First, how bad are things going for the Chris Russo show when they ask Jerry Stackhouse to be a talking head...
Secondly, Stackhouse is right about coaches being overly controlling. It's their job, so this doesn't come as any news to sports fans. If a coach wasn't controlling, he wouldn't have his position.
Thirdly, just to put a sociological spin on this as I always enjoy doing, historically, positions of power are always given to people who are controlling and possesive. It's in the nature of powerful positions to be that way. No head of state, boss of company, or leader is any different. The more controlling an individual is, the longer their legacy lasts (Think Stalin, Mao, Castro, and Chavez)
An NBA coach is no different from a modern day "dictator". A GM, well, that is the person who needs to be political and concearned with the public and players. A coach is job is come in and lead the way a newly installed "dictator" must immediatley enforce his mandate over a populace.
Kudos Mike D.
WOW. That's a huge leap: you're comparing revolutionaries, radical politicians, ideologues and businessmen to basketball coaches? Maybe businessmen and ideologues could be compared to certain coaches, including D'Antoni, but the other comparisons, I think, are ridiculous.
Well, let's dissect your commentary, anyway. So... legacy, as you put it, when referring to various dictators, makes being a control freak and a manipulator worthwhile. You basically imply that D'Antoni is one but that you feel it's a positive, because I guess you believe 6-3 is the percentage the Knicks will continue to win the rest of their games at.
First of all, whether or not the man is a control freak (I think he is) is irrelevant to his legacy as a Knick coach, he has not cemented that at all. Plenty of Knick coaches have won 6-3, or better.
Secondly, your commentary also seems to suggest you believe all successful leadership is coercive and insensitive in nature. The plain fact of the matter is that this is not true. There have been many successful, compassionate leaders, in and out of sports. MLK was one of those, so was FDR, amongst others (I'm not going to mention sport coaches here). There are bosses and supervisors who care about their employees and treat them with respect, and there are micromanaging, racist, criminal supervisors, who abuse their power over their employees, because it makes their crotches tingle.
In the coaching world, there are plenty of successful coaches who don't play hidden hand politics, who temper the hard hand with the rewarding of cooperation and improvement. With D'Antoni, there is no precedent, when it comes to Nate, of having reduced his minutes, followed by a gradual, conditional increase. D'Antoni is simply using the only vehicle he has ever had to attack another human being, since he's obviously even too much of a pussy to speak plainly on Nate's situation.
What's most disturbing about you, and some of the other posters on this site, is how slavish your thinking is when it comes to D'Antoni and Walsh. Some of you literally repeat his words, word-for-word. "Gallinari is our best shooter" anyone?
You specifically, though, disgust me with your comments on this thread, when you make yourself seem to worship every asshole in history, known and unknown.
Control freaks in the world of work and politics, some of which you mention, are the same monsters who supported segregation because it was politically advantageous, who passed NAFTA and basically destroyed American manufacturing, forever, who treat workers, their rights and well being, like an accountant treats numbers on a spreadsheet.
Sure, many of them were successful at fulfilling quotas and profit margins, but what did they do for the state of the world: all of it, not just your insulated little corner.
Anyway, congratulations: you're a wonderful person!