Discussion in 'January 2008' started by max, Jan 6, 2008.
The issue is what I was responding to.
I don`t know how many times we have to visit this topic of Laimbeer becoming an NBA coach. Lambeer would be crazy to come into the NBA as a rookie head coach and be Mr Hard Ass. Players would tune him out in a heartbeat, as Mikhail said. Again, the best advice for Laimbs is to get an assitant head coach job, learn the NBA ropes, then see what happens.
What were you responding to?
I don't believe that at all. At the end of the day if he gets hired as head coach, he is the "boss." Teams with players who can't follow directions never win anyway so I don't think this guy has to win a title in the NBA to be listened to. It's the GM's job to fill the team with players that know how to follow instructions and have positive chemistry with their teammates. I think it's ludicrous to think a guy can't be demanding because he's new. He is who he is and his coaching style would reflect that. So for Laimbeer to be an NBA head coach he has to be somebody else? If that's the case, the teams have already hired all the someone elses. The league is full of teams with crappy coaches who haven't won anything and aren't demanding. That's like saying Laimbeer has to essentially come into the game and be Mo Cheeks on the bench. Then what the hell would you hire Laimbeer for? Just keep giving Mo Cheeks new jobs. The difference is what? Flip? Cola? Guys with a ton of NBA coaching experience that can't get the job done. A head coach is a head coach because he knows how to instruct/lead/coach players, not because he's in the NBA.
I guess we will find out if he ever becomes a head coach. He has been around the NBA long eneough to understand what to do and what not to do. He would probably be a good coach for a young upcoming NBA team with his rugged style. Sheed would tell Laimbeer to (insert your own sentence here) during a losing streak where he said anything he didn`t agree with, IMO. I never said a coach has to win an NBA title to be listened to, just have some experience as an NBA coach, that`s all. Everyone has their opinion on Lambeer becoming an NBA coach and mine is different from most, I guess we have to wait and see. Lambeer hasn`t proved he can coach/lead/ instruct anybody, which is exactly my point. I take that back, he can lead/instruct/coach women.
This is a quote from an article I posted the other day by Sam Smith. (http://www.pistonsforum.com/nba-stuff/7683-2007-08-general-league-thread-non-pistons-33.html) I was thinking about this the other day after talking to Scottie Pippen about the possibility of him coaching someday in the NBA. I told Pippen he needed coaching experience first. He asked me why. So why does someone have to sit next to a coach for years or coach in the minor leagues or overseas before becoming an NBA coach? Why isn't making split second decisions in the biggest games ever enough experience? Pippen had a good point. Larry Bird never coached. But he got a pair of good assistants, went to the NBA Finals, and was coach of the year. Doc Rivers never coached and was coach of the year in Orlando. Avery Johnson barely was an assistant. Pat Riley was mostly a broadcaster. Don Nelson was trying to get into referee school. Isiah Thomas never coached and had a nice three-year run with the Pacers. Doug Collins was a natural without any real experience other than studying the game every day of his life and being an NBA All-Star. So, Bill doesn't have any NBA coaching experience, so what? I agree with Sam. Knowing the game is more important than having sat beside a mediocre coach as an assistant. Whether Bill could manage NBA players or not seems to me a very real question. Certainly the style of coaching I read about that he shows in the WNBA wouldn't fly. He'd lose the players in a week. (As he has lost some of the WNBA players. Perhaps there would have been more titles with that bunch with another coach, who knows.) But that all assumes that Bill isn't smart enough or able enough to know how to adjust his style to the situation. That seems to me to be the real question.
All of this is true, but Owners are looking for the Company man. Somebody who projects a good image and gets along with the others in the organization. Making the owner 20 million per season (mostly the GMs job) also helps clarify the image of the coach for most owners. I'm not sure how Laimbeer looks in the area of People Skills. This may be his downfall to landing that elusive Head Coaching gig.
Skiles managed to find success using similar style. But he was working with a bunch of youngsters, his act would probably get old quick - just ask Ben.
Separate names with a comma.