Tom Thibodeau To The Knicks 90% Likely!

[DOT]

To me, the pro Thibs arguments that are hard to refute are:
He'll have the team prepared
He'll preach defense
The team will play hard
He'll run a modified triangle, which no one b*tched about with the Bulls, so there will be movement and sharing

This would be my counter-arguments for these

He preaches defense yeah, but it didn't translate in Minny. If you look at their relative DRTG (how many pp100 away from average), the year before he was hired they were 3.7 worse. First year, 3.2 worse. Second and third years both 2.5 worse than average, and that's with a whole year of Jimmy Butler in there. So he really didn't have an effect on Minny's defense while he was there

Did he really get guys to play hard? KAT and Wiggins never really played hard under him, sure, the Bulls players yeah, but how many players were there who didn't play hard before being coached by him that he got to play hard? Seems like it's more dependent on the player than on him

And his offense isn't ball movement and sharing. Wolves were top 10 in apg the year before he got there, 9th his first year, 17th his second year, and 15th his last year. They were also bottom 10 in passes per game each year he was there, and they were towards the top in iso% every year as well. Plus, he was still starting Taj Gibson next to KAT, which would be fine for 2008 but not in 2018

To me, Thibs seems like a guy living off the reputation he made a decade ago. Now, you could argue that Chicago was the real Thibs and Minny was the anomaly, but it looks like Thibs can only get what his players give him. He had guys who worked hard and played defense in Chicago, but not in Minny. People can blame KAT and Wiggins all they want, but if he can't get them to work hard, then he needs guys who work hard to begin with, in which case, what's the benefit of hiring him over someone else if it's still the player that matters?

[thebuzzardman]

To me, the pro Thibs arguments that are hard to refute are:
He'll have the team prepared
He'll preach defense
The team will play hard
He'll run a modified triangle, which no one b*tched about with the Bulls, so there will be movement and sharing

This would be my counter-arguments for these

He preaches defense yeah, but it didn't translate in Minny. If you look at their relative DRTG (how many pp100 away from average), the year before he was hired they were 3.7 worse. First year, 3.2 worse. Second and third years both 2.5 worse than average, and that's with a whole year of Jimmy Butler in there. So he really didn't have an effect on Minny's defense while he was there

Did he really get guys to play hard? KAT and Wiggins never really played hard under him, sure, the Bulls players yeah, but how many players were there who didn't play hard before being coached by him that he got to play hard? Seems like it's more dependent on the player than on him

And his offense isn't ball movement and sharing. Wolves were top 10 in apg the year before he got there, 9th his first year, 17th his second year, and 15th his last year. They were also bottom 10 in passes per game each year he was there, and they were towards the top in iso% every year as well. Plus, he was still starting Taj Gibson next to KAT, which would be fine for 2008 but not in 2018

To me, Thibs seems like a guy living off the reputation he made a decade ago. Now, you could argue that Chicago was the real Thibs and Minny was the anomaly, but it looks like Thibs can only get what his players give him. He had guys who worked hard and played defense in Chicago, but not in Minny. People can blame KAT and Wiggins all they want, but if he can't get them to work hard, then he needs guys who work hard to begin with, in which case, what's the benefit of hiring him over someone else if it's still the player that matters?

I kind of/sort of covered these in that personnel matters and is it possible he's too inflexible to adjust to rules/style that render his positives no longer there.

Most coaches only give what their players give them, ultimately. There's like a handful of coaches that provide "more".

Would have the fans on here still be sniffing JVG's jock if Ewing\Oak etc didn't provide the 50 wins a year they would have provided anyway? I mean, for sure he was a continuation of the hardnosed style Riley instituted, but other than that, which wasn't even original, what did he add? Other than it being cool that the guy who looked like the science teacher who doubled as bball coach at a small high school was coaching an NBA team?

There isn't a coach in the league that doesn't win without talent. Period.
I agree there's an argument for "anyone else"
Thibs deserves a hit for the Wolves and it's troubling for sure, but if 2/5ths the starting lineup isn't that good defensively and not really that into trying hard at it/good at it, is the team ever really going to be good defensively?

We constantly hear how important it is for the star player to buy into what the coach is doing and into playing hard defense, because usually the effort won't then be there.

At the least the Knicks would have to decide to put those kinds of players around Thibs - the kind that actually care about effort.
Then again, the Knicks have been on a pretty continual disconnect between hiring coaches and the kind of players they may need for at least 10 years running.

