Nick, Your logic is pretty much vacuous. Hindsight is 20/20. Your argument pretty much implies that good player will eventually make the league regardless of the calibre of the coach - I do not want to talk about what is the best way to develop youngster, whether they need to be cuddled, or they need strict disciplinarian - but there is a strong presumption to suspect coaches DO play a role in player's development, which you are almost denying by positing the responsibility of player's development, or rather lack of, on the part of players themselves than the coach. durvasa, Being an ultimate stat guru, yourself, these unique "statistical results" Van Gundy achieved is not sufficient enough to propel him into "Championship Calibre Coach". Why give away home advantage so frequently? Part of being a good team is gaining those home advantages by doing well during the regular reasons. And most importantly, those Knicks team probably had the highest pay-roll in the league. I couldnt find the info to compare Van Gundy's Knicks per dollar value for a win, with the rest of league, but I suspect the indications won't be too good. One might blame GM for a albatross contract, but coach should also take a burden of responsibility. I have been pleasantly surprised by the Rockets this year, and I won't be too much vitriolic on Van Gundy since I do not want to undermine his achievement this year. But he has to realize his window of opportunity is dwindling year by year, and this is his last year to demonstrate his worth to the team. And he knows it. Van Gundy got to deliver.
Okay, you just asked when the last time he got a T was... and I gave it to you... down to the game... the quarter... the minute... and the second. He got one for standing up to crappy officiating. And it wasn't 4 years ago. It just happened a few weeks ago. And it's not the only time it's happened since he's been coaching here. Like another poster stated, I'm surprised he doesn't get more as much as he bickers with the refs during the games. As for yelling at players or criticizing them for making mistakes, he's not alone in that regard. The so-called championship caliber coaches that everyone keeps citing (Phil, Pat, Pop, Sloan, etc.) do it as much if not more than JVG does... and they even do it after games they win just like he does sometimes.
Man- I dont like everything he does- but JVG is one of 5 best coaches in the NBA and as far as defensive minds goe- I would think he will be in the top 3 of active coaches. Too bad- this style of coaching is old fashioned. Sure- I wish he is more adaptive in game time situations and does not play favorites ( regardless of performance)- but you will not get this calibre of coaching easily. This is all about playoffs- and when that one issue is kept in mind- half court style will trump all the razzle dazzle stuff.
If Dallas wins it all this year, is Avery a championship caliber coach? Some of yall saying that JVG wouldnt win a ring no matter where he coaches. It's debatebale if he is the right coach for this team to win the championship, but I think he is a championship caliber team because as other mentioned he is in the same school of coaches proven to be successful.
Show me where I said that its a players job to develop by himself... I never ever ever said that. What I said was that JVG prepares his players to the best of their ability, and holds them all accountable to put forth the effort he demands neccessary. Guys who do put in that effort have improved... see Luther Head, JLIII, and Chuck Hayes. Novak also talks about how much work he's putting in to become an all-around player, and not just a guy who can shoot an open shot. JVG puts the best team on the floor to win games... you guys are more concerned about the development of a former 2nd round pick in his first year of NBA ball. I'm more concerned about the team we have right now, without Yao, being able to win games (which they have, so far).
Let me know when the "new-fashioned" coaches win it all. Even Avery Johnson is preaching defense first... and it was the Miami defense/physical nature that shut his team down in their championship run.
I despise Larry Brown...he is a great college coach, and a mediocre pro coach. He ruins teams....his run in Detroit was more about right place at right time. Larry Brown....BLECH !! DD
Haha that would be interesting. What do you guys think our team would look and play like if we had Nellie running the show?
