The decision that has to be made.

[KB21]

It is pretty obvious at this point that the Hawks cannot bring both Billy Knight and Mike Woodson back. It can be one or the other, but their relationship is strained to the point that the Hawks cannot bring both back. There is a lot of sentiment from the media that the ASG will ultimately decide to keep Mike Woodson and replace Billy Knight. They are probably drawing the correct conclusion as well, since the ASG did not allow Billy to fire Mike during the season. That was probably the first sign that the ASG was no longer in support of Billy Knight.

I think there is a right way to go through this process though. Personally, I do not think it is wise to hire a head coach before you hire a general manager. When you do that, you run the risk of putting the general manager in a position where he doesn't want the head coach you have decided on. The general manager should have input into the coaching hire, IMO.

One of the most important aspects in the general manager and head coach relationship is that they have to be on the same page. I also believe it is better if they have the same philosophy. When you have a general manager that is going one direction and a head coach that is going the other, the situation rarely works out.

The ASG has to be careful here though. If they decide that they want to keep Mike Woodson, then they are essentially limiting the pool of general manager candidates because the proper way to hire one is to get one that can work with Mike Woodson. If you give Mike an extension, then the best move is probably an in house promotion of Gary Fitzsimmons or maybe hiring one of the executives from the Detroit Pistons who knows Mike from those days.

If it were me though, I would hire the general manager first and then get his input into the coaching hire. If that GM decides to go with Mike Woodson without the goading of ownership, so be it.

[Packfill]

Quote:

---

It is pretty obvious at this point that the Hawks cannot bring both Billy Knight and Mike Woodson back. It can be one or the other, but their relationship is strained to the point that the Hawks cannot bring both back. There is a lot of sentiment from the media that the ASG will ultimately decide to keep Mike Woodson and replace Billy Knight. They are probably drawing the correct conclusion as well, since the ASG did not allow Billy to fire Mike during the season. That was probably the first sign that the ASG was no longer in support of Billy Knight.

I think there is a right way to go through this process though. Personally, I do not think it is wise to hire a head coach before you hire a general manager. When you do that, you run the risk of putting the general manager in a position where he doesn't want the head coach you have decided on. The general manager should have input into the coaching hire, IMO.

One of the most important aspects in the general manager and head coach relationship is that they have to be on the same page. I also believe it is better if they have the same philosophy. When you have a general manager that is going one direction and a head coach that is going the other, the situation rarely works out.

The ASG has to be careful here though. If they decide that they want to keep Mike Woodson, then they are essentially limiting the pool of general manager candidates because the proper way to hire one is to get one that can work with Mike Woodson. If you give Mike an extension, then the best move is probably an in house promotion of Gary Fitzsimmons or maybe hiring one of the executives from the Detroit Pistons who knows Mike from those days.

If it were me though, I would hire the general manager first and then get his input into the coaching hire. If that GM decides to go with Mike Woodson without the goading of ownership, so be it.

Agreed. Makes no sense to hire a coach before a GM as no quality GM candidate will take the job.

[wakingup]

I'd fire Knight for the bad bad bad bad bad bad bad drafts. Actually only one was horrible (Shelden), Marvin wasn't the best we could've gotten out of it but in reality it wasn't a total waste.

I'd keep Woodson for a season but on a short leash - with a few goals for him to fulfill if he wanted to keep his job - say a .500+ record and giving the bench players some more minutes.

[TruJerz]

I agree with you waking up. Woody deserves to stay after what he showed us since cutting all his hair off lol but we need a new GM forreal!!!!

[DrReality]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It is pretty obvious at this point that the Hawks cannot bring both Billy Knight and Mike Woodson back. It can be one or the other, but their relationship is strained to the point that the Hawks cannot bring both back. There is a lot of sentiment from the media that the ASG will ultimately decide to keep Mike Woodson and replace Billy Knight. They are probably drawing the correct conclusion as well, since the ASG did not allow Billy to fire Mike during the season. That was probably the first sign that the ASG was no longer in support of Billy Knight.

I think there is a right way to go through this process though. Personally, I do not think it is wise to hire a head coach before you hire a general manager. When you do that, you run the risk of putting the general manager in a position where he doesn't want the head coach you have decided on. The general manager should have input into the coaching hire, IMO.

One of the most important aspects in the general manager and head coach relationship is that they have to be on the same page. I also believe it is better if they have the same philosophy. When you have a general manager that is going one direction and a head coach that is going the other, the situation rarely works out.

The ASG has to be careful here though. If they decide that they want to keep Mike Woodson, then they are essentially limiting the pool of general manager candidates because the proper way to hire one is to get one that can work with Mike Woodson. If you give Mike an extension, then the best move is probably an in house promotion of Gary Fitzsimmons or maybe hiring one of the executives from the Detroit Pistons who knows Mike from those days.

If it were me though, I would hire the general manager first and then get his input into the coaching hire. If that GM decides to go with Mike Woodson without the goading of ownership, so be it.

Agreed. Makes no sense to hire a coach before a GM as no quality GM candidate will take the job.

Ditto. But if you recall the ASG said they were going to be more involved in the franchise and my fear is they will hire a GM that they can tell what to do. One way or the other exert their will on the franchise. That would be a disaster.

[Packfill]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It is pretty obvious at this point that the Hawks cannot bring both Billy Knight and Mike Woodson back. It can be one or the other, but their relationship is strained to the point that the Hawks cannot bring both back. There is a lot of sentiment from the media that the ASG will ultimately decide to keep Mike Woodson and replace Billy Knight. They are probably drawing the correct conclusion as well, since the ASG did not allow Billy to fire Mike during the season. That was probably the first sign that the ASG was no longer in support of Billy Knight.

I think there is a right way to go through this process though. Personally, I do not think it is wise to hire a head coach before you hire a general manager. When you do that, you run the risk of putting the general manager in a position where he doesn't want the head coach you have decided on. The general manager should have input into the coaching hire, IMO.

One of the most important aspects in the general manager and head coach relationship is that they have to be on the same page. I also believe it is better if they have the same philosophy. When you have a general manager that is going one direction and a head coach that is going the other, the situation rarely works out.

The ASG has to be careful here though. If they decide that they want to keep Mike Woodson, then they are essentially limiting the pool of general manager candidates because the proper way to hire one is to get one that can work with Mike Woodson. If you give Mike an extension, then the best move is probably an in house promotion of Gary Fitzsimmons or maybe hiring one of the executives from the Detroit Pistons who knows Mike from those days.

If it were me though, I would hire the general manager first and then get his input into the coaching hire. If that GM decides to go with Mike Woodson without the goading of ownership, so be it.

Agreed. Makes no sense to hire a coach before a GM as no quality GM candidate will take the job.

Ditto. But if you recall the ASG said they were going to be more involved in the franchise and my fear is they will hire a GM that they can tell what to do. One way or the other exert their will on the franchise. That would be a disaster.

Indeed. That would be a total disaster.

[AnnArborHawk]

Or worse, they'll decide they don't need a GM. I mean, if the owners are all making the decisions, they'll probably add GM to Nique's title, and he'll continue to be the famous face of the franchise - with Gearon Jr. pulling the levers behind the curtain.

[Diesel]

I've heard this idea of Gary Fitsimmons just moving up and I understand the thought because a new GM will want to chose his own Coach.

BUT...

What are some of Fitzimmons ideas about the direction of this team? If we fire BK, we don't want a kinder, gentler BK. We actually want a GM who has a gameplan for making this team better than to say.. Let's just keep things the same. IF that be the case, then make Gearon Jr. the GM and let him stay the course.

However, if we fire the head guy in the front office, let's replace him with somebody who has a gameplan other than following BK's script.. because in firing BK, we're saying we didn't like his script or his choice of actors.

[DrReality]

I think the ASG THINK they know what they are doing. That's scary. And I can easliy see them having a figure head as a GM when they really call the shots.

[Admin]

Isn't that what they are already doing?