So I had BETTER see Thibodeau coming here...

OGSactownballer · Post #1 » by **OGSactownballer** » Mon May 18, 2009 11:32 pm

If the Magoofs don't have him in to interview then all is seriously wrong.

Post #2 » by **KF10** » Mon May 18, 2009 11:42 pm

I'm pretty sure it is Petrie's control now in terms of handling the potential coaching candidates.

RIPskaterdude · Post #3 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Tue May 19, 2009 12:23 am

Thibodeau won't be on the list of people interviewed.

While Thibodeau does not fit the Kings' parameters of a coach who has previous head coaching experience in the NBA, the then-Houston assistant was a candidate two years ago before the job went to Reggie Theus. - Sam Amick

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/sports/kings/archives/022401.html

Don't forget, Petrie said they were going to interview and pick someone with head coaching experience AND that has been successful as a head coach in the NBA.

perezident · Post #4 » by **perezident** » Tue May 19, 2009 12:45 am

Good, cuz just like Avery Johnson, he's just a name. He's nothing special at all. I never understood the hype behind his name in all seriousness! What has he done for posters to be so gaga over him??

Post #5 » by **pillwenney** » Tue May 19, 2009 1:08 am

perezident wrote:Good, cuz just like Avery Johnson, he's just a name. He's nothing special at all. I never understood the hype behind his name in all seriousness! What has he done for posters to be so gaga over him??

He basically designed and ran Boston's championship caliber defense and Houston's before that. The Celtics flat out do not win a ring without him last year. He is probably the best defensive coach in the NBA right now.

Having said that, I understand us not going after him, although I would at least like to see him interviewed.

Smills91 · Post #6 » by **Smills91** » Tue May 19, 2009 1:56 pm

mitchweber wrote:
perezident wrote:Good, cuz just like Avery Johnson, he's just a name. He's nothing special at all. I never understood the hype behind his name in all seriousness! What has he done for posters to be so gaga over him??

He basically designed and ran Boston's championship caliber defense and Houston's before that. The Celtics flat out do not win a ring without him last year. He is probably the best defensive coach in the NBA right now.

Having said that, I understand us not going after him, although I would at least like to see him interviewed.

Good assistants don't always translate into good head coaches. We're looking for a sure bet here.

cdt3 · Post #7 » by **cdt3** » Tue May 19, 2009 5:00 pm

Petrie will not hire a defensive only coach. The players he has are balanced but they really only need to continue developing their d but not a total sysytem overhaul. Petrie has gotten scoring big guys like JT and Hawes who are going to put up tons of points and what would do under a Van Gundy or Natt or Mussellman? They just don't get the most of the tools we have invested years into in already. You need a balanced team and we are leaning a bit to offensive now and need to lean a little more defensively but a defensive leaning team is not an option.

Post #8 » by **pillwenney** » Tue May 19, 2009 6:18 pm

Smills91 wrote:
mitchweber wrote:
perezident wrote:Good, cuz just like Avery Johnson, he's just a name. He's nothing special at all. I never understood the hype behind his name in all seriousness! What has he done for posters to be so gaga over him??

He basically designed and ran Boston's championship caliber defense and Houston's before that. The Celtics flat out do not win a ring without him last year. He is probably the best defensive coach in the NBA right now.

Having said that, I understand us not going after him, although I would at least like to see him interviewed.

Good assistants don't always translate into good head coaches. We're looking for a sure bet here.

No I know. I just think Thibodeau is a high risk/high reward. I think the reward is high enough to at least try interviewing him. But I understand the decision.

RIPskaterdude · Post #9 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Tue May 19, 2009 6:26 pm

They did interview him before they picked Theus, though. So they know what he brings to the table, which is probably why they won't re-interview Shaw or Kurt Rambis again.

Zin5 · Post #10 » by **Zin5** » Wed May 20, 2009 3:33 am

Maybe just a small sample size, but I remember the game he coached this past year when Doc got ejected and he's just not a good offensive coach. Iso Pierce, iso Pierce, iso Pierce. Etc. Yeah, it works in spurts, especially late in games with how clutch he is, but it's not something to run an offense off of, especially when we had Rondo in the mix. I just don't think he'd be a good head coach. It's Thib's schemes and system on defense, but Doc still draws up and calls the plays on both ends of the court during the game and out of timeouts. Great assistant, but I just can't see him making it as a head coach.

SacKingZZZ · Post #11 » by **SacKingZZZ** » Wed May 20, 2009 3:38 am

And that's an important thing to remember. Despite what anyone says about how defense is important, blah, blah, blah, offense isn't what wins you championships but an all defense no offense team doesn't even get out of the starting gates.

Post #12 » by **pillwenney** » Wed May 20, 2009 3:42 am

SacKingZZZ wrote:And that's an important thing to remember. Despite what anyone says about how defense is important, blah, blah, blah, offense isn't what wins you championships but an all defense no offense team doesn't even get out of the starting gates.

That's why you can bring in an offensive assistant--just like the reverse would be true for a guy like Jordan.

Post #13 » by **KF10** » Wed May 20, 2009 4:01 am

Things are getting going here at Center Court with the lottery coming soon, but there's news already.

Gavin Maloof just told The Bee that the Kings will be expanding their coaching search to include Boston assistant Tom Thibodeau and Lakers assistant Kurt Rambis. More to come...

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/sp ... 22441.html

Zin5 · Post #14 » by **Zin5** » Wed May 20, 2009 5:25 am

mitchweber wrote:
SacKingZZZ wrote:And that's an important thing to remember. Despite what anyone says about how defense is important, blah, blah, blah, offense isn't what wins you championships but an all defense no offense team doesn't even get out of the starting gates.

That's why you can bring in an offensive assistant--just like the reverse would be true for a guy like Jordan.

You can't just put an offensive genius or a defensive genius at head coach and supplement their deficiencies with an assistant. You have to have someone who's capable of being the head coach and is preferably proficient in one or the other so you could supplement their weaknesses with an assistant. I just highly doubt Thib's ability to be a head coach.

Rivers has been a great player and game manager for us and is decent at creating offensive sets and his liabilities on defense are covered by Thib. Whereas I doubt Thib has the capability of coaching a team in game. Granted, he's a great assistant and what he provides in practice is definitely something else that you may still find worthy of making him the head coach to try to instill that defense into them for the next half-decade with a better coach, but right now he's unproven and he's had a chance, albeit brief.

He's familiarized himself with the Celtics, a veteran team that knows how to play the game, and the best he tried to coach out of the team was our most primitive set that we hadn't used extensively in four years, when Pierce really was our only option. That's two years with a veteran team, I'd be worried about what he brought to the table in-game with a younger team like Sacramento. I might just be being harsh, but he's really only half a head coach and the whole community of coaches thing just wouldn't work. If you guys want to be successful in the next five years, then you want a coach that can call a game from both sides of the ball.

Post #15 » by **pillwenney** » Wed May 20, 2009 6:07 am

Zin5 wrote:
mitchweber wrote:
That's why you can bring in an offensive assistant--just like the reverse would be true for a guy like Jordan.

You can't just put an offensive genius or a defensive genius at head coach and supplement their deficiencies with an assistant. You have to have someone who's capable of being the head coach and is preferably proficient in one or the other so you could supplement their weaknesses with an assistant. I just highly doubt Thib's ability to be a head coach.

Rivers has been a great player and game manager for us and is decent at creating offensive sets and his liabilities on defense are covered by Thib. Whereas I doubt Thib has the capability of coaching a team in game. Granted, he's a great assistant and what he provides in practice is definitely something else that you may still find worthy of making him the head coach to try to instill that defense into them for the next half-decade with a better coach, but right now he's unproven and he's had a chance, albeit brief.

He's familiarized himself with the Celtics, a veteran team that knows how to play the game, and the best he tried to coach out of the team was our most primitive set that we hadn't used extensively in four years, when Pierce really was our only option. That's two years with a veteran team, I'd be worried about what he brought to the table in-game with a younger team like Sacramento. I might just be being harsh, but he's really only half a head coach and the whole community of coaches thing just wouldn't work. If you guys want to be successful in the next five years, then you want a coach that can call a game from both sides of the ball.

I'm not saying he couldn't be ineffective in other ways, but not because he's a defensive specialist.

And for what it's worth, Boston got good defensively quite quickly last year. But your points are well taken.