^^ Salient points abeer3. I've said my piece about why I'm ok if it comes down to Phil being brought in if Jim can't do what he's promised. But yours has been the most convincing post to me about not bringing him in. While it's true that Phil has played the savior role here a couple/few times now and has done a brilliant job of it, it's not clear that he can pull off the same kind of magic if given complete executive power over basketball ops. And as others have mentioned, the conflict of interest aspect of a power couple in Jeannie and Phil controlling all the day to day of the franchise is a potentially dangerous one that no doubt would have worried the great Jerry Buss. Basically, I hope it doesn't come down to something such as this. I'm hoping the FO gets their act together and delivers on what they have been saying they will do for some time now. We know the roadblocks they ran into getting here: the Stern veto of the CP3 trade, Nash and Howard being a bust, Kobe tearing the Achilles, and not enough appeal to get the top tier FA's here the past couple years. But that's all in the past. They have a clean slate with no Kobe any more, a ton of money and a deadline over their heads. They need to perform.
No. I'd like a complete re-boot. We have the fresh new players to develop, pick up another stud in the draft and find that not so old star to lead as well as blend it with them. On top of that, out with the old and in with the new for both coach and maybe in the future...owners.
Not me, but that's not the reason I don't want Phil. All indications are that he's married to the Triangle and I'm not. Although @revgen says that Phil says differently. I don't know. There's a lot of evidence to support him being married to the Triangle and not a lot to support him being open to any motion offense...
@therealdeal I found a tweet by Phil that confirms what I mentioned earlier. For those who don't want to search through the long article he wrote, here's the important part. "How that is done can include using the [triangle] system of basketball, but doesn't exclude other systems that include group play." Now Phil obviously prefers the triangle since he's more familiar with it and has won multiple championships using that particular system, but he's not opposed to other system offenses if they are a better fit for the personnel on the floor.
I still don't want Phil here, because I think we need to go a completely new direction, maybe even a relatively younger direction, but I appreciate the points revgen is making and showing the rational side of that argument. I want some stability and some people in this for the long-haul, and at Phil's age, I'm not sure how much left he has to give, to put his all into this, and for how long. So we get Phil for a few years, and then he gets tired and wants to retire, then we have to start all over again like the last time he was fired. No, I want to start all over again NOW.
Thanks for the detective work rev. I'm not doubting you at all, honestly I'm doubting Phil. I hear him, but when I look at what he's doing I think maybe he's not actually going to do the things he says he's going to do. Otherwise how do you justify hiring Rambis long term and pushing the Triangle to the point where your star get so sick of it that he's okay leaving as has been rumored? I think this statement is a long form way for him to go to LA and still be okay hiring Luke who will run a motion offense that's got some Triangle sets, but also more like what the Spurs and Warriors do.
The Knicks don't have a good roster, they don't have a head coach, the season is over, and Phil is holding little triangle mini-camp teaching class things.? http://nydailynews.com/sports/baske...-triangle-seminar-mini-camp-article-1.2606233 Get a coach, get some better players, THEN teach THOSE guys, lol. What in the world is the point in holding a little triangle camp when guys have checked out, want to go on vacation, or already are on vacation? Talk about old school and out of touch. This is not a man I want coming in to run our franchise after Jim. Love the dude, coached our teams to 5 titles, but this is not coaching, he is out of his depth. If Jeannie really has some evil plot going on to keep B0ron and handicap Jim on purpose so she can fire him and bring in Phil, I don't want her running things either, that's ruling with emotion, not what's best for the franchise.
And inviting outside players not in the playoffs To learn the tri and get some pampering Is not called coaching It's called tampering....
I think I agree, Weezy. We can't just run back to Phil every time things look ugly. Phil is an old man, and he won't live forever (unfortunately). It'd be nice to find a good young coach out there who we could lock up for a long time to help build this team up. I think that is why the likes of Luke Walton are so attractive. If he can be brought in and if he does well and the team starts to improve he could be a solid head coach for us through multiple championships and Russell and Randle's careers. I love Phil, but it is time to look elsewhere. We just don't need another Mike Brown, Mike D'Antoni, or Byron Scott. Let's get someone who can coach effectively. Luke Walton has proven that with the right personnel, he can get the job done. Do the Lakers have the right personnel at the moment? No, but perhaps we can in a couple years when this team is really put together.
ok, i'll be the nitpicky jerk: phil Jackson's writing leaves a lot to be desired. this really has little to do with the thread, just something that struck me as I was reading that excerpt. and carl rogers would not have been a fan of most of pj's top players, and perhaps aspects of pj's own behavior, fwiw. of course, carl would not have said such a thing...which is part of the point...
You and i may be the only two here who know wtf you're talking about...I agree with you, whole-heartedly btw.
