OT? Thibs to NY Knicks on 5 year deal

[transplant]

People can change, but the Thibodeau I know isn't a very good people person, but possibly the best defensive game planner I've ever seen. As is so often the case with NBA head coaches, the key is whether the players will choose to buy in, because in the NBA, the players have this choice. This is where the people skills come in.

If Thibodeau gets the Knicks gig and the players buy in, they'll be a good defensive team. That's as far as my prediction goes.

[dice]

so hoping that the knicks trade for lavine and make thibs's head explode

[dice]

Here come the Knicks. They'll be respectable in short order.

i tend to think that the knicks won't make the playoffs under thibs

[sco]

He'll overplay Nikitilina and Robinson. Randle is their ket to turn things around. He's a ball hogging, non-defender, but he seems like a worker. Barrett won't develop an outside shot.

[kodo]

WT is reporting Kidd is the favorite now over Thibs?

[dougthonus]

WT is reporting Kidd is the favorite now over Thibs?

Espn article is more recent. Perhaps Kidd thing was put out there to pressure Thibs.

[MrFortune3]

WT is reporting Kidd is the favorite now over Thibs?

Espn article is more recent. Perhaps Kidd thing was put out there to pressure Thibs.

It was to put pressure on Thibs. He wanted a 5 year deal and the Knicks wanted a 3 year or so like the Lakers offered Lue.

[MrFortune3]

Minnesota made people forget.

I think five years of Hoiberg/Boylen made people forget that Thibs yanked young players extremely fast and never let them play through mistakes. It was a fairly consistent complaint in his era.

Oh we remember. But who developed after he left for real?

[coldfish]

Thibs had Rose, Noah, Butler, Gibson and a few other players blossom under him. Players that suck don't get to play but its not like McDermott went on to light the world on fire after leaving Thibs.

Compared to other coaches, I would say that Thibs has a fantastic batting average. Fans frequently decide that their pet cat is a stud and the only thing holding him back is the coach but the reality is that most draft picks don't work out.

Noah was basically who he was the year before Thibs got there. Gibson only played a year pre-Thibs but had an excellent rookie season as well. Both of those guys also had extended college careers. I don't think Thibs did anything to develop either.

Rose obviously took off big time when Thibs arrived. Whether you want to credit that to Thibs or not is perhaps a stretch, but I will say that I'd give Thibs some credit for improving Rose's defense.

Maybe could also give him credit for finding ways to use Asik.

Also, it took four years for Jimmy Butler to break out, largely because Thibs felt it necessary to play Deng a gazillion minutes a night and kept other scrubs ahead of him in the rotation, and Butler continued to get better post Thibs. He absolutely destroyed Kris Dunn, whom seemed to be a better player immediately after Thibs wasn't his coach. Same was probably true of LaVine, but LaVine also was at the point where that was pretty natural.

I think its hard to give Thibs (or any coach really) credit or blame for how good a player is, we never really know if a guy would have been better or worse in a different situation, and development is primarily the responsibility of the player. What we do know is that Thibs has a faster hook and lower tolerance for rookies playing poorly than other coaches. The one singular thing a coach might do to help a player grow is manage playing time well, and I'd say Thibs historically is really light on minutes for guys that need to develop.

I'll just do a few, both good and bad.

If people remember Derrick before Thibs came, Derrick was among the league leaders in long 2 point shots taken. On defense, he never helped and when a pick was set, it completely took him out of the play. Into Thibs' first year, Derrick went from a horrific defender to a mediocre one. His shot selection drastically improved. I hate to be blunt but Derrick isn't a rocket scientist. Thibs put it a pretty simplistic offense for him where the looks were predictable. The year where Derrick really started to get it was his second year under Thibs when his anticipation got significantly better. I think its pretty clear that Thibs made Derrick a more effective player, much like he did with a bunch of scoring PG's.

And no, Derrick was never looking over his shoulder about minutes.

You brought up Mirotic. Mirotic's problem was always just an issue with general awareness. Thibs never taught it to him. After he left Chicago, he continued to struggle with it. Both of his teams after Chicago were enticed by the potential but eventually saw through the glitz and realized that Mirotic just wasn't that effective of a player, something Thibs saw early.

Regardless, where I always disagreed with people is on playing time. IMO, most improvement happens in practice and the offseason. The only stick that coaches have is playing time and Thibs frequently used it to force players to learn. Others vehemently disagree with this philosophy and as such, really didn't like Thibodeau.

[MrSparkle]

It’s been proven that coaches can’t make Filet Mignon out of Spam, but Thibs 12-14 stretch was as good as I’ve seen a coach work. Few others come to mind, all of the elite class, taking truly untalented rosters to the playoffs: Popovich, Carlisle, etc.

But as those two showed, you can’t always win. That Wolves roster was good on paper, only because KAT was designated an MVP type of talent and Wiggins/Zach were athletic lotto talent. Reality never caught up to expectations; those 3 weren’t ready to win games. 5 years later, they’re still not ready. When he had Jimmy, he had that team in the playoffs in the tough West.

His track record is plain good when he has his type of players. Like I said, this Knicks team fits him better than the 2015 Wolves.

The Knicks were bad this year, but as we saw in those losses, they are tough. If they feed into that identity, they’re not gonna be an easy match-up for anybody.

[DuckIII]

I like Thibs and I hope he does well. But for me, the bloom is very much off the Rose for that guy. He’s fine, and he had a helluva run with us. But he’s not special. At least not anymore.

Regardless, I would like to see the Knicks and Bulls both return to EC relevance at the same time. It would make the Bulls and the NBA far more interesting.

[transplant]

It’s been proven that coaches can’t make Filet Mignon out of Spam, but Thibs 12-14 stretch was as good as I’ve seen a coach work. Few others come to mind, all of the elite class, taking truly untalented rosters to the playoffs: Popovich, Carlisle, etc.

Untalented rosters? Rose, Hinrich, Butler, Deng, Boozer, Gibson and Noah is "truly untalented?" Way too many all star game appearances to call that roster truly untalented IMO.

[dougthonus]

I'll just do a few, both good and bad.

If people remember Derrick before Thibs came, Derrick was among the league leaders in long 2 point shots taken. On defense, he never helped and when a pick was set, it completely took him out of the play. Into Thibs' first year, Derrick went from a horrific defender to a mediocre one. His shot selection drastically improved. I hate to be blunt but Derrick isn't a rocket scientist. Thibs put it a pretty simplistic offense for him where the looks were predictable. The year where Derrick really started to get it was his second year under Thibs when his anticipation got significantly better. I think its pretty clear that Thibs made Derrick a more effective player, much like he did with a bunch of scoring PG's.

And no, Derrick was never looking over his shoulder about minutes.

Well he won the MVP his first year under Thibs, and that was statistically his best year. Thibs may have designed the offense around Rose because Rose was a franchise caliber talent, and I completely agree that Thibs helped Rose, but that's a pretty unique situation that really isn't around player development. It's him taking the best talent on his team and figure out the way to use him most effectively.

Of course Rose wasn't looking over his shoulder for minutes. I mean, I think if Thibs got to coach Zion, he also might figure out a way to make Zion really effective too, but I wouldn't say that makes him a great development guy.

Regardless, where I always disagreed with people is on playing time. IMO, most improvement happens in practice and the offseason. The only stick that coaches have is playing time and Thibs frequently used it to force players to learn. Others vehemently disagree with this philosophy and as such, really didn't like Thibodeau.

Thibs may have run it differently, but a lot of teams really aren't doing that much real practice during the season in order to stay fresh for the season and the games. If you aren't playing, your odds of developing are probably way down.

As a side note, I literally can't think of any single thing in my life ever, not one single instance, where I was punished for screwing up and that helped me develop my skills better. In every regard in my personal experience, I've found that to be an awful way to learn/grow/improve and become an obstacle that I may or may not overcome in order to develop.

Nor do I think that Thibs used punishment or yanking young player minutes as a method of improving those players. He did it because he only coaches for the next five minutes and not for the season and certainly not for the next four seasons. We can tell that for sure by a 100 examples. His full out, balls to the walls, take no prisoners, play every second as if its the NBA Championship approach absolutely has some benefits as well. I think he can get a group of guys that are bought in to overachieve in the short term which is awesome. I just don't think it lines up well at all with player development.

