16 replies to this topic

[rockets best fan]

while I only post my thoughts here at Red94 I do read other Rocket sites. I recently stumbled across a post from a guy I respect as an insider when it comes to information about the Rockets. whether the information is accurate or not it does open a subject for debate

http://bbs.clutchfan...ad.php?t=269974  

I'm sure my feelings on the matter are clear to most on this board. while I don't believe he is among the elite of coaching in the league I was resolved there would be no coaching change and had accepted the fact we would just have to grab our championship dragging McHale along kicking and screaming for the ride, however when presented with an option I still believe we would be a better team if coached by someone else. this source raised the possibility of S. Brooks to help lure K.D. in next years FA market. intriguing to say the least..............thoughts anyone?

[txtdo1411]

I saw that thread as well. I mean it seems pretty logical to me. We finally have a team that "should" be good enough to compete for the championship, so that should be the goal. I don't see us making a move during the season or anything like that, but I could see a move in the offseason if we have a poor showing in the playoffs. I personally feel like during McHale's tenure here has done an excellent job, and think it is premature to start talking about a coaching change 6 games into the season. I also feel like he has been dealt a pretty lame hand through training camp, preseason, and the start of the season with all of the injuries and what not. I do not think Brooks would be any better here than McHale has been. I also don't know who you could bring in that would be an immediate upgrade. 

 

So to sum it all up, I think it is premature, but understandable to have pressure on him this season. That being said, he has no control over injuries, so we need a lot more time to see how we operate fully healthy. If we are healthy by seasons end, and have a poor showing in the playoffs, I am okay with them making a move, but don't see many potential coaches that would definitely represent an immediate positive impact. 

[thejohnnygold]

Meh.  This is nothing.  He says that nothing happens until after the season (which anyone who thinks about it for 30 seconds could also surmise and "predict").

 

He also isn't explicit about what changes until he chimes in about Scott Brooks.  Seriously?  The man who was lauded for his inability to coach 2 of the top 5 players in the league (plus Ibaka)?  That guy?  The one who was canned just this year? (...and you know KD was asked about that before they did it.  You don't piss off a guy like Durant in a contract year.  You try to do anything to retain him--which includes firing the current coach and bringing in one he likes.  Unless we are assuming Sam Presti is a complete moron who has no interest in retaining Durant's services...  )

 

Sorry, kids.  This rumor is premature, off-base, and completely moot at this point.

 

McHale may end up canned at season's end.  He may also be hoisting a championship trophy.  

[blakecouey]

I too find it far too premature to consider at this point.  We're 6 games into the season, and although we may not have started how we all had hoped.  Aside from the opening night Denver loss the other two were not to be unimaginable by any means.  

I am in complete agreement with Johnny that unless Presti is a complete moron and didn't think to ask his star player(s) about firing SB before he went thru with it.  That said, what makes anyone think that hiring SB means KD is any more likely than he was before to come here?  It's not like they bonded over winning a Championship.  

PIPEDREAM- I wouldn't mind seeing SB, and/or Thibs as assistant coaches with us, HAHA.

[Cooper]

I thought Mchale was good last year, not a great start to this season but nothing too concerning. If they get bounced in the first round or are hovering .500 at the all star break there probably will be a change. Brooks certainly isn't the answer if they do decide to make a change at some point.

[slick shoes]

 
PIPEDREAM- I wouldn't mind seeing SB, and/or Thibs as assistant coaches with us, HAHA.

I have been lusting over the thought of that since the Thibs firing. S Brooks makes sense in that he was here for our championship rings, but I don't really see what he adds to our staff that isn't there already. Thibs as a defensive coach though....

[Willk]

Meh.  This is nothing.  He says that nothing happens until after the season (which anyone who thinks about it for 30 seconds could also surmise and "predict").

 

He also isn't explicit about what changes until he chimes in about Scott Brooks.  Seriously?  The man who was lauded for his inability to coach 2 of the top 5 players in the league (plus Ibaka)?  That guy?  The one who was canned just this year? (...and you know KD was asked about that before they did it.  You don't piss off a guy like Durant in a contract year.  You try to do anything to retain him--which includes firing the current coach and bringing in one he likes.  Unless we are assuming Sam Presti is a complete moron who has no interest in retaining Durant's services...  )

 

Sorry, kids.  This rumor is premature, off-base, and completely moot at this point.

