what is difference in his first year here than anywhere else he's been? his first year is always one with the worst record and then you see improvements over the next 2 years as he starts bringing in his guys.
This is not true. Please check out: http://www.basketball-reference.com/coaches/brownla01c.html to see that LB has had teams that start fast, slow and in between.
His biggest turnaround was always known as the "David Robinson rookie year turnaround" until LB arrived here in NYC. The Spurs were awful in '89, they only won 21 games. Then David Robinson showed up in '90 and they won 35 more. Either Robinson is a 50 greatest player or the Spurs just coincidentally "bought in" at the same moment that DR showed up.
so one year down and it's a bad year win/loss wise. can we see what happens over the next two as he brings in his players?
Sure we can. We can also say LB was god-awful this year. If Garnett shows up here next year and averages 10/5/2, then we can say KG has been playing terrible during next year, despite his past accomplishments or future possibilities. It is just an observation, and I really think it is as obvious as the color of the sky.
if the celtics had a coach like lb, riles, or don nelson, who has had a track record of taking crappy teams and turning them around, then i would agree with the celtics fans. i've changed alot as a fan this year. i realized how really important coaching is and how important it is to establish a system and bring in players to fit the system, as opposed to bringing in a coach to complement the players. every coach has a system, some systems are proven more effective than others. so lb has a system based on individual players sacrificing their own personal achievements for the betterment of the team goal. it's been a tough transition for many players here. some are doing it and some aren't and it's especially tough when the guy who's the best player and the point guard not seeing eye to eye with the coach.
But the difference is that nobody changes his style more to suit his players more than Don Nelson, and Riley is willing to adjust too. Only LB seems to have this system which he refuses to change, in NYC that is, in Philly LB let Iverson shoot as soon as he crossed mid-court. That wasn't much of a ball-sharing team. Those coaches don't peel their players in the press like LB either. Riley will let a shot loose now and again, but not licentiously like LB does.
and when lb reveals the team weaknesses, what exactly is he doing? he's asking for ball movement, he's asking to protect the ball, he's asking to play defense. we haven't played defense all year long. but you actually see some growth in that department in some of our players. we haven't protected the ball all year long and that goes to alot of our guys just not having that high a bball iq. and by asking players to expand their game and put them in situations they're not accustomed to...does make them better...if they want to be. i still don't get the gripe.
I'm sorry I don't get it. He is exposing them in an attempt to ask them to do better? Wouldn't it make more sense to play the players in a style geared to their abilities, get their value up, then ship them out for the type of players you want, rather than trying to make silk purse out of sow's ear?
do you truly believe this team will be crappy the next two years? do you really give a sh t that lb has a big ego and just don't want him to succeed b/c of it? lb is not a quick fix guy. let it marinate before you all go nuts on him.
I think it is quite possible for this team to be crappy for two more years, which will make them crappy for the whole Millenium/Century thus far.
And where do you get the impression that I don't wan't LB to succeed? As long as he is the coach of the Knicks, I want him to succeed. Otherwise, I couldn't give a rip about him.
Also, I am not going nuts on him. I am simply writing what I observe. If anyone is going nuts on anybody, LB is going nuts on us!
oohah
[Edited by - oohah on 04-03-2006 01:18 AM]
