View Full Version : Patrick Ewing to Retire
09-16-2002, 10:44 PM
09-16-2002, 11:25 PM
He just had a 2.5 year farewell tour.....
09-17-2002, 07:30 AM
He could have brought his creaky knees and finished his career in Dallas... Does anyone else remember the Knicks-Ewing, Mavs-Kidd trade talk a few years back?
09-17-2002, 09:14 AM
Ewing was one of my favorite players in the 90s, as well as back in the 80s at Georgetown. But as great as he was, he limited himself by overrating his own offensive game, and by becoming enamored of his own jump shot. And unfortuantely, too many people are eager to brand him as a loser, because of the failures of the NYKs. (That loser label must be why the current management thinks they'll achieve some sort of ultimate brand-image synergy by associating him with the team.)
Ewing in Dallas would've made Nelson in Dallas impossible. Ewing made it clear that he'd have nothing to do with the Nelson-led Mavericks when more recent trade talks occurred, and I doubt Nelson would even consider coaching a team associated with Ewing.
I've been a little testy regarding The Don lately, and his seeming off-season lethargy. (If they sign Lewis, it was a calculated gamble that paid off. If they don't sign him, it will represent several other significant opportunities to improve the team that will have been foregone.) But when I look at where Nelson has taken the Mavericks, and compare it to where the NYKs have fallen (even considering that fluke of an ill-fated,ill-fitted championship-series run in '99), there's no question in my mind that Nelson was right and Ewing was not when they were together in NY.
Tough legacy, Big Guy.
09-17-2002, 02:56 PM
Great career but his retirement comes about 5 years too late imho. i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif
09-17-2002, 07:18 PM
<< I've been a little testy regarding The Don lately, and his seeming off-season lethargy. (If they sign Lewis, it was a calculated gamble that paid off. If they don't sign him, it will represent several other significant opportunities to improve the team that will have been foregone.) >>
Under contract right now:
That's 10. Wang and Eduardo are still unsigned. That's 12. Dirk, Fin & Nash won't be going anywhere. Raef can't be traded until December. Who are Bradley, Esch, Griffen, TAW and AJ going to fetch in a trade that will be an improvement? NVE is tradeable if you can find someone that wants to assume his $11M contract. Yep, Don needs to get off his dead rear end and DO something.
09-18-2002, 05:10 PM
Well we're NOT getting Rashard Lewis.. Maybe Rashard Griffith but that's the only SHARD we'll be getting here.
Anyway MavKiki, I hear where you're coming from about Ewing but he was simply a superstar who was extremely confident. I think his problem was the Knicks organization didn't surround him by any consistent capable scorers until it was too late. I think if in his prime, he had someone like Houston who was consistent and not erratic like Starks, Ewing could have not been such a black hole at times that sometimes got the team in trouble. Because when Ewing was off, the team did NOTHING!!! They never had anyone else who really could help. The best option he had at one point was Derek Harper... Either way, I love Ewing, I thank him for what he did for the Knicks and I have no problem with him at all.
09-18-2002, 09:12 PM
Yeah, no problem with Ewing as a player. Not sure he was such a great guy offcourt, but truly have to respect what he did and what he brought night, after night, after night. I suppose you could say that the same ego and drive that helped make him such a force, kept him from realizing the need to change his style of play later in his career, which very well might've given him another chance to win a championship.
<< patient david, we will get popeye and or shard >>
David has a long and colorful history on this board as a Nellie antagonist. But I refuse to hold Nellie's trades for high-dollar contracts like AJ's and TAW's against him, his re-signing of Mantis, his over-generous offer to Esch, or his reluctance to do anything creative in terms of a sign-and-trade with LaF, for whom, incidentally, any trade value must have sharply plummeted after his (non)performance in the World Championships.
Nellie has a great record of building losing teams into teams who win a lot of games and put a very entertaining product on the floor, which, in turn, puts butts in seats. So no need to tell him to get off his and DO something, no need to suggest that he acquire tough-assed, defensive-oriented players just because the style of play that he coaches has never won a championship or even gotten to a championship series. We can still admire his accomplishments even if he, like Patrick Ewing as a player, (which was the original topic of this thread) retires without having won an NBA championship as a coach.
