Who should Nate choose to replace Jent?

[sturt]

Guys. Really?

 

There are few things more ridiculous than fans trying to analyze who is and who isn't a "good assistant"... and that goes for any given sport.

At least with the head coach, there is some evidence of whether he's good at his job. Some. (That to say, there's also the "small" matter of the GM's having done a good job of giving the HC adequate talent to work with.)

 

You don't have mics. You don't have hidden cams. You're not in the facility to view practices. You don't have insider intel as to what assistants are doing and what they're asked to do. The only time you even see them is on the bench, or on the wild chance that there's an interview conduced by the regional sports network.

 

Pretending you know what one cannot possibly know is why "pretentious" shares a root word with "pretending."

 

The only thing you know is (a) some idea of how good of a head coach someone has been, if that's the case, and (b) what players or previous bosses have said, if anything, about the current or prospective assistant.

 

Do I know how good of a coach ZaZa could be? Not at all. My proposal is totally based on my own perceptions of him, and my own inclination that he could be an especially good asset in coaching our big men. But it's all conjecture on my part. It could be that he only has a job with GSW because he was a fan favorite, and it was thought to make for good PR. He may be terrible at everything that a coach needs to be good at.

 

Spitballin about this stuff is fun. But that's all it is.

[sturt]

Question answered.

 

 

 

[sturt]

[sturt]

 

 

[sturt]

16 hours ago, sturt said:

Guys. Really?

 

There are few things more ridiculous than fans trying to analyze who is and who isn't a "good assistant"... and that goes for any given sport.

At least with the head coach, there is some evidence of whether he's good at his job. Some. (That to say, there's also the "small" matter of the GM's having done a good job of giving the HC adequate talent to work with.)

 

You don't have mics. You don't have hidden cams. You're not in the facility to view practices. You don't have insider intel as to what assistants are doing and what they're asked to do. The only time you even see them is on the bench, or on the wild chance that there's an interview conduced by the regional sports network.

 

Pretending you know what one cannot possibly know is why "pretentious" shares a root word with "pretending."

 

The only thing you know is (a) some idea of how good of a head coach someone has been, if that's the case, and (b) what players or previous bosses have said, if anything, about the current or prospective assistant.

 

Do I know how good of a coach ZaZa could be? Not at all. My proposal is totally based on my own perceptions of him, and my own inclination that he could be an especially good asset in coaching our big men. But it's all conjecture on my part. It could be that he only has a job with GSW because he was a fan favorite, and it was thought to make for good PR. He may be terrible at everything that a coach needs to be good at.

 

Spitballin about this stuff is fun. But that's all it is.

 

  

24 minutes ago, ATLHawks3 said:

I'm mad that this addition means Prunty gets bumped up to top assistant.

 

*sigh*

 

 

[RandomFan]

We do seriously need an offensive coach to kick Nate into this century. 

Edited July 4, 2022 by RandomFan

[NBASupes]

1 hour ago, RandomFan said:

We do seriously need an offensive coach to kick Nate into this century. 

I actually like our offensive system. We just need to develop better in the offseason. I know last year was tough because of the extremely short offseason 

[sturt]

Well of course, you need an offense-specialist assistant coach when the stats so vividly support that you need to improve your offense, given all those bottom-20%-of-the-league numbers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait. Wha?

Top 20%???

You sure about that???

[RedDawg#8]

12 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

I actually like our offensive system. We just need to develop better in the offseason. I know last year was tough because of the extremely short offseason 

Honestly, if we can get our defense to be average, we are back to being contenders.

If we can get it to be top 10, we are a Finals team.

[RandomFan]

50 minutes ago, sturt said:

Well of course, you need an offense-specialist assistant coach when the stats so vividly support that you need to improve your offense, given all those bottom-20%-of-the-league numbers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait. Wha?

Top 20%???

You sure about that???

How'd that work out in the playoffs? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rhetorical question. We know the answer. 

[Guest]

Though we rated highly, offensively, last year, I still can't help but feel that much of that is due most specifically to Trae's individual talent. 

But, he too needs some refinement, preferably from a respected source, as well as we may need someone to create a new framework that best incorporates Murray into the overall scheme.

[JeffS17]

53 minutes ago, sturt said:

Well of course, you need an offense-specialist assistant coach when the stats so vividly support that you need to improve your offense, given all those bottom-20%-of-the-league numbers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wait. Wha?

Top 20%???

You sure about that???

Trae is going to get us through the regular season, but we do need someone who understands post-season offense.  Team start eliminating your best options/sets and you have to maximize your players running stuff you don't necessarily want to be running.  Murray is going to help a lot with that but we still need someone on the bench that can be more offensive oriented.  ATO plays alone would be a major help (see last play of our season).

[sturt]

14 minutes ago, RandomFan said:

How'd that work out in the playoffs? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rhetorical question. We know the answer. 

 

 

It went as well as it will ever go when the other team has a week of rest and your team has played two play-in games in the previous 5 nights... as well as it will ever go if your PG has no starting post players who are 100% who he otherwise depends on.

[sturt]

12 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

Trae is going to get us through the regular season, but we do need someone who understands post-season offense.

This would be so much more convincing if this very same team hadn't been a legitimate threat to get into the NBA Finals in 2021.

To me, Nate is just an easy target, as most head coaches in any pro sport tend to be until/unless they win their first trophy. And winning a trophy is damn hard.

To me, fans over inflate their own capacity to diagnose and remedy what coaching moves ought to be made under what circumstances. It's just a condition of not having your own paycheck depend on 24/7 having to think about and weigh all the options.

So, in this case... if we can't ding him for the overall offensive production in the regular season, then hell, we failed so dramatically vs MIA, surely we can ding him in a significant way for that.

It's just fans being fans. Fans enjoying the ego satisfaction that "I'm not a coach, but man, that's their loss that they've never called me."

Specious.

[RandomFan]

9 minutes ago, sturt said:

This would be so much more convincing if this very same team hadn't been a legitimate threat to get into the NBA Finals in 2021.

To me, Nate is just an easy target, as most head coaches in any pro sport tend to be until/unless they win their first trophy. And winning a trophy is damn hard.

To me, fans over inflate their own capacity to diagnose and remedy what coaching moves ought to be made under what circumstances. It's just a condition of not having your own paycheck depend on 24/7 having to think about and weigh all the options.

So, in this case... if we can't ding him for the overall offensive production in the regular season, then hell, we failed so dramatically vs MIA, surely we can ding him in a significant way for that.

It's just fans being fans. Fans enjoying the ego satisfaction that "I'm not a coach, but man, that's their loss that they've never called me."

Specious.

Or, and hear me out, it could be...not...that. It could be something other than the reason you try and assign in your mind to every single thing someone posts. 

[JeffS17]

8 minutes ago, sturt said:

This would be so much more convincing if this very same team hadn't been a legitimate threat to get into the NBA Finals in 2021.

I know this is basically your pet topic right now, but we had a number of factors that allowed us to get far in the East in '21.  We beat the Knicks because they were probably the most overrated team in the NBA and Randle is not the real deal.  No reason to go into much detail there... From a completely neutral perspective, Doc imo lost the Sixers that series.  Multiple 20+ point leads blown while he just stood there mouth breathing on the sideline with no timeouts, no adjustments, nothing... Philly had a very good perimeter defender in Simmons, but the PnR was a huge problem for them because outside of him, they had Seth Curry (turnstile, terrible defender, Tobi who cannot switch, Embiid who cannot switch, and Milton/Maxey who are not plus defenders.  We matchup really well with that squad on both ends of the ball. 

The writing was on the wall if you rewatch the Raptors games from last year -- that team also has a bunch of athletic dudes that can defend many positions.  We struggle a lot with effective switching because our offense is anemic outside of the PnR and trying to abuse JC mismatches.  Trae ISO ball is the last resort which usually ends with him being completely gassed and higher turnovers because he has to force action.  Murray should help a lot this year, but a coach that can get creative and help the offense against different looks would be a huge asset imo.  If teams want to play drop coverage every play we know what to do, but when teams can switch or play zone and block driving lanes, or trap/double trae, we clearly struggle and no one seems to know how to react which is a coaching issue

[sturt]

34 minutes ago, RandomFan said:

Or, and hear me out, it could be...not...that. It could be something other than the reason you try and assign in your mind to every single thing someone posts. 

Are you parodying yourself?

Because, we have yet another example of specious response.

In fact, even granting that as "specious" is maybe too kind... you didn't even present a counter to be considered. You just pretend there must be one since it certainly can't be anything consistently asserted previously by this other person.

(EDIT: Come to think of it, that's essentially what you did last time we crossed paths on this topic... abandoned that line of discussion, and jumped to a whole other. Beginnings of a pattern there, it would seem.)

But whatever. I'm not the boss of you. It's fine.

[sturt]

21 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

From a completely neutral perspective, Doc imo lost the Sixers that series. 

Not going to bore you with a response since it's so likely DOA before you'd even begin to dive in... and no kidding, yes, you've probably mostly heard before whatever form the response would take.

Instead.

Let's just study this sentence, shall we?

And let us bathe in the vast well of intellectual humility that attempts to place those words all collected in the same coherent (?) sentence... hehehe.

[sturt]

21 hours ago, sturt said:

Guys. Really?

 

There are few things more ridiculous than fans trying to analyze who is and who isn't a "good assistant"... and that goes for any given sport.

At least with the head coach, there is some evidence of whether he's good at his job. Some. (That to say, there's also the "small" matter of the GM's having done a good job of giving the HC adequate talent to work with.)

 

You don't have mics. You don't have hidden cams. You're not in the facility to view practices. You don't have insider intel as to what assistants are doing and what they're asked to do. The only time you even see them is on the bench, or on the wild chance that there's an interview conduced by the regional sports network.

 

Pretending you know what one cannot possibly know is why "pretentious" shares a root word with "pretending."

 

The only thing you know is (a) some idea of how good of a head coach someone has been, if that's the case, and (b) what players or previous bosses have said, if anything, about the current or prospective assistant.

 

Do I know how good of a coach ZaZa could be? Not at all. My proposal is totally based on my own perceptions of him, and my own inclination that he could be an especially good asset in coaching our big men. But it's all conjecture on my part. It could be that he only has a job with GSW because he was a fan favorite, and it was thought to make for good PR. He may be terrible at everything that a coach needs to be good at.

 

Spitballin about this stuff is fun. But that's all it is.

  

4 hours ago, terrell said:

Prunty on the other hand…...................

*sigh*

[sturt]

1. I have no clue if Joe Prunty is a "good" assistant coach. He might be terrible. He might be great. He might be average. I have no solid evidence that leads to any given conclusion.

 

2. I do have a clue that he seems to have his advocates who, themselves, have some regard in the industry.

Several interesting entries in the feed: https://hoopshype.com/tag/joe-prunty/

 

SAS blogger in a series about Pop's coaching tree branches: https://www.poundingtherock.com/2021/6/18/22533428/nba-san-antonio-spurs-gregg-popovich-longtime-assistant-joe-prunty-hank-egan-fiba-team-usa-nets-cavs

 

USA Basketball bio: https://www.usab.com/basketball/staff/p/prunty-joe.aspx