Posted by TheGame:

Originally posted by 4949:

Okay, aside from some bad Larry moves in coaching this team last season (and I agree on about some of his bad moves), the point that I am making on the season is, it did not help matters much for starbury to go into his mood swings and disrupt the team like he did. There are some folks here placing all the blame of Larry, when nothing is said by these same folks about starbury's tactics. If you blame Larry for the season, then make sure you blame the other players for the fiasco that went on. Coaching tactics can be changed, but disrupting the team outside of a professional attitude is unexceptible! We all saw with our own two eyes what happened, it's only fair.

I agree that Marbury did not have the greatest attitude in the world. But it is hard to put most of the blame on Marbury for last season. First, it is clear that Marbury was our best player and the few games we won were due in large part to his efforts. Second, most of Marbury's antics were in reaction to the bulls--t LB was doing. Was that professional? No, but I am not going to put more blame on Marbury for acting unprofessional in response to LB's unprofessional behavior. If LB would have handled the Marbury situation in a more professional manner, rather than selling him out in the media, things would not have gotten as bad as they did. What other coach sells their star player out in the media? Third, the players did not put the blame on Marbury and the players are the ones that see firsthand what is going on. The players at their exit interviews put the blame squarely on LB and his coaching and personnel decisions. While I agree that IT and the players could have and should have done some things differently, it was LB that really made this situation spin out of control.

Moreover, this whole thing about LB being a great coach misses the point. LB is incapable of coaching any team that is not composed of defensive-minded players who can also score. IMHO, a great coach is someone that can get the most out of the players that he has, whether they are offensive or defensive-minded players. That is what a coach is expected to do, and that is the reason everything fell apart last year. IT and Dolan expected Larry to come in here, teach this team fundamentals, and try to win as many games as possible with the current roster to see where we were at. Larry came in, realized that these guys could not play defense the way he wanted, got frustrated and started f--kin' around with the roster in an attempt to expose the players, with the ultimate hope of forcing IT to dump the entire roster (or get IT fired so that he could take over and dump the roster). The Knicks did not pay LB $50 million for him to act as a psuedo GM. They paid him $50 million to take the 2005 Knicks as far as he could and he wholly failed in that endeavor. That is why he got fired. He may be a great coach (and he obviously still knows alot about the game and can coach in this league), but I think his ego has gotten in the way of his coaching abilities at this point.

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by 4949:

Posted by joec32033:

I would also like to point out, and you can check it out on a time-line basis wise, when Q's bro got shot, things seemed to really come un-raveled around then and it just got worse. We just never seemed to have a chance to come together from that point on.

I can give you basic averages.

Before December 6th- 6 pts, 3.875 rebounds.
After he got back- 8.44 pts, 4.10 rbs.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/3417/gamelog;_ylt=At1fzHhWE_W_uqiIHGUiFC.kvLYF
click on splits and go down, it breaks it down by the month too.

I was referring to the 'team' psyche. He (individually) came on stronger later in the season to get those numbers up. I would appreciate stat provers to take into consideration that there is a human being behind those numbers you post as proof. Proof? Iverson averages 30 each year, but has never won an NBA championship. There's always the human factor in this game. Think about that in your stats.

First off, I was being totally impartial, I took what you said you just wanting to see some type of stats before and after Q's brother got shot, so I decided to do the leg work for you. Next time, I'll just let you do your own leg work.

Bro read the names next to the posts, before you start coming strong on people. I have been agreeing with you this whole thread.

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by wsdm:

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by oohah:

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by oohah:

Aren't we forgetting something fundamentally important here? Of all of the teams Larry coached, did he not have a first bad year, then a very successfull following year and then some?

This is possibly the most widely repeated misconception about LB. From a earlier in this thread, LB's first year with each pro team he has coached:

1973 CAR ABA 57 27 .679
1977 DEN NBA 50 32 .610
1982 NJN NBA 44 38 .537
1989 SAS NBA 21 61 .256

1992 LAC NBA 23 12 .657
1993 LAC NBA 41 41 .500
1994 IND NBA 47 35 .573
1998 PHI NBA 31 51 .378
2004 DET NBA 54 28 .659
2006 NYK NBA 23 59 .280

LB's win pattern follows as such: When he has had less talent, he has lost more, when he has had more talent he has won more. With the notable exception of last year's Knicks.

oohah

Now if the bolded statement wasn't true for 100% of the other NBA coaches that ever coached in the league, than you would have a point.

