On the show, one of the topics in the final segment was about JVG going to the CAVS. One guy said that JVG is a hot coaching commodity and that JVG should coach the CAVS. The other guy said that JVG shouldn't coach the CAVS becuase Cleveland is a wasteland and instead should hold out for a better job. What better job is out there? The only one that I can think about is the Rockets potentially. Regardless, JVG is a highly respected coach and the general consensus on the show is that JVG will do wonders for the team that hires him. If JVG turns down the Cleveland job and since he has already turned down the Hornets job, does it mean that there is still some slight hope that he is holding out for the Rockets job, just as everyone thinks? Maybe he knows something that the rest of us don't. I know what Doc Rocket said, but until Les comes out and confirms that Rudy is back next year, we can only hope and dream that we have seen the end of iso.
You think you're getting rid of ISO's by hiring Van Gundy? Now that's funny. Can't wait till you want to can him for running too many iso's since that's what he played a lot of with Sprewell and Houston while he was there. FYI, during one of the playoff games, Van Gundy admitted to already meeting with the Cavs.
yeah, yao kind of resembles ewing. yao's new haircut kind of resembles his and they both miss a ton of layups when the game is on the line. yao's a better free throw shooter though and ewing's more aggressive .
The only reason why there were some ISO plays for the Knicks back then was because Houston/Sprewell were the only ones who could score so that was expected. Given the fact that the Rockets have multiple players who can score 20 on every night, I'm sure that JVG will be more creative in designing an offense that does not involve one guy dribbling around while the other 4 are on the other end of the court watching.
JVG is not such a bad coaching change. but, if i were to change it, i would move rudy up and try all that i can to sign larry brown or paul silas.
Here's an article on the Cavs coaching situation about JVG. http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1699&dept_id=46370&newsid=8064091&PAG=461&rfi=9
Do you actually understand what an ISO play is because if you did you would know that the Rockets practically eliminated them from their offense. And where definitely one of the least ISO'ing teams in the league.
actually, it was van gundy. but the fact that his team took the rockets to seven games is already impressive in my opinion. all he had at the time were patrick ewing, and john starks. ewing is no where near hakeem. and starks is not a consistent shooter and very streaky. that's not a good combination. for his team to even make it close, shows what a good coach he is.
Old Man Rock is right. We did not ISO much at all last year, especially in comparison to years past. I am guessing that some may not know what the true definition of an ISO is. Also, Van Gundy was indeed know of ISOing quite a bit. And who said the Knicks ran ISO because they weren't talented? Ewing (past his prime, but still a 20/10 guy), Houston and Sprewell is a solid talent base. Camby and Kurt Thomas were on those teams to. The only consistant 20 PPG scorers we have are Francis and Mobley.
JVG did coach that team...as an assistant to Pat Riley. You're thinking about the JVG lead improbable playoff run a few years later.
you do realize that ISO in those days was more effective because the rules were different. who cares about ISO? it's van gundy's defensive strategies that people are impressed with. Ewing past his prime was not a 20/10 guy, his stats noticably went down after charles oakley left. no enforcer to protect the guy, camby is a softee and he did not play against the rockets. neither did houston or sprewell.
Rudy has had some good defensive teams also (including this year). In 1996-1997 (Van Gundy's 1st season) Ewing averaged 22/11. In 1997-1998 Ewing averaged 21/10 In 1998-1999 Ewing averaged 17.5/10 (this is where Oakley leaves and Sprewell comes aboard) In 1999-2000 Ewing averaged 15/10 So Ewing was pretty much, on average, around 19/10 during those 4 seasons. Sounds pretty close to a 20/10 guy to me. Adding Spree's 16-18PPG had more to do with Ewing's diminished scoring role than Oakley leaving. As far as saying that Camby, Houston and Spree didn't play against the Rockets, I have no clue why you brought this point up as it has nothing to do with whether or not the Knicks ISOd alot. Van Gundy had Ewing, Spree and Houston on 2 or 3 of his teams and they ISOd quite a bit as DrofDunk pointed out earlier.
while you're doing research on ewing's stats, let's bring up his field goal percentage and average field goal attempts per season as well and minutes played per game. you really don't get it do you? there have been articles that talked about it. ewing himself was mad that the knicks traded away oakley, his bodyguard. if you're saying oakley had no impact on ewing's scoring, you're r****ded. spree coming on is like having a more efficient john starks and starks took a lot of shots, but ewing still got his 20, 10 back then. and who cares about whether they ISOed? it's van gundy's defense that makes him a good coach.
Ok, I have researched those stats. Over a 4 year period (with Oakley being there the first 2 years and Spreewell the last 2), Ewing's shot attempts per game (based on a shot per minute average x 48 mins) difference, between those two eras, was approximately 4.5 shots a game. Now, once Sprewell came aboard, he took apporximately 20 shots a game, per 48. So, IMO, adding Spree's 20 shots per 48 min would pretty much explain why Ewing's shot attempted dropped by 4-5 shots a game. I don't think Oakley had anything to do with whether or not Ewing got shot attempts or touches. With regards to his FG%, it was 47% and 44% his last two years, which is approximately 3% and 6% less than his career %. Now, taking into consideration the fact the Ewing missed 44 games one year and 20 the next, PLUS taking into considertion that is was a well known fact that Ewing was suffering from all sorts of chronic injuries and was on his last legs, I think its fair to attribute his slight decline in FG% to his injuries and age rather than the departure of Oakley. Rudy's defense makes him a good coach also (top 5 in the league). So if they are both good defensive coaches and both have heavily relied on ISO in the past, why is Van Gundy a better option than Rudy?
