[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

We need a new Coach
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 3  1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/18/2007  2:00 PM
Its clear Dolan loves Isiah and i'm preparing as if he will be GM forever.

That said, where did Dolan say Isiah had to Coach them anymore? That was a one year thing.

Now that Zeke has a contract, why is he still coaching?

He sucks as a coach for this team. You can't do both jobs isiah, remember you said that yourself.

So... is it too much to ask for that Isiah removes himself as Coach?

He only has but so many moves left he can make before realizing the team has tuned him out.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
AUTOADVERT
Klytus
Posts: 20276
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/15/2007
Member: #1743
12/18/2007  2:04 PM
Coaching is not the main problem. It's the players. They stink.
Panos
Posts: 30716
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2004
Member: #520
12/18/2007  2:09 PM
Dolan might not let him. If even HE himself can't coach the team, how can he expect someone else to. How can he justify firing all those coaches?
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
12/18/2007  2:11 PM
alot of people said isiah was the right coach for this group last year.
now all of the sudden he's not? did he forget how to coach?
nyk4ever
Posts: 41014
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
12/18/2007  2:13 PM
As long as when we get rid of the coach the GM goes with him, I agree.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
12/18/2007  2:21 PM
No, I think Kam has it right. We should go back to Isiah undermining HOF coaches to save himself.
Klytus
Posts: 20276
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/15/2007
Member: #1743
12/18/2007  2:23 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

alot of people said isiah was the right coach for this group last year.
now all of the sudden he's not? did he forget how to coach?

There is no such thing as the right for for THESE players. No Coach can with with this roster. They are not good!!
PresIke
Posts: 27673
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
12/18/2007  3:21 PM
Kam's logic underlines a key point; how fans and critics are reaching solutions to the situation.

Interestingly, as I and others have mentioned before, my contention is that a good number of those who have supported Isiah for longer than others may have done so based on the conclusion that ownership approach would not change. Thus deciding to support "what we have" and hope for the best. This doesn't mean that this is what "should" happen, but it may explain where some fans were coming from.

I believe similar logic is behind the notion of removing Isiah as coach, with the expectation of him remaining as GM.

We are faced with really tough questions about what is the best course of action. This is primarily due to concerns regarding the Knicks as an organization, and their readiness for change (which by the way there is even scholarly literature about i.e. the Transtheoretical Model of Change -- which might suggest the Knicks aren't ready for change yet).

There are many ways fans and critics can interpret a course of action.

Primarily, it comes down to how one views the prospects of the Knicks as a team and organization in de facto ("reality") versus de jure ("should happen") terms. Thing is many don't even agree on what "reality" is nor what "should happen."

[Edited by - PresIke on 12-18-2007 3:22 PM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/18/2007  4:37 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

alot of people said isiah was the right coach for this group last year.
now all of the sudden he's not? did he forget how to coach?

Yes. He did. Isn't it obvious? He gave lip service all summer to defense but these guys don't look any different. He jumped the gun on Marbury, then tried to make nice which shot all credibility he had with the team. Its obvious. The players we have don't suck. The system we have in place for them and the vision is just alarmingly absent.

You can't just get rid of everybody. But you can put smelling salts under the player's noses by giving them a new voice to listen to. A new taskmaster. Someone who isn't there to be your friend. Someone unafraid to glue peoples asses to the bench.

MOST IMPORTANT, someone not coaching to save the GM's job. Thats why we need a new coach.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
12/18/2007  4:44 PM
Posted by kam77:
Posted by djsunyc:

alot of people said isiah was the right coach for this group last year.
now all of the sudden he's not? did he forget how to coach?

Yes. He did. Isn't it obvious? He gave lip service all summer to defense but these guys don't look any different. He jumped the gun on Marbury, then tried to make nice which shot all credibility he had with the team. Its obvious. The players we have don't suck. The system we have in place for them and the vision is just alarmingly absent.

You can't just get rid of everybody. But you can put smelling salts under the player's noses by giving them a new voice to listen to. A new taskmaster. Someone who isn't there to be your friend. Someone unafraid to glue peoples asses to the bench.