 

McHale may end up canned at season's end.  He may also be hoisting a championship trophy.  

It is nice to see optimistic JG back. I agree, Brooks would be a bad hire unless it is guaranteed that Durant is coming with him. I was secretly hoping that Carlisle was going to see how bleak the Mavs future looks and walk straight to Houston, but obviously that is not going to happen. I would be ok to changing to Pop, is he free? ( I'm joking). I would be ok with Clifford only if the Rox get bounced in the first round.

Sam Presti might be a moron. He did trade Harden for nothing (maybe the worst trade in NBA history), signed Kanter to a max deal, and according to this, he did not consult any player prior to the Donovan hire:

http://thunderousint...t-on-new-coach/

Maybe Presti will drive Durant into the hands of the rockets? I can dream

[Willk]

I have been lusting over the thought of that since the Thibs firing. S Brooks makes sense in that he was here for our championship rings, but I don't really see what he adds to our staff that isn't there already. Thibs as a defensive coach though....

Thibs as an assistant would be sweet. Just do not allow him to have influence on player's minutes.

[rockets best fan]

I gathered something a little different than some when I read the post. I don't believe the Rockets are looking to make a change right now. I only gathered that they have put pressure on McHale to perform this year. to me that's good news. to know that Les will not except a fall back season without taking action. this team is too talent laden to be content with mediocre results. as for the S. Brooks subject...........I don't believe S. Brooks is an elite coach. JG I don't believe Durrant was 100% on board with Brooks firing for what it's worth. when I listened to KD's MVP acceptance speech I understood how much he loved and respected the man. I think he was more talked into saying it was ok than leading the cheer. I believe Durrant will leave OKC this coming summer if they don't win the championship. whether we get him or not I think he has become discontented in OKC. I see something in the way he's snapping at the media and doesn't seem quite as happy as before. it may just be me, but he looks different. I don't think he likes playing with Westbrook as much as he enjoyed playing with Harden which should give us the upper hand when he hits FA. I used to think Durrant in a Rocket uniform was a pipe dream. I don't anymore. depending on how event playout this season can change the landscape of the west in our favor dramatically.

 

back to the Rockets.......I am still on board with the championship or bust idea. if we fail to win ( and I know the road is full of land mines) the championship heads should roll. I believe this to be the most talent laden team we have had in years. Les making his point early in the season sends the message that he believes the same. the money is on the table, so for those who believed Les was cheap that rumor has been proven wrong. now he wants a championship return on his investment. NO MORE EXCUSES. put up or shut up. I like that

Edited by rockets best fan, 08 November 2015 - 05:39 PM.

[thejohnnygold]

@RBF--I agree with you mostly and I do like that Les is letting everyone from Morey down know it's time to get to work.  Les is not one to over-react.  I think he will keep an even keel even if we wind up achieving less than we want.

 

The Western conference is what it is.  If we were in the East and couldn't get to the Finals that would be one thing, but in the West the deck is stacked against you so strongly that it can create a false impression of failure.  We have a high quality team from top to bottom.  Barring a sure-fire upgrade, I think letting this stew simmer is the way to go.  

 

We know that McHale delegates a lot of the coaching duties.  Bickerstaff has been at the top of head coaching lists for the last 2-3 years.  He is going to get his chance (likely after this season) which opens up a chance to snag a guy like Thibs as an assistant.  I believe McHale has proven to be an effective component in talent recruitment.  As long as we have solid assistants then things should be fine.

 

At season's end we will have to evaluate the coaches, Dwight Howard, Motie and Jones, plus Ty Lawson.  There is plenty of room there to make a change or decide to stand pat and make another run at it.

 

Next year's free agency is loaded with talent and we all know about the new money coming into play.  It's going to be insane.  Seriously, scroll through this list of names.  Durant and Drummond (Sorry, Dwight.) would turn this team into something other-worldly.  (I realize Drummond is restricted and has a 0.0001% chance of not staying in Detroit, but I can dream...)

[Sir Thursday]

Scott Brooks is a similar style of coach to McHale - both are motivators and player developers first, tacticians second. IMO there's no point making a coaching change just for the sake of it - it's only worth doing to bring a different approach. So under no circumstances should the Rockets consider swapping unless they are bringing in someone with a different philosophy altogether. Brooks would be a poor choice.

