Mike Brown Fired

[KB21]

Add another team to the coaching search mix and another potential name to the coaching pool. Cleveland officially fired Mike Brown at 2AM this AM.

What gets me over some of these decisions is how some of these teams actually feel there is a coach out there that will make a difference towards pushing them over the top. My guess is, they will let Lebron dictate who they hire.

[Plastic Man]

Add another team to the coaching search mix and another potential name to the coaching pool. Cleveland officially fired Mike Brown at 2AM this AM.

What gets me over some of these decisions is how some of these teams actually feel there is a coach out there that will make a difference towards pushing them over the top. My guess is, they will let Lebron dictate who they hire.

Best record in the EC and lost his job. I'm not saying Brown is a great coach but it seems management and players should get more of the blame. No coach is safe out there. I would think if they're going to let Lebron influence the hiring of a new coach, Brown would've been fired sooner, especially considering the vacancies already. Or, maybe Brown and Lebron will reunite in NJ...

[Dragitoff]

Best record in the EC and lost his job. I'm not saying Brown is a great coach but it seems management and players should get more of the blame. No coach is safe out there. I would think if they're going to let Lebron influence the hiring of a new coach, Brown would've been fired sooner, especially considering the vacancies already. Or, maybe Brown and Lebron will reunite in NJ...

I think both Cleveland and Atlanta had teams built to succeed. They just didn't come through in the clutch for whatever reason. I think Sund did a good job putting our team together and Cleveland's GM did a good job (although the Shaq aquisition is curious) with their team as well.

[DrReality]

In the clutch Boston has something that the other teams in the East don't . . . . . toughness. Makes the Hawks look like pansies. Play physical defense and offense 48 minutes. We don't even come close. And I don't think Woody or Brown instilled that in them.

[Gray Mule]

:magnifier:

When success doesn't come when it's expected, there are 2 solutions. Unless the cause of the

failure is known - - major injuries, etc --- Then you must say that it's both the players and coaches

who are at fault.

Which is easier - - and cheaper - - to let go? The coach who has lost the players or the players

who refuse to listen to the coach? That answer is easy, as we can see. Replace the coach.

A new coah. A new voice. Hopefully, new & different ideas about what to do to be successful.

Coaches now are playing musical chairs. Most of them will not be out of a job come next season.

They will recycle as the new coach somewhere else. Sometimes, an assistant coach breaks into

the mix and becomes a head coach. Ocassionally, a fromer head coach will become an assistant

coach somewhere else.

:handshake:

Yep. They aren't wanted somewhere but are just what this other team needs - - Thet is, until the

end of another season. Then the musical chairs begin again.

:biggrin:

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I think both Cleveland and Atlanta had teams built to succeed. They just didn't come through in the clutch for whatever reason. I think Sund did a good job putting our team together and Cleveland's GM did a good job (although the Shaq aquisition is curious) with their team as well.

Both the Cavaliers and the Hawks ( front office and fans ) overrate their talent as being better than what they are. So when they don't reach expectations, the easiest thing to do is fire the coach. In Cleveland's case, the worst thing they did, was NOT acquire Amare Stoudemire when they had the chance, and instead went with Jamison. And to think that JJ Hickson was one of the minor sticking points in why Cleveland didn't make that deal, is mindboggling.

And we all know what is up with the Hawks. Our star player isn't a superstar, while everybody around that star player has the "potential" to be a superstar, according to fans and ownership ( which is false ). So when they also come up short, the easiest thing to do is blame the coach. But like with the Cavs, the Hawks could've made a big time push to get a guy like Andre Miller to solidify the PG spot . . but didn't do it. They would've had to renounce some contracts to do it, and it would've been a risk to do it. But it could've been done.

[Wretch]

I was going to start a thread about Mike Brown, but I guess I'll post my comments here. I'm not saying this move is a good or bad. However, these are the kinds of moves that the more competitive teams in the league make. You see it all the time except for like a couple of teams with coaching legends. Hawks management and fans need to take note. Put ourselves in this situation - LOOK AT BROWN'S TRACK RECORD WITH CLEVELAND. If this was our coach, we'd be hanging on to him for dear life for the next 10 years...giving reason after reason for extending him.

I'm not saying he's good or bad, or even that it's the best move for the team. It's just that when we had the chance to move Mike Woodson, we were scared to and we attributed every fault of this team to something else. Coaches are everywhere and the next great one is waiting in the wings. You have to make moves that make a difference and a coaching change is the simplest one to test.

Are they going "green" in Cleveland after they let Brown go? I doubt it. But if they do I can guarantee two things are NOT being factored into the equation: A) The price tag of this coach will be a NON-factor. B) He will be cut loose QUICKLY with no debate if the team underachieves. Contrast that to us. I am pretty sure the cost of our new coach is being considered in some way, shape, form, or fashion and we'll be seeing this guy for the next 6-7 years, minimum unless he TOTALLY craps out.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Wretch

[lethalweapon3]

Which Mike will get a new head coaching job first? Brown or Woody?

~lw3

[AHF]

I will say this - IMO both MIke Brown and Mike Woodson did their teams a grave disservice by running so much Iso-Joe and Iso-Lebron. Neither prepared for the playoffs by developing a lot of flexibility with their offense. I would be really, really frustrated with Rick Sund if he hired Mike Brown. To me, the clearest comparison between any two available coaches is between Brown and Woodson.

[jhay610]

I've been saying that Brown and Woodson are the same coach for the longest, and I don't particularly care for either one of them (as coaches). Brown is much more annoying due to his ridiculously wide mouth movements. Dude's mouth looks like an alligator's when he's speaking.

[AHF]

I've been saying that Brown and Woodson are the same coach for the longest, and I don't particularly care for either one of them (as coaches). Brown is much more annoying due to his ridiculously wide mouth movements. Dude's mouth looks like an alligator's when he's speaking.

I definitely remember. You and I have been two of the people beaingt that drum for a while.

Edited May 24, 2010 by AHF

[jhay610]

I definitely remember. You and I have been two of the people beaingt that drum for a while.

Yep - we've been eye to eye on this since I joined. Mike Brown owes his Coach of the Year award to LBJ.

While both Woody and Brown should be credited for their steady guidance and regular season successes, they both seem to have the same shortcomings regarding offensive tactics (or lack thereof) and game management. (Although, as far as I am aware, Brown is not on record as not giving a ____ about offense.)

Further to your playoff offense thread, it would appear that an iso-based offense is not a viable strategy against the type of defensive effort you see in the playoffs, particularly as opposing coaches will have extended time between games for scheming on how to defend it. The reality is -- and it is a harsh reality given both Woody's and Brown's regular season successes, particularly on the offensive side of the ball -- fans want to see playoff wins.

I think that Brown and Woody's Iso-style lends itself to greater criticism when it doesn't work. When you see guys standing around while Lebron or JJ tries to crack a set defense by going one-on-one (or four), it's really a striking difference for fans as they watch opposing teams work the ball around for good shots. It really makes Brown and Woody lightning rods for criticism, right or wrong, because it's so unconventional and contravenes most viewers' concept of "good" basketball.

I think if they deployed a more conventional style of attack they wouldn't be subject to such widespread criticism even if the results were similar in terms of wins/losses.

Edited May 25, 2010 by jhay610

[xhawk]

What gets me over some of these decisions is how some of these teams actually feel there is a coach out there that will make a difference towards pushing them over the top. My guess is, they will let Lebron dictate who they hire.

My only complaint with Brown is the fact that he stopped playing JJ Hickson in the playoffs. What kind of coach benches a player playing good basketball?