MOST IMPORTANT, someone not coaching to save the GM's job. Thats why we need a new coach.

that's if you believe these players are coachable. that's if you believe any coach can play zach + eddy together and be successful at it. that's if you believe you can coach marbury to be a "leader", jamal on when to shoot, and q to get a new back. seems like these are the same players they were since they entered the league. so either every coach they had failed, or the players don't want to be coached.

marbury leaves, team gets better.
jamal + eddy leave, chicago gets better.
zach leaves, portland gets better.
etc. etc. etc.

btw, did eddy show up in shape ready to play defense? how about zach taking a powder this summer while a bunch of knicks were practicing together? or jeffries supposed new jumper? q show up with man boobs again also.

and tell me when any of our players played defense at any point in their career.

it's not a coincidence. and kam - you CAN get rid of everybody. isiah did it in 18 months.

[Edited by - djsunyc on 12-18-2007 4:45 PM]
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
12/18/2007  4:48 PM
and if a coach really wants to play those guys that give it their 100% and play team ball, we'd be putting out an expansion team roster that won't crack 20 wins.
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/18/2007  4:51 PM
Posted by djsunyc:

and if a coach really wants to play those guys that give it their 100% and play team ball, we'd be putting out an expansion team roster that won't crack 20 wins.


Thats what people have been clamoring for.

Get a coach that will bench the me-first no-defense guys. If we win 20 games with $60million sitting on the bench so be it. At least we'll be proud of the team and wins will be building blocks instead of lottery knocks.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
martin
Posts: 81055
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
12/18/2007  4:55 PM
Posted by kam77:
Posted by djsunyc:

and if a coach really wants to play those guys that give it their 100% and play team ball, we'd be putting out an expansion team roster that won't crack 20 wins.


Thats what people have been clamoring for.

Get a coach that will bench the me-first no-defense guys. If we win 20 games with $60million sitting on the bench so be it. At least we'll be proud of the team and wins will be building blocks instead of lottery knocks.

you also need a GM to back the coach while he did that though and also insulated the coach from the owner. I think Wilkens, LB and maybe Chaney wanted to sit the big money players and play the bench but the GM didn't back them, he backed the players
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/18/2007  5:05 PM
Of course martin+dj, we need a new GM.

Isn't it clear that until Dolan decides he has had enough, there is no point wishing upon a star.

Why should I make a thread called: We need a new GM.

That should go without saying. I said i'm preparing as if that aint gonna happen.

lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/18/2007  5:06 PM
Knicks were outscored 55-28 across the final 17:40. Read that again. 55 points??!?

"We had a good basketball game going, then all of a sudden, our team stopped competing,'' Thomas said. "We just gave in and let it happen. There has to be individual professional pride. Tonight we didn't have that.

Hey *******. You should call a timeout and draw up a play maybe? Just sayin'
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
12/18/2007  5:19 PM
Posted by PresIke:

Kam's logic underlines a key point; how fans and critics are reaching solutions to the situation.

Interestingly, as I and others have mentioned before, my contention is that a good number of those who have supported Isiah for longer than others may have done so based on the conclusion that ownership approach would not change. Thus deciding to support "what we have" and hope for the best. This doesn't mean that this is what "should" happen, but it may explain where some fans were coming from.

I believe similar logic is behind the notion of removing Isiah as coach, with the expectation of him remaining as GM.

We are faced with really tough questions about what is the best course of action. This is primarily due to concerns regarding the Knicks as an organization, and their readiness for change (which by the way there is even scholarly literature about i.e. the Transtheoretical Model of Change -- which might suggest the Knicks aren't ready for change yet).

There are many ways fans and critics can interpret a course of action.

Primarily, it comes down to how one views the prospects of the Knicks as a team and organization in de facto ("reality") versus de jure ("should happen") terms. Thing is many don't even agree on what "reality" is nor what "should happen."

[Edited by - PresIke on 12-18-2007 3:22 PM]


I didn't even know that was your contention. Would you care to name some posters who fit into that theoretical category, because from what I've seen the vast majority of supporters did so because they thought the product would win. They thought all the drama and disfunction was fabricated by people like myself, or the media, and largely irrelevant to our needs as fans, which, as was put forth, is to watch "entertaining" basketball.

I saw very few intellectualize that even if this sucks, it's the best we can hope, for so it makes sense to force oneself to love it. That's a stoic position few people possess the will for. How do I know this? Because as soon as the product looks irretrievable, like now, we see no such philosophizing. We now see those people exhibit no such stoicism, they want the same kinds of changes us doubters have been clamoring about for years.

