Jonny Blaze wrote:This is another really horrible strawman argument. I said nothing about Becky Hammon not belonging in Sports.
Why is it so important for her to coach men instead of other female basketball players?
What makes her so special?
How was she supposedly more qualified than Chauncey Billups for the Portland job?
You just said a man cannot respect a female coach like a male coach. I just said that the NBA is extremely progressive when it comes to stuff like that. Some people don't like that and want the game to be a "man's game" - I argue that it doesn't matter who is at the helm as long as they have the pedigree, have put the work in, and have competence. Plus, the NBA is never just the HC. Assistants do a ton of work as well.
The goalposts always move when it comes to Becky and it's rare to have goalposts move this much with any other assistant. Bottom line:
Becky Hammon shouldn't get a coaching job just because she is female and it would be good for representation. It would set a bad example because it means that people care about optics more than results. However, you see a guy like Steve Nash have zero experience and get a very important Nets job and completely bungle it.. it's already out there.
Becky Hammon SHOULD get a coaching job if she is deemed to be a competent leader, good at her job, and has put the work in. With 8 years under Popovich, and if she does well with the Aces, I see that as a pretty damn good resume.