Posted by martin:
I understand how Ewing is regarded as being a Knicks player and part of what was very good about the Knicks team but I just don't think he what it takes to be an assitant. He was too stubbern as a player, didn't learn quickly enough, had a hard time bettering the game of others around him. Not to say that he couldn't become a good assitant, but the attributes just weren't there.
1. All of the greats were stubborn. Your favorite coach in the world LB is as stubborn as they come, but you still wanted him here. Being stubborn as a player is not necasarily transferable to coaching, especially asst. coaching.
2. Learning quickly enough? Please explain.
3. Bettering others around him? he carried the team on his back for 15 years, and I am not sure this has anything to do with his ability to asst. coach.
As an asst. coach, I would expect him to be able to teach our bigs how to use their 'length & girth'. Show them how to move under the basket, how to respond to their man on defense, how to exploit other bigs' weaknesses, in game analysis and teaching. Show them some moves and provide inspiration to the youngns about what it means to be a knick and a professional. And perhaps intimidate a few cats. Didn't you support bring oakley back AS A PLAYER to do some of these same things, especially the last 2?
I think he can fill that role, he certainly has the knowledge base. Its just a question of is he motivated, and is he a good teacher. I don't know, but it seems worth a shot to me.
[Edited by - Killa4luv on 09-01-2006 03:20 AM]