Sergio finally realizes

[Fez Hammersticks]

That he is just not an NBA caliber player.

It looks like fans no longer have to worry anymore about what the Knicks plan on doing with point guard Serigo Rodriguez. According to Encectando.es, Sergio Rodriguez has made up his mind to return to Spain. Supposedly Rodriguez has reached a two year agreement to play for Real Madrid overseas.

LINK​

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Damn, looks like Nate blackballed him from the NBA.

 

[Tince]

If he only could have got an opportunity to play under a guy like D'Antoni, he would've thrived in the NBA...

 

[Rodolfo]

Now we'll never know how truly great he could have been!!

 

[illmatic99]

Sergio haters out in full force.

Whatever.

He'll be back soon enough.

 

[ehizzy3]

he wants to face the toughest competition. can't blame him.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Sergio haters out in full force.

Whatever.

He'll be back soon enough.

Really? You think he'll want to come back?

I think he'll be happy being a big fish in a small Euro pond.

I wish him the best!

 

[Tince]

Sergio haters out in full force.

Whatever.

He'll be back soon enough.

Back, where? The NBA?

 

[illmatic99]

Really? You think he'll want to come back?

I think he'll be happy being a big fish in a small Euro pond.

I wish him the best!

I think he's a very capable backup in the NBA. His game did not flourish here because of a multitude of reasons, but he has NBA caliber talent, and I think he will want to come back here eventually (at least, I hope he does).

 

[Tince]

I think he's a very capable backup in the NBA. His game did not flourish here because of a multitude of reasons, but he has NBA caliber talent, and I think he will want to come back here eventually (at least, I hope he does).

I hold no negative feelings towards Sergio, and I'd like to see him succeed in the NBA, but I'd be shocked if he ever plays another game in the league.

 

[julius]

he's fully capable of being a backup. That doesn't shoot very well, doesn't defend very well, and can't finish strong.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Sergio is like Sebastian Telfair. He can pass and find the open man but he cannot score from ANYWHERE. He's easy to defend -- just give him room to shoot.

The NBA will not miss Sergio.

 

[Sug]

He was the best NBA player in the history of the NBA to never get a fair shot. He could have been the next Stockton, but Nate killed his career...

 

[Mediocre Man]

More money, more playing time, playing at home.....those all sound good to me.

 

[Minstrel]

He was the best NBA player in the history of the NBA among those without NBA-caliber talent.

That's something.

 

[MARIS61]

Amusing to see the haters doing the "foot in mouth" play here, and it will be fun to call them on it when their lack of talent recognition comes back to embarass them in the very near future.

 

[LameR]

Amusing to see the haters doing the "foot in mouth" play here, and it will be fun to call them on it when their lack of talent recognition comes back to embarass them in the very near future.

I'm confused. Meh.

 

[Minstrel]

Amusing to see the haters doing the "foot in mouth" play here, and it will be fun to call them on it when their lack of talent recognition comes back to embarass them in the very near future.

When he leads his Spanish team to an NBA championship, the "haters" will be put in their place.

 

[MARIS61]

From the link, "Besides that it would hurt the Knicks’ chances of signing two max players. With Donnie Walsh in charge and sticking to his guns the days of over paying players is coming to an end."

Seems a contradiction there. Paying 2 players the max/not overpaying players?

No chance the Knicks get even one decent max player now that they will have NO PG, starting or otherwise, and no, I can't seriously count Toney Douglas as either. What star wants to go to a team with nobody to set them up?

If true, I expect Real Madrid is counting on getting Rudy also. I smell another 6-year rebuild for the Blazers in the works.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

He was the best NBA player in the history of the NBA to never get a fair shot. He could have been the next Stockton, but Nate killed his career...

Drinking early, are we?

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

If true, I expect Real Madrid is counting on getting Rudy also. I smell another 6-year rebuild for the Blazers in the works.

Rudy wouldn't be hard to replace. I also wonder if he will return to Spain.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

This thread should be re-named "Haters Unite".

 

[oldmangrouch]

Pointing out that the sky is blue doesn't make you a "hater."

Sergio had multiple chances, and he just couldn't cut it at the NBA level. How is that even debatable?

 

[barfo]

Sergio had multiple chances, and he just couldn't cut it at the NBA level. How is that even debatable?

Depends on your perspective. As compared to, say, Tony Parker, no, he didn't cut it at the NBA level. But as compared to 99.9999% of the people on earth...
He made it to the NBA and played a few years. That's not a shabby achievement. I'd take his basketball career over mine.

barfo

 

[BBert]

I don't expect Sergio to be back. I'm sure he'll be happier playing in Europe. He gave it a shot. That's more than anyone on this board can say. Why some people feel the need to insult the guy because he didn't make it (for more than a few years) is beyond my comprehension.

 

[MARIS61]

Pointing out that the sky is blue doesn't make you a "hater."

Sergio had multiple chances, and he just couldn't cut it at the NBA level. How is that even debatable?

Well, as any Jr. High Science teacher will tell you, in fact THE SKY IS NOT BLUE.

It only seems that way to the uninformed and ignorant.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

I don't expect Sergio to be back. I'm sure he'll be happier playing in Europe. He gave it a shot. That's more than anyone on this board can say. Why some people feel the need to insult the guy because he didn't make it (for more than a few years) is beyond my comprehension.

You'd have a point if he played for free. He made $4.7 million playing a game he just isn't good at.

$4.7 MILLION for Sergio Rod-freaking-riguez.

 

[barfo]

Well, as any Jr. High Science teacher will tell you, in fact THE SKY IS NOT BLUE.

But, then, what is the definition of "blue"? If the sky is not blue, are there other things that are blue? What makes them blue that does not apply to the sky? If there are no things that are blue, then what's the point of having the word "blue", unless it is to describe things that look blue?

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

But, then, what is the definition of "blue"? If the sky is not blue, are there other things that are blue? What makes them blue that does not apply to the sky? If there are no things that are blue, then what's the point of having the word "blue", unless it is to describe things that look blue?

barfo

Am I the only one who paid attention in class?

http://www.coolquiz.com/trivia/explain/docs/sky.asp

The sky appears blue to us on a clear day, because the atoms of nitrogen and oxygen in the atmosphere separate the suns white light into its many colors, and scatter them throughout the atmosphere.

The wavelength of the blue light scatters better than the rest, predominates over the other colors in the light spectrum, and makes the sky appear blue to us.

The scientific name for this phenomenon is the Tyndall effect, more commonly known as Rayleigh scattering.

This phenomenon describes the way in which light physically scatters when it passes through particles in the earths atmosphere that are 1/10th in diameter of the color of the light. The light spectrum ranges in wavelength from red to violet, and, since the wavelength of the blue light passes through the particles with greater ease than the wavelengths of the other colors of light, the sky appear blue to the naked eye.

The human eye has three types of light receptors, known as cones, located in the retina. The cones are either considered to be red, or blue, or green, based upon their strong response to light at these wavelengths. As light stimulates these receptors, our vision translates the signals into the colors we see.

When gazing at the sky, the red cones respond to the small amounts of red light scattered, and even less strongly to the orange and yellow wavelengths. Although green cones respond to yellow, their response to scattered green and green-blue wavelengths is stronger. Finally, colors near the strongly scattered blue wavelengths stimulate the blue receptors.

In short, the skylight stimulates the red and green cones almost equally, while stimulating the blue cones more strongly. For these reasons, our vision naturally adjusts as clearly as possible to separate colors.

 

[barfo]

Am I the only one who paid attention in class?

Yeah, yeah. But you didn't answer the questions. Supposing your car is blue, why is it blue?

barfo