Everything you know about the Wolves is wrong, pt.ii: David Kahn needs to act quickly with Kevin McHale
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 2:38 PM CDT
41 comments
This wasn't going to be an original topic in this series (hiring Sam Mitchell was going to be the next in line) but a distinct little meme has been popping up among the local opinion makers who purportedly still pay attention to the team and I thought it would make for an interesting conversation. It starts with drive-time talker Dan Barrerio:
Closed circuit to Kahn: Make a call here. You're not negotiating with Red Auerbach in his coaching prime. Get a deal done with the Ostrich...or move on so you have time to get the next coach in here so maybe he can eventually be involved in viewing what talent might be available.
Keep in mind that this take is coming from a guy who has, for years, argued that the Wolves needed to rid Kevin McHale of any and all front office duties and bring in an outside voice to provide a new perspective on things; you know, the kind of guy with the ability to hire who he wants to hire. Now that this has happened, and now that the team finally has done what he has long been clamoring for, Barrerio still needs to find a "talker" in the issue, and, in typical drive-time fashion, he finds a way to insert his own opinion about what needs to be done into the action rather than bother with dealing with what is actually happening. Closed circuit to David Kahn: Barreiro will always do this to you. Short of a title it will never be enough (even then, I'm not so sure). If called on his BS, Barreiro will undoubtedly unleash a string of nuances and/or conditions to his opinion that will allow him an escape route. This is par for the course for a guy who values being in the middle more than anything else. Closed circuit to Barreiro: There is no middle, only a center of attention.
The meme continues with former KFAN personality Doogie:
McHale's dirty fingerprints are all over this franchise.
It's time for Kahn to cut the chord. McHale is being treated as if he were Phil Jackson or John Wooden. He can motivate the players - so can many others. He doesn't have a playbook or even design plays in-game. That responsibility fell last season to assistant Jerry Sichting. I am struggling to come up with even one semi-plausible reason to retain him.
There's no need for a third meeting. McHale's body of work - or lack thereof - speaks for itself. These sitdowns are a waste of time. Kahn said he'll take his time with the McHale decision and may not hire a coach, whether that person is McHale or not, until after the draft. That is the wrong approach. A coach needs to be in place beforehand so you know what kind of style of play to draft around. Doing your due diligence on the draft and hiring a coach can be done simultaneously.
Phil Jackson, Red Auerbach, and John Wooden. What is in the water at KFAN? Aside from the back-asswardsness of this logic (those three coaching giants would be the ones to get quick public answers on whether or not they are wanted if a new GM were brought in), it ignores the basic fact that Kahn isn't interviewing anyone right now and the only reason he's talking to McHale is to get a grip on whether or not he will be included in the mix when he actually begins looking at coaches. Going even further, there is no interim label on McHale's desk. This is still a business, and as a business with new leadership, this is how existing management are dealt with. Does the employee have a future with the organization? If he does, what is it? If he does should he have to compete against outside talent? This is where Kahn is at with the process. It is only the local opinion makers who are, as they like to think of themselves, ahead of the curve.
Adding to the nonsense is the fact that this line of thinking only makes sense if McHale is the one making the decision to return. That's the only way it works. The guy has been banished away from draftee workouts and is clean out of the picture except for a few dinners with the new boss. That's it. Somehow, this situation has made the local scribes jump up and down while shouting that the new guy needs to quickly make a decision so the new coach can have an impact on selecting the players that the new guy was just brought in to help select. Why do you need to have a coach in place to know what style of play and players you want to see on the squad? Your guess is as good as mine.
Doogie squares the circle with a take straight out of the Sid Hartman playbook:
Call Sam Mitchell. Kahn and Mitchell were together briefly in Indiana. Mitchell proved in Toronto that he can coach.
Owner Glen Taylor reportedly asked at least one candidate for Kahn's job to undergo detailed psyhcological testing. Some serious research would need to be done on Kahn if McHale is back.
