Dwane Casey SCARES ME!

[JTB]

At first when i read about casey i was hyped but then the more i read the more he sounds like woody. I mean just like woody he's defense minded and just about ALL researching you do on casey will say he's a good defense coach but will need a very strong offense coach on his side! An just because he's friends with Sund tells me nothing but he's already one foot in the door. His resume sounds good with defense but horrible with offense. This makes me wonder why the ASG and even Sund would even consider hiring him! On top of all that this man is known to be LAID-BACK! We dont need a laid back coach especially with a team like this. Thats whats wrong with the hawks now they dont respect or listen to Woody cause he dont demand it cause he's too laid back. I can only give Casey 2 props, he is great defensively and he can motivate younger players better than Woody but that wont help the hawks if they wont listen to him! The Hawks are young and they will just run all over casey if he gets signed here!...........I say the Hawks either sign a coach that going to demand some respect or just kiss JJ good bye and risk starting our franchise over!........We need Avery Johnson, Byron Scott, or Sam Mitchell, I mean these guys demand respect, they coach both sides of the ball very well, and on top of all that they can motivate players and get the best out of there players.Plus all 3 of them proved they can do it.I rather us have a proven coach than a development one at this stage!

The hawks considering Casey just tells us that again they are trying to be Cheap! I mean there are some good things about Casey but more bad than good. The worst in Casey's Case is that he wont bring that offensive scheme the hawks badly need. With that said how many of you really want Casey over...............hell any other coaching canindates? I mean if you read on some others that arent huge named, they sound far better than Casey as a overall Coach.

[TransitionOffense]

Sund fired Woody for a reason. He isn't going to hire his "buddy" to perform at the same level and approaching it the same way. I'm pretty sure Sund understands the need for a structured offense. That being said, Casey isn't a diamond, but I have no doubt the coaching staff will be much improved. And THAT being said, it all boils down to the relationship between coach and players. It's a family. Fight for one another.

[NJHAWK]

This would be bad imo as well. To me this is a backwards move, not even a lateral one.

[JTB]

Sund fired Woody for a reason. He isn't going to hire his "buddy" to perform at the same level and approaching it the same way. I'm pretty sure Sund understands the need for a structured offense. That being said, Casey isn't a diamond, but I have no doubt the coaching staff will be much improved. And THAT being said, it all boils down to the relationship between coach and players. It's a family. Fight for one another.

hopefully your right about Sund. but if he does hire his buddy this will be his worst move since he's been here unless he really gets casey some help. But so far Sund has done nothing but good for this ballclub and i guess i shouldnt give up on him now. But the thought of casey as our next coach still bothers me!

[GameTime]

The more I read about him, the more I agree JTB.

[JTB]

The more I read about him, the more I agree JTB.

yeah, gametime man................i just read that article you posted in another thread about casey and it was long but worth reading and it really sounds like woody 2.0 but you know the worst thing about all this i really think the ASG is possibly going to sign this guy cause the ASG is known to be cheap....but i could be wrong since there are sources saying the hawks have strong interest in Avery Johnson so thats good. Lets hope Avery impresses so well that they try to sign him right away!

Edited May 18, 2010 by JTB

[Plainview1981]

Sund fired Woody for a reason. He isn't going to hire his "buddy" to perform at the same level and approaching it the same way. I'm pretty sure Sund understands the need for a structured offense. That being said, Casey isn't a diamond, but I have no doubt the coaching staff will be much improved. And THAT being said, it all boils down to the relationship between coach and players. It's a family. Fight for one another.

Sund fired Woody because Gearon likely told him to fire him.

[thecampster]

Sund fired Woody because Gearon likely told him to fire him.

And Hotlanta speaks the blunt truth again.

[KB21]

I disagree with this. Dwane Casey has proven to be a solid coach. He got a raw deal in Minnesota. His career record is currently below .500, and he was fired when he was 20-20 in his second season. However, since that time, the timberwolves have gone into the toilet.

Dwane has been associated with strong defensive teams in Seattle under George Karl and under Nate McMillan. He has also been associated with teams that can play both up tempo on offense and slow the pace down. I see nothing that suggests he is a weak offensive coach. The guy is getting a lot of interest from other NBA teams as well this offseason. I think he's a good fit. He's not a hard driving task master, but he's also not one that will put up with poor effort. If he gets a fair chance, I think he will prove himself to be a capable coach. It remains to be seen if he can take the Hawks to the next level, but you know what. I don't see any coach available that might be able to do that. You can make an argument for Avery Johnson, but Avery is a micromanager that wants the game played his way. He is very quick to take the reigns from his point guard, slow the pace down, and call the plays himself.

[DrReality]

Casey will not get us over the hump. But then I'm not sure Sund will either. Time will tell.

[sturt]

There is no "best" coach out there who's available.

Casey has his faults, I'm sure.

ON BALANCE, THOUGH, it's a crapshoot--Casey's faults are pretty much just as bad but no worse than anyone else's.

And more pertinently, this is NOT AT ALL the decision that is going to dictate our fortune over the next 2-3 years in comparison to the roster decisions that will be made.

So chill.