That is the point 49. This "LB always starts slow" is a mythology used to explain what he did with the Knicks. Like any other coach he does better when he has had better players. Last year he had good enough players to be mediocre. He underachieved horribly and authored his own demise.

oohah

Oohah, this is a self serving argument, IMO. You are going by these numbers but you dealing with an uncertainty here. You have no idea how good or bad these teams would have been if Larry wasn't there. Larry may have coached a horrible team to a decent .500 record, where as another coach's best with that team could have been a .400 record.



[Edited by - joec32033 on 09-21-2006 07:51 AM]

I think you guys are looking at this way too deeply. Oohah's only point is that its a myth that LB's teams start poorly and last year simply fit that mythological pattern. When you have .600 or even near .700 winning %s on teams in your first year with them, you're obviously not starting poorly.

Understood. But the fact remains that nowhere is anyone taking into consideration the team he took over and where they were the season before. You take over a god team that just needs a better coach (a la the Pistons), your first year will be better. You also have to take into account the how receptive the players are to your system.

1972 Cougars- 35-49/1973 Cougars- 57-27 - Major difference other than Brown is that the best player on the 72 squad was the third best player on the 73 squad.

1974 Nuggets (Oohah your info is off, LB was coaching the Nuggets for 2 years in the ABA starting in 1975 before they went to the NBA and he produced the record you listed)-37-47/ 1975 Nuggets 65-19 - Once again, most of the top 4 players are totally different than the year before.

1981 Nets-25-58/1982 Nets 44-38- Once again a totally different roster from the season before.

1988 Spurs-31/51/1989 Spurs 21/61- Many of the same players from the year before. 1990 Spurs-56-26 Totally different roster.

1991 Clips-31-51/1992 Clips(3 coaches in one season-Larry being the last one) LB's record-23/12. The first coach MIke Schular was 21-24, the next coach was 1-1, then LB. It was a decent team.

1993 Indy 41-41 under Bob Hill/ 1994 Indy 47-35. A good team, A few Key changes were made to that team (Schrempf out McKey in).

1997 Philly- 22-60/1998 Philly 31-51. Major roster changes when LB took over.

Detroit we all know about them. And now us.

It seems the only way there IS a quick turnaround is if you get LB players he needs or wants.

Agreed! It's about chemistry and tweeking the players. I think it's fair to say that the chemistry just wasn't there. That's kind of why I said what I said about being professional about the season, which this team did not act on. It's really hard to put the blame of anyone specifically. The chemistry just stunk.

Posted by SeatsBlue:

BlueSeats puts on a clinic as usual.

Posted by oohah:

Posted by joec32033:

Posted by oohah:

Understood. But the fact remains that nowhere is anyone taking into consideration the team he took over and where they were the season before. You take over a god team that just needs a better coach (a la the Pistons), your first year will be better. You also have to take into account the how receptive the players are to your system.

1972 Cougars- 35-49/1973 Cougars- 57-27 - Major difference other than Brown is that the best player on the 72 squad was the third best player on the 73 squad.

1974 Nuggets (Oohah your info is off, LB was coaching the Nuggets for 2 years in the ABA starting in 1975 before they went to the NBA and he produced the record you listed)-37-47/ 1975 Nuggets 65-19 - Once again, most of the top 4 players are totally different than the year before.

1981 Nets-25-58/1982 Nets 44-38- Once again a totally different roster from the season before.

1988 Spurs-31/51/1989 Spurs 21/61- Many of the same players from the year before. 1990 Spurs-56-26 Totally different roster.

1991 Clips-31-51/1992 Clips(3 coaches in one season-Larry being the last one) LB's record-23/12. The first coach MIke Schular was 21-24, the next coach was 1-1, then LB. It was a decent team.

1993 Indy 41-41 under Bob Hill/ 1994 Indy 47-35. A good team, A few Key changes were made to that team (Schrempf out McKey in).

1997 Philly- 22-60/1998 Philly 31-51. Major roster changes when LB took over.

Detroit we all know about them. And now us.