Attributing optimism to a sense that the situation will never change, no matter how bad, really doesn't make sense. It should lead to negativity and dispair. If anything, this cult of optimists you speak of only used the situation as an excuse to buy more time for the team before inevitably jumping on the so called "unrealistic" things-must-change bandwagon.

[Edited by - blueseats on 12-18-2007 5:32 PM]
VDesai
Posts: 43302
Alba Posts: 44
Joined: 10/28/2003
Member: #477
USA
12/18/2007  5:23 PM
I've never liked the Coach/GM double duty. Its WAY too much responsibility and there is a huge conflict of interest. I thought it was an endgame for Sunt Thomas b/c a failure at coaching his own "talented, younger, more athletic roster" would mean even he didn't know how to get them to fit, but he got himself an extension. Once he got the extension the desperation of doing both jobs was lifted. He really should've replaced himself in one of those roles.

To some degree, he brought in Grunwald to do more of the GMing- but he's still taking responsibility for all that. When Pop was the GM/Coach in Sac-town he eventually shifted to just being the coach and it paid off beautifully.
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/18/2007  6:45 PM
Isiah should lose both his jobs.

Failing that,

He should at least come out and say "I can't do both jobs anymore"

In that case, we should keep him nominally as GM.

But distance him from the team.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
kam77
Posts: 27664
Alba Posts: 25
Joined: 3/17/2004
Member: #634
12/18/2007  6:48 PM
Posted by BlueSeats:
Posted by PresIke:

Kam's logic underlines a key point; how fans and critics are reaching solutions to the situation.

Interestingly, as I and others have mentioned before, my contention is that a good number of those who have supported Isiah for longer than others may have done so based on the conclusion that ownership approach would not change. Thus deciding to support "what we have" and hope for the best. This doesn't mean that this is what "should" happen, but it may explain where some fans were coming from.

I believe similar logic is behind the notion of removing Isiah as coach, with the expectation of him remaining as GM.

We are faced with really tough questions about what is the best course of action. This is primarily due to concerns regarding the Knicks as an organization, and their readiness for change (which by the way there is even scholarly literature about i.e. the Transtheoretical Model of Change -- which might suggest the Knicks aren't ready for change yet).

There are many ways fans and critics can interpret a course of action.

Primarily, it comes down to how one views the prospects of the Knicks as a team and organization in de facto ("reality") versus de jure ("should happen") terms. Thing is many don't even agree on what "reality" is nor what "should happen."

[Edited by - PresIke on 12-18-2007 3:22 PM]


I didn't even know that was your contention. Would you care to name some posters who fit into that theoretical category, because from what I've seen the vast majority of supporters did so because they thought the product would win. They thought all the drama and disfunction was fabricated by people like myself, or the media, and largely irrelevant to our needs as fans, which, as was put forth, is to watch "entertaining" basketball.

I saw very few intellectualize that even if this sucks, it's the best we can hope, for so it makes sense to force oneself to love it. That's a stoic position few people possess the will for. How do I know this? Because as soon as the product looks irretrievable, like now, we see no such philosophizing. We now see those people exhibit no such stoicism, they want the same kinds of changes us doubters have been clamoring about for years.

Attributing optimism to a sense that the situation will never change, no matter how bad, really doesn't make sense. It should lead to negativity and dispair. If anything, this cult of optimists you speak of only used the situation as an excuse to buy more time for the team before inevitably jumping on the so called "unrealistic" things-must-change bandwagon.

[Edited by - blueseats on 12-18-2007 5:32 PM]

It doesn't have to be stated and philosophized beforehand. You don't always know why you like what you like or vice-versa. Prez may be onto something. Its at least an interesting theory.
lol @ being BANNED by Martin since 11/07/10 (for asking if Mr. Earl had a point). Really, Martin? C'mon. This is the internet. I've seen much worse on this site. By Earl himself. Drop the hypocrisy.
SlimPack
Posts: 23588
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/14/2005
Member: #1009
USA
12/18/2007  7:29 PM
If Isiah were to step back, and Hire a new Coach, I can guarantee you that the new coach will be fired within a season.
Page 1 of 3  1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
We need a new Coach
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy