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

Allow Bip to explain the GM coach relationship to the uninformed
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 3 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
martin
Posts: 79151
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
3/27/2006  7:02 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by martin:
Posted by holfresh:

Well Bip, sounds like a solid idea...The whole unity stuff sounds great,the only thing is, this is the NBA...No organization builds its team around a coach, the idea is usually to get two good young players and build around them...

I think you are taking it too literally. There has to be a match between coaches and players. Phoenix sure has matched the coach and players. They knew they wanted to go uptempo and had D'Antoni and some high fliers. Marb and Penny didn't want to by in to that system and so were moved (they were moved for more than just that obviously).
It's ironic that that decision was made about Marbury on an evaluation of about an 8 week period during most of which the team's best player was injured (Amare). Not too long before that eight week period, their GM thought Marbury fit into the system so well that he gave Marbury about a $100 million contract extension.

and sometimes you realize you made a HUGE mistake and try to fix it quick. Could also be that the organization realized that they needed to extend him or lose him for nothing without doing it.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
AUTOADVERT
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
3/27/2006  7:21 PM
Posted by Bippity10:

The biggest myth in the NBA is the myth of franchise players. There are only two(soon to be one) in the entire NBA. Now after Detroit won teams are finally refocusing and realizing you don't need a "franchise" player to win it all. You need an organization and need to build. If you look at the champions over the past few years you will see coach's that have been there for a few years, GM's that do thy bidding and organizations that support every move that the two make together. IF you think it's koombaya(however you spell it) talk my guess is that you are probably rooting for a team that hasn't won a title in 30+ years.

The LA clippers have had more lottery picks than the New york lottery, yet they didn't start winning until they became committed to it. In NY we constantly think we are one player, or one lucky ping pong ball away from a title. And this my friends is why we don't win.



Detriot is unique in that it has 5 all stars starters...Or they should be all be all stars...The other teams that have won the Championship over the past 20 years has all had one or at least two players that are considered franchise players...Shaq, Kobe,Duncan,Micheal,the Dream,Magic,Kareem, Bird and I can go on...Not one of those teams ever had the coach as being the most important part of the puzzle...not one....So the idea of a franchise player being a myth, look at the list of teams that won it over the last 20 years...Just 2 teams did't have what was considered a franchise player was both Pistons teams..
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
3/27/2006  7:22 PM
Posted by Bippity10:

"we"=Everyone involved in the Knicks organization(kind of like I wroter) GM, ownership, coach, players, fans and yes even the media. "We" are all involved. We all have contributed to the culture of losing. When marbury comes back at LB or ANY COACH(EVEN cHANEY) and we support Marbs, it just fuels his fire to be more insubordinate. It all adds up over time in lower standards and supporting players that never win.


I think the fans will go along, so long as there is a clear direction and it is explained to us. Ultimately ownership and management are in control of this and they need to: 1) have a plan and 2) explain it to those of us who have little control over this situation, but a stake in the outcome.

I've never had a problem with the team having a few losing seasons if it is part of an overall plan to rebuild and improve. As it is, we get the losing seasons, but there seems to be no plan and no progress.

Now we root for a team with the largest payroll and the worst record. Go figure.



[Edited by - BASKETBALLJONES on 03-27-2006 19:26]
https:// It's not so hard.
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
3/27/2006  7:35 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by holfresh:

Well Bip, sounds like a solid idea...The whole unity stuff sounds great,the only thing is, this is the NBA...No organization builds its team around a coach, the idea is usually to get two good young players and build around them...

I think you are taking it too literally. There has to be a match between coaches and players. Phoenix sure has matched the coach and players. They knew they wanted to go uptempo and had D'Antoni and some high fliers. Marb and Penny didn't want to by in to that system and so were moved (they were moved for more than just that obviously).

Same with Detroit. I think Dumars was after a team oriented, defensive team. First Carlisle and then Brown, who fit with the players they had. Same with Spurs and Dallas.

As an organization do you start with the players and add coaching? Or the coach and move the players? I think it doesn't matter, as long as the GM, coach and players are all on the same page, then things will happen. IMO, if the Knicks are smart they realize that Brown is the best asset they have and move to fit the players around him.



I have never seen as NBA Championship won because of coaching....Players win Championships...
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
3/27/2006  7:39 PM

And don't even say Larry in Detroit..I think think the difference was Sheed...I'm hoping Flip will prove that this year...
martin
Posts: 79151
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
3/27/2006  7:52 PM
Posted by holfresh:
Posted by martin:
Posted by holfresh:

Well Bip, sounds like a solid idea...The whole unity stuff sounds great,the only thing is, this is the NBA...No organization builds its team around a coach, the idea is usually to get two good young players and build around them...

I think you are taking it too literally. There has to be a match between coaches and players. Phoenix sure has matched the coach and players. They knew they wanted to go uptempo and had D'Antoni and some high fliers. Marb and Penny didn't want to by in to that system and so were moved (they were moved for more than just that obviously).

Same with Detroit. I think Dumars was after a team oriented, defensive team. First Carlisle and then Brown, who fit with the players they had. Same with Spurs and Dallas.

As an organization do you start with the players and add coaching? Or the coach and move the players? I think it doesn't matter, as long as the GM, coach and players are all on the same page, then things will happen. IMO, if the Knicks are smart they realize that Brown is the best asset they have and move to fit the players around him.



I have never seen as NBA Championship won because of coaching....Players win Championships...


