The case for Van Gundy

the thing that bugs me about Brown is his longevity with any of the teams. That being said he does have the ability to turn things around quickly.

Dunleavy should get strong consideration. He did well in Portland except that the players lost control. I don't think he fits perfectly but he's a good coach.

JVG is a good coach but I don't remember what shape the Knicks were in when he assumed control.

If I had a choice, I'd stick with Brown.

 

I just posted this in another thread----Is Van Gundy really that stable, his departure from New York was at best odd.

 

I do not regard Brown's "wanderlust" as a serious problem. He is being hired to turn the team around and build a winner. He should be able to do that in 3 or 4 years with the talent we have. If that is the case, he and the Rockets are smart enough to groom someone to take over when he decides to retire or move on.

When you have a shot at a guy with that much talent who has turned around every franchise he's been with, you take it and worry about the consequences of him leaving later.

As for Van Gundy, I have three issues with him.

1. I think he is over-hyped. Does anyone honestly believe he would have gotten this kind of attention had he not been on TV the last year?

2. He quit on his team 19 games into the last season he spent with the Knicks. Maybe it was the pressure of the Big Apple, but I dunno. I'd want to know for sure that he could deal with the rigors of a young team.

3. He is a brilliant defensive coach but one of the biggest knocks on him was that he practically ignored the offensive end of the floor. When you have veterans like Houston, Ewing and Sprewell, you can do that, but not with a young team like the Rockets. From all I've read, he is as un-creative on the offensive end as he is creative on the defensive end. In the West with Sacramento, Dallas, the Lakers, etc, that isn't going to get it.

If I were ranking the choices for me, it would be Larry Brown first, Mike Dunleavy second and Jeff Van Gundy third.

 

I think if everything is pretty much even between Van Gundy and Larry Brown, Les will go with the guy who seems more Jewish. : D

 

Im not going to act like I know anything about Van Gundy because I dont, but I will point out some things I've noticed about him that may make him a better choice.

1) He has a funny personality which makes it seem like he would be easier to get along with, more so than Brown who seems at times to be too stern and too moody.

2) He is closer to Les's height, which means He and Les would literally see eye to eye on many issues.

3)He's younger and healthier than Larry Brown who had to leave the bench during during a TNT game last year because of chest pain. Also being younger and more energetic would allow him to be more physically involved during practices which could have a more positive effect on players who need to be shown how to do certain things and not just told.

 

Youth is also the reason I'd go with JVG over Larry Brown.

While I think Brown is better, I think JVG is the more stable choice.

How important is stability?

If RT had coached the entire season, the Rockets would have made the playoffs and YM would have been ROY.

Raven

 

Jeff - I agree with you on every point, but I have a question that I hope someon can answer.

While I would prefer to see Brown with an assistant coach / appointed successor, is that really going to happen? At this other coaching stops, did this occur?

And the "case for Van Gundy" is STILL non-existent. Does anybody have an X's and O's reason as to why he'd be better than Brown? If the only argument is that he is more stable, I don't buy it. I think he's overhyped, too. Jeff's got it right when he ranks the candidates 1) Brown, 2) Dunleavy), and 3) Van Gundy.

 

i'm not saying there isn't a case to be made for van gundy, but that's a terrible one. not one of those 3 "factors" has any substance or meaning.

 

1) Van Gundy would provide a more stable atmosphere and likely longer tenure. The last thing this team needs is for Brown to come here for a few years and then leave. Stability has to be a priority, especially after we lost the greatest and longest-tenured coach in franchise history.

What if Francis don't buy into team D or individual D? what if Francis/Cat goes off into their own world like Spree/Housotn? If you want stability...keep Rudy. If you want to improve inside and out of this team, get Brown


2) Van Gundy had a lot of success with the Knicks and coached a formidable center in Patrick Ewing. We need that experience for Yao. For Brown on the other hand, the only big man experience was David Robinson for a short while.

Ewing was already an established center (i hated typing that) when Van Gundy took over. Ewing was starting his decline....see how many minutes he played in the finals against San Antonio. Brown makes his centers improve. THey go from crap/decent to pretty good. Ex. Ratliff/Maccallouch (spelling?). This was because Brown knows how to get to his players


3) While Brown is a great coach, I'm not sure if he prefers coming into a good situation (ala the Rockets) or making the best of a bad situation (as he has his whole career). This being said, Van Gundy looks more likely to have better potential in the playoffs than Brown.


Going to a team that has missed the playoffs since god knows when is a good situation? please...this is what Brown should be dreaming about.

Again, these are just my opinions, which I'm sure will clash with many others on this board.

I will note this

 

What the hell was that?

Come on no racist remarks.

 

Have you seen the records of most teams Brown has taken over? Let's just say they were not above .500. I think just about everyone would agree the Rockets are a "good situation."

