aq_ua wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:Taj Gibson has spoken. Looks like Taj wants to make sure he still has a job here.
https://nypost.com/2020/07/14/tom-thibodeau-remains-knicks-favorite-even-after-jason-kidd-wows-them/Thibodeau’s ending wasn’t pretty in Minnesota with allegations of failing to connect with some of the team’s young nucleus, but former Wolves big man and current Knick Taj Gibson defended him.
Gibson told The Post on Feb. 13, when Thibodeau’s name first was reported as a potential successor to interim coach Mike Miller, “Since I’ve been here, a lot of those old Knicks players always come up to me and they loved Thibs.
“He’s been misunderstood. A lot of players have different mindsets. His mindset is winning. To win games you got to go through a lot of hard work. Sometimes young players don’t understand it.’’
I think it's fair to say there is a type of veteran player that resonates with Thib (all the ex-Bulls seem to love the guy), and the authoritarian style hasn't necessarily disappeared from the NBA (Spoelstra and Pop spring to mind) so there does seem to be a subset of players that still responds positively to that style, young and old.
The problem is that I do not think our roster is comprised with those sorts of players. We continually seem to attract players that think they can just focus on certain aspects of the game that they prefer, and working hard means looking good on social media. That's the mentally weak variety of players that consistently allow teams back into games in the fourth quarter, or fail to execute a play out of a timeout during crunch time. It's also a group of guys that don't like to push each other and prefer playing nice - at least on the surface - and pretend time will fix things.
Accepting that Thibs is the likely path we're on, the roster needs a purging of all the weak minded players, and that means a fairly robust roster churn. Otherwise, we'll head to yet another meltdown type season where players under perform and fans are left wondering why.
The real question to ask may be can the core players we already have work with an old school coach? For me that is Mitch, RJ and Frank. I'd say all three are capable of that. Others may not include Frank in that list, but the question still applies.
If Randle or other players under contract can't handle that, then they can sit. And the franchise can get players who don't need to be coddled according to this theme that modern players are so damn touchy and need to be coddled like brats who are paid tens of millions of dollars per year.
We still need a coach whom the players respect so that's a two-way street and I'm not advocating for a Bobby Knight personality who will eviscerate the souls of our players. But if it is a coach who demands hard work, intense defensive effort and sacrifice to team play and you can't handle that then I think it can be good for team culture to side with the coach over individual players.
Until we land a Lebron type of talent, there is absolutely no reason to build a team around slurping any kind of diva behavior. Fans may be all about that one star player, but there are only a few players in the NBA at any one time who can carry a team on their back and are thus entitled to have their demands on style of play accommodated by a franchise or coach. 99% of the NBA is made up of moving parts and some of them are All-Stars, but almost none of them should be the sole reason for how a club runs itself.
If we don't build a powerful defensive starting unit, we've effed up again AFAIK. I know we need shooters, but that is a quality that can be found along with defensive effort. And clubs that commit to defense are usually going to have a FO committed to defense, not just a coach. Pat Riley usually finds guys to play defense for Spoelstra. That's a cultural imperative. We need that more than we need to pamper players.
