NardDogNation wrote:We can all say we'd hire Jackson in retrospect but if you had a 23 win, $100+ million roster in the media capital of the world, would you hire a rookie head coach with no coaching experience AT ALL? Unlikely.

I have argued against MJax for this reason and the pressure in NY and the franchise would not give him the room to grow as a coach.

would he be the coach he is today if he was the knick coach? Would he even have survived? Maybe MDA did the best job because he did not adapt? Linsanity would never have happend!

Relax y'all, I think MDA was teh wrong guy for a Melo lead team, but premelo the roster changes were frequent.

NardDogNation wrote:We can all say we'd hire Jackson in retrospect but if you had a 23 win, $100+ million roster in the media capital of the world, would you hire a rookie head coach with no coaching experience AT ALL? Unlikely.

if i am walsh and i have been hired by dolan's knicks with a ton of pressure from stern, after the team and dolan has been referred to as "not a model of intelligent management" i have carte blanche to hire whomever i wish as a coach, especially a guy who used to play for me in indiana.

the assumption in this thread is that walsh sucked because of all this alleged pressure that ny puts on a franchise.

well guess what... that pressure led to year after year of incompetence and failure. so if i am walsh i have a ****-ton of leverage to do as i please.

come 2010 even if i still get duped by lebron i still have a team and likely have enough cap space to work with going forward. and i would NOT go after carmelo anthony!

even as things unfolded.... d'antoni, gallinari, etc. i would never have pulled the trigger on the melo trade. and i would have "retired" as soon as my way of doing things was co-opted-- which is exactly what walsh did.

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:We can all say we'd hire Jackson in retrospect but if you had a 23 win, $100+ million roster in the media capital of the world, would you hire a rookie head coach with no coaching experience AT ALL? Unlikely.

if i am walsh and i have been hired by dolan's knicks with a ton of pressure from stern, after the team and dolan has been referred to as "not a model of intelligent management" i have carte blanche to hire whomever i wish as a coach, especially a guy who used to play for me in indiana.

the assumption in this thread is that walsh sucked because of all this alleged pressure that ny puts on a franchise.

well guess what... that pressure led to year after year of incompetence and failure. so if i am walsh i have a ****-ton of leverage to do as i please.

come 2010 even if i still get duped by lebron i still have a team and likely have enough cap space to work with going forward. and i would NOT go after carmelo anthony!

even as things unfolded.... d'antoni, gallinari, etc. i would never have pulled the trigger on the melo trade. and i would have "retired" as soon as my way of doing things was co-opted-- which is exactly what walsh did.

Actually he didn't accept a pay cut when his new contract was negotiated.

that's the surface situation.

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:We can all say we'd hire Jackson in retrospect but if you had a 23 win, $100+ million roster in the media capital of the world, would you hire a rookie head coach with no coaching experience AT ALL? Unlikely.

if i am walsh and i have been hired by dolan's knicks with a ton of pressure from stern, after the team and dolan has been referred to as "not a model of intelligent management" i have carte blanche to hire whomever i wish as a coach, especially a guy who used to play for me in indiana.

the assumption in this thread is that walsh sucked because of all this alleged pressure that ny puts on a franchise.

well guess what... that pressure led to year after year of incompetence and failure. so if i am walsh i have a ****-ton of leverage to do as i please.

come 2010 even if i still get duped by lebron i still have a team and likely have enough cap space to work with going forward. and i would NOT go after carmelo anthony!

even as things unfolded.... d'antoni, gallinari, etc. i would never have pulled the trigger on the melo trade. and i would have "retired" as soon as my way of doing things was co-opted-- which is exactly what walsh did.

Actually he didn't accept a pay cut when his new contract was negotiated.

that's the surface situation.

I don't think Dolan was begging for Walsh to stay. There was a lot of outrage regarding the fact that Walsh was offered a pay cut at the time but remember Dolan was told to hire Walsh. I think he was ready to move on.

walsh was forced on dolan. when stern says publicly that the knicks franchise is not a model of intelligent management and "requests" that dolan bring in someone like, say, walsh-- then the two years of stewardship could not possibly elapse fast enough.

CrushAlot wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

3G4G wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Nalod wrote:Pacers are non starphuching and have good value. Might not ever get over the hump but things are not looking that up for us at the moment either.

They are not pretty and would not draw celebs to MSG but they have a young team.

Differnet ways for differnt markets.

