Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Benching of Monk if very frustrating


davos

Recommended Posts

Young players go through growing pains.  Monk happens to be one of the most potentially potent offensive player in some time and sure, his shot is off at the moment, but you don't bench that type of player.

I dunno, it's just frustrating.  He's obviously not going to be a bum and has long term NBA potential.  We've won recently but we need to play this kid if we're still willing to give this Bacon kid minutes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like Monk and feel he should get burn at SG. I know Cliff loves size but we have seen a ton of players who are short become great two guards. Maybe with the Batum injury and Lamb in the starting lineup we will finally see Monk at SG where he is supposed to be. Also if he goes off in Q2 please play him early in Q3. Dont wait until Q4 and he be out of rhythm! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carl Spackler said:

Three minutes. Needed more on a night when no one could throw it in the ocean.

Yeah, but Clifford swears up and down that defense alone will win you games. His style is 1980s/1990s style of basketball. It just doesn't work when teams are stacked with scorers. We didn't draft Monk to play defense like MKG or Marvin do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, YoungPanthers89 said:

Lol some of you fugers would rather see Monk on the floor for 15 minutes and lose than not see him and win 3 in a row

Correlation does not equal causation.  

Doesn't mean we can't win with him.  It's silly to bench him at this point.  What good does it do for anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • But that's the point, if the locker room feels that way, then you're going to upset them by still keeping Bryce around and playing him over the Top 10 pick, as opposed to bringing in a vet to start until the rookie is ready. Again, it goes one of 3 ways... 1. Bryce plays well enough to earn an extension 2. Bryce still sucks and we draft his replacement who starts Week 1 with a new QB as his backup 3. Bryce still sucks, we draft his replacement in the 1st, but they start the season backing up a new vet QB who was brought in to be his mentor. With an OUTSIDE chance at a 4th option where Bryce plays well enough to convince the team to let him play out the 5th year option and then make a decision.  Which I can't see it happening, but there is still a non zero chance of that happening I guess. The only way we draft a QB next year and still have Bryce on the roster, is if we're taking someone in the middle rounds hoping to develop them as a long term backup to Bryce.
    • I hear you. But I am not absolving Legette just because he is from my neck of the woods or anything else.  Tge comment was more about the fans uneven application of blame.  I do agree that there is a noticeable disconnect between him and the QB and that he might do better with a more polished and capable delivery man.  Abd don’t feel that they used XL right, or at least how I expected it to look.  And that could be a function of a reticent WB that shies away from that style of attack. I mean it was either him or Canales that pretty much eliminated downfield from the playbook - even while we see guys running free at times. It Could work if they commit to it.  Whoever isn’t committing. 
    • Lot of passion there.  Look, if Bryce plays down to the level that we feel the need to draft a QB high, you don’t think the locker room might be ready for anything that helps them win?   There are s lot of angles to this that could come into play depending on what happens this year. 
×
×
  • Create New...