Stan Van Gundy on coaching, NBA, Dwight Howard, politics

Jon Saraceno, USA TODAY Sports | USATODAY

Relaxed, tanned and scruffy, Stan Van Gundy props his feet on an oversized ottoman ideally positioned on a humongous deck overlooking a man-made lake. Van Gundy, 52, shares the rustic home in Lake Mary, Fla., with his wife and their four children, plus five cats and a dog, Skip. The former NBA coach is enjoying life but is conflicted regarding his future. With a .641 career winning percentage, does he desire to resume his vocation – and does any NBA team covet his outspoken, grumpy and hard-driving coaching style? Van Gundy's teams in Miami and Orlando made the playoffs seven times in eight seasons, including the Magic's unsuccessful trip to the Finals against the Los Angeles Lakers in 2009. His six-year run in Orlando ended in controversy last May when the team fired him at the behest of star center Dwight Howard. "Sitting out here right now, looking at the lake on a beautiful day, there are times when I feel grateful to be away from it — and then there are times I miss it,'' he said. Van Gundy chatted about several topics, including his gig as an NBC college basketball analyst, with USA TODAY's Jon Saraceno. The interview was edited for clarity and length.

Q: You're a baseball fan, so let's go off-topic. What was your take on suspected PED users being rejected for the Hall of Fame?

A: I certainly would have voted for anyone who was not proven to have taken them. This idea that we can decide who took steroids or not . . . there has to be a level of proof not just suspicion. I can have my suspicions about Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens. But I don't think I should be able to keep them away from the greatest professional honor of their lives because I have a suspicion.

But I do understand the argument about the guys who were clean and couldn't measure up. I don't think a guy should have to make the decision to put something dangerous in his body to be able to make it. I like the idea of cleaning it up.

But in their generation, it wasn't cleaned up. So now we're going to punish all of these guys? I wouldn't have voted for Mark McGwire (anyway), just because I don't think he was good enough. He hit for power, that was it. But Barry Bonds? Hell, yeah, I'm voting for him.

Q: Your reaction to Lance Armstrong's admission?

A: I do believe that when he did (PEDs), he didn't look at it as cheating (but) only as leveling the playing field. What I don't understand is the way he attacked people who told the truth -- just don't say anything. But to come out with those full-throated denials and proclamations of innocence . . . The guy is very full of himself. That was inexcusable. It says to me that Lance Armstrong, despite his good deeds, is a very selfish person.

Q: Let's switch to hoops. Greatest challenge facing the NBA?

A: I think we disregard fans too much. They drive our sport. The money has gotten so big that it has become a corporate league other than the nosebleed seats. It's getting worse and worse. The business concern is growing the next generation of fans. The NBA keeps getting more and more TV money, and keeps charging more for tickets. I'm sure (Commissioner David) Stern would talk about the logistics of putting the league in Europe (as the looming issue). But my concern is can a teacher (afford to) take his family of four to an NBA game? No.

Q: We anoint you Commissioner For A Day. First act?

A: I think (Stern) had the right idea with our last lockout (regarding) this runaway train of money. It had to stop at some point. It's hard because players aren't going to want to give back. Selling advertising on jerseys is preferable to keep jacking up prices on the fans.

I remember moving to northern California (as a boy) in 1968. My dad was a high school coach. We could afford to go see the Warriors. If you measured then the cost of a pro basketball ticket to a movie, it's not anywhere near what it is now. Maybe that train has left the station.

Q: Would you alter the game in any way?

A: The product is pretty good as far as rules and officiating. The game is in a good place. The thing that would make the game better never is going to happen: Play one game fewer per week for each team.

Q: Well, it could happen — if the owners were less greedy.

A: And the players. I remember last year playing this crazy (lockout-related) schedule. Guys were complaining. I said, "Wait a minute. You guys agreed to this because more games (meant) more money.'' Let's cut it back to 66 games like we did last year. In the long run, they might make a little less money, but it would be better for the players' health and bodies. You would get a little more practice time, which would add to the quality of the games. From a fans' perspective, fewer games makes (them) more meaningful. The NFL product is great because every game means something.

