Voisin: Brown Interested in Kings Job (merged)
- Thread starter Rockmeister
- Start date
I didn't disagree with your statement. In fact I started off by saying you make great points. It's just that you haven't convinced me that Brown is not a good option.
And don't assume that I'd rather have Brown coaching than any of the other candidates YOU listed. Sloan and Adelman aren't available last time I checked. I do, on the other hand, want Brown over Theus, Shaw, and all the other available candidates. And not just because he has rings, but that is one of the many reasons.
It would be one thing if Larry rode a Michael Jordan or Shaquille O'Neal to his rings but he took a group of guys and made champions out of them. And NOTHING, not even a pathetic stint in New York, can take that away from him.
Cool, now i'm in yet another apologist group.
Read carefully...I noted that Larry is not responsible for ALL the turmoil in NY. Isiah is an idiot. The players are idioits. And I do recognize that Larry could have done some things differently.
Didn't they "grossly underperform" because of guys like Marbury who wouldn't listen to Larry? One group of guys, in Detroit, had great success under Larry when they listened to him.
Brown inherited an "arguably improved" team? Hmm, lets see...
'02-'03: 37-45
'03-'04: 39-43
'04-'05: 33-49
Grossly underperform? Arguably improved? Looks to me like the team was a below .500 team in a weak conference to begin with. Then when they kept losing games they just tuned Larry out.
So Eric Muss' greatest coaching year amounted to the same wins as Larry Brown's worst coaching year? What are you trying to convince me of? That Eric Musselman = Larry Brown?
If past actions are an indicator of future performance could we also expect that Larry Brown will make the Kings champs?...Twice? I'm not saying he will, but your logic can go both ways.
You can't look to their worst moments OR their best moments when you choose a coach. You look at it all. And an average Larry Brown is still better than all of the competition combined.
And don't assume that I'd rather have Brown coaching than any of the other candidates YOU listed. Sloan and Adelman aren't available last time I checked. I do, on the other hand, want Brown over Theus, Shaw, and all the other available candidates. And not just because he has rings, but that is one of the many reasons.
It would be one thing if Larry rode a Michael Jordan or Shaquille O'Neal to his rings but he took a group of guys and made champions out of them. And NOTHING, not even a pathetic stint in New York, can take that away from him.
Cool, now i'm in yet another apologist group.
Read carefully...I noted that Larry is not responsible for ALL the turmoil in NY. Isiah is an idiot. The players are idioits. And I do recognize that Larry could have done some things differently.
Didn't they "grossly underperform" because of guys like Marbury who wouldn't listen to Larry? One group of guys, in Detroit, had great success under Larry when they listened to him.
Brown inherited an "arguably improved" team? Hmm, lets see...
'02-'03: 37-45
'03-'04: 39-43
'04-'05: 33-49
Grossly underperform? Arguably improved? Looks to me like the team was a below .500 team in a weak conference to begin with. Then when they kept losing games they just tuned Larry out.
HndsmCelt said:
Ironically Muss managed to amass a 33 win season himself so IF history and past actions are an indicator of future performance we could expect Larry to once again amass 22 wins in 2008 and we can watch Bibby and Artest's fist fight on Youtube... and THAT is an opimistic view assuming Larry has not lost a step since 2005.
If past actions are an indicator of future performance could we also expect that Larry Brown will make the Kings champs?...Twice? I'm not saying he will, but your logic can go both ways.
You can't look to their worst moments OR their best moments when you choose a coach. You look at it all. And an average Larry Brown is still better than all of the competition combined.
Whatever. Care to site some examples? There are lots of polls in the back threads. Show me where in public polls people have voted against how they really feel because some of the "respected members" have voted a certain way.
I'm sorry, Entity, but I think you're insulting a vast majority of our membership with that kind of comment. If they've shown anything over the years, it's their ability and inclination (for the most part) to go toe-to-toe with the "respect members* (whomever you're deciding they are) to stand up and argue their beliefs.
I'm sorry, Entity, but I think you're insulting a vast majority of our membership with that kind of comment. If they've shown anything over the years, it's their ability and inclination (for the most part) to go toe-to-toe with the "respect members* (whomever you're deciding they are) to stand up and argue their beliefs.