Lets hope a legendary resurection and a defining moment by our Golden Mooby!

i don't know about that. once we got duped by lebron and were "stuck" with stat as the main guy on the knicks we could have continued to build the right way, starting with upgrading at pont guard since felton was on a short and cheap contract. who knows who else we may have been able to draft or acquire? at least we'd have genuine hope to go with youth.

right now the pacers team is in a better position to upset the heat than the knicks. really good team!

kudos to walsh. dolan didn't deserve a guy like walsh anyway.

Walsh is a better gm when moves don't need to be made. Guys brought in on his watch since the draft last year, Plumlee, Young, Mahini and Augustin. Walsh had a pretty flawed plan in NY and came away with Amare after letting young guys leave and trading draft picks. A lot of teams were romanced by the potential of getting LBJ but the Knicks may have come out the worst. I keep asking myself what if Walsh just hired MJax.

Walsh....

hiring D'Antoni

signing Amar'e

drafting Gallo

drafting Hill

using additional 2009 first on Toney Douglas

trading with Morey

Waiting too late to trade David Lee

Were huge blunders. Now you could say the Gallo pick was okay.....but not when assessing what our roster needed at the time it wasn't a good pick. All the other moves led to really bad situations in which we never maximized any of them.

The best thing I think Walsh does is oversee decisions that are being made not actually making them and sticking up for his people in a professional manner. Somewhat of a double talker and sour graper. Hiring Pritchard was a good move by him though for the Pacers, the rest of what you see in Indy is all Bird.

Even the Gallo pick was a mistake in my opinion. Gallo is a very good player but the Knicks had Lee and Wilson already. There were too many good players that filled needs available when Gallo was picked.

Didnt we desperately need a PG at the time too? Or was that Hills draft?

I think the Hill draft was the one where the Knicks targeted Curry and Rubio. Jennings was there when they picked. Holliday was as well but he wasn't rated as high as the other guys at the time.

I remember some were clamoring for Johnny Flynn too. Let's not forget Lawson was there along with the pick being available for trade(20 I believe). The Wolves drafted 2 point guards prior to the pick. What they wanted was a future first with protection and most certainly it would have been worth it. Instead Denver said we'll oblige. Supposedly scuttlebutt at the time was Kahn and Walsh would eventually strike a deal favorable for us, because Kahn was Waslh's understudy....lol

We let that opportunity pass by and instead gave the Lakers $3mil in cash plus a 2011 second rounder for Douglas, when we were over the cap... which means we were also paying Tax on Douglas' salary that year and in 2010.

Walsh was so negligent in many ways. I really didn't like him as a GM at all here.

Lawson was the guy I was targeting. I said of all the point guards I felt he was the best from that crop and I still do. A strong case can be made for Curry and Jrue being better but it's not absolutely clear cut.

Nalod wrote:

ChuckBuck wrote:

Nalod wrote:

Silverfuel wrote:Wow, just read a page of posts where NardDogNation is schooling posters. Walsh definitely hurt the Knicks. That Amare contract is going to kill the next 2 years.

Really think Walsh was the driver to bring in Amare? You really think this is a signiture Walsh move? With everything you know about Dolan, the starphuch manifest, and impatience that this is the kind of contract he would build his legacy on to return to new york and bring a championship?

Everyone entitled to his opinion.

Yes. He(Walsh) even stated as so, back in 2010 that he was going to sign 1 maybe 2 free agents with the cap space HE freed up for the Knicks the last few years. He said Lebron was one Plan A, then he said he Plan B etc.

Plan A) Lebron B)Wade C)Bosh or Boozer D)Nowitzki E)Kobe F)Joe Johnson etc....Z)Amare Stoudemire

All his contingency plans fell through the sewer as everyone shafted the Knicks...Walsh signed STAT in desperation to save face.

Lets be clear, the record speaks for itself so Im not here to defend the legacy, just my interpretation.

I am forever thinking that an owner is the ultimate driver of a team. Nobody signs a 100million player with the health issues and insurance issues without the owners blessing. There are countless owners who are involved in many phases of decisions and I would have to say that the one constant thru the Jimmy era is the starphuch.

Ultimately the job of a president or GM is to take the hit for owner becuase the brand identity has to continue when a change is made. We celebrated Layden departure, Isiah's arrival, his departure, Donnie, and all the coach's over the years because we love our team. When the owner becomes the defacto face of the franchise there is a bigger problem because he won't go away so fast. Cube has made a positive impact and he has his trophy, as did Al Davis of the Raiders, but when it goes bad its hard to wipe the image away unless you hire people around you and fade away.

LIke Steinbrenner did. After a great run in the late 70's George had pissed off Reggie, made the whole Winfield debacle a mess and when he stepped away and let baseball people run things they became a modern dynasty!

