you are always so hard on my boy AB. Even you have to admit it looks like he is starting to finally "get it". The dude is starting to "fill out" and he has a silky smooth game that folks are starting to take notice too.

He is so smooth it looks like he is not putting out 100%. That will change also as he matures more. As I said before, give the youngsta a little slack for the rest of the year and if he is ever allowed to play 35 to 40 minutes only at the "4" spot look out. I know you have to see that??

I agree with your assestment of Avery and you are right he is old school like Eddie J'. However a think AB has been conditioned now on how to deal with a coach like that and he knows he would have a clean slate with Avery. So I think he learned from the past with Eddie J' and would not make the same mistakes.

As for Mark Jackson I agree there too. Although I think he would be better then Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott hands down.

As I have said before I had no problem with EJ and I wanted him to stay here as coach, but his prolonged treatment of AB and Haywood before that and always playing "slow small ball" with Song. at the "5" drove me over the edge. I could not take it anymore so I wanted him gone.

If I knew I was going to get a guy playing the same "slow small ball" with Song. at the "5" even more then Eddie J' did and have a coach kill the confidence and game of the one and only true bright spot on the team (McGee) for reasons only he knows; I would have preferred for Ernie to keep Eddie J' then.......

*** Man like I said, you better be careful for what you wish for........

Posted by: BulletsFever | January 20, 2009 6:34 PM

Original Mark - Very good post. I wonder if Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott sees this very same thing when he looks at tape of the past game.

Something tells me he does, but he is so stubborn he will convince himself it was one of the other players not named CB, AJ, or Song. fault for it happening.

Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott problem is he is so concerned with making sure he does not get the "vets" mad at him he is missing the whole big picture on what is going on with this team.

It is so obvious it almost makes you sick. CB, AJ and Stevenson are running this team not Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott. Now don't get me wrong, but I think the only one of all the vets who should be getting 35 to 40 minutes is CB.

I think this team would be better served to have AJ come off of the bench and let AB start at his natural "4" spot. Either start OPEC or McGee at the starting "5" spot and give them all at least 30 to 35 minutes.

Song. should only see 15 to 20 at the "4" spot only without seeing any time at the "5" period. Stevenson needs to go on and have surgery and not try to come back eating up NY's minutes. Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott is too scared to tell Stevenson to sit out the rest of the season and get himself healthy.

This team is in a world of trouble because we are going to continue to lose games because having James, McGuire, CB, AJ, and Song. logging major minutes in that 5 man lineup is going to have us two steps slower then most teams we play. Too bad Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott does not see the same thing........

Posted by: BulletsFever | January 20, 2009 6:45 PM

after a few years of avery johnson, a few mavericks players threatened to leave money on the table and leave the team because he was so much of a slavedriver, according to espn. i can't like him for the wiz job until i become convinced that he's willing to cut the players enough slack that they could keep their personalities and really want to play hard for him

Posted by: mr91 | January 20, 2009 7:05 PM

the schedule does not matter,this recent stretch has proven this, the warriors handled us, that makes us garbage compared to whoever we play, the team being without any coherent rotations is the issue, aj plays way too much 4 and should be a sixth man already, cb and james get too much time, ab should play more four, mcgee needs to play half the game at center, song should only play pf, ny needs to start, juan should be given heat checks at least, now that we don't have to force him to play the point he could be useful occasionally scoring in bunches, pech should steal some minutes from someone, and dom needs to play similar minutes off of the bench, my logic being it's easier for his game to be incorporated whenever than it is to just plug nick in

Posted by: bford1kb | January 20, 2009 7:07 PM

What's worse?

Losing when the schedule gets tougher, or losing when the schedule is easy?

It don't mean a d@mn b/c a loss is a loss, and there's plenty of that going on this season.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | January 20, 2009 7:17 PM

No worries. We been winning 1 out of every 5 so far with the "soft" schedule so we should win at least four more times this year.

Posted by: glawrence007 | January 20, 2009 7:35 PM

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | January 20, 2009 10:08 PM

Mr91,

Thanks for a little inside on Avery. Like I posted above, something went amiss in Dallas and thats why they did not get the Rings with Avery.

He inherited a superior offensive Team that was already a proven playoff Team. Even though he made them a better defensive Team, their offense was not as good when he left.

I could be totally wrong about Mark Jackson, but if I could get him, I would not hesitate. I think he would be smart enough to get veteran assistants, even a former coach as an assistant to help him. I do not think he would have any false pride doing whatever it took to win a championship.

Everytime I listen to him commentate, his game analysis speaks volumes, as does Avery's.

But I think Avery blew his chance in Dallas. Don Nelson left him on the doorstep and he could not get through the door.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | January 20, 2009 10:27 PM

"But I think Avery blew his chance in Dallas. Don Nelson left him on the doorstep and he could not get through the door.

