knicks1248 wrote:BigDaddyG wrote:knicks1248 wrote:shouldn't we focus on a head coach who's had success as a NBA head coach, or should we continue to hire in experience coaches that have done nothing good for us (fisher, fiz, Jh) now you guys want mike like he was killing it
How do you define success? Hornacek was close to being coach of the year one season. Fiz was everyone's darling his first playoff season. Success usually starts with stability in the front office.
A winning record is having success
We have hired solid guys that would make good assistant coaches including Miller, but they are not NBA head coaching material.
what makes matter worse is that we give these young in experience coaches super flawed rosters to work with that's voided of stars, leaders or even above avg talent, they have no system, no identity, and a losing culture to build off of.
Ok, but those guys aren't coming to this situation. We're either gonna look at who are new or guys who have had success, but are damaged. A lot, of guys want Atkinson, but he started in a similar fashion to Miller. Heck, Kerr was a bust executive with no coaching experience. We brought in
in the same manner Thibs would potentially be hired. We've tried it all and failed. Ultimately, It's not a manner of bringing in Woodson, Thibs etc. We need stability at the top. I think Miller showed he had solid coaching chops. Why keeping spinning the merry-go-round? This team had 30 win talent and Things got them to perform to that. Are any of the candidates out there going to do better? Maybe, but it is doubtful.
Always... always remember: Less is less. More is more. More is better and twice as much is good too. Not enough is bad, and too much is never enough except when it's just about right.
- The Tick