Dolan is awful and he won't put his face on the franchise which is a good thing, but that does not mean he does not have big imput thru the organization.

NY and the Knicks have to take a big approach to be successful. Knicks have to compete with other entertainment to attract the $. There are 3 NHL teams, another NBA team, Two NFL teams, Two MLB teams, and minor league baseball and pro soccer. Indy has the Colts and the Pacers. Portand has the Blazers. OKC is also a one team city.

Back to Walsh and the job he did, my take is if you look at the way the Pacers were constructed over the many years there were few where they were bad. Even Isiah as the coach was a regular season success. Walsh's teams were tough and home grown and while no championships, in teh same time frame we did not win either.

So the real question is "who to blame" becomes the real focus? Since Checketts was let go we as fans love to blame the coach's (a long list) and Grunfeld, Layden, Isiah, Donnie and in time Grunfeld will get his. The one constant has been the owner. Dolan made the presentation to Lebron, Dolan was the one who finished the Melo trade when Walsh was resisting the price. Im going to guess Dolan had his hand in Amare. Donnie is long gone.

I started this thread not to rub in the face the knicks were going down but the view that Donnie/Bird have had a long vision and system to which their teams are built. Even bringing in Vogel, the youngest NBA coach and one without the star power is much different than what the knicks do. Woodson was not a starphuch but MDA and to me was a solid addition. The kind of non star moves we should be making!

With Hill's concussion its a sudden turn that gives a glimmer of hope that maybe we can turn this around and in the end the knicks will prevail and Walsh won't have the laugh.

Walsh was at the helm when we signed Amare so if you want to pin it on him I guess its fair game. He has proven to be an organizational kind of guy who never said a bad word about the team or Dolan. He played the MSG game as it is written.

A guy like that I defend because he returned order to the team and paved the way for what we have now. Love my knicks but don't love this roster. That don't make me a hater, its just my take.

I am discouraged the knicks fiscal health is not consistant with what hard core fans want.

So your call is that it's was Dolan's idea to bring in Amare and not Walsh's idea...Or Since Dolan has to sign off on a 100 mil contract, it is ultimately his decision???

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:We can all say we'd hire Jackson in retrospect but if you had a 23 win, $100+ million roster in the media capital of the world, would you hire a rookie head coach with no coaching experience AT ALL? Unlikely.

Absolutely but Mark is one of my favorite knicks and I think his character and knowledge were underrated at the time. I also think Walsh would have hired him. Mark is from NYC, was a Knick twice, and was broadcasting Net games at the time. Walsh had a chance to do something a little risky that would have most likely turned out great.

Smarts don't always translate to success in any respective field. Some of the smartest people I know I functionally retarded. It takes a combination of intellect and resourcefulness to get anything done. Clearly, Jackson had what it takes to be a solid NBA coach but he could very well be the aberration to the rule and could've had much different results in NYC. This place has eaten Hall of Fame coaches alive (see Larry Brown, Lenny Wilkins, Hubie Brown, etc.) so I'd be hesitant to hand things over to a rookie coach without coaching experience, especially one that I like as a person (or at least who I assume he is as a person).

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:We can all say we'd hire Jackson in retrospect but if you had a 23 win, $100+ million roster in the media capital of the world, would you hire a rookie head coach with no coaching experience AT ALL? Unlikely.

Absolutely but Mark is one of my favorite knicks and I think his character and knowledge were underrated at the time. I also think Walsh would have hired him. Mark is from NYC, was a Knick twice, and was broadcasting Net games at the time. Walsh had a chance to do something a little risky that would have most likely turned out great.

Smarts don't always translate to success in any respective field. Some of the smartest people I know I functionally retarded. It takes a combination of intellect and resourcefulness to get anything done. Clearly, Jackson had what it takes to be a solid NBA coach but he could very well be the aberration to the rule and could've had much different results in NYC. This place has eaten Hall of Fame coaches alive (see Larry Brown, Lenny Wilkins, Hubie Brown, etc.) so I'd be hesitant to hand things over to a rookie coach without coaching experience, especially one that I like as a person (or at least who I assume he is as a person).

3G4G wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

3G4G wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Nalod wrote:Pacers are non starphuching and have good value. Might not ever get over the hump but things are not looking that up for us at the moment either.

They are not pretty and would not draw celebs to MSG but they have a young team.

Differnet ways for differnt markets.