[MrSparkle]

It’s been proven that coaches can’t make Filet Mignon out of Spam, but Thibs 12-14 stretch was as good as I’ve seen a coach work. Few others come to mind, all of the elite class, taking truly untalented rosters to the playoffs: Popovich, Carlisle, etc.

Untalented rosters? Rose, Hinrich, Butler, Deng, Boozer, Gibson and Noah is "truly untalented?" Way too many all star game appearances to call that roster truly untalented IMO.

12-14. Rose played... 7 games. Kirk and Boozer were scarecrows and out the league the year after. Deng was traded by January; that 13-14 roster particularly was as bad a team I ever saw win 48 games. DJ Augustin was a big savior, but you also consider that he played his best ball ever for Thibs, which was a recurring thing (scrub scoring PGs having career years).

The 2013 team had no business beating BRK. Mind you Deron and Lopez were still 20+ PER stars- I think that Bulls series sent Deron into a depression he never recovered from.

[DuckIII]

Nor do I think that Thibs used punishment or yanking young player minutes as a method of improving those players. He did it because he only coaches for the next five minutes and not for the season and certainly not for the next four seasons.

Precisely right. And he’ll need to evolve in this regard to legitimately “develop” the Knicks roster. Otherwise they’ll need free agency to do it for him.

I think Thibs has the brain to be exceptional in the long term. But he’ll need to get out of his own way to do it with a young roster.

[coldfish]

It’s been proven that coaches can’t make Filet Mignon out of Spam, but Thibs 12-14 stretch was as good as I’ve seen a coach work. Few others come to mind, all of the elite class, taking truly untalented rosters to the playoffs: Popovich, Carlisle, etc.

Untalented rosters? Rose, Hinrich, Butler, Deng, Boozer, Gibson and Noah is "truly untalented?" Way too many all star game appearances to call that roster truly untalented IMO.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/2014.html

That was one of the best coaching jobs I have seen in my life. After Rose was down and Deng traded, the cupboard was really bare in Chicago. Boozer had nothing left in the tank. Butler was just figuring things out. It was basically Noah, Taj and a bunch of scrubs going on to win 48 games. Most coaches would struggle to win 30 games with that group. Putting Noah at point center was brilliant.

[MrFortune3]

Nor do I think that Thibs used punishment or yanking young player minutes as a method of improving those players. He did it because he only coaches for the next five minutes and not for the season and certainly not for the next four seasons.

Precisely right. And he’ll need to evolve in this regard to legitimately “develop” the Knicks roster. Otherwise they’ll need free agency to do it for him.

I think Thibs has the brain to be exceptional in the long term. But he’ll need to get out of his own way to do it with a young roster.

For the Knicks, they'll need to dip into FA anyway. That roster is not balanced, especially not for Thibs preference.

You have Randle and Barrett and there is no telling what Thibs thinks of Randle.

[Leslie Forman]

Minnesota made people forget.

I think five years of Hoiberg/Boylen made people forget that Thibs yanked young players extremely fast and never let them play through mistakes. It was a fairly consistent complaint in his era.

Well that won't happen in New York, since every player they have is young and bad.

[dougthonus]

Minnesota made people forget.

I think five years of Hoiberg/Boylen made people forget that Thibs yanked young players extremely fast and never let them play through mistakes. It was a fairly consistent complaint in his era.

Well that won't happen in New York, since every player they have is young and bad.

Fair point, I'd say that to mock them, but it would be the same if he were here, so glass houses and all that.

[coldfish]

I'll just do a few, both good and bad.

If people remember Derrick before Thibs came, Derrick was among the league leaders in long 2 point shots taken. On defense, he never helped and when a pick was set, it completely took him out of the play. Into Thibs' first year, Derrick went from a horrific defender to a mediocre one. His shot selection drastically improved. I hate to be blunt but Derrick isn't a rocket scientist. Thibs put it a pretty simplistic offense for him where the looks were predictable. The year where Derrick really started to get it was his second year under Thibs when his anticipation got significantly better. I think its pretty clear that Thibs made Derrick a more effective player, much like he did with a bunch of scoring PG's.

And no, Derrick was never looking over his shoulder about minutes.

Well he won the MVP his first year under Thibs, and that was statistically his best year. Thibs may have designed the offense around Rose because Rose was a franchise caliber talent, and I completely agree that Thibs helped Rose, but that's a pretty unique situation that really isn't around player development. It's him taking the best talent on his team and figure out the way to use him most effectively.

Of course Rose wasn't looking over his shoulder for minutes. I mean, I think if Thibs got to coach Zion, he also might figure out a way to make Zion really effective too, but I wouldn't say that makes him a great development guy.

If Mark Jackson or Jason Kidd or countless other coaches were coaching Derrick, they would have tried to turn him into something he wasn't, which was a passing PG. Thibs embraced Rose as a scoring guard and that maximized his talent. I doubt that Rose would have won MVP with many other coaches.

Regardless, I made the specific points about Derrick making noticeable improvements. You seem to be raising the bar to a level where no coach could ever reach. I would love an objective read on the situation. During his tenure how many players became all stars under him who never had before versus other coaches?

Regardless, where I always disagreed with people is on playing time. IMO, most improvement happens in practice and the offseason. The only stick that coaches have is playing time and Thibs frequently used it to force players to learn. Others vehemently disagree with this philosophy and as such, really didn't like Thibodeau.

Thibs may have run it differently, but a lot of teams really aren't doing that much real practice during the season in order to stay fresh for the season and the games. If you aren't playing, your odds of developing are probably way down.

As a side note, I literally can't think of any single thing in my life ever, not one single instance, where I was punished for screwing up and that helped me develop my skills better. In every regard in my personal experience, I've found that to be an awful way to learn/grow/improve and become an obstacle that I may or may not overcome in order to develop.

It is my understanding that teams do few full on practices during the season. That said, they do film work with coaches regularly. What we refer to as a "shootaround" is really a pre-planned set of individual workouts with trainers. Walkthroughs are before every game and players have a chance to work with coaches then, put film work into play and work on 5 on 5 game understanding at a slower pace.

Don't get caught up in the word "practice" as being only full speed full team workouts. For every hour they spend on an NBA court, players will spend several working on their craft in some way. Some people might call that "practicing".

Nor do I think that Thibs used punishment or yanking young player minutes as a method of improving those players. He did it because he only coaches for the next five minutes and not for the season and certainly not for the next four seasons. We can tell that for sure by a 100 examples. His full out, balls to the walls, take no prisoners, play every second as if its the NBA Championship approach absolutely has some benefits as well. I think he can get a group of guys that are bought in to overachieve in the short term which is awesome. I just don't think it lines up well at all with player development.

In general, I think you completely missed Thibodeau's point.

“Practice is important. The regular season is important. Your meetings are important. Your walk-through is important. Everything is important. You want to be a championship team, there's a price to pay. And that's what you have to do. There's no shortcuts. You can't shortcut your way to success.”

That goes with the above too.

You know how towards the end of the Rose run with Pau the team just kind of lollygagged its way through the regular season? If you go back to the board at the time, you will see many people talk about the team "flipping a switch". When the playoffs came, they were unable to do so.

This is a common thing in sports. A lot of players and teams think they can just turn it on when they feel like. Very few really can though. Thibodeau doesn't believe that game 15 of the regular season is going to make or break the team. The whole purpose of taking every game seriously is to teach players HOW to take games seriously. Work on conditioning. Develop good habits.

Here is another guy I'm guessing you would have hated as a coach but its exactly the same philosophy:
https://www.amazon.com/Winning-Habit-Lombardi-Success-Excellence/dp/0062702157

As a side note, I literally can't think of any single thing in my life ever, not one single instance, where I was punished for screwing up and that helped me develop my skills better. In every regard in my personal experience, I've found that to be an awful way to learn/grow/improve and become an obstacle that I may or may not overcome in order to develop.

I'm a golfer, so I'll give a golf analogy. No one has ever improved their swing by taking their practice and game time like a joke and trying Happy Gilmore swings with their off hand. You get better by developing a swing routine and sticking to it.

Thibs didn't pull people for missing shots. Most of the issue with Thibs was players missing defensive assignments. Letting players do that regularly doesn't help them and it also demoralizes the rest of the team who are working to do the right thing.

I literally can't think of any single thing in my life, ever, not one single instance, where I got better at something by doing it the wrong way.