The Smartest Coach
Smart coaches help their teams win games. Genius coaches attach themselves to teams that are on the upswing anyway, and then bail before things turn too sour. Larry Brown is a genius. The law of averages, some decent draft picks, the Allan Houston Rule, and the looming expiration of Penny Hardaway's contract combine to all-but-ensure that the Knicks will do better over the next two seasons than they did in 2004-05. Sure, they almost certainly won't actually be a good team, but the bar's been set so low that everyone will be thankful. Then he can skip town once the pressure builds to take things to the next level.
Advertisement
Larry Brown actually has been to the next level. It is true that he is not a long-term fix; but if he makes a team on the upswing swing up farther, isn't that good?
He reminds me of a nonalcoholic Billy Martin -- if you want to win now, he is your man.
July 26, 2005 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought you were going to be making a ghastly error, given that any team with Stephon Marbury as its "star" will never be good. But you redeemed yourself. Unfortunately for the Knicks, the East has been improving lately, and you've got a number of teams that will actually be good for the next couple of years: Miami, Detroit, Indiana, NETS, Cleveland, and Chicago. Even Boston, Phily, DC and Milwaukee(?). It's gonna take some effort to get by the latter 4, not to mention compete with the first 6.
July 26, 2005 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Brown can take the Clippers to the playoffs I wouldn't underestimate his ability to pull the Knicks up to 7th or 8th seed. Certainly they won't go anywhere, but as Matt says the bar is so low he really can't go wrong.
July 26, 2005 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
"It's gonna take some effort to get by the latter 4, not to mention compete with the first 6."
The LB/Zeke project is not about winning the East this coming year.
If the project lasts three years, they'll be doing some serious damage.
The measure of the profundity of His Genius can be expressed in one sentence:
He took the Clippers to the playoffs two years in a row.
July 26, 2005 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even the "smartest" coach needs talent. Players can make a coach look good or bad. Brown had some great talent in Detroit...not the least of which was Wallace, Hamilton and Billups. The only reason he didn't do more in Philly is he had a Prima Dona playing for him who felt he was more important then the team.
He took the Pistons to the next level, he won a championship and got the Pistons back to the finals last year. It might take a couple years but if Isiah gets Brown the talent, he will win in NY...
July 26, 2005 9:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
"The only reason he didn't do more in Philly is he had a Prima Dona playing for him who felt he was more important then the team."
Iverson played the exact role Brown wanted him to play.
It's worth noting that Iverson's Philly was Brown's longest coaching tenure in his career.
And as far as not doing more, when was the last time a team built around a 5'11" shooting guard made the Finals?
July 27, 2005 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
And as far as not doing more, when was the last time a team built around a 5'11" shooting guard made the Finals?
As far as I knew Iverson was supposed to be the point guard. They always seemed to be fueding, I don't know if Brown's strategy was to have his point guard hoisting up 40+ shots per game. I guess the team led by a "small" guard that did well was Thomas' Pistons teams of the late 80's. I am interested if the Suns and Nash take the next step next year, but Nash does have some big man help in Stoudemire.
July 27, 2005 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
"As far as I knew Iverson was supposed to be the point guard."
Iverson played point before Brown arrived. Iverson played point after Brown left. But he didn't play a minute at the point while Brown was in town.
"I don't know if Brown's strategy was to have his point guard hoisting up 40+ shots per game."
Brown had his point guard, Eric Snow, hoisting up very few shots.
But Brown's strategy was indeed to have Iverson taking the huge bulk of the team's shots. He made that publicly very clear during his entire tenure in Philly. And that's obviously why he moved Iverson out of position to play at the "2".
The strategy involved Iverson constantly penetrating the lane, drawing lots of big guys to him, and thus letting the Sixers dominate the offensive glass on his misses.
Brown and Iverson had some legendary feuds, but none of them were about how much Iverson was shooting. That was by design.
July 27, 2005 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I don't know if Brown's strategy was to have his point guard hoisting up 40+ shots per game."
FWIW, Brown had Iverson playing the same basic role in Philly that he had Reggie Miller play in Indiana and Rip Hamilton play in Detroit.
The idea is to focus the offense on your "2" guard running his defender off multiple screens. The ball is designed to end up in that guy's hands with about 10 seconds left on the shot clock, and let him do what he does best with his defender off balance.
In Reggie's case, that was to shoot long. In Rip's case, that was to shoot the mid-range shot. And in Iverson's case, that was to penetrate.
July 27, 2005 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
July 27, 2005 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
And part of the strategy of penetrating the lane is if the defense collapses on the player, he would then dish to the wings instead of always forcing the shots. And penetration is predicated on the fact that the player (usually a point guard "1") handles the ball. Maybe Iverson wasn't considered a true point guard under Brown but he wasn't supposed to be the shooting guard either. His job was to create for chances for the team and just not himself.
July 27, 2005 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Maybe Iverson wasn't considered a true point guard under Brown but he wasn't supposed to be the shooting guard either."
Yes. He really was.
It's not that complicated. Brown played Eric Snow over 40 minutes a game at point, and had point guard backups in while Snow was on the bench. Iverson played shooting guard. He didn't bring up the ball. He didn't distribute the ball.
"And part of the
July 27, 2005 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I am wondering whether
July 27, 2005 1:35 PM | Reply | Permalink