Let me put it this way, since that hot start of 34 games, the results have been mediocre at best. They are 65-87 since then, is this the sort of results that should be expected from a team that is "loaded with talent"? Isn't that the point though, that they should play better than this? If you think the team has no talent, then you can't really be over reacting at all I suppose, because you shouldn't have expected much else. But, on the other hand, if you think the team has a lot of talent, then you should know they are not playing up to that talent at all, and that is where the concern comes in. I expect much better of this team, because I believe they're talented, and I agree the results have been mediocre for awhile and that is unacceptable. If you want to believe the team lacks talent because they're not putting up winning results, that's your opinion, but I don't think talent is gauged on a win/loss record, really at all. I lean heavily that the team lacks leadership, I don't think Ned's "they'll figure it out, they're good kids" routine is really a prime example to set and I think that is hurting this team far more than any perceived lack of talent. (BTW, I don't think you need to keep putting loaded with talent in quotes like that, it seems pretty condescending when written repeatedly that way. IMO.