OT: Knicks to pursue Thibs as HC

[MadGrinch]

As a coach he's excellent ...in truth his methods gave bulls fans an unrealistic view of the team .

overplaying the bulls core gave them more wins but they had to play his way ...he had Keith Bogans as a starter and won 62.

in hindsight if Bogans is starting for you and no top 15 player as a 2nd scoring star , you weren't going to win in the age of the super team.

but people really believed they could do it.

[erlim]

I think he’s be really great for guys like RJ Barrett, but I have to say, I would hate to see Thibs go there because I like him. James Dolan is a reprehensible disaster of a person who brings ruin and destruction to everything he does. Even his garbage adult contemporary soft rock band.

[dougthonus]

thibs is the kind of coach that, if successful, creates an immediate positive culture change and defensive improvement. it happened in chicago. it didn't in minnesota. was it a personnel issue or had the league caught up to him? not sure the knicks will answer that question for us

Wolves had a slight improvement (2 games) in his first year.

regression to the mean is expected, though. and probably more than 2 games given how bad that team was and how young they were. and taking over for a coach who is not particularly highly regarded

They won 47 games his second year (after the Butler trade though) and made the playoffs for the first time in 15 seasons.

yeah, hard to judge that season

In his 3rd year they were 19-21 when they fired him and went 17-25 after they fired him.

fair point

This year, without him, they were 19-45.

rookie head coach this season, KAT has missed nearly half the season, bad 2018 pick josh okogie is leading the team in minutes, 2nd is putrid high 2019 pick jarrett culver, nobody else has played more than 48 of the 64 games[/quote]

Overall, you have made an excuse why everything good that he did doesn't count. The teams record with/without KAT in the lineup was not really meaningfully different percentage wise, they were still way worse off with KAT back than they were the previous year with Thibs and way worse off the same year when Thibs left.

They still improved with him in his first season, and had their most successful season as a franchise in forever with him in his second, and were playing better with him in his 3rd than they were with the same talent after he left.

I'm not saying he killed it there, but all evidence points to him generally being successful rather than unsuccessful.

[dice]

Wolves had a slight improvement (2 games) in his first year.

regression to the mean is expected, though. and probably more than 2 games given how bad that team was and how young they were. and taking over for a coach who is not particularly highly regarded

They won 47 games his second year (after the Butler trade though) and made the playoffs for the first time in 15 seasons.

yeah, hard to judge that season

In his 3rd year they were 19-21 when they fired him and went 17-25 after they fired him.

fair point

This year, without him, they were 19-45.

rookie head coach this season, KAT has missed nearly half the season, bad 2018 pick josh okogie is leading the team in minutes, 2nd is putrid high 2019 pick jarrett culver, nobody else has played more than 48 of the 64 games

Overall, you have made an excuse why everything good that he did doesn't count.

The teams record with/without KAT in the lineup was not really meaningfully different percentage wise, they were still way worse off with KAT back than they were the previous year with Thibs and way worse off the same year when Thibs left.

that's a good catch on KAT. as for comparing performance to last season, know who else had a substantially better record with the wolves last season? ryan saunders. which is strong evidence that the decline this season has had little to do with coaching

They still improved with him in his first season

as explained, that 2 game improvement was not evidence of coaching impact. it was instead a terrible disappointment. their over/under heading into that season was 41.5. they won 31. the young guys were expected to make a jump and thibs was supposed to facilitate that. hardly an unrealistic expectation. but it didn't come close to happening

and had their most successful season as a franchise in forever with him in his second

first of all, franchise history is irrelevant. you're making the same argument those arguing for derrick rose in the HOF do ("he made us excited about bulls basketball for the first time in a long time"). secondly, their over/under going into THAT season was 48.5. but this time there was surely no significant thibs factor built into that projection given the lack of meaningful improvement the previous season. it was almost entirely based again on an expectation of significant improvement from the young guys and the input of jimmy. the team more or less performed to expectation in thibs's second year there. i can't logically give thibs significant credit for that as a coach

now, if you want to say that thibs gets credit that season as an executive for TRADING for jimmy, that's fine. but then you also have to account for what he gave up for one full season of jimmy. after jimmy left, they were probably worse off than they would have been had he never been acquired

...and were playing better with him in his 3rd than they were with the same talent after he left

which i acknowledged. but there was a logical reason for that falloff as well, namely being replaced by a rookie 32 year old head coach who clearly got the job through nepotism

I'm not saying he killed it there, but all evidence points to him generally being successful rather than unsuccessful.

and i'm not saying he was a bad coach. the talent he inherited obviously progressed poorly as well (neither thibs nor jimmy got much out of them). but thibs's tenure was most certainly a big disappointment. and any expectation by the knicks of a significantly different result given their similarly young roster is foolhardy

