ORLANDO . . . what is wrong with you guys?

[Buzzard]

Exactly. Pop pretty much came in on the perfect situation, when he had both Duncan and Robinson. Then he was able to assemble a team that could effectively shut down people, while having Duncan as the offensive centerpiece.

And Jerry Sloan is a perfect example. Everybody respects him as a coach, and believes that he may be one of the top 5 coaches in the league. Having said that, UTAH hasn't posted a winning record on the road since the 2000 - 01 season. That's almost an incredible stat for a coach that respected.

From the time that Jordan pushed Bryon Russell out of the way to beat them in the 1997 NBA Finals, Utah has:

* Been to 1 WC Finals

* Lost in the WC Semis 3 times

* Lost in the WC 1st Round 4 times

* Missed the playoffs 3 times

In that span, Sloan has had three 50+ win teams.

It's not a bad resume from him at all, but maybe not one that lends someone to believe that he's a great coach. Good coach? Definitely. Great coach? No way.

But he hasn't had a top 10 player in the league since Karl Malone and John Stockton were real good back around 2000. Deron is a very good player, but like a JJ, he needs consistent play from his supporting cast. Utah can beat anybody at home, and lose to anybody on the road, because of that quality.

Bottom line . . . good coaches can't turn mediocre talent into champions . . . without a great player.

So I guess by your standards we have never had a great coach. You know that saying the grass is always greener on the other side. You are the complete opposite. The Hawks management and coaching staff in your eyes can do no wrong and win absolutley nothing except a 1st round series. You really are the poster child of all fans when it comes to seeing JJ and Mike Woodson through rose colored glasses.

Edited January 7, 2010 by Buzzard

[macdaddy]

You said "Orlando probably does need a new coach". If you don't mean that the Magic should fire their coach do you think they should be hiring a new coach alongside Van Gundy?

I just think its funny how some people always blame the coach. To me the NBA is the league where coaching matters the least.

No. I'm saying they would benefit from a coach who would make these guys play tougher. I'm not advocating they make the change though. It comes with plenty of risks. Like with Boston. I think there are plenty of people who think there are much better coaches than Doc for that job, but does that mean he should be fired? I don't think so.

I also disagree that coaching matters least in the NBA (I think its really MLB). Sloan has kept teams with questionable talent winning. Maybe to their detriment as they could probably have used more lottery picks. To me there are good coaches, great coaches, and bad coaches. When you get a bad one you realize how much it matters. Like Tim Floyd, Lon Kruger, Bob Weiss, and Magic Johnson.

[spotatl]

The Hawks have never had a great coach.

And to me even having the best coach in the league would not make us favorites against the Magic, Cavs, or Celtics. Thats why I say that coaching matters less in the NBA than it does in any other sport.

[spotatl]

I think pitching and hitting coaches in baseball can make a TON of difference. But I'll agree that in game I think baseball and basketball coaches have about the same amount of influence.

Edited January 7, 2010 by spotatl

[AHF]

College sports are where coaches matter most of all.

In the three major pro sports I would rate the importance of coaching as:

NFL > NBA > MLB

[TheNorthCydeRises]

So I guess by your standards we have never had a great coach. You know that saying the grass is always greener on the other side. You are the complete opposite. The Hawks management and coaching staff in your eyes can do no wrong and win absolutley nothing except a 1st round series. You really are the poster child of all fans when it comes to seeing JJ and Mike Woodson through rose colored glasses.

Who are the great Hawk coaches that we've had here? And were they great as the coach of the Hawks?

You can place those exaggerations on me all you want, but I'm not the one concerned about a 22 - 12 team that has proved that they can play at a high level against the top 10 teams in the league.

I'm not the one who questions our soon to be 4-time All Star player, and expects him to play like Kobe on a nightly basis.

I'm not the one questioning every single move of the coach, like it negatively affects the team every time he does ( or doesn't ) do something.

I'm not the one worrying about the teams behind us, when they haven't made a significant move to even look like they can catch us.

On the contrary sir, I'm enjoying this season. This is easily one of the most stress-free seasons I've ever experienced as a Hawk fan. As long as Sund doesn't mess it up by tradng JJ for 1 or 2 decent, but non-star players, I'll keep enjoying the season.

If I can quote the "great" Dennis Green, these "elite" teams aren't who we thought they were. So if they're not elite, I'm not worried about falling behind them . . because they won't pull away from us.

It's easy Buzz. The difference between you and I, is that you have no faith in Woody and JJ . . and I do. So we'll always be at opposite ends of the spectrum on this.

[Buzzard]

College sports are where coaches matter most of all.

In the three major pro sports I would rate the importance of coaching as:

NFL > NBA > MLB

I think the NBA is the leader by far as how a coach can impact a team. In more specific terms, impacting in a negative or positive manner with their distribution of minutes. Anyone can throw Tim Duncan or JJ out there; but making the decisions between Ginolbli and whomever to start or McDyess vs Blair getting minutes....our case Marvin vs Evans vs Crawford vs Bibby vs Teague. Those are the ones that can impatct a team in ways that are only noticeable once the coach is gone, the player is gone, or his lineup changes to force him to play or not play someone.

In no uncertain terms Pops is thrilled with Blair and gives him good minutes in tight games or blow outs. Woody plays Teague like a bust, getting his major minutes only in blow outs. Maybe Woodson is right; but it is this kind of decision making that impacts a basketball team so much more than any of the other pro sports. And its not that it does not happen in the other pro sports; its just that with a smaller lineup it is much more impactful.

There is no way to know at this moment if Woody is correct in his assesment of Teague; but make no bones about it, Woody does not think much of Teagues game. Not right now or anytime in the near future. And I for one hope his assesment is wrong; otherwise we got us another 1st round bust.

Edited January 7, 2010 by Buzzard

[AHF]

I think the NBA is the leader by far as how a coach can impact a team. In more specific terms, impacting in a negative or positive manner with their distribution of minutes. Anyone can throw Tim Duncan or JJ out there; but making the decisions between Ginolbli and whomever to start or McDyess vs Blair getting minutes....our case Marvin vs Evans vs Crawford vs Bibby vs Teague. Those are the ones that can impatct a team in ways that are only noticeable once the coach is gone, the player is gone, or his lineup changes to force him to play or not play someone.

In no uncertain terms Pops is thrilled with Blair and gives him good minutes in tight games or blow outs. Woody plays Teague like a bust, getting his major minutes only in blow outs. Maybe Woodson is right; but it is this kind of decision making that impacts a basketball team so much more than any of the other pro sports. And its not that it does not happen in the other pro sports; its just that with a smaller lineup it is much more impactful.

There is no way to know at this moment if Woody is correct in his assesment of Teague; but make no bones about it, Woody does not think much of Teagues game. Not right now or anytime in the near future. And I for one hope his assesment is wrong; otherwise we got us another 1st round bust.

I don't disagree with the points you make about NBA coaches but I think the strategy involved in the NFL is just on another level and many of the same playing time issues you raise also apply to the NFL. I'll put it this way. Mike Woodson's and Mike Brown's X's and O's ability doesn't prevent them from coaching top 4 teams in the East. If you put their equivalents in the NFL, those guys would drown because the scheme and specific playcalling matters so much in that league and that is all coach driven.

I do feel like if clones of me were put in charge of all the coaching positions with the Falcons, Hawks and Braves for one game in the middle of the season that the Braves would not miss a beat, the Hawks would do just fine, and the Falcons would not have any kind of game plan and would lose that game in embarassing fashion.

[Buzzard]

It's easy Buzz. The difference between you and I, is that you have no faith in Woody and JJ . . and I do. So we'll always be at opposite ends of the spectrum on this.

Yes we will; at least untill Woody (our great coach wanting a nice contract extension) and JJ (our great player wanting max money) get us a division banner and past the 2nd round. If they can do that, then my spectrum may shift; but for now 2nd place is still 2nd place by anyones definition.

[Buzzard]

I don't disagree with the points you make about NBA coaches but I think the strategy involved in the NFL is just on another level and many of the same playing time issues you raise also apply to the NFL. I'll put it this way. Mike Woodson's and Mike Brown's X's and O's ability doesn't prevent them from coaching top 4 teams in the East. If you put their equivalents in the NFL, those guys would drown because the scheme and specific playcalling matters so much in that league and that is all coach driven.

I do feel like if clones of me were put in charge of all the coaching positions with the Falcons, Hawks and Braves for one game in the middle of the season that the Braves would not miss a beat, the Hawks would do just fine, and the Falcons would not have any kind of game plan and would lose that game in embarassing fashion.

Yes strategy in the NFL is on a higher level than the NBA. But minutes given bench players (your best two or three on the bench) is much more critical to winning a given game or set of games in the NBA. I find it interesting that so many disregard a coaches worth in the NBA; when the decision of who to play and how much is such a critical factor. Like I said any idiot can play Kobe, JJ, or Howard 40 minutes. Its the decisions between your non all-star starters, role players, and best bench players that usually determine the outcome of most close games.

Kobe may take the game winning shot 9 out of 10 times. But he did not grab every rebound, he did not get every assist, he did not give every hard foul, and he probably did not score every point in the 4th quarter when the game was close and on the line.

[dlpin]

Not only are coaches extremely important in the NBA, assistant coaches are also very important.

