namelesstavern.net

Had a fun debate about Tom Thibodeau and whether or not he overworks his players and is the reason they can't go deeper in the playoffs. Thoughts?

Personally I think the Bulls success and failure both stem from how much Thibs is pushing his top players.

Also, I lost my Chicago privileges because I said that I never felt Phil was an amazing coach. I said he was a good coach at best but he's no Pop or Steve Kerr.

Also, Steve Kerr getting the COTY snub. Legit?

PS - Hi

Not sure Steve Kerr should really be mentioned with the greats, yet. I love Pop. Of the contemporaries, I'd also mention Jerry Sloan and yes Phil Jackson who I think is great. I know he had all that talent, but here's the thing about winning. Winning makes players look great. Look at that Spurs roster. Leonard is a Playoff MVP winner. He's going to get a max contract. That's because he's a winner. On most other teams he'd be a marginal talent. Point being, you can look up and down those Phil Jackson teams and say they were stacked, but it's a chicken and the egg argument. Did they win because they had stacked teams or do they have stacked teams because they win?

Anyway, as for Thibs, me and Snero see eye to eye on this. We think he's great. Stan Van Gundy talked about player minutes a lot at a Sloan summit a few years ago and I completely agree with him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZaCcg20TuY

The bit about players health is around the 32 minute mark, but it's worth watching the entire video. Really interesting stuff.

My opinion on coaching in general though? I don't think it makes much difference to be honest. I think the best thing coaches can do is manage players, and get them to listen. A team with a coach that the players don't listen to is done, but all these guys know how to coach. Every year the league fires a bunch of guys and calls them morons and incompetent. It's asinine. None of those coaches are morons, and none of them are incompetent. Not at that level. Some lose their team though, and a team that doesn't listen to their coach in a game with so many options on the court is toast.

Here's a write up that gives some perspective on the impact of coaches.

http://freakonomics.com/2013/05/30/a-former-nba-coach-argues-that-coaches-are-not-responsible-for-outcomes/

I somewhat agree, although they take the analytics side and I think discredit coaching impact entirely, but I do think coaches are mostly blamed unfairly. I don't think Thibs is the reason Chicago hasn't done better. The real reason? LeBron James mostly. And injuries.

Haven't watch the video yet but you don't think Thibs pushing his players is the reason they are getting injured?

I don't think 3 or 4 minutes a game adds any wear on a player. Many disagree with me, but these people practice for hours a day, do you think if those two hour practices were reduced by 3 minutes it would save some wear and tear? I don't see any logical correlation. The bulls have lost because they aren't good enough.

Not so sure I'd be so quick to dismiss a coach's importance. I know at least in Football & Hockey it makes a huge difference, especially with hockey for in-series adjustments. I know the local media has been raving about Kerr's adjustments in the Memphis series, including a big switch of defensive scheme by putting Bogut on Allen. They've been raving about his use of his bench, too.

In other questions, what did you think about the Warriors in the Memphis series? I've actually watched a little of the W's in the postseason, much as I don't follow basketball. I did see that 62 foot shot in game 6, too. That was a dagger shot. heh.

I haven't been following the series that much, but everyone makes adjustments. They have a damn good team. Kerr's a good coach...today. Plenty of good coaches have been run out of town. Look at Scott Brooks. He was thought of as one of the great up and coming coaches. He's now as much an NBA coach as Isaiah Thomas.

I think the heavy minutes does wear on the players, but I think it's more of a GM issue than just a coach problem.

The bulls really needed to hit on a few of their more recent draft picks. They paid a fair bit to get mcbuckets and he didn't play up to expectations. The team isn't deep enough, and when guys like Noah and Rose start to get run down, they don't have the players to make up for it.

Thibs is also not a great offensive coach, and the team is paying for that. They pretty much need a 2 or a 3 like jamal crawford, who's terrible defense can be covered up, but can score almost at will, which is exactly what mcdermott was supposed to be.

Pops is at least the best coach that I've seen. I think Kerr still needs to prove himself, he has a fantastic team and I think Phil is horribly overrated and the triangle is a gimmick that only worked because of the players he had. But you could have made the bulls or the lakers play the Princeton offense, or really anything else and they would still have won all those championships.

I guess I'm giving Kerr his analyst dues while saying "coach" instead. Yeah he has time before being compared to certain people.