# Phil Jackson



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Now that Mo has been let go... now the choices will start to pop up


Once again we ask.... can the Blazers get Phil Jackson as coach?


Is it any where realistic for us to think of it? Is it a challenge for Phil to coach here?

Now its real, Mo is gone... we can talk about it.... its at least a coach firing closer to happening


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

NO.

unless PA promises to spend spend spend spend...


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

He's really not that good of a coach and he's a lousy communicator. He rarely plays the young guys much when it matters.

On top of those negatives, few things are more boring to watch than "The Triangle".


----------



## ProudBFan (Apr 29, 2003)

The bigger question is:

Would any quality NBA coach in his right mind ever consider coming to Portland?

Seriously. We've built a terrible rep with player misconduct over the past several years, and even though we've jettisoned many of those players a few still remain, and a couple of our young "studs" (Zach and Darius) have serious question marks floating around them. Our Management team has just spent most of this season dictating lineups to Mo in order to showcase certain players for trade, and then unceremoniously dumped him with 27 games left to play. And by all accounts Paul Allen is making good on his promise to become more "fiscally responsible".

I don't know that the combination of all these factors makes the Blazers' coaching position very attractive to highly-qualified candidates.

But of those, I'd like to see the Blazers lookinig at Saunders, Musselman, and Jackson at least (in that order).

PBF


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

yes because if the coach can turn it around it will make it seem like that coach climbed a mountain while righting a ship


----------



## gambitnut (Jan 4, 2003)

Don't ask for a source, because I have no idea where this is coming from, but a guy I know said that he had heard that Phil Jackson had ALREADY been offered the job and is thinking it over.


----------



## chris_in_pdx (Jul 11, 2004)

gambitnut said:


> Don't ask for a source, because I have no idea where this is coming from, but a guy I know said that he had heard that Phil Jackson had ALREADY been offered the job and is thinking it over.


PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE 
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE 
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE 
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE 
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE 
*LET THIS BE TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Just a little fuel for the fire, but asside fromt he occasional GM (McHale) how many interim coaches come from outside the coaching staff that is already in place?


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Ok Conspiracy theory time.

Say Portland has been communicating with Phil Jackson basically for next season. But Phil says he wants to see a biut more of what he will have to work with next season before he accepts the offer. 

Portland can't go to Mo and ask him to play the young guys because PJ wants to see them. THe assistant coaches really are in a situation where they would be replaced if Phil was brought in so they also couldn't be relied on.

So Portland releases Mo and brings in a person from the player personnelle department to audition the core for Phil so he can make his decision. 

Add tot the Mix that Nash said they would give it about 10 more games to evaluate if it was time for the young guys to be the focus, and the team went 3....

Just food for thought.


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

I'd like to see Flip Saunders first, but would take PJ if he could get this team going. It'd certainly be a challenge for the Zen Master.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

If Phil Jax has really been offered the job and he accepts it, I'd very excited.

*A.* Because I don't think Jackson would accept unless he felt Portland were nicely positioned for the future and

*B.* Because Phil Jackson is a great coach. He knows how to get talent to work together and he's a very good communicator. The only player who disliked him was Kobe Bryant. Jordan retired when he found that the Bulls did not plan to keep Jackson.


----------



## Paxil (Jan 1, 2003)

Gambitnut... I hope you are right.. but I really feel we are a stinker of a situation... and no one in their right mind would come here.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

I don't think Phil would take this job when there are more desirable situations for him (i.e. NY, Minny).


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

Just say no to Phillip


----------



## RW#30 (Jan 1, 2003)

Jackson would be ok but I prefer Muss. I would hate to see Saunders and THANK GOD the czar is off the market. There are not many head coach projects in the assistant coach rank these days. 

Looking it the landscape I think we could have a reasonable chance to get PJ. The Knicks are way over the cap with no talent on the team. He doesn’t like Kobe and the talent level is average on the Lakers. We are young with a good pick this year an owner, who is willing to spend, building blocks with Zach, Darius, Sebastian and Pryz. We may be able to trade our pick with SAR (after August 15?) to get a possible top 3 pick. Nash still have some option if he is willing to take a chance. 
:cheers:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

RebelSun said:


> I don't think Phil would take this job when there are more desirable situations for him (i.e. NY, Minny).



minnesota, maybe.

New York? how in the blue hell are they more desirable? Because it's NY?

that's been done to death.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

RW#30 said:


> Jackson would be ok but I prefer Muss. I would hate to see Saunders and THANK GOD the czar is off the market. There are not many head coach projects in the assistant coach rank these days.
> 
> Looking it the landscape I think we could have a reasonable chance to get PJ. The Knicks are way over the cap with no talent on the team. He doesn’t like Kobe and the talent level is average on the Lakers. We are young with a good pick this year an owner, who is willing to spend, building blocks with Zach, Darius, Sebastian and Pryz. We may be able to trade our pick with SAR (after August 15?) to get a possible top 3 pick. Nash still have some option if he is willing to take a chance.
> :cheers:


Shareef woulf have to be a sign and trade or if he were re-signed he couldn't be traded till december 15th.

The pick, once signed also wouldn't be able to be traded til December 15th.


----------



## TP3 (Jan 26, 2003)

Bringing in a guy like PJ immediately puts us back on the desirable list for free agents. We NEED a big name, magnet type of guy to help turn this around. A guy who commands respect based on his history and the way he conducts himself daily.

I think it would be a great hire if possible...no question about it.


----------



## CelticPagan (Aug 23, 2004)

Next season, the only player on our team with a bad history with coaches is Darius Miles. And even he's not really a bad apple. The 'character' of our team is really no different than any other NBA team. Sheesh. It's just that most of our players are inside players, that's why we look so akward on offense.


----------



## Utherhimo (Feb 20, 2005)

i think PJ is the only coach out there besides looking at Pat Summers and the CSKA coach that could get the most out of our players, I hate to say this but I think we need PJ more than other coach that is out there.


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

One of the benefits of adding Jackson as a coach would be credibility....he brings credibility and RESPECT all by himself....

You could be sure that some media outlets would blast him as being crazy to join the "circus" that is POR (not my opinion but it seems to be the prevailing national opinion, thanks to our local media... IMO)...but at the same time they woud have to acknowledge POR trying to make a step in the right direction...the guy is a HOF....he lends credibility wherever he goes. All the sudden the NTL media has to start looking at the POR franchise with more respect...that cannot be understimated IMO.

I also believe the risk is good for Jackson, POR is in a low place right now...competitively and PR wise....they cant go much lower...And if he could come in here and ressurect this team competitively, & change the prevailing opinions\stigma on this franchise?

Besides, POR has several assets that make them attractive...moreso than any other team he could go to IMO...namely an owner in Paul Allen who has the money and is willing to use it to win a NBA title...that is a HUGE asset that ANY coach should consider....IF Allen gives him him a big say in personal decisions...well...then Jackson has everything he has wanted and HAS NOT been able to recieve elsewhere...Is Isaiah Thomas going to give up that much? I don't think so, his ego won't allow it....

Besides...this whole legacy thing....I mean one of the stigmas on Jackson is that he had great players that made him appear to be a better coach than he really is...I agree with that sentiment myself...

But if he were able to take a bottom barrel team, a league laughingstock, and turn them into a championship team?...um...What can I or any of his other detractors say then? And even if he fails, its on the Blazers, not on him......

Also I don't think you can underestimate his desire to live in the NW...He likes it here, has said so on numerous occassions...a major reason? No, but a contributing factor for his decision? yeah, I believe so...

Besides, who wouldn't want to see Jackson square off and run circles around Canzano, Quick and the rest of the idiots in the POR media? 

I would like to see Jackson as the coach just for that entertainment value......


----------



## chris_in_pdx (Jul 11, 2004)

*I find the Phil Jackson haters hilarious*

Let's see.... 9 championships in 13 seasons. Future first-ballot Hall Of Famer. Molded Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant into what they are today. Has a way of getting the most out of players who are considered "role players". Wants to pass Red for most career championships.

And some of you would choose someone else over him? Is it because you don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell he'll take the job? Or that you think he couldn't do anything with the roster that we have now, regardless of whatever trades or free agent signings they do in the future?

I'm very curious why some of you are so against his coaching the Blazers.

Even if he doesn't win one extra game for the team, he brings INSTANT CREDIBILITY to this franchise, like when the team traded for Scottie Pippen. You won't be able to say that Allen, Patterson, and Nash don't want to win if Jackson helms the ship. Or maybe that's the reason? Some of you just love to piss and moan, and don't want to lose your favorite target? To be honest, I just can't see any other reason.


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: I find the Phil Jackson haters hilarious*

Here's my pseudo-psychological rambling on the subject: I think that we as a fanbase are inherently leery of PJ as our coach because of the stigma he has caused POR fans to have. First his Bulls beat us for the title, then his Lakers proceed to trounce us out of the playoffs year after year. We associate all of these things with Phil Jackson. 

So ends my pseudo-pyscho-babble.


----------



## chris_in_pdx (Jul 11, 2004)

*Re: I find the Phil Jackson haters hilarious*



4-For-Snapper said:


> Here's my pseudo-psychological rambling on the subject: I think that we as a fanbase are inherently leery of PJ as our coach because of the stigma he has caused POR fans to have. First his Bulls beat us for the title, then his Lakers proceed to trounce us out of the playoffs year after year. We associate all of these things with Phil Jackson.


I can see that, but I'd hire Darth Vader to coach our team if I thought he could make them winners.

In fact, some people have said in the past that Jackson has Dark Jedi Force powers. :biggrin:


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

hm..you know if phil jackson coaches here, and doesn't win right away, it'll "prove" he's a hack coach. And in the media's eye, that'll make Portland look bad because they tried a gimmick


----------



## Kmurph (May 7, 2003)

Hap said:


> hm..you know if phil jackson coaches here, and doesn't win right away, it'll "prove" he's a hack coach. And in the media's eye, that'll make Portland look bad because they tried a gimmick


Yeah we wish that would be the case....but you know how the media would spin it...

" POR...A team that is so screwed up, even a future HOF coach couldn't clean it up...."

It would ALL (or a large majority) fall on the franchise, and not Jackson....Jackson is a HOF whether or not he would be successful as a coach in POR....

But if he wWAS successful...The Red Auerbach, and his supporters has nothing left to say does he\ do they?


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Talk about a challenge for Jackson, I would find it very out of character for him to take the Portland job, but it would be exciting to see it. I wonder what players would want to come to Portland if Jackson was named coach here. 

I am not going to hold my breath, but Paul Allen has the pocket book to do it. My only question is, does this mean another comeback for Michael Jordan as our starting shooting Guard? I would be weird to see him in a Blazer uni wouldn't it? :biggrin:


----------



## chris_in_pdx (Jul 11, 2004)

HOWIE said:


> My only question is, does this mean another comeback for Michael Jordan as our starting shooting Guard? I would be weird to see him in a Blazer uni wouldn't it? :biggrin:


I think I just burst a blood vessel in my brain.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

chris_in_pdx said:


> I think I just burst a blood vessel in my brain.


Maybe you should go and get a band aide then!!!! :biggrin: 

As much as I have hated Phil Jackson in the past, if he were to come and coach the Blazers, there would be some dancing in the streets, you know it and I know it. :banana:


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

I have to agree with one of the things I read in HH today...

Would Phil rather coach Garnett or the players of Portland?

I think you gotta say Garnett.... plus their franchise has not been such a mess like ours lately.

But I am hoping Jackson at least considers us


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Trader Bob said:


> I have to agree with one of the things I read in HH today...
> 
> Would Phil rather coach Garnett or the players of Portland?
> 
> ...


Except where doe Minny stand next year? 

I doubt they are any better Personel wise. They've had a good dteam, but outside of KG and Waly it looks very tired.


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Kmurph said:


> ....
> Besides, who wouldn't want to see Jackson square off and run circles around Canzano, Quick and the rest of the idiots in the POR media?
> 
> I would like to see Jackson as the coach just for that entertainment value......


OK. Here is where you sold me. He would abuse these wannabe hacks. :banana:


----------



## BBert (Dec 30, 2004)

Let me add that if Jackson has any competitive fire, pride and confidence in his abilities, and he seems to have plenty of each, IMO this Blazer team -- with a few obvious positional tweaks -- would be just the type of opportunity he SHOULD be looking for, if he is looking at all. Look at all the young exciting players he can mold. Does he really need another coattail ring?


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

> Does he really need another coattail ring?


how many rings did MJ and scottie have before phil went to chicago? how many rings did shaq and kobe have before he took charge of the lakers?


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

el_Diablo said:


> how many rings did MJ and scottie have before phil went to chicago? how many rings did shaq and kobe have before he took charge of the lakers?



This argument is SOOOOOOOOOOO tired. Phil Jackson is considered a great coach because of players like Jordan, Pippen, Shaq and Kobe. Those players were and are considered great players without Phil Jackson. Phil Jackson basically let his players win championships for him. Jack Ramsey is considered by many to be one of the best basketball minds and coaches in history. He won 1 title. Why did he win 1 title? Because he had the best player in the league on his team. Larry Brown is the ONLY coach that can say he won the title without the 1 or 2 best players in the league on his team, or at least one of the top 5 players. 

Let's take a look back shall we.

Pistons 
Lakers - Shaq, Kobe
Spurs - Duncan, Robinson
Bulls - Jordan, Pippen
Rockets - Hakeem, Drexler
Celtics - Bird, Mchale, Parrish
Pistons - Thomas, Dumars
Lakers - Magic, Kareem, Worhty

Again, minus the Pistons of last year EVERY one of those teams had the or one of the best players in the league on it.

Heck even the runners up had great players. Players win championships, not Coaches. Phil Jackson is a good coach, but he's not the difference maker in Portland.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Except where does Minny stand next year?
> 
> I doubt they are any better Personel wise. They've had a good team, but outside of KG and Wally it looks very tired.



Agreeed, but at least they have ONE MVP type candidate to start with in KG.


----------



## el_Diablo (May 15, 2003)

mediocre man said:


> This argument is SOOOOOOOOOOO tired...


so all coaches are coattail riders? except larry brown 2004.

I can live with that...


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Hap said:


> minnesota, maybe.
> 
> New York? how in the blue hell are they more desirable? Because it's NY?
> 
> that's been done to death.


I just don't think Jackson would be interested in coming out of retirement to coach such a young team.


----------



## crandc (Sep 15, 2004)

I agree with those who say Jackson would bring instant credibility, not to fans or media (although those are of importance) but to the guys on the team. And it would be a no lose proposition for Jackson. If he wins, he's the greatest coach ever. If he does not win, it's because the team was too screwed up even for him. Either way, he'd make a mint, although he's probably already set for life.
Of course it's true that teams, with few exceptions, need great players to win titles. That's beside the point. Who knows if the Blazers may have a youngster who will become a great player? No one knew that Pip, for example, would be.
But if Jackson is not available, I'd go with Mussulman over Saunders (since I know we won't get Pat Summitt). Muss coached the woeful Warriors to a 19-game improvement 2 years ago. They kept the same record last season despite numerous injuries. He got career performances from role players like Early Boykins and Brian Cardinal. He was the first teacher of young guys like Jason Richardson (can't stand the guy but he can play). He has Portland ties. Saunders, OTOH, came from a team that made the playoffs year after year to get bounced in the first round. Last year they broke through but still stopped short of where they wanted. Instead of building on that success, they backslid badly and ended up with a very talented team who was tuning out their coach, which sounds painfully familiar. They underachieved spectacularly, expected to be a top 4 and now may not even be a top 8.
Well, we shall see what we shall see.


----------



## MARIS61 (Apr 28, 2003)

Schilly said:


> Except where doe Minny stand next year?
> 
> I doubt they are any better Personel wise. They've had a good dteam, but outside of KG and Waly it looks very tired.


Yeah.

They're tired of beating us over and over.


----------



## RW#30 (Jan 1, 2003)

*Re: I find the Phil Jackson haters hilarious*



chris_in_pdx said:


> Let's see.... 9 championships in 13 seasons. Future first-ballot Hall Of Famer. Molded Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant into what they are today. Has a way of getting the most out of players who are considered "role players". Wants to pass Red for most career championships.



WOW... Wait a second. Michael was *well* established way before PJ took over. Heck they had Pip and Horace . Michael was in his 5th/6th year. The turning point was Bill Cartwright. Finally they could run the triangle with a center. 

I do agree with the rest.


----------



## mediocre man (Feb 24, 2004)

el_Diablo said:


> so all coaches are coattail riders? except larry brown 2004.
> 
> I can live with that...



Players win championships. If Portland had a championship caliber team then maybe Phillip and his coat riding shoes could come in and make a difference. But with the current team, and even next year I don'tthink we ar close.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

I think that a lot can be made of Phil Jackson coming to Portland if certain things are met. Let's just say for fun that he is interested in coming to Portland to get back into coaching. I mean Portland has nothing to lose by hiring Jackson and he has everything to lose, right?

I can see how the firing of Mo Cheeks is coming into play with those people thinking that Jackson might be interested. We the fans are now told that the team is going to EVALUTE the team the rest of the season, or is Phil Jackson going to be doing the actual evaluating of this teams young guns?

So let’s say that Jackson looks this roster up and down and can see a ray of hope with the young talent assembled here in Portland, what next? I would think one of two things is going to happen. Jackson is either going to want to have complete control (meaning that John Nash is gone) or he is going to want to have equal say in the addition of player personal, which means that Nash may as well be gone.

Then comes the pay out for Paul Allen, he is going to really have to pay Jackson for his services. Jackson isn't going to come here for a Cheek's salary, no your going to have to pay him a hell of a lot more money and rightfully so, wouldn't you think?

So in order for Phil Jackson to come to Portland he has to believe that Portland is ahead of the rebuild, which you could argue that they are to some extent. He is going to have to have control of Player Personal, which might be a good thing, but could blow up in his face and Paul Allen is going to have to open that wallet like he has never done before.

Personally, I could see Jackson looking at this team as a challenge to put to bed the coat tail theories, but remember, Portland has nothing to lose and Jackson has only his legacy to lose, but he will be a very rich man.

What to do, what to do??????


----------



## Dan (Dec 30, 2002)

HOWIE said:


> What to do, what to do??????



come to the acceptance that we're probably getting some crappy re-tread coach that will make us look back fondly on the days of Maurice Cheeks.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> come to the acceptance that we're probably getting some crappy re-tread coach that will make us look back fondly on the days of Maurice Cheeks.


Well that's an encouraging thought.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Hap said:


> come to the acceptance that we're probably getting some crappy re-tread coach that will make us look back fondly on the days of Maurice Cheeks.



Yeah, a re-tread like...Phil Jackson! Dude was pushed out in his last two stops and even coached in the CBA.


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

MARIS61 said:


> Yeah.
> 
> They're tired of beating us over and over.


Minny is where Portland was 2 years ago. On the way down. WHich team is in better position for the long haul? Minnesota has Garnett and Wally signed through 2009. $28 mil to those 2 alone next year $37mil to those 2 in 2008/2009

So they are locked into no cap space and outside of those 2 really don't have any tradeable commodities, they also don't have any young guys except Ebi.


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Hap said:


> come to the acceptance that we're probably getting some crappy re-tread coach that will make us look back fondly on the days of Maurice Cheeks.


Whew, I feel better now, I guess I can hit the hay then!!!!! :biggrin:


----------



## Schilly (Dec 30, 2002)

HOWIE said:


> Whew, I feel better now, I guess I can hit the hay then!!!!! :biggrin:


Cover your eyes when yo do, them straws can be lethal.


----------



## Blazer Ringbearer (Jan 28, 2003)

This Phil Jackson stuff reminds me a lot of the Michael Redd stuff, and the Paul Pierce stuff, and the Vince Carter stuff, and the Ray Allen stuff...

Meh. 

I just don't feel like getting my hopes up anymore. Anyone else feeling the same way?


----------



## HOWIE (Dec 30, 2002)

Blazer Ringbearer said:


> This Phil Jackson stuff reminds me a lot of the Michael Redd stuff, and the Paul Pierce stuff, and the Vince Carter stuff, and the Ray Allen stuff...
> 
> Meh.
> 
> I just don't feel like getting my hopes up anymore. Anyone else feeling the same way?


Maybe! :biggrin:


----------



## 4-For-Snapper (Jan 1, 2003)

Blazer Ringbearer said:


> This Phil Jackson stuff reminds me a lot of the Michael Redd stuff, and the Paul Pierce stuff, and the Vince Carter stuff, and the Ray Allen stuff...
> 
> Meh.
> 
> I just don't feel like getting my hopes up anymore. Anyone else feeling the same way?



Actually, now that you mention it, I do feel the same way. Thanks for bringing those feelings of resentment to the surface.


----------



## Trader Ed (Jun 17, 2002)

If indeed its true Nash be on the fireing line, then maybe Jackson has more interest. He can possibly be a coach with GM interest. Determining more of the type of players he wants on his team without having to barter for it. He can be the decision making process. I think I recall Jackson wanting more control while he was in ether in Chicago or LA.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Schilly said:


> Minny is where Portland was 2 years ago. On the way down. WHich team is in better position for the long haul? Minnesota has Garnett and Wally signed through 2009. $28 mil to those 2 alone next year $37mil to those 2 in 2008/2009.


The difference, of course, is Garnett. KG is a top-5 player, and he makes others around him better. Get good role players around him and the team can be competitive every year... get lucky and add a second all-star and you're really in business.

Portland hasn't had any all-stars for years, except Rasheed, and he was never near Garnett in terms of production or impact IMO.

Ed O.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

Trader Bob said:


> If indeed its true Nash be on the fileing line, then maybe Jackson has more interest. He can possibly be a coach with GM interest. Determining more of the type of players he wants on his team without having to barter for it. He can be the decision making process. I think I recall Jackson wanting more control while he was iether in Chicago or LA.


I agree... from what I've read, PJ is interested in having control of personnel as well as on the bench. When I hear about Jackson becoming coach I assume he'll have player decision control... and that's the reason I'm less than excited about the prospect.

With Pritchard's prominent role and seemingly big future with the team, maybe my assumption is off.

Ed O.


----------



## e_blazer1 (Feb 3, 2004)

Ed O said:


> The difference, of course, is Garnett. KG is a top-5 player, and he makes others around him better.
> Ed O.


Sure hasn't worked out that way so far this year.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

e_blazer1 said:


> Sure hasn't worked out that way so far this year.


It's only 2/3 of a season. And they're still looking in good shape for a playoff spot in spite of all the craziness surrounding Sprewell and Cassell.

Ed O.


----------

