Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Pharzeone:
Hell he didn't even want Thomas or Dolan to have any exit interviews with the players.

Just for the record, I'm pretty sure his request was simply that they do what they have always done in the past and as most clubs do, which is to have one exit interview with the coach and GM together, not the separate interviews isiah conducted which undermined Brown by not presenting a unified front.

No coach wants to be undermined as such.

Many players indicated that they would not participate in exit interview with Brown present period. Which is alarming. Brown suggested than that no exit interview be perform since he believed he he will be trashed by the players. If the player doesn't attend the exit interview then Thomas only has the one side from Coach Brown. It works two ways. BTW, Exit interviews are not for the benefit of the interviewers but mainly for the benefit of the person being interview. I conducted exit interviews a number of times and had personnel inform me that they don't which a certain party to be present. At my firm and I think its the norm that those request are normally granted, particularly if there is an issue between the two. The exit interview is not about presenting an united front at all.

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Pharzeone:
Hell he didn't even want Thomas or Dolan to have any exit interviews with the players.

Just for the record, I'm pretty sure his request was simply that they do what they have always done in the past and as most clubs do, which is to have one exit interview with the coach and GM together, not the separate interviews isiah conducted which undermined Brown by not presenting a unified front.

No coach wants to be undermined as such.

Many players indicated that they would not participate in exit interview with Brown present period. Which is alarming. Brown suggested than that no exit interview be perform since he believed he he will be trashed by the players. If the player doesn't attend the exit interview then Thomas only has the one side from Coach Brown. It works two ways. BTW, Exit interviews are not for the benefit of the interviewers but mainly for the benefit of the person being interview. I conducted exit interviews a number of times and had personnel inform me that they don't which a certain party to be present. At my firm and I think its the norm that those request are normally granted, particularly if there is an issue between the two. The exit interview is not about presenting an united front at all.

I'm not aware that many players indicated they would not participate with Brown present. That would change my feelings somewhat. Do you have anything to corroborate that?

Regardless, the convention is to have one exit interview and it's not true that those interviews are solely for the interviewee, many players are punished for skipping their interviews. As often or not many players do little talking at all as directions are given to them on what they need to work on. Very few coaches and GMs are all that interested in having their work critiqued by the players unless they franchise caliber.

And when the mantra of the entire season has been that "this is browns team and the players need to adapt", what has occurred since the end of the season has only gone to unravel any progress in that regard that the season may have held.

Bippity asks what coach would want to deal with this place and one needs to consider just what "dealing with it" entails. I'm of the mind that Larry saw Chaney and Wilkens undermined and humiliated and he witnessed isiah's unholy and unhealthy alliance with Marbury, and that only fueled LBs intent to grab power. Not cause he wanted isiah's job or anything like that, just cause he wanted rightful dominion over his players as any coach worth his salt would.

Many of us wanted a guy with credibility and authority precisely to confront the prevailing imbalance of power. Now the solution is to dump him or neuter him for a yes-man so we can go back to square one?

Just how does a coach of any measure "deal" with this place? Lenny quit, larry driven out. We can't go with HOFers, they wont tolerate it. Fans have no patience for a Chaney or Herb. This place appears presently uncoachable. So we don't endorse our coaches, we dangle them.

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Pharzeone:
Hell he didn't even want Thomas or Dolan to have any exit interviews with the players.

Just for the record, I'm pretty sure his request was simply that they do what they have always done in the past and as most clubs do, which is to have one exit interview with the coach and GM together, not the separate interviews isiah conducted which undermined Brown by not presenting a unified front.

No coach wants to be undermined as such.

Many players indicated that they would not participate in exit interview with Brown present period. Which is alarming. Brown suggested than that no exit interview be perform since he believed he he will be trashed by the players. If the player doesn't attend the exit interview then Thomas only has the one side from Coach Brown. It works two ways. BTW, Exit interviews are not for the benefit of the interviewers but mainly for the benefit of the person being interview. I conducted exit interviews a number of times and had personnel inform me that they don't which a certain party to be present. At my firm and I think its the norm that those request are normally granted, particularly if there is an issue between the two. The exit interview is not about presenting an united front at all.

I'm not aware that many players indicated they would not participate with Brown present. That would change my feelings somewhat. Do you have anything to corroborate that?

Regardless, the convention is to have one exit interview and it's not true that those interviews are solely for the interviewee, many players are punished for skipping their interviews. As often or not many players do little talking at all as directions are given to them on what they need to work on. Very few coaches and GMs are all that interested in having their work critiqued by the players unless they franchise caliber.

And when the mantra of the entire season has been that "this is browns team and the players need to adapt", what has occurred since the end of the season has only gone to unravel any progress in that regard that the season may have held.

Bippity asks what coach would want to deal with this place and one needs to consider just what "dealing with it" entails. I'm of the mind that Larry saw Chaney and Wilkens undermined and humiliated and he witnessed isiah's unholy and unhealthy alliance with Marbury, and that only fueled LBs intent to grab power. Not cause he wanted isiah's job or anything like that, just cause he wanted rightful dominion over his players as any coach worth his salt would.

