There's not a coach in the NBA that I wouldn't trade Brad for.
I hope so.So, I had a number of drinks tonight, but this quote is backwards right?
Trying to make Love play defense to get TT off of Horford.Well, in the first half tonight, he wasn't. Yabu? Monroe? Ugh.
Pretty much trying anything to erase a 25-7 deficit or whatever it was. Can't really blame Brad for changing things up when his starters were in a haze or as my old coach used to call it, "the glare."Trying to make Love play defense to get TT off of Horford.
What?Trying to make Love, play defense, and get TT off.
The ironic thing about that hypothetical is that a lot of Brad's value comes from the fact that you don't have to choose between him and star players. No salary cap for coaches is a very real thing; it's just that most coaches don't move the needle enough for it to matter.So there's a thread on Reddit about KAT vs Thibs and that the Wolves should (duh) keep KAT if they have to choose.
The thread is full of people saying that Stevens is the only coach they would keep over the team best player.
I'd be interested in your thoughts on that.
Rather than everyone choose their own adventure.
Whould you keep Stevens over
A) Kyrie
B) horford
C) Hayward
D) Brown
E) Tatum
I would absolutely (personally) keep young controlled talent over the coach, but Kyrie is possible, Horford maybe (age), Hayward probably not but maybe (injury)
I thought it might be an interesting discussion. Because it's really a team where any one player hasn't seemed to make a huge difference and the coach has been given a great deal of (deserved) credit.
Pinkie obviously.Yeah, I'd go with "everyone but Tatum" too right now, but damn you for making me think about that.
Next time, on LondonSox's Funhouse Mirror, it's "which third-world dictator would you prefer rule over you in a post-apocalyptic hellscape?", followed by "if you had to trade Mookie to the Yankees for a bag of balls, or let them cut off a finger of your dominant hand, which fingers would you consider?"
This is totally fair.. I’m interested as well.. to me there are def coaches throughout sports that clearly make a tangible difference in how their team plays and how they develop teamwork or young talent.. but even with that it’s all on the players and their talent to execute.Neither. I would choose a different coach.
I I hypothetically had to give up one (ie which do I prefer) I guess Simmons.
I don't think there's enough data to know how much impact a coach has, and I believe it's not that hard to get an ok coach
Great is hard, but great over good is worth what? I am highly dubious it's worth more than a good young player.
Covington is not good enough to stop me having the coach I want.Curious if you would choose Stevens or Covington.
More like First Team Only Defense, amirite?Covington is not good enough to stop me having the coach I want.
But that is first team all defense Robert Covington btw
I mean he shot 37% from 3 for the season on 7 a game.More like First Team Only Defense, amirite?
I agree with this. The downgrade or lateral move from Covington to his replacement is a fair price to pay for the upgrade or lateral move to the coach you want. This values a role player and a coach similarly which has always been my position. However to consider Embiid or Simmons for a coach is about as outrageous a question as I've ever heard.Covington is not good enough to stop me having the coach I want.
But that is first team all defense Robert Covington btw
I was responding to London because I knew he was a Sixers fan and he’d asked what celts player Brad was worth so I figured I’d ask him about his teamI agree with this. The downgrade or lateral move from Covington to his replacement is a fair price to pay for the upgrade or lateral move to the coach you want. This values a role player and a coach similarly which has always been my position. However to consider Embiid or Simmons for a coach is about as outrageous a question as I've ever heard.
I think coaches impact is incredibly hard to actually value.I was responding to London because I knew he was a Sixers fan and he’d asked what celts player Brad was worth so I figured I’d ask him about his team
Great post. And this is exactly the line of thinking I'm trying to engage, but you laid it out better.I think coaches impact is incredibly hard to actually value.
I would say Rev is right, the fact that coaches are outside the cap means there's little excuse for losing one who is good.
The NFL seems more extreme, harder cap, more importance of play calling. Of all people New England area people should appreciate this.
But BB was bad by most measures before the Patriots. Well not bad, but nothing special. It's really over time we see the clarity.
Stevens is also hard, I mean are the players just good so actually Ainge is the bigger deal?
Or are they who we think they and Stevens is amazing.
I mean the Celtics have only won one road game all playoffs. What they are doing is great, obviously, but how much is the garden a factor?
There's a Twitter guy who is coach in training and a smart analytics guy and he scouted coaches and Stevens was up there. But really it's been almost intangibles that have impressed. The system, the culture and the strong mental aspect of dealing with injuries.
I have little idea how to value that.
How much praise is ainge vs Stevens? Or development coaches? How much is browns improvement due to Stevens?
There's so much it's hard to know
For the sixers, brown held together the rebuild, built a culture in some of the hardest environments imaginable, and has progressed when given a chance. But how good is he at coaching? I don't know. I think he's earned the time to see.
I think Stevens probably deserves the benefit of the doubt, but <shrug> who knows.
