Adelman vs JVG

you just judge two coaches a little bit too soon

hey, we are now out of picture of playoff, JVG brought home-advantage
RA's system still on the way of testing. maybe after regular season, you can put your thought

 

This is very true and possibly the most important thing to understand about the two coaches. I started out skeptical of Van Gundy and became a fan. I really admired, and still admire, his emphasis on work ethic, discipline, and execution. If you look back at his record, he did arguably the best possible job of extracting the most wins from any given season. That's because he focused on eliminating mistakes (turnovers, short possessions, low-percentage shooter taking the shot) and preventing our team from falling below a certain standard of performance. He did not tolerate laxity. You can win an extra 10 games a season based on that kind of consistency.

I've been pretty unhappy with Adelman's loose hand, for the same reasons. I don't like what appears to be his higher tolerance for bad decisions, slacking, and general chaos. However, I have to be fair and acknowledge that his "mistakes are okay" philosophy (if that's what it is -- and I think this is an excellent way of putting it) has a theoretical upside that may be what we're now seeing on the court. If I'm not mistaken, for example, Alston's turnovers have gone up, along with his versatility, shooting, and all-around performance. Brooks is playing. Bonzi is still making his trademark boneheaded plays, but he's also causing some havoc for opponents. Luther still can't dribble, but he seems to be taking more shots and hitting them.

Everybody seems to be relaxing a bit, loosening up, and taking more risks. Many of them are paying off. Guys are doing things we didn't think they could do. And it's definitely a lot harder for defenses to guess what comes next. That may be the most important point. Under Van Gundy, it was really easy for opponents to guess what came next. Van Gundy, as a matter of coaching philosophy, wagered that this didn't matter much. I recall him saying on several occasions that there aren't a lot of surprises in basketball and that the key is to do a few simple things consistently well. He believed that talent was pretty equal around the league and that the team that executed consistently, with fewer mistakes, would generally win.

I regard last year's series against Utah as a stinging indictment of Van Gundy's philosophy. We were very risk-averse, very predictable, and very reliant on two guys. We had only one player who might do something surprising. If you doubled and controlled him, nobody else on our team was likely to surprise you. Van Gundy wagered that our defense would keep the opponent's score low enough that our own unspectacular offense would suffice. In game 5, he was validated. In game 7, he wasn't. And we couldn't afford to lose that one game, because we'd done nothing in the rest of the series but barely hold serve. His low-risk philosophy turned out to be too risky.

If you look at our regular-season record last year against playoff teams, you'll see the same general pattern: We beat the lesser teams consistently and lost to the best teams pretty consistently. We were built for the regular season, not for the playoffs. That's the price of a low-risk approach.

So let's see what Adelman's "mistakes are okay" philosophy produces. A string of wins against lesser teams is nice. Beating the better teams, especially when it counts, will be the true test.

 

you are so awesome

 

Pretty much everything is spot on. The Rockets under JVG were focused, but not relaxed. The Rockets are now relaxed, yet still focused.

 

This is probably one of the most lucid comparisons that I have seen here. I'm not sure if the fan base will be patient enough to bear increased mistakes now for the potential of increased performance later, but as long as there is a logical plan in place, then I can understand the growing pains a bit more.

 

You raised an interesting perspective.

James and Francis - not team oriented enough

Chuck Hayes - team oriented enough

 

JVG told JH that he would be out of rotation at the begining of the last season. But Yao injured and steve novak couldn't play and JH came back. JVG even started novak once. If JVG didn't play rocky, then same as RA.

 

JVG couldn't pair Hayes and Deke together as backups -- that's gonna be the offensively worst combo in the entire league, thus JH came off the bench.

 

As i said, the difference is in approach regarding fairness. Gundy had his favorite players and they were allowed to get away with mistakes, while those he did not trust or liked, were yanked as soon as the first mistakes were made. Since I hate favoritisms, this irked me like hell.

So far, Adelman has been very fair with everyone. I cant think of one person he has not given the opportunity to prove themselves. I was in favor of Mike James getting more minutes than Rafer initially, but I have absolutely no problem with Rafer getting them because MJ has been sucking and Rafer has been producing. Brooks, a rookie guard, shined against the Knicks, similar to a rookie guard last year. Next games, Brooks had some turnover. Unlike last year, the turnovers did not result in immediate benching. Guys have had plenty of time to prove themselves and mistakes have been accepted in most cases.

This team still has a lot to learn. It will also make a lot of mistakes. The difference is that unlike previous years, neither the players nor the fans will be worried about someone being benched at the first sign of trouble.

 

I think "team oriented-ness" is more important than "multi-dimesnion-ness" to Adelman.

A lot of people espouse a lot of crappy analysis about coaches (and players) based on stereotypes and myth and don't see the more important points.

On Adelman's best Kings teams, which I watched pretty closely given that I live near Sacramental back then, the thing that stood out at you isn't overwhelming number of guys who can score 1-on-1-- it's frequent and crisp passing and a lack of guys who overdribble or hold on to the ball longer than is neccesary.

Even when Adelman had guys who are capable of getting their own shots-- Webber, Divac, Stojakovic, Bibby, maybe Miller, they don't often do so. For example, one of the years (03-04, I think) 69% of the baskets scored for them are assisted.

Don Nelson, by the way, is the oen who loved versatile atheletic guys who can create his own shot. Nelly-ball is all aout mismatches.

The differences are important, and, frankly, not very subtle. But people don't recognize it. This is why, by the way, some people get puzzled as to why Mr. Offense Rick Adelman gives so many minutes to Battier and Hayes. These guys may not score, but they keep the ball moving.

 

100% spot on......

It is about any player being able to be the initiator/creator of the offense.

Everyone being accountable and part of the offensive possessions.

I believe it keeps them more engaged when they are on the floor, as they could all be called on to score or create at any moment.

Team ball....a thing of beauty.

DD

 

as is having a much better bench with guys that can create shots as opposed to last year's bench that was garbage

 

Van Gundy is a very good coach and I think Adelman is a good coach.

I think Van Gundy's strength was his basketball IQ, and accountability and motivation methods.

I think what I see in Adelman is he is good at adjustments and experimentation and he has a good sense of utilizing a player's strengths.

I think Van Gundy would fit in philosophy with Pop in San Antonio and Riley in Miami and Sloan in Utah.

Adelman looks like a Don Nelson, Lenny Wilkens type.

I think both coaches need the roster tooled to their strengths.

I hope we get outstanding PG play from either Rafer or Brooks because it will take tremendous PG play to get through the playoffs under Adelman.

Since my goal is ONLY a championship, I am not happy yet that we are having to retool the team to fit another coaching style, but I am hoping we can quickly solidify the PG and PF position. It is too early to tell if Brooks and Scola are the answer.

I am not going to be happy just because we win a playoff series. If we make the playoffs.

I have been very encouraged by Scola and Yao so far this season.

But without a solid effort from TMac I don't expect us to even be a contender this year.

And that really is what bothers me alot, because at the end of the Utah series I firmly expected us to contend for the championship this season.

 

are you suggesting that Brooks and Scola would have gotten the room for mistakes, second chances, and minutes.. to get to where they are now.. with JVG?

infact the entire roster has gotten multiple chances throughout the season to contribute.. Snyder has had 4 chances to suck, Mike James has had two chances to get back in the rotation after playing himself out of it.. Novak and Landry, colder than these two.. have been given the time to come in and contribute.. Landry's starting to come into his own.

would JVG have substituted Hayes and Head for Brooks and Scola in the 4th quarter of a crucial game against the Hornets? Sacrifice defense and JVG's favorite 3pt 'specialist' for two rookies? Who, again, are playing like they are, because they've been given the play time, room for error, and freedom (I don't see Brooks, an unproven rookie, being allowed more playing time taking some of those risky Jon Barry running quick shots he takes sometimes, or those crazy 3-1 drives, under JVG's strict disciplinary coaching. Which so far, they go in for the former, and get shooting fouls for the latter.)

we all know what Bonzi said after comming back to the Rockets this year.. but would he really have been as motivated to return and give forth the effort if JVG had been still employed as head coach?

the whole "JVG sure could've used this bench last year" argument just doesn't make sense to me.. remembering how the man coached.. and remembering that two of the 3 biggest contributors off the bench have been two rookies.. one that seemed foul prone, hesitant, and uncertain in his first few games.. going through the ups and downs of adjusting to a new league.. and another one so undersized, over-eager, nervous, that it took him more than a few tries to crack the rotation.. And another thing, I don't see JVG using AB as a two guard.. ever. let enough for a while enough to get comfortable enough and ease of enough , to start steadily getting into his fair share of ball handling duties.

 

I seem to remember JVG playing Head and Hayes quite a bit when they were rookies. I love the revisionist history b/c the guy refused to play Vspan and Novak...two guys who clearly were not ready to play in the NBA

EDIT: and I was all for JVG being canned when he didn't advance us out of round one, but he certainly didn't have the talent RA has

 

Head got consistent playing time in the year that Snyder, Bonzi, T-mac were all injured for a long period of time. Back when we didn't have a glut at the guard positions..

Hayes was initially cut.. And at first was getting Carl Landry minutes.. when his only competition was Juwon Howard..

 

check the game log on head. that is a misconception.

bonzi was not on this team when head was a rookie. neither was snyder

 

Adleman should have a better bench than JVG because he's a better talent finder and utilizer. Adleman identified AB as a player he likes before the draft, he also properly utilized Bonzi, who JVG ignored. Scola is exchanged for V-Span, who JVG didn't want in the first place. If everything goes the JVG way, Rick Adleman would not have a bench.

 

you have morey and adelman confused

bonzi was fat and quit on jvg and the rockets