Lakes should give him a raise if they want to keep him for rebuild in two years.

Of course, Adelman has a proven track record.

Proven he has not coached a champion.

They might look at success financially as going to conf. finals. That he has done.

Knicks could be the same thing. Build it to entertain and make money.

Its all about the "Product".

Nalod wrote:Adelman is a good hire if they keep the team intact.

Lakes should give him a raise if they want to keep him for rebuild in two years.

Of course, Adelman has a proven track record.

Proven he has not coached a champion.

They might look at success financially as going to conf. finals. That he has done.

Knicks could be the same thing. Build it to entertain and make money.

Its all about the "Product".

I want a chip more than anything else, but I'd settle for contention and tough playoff series, heated rivalries, and more of that 90's era determination to win. It is entertaining to try to win a chip and come up just short. Might not be as satisfying as getting rings, but it's worth doing for the sake of the game and us fans. I'm not suggesting that our ambition as a team should be to be almost-rans, but it's better than being first round losers every year. There are no guarantees in the NBA.

Moonangie wrote:

Nalod wrote:Adelman is a good hire if they keep the team intact.

Lakes should give him a raise if they want to keep him for rebuild in two years.

Of course, Adelman has a proven track record.

Proven he has not coached a champion.

They might look at success financially as going to conf. finals. That he has done.

Knicks could be the same thing. Build it to entertain and make money.

Its all about the "Product".

I want a chip more than anything else, but I'd settle for contention and tough playoff series, heated rivalries, and more of that 90's era determination to win. It is entertaining to try to win a chip and come up just short. Might not be as satisfying as getting rings, but it's worth doing for the sake of the game and us fans. I'm not suggesting that our ambition as a team should be to be almost-rans, but it's better than being first round losers every year. There are no guarantees in the NBA.

That's a beautiful point. In sports, teams can only be built to a certain level and then actually winning the chips comes down to circumstances and matchups and things that are outside the control of putting the roster together. In the NBA, I think you can build a team to get to that conference semifinals or conference finals every year, but then the difference in talent becomes so miniscule that it's hard to determine a winner on paper. The Lakers have just been a complete dynasty, but if you look at the other recent great runs, like San Antonio, Phoenix, Dallas, Boston, etc..., those teams don't win the chips very often. The Knicks haven't won in my lifetime, so I'd probably be able to deal with it if the Knicks won one chip and then broke up the team or whatever.
However, if the Knicks are good and play but Miami runs off the next 5 to 6 titles because they have James and Wade it'd be hard for me to be upset.

To Nalod's point, I think that saying that coach or player x or y hasn't won a ring is a pretty poor evaluation method. The Lakers aren't going to get an upgrade over Jackson, but Adleman has a track record of getting the most out of his talent, and that's exactly the type of coach LA needs at this juncture. We all know that winning is just as much or more about the players as it is the coaching.

Coaching-wise, the Knicks are better off keeping Pringle right now so they can fish for Phil Jackson if Mike can't get the job done.

JrZyHuStLa wrote:I don't think any all defensive team player wants Mike Dantoni coaching his team. The guy is a disrespect to professional basketball.