Players also go 19-50, right? Or do both players AND coaches AND GMs?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
holfresh
Posts: 38679
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/14/2006
Member: #1081
3/27/2006  8:03 PM

I'm not saying we have a great team now...But if you think building a team with the coach being your best asset, get ready for many 19 and 20 win seasons...This is the NBA...not College or High School..and It's not the NFL either...In the NBA and MLB...Players matter much more than coaches....Why good coaches are important in the NBA is that not having the right guy on the sideline can lose you a Championship...But he won't win it for you...
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
3/27/2006  8:20 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by holfresh:

Well Bip, sounds like a solid idea...The whole unity stuff sounds great,the only thing is, this is the NBA...No organization builds its team around a coach, the idea is usually to get two good young players and build around them...

I think you are taking it too literally. There has to be a match between coaches and players. Phoenix sure has matched the coach and players. They knew they wanted to go uptempo and had D'Antoni and some high fliers. Marb and Penny didn't want to by in to that system and so were moved (they were moved for more than just that obviously).

Same with Detroit. I think Dumars was after a team oriented, defensive team. First Carlisle and then Brown, who fit with the players they had. Same with Spurs and Dallas.

As an organization do you start with the players and add coaching? Or the coach and move the players? I think it doesn't matter, as long as the GM, coach and players are all on the same page, then things will happen. IMO, if the Knicks are smart they realize that Brown is the best asset they have and move to fit the players around him.


Thank you
I just hope that people will like me
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
3/27/2006  8:31 PM
Posted by holfresh:
Posted by Bippity10:

The biggest myth in the NBA is the myth of franchise players. There are only two(soon to be one) in the entire NBA. Now after Detroit won teams are finally refocusing and realizing you don't need a "franchise" player to win it all. You need an organization and need to build. If you look at the champions over the past few years you will see coach's that have been there for a few years, GM's that do thy bidding and organizations that support every move that the two make together. IF you think it's koombaya(however you spell it) talk my guess is that you are probably rooting for a team that hasn't won a title in 30+ years.

The LA clippers have had more lottery picks than the New york lottery, yet they didn't start winning until they became committed to it. In NY we constantly think we are one player, or one lucky ping pong ball away from a title. And this my friends is why we don't win.



Detriot is unique in that it has 5 all stars starters...Or they should be all be all stars...The other teams that have won the Championship over the past 20 years has all had one or at least two players that are considered franchise players...Shaq, Kobe,Duncan,Micheal,the Dream,Magic,Kareem, Bird and I can go on...Not one of those teams ever had the coach as being the most important part of the puzzle...not one....So the idea of a franchise player being a myth, look at the list of teams that won it over the last 20 years...Just 2 teams did't have what was considered a franchise player was both Pistons teams..


But Holfresh that is the point. The NY knicks have been operating for decades under the one player away philosophy. All we need is one franchise player. All we need is one coach. All we need is one draft pick. All we need is to make the right trade and that turns it all around. So year after year we see the same trades and signings and firings that follow this philosophy. Sure it would be great to get Lebron James. But you don't need him! If you build a team you can overcome this belief in luck. At that point luck seems to find you. Everyone thinks the pistons got lucky in trading for Ben WAllace and Chauncey and Rip. They created an organizational philosphy and an organizational standard and only went out and got players that matched that standard. When the standard was met by every player they then had the ability to reach out for a Rasheed(or Chicago reaching out for Rodman) without worrying about his influence. Because winning was so ingrained in them, Rasheed's influence was nil. If they had brought him in years before it would have been a circus and he would have dragged them down like Rodman dragged down the Spurs.

We need leaders(coach's, GM's and owners) who set a standard. then go out and get players that match that standard whether it's through the draft or trades or free agency does not matter. But sitting back and hoping that we somehow get a magical franchise player somehow is just never going to happen. How much more evidence do we need? Winning is not luck
I just hope that people will like me
martin
Posts: 79151
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
3/27/2006  8:33 PM
Posted by holfresh:


I'm not saying we have a great team now...But if you think building a team with the coach being your best asset, get ready for many 19 and 20 win seasons...This is the NBA...not College or High School..and It's not the NFL either...In the NBA and MLB...Players matter much more than coaches....Why good coaches are important in the NBA is that not having the right guy on the sideline can lose you a Championship...But he won't win it for you...

Tell that to Shaq and Jordan.

OK, you have to re-read Bip's and my posts. No where to you see it said that the coach is the MOST important part. Or that you start with the coach and go from there.

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
3/27/2006  8:35 PM
Posted by holfresh:
Posted by martin:
Posted by holfresh:

Well Bip, sounds like a solid idea...The whole unity stuff sounds great,the only thing is, this is the NBA...No organization builds its team around a coach, the idea is usually to get two good young players and build around them...

I think you are taking it too literally. There has to be a match between coaches and players. Phoenix sure has matched the coach and players. They knew they wanted to go uptempo and had D'Antoni and some high fliers. Marb and Penny didn't want to by in to that system and so were moved (they were moved for more than just that obviously).

Same with Detroit. I think Dumars was after a team oriented, defensive team. First Carlisle and then Brown, who fit with the players they had. Same with Spurs and Dallas.

As an organization do you start with the players and add coaching? Or the coach and move the players? I think it doesn't matter, as long as the GM, coach and players are all on the same page, then things will happen. IMO, if the Knicks are smart they realize that Brown is the best asset they have and move to fit the players around him.



I have never seen as NBA Championship won because of coaching....Players win Championships...



LB is not going to win us a championship. But the stability and respect that he has earned can help us to get players and coach players that will up their standards individually and as a whole. Until we get someone that sets a standard it doesn't matter how much talent you bring in. Rookies will never develop and vets will continue to underachieve. It's not a magical formula.
I just hope that people will like me
Page 3 of 3 ‹ Previous 1  2  3 
« Reply To Topic
Allow Bip to explain the GM coach relationship to the uninformed
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