Knicks to Hire Mike Brown as Next Head Coach

[Zenzibar]

Watch on YouTube

[8516knicks]

Getting back on topic, everyone is entitled to their opinions on either side for this hire.

The only real question is: if you don't like Brown, who would you have preferred out of the available options?

If your answer is some unknown assistant somewhere, then really, you are just choosing the mystery box, because you have no credible track record of any kind to point to in order to say that hire would be better. The lack of NBA track record to criticize would be the only advantage that person has over Brown and that would be a pretty outsized risk for all parties involved.

David Blatt comes to mind as a cautionary tale on that front.

Realistically, Brown isn't the sexy hire but his experience does matter a lot. I was listening to Mark Spears and Hahn talking about Brown and Spears' take makes me understand why Leon and co went with him. The guy definitely seems to be someone who is heavy on preparation and he apparently went into the interview with a well thought out plan for the team, along with the willingness to collaborate with the front office.

That being said, I think he should still be given room to develop his vision for this group, but opinions should be shared and the analytics team should definitely have a voice. Also, development of the young boys is critical. He has to hit on that area.

Though it's said he has the freedom to construct his own staff, it seems there will be MANY Thibs holdovers. Whether this is the FO influence, or just acknowledgement by consensus with Mike Brown that Thibs was off in his own universe and didn't listen to good assistants is an open question. We expected Rick to be untouchable but some four or five others are also expected to be back.

[Jeff Van Gully]

Getting back on topic, everyone is entitled to their opinions on either side for this hire.

The only real question is: if you don't like Brown, who would you have preferred out of the available options?

If your answer is some unknown assistant somewhere, then really, you are just choosing the mystery box, because you have no credible track record of any kind to point to in order to say that hire would be better. The lack of NBA track record to criticize would be the only advantage that person has over Brown and that would be a pretty outsized risk for all parties involved.

David Blatt comes to mind as a cautionary tale on that front.

Realistically, Brown isn't the sexy hire but his experience does matter a lot. I was listening to Mark Spears and Hahn talking about Brown and Spears' take makes me understand why Leon and co went with him. The guy definitely seems to be someone who is heavy on preparation and he apparently went into the interview with a well thought out plan for the team, along with the willingness to collaborate with the front office.

That being said, I think he should still be given room to develop his vision for this group, but opinions should be shared and the analytics team should definitely have a voice. Also, development of the young boys is critical. He has to hit on that area.

Though it's said he has the freedom to construct his own staff, it seems there will be MANY Thibs holdovers. Whether this is the FO influence, or just acknowledgement by consensus with Mike Brown that Thibs was off in his own universe and didn't listen to good assistants is an open question. We expected Rick to be untouchable but some four or five others are also expected to be back.

there are more options. this is not uncommon. assistants can help with continuity during HC changes. they also could be working on specific things with players that everyone values and wants sustained.

i def thought rick was gone though.

[GONYK]

Getting back on topic, everyone is entitled to their opinions on either side for this hire.

The only real question is: if you don't like Brown, who would you have preferred out of the available options?

If your answer is some unknown assistant somewhere, then really, you are just choosing the mystery box, because you have no credible track record of any kind to point to in order to say that hire would be better. The lack of NBA track record to criticize would be the only advantage that person has over Brown and that would be a pretty outsized risk for all parties involved.

David Blatt comes to mind as a cautionary tale on that front.

The Knicks were looking for the right person to lead the team. Not just the right tactician.

Thibs got fired mostly for how he conducted himself outside of games, not during them.

I think once the criteria was established of who we were looking for, my focus with experienced coaches would have been on Jenkins and Bud. I don't know if we even reached out to Bud but I think judging him on his Suns tenure is a little unfair as that franchise is a festering disaster pit. He's a champion and prior to the last few years had overachieved in his stops by my measure. I was pleased Jenkins was heavily considered.

