PDA

View Full Version : Who should succeed Rick Carlisle?



Shade
04-09-2006, 04:42 PM
If you're of the belief that Rick should be/is gone at the end of the season, who would you like (that is available) to replace him?

rexnom
04-09-2006, 04:43 PM
Larry Bird or possibly Eric Musselman

bulletproof
04-09-2006, 04:47 PM
John Madden.

Unclebuck
04-09-2006, 04:51 PM
Eric Musselman is my choice.

Dennis Johnson is someone I'd like to know more about

Kstat
04-09-2006, 04:55 PM
Musselman replacing Carlisle...that would be the funniest moment of my year.

Replace Rick with a guy that coaches EXACTLY LIKE HIM.. :laugh:

Don't get me wrong, I like Musselman. He's a solid young coach. But so is Carlisle. They coach almost exactly alike.

Jermaniac
04-09-2006, 04:55 PM
Steve Spurrier Fun N Gun baby

Jermaniac
04-09-2006, 04:56 PM
Musselman replacing Carlisle...that would be the funniest moment of my year.

Replace Rick witha guy that coaches EXACTLY LIKE HIM.. :laugh:Yep, I dont want Musslemen after what I heard the Warrior fans say about him.

#31
04-09-2006, 05:04 PM
Slick? :)

sweabs
04-09-2006, 05:05 PM
Rick Adelman. Pipe dream, but I love the way his teams play.

George Foreman
04-09-2006, 05:06 PM
What about Dennis Rodman, I heard he has been looking to return to the NBA.

Unclebuck
04-09-2006, 05:07 PM
Musselman replacing Carlisle...that would be the funniest moment of my year.

Replace Rick with a guy that coaches EXACTLY LIKE HIM.. :laugh:

Don't get me wrong, I like Musselman. He's a solid young coach. But so is Carlisle. They coach almost exactly alike.



So you want us to pick a bad coach. Why not pick the best coach available.

I would be very intersted in your thoughts though, I don;t think Mus coaches like Rick at all really.

Shade
04-09-2006, 05:09 PM
So you want us to pick a bad coach. Why not pick the best coach available.

I would be very intersted in your thoughts though, I don;t think Mus coaches like Rick at all really.

Going by that rationale, Carlisle is the best coach available. But that doesn't make him the right coach.

rexnom
04-09-2006, 05:11 PM
So you want us to pick a bad coach. Why not pick the best coach available.

I would be very intersted in your thoughts though, I don;t think Mus coaches like Rick at all really.

From what I've heard, I have to agree with this. I've heard lots of good things. And in the end, he ended up doing better with his GS team than this far more talented team did with his replacement Montgomery.

Indyfan
04-09-2006, 05:11 PM
Is there a right coach for this team???

rexnom
04-09-2006, 05:12 PM
Going by that rationale, Carlisle is the best coach available. But that doesn't make him the right coach.

Isn't the reasoning here that we need change for change's sake, the three year rule, etc.? No one is questioning how talented Rick is. We just need new blood at this point.

Kstat
04-09-2006, 05:17 PM
the three year rule, etc.?

Can we start calling it "Bird's 3-year rule?"

It's his rule, nobody else's, to my knowledge.

Since he was quoted as saying that, his word has been taken as gospel here, when there are plenty of coaches who have coached longer than 3 years in the same city and been successful.

It's really not a rule in the NBA, it's just a guideline that Bird says he goes by.

Lord Helmet
04-09-2006, 05:19 PM
I really don't know.

Evan_The_Dude
04-09-2006, 05:26 PM
I've already said Musselman 3,000 times. Looking at what Muss did with a similar roster to what Montgomery has had (minus Baron Davis) I think that says enough about his coaching abilities. He also coaches through every minute of the game, never sits down, he's always on the players asses, and he's PROactive.

Warriors fans say what they do about him because to them, they haven't made the playoffs since 93 (?). They don't care about a coach that almost got them there but didn't because their players hadn't matured to a playoff level yet. The two years Muss was there, I only missed watching 4 of the games. I was a Warriors fan those two years.

HulkSmash!
04-09-2006, 05:28 PM
Mark Boyle is my #1 choice.

Eindar
04-09-2006, 05:31 PM
Stan Van Gundy, anyone?

Doug in CO
04-09-2006, 05:31 PM
Mark Jackson was a popular choice at the party - and after hearing what he said about the Pacers today - that the team has lost its swagger (pride) - I am liking that idea more and more.

Ragnar
04-09-2006, 05:41 PM
Mark Jackson unless something freakish happens and NO/OK loses Byron.


Hey they have made some stupid moves in the past it could happen.

Roaming Gnome
04-09-2006, 05:49 PM
I also like the idea of Mark Jackson, but is he a realistic choice? One thing that was also discussed at the party was his lack of intrest in becomming an assistant coach. I'm sure his statement of, "why would I want to be an assistant coach, I've been one for 18 years!" is not opening him any doors. Little things like that can and do cost you!

Kegboy
04-09-2006, 05:58 PM
Musselman in GS was exactly like Rick in Detroit, before he softened his demeanor due to the hatchet job he received when he left. He's the perfect assistant, but he may be too caustic to be an effective head.

Johnson coached the Clips in '02-03 to a 27-55 record. Coincidentally, that was Andre Miller's one year there, where he pouted half the season away.

As for the question at hand, Michael Cooper, but I still don't see it happening, regardless of people at the forum party trying to get my hopes up.

If people want someone to come in and kick ***, Bill Laimbeer.

Byron would be great, but sadly he's not available.

pacerwaala
04-09-2006, 06:02 PM
Can we start calling it "Bird's 3-year rule?"

It's his rule, nobody else's, to my knowledge.

Since he was quoted as saying that, his word has been taken as gospel here, when there are plenty of coaches who have coached longer than 3 years in the same city and been successful.

It's really not a rule in the NBA, it's just a guideline that Bird says he goes by.


Damn Right. Most or all or Bird's coaching was based on his pedigree and achievements in the NBA. He had disciplined and determined players who showed up every night. He had good Xs and Os coaches and he showed leadership by setting expectations. I highly doubt he would have the success that he had with the 2000 Pacers if he was coaching the present bunch of Pacers. He probably would not be as successful as Carlisle has been with the present Pacers.

Since Bird's coaching was based on his aura, etc it would only last for 3 years. After that, players like Jalen Rose and some of the young players in today's NBA would loose their reverence for Bird and start breaking plays. I think that is the reason he had this three year rule.

Carlisle's coaching has substance and strategy and a system(good or bad). So, I think he can make adjustments and coach in this city for a few more years with success.

Shade, I know you started this thread saying "If you feel Carlisle needs to be replaced" but I thought it is appropriate to point out that the three year rule is kind of an overblown thing on this board.

If Carlise had to be replaced ( I personally do not want this to happen, I want Carlisle to have a long career here) the names that I would consider are

Larry Brown - if he parts ways with NY
John Starks - has put in the work and won a championship in the CBA
Lambeer - I know Bird won't do it but Lambeer is very smart and candid(WNBA championships do not count for much but he still did have to press the right buttons)
Billy Donovan (I do not know much about him but his teams have had decent success in the past few years capped by a championship this year)
Mario Ellie - He has put in the work as an assistant with the Warriors and showed passion when he was a player
Rick Adelman - Good system and good Xs and Os caoch

I am just throwing out a few names for discussion. Feel free to shred my picks apart.

SoupIsGood
04-09-2006, 06:02 PM
Can we start calling it "Bird's 3-year rule?"

It's his rule, nobody else's, to my knowledge.

Since he was quoted as saying that, his word has been taken as gospel here, when there are plenty of coaches who have coached longer than 3 years in the same city and been successful.

It's really not a rule in the NBA, it's just a guideline that Bird says he goes by.


THANK GOD SOMEONE SAID THIS I LOVE YOU K









Rick Adelman

Hicks
04-09-2006, 06:21 PM
Right now I'd probably want Adelman if he's out there.

SwissExpress
04-09-2006, 06:24 PM
Anyone of the D.Nelson dinasty.

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 06:26 PM
Eric Musselman is my choice.

Dennis Johnson is someone I'd like to know more about

I agree on Dennis Johnson, it would be interesting to learn more about him.

rexnom
04-09-2006, 06:28 PM
I wouldn't mind the idea of Adelman either but are we sure he'll be available?

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 06:32 PM
John Starks - has put in the work and won a championship in the CBA

I am just throwing out a few names for discussion. Feel free to shred my picks apart.

Heh heh, that one would take some getting used to. ;)

It's good to hear he is making a serious effort to become a coach.

Steveman
04-09-2006, 06:37 PM
Mark Jackson unless something freakish happens and NO/OK loses Byron.

We can only hope for something freakish .... and while we are at it, let's hope he brings Chris Paul with him!

Big Smooth
04-09-2006, 06:38 PM
We can only hope for something freakish .... and while we are at it, let's hope he brings Chris Paul with him!

I like the way you think! ;)

Unclebuck
04-09-2006, 07:46 PM
I'd rather have Rick Mahorn than Bill Laimbeer.

I realize most of you are sick of me constantly bringing up the name of Eric Musselman, but I'm 100% sure that he'll be the next excellent coach, whether it is here or someplace else. But he isn't like Rick, Eric is very innovative, willing to try new things. Didn't anyone read that article I posted about him diagramming a new play during every preseason game just to see which players can adapt to brand new plays.

I'd compare Eric much more to Scott Skiles or Jeff Van Gundy, than I would to Rick Carlisle

Moses
04-09-2006, 07:50 PM
Bill Walton.

Easy choice here.

Kestas
04-09-2006, 07:57 PM
If you're of the belief that Rick should be/is gone at the end of the season, who would you like (that is available) to replace him?

Dusko Ivanovic is my fantasy coach of this team. shock therapy!
Nelson Jr. could be the reality one.

GO!!!!!
04-09-2006, 08:39 PM
No Change...

Kaufman
04-09-2006, 08:46 PM
I'm thinking Mark Jackson, but I also think we have to consider that Larry is from a Celtic tree and he may look to some Celtic connections.

Kstat
04-09-2006, 08:50 PM
in all likelyhood I think Dennis Johnson will be the name that comes up the most if Rick gets canned.

TheLemonSong
04-09-2006, 09:43 PM
For those that slurp Adelman, keep in mind that it is Pete Carril that devised that offensive scheme.

I'd rather see what the team looks like before picking a coach. I think Rick has done more with less than perhaps anyone in the history of the game.

I love how no one said squat about Rick's coaching when the Pacers won 61 games, then the walls cave in and everyone points the fingers at Rick.

Kaufman
04-09-2006, 09:50 PM
Lemon,

I don't think anyone dislikes RC or thinks he is a poor coach. On the contrary, I think he has done a fantastic job. I'll miss him, he's done a great service to our team in lifting it out of the years that were Isiah Thomas. But this team and this organization, collectively, have outgrown him. He does not have command of the team any longer, and we're not going to be able to trade ALL of our players. Its time for wholesale changes and I think most are in agreement with that.

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 09:56 PM
I'm thinking Mark Jackson, but I also think we have to consider that Larry is from a Celtic tree and he may look to some Celtic connections.

If so, I may consider an assassination plot.

I don't like the green guys.

Kaufman
04-09-2006, 10:02 PM
Yeah but you like Larry!!!








You do like Larry, don't you?

Doug in CO
04-09-2006, 10:05 PM
Bill Walton.

Easy choice here.

Why? To get him off the air?

Kegboy
04-09-2006, 10:06 PM
Bill Walton.

Easy choice here.

I think I might have to move away if that happened. Far, far away.

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 10:08 PM
No. I hate Larry Bird.

One of the reasons I was such a big Chuck Person fan was because Chuck wouldn't back down from Larry. He didn't have as much success as I wanted him to have, but at least he tried. Which is better than anybody else involved with the Pacers had done in the seven/eight seasons prior to to that.

My all-time favorite Chuck Person-ism was before a Pacers/ Celtics regular season game in 1991 - right before the huge playoff series and as the rivalry was hitting high gear.

Chuck was all over the Indy fans that would show up at MSA was a green #33 jersey and a Pacers hat, and then cheer for both teams and go home happy.

I was always cheering for my hometown team. Bird was the enemy.

Doug in CO
04-09-2006, 10:08 PM
No. I hate Larry Bird.

One of the reasons I was such a big Chuck Person fan was because Chuck wouldn't back down from Larry. He didn't have as much success as I wanted him to have, but at least he tried. Which is better than anybody else involved with the Pacers had done in the seven/eight seasons prior to to that.

My all-time favorite Chuck Person-ism was before a Pacers/ Celtics regular season game in 1991 - right before the huge playoff series and as the rivalry was hitting high gear.

Chuck was all over the Indy fans that would show up at MSA was a green #33 jersey and a Pacers hat, and then cheer for both teams and go home happy.

I was always cheering for my hometown team. Bird was the enemy.

What he said.

Kegboy
04-09-2006, 10:11 PM
No. I hate Larry Bird.


:hug2:

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 10:17 PM
Yeah, but I think we're the only three.

Kaufman
04-09-2006, 10:19 PM
Well I loved Chuck too, and still do, even if I have to give him a little EXTRA loving to cover his body surface area.

I know the 1991 series you speak of - its when I too became a Chuck and Pacers fan. Hit 39 and 38 points in consecutive games. There is an Upper Deck card dedicated to it "Classic Rivalries" if I remember right with him and Bird. And one of my favorite shot is the one in the fifth game when Chuckles launched it from the suburbs and hit though it was too little too late by that time.

But the thing is, Larry is a Hoosier too. And there's not a think wrong with embracing him... he's one of us and even though we loaned him to Boston for a few years, and championships, he's back. And its fine.

pizza guy
04-09-2006, 10:28 PM
Why is it Stan Van Gundy gets no discussion? Obviously, he's not the most experienced coach out there, but Lambier doesn't have NBA coaching experience either. I think the coach should be chosen, and then the players (assuming we make many moves this offseason) according to the coach, and with his input. What I'd like to see is a Bobby Knight type guy, with the fire and tenacity and straight up frightening presence. Find him, and you'll please the fans who are sick of the team not giving 100% every night.

Unclebuck
04-09-2006, 10:30 PM
What I'd like to see is a Bobby Knight type guy, with the fire and tenacity and straight up frightening presence. Find him, and you'll please the fans who are sick of the team not giving 100% every night.



That doesn't work in the NBA. Players will quit on a coach like that by Thanksgiving.

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 10:37 PM
Tark in the NBA?

:laugh:

John Calipari in the NBA?

:laugh:

There's plenty of proof that doesn't work.

SoupIsGood
04-09-2006, 11:02 PM
Yeah, but I think we're the only three.

I could swear Grace hates Bird.

Although, she probably didn't see this conversation, since she has everyone on ignore. ;)

ChicagoJ
04-09-2006, 11:03 PM
And me too, as of about five minutes ago.

:blush:

GO!!!!!
04-09-2006, 11:20 PM
it's Mike K or it's nothing...

abington
04-09-2006, 11:23 PM
mark jackson or reggie miller.

Slick Pinkham
04-09-2006, 11:34 PM
Can we start calling it "Bird's 3-year rule?"

It's his rule, nobody else's, to my knowledge.

Since he was quoted as saying that, his word has been taken as gospel here, when there are plenty of coaches who have coached longer than 3 years in the same city and been successful.

It's really not a rule in the NBA, it's just a guideline that Bird says he goes by.

Even BIRD doesn't give any credence to this stupid rule. He has alluded to that in interviews.

Bird had health problems and wanted out of coaching. He also didn't like coaching that much. That was his excuse to step away. He created that stupid excuse so that people would not dig deeper to find the real reason he wanted to quit, and that was his health. He is a very private guy.

I don't even remember what the health problem was now.

Musselman would be OK. I actually think that Dennis Johnson would be OK too.

Nobody will turn anything around without major roster turnover, so I wonder what's the point.

sweabs
04-09-2006, 11:55 PM
It will be important that we find the right coach for the type of team we are trying to create. This is why it's important that Larry and Donnie think things through and get some sort of direction or vision on where they want things to go for this franchise.

They need to make some roster moves and know what type of player personnel we are going to have so we know what coach will best mesh with those guys. Not vice versa.

Bball
04-10-2006, 12:25 AM
Even BIRD doesn't give any credence to this stupid rule. He has alluded to that in interviews.

Bird had health problems and wanted out of coaching. He also didn't like coaching that much. That was his excuse to step away. He created that stupid excuse so that people would not dig deeper to find the real reason he wanted to quit, and that was his health. He is a very private guy.

I don't even remember what the health problem was now.



IIRC Bird declared that '3 year rule' of his up front... heading into his coaching job. Not at the end. He simply stuck with it thru all 3 seasons and never publicly looked back.

-Bball

Bball
04-10-2006, 12:29 AM
It will be important that we find the right coach for the type of team we are trying to create. This is why it's important that Larry and Donnie think things through and get some sort of direction or vision on where they want things to go for this franchise.

They need to make some roster moves and know what type of player personnel we are going to have so we know what coach will best mesh with those guys. Not vice versa.

Yip...
If Walsh's days really are numbered and we're transitioning to a Larry Bird team then they need to start crystalizing that vision and building toward it now.

I don't want to be reading how Bird wants the Pacers to play a 'more Euro style of game with more ball sharing....' while we have a coach that seems absolutely against that. And players who make questionable decisions with the ball... altho sometimes they might be doing exactly what the coach wants (to the best of their ability anyway).

We don't need 4 PG's on the team either... make a decision and live or die with it.

By the way, learning to use the trade deadline would be nice as well.

-Bball

DrBadd01
04-10-2006, 02:00 AM
If we chose to replace Rick than I say we go in a different direction. With that in mind. . . .

Pini Gershon
http://www.24sec.net/article.asp?index=2064

http://www.maccabi.co.il/MaccabiStaff.asp?SeasonYear=200506&Role=CH&language=english

Gershon has been very successful over in Israel and if he went to the Pacers than he would already have a player he is familiar wiith in Saras. Additionally, from what I have read his teams play a game that is very up tempo, like the Suns. If we wanted to go in a different direction than I can't think of one that is more different or more suiting (especially if Larry wants to make the Pacers play more of a European style)

Kestas
04-10-2006, 07:47 AM
If we chose to replace Rick than I say we go in a different direction. With that in mind. . . .

Pini Gershon


as you noticed, Gershon emphasises the offense. NBA fans are allergic to anyone, who pays less attention to deffense (or looks like doing so).
if a mirracle were to happen (think Bush resigning in favour of H. Clinton or Osama bin Laden surrendering to the Americans), it would be better to invite somebody with a more complete phylosophy and more varied experience. imho. somebody like Ivanovic or Obradovic. or Jonas Kazlauskas. people like them would shake the NBA to the roots with their iron solid discipline (no stars in the team.) and varied deffenses that no NBA team ever uses. and the team oriented offense, that's by default.. I'm sure that given the chance these people would achieve more in NBA than any Chucks Browns there are. simply NBA is so unfamilliar with the team concept (on offense and deffense), that the team who would start utilising that in full first would be wining big.

while Gershon is a bit of a popstar type imho.. but don't take me wrong - even him would be ten times better for this team than Rick Carlisle ;)

Doug in CO
04-10-2006, 08:22 AM
I thank God every day that we have folks like you here to straighten out us ignorant, ugly Americans.

Thank you!

DrBadd01
04-10-2006, 09:31 AM
as you noticed, Gershon emphasises the offense. NBA fans are allergic to anyone, who pays less attention to deffense (or looks like doing so).
if a mirracle were to happen (think Bush resigning in favour of H. Clinton or Osama bin Laden surrendering to the Americans), it would be better to invite somebody with a more complete phylosophy and more varied experience. imho. somebody like Ivanovic or Obradovic. or Jonas Kazlauskas. people like them would shake the NBA to the roots with their iron solid discipline (no stars in the team.) and varied deffenses that no NBA team ever uses. and the team oriented offense, that's by default.. I'm sure that given the chance these people would achieve more in NBA than any Chucks Browns there are. simply NBA is so unfamilliar with the team concept (on offense and deffense), that the team who would start utilising that in full first would be wining big.

while Gershon is a bit of a popstar type imho.. but don't take me wrong - even him would be ten times better for this team than Rick Carlisle ;)

Okay. I just wanted to suggest someone accomplished from Europe. The coaches you mentioned would be just as good. It would give the NBA a different look that would take some getting used to for the other teams.I think that this is in part why the Suns are so successful. D'Antoni coaching philosophy is so different from most NBA coaches.

Unclebuck
04-10-2006, 09:45 AM
Can I just say I don't want a coach from Europe. I want someone who who has NBA experience. if you think Saras has rubbed the players the wrong way what would a coach who has never coached or played in the NBA do.

SwissExpress
04-10-2006, 09:48 AM
I doubt that zone specialists from Europe would really be successfull in the NBA... (Ignoring the fact that he's too old for such changes,) Pini Gershon would probably be the best choice among Euro coaches now.

And to be more realistic, I think that David Blatt is currently the only Euro coach whom I can clearly see among NBA coaching staff someday.
He's very young (which enables him to take time and spend some years at assistant coach position),
ambitious,
flexible (not every coach would dear to move from US to Italy to Russia and still be successfull everywhere),
he's American and
he has already proven himself as much as any other Euro coach except Gershon, Messina, Obradovic, Ivkovic and 4-5 others.
(Besides, he's elegant, funny and good looking enough to make him easy-to-sell for the fans.)

DrBadd01
04-10-2006, 09:58 AM
Can I just say I don't want a coach from Europe. I want someone who who has NBA experience. if you think Saras has rubbed the players the wrong way what would a coach who has never coached or played in the NBA do.

Put in a completly different system of Basketball that would emphasis team play. I imagine that this philosphy would be similiar to the one that has defeated team USA in the world championsips, and Olympics respectivly.

Hiring an European coach would also make it easier to get International/European players to sign with us. Simply put it would be a different style of basketball that could potentially win us a lot of games.

SwissExpress
04-10-2006, 09:58 AM
PS: Gershon is not really known to be very friendly with team management. He likes to speak out his dissappointments loudly, at least I've got such impression.

Saras talks about NBA peculiarities in general, without mentioning anyone in particular. From Gershon you could expect clear remarks in Bird's and Walsh's address if they aren't bold enough with reforms the coach is promised.

Be carefull what you wish for. ;) Gershon is an eccentric personality.

Unclebuck
04-10-2006, 10:02 AM
Hiring an European coach would also make it easier to get International/European players to sign with us. Simply put it would be a different style of basketball that could potentially win us a lot of games.



I don't want anymore international players, and I don't want to "win a lot of games" I want to win a championship, and I believe in order to win it all you have to play a playoff style.

SwissExpress
04-10-2006, 10:07 AM
Kazlauskas, on the other hand, must have spent nearly a decade as a coach of Lithuanian and Chinese NTs, in cooperation with several NBA coaches from the Dallas organisation. Thus he should currently have the best idea about NBA coaching among Euro coaches.

I'm not sure about his age, though. I remember that several years ago he said he might be too old to start as an assistant coach in NBA. And straight transfer from Europe to the main coaching job in an NBA team might be too big of a risk even for him.

DrBadd01
04-10-2006, 10:10 AM
I don't want anymore international players, and I don't want to "win a lot of games" I want to win a championship, and I believe in order to win it all you have to play a playoff style.

Fair enough. However, I would think that winning a lot of games would include the playoffs. How could a NBA team defend against philosophies that they would know little to nothing about? If you watched the Olympics and the World Championships its obvious that the American style of Basketball doesn't understand Euro Basketball. I Doubt that the league would be able to pick up all the nuances.

SwissExpress
04-10-2006, 10:10 AM
It's easier to make a playoff-style team by starting with a good Euro-centred team (a la Nelson and Nowitzki Mavs) than from scratch.

ChicagoJ
04-10-2006, 10:24 AM
Can I just say I don't want a coach from Europe. I want someone who who has NBA experience. if you think Saras has rubbed the players the wrong way what would a coach who has never coached or played in the NBA do.

The only reasonable candidate with a European pedigree is Donn Nelson, Jr.

I wouldn't object to that. I know you'd hate it. That would keep PD interesing. :-p

ChicagoJ
04-10-2006, 10:26 AM
I don't want anymore international players, and I don't want to "win a lot of games" I want to win a championship, and I believe in order to win it all you have to play a playoff style.

Fine.

I want the 1980s-era Lakers playoff style.

:devil:

And (I'll say it), I'd do backflips if we got rid of that Green guy and brought in Riley to lead it.

themind
04-10-2006, 10:35 AM
I doubt that zone specialists from Europe would really be successfull in the NBA... (Ignoring the fact that he's too old for such changes,) Pini Gershon would probably be the best choice among Euro coaches now.

And to be more realistic, I think that David Blatt is currently the only Euro coach whom I can clearly see among NBA coaching staff someday.
He's very young (which enables him to take time and spend some years at assistant coach position),
ambitious,
flexible (not every coach would dear to move from US to Italy to Russia and still be successfull everywhere),
he's American and
he has already proven himself as much as any other Euro coach except Gershon, Messina, Obradovic, Ivkovic and 4-5 others.
(Besides, he's elegant, funny and good looking enough to make him easy-to-sell for the fans.)

I agree with this completely.

To other European bball lovers:
It's Pacers forum, not an advertisment board for European coaches/players that are relatively unknown.

PEACE :)

Kestas
04-10-2006, 12:17 PM
And to be more realistic, I think that David Blatt ...
He's very young

imho this is the only virtue he's got, unfortunately. I don't understand who in the world adviced Benetton to sign him.

he is far from being among the best even if we consider his age and probable improvement. his choice of assistant (Kemzura) only proves his incompetence ;) imho...

Kestas
04-10-2006, 12:19 PM
I agree with this completely.

To other European bball lovers:
It's Pacers forum, not an advertisment board for European coaches/players that are relatively unknown.

PEACE :)

my friend, if Ivanovic, Kazlauskas or Obradovic are "relatively unknown", then 3/4 of the American coaches mentioned in this thread are simply unknown in all ways possible ;)

Kestas
04-10-2006, 12:34 PM
The only reasonable candidate with a European pedigree is Donn Nelson, Jr.


yeah, we all understand that NBA is not ready for a European coach yet. they would eat him alive, unless the organization behind him could afford to lose a year or so calming down the anraged fans and stedying the confused players.. it will probably come, but not yet. untill that Nelson is the closest thing to someone like Kazlauskas one could find in NBA. yah, he's worse than European stars, but still better than Rick. and he was advising the same Kazlauskas when Lithuania lost by 2 to US in 2000 (intentional sellection of an example there ;)), so he more or less knows the European style.

SwissExpress
04-10-2006, 12:36 PM
imho this is the only virtue he's got, unfortunately. I don't understand who in the world adviced Benetton to sign him.

he is far from being among the best even if we consider his age and probable improvement. his choice of assistant (Kemzura) only proves his incompetence ;) imho...

Didn't he win the cup of Europe a season ago? Or am I confusing smth?
Hasn't he done that with that very assistant?


yeah, we all understand that NBA is not ready for a European coach yet.

They were ready for D'Antoni.

I guess the issue lies elsewhere. Elder and most established Euro coaches don't come to NBA because they aren't ready to start from the assistant position; Obradovic, Gershon or Ivkovic don't have enough time (they must be in their 60s or somewhere around that?). Besides, the difference between NBA and top Euro coach salaries isn't that big as between NBA and Euro players. Top Euro coaches earn salaries with 7 digits; they probably wouldn't be able to get that as assistants in NBA. Furthermore, people like Messina, Obradovich etc might be the biggest stars in their respective clubs. Messina (while in Beneton) is the best example of that. They are too old and too proud to become rookies out of superstars a la Saras.

Chauncey
04-10-2006, 12:39 PM
Paul Westphal

Yes, I'm serious. I've said this before, so pardon me while I repeat myself. The Pacers (and, thus, their fans) have been through so much the last couple of years, that the organization needs to reward the players and fans with some fun.

It doesn't matter what style they play or who the coach is for the next 2 years because the Pacers aren't winning a title in that time. The Pacers need to cleanse themselves of all of this turmoil, get the fans back on their side, and then make a new championship push.

1. Resign Peja

2. Find a PG...settle on a PG...whatever it takes.

3. Trade the unpopular players (Tinsley, Jax)

4. Start playing fan-friendly basketball, get the fieldhouse rockin again. Up and down the floor.

5. A couple of nice draft picks + more maturation from JO + development of Granger

6. Once they peak, bring in a defensive-minded coach to finish the job. Its basically a complete recycling of the past few years, but you just can't keep banging your head into the wall over and over again and expect it to stop hurting. At some point you have to try something else, if only to be doing something else for a change.

I can't overstate how important it is for the fans to be behind this team. And the only way to get the fans back is to excite them again. Sure, fans will be pretty happy when the team is winning, even if they are playing boring basketball...but that wears thin unless you're winning championships.

Its time to reward the fans, cast off those that aren't playing hard, and cast off anyone in the organization (read: Carlisle) that isn't willing to change their approach.

D-BONE
04-10-2006, 01:04 PM
Lawrence Frank. I know his tied up w/NJ. Who cares. Find a way to lure him over here. He's young and he's got moxie.

CableKC
04-10-2006, 01:32 PM
After listening to Hubie Brown's commentary yesterday.......he is on my short list of coaches to replace Carlisle ( if it happens ).

Doug in CO
04-10-2006, 01:45 PM
How about Peck as the next coach?

DeS
04-10-2006, 01:49 PM
How about Peck as the next coach?
Only if, BBall agrees to be the assistant coach ;)

Young
04-10-2006, 03:44 PM
Forget Dennis Johnson, Eric Musselman, and Larry Bird, and all these cureent head coaches still in their contracts.

I've said this name before and I will bring him up again, Mike O'Koren for the next Indiana Pacers head coach.

http://www.nba.com/coachfile/mike_okoren/index.html?nav=page

I don't know what it is about this guy but I just have a good feeling that once he gets a head coaching job he will do a fine job in the NBA. He has past success as an assistant and I like the fact that he has been a top assistant under Byron Scott and Eddie Jordan.

He is still young and the players seem to like him. I think he would be a great choice for a new head coach should the Pacers choose to get rid of Rick Carlise.

Kegboy
04-10-2006, 03:54 PM
O'Korean will be a good HC some day, but the flighty nature of a number of Washington's players gives me pause.

Slick Pinkham
04-10-2006, 04:06 PM
How about Peck as the next coach?



He'd be really tough. Whatever any player did, Peck would tell them how "They ain't no Dale Davis".

Unfortunately, his written pregame instructions for each player would take an hour to read.

Eindar
04-10-2006, 04:07 PM
Fair enough. However, I would think that winning a lot of games would include the playoffs. How could a NBA team defend against philosophies that they would know little to nothing about? If you watched the Olympics and the World Championships its obvious that the American style of Basketball doesn't understand Euro Basketball. I Doubt that the league would be able to pick up all the nuances.

There's the rub. If you bring in a Euro coach, the other coaches get to watch his "style" for 82 games before the playoffs start, including 2-4 times in person. It doesn't take long for an NBA coaching staff to break another team down. This isn't a situation where the Euro coach only has to flummox his opposition once or twice. The only caveat to that is D'Antoni, and he's not really playing euro ball, to be honest. In fact, I have a hard time putting my finger on exactly what he's doing, other than winning with a bunch of small forwards :)

Also, when speaking so highly of Euro ball, keep in mind that it's not just the style that's different, it's the court, as well. The trapezoidal lane is simply devastating to the way NBA teams play ball. It virtually eliminates low post play, which is what is played almost exclusively in the playoffs. Combine that with the closer 3pt line, and it really turns the game into what, by NBA standards, is a jumpshooting competition, which NBA players don't practice much.

I'm not saying a European coach couldn't do well here, I'm just pointing out that there are several factors you aren't including in your analysis.

Eindar
04-10-2006, 04:09 PM
Still no love for Stan Van Gundy in this thread, then?

Doug in CO
04-10-2006, 04:11 PM
Still no love for Stan Van Gundy in this thread, then?

NONE

No thanks

No way

SwissExpress
04-10-2006, 04:23 PM
There's the rub. If you bring in a Euro coach, the other coaches get to watch his "style" for 82 games before the playoffs start, including 2-4 times in person. It doesn't take long for an NBA coaching staff to break another team down. This isn't a situation where the Euro coach only has to flummox his opposition once or twice. The only caveat to that is D'Antoni, and he's not really playing euro ball, to be honest. In fact, I have a hard time putting my finger on exactly what he's doing, other than winning with a bunch of small forwards :)

Also, when speaking so highly of Euro ball, keep in mind that it's not just the style that's different, it's the court, as well. The trapezoidal lane is simply devastating to the way NBA teams play ball. It virtually eliminates low post play, which is what is played almost exclusively in the playoffs. Combine that with the closer 3pt line, and it really turns the game into what, by NBA standards, is a jumpshooting competition, which NBA players don't practice much.

I'm not saying a European coach couldn't do well here, I'm just pointing out that there are several factors you aren't including in your analysis.

I agree to almost all of that. That's why I think that any transition of that kind should include several years as NBA assistant coach. And for the very reason there won't be many (if any) transitions like that (unless NBA becomes composed mainly of Euro players).

I don't agree with your first point, however. Sure, NBA coaches have much more visual material on other teams, more face-to-face experience each year. But they don't have the luxury to spend nearly a week preparing for each meeting (as Euroleague teams do): studying those videos, showing them to players for hours before each game, preparing new plays for each particular opponent, etc. I don't think tactics would be the weak side of Euro coaches in NBA. They would have too much ideas, schemes and creativity for anyone to "break down".
I think that they might encounter quite the opposite problem: their tactical skills and schemes might be impossible to apply in an environment where players don't really have much time to learn.

CableKC
04-10-2006, 04:29 PM
A couple of weeks, I had posted a question to the Warrior Fans on RealGM so that I can get an impression of what type of coach that Eric Musselman was during his tenure as the Warrior's Head coach.

Below is a quick summary of what I was able to gather from their comments:

PROS:
- He is able to adapt his coaching style to changing situations
- For Non-Starters, he would play the players that earned their minutes regardles of who else was sitting on the bench.
- Believes in discipline among his players
- If given the right players, he can be a defensive-minded coach.
- He is a Quick Learner

CONS:
- Stubborn coach that could butt heads with Management and players.
- Definitely not a Players Coach
- Frustrating ( yet Odd ) substitution patterns
- poor In-Game Management
- Big Ego
- seems like he has favorites on the team

In-Between PROS and CONS ( not sure if its a good or bad thing )
- Runs a Motion Offense
- yanks players for continually making mistakes
- May have been limited due to Management interference
- Some think that Musselman would be a good coach on a team with an established roster and organizational Support for him.

Filtering through most of what was said there........towards the end of his coaching career with the Warriors.......it sounded more like what we are facing now with Carlisle. You either hated...or loved Musselman for his coaching style.

Below if the thread if you wish to go through it:

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=496859

A few highlights that are worth noting:

- Didn't really want to play DunDun in his rookie year. The rumor is that Musselman was essentially forced by Mullin to give Dunleavy significant minutes.
- Rumored to not get along with JRich. This problem....coupled with butting heads with Mullin.....is rumored to be one of the reasons why he was eventually fired.
- Didn't play Pietrus as much in his rookie and Sophmore years...unless he had to. Although many did not agree with Musselman during that time....hindsight....it looks like they agree with what he did as Pietrus did not appear to be ready that early in his career.
- Played players like Earl Boykins and Brian Cardinal ( both considered hustle and hardworking players ) in favor of other players like Gilbert Arenas or other team favorites.

Although most of the threads could be considered "informed" opinions......it will give you a good idea about Musselman. Its very possible that he will still be the same coach as he was with the Warriors.....but also possible that in the 2 years that he has been an assistant coach under Mike Fratello....he has grown a little.

SwissExpress
04-10-2006, 04:42 PM
Very informative.
By the way, why Musselman? Is it due to some previous connections with the Pacers/Indiana or simply due to his name and previous jobs?

Unclebuck
04-10-2006, 04:58 PM
I just liked the job Musselman did with Golden State. he is a basketball junkie


http://espn.go.com/page2/s/rosen/030226.html

CableKC
04-10-2006, 05:06 PM
A little of both. I live in the Bay Area.....so I have paid a little attention to Warriors over the last couple of years. Musselman seemed to do very well in his first head coaching gig in the period of time that he was there....even coaching them to a pretty respectable late playoff push ( but failing ) in one of his seasons.

I don't know what....if any....connections that he has with Indy or the Pacers. I maybe wrong....cuz it wasn't brought up alot in the thread.....but he was the only Warrior's coach in recent history that stressed the importance of defense on a team that wasn't far removed from the Don Nelson "defense-less" coaching years.

Its unclear to me whether he would be a very good coach for the Pacers....mainly cuz he shares similiar qualities that many of us dislike about Carlisle.....like willingness to favor vets yet not in favor of giving decent minutes to rookies.........but has certain qualities that I like....like rewarding hard work, discipline, willingness to bench players and the ability to adapt to given roster situations.

The only way that I can describe him ( based off of what I read ) is that he is like Carlisle-Lite.....but a bit more stubborn. One of the opinions of one of the more knowledgeable Warrior poster thought that Musselman maybe a good coach for the Pacers as long as he has the right type of support from Management.

FrenchConnection
04-10-2006, 05:08 PM
yeah, we all understand that NBA is not ready for a European coach yet. they would eat him alive, unless the organization behind him could afford to lose a year or so calming down the anraged fans and stedying the confused players.. it will probably come, but not yet. untill that Nelson is the closest thing to someone like Kazlauskas one could find in NBA. yah, he's worse than European stars, but still better than Rick. and he was advising the same Kazlauskas when Lithuania lost by 2 to US in 2000 (intentional sellection of an example there ;)), so he more or less knows the European style.

If European coaches did not work in the NHL (Ivan Hlinka in Pittsburgh and that Finn in Chicago), where a much larger percentage of players are from Euorpe, how could you possibly think that it could work in the NBA? The American players simply would not listen to a European coach, simply because they are not American. I think that people are afraid of the language barrier in timeouts, etc... Anyway, Americans are just not used to this sort of thing, unlike Europeans who are very used to it from the common practice of foreign managers on national and club soccer teams.

CableKC
04-10-2006, 05:09 PM
I just liked the job Musselman did with Golden State. he is a basketball junkie
http://espn.go.com/page2/s/rosen/030226.html
That's another similiar comment on Musselman that was pointed out.....he always like to be prepared....which I am guessing refers to being prepared before a game.....which is a similiar quality to what I thought Carlisle shared.

FrenchConnection
04-10-2006, 05:11 PM
A couple of weeks, I had posted a question to the Warrior Fans on RealGM so that I can get an impression of what type of coach that Eric Musselman was during his tenure as the Warrior's Head coach.

Below is a quick summary of what I was able to gather from their comments:

PROS:
- He is able to adapt his coaching style to changing situations
- For Non-Starters, he would play the players that earned their minutes regardles of who else was sitting on the bench.
- Believes in discipline among his players
- If given the right players, he can be a defensive-minded coach.
- He is a Quick Learner

CONS:
- Stubborn coach that could butt heads with Management and players.
- Definitely not a Players Coach
- Frustrating ( yet Odd ) substitution patterns
- poor In-Game Management
- Big Ego
- seems like he has favorites on the team

In-Between PROS and CONS ( not sure if its a good or bad thing )
- Runs a Motion Offense
- yanks players for continually making mistakes
- May have been limited due to Management interference
- Some think that Musselman would be a good coach on a team with an established roster and organizational Support for him.

Filtering through most of what was said there........towards the end of his coaching career with the Warriors.......it sounded more like what we are facing now with Carlisle. You either hated...or loved Musselman for his coaching style.

Below if the thread if you wish to go through it:

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=496859

A few highlights that are worth noting:

- Didn't really want to play DunDun in his rookie year. The rumor is that Musselman was essentially forced by Mullin to give Dunleavy significant minutes.
- Rumored to not get along with JRich. This problem....coupled with butting heads with Mullin.....is rumored to be one of the reasons why he was eventually fired.
- Didn't play Pietrus as much in his rookie and Sophmore years...unless he had to. Although many did not agree with Musselman during that time....hindsight....it looks like they agree with what he did as Pietrus did not appear to be ready that early in his career.
- Played players like Earl Boykins and Brian Cardinal ( both considered hustle and hardworking players ) in favor of other players like Gilbert Arenas or other team favorites.

Although most of the threads could be considered "informed" opinions......it will give you a good idea about Musselman. Its very possible that he will still be the same coach as he was with the Warriors.....but also possible that in the 2 years that he has been an assistant coach under Mike Fratello....he has grown a little.

Runs a motion offense? Perfect fit here in the Hoosier state. Like having Robert M. Knight without the bad sweater and chair throwing:)

CableKC
04-10-2006, 05:16 PM
I just liked the job Musselman did with Golden State. he is a basketball junkie
http://espn.go.com/page2/s/rosen/030226.html
Good read........although you don't need to convince me.......I'm more sold on Musselman then before....IF Carlisle leaves before the end of the season.

Is he a clone of Carlisle?

Yes and No, to some degree.

CableKC
04-10-2006, 05:18 PM
Runs a motion offense? Perfect fit here in the Hoosier state. Like having Robert M. Knight without the bad sweater and chair throwing:)
I'm stupid when it comes to "basketball" terms like Motion Offense or whatever Carlisle runs here in Indy.

Can someone give me an idea about what "motion Offense" is and how it may or may not be better then Carlisle's offensive strategies?

One more thing......if Carlisle goes....then we also have to have a significant change in the roster. There is no way that I would want SJax or Tinsley back next season.

ChicagoJ
04-10-2006, 05:26 PM
The biggest thing is off-the-ball movement. Carlisle's offense is based on isolations.

CableKC
04-10-2006, 05:29 PM
The biggest thing is off-the-ball movement. Carlisle's offense is based on isolations.
Let's move this to the next level....let's assume that the level of change that we see in hte offseason is Carlisle leaving ( more then likely on his own decison ) and our 2 favorite players are somehow shipped off.

Given the remaining players that we have and the resigning of either Freddie or Peja ( more then likely Freddie ) and any likely players that we get to fill in the blanks...would this "motion offense" work better?

ChicagoJ
04-10-2006, 05:36 PM
Motion offenses don't work well with a strong post presence.

He just gets in the way.

That's why whenever Bob Knight had a strong "C" in Bloomington, the team underachieved.

I think a post presence is more important than a motion offense.

But having a post presence does not require the minimal amount of off-the-ball movement the Pacers employ.

I'd rather have a running/ fast breaking team that knows when (and how) to stop and run a traditional half-court set.

We don't necessarily need a different offense, we just need to be more aggressive within the offense.

Under Rick, it seems he'd rather not score at all than score with 15 second left on the shotclock.

DeS
04-10-2006, 05:36 PM
I'm stupid when it comes to "basketball" terms like Motion Offense or whatever Carlisle runs here in Indy.

Can someone give me an idea about what "motion Offense" is and how it may or may not be better then Carlisle's offensive strategies?
Imo it's simple. As the name of the term implies - it's an offense utilyzing movement of players and ball in order to create confusion for the defense and get open looks for players.
If properly executed it's better then some RC strategies as it get the open looks and it is the choice to follow if You don't have great players (imo - the only option).

Slick Pinkham
04-10-2006, 05:41 PM
Can someone give me an idea about what "motion Offense" is.

Motion offenses involves a lot of off-the-ball screens, movement without the ball, and cutting. It favors teams with good passers, good pick-setters, good shooters, and teams with high intelligence.

The last point is very important. There are not many set plays, there are types of picks you set and the ball movement is based upon KNOWING HOW TO REACT to the movements of the defenders and the relationship of "BALL-YOU-MAN", where you are, where your defender is, and where the ball is, and what cuts and screens are appropriate.

Generally when run well it leads to balanced scoring and lots of trips to the free throw line.

It is the opposite extreme to "isolation ball" and dozens if not hundreds of precisely drawn set plays.

The most successful motion type offense in the NBA in recent years was Sacramento with Webber & Peja, after they brought Pete Carill in as an assistant. Carill's "Princeton offense" is a protypical motion offense with lots of screening, cutting, and ball movement.

Bob Knight wasn't solely the inventor of the pure motion offense, but he developed it far beyond where anyone else has ever taken it and is probably the first to use it exclusively and to win titles with it. I think Henry Iba, Clair Bee, and some other old-timers developed the principles that Knight expanded upon.

(edit)- Jay's point about the center is mostly valid, I think. You rarely have a prototypical back-to-the-basket center. The best motion offense centers set great picks, pass well, and can hit shots. That's why Brad Miller is a very good center in a motion-type offense. The PG doesn't dominate the ball. Many different players can distribute.

Slick Pinkham
04-10-2006, 05:54 PM
Also motion offenses typically have a high learning curve. It takes awhile to learn how to read defenders and have 5 guys all reponding appropriately.

It requires a much higher basketball IQ than the Pacers have right now, I think.

CableKC
04-10-2006, 05:55 PM
Given the way that SJax and Tinsley play....it sounds like their lack of consistency on the shootng end....would play well for a motion offense...as it requires that if they get open....they drain the shot most of the time.

It would fit shooters....like Peja, Sarunas and ( to a lesser degree )....Freddie and AJ.

TheSauceMaster
04-10-2006, 06:28 PM
It's really too bad we losted Mike Brown , would've loved to give him a shot at coaching the Pacers. I think Rick Carlisle is a decent coach but for this Pacers team he's not the right coach. If anything I would say Mike Brown leaving may have exposed Rick Carlisle's weakness as a coach.

I truely do believe we need a new coach , but I hope we don't just stand pat with any other moves and pray that solve's our problems. We have deeper issues and problems than just a coaching problem.

Kegboy
04-10-2006, 07:46 PM
I just liked the job Musselman did with Golden State. he is a basketball junkie


http://espn.go.com/page2/s/rosen/030226.html

I take it the "rosen" means Charlie Rosen. Any man he endorses I don't want on general principle.

FrenchConnection
04-10-2006, 09:01 PM
I only highlighted that point about the Motion Offense because it has been discussed ad nausum during the IU coaching search. I am not a big fan of the pure motion offense in the NBA (remember the "Quick") becuase defenders are generally too big and too quick. I view Bob Knight's offense much like the option in college football. However, the Princeton Offense would be great for the Pacers to run if we got a better passing big man. You know that Saras with his pinpoint passes would be great in a Princeton Offense, or at least he would have a change to have a positive impact on the game. In fact, I think that in the video that I saw of him playing in Europe they were running some sort of Princeton-type offense. Also, I think that Bird would like us to have a motion offense, at least in one of it guises.

pizza guy
04-10-2006, 11:11 PM
Motion offenses involves a lot of off-the-ball screens, movement without the ball, and cutting. It favors teams with good passers, good pick-setters, good shooters, and teams with high intelligence.

In other words, we'd need a MUCH different team to run a motion offense.

Actually, I think our frontcourt could do extremely well in that type of game. JO would have to slim back down to play EXCLUSIVELY at PF with Peja/Granger at SF and Harrison at C. If those three/four can work together, moving the ball just between themselves, it could be dangerous. I also think we need a new backcourt. Jason Kidd is what I'm looking for, but he will never wear a Pacers' uni because NJ won't let him go unless they go crazy. SJax would have to be gone as well and I'd like to see Reggie's re-incarnation at SG. That obviously takes a lot and probably won't all happen, but, IMO, it's what should happen.

About the coach, I didn't mean that I want Bobby Knight, and obviously his temper wouldn't last in the NBA. But, I would like to see someone with a real fire that doesn't stand around without any emotion like RC does. A Euroleague coach is what hoopsforlife would want, but not me. Euroball wins regular season game, but not playoff games -- example PHX Sun having a top record last year and losing to the Spurs (?) in the playoffs anyways because SA is a playoff team. PHX can keep D'Antoni, I'll take a coach who will teach team defense, rebounding, and discipline. I think it was UB who said he doesn't just want regular season wins, but a championship -- I agree 100%.

sweabs
04-10-2006, 11:16 PM
For what it's worth, I think Jeff Foster is the type of guy who could really excel in a motion offense.

Bball
04-11-2006, 03:57 AM
I think some of you are selling our players short on their ability to play something besides Rick's ISO ball....

During the injury/suspension periods we went away from ISO ball and the team adapted very quickly. We just didn't stay with it once JO was ready to return.

There's nothing wrong with having some grind it out/half court sets in the arsenal but IMHO it gets rather easy to defend when you're not good enough or disciplined enough to make it really work yet you go to it every single trip down the floor (or what feels like it anyway). And IMHO an over-reliance on it breeds selfishness and can bruise egos. For a mentally weak team like the Pacers, that isn't good.

Motion gets all the players involved and gives them roles. It does give them more scoring opportunities and opportunities to touch the ball and it also gives them things that they can do to make the game easier for others (rebounding, screens, passing) and feel more important to the offense and success of the team (even if they aren't designated as the main options on offense). And it allows better rebound positioning for offensive rebounds. It keeps the other team's defense more honest and makes them work overtime running thru/around picks.

And I personally believe the majority of Conseco attendees prefer to see their basketball played in this way. Players dominating the ball isn't what I call good basketball.

Standing at the 3 point line with a defender between you and the basket and watching JO 'go to work', shoot a fadeaway, clank it off the rim, and nobody have a chance at the rebound can't be very inspiring to the players... or fans...

-Bball

Kestas
04-11-2006, 04:50 AM
Didn't he win the cup of Europe a season ago? Or am I confusing smth?
Hasn't he done that with that very assistant?


this is very OT.. but you should look at the budget of the club, that he won the Cup last year with. also bear in mind the fact that this was a very weak cup. MUCH weaker than ULEB Cup and not even comparable to Euroleague. the Cup of second or third tier teams - a scrub'o'contest. obvisously, when in such a company, a club, which has a budget, much larger than some Euroleague clubs could dream about, turns out to be a winner. simple as that. Russia is like that.. some oligarchs buy the second or third-tier clubs, hire first tier Europeans and Americans (in case of ladies ball they buy WNBA all-stars and go play in the second tier European cups) World-level stars, join weak cups and blow them away. Blatt just got lucky he was noticed by some very questionable blokes behind the club he joined. otherwise he's very average at best imho. I don't even want to talk about Kemzura, who, in my humble opinion, would be too bad for some Estonian club.
(all this very subjective in all meanings of this word ;))

besides, now that we know Bird wants Rick to stay it's no use to discuss others. besides, European coach is impossible in the current layout of NBA. it could change very fast (NBA-Euroleague games should be the main catalyst for that), but now it's not possible.

Chauncey
04-11-2006, 08:34 AM
I think some of you are selling our players short on their ability to play something besides Rick's ISO ball....
-Bball

That is absolutely true. Its unfortunate that it would take a complete overhaul to get some effort out of him, but I'd be particularly interested in seeing what Tinsley could do without having to run the prevent offense. Not to mention SJax, Foster and Granger.

I can really only think of one guy that really benefits in the prevent offense as compared to something that would open things up more; and thats Anthony Johnson. I think everyone else would adjust fine and some would thrive.

SwissExpress
04-11-2006, 09:35 AM
this is very OT.. but you should look at the budget of the club, that he won the Cup last year with. also bear in mind the fact that this was a very weak cup. MUCH weaker than ULEB Cup and not even comparable to Euroleague. the Cup of second or third tier teams - a scrub'o'contest. obvisously, when in such a company, a club, which has a budget, much larger than some Euroleague clubs could dream about, turns out to be a winner. simple as that. Russia is like that.. some oligarchs buy the second or third-tier clubs, hire first tier Europeans and Americans (in case of ladies ball they buy WNBA all-stars and go play in the second tier European cups) World-level stars, join weak cups and blow them away. Blatt just got lucky he was noticed by some very questionable blokes behind the club he joined. otherwise he's very average at best imho.

Nah, I just have to defend Blatt here. Blatt's St.Petersburg wasn't even the best and most powerfull Russian team in that competition. Unics had definitely higher expectations. Possibly Ural Great or even Khimki did too. I won't enumerate the Turkish, French and Greek teams.

I'm not sure about how you present that tournament, too. Are you sure with your evaluation (capital letters, etc)? E.g., I tend to think of Unics (from last year's FIBA Cup) as a Euroleague level club. ULEB Cup's composition last season (http://www.euroleague.net/ulebcup/noticia.jsp?temporada=E03&jornada=31&id=922) wasn't all that impressive comparing with FIBA Cup's.

Even more saying is the fact that Blatt's Benetton is currently in no.1 position in Italian league with a more than good chance to stay there. In other words, he's doing better in Benetton than "The Magician" Messina in the two previous seasons. Anyone who's doing a better job than possibly the best coach in Europe does not deserve the title "very average at best"... It's ridiculous.

Unless you find me a fan of Benetton or St.Petersburg who says otherwise, I just don't see how Blatt or his assistants may be put in mediocre - let alone bad - light.

Fool
04-11-2006, 09:53 AM
Sounds like he's the Rick Adleman of Eastern Europe.

SwissExpress
04-11-2006, 10:09 AM
I don't know. I'm not sure if there's any similarities in the style. Blatt stresses offense; though Benetton's defense is above average too. I have seen two of their games earlier this year but don't remember much.

In any case, he's American and must have met plenty of NBA managing/scouting staff this year as he's coaching Andrea Bargnani's club. It should make it a lot easier for Blatt to get noticed.

It's rather symbolic that it's Mike D'Antoni's last European club, too:)

Fool
04-11-2006, 12:09 PM
I don't know. I'm not sure if there's any similarities in the style. Blatt stresses offense; though Benetton's defense is above average too. I have seen two of their games earlier this year but don't remember much.

In any case, he's American and must have met plenty of NBA managing/scouting staff this year as he's coaching Andrea Bargnani's club. It should make it a lot easier for Blatt to get noticed.

It's rather symbolic that it's Mike D'Antoni's last European club, too:)

I was trying to be humorous. Comparing the two because it sounds like both coaches have accomplished things and yet get played off here as "ho hum" or ordinary job holders.

Slick Pinkham
04-11-2006, 11:20 PM
Motion offenses don't work well with a strong post presence.

He just gets in the way.

That's why whenever Bob Knight had a strong "C" in Bloomington, the team underachieved.

I would agree that a big scoring and rebounding center isn't necessary for a motion offense and that RMK didn't have big man recruiting as a priority, but perhaps these are the 3 best centers of the Knight era, and they all won a championship ring and played in the NBA:

1) Kent Benson (76 champions)-- 10 years in the NBA
2) Dean Garrett (87 champions)-- 5 years in the NBA
3) Ray Tolbert (81 champions) -- 7 years in the NBA

The only other IU centers under Knight who played some in the NBA, that I can think of, are Uwe Blab (4 years) and Steve Downing (2 years).

So I guess you can say that when he got a half decent center he made pretty good use of him.

edit- neat site with NBA stats for alums of various colleges: http://www.databasebasketball.com/players/bycollege.htm?sch=Indiana+University

ChicagoJ
04-12-2006, 04:44 PM
interesting.

Can't say much about Bennie, I remember him more from '77 when he proved he was not a one-man-show.

I'd say the IU teams with Tolbert and Garrett played better when those guys were on the baseline than in the post. They were both very versatile players at their size.

Mourning
04-12-2006, 05:28 PM
I don't want anymore international players, and I don't want to "win a lot of games" I want to win a championship, and I believe in order to win it all you have to play a playoff style.

You mean like ... the Spurs? ;)