Cutting 16 games off the schedule basically would take off the back-to-backs. Then you would get rid of the Gregg Popovich situation (where a fan sued the team because the San Antonio Spurs coach rested his star players at the end of grueling road trip). But that is fantasy land.

Q: Is there a solution to avoiding Pops' action?

A: I don't know if there is. I didn't like the league stepping in, (although) I agree with it, in principle. We charge exorbitant prices; we owe (fans) the best show.

Call it injury prevention. He was trying to take care of his players. It's a murky issue and I don't think the (Spurs) deserved the ($250,000) fine.

Tough issue. I don't think David Stern ever clarified what the rule is. You can't sit anyone out? Four (players) . . . three, two? Only in nationally televised games? Which I'm guessing is what pissed him off because that's where the money comes from. I don't think it was the fans in the arena.

Q: How much NBA do you watch?

A: A lot because I do radio for NBC and I have to talk about it. I flip from game to game (and) try to follow my former assistants and players.

Q: Any pangs?

A: Oh, yeah. I miss it. But when Orlando was on a West Coast trip, I didn't miss that. I didn't miss it on Christmas Day when I was home with the family.

If I could coach three days a week on my schedule and not travel, I would love to. I love the coaching. I miss the practices. I miss thinking about the strategy. I miss the games. But the lifestyle part if a whole different thing. And my wife certainly doesn't miss it. She basically raised four kids.

There will be a big part of me that always will want to coach. But my family deserves to have veto power. They sacrificed. When we moved here (from Miami in 2007) my oldest daughter was going to be a sophomore in high school. She was pissed. I think she has forgiven me by now. I felt bad for her but I needed the job.

It would have to be a place where I came home and said, "What do you think of such-and-such city?" I don't know if that's out there.

Q: Could it be in, say, Milwaukee?

A: We've done our time in Wisconsin. We spent three years there (from 1992-95 when Van Gundy coached Wisconsin). We loved Madison but when you've lived like this, and lived in Miami, I don't know that we're going back to winters. It's funny because my wife is from Vermont. But now, if it drops below 70 degrees, she's too cold.

Q: Are you limited geographically?

A: It's not just weather. (Maybe) if there were places where we were close to family. I wouldn't do it against their will. It was funny, but some (possibilities) came up this summer. My 15-year old (daughter Ali) rides horses. She said, "If we're going somewhere, (horses) Summer and Julie have to go with us."

I can't do the thing where the family stays here and I go off on and coach. (Boston Celtics coach) Doc Rivers has done it for years. (Detroit Pistons coach) Lawrence Frank is doing it. But if you're off in another city, you're never going to see them. Now, my family might actually enjoy that. But I wouldn't.

Q: But you are going to coach again, right?

A: You know what? Everyone tells me that. I miss it. So does my brother (ABC analyst Jeff Van Gundy). Same thing — family thing. You get to the point where it can't be all about you.

Q: Options?

A: I'm sort of enjoying new things. I am a lot more involved in the community. . . . I can support things my wife is doing.

Q: Didn't you lead a pro-tax vote in the November elections in Seminole County?

A: I did — and in this county, that ain't easy. There was a ballot initiative to raise the millage tax to generate about $25 million for the schools' operating budget.

I didn't (initially) know what was going on but I'm a big believer in public education. I ended up doing a lot more than I planned. I became sort of the face of it. I was involved for about 11 weeks. I probably spoke at least three or four times a week. It passed 56-44% in a county that went about 54% for (Republican presidential candidate Mitt) Romney. It wasn't a partisan issue — you could be anti-tax and be for this.

Q: Bump into any angry citizens?

A: The only time I ran into it was when we were outside holding signs. People would make some comments, negative stuff. Most people were civil. A few people got really nasty. The advantage I had is that in coaching you are used to not being loved all the time.

Q: Is politics in your future?

A: I never would (run) as a candidate — that convinced me of that. Going in, I thought I would. Even as a coach, I used to talk to (wife) Kim about possibly running for the school board, maybe county commissioner or state representative. But after going through 11 weeks of this? No way.

As NBA coach, people get on you. But politics, maybe even more so at the local level, is nasty on a very personal level. I have a thick skin but I don't want to deal with it. The crap you put up with . . . it was really disappointing. I knew what the discourse was on the national level. But you would think with people in your community it would be more civil and less partisan. People are ideologues. It was disillusioning.

