I respectfully disagree
Which further shows how little you know.
I respectfully disagree
Which further shows how little you know.
I don't think either one of you know much about basketball. Especially the one of you who needs 3 posts to show how little he knows.
What makes Scott a good coach? Just curious
If anything at best he is avg....maybe shit coach was harsh but I don't consider hm a good coach
What makes Scott a good coach? Just curious
If anything at best he is avg....maybe shit coach was harsh but I don't consider hm a good coach
He is average at best. But I'll save everyone some time. Trojan thinks he's a good coach because he took the Nets to 2 Finals over 10 years ago and if you gave the Lakers great players, he could do the same thing. Scott just needs great players. Nevermind the fact that's pretty much the definition of an average coach, only getting the minimum amount of his players' talent (hi Scott Brooks!), but that's the gist of it.
What makes Scott a good coach? Just curious
If anything at best he is avg....maybe shit coach was harsh but I don't consider hm a good coach
I don't think I agree because he took the reigns of several teams with many young players and as I recall nearly took them to the finals. The problem he has with this current team is that many of them are not young players. They are lazy and untalented veterans. Nick Young has been around awhile now and is about as good as he ever will be. If you want to make a delicious chicken salad, you need a good chicken - not chicken shit. Jeremy Lin is another one. Now when they conduct their exit interviews, it would be nice if some of them would be willing to sit down with Byron Scott and come to an agreement on what they need to do in order to be the best player possible but lets get real - Lin and Young are gone next year and so is Boozer and they need to bei dont think Scott is the guy to rebuild with and connect with young players- he is from a bygone era and the way he thinks is just not the way current players think- Do i think todays players COULD learn a lot from the way Scott carries himself? Yes- obviously the guy was a pro's pro who did things the right way- but his style just does not connect with todays AAU style young guys.
hes ok i guess- but he resented having to use advanced metrics- and just basically assumed he did not have to "teach" effort- on a certain fundamental level i agree with him- you guys are pros- give a pros effort- but that just totally ignores the mindset of todays young NBA players...I dont know anyone that would say he is a coach who belongs in the top half of NBA coaches.
persoanlly- there were things i liked about the guy- i liked his demeanor and his toughness- obviously this is a guy that has carried himself like a professional his whole life- but as a coach of y oung guys he really did a crappy job.
Really? CP3 and Kyrie disagree about his ability to work with young guys. So does Kobe (although he's old). Also, the Lakers are pretty young and while they suck, it's because of a lack of talent, not a lack of effort.
You couldn't possibly have it more backwards either. If his "authoritarian coaching style" is going to rub anyone the wrong way, it's going to be vets who have been around, accomplished some things and think they are above being corrected (like Jason Kidd). Young guys need his "authoritarian coaching style" because they haven't accomplished shit and don't know shit.
He is average at best. But I'll save everyone some time. Trojan thinks he's a good coach because he took the Nets to 2 Finals over 10 years ago and if you gave the Lakers great players, he could do the same thing. Scott just needs great players. Nevermind the fact that's pretty much the definition of an average coach, only getting the minimum amount of his players' talent (hi Scott Brooks!), but that's the gist of it.
Yes, because after all, guys like Phil Jackson, Pat Riley, Greg Popovich, etc. have all taken average/below average team to championships.
I'll bet Spoelstra still would have taken the Heat to 4 straight finals and won 2 if he didn't have Lebron, Wade and Bosh on the team.
It's amazing how good coaches look with guys like Magic, Kareem, Worthy, MJ, Pippen, Duncan, Robinson, Parker, Lebron and Wade isn't it?
I'll wait while you compile the list of coaches who have won titles without great players.
I have watched more of Kyrie's game than practically anyone that does not actually work for the Cavs- and Kyrie did not give one shit about defense under Scott- Neither did Waiters- the first time I saw either care at all was under Blatt.
it was comical how horrible of an effort the Cavs gave on defense under Scott- and not one player played over their expectations.
Believe- i have learned that i cant tell you something you dont want to hear by now- but i watched so many Cavs games under Scott where I was no upset they lost- but upset because the effort was awful- and this is the first time i have seen Kyrie play defense sincehe got to the league- and this is the first year TT has taken a big step up and developed into one of the better rebounders in the league.
Also- Scott was a huge factor in drafting Waiters- saying he saw a lot of Dwade in him- and Waiters under performed and pouted under Scott all the time- all though Dion under performed and pouted under just aboutevery coach.
Really? CP3 and Kyrie disagree about his ability to work with young guys. So does Kobe (although he's old). Also, the Lakers are pretty young and while they suck, it's because of a lack of talent, not a lack of effort.
You couldn't possibly have it more backwards either. If his "authoritarian coaching style" is going to rub anyone the wrong way, it's going to be vets who have been around, accomplished some things and think they are above being corrected (like Jason Kidd). Young guys need his "authoritarian coaching style" because they haven't accomplished shit and don't know shit.
Larry Brown
Yeah, I'm sure having Lebron on the team has absolutely nothing to do with Kyrie playing defense. The more you post, the worse you look.
todays young guys dont respond to that though- they are getting paid millions with guaranteed contracts- and tune that crap out- unfortunately to be a head coach that gets through to those players you need to have a lot different demeanor then Scott has- his old school style just does not work on todays young players.
I think its a shame that todays young players tune that stuff out because it could help them- but they do- they are millionaires with guaranteed contracts taken high in the draft and know they are more important to the long term success of the team than the coach- Scott just has not evolved.- he didnt with the Cavs anyway- I can just tell you what i saw.
I just showed you that they are, do and have. The guys whose balls you slobber over on a daily basis around here has credited Scott for much of his development.
You really need to stop embarrassing yourself.
I am sure it does too- of course having LeBron - a player and vet hold guys accountable helps- but its obvious that Scott couldnt do it- and i look at a team like the Celtics who have traded away players- have a bunch of young guys- and are still fighting for a playoff spot becuase of a great young head coach like Brad Stevens. He is getting stuff out of the Celtics that Scott never got out of the Cavs and there is no doubt the Cavs had more talent.
He is average at best. But I'll save everyone some time. Trojan thinks he's a good coach because he took the Nets to 2 Finals over 10 years ago and if you gave the Lakers great players, he could do the same thing. Scott just needs great players. Nevermind the fact that's pretty much the definition of an average coach, only getting the minimum amount of his players' talent (hi Scott Brooks!), but that's the gist of it.