He isn't a loser. He never was. He had a winning record in the NBA until he took on rebuilding the Pacers. He will do a good job for Dallas too....:cool:
Isiah in the 2003 playoffs - remember game one?
Don't make me pull that play-by-play out of the PD archives.
Remember - he ran out of timeouts because he burned one to prevent one of Ron's meltdowns, "accidentally" took Reggie of out the game when the C's were at the line -- in the last 24 seconds when the Pacers had 0 timeouts and the Celtics missed the freethrow. The Pacers rebounded and the only way they could stop the clock to get Reggie back in the game was to commit a turnover.
I didn't like Jim O'Brien's emphasis on perimeter play, but he wasn't THAT bad.
James Posey..... that is all
JOB was a bad coach. He did not know how to utilize talents of the players.
Plain and simple - he got fire, Vogel stepped in and got us to the playoffs in 2011. Vogel went 20 - 18 in the last 38 games with the same roster that JOB had
Not our problem anymore.
Nothing to see here folks... thanks for stopping by.
And the beat goes on
And the beat goes on.
Retaining O'Brien was the only tanking strategy the Pacers had available short of infecting their players with various communicable diseases during the course of his regime. Their talent level was too good. The instant turnaround for the one game under Lester Conner where they played correctly and in the proper positions as well as the remainder of the season of the great emancipation where the Pacers could easily have ousted the Bulls in the first round of the playoffs were clear illustrations that either O'Brien was a willing participant in a brilliantly disguised tank, or that the game of professional basketball had long ago passed him and his rigid and completely predictable strategies by.
O'Brien's poor rotations, playing his available talent out of position and away from their strengths or not at all for absolutely no basketball reason other than being young, as well as his complete lack of clock and momentum management were each maddening, but the combination of all of them did what even the brawl and the events that transpired after could not - namely, drive away a good portion of the remainder of the core of the fanbase as paying customers. Even Isiah Thomas didn't accomplish that.
While I don't like JOB as a coach, I think he's not as bad as some people think. Heck he has a pretty decent coaching record than most of his peers in the business.
The thing with JOB is that he's a coach that's like a fixed shape, meaning his philosophy is fixed, his pattern is fixed, his style of coaching is fixed, etc. That is why he clicked on some teams, like Boston for example, while did not on a team like Indiana. While this is obvious to all, his coaching style revolves around these:
- He likes a big man who can shoot from outside the perimeter. Walker and Posey flourished under his coaching. Stretch 4 is somehow synonimous with JOB.
- He loves 3-pointers. Pierce and Granger for example, made a living outside when JOB was their coach.
- He does not rely on point guards to set plays, and never likes them to be ball-dominant. Ball-dominant point guards, like DC and TJ, never had a great career under him. And he likes continuous ball movement, although mostly from outside the arc.
- He likes to play veterans. Veteran teams like the Celtics and Sixers made the playoffs without too much fiasco over playing time. In the Pacers, well Roy Hibbert as a rookie never had much of a significant career mainly due to Rasho playing more. And the PF spots mainly belong to Murphy and Posey duing his era as Pacers HC, both are veterans and outside shooters, as opposed to Josh and Tyler.
- His rotation is fixed. Regardless of how good you were the last game, a bench player will always be a bench player for him. A starter, even though struggling, will still get the bulk of the minutes.
In Dallas as an assistant coach, I think his offense will be well-suited because Dallas not only has Dirk as the stretch 4, and also the main guy, but that team is also loaded with veteran role players that will have little problems with regards to offensive roles and playing time (although it's still Rick's call when it comes to PT and plays). Aside from that, JOB won't have problems working on defense because Rick has been there sharpening their defense, which is one of the best in the league. It will be interesting how Rick and JOB, 2 guys that are good and bad on opposing fields, will be coaching that team.
So to summarize, JOB before the Indiana coaching gig was a good one. JOB in Indiana is a bad coach, one of the worst in recent Pacers history. JOB with Dallas can potentially be good.
do people actually forget the 08-09 season? There were a few coaching brain farts, but go look at that roster and tell me if they had any business being in that many close games/ coming close to securing a playoff spot. If the goal was to tread water (and that appears to have been the FO's goal) then by that measure he did all he could and maximized the strengths of that squad. Sure, as a fan I probably would have done a better job in developing the young guys. But by doing that I probably would have finished with ten less wins and been let go by bird at the end of the season.
(In answer to the original post.)
Hoop, you are one of my favorite posters, but I strongly disagree with you that gettign to the Eastern Conference finals is a fluke - it is never a fluke. This isn't the NCAA - the better team almost always wins the playoff series. No, Jim did a great coahcing job to get that Celtics team to the ECF.
The Siixers were better the season Jim coached them then they were the season before or the season after. He wasn't well liked by the players there, but a lot of coaches are not well liked.
I also remember the time he was leaving Melo open because his book told him to..... Of course we could forget that because he made it to the ECF with Boston right?
Strategy shifts can happen during games. That's what good coaches do. It's what bad coaches don't do.
When was this game. I am curious, i'd like to see the box score. Was this in Jim's last season or third?
OK - I located the game it was 1/23/10 - in the middle of a 6 game losing streak 3 games before his firing.
He shot 6 for 8 from threes. One thing the play-by-play does not detail is missed three point shots.
But here is when He hit the threes.
1) 4:19 - first quarter
2) 9:16 - third quarter
3) 8:40 - third quarter
4) 3:08 - third quarter
5) 2:25 - third quarter
6) 1:03 - third quarter
So there was no reason to make any adjustments at halftime - 5 of the 6 threes came in the third quarter when the Nuggets went from a 10 point halftime lead to a 20 point end of third quarter lead. Seems to me the threes came really quick in what was a blowout.
The question is did Jim make any adjustments in the 3rd quarter - I don't know how we can ever determine that. he had lost the team by then, so who knows if he told the players after the first two threes in the 3rd to get up on Melo, or if we was content to play the percentages.
Melo is a .322 career three point shooter, so yes if I were coaching against him I would be thrilled if he took 8 threes - whether open or not. Miuch better than his wing jumper or getting into the lane and getting to the free throw line/.
I would guess every coach's gameplan on melo is "give him the threes", pray he is three happy tonight.
I'll repeat, at the very least it is within the realm of NBA coahcing reasonableness to allow Melo to get some open threes.
On the other hand, it is equal annoying to me that you can't seem to acknowledge that he was a bad coach here at Indianapolis. I don't know why he was so bad here, but he had some nice successes in Boston. I'm sure there's reasons. But to just stick your head in the sand forever and ever about this problems here . . . well, that annoys me as much as people annoy you who say he never had good moments as a coach.
The clown had Murphy on Bynum and Dunleavy on Gasol at one time but he made the ECF with Boston so is ok, he had Posey on guys like Amare and Griffin but is ok because he made it to the ECF with Boston, he called Mcbob's irrelevant after having played the game of his life but is ok because he made it to the ECF with Boston...... :angry:
Hopefully I can stop posting with this.
I thought at the time and still think that getting those Pacers teams to win 36 games in each of Jim's first two seasons, was a good coaching job. Not coach of the year quality, but so far so good quality.
Third season things fell apart to a degree, and I posted after that third season that Jim should not be brought back as I feared and figured season #4 would be worse than season #3.
Does this indicate my head is in the sand?
Many things I didn't agree with. Too many three point shots. his inability to get his players to buy into his defensive scheme a scheme which was fine a scheme which the Celtics used to great results in 2008. Never liked his wild subsitution pattern - I like a set rotation like Frank does it.
So no, I don't agree that Jim was a horrible coach when he was here. Two good seasons followed by a bad season and a half and it should have only been 1 bad season - bad decision to bring him back by TPTB.
Overall he was better than Isiah, Versace, Irvine. No where nearly as good as Brown, Carlisle and Bird. In the same class (sorry ChicagoJ) as Bob Hill.
So I guess I view him as an average coach during his time with the pacers.