[majik19]

Scott Brooks is no upgrade on McHale, and I would actually consider him a downgrade. Brooks' offense is much like the Rockets' current offense - let your stars make plays and run the offense. Defensively he may bring a little more than McHale (maybe) but if we were to fire McHale, I would be very disappointed with a Brooks hire. 

 

Thibs as an assistant coach is a pipe dream. He's going to get a head coaching job next season, I'll almost guarantee it. Now if we were to fire McHale and hire Thibs, that may be an upgrade on the floor, but as someone noted earlier, his minutes management is pretty awful. We already run our guys into the ground as it is. 

 

Personally, I think McHale is juuuust good enough to win a championship. As far as X's and O's go, he's not the greatest coach. But I think he is a great motivator and the players believe in him. 

[rockets best fan]

Scott Brooks is a similar style of coach to McHale - both are motivators and player developers first, tacticians second. IMO there's no point making a coaching change just for the sake of it - it's only worth doing to bring a different approach. So under no circumstances should the Rockets consider swapping unless they are bringing in someone with a different philosophy altogether. Brooks would be a poor choice.

while I will agree Brooks is a poor choice, I don't agree that making a coaching change to bring a different approach or philosophy is the only acceptable condition to consider the move. sometimes the present system only needs tweaking. look at GSW.......Kerr didn't change the way they play....he only tweaked the starting lineup changing the rotations.  since I don't believe we are maximizing the potential of our team I also don't believe we have seen the true potential of our offense. believing that since our present staff couldn't execute this offense then it's faulty and someone else would not be able to do a better job would be short sighted. just because McHale can't do the job (if it comes to that) doesn't mean the next coach to try it will fail

 

@JG

I know the west is stacked, however I only believe 2 teams to be on level with us talent wise. GSW and the Spurs. top to bottom these 2 can boast as much talent as us. we should be able to handle all others IMO. I don't think we will be going thru just the normal evaluation this next summer. big decisions will have to be made and short of us reaching the WCF I believe McHale will be fired. true Les doesn't overreact, but would that be an overreaction? I don't think so. it's easier to change coaches than players. part of my acceptance of McHale has been his delegation of the real coaching duties to others who seem more able to handle it. However maybe this teams needs more than just a motivator or figure head for a coach. this season will surely answer that. as for getting Thib's for assistant..........forget about it. his next job will be head coach somewhere. besides while I consider him an elite defensive coach his offensive schemes are lacking at best. looking at the coaching landscape right now I don't really see someone I like, but you never know what will shake lose during the year.

 

MINIMUM WE SHOULD RETURN TO THE WCF .............there's no false impression of failure there. either make it that far or hit the road. we may be at the same threshold the GSW were at before their decision to fire their coach and go after Kerr. is our coach maximizing the talent of this roster? win or go home

Edited by rockets best fan, 08 November 2015 - 11:39 PM.

[Fury]

The biggest thing for me is, can we please begin to see some creativity with the offense?

 

We bring in a solid PG in Lawson, and the offense hasn't been anywhere near humming. Now, Harden's brilliance coupled with out offensive philosophy combine to guarantee us a solid offense at all times, but the only thing preventing us from reaching Spurs, Clips, Warriors level of offensive efficiency is the scheme.

 

To that end, Brooks would probably be a step in the wrong direction. There certainly is room for us to take steps in the RIGHT direction.

[rockets best fan]

The biggest thing for me is, can we please begin to see some creativity with the offense?

 

We bring in a solid PG in Lawson, and the offense hasn't been anywhere near humming. Now, Harden's brilliance coupled with out offensive philosophy combine to guarantee us a solid offense at all times, but the only thing preventing us from reaching Spurs, Clips, Warriors level of offensive efficiency is the scheme.

 

To that end, Brooks would probably be a step in the wrong direction. There certainly is room for us to take steps in the RIGHT direction.

I agree we could use more creativity, however before we can run any plays we need to decide who handles the rock and when. the dynamic between Harden and Lawson is killing the offense. Lawson seems to be playing timid trying not to step on any toes. he's got to be aggressive. I still believe Harden is doing to much dribbling. our PF play stinks right now. I understand the need to play small to some degree right now, but we need TJ or D-Mo back like yesterday. Harrell may have looked decent during preseason, but he looks overwhelmed right now and I'm just not cool with Ariza trying to play PF. we need him on the best wing player defensively. I think that is contributing to his poor play. Brewer is struggling right now. we need to run some stuff to get him cutting to the basket ( help him break out of his slump). we have got to rebound the basketball better. while we are winning right now continuing to loose the rebounding battle will bite us eventually. it all comes down to chemistry. we have not yet figured out who we are. the pieces are intriguing, but we're still working on the puzzle. I have seen some questionable lineups, but I'm giving McHale the benefit of the doubt right now since we aren't healthy. however I do believe we have enough to win. PF is the only position we should be struggling at because of health reasons.

[Sir Thursday]

while I will agree Brooks is a poor choice, I don't agree that making a coaching change to bring a different approach or philosophy is the only acceptable condition to consider the move. sometimes the present system only needs tweaking. look at GSW.......Kerr didn't change the way they play....he only tweaked the starting lineup changing the rotations.  since I don't believe we are maximizing the potential of our team I also don't believe we have seen the true potential of our offense. believing that since our present staff couldn't execute this offense then it's faulty and someone else would not be able to do a better job would be short sighted. just because McHale can't do the job (if it comes to that) doesn't mean the next coach to try it will fail

 

Actually, Kerr did fundamentally change the Warrior's offensive system. Under Mark Jackson they ran a lot of sets designed to generate and exploit mismatches. This meant that there were a lot of possessions where Thompson or Barnes ended up posting up and getting bad results. It led to a lot of stagnant offense and standing around and really didn't maximise the skill-set of they're players, particularly Curry. Kerr got rid of all that and switched to a system that relied on a lot of passing and movement. Watch them play now and you'll see a whole bunch of stuff that they did none of before. They use the threat of Curry's pull-up three to the fullest and get everyone moving off the ball. Suddenly there's always someone open (there wasn't before). Suddenly the floor is stretched and Curry has plenty of room to drive (he didn't before). Now Thompson and Barnes don't bother to post up - they get open around the three point line or off cuts instead.

 

So it's absolutely wrong to say that Kerr was not a big change in philsophy to Jackson. And it's not just the Xs-and-Os. Their personnel management styles are different too - Jackson attempted to build a team identity and strong bond between the players on the basis of faith. And that wasn't a bad strategy except that he had a few players on his team that weren't particularly receptive to that style of management (reading between the lines, I'm pretty sure Bogut was not a fan). Kerr uses Basketball as a motivator, and that seems to work much better (since you'd hope it's a subject all the players are interested in).

 

Anyway, back to the Rockets. The way I see it, McHale has designed a system to try to maximise Harden's individual impact. And it can work really well, as evidenced by last year's run. Harden thrives on the chaos and the drive-and-kick game suits him down to a T. The problem is that it's quite a fragile way of playing (what if Harden isn't quite himself? What if he's injured?) and it looks really ugly when it doesn't work. Plus there are areas where it can be significantly improved: keeping the off-ball movement high will reap benefits, as will coming up with a better way of handling crunch-time than long bouts of 1-4 flat. Now, it would be nice if McHale could get the team to improve in those areas, but ultimately the methods of improvement are secondary to the results at this point. If this team is capable of getting the results they want without fixing those issues then fair play to him and his coaching staff. If the team doesn't do well in the playoffs and hasn't improved though, it may be time to find someone who is more likely to fix those deficiencies.

 

ST

[rockets best fan]

@Sir Thursday

I do believe you are correct about the difference between Kerr and Jackson when it come too management style. they have a very different approach no doubt, however many of the plays that were in Kerr's playbook last year were also in Jackson's. the big difference IMO was the personnel running the plays. D. Green and Barnes entered the starting lineup. the impact of those 2 players is what's the difference between what Jackson had and what Kerr is doing. he didn't suddenly pull some magical play out......he found players who could better operate chemistry wise. granted I will agree he has added some new stuff, but  he didn't revamp their system IMO. I respect your right to your opinion, but I disagree.

 

as for the real point in my statement.........I don't think a perspective candidate should be eliminated because he has a similar philosophy to the present coach. I also don't think that you have to change the philosophy as part of a coaching change to get better results. I believe there are other conditions that warrant a change in coaching without a change in philosophy. philosophy change is not a precondition of the reasons to change coaches or eliminate potential candidates from consideration IMO