Regarding the inexperienced coaches, the question itself is a little unfair and, I expect, any answer would be met with the dismissal that we don't really know what they would offer. Of course we don't. We're fans. We don't interview the coaches and only have access to their public faces and a fairly limited knowledge of their tactical approaches. I had a few in mind that I know of - Bryant and Cassell in particular - but mostly found it frustrating that inexperienced coaches were downgraded in the process. We've recently seen several new, bright minds such as Daignault, Finch, Mosley, and Mazzulla find success in the league that will be long term fixtures on their teams and I was hoping we'd find ours. I'm not convinced we seriously even looked.


I'm not gonna harp on Brown being the choice and hope he works out. I could see us having our best regular season record since the Riley years under him but I do have some concerns about what happens in the playoffs when we meet some of the greater tacticians in the game over a long series.

I get your sentiment, and it's not one that I think off base at face value. Wanting a new, young, presumably innovative coach to grow with is great. All the coaches you mentioned though did not take over their teams at the "win or else" stage of the roster's timeline. Daignault, Finch and Mosely took over stage 1 rebuilds and even though all 3 have had success, they are still experiencing growing pains during their playoff runs.

Mazzulla is a little bit different, because he was in-house for the Celtics. Even then, he defintely had some rough patches this year that perhaps betrayed his inexperience.

I get why you think the question is unfair, but I would argue it's unfair to expect the FO to spend years of Brunson and Co's prime trying to figure out if they made the right choice.

As far as your other suggestions, I would have spoken to Vogel and Bud, just to see what was up. Jenkins intrigued me, but I can't knock them for passing on him if he wasn't enthusiastic about the opportunity.

[GONYK]

Getting back on topic, everyone is entitled to their opinions on either side for this hire.

The only real question is: if you don't like Brown, who would you have preferred out of the available options?

If your answer is some unknown assistant somewhere, then really, you are just choosing the mystery box, because you have no credible track record of any kind to point to in order to say that hire would be better. The lack of NBA track record to criticize would be the only advantage that person has over Brown and that would be a pretty outsized risk for all parties involved.

David Blatt comes to mind as a cautionary tale on that front.

The Knicks were looking for the right person to lead the team. Not just the right tactician.

Thibs got fired mostly for how he conducted himself outside of games, not during them.

Of the available coaches I was hoping for Jenkins/JVG and that assistant from Minny as my #2.

Fair enough. Jenkins was ahead of Brown for me, but it sounds like he sort of took himself out of the process.

[TheGreenArrow]

30 pages of people trying to convince you that Mike Brown is good and if you don't agree you're a hater.

If the Charlotte Hornets hired Mike Brown we would be laughing at them and calling them the 'same old Hornets'.

This is what it is. This guy will not last long so I've given up on caring. But he certainly is not an improvement over Tom Thibodeau - and I campaigned for the firing of Thibodeau.

If some of the young guys can be developed that would be the silver lining.

We’d be laughing because it’s the hornets and nooo coach not even spolestra would change that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mike brown coaching Lamelo ball and a bunch of scrubs is totally different than Mike brown coaching a superstar like Brunson with an elite supporting cast!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[HerSports85]

Getting back on topic, everyone is entitled to their opinions on either side for this hire.

The only real question is: if you don't like Brown, who would you have preferred out of the available options?

If your answer is some unknown assistant somewhere, then really, you are just choosing the mystery box, because you have no credible track record of any kind to point to in order to say that hire would be better. The lack of NBA track record to criticize would be the only advantage that person has over Brown and that would be a pretty outsized risk for all parties involved.

David Blatt comes to mind as a cautionary tale on that front.

The Knicks were looking for the right person to lead the team. Not just the right tactician.

Thibs got fired mostly for how he conducted himself outside of games, not during them.

Of the available coaches I was hoping for Jenkins/JVG and that assistant from Minny as my #2.