Q: What about your flirtation with working in media?

A: I'm enjoying it. No. 1, it's not a lot. I have (seven TV) games scheduled, about once every two weeks (next up: Jan. 31, Drexel at George Mason). The talent level is not the same, but the environment is so much fun. We got to call (Georgetown-Florida) on the ship in Jacksonville, then (we did a game) at the Palestra in Philadelphia. It was fabulous.

Q: Why couldn't you become the next Dick Vitale?

A: I don't think anyone could be the next Dick Vitale. I mean that in a good way. More than an announcer, Dick is an ambassador for the game. Dick is in class by himself. Like what he does or not, what he has done to expand the popularity of college basketball is phenomenal.

My brother basically does a game a week. I could see doing that.

I like the radio thing. I do a three-hour Miami show with Dan LeBatard every week. That's a blast. He's the one who told me from day one after I got fired: "Whatever you do next, it has to be fun. You don't need the money.''

I was disappointed the ESPN (offer) fell through because I was going to do their studio show (until the deal fell apart). (But) my brother said, "You're not going to enjoy doing a (studio) show.''

Q: Do you believe you were submarined out of that job?

A: I'm pretty sure I was by David. It's funny. People say it all the time that when an opportunity closes, you end up in a better place. It happened to me in Wisconsin. I lasted one season and got fired. I was 36 and absolutely depressed — like I just blew the best opportunity I ever will have in my life. A few months later, I'm in the NBA.

(The ESPN job) would have been more money but I would have been basically flying to LA all the time. Now I work Wednesdays, a little on Fridays and do a college game on a Saturday every couple of weeks. I stay in touch with the game and I'm having fun with it.

Q: Why do you see Stern's footprints?

A: (ESPN) contacted me – they drove the whole thing. All of a sudden, it came to a stop. Whether it was Stern directly, the league office making a call or someone at the top at ESPN . . . There's no question the comments I've made about David Stern kept them from hiring me. I said things that pissed him off.

Q: What do you believe upset him the most?

A: There was the time that the Arab Spring was in full bloom. I compared him to other world leaders in that he didn't tolerate dissenting opinions very well.

Q: Stern is retiring in February of 2014. Does it matter for the league?

A: Probably not at this point. He expanded the NBA brand and promoted the game internationally. Business has expanded and he deserves credit. Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James probably deserve more. I'm not sure he believes that but I do.

I don't expect you will see many changes. I don't think it will have a negative impact.

From a former coach's selfish standpoint, I hope (commissioner-in-waiting) Adam Silver will treat them with greater respect. That was at the heart of why I had problems with Stern. I don't think he treated coaches with much respect. You (would) go to those coaches' meetings and he was very condescending. I'm certainly far from the only (coach) with those sentiments.

Q: Back to the bench. You are still young. Wouldn't you miss your life's calling?

A: Oh, yeah, absolutely. But one of the things my wife says to me all the time is, "Just remember how unhappy you were most of the time when you were coaching.''

The further away you get, you start idealizing (the job). You forget how many times you got three or four hours of sleep and were grumpy and cranky. And the way losses affect you — you are in misery. Then you become a pain in the ass at home.

I miss coaching. But if I went back to coaching, I would miss this (looks out at the lake).

Q: How would you feel about a temporary Brooklyn address?

A: My brother and I believe the same thing — if somebody already has a job (they won't campaign for it). P.J. (Carleismo) has the (Nets) job. I know, like and respect P.J..

If it were the off-season, I would listen to (overtures from NBA teams). But I don't know. I've only been out of it six or seven months. I'm not ready to make that decision and just jump back in, like what Andy Reid did (with the Kansas City Chiefs).

Q: Do you want a new career or your old job?

A: I really don't know yet and I don't want to have to decide. I was really a pain for my agent. We had proposals for doing a five-day-a-week (radio) talk show nationally. Then I call my agent and say, 'I don't want to do five days a week.' I follow the NFL but when that becomes your (job). With the NBA stuff, I really know what I'm talking about. I would do some stuff on local stations but I'm a little reluctant because the Magic are sort of the only game in town. I don't know (coach) Jacque Vaughn at all but I'm not going to be the guy beating him up (on the air).

Q: Biggest surprise this season?

A: Like everybody, probably the way the Lakers have struggled. There are probably pretty easy explanations for it. I'm not totally (surprised), but if you had asked me early in the year, I thought they would win the West.

I never could have predicted they would have screwed up the coaching situation — fire a guy (Mike Brown) five games into the season and be on three coaches 11 games into the year. Or have predicted their injuries. That's as screwed-up a team as I've seen in a long time.

Q: What about team chemistry?

A: I still think that would've worked out. Training camp now is a total waste. Bill Walsh in his book (Finding the Winning Edge) said that you have to stay true to your process. You don't circumvent the process. The Lakers screwed up the process. They haven't given it a chance to work.

Gregg Popovich says you can't skip steps. They skipped. (Coach) Mike D'Antoni is coming in on the fly and doesn't have time to build chemistry and respect in the locker room. I feel badly for Mike because he's a great guy and a great coach. The situation is impossible.

At the end of the day, there are a lot of guys who are qualified to coach. But the key thing is you all have to be on the same page. I sometimes marvel how organizations sometimes shoot themselves in the foot.

Q: Was Phil Jackson the solution?

A: I think Phil would have run into the same problems. Kobe (Bryant) and Pau (Gasol) are really the only guys left (from his tenure). It all would have been new — he would've gone through the same chemistry problems. I mean, I think they should have stuck with (Brown).

There are some firings where, even if you (personally) disagree with them, you see where (management) is coming from. (But) five games in? If you weren't committed to Mike Brown, you shouldn't have brought him back. With two new high-profile players, he needed time to put this together.

Q: But was Brown the right guy for the Lakers?

A: I think he was . . . he could have been. They really didn't have the people to play that way. The hired Mike D'Antoni and they're (supposedly) going to bring back Showtime. Showtime? Are you kidding me? Those (older players) aren't going to be Showtime. They weren't really Showtime when Phil was there, quite honestly. They executed in the half-court and used their size.

D'Antoni is a great coach but they have to have the right pieces. It all has to fit — what management wants, the type of players and the coach. It's not an easy thing. For all the success they've had, I just think this year that they've looked pretty foolish as an organization.

Q: What did you think of New York Knicks owner James Dolan ordering the placement of secret parabolic microphones near team benches to "protect'' Carmelo Anthony from trash-talking opponents?

A: Useless. I think it's ridiculous, quite honestly. Things are going to get said on the floor. Carmelo is no innocent in that regard, either. It certainly is not going to solve anything.

Q: Will D'Antoni's system ever produce an NBA championship?

A: I think it could. I don't think he ever has had good enough players across the board to do it. People will say it can't be done but f you look around the league right now there are more and more teams embracing the 3-point shot. The pace is up with some of the better teams because it's tough to score in the half-court (offense).

People associate D'Antoni, and unfairly, with (his teams) playing no defense. Well, you're going to have to defend. You still have to guard — there hasn't been a team in the last six years that has been to the NBA Finals that hasn't been a top 10 team defensively.

Mike's teams (in Phoenix and New York) always were a little better defensively than he was given credit for. His teams really weren't built with the size to be great defensive teams. But his offensive system is the way the game is going. San Antonio, for years, has embraced the 3-point shot. Look at the Heat — that has been their entire roster moves to surround LeBron James with shooters. Dallas beat Miami (two years ago) largely because of spreading out the floor and their 3-point shooting.

Q: Why are you sitting on your deck right now while Dwight Howard is in L.A.?

A: Two separate questions. I think Dwight had decided before last season started — maybe even before then — that he was going to leave Orlando.

Q: Do you think he really knew what he wanted?

A: I think he might have known. He had a great fondness for Orlando, the fans and the way people treated him. I think he might've wanted a different environment, a big city. He's a young guy and I think he was conflicted. It was hard for him. Dwight doesn't like to disappoint people. That's one of things that sort of clouded the situation and made it as messy as it was. He's not the kind of guy to just say, "I want the hell out of here.''

With me, the situation wasn't good for our team. There was a lot of speculation, first about (Howard possibly) leaving. As a team, our guys dealt with it well. Before he got hurt, we had one of the top five or six records in the league. The distractions kept amping. The story got out that Dwight asked for me to be fired. Before the All-Star break, ESPN reported that the Magic had told Dwight that, at the end of the season, he could decide whether (general manager) Otis (Smith) and I came back.

I had some real disagreements with (Magic CEO) Alex Martins. Otis and I were on the same page and I didn't have any problems with Dwight. I had problems with how our organization approached the situation, how they decided to cater to (Howard) in ways that I thought were counter-productive for our team.

I thought we should have dealt with some of the rumors (about his coaching future). I made it known that it wasn't a matter of my fate. They could have ended all the speculation and fired me right then — I said that to them. That stops the speculation and gets you back to basketball. They wouldn't do anything about it.

Q: What's your theory?

A: If they fire me at that point, my guess is two things would have happened: Dwight becomes the bad guy, which they didn't want (because they wanted to re-sign him). And/or they look like they're taking their marching orders from him.

I was convinced during the process — and I'm not saying it shouldn't have been — was (the Magic's) concern was keeping Dwight Howard in Orlando. That was a very, very important thing. But it was at odds with my concern, which was our team. It can't be just one guy. We have 12 other guys. This detracted from us being the best we could be. It needed to be dealt with.

When I (publicly) confirmed what I knew that (Howard) had asked for me to be fired, I thought, "The story dies." We didn't get to find out because Dwight played only two more games.

I've been asked if I had any regrets about what I said. My only regret was that I didn't bring things to a head a lot earlier. If you're going to coach, your responsibility is to do the best for your team. I presented (management) with the option of getting rid of me. I wasn't trying to save my job. When I (publicly) confirmed Dwight (tried to fire him), I knew it wasn't the best move for me to keep my job. But if you're going to coach just to keep your job, you're not going to be very good.

Q: What was your relationship with Dwight? Didn't you and your system help him become the player he is?

A: I wouldn't say that. He made himself a player (with the help) of some of our assistants.

People focus on coaches and player relationships: Are they good or bad? I have always felt that it's pretty easy to figure out; watch what happens on the court. It's a working relationship — we're not getting married. (Miami Heat President and former coach) Pat Riley always used to say that it's a relationship to produce a result. By any objective measure, my relationship with Dwight was outstanding.

I understand players might not see it that way. I would rather be liked than disliked. But that's not the job. The results we got were good. But there are people, particularly ones who aren't in locker rooms every day, who get very flustered by confrontation. It is a fact of life in a lot of jobs, and certainly in coaching. On every team in the NBA right now there are guys who are unhappy with their role. You're going to have confrontation. The relationships between players and coaches are not static.

It would've worked out. That doesn't mean I wouldn't have been fired or Dwight wouldn't have left but it wouldn't have been what it was if they had left it to Otis. He and I didn't always agree but I trusted Otis. Then it got above him and (team executives) panicked — "Oh, my God, what are we going to do to keep (Howard)?'' They were willing to do almost anything.

I go back to the Lakers: Any time you get out of kilter and you're not on the same page, it's not going to work. That's why an organization like the Spurs is (so effective). Look at the Patriots in the NFL. It's the only way it works. It's funny because people keep trying to do it other ways. It won't work.

Q: Did Dwight think you were too tough on him?

A: No player will ever say you're too hard on them because that makes you look soft as a player. Basically, his complaint was the yelling and screaming — (it was) too negative an environment. Plus, I think he had some other minor things with his role . . . who I played or didn't play.

Here's what happens: Every player has things they don't like about their coach. I don't blame Dwight even a little bit for the way the situation evolved. If (management) asks (players), they're going to give their (opinions). I've had a lot of people not like me but I've been able to coach them and they did well.

Alex Martins didn't want to get into all of that. When he fired me, he painted it as we had lost two years in a row in the first round of the playoffs and that's unacceptable. He (later) said that, strategically, I was as good as anybody but there are other parts of the job. He basically made it a relationship thing — that I didn't know how to deal with people.

That's fine. He and I come from different places. He's not a sports person. He has no idea what it's like to be a (coach). In his mind, you should be the kind of person where all your players like you. That doesn't work.

Q: What is your relationship now with Dwight?

A: We stay in touch. Look, we're in two different points in life — it's not like we hang out. But I'm concerned about what's going on with him. He's always been respectful with me. He was pissed off that I made public (that Howard wanted him fired). I've never had a problem with him.

Maybe he could have handled it better — maybe I could have handled it better. I have great appreciation for him. We won a ton of games here and, in large part, it was due to him.

Q: Would you be interested in coaching him again?

A: If I were coaching, and he were available, I would tell my GM, "That is a guy you want." He's smart, he defends — he does a lot of things.

(Howard) would have to answer this question: Would he want to play for me again? That was a definite issue. I told him at the time that I don't have any problem if an organization says, "We don't think this is working. Dwight's our star. We want someone he feels more comfortable with." What is not fine is what (the Magic) let it become.

Q: Did management coddle Dwight?

A: We didn't coddle him and I don't think he asked to be coddled. But in the last year, yeah, they tried to appease him — "You want this, we'll give you this." That has happened several times in this league and it never has worked. What Otis said was, "He has been with us eight years, he knows us, we've treated him well — either he wants to be here or he doesn't.'' You don't break down your entire value system or culture for anybody.

Q: Would you do anything differently if you coach again?

A: I had already made those changes. Otis always was very honest with me. His concern was for the team. One of (his) big (criticisms) was with the way I approached guys during games. Practice is a (different matter because it's closed to the public).

The problem is that when you are perceived one way, the perception never goes away, even if the behavior changes. I was much less combative — (even) with referees. But I believe in hard work in practice, preparation and (long) walk throughs of at least one hour. I am going to demand a high level of execution and effort. Those things are not in vogue right now in the NBA so I don't know if that's what (owners and GMs) are looking for. I don't know any other way to do the job.

It always will be a players' league. The best players, deep down, they want to be pushed. They want structure and discipline. Look, nobody walks into the gym saying, "I really want to push myself to the limit today." But they understand the importance of it. Over time, they will respect that more than somebody who is letting them call all the shots. Players haven't changed. It's the way we treat them. I don't think anyone wants to be verbally abused but I do think they want to be pushed.

Q: Did you go too far?

A: Oh, yeah, no question. No question. But I will say this: You never will walk the line perfectly. My feeling always was — and maybe it's wrong — is that I'd rather push too hard or go too far, than not enough. I wouldn't be able to live with a player saying to someone, "Stan didn't push us enough.'' I wouldn't be able to stomach that. I would rather go over the line than be too far behind it.

Q: Best player you have coached?

A: (Dwayne) Wade. Then Dwight. Wade was spectacular and very early-on in his career. His first playoff game as a rookie we put the ball in his hands. He winds down the clock and hits the game winner with three-tenths (of a second).

Dwight is right there. And (so is) Shaq (O'Neal) but it was near the end of his career. Historically speaking, he is the best player I ever coached but he wasn't at his peak when I had him.

Q: One center, one game: Wilt, Kareem, Shaq or Dwight?

A: Man, that's tough. I would probably say Kareem. Then maybe Wilt (Chamberlain). Kareem (Abdul-Jabbar) had it all — tremendous intelligence and an unbelievable skill level. With the other three, they had the one Achilles heel — it would be tough to go to them late in the game because you could foul them. You couldn't do that to Kareem. Plus, Kareem had the most unstoppable shot in the history of the game (with the sky hook).

Q: Does LeBron break Kareem's all-time scoring record?

A: He's more than half way (with 20,000-plus points) but, golly, I think someone said he has to average like 25 a game for more than 10 years. That's awfully hard but not impossible. What makes it unlikely is that his instincts make him a pass-first guy. He's not Kobe.

He's certainly capable. If that were a goal of his, I have no doubts he could do it.

Q: Most overrated player today?

A: Jeremy Lin (of the New York Knicks). He's not a guy who should be third in the (All-Star) voting. I never thought (Nets point guard) Deron Williams was overrated but right now people still look at him as one of the top two or three point guards in the league. He hasn't been that (in recent seasons).

Q: Most underrated?

A: I don't know if he's underrated but (the Nets') Joe Johnson is underappreciated.