What I mean by thinking outside the box is more a matter of adjustments.....if plan A is not working....JVG doesn't seem to have a plan B. Popovich will pull his entire starting lineup and put in subs to try something different to shake it up to make a point. Or, Avery will go super small and quick..... I want JVG to go deeper into his bench, and I want him to put in a 2nd penetrating player. DD
It was meant to illustrate that his team haven't underperformed in the playoffs (relative to regular season performance), and generally have probably overperformed. Whether he should have coached his teams to better regular season records is another issue. Let's review the Knicks history during the Van Gundy era. Firstly, in 1995, under Riley, the Knicks won 55 games but lost in the Semis to the Pacers (a good team, which won 52 games). Riley quit. In 1996, Nelson coached them to a dissapointing 34-25 record, he left, and the team finished the season under Van Gundy with a 13-10 record. They swept the Cavs (without home court advantage, I forget to mention that one), but lost to a superior Bulls team. In his first full season as Knicks coach in 1997, he coached the Knicks to 57 wins. They were 1st in defensive efficiency (including 1st in field goal defense and 1st in defensive rebounding). They were a very good team which happened to lose to a better Miami Heat team which won 61 games. In 1998, Van Gundy's Knicks only won 43 games. But when you consider that Patrick Ewing only played 26 games that year and no other regular on the team had a PER exceeding 15.8, I'd say that's pretty good. Even without Ewing for most of the season, they managed to be 4th in defense. Plus, he coached the Knicks to an upset over the Miami Heat in the first round without Ewing. It's preposterous for anyone to point to this season as a dissapointment from a coaching perspective. In 1999, the story is well known. A lockout year. Again, Ewing battled health problems but managed to play 38 out of 50 regular season games. But his PER dropped significantly so he wasn't nearly the same player. Looking at their roster, no one else was close to allstar-caliber. He got solid play out of a young Marcus Camby, and Sprewell did an ok job (though he missed 13 out of 50 games), but Allan Houston was a dissapointment that year. The Knicks finish with a 27-23 record and the 8th seed. Amazingly, despite Ewing not being right health-wise, JVG got his team all the way to the Finals. You certainly can't point to that year and say he underperformed as a coach. In 2000, the Knicks won 50 games. Ewing missed 20 games, and his PER dropped to 16.9. He was clearly not the same player. Knicks were depending largely on Allan Houston and Latrell Sprewell on the offensive end. They were good players, but hardly big-time stars (16.5 and 15.7 PER, respectively). It's not like this was a team loaded with talent that should have won more games. Personnel-wise, they were above average and they should have been happy with 50 wins. JVG coached the team all the way to the conference finals. Good coaching job. In 2001, Ewing was gone. Their best player in terms of PER was Marcus Camby, but he played only 63 games that year. Again, it was Houston and Sprewell leading the show offensively for the most part, though again they weren't exactly great players. They picked up Glen Rice, who was well past him prime by then. Larry Johnson's days were numbered by that point. They picked up Mark Jackson in a trade mid-season. A good player, but obviously well past his prime. On the season, only 4 players played more than 65 games. The team ended up with 48 wins, which is more than respectible given the makeup of the roster and the injuries. They lost to a 47-win Toronto team in the first round. In 2002, the Knicks started the season without their best player -- Marcus Camby. They went 7-8 without him, and when he returned they went 3-1. But Van Gundy decided to resign at that point due to differences with management. I would say he proved to be a very solid coach while with the Knicks, and considering the roster and the injuries (including a Patrick Ewing in obvious decline) he had to deal with during that time it's silly to suggest that he underacheived. It's the same story so far with his time in Houston. JVG never had a losing season until last year when the team was ravaged by injuries. He never missed the playoffs either. I don't know how to define "Championship Caliber Coach". I assume it means that he's capable of winning a championship. And I think he is. He's very good at making between-game adjustments. He's a great defensive coach. He gets his players to work hard. He may not be perfect, and I certainly don't agree with all of his decisions. But, overall, I think he's an upper-tier coach and you can win a championship with him. Of course, overwhelmingly championships are won on the strength of the roster, health, and which team happens to get in a hot streak at the right time. In my view, coaches are generally given too much flak for the lack of success of their teams, and often too much credit for the success of their teams.
