Guest Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 (edited) Ahh well I'm sure us lay people could figure it out, as long as you wrap it up in your typical better than thou response. But let me help you out here a bit since you are probably so busy with your math and all this morning. http://www.basketball-reference.com/coaches/NBA_stats.html There are 48 coaches in NBA history with a .500 or greater winning percentage in the playoffs and yet for some reason you want us to hire the guy ranked 86th. Something is clearly fogging your genius brain as 86th all time is just not that damned impressive, no matter how you try and spin it. Oh and looky who's right there 2 spots ahead of him, public enemy #1 Larry Drew, the guy who you are so eager to replace and you're gonna do it with someone with less success. Great choice! I think the rest of us simple people who can't understand math will go with SVG, who somehow, someway, is 27th on that list with a .552 winning percentage, which is somehow over .500. I mean that makes no sense as surely he should be in that vast majority of scrubs that you want us picking from, right? Why is it you think I do not want SVG? Oh thats right, you are giving me a false option. I would also like SVG. By me saying I like Nate does not imply he is the only one I like. -- EDITED -- Edited May 16, 2013 by Dolfan23 Edited and removed abusive comment and warning sent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 I like SVG a lot and want him as our next coach. But something about .552 with players like Wade, Shaq, and Howard does not impress me. If we are talking Wade as a veteran then yes of course but he had Wade as a 2nd year player and Shaq was in his 13th year in the only year that SVG got to coach them, unless you include the handful of games SVG got in the 2nd year when he had his job stolen from him by Riley who went on to win the title that year with the Heat. Even still he did pretty well with a young Wade and aging Shaq going 11-4 in the playoffs that year, which obviously skewed his record, but it's still impressive. With Orlando and Howard obviously he had the best big man in the league and he probably would have had a championship with that group if Otis hadn't screwed up the roster by trading away Lewis, Turk, VC, Gortat, etc. as SVG had a really good group that were coached well. I don't think that he can only coach teams with elite talent, but if we're holding coaches to the standard that their coaching record is only impressive if they don't have superstars on their team then the only guy who's had success without superstars would be Larry Brown who won the title in Detroit. For the record, he's 36th on the all time list with a .516 winning percentage, which is quite an accomplishment since he didn't have any superstar players that I can recall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Dolf, were you in any competitive debate teams in high school or college? Ha no and I suck at debating. Guys like AHF, Niremetal, Wretch, Northcyde, Macecase, etc. are all far better than I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member BrazilianHawk Posted May 16, 2013 Premium Member Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Ahh well I'm sure us lay people could figure it out, as long as you wrap it up in your typical better than thou response. But let me help you out here a bit since you are probably so busy with your math and all this morning. http://www.basketball-reference.com/coaches/NBA_stats.html There are 48 coaches in NBA history with a .500 or greater winning percentage in the playoffs and yet for some reason you want us to hire the guy ranked 86th. Something is clearly fogging your genius brain as 86th all time is just not that damned impressive, no matter how you try and spin it. Oh and looky who's right there 2 spots ahead of him, public enemy #1 Larry Drew, the guy who you are so eager to replace and you're gonna do it with someone with less success. Great choice! I think the rest of us simple people who can't understand math will go with SVG, who somehow, someway, is 27th on that list with a .552 winning percentage, which is somehow over .500. I mean that makes no sense as surely he should be in that vast majority of scrubs that you want us picking from, right? Okay. All we have to do is wait until the Bulls drop Thibodeau and hire him the next minute. Oh wait! Thibodeau has only .471 in the playoffs, so he CLEARLY sucks at coaching. I also quit on Sloan, .485 in the playoffs won't make it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Okay. All we have to do is wait until the Bulls drop Thibodeau and hire him the next minute. Oh wait! Thibodeau has only .471 in the playoffs, so he CLEARLY sucks at coaching. I also quit on Sloan, .485 in the playoffs won't make it... I am not saying that .500 is the gold standard as you have to look beyond that, but when you're looking at a guy with a .412 winning percentage and 5 playoff appearances in 12 years that's just not that impressive. Thibs has coached 3 years and has been in the playoffs all 3 years and was .500 coming into this season. I don't think it's all that disappointing that his team without Rose lost to easily the best team in the playoffs this year, which hurt his winning percentage. Sloan coached 26 years and made the playoffs 20 times with 8 of those years winning more playoff games than he lost. By contrast, Nate only had 1 year where he won more playoff games than he lost, going 6-5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member BrazilianHawk Posted May 16, 2013 Premium Member Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Of course, but you have to look at the rosters they were working with. In the Western conference, the Hawks would struggle to make the playoffs. Why is that some consider LD and Woody any better than Nate? I say, if this is the best Ferry can do, I'll take McMillan over LD and Woody 11 times out of 10 ten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Of course, but you have to look at the rosters they were working with. In the Western conference, the Hawks would struggle to make the playoffs. Why is that some consider LD and Woody any better than Nate? I say, if this is the best Ferry can do, I'll take McMillan over LD and Woody 11 times out of 10 ten. I can't speak for anyone else but I don't actually consider Woody or LD any better than Nate, really just more of the same. As Sothron pointed out he runs the same basic iso offense that Woody ran and he had some pretty talented teams in Portland that could run them well but that stuff doesn't work in the playoffs. If we can't get a guy like SVG then I'd rather take a shot on an up and coming assistant or hope that Scott Brooks is replaced in OKC. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member BrazilianHawk Posted May 16, 2013 Premium Member Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Scott Brooks Long shot, but I definitely like it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Long shot, but I definitely like it! Agreed, but you never know the management in OKC might think that he's gone as far as he can go. There's a history of coaches getting cut too soon after playoff defeats like this when he didn't have his full roster. But for me I'm all about the up and coming assistant guys as you could get lucky and hit on a guy like Brooks, Vogel, Thibs. To me that's the better route than a vet name coach who's been around a long time without a lot of success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonegully Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 I dont even care about the offense any more. This is what i would like to see in the next coach. 1. I would love a coach with ZERO ties to the Hawks. If you had ANY ties to the Hawks from 2000-current you are not considered. a. We need a fresh start, fresh front office, fresh coaching staff, and a fresh coach if we want this organization changed. If we want FA to look at ATL we need to show them this is not the Hawks of old.2. I would love a coach to hold players accountable and not afraid to put them in their place. A good example of this is Pop. He was just yelling at Tony Parker during a timeout the other night about a missed defensive assignment. Hold these players accountable. If a player is always taking bad shots, put him on the bench dont let him stay out there and continue to take bad shots and make bad plays.3. A motivator. I dont care how much you make at your job. Something or someone has to motivate you. To many a nights Bob and Nique say the same things "no energy" "not playing with a purpose" Well in my line a work its on the supervisor to motivated his Soldiers to meet or exceed certain standards. LD just stands there. If you see your star player or better Teague trying to gets call when he is getting killed in the lane, dont just stand there with your arms cross. SAY SOMETHING. Show some freaking passion. After those three are met then ill ask about what offensive sets he has lol. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AHF Posted May 16, 2013 Moderators Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 (edited) Offense Iso = No Go (Also, those playoff margins are more troubling than the overall record. Those aren't just losses - they are non-competitive losses.) Edited May 16, 2013 by AHF 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buzzard Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Okay. All we have to do is wait until the Bulls drop Thibodeau and hire him the next minute. Oh wait! Thibodeau has only .471 in the playoffs, so he CLEARLY sucks at coaching. I also quit on Sloan, .485 in the playoffs won't make it...If we could get Sloan I would be hyped. I have to wonder if the reports that SVG is our first choice have done anything to turn him away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTB Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 I can't speak for anyone else but I don't actually consider Woody or LD any better than Nate, really just more of the same. As Sothron pointed out he runs the same basic iso offense that Woody ran and he had some pretty talented teams in Portland that could run them well but that stuff doesn't work in the playoffs. If we can't get a guy like SVG then I'd rather take a shot on an up and coming assistant or hope that Scott Brooks is replaced in OKC. I cant believe this has gone this far up to almost 5 pages! Nate is a heavy iso offense coach! Why would any hawks fan want to see that again? Ferry is scaring me! I understand keeping options open but some dont even need to be considered! He should know better from the Mike Brown heavy isos ran in cleveland!...Come on now ferry! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 I think Ferry is just interviewing some candidates but not really serious about them. He just wants to go through the process but I'm sure he has someone specific in mind. I still like Sloan, Byron Scott, Sam Mitchell and most definitely budenholzer. Please don't hire SVG or Nate McMillan. No Synder either that would be a complete joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GameTime Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 From thorough research it sounds like McMillain is a poor man's Woody. Slow mundane tempo and not as good on defense as you think. Give me Byron Scott and Sam Mitchell over him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yungsta Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 From thorough research it sounds like McMillain is a poor man's Woody. Slow mundane tempo and not as good on defense as you think. Give me Byron Scott and Sam Mitchell over him. Just like woody the only reason people think he is a good defensive coach because they just look at PPG. The reason it is so low because of the extremely slow pace they play at. if you look at their overall defensive efficiency it is ranked right in the middle. Very Average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Sothron Posted May 16, 2013 Premium Member Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Nate's Trailblazers? Yeah, here's where they ranked with pace. Brace yourself, it is ugly. 2010-11 last full year with team 90.5 pace dead LAST in NBA 2009-2010 90.2 pace dead LAST In NBA 2008-2009 89.2 pace NEXT to LAST in NBA 2007-2008 100.2 pace NEXT to LAST in NBA 2006-2007 105.00 pace NEXT to LAST in NBA 2005-2006 103.9 pace Second to LAST in NBA So if you want boring, extremely slow paced and isolation exclusive offense then Nate is your man. Frankly I want NO PART of him. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AHawks89 Posted May 16, 2013 Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 Definitely do not want Nate. Never liked his as a coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member cam1218 Posted May 16, 2013 Premium Member Report Share Posted May 16, 2013 So if you want boring, extremely slow paced and isolation exclusive offense then Nate is your man. Frankly I want NO PART of him.Who is to say there aren't a lot of us who would love to have a slow and boring team?Lol those numbers are pretty scary. I knew he was similar to Woodson, but that makes it seem worse. I'm not sure if he is an upgrade over Drew or not. Hopefully Ferry is just going through all candidates and this guy isn't our next head coach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now