Nolan Richardson

[sturt]

Loved to watch that guy's 40-minutes-of-hell teams... always thought it was a crime that he didn't go immediately from the Arkansas debacle/lawsuit to an NBA team (...no college wanted to touch him b/c of he wouldn't allow administration to control him).

He may be too old now (65) to consider in Atlanta. But man I'd love to find a younger clone of him, if in fact Sund were to make a change (or have one thrust upon him).

Found this 2004 article about him...

http://www.blackathlete.com/Basketball/022604.shtml

[TheDude]

yeah i can't say that i rooted for them in the championship games but it wasnt anything against him, i was just going FOR the other team...but much respect to him....if you can preach that type of mentality to a team, AND GET THEM TO LISTEN, you are going to be successful..

good to hear he mentioned some names like Bighouse Gaines and Mclendon. I saw a special on those guys and it was extremely interesting to hear about the history of black players and coaches....

[Plainview1981]

No more coaches without head coaching experience.

[AHF]

I dislike the idea of bringing in a college coach (a lot) and also don't think that the Richardson/Pitino style of play translates nearly as well to the NBA as to college basketball. I would not be happy with the Hawks' hiring Nolan Richardson.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

I dislike the idea of bringing in a college coach (a lot) and also don't think that the Richardson/Pitino style of play translates nearly as well to the NBA as to college basketball. I would not be happy with the Hawks' hiring Nolan Richardson.

Sample size seriously handicaps us from getting any clear picture of the oft-presumed leap b/t college and pro hoops. I personally believe there is one, but that it's so minute, particularly where basketball is concerned (as compared with football), that it overshadows far more important factors. It's almost like asking if Southerners make good U.S. Presidents *ducking*...

On the other hand, I think the Pitino outcome is very consistent with what we find almost anytime a coach is hired to be his own GM... it just rarely works, regardless of the sport, regardless of the era (at least, in my own lifetime).

And, as to the Pitino style, the trick is being able to acquire the necessary quantity of personnel that fit the style of play... and Pitino was a better coach than he was a GM.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I dislike the idea of bringing in a college coach (a lot) and also don't think that the Richardson/Pitino style of play translates nearly as well to the NBA as to college basketball. I would not be happy with the Hawks' hiring Nolan Richardson.

Sample size seriously handicaps us from getting any clear picture of the oft-presumed leap b/t college and pro hoops. I personally believe there is one, but that it's so minute, particularly where basketball is concerned (as compared with football), that it overshadows far more important factors.

There are at least some trends that should be noted, particularly since most college coaches are highly compensated when they make the jump:

Average Coach: .500

Recent college coaches:

Larry Brown - .558

John Calipari - .391

PJ Carlisimo - .417

Tim Floyd - .280

Leonard Hamilton - .232

Lon Kruger - .361

Mike Montgomery - .415

Rick Pitino - .466

Jerry Tarkanian - .450

It is just not very encouraging when the last winning college coach came from the 1980s and there are known conflicts between the college style of managing athletes and the style that is effective in the NBA.

[Duff_Man]

That and Nolan is a card-carrying, race-baiting psycho. Everyone forgets his "race riot" tirade when he was upset with Arkansas administration.

[Dsinner]

Quote:

---

I dislike the idea of bringing in a college coach (a lot) and also don't think that the Richardson/Pitino style of play translates nearly as well to the NBA as to college basketball. I would not be happy with the Hawks' hiring Nolan Richardson.

+1

I'd rather keep Woody than bring in ANY college coach.

[frosgrim]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I dislike the idea of bringing in a college coach (a lot) and also don't think that the Richardson/Pitino style of play translates nearly as well to the NBA as to college basketball. I would not be happy with the Hawks' hiring Nolan Richardson.

Sample size seriously handicaps us from getting any clear picture of the oft-presumed leap b/t college and pro hoops. I personally believe there is one, but that it's so minute, particularly where basketball is concerned (as compared with football), that it overshadows far more important factors. It's almost like asking if Southerners make good U.S. Presidents *ducking*...

On the other hand, I think the Pitino outcome is very consistent with what we find almost anytime a coach is hired to be his own GM... it just rarely works, regardless of the sport, regardless of the era (at least, in my own lifetime).

And, as to the Pitino style, the trick is being able to acquire the necessary quantity of personnel that fit the style of play... and Pitino was a better coach than he was a GM.

I was in Connecticut during the Pitino era with the C's and I can tell you he was a very bad NBA coach. He did not relate well with his players and was too impatient. Pitino actually has admitted as much in speeches. In many ways Pitino had the exact same problems that The Quiter had with the Falcons. That is, Pitino couldn't bully the players into submission.

