Please not Avery, nor Mark Jackson

[bumpyphish1]

Of all the candidates I am hearing, the only one that semi intrigues me is Casey. If we hire one of those two or Scott, we have lost before we even started. Sund hasn't made a bad decision since he has been here, but if he hires Avery (even without personnel control), then that would be a colossal mistake. If Avery is a colossal mistake, I can't think of an adjective extreme enough to call what hiring Mark Jackson would be. Byron Scott would be the most innocuous of the three, but he would be a very minor upgrade over Woody and wouldn't get us to the next level. I think it's Dwane Casey or bust.

...unless Jeff Van Gundy wants to come on down.

[JTB]

Of all the candidates I am hearing, the only one that semi intrigues me is Casey. If we hire one of those two or Scott, we have lost before we even started. Sund hasn't made a bad decision since he has been here, but if he hires Avery (even without personnel control), then that would be a colossal mistake. If Avery is a colossal mistake, I can't think of an adjective extreme enough to call what hiring Mark Jackson would be. Byron Scott would be the most innocuous of the three, but he would be a very minor upgrade over Woody and wouldn't get us to the next level. I think it's Dwane Casey or bust.

...unless Jeff Van Gundy wants to come on down.

one question you are entitled to your own personal decisions but PLEASE tell me what you are so hyped on about Casey? I see him as a bust for this team and not a upgrade really but maybe you can change my mind on why your so big on Casey then I might change the way I think of him? So explain if you dont mind why you like Casey so much?

[Popeye]

Of all the candidates I am hearing, the only one that semi intrigues me is Casey. If we hire one of those two or Scott, we have lost before we even started. Sund hasn't made a bad decision since he has been here, but if he hires Avery (even without personnel control), then that would be a colossal mistake. If Avery is a colossal mistake, I can't think of an adjective extreme enough to call what hiring Mark Jackson would be. Byron Scott would be the most innocuous of the three, but he would be a very minor upgrade over Woody and wouldn't get us to the next level. I think it's Dwane Casey or bust.

...unless Jeff Van Gundy wants to come on down.

What has he done?

[HawksFan87]

I agree what makes Jeff Van Gundy such a great coach?? I don't get the hype, and Casey reminds me too much of Woody. I don't want anything to do with him..

[bumpyphish1]

one question you are entitled to your own personal decisions but PLEASE tell me what you are so hyped on about Casey? I see him as a bust for this team and not a upgrade really but maybe you can change my mind on why your so big on Casey then I might change the way I think of him? So explain if you dont mind why you like Casey so much?

I'm not convinced Casey is a great answer either. However, I'm also not convinced he isn't. His record in Minnesota was incomplete, they actually showed progress in his tenure and regressed when he left. With the other two (or three if you count Scott), I AM CONVINCED they are poor candidates and sub-par coaches. Of all the names I am hearing, I feel like at least Casey gives us a chance. The others would put us behind the 8 ball on day 1 for sure.

Jeff Van Gundy? His pedigree is just fine. He took NYK teams to the ECF several years where if the Bulls hadn't been arguably the greatest dynasty with inarguably the greatest player of all-time, he would have probably won rings. I have listened to enough commentary to know he is bright and knows the game (alternately, I have listened to Mark Jackson enough on the same broadcasts enough to know that he needs to put his foot in his mouth), and I have to be honest, I love his sense of humor, thought the whole grabbing onto Mournings leg thing was hilarious, etc...part of me wants him just because I like him. That's not to say he isn't a better candidate than these other bums whose names are being tossed around....he most certainly is.

For some odd reason though, I have faith Sund will make a good to great hire (ASG cheapness might prevent us from making a great one). He hasn't screwed anything up since he has been here, so I gotta give him the benefit of the doubt. Specifically his handling offseason contracts, giving Woody a modest 2 year deal the first time around, and not extending Woody early this season when so many were calling for him to do so, have exhibited great judgment, imo. I'm gonna trust in Sund until he gives me reason not to.

[KB21]

I'm not convinced Casey is a great answer either. However, I'm also not convinced he isn't. His record in Minnesota was incomplete, they actually showed progress in his tenure and regressed when he left. With the other two (or three if you count Scott), I AM CONVINCED they are poor candidates and sub-par coaches. Of all the names I am hearing, I feel like at least Casey gives us a chance. The others would put us behind the 8 ball on day 1 for sure.

Jeff Van Gundy? His pedigree is just fine. He took NYK teams to the ECF several years where if the Bulls hadn't been arguably the greatest dynasty with inarguably the greatest player of all-time, he would have probably won rings. I have listened to enough commentary to know he is bright and knows the game (alternately, I have listened to Mark Jackson enough on the same broadcasts enough to know that he needs to put his foot in his mouth), and I have to be honest, I love his sense of humor, thought the whole grabbing onto Mournings leg thing was hilarious, etc...part of me wants him just because I like him. That's not to say he isn't a better candidate than these other bums whose names are being tossed around....he most certainly is.

For some odd reason though, I have faith Sund will make a good to great hire (ASG cheapness might prevent us from making a great one). He hasn't screwed anything up since he has been here, so I gotta give him the benefit of the doubt. Specifically his handling offseason contracts, giving Woody a modest 2 year deal the first time around, and not extending Woody early this season when so many were calling for him to do so, have exhibited great judgment, imo. I'm gonna trust in Sund until he gives me reason not to.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I was looking at Rick's coach hiring history in his many years in the NBA. It's mixed, but I would bet that every GM's coaching hires are mixed. I think a lot of that is team dependent. The first coach Rick hired was d*ck Motta in Dallas. I think that was a pretty signficant hire. Rick built that team from scratch and hired an established head coach to lead it initially. That team ended up going to the WCF, where the Lakers stood in their way of making it to the NBA Finals. When Motta retired, Rick hired John MacCleod, and experienced head coach. After MacCleod was Richie Audobato, another experienced head coach. He replaced him with Gar Heard on an interim basis before leaving to go to Seattle as a consultant. He then took the Detroit Piston's GM spot. His first coaching hire there was Doug Collins, an experienced head coach. He replaced Collins with Alvin Gentry, who I believe had some coaching experience with the Heat prior to the Detroit job. He then went back to Seattle where he hired Nate McMillan to be the head coach. That was a splash move, IMO, and it was done with a guy who had no previous head coaching experience.

Given his history, I would bet that Atlanta will end up hiring someone with head coaching experience. I don't see any correlation with previous associations in Rick's hirings. With Dwane Casey, I think everyone is assuming that he's the top guy because of their previous associations.

[Guest]

After MacCleod was Richie Audobato, another experienced head coach. He replaced him with Gar Heard on an interim basis before leaving to go to Seattle as a consultant.

Audobato coached 70 games before the Mavs job and that was almost 10 years prior to the job. Not sure if thats considered an experienced head coach.

He then went back to Seattle where he hired Nate McMillan to be the head coach. That was a splash move, IMO, and it was done with a guy who had no previous head coaching experience.

Sund was GM of the Pistons until 2001. McMillan was hired by the Sonics in 2000.

With the Pistons he fired Collins midseason to hire Gentry. He also fired Gentry midseason and replaced him with George Irvine (who?). Sund is definitely a mixed bag when it comes to coaches, I am not too sure I want Sund to make the decision. But then again it may not be Sund making the decision.

Edited May 24, 2010 by hawksfanatic

[Plastic Man]

I'd take Lawrence Frank over any of these candidates so far. We need some energy.

[KB21]

Audobato coached 70 games before the Mavs job and that was almost 10 years prior to the job. Not sure if thats considered an experienced head coach.

Sund was GM of the Pistons until 2001. McMillan was hired by the Sonics in 2000.

With the Pistons he fired Collins midseason to hire Gentry. He also fired Gentry midseason and replaced him with George Irvine (who?). Sund is definitely a mixed bag when it comes to coaches, I am not too sure I want Sund to make the decision. But then again it may not be Sund making the decision.

You are right. Wally Walker hired Nate and then hired Sund as the GM when he became Team President.

Sund's hire in Seattle after Nate left for Portland was Bob Weiss and then Bob Hill. Two coaches who had previous head coaching experience. His decisions are very much a mixed bag.

[TruJerz]

I'd take Lawrence Frank over any of these candidates so far. We need some energy.

I agree with that. Being from New Jersey, I appreciate what the guy did even though he made history lol he made history twice though..starting his career with 13 straight wins and then getting the worst start in NBA history lol but with that said, he's not a horrible coach and everyone knows that. He's a good energy guy and can draw up plays as well. I would like to see him get a chance to coach next season

[Antmillennium]

The last person I want to see hired is Casey. From everything I've read, it seems as if he's another Mike Woodson. It sounds as if he just focuses on defense and doesn't focus too much on the offensive end. I absolutely do not want another coach that is not a good offensive coach. I want a coach that cares about both aspects of the game. I want him to be very good on offense and at least decent with defense.

[bumpyphish1]

I'd take Lawrence Frank over Scott, Avery, or Mark Jackson in a heartbeat.

[Guest]

I've just realized I don't care who we hire (preferably someone with experience, even an assistant) as long as they have a different offensive (Iso) and defensive (switching) philosophy than Woody. We can all look at past resume's and such and try to project what kinda coach someone is or isn't but we won't know until they hit the floor running, so I will reserve judgement on whoever they bring in until the All-star break next season.