 

I like Van Gundy too, and the primary reason is because the stability issue. I'm not worried about Brown leaving in three or four seasons, I'm worried about him leaving after ONE season! Some of you are acting like Brown will definitely be here a couple of years. I'm not so certain, especially when you take into consideration that he's starting to get up there in age. The guy is so wishy-washy, I wouldn't put it past him to bolt after one year.

Dunleavy just seems a little too much like Rudy T to me. I don't think the changes will be very noticeable if he takes over. With Van Gundy I think there will be more changes, which I think is what this teams needs.

 

Who Is the Lord of the Rings???
In my POV, the above highlighted segment is precisely why Brown does not fit with the Rockets. Contrary to what most/many people might believe, just b/c a coach proves himself to be a genious in one situation doesn't mean he's a genious in another. Larry Brown is indeed a great turnaround artist. He's also a great collegiate coach. However, do such attributes also make for getting us the championship or for creating a "dynasty"? IMHO, the answer is NO.

The best analogy is probably taking a look at corporate America. Whenever a company is in dire need of restructuring, smart directors will look to hire a "turnaround artist." i.e. a hardnosed fellow who reviews the entire {company}, sheds unproductive {assets}, sets a new {direction} and institutions new {policies}. In the case of coaches, you can simply substitute the words, "team", "players", "gameplan", and "plays" in each of the above brackets. However the question we ALL NEED TO BE ASKING ourselves, is are the Rockets a turnaround situation? Is this a case where we see major overhaul to our roster? Is this a case where we see a whole new style of play? Is this a case where CD will tolerate a complete overhaul? These questions are open to debate. But IMHO, I just don't see Rockets of today as comparable to the Pacers and 76ers of yesteryear.

Moreover, I think Larry Brown, demands a lot from his players... so much so, that he ends up repeatedly alienating them by year 3. Maybe at the collegiate level, some of that peppiness can work. But at the NBA level??? History is already telling us something very impt, Brown's influence wanes into something pernicious after about 3 years. Do you honsetly see the Rockets squad responding well to this after playing for a "player's coach" in RudyT? IMHO, this is like taking a nice warm shower when, all of a sudden, the water goes ice cold b/c some idiot just flushed the toilet.

Another question, everybody should be asking themselves is, "what's in it for Brown?" Obviously he can LIVE w/o a championship ring, else why leave so many teams, purportedly, at the cusp of winning a ring? Personally, I don't think the ring is all that important to him. What we need is a coach is as absolutely obsessed with the ring... the Golums of the NBA. I honestly don't see Brown choosing the Rockets over a nice comfy GM AND Coaching job in L.A. Given all that we know about Brown, if you were in his shoes, would you???



theSAGE

 

I have some issues with Larry Brown, JVG, and Dunleavy.

Larry Brown:
1. He has turned around several teams in the past, but it's not like this team needs that much fixed if we were one game away from the playoffs. Imagine how good we'd be if we actually had an offensive system and played defense. Now taking this team to a championship contender is another story. That is going to take some time, time that Brown will not be able to spend here.

2. Teams focus on the defensive end and consistently give effort. He had Philly's team buying into the team concept. He had players willing to let AI take 30+ shots a game with everyone else doing the dirty work willingly. However, it's almost the opposite here. Steve can take 30 shots a game (although he wasn't Steve haters) but we have more talent to spread the shots around, so he needs to get everyone to buy in a different type of team concept.

3. Decently dealt with AI who I hope is harder to deal with than Steve and Cat.

I like Larry Brown alot, and short-term I'd think we would make the playoffs as long as him and Steve didn't butt heads too much. Long-term he would be good if the players listened to him not just becuase he's coach but because they realized he's right. This would hopefully mean the successor would have no problems with recurring habits. I don't know if Brown is as much of a hardass nowadays, though, and that's a problem because we don't need a player's coach now.

Mike Dunleavy
1. He's too nice, sorry. He couldn't control Portland, although not many people could. This isn't nearly as extreme a situation, but I agree with the comparisons of him to Rudy.
2.Honestly don't remember how good he was with x's and o's

JVG
1.Stability, I'm really concerned about how long Larry Brown would really stay. But forget about that right now, and just think about who is the better coach. I don't know how you could say Dunleavy is.
2.JVG bailed on NY, but can you blame him. Forget the fans and the media expectations, the management is the problem. They had the highest payroll, a bad GM (Houston for 100M !!!), and were going nowhere.
3.JVG's offensive coaching concerns me, but again another good defensive team.

