knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:

martin wrote:

Chandler wrote:
Does anyone else find it a little funny that with all of this turnover Fisher's name has not come up once

I agree with Nixluva's sentiment above and also believe that most consistently successful sports organizations have had "simpatico" between front office, back office, coaching, scout etc.

Agreed. Not sure why this is often times brought up with bad slant optics, as if it was suddenly invented by Phil and an oddball thing

Just read yet another article suggesting Phil hire the best coach and get out of the way! Which begs the question what's the criteria for "best coach available"? Does FIT for your team not factor into it? Why did Riley get rid of SVG? He was certainly better than Spoelstra as a young coach.

The criteria shouldn’t be the triangle, or if the coach is simpatico with Phil. The Knicks should look for the best coach, hire him and leave him alone. Of course, they may all be gone by the time Jackson ends his vacation.

http://www.northjersey.com/sports/basketball/new-voice-sought-but-is-phil-listening-1.1568481

Firstly, Riley didn't get of Stan for Spo, no idea how you tied those two together. All of the options out there presently are some pretty good ones, but if running the triangle is a true criteria, then all may decline. I don't think it is personally, but Phil has presented things to make it seem so.

I wasn't saying it was a direct from SVG to Spoelstra! The point was SVG is a quality head coach but Riley eventually went with Spoelstra. my point was WHY SPOELSTRA? Clearly it gave Riley more control and that's no different than what Phil is doing.

People criticize Phil for trying to do the same thing Riley did with the Heat. Riley came back and coached but Phil can't but instead gave Fish then Rambis a shot. Riley wanted to get more hands on:

Heat coach Van Gundy resigns; Riley returns

Dec 16, 2005

MIAMI -- Pat Riley and Stan Van Gundy walked off the dais
together Monday, then went in opposite directions.

Riley packed his tailored suits and headed back to the NBA
sidelines, looking to add another entry to his long and glowing
coaching resume. Van Gundy simply went home.

Months after he said he wanted to reclaim more of a hands-on
role with the team -- a comment that prompted rampant speculation he
was about to fire his former protege -- Riley returned to the
business of coaching. Van Gundy quit to spend more time with his
family, and will stay with the team in a limited capacity.

crzymdups wrote:

Chandler wrote:

crzymdups wrote:According to Berman and the Vertical (Woj), Joerger is headed to Sacramento and Grizzlies GM Chris Wallace may aim to join him there.

That's a huge indictment of the Grizzlies ownership, I'd say.

Anyway, we'll see what happens.

I hope this gives us a crack at Conley.

If Phil gives us Conley and Vogel this off-season, I will admit to feeling silly about all my criticisms of him.

Though if you put a gun to my head, I'd still predict Rambis is who Phil signs to be head coach.

I read an article that Joerger supposedly was quasi-secretly checking his options last season too (and this) and that was a reason he was relieved (i.e., for whatever reason he didn't want to be there); The Wallace stuff too was a big surprise.

I am not a fan of Conley but still see this as opportunity because if Sacremento gets Conley, then some other Sac guards might be options for us (not a fan of Rondo either)

One thing this all reminded me of was Jerry West: Grizz got really good because of him and then he left and ....; and then he went to GS and made them even better

In each case, West did not transform team over night. If we use him as an example we'd be more patient with Phil

Yes, Jerry West also got Shaq and Kobe Bryant for the Lakers. He has a track record as a brilliant talent evaluator and front office guy. He also built the Showtime Lakers in the 80s.

Phil does not have that track record yet.

You can't compare Phil to Jerry West, who is one of the best talent evaluators in the history of the game and basically the main reason Phil was able to win his second five rings in LA.

It should be noted that Jerry West was a mediocre coach - 140-100 or so in three seasons as Lakers coach. BECAUSE BEING A FRONT OFFICE EXECUTIVE AND COACH ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT JOBS.

He became Lakers GM in 1982 or something and was one of the best executives ever. NOT A GREAT COACH.

So, why is it that people think Phil, a truly GREAT coach, can also be a great executive? Riley is one of the few who was able to do it. Don Nelson, maybe, in Dallas, too. But the list is not too long of guys who have excelled in both roles.

All good points. My main argument is if it took Jerry time, we should be AT least as patient with Phil. He stole Kobe from Charlotte (for Divac). Shaq is a different story. And as far as talent goes he gave away Pau to the Lakers (always seemed fishy) and then in the next breath got Marc

Hey I wouldn't dismiss West's coaching. 140-100 record would get you 10mm+/year and complete autonomy from Minnesota and a bunch of other cities.

