Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Friday, July 25, 2014

Knicks Sign Mike Woodson to Multiyear Extension

It’s finally official! Coach Woodson will be returning to coach the Knicks next season and possibly many more!

The Knicks announced that they gave Woodson a multiyear extension (terms of the deal have not been released yet).

Congratulations to Coach Woodson! You certainly can’t argue about giving a guy who went 18-6 as coach a new contract. Woodson said about the deal, “I know expectations are high and they should be high and I’m looking forward to the challenge.” He is right, expectations will be high. Good luck to him in meeting them!

15 comments on “Knicks Sign Mike Woodson to Multiyear Extension

  1. max fisher-cohen

    gosh darnit, Brian, it’s so hard to be negative when your post was so enthusiastic… Congrats, Mr. Woodson. I hope you can make this work, and I hope that if you can’t, you don’t end up another scapegoat.

  2. Z

    Hmmm… Wonder why they released the news on Friday night. Not exactly the place where good news goes to live…

  3. TelegraphedPass

    Z:
    Hmmm… Wonder why they released the news on Friday night. Not exactly the place where good news goes to live…

    The Knicks organization basically said for the past week that they wanted the coaching announcement to be a low-key affair. No grand proclamation. Just a confirmation of what everyone expected.

  4. bob cook

    Some will presumably say, “we could have had Jackson, or Sloan or Calipari yadda yadda”. I vote for Woody for two reasons. (A) the alternative guys, especially Jackson, are old dudes and presumably less driven than what is called for in a tough job but the bigger reason (B) is that experience shows that just cause a coach has a big rep doesn’t mean he won’t crash and burn in the strange Dolan/Knicks universe. Exhibits include Larry Brown, Wilkins, D’Antoni, Nelson etc. So Woody’s 18-6 work in the actual real world looms large and with his Atlanta resume, easily justifies his retention.

  5. Brian Cronin

    If I thought the Knicks were getting Atlanta Woodson, I’d be worried, but I think he’s grown from his time in Atlanta. Okay, I guess I should say that I am hopeful that he grown from his time in Atlanta. Injuries forced him into relapsing a bit in his coaching style, but I think with a healthy Knicks squad you will see a lot more creativity from him than we ever saw in Atlanta (more like the stretch when he had STAT, Melo and Lin together).

  6. thenamestsam

    I have no problem with Woodson being the choice. As Brian pointed out, it’s certainly hard to argue too much with 18-6, and the team looked very good for the short stretch where they were at full strength, and it’s hard to give him too much crap for the lack of adjustments etc. during the Miami series given the lack of tools in the toolbox at the time.

    However, it still annoys me that they didn’t look around a bit. A year ago we all would have considered Woodson an unacceptable choice, correct? Or at least a seriosuly mediocre one. And now, what we have to counter that is a 25 game sample. As I said above, a 25 game sample where the results were very good, but even the biggest Woodson supporters would I think agree that his contribution to it was a bit hazy. He got the team to play with more effort and stop switching on D, but I sort of feel like any coach was going to capitalize on the post-Dantoni bounce in effort to some extent.

    Anyway my larger point is that there was absolutely nothing to be lost by having a real coaching search. Call PJax. Call Sloan. Maybe they wouldn’t have been better fits, but that’s why you interview them, to find out. They may have made the right decision in the end, but the process that led to that decision still seems pretty flawed.

  7. Brian Cronin

    Coach Woodson was my worst nightmare when he was first announced as D’Antoni’s assistant coach before the season. But that was because I thought we were going to get Atlanta Woodson. We might still get Atlanta Woodson next season, in which case, yeah, I’ll be pissed. But the Woodson who coached them in those full strength games was a lot better than Atlanta Woodson. Much more creative and adaptable. Playoff Woodson…not so much.

    I wonder if this is enough of an incentive for JR Smith to return.

  8. TelegraphedPass

    @6 My only issue with those two head coaches is it would be a hire based seemingly on name only. Isn’t that the kind of attitude we hoped to erase in New York? I’m not sure installing the triangle or the flex would make best use of our assets, and we almost certainly would run those systems under those two coaches. I don’t mind the continuity at all.

    Carmelo clearly likes Woodson. JR Smith likes Woodson, whatever that means. This next season will be his opportunity to show what kind of offensive mind he and the coaching staff possess. Hopefully they can converge the talents of Carmelo and STAT into a cohesive system.

