PDA

View Full Version : Players VS. Coaches...Who should get the credit?



twoearl
03-15-2010, 03:05 PM
In the NBA what percentage of credit do you think the Players and Coaches should get for Winning? Is it a 50%/50% split or is it something else?

IMO Coaches in the league get too much credit but also too much blame. I understand coaches are supposed to lead their teams but in the end who is making that last second shot? Or who has to defend the opponent’s top player and fight them for every inch?

I am seeing the split as 75% of the credit goes to the Players, while 25% of the credit goes to the Coaches...

JermanJaysFan
03-15-2010, 03:19 PM
It depends. For example, you can't give Phil Jackson, Mike Brown, or Erik Spoelstra credit when their superstars take over a game or series singlehandedly. Conversely, sometimes you see a game or series where one coach simply out manages his counterpart on the other squad.

They both deserve their credit in different situations.

pebloemer
03-15-2010, 03:30 PM
In the NBA what percentage of credit do you think the Players and Coaches should get for Winning? Is it a 50%/50% split or is it something else?

IMO Coaches in the league get too much credit but also too much blame. I understand coaches are supposed to lead their teams but in the end who is making that last second shot? Or who has to defend the opponent’s top player and fight them for every inch?

I am seeing the split as 75% of the credit goes to the Players, while 25% of the credit goes to the Coaches...

Far too general of a question to answer. I'd imagine for each team, each year, each group of players or individual players, it is a little different. Current coaches and previous coaches help/helped develop the players into who they are, they put them in positions to succeed, they put the best groups out there to compete, develop systems, etc to counter their opponent, however players have to learn, develop, execute, perform, etc. I'm not sure how much coaching it takes to get LeBron to do what he does game in game out, but I'd imagine it would take a lot to take a raw rookie and make him NBA ready and able to compete.

Iodine
03-15-2010, 03:32 PM
There are rarely more than 5 coaches in the NBA who actually matter for more than making substitutions

RaptorizedKevin
03-15-2010, 03:34 PM
i think players should be given 75% of the credit. mike brown isnt that of a great coach is he? hes not that great at drawing up plays is he? he has the best player in the league making him look good.

twoearl
03-15-2010, 04:06 PM
There are rarely more than 5 coaches in the NBA who actually matter for more than making substitutions

lol kind of harsh but i agree. Give somebody a superstar and 4 role players and any average joe can at least get his team to the playoffs...

Raph12
03-15-2010, 04:13 PM
Depends on the team; a team like the Cavs, the players (specifically Lebron); a team like the Rockets, the coach; a team like the Thunder, both.

ManRam
03-15-2010, 04:15 PM
For the most part the credit goes to the players more so than the coach. I think very rarely does the coach deserve a ton of credit. A lot of coaches sit back and let their players go to work. Most of the coaching is done on the defensive end, but even so, it's up to the players to buy into it and commit at that end. Offensively, coaches do very little I feel like.


EDIT: I agree with Iodine (shocking).

Iodine
03-15-2010, 04:18 PM
Manram you know you love me

remember during the 2008 finals all the **** we started?

TopsyTurvy
03-15-2010, 04:19 PM
I would have to say it's a 50/50 split. Players can have all the physical gifts in the world and still not succeed at the level they should. I don't think any coach expects to get credit (rightfully so), but there's no denying the importance of the staffers in terms of player development, x's and o's, and player management.

DerekRE_3
03-15-2010, 04:20 PM
Depends on the team; a team like the Cavs, the players (specifically Lebron); a team like the Rockets, the coach; a team like the Thunder, both.

Bobcats.

Joshtd1
03-15-2010, 04:20 PM
IMO its 60/40.

Players obviously have to go out there and win the game....but sometimes its hard to when a game when a coach is making terrible decisions, by putting out scrub players, or putting out an awful lineup that isnt doing anything. You would think that after a while, the coach would make adjustments, but if he doesnt, then its on him.

JasonJohnHorn
03-15-2010, 04:33 PM
In most situations the two must work in concert to win. I wouldn't say its equal, but you can't win a title with a bad coach, or without great players. No matter how great a coach is, evne the best can't win without talent. You can take a great coach like Doc Rivers (some may agree or disagree about how good he is, but lets save that for another day). The guy comes into Orlando, who is expected to finish among the league's worst teams, and gets them to buy into his system and to believe in themselves, and they almost make the playoffs. But as good as Rivers was, he still couldn't get them into the playoffs. Likewise Rick Adleman has gotten his Rockets team ot overachive, and Jerry Sloan, in the face of losing three HOF players in one season (Karl Malone, John Stockton and Mark Jackson), still managed to finish two games over .500 despite the fact that the nucleous of his team had been ripped out with no legit replacements to fill the void (and that was only five less games than the season before). Still, the Jazz missed the playoffs.

Likewise you can have a very talented team and not win. Look at the Goldenstate Warriors line up in 93/94 and 94/95. They had stacked rosters both seasons and one year they got swept out of the first round and the following season only got 26 wins.

you need both to win and though you may need more talent on the floor than at the coaching position, you still need both, and even with talented rosters, if you don't have people buying into what the coach is laying down, then things aren't going to work. One need look no further than Rasheed Wallace (a player I love but can be very frustrated with). He ignored his defensive assignment in the finals '05 and left Horry open to hit that dagger. Had he really respected and listened to what his coach was saying, the play may or may no thave went in Detroit favour, there is no what to know for sure, but we know for certain that ignoring Larry Brown in that instance didn't help matters.

Sometimes you get smart players (like Wallace who certainly does have a high basketball I.Q.) who think they know better than the coach and that can be a problem. Some times you get a guy like Vince Carter (and many other players have done this) who blame a coach like Lenny Wilkens (as he did in Toronto) for the team losing when the team is working through a lot of issues such as injury and the player laying the blame around is either injured or not playing well because they are coming of injury.

More often than not coaches get blamed when teams aren't playing well despite a lack of effort or talent that a roster has. Great coaches can get average or bad teams to over achieve, but they can't get them to win titles.

A great rosters need a good coach at least to really compete. You may need talent on the floor to win at a high level more than you need a great coach, but you need a good coach at the very least, or you'll end up like the Cavs the last couple of years, a talented roster and no rings to show for it.

ManRam
03-15-2010, 04:33 PM
Manram you know you love me

remember during the 2008 finals all the **** we started?

Quite possibly the highlight of my life. I've only been posting lately to get practice on the beat-downs I'll (we'll) be supplying.

ManRam
03-15-2010, 04:34 PM
I just think it usually ultimately comes down to execution. And who's responsible for that? The players.

Iodine
03-15-2010, 04:34 PM
Troophgoose=best sig ever

J-Relo
03-15-2010, 04:35 PM
Coaches get the respect if they do the right thing for a longer period or sometimes when they get instant success, usually people credit players a lot more (80% to 20%), but at the same time there are coaches owning their spot for their (their team) acomplishments and how they work with players, help them to develop... It also depends on a team, if a team has a real superstar loved by fans not only for his personality but for his game he usually overshadows the coach. I believe some coaches should get more credit, but i don't think it's a problem.

Iodine
03-15-2010, 04:35 PM
I just think it usually ultimately comes down to execution. And who's responsible for that? The players.

NO WAY.

Ultimate example

Larry birds college coach for his senior year won coach of the year and was out of a job for the rest of his life in 5 years

kidfury
03-15-2010, 04:44 PM
With a young team i think a coach plays a greater role. There's those coaches that don't have the special elite talent on their team but still continuously compete well such as utah/sloan, i think he doesn't get enough credit.

Phil Jackson, I think is SOOOOO overated, has only coached ELITE players and often a veteran team, and when things are not going well 'let's the team play things out' and won't call a time out... uh i hope kobe or jordan can pull this one out for me yah good job zen master

JordansBulls
03-15-2010, 05:04 PM
Depends on the situation. I'd say your top player gets more credit than anyone else. 2nd would be either your coach or your 2nd best player on the team.

Raph12
03-15-2010, 05:39 PM
Bobcats.

I think Larry Brown is one of the best coaches of all-time and the Cats' players are all guys that play his type of game, so it's a hand-in-glove fit.

DerekRE_3
03-15-2010, 05:48 PM
I think Larry Brown is one of the best coaches of all-time and the Cats' players are all guys that play his type of game, so it's a hand-in-glove fit.

Yeah they do fit his type of game, and a lot of the players on the Cats now were guys that Larry Brown himself said he wanted. Who's decision do you think it was to get a guy like Raja Bell or now Theo Ratliff? But also Brown did an amazing job teaching Gerald Wallace how to become a better, smarter player, on both offense and defense. Wallace was also willing to learn and listen, so it does go both ways. Same goes for Raymond Felton, who is ridiculously underrated. But I just don't see a coach that gets more out of players than Larry Brown has during his coaching career. There are guys like Phil Jackson who can manage superstars, and then there are coaches like Brown who can take players that are willing to learn and mold them into a cohesive unit.