Strong Quote From Jeff Van Gundy Today

[europa]

"You can't make somebody different from who they are."

While covering the start of the Spurs-Suns playoff game today, Mark Jackson wondered why the Suns couldn't play defense consistently the way they did to open the game. Van Gundy replied with the quote above. He then went on to say that you can "ocassionally" get players to play different from their natures but over the course of 48 minutes and over the course of a season "they are who they are."

I found that a very interesting quote and certainly one that could be directed at the Bucks as well. I wonder if Hammond and Skiles subscribe to this theory and how much that will factor in the team's personnel moves this summer.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

JVG wouldve been a great coach here

[unklchuk]

I tend to find my position by mixing a little bit of the pro with a little bit of the con.

"You can't make somebody different from who they are."

True. But only part of the story. THEY can make themselves different from who they are. It's not easy. Change fails more often than it succeeds. But sometimes the internal ducks all get in a row. Sometimes an individual wakes up and sees things differently. And then, change happens.

In my view, Hammond and Skiles can't assume that players will change. Shouldn't assume that they can't change. I think they have to evaluate player by player and make individual decisions.

That's part of being a top-shelf GM and Coach.

[icat2000]

No ... but you can change those somebodies for others . .

[Epicurus]

As I've said several times before, success is hard to change. Guys who are in the NBA are successful, no matter what a fan wishes to say about them. The players thus continue doing that which brought them to this successful level and for which they have received huge reinforcement via salaries at the lowest higher than 99% of the fans will ever see. Entry success and giant remuneration make change and a willingness to change very, very improbable. This goes more towards the stars and even NBA starters.

Sometimes someone in that group toward the end of their career, maybe in their last contract and without a championship, will noticably alter their game. But not always. Thus VG is correct, not just due to his rich experience in the game, but also by social psychological theory.

[Kerb Hohl]

"You can't make somebody different from who they are."

While covering the start of the Spurs-Suns playoff game today, Mark Jackson wondered why the Suns couldn't play defense consistently the way they did to open the game. Van Gundy replied with the quote above. He then went on to say that you can "ocassionally" get players to play different from their natures but over the course of 48 minutes and over the course of a season "they are who they are."

I found that a very interesting quote and certainly one that could be directed at the Bucks as well. I wonder if Hammond and Skiles subscribe to this theory and how much that will factor in the team's personnel moves this summer.

If it does, we will have about 4 players from our current roster on next year's squad...if that.

[europa]

As I've said several times before, success is hard to change. Guys who are in the NBA are successful, no matter what a fan wishes to say about them. The players thus continue doing that which brought them to this successful level and for which they have received huge reinforcement via salaries at the lowest higher than 99% of the fans will ever see. Entry success and giant remuneration make change and a willingness to change very, very improbable. This goes more towards the stars and even NBA starters.

I think this goes to the point that not only do the Bucks need to start bringing in the right type of players instead of the wrong ones, they need to start rewarding players for doing things that can help a team win as opposed to rewarding players who don't contribute strongly in that regard.

And that was one long sentence.

[unklchuk]

Epi points out well why change is hard for NBA players. As I acknowledged, the odds are not good. But they double or triple if management knows how to evaluate men and has a gift for working with them. The chances improve further if management can create a situation for the player that makes change more comfortable and accepts (to a reasonable degree) that which cannot be changed. And the return can be major. I have no inside knowledge but that seems to be what the Pistons have done with Rasheed Wallace.

You don't gamble on most players changing, but IMO you gamble on some.

Epi stresses wisdom gleaned from analysis of the group. I stress the power of individuals. And I stress the wisdom and touch that the best of leaders have. I think both his and my perspectives have a lot to say. YMMV

In the long run, the academic side will likely win. As "group knowledge" catches up to and probably exceeds the knowledge of gifted individuals. Things will then be more dependable, but a little less colorful.



I have determined that my post exceeds forum standards for hypothesizing (which is kinda like masturbating but not nearly as much fun). I sentence myself to banishment until tomorrow morning. (Unless there's big news.)