It seems the only way there IS a quick turnaround is if you get LB players he needs or wants.

Thanks for the correction Joe, , I copied and pasted wrong.

Again, my statement only had 2 points: That it isn't true that he always has a very bad first season, therefore last year's debacle was to be expected.

The second point is that his record rises and falls in accordance with better or worse rosters. You described that as getting "HIS" players, I don't think that is accurate, I think of it as getting a better quality of player, not nessacarily his hand picked players. The best example of this would be in San Antonio, where he went from 21 wins to 56 with the addition of David Robinson.

All this begs the question: How good should the Knicks have been last year? I say they should have been mediocre with any kind of decent coaching job. Then this year we would be building on that to become mediocre/good instead of just mediocre.

LB's swift progress is interesting, (And as you pointed out coincided with leaps in talent in many cases.) but that isn't what happened here, and it is not the same situation. He needed to deal with what he had in order to get what he wanted.

oohah

Once again, I point to the strength of the GM and his willingness to tell Larry no, but to also get Larry the types of players he needs. Look at what Indy did with getting rid of Detlef Schrempf. SA added guys like Willie Anderson (a good defender),Vernon Maxwell(another good defender). Anderson and Maxwell were drafted in the 88 draft and Larry gave them big minutes. Obviously you had Robinson, too. Indy added McKey, Byron Scott, Haywood Workman, the Davis boys....We gave Larry what? Jalen Rose and Steve Francis halfway through the season? I see a difference.

This is why I say LB is an impatient ass. He knew what he was getting into. He cannot realistically have expected to have the whole roster turned over during last year, or even by the end of the next. Still IT managed to get 2-3 players this summer that were right up LB's alley.

But in the meantime, he should have been doing everything in his power to make these players attractive to other teams so he could get the players he wanted, not exposing them and devaluing them.

He made his own bed.

oohah

The thing is noone knew what LB was getting into. A third of us thought we were rebuilding, a third of us thought we were trying to win now, and a third of us thought we were trying to rebuild while winning now. The other 1% didn't know what the hell we were doing.

I agree LB is impatient, abrasive, anal, confusing, demanding, whiny, and hard to work with. Not one person has disagreed with any of that.

We already got into a debate a while ago about Isiah changing his "plans" about 4 different times in 2 years. And noone can say with certainty that he didn't do just that again this season. Should Larry have made these guys attractive to other teams-IF he knew they had a chance of getting traded-sure. But it seems he was told these are the players he is going to coach, at which point he had to teach his player his system. At that point they pretty much succeeded in making themselves look pretty bad without any help from LB.

Posted by BlueSeats:

I think most of us expect a far better performance this season. But the reason some of us are less sanguine or optimistic than yourself is the overriding sense that this team doesn't have the fortitude and moral fiber to handle adversity well. So, if all your causes for optimism don't pan out, or are short lived, we could be right back where we were, but with a new set of reasons or excuses.

Like if Isiah gets fired, or if someone gets injured, or if a couple of guys gang up on Steph and trap him in the ladies room, or if guys bicker over roles and minutes, or if the press is relentless, or if Marbury needs to take a leave of absence to launch a new product line (plastic diamonds, so everyone can afford the 9 karat earrings he promises to wear in games), etc.

There's just been so much hype over the years that's failed to materialize. You know, like that TT would play his best ball here cause he had something to prove and cause he's from Patterson, NJ. And that Houston will be "just fine" and he and Marbury will comprise the best backcourt in the game. And that Lenny was from Brooklyn and he used to run a three guard alignment in Cleveland. And that veterans like Marbury, Penny, and Houston would be a great influence on Crawford. And that steam would rise from the roof of the Garden. And that Larry would do for Steph what he did for Chauncey. And that Vin Baker was coming back with a "new" heart. (Such a successful operation that the Dr who did it (Lisa Callahan) replaced Dr Scott as our head doctor, while Vin came off it never looking worse in his life.) And that Steph was maturing and ready to become the undisputed leader of his hometown franchise. And that trading expiring contracts was the new economics of the league and which gave us a great advantage over everyone else. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Some of us just get tired of believing that all the best things that can possibly happen WILL actually happen when it seems to work in reverse more often than not. We're jaded. We know that one can get the best player in the draft in the second round, but the odds are against it. We know that Marbury, Crawford, Francis, Frye and Curry could all be voted all-stars next year, but the odds are against it. We know that it could snow in August, but the odds are against it.

