So this is what we're left with? Mike Dunleavy? He's decent...but is decent the best we can do? We got rid of a long time, loyal, and largely successfull coach to hire Mike Dunleavy? Don't get me wrong...he's hardly a terrible coach, as some would have it. But he has done little in his NBA career to make him anything more than a decent coach. He has had teams with exceptional talent, and lead them about where they'd have gone by themselves. He adds little and subtracts little from the equation. He's a very nice guy, but so's my next door neighbour. He's got friends in Houston, including in the Rockets organization, but so does Kenny Smith. Mike Dunleavy is a 7 out of 10...he's melba toast...he's vanilla ice cream...He's safe, and he's competent, and he's very enthusiastic about coming to houston. That's all very nice if you're hiring someone to cater your anniversary party, but I thought we just figured out that we need more than that here. He's probably better at the Xs and Os than Rudy was, but Rudy had a better track record and credibility here, so at best it's a wash. This team and organization is in need of a new identity, a new sense of focus. The coach we hire will go a long way to shaping that identity and aiming that focus. This will be the guy who directs Yao Ming's career development at it's most crucial stage,and tries to shape an offense around the complex questions of Francis, Mobley, and Yao. Do we really want that man to be Mike Dunleavy? Is now the time to play it safe? What is there to say for Dunleavy...not absence of extreme negatives, but what are his extreme positives? What does he stand for, in a basketball sense? What is his philosophy? In 10 coaching seasons his teams have won 8 games more than they have lost, total. His team had a winning record 6 times and a losing one 4 times. He is the porridge that Goldilocks ate, but she was a middle of the road kind of girl. Mike Dunleavy has coached for a decade, and I defy anyone here to give me a clear idea of what he's about. I think Mike Dunleavy is a solid coach. if we had a veteran team who needed a coach to not mess things up, I'd be happy with Dunleavy. Not ecstatic, not depressed, just plain old middle of the road happy, as you'd expect. We had a shot at greatness, in Brown, and it looks like we missed, for whatever reason. I say take more shots...see what it would take to get Orlando to let us talk to Rivers...approach Carlisle...see if Riley has an out... All of these guys have questions, probably more questions than Mike Dunleavy. But they all also represent a whole lot more potential answers than Dunleavy. He asks and answers few, and I think we need more than that. I'd rather take a chance on an unproven, or a guy who has had problems but stands for something, like Eddie Jordan or even Jim Cleamons than go with safe old Mike Dunleavy, given our situation. Last year we lacked identity and accountability. Tjose were our biggest problems. I don't see Mike Dunleavy solving them. I have questions about Jeff Van Gundy, but I'd pick him over Dunleavy, because at least I get a sense that he has a direction. If you're going to be a leader, you have to have somewhere to go. I think Mike Dunleavy just sticks to the middle of the road, and that's just not enough.
Any reason you couldn't throw this in the other Dunleavy thread? Was it simply not grandiose enough for your style?
Yeah...a cool title. No, but seriously, I wanted to make a point about settling for the middle road, and I didn't think that ir belonged in that thread, which was about him wanting the job ( which i don't refute) or any of the others. Ahh..you felt the need to add a personal shot, so if for no other reason at least this thread gave you an opportunity to get back at me for all the shots I've taken at you over the years...
Well, in defense of Mike Dunleavy, I think he's a lot smarter and a much stronger leader than most people give him credit for. For starters, the man's coaching career is squarely focused on the Western Conference. i.e he is familiar with lots of the players out there that we see more often than not in division and conference matchups. Moreover, it speaks volumes about a guy who, despite having no "hiring/firing" power, still managed to get two teams with their fair share of headcases, respectably into the playoffs. If one were to make comparisons, I don't see how Maurice Cheeks achievements in Portland are any better than Dunleavy's. Sure Cheeks helped that little girl out with the national anthem, but aside from that, Portland's playoff performances have been futile. IMO, Dunleavy did a very respectable job in both Portland and L.A. Where he had his problems was in Milwaukee.. where he was probably in over his head with the "rebuilding" challenge there. So based on history, Dunleavy actually is a great fit for the Rox. He has a demonstrated ability to work with talent (even if that talent has anger management issues) and playoff-caliber teams. Where he has shortcomings may be in trying to "rebuild" a team with young players. While the Rox are "young", they are in no ways a team in rebuilding mode. With the Bucks, Dunleavy had high hopes to land Chris Webber (remember that lottery folks?) to fill his forward spot. However, that never panned out, and plan B was to simply keep working with the young players they had. Dunleavy + the Rox could very well work. I see nothing "plain vanilla" or middle ground about it. Absent his stint with the Bucks, Dunleavy's record is actually very respectable. theSAGE
I completely agree Macbeth. I think Dunleavy is a nice enough guy, but this new coach is very important- to all of us. We have a lot riding on this. We will see Francis at his peak these next few seasons, Yao Ming develop, and many trades and deals that shape this team. I really hate Pat Riley-sleazy gangster burnout- way past his prime, but I would rather have him than Dunleavy - I cannot believe I said that. We deserve a special coach. Van Gundy would be better. I really like Carlisle- could we get him????? Lets make a strong clear assertive offer for Carlisle. Les -hit him with your best shot...... Let us not settle for Mike Dunleavy........
But is that what it's come down to? We hope to move this organization ahead, and start off a new era in Rockets' basketball, by eliminating a negative and replacing it with a neutral or at best slight positive?
I really felt sorry for Dunleavy while at Portland. He had some real head cases there. Remember how bad J R Rider behavior was. RAsheed is unstable, and they had so much talent that it was all on him. GM Trader Bob Whitsitt seemed to say -here it all is for your Mike now do something with all this talent. Dunleavy did develop some very good teams-he could not help it if JR Rider went mental... I still do not want him....
Yeah, it's quite a letdown. I totally agree with you that he's a "7 out of 10, melba toast." I would hope that the Rockets give Carlisle a look.
Carlisle would be a smart move- an improvement for us. We need to hit this aggressively-sign him up- he will nto be available long- he is the best one out there right now. I would take Carlisle over Doc Rivers or Jim Cleamons or Byron Scott. Carlisle is unemployed right this minute and would require less red tape than getting permission to talk to Rivers or Scott. I know Scott and Rivers are not really available-I am just using and example for comparison of successful young coaches.
MacBeth, I highly respect your opinion, but I think you seriously underestimate the coaching skills of Dunleavy. Portland was surely loaded, but with the wrong mix of talent IMO. Even with that combustable mix, he was a really good coach. JVG was also a decent coach, but I don't think he would make it in the West. I would honestly place Dunleavy as our next choice below Brown.
Yeah, but its like the Rockets had a date with the prettiest girl for prom but then all of a sudden a richer guy from the the east side of town just comes over and snatches her away so now they're stuck with the platonic friend that needs a date. The Rockets were in a dare to be great situation.
Dunleavy seems to be adjustable with his basketball philosophy. He went against a legend in Los Angeles and slowed down showtime. As a result, his team went to the finals. I agree he was in over his head in Milwaukee, but some of the moves then paid ff in the future. I can't remember much about the offense, except that it was run through the two forwards out of necessity. In Portland he liked to run and be a little more creative, while playing strong defense. Come on - Pippen said nice things about him - he criticizes everything. BGM - catfight!
I agree that he isn't a guy who comes in with a My Way or the Highway scheme...and generally I like that. But in this case it seems to just fit in with the sense I have of him of having no sense of him. I am not saying he's a bad coach...not at all...just that he's decent, and nice, and phlegmatic at a time when I feel we sorely need an identity, and accountability. I say take a chance on getting something better, rather than settle, and 3 or 4 years be looking for a coach to take us further.
The Blazers have gone downhill since Dunleavy left. I'm not necessarily saying he's the best candidate but I think you're selling the guy short.
I don't think so, but it's not impossible. I do acknowlege that this might in part be motivated by a huge sense of letdown. The coach I believe is probably the best in the business, and fits this team so perfectly, and already has the biggest question mark ( Francis) he'd have to deal with behind him was here in town to interview for the job within 48 hours of coming onto the market... ...and now we're talking Mike Dunleavy.
I was one of Rudy's critics the past season and I can tell you I see hiring Dunleavy as a lateral move. Van Gundy would be a downgrade. Silas had the potential to be an upgrade, but he's off the market, Carlisle for all of his accomplishments in Detroit has only had two years of head coaching experience and we really don't know what his future career will be like. The chance to do somehting special is expiring by the hour this Sunday. If I were CD and Les, I would be bidding on Brown against Detroit. No price is too high to bring in Brown in my opinion.