And I don't think being a great coach means you'll be a great GM or vice versa. I do think Phil is driven though. And he will make mistakes, but to equate that with incompetence or even to be unexpected is foolish. Also to equate deliberateness with being a bad GM or asleep at the wheel is foolish. SOmetimes the best thing you can do as an executive is avoid mistakes. Being "agressive" and "jumping" on this or that opportunity is great if it works out; but can be disaster if it doesn't. It can be tough to unwind mistakes -- See [choose your pick of prior bad contracts by Knicks].

Red A is a great example of someone who was great coach and GM.

Rambis is a known commodity and Phil knows Kurt can teach certain principles

On the other hand he's struggling w Kurt's ineffectiveness. If Kurt won more games he would have been named already

On the other hand he doesn't want to hire someone w a significant risk it will be Fisher II

Malcolm wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:If Phil wants Vogel i would think he could easily have him and the only other team i could see him chosing over the Knicks job would be the Houston job since they already have a good team and a owner that will spend money.

Not sure I see that Houston is such a great destination. Howard and Harden are both problematic.

But you're asking the right general question: What teams are more attractive than the Knicks (?)

Houston (?) No.
Sacramento (?) No.
Indiana (?) No.
Minnesota (?) Maybe (talent).
Phoenix (?) No.

Howard is gonna opt out and leave Houston though which i see as a good thing for Houston. Howard brings problems in the locker room with his childish ways and other players don't like that and Houston will be better off without him and still have some good players that they can take the Howard money and add to with J.Harden, T.Ariza, P.Beverley, C.Capela, S.Dekker, M.Harrell and D.Motiejunas.

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/WojVerticalNBA/status/728955809250430978

This would infuriate me.

I was going to say I could see Memphis snapping up Vogel- I think that's where he'll end up and it would be a nice fit for him.

Every team without a head coach is gonna have F.Vogel at the top of their list so seeing that Memphis will be interested is just what i expected when i saw they fired Joerger. If Phil wants Vogel i would think he could easily have him and the only other team i could see him chosing over the Knicks job would be the Houston job since they already have a good team and a owner that will spend money.

Vogel to houston? funny

I think D'Antoni to Houston would be funnier.

I don't think that is funny at all. Howard would obviously have to be shipped out and that is a good thing anyway cause he is the softest player in the league.

Vogel has no chance to go there.

I love how you always talk in facts but never post any facts in what you say...hahahahah

crzymdups wrote:

Chandler wrote:^ I think he's debating a bird in the hand (rambis) vs two in the bush

Rambis is a known commodity and Phil knows Kurt can teach certain principles

On the other hand he's struggling w Kurt's ineffectiveness. If Kurt won more games he would have been named already

On the other hand he doesn't want to hire someone w a significant risk it will be Fisher II

I honestly do think that Phil still wants Rambis, but due to his ineffectiveness the likes of Dolan, Mills, Melo are questioning and maybe even objecting to the move.

Hmmm I'm sure he cares what they think. But I'm also confident that he thinks he's the smartest guy in the room when it comes to this stuff.

nixluva wrote:

knickscity wrote:

nixluva wrote:

martin wrote:

Chandler wrote:
Does anyone else find it a little funny that with all of this turnover Fisher's name has not come up once

I agree with Nixluva's sentiment above and also believe that most consistently successful sports organizations have had "simpatico" between front office, back office, coaching, scout etc.

Agreed. Not sure why this is often times brought up with bad slant optics, as if it was suddenly invented by Phil and an oddball thing

Just read yet another article suggesting Phil hire the best coach and get out of the way! Which begs the question what's the criteria for "best coach available"? Does FIT for your team not factor into it? Why did Riley get rid of SVG? He was certainly better than Spoelstra as a young coach.

The criteria shouldn’t be the triangle, or if the coach is simpatico with Phil. The Knicks should look for the best coach, hire him and leave him alone. Of course, they may all be gone by the time Jackson ends his vacation.

http://www.northjersey.com/sports/basketball/new-voice-sought-but-is-phil-listening-1.1568481

Firstly, Riley didn't get of Stan for Spo, no idea how you tied those two together. All of the options out there presently are some pretty good ones, but if running the triangle is a true criteria, then all may decline. I don't think it is personally, but Phil has presented things to make it seem so.

