I've never been a Mike Brown fan, but he proved me wrong this season. Maybe he needed some more seasoning as an assistant before he was ready to win it all as a head coach. And in fairness, it's not like he hadn't gotten close to a title previously. I definitely agree with the Thibs/Ime comparisons. Both of them vocally and visibly berate their players, they play their starters way too many minutes, they're focused primarily on defense and hustle, and they appear to have a ceiling as a head coach. Unfortunately we're doomed to waste at least one more year on Ime, but hopefully Rockets management finally realizes they've hired a Thibs/Mark Jackson type who's not the right longterm fit for this team.
We’ll be a better team *clap*clap* once we move on from Nigerian Thibs @ThatboyPhuong @Bobbythegreat Spoiler https://nypost.com/2026/06/17/sports/james-dolans-wild-ride-to-knicks-championship-owner/ “We loved Thibs, we really did, I held him in high regard,” Dolan said. “It would not surprise me at all, by the way, if Thibs comes back and coaches a championship team because I think you could still win that way.” Sometimes you can see the “but” coming a mile away. “Thibs was kind of old style. Right? Like Red Holzman, right, everything comes through me, and I’ll guide us through. He’s very good at that, but that sort of obviated the need for all these other people. Mike Brown had a different view. He had a different approach. And you look at our team, in the Finals. Everyone was healthy. There is little argument there. One of the little-discussed but essential parts of last Saturday was this: In Game 101 of the season, the Knicks had no injury report. “Everybody was in top form for the Finals,” he said. “And that doesn’t happen overnight. That was very carefully orchestrated and monitored every week. And it really paid off. I mean, if you put it together, the year before, we went into the playoffs, we had a lot of injuries. The somewhat old style of relating to the players, and so on. I mean, I think, actually, that was a huge difference.”
The Knicks play this year reflects the hand of both Thibs (defense) and Brown (offense). It is like a 40/60 split, not to discount Brown.
No. Thibs would have probably only given some off the bench minutes for Robinson to cover KAT’s foul problems, and almost no minutes at all to their other bench players. Brunson played less than 40 minutes in games 1 to 3! And in his heroic game 5 he only played 41 minutes. Thibs would have played him (and OG, Bridges and Hart) 45 minutes from game 1, which would have driven the Knicks players to making mistakes in crunch time, and ultimately lose the series.
Exactly! He knows how to use his bench in a real smart way. Sure, he mostly uses his starting 5, but he knows the importance of 10-12 minutes rest to his starters throughout games, and he’s flexible - like in game 4 when he gave Alverado minutes in the 4th instead of Bridges who had a bad day. Thibs and Ime would’ve insisted on keeping Bridges on the floor - it’s pretty much their way even in regular season, so there’s no question when it comes to playoffs.
Honestly, when you see the types of coaches that win it all, it's not the Thibs/Udoka types. Those type of coaches clean up your team and instill good habits, but that will only carry you so far. You only have too look at who has won recently, and it's definitely not the hard nosed clap-clap-play-harder type of coaches who berate players. People skills and taking accountability for your coaching rather the blaming the players makes a big difference. Letting your players make mistakes along the way to learn from them instead of shaming them publicly and benching them instills confidence. Using your bench effectively instead of constantly using a short rotation gets morale up and everyone playing together, while reducing injuries and increasing intensity during the moments on the actual court. Simply put, Sil@ss was the absolute worst in the league, but to just settle for a decent coach like Udoka ain't gonna cut it, he is incapable of providing the system necessary for our players to succeed, making all of them look worse than they really are.
Brown pulled off a Kerr. Jackson built the Warriors foundation then Kerr took it from there. Brown took Thibodaux's foundational work to a championship run.
The biggest difference between Mike Brown and the Thibs/Ime types is not really about the minutes, it's the mindset that leads to the minutes. The Thibs and Udokas of the world are glass half empty guys, they are risk averse and they prioritize defense over anything else so if they have a roster with 4 high level defenders, the ENTIRE rotation is based around putting those 4 guys in a place to minimize the defensive weaknesses of the rest of the guys. The problem is it means you burn out our defensive aces because some combination of that group HAS to play the full 48 AND since you are so overly focused on defense, you are bringing guys like Okogie and DFS in to supplement the minutes even though they are trash offensively and that puts even more pressure on playing guys like KD astronomical minutes for his age. With a guy like Mike Brown and even Mitch Johnson - they are more willing to experiment and give up some defense for better offense at times. That would NEVER happen with Ime/Thibs. THAT is the difference between them. Ime is looking for lineups that make sense defensively first rather than the best overall lineup and honestly - that would be fine if we had a top 3 defense, but we didn't at all last year. If I'm the GM of this team, my conversations with Ime goes something like this: - we understand and value your defensive focus but at the end of the day you have to be held accountable to what you are able to accomplish with the roster you are given and we continue to see a pattern of defense over offense even when the defensive personnel make the team worse overall. I am challenging you for the betterment of this team and as a point of emphasis for your growth as a coach to be willing to experiment with lineups you are uncomfortable with in an effort to find the best team lineups in the aggregate and not just the the best defensive lineups over 48 minutes. Your value to the org at this point is not just in what you know, it's what new you can learn about this team every year and if you aren't seeing new learning lessons with this team, then it means we are not doing enough to push our team to grow. Guys like Thibs and Ime know a lot about defenses but the best coaches are always learning and experimenting. You can be a subject matter expert on the bench as an assistant coach, but the head coach needs to be challenged to tap into a different role that activates the whole team - not just the specialty they hold domain expertise in.
