Pretty scathing sendup of the Jackson NYK era.
"When asked at his end-of-year talk what he liked from KP this season, Jackson said, in part, that he was proud of a game in which Porzingis didn’t take a 3 because “they’re a cheap way to get points.” WHY DON’T YOU WANT YOUR TEAM GETTING CHEAP POINTS, JACKSON?"
Phil Jackson Has Run the Knicks Into the Ground - (
New Window )
that is what he said, not what the dailynews is spinning
Increasingly it seems to me his success was predicated on going to the franchises that had the greatest players of that era. It would have been much more of a barometer for success had he stayed in Chicago after Jordan left and won more championships; Much like Red Auerbach did with the Celtics after the Russell era.
No shit a coach needs to have great players to win championships. However, there is more to the job than managing egos. For all of Phil's talk about 3 pointers, I've NEVER seen a team that spaced the floor as well as his Lakers and took advantage of Shaq's passing and guys like Rice, Horry, Fox, and Ariza to bang threes. The floor was so well spaced that when the double came and the ball was kicked out, it was nearly impossible for the defense to recover and get to the open man.
I don't think that's clear at all. Add a good player in this lottery, remove the dead wood, and add another good player in the next lottery and the team could look a lot different in 15 months. I'm not advocating Phil get endless amount of time to turn this around, but I'm comfortable with seeing where we are next year at this time.
I didn't think signing Jackson made any sense. The most troubling thing going on now is that apparently KP isn't bought into whatever Jackson is selling. WTF? How many teams in the NBA have a player revolt? It just never ends with this franchise.
But the culture that PHIL is building seems to be one of petty recriminations. A culture based on the personalities of the two heads of Knicksland -- Phil and Dolan -- is doomed to fail. They're two assholes. The culture in LA and CHI I think was more set by MJ and Kobe than Phil. Phil managed the stars, the stars managed everyone else.
Also, I think there is a lot to the premise of the Ringer piece that he cares more about proving that the Triangle is the key to basketball than he does seeing the Knicks win.
First off, I thought his strength would be changing the culture and perception around the Knicks, but that's been his weakness. Somehow, he's made it worse which isn't easy to do.
Secondly, he def got lucky that we imploded as bad as we did. If we just missed the playoffs or just squeeked in, we'd be in a bad spot.
All that being said, the franchise is in the best position we've been in, in a long time. We have young players to build around. We have young players that can fill out a roster and grow into solid role players. We have a premium pick and our important future picks. Unlike GM's of the past, while going for a quick fix, he didn't mortgage the future and that's a plus.
I'm hoping that this is a learning experience and Phil will get better at his job, but when you hired him, he needs to be given the appropriate time to succeed.
1. I dont think that when we hired him that anyone expected him to alienate our players or the league's biggest star. The meddling with the coaches is also hurting the team. He's behaving like an asshole, and the fact that he is the incumbent head BB man is not an excuse for that.
2. The notion that he needs time is severely undercut by the fact that he has not, to date, undertaken any sort of long term plan. Rather, in at least 2 of the 3 seasons he has sold the team to fans as intended to be competitive. If we are now in a real rebuild, it's a pivot by him that is basically forced by the failure so far and the fact that we cant pull top UFAs, it's not the long simmering plan.
never going to win regardless of if jackson stays or goes
Quote:
Would be a huge mistake. Starting over again would be a bad move. We have to have a coaching staff and management in place for some consistency or this is going to happen over and over. The fans want to fire everybody so hold on to somebody and build some kind of culture.
But the culture that PHIL is building seems to be one of petty recriminations. A culture based on the personalities of the two heads of Knicksland -- Phil and Dolan -- is doomed to fail. They're two assholes. The culture in LA and CHI I think was more set by MJ and Kobe than Phil. Phil managed the stars, the stars managed everyone else.
Also, I think there is a lot to the premise of the Ringer piece that he cares more about proving that the Triangle is the key to basketball than he does seeing the Knicks win.
The guy who wrote "The Letter" exposed himself as an asshole, yet he's now the owner of defending NBA Champions. Why? Because of luck. Even the Warriors got lucky with Curry dropping to the seventh pick. (I'm no drafting wizard, but I sure as fuck would've taken Curry ahead of Flynn and Rubio at the time.) Is Sam Presti the same genius if Greg Oden isn't the number 1 pick and Durant is? Yes, Presti has shown himself to be really good at the job in other drafts, but luck is a indisputable part of being good in the NBA. The Knicks haven't been lucky at all. I love KP... I'd rather have KAT.
1. I dont think that when we hired him that anyone expected him to alienate our players or the league's biggest star. The meddling with the coaches is also hurting the team. He's behaving like an asshole, and the fact that he is the incumbent head BB man is not an excuse for that.
