While I prefer old school type of coaches - the kind that demand and demand - Brown obviously wasn't a good fit for this roster. While I have my doubts that this roster couldn't "handle all the demands and authority" - we have moved on and will hopefully see significant improvement for this team. So for all those who hate Brown and are type-happy with the rookies comments, consider a few points...

1)Would you rather have a player that can respect authority,take some criticism, and learn how to play for themselves (as a result) OR have a player be coddled and only achieve because they're supported and full of "positiveness?"

The truly great players don't need coddling and "positive comments" to play well. What do you think the truly talented players would choose (Jordan, Kobe, Wade, KG, etc) Do you think any of them would choose the second choice? So why would you? Maybe it's what we have as a roster and have to live with it. But I would rather have players that learn and improve their decision making on the court - then players that have to rely solely on their coaches for direction, leadership and "positiveness." So when thinking about how bad Brown was, and how he failed (and he did fail in the one year he was here) - remember that he teaches/coaches with long term goals in mind. This is why his records the first year are significantly worse before they get better. You IT supporters think he tanked the season? I believe he kept trying to get the message through to players that were unwilling to be broken down (and rebuilt) - ultimately it failed.

2)In response to the players's comments...
Frye - sure Brown is tough on rookies - but he played him decent minutes until he hit the wall. His defense and rebounding leave something to be desired. I remember at least two games where he didn't secure a defensive rebound in the last possession of a game we lost.
Lee - I admit, I don't know why he didn't play more. Maybe Brown thought he wasn't serious enough b/c he's a kid. But he played well so I don't know.
NRob - as much as I like him and his energy - he did play like a highlight reel and Brown telling him not to play to the crowd is correct! We all remember him show-boating after that dunk when we were down 20 something points.

The point is all three of these players learned things (from Brown) that may not show up until down the road... discipline, defense, composure

the real question is would you rather have a coach like LB & a roster that could succeed under him, or a roster like we have now & a coach they'll enjoy playing for... i guess the easier route was to choose the latter, but easier isn't always necessarily the better choice.

Posted by TMS:

the real question is would you rather have a coach like LB & a roster that could succeed under him, or a roster like we have now & a coach they'll enjoy playing for... i guess the easier route was to choose the latter, but easier isn't always necessarily the better choice.

Thats what I've been trying to say forever TMS, maybe you just said it more simplistic because I think thats spot on.

Posted by rvhoss:

as much as last year debacle can be almost 100% attributed to larry brown, this year's success can be split evenly between lb, zeke and the players.

and i mean that honestly. (hey mart, anything you want to point out that I said wrong in that post?)

Capitalization and puncation in your post!

Posted by martin:

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by rvhoss:

as much as last year debacle can be almost 100% attributed to larry brown, this year's success can be split evenly between lb, zeke and the players.

and i mean that honestly. (hey mart, anything you want to point out that I said wrong in that post?)

Capitalization and puncation in your post!

how about this: "almost 100%"? The players still play, right?

No they don't. Larry Brown controls them with a joystick.

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by martin:

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by rvhoss:

as much as last year debacle can be almost 100% attributed to larry brown, this year's success can be split evenly between lb, zeke and the players.

and i mean that honestly. (hey mart, anything you want to point out that I said wrong in that post?)

Capitalization and puncation in your post!

how about this: "almost 100%"? The players still play, right?

No they don't. Larry Brown controls them with a joystick.

Larry and Dolan last season--
-Here's Zeke trying to figure out his next trade on NBA Live.

Posted by joec32033:
-Here's Zeke trying to figure out his next trade on NBA Live.

u sure that's not Ben Gordon trying to make sure the Bulls don't trade him to the Knicks in fantasy mode?

I would like to think some good (defense, etc) would follow through from LB.

There is some good from LB- the players will be so happy to not have LB that they will embrace Isiah and be enthusiastic to be free...

as part of my fan appreciation for the coaching lesson you displayed in 2005-2006 season i thank you larry brown for coming to new york just to show how much of a winner you really are

sugar coat it any way you want, larry brown will be remembered as one of the biggest losers in ny sports history

Posted by TMS:

the real question is would you rather have a coach like LB & a roster that could succeed under him, or a roster like we have now & a coach they'll enjoy playing for... i guess the easier route was to choose the latter, but easier isn't always necessarily the better choice.

I am a Brown supporter, always was. So with that, i'd like to add, it depends on whether the team could have played better, under a more relaxed situation. If they had a coach that just let them run, maybe it would have been a different story. Instead, this team didn't seem to be able to respond to the Brown discipline. So we'll see if Zeke let's them play loser. If so, we may get a lot more wins around this time. The down side, if Nate is allowed to 'showboat' then it could have a negative affect on this team. It leaves open doors, that are vulnerable to different types of media in other cities. One for sure, that I know of is Chicago. They are experts at expoiting the psychology of a player and it's local fans, who buy into the whole 'hype' thing. They did it when Jordan was there, still trying to do it today and will do it in the future. If you don't think someting like that doesn't count, then you have a few things to learn. A lot of people don't take this knid of thing into consideration when considering the things that go into a player, a game, a season, a career. ATTITUDE is more important nowadays, then it has ever been. Disciplin is going out the window, it's true. So when you view the negative and positive aspects of the NBA today, you have to take those kinds of things into consideration, to be able to evaluate the kind of player, team you are trying to convey to the fans. I can tell you two things in this thought. One, you can have a team that conducts itself professionally, who plays good hard defense and plays a good fundamental game, a focused game, not letting anyone into your psychology or you can have a showboating team that will try to get into peoples faces, do the war of words and try to win on that alone. I prefer the professional aspect, because no one can attack it, when you win. What is my proof? The Magic Johnson Lakers, with Kareem and Worthy, a hard working, talanted, gifted Pat Riley disciplined group that went out to play good fundamental basketball, who won five championships. The same could be said of the Bird Celtics, who won three during those wars. The Houston Rockets, with Hakeem and company, who went out and played a good solid game, who won two championships. The San Antonio Spurs with Tim Duncan and company, who played a good solid game that they won with. The Ben Wallace Pistons could be another hard playing defensive team that finally won one. Now for the others, The Bulls, of course they had Jordan and with that they could afford to have an attitude. Just ask Pippen? The Bad Boys of Detroit, had all kinds of attitude problems and basically had an outstanding guard, and terrific rebounder in Rodman and a very good 'outside' shooting center who took two championships. So those were two cases that could get away with it. Another team, the Shaq - Kobe Lakers could get away with it also. Kobe just so happened to be talanted enough to have an attitude and win with Shaq and company, but look what the attitude did to the team. Shaq left and we see who the real leader of the team was now, don't we? So my point is, you can win with a good solid team, that runs a good hard nosed routine that could get you back into contention or you can have all the attitude you would want, but you better have a Zeke-Rodman type group or a Jordan - Pippen type group or a Shaq - Kobe type group if you want to win it all. So far, we have a chance to have a solid, well fundamentally sound team here that could eventually go knocking on the door again. If you choose to have the atttitude team, then you better have a few 'real' superstars to go along with it. Otherwise this team will be writing it's character now for years to come.