Fair enough. Jenkins was ahead of Brown for me, but it sounds like he sort of took himself out of the process.

Same here. I agree if Jenkins wasn’t that excited about the job or displayed the energy we needed, then I can’t blame the FO at all.

[MrDollarBills]

Realistically, Brown isn't the sexy hire but his experience does matter a lot. I was listening to Mark Spears and Hahn talking about Brown and Spears' take makes me understand why Leon and co went with him. The guy definitely seems to be someone who is heavy on preparation and he apparently went into the interview with a well thought out plan for the team, along with the willingness to collaborate with the front office.

That being said, I think he should still be given room to develop his vision for this group, but opinions should be shared and the analytics team should definitely have a voice. Also, development of the young boys is critical. He has to hit on that area.

Though it's said he has the freedom to construct his own staff, it seems there will be MANY Thibs holdovers. Whether this is the FO influence, or just acknowledgement by consensus with Mike Brown that Thibs was off in his own universe and didn't listen to good assistants is an open question. We expected Rick to be untouchable but some four or five others are also expected to be back.

there are more options. this is not uncommon. assistants can help with continuity during HC changes. they also could be working on specific things with players that everyone values and wants sustained.

i def thought rick was gone though.

I don't think that continuity is a bad thing because the holdovers from Thibs' staff have information on each player.

Mike should still have the final say on his staff. Especially when the draft and free agency went by without his input

[Jeff Van Gully]

Though it's said he has the freedom to construct his own staff, it seems there will be MANY Thibs holdovers. Whether this is the FO influence, or just acknowledgement by consensus with Mike Brown that Thibs was off in his own universe and didn't listen to good assistants is an open question. We expected Rick to be untouchable but some four or five others are also expected to be back.

there are more options. this is not uncommon. assistants can help with continuity during HC changes. they also could be working on specific things with players that everyone values and wants sustained.

i def thought rick was gone though.

I don't think that continuity is a bad thing because the holdovers from Thibs' staff have information on each player.

Mike should still have the final say on his staff. Especially when the draft and free agency went by without his input

i’d like to think he does and that the holdovers are not an imposition.

[Adelheid]

it was said that brown has the liberty to get rid of the existing assistants if he wishes, though it would seem he is going to retain most of them at least.

[8516knicks]

Though it's said he has the freedom to construct his own staff, it seems there will be MANY Thibs holdovers. Whether this is the FO influence, or just acknowledgement by consensus with Mike Brown that Thibs was off in his own universe and didn't listen to good assistants is an open question. We expected Rick to be untouchable but some four or five others are also expected to be back.

there are more options. this is not uncommon. assistants can help with continuity during HC changes. they also could be working on specific things with players that everyone values and wants sustained.

i def thought rick was gone though.

I don't think that continuity is a bad thing because the holdovers from Thibs' staff have information on each player.

Mike should still have the final say on his staff. Especially when the draft and free agency went by without his input

I would think they would have asked in their interviews with him what he thought of Clarkson and Yabusele. For the draft it seems they were intent on taking Yabusele's french friend.

[Ravenxvirall]

Getting back on topic, everyone is entitled to their opinions on either side for this hire.

The only real question is: if you don't like Brown, who would you have preferred out of the available options?

If your answer is some unknown assistant somewhere, then really, you are just choosing the mystery box, because you have no credible track record of any kind to point to in order to say that hire would be better. The lack of NBA track record to criticize would be the only advantage that person has over Brown and that would be a pretty outsized risk for all parties involved.

David Blatt comes to mind as a cautionary tale on that front.

The Knicks were looking for the right person to lead the team. Not just the right tactician.

Thibs got fired mostly for how he conducted himself outside of games, not during them.

I think once the criteria was established of who we were looking for, my focus with experienced coaches would have been on Jenkins and Bud. I don't know if we even reached out to Bud but I think judging him on his Suns tenure is a little unfair as that franchise is a festering disaster pit. He's a champion and prior to the last few years had overachieved in his stops by my measure. I was pleased Jenkins was heavily considered.

