A much better piece on the Jackson firing from a long time Warriors watcher/writer
Firing Mark Jackson: Hard, Right and Necessary for the Next Step
Posted on May 6, 2014 by Adam Lauridsen Fast Break
Mark Jackson wasnÔÇÖt fired for his tactical decisions (or lack thereof). He was fired, in part, for how he dealt with the criticism of those decisions. Everyone starts somewhere. The term ÔÇ£beginnerÔÇÖs mistakeÔÇØ implies that there are certain growing pains that ÔÇö if not excusable ÔÇö are understandable as we figure our way around whatever weÔÇÖre doing. But Mark Jackson was three years into his tenure as head coach. He was no longer a beginner. This season ÔÇö continuing through the playoffs ÔÇö a pattern was established where Jackson would make questionable decisions and then actively silence or rebel against those in the Warriors organization who would question him. ThatÔÇÖs not an environment in which this very talented team can reach its full potential. In letting Jackson go, the Warriors made the hard ÔÇö and correct ÔÇö decision.
Some of the stories of JacksonÔÇÖs last year are starting to emerge. There will be more that come out later. There are a few common problems that run through them.
Last off-season, when Mike Malone took the KingsÔÇÖ head coaching job, Lacob and Myers approached Jackson about getting another experienced assistant to serve as his chief deputy. Jackson fought hard to promote from within (Pete Myers). The new assistant added to replace Malone ÔÇö Brian Scalabrine ÔÇö was at the end of the coaching bench. This decision set the tone, more than any personal squabble over where Jackson would live or where an assistant would park, for how his season would be evaluated. Jackson had bristled during at earlier comments that Malone was responsible for his success. The 2013-14 season would be all Jackson and ÔÇ£his guys.ÔÇØ
During the season, Jackson actively avoided engaging others in the organization on basketball matters and grew angry when they would interact, even casually, with players on these issues. Zach Lowe already reported that Jackson banned Jerry West from practice and team functions for a period of time. Kirk Lacob, who helps the team with a variety of basketball analytics, among other things, also caught JacksonÔÇÖs ire for discussing basketball-related issues with players. The ÔÇ£difference in philosophyÔÇØ with Scalabrine has been well documented, including the allegation that one source of ScalabrineÔÇÖs frustration was the coaching staffÔÇÖs lack of attention to detail. We can safely assume that Darren Erman wasnÔÇÖt allegedly recording coaching meetings because he agreed with everything that was being done, but because he believed there were fundamental problems. While thereÔÇÖs no dispute that Jackson was the coach and had final say over basketball matters, itÔÇÖs these types of things that Lacob likely had in mind when he commented today that Jackson needs to be as good in his next job at ÔÇ£managing up and sidewaysÔÇØ as he is managing his players.
Jackson was plagued all season by reports that he wasnÔÇÖt adequately preparing his team for games ÔÇö particularly when they were the humdrum variety against the bottom half of the NBA ranks. Lacob took the unusual step of even publicly commenting on some of his frustrations. Despite this spotlight on his prep work, Jackson continued to engage in behavior that some in the organization found highly questionable. Reportedly, after the Game 2 40-point blowout, Jackson reconvened his team for a 20 minute practice the next day ÔÇö far shorter than usual. In Game 3, the Warriors came out flat and made similar mistakes to those that cost them the prior game. It wasnÔÇÖt until the second half of Game 3, when Jackson finally went small, that the team snapped back to life. Would extra prep work before Game 3 have made the difference in the first half in a game where the Warriors eventually lost by 2? ThereÔÇÖs no way to know for sure, but JacksonÔÇÖs decision again raised eyebrows.
Jackson carefully cultivated the image that he was loved by his players. For many, thatÔÇÖs undoubtedly the truth. Curry couldnÔÇÖt have been more vocal in supporting him and others have weighed in after his departure. But according to sources with direct knowledge of the situation, not everyone felt the same way, with roughly half the locker room ambivalent or worse in their views on Jackson. The public got a glimpse of this during the Bogut sleep-injury brouhaha. What should have been a couple of off-hand remarks, chalked up to the fog of pre-game chatter, instead triggered JacksonÔÇÖs most heated press conference of the year. The absolute and forceful nature of his denials was meant to project strength, but seemed to indicate the opposite. JacksonÔÇÖs best argument for keeping his job was the love he received from his players. Even that appears to be a more complex picture than Jackson and his supporters have presented.
