That's where I sit too. Mitch "got a chance" to coach basically 80% of last season and the results were hit and miss (to say the least).
Yes, there were injuries and trades and he didn't really get to integrate his own system or staff or whatever...but I still have my doubts. And to know there are people like Malone and Jenkins and Budenholzer (and maybe Becky) currently available, it feels like the Spurs aren't doing their due diligence unless there is just really something AMAZING about Mitch we are all missing.
Or this succession plan was already in place and now they are just fast-tracking it, who knows. Hopefully we are all wrong and he turns out to be great, but this feels like a lazy hire. At least do some interviews or something and make it seem like you are trying.
Last edited by Dex; 05-02-2025 at 03:23 PM.
The entire back-half of this season, the running theme on ST was "We can't wait til this season is over so don't have to watch this idiot Mitch Johnson coach another game and we can get a real coach" and not only did they keep him on staff, they decided to promote him to HC lol. Hilarious.
Just gotta hope he pulls his head out of his ass and figures it out I guess cause something tells me we're stuck with this guy for a long time, for better or worse.
Boooo.
My sentiments exactly !!! Only this time with a healthy team !!! Go Mitch Go !
We know the Spurs believe in continuity more than anything else. Not surprised by this.
That said, nobody is 05 Gregg Popovich their first year, and our players (excluding CP3, HB, and Castle) are not always the smartest guys in the arena. Maybe the players will get a little smarter and Mitch will get a little smarter, and things will be ok.
Maybe.
Last edited by tim_duncan_fan; 05-02-2025 at 06:21 PM.
A yo mods, can I get BLACKED?
My user name, I mean.
This.
Tiers of the West going into 2025-26 season. IMO.
Top Seed (The juggernaut, Spurs have no chance against):
- OKC
(2-5) seeds (project to be better than the Spurs, but we can compete against):
- Houston (will add KD or Giannis)
- Lakers (will address depth + fitter Luka)
- Nuggets (best player ITW)
- Wolves (too deep with a star player hitting his prime)
6th Seed contenders (Spurs tier):
- Memphis (overrated star players)
- Warriors + Clippers (a year older and one-injury away from lottery)
Play-in Hopefuls (Spurs should ABSOLUTELY be better than those teams):
- Kings (Bulls West)
- Phoenix (dumpster fire and Booker not a number 1 guy)
- Mavs (no Kyrie and 33 year-old AD as your best player? Good luck with that)
- Pelicans (will be better but not good enough)
Lottery Lock:
- Blazers
- Jazz
Grand opening grand closing
Spurs over/under on wins was 35.5 last season and that was before Pop stroked out and Wemby went down.
I know Vegas expectations aren't the end-all be-all, just looking for hope lol. Interested to see where they have us next year.
The FO gets practically autistic with some of their mantras, specifically Continuity. Basically, they just don't like to make change because they are cautious and anxious. There's no point in prioritizing continuity with a bad quality of product. And there's a huge gulf between bringing in a new coach (whom they already worked with!!) and behaving like the Phoenix Suns.
You act like his DVT was a singular event. The fact that he went from a top 10 player in December to barely getting up and down the court in January should tell you it wasn’t.
Nope, just frustrations with certain coaching decisions over the past few years that didn’t focus strictly on winning every single game, which has led to the acquisition of castle, wemby, and fox.
I think you've been saying that the Spurs are going to make moderate, non-exciting moves this offseason. And not to expect radical change. I think you're gonna end up being correct. And the naming of Mitch speaks volumes about what's ahead. This organization does everything by design, and I think the current design points to a path I hadn't considered before this afternoon.
Every Spurs fan on this board analyzes each new move in the context of winning. Me too. But bottom line, seeing Mitch named as head coach -- we're gonna be a losing franchise for a very, very long time to come. And it's by design across more seasons than any fan will imagine enduring -- which is, stockpile draft pick assets and trade stars for even more draft pick assets, so that eventually we're too young, talented, and good, to lose. In the meantime, draft for volume and cost efficiency. That's the Sam Presti / OKC route, and we're nowhere close to having a winning roster of young, talented and too-good-to-lose players. I think OKC will win championships this way, and I think the Spurs might eventually do it too, but it's gonna take a longer time than Victor and the city will have. I don't think Victor will be a Spur in two years. Spurs will reside in another city within 10.
