PDA

View Full Version : Do Coaches Get Too Much Credit?



Baller1
01-27-2011, 02:49 AM
I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me on this, but I truly think coaches are given too much credit in the NBA. Yes, there are coaches that are better than others; with that said, I think there are a lot of overrated coaches (much more than "underrated" coaches). And I was thinking about it and came up with the conclusion that coaches, in general, are just overrated in this league.

Easy example for me, Scott Brooks. Is he a better coach than the franchise's previous coach, PJ Carlesimo? Yes. But, that's only because PJ was terrible. Brooks should not have won Coach of the Year last year, and he's showing that this year with his lack of an offensive system and refusal to start his best players. It's the talent level that turned the team around last year, not Brooks.

Also, Phil Jackson (I know, controversial). He's had some of the greatest players in the history of the league for him, of course he's going to rack up championships. He's had some of the most talented teams from top to bottom ever.

I'm not saying coaches are unnecessary or anything like that, far from it. I just think they aren't as essential to a teams success as some might perceive them to be. So I'm curious, does anyone else feel coaches are given to much credit in basketball?

(This isn't a knock on guys like Sloan, Pop, Adelman, Coach K for that matter, etc.)

Chronz
01-27-2011, 02:51 AM
Have you seen the effect Thibs has had on Chicagos defense? Frankly I think thats the one side coaches dont get enough credit for. Van Gundy bros, Skiles, anyone from the Riley frat are the same way.

sargon21
01-27-2011, 02:54 AM
Good question, but I'm not sure it can be generalized. For instance, the Bulls have become one of the top, if not the best, defensive team in the league this year, and that undoubtedly has come from Thibodeau's influence. While our team doesn't have many stand-out defenders, he has implemented a system that is successful. So, I don't think this is a case where a coach is being given too much credit, but I can def. see it being a case by case analysis.

Also, like you said, if you had a poor coach before getting a good coach, it makes that coach seem great, just because of the bone-head your team has had in the past, ala Vinny Del Negro (even though I liked him b/c he got his players to play hard every game).

Enemey
01-27-2011, 02:54 AM
I thought Chicago was already a great defensive team last year but it was their offense that wasn't great?

Baller1
01-27-2011, 02:54 AM
Have you seen the effect Thibs has had on Chicagos defense? Frankly I think thats the one side coaches dont get enough credit for. Van Gundy bros, Skiles, anyone from the Riley frat are the same way.

I figured you'd be all over this one Chronz.

Trust me, I know what you're saying. And I'm not trying to discredit coaches completely. I just think they get more credit than they deserve.

Also, I'd give more credit to Ron Adams for Chicago's turnaround. Not Thibs, although he's obviously helped.

sargon21
01-27-2011, 02:55 AM
I thought Chicago was already a great defensive team last year but it was their offense that wasn't great?

Well we were good, I think about top 10 in the league, but now we're #1 I think.

kingbrentg
01-27-2011, 02:56 AM
Also, I'd give more credit to Ron Adams for Chicago's turnaround. Not Thibs, although he's obviously helped.

Of course you would, Thunder homer. :p

Chronz
01-27-2011, 02:56 AM
Whos Ron Adams?

Baller1
01-27-2011, 02:56 AM
Good question, but I'm not sure it can be generalized. For instance, the Bulls have become one of the top, if not the best, defensive team in the league this year, and that undoubtedly has come from Thibodeau's influence. While our team doesn't have many stand-out defenders, he has implemented a system that is successful. So, I don't think this is a case where a coach is being given too much credit, but I can def. see it being a case by case analysis.

Also, like you said, if you had a poor coach before getting a good coach, it makes that coach seem great, just because of the bone-head your team has had in the past, ala Vinny Del Negro (even though I liked him b/c he got his players to play hard every game).

That's exactly why I asked the question, it's hard to come up with a definitive answer (actually, it's impossible), because there are cases in which both sides can be argued. As you said, I guess it's just whichever way you like to look at it.

sargon21
01-27-2011, 02:57 AM
I figured you'd be all over this one Chronz.

Trust me, I know what you're saying. And I'm not trying to discredit coaches completely. I just think they get more credit than they deserve.

Also, I'd give more credit to Ron Adams for Chicago's turnaround. Not Thibs, although he's obviously helped.

Nah dude, it's Thibs. His commitment on that end of the floor is ridiculous. He literally jumps around on the sidelines showing guys what they should be doing and how to be defending.

Baller1
01-27-2011, 02:57 AM
Of course you would, Thunder homer. :p

I know, I miss him so badly. :(

sargon21
01-27-2011, 02:57 AM
That's exactly why I asked the question, it's hard to come up with a definitive answer (actually, it's impossible), because there are cases in which both sides can be argued. As you said, I guess it's just whichever way you like to look at it.

Yeah, tough question.

Baller1
01-27-2011, 02:58 AM
Whos Ron Adams?

He's Chicago's assistant coach, a defensive specialist. He was the Thunder's assistant last year, and now look at our defense.

Baller1
01-27-2011, 02:59 AM
Nah dude, it's Thibs. His commitment on that end of the floor is ridiculous. He literally jumps around on the sidelines showing guys what they should be doing and how to be defending.

I don't doubt that Thibs has helped them defensively at all, he's clearly got that team playing great ball. But the reason I give Adams so much credit is the pathetic fall off OKC has experienced. He's literally the only piece we lost that could possibly be accredited with the fall off.

abe_froman
01-27-2011, 03:00 AM
I know, I miss him so badly. :(

well does this kind of answer your own question.that you miss you,you think he should be credited for having an influence on a team(well at least you are crediting him)

i honestly think they dont get enough,and are too easily blamed

sargon21
01-27-2011, 03:02 AM
I don't doubt that Thibs has helped them defensively at all, he's clearly got that team playing great ball. But the reason I give Adams so much credit is the pathetic fall off OKC has experienced. He's literally the only piece we lost that could possibly be accredited with the fall off.

Yeah, I actually forgot about that lol, seems like his presence was huge actually now.

D1JM
01-27-2011, 03:02 AM
Of course you would, Thunder homer. :p

x2 thibs transformed a team that was Avg to a top defense without an all defensive 1st or 2nd team player.

Baller1
01-27-2011, 03:02 AM
well does this kind of answer your own question.that you miss you,you think he should be credited for having an influence on a team

i honestly think they dont get enough,and are too easily blamed

Well you can actually sway that statement in my case. As easily as they might be accredited, they're also easily blamed. Thus, too much is being put on the coaches.

If the team is experiencing a losing streak, the coach can't go out there and start winning the games. The players have to execute. Does it require strong coaching? Of course, but coaching can only extend so far. Games are won on the court, by the players.

Chronz
01-27-2011, 03:03 AM
He's Chicago's assistant coach, a defensive specialist. He was the Thunder's assistant last year, and now look at our defense.
Considering they are running Thibs system I think the credit falls on him. That your defense fell off so soon tells me hes not that good of a teacher. The residual effects from losing a coach usually dont fade so quickly.

Thibs has a much longer track record and has learned under the games best defensive minds, hes without a doubt the key cog in their defensive gameplan.

Check out this article
http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1423

Baller1
01-27-2011, 03:03 AM
Yeah, I actually forgot about that lol, seems like his presence was huge actually now.

Yeah, so let me rephrase. Thibs has done a great job turning Chicago into a defensive juggernaut, but it wasn't all him, as OKC's embarrassing drop off has shown us..

abe_froman
01-27-2011, 03:05 AM
Well you can actually sway that statement in my case. As easily as they might be accredited, they're also easily blamed. Thus, too much is being put on the coaches.

If the team is experiencing a losing streak, the coach can't go out there and start winning the games. The players have to execute. Does it require strong coaching? Of course, but coaching can only extend so far. Games are won on the court, by the players.

i would agree with this assessment

Baller1
01-27-2011, 03:06 AM
Considering they are running Thibs system I think the credit falls on him. That your defense fell off so soon tells me hes not that good of a teacher. The residual effects from losing a coach usually dont fade so quickly.

Thibs has a much longer track record and has learned under the games best defensive minds, hes without a doubt the key cog in their defensive gameplan.

Check out this article
http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1423

I got a midterm early tomorrow, so I'll have to check that out tomorrow, but thanks.

Well let me ask you this though before I head to bed, who/what do you blame for OKC's sudden drop? Because the only plausible answer in my mind is Ron Adams.

D1JM
01-27-2011, 03:06 AM
I don't doubt that Thibs has helped them defensively at all, he's clearly got that team playing great ball. But the reason I give Adams so much credit is the pathetic fall off OKC has experienced. He's literally the only piece we lost that could possibly be accredited with the fall off.

Somehow it seems thy okc is not interested as much playing on the defensive side of the court. I know they lost their coach but it's also up to the players to commit.

sargon21
01-27-2011, 03:06 AM
Agreed @ baller.

michael811
01-27-2011, 03:06 AM
Michael Jordan rings with Phil 6 rings without Phil 0
Phil's rings without Michael Jordan 5
Scottie Pippen rings with Phil 6 rings without Phil 0
Phil's rings without Scottie Pippen 5
Shaq rings with Phil 3 rings without 1
Phil's rings without Shaq 8
Kobe Bryant rings with Phil rings without 0
Phil's rings without Kobe Bryant 6
The greatest player ever has 0 rings without Phil Jackson as his coach. Coaching means a lot

John Walls Era
01-27-2011, 03:08 AM
I think Coaches do get a lot of credit. But it goes with the territory. When things go sour, they are the first to be blamed. Players quit and coach can get fired.

Sadds The Gr8
01-27-2011, 03:15 AM
funny...i was gonna make a thread about this and u beat me too it. I 100% agree.

ChiSox219
01-27-2011, 03:52 AM
Coaches don't get enough credit.

TopsyTurvy
01-27-2011, 04:30 AM
Coaches don't get enough credit.

This.

Motivation is the fuel that drives a given team.

Hellcrooner
01-27-2011, 11:34 AM
In Nba? they definetly get too much credit for doing almost nothing.

I can sit there too and say Give the Ball to Franchise dude adn get out of the way.
Then after some minutes use the whoel bench at the same time for some minutes befor putting back the whole starters for <>"crunch time".

Fiba and NCAA coaches have a GREATER importance in teams play than Nba Coaches.

JasonJohnHorn
01-27-2011, 11:53 AM
I understand what you are saying. Sometimes coaches do get to much credit. Phil Jackson is an interesting example. Chi-town fired Doug Collins for pushing Detroit to the brink with a very young team, the next year, Phil Jackson, with the same core, but with players who were more developed and the addition of BJ Armstrong and Stacy King (who though not much of a player after his Chi-town days, was a solid contributor off the bench when MJ was around). Phil did not better with more tools. Had Doug Collins not been fired, he may have been able to topple Detroit the next year himself, and would have been the won with 6 rings.

But that said, when Jackson returned to LA, he turned that team around. He got a lottery team, IN THE WEST, into the playoffs with next to no additional players! And coupled with that he has the ability to handle egos like nobody in the NBA. There have been all-star teams put together that have just imploded. I remember the Goldenstate Warriors when they had Webber had a sick team and ended up in the lottery when they should have been making a run at the finals. I remember so Portland teams, and Pacers teams, and New York teams that looked AMAZING on paper, but do nothing. And I've seen teams with next to nothing (Orlando when Doc Rivers took over) make a run at the playoffs when they should have been looking at single digit wins, and guys like Fratello and Wilkens take teams like the Hawks and Cavs out of their downward spiral and bring them into the playoffs.

Outside of football, I would say that coaches are more important in basketball than any other sport. We see how inept coaches (Mike Brown) put stagnant offences on the floor and see a team that should be sweeping their way to the finals get knocked out in the second round. In hockey, players are often scrambling for the puck and its about hussle and puck handling, and if you got guys that can do that you're set. In baseball, you just put up a batting rotation, which most fans can do. But basketball, the offensive sets and defensive sets and so important, and coaches need to understand their players abilities and weaknesses and make a system fit for them. and unlike football coaches, basketball coaches do offence and defence.

JDink24
01-27-2011, 12:08 PM
Coaching matters more for certain teams. Coaching is crucial to a young team like the 76ers. Last year Eddie Jordan ruined the Sixers in what was possibly the worst coaching job I've ever seen in any sport. This year Doug Collins has pretty much corrected all of Jordan’s mistakes and seems to be an ideal fit for our team. On the flip side a veteran team with established players probably doesn't need coaching much at all.

Hellcrooner
01-27-2011, 12:10 PM
I understand what you are saying. Sometimes coaches do get to much credit. Phil Jackson is an interesting example. Chi-town fired Doug Collins for pushing Detroit to the brink with a very young team, the next year, Phil Jackson, with the same core, but with players who were more developed and the addition of BJ Armstrong and Stacy King (who though not much of a player after his Chi-town days, was a solid contributor off the bench when MJ was around). Phil did not better with more tools. Had Doug Collins not been fired, he may have been able to topple Detroit the next year himself, and would have been the won with 6 rings.

But that said, when Jackson returned to LA, he turned that team around. He got a lottery team, IN THE WEST, into the playoffs with next to no additional players! And coupled with that he has the ability to handle egos like nobody in the NBA. There have been all-star teams put together that have just imploded. I remember the Goldenstate Warriors when they had Webber had a sick team and ended up in the lottery when they should have been making a run at the finals. I remember so Portland teams, and Pacers teams, and New York teams that looked AMAZING on paper, but do nothing. And I've seen teams with next to nothing (Orlando when Doc Rivers took over) make a run at the playoffs when they should have been looking at single digit wins, and guys like Fratello and Wilkens take teams like the Hawks and Cavs out of their downward spiral and bring them into the playoffs.

Outside of football, I would say that coaches are more important in basketball than any other sport. We see how inept coaches (Mike Brown) put stagnant offences on the floor and see a team that should be sweeping their way to the finals get knocked out in the second round. In hockey, players are often scrambling for the puck and its about hussle and puck handling, and if you got guys that can do that you're set. In baseball, you just put up a batting rotation, which most fans can do. But basketball, the offensive sets and defensive sets and so important, and coaches need to understand their players abilities and weaknesses and make a system fit for them. and unlike football coaches, basketball coaches do offence and defence.
Rudy tomjanovic lakers were a "lottery" team because kobe went down with an injury.
They would have been the 8th seed otherwise.
So he did no miracle there.

JayW_1023
01-27-2011, 12:21 PM
The Spurs wouldn't be close to the no.1 seed without Pop. His Allstar coaching selection is well deserved. Maybe he'll pull a few pranks like the one he did here to Shaq:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBQb5nVCHno LOL. Pop is awesome.

If Pop isn't COY frontrunner I will shake my head in disbelief.

KnicksorBust
01-27-2011, 12:21 PM
I know a lot of people are going to disagree with me on this, but I truly think coaches are given too much credit in the NBA. Yes, there are coaches that are better than others; with that said, I think there are a lot of overrated coaches (much more than "underrated" coaches). And I was thinking about it and came up with the conclusion that coaches, in general, are just overrated in this league.

Easy example for me, Scott Brooks. Is he a better coach than the franchise's previous coach, PJ Carlesimo? Yes. But, that's only because PJ was terrible. Brooks should not have won Coach of the Year last year, and he's showing that this year with his lack of an offensive system and refusal to start his best players. It's the talent level that turned the team around last year, not Brooks.

Also, Phil Jackson (I know, controversial). He's had some of the greatest players in the history of the league for him, of course he's going to rack up championships. He's had some of the most talented teams from top to bottom ever.

I'm not saying coaches are unnecessary or anything like that, far from it. I just think they aren't as essential to a teams success as some might perceive them to be. So I'm curious, does anyone else feel coaches are given to much credit in basketball?

(This isn't a knock on guys like Sloan, Pop, Adelman, Coach K for that matter, etc.)

It's an interesting OP because even you seem conflicted about it and mention coaches who are considered integral to their team's systems and success. Like your boy Ron Adams. :)

PhillyFaninLA
01-27-2011, 12:26 PM
Players win championships, thats true but an improperly coached team will not create team unity and will have the egos running wild. A good coach in the NBA manages egos, makes sure the team has the right players for the offense of defensive scheme to run it properly, and knows how to motivate, manage, and create and maintain unity amongst that particular group.

I think the NBA coach does less at game time than any other sport but as much as any sport when its not game time.

magichatnumber9
01-27-2011, 12:34 PM
Thibs has made a huge difference on that Bulls team. Coach of the Year by a landslide in my opinion.

Baller1
01-27-2011, 12:40 PM
It's an interesting OP because even you seem conflicted about it and mention coaches who are considered integral to their team's systems and success. Like your boy Ron Adams. :)

Yeah I know, that's why I brought it up. I can't even come up with a solid answer to my own question. Maybe I should've just asked "Is Scott Brooks overrated"...

heyman321
01-27-2011, 12:50 PM
Michael Jordan rings with Phil 6 rings without Phil 0
Phil's rings without Michael Jordan 5
Scottie Pippen rings with Phil 6 rings without Phil 0
Phil's rings without Scottie Pippen 5
Shaq rings with Phil 3 rings without 1
Phil's rings without Shaq 8
Kobe Bryant rings with Phil rings without 0
Phil's rings without Kobe Bryant 6
The greatest player ever has 0 rings without Phil Jackson as his coach. Coaching means a lot

That is terrible reasoning. You are using cyclic logic. Yeah, Phil has six rings without Kobe and Shaq, but that's because he had Jordan and Pippen. Yeah, Jordan would have zero rings without Phil, and Phil would TECHNICALLY have 5, but that's because he had Shaq and Kobe, and Gasol/Kobe/Fisher/Bynum/Odom.

D1JM
01-27-2011, 04:27 PM
Yeah I know, that's why I brought it up. I can't even come up with a solid answer to my own question. Maybe I should've just asked "Is Scott Brooks overrated"...

Is it me or does westbrook and durant seem less interested in playing Defense?

D1JM
01-27-2011, 04:41 PM
opponent G MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS PTS
2009-2010 82 19805 3007 6718 .448 481 1414 .340 1541 2018 .764 937 2397 3334 1618 616 384 1238 1755 8036 98.0
2010-2011 45 10950 1747 3733 .468 272 732 .372 836 1125 .743 502 1331 1833 962 323 196 659 1002 4602 102.3



seems .20% up in fg and .32% up in 3pt. Seems that three ball is killing you guys. you guys were ranked #3 last year in opponents 3P% and this year you guys jumped to #23. perimeter defending needs to get better.

Baller1
01-27-2011, 04:46 PM
Is it me or does westbrook and durant seem less interested in playing Defense?

They've been hurt by the fall in the team defense as a whole, but yeah I think you're right. For now, I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt and say their defense is hurting because of such offensive burdens placed on them.

I just hope they figure it out soon. If we can play defense like we did last year, we be right up there fighting with LA for the 2 seed. I don't know what happened.

D1JM
01-27-2011, 04:57 PM
They've been hurt by the fall in the team defense as a whole, but yeah I think you're right. For now, I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt and say their defense is hurting because of such offensive burdens placed on them.

I just hope they figure it out soon. If we can play defense like we did last year, we be right up there fighting with LA for the 2 seed. I don't know what happened.

maybe it might help by switching ibaka to the starting lineup. He has double the TRB% of Green and might help eliminate some offensive rebounds that the opponents get.

Baller1
01-27-2011, 04:58 PM
maybe it might help by switching ibaka to the starting lineup. He has double the TRB% of Green and might help eliminate some offensive rebounds that the opponents get.

Don't even get me started... :laugh2:

To keep it short and sweet, I agree with that assessment.

DoubleDragon
01-27-2011, 05:22 PM
I personally think just the opposite. If you have ever played organized sports at even the high school or college level, you'd realize that an army is only as effective as its commanding officer (OK, I threw my Marine analogy in there). This goes for mental preparedness, offensive/defensive schemes, substitution patterns (and we've all seen how a coaches poor decision at the worst time has resulted in a team's unnecessary close loss). A talent pool is just that, a pool. The coaches and staff get them all swimming in the same direction. They're responsible for player accountability as well. I do understand the thread and your point, but IMO, I strongly side on the coaches as a huge factor in any given team sport.

thenyknicks
01-27-2011, 05:24 PM
just enough.

twoearl
01-27-2011, 06:06 PM
Winning is 65% player 35% Coaching.

Chronz
01-27-2011, 06:59 PM
Rudy tomjanovic lakers were a "lottery" team because kobe went down with an injury.
They would have been the 8th seed otherwise.
So he did no miracle there.

BS

Lakers had the easiest schedule at that point, their efficiency differentials were not playoff caliber. And it wasnt Kobes injury that derailed them, it was Odoms. Regardless they were going to drop off anyways, they went something like 3-19 WITH Kobe. That doesnt happen to playoff teams.

JNA17
01-27-2011, 07:10 PM
Coaches hardly get any credit lettle alone too much.