David Leonhardt Wins a Pulitzer Prize and Some Comments on NBA Coaching
On Leonhardt, Adelman and Thibodeau.
about 1 year ago
John R
124 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
The article seems to vindicate VDN
According to the article:
“If we consider the production of the veteran players the Bulls employed this year in 2009-10, and the minutes and position played in 2010-11, we would have expected the Bulls to win about 59 games in a complete regular season.”
Despite this, I’d personally rather have Adelman than VDN.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Isn't that basically saying that the new players only added +2 wins?
And that if VDN had played the right people, at the right positions, for the right amount of minutes, he could have won 59 games?
That’s how I’m currently interpreting that statement (not that I agree with it at all).
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
They are clearly stating that "coaches don't matter"
And frankly, the statement is incorrect.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
The fact that you think that statement has ANYTHING to do with VDN
Vindicates my statement that you are an idiot.
So, coaches suddenly do matter, according to you
Except that you’ve argued for years while MDSr was here that they don’t.
Truly, your intellect is dizzying.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
lol
“I had three experiences [before Houston]," he said. "At two, I had a lot of talent and at one, I didn’t. I won at two places and didn’t win at the other. I figured it out that talent is pretty important…”
Even Adelman thinks coaches don’t matter.
But I wonder, even if players’ production is the same, regardless of who his coach is, doesn’t the coach control the minutes each player plays, and in doing so, can have a significant effect on overall wins? Like choosing to bench your Kevin Loves for as long as Minnesota did. Then again, I’d wager that this doesn’t happen enough to matter.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
"doesn’t the coach control the minutes each player plays,"
Correct. This is the only way that coaches matter. But even then, often the minutes aren’t really determined by the coach’s estimation of the player’s contributions but by other factors. Some of these are inside of his control like being afraid to take a risk on a younger player or a foreign born player, and others are outside of his control like having to pass out minutes by contract value or else.
Still, most often coaches get it reasonably correct so it evens out to coaches don’t matter. Now about Deandre Jordan…
You're right that coaches do matter
Case in point – MDSr starting Q Ross over Maggette in ‘07 killed the Clips’ chance for the playoffs that year.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Back to Q-Ross starting over Maggette.
That was absolutely the right call. You see Bogans starting in CHI, Bowen for SAS, Mbah a Moute for MIL. I’m not saying we were a title contender, but we were successful when Maggs was out nearly the entire season in 05-06. He’s never made the playoffs as a full-time starter. Just look what he did to a Bucks team that won 47 games and was desperately in need of offense.
We missed out in 06-07 because Brand lost 5 points from his PPG game average, Kaman regressed, and Sam got older.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Apr 20, 2011 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions
it barely matters anyways
Maggette still played near starter minutes (30.5 mpg) which is actually a little more than he usually plays each year.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Jason Terry/Lamar Odom "6th men"
It’s a good sign when your team has a guy off the bench who plays that many minutes. It means you have a glut of talent. I want that again :( and HELL NO i don’t want that guy to be Randy Foye.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
No it wasn't - we didn't have enough scorers
with Cassell declining and Maggette absolutely had to start. I would imagine that even the John R website indicated that he was better than Q Ross. SAS and the other teams all had scorers We didn’t.
We were successful the year before because Cassell had stepped up. That wasn’t happening the following year.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
QRoss was the key to beating Denver in the playoffs.
His defense against Melo was tremendous. Maggette is a guy who thinks he’s better than he is. Good for him, but he could have been a great 6th man off the bench, if he would have accepted the role. Instead he pouted, instead of passed (the ball). He is a bull in a china shop, running to the basket and bowling over anyone in his path. QRoss knew his role and his offensive limitations and was beloved by his teammates. Maggette, not so much.
That's not accurate
Sorry RAR. Maggette is indeed well-liked. The problem was that the team simply didn’t have enough scoring. Granted he’s limited but that’s the fault of the GM – MDSr. They should have started the guy and MDSr getting into a dspute with him about this obvious fact was ridiculous. EB will tell you what he thinks of MDSr and Corey if you ask him.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
It wasn't the scoring
do you know the Clippers had the offensive rating per 100 possessions in 2005-2006 and 2006-2007? It’s the defense stupid.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions
No, they needed a better scorer to start the game
But keep denigrating others, it just makes you look worse.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
The MIL locker room hates him.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Apr 20, 2011 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Not true at all.
