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

Execs even state that what LB was doing was wrong !!!
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 3 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
6/24/2006  9:51 AM
hoofah...I guess the knick fans are coming back in full force.

one thing I noticed in defending brown and last year, it's one or two examples against a plethora examples to the contrary.

Experts, analysts, all say one thing, and the response is, he did it for a reason.

But heaven forbid we say anybody else in the knick organization "did it for a reason" and it's malarky.

LB was the cancer. A highly paid cancer.

[Edited by - rvhoss on 06-24-2006 09:53 AM]
all kool aid all the time.
AUTOADVERT
OasisBU
Posts: 24138
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 6/18/2002
Member: #257
USA
6/24/2006  10:15 AM
Posted by rvhoss:

hoofah...I guess the knick fans are coming back in full force.

one thing I noticed in defending brown and last year, it's one or two examples against a plethora examples to the contrary.

Experts, analysts, all say one thing, and the response is, he did it for a reason.

But heaven forbid we say anybody else in the knick organization "did it for a reason" and it's malarky.

LB was the cancer. A highly paid cancer.

[Edited by - rvhoss on 06-24-2006 09:53 AM]



I am right there with you - I think LB has talent as a coach but look at his recent jobs...Olympics - disaster and he played a big role in that, 76ers - that scenario is looked on in a much better light today then it was at the time he was there, the guy was dysfunctional there. So he took the pistons to the finals, then got dysfunctional in detroit too. Is it a surprise what he did with the Knicks? I dont think so. To the extent that it god bad, maybe, but there was definitely the possibility for trouble when he was signed.

As far as him being a cancer, I totally agree. He badmouthed his players to the media, you just dont do that. He couldnt set a starting lineup, that was rediculous. He showed zero class in NY and NY showed him none when he got booted out the door. End of story, thank god its over, and hopefully next season will be better.
"If at first you don't succeed, then maybe you just SUCK." Kenny Powers
martin
Posts: 79163
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/24/2006  1:03 PM
Posted by oohah:
and then there is Crawford. Didn't know his role. Started some games but came of the bench for most. SG or PG? 20 minutes 1 game, 46 the next. Didn't deter him from giving 100% OR getting better for the duration of the season.

Kinda shoots that theory, doesn't it?

I don't think it shoots Ewing's theory. Did JC improve? I don't know if he really did, we'll see next season. Maybe he had improved coming in to this season, but he did not get the chance to show until the end of the year. It's tough to tell.

We know this for sure, Crawford played a lot better once he got consistent time, unfortunately by then we were in the last 15%-20% of the season. He definitely improved his performance over the earlier part of the season when he did not know when or how he was going to play.

Granted, lineups changes, substitution patterns were not obvious, minutes varied. But contracts are guarenteed and so should effort be guarenteed, and that did not happen from everyone on this team.

I think that the effort of the coach should be guaranteed with his $50,000,000 contract as well. Maybe he set a bad example for the players when he started acting like they couldn't win before the season even started, and they followed his lead?

oohah

we shall disagree about JC. Last 2 years he was a chucker and someone who shot a LOT more threes then free throws and constantly shot those fall back jumpshots. This year, under LB, he went to the basket more, had a lot more midrange game and wasn't as much of a chucker. That's improvement. Dramatic? Not really, but improvement non the less.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
martin
Posts: 79163
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/24/2006  1:06 PM
Posted by EwingsGlass:

[quote]Posted by martin:
and then there is Crawford. Didn't know his role. Started some games but came of the bench for most. SG or PG? 20 minutes 1 game, 46 the next. Didn't deter him from giving 100% OR getting better for the duration of the season.

Kinda shoots that theory, doesn't it?

Granted, lineups changes, substitution patterns were not obvious, minutes varied. But contracts are guarenteed and so should effort be guarenteed, and that did not happen from everyone on this team.

As a moral highground, yes, effort should be guaranteed from every player. However, this "lack of effort" is merely a symptom of disenfranchisement. Crawford wanted to get traded. So did Qrich. They showed different symptoms of disenfranchisement. It is a fact that Crawford's total performance was exceptional in every category when he was getting prime minutes everyday in April. Other times during the year, he was putting up games with 0, 1 or 2 assists. All I am saying is that players perform better when they have a vested interest in the outcome of the game and they are treated with a certain degree of dignity. I don't think my theory is totally without merit.

I would agree that your theory is totally not without merit. So is mine though (that effort should and could have been given regardless of what LB did).

Also, you are going to have to explain to me how you can tell that JC and Q wanted to get traded and that's where their effort came from. You can't, and can't say that that was the reason they gave effort.

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
martin
Posts: 79163
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/24/2006  1:07 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
and then there is Crawford. Didn't know his role. Started some games but came of the bench for most. SG or PG? 20 minutes 1 game, 46 the next. Didn't deter him from giving 100% OR getting better for the duration of the season.
Please...he had a few good months. Next time he has a good season will be his first.

Bonn welcome to the converation. Feel free to tell me where I said JC had a good season.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
martin
Posts: 79163
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/24/2006  1:09 PM
Posted by Killa4luv:
Posted by martin:

and then there is Crawford. Didn't know his role. Started some games but came of the bench for most. SG or PG? 20 minutes 1 game, 46 the next. Didn't deter him from giving 100% OR getting better for the duration of the season.

Kinda shoots that theory, doesn't it?

Granted, lineups changes, substitution patterns were not obvious, minutes varied. But contracts are guarenteed and so should effort be guarenteed, and that did not happen from everyone on this team.
Martin this is a crock of BS. Crawford plays well in the final month after we are mathmatically eliminated from even mattering. I cannot stand here and let you and others paint Crawford as the great student of Browns Bball tutaledge. Craw was inconsistant throughout, improvement schmovent. So I guess its okay to sabotage your team if you can get 1 player on the whole roster to play well in the garbage time of the season?

Killa, get a hold of yourself and reread the thread and the point at which I injected my comment. It has absolutely nothing to do with what you responded to. Are you even reading what I posted or just posting with blinders on?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
EwingsGlass
Posts: 27716
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 4/29/2005
Member: #893
USA
6/24/2006  1:41 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by EwingsGlass:

[quote]Posted by martin:
and then there is Crawford. Didn't know his role. Started some games but came of the bench for most. SG or PG? 20 minutes 1 game, 46 the next. Didn't deter him from giving 100% OR getting better for the duration of the season.

Kinda shoots that theory, doesn't it?

Granted, lineups changes, substitution patterns were not obvious, minutes varied. But contracts are guarenteed and so should effort be guarenteed, and that did not happen from everyone on this team.

As a moral highground, yes, effort should be guaranteed from every player. However, this "lack of effort" is merely a symptom of disenfranchisement. Crawford wanted to get traded. So did Qrich. They showed different symptoms of disenfranchisement. It is a fact that Crawford's total performance was exceptional in every category when he was getting prime minutes everyday in April. Other times during the year, he was putting up games with 0, 1 or 2 assists. All I am saying is that players perform better when they have a vested interest in the outcome of the game and they are treated with a certain degree of dignity. I don't think my theory is totally without merit.

I would agree that your theory is totally not without merit. So is mine though (that effort should and could have been given regardless of what LB did).

Also, you are going to have to explain to me how you can tell that JC and Q wanted to get traded and that's where their effort came from. You can't, and can't say that that was the reason they gave effort.

Again, I think you misunderstand me. I agree every player should always give full effort (although we know that doesn't happen, look at Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady etc..). I am saying that Larry Brown disenfranchised players. Some players reacted to this by playing with no effort. Some players suggested they would like to leave NY. Lack of effort is one symptom related to disenfranchisement. Desire to abandon NY is another symptom, mutually exclusive from effort.

My point:
1) Players were disenfranchised.
2) Some players reacted by "giving up".
3) Some players reacted by requesting trades (not that they provided "extra effort").
4) Some players verbalized their disenfranchisement in the media.
5) Brown caused this disenfranchisement by his poor communication skills, lack of consistency in lineups, playing time, etc...(see above)
You know I gonna spin wit it
martin
Posts: 79163
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
6/24/2006  2:07 PM
Posted by EwingsGlass:
Posted by martin:
Posted by EwingsGlass:
Posted by martin:

[quote]and then there is Crawford. Didn't know his role. Started some games but came of the bench for most. SG or PG? 20 minutes 1 game, 46 the next. Didn't deter him from giving 100% OR getting better for the duration of the season.

Kinda shoots that theory, doesn't it?

Granted, lineups changes, substitution patterns were not obvious, minutes varied. But contracts are guarenteed and so should effort be guarenteed, and that did not happen from everyone on this team.

As a moral highground, yes, effort should be guaranteed from every player. However, this "lack of effort" is merely a symptom of disenfranchisement. Crawford wanted to get traded. So did Qrich. They showed different symptoms of disenfranchisement. It is a fact that Crawford's total performance was exceptional in every category when he was getting prime minutes everyday in April. Other times during the year, he was putting up games with 0, 1 or 2 assists. All I am saying is that players perform better when they have a vested interest in the outcome of the game and they are treated with a certain degree of dignity. I don't think my theory is totally without merit.

I would agree that your theory is totally not without merit. So is mine though (that effort should and could have been given regardless of what LB did).

Also, you are going to have to explain to me how you can tell that JC and Q wanted to get traded and that's where their effort came from. You can't, and can't say that that was the reason they gave effort.