Lets hope a legendary resurection and a defining moment by our Golden Mooby!

i don't know about that. once we got duped by lebron and were "stuck" with stat as the main guy on the knicks we could have continued to build the right way, starting with upgrading at pont guard since felton was on a short and cheap contract. who knows who else we may have been able to draft or acquire? at least we'd have genuine hope to go with youth.

right now the pacers team is in a better position to upset the heat than the knicks. really good team!

kudos to walsh. dolan didn't deserve a guy like walsh anyway.

Walsh is a better gm when moves don't need to be made. Guys brought in on his watch since the draft last year, Plumlee, Young, Mahini and Augustin. Walsh had a pretty flawed plan in NY and came away with Amare after letting young guys leave and trading draft picks. A lot of teams were romanced by the potential of getting LBJ but the Knicks may have come out the worst. I keep asking myself what if Walsh just hired MJax.

Walsh....

hiring D'Antoni

signing Amar'e

drafting Gallo

drafting Hill

using additional 2009 first on Toney Douglas

trading with Morey

Waiting too late to trade David Lee

Were huge blunders. Now you could say the Gallo pick was okay.....but not when assessing what our roster needed at the time it wasn't a good pick. All the other moves led to really bad situations in which we never maximized any of them.

The best thing I think Walsh does is oversee decisions that are being made not actually making them and sticking up for his people in a professional manner. Somewhat of a double talker and sour graper. Hiring Pritchard was a good move by him though for the Pacers, the rest of what you see in Indy is all Bird.

Even the Gallo pick was a mistake in my opinion. Gallo is a very good player but the Knicks had Lee and Wilson already. There were too many good players that filled needs available when Gallo was picked.

Didnt we desperately need a PG at the time too? Or was that Hills draft?

I think the Hill draft was the one where the Knicks targeted Curry and Rubio. Jennings was there when they picked. Holliday was as well but he wasn't rated as high as the other guys at the time.

I remember some were clamoring for Johnny Flynn too. Let's not forget Lawson was there along with the pick being available for trade(20 I believe). The Wolves drafted 2 point guards prior to the pick. What they wanted was a future first with protection and most certainly it would have been worth it. Instead Denver said we'll oblige. Supposedly scuttlebutt at the time was Kahn and Walsh would eventually strike a deal favorable for us, because Kahn was Waslh's understudy....lol

We let that opportunity pass by and instead gave the Lakers $3mil in cash plus a 2011 second rounder for Douglas, when we were over the cap... which means we were also paying Tax on Douglas' salary that year and in 2010.

Walsh was so negligent in many ways. I really didn't like him as a GM at all here.

Lawson was the guy I was targeting. I said of all the point guards I felt he was the best from that crop and I still do. A strong case can be made for Curry and Jrue being better but it's not absolutely clear cut.

Truth telling time, I was one of those guys lobbying for Johnny Flynn and then Jordan Hill when he was taken, lol. Guess I made some boo-boos, LMAO.

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:We can all say we'd hire Jackson in retrospect but if you had a 23 win, $100+ million roster in the media capital of the world, would you hire a rookie head coach with no coaching experience AT ALL? Unlikely.

Absolutely but Mark is one of my favorite knicks and I think his character and knowledge were underrated at the time. I also think Walsh would have hired him. Mark is from NYC, was a Knick twice, and was broadcasting Net games at the time. Walsh had a chance to do something a little risky that would have most likely turned out great.

Smarts don't always translate to success in any respective field. Some of the smartest people I know I functionally retarded. It takes a combination of intellect and resourcefulness to get anything done. Clearly, Jackson had what it takes to be a solid NBA coach but he could very well be the aberration to the rule and could've had much different results in NYC. This place has eaten Hall of Fame coaches alive (see Larry Brown, Lenny Wilkins, Hubie Brown, etc.) so I'd be hesitant to hand things over to a rookie coach without coaching experience, especially one that I like as a person (or at least who I assume he is as a person).

Walsh knew him from his time in Indiana and wanted him before D'Antoni became available. The guy had quite a pedigree. He played point guard for JVG in three places because Jeff was so impressed with him as a player and high character guy. I think he was as close to a sure thing as there was but I have always been a big fan of Mark.

To each his own I suppose. Some solid NBA coaches that had coaching experience beforehand, got off to really rocky starts in their head coaching career like Mike D'Antoni. He ended up getting fired in Denver and sent adrift before resurrecting his career/reputation in Phoenix. Because of the nature of the game, coaches are always the first to be sacrificed when things go south and often times it isn't even their fault. I think the averaging coaching career for a coach with a franchise is only 2-3 seasons, which isn't enough time to learn on the job especially with so much competition for only 30 spots. I think Jackson was able to beat the odds in GS because the expectations were so low and he so well liked, that they were willing to grow with him. I doubt that happens in NY.