Phx-Suns.Net

Like I said, he's going to win the press conference. The guys on the radio love him. None of that matters to me though.

I think it's pretty laughable that he was supposedly brought in to help Bledsoee and Knight become better PGs. Watson was never as good as either player is now; how would he help them be better?

I don't think you are close on this one, Mori. He does seem like he was brought in as a PG coach, knowing that they needed help. And that he knew and played with LMA was a big help.

To say he wasn't as good of a player (meaning talented), sure. But if you mean PG, then you are wrong. He was a much better PG than either of them will ever be. He was a back up PG, but a true PG. Even as a backup, he averaged more assists per game than those guys have. And less TOs. That is the job of your PG. Get you into your offense, get people easy baskets, and don't turn the ball over. Bledsoe and Knight can't do any of that.

Mori Chu wrote:

-Xs and Os are overrated.

That explains a lot.

That part kills me. I haven't listened to the interview yet, so I don't want to jump to conclusions. However, if he doesn't think truly understanding offense and defense, and adjusting to what the other team is doing matters, then he can't be even a mediocre coach.

X's and O's are not the most important thing right now. We need our players to develop the individual skills and character they need to succeed in the long run, not to learn any particular system.

There is a big difference between "overrated" and "unimportant". Many of you are overreacting.

Superbone wrote:There is a big difference between "overrated" and "unimportant". Many of you are overreacting.

I don't think fundamentals of the game are over-rated or unimportant. A coach saying that scares me.

Cap wrote:X's and O's are not the most important thing right now. We need our players to develop the individual skills and character they need to succeed in the long run, not to learn any particular system.

If he means his players not understanding complicated defensive and offensive schemes is not the most important thing for them, I am good with that. I though the question was about him.

OK, I will back down. I just listened to it.

Watson: "When you coach a team, you have to understand each player beyond the court. We all know Xs and Os. We can debate what should have happened, what shouldn't have happened..."
Gambo cuts in: "It's over-rated. Xs and Os are over-rated."
Watson: "It's over-rated. I have to connect with you beyond basketball."

I don't have any problem with how that came out. Gambo was baiting him, clearly.

Knight doesn't make people better. Doesn't look particularly interested in learning.
-You are never too old to grow. A coach is a teacher. Players don't understand how to get better. That's a coach role. Knight one of the better students on the team. He is a competitor, good thing. We can't just hand over things. Kobe had to watch Eddie Jones for one year.

This was my favorite part. By far. Gambo said that first line up there, very pointedly. Said that the reason Kidd dumped Knight was because he doesn't make other players better. How do you fix that, he asked. Watson was very, very deliberate in his answer of "you... are... never... too old... to grow."

Then Burns said: "To be a good teacher, you need to have a willing student. Do you think BK is a willing student?"
Watson follows up by saying he is one of the smartest guys on the team...

Burns: There is a different between smart and willing...

Watson: His comments at the end of the season were because he is a competitor and he isn't going to hand over anything to anybody. If we want Booker to be who we think Booker can be, he needs to compete and earn that starting spot.


Sorry for rehashing what Ring already posted. It is a good listen, and I recommend hearing it first-hand.

I think Watson handled Knight's comments about as well as they can be handled. He kind of spun it as BK just being competitive and confident, as there will be a competition between Knight and Booker for the starting spot, it won't be handed to anyone, and that competition is healthy.

Cap wrote:I think Watson handled Knight's comments about as well as they can be handled. He kind of spun it as BK just being competitive and confident, as there will be a competition between Knight and Booker for the starting spot, it won't be handed to anyone, and that competition is healthy.

Exactly. Gambo was baiting him, and Burns then turned up the heat. And it was the right answer. You don't decide today who is the better player and who should start. You let them fight it out in training camp. And to me, that is exactly what Booker should have to do. I want him hungry and fighting.

Another thing you have to give up for Watson is that he himself is a competitor. He let Burns and Gambo know that he wanted to come in and talk to them in person and then they made it happen a couple days later. Gambo is as acerbic as they get. Watson wanted to come into their territory and face him directly. I just like the guy's spirit. Like he said, he's faced adversity his whole life and he welcomes it.

I am fine with them fighting it out, as long as they are evaluated on the basis of team ball and efficiency not just individual stats. If that is the case Booker will drive Knight to be a better player.