Is it what I want? No way. As fans, we've already endured a lot of losing, and we think the good days are ahead. But if design is a matrix of decisions, then that's not what the design says, and not the outcome to expect with Mitch as head coach, amidst so many capable veterans. The Spurs are not interested in winning anytime soon. The process is to keep stockpiling. Lottery after lottery after lottery. All part of the design of what's being put in front of us. Adjust watches, as needed.
I think the best option would be Ime Udoka, yes he has a job but he is the best candidate of the Pop disciples, and he might see the Spurs as a better option than the Rockets.
Your original claim was that Mitch didn’t have Wemby or Fox. You’ve now conceded that claim is demonstrably false. The point here is that the organization has had plenty of time to evaluate Mitch, so we need to put the “let’s see what he’s got” canard to rest.
The counter-factual of whether they would have made the play in or not with Wemby and Fox, while fun, is both pointless and irrelevant. Yes Dallas imploded, but they were 5-8 leading up to Wemby’s DVT. In all likelihood, Portland would have made the play in. Who knows, and more importantly, who cares?
They were a solid defensive team with Wembanyama on the floor, terrible with him off which makes sense considering the lack of a credible backup center/positional size in general.
Yeah, "too nice" or lack of commanding presence is my concern. It's not only with the players, but if necessary, Pop too.
Tactically, all these coaches know and mostly utilize the same stuff, tailored to their personnel, with a dash of preference thrown in, of course. They wouldn't sniff the NBA otherwise.
By far the most important thing is that they fix (size, shooting, physicality) the roster this off season. Do that and like any coach, they'll make him look good.
Your original claim was that Mitch didn’t have Wemby or Fox. You’ve now conceded that claim is demonstrably false. The point here is that the organization has had plenty of time to evaluate Mitch, so we need to put the “let’s see what he’s got” canard to rest.
The counter-factual of whether they would have made the play in or not with Wemby and Fox, while fun, is both pointless and irrelevant. Yes Dallas imploded, but they were 5-8 leading up to Wemby’s DVT. In all likelihood, Portland would have made the play in. Who knows, and more importantly, who cares?
There is no design here. It's "Pop's the goat, we're going to let him call the shots on everything in this organization until he's six feet under."
Say what you want about Kraft but at least he had the guts to tell Belichick you can keep coaching / doing player personnel stuff, just not here.
Unbelievable that this organization has a generational talent, got an All Star on the cheap from Sacramento, and hit on this year's rookie of the year too, only to let the geriatric narcissistic stroke patient continue to call the shots.
I don't like the hire. I'd rather have gotten Jenkins, but I'm ready to make some moves and give him a chance. We need to upgrade the roster and decide how we want to go forward.
I like Mitch and am happy with him being the head coach. If you guys don't like Mitch than hope for a Durant to Spurs trade because he seems good at getting coaches fired.
Yeah give him a chance to coach a more balanced roster that isn't having double-digit rebounds deficits every single game and maybe the results will be better.
Pop's gone.
Pop wasn't coach last year. He wasn't GM. Mitch was the coach. Wright was the GM. They called the shots. The team was a loser. The only shot Pop was calling last year was how high to raise his arm on a given day.
Organization gave Pop a le next year. But that's all it is. A le. You just said it yourself -- he's a stroke patient. He's done.
Chill.
I thought you read better than this.
My comments aren't saying that the Mitch hire was good. It's saying that he got hired, so here's the gameplan. I'm not ting myself inside out like you guys are because I don't find that fun or interesting. If Pop had stepped down and the Spurs began a coaching search, I would have said something different because the reality would be different.
And for s sake, what does sniffer even mean now that Pop is gone?
You unintentionally highlighted everything that’s wrong with this hire. Congrats!
Imagine thinking year six of wemby is when you really go for it. Some of you people have not watched basketball outside of the spurs, and it really shows.
Rookie scale Wemby is when the spurs need to maximize the supporting cast, not after his rookie contract is over, dummies.
Pop is not gone in fact in all probability he was the deciding factor in promoting Mitch to head coach. No one wants to lock horns with Pop as that is a quick way to loose your job. Also, keeping Pop in new role and naming Mitch head coach gives job security for everyone from GM to Water Boy.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote