Curt:
Is coaching over rated in the Nba? Give any average joe a superstar and 4 role players and he'll at least make the playoffs right?David Thorpe:
Just the opposite. It's a coaches league.
From David Thorpe Chat at ESPN.
I have always thought the opposite, but food for thought concerning our recent debates.
almost 2 years ago
hawksdawgs
9 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
i have always been of chuck daily mentality
players let you coach them or they don’t but it is a player league.
that being said, the elite teams let their coaches coach. so i guess it just depends on what side you look at it from.
But outside of a small few, who has job security?...
Phil as long as his health permits.
Sloan and Popovich are there until they hang it up as well.
George Karl seems relatively safe, and Mike Brown as long as Lebron wants him there. But Karl has the health issue, and Brown is as I said, only there if Lebron wants him and if James wanted someone else, he’d be gone quickly.
Every other coaching spot seems like a revolving door, with no one really being able to last long. Even Stan van Gundy has been questioned and does anyone really expect him to be there in 2015? There may be 3 or 4 coaches who will be with their current teams in 5 years, and probably even less considering the age and health of some of the more stable spots. If someone wants to call this a coach’s league, I’m not sure what they mean.
by Mr. Sanchez on Mar 11, 2010 10:04 AM EST up reply actions
oh i agree
it is always easier to get rid of the guy who makes 3 million vs. the guy who makes 8 or 15 million. that is why it happens, but i think you could make the argument that the elite coaches are able to get players to buy into a philosophy. or maybe better put, the elite teams buy into a philosophy. so still a players league but a coaches league in its own way.
It's a player league...
but coaches certainly make an impact. They are much more impactful at the college level where recruiting and player development matter more. But in the NBA, it’s hard to beat superior talent with superior coaching on a nightly basis. Give me Sloan, and the Al Harrington Hawks, and they still stink. But I agree coaches can make a deciding factor when talent becomes more even. After all, coaches put players in a proper position to win.
by Mr. Sanchez on Mar 11, 2010 10:19 AM EST up reply actions
There's also only one coach versus 13-15 players
and the lack of salary cap and salaries that don’t count against any kind of cap make coaches slightly easier to move when things aren’t working out.
all of those coaches have superstar players
which makes it easier for them to succeed and a lot of those players are good leaders Except Sloan whose been with the Jazz for years and had much success with many different players.
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Curt is more correct. If he had said “average coach” rather than “average Joe”, he would have been spot on. This is not to deny the effect of really bad or really good coaches, but most coaches are by definition somewhere in the middle and therefore interchangeable. To take the Hawks as an example, virtually any NBA coach would have the Hawks roughly where they are in the standings currently. A small number would have them higher, and maybe a couple would have done worse.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