I'd never value him over any good player.
I dunno, I don't think it's revisionist history to say that in 1994 and 1995, people who knew what was up in Cleveland saw that their coach was making a lot of progress, and that the whole was more than the sum of the parts. Belichick's 1990 gameplan that beat the Bills is in the HOF; he was probably one of the most famous coordinators in the game at that point, and of course was hired away. And as soon as Parcells got him back, he (again, famously) tried underhanded tricks to keep him in-house, rather than let him go run his own ship again. So yeah, it took him his first few years to find his feet as a HC (and setting Bernie Kosar on fire probably took a lot out of his political capital), but it's not like in 2001, after 25 years in the league, he suddenly had a eureka moment. I think the comparison to Stevens - who showed promise immediately, but didn't show results for a few years - is fairly apt, despite the differences in their sports.The NFL seems more extreme, harder cap, more importance of play calling. Of all people New England area people should appreciate this.
But BB was bad by most measures before the Patriots. Well not bad, but nothing special. It's really over time we see the clarity.
It depends on what you mean by "any good player" but I am in the camp that, if you are trying to win over a sustained period, you absolutely would value an elite coach (and again I know there are those who don't consider Stevens an elite coach yet or perhaps they never will) over "any good player".I'd never value him over any good player.
This is a good point too.Well also, re: NFL v. NBA, the marginal impact of any one player in the latter is tremendously higher than the former.
So even if the coach had the same absolute impact on winning percentage in both leagues (and the variance between the potential options at coach were the same (VORC?)) the NFL coach would be much more likely to be more important than a player than their NBA counterpart.
Well I think that's the thing it's very hard to separate these things.It depends on what you mean by "any good player" but I am in the camp that, if you are trying to win over a sustained period, you absolutely would value an elite coach (and again I know there are those who don't consider Stevens an elite coach yet or perhaps they never will) over "any good player".
Would you really take peak Russell Westbrook on your team over, say, Popovich? I know some would and it also depends on what the rest of your roster looks like but I would lean toward no. What about someone like Karl Anthony Towns? Again, its dependent on how the rest of your team looks but I would have to think long and hard about it.
I know HRB and others think that's crazy but as we have seen in these playoffs, while talent is absolutely the dominant predictor of success, aside from the truly elite players (say top five or so players), coaching and adjustments are what win series.
And to be clear, while I think that the narrative that the Celtics beat more talented teams this post-season is off (mostly because it undervalues guys like Tatum, Brown, Rozier and even Average Al Horford), its hard to argue that the Celtics would be at this point with any average NBA coach.
As y'all know, I'm not a basketball guy but an educator. I remember that when Brown's friend killed himself, I instinctively thought, "Well, Brad's the guy I'd want to be his coach in that situation." It's instinctive for me when I hear about such a thing--who's on point with that person, who do they have? because it happens so often in education and you're told by a student and you have to figure out what to do, what to say. So that's what I mean when I was thinking, man, well, he's in a good situation to deal. It was automatic. Because I think Brad is that guy.Would you really take peak Russell Westbrook on your team over, say, Popovich? I know some would and it also depends on what the rest of your roster looks like but I would lean toward no. What about someone like Karl Anthony Towns? Again, its dependent on how the rest of your team looks but I would have to think long and hard about it.
. . .
And to be clear, while I think that the narrative that the Celtics beat more talented teams this post-season is off (mostly because it undervalues guys like Tatum, Brown, Rozier and even Average Al Horford), its hard to argue that the Celtics would be at this point with any average NBA coach.
I think one of the confounding factors London cited swamps all the others. With Popovich and Belichick, you know that you're getting elite roster construction, contract negotiation and cap management at the same time as you're getting elite in-game tactics, season-long strategy, player development, and other coaching aspects. With Stevens, so much of the franchise has been Ainge (PP/KG, Billy King), or Stevens + Ainge acting in concert (IT4, drafts of Brown and Tatum), that it's really hard to unscramble that egg. We'll never know how crucial Stevens' input was in Ainge's ultimate decisions there, despite knowing plenty about his role in other key events (e.g. the free-agent sales pitches to Horford and Hayward, where Ainge is pretty much just there to sign the contract and shake hands).Would you really take peak Russell Westbrook on your team over, say, Popovich? I know some would and it also depends on what the rest of your roster looks like but I would lean toward no. What about someone like Karl Anthony Towns? Again, its dependent on how the rest of your team looks but I would have to think long and hard about it.
You, Rev and Denz all raise good points. That said, even if the Celtics lose tonight, the road record thing is just complete bullshit. I know you are referring to the playoffs the but just so we establish some context, the Celtics had the third best away record in the league this regular season. Last year Boston was tied for fourth best road record during the regular season. The year before that they were tied for eighth best.Well I think that's the thing it's very hard to separate these things.
How much is him, how much is it the staff underneath, how much is ainge, how much is it the fans. How much is luck?
If it's all Stevens why the home away split?
I think it's very hard to say.
And I'd obviously take KAT over pop. Westbrook sure and that's despite my dislike for him.
Well, to say nothing of if he wins the whole. fucking. thing.IMHO, we shouldn't be dinging Stevens teams for not winning games on the road. We should be marveling at the fact that he won any playoff games with guys like Evan Turner, Jonas Jerebko, Tyler Zeller and even Jared Sullinger getting some playoff run. Now if he can't win on the road when the Celtics are at full strength with Irving and Hayward, there is absolutely a conversation to be had.
One thought.. given the salary cap in the nba.. that young, cost-controlled talent is ultra valuable.. if you could trade veterans for coaches it may make more sense.. if there were no salary cap considerations for bringing in a max player, for instance. The years of available growth for a young star are probably more valuable than a star at the end of a career.. of course their needs to be a balance.I think coaches impact is incredibly hard to actually value.
I would say Rev is right, the fact that coaches are outside the cap means there's little excuse for losing one who is good.
The NFL seems more extreme, harder cap, more importance of play calling. Of all people New England area people should appreciate this.
But BB was bad by most measures before the Patriots. Well not bad, but nothing special. It's really over time we see the clarity.
Stevens is also hard, I mean are the players just good so actually Ainge is the bigger deal?
Or are they who we think they and Stevens is amazing.
I mean the Celtics have only won one road game all playoffs. What they are doing is great, obviously, but how much is the garden a factor?
There's a Twitter guy who is coach in training and a smart analytics guy and he scouted coaches and Stevens was up there. But really it's been almost intangibles that have impressed. The system, the culture and the strong mental aspect of dealing with injuries.
I have little idea how to value that.
How much praise is ainge vs Stevens? Or development coaches? How much is browns improvement due to Stevens?
There's so much it's hard to know
For the sixers, brown held together the rebuild, built a culture in some of the hardest environments imaginable, and has progressed when given a chance. But how good is he at coaching? I don't know. I think he's earned the time to see.
I think Stevens probably deserves the benefit of the doubt, but <shrug> who knows.
I'd never value him over any good player.
Yeah.. the whole road playoff thing is overblown.. especially since they haven’t lost at home. Not a lot of teams win on the road in the playoffs.. especially when your two young stars get zero calls.. or not nearly as many as an established star.You, Rev and Denz all raise good points. That said, even if the Celtics lose tonight, the road record thing is just complete bullshit. I know you are referring to the playoffs the but just so we establish some context, the Celtics had the third best away record in the league this regular season. Last year Boston was tied for fourth best road record during the regular season. The year before that they were tied for eighth best.
Now with regards to the playoffs, are people really dinging a guy who has - aside from Al Horford and some emerging players this season who are still in their very early 20s - had no real star players to feature in games on the road? Recall that last in last season's playoffs, after IT4 finally peaked, the Celtics had to contend with the death of his sister as well as his hip injury - an injury that eventually shut him down. Furthermore, its been pretty well documented here and elsewhere that for all of his amazing offense, Thomas was a massive liability on defense.
IMHO, we shouldn't be dinging Stevens teams for not winning games on the road. We should be marveling at the fact that he won any playoff games with guys like Evan Turner, Jonas Jerebko, Tyler Zeller and even Jared Sullinger getting some playoff run. Now if he can't win on the road when the Celtics are at full strength with Irving and Hayward, there is absolutely a conversation to be had.
It's not just the Celtics that go on the road and disappear. The Cavs are 0-3 on the road this series. Home Court is huge in the NBA, more so than any other sport and given how young the Celtics are, probably more so for them.It is still weird that this team goes on the road and immediately starts taking whole halves and quarters off.
It is inexcusable that they completely bailed on the second quarter tonight. Yes Cleveland did some things but they didn’t make the Celtics decide that the only good shot was a contested 3 early in the clock.
I'd be fine with the disappearing if they were just missing shots, or Cleveland was playing with incredible energy on D.It's not just the Celtics that go on the road and disappear. The Cavs are 0-3 on the road this series. Home Court is huge in the NBA, more so than any other sport and given how young the Celtics are, probably more so for them.
Here is the ESPN article (Jackie MacMullen) that the Yahoo article is referencing. Probably best to read it directly: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/24393541/jackie-macmullan-complex-issue-mental-health-nba-african-american-community
The day will come when we will weep, for their are no more teams to conquer.
This organization so has its shit together.
He heads back to the bathroom for eight more cleansings. By the end of the day, his hands are so raw from the obsessive washing, he falls into bed with bloody open sores.
On the occasions when Allen's treys were not dictating Larkin's day, it would be something as innocuous as a trio of bluebirds perched on a branch outside Larkin's window. Larkin would breathe a sigh of relief because his obsessive behavior would be more manageable for the next 24 hours with the number at only three.