2. The notion that he needs time is severely undercut by the fact that he has not, to date, undertaken any sort of long term plan. Rather, in at least 2 of the 3 seasons he has sold the team to fans as intended to be competitive. If we are now in a real rebuild, it's a pivot by him that is basically forced by the failure so far and the fact that we cant pull top UFAs, it's not the long simmering plan.
1. He's always been the type of guy to use the media to get his point across and motivate certain players to change. It certainly backfired this time. All that said though, I think it was a calculated move to get Melo to want to leave. Regarding Lebron...Eff him and his soapbox. I think you can certainly make a fair case that he's been acting like an ahole and it hasn't worked.
2. True to a point. Yes, he's attempted to make the team competitive, but he's also done that with an eye on the future. So he's put himself in a position to be able to pivot to a total rebuild. Again, I'll bring up the past few GM's who have attempted to be competitive, but sold off our future to make that happen. So when it didnd't work, there was no ability to pivot to a rebuild, they could just dig the hole deeper.
Chandler quit and stole checks in 2013-2014. JR Smith was such a headache that the Knicks needed to pair him with Shumpert just to get rid of him (despite JR having a REASONABLE contract). While I hated taking back Calderon in the Chandler deal, I had and still have zero problem with these 3 players being shipped off.
and whoever said the knicks have been rebuilding for 20 years are talking out of their ass, every gm went for the quick fix, even the great donnie walsh who spilled his guts to the media about what he wanted to do at every second..
but i can see what type of thread this is going to be so you gentleman have fun and have a good day
Quote:
He has alienated Carmelo rather than give him a better supporting case. Relatively wasted JR Smith and Shumpert.
Chandler quit and stole checks in 2013-2014. JR Smith was such a headache that the Knicks needed to pair him with Shumpert just to get rid of him (despite JR having a REASONABLE contract). While I hated taking back Calderon in the Chandler deal, I had and still have zero problem with these 3 players being shipped off.
so it was smart to "sell low" on those guys? Ok, sure.
so it was smart to "sell low" on those guys? Ok, sure.
Keeping people around who're quitters and assholes isn't in the best interest of any organization either. JR Smith was NEVER going to improve his value in this setting because his entire issue was non-basketball related.
If we take out the Ewing years can you tell me when the Knicks haven't been rebuilding over the past 50 years? As far as I can tell, aside from the Ewing years, the Knicks haven't been a legitimate contender for an NBA title since the 70s. Maybe you're right and success is just around the corner but it's not like we haven't heard that before.
Quote:
whoever said the knicks have been rebuilding for 20 years are talking out of their ass, every gm went for the quick fix, even the great donnie walsh who spilled his guts to the media about what he wanted to do at every second..
If we take out the Ewing years can you tell me when the Knicks haven't been rebuilding over the past 50 years? As far as I can tell, aside from the Ewing years, the Knicks haven't been a legitimate contender for an NBA title since the 70s. Maybe you're right and success is just around the corner but it's not like we haven't heard that before.
the definition of rebuilding is tearing it down building from scratch, when have the knicks ever done that?
The difference between me and you is IDGAF about press conferences. A press conference has never won a championship in any sport. Draft picks, OTOH, win most of the NBA championships. This team has been almost completely lacking in picks during Phil's tenure. It would be one thing if it was HIS fault they didn't have draft picks, but it's not.
Literally not one person would say Phil's tenure has been "good". However, I'm willing to give him these 3 draft picks and see where we are in 12 months. I don't see how that's being a homer unless you're one of these people who think Phil is the root cause of all evil.
Quote:
whoever said the knicks have been rebuilding for 20 years are talking out of their ass, every gm went for the quick fix, even the great donnie walsh who spilled his guts to the media about what he wanted to do at every second..
If we take out the Ewing years can you tell me when the Knicks haven't been rebuilding over the past 50 years? As far as I can tell, aside from the Ewing years, the Knicks haven't been a legitimate contender for an NBA title since the 70s. Maybe you're right and success is just around the corner but it's not like we haven't heard that before.
I don't think you know what rebuilding is. The Knicks rebuilt once when Walsh took over. At no fault of his, he didn't rebuild the right way. He sold off everything and mortgaged the future to try and rebuild through FA, but that obviously didn't work. Other than that, we haven't been rebuilding at all before Phil. We've been trying for the quick fix, retool which has been a disaster.
so it was smart to "sell low" on those guys? Ok, sure.
+1. Knicks have absolutely the most short-sighted fans. All players are assessed based on what they are this very moment. People declare with certainty what rookies will become. Guys who are not playing well suck and should be dumped ASAP.
TC's last year here he was a .143 WS48 player. So significantly better than average starter. The next season he was back over .200. Basically, should have been an all star (except you dont get allstar nods for defense).
The Rose deal played out as the worst case scenario. That scenario is creating cap space and losing Lopez and Grant which is no big deal at all. Certainly not a panic move.
