Putting the McHale Coaching Malcontents to Rest (Hopefully)

I actually don't have a big enough issue with McHale to want him fired right now.

With that said, a lot of the pro-McHale arguments is what you just said - young team, 8th spot in playoffs, scoring lots of points, new team put together only this year, etc. So therefore, McHale must be doing a good job.

My question to you is this: Why do you assume that because we have a young/inexperienced team + the fact that we're in playoff contention = McHale has been doing a good job?

I present my arguments in stats form:

Rockets actual W/L: 27-24

Exhibit A:
Rockets Expected W/L from Pythagorean formula: 30-21 (or Rockets should be 3 wins better than what they should be)

Exhibit B:
List of Win Shares for all Rockets Players:

James Harden 7.9
Chandler Parsons 4.2
Jeremy Lin 3.1
Omer Asik 2.9
Patrick Patterson 2.6
Greg Smith 2.4
Carlos Delfino 2.1
Marcus Morris 1.9
Toney Douglas 1.5
Patrick Beverley 0.4
Terrence Jones 0.2
James Anderson 0.2
Donatas Motiejunas 0.2
Cole Aldrich 0.1
Daequan Cook 0.1
Scott Machado -0.1
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/2013.html

Add that all up and you get 29.7, or rounded up, 30 wins. This means that the Rockets' players have performed well enough to be at 30 wins, yet the team is only at 27.

To repeat, two different evaluations of statistical performances says the Rockets should be at 30 wins, yet they are only at 27.

WITH THAT SAID, I do not attribute the -3 wins to McHale's coaching. Any number or reasons could account for the delta 3 in W/L record. This would be a much longer response if I went into them. These types of analysis are not completely black and white. But they are more often right then wrong.

The only thing I'm trying to say here is that the base assumption - that the Rockets are where they should be in terms of record is incorrect. MY OPINION, which I derived from statistical analysis, is that the Rockets are 3 wins LESS than what they should be.

 

First Post

I think that what riles most people is the perception that McHale seems to be 'outcoached' into losses now and then. For a start, this may be an asymmetric perception because it seems more natural to blame the coaching during losses than attribute a win to the substitution patterns.

However, a coach has little impact on the overall team winning percentage, in that not even the elite coaches will be able to guide the current Bobcats to the championship. Even the strategies used by the Rockets (such as getting quick transition buckets) are not solely McHale's; they are a product of an entire coaching staff. So using the Rockets' record to defend/attack McHale might be misleading.

McHale's doubters may have recognised something after all: that the in-game impact he makes is what's important. (But like itachen pointed out, this will only be crucial come the playoffs when the margins are fine and each game matters.)

So my two cents' worth to add to this discussion is that we should perhaps be looking at things like how his substitutions have affected games, how often his in-bounds plays that he draws at the ends of games works, and whether he has the leadership skills (to motivate his players in-game).

 

Championships aren't won in the regular season, that's what a good coach is needed for.

 

Durant scored 30 ppg at 55/40%, if that's bothering Durant, I don't want to see waving him by.

 

I understand this when put into our current season but looking to the future, few coaches can win an nba title. Phil Jackson didn't get 11 because he gamed the odds. He was a master and knew what to do in critical moments and could manage his team no matter the egos. Can't get that from numbers.

 

Red Auerbach didn't have assistant coaches and look how his players developed...just sayin'

 

HIRE GUNDY!!!!

Though, I am perfectly content with McHale who has this team over achieving.

 

So I guess I could do just as well?

 

Also... one star post...

this is the dumbest crap ever thrown forward by supposedly smart people.

Turrible...

 

I think we're mad because we know this team has more potential than the results we see. Yeah being 8th in the ranking isn't so bad but many of us watch the game, follow the game, and see every play/substitution, and we have a strong feeling that we don't agree with a LOT of coach's decisions. Subbing players out when they're hot until they're cold, putting both Lin and Harden out at the same time, not calling timeout until we lose our lead by double digits, etc.

I feel like this team could have so much more potential if we orchestrated our offense thru the PG like most other teams and play a lot more PnR with good screens. But instead, we choose to play iso-ball with Harden and have Harden play the point, which not only hurts Lin because we're making him useless and forcing him to play unnaturally (he's a penetrating guard who needs the ball in his hands) but we're also hurting Harden by exhausting him to make him score AND orchestrate the offense.

I do realize some of the game is going to turn out that way regardless of the coach...but the coach is there to set the plays, and he also works with the players OUTSIDE of games. He can teach them defense, create better plays, give advice, make them into better players by giving them confidence. Not only do we see Mchale dodge responsibility in post-game interviews, but he crushes some of our player's confidence and trust by benching them when we need them.

 

Because young/inexperienced teams often are terrible (see every other young team currently in the NBA).

 

I only read the OP, but I'm going to assume that this post completely worked, the complainers have seen the error of their ways, and the subsequent 4 pages are filled with laudatory comments about how the brilliance of this thread has settled a long-standing dispute that has bedeviled sports since the inception of coaching.

 

To piggy back on this statement, I feel like we need to highlight this a little more- Not only are they the youngest team in the league, the players they currently have are some of the biggest overachieving young players the game has ever seen have this kind of success this early on.

Lets just look at what kind of high level talent this team was projected to have as young players coming into this league-

Lin- Undrafted
Harden- Top 3 pick
Parsons- 2nd Round
Patterson- Late Lottery
Asik- 2nd round pick

And now lets look at the closest resemblence of a team that had similar success while being the youngest team in the league back in 2009/10... the OKC Thunder.

Westbrook-3rd overall pick
Harden-3rd overall pick
Durant- Top 2 pick
Green- Top 5 pick
Krstic- Late 1st Round pick

Now, Im not saying the Rockets are going to end up finishing the season with 50 wins like that years team, or that they will have the success the Thunder had the next few seasons, but they are projected to come pretty close.

So not only are they JUST overachieving for a young team, If you look at the talent they have on their roster in comparison to what other young over-achieving teams have accomplished in the past, the Rockets are clearly doing something that NO OTHER NBA TEAM has done before.

 

This is like reading a study that says something like "there's no discernible difference between programmers who recently graduated college regardless of race or gender," and thinking, "I am a high school dropout, I guess I should apply for a job in programming because they're all the same!"

 

I agree that McHale has done a decent job. But I guess with this young and talented team, many fans expect much more from the team, whether it is realistic or not. Plus, some of the criticisms are fair criticisms.

 

McHale is not just a good coach but a brilliant one. I mean who would sit his starting PG the last 12 minutes of the game and play someone who had been playing in Russia, had about 20 minutes of NBA experience and had never practiced with the team? And we won - absolute genius!

 

My biggest issue is not playing young players. Main example is DMo and TJone. Its baffling. Now Ive been holding out hope that its because of the trade deadline. We'll see after feb 21st. Hes not the best in game asjuster either, BUT all in all, hedone alot better than anticipated. Hes at least a good competent coach, we'll see if he matures further.

 

It is extremely difficult to judge a coach's work in terms of results. You really don't know how much is the players and how much is the coach. You pretty much have to take the whole career of work to have some sort of objective measurement.

McHale is pretty much a rookie (or sophomore at best) in his coaching career. He has very little track record to show how good or how bad he is as a coach.

Sure you can critique his substitution pattern and disagree with him. (I did. There were some head scratchers at times.) Or you can critique the way how he points out what needs to be done to improve. Or you can point out what he should or should not say in terms of motivating players. But at the end of the day, there is not much objective proof how these things impact results.

 

Look at your link again.
Win shares, almost across the board have improved, except for Harden and Delfino.
Almost every player has improved statistically from last season.

That is not a sign of bad coaching. Not even close.

 

I think the fact that this team is actually over .500 and not in last place has gotten its fan to think that they are capable of contending for a title this year. But most of the fans in the beginning of the season were crying for tanking/losing season. They forget that the team is young and this is their first time playing together. I think McHale is doing a fine job this year of getting the team to learn to play together. That being said, next year is whole different story. If the team doesn't improve or has a losing record then the "fire McHale" threads are warranted.

Im fine with just a playoff berth this season just for the experience to be under our young teams belt.