Is Kevin McHale Just a Transitional Coach for the Houston Rockets?

I doubt Morey is the type of guy who hires people just for the sake of hiring. If he didn't believe McHale would be a good coach, he could've just said McHale would make a good coach or a fine coach. Instead, he said he felt he would be one of the best. That's some high praise and his job is on the line if its not true.

 

from spacecityscoop.com

Continue reading

 

You also have to entertain the thought that it wasn't his decision. Many agreed that hiring McHale was a high risk. If it was his, it would be detrimental to his career as the Rockets GM.

Great read. Not being a homer or a hater, McHale definitely underachieved last year with the players he had.

 

Let's hope so.

 

I think Les approved of the McHale hire but I think it was both Morey and Les' joint decision. I don't think I've read anywhere that Les picked out McHale without anyone Morey's input. Links?

McHale got us ninth seed, same as Adelman the year before. Last year, he wasn't able to practice with the team during the summer. He's not terrible.

 

Can't use that...they all had an equal start last season.

 

This is an Owner Alexander managed team, people...

 

I'm curious why you think McHale was a Les hire and not a Rockets FO hire.

It was McHale's first season with the Rockets. He didn't know his personnel and the lockout prevented him from contacting anyone a precious few weeks before the season started.

 

The six game losing streak killed us but at the end of the season, the record was 2 games over .500. With Adelman, we had one game over .500 and we started out the year with a 0-5 record. I'm wondering what people's expectations are for a team with no superstar and a coach in his first year with a team in a condensed season. I don't think we underachieved at all. I think we did the opposite.

 

Im going to second that. Overall, I believe the Rockets overachieved despite the downtimes in the season.

However, there is one thing that McHale should be accountable for I must say. The Losing Streak and losing their spot in the playoffs-

-The Utah game, and the losing streak that followed should have led to a nice sit down chit chat with Morey or Les. That was unnacceptable, and McHale should have better prepared his team.

In that timeframe, teams were keying in on Dragic, and figuring out how to stop him in the P&R(Make him go right & pack the paint) McHale should hold blame here for not having more audible plays to run in this instance. He can blame the lockout & training camp if he wants, but I still expect more preparation in a 5 month time frame.

Instead he decided to stay with the original gameplan, and it ended up costing them the playoffs. Not that I know what alternate gameplan would have actually worked, but after the third loss, I would have thought that it was time to try something new.

-The bright side to this, is that Jeremy Lamb might not be a Rocket today if they would have made the playoffs and lost their 1st draft pick that they were able to trade up to get Lamb with. Still, a playoff run with that team might have been fun to root for, and McHale should have been accountable for the gameplan that might, or might not have had something to do with them losing those games to close out the season on a low note.

That being said though, the expectation was that this was a tanking year for the Rockets to rebuild their team after the Yao years. Everyone expected that Scola and Martin would be traded after the the Gasol deal fell apart, and even after that fiasco, the leftover Rockets still managed to put themselves in a position to be a playoff team without an all-star player on their roster. OVERALL, the team performed well given the circumstances, and given their coach was Kevin McHale.


So one of two things are apparent here- The coach of an NBA team really doesn't matter, and most of the success depends on the personnel on the roster, or McHale simply did a pretty good job overall. Draw your own conclusion from either of those two outcomes. That being said, I dont think McHale is a perfect coach, but neigther at the alternatives.

 

The owner 'demanded' a big name. This was the result.

 

pro: gregg popovich and the spurs show that coaching matters.

con: spoelstra and brooks were the two coaches in the finals.



(I personally think coaching matters quite a bit - but more as a way to control egos and drama than x's and o's.)

 

Spoelstra I'll give you as a con but not Scott Brooks, he is a great coach.

 

Here are some of the links. Read up and draw your own conclusion.
http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/5/23/2185331/kevin-mchale-houston-rockets-coach

http://www.chron.com/sports/rockets...-+NBA+Basketball%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

Opposing argument (Morey going all in on McHale)
http://houston.sbnation.com/houston...s-front-office-makes-this-team-all-about-them

Spurs are all about Popovich. Pop made a major change in their offense two years ago and went from 9th to almost 1st in offensive efficiency with the same roster.

Three aging stars played under the new system who were all past their prime, yet performed beyond anyone's expectation, beholders of best record last year and had the most efficient offense in NBA for the last two. But in the end (WCF), he was badly outcoached by Brooks....

If it was anyone but Brooks, last year's Finals wouldve been Spurs-Heat.

Yes, coaching means a lot under most of the circumstances.

 

Im personally not going to say that coaching doesn't matter one bit to every team, but regardless of coach, its personnel first and foremost that matters, and at the end of the day sometimes you get the same result regardless of coach IMO. Even the great Phil Jackson couldn't have made last years team a contender if he wanted to.

 

Not to to nitpicky here Kuku, but the Spurs "big 3" were not necessarily past their prime's when Popovich changed the offense. Only one of them was, and you can even argue that the surrounding cast had much more talent to offer than even some of their teams did back in their championship years.

-Tony Parker is still improving to this very day. His production was off the charts last year, and even was a darkhorse MVP candidate. Any time you have a top 2 or 3 PG in the NBA on your team, you have a shot at a title.

-Ginobili's has had his fair share of injury woes, but its not like his athleticism and production have declined dramatically. In 2010/11, he was still averaging around the top end of his PPG average in his career. That was just a season ago when he was healthy.

-Yes, Tim Duncan is not the player he once was, but he's still very effective in his role. He's a huge part of their defense. One of the most underated low post defenders of all time. He's not a 20/10 guy, but he's a damn good 15/9 guy playing 10 minutes fewer per game then he did in his prime.

I think Pop is a GREAT coach. One of the best of all time, but he could not have had the results he had the past two seasons if the Spurs ended up with a big 3 of Jermaine Oneal, Jerry Stackhouse, and Allen Iverson taking them through the past decade. At the end of the day, his big 3 and their surrounding cast are still VERY, VERY good despite the coaching which was excellent.

That being said, I think gameplanning, and communication are important aspects of NBA coaching that could have helped McHale close out the season on a more positive note. He deserves criticism at least on the gameplanning aspect during the 6 game losing streak that cost them the playoffs. A few wins here and there matter, but in the end, you have to have great talent to truely compete in the NBA.

 

I wonder how much difference it would make if McHale got them to the playoffs this season?

 

The fact that Mike Brown is a successful coach convinced me that you can't predict the value of coaching on a team. It's a case by case basis.

 

It's a debatable opinion, and It may just prove how important star players are.