I wasn't saying it was a direct from SVG to Spoelstra! The point was SVG is a quality head coach but Riley eventually went with Spoelstra. my point was WHY SPOELSTRA? Clearly it gave Riley more control and that's no different than what Phil is doing.

People criticize Phil for trying to do the same thing Riley did with the Heat. Riley came back and coached but Phil can't but instead gave Fish then Rambis a shot. Riley wanted to get more hands on:

Heat coach Van Gundy resigns; Riley returns

Dec 16, 2005

MIAMI -- Pat Riley and Stan Van Gundy walked off the dais
together Monday, then went in opposite directions.

Riley packed his tailored suits and headed back to the NBA
sidelines, looking to add another entry to his long and glowing
coaching resume. Van Gundy simply went home.

Months after he said he wanted to reclaim more of a hands-on
role with the team -- a comment that prompted rampant speculation he
was about to fire his former protege -- Riley returned to the
business of coaching. Van Gundy quit to spend more time with his
family, and will stay with the team in a limited capacity.

Come on now Nix, you know the Phil haters don't wanna hear about this because they know it's true and might take the attention off of the Phil hate. Riley absolutely did what they say Phil is doing but since Riley was able to get Shaq to come join Wade and win a championship and then he lucked into Lebron setting up him and Bosh taking their talents to Miami to win more championships then Riley will never receive all the crap from the fans and media like Phil's getting. It's a joke.

newyorker4ever wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

newyorker4ever wrote:

smackeddog wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/WojVerticalNBA/status/728955809250430978

This would infuriate me.

I was going to say I could see Memphis snapping up Vogel- I think that's where he'll end up and it would be a nice fit for him.

Every team without a head coach is gonna have F.Vogel at the top of their list so seeing that Memphis will be interested is just what i expected when i saw they fired Joerger. If Phil wants Vogel i would think he could easily have him and the only other team i could see him chosing over the Knicks job would be the Houston job since they already have a good team and a owner that will spend money.

Vogel to houston? funny

I think D'Antoni to Houston would be funnier.

I don't think that is funny at all. Howard would obviously have to be shipped out and that is a good thing anyway cause he is the softest player in the league.

Vogel has no chance to go there.

I love how you always talk in facts but never post any facts in what you say...hahahahah

You tell me why vogel is not a candidate? 2 guesses :-)

crzymdups wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sam_amick/status/729738931353223168

Joerger to Sacramento before Phil even woke up from his nap.

Pretty sure Phil wasn't high on Joerger. What's the point of bashing Phil based on every single coach that gets hired? It doesn't make sense. There's no law that Phil has to interview every single coach in existence to prove he's doing his job.

crzymdups wrote:

nixluva wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sam_amick/status/729738931353223168

Joerger to Sacramento before Phil even woke up from his nap.

Pretty sure Phil wasn't high on Joerger. What's the point of bashing Phil based on every single coach that gets hired? It doesn't make sense. There's no law that Phil has to interview every single coach in existence to prove he's doing his job.

The point is that he's a better coach than Rambis and he didn't even get a phone call.

Also, a secondary point is that the good coaches have not been on the job market very long. Thibs was hired a week after the regular season ended. Walton was hired during the playoffs from another job. Joerger was out of a job for about 48-72 hours.

You really think Vogel is going to be around very long? It'd be nice if Phil actually interviewed some of these guys to see if they're a fit before they get hired somewhere else.

Vogel will have a job by the end of the week. Probably sooner. I hope Phil is wise enough to at least interview the man first.

Knicks should probably send you hourly updates so that you know they are doing something and don't freak out so much

crzymdups wrote:

martin wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

nixluva wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/sam_amick/status/729738931353223168

Joerger to Sacramento before Phil even woke up from his nap.

Pretty sure Phil wasn't high on Joerger. What's the point of bashing Phil based on every single coach that gets hired? It doesn't make sense. There's no law that Phil has to interview every single coach in existence to prove he's doing his job.

The point is that he's a better coach than Rambis and he didn't even get a phone call.

Also, a secondary point is that the good coaches have not been on the job market very long. Thibs was hired a week after the regular season ended. Walton was hired during the playoffs from another job. Joerger was out of a job for about 48-72 hours.

You really think Vogel is going to be around very long? It'd be nice if Phil actually interviewed some of these guys to see if they're a fit before they get hired somewhere else.

Vogel will have a job by the end of the week. Probably sooner. I hope Phil is wise enough to at least interview the man first.

Knicks should probably send you hourly updates so that you know they are doing something and don't freak out so much

He wasn't coming here!