Many of us wanted a guy with credibility and authority precisely to confront the prevailing imbalance of power. Now the solution is to dump him or neuter him for a yes-man so we can go back to square one?

Just how does a coach of any measure "deal" with this place? Lenny quit, larry driven out. We can't go with HOFers, they wont tolerate it. Fans have no patience for a Chaney or Herb. This place appears presently uncoachable. So we don't endorse our coaches, we dangle them.

I will try to find those press clippings I think it was the Post and News that reported that they didn't want Brown present. Brown actually spoke privately with many players during his own exit interview and I guess he also spoke with some together with Isiah that were comfortable. I am also going to find those clippings where both Dolan and Thomas backed Brown against the players and Brown said he hated that for Bip.


http://www.nba.com/knicks/news/transcript_060420.html

GREENBURGH, NY, April 20, 2006 -- Knicks President of Basketball Operations Isiah Thomas and Head Coach Larry Brown met the media at the MSG Training Center to discuss the 2005-06 Knicks season as part of the team's end of season exit interviews. Following is a transcript of their remarks:

Q: What do you make of Steph talking about playing with more freedom and doing what he wants to do?
Thomas: I’ll answer two questions, the question that you didn’t ask that I’m going to answer also. And I’ll try to give a long-winded answer to that. Fortunately, I’m a fan and the president of the team… and a lot of the things, and I try to read what you write, but I read everyday and read everything. It’s been suggested that maybe I should’ve stepped in and said something to Marbury or maybe he should’ve done something. In terms of managing the team, a lot of the things that you do in private, you don’t necessarily have to come out and make them public. The situation was addressed in-house and we gave Coach the option if he wanted to suspend Marbury, fine him, whatever type of discipline that he felt necessary at the time, we were willing to take. What he said to us was that he didn’t think that would be appropriate because he didn‘t want to single him out and he thought this was a good opportunity to coach him. There’s a fine line in terms of jumping in and saying something publicly to appease our fan base. I thought the position that Coach and Steph were in, it was a manageable position between those two and he was handling it.

Q: What are your thoughts on Stephon Marbury?
Brown: We’re on the same page. I met with him …again, I think I’ve expressed this numerous times, before he got hurt, I thought he was doing everything he possibly could to try to play the right way and I thought he was playing great. I told him again that and I said all I want you to allow me to do is coach you. We didn’t talk very long, but I think he understood what I was talking about. He expressed to me he wants to be part of this. I kind of told him that if there was a trade out there that made us better and he was involved, he might not be here. But as far as I was concerned, I was perfectly comfortable with him helping us improve.”

Q: What did Malik say?
Brown: I want us to win more games.

Q: To clarify, Larry’s definitely coming back?
Thomas: Yes.

Q: Steph said you made him a better man. Does that comment surprise you?
Brown: He said that to me. All I told him is that the only thing I ever want is to make players better and to feel like you’ve helped them in doing something that they obviously want to do well. I was disappointed in our record. I was disappointed in people maybe pointing a finger at him and blaming him because of what went on this year, but when you’re the coach or you’re the best player or you’re the president, things tend to go our way and rightly so. Again, I think this kid tries to go out and win and he plays hard and I’m hopeful that he’ll get better and better.

Q: You said three months ago if player doesn’t get along with coach, the player is gone. Where does Marbury stand right now considering some of the things he said?
Thomas: I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: I am loyal to winning. I am not loyal to any singular individual. I love all the players. I like them all. But I’m about winning and if we can make our team better, then I’m going to do what I need to do to make our team better. If that means trading a couple, two, three, four players, I want to win. I’m committed to that. That’s my only agenda, is to try to put together a winning basketball team.

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Pharzeone:

Posted by BlueSeats:

Posted by Pharzeone:
Hell he didn't even want Thomas or Dolan to have any exit interviews with the players.

Just for the record, I'm pretty sure his request was simply that they do what they have always done in the past and as most clubs do, which is to have one exit interview with the coach and GM together, not the separate interviews isiah conducted which undermined Brown by not presenting a unified front.

No coach wants to be undermined as such.

Many players indicated that they would not participate in exit interview with Brown present period. Which is alarming. Brown suggested than that no exit interview be perform since he believed he he will be trashed by the players. If the player doesn't attend the exit interview then Thomas only has the one side from Coach Brown. It works two ways. BTW, Exit interviews are not for the benefit of the interviewers but mainly for the benefit of the person being interview. I conducted exit interviews a number of times and had personnel inform me that they don't which a certain party to be present. At my firm and I think its the norm that those request are normally granted, particularly if there is an issue between the two. The exit interview is not about presenting an united front at all.

I'm not aware that many players indicated they would not participate with Brown present. That would change my feelings somewhat. Do you have anything to corroborate that?

Regardless, the convention is to have one exit interview and it's not true that those interviews are solely for the interviewee, many players are punished for skipping their interviews. As often or not many players do little talking at all as directions are given to them on what they need to work on. Very few coaches and GMs are all that interested in having their work critiqued by the players unless they franchise caliber.

And when the mantra of the entire season has been that "this is browns team and the players need to adapt", what has occurred since the end of the season has only gone to unravel any progress in that regard that the season may have held.

Bippity asks what coach would want to deal with this place and one needs to consider just what "dealing with it" entails. I'm of the mind that Larry saw Chaney and Wilkens undermined and humiliated and he witnessed isiah's unholy and unhealthy alliance with Marbury, and that only fueled LBs intent to grab power. Not cause he wanted isiah's job or anything like that, just cause he wanted rightful dominion over his players as any coach worth his salt would.

Many of us wanted a guy with credibility and authority precisely to confront the prevailing imbalance of power. Now the solution is to dump him or neuter him for a yes-man so we can go back to square one?

Just how does a coach of any measure "deal" with this place? Lenny quit, larry driven out. We can't go with HOFers, they wont tolerate it. Fans have no patience for a Chaney or Herb. This place appears presently uncoachable. So we don't endorse our coaches, we dangle them.

I will try to find those press clippings I think it was the Post and News that reported that they didn't want Brown present. Brown actually spoke privately with many players during his own exit interview and I guess he also spoke with some together with Isiah that were comfortable. I am also going to find those clippings where both Dolan and Thomas backed Brown against the players and Brown said he hated that for Bip.


http://www.nba.com/knicks/news/transcript_060420.html

GREENBURGH, NY, April 20, 2006 -- Knicks President of Basketball Operations Isiah Thomas and Head Coach Larry Brown met the media at the MSG Training Center to discuss the 2005-06 Knicks season as part of the team's end of season exit interviews. Following is a transcript of their remarks:

Q: What do you make of Steph talking about playing with more freedom and doing what he wants to do?
Thomas: I’ll answer two questions, the question that you didn’t ask that I’m going to answer also. And I’ll try to give a long-winded answer to that. Fortunately, I’m a fan and the president of the team… and a lot of the things, and I try to read what you write, but I read everyday and read everything. It’s been suggested that maybe I should’ve stepped in and said something to Marbury or maybe he should’ve done something. In terms of managing the team, a lot of the things that you do in private, you don’t necessarily have to come out and make them public. The situation was addressed in-house and we gave Coach the option if he wanted to suspend Marbury, fine him, whatever type of discipline that he felt necessary at the time, we were willing to take. What he said to us was that he didn’t think that would be appropriate because he didn‘t want to single him out and he thought this was a good opportunity to coach him. There’s a fine line in terms of jumping in and saying something publicly to appease our fan base. I thought the position that Coach and Steph were in, it was a manageable position between those two and he was handling it.

Q: What are your thoughts on Stephon Marbury?
Brown: We’re on the same page. I met with him …again, I think I’ve expressed this numerous times, before he got hurt, I thought he was doing everything he possibly could to try to play the right way and I thought he was playing great. I told him again that and I said all I want you to allow me to do is coach you. We didn’t talk very long, but I think he understood what I was talking about. He expressed to me he wants to be part of this. I kind of told him that if there was a trade out there that made us better and he was involved, he might not be here. But as far as I was concerned, I was perfectly comfortable with him helping us improve.”

Q: What did Malik say?
Brown: I want us to win more games.

Q: To clarify, Larry’s definitely coming back?
Thomas: Yes.

Q: Steph said you made him a better man. Does that comment surprise you?
Brown: He said that to me. All I told him is that the only thing I ever want is to make players better and to feel like you’ve helped them in doing something that they obviously want to do well. I was disappointed in our record. I was disappointed in people maybe pointing a finger at him and blaming him because of what went on this year, but when you’re the coach or you’re the best player or you’re the president, things tend to go our way and rightly so. Again, I think this kid tries to go out and win and he plays hard and I’m hopeful that he’ll get better and better.

Q: You said three months ago if player doesn’t get along with coach, the player is gone. Where does Marbury stand right now considering some of the things he said?
Thomas: I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: I am loyal to winning. I am not loyal to any singular individual. I love all the players. I like them all. But I’m about winning and if we can make our team better, then I’m going to do what I need to do to make our team better. If that means trading a couple, two, three, four players, I want to win. I’m committed to that. That’s my only agenda, is to try to put together a winning basketball team.

What is the point you are trying to make with those transcripts?

Posted by SlimPack:

when did herb say marburys role should be diminished?

anyway as for the 16-13 turning to 2-15. while I will admit becuase of the huge descrepancy between the two records, the team to a degree must have given up. at the same time, factors one also has to consider is h20's less than successful return to the lineup, and then abrupt departure from it back to the IR, crawford's inury, and tim thomas's injury (although he was only injured breifly).

I dont know if I buy the 4 coaches have not been empowered to succeed thing, but I do agree that not letting lenny keep his assistants, in favor of aguire, and herb and those guys was pretty stupid of Isiah.

Posted by holfresh:

I don't know about that Herbs hinting he will be playing Marbs less thing...I just can't remember that... Oh well...