Again, I think you misunderstand me. I agree every player should always give full effort (although we know that doesn't happen, look at Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady etc..). I am saying that Larry Brown disenfranchised players. Some players reacted to this by playing with no effort. Some players suggested they would like to leave NY. Lack of effort is one symptom related to disenfranchisement. Desire to abandon NY is another symptom, mutually exclusive from effort.

My point:
1) Players were disenfranchised.
2) Some players reacted by "giving up".
3) Some players reacted by requesting trades (not that they provided "extra effort").
4) Some players verbalized their disenfranchisement in the media.
5) Brown caused this disenfranchisement by his poor communication skills, lack of consistency in lineups, playing time, etc...(see above)

fair enough.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
newyorknewyork
Posts: 30255
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #541
6/24/2006  2:52 PM
Larry Browns job was to eliminate any excuse for a player to not play with effort. Find a way to get the best out of all his players. Using whatever tactic he got to use to get it to them. Put all his players in a position to succeed given there strengths even if they are all redundant. Example If we have 3 talented scoring combo guards then we should have one of the top scoring 3 somes at guard in the league. Definatly try to expand players games to his liking, but don't depend on it until it becomes a strength. Develop Curry, Frye, Lee, Nate, Crawford. He gets an overall F

Isiahs job was to work with Larry Brown, work the phones, scout, and all that good stuff trying to find the players that Larry wants. And gradually turn the roster over to Larry's liking with smart moves. He only brought in one player(Woods) to Larry's liking. He gets an F

Players job were to just listen to the coach. And do what ever the coach says with 100% effort, Even if they aren't put in position of strength. Never question just do. They get an F

Everyone played there part in the horrible season.

For the future this organization needs to get every person on the same exact page, and have way better communication throughout of what each persons goals and expectations are.
https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
6/24/2006  3:47 PM
Posted by martin:
Posted by Bonn1997:
and then there is Crawford. Didn't know his role. Started some games but came of the bench for most. SG or PG? 20 minutes 1 game, 46 the next. Didn't deter him from giving 100% OR getting better for the duration of the season.
Please...he had a few good months. Next time he has a good season will be his first.

Bonn welcome to the converation. Feel free to tell me where I said JC had a good season.
So the one player that LB turned around here really just turned around to the point where his season was still not good? Exactly what theory does that "shoot down" (to use your words)?
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
6/24/2006  9:29 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by martin:
Posted by Bonn1997:
and then there is Crawford. Didn't know his role. Started some games but came of the bench for most. SG or PG? 20 minutes 1 game, 46 the next. Didn't deter him from giving 100% OR getting better for the duration of the season.
Please...he had a few good months. Next time he has a good season will be his first.

Bonn welcome to the converation. Feel free to tell me where I said JC had a good season.
So the one player that LB turned around here really just turned around to the point where his season was still not good? Exactly what theory does that "shoot down" (to use your words)?

Now I HATE SAS, but here in Buffalo, there is no BBall talk and since I can get about half an hour of his show off espn podcast and I am almost garaunteed at least 10 minutes of bball talk I listen to him, and he brought up two great points.

#1-Of all the "stars" that Larry coached-David Robinson, Reggie Miller, Allen Iverson, Chauncy, Rip-They ALL hated him when he was there. Despided him even, but it was only after he left they all appreciated what he did to them and turned them into. They ALL responded to his "technique"(I'll get to that in a minute). They only "star" he has coached-in the NBA- that has not responded to him was Marbury.

#2-Larry's technique for motivating you is harsh but it is what it is. He gets you to play better by getting you to play better by insulting you. He wants you to get pissed at him and PROVE HIM WRONG.That is what he tries to do. Anger you into getting better-according to SAS.

#3-Everything that Larry has done here-from wanting all these guys traded, bothering the GM, making his own trade offers, talking to the press...This is nothing new to LB. He has done it everywhere, for 30 years. Was he making a power play? Possibly, BUT there is no difference in his pattern here than anywhere else, except in his poor coaching decisions.
-On a side note, SAS was on Mike and Mike in the Morning the Friday. At the begining of the show, Greeny was yelling from the top of the mountain that Larry threw games. Tanked the season. They had 3 truly basketball related guests on first Bucher than towards the end of the show SAS and Lupica. With Bucher, he sort of tap danced around the subject and with SAS and Lupica he didn't even come close to bringing it up.

As a side note, SAS was uber-harsh on the players-especially Marbury-he was just str8 RIPPING him up. But definately said there was enough blame to go around. Said these players have never faced up to a tough situation and these players all backed down in the face of adversity.

