Dick Justice: Alexander looking to replace Adelman

Sloan??? Anybody

 

Sloan won't coach a team without a 250 pounds PF who can post-up.

 

Very interesting interview with Morey today, which touched on his view on the impact of coaching:

http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showpost.php?p=6008807&postcount=1

What caught my attention was from 25:18-28:08 on how much difference can tactics make?

Like I said previously in this thread, that is my biggest gripe with Adelman. However I love his big picture system, and when you take that into account, it overcomes any mistakes he may make on in-game micromanagement.

Well, according to Morey, it seems even those concerns may be a little exaggerated. He believes tactical decisions would make less than a 5 win difference on a team over the course of the season. Meanwhile everything else the coach does has a much greater impact.

I think his reasoning can be found in another segment, 13:13-16:49, where he talks about why the best team nearly always wins the title in the NBA.

It is because the sheer amount of possessions in an NBA game, and high probability for each possession to impact the scoreboard- in contrast to something like soccer where you can do all the right things but still have a low probability to impact the scoreboard.

Taking that into account, while a few mismanaged possessions sticks out like a sore thumb to us fans because it seems so obvious, what has a much greater impact on the outcome of games is the other 90 some odd possessions(duh). As long as the team is well-coached overall, micromanagement has little impact over the course of the season. Or at least that is the theory.

This makes me feel a lot better about Adelman, even though I wanted to keep him before anyways.

On the other hand, Morey also made a few points that would support the other side of the debate. The main one being the diminishing impact of coaching as you go up in win totals. It is much harder to squeeze out an extra 5 wins due to superior coaching on a 60 win team compared to a 30 win team.

I believe this is because at the highest level talent wins out. I do not regard guys like Mike Brown or even Doc Rivers as that great of coaches, but that did not stop them from having great records due to the talent on their teams. What this tells us(something many of us already knew) is that at the end of the day, whether we ever win a championship or not will not be predicated on if it is with Adelman or any other coach, but much more on Morey's ability to bring in talent.

 

That's true. When you have superior talent, tactical coaching doesn't make a whole lot of difference. It's mostly personality management.

On the other hand, I think tactics and game plans makes more impact in the playoffs when you play the same team several times in a series.

 

you don't have to convince me. i was just making predictions as to why les would want to replace the coach.

also, all of that is a moot point if adelman wants to leave to coach a contender.

 

What about who plays and who doesn't? I don't know maybe DM just didn't consider it but making the rights subs is also part of the decision making process, and you can't really prepare those beforehand. Take for example when Adelman was playing brooks like 20 minutes a night even though he was clearly battling with mental issues regarding his game. The bench production that was supposed to be our strength plummeted, and people were complaining that Morey brought in crap. It may be true that tactical decisions like run X play instead of Y play only impact 1 or 2 possessions, but how many possessions did Brooks play in that he negatively impacted? During the 20 minutes he was in he could have impacted up to 20% of those possessions which is quite huge.

His whole "big picture" thing also seems fly counter to his "leveraged possessions" theory, wherein not all possessions are equal and some are more pivotal than others. In those scenarios, having a moronic Xs and Os coach is like having to rely on Peja Stojakovic during the last possession in a tied game.

If you look at it objectively, we actually got worse after the break, as we lost Shane Battier and Brooks and got a project and a poor man's lowry in return. However we went on a bit of a tear, and a large reason for this is because by trading him Adelman can't play Brooks anymore.

 

I already posted the link to the Alexander interview in the "Will Yao retire from NBA? Maybe, maybe no" thread, but it's probably more fitting here.

http://www.nba.com/rockets/video/2011/03/10/ZOOM0002MOV-1586696/index.html

Really sounds like he's not happy/content with Adelman to me.

 

The way I remember it, he was "undecided" about Jeff Van Gundy, too. In fact, he practically dared Jeff to publicly testify that he wanted to keep his job. JVG never budged one way or the other and in came Adelman. Looks for all the world that he'll be out soon, too.

I think Rick is an elite coach and I hope he sticks around. But there are lots of good coaches in the NBA if he doesn't.

 

man i so wish thibs could be had. aargh

 

Just listened to this.

Les Alexander:
　

Spoiler

Yao was just talking with us. He said about 10 weeks he'll maybe be able to get on the floor and test things out. What feelings do you have about Yao now and the future?

