The Annual CoachSearch Thread: 2014 Version

[LoboGuerrero]

I'm not going to continue comparing them because there never was a comparison. Hollins was more successful than Joerger. Period.

You can rationalize it any way you want, but it doesn't change the history books that say Memphis was more successful in the playoffs under Hollins than Joerger, and I honestly don't care enough about this topic to continue trying to explain that to you.

What you're ignoring is that while their roster was the same, their opponents' we're not. This OKC team is far better than the OKC or Clippers teams they faced last year.

[Q00]

If you are going to try and refute my irrefutable point

He already refuted your "irrefutable point". I already refuted it. If you choose to not use common sense when formulating an argument, or responding, it isn't our failure.

All you have done is given your opinion that you think Joerger is a better coach. You haven't refuted anything with actual evidence to support this opinion. We've already established that Hollins won more games in the regular season and playoffs last year. So unless you have some stats you want to share that somehow support your claim of Joerger being better this year, you haven't refuted anything. All you did was give an opinion and then make up excuses to support it. That is your failure, not mine. I've already given evidence to support my argument.

[Q00]

Typo that further proves my point. The OKC team the grizzlies beat last year didn't have Westbrook, a top 10 player. Are you telling me you're going to continue comparing the two?

I'm not going to continue comparing them because there never was a comparison. Hollins was more successful than Joerger. Period.

You can rationalize it any way you want, but it doesn't change the history books that say Memphis was more successful in the playoffs under Hollins than Joerger, and I honestly don't care enough about this topic to continue trying to explain that to you.

If you want to be taken seriously, I'd recommend being constructive when addressing posters. It might just be me, but you're coming off condescending, which in turn unfortunately just makes you come off as someone with a social handicap. You make good points all over the board, but you just have to concede when you're wrong rather than throw back the "you're too stupid to understand" spiel. I mean, are you really trying to argue that Randy Wittman is the more successful/better coach this year when compared to Carlisle and Thibs? Your arguments are always stripped down to one variable that proves your point when there are clearly multiple.

You gotta be kidding me...You should learn the difference between socializing and arguing a point. I'm not socializing with you. I'm stating facts that support the argument that Hollins is a better coach than Joerger, and the record speaks for itself. So you might want to take your own advice and concede that you're wrong and stop posting in an argument that you can't win. If Joerger gets them to the WCF next year, come back and tell me he's as good as Hollins and I'll gladly listen. Right now you have nothing to support this claim other than excuses and I'm getting tired of hearing them, to be honest.

And yes Wittman had a more successful season than Carlisle and Thibodeau. That's not being too black and white. Sports are decided in the playoffs. There is no arguing who is the best team at the end of the year. The playoffs decides that. That's the beauty of debating sports. You can argue a team, coach, player is better/worse all season, but eventually all debates get decided in the playoffs, one way or the other. So, yes, the coach who gets his team further in the playoffs had the more successful season. Especially if he got further by beating the other coach in question. Wittman just beat Thibodeau 4-1. How is that even a question?

[Kilo]

Mike Brown out in Cleveland now - another opening that will be filled before Detroit even gets a GM in place.

[ImHeisenberg]

Mike Brown out in Cleveland now - another opening that will be filled before Detroit even gets a GM in place.

I absolutely do not understand why that moron kept getting hired. Was everyone in LA and Cleveland blind to the fact that LeBron carried those awful teams?

Brown's ceiling is an assistant coach. That's it.

[Kilo]

^And if Dumars was still GM here and hadn't hired Woodson yet, he'd now have a helluva quandary on his hands - who to hire Woodson or Brown, or if they could co-head coach.

[ImHeisenberg]

^And if Dumars was still GM here and hadn't hired Woodson yet, he'd now have a helluva quandary on his hands - who to hire Woodson or Brown, or if they could co-head coach.

Dumars sure did like that toilet bowl offense.

[jaredtyshaf]

Just hire Tom Izzo or Kevin Ollie and hope for a home run. I don't think any established (NBA) coach is even going to entertain the idea of coming here.

[Joe Berry]

Just hire Tom Izzo or Kevin Ollie and hope for a home run. I don't think any established (NBA) coach is even going to entertain the idea of coming here.

+1

also which established coach would come here if the GM is not in place yet? i mean thats the most important link to the frontoffice for any coach. The GM should choose the coach not the ownership group.

That being said I want SvG if they really focus the coaching hire first. He can get some roster responsibilities too for my liking and hire "his" GM. I just think he did a great job in Orlando before Dwight Howard turned into a whiny b**tch. He took that team to the finals with limited talent. They failed to surround Dwight with that 2nd star but thats not his fault, he got the maximum out of his players.

[jaredtyshaf]

Just hire Tom Izzo or Kevin Ollie and hope for a home run. I don't think any established (NBA) coach is even going to entertain the idea of coming here.

And just now news breaks we are most likely signing SVG