[Bucks_Revenge]

*cough* *cough Michael Redd...

[SupremeHustle]

Jeff Van Gundy has obviously never seen "Tootsie".

[El Duderino]

*cough* *cough Michael Redd...

Yep

That's why i never bought into the yearly will Michael Redd change his ways hopes before each new season. He's never passed, rebounded, or defended well simply because he's not a good passer, rebounder, or defender. Maybe if you're dealing with a rookie or second year player, there is a bit of reason to have hope that the guy will improve quite a bit on the negative aspects of their game.

An 8th year vet is another story. Same goes for Mo, any minor minor hope i had that he might defend better has evaporated.

[DH34Phan]

We know Michael and Mo will never change.

At least Mo has a role off the bench. Michael Redd can't, and would never come off the bench.

[El Duderino]

We know Michael and Mo will never change.

At least Mo has a role off the bench. Michael Redd can't, and would never come off the bench.

That's because Redd shouldn't come off the bench

As badly as i want Redd traded, it's pretty silly for anyone to say Redd isn't good enough to be a starting SG in the NBA.

[TheTrivium]

-= original quote snipped =-



That's because Redd shouldn't come off the bench

As badly as i want Redd traded, it's pretty silly for anyone to say Redd isn't good enough to be a starting SG in the NBA.

Just like its silly to suggest that Manu, isnt good enough to be a starting SG. Why does a top player always need to start, sometimes they can best serve by coming off of the bench.

[Sigra]

-= original quote snipped =-




Just like its silly to suggest that Manu, isnt good enough to be a starting SG. Why does a top player always need to start, sometimes they can best serve by coming off of the bench.

Yup.

Sometimes I wonder how good would we be if Popovich is our head coach. Could Mo looks like Parker (scoring PG good at pick and roll). Could Bogut looks like Duncan (Inteligent big who anchor defense and is good at pick and roll). Could Redd looks like Manu (instant offense from bench). Poor man offcourse for all 3 of them. Probably not but who knows.

[NotYoAvgNBAFan]

Europa, please...man.

WHY THE HELL DO YOU FIND THESE COMMENTS SO DARN PROFOUND europa ???

I've said this for the last 5 years this very thing. Where have you been? We all know this...

They don't know anything we don't know from stuff writing in here.

I say this all the time and have told you this all year long!

Why do you all run in here thinking you are sharing something new and deep from all these guys on tv, the internet and in the papers?

You have heard and read EXACTLY WHAT they say and write, in here from many of us...

Go look at my post! I've said this a thousand times you can't make Redd or any of our guys who they are not! Or that they are what they are.

Van Gundy is not sayng anything I (We) don't know or that I have not mentioned or any of us. Why does this comment amaze you!?

All our players are who they are! That is obvious. We don't need Jeff Van Gundy to tell us that. You've read that in here for years!

What just because we are not on TV and you dont see our face and voice we are less reputable?

We say the same thing in here...they always confirm what we say months later.

[Hollywood24]

I can never hear Jeff Van Gundy without thinking about him getting dragged around on the court by Zo during that playoff game in like 97'? dont remember the exact year. Very interesting point though about Michael and Manu, Michael would be very potent instant offense off the bench and that is all he would need to worry about. I thought in a way that being around Kobe, LeBron, and some of the other top guys poisoned Michael into thinking that he really was at their level, and worse thought even more that he needed to "take over" like they do. At any rate he doesnt make his teammates better and I have always seen him as more or a complimentry piece like a Manu that when used correctly is potent in a scheme. But when you are making 90 mil its tough to tell someone they are fitting into a roll. Michael Redd could be the microwave 2, instant offense from the bench

[europa]

I loved Van Gundy's comment during the game the other day about players not giving their all because it was too hard to do certain things. He went off on it and then closed his comments with: "What if I was asked about how to defend the Spurs pick-and-roll and I said it was too hard? I got nothin."

Hilarious.