nate & Eddie both cut..

could we use either.. ? Actualy Eddie might be a better fit still, Though he's not a 5 like we likely need most Im thinking that as a 3rd option at the pg..

whatcha all think..?

There's no room in the inn?

Come on! Eddie brought the love & hugs like Posey did. Let's be like Motel 6 & leave the light on for him. When Eddie's in da' House, there's always a clutch "3" to see!

MD!

Gotta agree with GYSO, loved Eddie and Nate for the brief time he was here. BUT we need to look ahead not keep looking in the review mirror. We got some good young talent that we can develop that might become key, and if not for us eventually, then chips for a bigger deal down the road.

Plus whom do we ditch?

beat

beat,

Nate would make a great Lucky mascot for us. He can act like a fool and no one would care!

Merry Christmas to you and yours!!!

gyso

gyso wrote:beat,

Nate would make a great Lucky mascot for us. He can act like a fool and no one would care!

Merry Christmas to you and yours!!!

gyso

Same to you and the Misses!

Plus we don't have Shaq or Baby for him to jump on.

beat

Nate was a point guard that couldn't play point. He hoisted up some very dubious 3s.

Eddie is a tweener, a 2 in a 1's body. His shot selection is much, much better than Nate's. Neither are great defenders due to their stature. Eddie's a grownup and Nate's, well, Nate.

There has been comments about the immaturity of the bench last season. Part of that was Nate. Eddie's a pro. He's also 33 years old.

IF we need a gunner from 3, House, even at 33, is my choice by far.

Who would be cut, though? Bradley or Moore? I'd say Bradley, since we already have two defenders at 1 (Rondo and Dooling) and no shooters.

bob

.

Sorry,

They bring nothing to the party. They had their 15 minutes of fame and it's time to move on.

112288