Rudy: An Examination Of Coaching Decisions

With all the rumours in the air about Rudy, and the possibility of a new coach being sought for the first time in quite a while around here, I thought a discussion about pro basketball coaching would be topical and interesting.

There are several ways to look at coaching, but the way I have chosen is to examine not the results of the decisions a coach makes, but the way he goes about making them, and separate the decisions into levels or types. This is based on the premise that results are not a clear indication of coaching ability, except when the responsibility is isolated, and only in the long run. For example, let's examine a coach's decision; Rudy decides to not play Eddie Griffin for a game. Ok, now what are the factors leading to that decision? Is Eddie hurting? Has the GM told Rudy that Mo T needs to be showcased pending a trade? Has Eddie been partying too much behind the scenes? There are dozens of potential reasons affecting each decision a coach makes to which the general public is not privy at the time.

And results...another blind alley of fallous thinking. If Mo T goes out that night and has a good night, does that make the decision a correct one? If he has a bad night, does that make it a poor decision? If he scores 20...would Eddie have scored 30? Or 5? Weighing the merits of a coaching decision are, while common, usually at best a last logical resort.

Okay, so other than long term 'success' rates of coaching decisions, I suggest that the best way to evaluate a coach are in his grasp of different decision processes, his tendancies with same, and the overall effect of those two factors on the team as a whole.

Organizational Level Decisions

These are decisions about what type of ship the coach/gm will run. Will it be tolerant of alternative personalities as long as the on court results are successfull, or does it prioritize 'character' players? Does it feel that players have to take an active part in selling the team to the public, or merely do their jobs on the court and in the press room? To what degree does the coaching staff interact with the GM? Are they a significant part of the decision making process re: trades, draft, etc., or do they merely take what they are given and try to win with it? What sort of assistants does the team employ, and what are their duties?Does the team commit to youth, or try to maintain a decent output when rebuilding?

Many of these questions are often generally attributed to the GM, but there is significant overlap, and in some cases the coach is at least as responsible for these types of decisions as the GM. The 'results' of these types of decisions are a little insubstantial, and are often seen more with regarding things like whether free agents want to come to a team, how many of the team's players get into off court trouble, what the relationship between the GM and coach is like, how often the organization has to rebuild and how it goes about it, and how often the team chooses to change coaches. Another telltale sign is whether the coach adapts the system to the players, or the players to the system.

While Rudy has a few weaknesses in this area, in my opinion ( specifically relating to his reluctance to give younger players enough time/touches considering external factors) I would say that this is an extreme strength, and we would be hard pressed to find a replacement who is more successfull when it comes to organizational decisions. We have tread a pretty narrow path between beeing permissive, and thus remaining a popular place to play, and strict, as we have had very few significant PR problems...a couple of drug related incidents is pretty low on the trouble chart. There has been fairly extreme long term cohesion between Rudy and CD, and this usually makes for a much better organization, although 'groupthink' can set in, and probably has with regards to decisions like getting Rice.

Players have been very happy, in general, to take part in PR operations, although Tim would know more about that, and Houston has become a top choice for potential free agents. The assistant coaching situation is a bit more vague...certainly there has been a lot of criticism aimed in this direction of late, and probably at least some of it is merited. All told, though, I would suggest that in this area Rudy ranks among the better coaches in the league, along with others like Jackson, Saunders, Sloane, the departed Wilkens, Brown, and Riley.

Team Level Decisions

These kinds of decisions are team wide, such as what type of offensive system to apply and how to get the players to apply it, what kinds of practices to run, how much time is devoted to film, how much to on-court drills, etc...what priority conditioning is imposed or left to the individual, what defensive sheme is run, whether the team adapts it's plan to opponents, or runs it's system and expects opponents to react...To what degree the team has flat, set rules, or differing or flexible rules depending on the status of the player in question.

In this area, I feel that Rudy has started to slip, or at least the personel is such that it is either exposing weaknesses previously covered up with talent/veteran leadership, or the players have tuned him out. For whatever reason, the Rockets have had offensive sets the past couple fo seasons often notable for their seemingly spontaneous and/or disorganized nature...and usually ineffective.'Selfish' play and stagnant half court sets has been the result of Rudy's iso system, whatever it's intent. Even if you decide that the players are the ones not executing, it is a coach's responsibility to see that his system is run...if it's not, it's merely a different type of coaching failure. Defensive cohesion improved last year, but that was moslt due to the simultaneous introduction of a consistent inside defensive deterrent and the revitilization of an old one. Stilll, credit is due in that area.

On the whole, Rudy falls well below the best in this area, with men like Rivers, Brown, Poppovich, Sloane, Jackson, Adleman, Nelson, and Carlisle suceeding where he has failed.

Player Level Decisions

This is the area that many usually think of when the term 'coaching' comes to mind...Decisions such as how to get the best out of a certain player, what position a player should play, what role a player should have, who should be the focus of the offense, whether Player A is best handled with kid gloves, or should he be bullied, whether The Kid has reached the time where he deserves the minutes over The Vet, etc. A strong factor here is getting players to commit to playing all out for you. A lot of the 'teaching' aspect of coaching goes into these types of decisions, and different coaches delegate different amounts of this responsibility to their assistants. Ultimately, though, the development, or lack thereof, of players is the coaches sole responsibility.

In this area, Rudy has a really mixed grade, mostly leaning to the negative. When forced to, Rudy has seemed to have some younger players, like Francis, Cat and Yao, initially exceed expectations...on the other hand, he has also seen many of those who initially showed such promise plateau, or even decline, at a time when players usually show improvement. I have often been puzzled by his decsions in this regard...his handling of Eddie Griffin has caused me a lot of brow furrowing, and I know that Clutch has been amazed at the Boki situation. Yao's first season, while ultimately a success, was at least as noteworthy for a series of seemingly counter productive decisions about his pt, touches, and role. On the other hand Cat started to play defense, and Cato played like a man in a contract year when he wasn't. I'm not sure that any coach could get Moochie to play as if he were a human being.

There was a time when this was an extreme strength of Rudy's...late draft picks, CBA pick ups and retread vets would blossom under his guiding hand...but it's been quite a while now. All told, I think that you have to chalk this up to a fail in Rudy's notebook. Certainly other coaches like Don Nelson, Adleman, Poppovich, Scott, Brown, Riley, Johnson, Cheeks, and Carlisle have surpassed him in this regard.


Game Level Decisions

These are immediate decisions, and somewhat harder to evaluate...What player to play in a certain game, what matchups to exploit, what ones to try and account for...What play to run coming out of a timeout...who to sit, and who to ride when hot...whether a certain player can handle 3 fouls in the 2nd quarter, or needs to be pulled...What play the other defense has yet to handle...what adjustments to make at halftime...Who should the ball go to with 6.3 seconds left in a 1 point game...whether to go for the 2 for a tie or 3 for a win...

These are the decisions most evident to fans, open to criticism, and to me hardest to actually pick apart. As mentioned earlier, may of these decisions are made with factors to which we are largely ignorant in mind...and again, just because a move doesn't work doesn't mean it was the wrong move, and vice versa. That said, I feel that, long term, Rudy has failed to show any significant positive in game adjustments in the last couple of years. Often players would get hot only to be then ignored...other players seemed to have free reignt to shoot an endless amount of iceballs...Disciplinary adjustments seemed non-existant, except seemingly inexplicably severe adjustments to a few youngsters...Pre-game decisions, ie matchups and sets are not evident either, although that is usually more of a result of a filing in the previous decision group.

Coaches who excell in this area are lead by Larry Brown, Nelson, Collins, Saunders, O'Brien, and Riley.



Ok...it would seem that this is a Rudy bashing thread, but that is hardly the case. The 1st level of decision making is an important one, and Rudy is as good as they come in that regard. I am not in favour of ousting Rudy short of a superior candidate...and this method of evaluating coaching decisions would be a handy way of comparing potential replacements. All things being even, the pro coach I would most like to have is Larry Brown. He is, I feel, the best at making superior decisions across the board. Others, like Saunders, Rivers, and Poppovich are also well rounded, and there are a couple of vets like Riley and Nelson who emphasize a particular area, but have the know-how to make that work. If I had superior individual talent which was underachieving due to ego conflict, the best ego wrangler in the business is Phil Jackson. But as thse guys are not available, to my knowledge, it would take someone better in a few areas to justify replacing Rudy, short of health deciding the matter for us. He remains a valuable commodity on the organizational level, and that kind of value ought not be thrown away lightly.

 

1) Lol...so are you saying you didn't read it all, or that you regret reading it all?

2) I don't think it's fair to say that he had no system...I think that would be to assume the absolute worst. I think what is clear is that what system he had either didn't work, or the players didn't run it.