[Wretch]

If what people are saying is true - laid back, defensive minded, needs help on offense - then he'd be the worst possible replacement for Woody. Truth is though, nobody knows what a coach like Casey can do for this team. Which is why I will be fairly disappointed if we hire him. If we were a young team with no expectations, maybe flirting with the 7th or 8th seed...sure. Hiring him or any unproven coach, no matter how much people sing their praise, is just the kind of mediocre move that we've always made.

Just makes me want to palm my forehead. Nothing against Casey, but when will this team finally GET IT?

[WraithSentinel]

I hope we don't bring in Casey. I want us to go with Larry Drew or Sam Mitchell.

[Buzzard]

There is no "best" coach out there who's available.

Casey has his faults, I'm sure.

ON BALANCE, THOUGH, it's a crapshoot--Casey's faults are pretty much just as bad but no worse than anyone else's.

And more pertinently, this is NOT AT ALL the decision that is going to dictate our fortune over the next 2-3 years in comparison to the roster decisions that will be made.

So chill.

I agree Sturt. When going after a coach with limited to no head coaching experience its a crap shoot especially for us fans. Its not like we are in the interview rooms listening to any of them talking about Xs and Os, discipline, or defensive strategies. Our roster changes, if any, are more important for the next three seasons than the head coaching decision.

I do not think our new head coach will have anywhere near 5 years to prove himself as Woody did. He better show promise within three or he will be shown the door IMO.

Casey had a very bad team in those Timberwolves. I just looked over their rebounding stats for the 05-06 and 06-07 seasons. His 2nd and 3rd best rebounders on that team in 05-06 was Kandiman and Eddie Griffin at 5.6 per game.....In 06-07 it was Mark Blount with 6.2 and Craig Smith with 5.6. And even with that bad a team he was 20-20 when they fired him during the 06-07 season.

Is it any wonder Garnet wanted out of Minny and away from McHale?

Edited May 18, 2010 by Buzzard

[gtmike]

Just because he has similar strengths/weaknesses doesn't mean he'll coach the same way. I wouldn't avoid any defense-oriented coach just because Woody was one. His coaching style, demeanor, locker room presence, decisions, etc. could well be very different than Woody's even if they have similarities. Not saying he's the guy to get, as I don't know much about him, but I don't think it makes sense to rule him out for that reason.

What if we hired someone that was the opposite, an offensive-minded coach that rides his team in the games and in the media? He'd be different than Woody but a season later you'd start hearing how we need to concentrate on defense and so on.

While we're talking coaching arguments, how about the one where we should only get a coach who has taken a team further into the playoffs than we've been? Are we limited to only picking coaches who have been in or won the Finals? I'd rather be the team who makes a smart pick and gets the next coach that will make an appearance there.

Edited May 18, 2010 by AHF

[gtmike]

I would avoid any defense-oriented coach just because Woody was one.

I might be missing the edit post button somewhere but that should say "wouldn't" and not "would."

[AHF]

Just because he has similar strengths/weaknesses doesn't mean he'll coach the same way. I wouldn't avoid any defense-oriented coach just because Woody was one. His coaching style, demeanor, locker room presence, decisions, etc. could well be very different than Woody's even if they have similarities. Not saying he's the guy to get, as I don't know much about him, but I don't think it makes sense to rule him out for that reason.

What if we hired someone that was the opposite, an offensive-minded coach that rides his team in the games and in the media? He'd be different than Woody but a season later you'd start hearing how we need to concentrate on defense and so on.

While we're talking coaching arguments, how about the one where we should only get a coach who has taken a team further into the playoffs than we've been? Are we limited to only picking coaches who have been in or won the Finals? I'd rather be the team who makes a smart pick and gets the next coach that will make an appearance there.

This is where I am. Woodson never coached one team that you could say had an outstanding defense during his 6 years in Atlanta. How does hiring someone who produced better defenses with worse talent (Casey) equate to a repeat of the Woody era? The myth that Woodson was a defensive genuis who produced top notch defenses in Atlanta while running an offense with little to no variation or structure is just that...a myth. In fact, Woodson was a coach who produced poor to mediocre defenses in Atlanta while running an offense with little to no variation or structure.

I can say this, if we hire someone with a "defense first" mindset I want an "offensive guru" on the staff.

IMO, Woodson Version 2.0 would be Mike Brown.

I might be missing the edit post button somewhere but that should say "wouldn't" and not "would."

It should appear to the bottom right of your post by the reply button.

[Buzzard]

This is where I am. Woodson never coached one team that you could say had an outstanding defense during his 6 years in Atlanta. How does hiring someone who produced better defenses with worse talent (Casey) equate to a repeat of the Woody era? The myth that Woodson was a defensive genuis who produced top notch defenses in Atlanta while running an offense with little to no variation or structure is just that...a myth. In fact, Woodson was a coach who produced poor to mediocre defenses in Atlanta while running an offense with little to no variation or structure.

I can say this, if we hire someone with a "defense first" mindset I want an "offensive guru" on the staff.

IMO, Woodson Version 2.0 would be Mike Brown.

I am with you gtmike and AHF. Woody talked defense to the press; what we did was switch all game long and play predictably poor defense on the court.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Buzzard