09-19-2002, 06:33 AM
IMO, the reason Nelson hasn't won a championship is NOT his coaching. It's the players on his teams. Traditionally, the NBA champion, with the exception of the Pistons a few years back, has had at least a top five player with adequate players around him. Nelson has never had that. NOW, Nelson has Dirk, a near top five player. If Nelson can come up with enough around him, Dirk can lead THIS team to a championship.
Nelson would have done something with those Knicks, with Ewing, if he had had more time. They turned him out when he had a winning record and Van Gundy implemented the exact changes Nelson had in mind. It was NY's loss and the Mavs gain.
09-19-2002, 09:54 AM
Aww, c'mon, David. That's no fun. You're supposed to come back with something personal and outrageous. Instigate and exscalate. This board has standards.
But I agree with you on the Nellie in NY thing. I think the NYKs would've been better off long-term with Nellie running things than JVG. Then again considering NYK's ownership, maybe not.
I disagree with you about Nellie's coaching style--he doesn't put a strong enough emphasis on defense, choosing instead to play up-tempo. Not only is it his coaching style, but it's the type of players he pursues. In some previous situations, it may've had to do with the type of players he could acquire due to financial constraints. Here in Dallas, where, by all accounts, he has relatively more financial latitude, he pursues the same type of players--offense, offense, offense, offense, and more offense.
Problem is, that doesn't work. Even the Showtime Lakers played good defense. So did the Celtics. The Pistons, as you mention. So did the Bulls. Same with the Spurs. Same with the recent Laker teams.
Not only the champions, but also many of the runnerups have been tough defense teams--Philly from a couple of years ago. The Jazz teams.
Anyway, I do have a lot of respect for Nellie's coaching abilities, in terms of being able to put together effective offensive teams, and being able to prepare teams to overachieve in a given series. Plus, they're fun to watch. But bottom line, as favorably as I regard him, I think his approach to the game has less probability of yielding a champion.
Mavs offer some great reasons to watch--Dirk, Nash and Fin. But I won't bet on them as champions with Nellie, given his current approach.
09-19-2002, 09:55 AM
How do you consider the Pistons who won a championship not have a player in the top five.. What was Isiah Thomas?? Also they had TWO players on that team who are among the top 50 best players.
09-19-2002, 07:05 PM
I don't believe the BS about Nelson not believing in defense. He was a Boston Celtic at a time when the Celtics were all about defense. I think Nelson just ended up with offensive players that he has tried to teach defense. Defense is mainly want-to. Nelson has never had the dominant big man is his stops, until now. Every time he has tried to get that big guy, it hasn't worked out, as with Chris Webber.
I never thought of Isiah Thomas as top five in the league when he played. He was pretty good, though.
09-19-2002, 08:24 PM
And now....for my 2000th post:
"Not believing in" is not quite the same as "doesn't put a strong enough emphasis on".
But if playing defense is mainly 'want-to', then so's coachin' it. They will not progress to the next level without playing better defense, come Del or high water. Better personnel, better scheme, more intensity.
Marques Johnson was pretty highly regarded for a few years back in the late 1970s--maybe not Top 5, but certainly one of the Top 5 young players. Came into the league the same year as Walter Davis and Adrian Dantley, I believe, and the three of them made quite a splash. (Edit: It wasn't Adrian Dantley. Bernard King?)
BTW, that Bucks team (and subsequent ones) with Quinn Buckner (grr), Sidney Moncrief, and an older Bob Lanier actually played pretty fair defense, as I recall. They were more of an offensive-oriented team, but actually gelled pretty well with Lanier in the middle. Kind of makes me wonder what effect a player like Mutombo would've had on this group. Oh well....
09-19-2002, 09:27 PM
The players Nelson had in Milwaukee were pretty much trained defensively when Nelson got them, Buckner at Indiana and Moncreif by Eddie Sutton, Lanier was on his last leg.
Nelson can emphasize all he wants, but short of firing someone or trading someone, I don't know what he can do. I'm sure he could get someone better defensively for each of his big three and we can all sit around and marvel at the defensive prowess of our new starters but can we win with that?
Nelson brought in an allegely good defensive coach and Donnie is supposed to be good in that area also. At any rate, I think the Mavs internal improvement depends on their defensive improvement.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.