Just look at Thibodeau with the celtics: the man is a defensive genius. But it is not just about being a good coach, it is also about being a good fit. Doc was an awful coach when the celtics were young and bad. He does a terrible job with young talent and he is not very good with the Xs and Os. I used to hate him as a celtics coach. But since the Allen and KG acquisitions he has become the best possible coach for the celtics. Why? Fit.

He is a player's coach who is able to communicate with them and make them see things his way. That is perfect for a veteran team. Very few coaches would be able to successfully make Pierce, Allen, KG and Sheed accept smaller roles. And because of Thibodeau he doesnt need to worry about the Xs and Os.

And just to throw out a few examples of how important coaching skill and fit are: in 2001 the celtics were 12-22 under pitino. He quit and with the exact same players Obrien finished the season 24-24, going from a 35% to a 50% team overnight. The next season the celtics were 49-33 and went to the ECF. Sloan is another good example. In one of the smallest markets in the league, with almost no lottery picks, the guy has been consistently excellent for two decades, and the only reason he didnt win a couple of championships is that he was unlucky enough to face michael jordan in the finals.

[AHF]

People need to make actual comparisons to persuade me here. I agree coaching is very important in the NBA. I just think it is even more critical in the NFL. I can cull anecdotes about turnarounds in the NFL as well but my overall point is more that more is demanded of NFL coaches than NBA coaches. Managing players 6-9 on your roster is important but is it really that much more complex than roster/playing time/player development management in the NFL? I don't see that.

[Buzzard]

People need to make actual comparisons to persuade me here. I agree coaching is very important in the NBA. I just think it is even more critical in the NFL. I can cull anecdotes about turnarounds in the NFL as well but my overall point is more that more is demanded of NFL coaches than NBA coaches. Managing players 6-9 on your roster is important but is it really that much more complex than roster/playing time/player development management in the NFL? I don't see that.

Like I said, I think NFL strategy is more complex than the NBA. But barring injury your bench use is far more important in the NBA. The Colts are perfect examples; they had no lineup issues all season until it was decided going undefeated was not as important as staying healthy.

Its simple numbers to me. You screw up your use of one out of 22 starters in the NFL; in the NBA its one out of your top 7 or 8. Screwups or finding the right combos are more glaring and impactful in the NBA. Not saying one is easier than the other; just one can have more of a immediate impact good or bad.

[spotatl]

I think Popovich plays Blair more than Teague because Blair is a much better player than Teague. Blair was a dominant college player and very well may have had a better season last year than Blake Griffin. Once again- talent makes coaches look good.

And Acie Law wasn't a bust because Woodson didn't play him- Acie Law was a bust because he was a bad draft pick. Woodson just recognized it before fans did. To me its to Woodson's credit that he didn't waste more minutes on Acie Law.

And I'll just say that- people questioned whether Acie was being misused- once he left it has been shown that Woodson was right as Acie didn't even get his 4th year team option picked up. People questioned whether Salim was being misused- once he left it has been shown that Woodson was right as he is totally out of the league. Shelden Williams was discarded by 2 teams since he left here and had to sign for the minimum. Woodson's trackrecord on assessing young talent has actually been very solid. The only one he missed on was Diaw, but I think that was more of a case where D'Antoni just had a brilliant move trying him at center rather than a coaching gaffe by Woodson.

Edited January 8, 2010 by spotatl

[spotatl]

Just out of curiosity, do you think that Larry Brown is a great coach?

[AHF]

Just out of curiosity, do you think that Larry Brown is a great coach?

Overall, yes. However, he doesn't put enough trust in young players, IMO. It is to his credit and good fortune that he figured out he needed to stop benching Tayshaun Prince in Detroit before it was too late Prince's rookie season. They never would have won like they did had he not finally had that dawning realization that his team was never going to succeed in the playoffs when his best wing defender was rooted to the bench...even if the guy is a rookie and Brown doesn't really like rookies.

[spotatl]

Could you imagine what the reaction here would be if Woodson were treating Gerald Henderson the way that Brown is?

[AHF]

I can't imagine it would be any different than the response to Teague's minutes.

Henderson is a wing and the Hornets have Stephen Jackson, Gerald Wallace, Flip Murray, and DJ Augustin ahead of him for minutes at the SG and SF positions. Henderson has been reasonably productive with his minutes so far and would be better served with a limited, consistent role, IMO.

[spotatl]

henderson was a lottery pick and has played just 2 minutes in the last 8 games combined. People here would be absolutely LIVID.

[AHF]

henderson was a lottery pick and has played just 2 minutes in the last 8 games combined. People here would be absolutely LIVID.

I don't think it would be much different than people's reactions in how Woody handled Law or how he is handling Teague. The DNPs tick people off.

Brown has been criticized throughout his career for his failure to develop young talent. Go talk to the fans of Philly on this and you'll get an earful.