ReginaldLewis wrote:Just a question. When I started this post, jaypat and coltraining felt that Harrington was quality. As a matter of fact they thought I was a little loopy (that's a nicer wotd than stupid) for writing it. I wonder if jaypat and coltraining feel that way now? Honest answers from all please. Has anyone's opinion changed on Harrington?
sigh, reggie. You quote me as saying things I never said. As a matter of fact, the first time I have ever used the word "loopy" in a post is right now, and the only time I have used the word stupid is to refer to Pietrus on the basketball court. Let me clarify for you, if you don't want to go back to my original response. What I said was I strongly disagreed with the statement that Harrington was another Mike Dunleavy. Harrington is a much better player than that. Even in a bad game (which he, along with every warrior had last night), he made an amazing coast to coast drive, demonstrating a skill level Mike Dunleavy can only dream about.
As I watch this sad sad team, there is no player other than Monta (and arguably Stephen Jackson prior to his injury) who is playing well the majority of the time. My opinion on Harrington has not changed. he is a good 3rd or 4th option on a team. the options should be: BD, (a 2005-2006) Jrich, Monta, Harrington and/or Jackson. He is the #2 option right now, as he was on Indiana, and he is not at that level. In the right role, he will give the team 15-20 points a game and is the best 3 point shooter on the team (well cabbage is the best, but he can never get open).
To Live is A Value Judgment - Albert Camus
3 reasons for living: Jazz, Hoops and women
President Barack Hussein Obama - America chose Hope over Fear