LarryInClintonMD.

Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | January 20, 2009 10:27 PM "

I think Cuban might have ruined it for Avery when he traded Devin Harris for JKidd.

Posted by: DC_MAN88 | January 20, 2009 10:35 PM

Speaking of developing players, are the Wizards in any position to bring in NBDL players on 10 day contracts to see if they can find a diamond in the rough? Or does the luxury tax situation preclude that?

Posted by: PostSubscriber | January 20, 2009 11:12 PM

"I think you hit the nail on the head, kal. We're arguing that since we're losing anyway, we may as well be learning and I can't see how the young players learn by watching the veterans lose."

That argument is wrong on two fronts. (A) As has been pointed out, ad nauseam, the young players have, in fact, been playing. They haven't been playing unlimited minutes or been given a free rein, but with the exception of Pech (who, I think it's pretty clear, they've decided is a bust) and McGee (who basically played his way out of the rotation) they have been playing significant minutes in meaningful parts of the game (at least as much as any Wizards game has meaningful minutes). (B) As has also been pointed out (including in my previous post) there are many ways to learn and many different lessons to be learned from any single situation. There's a difference between learning and getting schooled, and letting the kids play 40+ and lose by 25 isn't teaching them anything of value other than to reinforce how much losing sucks. But that won't actually make them better. If it did, the Timberwolves would have won a title by now. They're being brought along slowly and in stages, which is the right, prudent way to do it.

"Original_Mark and Kalo_rama, you both make valid points and I think you guys agree on the important issues. But Kalo, I agree with a lot of what you say, but it seems you call bloggers out when in actuality you actually agree with them. Your adept analysis is more inclusive than you might think."

Then I think you need to read my adept analysis a bit more closely. It's pretty clear where mark and I disagree.

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 21, 2009 12:30 AM

My argument isn't wrong. I normally argue for CONSISTENT minutes, not just minutes for the youngsters. Any player will tell you that getting 30 one night and 5 the next retards development more than just getting 10 per night.
Also I am not sure what games you saw where the young guys were getting blown out by 25+ or if it was a hypothetical but the vets aren't losing close games for the most part. We're getting blown out with the veterans. Losing by 1 and losing by 25 are the same. No moral victories in a loss. My point remains the same. If we're losing, lose and get experience with the hope rather than lose and learn nothing.

I also don't agree that JM played his way out of the rotation. I believe it was an arbitrary move that made (and makes) little sense. Playing your way out of a rotation means that the guy who replaces you performs better. Neither Etan nor Songaila have played better at the C position than JM. AB has and should be starting since he can't supplant the guy who plays his natural position (AJ at power forward). But JM should STILL be in the rotation and at the very least get time as a defensive substitution. I've watched AB, Songaila and JM play defense a lot this year. AB is average, JM is average and Song is below average. Jm at least scares some people away from the hoop because of his length. Song's presence ppl to drive and I'm not just talking about his man. With Songaila in the game, everybody's man tries to take the ball to the hoop because they know there's no help. Sure I can blame AJ for not being able to stop Maggette repeatedly. (I also blame the coach for putting him on Maggette in the first place). The truth of the matter, though, is that most players can't stop another from driving and require help. Songaila can't help.


I think that the one thing that Kal and I agree on is that Tap and EJ have decided that Pech can't play. In a season when we're 8 and 30 something, not playing your 23 year old former first round pick certainly means they've given up on him.

Posted by: original_mark | January 21, 2009 7:26 AM

Teams that get into a habit of losing, get used to losing, and eventually come to expect to lose. Once they get to that point, turning them around takes a grand, sometimes Herculean effort.

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 20, 2009 3:59 PM

Habit of losing...... like 8-32 habit of losing? Like losing 7 of their last 8 games, against teams with losing records? THAT kind of "habit"?

OK then... What kind of "Herculean effort" is needed to turn THIS team around?

Firing the Coach did not work.

Obviously, playing the veterans 35-40 minutes a night is not working.

Changing the Offensive scheme is not working.

Trying to change them into a "Defensive" team is not working.

Playing Songaila or Jamison at Center is not working.

Drafting McGee and sitting him on the bench is not working.

Trading for Crittenton and sitting HIM on the bench did not work.

If the "veterans", with all their savvy and poise and guile, cannot manage to win games against the likes of Milwaukee, Charlotte and Golden State............ and you've tried everything else...

Then............................

Why not play the youngsters?
Can they be any worse than the veterans?
Can they jeopardize their chances at the Playoffs?
Will they look as pathetic and lost in the 4th quarter as the Vets?

Yeah - maybe they will. But at least they're more entertaining than guys like Songaila, Mike eff-ing James and Etan Thomas - AND as a fan, it would at least give me a reason to buy a ticket.