Signing Lee was a solid move. He's got a fair deal and should be an asset to the organization. He fit a need, certainly not a panic move.
Signing Noah was the only move that could be considered a panic move. Phil believed that he was the missing piece and took a big chance. I was ok with signing Noah, just not more than 2 years. You can certainly make the case that this was a panic move.
All in all, he didn't panic last offseason. He made calculated risk moves that didn't all work out, but didn't hurt the future of this team either.
Quote:
so it was smart to "sell low" on those guys? Ok, sure.
+1. Knicks have absolutely the most short-sighted fans. All players are assessed based on what they are this very moment. People declare with certainty what rookies will become. Guys who are not playing well suck and should be dumped ASAP.
TC's last year here he was a .143 WS48 player. So significantly better than average starter. The next season he was back over .200. Basically, should have been an all star (except you dont get allstar nods for defense).
There's a difference between a guy not playing well because he suffered a severe or nagging injury and a guy who's cashing checks and not giving requisite effort. It's one thing if a guy who normally shoots well has an off year shooting the ball. It's another when a guy whose game is so dependent on effort clearly and obviously rolled that effort back. Why would anyone expect someone who does something like that to improve in the same setting the next year? Why would you want to keep someone around who did something like that?
You might think Chandler's effort wasn't an issue that year. I did. Phil did. Tyson has made comments in reference to how Phil viewed him on the floor and in the locker room.
Quote:
so it was smart to "sell low" on those guys? Ok, sure.
Keeping people around who're quitters and assholes isn't in the best interest of any organization either. JR Smith was NEVER going to improve his value in this setting because his entire issue was non-basketball related.
JR was 6th man of the year for a division winner. A little over a year later he needs to be moved at all costs? That's just dumb short-sighted nonsense.
Agree. Phil basically admitted the Rose trade was in part a result of his exit meeting with Melo last year where Melo stated his case for a dynamic PG. So out goes a decent PG in Grant and a solid/reliable center in Lopez and in comes Rose/Noah. Funny how a year later Phil has gone from making big moves like that to appease Melo to now trying forcing him out the door. Melo is the same player today that he was in that meeting last year. In other words, Phil has no plan.
Quote:
worse, he takes his 1 press conference of he year as an opportunity to absolve himself of any blame. Total asshole.
The difference between me and you is IDGAF about press conferences. A press conference has never won a championship in any sport. Draft picks, OTOH, win most of the NBA championships. This team has been almost completely lacking in picks during Phil's tenure. It would be one thing if it was HIS fault they didn't have draft picks, but it's not.
Literally not one person would say Phil's tenure has been "good". However, I'm willing to give him these 3 draft picks and see where we are in 12 months. I don't see how that's being a homer unless you're one of these people who think Phil is the root cause of all evil.
far from the only difference my friend. 3 years, 3 coaches, 166 losses, underming the coach (except for his butt boy Rambis), complete organizational diysfunction, signing Melo with a no move clause, then trashing him on social media, bad signings, fleeced on trades, but yeah, you're not a homer, just an idiot.
Quote:
In comment 13434086 Victor in CT said:
Quote:
worse, he takes his 1 press conference of he year as an opportunity to absolve himself of any blame. Total asshole.
The difference between me and you is IDGAF about press conferences. A press conference has never won a championship in any sport. Draft picks, OTOH, win most of the NBA championships. This team has been almost completely lacking in picks during Phil's tenure. It would be one thing if it was HIS fault they didn't have draft picks, but it's not.
Literally not one person would say Phil's tenure has been "good". However, I'm willing to give him these 3 draft picks and see where we are in 12 months. I don't see how that's being a homer unless you're one of these people who think Phil is the root cause of all evil.
far from the only difference my friend. 3 years, 3 coaches, 166 losses, underming the coach (except for his butt boy Rambis), complete organizational diysfunction, signing Melo with a no move clause, then trashing him on social media, bad signings, fleeced on trades, but yeah, you're not a homer, just an idiot.
Is that necessary? You're incapable of disagreeing with someone without name-calling?
JR was 6th man of the year for a division winner. A little over a year later he needs to be moved at all costs? That's just dumb short-sighted nonsense.
Your first sentence didn't mean anything anyore... it would've been great if it did. They had to give the Cavs someone else in order to take JR off of their hands. That's how non-existent the market was for JR Smith. JR Smith got fined and benched, yet his behavior hadn't changed.
I generally agree that you don't want to trade a player when their value is at it's lowest. But the problem becomes what is the expectation of a guy raising his value and will it be at the expense of keeping him around the organization longer? It think the argument for letting Chandler stick around and raise his value is stronger than it was with JR Smith.
Knicks constantly trade guys at the bottom of their value, attaching assets to guys who could be assets themselves given a little time.