Reply With Quote
Didn't read yet. McHale doesn't suck because he's tall btw.
Didn't read yet. McHale doesn't suck because he's tall btw.
I think the NBA is more biased against making dumb ass statements like Ewing did during the lockout season and are worried he'll say something else pretty stupid, brand damaging and counter-productive like this:
"Sure, we make a lot of money, but we spend a lot, too."
Phil Jackson would not agree with that statement, and truthfully what do you consider tall? In my everyday normal people world anyone over 6 feet is considered tall. To the contrary there doesn't apprear to be too many short statured coaches in this National Basketball Ass'n. Where are the Avery Johnsons of the world? He'd have a real argument there. Bitter grapes from Mr Neanderthal if you ask me.
So that's why Mike Fratello was so successful.
i wonder if he's mad that the Patrick Ewing effect was named after him
Phil Jackson was a big man in the Pros. I think it's more do you understand the Xs and Os.
McHale is a terrible coach.
I recall an article saying all Ewing did on the bench as an assistant coach was check out girls in the stands.
A shocker that nobody wants to hire him as head coach.
Yes, because in the United States of Short Meskins, 6 feet is Amazonian. America used to be the tallest nation on the planet. Thanks Mexico for making us #2!
Well the NBA certainly isn't biased against ty coaches so he has that going for him.
I think he probably just phrased it incorrectly. I think he's right that the league has a bias toward coaches who were guards when they played. I can't think of many NBA head coaches who were forwards or centers when they played. I think teams feel that guards have to be smarter to play at a high level than most bigs do, and therefore they probably have what it takes to coach more. Certain front-court guys would probably have no problem getting coaching jobs if they wanted to. Duncan, Lebron, Grant Hill, Battier, Diaw and Garnett are all players who could be head coaches within a couple of years of retiring without anyone questioning their qualifications. , who knows where Rasheed Wallace will be in a couple of years?
“When people think of point guards, they think they’re the leader of the team, they’re the floor general," Ewing explains to Dan Patrick. "But the center is also the floor general, too. Just the floor general on the defensive side of the basketball.”
holy dude it's not b/c of what position you played or how tall you had to be to play it.
Almost everyone in the game understands the x's and o's. What they don't understand is who on their team can do these things, and how can they get their so so guys to produce? Stars will almost always produce, but invariably the more successful teams in the league have role players who produce and a lot of that has to do with how they are utilized throughout the season and how they are handled during practices and in training camp.
A point guard has to know all the plays and often he's the one initializing them. He has to be able to read the defense and have court awareness. That translates well to coaching where as the defensive big has to know his role. He's not out contesting the 3 or chasing down a fast break. He's not commanding the defense and not putting people in places they wouldn't be otherwise. He's got his role, that's it. That doesn't translate well to coaching because coaches have to have the wherewithal to know what all the positions should be doing at all times, and centers don't need to know that even if they might anyhow. Still, a great basketball mind trumps a great PG, and a great motivator and problem solver can learn the game, but it's hard for anyone who's not a great people person to become one. I don't think anyone wants to hear Patrick Ewing.
Yeah, I understand why the NBA leans towards former guards as coaches. I was just saying that I think he's right that there is some bias against big men, but that I also think that there are quite a few front-court players who would have no problem getting coaching jobs if they wanted them. , Ewing himself has been benches for years now. He's had plenty of time for his work to supersede stereotypes. Honestly, though, I've never heard a single good thing about Ewing's coaching skills.
And there's bias toward big men as bouncers and defensive linemen in the NFL. It's not because the guy is tall or short, it's because he's required to understand the game of basketball. Could you imagine Shaq being a coach? How about Barkley?
Coaches of the future, imo, are Manu, probably Matt Bonner (assistant for a long long while first), and maybe Dwayne Wade or Ray Allen. It seems the best coaches are people who probably didn't star in the league, and I am not sure why that's the case. Maybe breaking down film and knowing the intricacies of the game is better than having actually played. Maybe players are better at being trainers than being coaches.
I would love to see Manu as a coach... he'd draw up some wacky stuff. Hopefully he stays on the Spurs bench for years to come
I don't think we're disagreeing. I think Ewing is pointing out something that really exists, but he's just framing it incorrectly. There aren't many former bigs as NBA head coaches, but that's because the league considers guards as more likely to possess the qualities that make for good coaches. If Ewing were to possess those qualities, teams would consider him eventually. He hasn't really shown that he has them in his years on the bench, however.
It takes more knowledge and better fundamentals to eek out an NBA career than it does to star, in my opinion. A guy like Jacque Vaughn had to learn every trick in the book to keep a roster spot. He didn't have the natural ability to dominate. Essentially, bench scrubs had to maximize their ability to hold off more-talented challengers for their spots. Therefore, they should be best at helping others maximize their talents. Lebron James would never be able to teach a young player how to play like he does. Shane Battier should damned sure be able to teach someone who to play like him, though.Coaches of the future, imo, are Manu, probably Matt Bonner (assistant for a long long while first), and maybe Dwayne Wade or Ray Allen. It seems the best coaches are people who probably didn't star in the league, and I am not sure why that's the case. Maybe breaking down film and knowing the intricacies of the game is better than having actually played. Maybe players are better at being trainers than being coaches.
I don't think it's "more likely", I think the league interviews guys and the guards actually do interview better. Also, the league doesn't hire coaches, franchises do, and franchises screen people and each of these people has a body of work that's easily accessed. They have living resumes, so to speak, and the bigs often don't fit the bill even for an interview.
Shane could get a head coaching job this year if he wanted, most likely.
Exactly. Ewing's problem is that he just hasn't really appeared to be all that good at coaching, not that he's tall.
The bias seems more about stars. Role players seem to make better coaches in the NBA, MLB and NFL.
Ewing sucking it up as the coach of Charlotte's summer-league team. I can't believe he thinks discrimination is the reason he can't get a HC gig.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
