Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: Stackhouse Calls Mike D a control freak, stands by Nate.

  1. #1
    Veteran DontForgetDerekHarper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,262
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Stackhouse Calls Mike D a control freak, stands by Nate.

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]



    has Stack house ever played for Mike D.

    I could have sworn all reports from all players is that Dantoni is the perfect players coach.

    And who the hell is stack to say anything

    L Brown, Mike D, even the announcers on the knicks legends like CLyde and Tripucka back Mike D's decision based on nates behavior.

    your thoughts.

  2. #2
    Hannibal Lecter TR1LL10N's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Dark side of the Moon
    Posts
    2,743
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    My thoughts is...who gives a **** what Stackhouse thinks...didn't he claim to be the air apparent at one point? LOL at him thinking he was the next Michael Jordan. He would have been lucky to be Eddy Jordan...

  3. #3
    The One and Only KING~POETIQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Queens the Foundation
    Posts
    1,807
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Originally Posted by DontForgetDerekHarper
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]



    has Stack house ever played for Mike D.

    I could have sworn all reports from all players is that Dantoni is the perfect players coach.

    And who the hell is stack to say anything

    L Brown, Mike D, even the announcers on the knicks legends like CLyde and Tripucka back Mike D's decision based on nates behavior.

    your thoughts.


    LMAO on calling tri--a a legend


    you're right, stackhouse is a nobody. he said this because he's probably still bitter that the KNICKS did not pick him up a couple months ago.

  4. #4
    Enlightened OGKnickfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    944
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Well, honestly, I think Stack, as someone who doesn't have to play politics, since he's no longer in the league, is saying what anyone else would say about a colleague, especially if they don't have to worry about repercussions.

    He's a basketball player and so is Nate. They're going to feel for each other, barring some sort of rift between the two, in a situation of this sort. Just look at the rest of the Knicks, they obviously care about him. They've even expressed their willingness for him to play, if you read between the lines when they talk about him.

    You guys don't play in the NBA, just like Stack doesn't work in whatever industry you work in. They can't easily understand your work situation, just like you can't easily understand theirs. I think Stack knows more about NBA politics and is much more qualified, as such, to comment on a D'Antoni-type coach, and Nate-Gate, than any of us.

    Stack's right about the solution, too: waive the guy and let him go elsewhere. They shouldn't let him rot on the bench, just because they can't get a trade and don't want to feel like they've blown their money. None of that is his fault.

  5. #5
    Veteran Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Bronx
    Posts
    1,472
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    First, how bad are things going for the Chris Russo show when they ask Jerry Stackhouse to be a talking head...

    Secondly, Stackhouse is right about coaches being overly controlling. It's their job, so this doesn't come as any news to sports fans. If a coach wasn't controlling, he wouldn't have his position.

    Thirdly, just to put a sociological spin on this as I always enjoy doing, historically, positions of power are always given to people who are controlling and possesive. It's in the nature of powerful positions to be that way. No head of state, boss of company, or leader is any different. The more controlling an individual is, the longer their legacy lasts (Think Stalin, Mao, Castro, and Chavez)

    An NBA coach is no different from a modern day "dictator". A GM, well, that is the person who needs to be political and concearned with the public and players. A coach is job is come in and lead the way a newly installed "dictator" must immediatley enforce his mandate over a populace.

    Kudos Mike D.

  6. #6
    Veteran DontForgetDerekHarper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,262
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    have u ever seen tripuckas career stats on winning teams playing along side other greats. Dude was so underrated.

  7. #7
    Member Asimov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    203
    Rep Power
    6

    Default

    all i can gather from this is...

    wowwww, Stackhouse must be bitter he got passed over. Or he just wants some attention because he's not much of an announcer, analyst, or whatever he does now

    This is completely uncalled for coming from a guy who has NOTHING, absolutely nothing to do with this franchise.

  8. #8
    Huge Member smokes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    4,226
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Actually the solution is simple, from Nate's point of view. Slow down, calm down, chill down and play with some brains and restraint, and he'll be back in the lineup.

    Can't do that? Deserve whatever the coach decides.

  9. #9
    Veteran mafra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,318
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Regardless of who is right-wrong in the Nate Gate situation, it's the timing that really stinks for STACK.

    The Knicks are 8-3 this month. 2 of the games they lost (@CHA, @CHI) were blow 4th quarter collapses- which means they were this close to being on a 10-1 roll (and a 9 game winning streak).

    In essence, these Knicks are playing some of their best basketball in almost a decade. This is one of the best months in Nate Robinson's career- and it just so happens its with him on the bench.

    While you can say it wasn't N8's fault we were losing, you can't argue with the fact that we are winning now with him on the bench.

    SO.... this just makes STACK look terribly selfish, and it's indicative of the sort of thing we see from athletes today. Free agency has turned all of these guys into mercenaries- men w/out a team.