Spoiler

　
Well, people always ask me, when I meet someone new, they say, you gonna have him back again? I say, if you can find me a 7'6 big man who is great and also a great person that can play for you....if he's healthy and the doctors say he can play for you, of course we want him back again.
　
[Talks about the charities]
　
...
　
What do you think about your team right now?
　
Your record speaks for yourself and that's how I feel right now. Honestly. You are what you are.
　
You feel fortunate you're still knocking on the playoff door with all that's happened this year?
　
I do feel fortunate. I'll tell you what I feel bad about. I feel bad about the 0-5 start. Aaron wasnt around, things werent aligned properly. With that 0-5 start, I think we...this team would be in the playoffs and that's what I really feel bad about.
　
What about Rick Adelman's future here?
　
At the end of the season, I sit down with Daryl and we'll talk about it. Nothings been done yet or thought about yet.
　
He has expressed ambivalence. How does that influence how you might feel?
　
What he said was about travling and that...?
　
In general. That would be the reason for it.
　
I can understand that. He lives in Portland and coming back and forth is a tough thing. That's all I can say. I cant speak for him.
　
What I meant was, if he's ambivalent, does that influence how you feel going forward?
　
Of course. Everything plays into it. Nothing that doesnt.
　
So your open minded until after the season?
　
Right.
　
Is this a difficult season for you? Started out with deep team and then all the things that have happened...
　
This is like every season. When it changes, it changes. Hopefully it'll change someday. People who dont know me come up to me and ask me, whats the biggest thing you have to overcome when owning a team. I always say one thing is injuries.
　
You mentioned record speaks for itself. As you look at Adelman, do you view it as his career, his time in Houston or..?
　
Dont understand your question.
　
You said record speaks for itself. I assume that speaks for him as well. What record though?
　
With 33-33, the West is unbelievably tough. This is a very good team but not good enough to be in the playoffs in the West. So the guys are playing hard and playing well but you're still 33-33 no matter what you wanna say.
　
That's what you'd say about Rick?
　
I say that all the time, about all the teams/coaches I've had. When you won the championship, you say they're a great team because they won the championship. That's the NBA right?
　
You say not good enough to be in the playoffs, but still a shot.
　
Exactly. Big shot. But right now they're not and that's where you have to judge it - where you are now. That's what I think really.
　
http://www.nba.com/rockets/video/2011/03/10/ZOOM0002MOV-1586696/index.html

 

By who? LA had the two best players, the best player in the league, and all the clutch players for the most part.

 

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/7466997.html

Owner unsure if Adelman to return
Alexander says he’ll mull options after the season

Spoiler

not exactly a vote of confidence

 

I think you missed the point.

Even in leveraged possessions, the order of importance goes like this

1. Superstar
2. Superstar
3. Superstar
.
.
.
Everything else.

So the difference between a supposed good coach and bad coach in crunch time is basically whose number they can call. Do you need a genius to know that the ball should go to Jordan or Kobe when the game's on the line? When Phil had no Jordan, he called upon the mighty Toni Kukoc to shoot the final shot. Is Phil a bad coach?

 

[rquoter]“We’re 33-33,” Alexander said. “The West is unbelievably tough. This is a very good team, but it is not good enough to be in the playoffs in the West. The guys are playing hard. They’re playing well. But we’re still 33-33 no matter what you want to say. I always say that all the time, about every coach, every team I’ve had. When you won the championship, you say it was a great team because they won the championship, right? That’s part of the game, right?”[/rquoter]

I wonder if that counts when evaluating Morey as well. Somehow I doubt it.

 

The part in bold is a given. What's funny is that Adelman catches flak for sticking with Brooks. There's not a coach in the league that wouldn't give one of his most important players every chance to break out of a funk. It's just sad that it needs to be justified, but that's the climate around here usually.

 

Your assumption here is that head coaches always know what number to call, and thus are only limited by whose number they can call. Having a Jordan or a Kobe isn't exactly a normal scenario, most of the time you have Kevin Martin and Courtney Lee to choose from. In your example, PJ can call upon Toni Kukoc to hit that final shot because he's good at in-game decision making. If it was Adelman he probably wouldnt' even have put Kukoc in the first place, and counted on Pippen to play all 48 minutes of the game to will the team to victory. When Pippen inevitably fails, he'll just say "Well I don't know else to do", and his backers will complain about the roster being crap.

 

The goal was to reach the playoffs, was it not? You've got to put the team goals over the player needs, isn't why PP had to sit half a season before he got a minute on the court?

 

Giving your funk player hurting the team 8 minutes a game to break out of the funk really isn't on the same order of fetishism as giving him 24 minutes a game to turn large number of wins into losses. Besides, Brooks' "importance" to the team is arguable even when he is 100%.

Brooks wasn't just costing the Rockets wins, Brooks was causing the bench to consistently lose leads and was pretty obviously killing the bench players' confidence. All of the bench players' efficiency dipped substantially when Brooks returned, with Lee's efficiency taking the biggest hit.

At the end of the day, it's like Adelman is more concerned with keeping his reputation as an offense guru than he is with winning games. It's like it isn't even about the team scoring, it's about the team scoring because of his system and not because of what advantage in ability the players have.

I think Adelman may actually prefer players who are mediocre to decent at a few things and excel at nothing (including making mistakes) just so he gets more credit for the success of the team. I swear, players like Brooks, Budinger, and Miller are like Adelman's wet dream.

 

This is where I stopped reading. Don't bother responding btw; there's plenty of other threads to bash Brooks in.