[dougthonus]

that's a good catch on KAT. as for comparing performance to last season, know who else had a substantially better record with the wolves last season? ryan saunders. which is strong evidence that the decline this season has had little to do with coaching

But they were much worse with Saunders than Thibs.

as explained, that 2 game improvement was not evidence of coaching impact. it was instead a terrible disappointment. their over/under heading into that season was 41.5. they won 31. the young guys were expected to make a jump and thibs was supposed to facilitate that. hardly an unrealistic expectation. but it didn't come close to happening

I agree, 2 game improvement isn't significant.

first of all, franchise history is irrelevant. you're making the same argument those arguing for derrick rose in the HOF do ("he made us excited about bulls basketball for the first time in a long time"). secondly, their over/under going into THAT season was 48.5. but this time there was surely no significant thibs factor built into that projection given the lack of meaningful improvement the previous season. it was almost entirely based again on an expectation of significant improvement from the young guys and the input of jimmy. the team more or less performed to expectation in thibs's second year there. i can't logically give thibs significant credit for that as a coach

If you're going to use the Vegas odds, it would be interesting to know if Vegas credited the Wolves with any expected improvement due to Thibs arrival.

and i'm not saying he was a bad coach. the talent he inherited obviously progressed poorly as well (neither thibs nor jimmy got much out of them). but thibs's tenure was most certainly a big disappointment. and any expectation by the knicks of a significantly different result given their similarly young roster is foolhardy

Probably fair to say that the Thibs era in Minnesota was disappointing (however you want to slice up the blame) and also fair that if Knicks fans think Thibs will come in and take bad players and make them great that they will be disappointed (as they would with that expectation regardless of the coach they hire).

I do think Thibs is a good coach though, and I do think he will be an upgrade to the coaches they've had recently.

[dice]

that's a good catch on KAT. as for comparing performance to last season, know who else had a substantially better record with the wolves last season? ryan saunders. which is strong evidence that the decline this season has had little to do with coaching

But they were much worse with Saunders than Thibs.

not last season. so was the minor difference between the two coaches last season a fluke due to small sample size and this season is a more appropriate indication of saunders's coaching? if so, than it could be argued that thibs might have only done as well as he did last season due to small sample size as well. it is my opinion that not only is thibs a significantly better coach, but the team has had substantial issues irrespective of coaching, including a lot of turnover. none of it is evidence of GOOD coaching on thibs's part

first of all, franchise history is irrelevant. you're making the same argument those arguing for derrick rose in the HOF do ("he made us excited about bulls basketball for the first time in a long time"). secondly, their over/under going into THAT season was 48.5. but this time there was surely no significant thibs factor built into that projection given the lack of meaningful improvement the previous season. it was almost entirely based again on an expectation of significant improvement from the young guys and the input of jimmy. the team more or less performed to expectation in thibs's second year there. i can't logically give thibs significant credit for that as a coach

If you're going to use the Vegas odds, it would be interesting to know if Vegas credited the Wolves with any expected improvement due to Thibs arrival.

in year one, i would imagine so. in year two, not so much

and i'm not saying he was a bad coach. the talent he inherited obviously progressed poorly as well (neither thibs nor jimmy got much out of them). but thibs's tenure was most certainly a big disappointment. and any expectation by the knicks of a significantly different result given their similarly young roster is foolhardy

Probably fair to say that the Thibs era in Minnesota was disappointing (however you want to slice up the blame) and also fair that if Knicks fans think Thibs will come in and take bad players and make them great that they will be disappointed (as they would with that expectation regardless of the coach they hire).

I do think Thibs is a good coach though, and I do think he will be an upgrade to the coaches they've had recently.

maybe so. everything knicks is a pretty low bar of expectation though

[dougthonus]

not last season. so was the minor difference between the two coaches last season a fluke due to small sample size and this season is a more appropriate indication of saunders's coaching? if so, than it could be argued that thibs might have only done as well as he did last season due to small sample size as well. it is my opinion that not only is thibs a significantly better coach, but the team has had substantial issues irrespective of coaching, including a lot of turnover. none of it is evidence of GOOD coaching on thibs's part

Thibs was on pace for a 39 win season.
Saunders was on pace for a 33 win season.

That's a pretty big difference IMO if your coach adds 6 games. They both coached nearly half the season, so sample sizes were reasonable (40 and 42 games) and about as good as you can possibly get within a single season.

Granted, the Wolves may have started to tear down at the end to lose to tank, the schedule may also have played out to favor one guy or the other, and Saunders didn't have to implement his own camp or schemes and likely stuck with what was there, so it's not really a great direct comparison between the two, but the team definitely lost some wind when Thibs left.

[dice]

not last season. so was the minor difference between the two coaches last season a fluke due to small sample size and this season is a more appropriate indication of saunders's coaching? if so, than it could be argued that thibs might have only done as well as he did last season due to small sample size as well. it is my opinion that not only is thibs a significantly better coach, but the team has had substantial issues irrespective of coaching, including a lot of turnover. none of it is evidence of GOOD coaching on thibs's part

Thibs was on pace for a 39 win season.
Saunders was on pace for a 33 win season.

That's a pretty big difference IMO if your coach adds 6 games. They both coached nearly half the season, so sample sizes were reasonable (40 and 42 games) and about as good as you can possibly get within a single season.

Granted, the Wolves may have started to tear down at the end to lose to tank, the schedule may also have played out to favor one guy or the other, and Saunders didn't have to implement his own camp or schemes and likely stuck with what was there, so it's not really a great direct comparison between the two, but the team definitely lost some wind when Thibs left.

i should note that jim boylan had a better record that skiles after skiles left, though skiles only coached 25 games that season. i'm sure there are plenty of examples of interim coaches doing better than long-serving coaches who left during the season. it's tough to make meaningful comparative judgments of coaching ability even if it's a 41/41 split

[dougthonus]

i should note that jim boylan had a better record that skiles after skiles left, though skiles only coached 25 games that season. i'm sure there are plenty of examples of interim coaches doing better than long-serving coaches who left during the season. it's tough to make meaningful comparative judgments of coaching ability even if it's a 41/41 split

My opinion is that often when the head coach leaves, the interim coach does better due to dead cat bounce, or because the head coach had lost the team so much that any new voice is appreciated and just the relief of losing that conflict causes players to play better.

I generally think keeping your players engaged is a huge portion of the job of head coach. I would expect with a guy like Thibs, whom was known as a tyrant, that you'd have more of that bounce. I actually think its interesting they did worse, but I haven't looked into it in depth, and there could be lots of reasons why that's true (schedule, injuries, tanking, etc).

[Jcool0]

Read on Twitter

[TheAlanParsons]

The proof will soon be in the pudding. My bet is that Thibs will be a massive failure. I might be wrong.

[Michael Jackson]

The proof will soon be in the pudding. My bet is that Thibs will be a massive failure. I might be wrong.

I think anyone going to the Knicks is going to be a huge failure honestly. There is very little to work with with that team, capspace is there but who is coming? Frankie Smokes and RJ and Robinson....

[MrFortune3]

The issue with Minnesota will always be the same no matter who coaches them. Wiggins and KAT wanted to get paid and act like stars but not play like them on defense.

[sco]

The Knicks are my 2nd favorite team, so as a fan, I'd like to see it happen. I think he could help a guy like Randle become a positive contributor vs. a huge negative. I think it could also be interesting their PG progression, which always seems to improve under Thibs. On the PG front, I sorta think it has to do with Thibs has guys so focused on the defensive end (with less energy on offense) so that the PG has a more prominent role on offense.

[P.C.]

The proof will soon be in the pudding. My bet is that Thibs will be a massive failure. I might be wrong.

I think anyone going to the Knicks is going to be a huge failure honestly. There is very little to work with with that team, capspace is there but who is coming? Frankie Smokes and RJ and Robinson....

Well, no one is coming if they hire Thibs as coach.

[TheFinishSniper]

The proof will soon be in the pudding. My bet is that Thibs will be a massive failure. I might be wrong.

I think anyone going to the Knicks is going to be a huge failure honestly. There is very little to work with with that team, capspace is there but who is coming? Frankie Smokes and RJ and Robinson....

Well, no one is coming if they hire Thibs as coach.

no one is coming to knicks regardless

[dice]

The Knicks are my 2nd favorite team

you are a unicorn. and a sad one, if the state of the 2 franchises is any indication

[sco]

The Knicks are my 2nd favorite team

you are a unicorn. and a sad one, if the state of the 2 franchises is any indication

But I crap rainbows!

[MrFortune3]

The Knicks are my 2nd favorite team, so as a fan, I'd like to see it happen. I think he could help a guy like Randle become a positive contributor vs. a huge negative. I think it could also be interesting their PG progression, which always seems to improve under Thibs. On the PG front, I sorta think it has to do with Thibs has guys so focused on the defensive end (with less energy on offense) so that the PG has a more prominent role on offense.

See, what you ain't finna do is say that on a Bulls board like it's just normal...

The Knicks? The Knicks? For real, the Knicks? THE KNICKS!!!?

[Jcool0]

Read on Twitter