Quote TheGloveinRapsUniform wrote: View Post
Agree. Although i dont think theyre trying to turn Lowry into Calderon, but rather taking positives from Calderon's game and trying to integrate it into Lowry's game. I dont mean to brag but this is what ive been saying about Calderon since T.J. Ford upto Lowry, you can coach how to pass and when to take shots, but the drive, willingness to attack and close games is innate. Things that Calderon does not have, and cannot be taught.

This is all on management. First, they shouldnt have rushed Lowry back. IMO, they did. Clearly Lowry wasnt 100% and wasnt in full attack mode when he came back against the hornets. Second, Lowry was the clear cut starter when the season started, why would you force him to come off the bench after an injury? It wasnt his fault he got injured. Given Jose was playing great (actually, not really since they were against sub par teams), roles have to be clearly defined. You wont see CP3 coming of the bench if he got injured and EB was playing great. You wont see Curry coming off the bench even if Jack was averaging 15/5/10. I know Casey is trying to preach the "earn your minutes" mantra but you cant define roles then blur them just because of a gliche.

Slaw is right. Clearly there is no plan. Casey is picking players he feels earned to play minutes. And you cant do that. Roles have to be clearly defined otherwise, things happen that he is vocal about avoiding - controversies.
And that worked out so well with Bargnani right? Defined role was a good thing for the team and resulted in less controversies?

Not holding players accountable, not rewarding players or allowing them to earn new or bigger roles, defining what a player is on that team and maintaining it as the status quo is a TERRIBLE idea. If it causes an internal controversy because a player has an issue with it, you know exactly which players to dump.

We've witnessed the consequences of defining roles wihout reward/accountablity for years. No more please.