Never once in the Van Gundy era did the Knicks have the talent to match up with the elite teams in the league. When Patrick Ewing was playing for them, there was that little Michael Jordan roadblock. When Jordan was on the way out, management made a critical bet. They signed Allan Houston and designated him as their post-Ewing savior, their Jordan. Houston has struggled to pay back their confidence ever since. Latrell Sprewell, brought in for reinforcement, added some pep. But neither he nor Houston has the skills to carry the Knicks. So it was left to Van Gundy to carry the Knicks, and he actually thought he could do it. This is why he suffered. Wins, in his view, were bought with hard work. If a string of 15-hour days culminated in an overtime loss to Sacramento, he'd go to 16-hour days to prepare for lowly Golden State. It made no difference who the opponent was or what point in the season it was—a team with insufficient talent could never afford to let up. Every practice was critical, every game do-or-die. Van Gundy's obsessive approach paid off in lots of ways, particularly in the postseason, as the Knicks routinely went deeper into the playoffs than they should have (last year's loss to Toronto being a notable exception). Their run to the finals three years ago, as the eighth seed in the East, was one of the most extraordinary underdog performances in NBA history. And with certain players, like Kurt Thomas, Van Gundy's relentless style clearly paid dividends. Before coming to the Knicks, Thomas was a wayward, injury-prone underachiever. Over the last three seasons, he became a reliable inside force and the Knicks' most consistent player. He faithfully supplies the dozen points and 10 boards a night they need from him. The End
Who said anything about whether or not Mr. Van Gundy has "Taskmaster" tendencies? Given the results to date, he probably needs to work them a bit harder. As to the quotes, great. Mr. Van Gundy said two nice things once in a very rare while. I could find a dozen negative quotes to every positive one. As to McGrady and Mr. Van Gundy, who cares if T-Mac has drunk the kool-aid? Perhaps he has learned something. Many people have said Mr. Van Gundy is a decent teacher, but that doesn't mean he is a winner. Yes, yes, eighth spot to the Finals. Need I remind you, "lockout season." As to the Knicks past, everything old IS new again. http://www.recordonline.com/archive/2001/11/18/kkgcolum.htm "You can hear it in the voices. In Latrell Sprewell's. In Allan Houston's. Sprewell keeps reminding management of the team's shortcomings. Houston tries to pass it off on execution and work ethic, fruitless excuses for a dysfunctional lineup. You want to root for the Knicks – and so you do. But you don't break the bank getting out to Madison Square Garden. You watch from your living room and, of course, hear the Knicks announce a sellout anyway. You want to wish for a championship but you can't. You are stuck with a perpetually grumpy coach, an inconsistent star (Houston), a finicky star (Sprewell) and three mediocre point guards. Everything is old hat at Madison Square Garden. The coach's dour moods and idealistic pleas directed at his team. The inflexible system. The plodding offense. Seventy-two games left and your season is over." THE END.
Lockout season excuse is bogus- the number of playoff games stayed the same, did they not? Did not every playoff team have an equal number of chances to advance? I'd venture to say that the Spurs of 1999 proved themselves to be one of the best teams of all time with their playoff run, regular season be damned. You said "Mr. Van Gundy is nothing but dour and pessimistic," nothing is a word that expresses an absolute, and I simply presented some quotes to the contrary. Is the guy more pessimistic than optimistic? Sure. He sits at the table, then, of Bill Parcells, Larry Brown, Jerry Sloan, Lou Piniella, Tony LaRussa, and Bobby Clarke.
Lockout excuse is not bogus. Perhaps the Spurs would've won the championship in a regular-length season, but Mr. Van Gundy's old folks home in New York City was definitely aided by entering the playoffs having played thirty fewer regular season games. I apologinze for saying "nothing but." I should've said "99.99% dour and pessimistic." The frown (and the ankle-biting) are the two images that come to mind with Mr. Van Gundy, which cannot generally be said of the other members of that "club" you assembled. (That may be so for Bobby Clarke, but I follow hockey pretty passively. I'm also pretty certain that after his playing days, he's "only" been a GM). Further, excluding Sloan (who I would not want coaching in Houston), the biggest differences would be: 2, 1 (NBA), 1, 1, and 2.
It is quite simple. If we go 42-26 the rest of the way, we will be at 45-37, most likely in playoff. Are we capable of 42-26 the rest of the way? I say yes if we get back healthy. Don't forget we went 29-13 the second half of last season. But we really need to turn this season around soon, otherwise it will get harder and harder. Considering the Dec. schedule, if we don't close in to that .500 mark by the end of year, the team will lose confidence and then it is all over.
Assuming a reasonably healthy McGrady, count me in with those thinking playoffs are a very real possibility. With one exception, all of the teams we've lost to thus far are playoff caliber teams. IOW, we've got a lot of non-playoff caliber teams remaining on the schedule. And IMHO, the WC isn't nearly as tough as it was last season. Here's what it looked like last season at the 14 game mark... SEA 12 2 PHX 12 2 SAS 11 3 MIN 9 5 SAC 9 5 DAL 9 5 DEN 8 6 POR 8 6 UTA 8 6 LAC 8 6 LAL 8 6 HOU 6 8 MEM 5 9 GSW 3 11 NO 1 13 We were 2 games out behind all the 7 and 8 seeds. But headed into a 3 game losing streak (6-11). Right now, we are 4.5 games behind the 8th seed Nuggs who are 8-7. And games behind #8 is the only number that matters IMHO.
Good point. The way I see it our team still controls it's own destiny, no way you can write a team off this early in the season (ok, except the Hawks). We know what we have to do now, and it's up to us to do it. 42-26 isn't unreasonable at all, if are really a competitive playoff team then we can do it, and if not then we don't deserve to make it. I believe we will make it though.
Nothing you do will have any effect on whether the Rockets make the playoffs or not. Is it possible the Rockets will make the playoffs? Absolutely. This is the NBA. The reasonable goal of 44-45 wins (with a mostly healthy McGrady) should be right on the bubble. Will the effort of the turnaround make things more difficult? Probably. Mr. Van Gundy prefers old players, and extra effort expended is not quickly recovered.
i agree. with the team we have now, we will win 44-46 games if we get healthy. we will most likely repeat our performance of last year's playoffs with all of our old tired legs losing the series for us. unless a trade comes that brings in a fast defensive guard then there is no reason to believe we will do any better.
