Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

    http://www.nba.com/2010/news/feature...s=iref:nbahpt1

    Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems

    Kurt Rambis was explaining to a cluster of reporters in a Target Center hallway Tuesday night the distinction between having a playbook and distributing a playbook.



    His way, the Timberwolves always have a steady supply of new on-court maneuvers to learn and master, while Rambis always has a resource, compiled over the years, to which he can refer. The other way, something gets left in a hotel room or a bus, only to wind up being discussed on a sports talk show in a rival city.

    Almost on cue, though, a Minnesota staffer came down some stairs and walked past the coach into the locker room with a stack of sleek, state-of-the-art handheld digital devices sheathed in black velvet.

    The Timberwolves were getting their iPads! Who needs a stinking paper-and-ink playbook in some archaic three-ring binder?

    "We gave them iPads, yes. But that's more to show them edits," Rambis said. "I don't know anything about computers. 'Here's some edits. Watch them.' We have a video department. They handle that."

    The days of an NBA team "film session" actually being on film, with the whirring of a projector as soundtrack, are over. So are those nights when players would head home with "videotape" to break down. It's a Bluetooth and 4G league these days, with team executives and head coaches welcoming almost any high-tech tool, stat or study to wring a little extra potential out of their players and maybe eke out the slightest competitive edge.

    A year ago, for instance, the Washington Wizards issued iPod touches to the players loaded up with training videos of opposing clubs and individuals. This year, coach Flip Saunders has upgraded to iPads, giving his guys a library of hoops video that can be constantly updated, in a larger, sharper format on a cooler gadget that they can study and review in their hotel rooms.

    When they're not using them for YouTube or tweets, that is.

    That's true, though, for whatever technology or tool a coach might embrace, in any era. Guys back in George Mikan's day might have stared out the window when they should have been studying coach John Kundla's chalkboard. Plenty of players have nodded off in darkened film rooms through the years. A DVD of the Grizzlies' pick-and-roll defense surely gathered dust because the disc drive in somebody's laptop was busy with Saw II.

    That doesn't mean teams are going to give up trying to fine-tune the multimillion-dollar assets they employ, or stop advancing with the gadgetry available to their scouts and coaches. Knowing that someone else -- and often everyone else -- is moving forward can push a general manager or coach in that directon even if he otherwise wouldn't feel very pulled.

    "When you look at the game, we've all got the same plays. We all have great athletes," Toronto Raptors coach Jay Triano said. "Technically and tactically, there's not a lot of variance in what teams do. So the other part of the game is the sports science part, where teams can really close the gap on other teams.

    "Every year people are finding ways to create an advantage over somebody else. People are delving into statistics more, they're looking into sleep patterns, they're looking into nutrition, they're looking into sports psychology. It's 'Whatever you can find to give you an edge.' Because it's extremely competitive and everybody's looking for that same edge."

    Said Dallas coach Rick Carlisle: "The changes have been massive over the 25 years since I've been involved as a player and a coach. When I got into coaching in 1989, with New Jersey, we did not have an editing device for video. It was still VCR-to-VCR, all done manually. ... Now everybody digitizes video and captures things in real time, which allows you to pull things up instantly -- which is extremely valuable."

    Carlisle's boss, Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, is a zealot for all things technological. A member of Carlisle's staff, Tom Sterner (now scouting for Philadelphia), helped to develop coaching software more than a decade ago. Portland coach Nate McMillan is a strong believer in the value of proper rest. Boston's Danny Ainge embraced the concept of "brain typing" years ago as a way to search for players with, if not Michael Jordan's physical gifts, at least something close to Jordan's drive and instincts.

    Teams throughout the league subscribe to the Synergy Sports analytics created and refined by former Phoenix Suns video coordinator Garrick Barr. For some, "advanced coaching tools" means employing an extra assistant or two to give special attention to certain players or aspects of the game. For others, it's the growing use of the Moneyball-type stats that swept through baseball.

    Every NBA team does something, or at least has an opinion about it, as I learned when talking with Triano, Saunders, Rambis, Carlisle and other head coaches during their recent stop in Chicago for an annual coaches meeting:

    Tom Thibodeau, Chicago Bulls
    The job has changed quite a bit over the years. Staffs have gotten bigger. Technology has really improved. There's a lot more information available -- at times, you might have too much information and you really have to pare down what you think is pertinent. But by having so much information available, it allows you to prepare better. So each game is similar to a playoff preparation.

    Jay Triano, Toronto Raptors
    I like the stats that we use now. I'm not going to base judgments [solely] on them, but they can back up some of the thoughts that you've already had. I won't say I use the stats to dominate what we do, but they do provide a good support system. You can measure a lot of things but you can't measure a person's heart or drive.

    [With sleep patterns], 82 games is tough to monitor and it takes some time, I think, for people to find the right mix of rest and recuperation and practice time. [With psychology] I think we will be working with someone this season who's more 'hands-on and preventative,' rather than dealing with someone after something happens.

    Stan Van Gundy, Orlando Magic
    Like everything, it's how you use it. For me, probably the technology of what we can do with game footage now is really helpful. For me to be able to go in and, at the touch of a button, pull up all of Boston's pick-and-rolls, something like that, without having to search through the tape, that's really a time-saver and allows you to focus your work.

    Film is something the players really like. First of all, the film doesn't lie. You can tell a guy something and he may not agree with you, but you show him the film, where he can see it, I think that's a big help.

    Jim O'Brien, Indiana Pacers
    When I came into the league at the end of the '80s as an assistant coach with the New York Knicks, we were just starting to get into the video aspect of it. Now, I spend a great deal of my day on video and also marrying up the video and statistical information. About halfway through any NBA season, I like to say statistics -- because of the 48 minutes that you play and the 24-second clock and number of possessions -- rarely lie. You can use those as fool-proof gauges of what an opponent's doing, what an individual is doing.

    Sure, on a regular basis, you [trust your eyes more]. For instance, when you're done coaching a game, you have your viewpoint on how the game went, the combination of players who did or did not work well together. Sometimes when you look at the statistics, they'll tell you a different story than you may have first thought. But usually the statistical information will match up pretty much with what you're seeing on video.    Nate McMillan, Portland Trail Blazers
    We are basically a society that is always looking for ways to push the envelope. How to get better. Looking for change. Change is not bad, but you have to really evaluate who you are, your situation, and try to make the adjustments for your particular team. As opposed to, say, always having an assistant for every player.

    We started [studying sleep patterns] a couple years ago. We were looking for the best way to help our players recover fast. So we looked into sleep, travel, food. What do you do in-between games? That's very important how you prepare, mentally as well as physically. For us, it's making sure that our guys get eight hours of sleep. You can adjust your travel for that. We try to stay within [the same] time zone whenever we travel.

    Rick Carlisle, Dallas Mavericks
    Statistical analysis has gone two or three generations and now it's at an extremely high level. So more teams are using that for everything, from performance of combinations to individual performances, to probability of injuries and everything else you can possibily imagine. It's unbelievable. At a certain point, it's making sure you don't have too much information.

    In most cases, what you believe in your gut is 80 percent right. There might be another 20 percent where the data will make you say, 'Hmm, I didn't realize that.' Whatever that might be. Sometimes it's a subtle thing, sometimes it's pretty severe.

    Scott Skiles, Milwaukee Bucks
    If you think you're qualified and you have any sort of philosophy at all, you follow your eyes and ears. You look and ask, 'What am I really seeing with this guy?' You talk to people, you do your background. All these tools are great, but you've still got to trust what you're seeing. If you tell me, 'So-and-so is really fast with the ball' and then I watch him play 45 times and I don't see it ... I didn't see it!

    If you are into the numbers -- which I am -- and you say, 'The guys who have been one of the top three rebounders in the ACC the past seven years have been top rebounders in the NBA within three or four years,' well, that's a great thing to look at. But when I watch him play, I have to see if that bears itself out. Is he going after the ball with two hands? Is he boxing out? Is he aggressive? To get a full picture, you use all that stuff. There isn't just one magic thing.

    Erik Spoelstra, Miami Heat
    I come from a background of crunching numbers to make a case. Really, it was just a responsibility that coach [Pat] Riley gave me over the years. I found it fascinating. I use the normal plus/minuses that people use. I love the defensive numbers that are specific to our system -- we have a whole grading chart on our defense, and that's usually the first one I look at. We have a series of 50 categories and grades that I look to after each game back in our 'dungeon.' I think more than anything, that's comforting for me.

    I usually give myself about an hour in the morning to go through all the data and try to be as disciplined as I can not to give all that information to the players. A lot of it is not necessarily getting the answer, but it might get you to have a little deeper thought about a certain event that happened in a game or a dynamic with your team.

    Scott Brooks, Oklahoma City Thunder
    One old-fashioned thing is defensive field-goal percentage, I really believe in that. Offensively, it's turnovers -- taking care of the ball, that's a pet peeve of mine, being a point guard. But I've always felt those were some of the most critical stats. 'Real field-goal percentage,' I like that one because it helps the 3-point shooters. You're weighted on those shots because you're getting that extra point on your makes. But plus/minus or unit plus/minus, I don't know, that just confuses me. If Kevin Durant has a bad plus/minus, I'm still going to be playing him.

    You can't be so hard-headed to think that, 'This is the only way to do it because it's been done like this for 40 years.' If that were the case, point guards wouldn't be allowed to score. When I first came into the league, backup point guards weren't allowed [by some coaches] to shoot but once a quarter or once each time they got into a game. Now, you want your backup point guard to provide some sparks offensively.

    Jerry Sloan, Utah Jazz
    I can't keep up with it. I don't have a computer. I don't mean to say, 'I'm right and they're wrong' or 'I'm wrong and they're right.' Everybody's got their system for doing things. I depend a lot on our assistant coaches. They do an awful lot with our team. Statistics can make you 'win' [when you've lost], if you look at 'em hard enough. I want to look at the bottom line: Did we win or lose?

    George Karl, Denver Nuggets
    I can't deny, before a game, with Elias [Sports Bureau], our PR director will get some special stats on the matchups that we have. I like those things. But sometimes when I get flooded by stats, I walk away from them. Because I don't trust them. I don't have a good trust in statistics as much as I trust my feel and my instincts. Stats [can argue both sides.] I see that more than I would like to see. Agents are fighting you sometimes. Your general manager might be fighting you with stats to play someone. I've heard some crazy stuff where I say to them, 'I'm sorry. I can't even identify what you're telling me.'

    I read [ESPN.com analyst John] Hollinger's stuff, I think he's good. I think 82games.com is good. When I have time, I check out that stuff. I'm not sure I listen 100 percent to any of it, but if it reaffirms something that I'm thinking that I haven't gone to yet, it might push me to go to it.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

    This is my main problem with Jim. He doesn't seem to have much of a "feel" for the game. Strict statistical analysis is far from foolproof.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

      Originally posted by Shade View Post
      This is my main problem with Jim. He doesn't seem to have much of a "feel" for the game. Strict statistical analysis is far from foolproof.
      Sounds eerily like flox as well. In fact the direct quote from Jim reminds me exactly of what flox said.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

        Originally posted by Shade View Post
        This is my main problem with Jim. He doesn't seem to have much of a "feel" for the game. Strict statistical analysis is far from foolproof.
        To be honest, I'd rather him go with a starting 5 or a new rotation based on stats than I do him just running it based off what he feels. Very rarely have Jim and I had the same thoughts on what our rotation should be... Catch 22 is I don't have a.. what.. 102-144 record as the Pacers coach...
        Reggie Miller is a God. Period.

        Passion. Pride. Pacers.

        It's ALWAYS Miller Time.
        #31 & Only

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

          Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
          Sounds eerily like flox as well. In fact the direct quote from Jim reminds me exactly of what flox said.
          Maybe we are the same person =)


          In all honestly I think if you don't use statistics to at least filter your reality then you are missing out on a key part of something that can give you a lot of wins.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

            I'd rather have a coach that practices Zen.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

              Well I think we can safely say that Jim doesn't ALWAYS analyze based on stats. He is sure to have noticed Troy Murphys awful plus minus, but man did he stick with his convictions.

              Way to go with your gut Jimmy!
              Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

                Originally posted by daschysta View Post
                Well I think we can safely say that Jim doesn't ALWAYS analyze based on stats. He is sure to have noticed Troy Murphys awful plus minus, but man did he stick with his convictions.

                Way to go with your gut Jimmy!
                Murphy's 3-point-% and double-double-statistic won against his plus-minus stat.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

                  Originally posted by flox View Post
                  Maybe we are the same person =)


                  In all honestly I think if you don't use statistics to at least filter your reality then you are missing out on a key part of something that can give you a lot of wins.
                  It haven't work out, is time for him to let it go.

                  Is funny that some of the NBA bad coaches are the ones that talk about how important is to use statistics.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

                    Originally posted by Shade View Post
                    This is my main problem with Jim. He doesn't seem to have much of a "feel" for the game. Strict statistical analysis is far from foolproof.
                    I am not commenting on Jim specifically, but I am commenting on your general point.

                    I am not a stats guy at all - Unless I see the game stats tell me very little. But that is me

                    But my point is if you watch the game (study the game) which obviously any head coach does - then i say OK in that case stats can be very valuable. So stats good if you watch the game also, stats no good if you use it as a substitute for watching the game

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

                      Here's a stat: Five wins in a row.

                      After analyzing those numbers, the obvious thing to do is change your lineup.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

                        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                        Here's a stat: Five wins in a row.

                        After analyzing those numbers, the obvious thing to do is change your lineup.
                        The obvious thing to do is call the NBA schedule makers and make sure you play the Knicks, Wizards, Warriors and Nets 4 out every 5 games. And for the 5th game against a good team, make sure they are playing their 3rd in 4 and you've had a couple of days off.
                        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

                          Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                          The obvious thing to do is call the NBA schedule makers and make sure you play the Knicks, Wizards, Warriors and Nets 4 out every 5 games. And for the 5th game against a good team, make sure they are playing their 3rd in 4 and you've had a couple of days off.
                          And after that, change the lineup, so there is no way to confirm whether it was the schedule or the players, so your stubborn ways can't be questioned.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

                            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                            And after that, change the lineup, so there is no way to confirm whether it was the schedule or the players, so your stubborn ways can't be questioned.
                            Yeah, because players should lose their starting spot to injury right?

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Coaches pull out new tricks to try to solve old problems/JOB mentioned

                              Originally posted by flox View Post
                              Yeah, because players should lose their starting spot to injury right?
                              If they have the highest +/- on the team, and the team wins most of their games when he's on the bench and lose most of them when he starts . . .

                              Yes.
                              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X