The Steve Clifford Thread 2.0 - Off the Cliff we go

[yosemiteben]

But why?

Because it leads to breakdowns, uncertainty, and disorganization.

My point was that none of the coaches you mentioned scrap their entire defensive scheme and base principles midseason or game to game.

[TheKingofSting]

But why?

Because it leads to breakdowns, uncertainty, and disorganization.

My point was that none of the coaches you mentioned scrap their entire defensive scheme and base principles midseason or game to game.

How is that any different than the crap defense he refuses to change?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vanderbilt_Grad]

I don’t like the way this conversation is being presented. It feels very binary – coaches change their defensive scheme or they don’t. I think that it’s more nuanced than that.

At a very high level I think that few coaches change their entire defensive approach during the season. A quick google search will return TONS of results about how “Team XYZ will not change defense in spite of new players” or some such. I suspect that there are good reasons for this that have nothing to do with players being able to learn something new or not. Keeping players accountable on defense is frequently part of team culture for instance.

But there are two related things that are important.

We do have lots of examples of teams changing defense mid-season. It happens frequently when there are coaching changes. New guy comes in and slowly gets the team doing things the way he wants them to vs what the last guy did. The players generally adjust just fine. So, from this perspective apparently changing defense is less of a problem for the team than it is for the coach.

And then we have tweaks. Since Pop has been brought up I’ll use him as an example. He’s infamous for his commitment to defense overall. He doesn’t change his overall scheme, but he will make adjustments based on the team being played – both before the game starts and at halftime depending on how things are going. Here are examples of both.

http://www.thescore.com/nba/news/1137677-4-clever-adjustments-popovich-used-to-ruin-warriors-debut

http://www.poundingtherock.com/2014/6/3/5772366/nba-playoffs-spurs-thunder-popovich-hidden-adjustment

And just because I like Pop,
http://www.businessinsider.com/gregg-popovich-philosophy-on-handling-players-exemplifies-spurs-success-2016-3

Taken together those articles show Pop coached teams
1. Doing something they don’t normally do on defense when it’s advantageous
2. Adjusting how they approaches guarding the other team’s main guys mid-game.
3. Altering playing time depending on matchups.

Those are not things that we tend to associate with Cliff.

I don’t want to go all anti-Cliff, but these are all areas where Cliff does not appear to have strength. Once he decides a thing, such as how he wants defense to work this year, he is reluctant to change. Cliff does have strengths as a coach and IMHO he’s the best one we’ve had in years on the NBA side here in Charlotte. But I also think that it’s fair to call out his weaknesses.

[TinmanZBoy]

i don't think coach Clifford will change his defensive schemes or it does not need to be changed... it has been working for you guys... you have to find the right players to execute it better than the current squad, particularly the bench...

[Braggins]

This season we were good at are defensive rebounding, transition defense, free throws, not fouling, and not turning the ball over. We were average to bad at everything else. This is Clifford's grand vision.

Clifford has a losing record as a coach and a disproportionate number of those wins are concentrated in two post all-star break runs (2014 and 2016), one of which was mostly fueled by big Al temporarily transforming into prime Olajuwon in the post. His win/loss record In February/March/April of 2014/2016 is 47-20. Outside of those two stretches his record is 113-148 and 160-168 overall. At this point I think considering Clifford a good coach is a more reactionary stance than being skeptical of his legitimacy.

[fatlever]

Counterpoint, isnt the sign of a good coach that his teams improve during the year? I think that's one of the reasons this year was so disappointing and strange, because it was the first year where the team didn't really improve. 2015 should be thrown out due to Lance and then the Kemba+MKG+Cody injuries to finish the season.

Do any of you really believe that with a different coach this same group of players becomes a different team? At best, a different coach gets maybe 5 more wins from this team. At worst, you have players wanting out of Charlotte.

I think Clifford has proven to be about league average as a coach, maybe in the 10-15 range.

[FreeMario]

Clown

[fatlever]

Clown

Posts like this are not helpful.

[Mystical Apples]

Clifford has a losing record as a coach and a disproportionate number of those wins are concentrated in two post all-star break runs (2014 and 2016)

I don't agree with the conclusion but it's potentially the most defensible argument against Clifford. Guessing a motivated researcher could identify if Post AS tanking + rest meaningfully devalues "Trying" wins. And if significant, create an Adjusted Win Total (or whatever).

Sounds like a blast.

[catch20two]

I tend to believe that it usually take Clifford until Post ASB to kick his stubbornness a bit, get the right lineups, and to finally make some adjustments to what hasn't been working all season.

[fatlever]

I tend to believe that it usually take Clifford until Post ASB to kick his stubbornness a bit, get the right lineups, and to finally make some adjustments to what hasn't been working all season.

or it takes Cho working some magic to help improve the roster - 2014 = CDR, 2016 = Lee.

[Cheeze]

Interesting discussion. So Clifford is a systems coach, who is a good communicator but a poor innovator, stubborn to a fault and unimaginative in game management. He's a defensive-minded coach in the Van Gundy mold who has league-wide respect but can be out-coached. Is capable of change, but lacks clear, defined growth as a head coach.

Does this pretty much sum up the guy?

If so, what does Clifford need to do to reach the next level? If you were to advise Clifford on the changes he needs to make, what would be your advice?

[fatlever]

The things that make Clifford a solid coach, his rigid system, his set rotation, his transparency with the players also leads to his faults. If he starts letting up on his principals, jerking guys around with their minutes, then the house of cards might fall.

Only thing that can really help Clifford go from middle of the pack coach to top tier is better players. I do think he's a good enough coach to get a talented team to the conference finals.

Some slight tweaks
- don't be afraid to go small and not just as a last resort reaction
- alter some of the defensive logic to limit overhelping from wings, even if that means more points allowed in the lane. (I think he'd be more willing to do this with an elite two-way rim protector, but there aren't many of those guys. He might just need to trust Cody a bit more)
- less reliance on vets that are clearly in over their heads, better plans for blooding some younger players
- perhaps a little more open-minded towards occasional rest for Kemba and Batum, even if it means a dropped game. Only a few times a season, but lets say we play @Toronto on Friday and @Cleveland on Saturday, maybe rest those guys for the Cavs game. This is much easier to do on a team that is comfortably in playoff position, which has never been the case under Cliff.

[yosemiteben]

I can get with all that fat, very fair and I'd agree on pretty much every point.

[Mystical Apples]

- less reliance on vets that are clearly in over their heads, better plans for blooding some younger players

IMO the most interesting plot line. Specifically, Briante and JOB -- are they strictly back benchers or viewed as legitimately competing for rotation minutes? Free Agent acquisition(s) may provide insight into how the FO and Clifford sees them.

Also wonder how related Marvin > Frank > MKG > JOB > Christian's release are, if at all.

[catch20two]

- less reliance on vets that are clearly in over their heads, better plans for blooding some younger players

IMO the most interesting plot line. Specifically, Briante and JOB -- are they strictly back benchers or viewed as legitimately competing for rotation minutes? Free Agent acquisition(s) may provide insight into how the FO and Clifford sees them.

Also wonder how related Marvin > Frank > MKG > JOB > Christian's release are, if at all.

I'm almost 100% (99%) sure that Clifford do not view Briante or JOB as players that can compete for regular rotation minutes. Briante could barely get in the game over Roberts whom is a donezy and JOB doesn't have enough playing experience.

Clifford will played a aged vet on his last leg and zero production from a former championship team over a inexperienced player with all the skill sets.

[yosemiteben]

I really hope the plan isn't to have Briante in the rotation, dude needs some major improvement.

Jury is out on JOB for me.

[Mystical Apples]

I guess I'm speculating if JOB's traditional PF size was a consideration. Specifically, hedging against Miles winning backup C and an eventual PF depth chart of Frank, MKG, Nic, and JOB over Christian.

[catch20two]

I really hope the plan isn't to have Briante in the rotation, dude needs some major improvement.

Jury is out on JOB for me.

Yea Briante is good 3rd string depth at best.

JOB is solid but I'd put him at 3rd string material at best as well until I see a string of consistent production. I think he could be for us something similar to Jeff Adrien in the past.

[mrknowitall215]

Read on Twitter