Can we at least agree now that coaches don't really matter that much?

Minnesota added an amazing PG. When that PG went down they sucked. Adelman was there the whole time. Not saying they mean nothing, but in basketball I am in the coaches are overrated camp.

 

Using the Rockets as the case study is too near sighted and difficult. Just look the Bulls lately. Yup, coaching matters.

 

Uh, Minny also added Rubio and Williams. We've had significant injuries to Martin, and recently, Lowry.

There are way more factors than just coaching.

 

Well, to be fair, there was a lot of room for Minnesota to improve. They added Rubio this year and Love lost weight and took his game to a whole other level. Also, Rambis was a terrible coach, so even getting someone somewhat competent was going to help. But Adelman did do a great job getting a young, accustomed-to-losing team to buy in and play good basketball until Rubio went down and even more injuries to Pek and Love started to occur.

McHale on the other hand took over a team whose core has been together longer and which Morey added some good pieces to: Dragic instead of AB all season, Parsons, Camby, Sammy. McHale also had Morris at his disposal...who he never bothered to integrate. It’s interesting how some Adelman haters who said Adelman wasted the first two months of Patterson’s NBA career have nothing to say about McHale wasting Morris' whole rookie season.

I do think talent matters much more than coaching, but I also believe we had the talent to be a playoff team this season and McHale just couldn't get it done.

 

I think the truth in this debate is somewhere between the two extreme opinions.

I don't think you can overstate the value of an elite coach. I'm talking guys like Phil Jackson, Popovich and the like. Those guys are masters at getting the best out of their team and getting their guys to fit in with what the team is trying to do. These guys are going to do a great job no matter how talented the team is and who is on the team.

I also think there are a handful of coaches that adversely affect their team's fortunes because they are so bad.

But with the 70 or 80 percent of coaches that fall between these two extremes, I'm with the OP. With these guys that fall in the middle, it's about the players. When they have good players, they win. When they have bad players, they lose.

 

Yeah they also added Rubio...and ever since Rubio went down it's been tough for the wolves.

The coach only adds or subtracts a few wins in the regular season. NBA coaches make their real money in the post season where adjustments have to be made and you have to know what you are doing.

 

Agree with the OP, but an even better example is the Timberwolves. In the 23 games this year without Rubio, which is the same team last year PLUS the second overall pick and a breakout player in Pekovic, they are playing just as bad as they did before. And that team was coached by Rambis, who some argued was the worst coach in history. Enter HOF coach Adelman, 5-18 without Rubio, same result. Maybe Adelman isn't the saint that some here perceive him as, but at worst he is still an upgrade to Rambis. However the record shows how little that upgrade translates to actual results.

A great coach can be the edge that gets a team over the hump against similar caliber talent. But if your talent is mediocre, that only gets you to slightly better than mediocre, which in the grand scheme of things is meaningless.

 

Under Adelman, they have improved by more than double their win-loss %. of the previous coach.

 

Old Man Rock knows what he's talking about.

Ricky Rubio and Pekovic have missed just as many games as Martin and Lowry to injury.

 

A great coach can get more out of players than a lessor coach.

As a Rockets fan, I want them to have great talent on the floor and a great coach.

If you settle for mediocrity on the coach, then what do you expect them to put on the floor.

DD

 

Can't talk about anything else but McHale vs. Adelman with regards to this group. In my opinion Adelman would've gotten probably either a little less, a little better record but more likely the same. The reasons being:

+ Martin would've made a bigger impact
+ Budinger would've been better served
+ Less tiring season for Lowry (we relied on him too much which wouldn't have been the case in Adelman's system)
+ more motivated players at the end of season
+ Camby in the high post
+ more consistent minutes for starters and veterans

- use of Dalembert
- no emergence of Parsons (but maybe would've developed Morris)
- worse defense
- even shorter rotations
- less use of young guys
- more patience with starters playing bad

Pretty much evens out though I value te defense orientated McHale over offense orientated Adelman who would've never gotten us wins vs. LA, Chicago, OKC etc. We needed change though I wonder if McHale is really going to get us back in top 10 defense.

 

In a shortened season, no less.

 

How many coaches take our level of talent and turn the teams into cesspools? Wiz have had some talent and a toilet bowl existence. Kings (even pre/post Westphal). Pacers. 6ers. Jazz. Blazers? And I think Nate is great, but look out below! Teams no better than Rox going any which way; coaches matter for middling teams too.

 

In my opinion it matters to a certain extent. You cant give them too much credit, and too little.

The coach has a responsibility to create a system that puts their team in the best situation to win. I also dont think that system has to be the same game after game.

This was my issue with Adelman, and is also my issue with McHale during the loosing streak. They both are very loyal to their system's and when teams really sort of and defend them well, they stick to their guns rather than having

 

We can agree, but we should also agree that in this case the small difference it made was likely the difference b/t playoffs and no playoffs. Suck it Leslie.

 

http://celticshub.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/293-gregg-popovich-thumbs-up.png

 

Yeah right...

 

In my opinion it matters to a certain extent. You cant give them too much credit, and too little.

Offensively the coach has a responsibility to create a system that puts their team in the best situation to win. I also dont think that system has to be the same game after game.

This was my issue with Adelman, and is also my issue with McHale during the loosing streak. They both are very loyal to their system's and when teams really learn how to defend them well, they stick to their guns rather than having audible plays they can run when their bread and butter goes stagnant.

You can blame not having a proper training camp and practice time for McHale not having proper audible plays to run I guess but he still should be held accountable the plays that are run.

Defensively, of course the coach matters. You cant tell me that Bulls are that much more physically capable of defending then the Rockets. Style of play matters as well, but alot of that is buyin that comes from the top and accountability from the coaches.

 

Bulls and Spurs coach is probably the best in the league and it shows.

 

so wrong. wrong wrong wrong. Our group of players this year was better. With Adelman we would've easily been a 5th to 7th seed.