Please tell me neither of you believe this. Not even remotely. If you do, well, I honestly wouldn't have anything good to say so I would just say nothing.

Cosmic wrote:So would Skiles have this roster 5th in the East with a 45-34 record?

Please tell me neither of you believe this. Not even remotely. If you do, well, I honestly wouldn't have anything good to say so I would just say nothing.

i believe this team would be putting more emphasis on the importance of playing defense & i would see less players launching up 3 pointers at will with zero ball movement... to me that's a start... to me it's the philosophy i'm not happy with... i'm not sure how anyone can tell me i'm wrong for feeling this way (not that you are necessarily), it's called personal preference... i prefer a defensive minded philosophy, i think that gives us a better chance of winning in the long run & the great Knicks teams have always been known for it... if i was a fan of the run & gun West coast style of play i would have preferred Don Nelson to have remained as our head coach.

TMS wrote:

Cosmic wrote:So would Skiles have this roster 5th in the East with a 45-34 record?

Please tell me neither of you believe this. Not even remotely. If you do, well, I honestly wouldn't have anything good to say so I would just say nothing.

i believe this team would be putting more emphasis on the importance of playing defense & i would see less players launching up 3 pointers at will with zero ball movement... to me that's a start... to me it's the philosophy i'm not happy with... i'm not sure how anyone can tell me i'm wrong for feeling this way (not that you are necessarily), it's called personal preference... i prefer a defensive minded philosophy, i think that gives us a better chance of winning in the long run & the great Knicks teams have always been known for it... if i was a fan of the run & gun West coast style of play i would have preferred Don Nelson to have remained as our head coach.

Sure, more emphasis on defense would have been made, and sure it would be a good thing. I don't disagree on that.

Yet I still don't think it would have made a difference. Why? Look at the roster. Who is a defender? Maybe Skiles would have played Darko more. Maybe Skiles would have killed Darko in his sleep.

Remember, Skiles is old school. He will murder primadonnas. Our team was LOADDDDDEEDDDDD with them and still is.

Skiles would have bombed even FASTER. More so than Larry. Skiles takes NO SHIT from anyone. Curry would have died in practice. Lee wouldn't be on the team anymore. Nate would have been stuffed into a sewer. Darko's wife and daughter would have been raped.

Seriously, Skiles would have gone crazy here with these clowns. No way he would whip them into shape.

The guys we have (and had) weren't and aren't the type of players that respond to coaching. In fact they go the other way when pressed by a tough coach. They ball up and cry. They sabotage the situation.

So, no...I just don't think ANY coach could have done ANYTHING with this team.

Except maybe Lenny Wilkens. The ultimate players coach. Hey, he got Isiah's trash to play nearly .500 ball! Maybe he could have done it with these clowns.

Outside of that? No way not a chance.

Any game you can think of that Skiles might have won versus Mike losing? You can think of as many games Mike won that Skiles would have lost. Just think about that.

Cosmic wrote:Oh come'on. Not a chance.