Bio not provided
" But in criticizing Zuckerberg, Davis and Krupnick relied on a stereotype that he himself did not—that only women care about clothes—and perhaps even reinforced that stereotype in sounding the feminist alarm."
5 months, 1 week ago on Conversation @ http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120272/lena-dunham-zuckerberg-controversies-dangers-feminist-overreach
"Why is there a persistent myth that Carmelo Anthony is some kind of FIBA savant?"
"Carmelo's beautiful. I love Carmelo," Krzyzewski said. "You talk about commitment. This is his third Olympics. He's played in a world championship. As good a player as he is in the NBA, I think he's one of the really outstanding international players, because the game's physical."
It didn't just come out of thin air. People accepted it because it's not the first time K's said similar things about him as an Olympics player.
Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/sports/article/Boeheim-Coach-K-defend-Carmelo-3726589.php#ixzz21aUyP1PB
2 years, 9 months ago on Carmelo Anthony was a bad Olympic player
@steppxxxxz You don't think he's a legit coach? He was able to take a young atlanta team with no standout star and get them better every single year while making the playoffs. If you don't think he's a legit coach you don't have all the facts to assume this article hits the spot. He's absolutely a legitimate NBA coach. That's crazy talk to say he's not. If you want to argue how good he is, that's another matter entirely.
2 years, 11 months ago on Mike Woodson: Company Man
@cdrmng Woodson stuck to his offensive philosophy: get the ball to your best player. When Lin went out, Baron Davis and Mike Bibby were the players responsible for running the offense.
Davis was playing on one knee due to injuries (which eventually blew out) and Bibby is just old and done as a player. The offense ran exceptionally well when, surprise surprise, they had a real, healthy, capable point guard running things.
I would like to add as well, what would you define as more stable? Seeing an improved Knicks team as a result of a coaching change, and attempting to go forward with that in place, or making overtures to Phil Jackson, who would probably be an ill fit with this roster?
If you want to go with Jackson, fine. He's great.
Who knows how long he'll coach, and who knows what he'll demand will be changed on this roster. So you have Phil Jackson, for probably not more than 2 years at best considering his very real age and health concerns, and you have another year in which the team will be forced to adjust to a completely alien offense, and most likely more new players to learn to play with. And when Phil Jackson eventually moves on, where is your stability then?
It's a well-written article, but it sounds like you're working off emotion. You're dismissing Mike Woodson's absolutely legitimate coaching qualifications, too. I don't see those mentioned anywhere.
How well should the Knicks have played offensively? It's very easy to say the coach should have been more creative when your point guard is an old, ineffective Mike Bibby. All they had was Carmelo Anthony and JR Smith.
So did Woodson fail to find a way to get Novak the ball, or was Novak shut down by a great defensive team who was very aware of what Novak could do if left unguarded?