So do these issues ÔÇö working with others, responding to criticism and engaging in thorough preparation ÔÇö justify letting go a 51-win coach with back-to-back playoff appearances? Lacob and Myers ultimately decided yes, because they have greater ambitions for this team than winning 51 games, and they donÔÇÖt have unlimited time to achieve them. It was going to take time for Jackson to develop his coaching chops, and given the very slow progress, development was by no means guaranteed. The Warriors also likely feared that JacksonÔÇÖs other problems were limiting his ability to develop his own skills as a coach and draw on the resources around him.
For these reasons, the decision to fire Mark Jackson was as much ÔÇö if not more ÔÇö about the future than it was the past. The Warriors were making the same mistakes ÔÇö ugly isolation sets that killed their greatest strengths, passing and shooting; careless late-game turnovers; head-scratching substitutions ÔÇö in game 1 of the season as in game 7 of the playoffs. Curry, Thompson and Green all improved as individual players this year. Iguodala was a major talent added to the starting line-up. Bogut was healthier for more of the season (but not the playoffs). And yet the Warriors only made a marginal bump in their overall record and took a step back in their playoff accomplishments. Given the skill, basketball intelligence, coachability and character of these players, Jackson had a lot to work with as a coach. He got a fair amount from it ÔÇö in large part because he is a tremendous motivator ÔÇö but where Lacob and Myers want to go next, theyÔÇÖll need more than just a motivated team.
I agree in principle with the Jackson firing. He was as maddening as he was inspiring. The problem is if the Warriors don't hire the right coach next they will take a big step back. Kerr was supposedly #1 on their list but it looks like he'll be heading to NYC. Van Gundy was #2 but he wants control of basketball decisions and Golden State told him no. He may not be heading for Detroit. Lionel Hollins is supposedly third on the list.
1) Is it really necessarily to check the replay on EVERY hard foul in transition? We should check to see if it was flagrant just in case....
2) The refs are getting WAAAAY reliant on instant replay. Totally kills the flow of the game; as if the shit wasn't killed already with the flops and unnecessary flailing of arms by these supposedly big strong athletes.
Big_Stacks"I don't worry about hittin' power, cause I don't give 'em nuttin' to hit." 4,670 Posts
Hey,
I gotta give it to him, Russell Westbrook played some serious 'big boy' ball last night. Although, that last-second 3-point shot was ill-advised, but Chris Paul gave him the bail out. That was a serious character-building win for the Oklahoma City Thunder last night. This could be their turning point for the playoffs, and give them confidence to play strongly to contend for the chip.
I gotta give it to him, Russell Westbrook played some serious 'big boy' ball last night. Although, that last-second 3-point shot was ill-advised, but Chris Paul gave him the bail out. That was a serious character-building win for the Oklahoma City Thunder last night. This could be their turning point for the playoffs, and give them confidence to play strongly contend for the chip.
Peace,
Big Stacks from Kakalak
it's hard to take the ball out of his hands now that he's proven that there isn't any one in the whole of the NBA that can stop him from getting to the rim at will. it's still a mental exercise of staggering proportions trying to figure out why, once he's proven that he's basically nightcrawler versus the clips, that he decides that he's going to switch mid-game to ill advised, off-balance jumpers.
1) Is it really necessarily to check the replay on EVERY hard foul in transition? We should check to see if it was flagrant just in case....
2) The refs are getting WAAAAY reliant on instant replay. Totally kills the flow of the game; as if the shit wasn't killed already with the flops and unnecessary flailing of arms by these supposedly big strong athletes.
I agree that instant replay is not good for the entertainment value of the NBA and that it's overused. That being said, the only reason Doc Rivers was upset is because instant replay should have resulted in a call reversal. If it had, I don't think he'd be saying let's get rid of it. Maybe they can just revise the rule so that it is used less often.
To me, the most annoying trend in refereeing is all the fouls called on 3 pointers. I get that shooters should be able to land without getting body contact, and therefore a foul can be called after the release - but the trend is that if there is ANY contact on a 3 pointer, there is a call. Reggie Miller (famous for kicking his legs out) would have been making a living on the free throw line if he was still playing.
I gotta give it to him, Russell Westbrook played some serious 'big boy' ball last night. Although, that last-second 3-point shot was ill-advised, but Chris Paul gave him the bail out. That was a serious character-building win for the Oklahoma City Thunder last night. This could be their turning point for the playoffs, and give them confidence to play strongly to contend for the chip.
Peace,
Big Stacks from Kakalak
Durant was having an off night. He did his thing.
Someone said on air last night that "he's like Kobe Bryant. he shouldn't be called a point guard. He's a 2 guard." I completely agree with that. Kobe took COUNTLESS ill-advised shots during his career, because he was the most aggressive and sometimes the only WILLING shooter on his team.
Regarding a title shot, I still think they lack the proper structure as a team to become the champ. I said earlier that OKC would beat SAS in a series, but don't think that's true, now that i've watched enough of them in the playoffs. Clearly, SAS and Miami have been the most consistent in the playoffs so far.
1) Is it really necessarily to check the replay on EVERY hard foul in transition? We should check to see if it was flagrant just in case....
2) The refs are getting WAAAAY reliant on instant replay. Totally kills the flow of the game; as if the shit wasn't killed already with the flops and unnecessary flailing of arms by these supposedly big strong athletes.
I agree that instant replay is not good for the entertainment value of the NBA and that it's overused. That being said, the only reason Doc Rivers was upset is because instant replay should have resulted in a call reversal. If it had, I don't think he'd be saying let's get rid of it. Maybe they can just revise the rule so that it is used less often.
To me, the most annoying trend in refereeing is all the fouls called on 3 pointers. I get that shooters should be able to land without getting body contact, and therefore a foul can be called after the release - but the trend is that if there is ANY contact on a 3 pointer, there is a call. Reggie Miller (famous for kicking his legs out) would have been making a living on the free throw line if he was still playing.
I don't blame the refs on those three point foul calls. It really comes down to lack of fundamentals on the defensive end. By the way, refs have been keen on that leg-kicking thing for a while now, not many players get that call anymore. I do wonder why Durant gets that follow-through-the-defender's arm bullshit though.
All of the little tricks these players are using now-a-days are incredibly lame. Trying to put the ball up to get the foul on the shot, flailing of arms to appeal the foul call, and on and on. CP3 managing the clock "to get the last shot". How about trying to get a "good shot" with the time available? Seems to me, you can get a higher percentage shot that way......
I remember back in the days a foul on a 3 pointer was a super rare call reserved for when a dude actually got hit and the shot substantially altered... not some ticky-tack shit that usually results in 3 made FTs when the percentage on the shot itself would be substantially lower.
I remember back in the days a foul on a 3 pointer was a super rare call reserved for when a dude actually got hit and the shot substantially altered... not some ticky-tack shit that usually results in 3 made FTs when the percentage on the shot itself would be substantially lower.
jamal crawford has had 44 four point plays in his career, tops all time. second place is reggie with 23. everyone else on the list is 14.
Muthafuckas said that shit about Jackson. Apply that shit to Kerr.
he got hired with absolutely no coaching experience.
i said: he was good on the court. Great career.
Doesn't mean he will be a good coach.
The dudes he will be coaching know him from the tail end of his career (2000 onward when his minutes started diminishing, if that) and his work as an analyst. I think he has a pretty big hill to climb before they even start to take him seriously as a coach-- all these young guys know are his catch phrases. plus he's already set the bar way too high by saying that the warriors will play a modicum of defense this year. like david lee isn't the starting PF or some shit.
I was really unhappy with this hire. And I think the guy's an annoying twat. So there's that, too.
i don't see how any of that is racist though.
I like Steve Kerr and Im sure he'll be no different from these regular ass coaches like Scott Brooks or Vinny Del Negro or Scott Skiles,
But U are now starting a whole new system for a team that was trying to get deeper in the Playoffs.
Im skeptical that this will get immediate Win results in the Western Conference.
These dummies in NYC now think Jackson should get his old ass on the sidelines now that Kerr slipped away.
This team is at least 3 years away from being real contenders. Second round appearances dont mean shit.
Jackson cant coach for three years at this age...or even two. And then your gonna need a Phil disciple to take over even if he did magically coach the Knicks. Who will be available then??? Brian Shaw? Pete Myers? Scottie Pippen? Kurt Rambis?
Im skeptical that this will get immediate Win results in the Western Conference.
It probably won't, but making second round of the playoffs is pretty much the best-case scenario for this Warriors team in this Western Conference anyway.
I like Steve Kerr and Im sure he'll be no different from these regular ass coaches like Scott Brooks or Vinny Del Negro or Scott Skiles,
But U are now starting a whole new system for a team that was trying to get deeper in the Playoffs.
Im skeptical that this will get immediate Win results in the Western Conference.
Who has proven to be a good coach in the NBA other than Popovich? I don't understand why Steve Kerr was so sought-after - he is an okay analyst but not nearly as good as someone like Doug Collins or Hubie Brown. I'd say he's no better than Reggie Miller or Greg Anthony - are people lining up to give them jobs as well?
The way coaches with no coaching experience are routinely hired in the NBA is still a mystery to me. I've got a friend who has been a head high school basketball coach for about 10 years, and I've seen him improve as a coach pretty dramatically over the years. The NBA hiring mentality basically says that coaching must be intuitive and not involve experience.
I like Steve Kerr and Im sure he'll be no different from these regular ass coaches like Scott Brooks or Vinny Del Negro or Scott Skiles,
But U are now starting a whole new system for a team that was trying to get deeper in the Playoffs.
Im skeptical that this will get immediate Win results in the Western Conference.
Who has proven to be a good coach in the NBA other than Popovich?.
If u mean coaches who did have to be "assistants" for 10 years before getting a job?
Doc Rivers.
Whats the difference in be an assistant to being a point guard for 10 seasons like Scott Skiles or Soctt Brooks?
I like Steve Kerr and Im sure he'll be no different from these regular ass coaches like Scott Brooks or Vinny Del Negro or Scott Skiles,
But U are now starting a whole new system for a team that was trying to get deeper in the Playoffs.
Im skeptical that this will get immediate Win results in the Western Conference.
Who has proven to be a good coach in the NBA other than Popovich?.
If u mean coaches who did have to be "assistants" for 10 years before getting a job?
Doc Rivers.
Whats the difference in be an assistant to being a point guard for 10 seasons like Scott Skiles or Soctt Brooks?
Doc didn't coach so well this series.
I think there are advantages of having former NBA players coach, but that if you offer a job to a guy with no coaching experience it doesn't say much for the value you place on the real coaching aspects of the job. It seems more like they are going after coaches who are going to gel with the players and maybe bring in some fans off of name recognition. Being a point guard is not the same thing as coaching a team. I played pg my whole life and know very little about x's and o's, other than the plays I was taught. Russell Westbrook is a pg, would you want him to coach a team?
Comments
Firing Mark Jackson: Hard, Right and Necessary for the Next Step
Posted on May 6, 2014 by Adam Lauridsen Fast Break
Mark Jackson wasnÔÇÖt fired for his tactical decisions (or lack thereof). He was fired, in part, for how he dealt with the criticism of those decisions. Everyone starts somewhere. The term ÔÇ£beginnerÔÇÖs mistakeÔÇØ implies that there are certain growing pains that ÔÇö if not excusable ÔÇö are understandable as we figure our way around whatever weÔÇÖre doing. But Mark Jackson was three years into his tenure as head coach. He was no longer a beginner. This season ÔÇö continuing through the playoffs ÔÇö a pattern was established where Jackson would make questionable decisions and then actively silence or rebel against those in the Warriors organization who would question him. ThatÔÇÖs not an environment in which this very talented team can reach its full potential. In letting Jackson go, the Warriors made the hard ÔÇö and correct ÔÇö decision.
Some of the stories of JacksonÔÇÖs last year are starting to emerge. There will be more that come out later. There are a few common problems that run through them.
Last off-season, when Mike Malone took the KingsÔÇÖ head coaching job, Lacob and Myers approached Jackson about getting another experienced assistant to serve as his chief deputy. Jackson fought hard to promote from within (Pete Myers). The new assistant added to replace Malone ÔÇö Brian Scalabrine ÔÇö was at the end of the coaching bench. This decision set the tone, more than any personal squabble over where Jackson would live or where an assistant would park, for how his season would be evaluated. Jackson had bristled during at earlier comments that Malone was responsible for his success. The 2013-14 season would be all Jackson and ÔÇ£his guys.ÔÇØ
During the season, Jackson actively avoided engaging others in the organization on basketball matters and grew angry when they would interact, even casually, with players on these issues. Zach Lowe already reported that Jackson banned Jerry West from practice and team functions for a period of time. Kirk Lacob, who helps the team with a variety of basketball analytics, among other things, also caught JacksonÔÇÖs ire for discussing basketball-related issues with players. The ÔÇ£difference in philosophyÔÇØ with Scalabrine has been well documented, including the allegation that one source of ScalabrineÔÇÖs frustration was the coaching staffÔÇÖs lack of attention to detail. We can safely assume that Darren Erman wasnÔÇÖt allegedly recording coaching meetings because he agreed with everything that was being done, but because he believed there were fundamental problems. While thereÔÇÖs no dispute that Jackson was the coach and had final say over basketball matters, itÔÇÖs these types of things that Lacob likely had in mind when he commented today that Jackson needs to be as good in his next job at ÔÇ£managing up and sidewaysÔÇØ as he is managing his players.
Jackson was plagued all season by reports that he wasnÔÇÖt adequately preparing his team for games ÔÇö particularly when they were the humdrum variety against the bottom half of the NBA ranks. Lacob took the unusual step of even publicly commenting on some of his frustrations. Despite this spotlight on his prep work, Jackson continued to engage in behavior that some in the organization found highly questionable. Reportedly, after the Game 2 40-point blowout, Jackson reconvened his team for a 20 minute practice the next day ÔÇö far shorter than usual. In Game 3, the Warriors came out flat and made similar mistakes to those that cost them the prior game. It wasnÔÇÖt until the second half of Game 3, when Jackson finally went small, that the team snapped back to life. Would extra prep work before Game 3 have made the difference in the first half in a game where the Warriors eventually lost by 2? ThereÔÇÖs no way to know for sure, but JacksonÔÇÖs decision again raised eyebrows.
Jackson carefully cultivated the image that he was loved by his players. For many, thatÔÇÖs undoubtedly the truth. Curry couldnÔÇÖt have been more vocal in supporting him and others have weighed in after his departure. But according to sources with direct knowledge of the situation, not everyone felt the same way, with roughly half the locker room ambivalent or worse in their views on Jackson. The public got a glimpse of this during the Bogut sleep-injury brouhaha. What should have been a couple of off-hand remarks, chalked up to the fog of pre-game chatter, instead triggered JacksonÔÇÖs most heated press conference of the year. The absolute and forceful nature of his denials was meant to project strength, but seemed to indicate the opposite. JacksonÔÇÖs best argument for keeping his job was the love he received from his players. Even that appears to be a more complex picture than Jackson and his supporters have presented.
So do these issues ÔÇö working with others, responding to criticism and engaging in thorough preparation ÔÇö justify letting go a 51-win coach with back-to-back playoff appearances? Lacob and Myers ultimately decided yes, because they have greater ambitions for this team than winning 51 games, and they donÔÇÖt have unlimited time to achieve them. It was going to take time for Jackson to develop his coaching chops, and given the very slow progress, development was by no means guaranteed. The Warriors also likely feared that JacksonÔÇÖs other problems were limiting his ability to develop his own skills as a coach and draw on the resources around him.
For these reasons, the decision to fire Mark Jackson was as much ÔÇö if not more ÔÇö about the future than it was the past. The Warriors were making the same mistakes ÔÇö ugly isolation sets that killed their greatest strengths, passing and shooting; careless late-game turnovers; head-scratching substitutions ÔÇö in game 1 of the season as in game 7 of the playoffs. Curry, Thompson and Green all improved as individual players this year. Iguodala was a major talent added to the starting line-up. Bogut was healthier for more of the season (but not the playoffs). And yet the Warriors only made a marginal bump in their overall record and took a step back in their playoff accomplishments. Given the skill, basketball intelligence, coachability and character of these players, Jackson had a lot to work with as a coach. He got a fair amount from it ÔÇö in large part because he is a tremendous motivator ÔÇö but where Lacob and Myers want to go next, theyÔÇÖll need more than just a motivated team.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/warriors/2014/05/06/firing-mark-jackson-hard-right-and-necessary-for-the-next-step/
They are fooling themselve into thinking they are Western Conference finalists.
1) Is it really necessarily to check the replay on EVERY hard foul in transition? We should check to see if it was flagrant just in case....
2) The refs are getting WAAAAY reliant on instant replay. Totally kills the flow of the game; as if the shit wasn't killed already with the flops and unnecessary flailing of arms by these supposedly big strong athletes.
I gotta give it to him, Russell Westbrook played some serious 'big boy' ball last night. Although, that last-second 3-point shot was ill-advised, but Chris Paul gave him the bail out. That was a serious character-building win for the Oklahoma City Thunder last night. This could be their turning point for the playoffs, and give them confidence to play strongly to contend for the chip.
Peace,
Big Stacks from Kakalak
it's hard to take the ball out of his hands now that he's proven that there isn't any one in the whole of the NBA that can stop him from getting to the rim at will. it's still a mental exercise of staggering proportions trying to figure out why, once he's proven that he's basically nightcrawler versus the clips, that he decides that he's going to switch mid-game to ill advised, off-balance jumpers.
