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.

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?

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.

@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.

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.

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.

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

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.