I live in NY and was born in Htown. Watched every game this year and last year for NY. Ime is Thibbs. They both overplayed starters so they were tired and didnt use his bench HAD NO OFFENSE. Mike is the opposite and he kept trying things until they worked. I could write pages and pages of differences and how the talent isnt really different from last year the biggest difference is how Brown used the talent. For instance when they were down big in game 4 of the finals Mike played EVERYONE. He was trying to find anything that worked and what worked for them was playing Alvarado next to Jalen and the Spurs were bamboozled and hadnt planned for something like that. Two fast small guards who can shoot pass defend and penetrate. They had to leave one of them open and Jose made them pay. The Spurs could no longer double Jalen and Jalen made them pay. In the Hawks series he moved Towns to a Sengun type role where he ran the offense and that bamboozled Atlanta and then the Knicks dominated them. Neither Ime or Thibbs would do those changes if they hadnt already had that as a main cog in their "offense". When Ime and Thibbs are losing they only make defensive changes. When Mike Brown is losing he tries EVERYTHING.
We will never know. Kerr and Brown won in their first year. They already had experienced teams and core players that went through several playoffs together and had most of the roster in tact from those playoff runs. The previous coaches on these teams never reached the finals. Boston was in a transition after Walker and Heyward left. They didn’t make the playoffs the previous year with a .500 record. Udoka took that team to the finals after a 17-19 record in Jan. That’s signs of a good coach. Mazzula failed to reach the finals the next season even with the addition of Brogdon and won with a rebuilt team with the addition of 2 star the season after that in 23-24.
This isn’t accurate at all. There’s a negative perception of Udoka among fans despite evidence to the contrary and nothing to support these accusations. For some reason Rockets fans see tough coaching and discussions as berating. Meanwhile Popovich has built a career out of tough coaching and a highly demanding style yet seen as great without any judgement or stigma attached to his name. Both Tatum and Brown loved Udoka. They praised that he was able to let them play according to their talent and style. Many players and coaches respect Udoka including Popovich. Udoka is also a collaborative coach, which is a new school of coaches. He relies heavily on his staff. Thibs has been described as an old school guy who only believed in one voice. Knicks players even questioned Thibs in public during the season. None of the Rockets players have done this in the 3 years Udoka has been here. Let’s stop this negative perception and judgement of Udoka being some cruel authoritarian because the evidence from reporting doesn’t support it. Player’s coach? Yes. Pushover? No way. “He definitely ain’t no punk, and you ain’t gonna try him,” Aldridge told NBA.com. “But he’s got this great balance, which is probably why he’s so good at coaching already in his first season as the guy.” First off, it was encouraged by Pop,” a laughing Udoka told NBA.com. “As we know, he wants [a] debate, discussion and arguments. He doesn’t want yes-men. I knew that as a player. The first thing he told us when he hired me and had us in coaching meetings and coaching retreats was, ‘Speak your mind. Everybody has different ideas. We value them all.’ So, he really encouraged us to do that. That’s who I am.” Ime was more like, figure it out, empowered us to go play, go hoop and be who we are, and it was different for us,” Brown said. “It definitely helped us grow as basketball players source:%20NBA.com https://share.google/wNUfD5AlhwKz3WWby https://www.masslive.com/celtics/20...s-on-ime-udokas-unique-impact-on-celtics.html
The Knicks clearly needed a coaching change. The two biggest differences between Thibs and Mike Brown are (1) Thibs is close-minded and stubborn beyond all reason while Mike Brown is open-minded and willing to experiment and (2) Thibs grinds his top 6-7 players down with too many minutes. Both are "defensive-minded" coaches at their core, but Brown has evolved over the years and appreciates that both ends of the court are equally important. When he coached LeBron in Cleveland, Brown was Thibs II. He was a harsh taskmaster about defense and didn't listen to players much. But I believe his time with Kerr changed him because I saw a changed vibe watching his Kings teams. He definitely made them better defensively, but they had an identity and cockiness on offense that was actually fun to watch. I doubt anyone wants to hear this, but Fox was one of the best closers in the NBA for a couple of years. Other times Malik Monk would step up. With the Knicks, I don't think Mike Brown went in and tore up everything and started from scratch. He just adapted himself to what they did well, spread their minutes out a bit more, didn't insist they play all-out defense every single possession and (unlike Thibs) listened to the players. The Knicks didn't need a lot of changes, they needed the baggage that came with Thibs to be discarded. The Knicks led the Celtics by 36 points! with 8-9 mins left in the decisive game and the starters stayed in until the 5 min mark. I thought Thibs went "mental" right there. I thought Mike Brown was a dimwit coach with the Cavs and despised him for it because I was a LeBron fan at the time. Never thought he could possibly win a championship. His "redemption story" with the Knicks this year showed he was mature enough to learn, grow and evolve and eventually close the sale.
One more thing, I wouldn't compare the Thibs ==> Brown change to Mark Jackson ==> Steve Kerr because Kerr literally went in and ripped everything Mark Jackson left behind and completely rebuilt the Warriors mindset, identity and offense. It was a complete mindwipe and I don't give Mark Jackson any credit for what the Warriors accomplished under Kerr. He held that team back and there is a reason he never got another HC job again.
I don’t think it’s fair to not give Jackson any credit. He still developed those players the 3 years he was there and they had success in both the regular season and postseason. He built that team into a playoff team and contender. He isn’t coaching because of his public stance against homosexuality, which affects the league’s public relations and marketing efforts to reach the gay market.
What I like about this is that Mike Brown clearly doesn't take himself too seriously. And that doesn't mean he doesn't take the work seriously. I wish Udoka could see that. For that matter, I don't think Pop took himself all that seriously either. He took the work dead seriously and didn't have any patience for those who weren't committed to the process. That's not Ime. He strikes me as an ego maniac. No accountability.