Regarding the inexperienced coaches, the question itself is a little unfair and, I expect, any answer would be met with the dismissal that we don't really know what they would offer. Of course we don't. We're fans. We don't interview the coaches and only have access to their public faces and a fairly limited knowledge of their tactical approaches. I had a few in mind that I know of - Bryant and Cassell in particular - but mostly found it frustrating that inexperienced coaches were downgraded in the process. We've recently seen several new, bright minds such as Daignault, Finch, Mosley, and Mazzulla find success in the league that will be long term fixtures on their teams and I was hoping we'd find ours. I'm not convinced we seriously even looked.


I'm not gonna harp on Brown being the choice and hope he works out. I could see us having our best regular season record since the Riley years under him but I do have some concerns about what happens in the playoffs when we meet some of the greater tacticians in the game over a long series.

I get your sentiment, and it's not one that I think off base at face value. Wanting a new, young, presumably innovative coach to grow with is great. All the coaches you mentioned though did not take over their teams at the "win or else" stage of the roster's timeline. Daignault, Finch and Mosely took over stage 1 rebuilds and even though all 3 have had success, they are still experiencing growing pains during their playoff runs.

Mazzulla is a little bit different, because he was in-house for the Celtics. Even then, he defintely had some rough patches this year that perhaps betrayed his inexperience.

I get why you think the question is unfair, but I would argue it's unfair to expect the FO to spend years of Brunson and Co's prime trying to figure out if they made the right choice.

As far as your other suggestions, I would have spoken to Vogel and Bud, just to see what was up. Jenkins intrigued me, but I can't knock them for passing on him if he wasn't enthusiastic about the opportunity.

This is very well said and thought out. Kudos

[Capn'O]

Getting back on topic, everyone is entitled to their opinions on either side for this hire.

The only real question is: if you don't like Brown, who would you have preferred out of the available options?

If your answer is some unknown assistant somewhere, then really, you are just choosing the mystery box, because you have no credible track record of any kind to point to in order to say that hire would be better. The lack of NBA track record to criticize would be the only advantage that person has over Brown and that would be a pretty outsized risk for all parties involved.

David Blatt comes to mind as a cautionary tale on that front.

The Knicks were looking for the right person to lead the team. Not just the right tactician.

Thibs got fired mostly for how he conducted himself outside of games, not during them.

I think once the criteria was established of who we were looking for, my focus with experienced coaches would have been on Jenkins and Bud. I don't know if we even reached out to Bud but I think judging him on his Suns tenure is a little unfair as that franchise is a festering disaster pit. He's a champion and prior to the last few years had overachieved in his stops by my measure. I was pleased Jenkins was heavily considered.

Regarding the inexperienced coaches, the question itself is a little unfair and, I expect, any answer would be met with the dismissal that we don't really know what they would offer. Of course we don't. We're fans. We don't interview the coaches and only have access to their public faces and a fairly limited knowledge of their tactical approaches. I had a few in mind that I know of - Bryant and Cassell in particular - but mostly found it frustrating that inexperienced coaches were downgraded in the process. We've recently seen several new, bright minds such as Daignault, Finch, Mosley, and Mazzulla find success in the league that will be long term fixtures on their teams and I was hoping we'd find ours. I'm not convinced we seriously even looked.


I'm not gonna harp on Brown being the choice and hope he works out. I could see us having our best regular season record since the Riley years under him but I do have some concerns about what happens in the playoffs when we meet some of the greater tacticians in the game over a long series.

I get your sentiment, and it's not one that I think off base at face value. Wanting a new, young, presumably innovative coach to grow with is great. All the coaches you mentioned though did not take over their teams at the "win or else" stage of the roster's timeline. Daignault, Finch and Mosely took over stage 1 rebuilds and even though all 3 have had success, they are still experiencing growing pains during their playoff runs.

Mazzulla is a little bit different, because he was in-house for the Celtics. Even then, he defintely had some rough patches this year that perhaps betrayed his inexperience.

I get why you think the question is unfair, but I would argue it's unfair to expect the FO to spend years of Brunson and Co's prime trying to figure out if they made the right choice.

As far as your other suggestions, I would have spoken to Vogel and Bud, just to see what was up. Jenkins intrigued me, but I can't knock them for passing on him if he wasn't enthusiastic about the opportunity.

I'm aware of the considerations - I'm actually pretty surprised we never looked at Cassell based on what we were looking for.

- he's been a part of the Celtics 3 pt blitz offense and Rivers heroball
- plus some great defenses
- great player relations
- championship experience as a player, player transitioning to coaching, and assistant coach
- everyone lauds his coaching chops
- seems to work well with others

Meets all of our criteria. Though no explicit HC experience I would have thought he'd at least get an interview.

They were definitely looking for somebody with HC experience though. Once Kidd was clearly not available it might have even been Brown or bust.

[DOT]

I did think Jenkins was the most intriguing name out there, but not by much

I think it's simple, basically every time Mike Brown has been hired, the team immediately improves, no team has ever really gotten worse on his hiring

But on the flip side, it seems like teams sour on him rather quickly, and he kind of stagnates after an initial period of success

So it's probably a pretty good hire because we have all the pieces, we just need a little extra oomph, but if he can't get it done in year 1 or 2, that's probably it for him.

[Adelheid]

I did think Jenkins was the most intriguing name out there, but not by much

I think it's simple, basically every time Mike Brown has been hired, the team immediately improves, no team has ever really gotten worse on his hiring

But on the flip side, it seems like teams sour on him rather quickly, and he kind of stagnates after an initial period of success

So it's probably a pretty good hire because we have all the pieces, we just need a little extra oomph, but if he can't get it done in year 1 or 2, that's probably it for him.

most nba coaches are like this; or perhaps teams switch way too quickly from development to contention

because really, there is always a coach getting fired every season; coaching tenureship goes out of the window and most people are not noticing this is the norm. thibs lasting 5 years is an anomaly compared to most coaches' employment

[HarthorneWingo]

I saw a YouTube video that called Brown “Black Thibs”. LMAO

[Bob Ross]

Still not offish?

[WaltFrazier]

Give me a sniper for the last spot and a legit assistant coach so we can go all out. I’m just excited to see the different concepts. When Kobe says he doesn’t have to ask Mike Brown is he wants a chip because he shows it every day. That’s coming from Kobe somebody I respect. Holding out hope we get a good assistant.

I would love an actual PG that can run the offense when Brunson sits. I think that should have actually been priority followed by C. Yabusele was a good move. I trust they try to make sense of these last two spots. I am not a fan of Clarkson. Hope I'm wrong there too.

A good assistant. That's where it all hinges for me. Who's offense are we running? All I have heard about Mike is he tried to run Princeton style offense once and it didn't work. That he was supposed to defense oriented. The stint in SAC gives me hope. Who was responsible for that offense? Would it work here?

If we simply keep Thibs assistants, which one of them helps with the offense? Last few assistants that we knew of are gone. Bryant/Woodson.

Questions.

I’ve been begging for back up point that can distribute but let’s hope having an actual offense helps us.

Is it too late for Brogdon? I just read Washington could do a sign and trade for him. I don't know how much room we have or what this would take.

Or could Wright still come back for whatever room we have? Sort of a Brogdon lite, big defensive guard, not a great playmaker PG but competent.

[Madskillzz024]

Read on Twitter

I imagine he would be denied to become our next associated head coach as well then?

[ScienceOfLosing]

Crossed my mind, Thibs vs Brown. Got it off Reddit.
Sort of feels like a very slight upgrade but we’ll see.