He is fairly well-liked off the court, but mostly kept to his self and his buddies. On the court, TOTALLY different. If you pass him the ball, odds are you ain’t getting it back. He has total tunnel vision and only cares about getting his points. It’s one thing to be like that if you work on the other end too, but he just didn’t, which is a shame, given his extraordinary athleticism.
And I actually know EB, so I already know what he thinks.
I know EB too
And Corey is who he is.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
"Corey is who he is"?
What does that even mean? EB is who he is. Carrot Top is who he is, too.
dunleavy was an idiot for the most part
but i agreed with starting q ross over maggette. someone had to cover cassell’s ass on D.
That was a problem
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Sorry, but coaches do matter.
Adelman did a great job this year, considering the lack of star power and new faces on the team. While he acknowledges that the team with great talent often wins, a coach molds the team, massages egos, manages minutes, and brings a certain style to add to the talent.
To say that the Bulls of 09-10 would correlate to winning 59 games this year is ludicrous. First off, they have different teams. Boozer was added, Hinrich and others were lost, Noah and Boozer each lost significant games to injury this year, Deng lost some last year, etc.
I said from Day 1 that I thought Thibs would be a fabulous choice, and that hiring Vinny D would be a shame.
Yeah, I think
Adelman was just being modest and the website (and thus John R) took what he said to be gospel. Having said that, injuries / players also play a big role IMO.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Of course injuries matter.
If Blake doesn’t miss all of last year, who knows how many games we would have won last year…and Dunleavy would STILL be our Coach/GM.
Talent matters most, but coaching can mold the team and take it to greater heights Look at Detroit’s title in 04. NOBODY thinks Detroit was more talented than the Lakers, not even close. But Larry Brown molded the team around defense, chemstry and unselfishness, and they easily slayed the giant. And it took an incredible shot by Kobe to even take the series to 5 games, or it would have been a sweep.
"NOBODY thinks Detroit was more talented than the Lakers, not even close."
Such loaded language. “Talented”. What does that even mean?
Isn’t it possible that NOBODY was correct?
Let's say you are picking teams.
Kobe and/or Shaq go 1-2, no question. The next picks are fairly evenly matched – probably Rasheed and Rip next, Malone, Billups, Payton, Prince, Wallace in some order but there will be debate on what order.
Or if you’re a GM, which roster would you rather have? A team with two of the best players in the NBA at the time and some other decent pieces, or the Pistons, a nice collection of good, solid players?
I don't think anyone disagrees that everyone would have picked Shaq-Kobe
But it’s just that everyone was overvaluing the 2 superstars versus the well-rounded team. It’s a mistake that everyone would continue to make, over and over and over again… it’s just the way the NBA’s culture is set up.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Detroit was the exception.
Every NBA championship team over the last 30 years has had at least one superstar, if not two. Magic/Kareem/Worthy, Dr J/Moses, Bird/McHale, Isaiah, Jordan/Pippen, Duncan/Robinson/Ginobili, Kobe/Shaq, Kobe/Pau, KG/Pierce/Allen, Wade, etc. Detroit in 2004 won with none. Some might say Larry Brown was their superstar.
I don’t think you could possibly overvalue those two in their prime (actually Shaq started his fall around then). The chemistry that year was the Lakers’ downfall. The Kobe/Shaq feud, thinking Malone and Payton were still up to par. The Pistons turned out to be the more talented team that year, but in no way were they more talented indivually.
"I don’t think you could possibly overvalue those two in their prime?"
Kobe? He’s constantly overvalued. He’s probably been overvalued every minute he has been in the league. Every time he has been compared favorably to Jordan I can only laugh.
But that’s because folks don’t know how to evaluate players.
Jason Whitlock called Derrick Rose the best player in the league and anyone who disagreed a hater.
Constantly overvalued?
Kobe may be hated and for good reason, but he’s one of the best 2 guards in NBA history. While I think Shaq deserves most of the credit for his first 3 rings, Kobe undoubtedly did the heavy lifting the last 2+ years. There may never be another Jordan, but so what? Kobe’s been as close as they come.
Has there ever been an advanced statistical comparison of Kobe vs Jordan?
If not, I’ll have to go digging into that one.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Its not even close
Jordan’s peak TS% was north of 60% four times which is generally specialist big man territory not Carmelo usage territory. His career TS%, including his time with the Wizards when he was bad, is 57%.