Posted by: Rook6980 | January 21, 2009 10:34 AM

Song comes out.

@ possesion slater, Maggete drives and misses because he's challenged by Mcgee. Turiaf gets the rebound and gets his shot blocked by JM. Azebuike gets the rebound and gets HIS shot blocked by goaltending is called.


This sums up the whole argument for me. I can't watch anymore of this.

Posted by: original_mark | January 20, 2009 6:14 PM

Obviously, Tap and Ernie don't have the resources that you have. I think they are working with a Real-Tek Beta Max in which they are recording games off of their 6" Sony Black and White Watchman (8 AA batteries not included). Abe, can you hire original_mark? I volunteer to be his agent. I can deleiver him for half the price you are paying Tap and EG.

P.S. Just make sure you pay me my 10%, original_mark :-)

Posted by: hamptonpirates89 | January 21, 2009 11:56 AM

Rook, that's is the only reason I could think of, too.
I bet the Wiz sales team members is banging their collective heads against the walls hoping for some changes, too. How exactly do you market Songaila and Mike James?

Talk to me about NY, JM, and Crit and now I'm interested.

Throw in Pech and AB and I'm thinkin' this team might have a decent future even beyond CB, AJ and Gil. Even if Pech can't play, at least lie to me and make me believe that he can.

Posted by: original_mark | January 21, 2009 11:58 AM

np. You can have 20% if collectively we can inject some common sense into this organization.

I was seriously surprised when I watched, I didn't expect it to be so bad.

Posted by: original_mark | January 21, 2009 12:00 PM

Funny thing about this so called "easy part of the schedule." Last time I checked, we had the 2nd worst record in the entire NBA, only percentage points away from being the worst. We are the easy part of everyone else's schedule. We're not the Washington Wizards, we are the Washington Generals. 48 minutes each for James, Butler, Songalia, Jamison, and Stevenson/Thomas (I guess they have no choice but to play Blatche in their absence). They are so starved for this "veteran leadership", I'm surprised they haven't called up Spencer Haywood or Charles Jones for a 10 day contract to add that presence. That will win us some games!!

Posted by: hamptonpirates89 | January 21, 2009 12:09 PM

I think Songalia and Stevenson have some compromising pictures of someone in the Gizard's management with an under-aged spider monkey.

Posted by: hamptonpirates89 | January 21, 2009 12:16 PM

McGee (who basically played his way out of the rotation) they have been playing significant minutes in meaningful parts of the game (at least as much as any Wizards game has meaningful minutes). (B) As has also been pointed out (including in my previous post) there are many ways to learn and many different lessons to be learned from any single situation. There's a difference between learning and getting schooled, and letting the kids play 40+ and lose by 25 isn't teaching them anything of value other than to reinforce how much losing sucks.

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 21, 2009 12:30 AM

Kal - First, other then the Orlando Magic game against D. Howard and the following game against the Lakers against Bynum was the only time McGee got "schooled" and he should have been sat down in the two games only.

If Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott is using that as his reason for showing McGee no minutes then that is just plain old DUMB...!!!! McGee never played himself out of rotation other then those two games, so I don't have a clue on how you could say that. Stevenson on the other hand "played his way out of the rotation", oops I forgot.

No he didn't. He went to the coach himself and "took himself" out of the lineup because he is a VETERAN.... Stevenson had a string of games where he was stinking it up and still never "played himself" out of rotation. Once again "double standard" coaching at it's best with Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott.

There's a difference between learning and getting schooled, and letting the kids play 40+ and lose by 25 isn't teaching them anything of value other than to reinforce how much losing sucks.

Posted by: kalo_rama | January 21, 2009 12:30 AM

Kal - You are kidding me right? When you get schooled, guess what? You are learning by getting schooled. We are losing by 20 to 25 points now with the vets playing so losing is still being reinforced without the team getting nothing out of it.

Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott is running CB, AJ, and Song. into the ground and for what?????? More unnecessary pounding on their knees just to lose every game by 10 or more. While you have fresh legs (OPEC, McGee, NY, AB, Critt and DMac) over there just "watching and learning" as you and Eddie "The Waterboy Coach" Tapscott say they are doing.

You used the example of the Timberwolves (hmm doesn't someone else we know like the Wolves????) for your arguement. Well I will use the 76er's for mine. New interim coach who adjusts to what he has (YOUNGIN'S AB, NY, MCGEE AND ETC. AGE) and lets them run.

The difference is Elton Brand gets hurt (he was slowing down their game ie. AJ) and instead of their coach forcing his youngsta's to slow it down (as I genius for a coach is doing), he instructed them to play to their strengths. Coaching my friend makes a heck of a difference, trust me......

Posted by: BulletsFever | January 21, 2009 1:34 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company