With center development, I'd say Brown would be the best, but that also really depends on assistant coaches because head coaches can't spend that much time tutoring.
With stability, JVG would be the best choice, but if Brown is as good as you all think and would have a long-lasting impression, than this is irrelevant.
With x's and o's it'd be Brown although none of the coaches seem very impressive.
With personality and attitude, I'd prefer JVG since Dunleavy is probably a little of a pushover and Brown is softening in his old age.

Disregarding stability, our coach's qualities should be prioritized:
1. Attitude-meaning passionate and stern to instil discipline but not overbearing
2. Emphasizing defense because that can get you a long way, BUT using an offensive system that utilizes your player's talents and also responds to what the other team is doing.

Stability, Media PR, etc is separate. Those are the only two things that matter. I remember one of the 610 guys saying they wouldn't hire Silas because he wouldn't be viewed by the public as a big-time hire. That's sad because real basketball fans know that he'd be as good or a better fit than all of these candidates. Doing what he did in Charlotte/NO with all the injuries was pretty impressive. And if we win, the unknowledgeable would like him too.

 

Let me preface my remarks on Jeff Van Gundy first by saying that, "yes, I am biased for Mr. Van Gundy." In fact, I've been giving him the plug throughout this entire season. And as a New York resident who has followed the Knicks for about two decades now, let me share we you why Jeff Van Gundy is a special coach.

First, in answer to the first question, don't underestimate one's "success" when that "success" is in New York. While New York is by no means the center of the world, it IS however one big spotlight waiting to shine, simmer or scorch the next "young" upstart performer. The NY Knick coaching job is no different. And if you recall, Nellie couldn't handle the pressures and consequently left the job, MID-season - a position that was then handed over to Jeff Van Gundy. The New York media has a knack of scrutinizing most every decision - good OR bad. As the great commentators that they are, the posters on cc.net are pretty good at evaluating every last detail. Sometimes we say some harsh things, other times, not so harsh. But imagine if all this was printed, DAILY, in the Chronicle? The microscopic scrutiny that NY coaches go under can absolute suffocate 95% coaches out there. Therefore, as the song "New York, New York" goes, "if you can make it {here}, you can make it anywhere" actually does hold water.

In the years that Jeff Van Gundy took the helm and took the Knicks to the finals in '99, he did many things which were quite remarkable.

1. He took a truly "not-so-talented" amalgam of players, as assembled by Pat Riley all the way to the finals
2. He mediated any ego friction btw former big-time veterans like Oakley and Larry Johnson and Spreewell and Houston.
3. He got his team to "buy" into his philosophy on winning
4. Had it not been for injuries, he nearly got them the ring

On Jeff's second point, I agree that it's a valid concern. However, here's my explanation of why he left the season early. First off, the Knicks were already in a state a decline. The departure of Ewing, or rather, I should say, the inability fo management to retain Ewing, was the first keystone to break. Second, the signing of Allan Houston to a $100M contract pretty much squaffed any cap room for improvement the Knicks had for future years. The loss of Oakley and Larry Johnson. i.e. the CORE of the Jeff Van Gundy teams of old were GONE. Moreover, ask any New York Knick's fan and they will attest that the new management of the Knicks after the departure of Dave Checketts is absolutely horrendous. A guy by the name of Scott Layden is insuring the future futility of the Knicks and Jeff, IMHO, wanted none of that. So on the record, he said something to the effect that he was "burned out." If CD started paying obscene checks to players with no chance for future player personnel improvement, I think RudyT would be pretty depressed too.

In this case, the interests of Knicks management and Jeff Van Gundy were not aligned, and the latter, to protect himself, had every reason to leave. Will that be a problem in Houston? I doubt it. Unless CD and LA decide to pack their bags, sell the company and leave it a crazy owner of a lousy cable company.

And lastly, on point three, Jeff Van Gundy is actually a very astute all-around coach. Everyone knows about his defensive attitudes, a trait passed on from Pat Riley. However, offensively, Jeff Van Gundy is leaps and bounds better than people give him credit for. Don't confuse the limited talent of the Knicks to the limited offensive schema of Jeff Van Gundy. Fact is, the Knicks, WERE really a team of limited talent that believed themselves to be better. Pat Riley knew this a long time ago, and so branded a new form of "brute ball" with his core of Xavier McDaniel, Oakley, and Ewing. Jeff Van Gundy improved upon this by adding some real offensive minded players in Houston. Nevertheless, the Knicks, even of '99, were a less-than-talented bunch who knew how to play mean-ass defense.

The single most important thing to know about Van Gundy is that he is a coach, through and through. He has no rings, but he has the mind of a champion. Why? b/c he's been reared by champions in Pat Riley and his father. Riley has more rings and more finals appearances than Brown ever had. And as his protege and student, Van Gundy has all the makings of a championship caliber coach. You can see it in his eyes.... JVG wants the ring.



theSAGE