I agree with many things you've said.
Chicago-Bull-E wrote:Years of experience doesn’t remotely equate to success in any profession, despite what elders may have you believe. It certainly can, but talent and IQ will trump experience. Brad Stevens resume wasn’t close to Boylens when he left college, and his abilities run circles around his elder Boylen. Being an assistant coach for long periods of time guarantees nothing.
Completely agree that experience doesn't equate to success, and I don't think anyone views Boylen as a success as a head coach either.
However, 20 years of experience at some extremely prestigious places and absolutely a sign that you are talented, well regarded, and aren't a complete imbecile, which seems to be the overriding opinion. Especially in a small niche industry where everyone talks and knows each other.
You simply don't get the types of jobs Boylen has had if you're a moron that knows nothing about what they're doing. So no, I don't think Boylen's assistant coaching experience makes him a good head coach, and I don't think he's been a good head coach, but I do think he knows a whole lot about basketball and has quite a bit of talent around the basketball side of things.
What he lacks, most likely, are the leadership skills required to be at the top and to get people to buy into his message and want to pull for him. Those are skills that no amount of assistant coaching is going to give you necessarily because those are the parts that are fundamentally a totally different role.
Half of the battle of a head coach today is getting a group of 20 year olds to play the best basketball they can. That includes leading them, relating to them, teaching them, knowing when to push them and when to pull back. Boylen has failed in these areas so many times it’s difficult to keep track. He has the typical personality of a boomer, his brain is a step too slow for a head coach position but his ego will always tell him otherwise. It’s amazing he can tie his own shoes, regardless of how long his resume says he’s been in this industry.
Agree completely with the first half of this and would say for a head coach that's actually probably 90% of the battle not 50%, and that he doesn't seem to do well in this areas at all and that's the big problem. I think the agism and insults in the second half, and arguments like this are where I get defensive of Boylen. They're just meaningless insults not based on anything.
I don’t doubt that Boylen knows more than 90% of message board posters when it comes to basketball. In no way does that make him a good head coach.
Switch 90% to 100% and switch more with "orders of magnitude more" and the first part is still accurate, but so is the second part. Even the lowest assistant NBA coach would be able to make the same claim if they've been in the league for a few years, it doesn't make them at all qualified to run a team, and I don't think anyone would say otherwise.