Rick Carlisle is a cheat code. It's almost not fair

[Teen Girl Squad]

Coaches like Carlisle and Spo are rare in the NBA today. You kind of need 3 things to get this kind of impact from a coach in today’s NBA.

#1. You need an actual elite coach. There just aren’t that many in the NBA. Most are personality managers over actual in game impact coaches.

#2. You need a front office foundation that will allow the coach to coach. This is a player’s league and the majority of players want to be coached by a player coach. So that’s who front offices tend to look for and will side with the players over the coach.

#3. Players that are willing to actually be coached. Again this is a player’s league and they want to be coached by a players coach. If the top guys on the team don’t buy in, the rest of the team won’t. This is where a lot of tactical coaches get chewed up and spit out in the NBA.

Carlisle gets to coach a team of a bunch of guys that are willing to get coached. So because of that, Carlisle gets to actually make an impact as a coach. Then throw in, it’s not like the Pacers are a bunch of scrappy no name guys. Ya you got your TJ McConnell, but that’s a deep team with legit talent as well.

In other words, Carlisle and Spo are great coaches who need a good FO and good players who listen and have the ability to execute .
But at the same time they are not magicians who can flip badly ran teams like Charlotte, Portland to take them to the playoffs.

Always has been. Its what helped Pop be great in San Antonio and Belicheck in New England. People treat coaches like its esports or chess, like they have complete and total control over what the players do in game (see how absurd baseball fans are with managers). Carlisle has always been on of those coaches and has consistently overperformed with his rosters but the other teams but its still within bounds. Its not like they are inventing new sets/strategies that no one has ever seen before and befuddling people or turning round 2 picks into perennial allstars with any consistency. Other teams have good coaches too and often better talent.

[Klomp]

Personally, I think Rick Carlisle might be one of the most underrated coaches in NBA history. In 23 seasons, he has brought 3 different franchises to the conference finals a total of five times and could possibly on his way to winning both of his Finals appearances.

[flow]

I'm sure Mathurin is no picnic.

Secret weapon last night too with 27.

Carlisle is BOSS.

What's interesting is that Carlisle has kept Mathurin on a very short leash over the last few years - pulling him from games when he has defensive lapses especially. Last season it was a running meme among the Pacers fans that Carlisle would pull Mathurin over tiny things. But maybe this has finally paid off.

He tightened the rotation considerably in these playoffs. Mathurin averaged 29 mpg during the regular season, and he's only averaged 16 in the playoffs. When he's not getting it done, Carlisle pulls him and he only plays 10 or 12 minutes. But he's had some great games and I think it's because Carlisle knows when Mathurin has it and knows when he doesn't. He lets him off the leash when he's cooking but benches him when he's not.

Mathurin averaged 29 mpg for the season because he started more than half the games, with Nesmith and others being out. In non-OT games that he didn't start, Mathurin averaged 23 mpg. Still more than he's averaging in the post-season, but not by a ton. He's averaging 17 mpg in non-OT/non-ejection games these playoffs.

.

[MrGoat]

In other words, Carlisle and Spo are great coaches who need a good FO and good players who listen and have the ability to execute .
But at the same time they are not magicians who can flip badly ran teams like Charlotte, Portland to take them to the playoffs.

Spo might be. He's pulled together some pretty sub-par talent into winners consistently and gotten buy in from guys who wouldn't elsewhere. Carlisle is more like a cicada where every 17 years or so he has a perfect fit for him and just dominates everyone.

I don't agree with this. Carlisle teams are always better than you'd think they should be, just like Spo's.

Carlisle actually made it pretty difficult in Dirk's later years because of just how good he was at maximizing questionable rosters which hurt the level of their draft picks. Spo is even known to look up to Carlisle, 2011 was rough for him considering what happened but Rick was willing to mentor and give him advice. There were times Mavs fans were annoyed with him but he's one of the best coaches in the league, period

[HotelVitale]

Carlisle IS one of the few legit good coaches but let's not give him more credit than he deserves. The Pacers have arguably the deepest team in the league and a well-constructed rotation of complimentary pieces. They're a very good team. Yes the Thunder have more talent but it's not an overwhelming advantage and wouldn't be them choking if they lost. Credit should go to the Pacers

And Carlisle had a lot to do with that, too. Carlisle took the job prior to the 2021-22 season. Two years later, there was only 1 player on the roster that was there when he arrived. Turner. Carlisle undoubtedly had a heavy hand in the moves that were made and players that were acquired. No way he was going back to the Pacers for a second stint without assurances of authority.

Risk of being a little preachery here, I never think it's useful to see a positive outcome in the NBA and say 'that's all because of the coaches/front office!'

Everything starts with the talent of the players--and this series should give us healthy respect for the crazy skill of those dudes--and then moves out to what the GM or coach might be doing. Generally speaking Carlisle definitely got the Pacers to play really fast and hard and move the ball around smartly in a very spread court, and to always be competing on both ends. That's been a longer-term stylistic thing that works because of the specific skills of Haliburton, Siakam, Nesmith, Nembhard, and Turner. Those guys had to be able to play those roles to begin with, and then the PO stuff Carlisle is doing is mostly just shifting things around to mess with OKC and keep them guessing about what's coming.