[Chanel Bomber]

So according to your logic, tibs worst mistake was that he coulndt turn KAT into a winner?

He turned a young roster in the bulls into contenders. His big mistake was that he was a bad gm. Dont give him front office powers, give him a young roster and he will turn them into winners.

If his great flaw was not being able to make kat a winner then i got news for ya. Kat doesnt seem like he will ever be a winner , he is in his 5th year.

Sent from my SM-N960N using Tapatalk

You said Thibs made them competent.

I countered by saying that Jimmy did. As evidenced by how they slipped after he left.

I'm not even blaming Thibs for the Wolves record without Jimmy, merely pointing out the fact that it's really Jimmy who made them competent.

Any team that ships away one of the best defenders in the NBA, a perennial All-Star and arguably their best player at the time would get worse, no? Thibodeau was 2 games under .500 at the time he was fired after leading the Wolves to their best record in 14 years at 47-35 (last time the Wolves had a better record was when a then 27 year old Kevin Garnett and Flip Saunders lead them to the Western Conference Finals. You can't be implying that Jimmy Butler all by himself was responsible for that are you?

I didn't imply that Jimmy Butler was solely responsible for the Wolves making the playoffs. Everybody played a factor, including KAT, Thibs and whoever they had around them. But Jimmy Butler when healthy made more of a difference than Thibs's coaching. I don't think that's a wild statement to make. Interesting, I didn't realize they were only two games below .500 when he was fired. I expecte more losses. My point remains.

If you're ok with settling for a coach like Thibs, who will have this team playing with effort but will always have a glass ceiling due to how archaic his offense looks, be my guest. He's certainly an upgrade over the last 4 coaches we've had, but for me that's settling. I'd rather watch this team play modern basketball. Give me Kenny Atkinson.

[thebuzzardman]

You said Thibs made them competent.

I countered by saying that Jimmy did. As evidenced by how they slipped after he left.

I'm not even blaming Thibs for the Wolves record without Jimmy, merely pointing out the fact that it's really Jimmy who made them competent.

Any team that ships away one of the best defenders in the NBA, a perennial All-Star and arguably their best player at the time would get worse, no? Thibodeau was 2 games under .500 at the time he was fired after leading the Wolves to their best record in 14 years at 47-35 (last time the Wolves had a better record was when a then 27 year old Kevin Garnett and Flip Saunders lead them to the Western Conference Finals. You can't be implying that Jimmy Butler all by himself was responsible for that are you?

I didn't imply that Jimmy Butler was solely responsible for the Wolves making the playoffs. Everybody played a factor, including KAT, Thibs and whoever they had around them. But Jimmy Butler when healthy made more of a difference than Thibs's coaching. I don't think that's a wild statement to make. Interesting, I didn't realize they were only two games below .500 when he was fired. I expecte more losses. My point remains.

If you're ok with settling for a coach like Thibs, who will have this team playing with effort but will always have a glass ceiling due to how archaic his offense looks, be my guest. He's certainly an upgrade over the last 4 coaches we've had, but for me that's settling. I'd rather watch this team play modern basketball. Give me Kenny Atkinson.

That's another settle candidate.

I'm not into a coach who let a team as sh*tty as the Knicks beat or compete with his team, on the regular, for the last few years.
If we pivot away from Miller and it's not Thibs, no thanks on Atkinson either.

[DOT]

I kind of/sort of covered these in that personnel matters and is it possible he's too inflexible to adjust to rules/style that render his positives no longer there.

Most coaches only give what their players give them, ultimately. There's like a handful of coaches that provide "more".

Would have the fans on here still be sniffing JVG's jock if Ewing\Oak etc didn't provide the 50 wins a year they would have provided anyway? I mean, for sure he was a continuation of the hardnosed style Riley instituted, but other than that, which wasn't even original, what did he add? Other than it being cool that the guy who looked like the science teacher who doubled as bball coach at a small high school was coaching an NBA team?

So I would say, if we can't get our hands on one of those coaches that get more, which I agree with you on, and those guys are extremely rare, we should try and minimize the negatives

Thibs has a lot of negative aspects to his coaching that are well documented. That's why I'm lower on him, because you can get a similar level coach with much less negatives to him

It's similar to the conversation about Mark Jackson, except Thibs is much better than Jackson in that regard

[thebuzzardman]

It's official. Save Dolan's money and give Miller another year!