Seriously though. The Hornets are looking damn good in the West. Byron was shitted on by the Nets and Kidd. Since Scott departure the Nets have yet to exit the second round. Byron on the other hand has the future best pg in the league. A big man that rebounds and block shots. A bench and scorers. Success is the best revenge.
Fuck Byron. Don't ever try to spoon feed me this crap that he is a good coach. The Nets should have a championship banner hanging if it wasn't for him. Lets just say Chris Paul and the pieces he has around him are really good.
The Hornets are a perfectly built team. Peja at the stripe, Paul, driving, creating, scoring, MoPete slashing, plus offensive big in West and defensive big in Chandler. It's a long season, we'll see in June, but it must be really nice for him now.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GM3 @ Jan 28 2008, 06:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>**** Byron. Don't ever try to spoon feed me this crap that he is a good coach. The Nets should have a championship banner hanging if it wasn't for him. Lets just say Chris Paul and the pieces he has around him are really good.</div> what makes you say that. The Nets went against the Lakers in their prime and was raped worse than a new cat on OZ. Plus the Nets played Tim Duncan Spurs. I'll be honest I felt Byron could have coached that series better but at the end of the day the Spurs were better.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Jan 28 2008, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GM3 @ Jan 28 2008, 06:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>**** Byron. Don't ever try to spoon feed me this crap that he is a good coach. The Nets should have a championship banner hanging if it wasn't for him. Lets just say Chris Paul and the pieces he has around him are really good.</div> what makes you say that. The Nets went against the Lakers in their prime and was raped worse than a new cat on OZ. Plus the Nets played Tim Duncan Spurs. I'll be honest I felt Byron could have coached that series better but at the end of the day the Spurs were better. </div> Game 5 2003 Finals. That was our game. Scott gave up with a lot of time left in that game. Game 5 winners in a series tied 2-2 historically have won the series every time in NBA History. Scott blew it off, on the sidelines and in post game pressers. The guy was too cocky. The thing is everyone saw, the assistants did most if not all of the work....from a vet like Kidd, who's been around Scott Skiles, Danny Ainge and Dick Motta, he knows when a coach is doing his work....Kidd saw Scott wasn't.
People trying to compare what he is doing now with the coach he was for the Nets are completely off base. Scott learned a lot and improved himself after being canned for not working hard and pissing off his players. A head coach that relies completely on his assistants to do the film studies and game planning isn't going to last very long. As the Nets HC, Scott spent more time playing golf than he did reviewing film.
It does not matter about the record. Boston and Phoenix fans agree that their coach is horrible but look at the players. Same thing for the Hornets IMO.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Jan 28 2008, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GM3 @ Jan 28 2008, 06:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>**** Byron. Don't ever try to spoon feed me this crap that he is a good coach. The Nets should have a championship banner hanging if it wasn't for him. Lets just say Chris Paul and the pieces he has around him are really good.</div> what makes you say that. The Nets went against the Lakers in their prime and was raped worse than a new cat on OZ. Plus the Nets played Tim Duncan Spurs. I'll be honest I felt Byron could have coached that series better but at the end of the day the Spurs were better. </div> You are overlooking and underrating Scott's crowning failure of being too stubborn to learn how to use Deke effectively. Then, when out of desperation he actually played Deke and Deke was effective, Scott stopped playing him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (killa kadafi191 @ Jan 28 2008, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GM3 @ Jan 28 2008, 06:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>**** Byron. Don't ever try to spoon feed me this crap that he is a good coach. The Nets should have a championship banner hanging if it wasn't for him. Lets just say Chris Paul and the pieces he has around him are really good.</div> what makes you say that. The Nets went against the Lakers in their prime and was raped worse than a new cat on OZ. Plus the Nets played Tim Duncan Spurs. I'll be honest I felt Byron could have coached that series better but at the end of the day the Spurs were better. </div> It's old news, but Scott did screw up game 6 vs. the Spurs. Waited way too long to bring back Kittles who was on fire in the third quarter helping them get about a 9 or 10 point lead. And he also didn't make any adjustments when the Spurs went on their run. Who knows, Nets could have won a game 7 or their home court. Byron had his flaws, but I'd take him over LF everyday of the week.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (L @ Jan 28 2008, 06:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>He actually has a damn good team to work with. Hurrah to Hornets' management, not to Scott.</div> correction, he has an excellent starting 5 to work with. he is keeping the team contending using the likes of ely, bobby jackson and that white guy who sux. he has improved as a coach. who are his assistants in NO?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SUPERB @ Jan 28 2008, 09:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>who would you rather have scott or frank? case closed.</div> whose has had more success? case closed. Plus with no Jason Kidd in our future looked like it all for nothing.
Scott was hired as our coach. Frank became the coach kinda by default since Jordan went to Washington and Scott was fired. Thorn likes him and gave him an extension. That's about it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SUPERB @ Jan 28 2008, 09:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>who would you rather have scott or frank? case closed.</div> scott
Scott can laugh at Frank for 3 months, because Frank has been laughing at Scott for 3 years. Frank has more wins and a better wining % than Scott has as a Nets coach or a Hornets coach.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rory @ Jan 29 2008, 01:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Scott can laugh at Frank for 3 months, because Frank has been laughing at Scott for 3 years. Frank has more wins and a better wining % than Scott has as a Nets coach or a Hornets coach.</div> Scott can laugh for the next couple years. Frank is about to lose his 34 yr old star pg and team with three stars he can only produce 18 wins. While Scott has a young all star has his team at the top of NBA. Plus things will get better. That winning percent don't mean nothing. When the last time the Nets got out of the second round oh yea Scott was on the side lines
scott has improved immensily ever since he lft NJ. frank is still a bad coach who has the same flaws every year, this team deserves to lose honestly.
