Meet
Good coaches do exist in the NBA
Posted by: Henri on March 11th, 2013
The author's views are entirely his or her own and may not reflect the views of the Utah Jazz.Maybe you remember my post dedicated to the poor strategy Ty employed in the game at bucks last week ?
http://www.utahjazz360.com/hb81/another-one-in-the-bandwagon/
If you don’t want to navigate between pages, here is an extract:
< Take any coach in Europe officiating from U15W up to euroleague and ask him:
“what would you ask your team to do when you are up by 3 and your opponent has the ball in his hands with less than 24 second to play?”
100% will answer:
“YOU FOUL to put them to the line, shoot 2 FT under pressure, then you secure the rebound”
… but there is no way coaches like Ty (and many in the NBA to tell you the truth) would even think about it. They would rather be in Jennings’ buzzer beater poster than giving their team their best chance to win. >
Well … I was wrong, I mean this is not a plague in the NBA. Some coaches are better than I was suspecting. Because it just occured twice last night:
- Bucks at Kings. Bucks up by 3 with around 3 seconds remaining, ball in Jimmer’s hands. Jenning fouls him. After hitting the first free throw, Jimmer misses the second one intentionnaly. Rebound Bucks. Bucks win by 2. Thanks coach Boylan.
- Cavs at Raptors. Raptors up by 3 with 4.7 seconds to play. Foul by a raptor’s player to put Waiters (if I remember well) at the line. Hits the first and misses the second. Rebound. Foul. Raptors win by 4. Thanks coach Casey.
C’mon, Ty …
Replies: 12
Views: 355
12 Responses
Yes Henri, good coaches do exist in the NBA, but coaches that add to the wins side of the equation are very rare. Before I retired I spent 25 plus years in the B-ball business and every time I reference studies that analyze the small impact coaches have I get the typical fan crap about how stats don’t mean anything, etc. Fans know more than people who have studied the game for years–more than GMs, more than owners, more than NBA executives. And Omar knows more than everybody.
In the NBA the overwhelming issue in regard to wins/losses is the players.
We’re talking about the NBA only. In colleges and the AAU’s coaches matter a lot mainly because of the teaching they do. And so do the players.
Here’s what I wrote last time. But I know the facts don’t matter, only fan passion does.
“While I don’t care for a lot of what Corbin does, I don’t think replacing him would make much difference.
Fans give coaches way too much credit for wins and losses. Lots of studies have suggested coaches have much smaller impacts on overall team records than the fans think.
These three articles sum up how little impact most NBA coaches have on the win loss records of their teams. Sloan was in the middle. He was considered neutral. Sloan’s main accomplishments came during the Stockton and Malone era. Stockton and Malone influenced the Jazz win loss record not Sloan.”
http://tinyurl.com/9woxtub
http://tinyurl.com/bxju7pb
http://tinyurl.com/avn4ja6
Ask my bookie, he’ll tell you.
You never bet on the coach. You bet on the players.
It’s true that, overall, players have more impact the game than coaches, but if the coach never lets the young players butt’s off the bench, they will NEVER affect the game. When riding the bench, burkes affects the game as much as me and the Nu Skin dancers. Ty may not do much, but there are two things he DOES do: Enable or Disable. There’s your problem.
Jazzman
While I appreciate your opinion based on observations, if you read the studies they take all the players into account. Vets and young guys.
We often think we’re seeing something different than what is explained by the stats. The reality is we’re not seeing enough across a large time frame. That means our observations are skewed due to insufficient data.
Only a 3 or 4 coaches add to win totals. Sloan was neutral.
Sloan didn’t play Carlos arroyo over john stockton. Coaches do make a difference.
Yes, coaches make a difference. I never said they didn’t. I said they make very little difference, not zero difference.
If you want to read the studies and have data to refute what they said, I would be interested in seeing it.
Otherwise the stat analysis speaks volumes on how small a difference the coach actually makes or doesn’t make.
This opinion that coaches make a difference regardless of what the studies in the NBA say is the same as another one I hear all the time. The myth that defense wins championships.
In the NFL and NBA, looking at all the Superbowls and NBA finals, it almost dead even in both at 50% for offensive power winning and 50% for defensive ability winning. There is no dominate offensive or defensive advantage despite what so fans, Michael Jordan or coaches say.
A whole lot of what coaches have historically said is inaccurate. That’s why so many new professional NBA coaches have gone to APBR metrics. They want to know the odds on end of game strategy, fouls, clock management, etc.
They know they can’t trust the old cliche’s.
Billy bob, with respect to your experience and the stats, I have 2 questions. 1. Why do coaches like Phil Jackson, in the past and Scott Brooks at the moment, get paid over 4 million a year if their affect is negligible. 2. In a game where all the athletes, including the benchwarmers, are amazingly talented, doesn’t the tiny affect of a good coach really stand out?
Disco,
Have you read the studies I sited?
I didn’t say coaches don’t do anything. I said the vast majority have very little influence over win loss records.
I like how Billy Bob takes a seat on the fence and therefore can’t be wrong.
“I didn’t say ALL coaches…and I didn’t say NO influence…”
Way to cover your butt both ways there.
The fact is I’ve watched Ty do stupid move over stupid move due to a veteran bias. Brings back injured players and gives them huge minutes rather than working them in slowly, often to the detriment of a rotation that had found a groove. This happened with Watson and Howard last year and Mo on this most recent road trip. He stubbornly plays vets who continue to have poor production yet his leash for young guys is ridiculously short.
Ty called a play once at the end of game thinking we were down by four when we were actuslly down by three.
So for one, I believe Ty is on the negative side of coaching effect. I believe he’s the wrong coach for a young group of developing players on a rebuilding team. And two, in a league where even one win can make a huge difference in the season’s outcome, you have to give yourself every advantage you can. Ty is not giving this team an advantage, in my view. Lastly, I can only assume you were hired by the front office to put the most positive spin you could in Ty lol.
Maybe good coaches have little impact on wins, but what is the impact of BAD coaches on losses ?!………..
Negligible and very little have pretty much the same meaning