  9. sidestep

    thenamestsam: However, it still annoys me that they didn’t look around a bit.

    If it ever got out that the Knicks shopped around before asking Woodson — and I think it’s likely it would’ve gotten out — it would make both Woodson and the management look bad. It would be a terrible way to start out a job for everyone to know, including the players, that you’re just the leftover second choice.

    If there is no obvious indication that Jackson would have taken such an offer, I think Grunwald made the right choice in not even approaching him about it. If there’s one thing that D’Antoni’s time at NY proved, it’s that an essential part of the job is managing people and their confidence in you, and Grunwald set the right tone by showing his complete confidence in the coach, instead of undermining him by shopping around.

  10. thenamestsam

    @6, it didn’t necessarily have to be those two guys, those are just two of the logical choices to inquire about. If you have a process there’s no reason the process has to focus on only the biggest names, they just didn’t have a process.

    @7 I think it only would have looked that way if they had obviously pursued Jackson (for example) and gotten turned down by him. But if they brought in 4 or 5 guys for interviews and then decided to go with Woodson it wouldn’t look like he was the 2nd choice. It would look like they had a coaching search and decided he was the best choice.

  11. thenamestsam

    Those #s should have been @8 and @9. It’s too hot for proper brain functioning.

  12. sidestep

    thenamestsam: I think it only would have looked that way if they had obviously pursued Jackson (for example) and gotten turned down by him. But if they brought in 4 or 5 guys for interviews and then decided to go with Woodson it wouldn’t look like he was the 2nd choice. It would look like they had a coaching search and decided he was the best choice.

    That would have been fine if D’Antoni just got fired and the season just finished. But Woodson, as interim coach, has basically showed what he is like on the job. That’s more than just some Q&A interview; that’s as much info as anyone could reasonably ask for. What could another candidate do in an interview that would be more substantive than that? It’s not as if candidates are going to bring out X’s and O’s and draw up plays on a board for Dolan or Grunwald. The questions would at best gauge one’s level of commitment; aside from that, the other candidates would have been judged on reputation alone. Reputation versus Woodson as a known quantity. Seems pretty iffy to me.

    To open a round of interviews would in effect be giving Woodson a no-confidence or low-confidence vote.

  13. thenamestsam

    sidestep: That would have been fine if D’Antoni just got fired and the season just finished. But Woodson, as interim coach, has basically showed what he is like on the job. That’s more than just some Q&A interview; that’s as much info as anyone could reasonably ask for. What could another candidate do in an interview that would be more substantive than that? It’s not as if candidates are going to bring out X’s and O’s and draw up plays on a board for Dolan or Grunwald. The questions would at best gauge one’s level of commitment; aside from that, the other candidates would have been judged on reputation alone. Reputation versus Woodson as a known quantity. Seems pretty iffy to me.

    To open a round of interviews would in effect be giving Woodson a no-confidence or low-confidence vote.

    So why do other teams ever do coaching Q&As if they have no value?

  14. sidestep

    @13, are you suggesting that since organizations do Q&As for candidates, they must be a good indicator of how the coach is going to perform?

    My main pt is that whatever the interviews may suggest, they’re not comparable to actually seeing Woodson working on the job. Woodson has the backing of Melo and other major players, and went 18-6 during the regular season.

    We we were all very disappointed by the playoffs, but honestly, does anyone really think that a genius coach have gotten the team to beat the Heat with that depleted roster? Both Lin and Shump out; Amare returning from injury to then bust his hand; Baron and Jeffries playing through injuries — I could mention Chandler’s flu in game one but since he was so bad in the other games, who’s to sa what difference it would’ve made. Under those circumstances, does anyone really think that Phil Jackson or Jesus Christ come again could get the series to seven games? Suppose Zen Master Phil Jackson mesmerized the Heat with a koan and took the series to six games: that’s 4-2 versus Woodson’s 4-1, a difference of one game.

    It was a crazy season and we (justifiably) had high expectations going into the playoffs, but injuries screwed it up in a way that I don’t think any coach could have turned around.

  15. sidestep

    I believed and hoped the series was going to go to seven games — why not? crazier shit has happened this season — but I certainly would not have bet real money on it.

Comments are closed.