I agree that instant replay is not good for the entertainment value of the NBA and that it's overused. That being said, the only reason Doc Rivers was upset is because instant replay should have resulted in a call reversal. If it had, I don't think he'd be saying let's get rid of it. Maybe they can just revise the rule so that it is used less often.
To me, the most annoying trend in refereeing is all the fouls called on 3 pointers. I get that shooters should be able to land without getting body contact, and therefore a foul can be called after the release - but the trend is that if there is ANY contact on a 3 pointer, there is a call. Reggie Miller (famous for kicking his legs out) would have been making a living on the free throw line if he was still playing.
Durant was having an off night. He did his thing.
Someone said on air last night that "he's like Kobe Bryant. he shouldn't be called a point guard. He's a 2 guard." I completely agree with that. Kobe took COUNTLESS ill-advised shots during his career, because he was the most aggressive and sometimes the only WILLING shooter on his team.
Regarding a title shot, I still think they lack the proper structure as a team to become the champ. I said earlier that OKC would beat SAS in a series, but don't think that's true, now that i've watched enough of them in the playoffs. Clearly, SAS and Miami have been the most consistent in the playoffs so far.
I don't blame the refs on those three point foul calls. It really comes down to lack of fundamentals on the defensive end. By the way, refs have been keen on that leg-kicking thing for a while now, not many players get that call anymore. I do wonder why Durant gets that follow-through-the-defender's arm bullshit though.
All of the little tricks these players are using now-a-days are incredibly lame. Trying to put the ball up to get the foul on the shot, flailing of arms to appeal the foul call, and on and on. CP3 managing the clock "to get the last shot". How about trying to get a "good shot" with the time available? Seems to me, you can get a higher percentage shot that way......
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10933515/steve-kerr-accepts-golden-state-warriors-coaching-position
jamal crawford has had 44 four point plays in his career, tops all time. second place is reggie with 23. everyone else on the list is 14.
I want to hear the "he has no experience" excuse.
Muthafuckas said that shit about Jackson. Apply that shit to Kerr.
Gotta wonder how Jackson feels about this.
b/w
Who are they gonna get now?
Kerr is friends with the owner, but im very surprised he said no to Jackson.
If I was NY Id get Lionel Hollins but hes not a triangle dude.
Who is left in the Jackson robots picks?
Or......Jackson, but dude has his parish in Cali.
But U are now starting a whole new system for a team that was trying to get deeper in the Playoffs.
Im skeptical that this will get immediate Win results in the Western Conference.
This team is at least 3 years away from being real contenders. Second round appearances dont mean shit.
Jackson cant coach for three years at this age...or even two. And then your gonna need a Phil disciple to take over even if he did magically coach the Knicks. Who will be available then??? Brian Shaw? Pete Myers? Scottie Pippen? Kurt Rambis?
It probably won't, but making second round of the playoffs is pretty much the best-case scenario for this Warriors team in this Western Conference anyway.
Its a good look for the suspect Eastern Conference.
Yeah watching them play like this has been fun. I hope they keep it together ad build on what they have, as well.
Good to see Indiana start to shake off whatever was ailing them early in the post season.
The Heat look stupid good right now.
its a strain not as sever as thought
cant win without him
Who has proven to be a good coach in the NBA other than Popovich? I don't understand why Steve Kerr was so sought-after - he is an okay analyst but not nearly as good as someone like Doug Collins or Hubie Brown. I'd say he's no better than Reggie Miller or Greg Anthony - are people lining up to give them jobs as well?
The way coaches with no coaching experience are routinely hired in the NBA is still a mystery to me. I've got a friend who has been a head high school basketball coach for about 10 years, and I've seen him improve as a coach pretty dramatically over the years. The NBA hiring mentality basically says that coaching must be intuitive and not involve experience.
If u mean coaches who did have to be "assistants" for 10 years before getting a job?
Doc Rivers.
Whats the difference in be an assistant to being a point guard for 10 seasons like Scott Skiles or Soctt Brooks?
Doc didn't coach so well this series.
I think there are advantages of having former NBA players coach, but that if you offer a job to a guy with no coaching experience it doesn't say much for the value you place on the real coaching aspects of the job. It seems more like they are going after coaches who are going to gel with the players and maybe bring in some fans off of name recognition. Being a point guard is not the same thing as coaching a team. I played pg my whole life and know very little about x's and o's, other than the plays I was taught. Russell Westbrook is a pg, would you want him to coach a team?