Phil Jackson, Flip Saunders, and Lazy Coaching Searches

Not quite 90 days ago, a demonstrably badly run NBA franchise hired the league's answer to John McCain to run the circus. Today, that answer anointed a rookie coach to accompany him, a rookie GM/team president, into the future, which is where we're all going. New York's Phil Jackson has hired Derek Fisher, and Minnesota's Flip Saunders has hired Flip Saunders, and one thing at least is very clear: nobody knows anything.

Naturally, Vice Sports convened the Cuddle Depot The High Post to cut their cuddle puddle short round-table these momentous events and all the other blooming wonders of this nascent summer, after which little could be the same.

Brian Lauvray: Obviously the biggest questions here are: who is the bunny, and who is the nanner?

Ian Levy: And who, if anyone, is going to put some peanut butter on that nanner?

BL: And when will Adam Silver flex his NBA Commissioner muscles and force Vegas to allow laying heavy money on the over/under for dunks in the entire series? Simmons'd! No, but seriously, when will the NBA allow -- or force! -- the Finals winner to play the Harlem Globetrotters?

IL: Never mind the peanut butter and nanner. I answered my own question—Boris Diaw, in the library, with the butter knife. The most pressing questions now are about the front of the Knicks' bench and the back of the Thunder's. Who fills the enormous veteran leadership void for Oklahoma City? Any chance they can get their hands on Andre Miller, or Chris Childs (is he still around)? And for the Knicks, is this really the way they drew it up?

Chris Collision: That's a fair question about the Knicks. I kind of prefer to frame it differently, though: is this an idiotic blunder or a hilarious misstep? Cronyism or just a thoroughgoing lack of give-a-shit? Plan B (the Times said P. Jax ain't have one) or the panic button?

Kevin Ferrigan: I don't think it was cronyism or not giving a shit. Phil seemed to have a model he was looking for in the next Knicks head coach. Basically, a former player who knew the triangle, with little to no experience, so that Phil could control things from on high or, at the very least, allow him to take the credit for any successes and to slough off any blame for failures. He's looking for a proxy, basically. If Phil could physically still coach, I believe he would be. But he can't, so this is his next best option. He tried and failed to get Steve Kerr to be his proxy, so now Fish is the guy. Seems simple as that to me. Are the Knicks so broken that we're all collectively over-thinking this?

CC: Is the triangle a good idea for the Knicks? Is "having played in the triangle for a long time (a long time ago)" the same thing as knowing how to coach it? I think there are questions available that don't require over-thinking, yeah.

IL: There are so many different shades of coaching. Managing player personalities and motivations is an entirely different skillset from designing and teaching offensive systems, look at Mark Jackson. Fisher clearly seems to have all of the "managing personalities" credentials. But I agree, does simply playing in the triangle equate to being able teach it, run it, and tweak it effectively?

KF: Those are all good questions, Chris and Ian. I just didn't think the framing of it as clearly a disaster made sense. The questions about the triangle are ones that get at whether its really a disaster or not. I don't think the triangle is really the silver bullet that Phil believes it is, but he has 11 rings and I'm just some idiot on the internet. The principles that undergird the triangle- move the ball, make quick decisions, playing inside out - are the principles that undergird just about every successful offense there is and even the ones that don't always work. Getting the players to do those things is the hard work of coaching and what separates the championship offenses from the ones that are mediocre (well, also, player talent level). We'll see if Fisher is capable of doing that bit, but I don't see why he couldn't do it. He seems smart and has played under smart coaches who have had lots of success. He projects like a "leader," whatever that means to people. He's professional and polished. Whether his guys in New York buy in remains to be seen. But I think he's got lots going for him.

CC: Hey, he's a black dude and not a retread. In those things, he's got my vote. NBA could use more of both on the coaching front.

KF: We're in agreement there, Chris. Also, how sad was it listening to Fisher try to spin the idea that this current Knicks roster could be better, even without a change in personnel? I mean, he has to say that, of course, but man, he can't actually believe that, right? I mean, right?