The NBA, as with all pro sports, is very different in terms of human management than college. In college the players have no power as they have no income (at least legit income). In the NBA, players make more than the coach. Players also can't be fired, coaches can. Thus, the power is shifted to the players and away from the coach.

Successful NBA coaches understand that they are dealing with young, financially independent, young men (for the most part). Bullying players doesn't work unless the coach has a track record to garner respect. Jerry Sloan, for example, yells, but he does so to get the players attention, but he follows up with teaching in a man-to-man fashion. Pitino just yelled and expected that to work.

I am convinced college coaches just don't work in the pros as a rule. Are their exceptions? Certainly, but they are few and far between.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

There are at least some trends that should be noted, particularly since most college coaches are highly compensated when they make the jump:

Average Coach: .500

Or over a career? Or in their first year? Their last year? Their best year? Their worst year?

Obviously, I think, you're suggesting that the average W/L % for all coaches in any year is .500, but that's not really useful in assessing the situation without some time parameter or other qualifier put upon the statistic.

Quote:

---

Recent college coaches:

Larry Brown - .558

John Calipari - .391

PJ Carlisimo - .417

Tim Floyd - .280

Leonard Hamilton - .232

Lon Kruger - .361

Mike Montgomery - .415

Rick Pitino - .466

Jerry Tarkanian - .450

Again, the same need for some qualifier in order to make sense of the number...

PLUS, and this is what I beg for people to pay attention to...

In order to adequately assess coaches merely on this one independent variable, you would have to build-in some control for the how good the team is (which can't actually be teased out well, except to look at how the team had already shown itself to be previous to their arrival).... AND... in order to have a true comparision, you'd have to know how all non-college coaches performed who came into the league during that period of time.... which, because it is so comparatively seldom that college coaches get NBA jobs, speaks to my assertion that sample size is a real problem in reaching a scientifically valid conclusion.

Quote:

---

It is just not very encouraging when the last winning college coach came from the 1980s and there are known conflicts between the college style of managing athletes and the style that is effective in the NBA.

Again, compare how many coaches were hired from elsewhere... and, also it would make sense to take into account how long it took any given new coach to experience their first winning season.......

"Known conflicts" or "presumed conflicts?" For all college coaches making the jump? Or most, or some, or a few?

I would agree that this is a worthy theory at first, but again, upon more thought, paints with too broad a brush, and is far too subject to fan presumption that every college coach handles players like every other college coach.

[frosgrim]

Sturt, I think you have to take into account that the college coach may not like the NBA all that much, ala Pitino, Calapari, Kruger. They hold in their back pocket that they can always go back to college and be successful. The fact that only 1 guy has won titles in both the pros and college speaks to how hard it is to accomplish. Futher, Brown was in the NBA for a long time before he won a championship (20ish years?).

NBA lifers, are committed to winning in the NBA. They don't want to deal with the headaches of college and the NCAA. Not to mention dealing with 18 year olds.

It just appears that the internal psychology for a successful college HC and a successful NBA HC are slightly different. This difference, IMO, accounts for the lack of success by college coaches.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It is just not very encouraging when the last winning college coach came from the 1980s and there are known conflicts between the college style of managing athletes and the style that is effective in the NBA.

Again, compare how many coaches were hired from elsewhere... and, also it would make sense to take into account how long it took any given new coach to experience their first winning season.......

"Known conflicts" or "presumed conflicts?" For all college coaches making the jump? Or most, or some, or a few?

I would agree that this is a worthy theory at first, but again, upon more thought, paints with too broad a brush, and is far too subject to fan presumption that every college coach handles players like every other college coach.

Known conflicts, IMO. It doesn't apply in every case but the way college coaches interact with players is significantly different than the way professional coaches interact with them.

If you want to increase your sample size go look at how NFL coaches do transitioning from college. They suffer from many of the same issues in being able to work with players.

I can understand an argument that the evidence is inconclusive on college coaches but every has to agree that they track record is inconclusive at best and certainly not favorable, right?

See NFL coaches who made the jump without NFL backgrounds:

Rich Brooks

Butch Davis

Dennis Erickson

Chuck Fairbanks

Lou Holtz

Jimmy Johnson*

John McKay

d*ck McPherson

Bobby Petrino

Mike Riley

Bobby Ross*

Nick Saban

Steve Spurrier

Barry Switzer

d*ck Vermeil*

Bud Wilkinson

The guys who were considered successful coaches were the exceptions to the rule here.

In college coaches go from playing with an advantage in talent and coaching players who hang on their word to dealing with much more competitive talent and players who have very different attitudes. Going from pros to college is a MUCH smoother and generally more successful transition.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

They hold in their back pocket that they can always go back to college and be successful.

I'll buy that.

Matter of fact, let me build on that idea... one could make the argument that what we're really looking at isn't a college vs. pro thing, but a longevity thing.