    It's all about them. All that jazz.

    It's like D'ant is saying- if we're winning, then why would I disturb the trend?

  10. #10
    Member DANUTZ39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    451
    Rep Power
    6

    Default

    Two things about this article should be mentioned.

    1. Why is Stackhouse calling out Dantoni since he never played for him, never had close ties with our team and is not a known friend of Nate?

    ''Veteran guard [Only registered and activated users can see links. ], who tried out for the Knicks last summer and never got a contract offer, blasted [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] over his treatment of [Only registered and activated users can see links. ], calling him "so stubborn'' and "a control freak.''

    Is that why he is running his mouth?


    2. Who wrote the article and what is his agenda?

    Mark Berman
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

    That should explain it all.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    76
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Originally Posted by DontForgetDerekHarper
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]



    has Stack house ever played for Mike D.

    I could have sworn all reports from all players is that Dantoni is the perfect players coach.

    And who the hell is stack to say anything

    L Brown, Mike D, even the announcers on the knicks legends like CLyde and Tripucka back Mike D's decision based on nates behavior.

    your thoughts.

    To tell you the truth I've heard none of those people agree with what Mike D is doing. It all seems neutral. Tripucka has a tough time being a 100% about how he feels about the situation. I also read an article from Larry Brown saying that he's not sure why Mike is doing what hes doing.

  12. #12
    Enlightened OGKnickfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    944
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Originally Posted by Starks
    First, how bad are things going for the Chris Russo show when they ask Jerry Stackhouse to be a talking head...

    Secondly, Stackhouse is right about coaches being overly controlling. It's their job, so this doesn't come as any news to sports fans. If a coach wasn't controlling, he wouldn't have his position.

    Thirdly, just to put a sociological spin on this as I always enjoy doing, historically, positions of power are always given to people who are controlling and possesive. It's in the nature of powerful positions to be that way. No head of state, boss of company, or leader is any different. The more controlling an individual is, the longer their legacy lasts (Think Stalin, Mao, Castro, and Chavez)

    An NBA coach is no different from a modern day "dictator". A GM, well, that is the person who needs to be political and concearned with the public and players. A coach is job is come in and lead the way a newly installed "dictator" must immediatley enforce his mandate over a populace.

    Kudos Mike D.



    WOW. That's a huge leap: you're comparing revolutionaries, radical politicians, ideologues and businessmen to basketball coaches? Maybe businessmen and ideologues could be compared to certain coaches, including D'Antoni, but the other comparisons, I think, are ridiculous.

    Well, let's dissect your commentary, anyway. So... legacy, as you put it, when referring to various dictators, makes being a control freak and a manipulator worthwhile. You basically imply that D'Antoni is one but that you feel it's a positive, because I guess you believe 6-3 is the percentage the Knicks will continue to win the rest of their games at.

    First of all, whether or not the man is a control freak (I think he is) is irrelevant to his legacy as a Knick coach, he has not cemented that at all. Plenty of Knick coaches have won 6-3, or better.

    Secondly, your commentary also seems to suggest you believe all successful leadership is coercive and insensitive in nature. The plain fact of the matter is that this is not true. There have been many successful, compassionate leaders, in and out of sports. MLK was one of those, so was FDR, amongst others (I'm not going to mention sport coaches here). There are bosses and supervisors who care about their employees and treat them with respect, and there are micromanaging, racist, criminal supervisors, who abuse their power over their employees, because it makes their crotches tingle.

    In the coaching world, there are plenty of successful coaches who don't play hidden hand politics, who temper the hard hand with the rewarding of cooperation and improvement. With D'Antoni, there is no precedent, when it comes to Nate, of having reduced his minutes, followed by a gradual, conditional increase. D'Antoni is simply using the only vehicle he has ever had to attack another human being, since he's obviously even too much of a ***** to speak plainly on Nate's situation.

    What's most disturbing about you, and some of the other posters on this site, is how slavish your thinking is when it comes to D'Antoni and Walsh. Some of you literally repeat his words, word-for-word. "Gallinari is our best shooter" anyone?

    You specifically, though, disgust me with your comments on this thread, when you make yourself seem to worship every ******* in history, known and unknown.

    Control freaks in the world of work and politics, some of which you mention, are the same monsters who supported segregation because it was politically advantageous, who passed NAFTA and basically destroyed American manufacturing, forever, who treat workers, their rights and well being, like an accountant treats numbers on a spreadsheet.

    Sure, many of them were successful at fulfilling quotas and profit margins, but what did they do for the state of the world: all of it, not just your insulated little corner.

    Anyway, congratulations: you're a wonderful person!
    Last edited by OGKnickfan; Dec 23, 2009 at 17:42.