Skipping some steps, any tweak the coaches have made or will make in this series is only working if the Pacers guys are outplaying and out-executing the other extremely skilled and well-coached guys on the other team. There's no simple fix for 'hey stop turning the ball over but still keep driving and whipping the ball around the court'--any little shift the coach makes won't do a thing if dudes like Haliburton, Siakam, and Nembhard can't drive and get into the teeth of the D while anticipating the ridiculous hands of OKC and what passing and finishing lanes might be available. I don't mean to take away from some of the clever little cross actions we've seen (and a lot I probably haven't noticed), but it feels like those decisions are making big differences and sort of dictating plays pretty rarely, and most of those strategies--and by far most of the game--is still coming down to if Haliburton can hit that tiny window or Mathurin drill the spinning fadeaway layup etc.

[jkvonny]

OKC got the better overall talent.

Indy has the much better coach (Carlisle).

That much is obvious.

This is only obvious when Indiana wins. Coaching is only considered elite when you win, winning is the ultimate validation. Look at Mike Malone fired at Sacramento despite having to deal with Demarcus Cousins, then going to Denver and bringing them their only championship, and then getting fired two years later......

Nah, seriously. Carlisle is a much better coach than OKC coach. More experienced as well and a champion.
OKC coach is young tho and still learning. Too many brain farts during the games despite the elite talent players he has. But, he's going to be a good one too.

[jkvonny]

In other words, Carlisle and Spo are great coaches who need a good FO and good players who listen and have the ability to execute .
But at the same time they are not magicians who can flip badly ran teams like Charlotte, Portland to take them to the playoffs.

Spo might be. He's pulled together some pretty sub-par talent into winners consistently and gotten buy in from guys who wouldn't elsewhere. Carlisle is more like a cicada where every 17 years or so he has a perfect fit for him and just dominates everyone.

I don't agree with this. Carlisle teams are always better than you'd think they should be, just like Spo's.

Agreed.

As, Clifford (Hornets) and Stotts (Portland) in recent years have had good playoff teams over the years.

Spo and Carlisle would do the same there as well.

[Black Jack]

One thing I used to see wrong with Carlisle is he seemed to want to call every play and was too controlling. Did he give that up?

[johanliebert]

team wins coach=cheat tcode.

team loses coach=overrated.

[jowglenn]

One thing I used to see wrong with Carlisle is he seemed to want to call every play and was too controlling. Did he give that up?

It seems so - he trusts this Pacers team a lot - multiple times where he could have called a timeout to draw up a play but instead he trusted Haliburton to just make it happen. And he has.

[tamaraw08]

Spo might be. He's pulled together some pretty sub-par talent into winners consistently and gotten buy in from guys who wouldn't elsewhere. Carlisle is more like a cicada where every 17 years or so he has a perfect fit for him and just dominates everyone.

I don't agree with this. Carlisle teams are always better than you'd think they should be, just like Spo's.

Agreed.

As, Clifford (Hornets) and Stotts (Portland) in recent years have had good playoff teams over the years.

Spo and Carlisle would do the same there as well.

I like both Clifford and Stotts and what they did for Charlotte and Portland respectively but I am talking about the current rosters of Hornets and Blazers team, how it's almost impossible to improve those teams esp the Hornets with the undisciplined LaMelo Ball spearheading that team.
Terry was blessed to have a pretty good lineup of Dame, LMA, peak Batum and even Matthews back then.
Even when LMA left, Stotts showed his ability to adjust.
Clifford was like an old mechanic who can make an old beat up car still work... but only for a few weeks or months. Somehow, he's like Del Harris, he will make a below average team better but I am not sure he can take them deep even with an improved roster.

[SOA]

If Carlisle coached the Mavs in 06, Dirk would have 2 championships.

[jkvonny]

I don't agree with this. Carlisle teams are always better than you'd think they should be, just like Spo's.

Agreed.

As, Clifford (Hornets) and Stotts (Portland) in recent years have had good playoff teams over the years.

Spo and Carlisle would do the same there as well.

I like both Clifford and Stotts and what they did for Charlotte and Portland respectively but I am talking about the current rosters of Hornets and Blazers team, how it's almost impossible to improve those teams esp the Hornets with the undisciplined LaMelo Ball spearheading that team.
Terry was blessed to have a pretty good lineup of Dame, LMA, peak Batum and even Matthews back then.
Even when LMA left, Stotts showed his ability to adjust.
Clifford was like an old mechanic who can make an old beat up car still work... but only for a few weeks or months. Somehow, he's like Del Harris, he will make a below average team better but I am not sure he can take them deep even with an improved roster.

Fair enuff.