Basically, we all know the possibilities as you see them, and it's not beyond us to cast them in the golden light of our imaginations. but we need to see them materialize before we rejoice. We understand the concepts of "talent", "positivity", "chemistry", "routines", etc - but too many times we've seen them overruled by other factors, like selfishness, immaturity, resentment, passivity, indifference, sullenness, despondency, unwillingness, etc.

At the end of the day the lab experiment has to come out of the test tube and stand up to real world conditions, let alone compete with the hardiest. This wouldn't be the first product to look a lot better on paper than in production, especially considering the failure rate of some of it's parts...

Posted by nixluva:
With most of these negative influences no longer happening. I expect a big turnaround by this team. There will still be issues, but nothing like what we saw last year. Most of the players really like each other and will pull together. This time with a coach that is supportive, but strong and consistent, I expect this team to have a good season. I can't wait for this season to get under way.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by nixluva:
With most of these negative influences no longer happening. I expect a big turnaround by this team. There will still be issues, but nothing like what we saw last year. Most of the players really like each other and will pull together. This time with a coach that is supportive, but strong and consistent, I expect this team to have a good season. I can't wait for this season to get under way.

I think most of us expect a far better performance this season. But the reason some of us are less sanguine or optimistic than yourself is the overriding sense that this team doesn't have the fortitude and moral fiber to handle adversity well. So, if all your causes for optimism don't pan out, or are short lived, we could be right back where we were, but with a new set of reasons or excuses.

Like if Isiah gets fired, or if someone gets injured, or if a couple of guys gang up on Steph and trap him in the ladies room, or if guys bicker over roles and minutes, or if the press is relentless, or if Marbury needs to take a leave of absence to launch a new product line (plastic diamonds, so everyone can afford the 9 karat earrings he promises to wear in games), etc.

There's just been so much hype over the years that's failed to materialize. You know, like that TT would play his best ball here cause he had something to prove and cause he's from Patterson, NJ. And that Houston will be "just fine" and he and Marbury will comprise the best backcourt in the game. And that Lenny was from Brooklyn and he used to run a three guard alignment in Cleveland. And that veterans like Marbury, Penny, and Houston would be a great influence on Crawford. And that steam would rise from the roof of the Garden. And that Larry would do for Steph what he did for Chauncey. And that Vin Baker was coming back with a "new" heart. (Such a successful operation that the Dr who did it (Lisa Callahan) replaced Dr Scott as our head doctor, while Vin came off it never looking worse in his life.) And that Steph was maturing and ready to become the undisputed leader of his hometown franchise. And that trading expiring contracts was the new economics of the league and which gave us a great advantage over everyone else. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Some of us just get tired of believing that all the best things that can possibly happen WILL actually happen when it seems to work in reverse more often than not. We're jaded. We know that one can get the best player in the draft in the second round, but the odds are against it. We know that Marbury, Crawford, Francis, Frye and Curry could all be voted all-stars next year, but the odds are against it. We know that it could snow in August, but the odds are against it.

Basically, we all know the possibilities as you see them, and it's not beyond us to cast them in the golden light of our imaginations. but we need to see them materialize before we rejoice. We understand the concepts of "talent", "positivity", "chemistry", "routines", etc - but too many times we've seen them overruled by other factors, like selfishness, immaturity, resentment, passivity, indifference, sullenness, despondency, unwillingness, etc.

At the end of the day the lab experiment has to come out of the test tube and stand up to real world conditions, let alone compete with the hardiest. This wouldn't be the first product to look a lot better on paper than in production, especially considering the failure rate of some of it's parts...

Posted by SeatsBlue:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by SeatsBlue:

BlueSeats puts on a clinic as usual.

Thanks.

Can't help but notice your user name. I guess I should be flattered. Do I know you from the past, under another alias perhaps?

Yeah Moocow and Realgm make that board virtually pathetic. I won't reveal who I am but asked you a while ago what other forums you posted on. I inverted your handle to basically get back at that board for banning. I still post here and there on Realgm but more than likely will increase my posting here.

Yeah, I remember. Thanks for clearing that up.

And welcome aboard!