~You can't run from who you are.~
Bobby
Posts: 22094
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/18/2003
Member: #408
USA
6/24/2006  10:49 PM
where did all the brown signatures go to
"Like they always say, New York is the Mecca of basketball,"I read that in Michael Jordan books my whole life and I played here in the Big East tournament, so it's always fun to play in the Mecca of basketball."---Rip Hamilton
rvhoss
Posts: 24943
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 11/2/2004
Member: #777
Switzerland
6/24/2006  11:03 PM
none of larry's superstars that hated him liked him during the first year. This is marbury's first year with him as a coach, to say he is the only person that hadn't responded is premature and incorrect. SAS is all talk. but I still like him.

And to listen to marbury so far, he's already responded AFTER HE LEFT. It's a self fulfilling prophecy...larry brown always makes a team better and they appreciate him after he's gone.

Upper management was just annoyed by it and wanted him out. If everyone did a bad job and failed, then the low man on the totem pole gets the boot.

On the knicks, larry's low man. (players don't get fired)

[Edited by - rvhoss on 06-24-2006 11:04 PM]
all kool aid all the time.
joec32033
Posts: 30631
Alba Posts: 37
Joined: 2/3/2004
Member: #583
USA
6/25/2006  5:03 AM
Posted by rvhoss:

none of larry's superstars that hated him liked him during the first year. This is marbury's first year with him as a coach, to say he is the only person that hadn't responded is premature and incorrect. SAS is all talk. but I still like him.

And to listen to marbury so far, he's already responded AFTER HE LEFT. It's a self fulfilling prophecy...larry brown always makes a team better and they appreciate him after he's gone.

Upper management was just annoyed by it and wanted him out. If everyone did a bad job and failed, then the low man on the totem pole gets the boot.

On the knicks, larry's low man. (players don't get fired)

[Edited by - rvhoss on 06-24-2006 11:04 PM]

That first paragraph is right and wrong. None of the guys like him but they did perform while he was with them. They didn't suddenly get better after he left. They got better while he was here and played better with him as their coach, then he would leave. SAS said Larry's style is grating, and he is absolutely correct. Steph did not respond when he was here, and I have no expectation that his game will overall improve now that he is gone. He probably will average his holy 20 and 8(becaue that is just what he has always averaged), but I don't think his overall game will improve.

As far as Marbury after her left (I am assuming you mean since word got out he was gonna be fired-I haven't heard any Knicks management or players talk since Thursday), I don't listen to anything Marbury says because he is alot of talk and very little bite, past experience proves that.

I agree that the Knicks took the easy and quick way out. Firing the coach is always easiest, but I am just saying easiest isn't always the right way to do it.

[Edited by - joec32033 on 06-25-2006 9:55 PM]
~You can't run from who you are.~
OldFan
Posts: 21456
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
6/25/2006  9:29 AM
Posted by crzymdups:

yeah, let's blow off two league execs confirming what we saw with our own eyes - that the way he handled the roster and playing time for guys who were doing well was odd.

meanwhile, maybe if we dig really hard we can find more reports from 34yr old 5'11" guys who played Eddy Curry in midnight pickup games who say Eddy didn't hustle to reaffirm our belief that it's really just all Isiah's fault.

I know that's my plan for the afternoon.

Didn't you see with your own eyes that Eddy Curry doesn't hustle and that IT is a terrible GM?

It's not all ITs fault - but even if Brown is the worst coach in the world - IT hired him.
Killa4luv
Posts: 27769
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
6/25/2006  9:44 AM
Posted by OldFan:

Didn't you see with your own eyes that Eddy Curry doesn't hustle and that IT is a terrible GM?

It's not all ITs fault - but even if Brown is the worst coach in the world - IT hired him.
In other words, its all Isiah's fault.
OldFan
Posts: 21456
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/24/2003
Member: #446
6/25/2006  9:45 AM
Posted by Killa4luv:
Posted by OldFan:

Didn't you see with your own eyes that Eddy Curry doesn't hustle and that IT is a terrible GM?

It's not all ITs fault - but even if Brown is the worst coach in the world - IT hired him.
In other words, its all Isiah's fault.


Well...
OngBok
Posts: 20899
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 5/1/2005
Member: #894
Thailand
6/25/2006  3:10 PM
Come on
Isiah Thomas will lead us back to the playoffs in 2006 !!!
Killa4luv
Posts: 27769
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
6/25/2006  11:28 PM
Old Fan is from the Larry Bronw school of contradiction. Say something. And then in the very next sentence, contradict your previous statement.
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
6/27/2006  3:28 PM
We have a lot of guys on our roster. Not everyone can get guaranteed minutes. Does that mean that those players that Isiah keeps out of the rotation have a right to not try hard when they are asked to play?
I just hope that people will like me
Page 3 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Execs even state that what LB was doing was wrong !!!
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