Good post

[boomershadow]

Risk of being a little preachery here, I never think it's useful to see a positive outcome in the NBA and say 'that's all because of the coaches/front office!'

I think the talent of players trumping coaching/ownership is overblown. It is not just about talent. I have zero faith that Sacramento would have put Haliburton in a situation where he might win a title.

Of course, ideally it takes everyone on board, from stars to role players to FO to ownership pulling in the right direction to win a championship.

[Lalouie]

The way Indy has controlled their turnover economy after that apocalypse in the first half of game 1, and adjusted their defense on OKC and SGA.

18 TO in the FIRST HALF of game 1

6 TO in the 2nd half
15 TO in game 2
13 TO in game 3

OKC Turnovers

8 TO in game 1
13 TO in game 2
17 TO in game 3

Rick whips their asses into shape every time there's 5 seconds to do it. Whatever you did in the last game that worked? Pour some liquor out for it, cause it's gone.

I'm not discovering fire here, obviously Rick is an all-time great coach and everybody knows that. Just like seeing greatness and the way Rick doesn't GAF how many wins your team had or what its SRS was is dope.

is it "RICK CARLISLE is a cheat code."
or "Rick Carlisle IS a cheat code."

Watch on YouTube

[Papi_swav]

Mavs should of never got rid of him smh

[MrGoat]

One thing I used to see wrong with Carlisle is he seemed to want to call every play and was too controlling. Did he give that up?

He needs a point guard he trusts fully. He clashed hard with Jason Kidd back in the day because of his insistence that he needed more freedom in the offense. Rick ended up ultimately conceding the keys of the offense to Kidd and that was when Rick's flow offense started, he could still call plays but he reigned it in a lot and let Kidd dictate it on the court for the most part. With a guy like Tyrese Haliburton Rick would probably have a similar level of trust. He really liked and trusted JJ Barea too and he drove Mavs fans nuts because Barea would have been a perennial All Star if he was a few inches taller but he wasn't

[MrGoat]

Mavs should of never got rid of him smh

They didn't. He quit because they fired Donnie Nelson

[dirkdiggler4177]

What dumbest organization on the planet would surrender the following?:

Luka
Brunson
Carlisle

If Brunson played with Luka, we would never know how good he could be. Him and Luka are top 3 in ballhandling time in the league, with Trae Young somewhere in the middel. Meaning they both need the ball to be who they are. So it would never be as good as people think.

Also, Luka and Rick would never work togheter in the long run. Luka needs a relaxed player coach. Rick's best teams are the pistons, pacers, Mavs and then pacers again. All balanced team with no superstar.

to be fair, there's a world where luka is playing off ball more from the start and develops differently leading to a more balanced team and allowing brunson to be developed alongside with him

Has this ever happened? Where you have two ballhogs who were able to play off-ball and actually make it work? Like Luka is overweight, slow, and not explosive. I don't see him running off the screen for an open 3. If someone were to do this, it would be Brunson who would play an Austin Reaves kind of role. Even if that happened, we would never see him as today's Brunson. It's like Harden staying in OKC, running off screen while his strong suit was his penetration and layup or kickout.

[NoStatsGuy]

If Brunson played with Luka, we would never know how good he could be. Him and Luka are top 3 in ballhandling time in the league, with Trae Young somewhere in the middel. Meaning they both need the ball to be who they are. So it would never be as good as people think.

Also, Luka and Rick would never work togheter in the long run. Luka needs a relaxed player coach. Rick's best teams are the pistons, pacers, Mavs and then pacers again. All balanced team with no superstar.

to be fair, there's a world where luka is playing off ball more from the start and develops differently leading to a more balanced team and allowing brunson to be developed alongside with him

Has this ever happened? Where you have two ballhogs who were able to play off-ball and actually make it work? Like Luka is overweight, slow, and not explosive. I don't see him running off the screen for an open 3. If someone were to do this, it would be Brunson who would play an Austin Reaves kind of role. Even if that happened, we would never see him as today's Brunson. It's like Harden staying in OKC, running off screen while his strong suit was his penetration and layup or kickout.

the way you describe it? nah it doesnt happen. But not everybody with high usage is a ballhog.

as i have said before. brunson was still developing and just showing he could play in high stakes games. and that 1 good season. its all about what the coaches do with them.

i agree their strenghts (as we know them now) dont fit neccessarily well. but that doesnt mean you cant run tons of offball screens and have either of them running off picks all game. brunson in 2025 shot 49% on spot up threes aswell.

carlisle could have made it work if luka and carlisle would have gotten along. its all coulda woulda shoulda. we know rick left the mavs because he didnt wanna coach luka anymore. but i think if all party would have been open to work with eachother it could have worked. Mavs arguably had the better player in kyrie anyway, which is a simillar playstyle thar brunson has. yea kyrie finishes better but they both try to get in the paint and breakdown the defense a lot. they do it in different ways. but i think luka/kyrie or luka/brunson wouldnt have been much of a difference for the mavs.