Larry Brown is not loyal to teams or players, but that doesn't make him a mediocre pro coach. He was sucessful in all the places he went except NY, where his star player Marbury didn't buy into his system. I still believe the cancer was Marbury instead of Brown. As for JVG, he has never had a stable rotation for two years in a row in Houston, mainly because huge trades like the Tmac one and injuries. There wasn't enough time to defelop chemistry. His 7 game series against that Mavs team with Rybo at PF and a not fully developed Yao at C actually proved JVG could maximize his team's ability in playoffs. You prefer Johnson and D'Antoni over JVG, but you never considered they have way more talents than what JVG got in Houston. D'Antoni could't win championship with Nash, Amare, Marion and Joe Johnson, what makes you think he can win Championship with Tmac and Yao but nothing else?
Doesn't that have more to do with the personnel those teams have on their bench, rather than how adventurous the coaches are? The Spurs have a lot of veterans who know how to play the game and understand Pop's system. Our bench is very young, and very inexperienced. As for the Mavs, they may have the deepest, most versatile bench in the league.
DD, your thread title and the poll question mean different things. Do you believe JVG as a championship coach? It depends. He can be a championship coach IF he gets HIS TYPE of players. JVG can only successfully coach a certain type of players. Is JVG the right coach to take the Rockets (I assume you mean THIS Rockets team) all the way? I don't think so, not until we get at least a couple more key role players he can coach. Of course, he can prove me wrong by taking this team all the way. And I hope so. What I don't like about JVG: 1. His number 1 weakness, IMO, is his scouting ability. He can only recognize how good a player is when he actually coach him in game. That leads to his constant looking for the "right" players and dumping of the "wrong" players. I hope with Morey onboard, this problem can be solved. 2. Related to #1 is, as many have pointed out, his inability to recognize young talents. A player has to get to a certain level of competence in order to get JVG's trust. Very few young players can do that in a short time. The only player who has successfully developed under JVG's free choice (Head and Hayes don't count because JVG was forced to play them) is Yao. But who wouldn't develop a player like Yao? 3. He is too inflexible in terms of people skills. He uses one approach for every player (unless you are a TMac). That is a big flaw for a head coach. 4. He is too slow to adjust. He is a good thinker, but not a fast thinker. He might be able to adjust between games. But he lacks the quick wit to adjust in game. What I like about JVG: 1. He is a great tactician attending to details. That's why I believe he can win it all if he has the right players. 2. His defensive philosophy is great. 3. He stands up for his players. He is loyal to them. 4. He is humble and is willing to change. Yes, I am serious. He is not afraid to admit mistakes. Yes, he is stubborn--to a certain extent. But when he realizes he is wrong, he is willing to change. Examples: (1) He was willing to let T-Mac loose after T-Mac initially struggled in JVG's rigid system. (2) He was willing to bring in shooters in the last offseason after he failed to recognize the importance of shooting early last season. Because of this last quality, I have hope in him, despite the shortcomings I listed above. But can he adjust fast enough before our window of winning it all closes?
JVG is a good coach only with reallly really good and experienced players. He did great 2 years ago w/ Sura, Wesly, TMAC, Barry, and Yao......but once he's struck w/ injuries, etc. his teams dont do well at all.......one might say this is the case w/ all teams. Not really. Indiana reaches 2nd round playoffs repeatedly w/ injury depleted teams (even that year full of suspensions). Utah is always in the race w/ injuries to AK47. Lakers made playoffs last year w/ a team w/ not quite that much talent. Dallas won 10 games in a row w/o Josh Howard. Phoenix w/o Amare last year..... That being said, when he has a full cast of players, all playing at a high level, sure he can win a championship. But then again, who wouldnt? To me, a great coach is one who, despite hurdles, can compete. That is not true of JVG teams (except for lock out year).