Last edited:
By your theory it would matter who "the some" are.
Why would someone who gets the chance to post here more often have an opinion that should be deemed better than someone who doesn't post as much?
I agree with VF on this one 100%.
I voted "Don't care". While I'm not against the hiring of Brown, it doesn't bother me too much. I'd rather have Shaw, a good young proffesional and a winner. A smart mind who is a young coach and who can hopefuly find a good start to his career with a good young rebuilding team.
I don't have a problem. If you'll check my post again - which has been edited, BTW - you'll see that I stated my objections.
YOU are the one who made this about members and not about Larry Brown. YOU are the one who had to make a blanket comment you cannot substantiate for whatever reason. And I - as someone who holds the membership of this board in great respect - called you on it. You pretty much inferred they're mindless sheep. I disagreed. And I still do.
You have NO idea whatsoever why some people vote the way they do and last time I checked there hadn't been a vote to elect you the speaker for the unnamed masses.
There are points to be argued on both side of the Larry Brown issue and it was going along quite nicely until you threw the snide comment into the mix.
YOU are the one who made this about members and not about Larry Brown. YOU are the one who had to make a blanket comment you cannot substantiate for whatever reason. And I - as someone who holds the membership of this board in great respect - called you on it. You pretty much inferred they're mindless sheep. I disagreed. And I still do.
You have NO idea whatsoever why some people vote the way they do and last time I checked there hadn't been a vote to elect you the speaker for the unnamed masses.
There are points to be argued on both side of the Larry Brown issue and it was going along quite nicely until you threw the snide comment into the mix.
Can't prove it. but it is a fact that you VF21 would respect Bricklayers opinion over MillerTime21 or 6ths opinion over Jdub^^55. If you say thats not true than you are a liar. Hell I would respect it more. because you kinda of know them from here. where as anybody else is a stranger and you don't respect strangers opioions. It works that way anywhere in life including here.
I cannot speak for VF, but I know that I'd respect whichever opinion seemed more valid. The reason why people like 6th and Bricks opinions are because they are usually spot on. That does not mean that on one particular topic I would respect Bricks opinion anymore than some poster I had never seen in my life. That's my perspective, anyway.
Oh good lord. Have you been in a cave over the years? Have you not seen the arguments Brick and I have gotten into? If someone brings their opinion and can substantiate it, I have no problem respecting them. But if someone makes a bold-faced statement WITHOUT being able to prove it, I'm going to call them on it. I don't care if they have 10,000 posts or 2 posts.
It's apparent you are obviously swayed by how someone else votes. That's on you. The fact you cannot prove it negates it being a fact and relegates it to the "it's my opinion" category.
Can we just let it go and get back to the topic at hand?
It's apparent you are obviously swayed by how someone else votes. That's on you. The fact you cannot prove it negates it being a fact and relegates it to the "it's my opinion" category.
Can we just let it go and get back to the topic at hand?
Sorry, just not so. VF and Brick go at it all the time, they have completely differing opinions of GP for example.
And if a new poster has a good opinion, it is as respected as those with more posts.
And again, this is about how the fans feel and all fans have equal weight in this type of situation. In another situation, a respected poster may get more weight, because we have experience with them. It would be more like if one were to throw out a rumor, it would have more weight with an established member. Certainly not in a poll, VF has asked you come up with specific examples and you will not be able to. I would drop it and move on if I were you.
And if a new poster has a good opinion, it is as respected as those with more posts.
And again, this is about how the fans feel and all fans have equal weight in this type of situation. In another situation, a respected poster may get more weight, because we have experience with them. It would be more like if one were to throw out a rumor, it would have more weight with an established member. Certainly not in a poll, VF has asked you come up with specific examples and you will not be able to. I would drop it and move on if I were you.
Last edited:
I wasn't disagreeing with you or telling you you're wrong, so apologies if you took it that way. However, I do feel you're being a bit harsh.
I was just saying how I go about rating different posters opinions. We're just different. And I never, ever look at who voted for who. I'll start doing so in future, but I never really cared who voted who, I always prefered to see who the majority of fans chose.