CC: I dunno: there were lots of blog cris de coeur last year claiming that Woodson was using the roster wrong, so…maybe? (As a Venture Bros. man, I do definitely support any after-action report beginning "What happened? Why did we suck? How can we suck less?")

KF: That's probably fair. I think the difference between the Knicks fixing the problems with Woody's coaching—refusing to play the two PG lineups, always going with two traditional bigs even though Melo was awesome as a PF, and never figuring out how to beat a front, to name a few—probably only gets you a couple more wins. This Knicks roster is pretty terrible, with no way to improve in the short term, and it'll be much, much worse if Melo decides to bolt. Can the Knicks make the playoffs in the East next year if Melo stays? Would that help them? What does a best case scenario look like for them going forward?

CC: Something that doesn't involve inexperienced management and incompetent labor? Sadly, it appears as though the checks have been cut, so we may be out of the realm of best-case scenarios.

KF: But going forward, given what has already transpired, is there any way this works for the Knicks? I haven't really loved or hated what they've done, I just think they sort of screwed themselves before they even hired Jackson or Fisher. There's not much those guys can do given the Knicks' roster and asset limitations. The only reason I thought Jackson might be a good idea, aside from his obvious knowledge of the game, is that he might have enough prestige or mystique to attract free agents, which is the only shot the Knicks have, given their current limitations, to rebuild. That's admittedly a long-shot bet, but it's probably the best option they had, given how much they'd botched things up to that point. So, this season is probably going to be painful for the Knicks and their fans, but can they get a star free agent or two in 2015? Is there any way Phil can parlay anyone on their current roster into draft picks to build for a future? Would he even be inclined to build a team that way? I'm really interested to see how Jackson tackles the next few months.

CC: He's definitely got layers of plausible deniability: while the coach is his, the roster was like that when he got there, and Phil's got the smug-disingenuous chops with the media to sell either Carmelo staying ("great building block, maximize him like I did with other guys around his height") or him going ("flexibility, new choices, a roster reflecting my priorities"). You know who doesn't? Flip "Flip" Saunders.

BL: Seemingly taking a page from the Clinton and Bush manual: 'How to Make Friends and Run an Oligarchy,' Minnesota's very own deposed-despot-in-training, Flip Saunders, named himself ruler for life head coach on June 5th. Of course, lots of people want lots of power, it's just odd (and likely damning down the road) when Saunders the president of basketball operations kicks Saunders the head coach to the curb and regrets not hiring a George Karl or Patrick Ewing. For much of the NBA and its fandom the news came as a welcome amount of comic relief: "The more things change in Minnesota…"; but of course for T-wolves fans the hiring of Flip, particularly with the egg-shell fragility of the Kevin Love situation, was no laughing matter. Should we all be waiting with bated breath for Flip to "flip" on the ol' Flip Charm" and woo Monsieur Love? No. We should not. Should we all be picturing Flip saying "Time to turn on the ol' Flip Charm" as he adjusts his neck tie with disgusted onlookers recoiling in slimy disgust? Yes. Should we expect Kevin Love to be one of said onlookers? Yes. Oh god, YES. Correct me if I'm wrong, but having a GM/Pres. of b-ball operations running the bench is usually one of those HUGE calculated risks that NBA savants (see: Popovich, Gregg or Riley, Pat) roll the dice on. For the Flip Saunderses of the world? The nanner might eat the bunny.

CC: Melo and Fish to the Wolves for Flip and Love.

BL: But, CC, that's presuming 'Melo and Fish won't go to the Hornets, nee Bobcats, to team up with Al Jefferson and MJ's Monopoly money? Also, why is Al Jefferson's nickname simply Al Jefe? In any case, there are still at least two more games of the NBA Finals to be played and an NBA Draft for us to drool all over before the offseason's biggest chips start to fall. Say goodnight, Brian. "Goodnight, Brian."