To wit, if an NBA coach doesn't do so great in their first position, they typically go back to being assistant and bide their time until they re-surface b/c of their new team's success, or if they're lucky, they catch on with another HC job.

College coaches don't often do that. You're right. They go back to an HC job where they had previous success.

Quote:

---

The fact that only 1 guy has won titles in both the pros and college speaks to how hard it is to accomplish.

Well, again, I think the very fact that AHF can list practically all of those who leaped directly from a college HC job to a pro HC job on a few lines says everything about that factoid.

Using the presidential analogy again, one could suggest that its hard to be Catholic and become the U.S. president since only one person has done that in the last 50 years (and actually, beyond that). Well, if very few Catholics ever ran for the office, then sure it's hard... it might not be the major reason, though, why Catholics so rarely become good presidents.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

Known

conflicts,

IMO

.

Hmmmm... pardon the observation, but isn't that an oxymoron? If it's "known," then it's not really your opinion, right? Not trying to be a jerk... the point is kind of central to my contention that the "known" conflicts are, in reality, "presumed."

Quote:

---

If you want to increase your sample size go look at how NFL coaches do transitioning from college.

At best, very thin ice on that one; at worst, not even sort of scientifically valid to switch b/t those contexts, including the point that head football coaches are much less likely to interact with individual players on a daily basis than head basketball coaches are.

Quote:

---

They suffer from many of the same issues in being able to work with players.

Still presumptive.

Quote:

---

I can understand an argument that the evidence is inconclusive on college coaches but every has to agree that they track record is inconclusive at best and certainly not favorable, right?

The results are conclusive... but the reason for the results is not conclusive. That the results are negative can't be used to say that the reason for the results is conclusive.

Quote:

---

See NFL coaches who made the jump without NFL backgrounds:

Butch Davis

Just to be clear, though, Davis went from being a college coach under Jimmy to being a pro assistant under Jimmy... and only after that became a pro HC coach.

Quote:

---

Going from pros to college is a MUCH smoother and generally more successful transition.

Hmmmm... basketball, okay... maybe. Off the top of my head, I'm not recalling a guy who first started in the pro coaching ranks who then took a college HC position... who are you thinking of?

But if you're looking at football, I'm pretty sure that that doesn't hold up all that well.

[Dsinner]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Known

conflicts,

IMO

.

Hmmmm... pardon the observation, but isn't that an oxymoron? If it's "known," then it's not really your opinion, right? Not trying to be a jerk... the point is kind of central to my contention that the "known" conflicts are, in reality, "presumed."

Quote:

---

If you want to increase your sample size go look at how NFL coaches do transitioning from college.

At best, very thin ice on that one; at worst, not even sort of scientifically valid to switch b/t those contexts, including the point that head football coaches are much less likely to interact with individual players on a daily basis than head basketball coaches are.

Quote:

---

They suffer from many of the same issues in being able to work with players.

Still presumptive.

Quote:

---

I can understand an argument that the evidence is inconclusive on college coaches but every has to agree that they track record is inconclusive at best and certainly not favorable, right?

The results are conclusive... but the reason for the results is not conclusive. That the results are negative can't be used to say that the reason for the results is conclusive.

Quote:

---

See NFL coaches who made the jump without NFL backgrounds:

Butch Davis

Just to be clear, though, Davis went from being a college coach under Jimmy to being a pro assistant under Jimmy... and only after that became a pro HC coach.

Quote:

---

Going from pros to college is a MUCH smoother and generally more successful transition.

Hmmmm... basketball, okay... maybe. Off the top of my head, I'm not recalling a guy who first started in the pro coaching ranks who then took a college HC position... who are you thinking of?

But if you're looking at football, I'm pretty sure that that doesn't hold up all that well.

You're over-thinking this big time Stu. It's pretty much common knowledge around the NBA AND the NFL that taking a chance on a college coach comes with some reservations. You don't have to do much more than pay antention to GM's from both leagues to know their feelings on the subject. Hell, Google it and you will see there's way more substance than you're giving it credit for.

There is a reason the sample size is so small.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

You're over-thinking this big time Stu. It's pretty much common knowledge around the NBA AND the NFL that taking a chance on a college coach comes with some reservations. You don't have to do much more than pay antention to GM's from both leagues to know their feelings on the subject. Hell, Google it and you will see there's way more substance than you're giving it credit for.

There is a reason the sample size is so small.

And what's to say, Sinner, that you're not under-thinking it? In fact, that's why I raise the issue... for the most part, I think fans have leaped to presumptions here, that aren't necessarily so well supported by anything beyond what sounds like a good theory.

As to why GMs hire NBA guys? They, like most people in a position to hire, hire people with whom they're comfortable... people with whom they've had experience, or know someone who has had a positive experience. That, as a rule, is going to be an NBA coach.

That isn't necessarily a reflection, however, on how well college head coaches may or may not do as NBA head coaches.

[Dsinner]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You're over-thinking this big time Stu. It's pretty much common knowledge around the NBA AND the NFL that taking a chance on a college coach comes with some reservations. You don't have to do much more than pay antention to GM's from both leagues to know their feelings on the subject. Hell, Google it and you will see there's way more substance than you're giving it credit for.

There is a reason the sample size is so small.

And what's to say, Sinner, that you're not under-thinking it? In fact, that's why I raise the issue... for the most part, I think fans have leaped to presumptions here, that aren't necessarily so well supported by anything beyond what sounds like a good theory.

As to why GMs hire NBA guys? They, like most people in a position to hire, hire people with whom they're comfortable... people with whom they've had experience, or know someone who has had a positive experience. That, as a rule, is going to be an NBA coach.

That isn't necessarily a reflection, however, on how well college head coaches may or may not do as NBA head coaches.

Fair enough. I know I've been accused of underthinking an issue or two or 28 before. I still think it's a hard thing to do that rarely pays off.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You're over-thinking this big time Stu. It's pretty much common knowledge around the NBA AND the NFL that taking a chance on a college coach comes with some reservations. You don't have to do much more than pay antention to GM's from both leagues to know their feelings on the subject. Hell, Google it and you will see there's way more substance than you're giving it credit for.

There is a reason the sample size is so small.

And what's to say, Sinner, that you're not under-thinking it? In fact, that's why I raise the issue... for the most part, I think fans have leaped to presumptions here, that aren't necessarily so well supported by anything beyond what sounds like a good theory.

As to why GMs hire NBA guys? They, like most people in a position to hire, hire people with whom they're comfortable... people with whom they've had experience, or know someone who has had a positive experience. That, as a rule, is going to be an NBA coach.

That isn't necessarily a reflection, however, on how well college head coaches may or may not do as NBA head coaches.

What is the evidence supporting college guys making the jump? I have given a bunch of evidence that infers but does not definitely prove that college guys suffer making the transition to the pro game. What is the counter evidence? If you are saying that the numbers have not been controlled for other factors then control for them and show something demonstrating that college coaches are equally as good as experienced NBA coaches when hired for a new job. If the best argument is "things don't look so good on the surface but maybe someone could show that it isn't really guys like Pitino and Calipari struggling with the NBA, maybe it is more about other factors" then I am not persuaded by that.

When you have things like Lon Kruger admitting that college coaches struggle to make the adjustment and you have the terrible numbers and NOTHING positive supporting college coaches being attractive candidates on the whole, it is tough to not be concerned:

Quote:

---

None of the seven coaches hired directly from the college ranks between 1992-2000 is still in the league, and only two — P.J. Carlesimo, then with the Portland Trail Blazers, and John Calipari, then with the New Jersey Nets — got their teams to the playoffs.

"The results kind of tell the story," says Lon Kruger, fired by the Atlanta Hawks last month with the team at 11-16, the last of the most recent crop of college coaches to exit the pro game. "It's hard to refute."

See Babcock as well:

Quote:

---

Atlanta general manager Pete Babcock says one reason for the communication breakdown is that college coaches don't have the same inherent leverage in the NBA.

"At the college level, you have a captive audience for a finite period of time," he says. "You have that group for maybe two or three years. In the NBA, you may have players any number of years. You can have a great speech, but if you deliver that speech 150 times, it is not as impactful the 150th time."

There are many other quotes that are also telling - both in the NBA and NFL - about guys struggling to adjust:

Quote:

---

"A coach with an NBA background understands travel and the way things go," says Indiana Pacers center Brad Miller, who played for Floyd in Chicago and gives him high marks for intensity and enthusiasm. "They know you've got 82 games and there are going to be ups and downs. College coaches are accustomed to playing one conference game a week and putting everything into that."

Even with his experience, Pitino struggled in the NBA. He says his biggest challenge was adjusting to practices.

"Every practice with a college coach is so significant," says Pitino. "Practice is not that important in the NBA. Staying healthy, staying fresh is the important thing. There is more emphasis on scouting, matchups and preparing for next game. College is constant player development."

Says Washington Wizards general manager Wes Unseld: "One thing (college coaches) don't understand is the amount of work to be done, and that there is so little time to do it."

"In college you did everything as a team," Tarkanian says. "But in the NBA, you saw them at practice and you didn't see them again until the game."

"The NBA is all business," says Hamilton, who is in his first season at Florida State after being out of coaching last season. "Rules and things like the salary cap have a lot more bearing. That makes the scenario a little bit different."