  13. #13
    Veteran DontForgetDerekHarper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,262
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Haha Truly I can only think of one thing maybe nate spilled something to stack and now stack is relaying what Nate is saying who knows

    it just better not be a distraction seriously.

  14. #14
    KnicksonLIN.com
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    3,073
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Jerry Stackhouse is 100% right. Mike D'Antoni is a little b!tc# who bleeds once a month. If he did not want Nate Robinson on the team, all he had to do was speak to him about it like a man. Instead, he gives Nate Robinson playing time for 12 regular season games, and then suddenly takes away his playing time completely. This is not a coinkydink. He did the same thing to Marbury, when he gave Marbury minutes throughout the entire preseason(including one game where he started) and then benched him and deactivated him.

  15. #15
    Veteran Starks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Bronx
    Posts
    1,472
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    Originally Posted by OGKnickfan
    WOW. That's a huge leap: you're comparing revolutionaries, radical politicians, ideologues and businessmen to basketball coaches? Maybe businessmen and ideologues could be compared to certain coaches, including D'Antoni, but the other comparisons, I think, are ridiculous.

    Well, let's dissect your commentary, anyway. So... legacy, as you put it, when referring to various dictators, makes being a control freak and a manipulator worthwhile. You basically imply that D'Antoni is one but that you feel it's a positive, because I guess you believe 6-3 is the percentage the Knicks will continue to win the rest of their games at.

    First of all, whether or not the man is a control freak (I think he is) is irrelevant to his legacy as a Knick coach, he has not cemented that at all. Plenty of Knick coaches have won 6-3, or better.

    Secondly, your commentary also seems to suggest you believe all successful leadership is coercive and insensitive in nature. The plain fact of the matter is that this is not true. There have been many successful, compassionate leaders, in and out of sports. MLK was one of those, so was FDR, amongst others (I'm not going to mention sport coaches here). There are bosses and supervisors who care about their employees and treat them with respect, and there are micromanaging, racist, criminal supervisors, who abuse their power over their employees, because it makes their crotches tingle.

    In the coaching world, there are plenty of successful coaches who don't play hidden hand politics, who temper the hard hand with the rewarding of cooperation and improvement. With D'Antoni, there is no precedent, when it comes to Nate, of having reduced his minutes, followed by a gradual, conditional increase. D'Antoni is simply using the only vehicle he has ever had to attack another human being, since he's obviously even too much of a ***** to speak plainly on Nate's situation.

    What's most disturbing about you, and some of the other posters on this site, is how slavish your thinking is when it comes to D'Antoni and Walsh. Some of you literally repeat his words, word-for-word. "Gallinari is our best shooter" anyone?

    You specifically, though, disgust me with your comments on this thread, when you make yourself seem to worship every ******* in history, known and unknown.

    Control freaks in the world of work and politics, some of which you mention, are the same monsters who supported segregation because it was politically advantageous, who passed NAFTA and basically destroyed American manufacturing, forever, who treat workers, their rights and well being, like an accountant treats numbers on a spreadsheet.

    Sure, many of them were successful at fulfilling quotas and profit margins, but what did they do for the state of the world: all of it, not just your insulated little corner.

    Anyway, congratulations: you're a wonderful person!
    [Takes a bow]

    I never once praised Mike D's coaching prowess ever on this site. EVER. So I'm not sure where that comes from?? Defending him isn't the same thing as praise.

    Also, your reading way to deep into something that isn't there. All I'm saying is that a coach that is a control freak (with players, the media, and all other individuals in his range) is more secure than the coaches that players disrespect and sports writers freely write circles (true and false) around them.

    I'm not condoning any dictators or anything I'm using them and their style as an example in another medium that illustrates how people stay secure.

    Where did this segregation stuff come from? Settle down their. Nelson Mandella is my idol and personally as a worker I hate working under a micro manager....but regardless if I hate those management style tactics, those are the managers that last the longest.

    The NBA coaching scene is one of the most insecure fields in modern sports. So a coach that actively dominates is the one that has a better chance of keeping his job....that is if the wins and losses stay reasonable.

    Dictators are sociopaths. No doubt about it. But when thinking from their frame of mind (how do i keep my position of power), they form a tight grip over their regime and eliminate all threats to them early. Thats a fact that can't be disputed. It's not as if its the only way to be leader, OBVIOUSLY. But its one way that one does.

    When Stackhouse compared Mike D to a control freak, I merely explain where it might come from and the basic ideology of where the trait comes from.

    Ummm so what exactly is your issue again? If its personal, message me and we trade barbs over history and unrelated basketball facts there. In fact, I welcome any intellectual dispute...gives me something to read and kill time at work.
    Last edited by Starks; Dec 23, 2009 at 19:11.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Apr 25, 2008, 18:21
  2. Nate Robinson MVP
    By Kiyaman in forum NY Knicks
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: Aug 06, 2007, 21:30

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •