PDA

View Full Version : Is the revolving door of coaches impeding team building?



JasonJohnHorn
02-09-2016, 09:33 AM
There have been several firings this season already.

Kevin McHale, who got an injury depleted team to the conference finals last year, lost his job less than 20 games into the season.

David Blatt, who had his team on pace for 60, was first in his conference, and got an injury depleted team to game 6 of the NBA finals was also fired.

BK fired their coach, despite the issue really being with the GM.

Jeff Hornacek, who had a winning record coming into the season and was in consideration for COY his first season, got sacked in large part due to a GM who took a team a part and alienated a key piece of the rotation.

Derek Fisher, who has been doing a fairly decent job (at least until the last ten games) with a team that isn't frankly terribly good got sacked less than two seasons into his contract.

And rumours abound that George Karl, who hasn't even coached a full season in Sac-town, is on his way out.


If guys like Chuck Daly had been fired like that, teams like Detroit might never have won a title. We've seen teams like Detroit and Indy give up on Carlisle, who has proven to be a solid coach.

We've seen Miami give up on SVG, and get pressured to dump Spo.

And no more than a handful of coaches in the league have a tenure longer than 2 seasons.

25 years ago, this was not the case. Coaches were allowed to build something.


Is this revolving door of coaches impeding player/franchise development? Are there examples of teams that have missed a chance to contend because they gave up to quick?

What are your thoughts?

Raidaz4Life
02-09-2016, 09:36 AM
I agree but we are also in an era where players run the league and system ball isn't as important as it used to be.

NYKalltheway
02-09-2016, 09:36 AM
It's not been a coach's game for around 20 years or so and it's more prevalent these days, so it's not unexpected.

tredigs
02-09-2016, 10:00 AM
If the Greeks ran the NBA, we'd see basketball in its true form and the true King would be crowned, that's all I know. The old guard in Pop, the new in Kerr; all would perish.

kdspurman
02-09-2016, 10:02 AM
Front offices are a mess aside from a handful. No trust, no patience, and frankly no vision. Of course all the coaching changes can have a trickle down effect to the players

Corey
02-09-2016, 10:12 AM
Continuity is so so so underrated.

2-ONE-5
02-09-2016, 10:27 AM
Front offices are a mess aside from a handful. No trust, no patience, and frankly no vision. Of course all the coaching changes can have a trickle down effect to the players

this is why most of on here support the sixers direction. Sure we trotted out a lot of players the last 2 years but we maintained most of last years team for this season and extended our Coach despite him having like 20 wins in 2.5 seasons. Like it or not Hinkie and the owners have a vision and have stuck to it no matter what and short of the Okafor incident there hasnt been anything bad happening with the players or rifts between players and coaches despite all the losing its a very positive locker room by all accounts.

kdspurman
02-09-2016, 10:37 AM
this is why most of on here support the sixers direction. Sure we trotted out a lot of players the last 2 years but we maintained most of last years team for this season and extended our Coach despite him having like 20 wins in 2.5 seasons. Like it or not Hinkie and the owners have a vision and have stuck to it no matter what and short of the Okafor incident there hasnt been anything bad happening with the players or rifts between players and coaches despite all the losing its a very positive locker room by all accounts.

Yea, I agree w/that. Many other teams would've fired Brown a long time ago, despite the team he inherited. I think in Brown's case, he also knew this would be a process, so there was clarity on all fronts. But now you can see the Sixers playing better, and by next year or 2 at most, he/Hinkie will want to start seeing that effort they're playing with reflect in the standings.

Scoots
02-09-2016, 10:51 AM
Any change has a negative effect, but sometimes the change can turn positive.

Firing the wrong coach causes turmoil and it can make the players think they are not responsible to anyone ... but hiring the right coach can make a for dramatic improvement in the long run.

It's mid-season firings that I find more questionable unless you KNOW your next coach is already on staff and everybody is clear where the next step is.

ewing
02-09-2016, 10:57 AM
If the Greeks ran the NBA, we'd see basketball in its true form and the true King would be crowned, that's all I know. The old guard in Pop, the new in Kerr; all would perish.

^^^^

FOXHOUND
02-09-2016, 02:43 PM
I agree but we are also in an era where players run the league and system ball isn't as important as it used to be.

The Warriors and Spurs would like a word with you...

FOXHOUND
02-09-2016, 02:44 PM
If the Greeks ran the NBA, we'd see basketball in its true form and the true King would be crowned, that's all I know. The old guard in Pop, the new in Kerr; all would perish.

Egine thoulia.

FOXHOUND
02-09-2016, 02:50 PM
Is this revolving door of coaches impeding player/franchise development? Are there examples of teams that have missed a chance to contend because they gave up to quick?

What are your thoughts?

I would say in most cases, yes. Continuity builds chemistry and ultimately the best play, but we see that from both coaching and team building. The Warriors roster was built and had continuity before the current coaching regime took over and implemented the new system. Likewise, you have the Spurs who have Pop heading the ship and constantly changing parts around the roster core as they evolve.

As a Knicks fan, I hate what just happened. I think firing a coach a year and a half into a rebuild primarily because of a 10-game stretch is a joke and makes the organization look fragile. Midseason firings rarely work out well and, unlike Pat Riley in 2006, Phil Jackson isn't coming downstairs to take over.

It's hard to build something when you are always starting over, but I think that goes from both coaching and roster building. The organization as a whole has to have a vision they build towards, and continuity that grows for years.

Raidaz4Life
02-09-2016, 06:34 PM
The Warriors and Spurs would like a word with you...

I completely agree but as of now its not a priority of many of the FO's in the league. They care more about appeasing their stars than implementing a system and signing/drafting to fill it.

FOXHOUND
02-09-2016, 06:57 PM
I completely agree but as of now its not a priority of many of the FO's in the league. They care more about appeasing their stars than implementing a system and signing/drafting to fill it.

Ah, gotcha. 100%

MILLERHIGHLIFE
02-10-2016, 11:21 AM
I lost count how many coaches Bucks had this past decade besides tons of players traded yearly.

KnicksorBust
02-10-2016, 12:45 PM
Continuity is so so so underrated.

I completely agree. Teams like Memphis and Portland in recent years who let core players stick together for 3-4 years eventually became good.

JAZZNC
02-10-2016, 03:21 PM
I completely agree. Teams like Memphis and Portland in recent years who let core players stick together for 3-4 years eventually became good.
It is evident that a steady coaching/upper management influence is overlooked by many in all pro sports. Look at the successful (perennial playoff teams) teams in the NBA and NFL for the last decade and they have one thing in common, long tenured head coaches and smart management (good FA signings and excellent drafting). They also keep their key players locked up and always seem to make the right call on who to sign/let go. That's why I like what the Jazz are doing, they have a great young core (missing a true star) that if kept together could make some noise in a couple years.


People seem to want the quick fix and that just rarely if ever works. Creating a team takes time and GMs and owners far too often just don't see that simple point.

NYKalltheway
02-10-2016, 05:00 PM
People seem to want the quick fix and that just rarely if ever works. Creating a team takes time and GMs and owners far too often just don't see that simple point.

Exhibit A: New York Knicks

(Trial and error)^infinity

JasonJohnHorn
02-10-2016, 11:00 PM
I lost count how many coaches Bucks had this past decade besides tons of players traded yearly.

As a Pistons fan... I feel your pain. I feel like before SVG got here, we were going through one every six months for the last five years.

KnicksorBust
02-13-2016, 09:37 AM
I completely agree. Teams like Memphis and Portland in recent years who let core players stick together for 3-4 years eventually became good.
It is evident that a steady coaching/upper management influence is overlooked by many in all pro sports. Look at the successful (perennial playoff teams) teams in the NBA and NFL for the last decade and they have one thing in common, long tenured head coaches and smart management (good FA signings and excellent drafting). They also keep their key players locked up and always seem to make the right call on who to sign/let go. That's why I like what the Jazz are doing, they have a great young core (missing a true star) that if kept together could make some noise in a couple years.


People seem to want the quick fix and that just rarely if ever works. Creating a team takes time and GMs and owners far too often just don't see that simple point.

The Jazz are a great example. Realistically they are just a PG away from being VERY good. I hope they keep Hayward-Favors-Rudy together for a long time.. do you put Hood in that core as well?

JAZZNC
02-14-2016, 12:47 AM
The Jazz are a great example. Realistically they are just a PG away from being VERY good. I hope they keep Hayward-Favors-Rudy together for a long time.. do you put Hood in that core as well?

Yeah I would have to put Hood in the group of very important long term players for the Jazz. We need his shooting.

5ass
02-14-2016, 12:53 AM
Teams might have to go through several coaches to find the perfect fit. Doesn't mean if they don't find the perfect coach its a setback. Sometimes a Mark Jackson is beneficial. Let's not forget to give him a little credit for the Warriors' championship.

Scoots
02-14-2016, 12:54 PM
Continuity is more important in players than coaches in general I think. Too many teams give up too quick on young players. The Jazz and Wolves are going in the right direction they just need to stay the course.

The Bulls didn't win until they worked at it for 6 years with Jordan. Picked up Grant a couple years later. Traded for Pippen. Changed coaches. Then they let it build.

Players get better with time in good organizations. Players get better at running complex systems with time in good organizations.