Kobe’s peak TS% is 58% and he has only been above 57% twice. Kobe’s career TS% is 55.6% and he hasn’t played his old man years yet.
Jordan played in an era when you could tackle a dude. Kobe plays in probably the most friendly period ever for offense, and he still can’t come close to scoring like Jordan.
Jordan is the best ever. (cough Magic quiet you) Kobe has rarely been the best player on his own team, and when he has been they struggle to get to .500.
How do players like Jerry West compare
Avg. 27 6 and 6 in an era without the three point line. If you think they were physical during Jordan’s time, you ain’t seen nothing.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
At basketball-reference.com
It was funny to see Dwyane Wade higher than Kobe on most lists. That’s what playing next to LeBron can do for your rep…
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
I think Wade's
been better than Kobe the last 3 years.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 21, 2011 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions
That's because you're a smart guy, CC ;)
I’m talking about guys like Michael Wilbon and Charles Barkley and Mark Jackson. If you said that to them… sheesh.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
You think Barkley would disagree?
Jackson actually thinks Kobe is better than MJ so he’s obviously an idiot. Barkley thinks you are crazy to think Kobe is as good as MJ. Plus Barkley and Wade are T-Mobile sponsors aren’t they?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 21, 2011 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Both great players
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Funny, the guy has 5 rings so far
I would tend to think that he’s a pretty good player
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
He is overrated
You can still be a good player and be overrated. Kobe doesn’t deserve to be considered better than Jordan. Now if the general consensus was EJ is better than Kobe than he would be underrated. Rings are a nice validation but if that was the only consideration then by that logic Sasha Vujacic is better than EJ.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 21, 2011 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Um,
who said Kobe is better than Jordan? He certainly should be rated pretty high. You can think he’s overrated if you want to, but this seems to be a lame debate because your buddy thinks he’s not a very good player.
I use the term “rings” not to suggest that rings themselves mean anything but rather as a tool for suggesting that Kobe has had some significant accomplishments. Surely you get that.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
I was going to point out your lie
But once I noticed it was you who commented, there was no need. Its you, its what you do.
Stop the bully attitude
You’ll do better in your life
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
who said Kobe is better than Jordan?
I could go on, but it doesn’t matter. People compare Kobe favorably to Jordan, therefore Kobe is overrated. Since you seemed to find my assertion that anyone would compare Kobe to Jordan so absurd as as to write “who said Kobe is better than Jordan?”, surely you agree that Kobe isn’t as good as Jordan.
So since we can see that you agree that Kobe isn’t as good as Jordan, but we also have evidence (trivially obtained) of him being compared favorably to Jordan, we can see that you agree that Kobe is overvalued. Once again, you are just arguing to argue.
Plus anyone that uses the word “rings” in discussing an individual’s value exposes that they don’t know how to separate an individuals contributions from their team.
What?
You are a complete douche.
Chuckles referenced that argument suggesting that others here said that above him, when they did not. So he introduced a strawman and shot it down.
All people were saying here is that he’s very good. You say he’s massively overrated. I disagree with you. Even your own TS% measure doesn’t suggest that he’s overrated (if you limit it to just that one stat).
I suspect you know that you’re just arguing about nothing, which is why you are so aggressive about trying to use the strawman as opposed to the arguments people actually made here.
And you completely miss the point about the rings.
Why they let you post here is beyond me.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
He actually said constantly overrated
and being underrated or overrated is a matter of opinion. Isn’t Kobe has been considered the best player of his generation? I’m pretty sure at least Tim Duncan has a strong case against that. What about best current player? Dwight Howard or Lebron can easily trump him there. Kobe’s had a great career and its still going but if people really think he’s the best of all time then those people are overrating him as there are a number of players better than him.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 21, 2011 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions
I do think that Kobe, at his age, is better than LeBron will be at that age
But that’s because I hate the way LeBron relies on athleticism so much. I don’t see much skill in charging your massive frame to the goal and scooping the ball into the hoop from half a foot away. When he can’t charge through people, and when he can’t rest his chin on the hoop, I imagine he’ll have to start relying on his jumper and footwork more often, like Kobe now does. And being that I hate his jumper as much as I hate his footwork, I don’t see a bright outlook.
However, his passing and defensive instincts and powder throwing will always be wayyy better than Kobe’s.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
That part of his game might not be as pretty to the eye
but Lebron’s post up game is actually more efficient than any wing players. Someone did a breakdown of it this year.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 21, 2011 4:33 PM PDT up reply actions
here it is
http://www.nba.com/heat/news/evolution_post_game_110412.html
I was wrong, Paul Pierce is actually the best post up wing player then Lebron.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 21, 2011 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow that's spot on
“…the grace of that fadeaway jumper, and its degree of difficulty, became the standard of excellence for all wing players developing a post-up game.
But that is basketball lyricism, and it has little to do with efficiency. "
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Really?
Dang, I always clown his post-up game, and I’ve gone on and on about Kobe’s great footwork in the post.
But yeah, I’m going solely off of prettiness and using that to predict how it looks later on. Pretty hook shots like Gasol’s seem to tend to age better than ugly ones like Dwight’s. But I’m also quite possibly making that up. But if you asked me right now to bet on who would be better as an older vet, LeBron or Wade, I’d pick Wade every time.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Really?
I’d pick Lebron as he’s the better outside shooter. I’m not sure how well Wade will age as he’s not tall enough to move to SF like Kobe and Jordan should/could in in their latter years.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 21, 2011 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Haha we should make it official
Let’s revisit this in 5-6 years :D
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
"Plus anyone that uses the word "rings" in discussing an individual’s value exposes that they don’t know how to separate an individuals contributions from their team."
Adam Morrison is offended.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
There's those words again
The proper draft order is probably Shaq (barely edging out), BWallace, Billups, Bryant, Prince, and then avoid taking Lakers.
Your draft is worried about scoring the most points. My order is about scoring more points than the other team. The Lakers probably only had 2 of the top 10 players on those teams, and the gap between Shaq and BWallace is too small to matter.
I really would have thought that Shaq >>>>>>> Ben Wallace by a wide margin
Prime-Shaq certainly scored/defended/rebounded/passed better than Wallace defended/rebounded, since we know Big Ben wasn’t putting up big scoring numbers.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
You'd be right.
Ben Wallace was a very good defender and great rebounder. Giving up 5 inches and 80 pounds to Shaq, he also required massive help in defending Shaq. Shaq’s defensive weakness was defending the P/R, but he owned the paint. He wasn’t the defender that Wallace was, but offensively there’s zero comparison. And as bad a FT shooter as Shaq was, he looked like Peja compared to Ben Wallace. Plus, nobody even guarded Ben Wallace.
And to say Ben Wallace and Billups would be ahead of Kobe is nonsense.
And then Detroit won the series
My worldview explains it, yours relies on magic to explain it.
1 out of 20
Yah that proves your point
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Malone
Wasn’t his injury a big factor in them losing the series? They pretty much rolled throught the west because Malone was able to play D on the other teams best bigs and the combination of him and Shaq gave the team a huge rebounding edge. LA had nobody to match up with both Wallaces and were able to pull Shaq out of position so that their guards were able to penetrate without ay worry of being stopped.
I’m not saying Detroit wouldn’t have won if Malone was playing but it was a big loss considering that they had nobody capable of filling the spot……Luke Walton was playing critical minutes in that series.
Also,
Didn’t Larry Brown just get fired?
Poor guy must have gotten senile in the years since then. Completely forgot how to coach!
I said talent matters most, but coaching adds to the puzzle.
Last year Charlotte had a team utterly devoid of talent, yet LB took them to the playoffs . That was a major accomplishment. His teams usually start slow, and then start winning. If he had stayed around longer than a month this year, he might have gotten them back. He took another team composed of one gunner and a bunch of role players, and molded it into a Finals team. Coaching matters.
That Detroit team did have talent. Did it have Kobe, Shaq, Malone, Payton, etc? No way. The disparity in talent was obvious.
"I said talent matters most, but coaching adds to the puzzle."
I completely agree with this statement. But you’re wrong on CHA. A core of Felton, S-Jax, Ty Chandler, and Crash Wallace had MORE than enough talent to make the East Playoffs. CHA sucked this year because they dumped their starting PG and C, each of whom went on to become huge parts of their new team’s success, for absolutely nothing.
Then they did it again at the deadline with Wallace.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Apr 20, 2011 12:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Tyson Chandler missed a huge chunk of the season and was never healthy. Wallace is ok as a role player, same with the powder keg, Stephen Jackson. A young Felton/Augustin combo is nothing to crow about. Felton has improved. Diaw hasn’t done much to replicate his Suns experience. Yes, the East was weaker last year than today, but to take these guys and win 44 games was a superb coaching job.
In a sense Larry Brown did forget how to coach
Or more accurately, he lost confidence in the team, and then the team lost confidence in him. From a recent end of season interview with Stephen Jackson.
"When I had my beginning-of-the-season meeting, he basically told me we weren’t going to be good, that we weren’t going to be a playoff team,’’ Jackson recalled in a remarkably candid interview Thursday.
"I kind of lost respect for him,’’ Jackson said. "Not as far as him being a great coach, a Hall of Fame coach. I lost respect for how he was approaching this season with this team.
"It’s kind of hard to go to war with a guy like that. I think that’s when he lost the team. We didn’t feel confident as a team. We didn’t feel good about being Bobcats until coach Silas was here.’’
Under Brown, the Bobcats were 9-19, while the Paul Silas led Bobcats were 25-29. The Bobcats were relatively healthy under Brown, and the only signinificant players transactions were at the deadline, when Gerald Wallace and Nazr Mohammed were traded away.
The evidence clearly suggests that Larry Brown’s performance as a coach this year hurt the performance of his team. Charlotte performed much better under Paul Silas even though the team’s best player was traded away for peanuts. Splitting out the pre and post trade record of the Bobcats with Coach Silas, they were 16-13 with Wallace and Mohammed and 9-16 after they were traded. So at least in this sad case study, a negative coach did appear to have hurt his team, and losing good players hurt them even worse.
+1
i’ve always thought the relationships within a team and with their coach are analogous to those in any workplace environment between managers and their underlings. in basketball, every game is a performance evaluation. not necessarily in wins or losses, but in maximizing the productivity/efficiency of your particular team. we are talking about human beings here, after all.
No, he wouldn't - the Clipper brass was sick of him and didn't want him there
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
You're wrong
if the Clippers were playing .500 ball and added Blake Griffin to that mix then they wouldn’t have fired him. Stop making up crap.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions
Exactly.
If we were winning, he would absolutely be here. If Blake took us to the playoffs, I reckon he might have even gotten another extension. It wasn’t until the all-star break when we tanked. We were hovering around .500 – add Blake to that, and playoffs would have been likely.
That's right
Remember during the infamous Grizzlies game we thought we would be .500 and Blake Griffin was rehabbing. That was a huge bucket of cold ice dumped on our heads that day.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Look that's what I heard from Clipper execs
Take it up with them
Btw, there’s no way MDSr could ever get the team to win. He is a horrible coach. Period, end of story.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
So 2006 never happened?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
True, that's the exception that proves the rule
But even there he killed the run
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
and the team was 40-42 the next year
which happens to be the 4th best season in LAC history. You can also choose to ignore his Finals appearance with the Lakers and WCF appearance with the Blazers since that cripples your point.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions
And his poor coaching killed their ability to get to the playoffs that year
See above.
He’s a poor coach. He took talent and lost with it. Repeatedly. This isn’t even debatable. But to argue with me you’ll even suggest that a sub .400 coach in 7 years is a good coach.
The Blazers? LOL
Whatever.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
It wasn't the coaching
it was Cassell being injured for much of the year (and playing just 24 minutes a game as a result) and poor Shaun blowing out his knee. That more or less dropped them just below the Warriors in the playoff race.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Dunny was NOT a horrible coach.
Finals with the Lakers in ’91, WCF Game 7 with POR, Semi-Finals Game with LAC. He just wore out his welcome here, it happens. Change was needed. MDSr. is a better coach than VDN. There, I said it.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's going down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Apr 20, 2011 12:17 PM PDT up reply actions
MDSr is not a respected NBA coach
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Hmm
NBA Coach of the Year (1999)
Yea. No respect.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Agree on Cassell
But that was all the more reason to start Maggette
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
I know the execs.
If we had won 50 games and gotten to the playoffs, he 100% would have been there. I know he grated people the wrong way. He pissed off some execs a few times, but winning would have cured all. When you’re under .500, you can’t be so arrogant to other people before it catches up to you.
To say that a .500 team + Griffin wouldn’t have mattered is just wrong. He might be a horrible person and he made a lot of coaching mistakes, but he changed the culture of the team and got us further than we’ve ever gotten. Did I agree we needed a change? YES. But I reckon if Griffin was healthy last year, we would have done some damage.
if you know the execs as you claim
then you would know that they could not stand him and wanted him out. If you say otherwise you don’t know the execs.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
But I agree if he had won he'd stilll be there
But he would never have won. He was the de facto GM and the coach of a poor team.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
I'm confused
if the team was so poor how is it so good (in your opinion) now? Did Ryan Gomes, Randy Foye, Brian Cook, Eric Bledsoe, Willie Warren and Al-Farouq Aminu do so much in one year?
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
You can't talk to Jax because he is so dishonest
He will lie and lie, and then when caught in his lie, change his story.
I’m not sure why he is allowed to post here. He doesn’t contribute a single thing to the community.
Look at how obsessed he still is with Dunleavy.
I'm dishonest because I don't share your unreasonable opinions
Yah, ok.
I’m not obsessed with MDSr. I’m just pointing out how your opinions change depending on who you like and don’t like and using your six years of defending his every move as exhibit A
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Its so bad you can no longer even remember what you are lying about
Of course the above comment contains new lies, but I’m redundant.
What will it take
For you to realize that your anger is the result of your own insecurity about yourself?
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Please read more closely.
I know that he had grated on the execs – I said that. They were jealous that he was getting all the credit for the team’s success. 09-10 became a make-or-break one for Dunleavy. DTS regretted giving him an extension almost from Day One especially at that rate, which is why he is trying to get out of paying him now. By the way, these same execs were the ones pushing for the extension. DTS was also pissed at paying 20 million to build a practice site when the team was not winning. He said they could have stayed at the Spectrum Club, saving him 20 mill, and not won. DTS gave him the extension due to his playoff run. And I said that a healthy Griffin would have likely led us into the playoffs again. The injury gave them an out and he was let go. Case closed.
FYI - the practice facility cost $50M
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Hard to say
some reports say $50 million. Some say the construction cost were $20-25 million. The Playa Vista area the facility was built in is up and coming but has had a lot of big companies flake during the downturn (Myspace/Fox was suppose to be taking up a huge spot)
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 20, 2011 1:36 PM PDT up reply actions
Not true again.
That’s what the team’s, aka DTS’s, press release says. It makes for a nice impressive, round figure to say that the land cost $25 mill, the building cost $25 mill. He actually got the land at a deep discount, and the building is obviously very nice but also nowhere near $25 million.
My understanding is $50M
If you are truly interested I can get the actual numbers. Seems like a tangential side issue though.
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Way less.
If DTS was the contractor of the facility and paid himself a $25-30 million fee, then yes, the place cost $50 million. Just like an MLB team owner paying his son $250,000 to do nothing. It makes it look like the team is spending big $$$, while earning less than it actually makes.
Akin to why the NFL and NBA don’t want their books opened and inspected too closely.
I agree with the general point about coaching and talent
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
"To say that the Bulls of 09-10 would correlate to winning 59 games this year is ludicrous"
That’s not what it is saying. It is saying that if you add up what the players that make up the 10-11 Bulls have done for their careers with whatever team they are on, and form them into a team, let’s call them the 10-11 Bulls, they would win about 59.
And then they won about 59.
Oh okay
I thought it was just talking about the Bulls vets that remained from last year, implying that the new guys only added 2 wins. That was weird to me, but if it’s all non-rookie players on the current team, regardless of where they used to be, then that’s a lot more reasonable.
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Coaches sort of matter
I think the difference between most coaches is like using a different brand of golf clubs however. It might save you a stroke or two but that’s mainly it.
Like most industries its a copy-cat world out there. Most teams run similar systems, similar schemes and plays. Most of them went to the same basketball schools (so and so served as an assistant coach to so and so) Some teams are better coached because they practice certain plays better (essentially better communication), have better clock management (2 for 1s, when to intentionally foul etc) and play the right players for the right amount of minutes (something Phil Jackson does well and someone like D’Antoni struggles with).
But at the end 90% of the NBA coaches probably know how to tell a team to stop a pick and roll, when to tell his guys to switch or not and a bunch of other in-game decisions. They also break down the film and find the small little things that gives their teams an edge (leave Rondo wide open from 15 feet out etc.) but players ultimately decide most of the game.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
I think the difference between most coaches is like using a different brand of golf clubs however. It might save you a stroke or two but that’s mainly it.
I like this.
by Michael White on Apr 20, 2011 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Funny thing
Supposedly a great coach, Phil Jackson’s teams are terrible at attaining 2 for 1’s, even though the math and eye test line up that it is very important to get those.
Yeah - he's a bad coach
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
Hey if you can't debate what Im actually saying
And comment after comment in this thread show that you cannot, fight that strawman. Rip him down!
You're good at strawmen - see above
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
You haven't been a big fan of VDN
Or was it just the fashion in which the Clips hired him?
If the Clips turned around and hired Adelman, I’d have a hard time suppressing, “My god, we’re getting more serious now.” We have a young team, and I suspect several of our kids would entertain similar thoughts. The aire of legitimacy might very well translate to the court… Especially if Ad then started making slightly better decisions. A small snowball effect could lead to a few more wins.
I’m spilling my thoughts, but you’ll notice that I’m not disagreeing with you. Coaches matter in subtle ways, including what a hire might say about a franchise and its deeper intensions.
"i know huh........freakin clippers man.....its like a wild ride rooting for this team....gotta love em....(sometimes) lol" In GrIfFin We TrUsT
to answer your question
both. He was a overwhelmed head coach with no previous coaching experience prior to coaching the Bulls. His teams never ran a coherent offense nor played great D.
I also didn’t like waiting for every other team to hire a coach and then sift through the leftovers. The Bulls identified exactly what free agents they wanted, what coach they wanted and went out and executed. The Clips settled for a head coach (who won the job at the 11th hour) that was just fired (and no one else wanted to hire) and signed a bunch of crummy free agents on the first available day instead of waiting to seek out better options.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
by ClipperChuck on Apr 21, 2011 12:28 AM PDT up reply actions
They aren't hiring Adleman
No point in getting your hopes up
by Michael White on Apr 21, 2011 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions
That would be admitting their mistake when they are trying to pump up an improved season
Never gonna happen :(
"Failure is not fatal, but failure to change might be." - John Wooden
Here's an article today
which points out situations where coaches do matter. You’ll need Insider to read it though.
Help us Altered Beast you're our only hope.
the 2 foul thing lol
I believe coaches often times do more to hurt than help a team.
The best coaches are the best motivators/life coaches, so I say the Clips should go after Anthony Robbins and just call it a day
Blake Griffin is coming, hide your MBengas
LOL - that was your funniest post ever
"[Fans are] not technically a lot of times savvy. They don't understand and they don't weigh issues the way that [I] weigh them."
Mike Dunleavy, Sr.
What about Doug Collins
Watched the game last night and saw a stat that Collins has coached 4 NBA teams and improved their win total vs prior season by 10 games with CHG in ’86-87, 18 games with DET in ’95-96, 18 games with WASH in ’01-02 and 14 games with PHI this year. Did Collins do a great job every time of picking the right team to go with or was he an improvement over Albeck, Chaney, Hamilton and Eddie Jordan? If coaching makes the difference in just 2-3 games regular season and one game in the playoffs, having the right coach may make all the difference in the world.
Collins is a great coach.
I read in Sports Illustrated that Reinsdorf gave him a ring after all of the Bulls’ championships because he contributed greatly to the team. If he had stayed on, who knows where Phil Jackson would have ended up? But if ifs and buts….
How would you prove the coach was responsible for those 2-3 games
And not luck?
Doug Collins was the man who couldn’t win a championship with Jordan, Pippen and Grant, right?
Not entirely fair to Collins.
He had Pippen and Grant for their first two years in the NBA. I don’t think Pippen was quite the same player those years than he was on those championship teams. Ditto Grant. Youth vs experience. Had he stayed a few more years, it likely would have been his dynasty, not Phil’s.
Yeah, I don't blame Collins
I don’t credit Jackson either. I just like getting people talking about the crazy things they believe coaches can do.
Jordan+Pippen+Grant/Rodman=championships. Period.
Still no one has been able to address the question on how they would differentiate the 2 or 3 wins a coach supposedly provides from luck.
At the end of the day coaches matter very little in the NBA
over the long course of a season usually talent is what wins out.
In the playoffs where the talent is almost equal, the team that plays the hardest will win out.
BUT, if you were to take very small sample size coaches do matter. Coaches can make certain adjustments during the flow of the game, or call certain plays that effect the game.
That is why coaches are more important in football, and in college basketball. Where the fate of teams often come down to a single game.
Blake Griffin is coming, hide your MBengas
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