To borrow from a comment by Poor Dick in a recent post; translation: I've heard of Sam Mitchell. We'll deal with the Sam Mitchell myth in a future post but let's first continue our tour of the latest and greatest meme in Wolves coverage. Here's long-time hack Bob Sansevere having trouble wrapping his head around the dueling blurbs of conventional Wolvesdom: McHale needing to be relieved of his front office duties and McHale needing to be fired as coach:
Item: Kevin McHale has not been attending NBA workouts at Target Center. I think: He's done as coach of the Timberwolves. If there were even a scant chance he was returning as coach, he would be there watching prospective Wolves. Never mind that we already know why McHale wasn't at the workouts. Never mind that McHale has had all of his front office duties removed. Nothing will get in the way of local columnists trying their darndest to fit new Wolves happenings into old Wolves memes. Kevin McHale = teh suck and he needs to go. Period. I mention all of this for a two reasons. First, it represents the very worst of the quasi inside-the-beltway "reporting" that makes people want to cancel their newspaper subscriptions and/or throw the radio/tv out the window. (One of the great ironies of the Barreiro show is that he's developed his very own country club of guests and yes-men...but that's a subject for another day.) We all know that folks who cover the team have their own ideas about the direction the team should go. That's fine. However, it is amazing how often these personal opinions are used as measuring sticks to gauge what is or is not happening with the subject they are covering. We see this sort of thing in political coverage all the time when "serious" people talk "seriously" about ideas and issues that are neither attached to popular opinion or existing policy; they're just opinions that person x, y, or Bill Kristol have about this, that, or the other subject. These clowns know that at the end of the day, if enough people on TV, print, and radio repeat their nonsense, it either drives the news or becomes the story itself. Here's the kicker: This sort of thing works for fans and for folks who just want to sit back and enjoy the action. If you are a big fan of a team or you want to share your political views of the world, you start a blog. I've long thought that the dirty little secret behind main stream media distaste for dirty bloggers was a bad case of projection. When opinion is news, or when opinion substitutes for coverage, the only difference between the writer of globalwarmingisadirtyhoax.blogspot.com and George Will is the size of the microphone and a crappy bow tie. Second, the Wolves have a new head of Basketball Operations who is preparing for the draft before he begins the coaching search. That's it. That's all we really know. That's a long way from forming reasonable opinions about how quickly McHale needs to be kicked to the curb. Questions like "Is he the best available coach?", "Did the players show solid progression under his tutelage?", or "Does his style best fit the direction the club wants to go?" are completely ignored, often in favor of the great Sam Mitchell mission. Why do you suppose the opinion makers in the local media want Smitch to return to the Target Center? You don't think it has anything to do with personal access, do you? Until later. PS: Completely setting aside the media aspect of all of this, what do you think needs to happen for McHale to stay? How would you handle the process? Should his front office record come into play when considering him as a coach? Is he the best fit for the club? We'd love to hear your take on the matter.
0 recs |
41 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Amen.
I think it’s a shame that McHale spent 14 years in the front office making his name synonymous with failure. Because I think he actually might be a pretty good coach. Unfortunately, keeping him around would be a TERRIBLE public relations move, and you know PR is what Kahn’s going to be looking for.
by LoveTo on Jun 4, 2009 3:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
SnP
I love the site and your work, so I hope you take this in the constructive manner that it’s intended, but this isn’t your best work. An extended rant about the media…isn’t really the issue. I’m much more interested in what your take on the coaching situation actually is, not how it’s being bloviated about, which has little to do with how the team moves forward.
We hope and have to assume that whatever these clowns say on the radio or write isn’t going to influence the decision-making process.
As for that process, my concern is whether or not McHale has decided whether he wants the gig or not. If he does, then OK. Kahn needs to decide whether he’s a candidate, and who else might be. If he doesn’t, fine, move on. If he’s dithering, then I see a problem. It seems reasonable to me that if they’ve met and exchanged ideas about the team, then Kahn is justified, and really should, tell him to decide if he’s interested in relatively short order.
In my view, I think the best result would be for McHale to gracefully and publicly bow out. I just think that everyone would be better off with a fresh start. WIthout going into it more deeply, this would allow Kahn to do a search without alienating players who like him. If he says he wants to stay, it’s a little harder. The players seem to like him, which makes firing him more difficult. I still think overall they would be better off with someone else.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 4, 2009 3:31 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yup
I agree, as longtime reader and appreciator of your work SnP, that this is just a little bit of a rant, but I guess we’re all entitled to one every now and again.
Having said that, my biggest question is whether—in a draft like this one where wheat and chaff is different for each beholder—is whether it is a good idea to draft players without a coach or (I’m presuming) a philosophy in place? I suppose the draft will tell us what the philosophy is, but wouldn’t you want some input from your coach about the kinds of players they like? The little things they look for? The things that they’d rather avoid in players? Am I out in left field on this one?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 4, 2009 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a rant?
Rant: To speak or write in an angry or violent manner; rave.
I don’t think this article is rant-like.
The article takes a story that is prominent in local Twolves coverage and pokes holes in the story. The article cites evidence of the local media’s story or meme and argues that this meme is flawed.
Of course, the article then proceeds to point out that we should not be surprised by these flawed arguments because those making the arguments are mass purveyors of flawed arguments. Here, the article gets a bit colorful, but I don’t think it gets angry.
Is it really angry to argue that there really actually might be something in the water at KFAN? If we just look at the facts and try to explain the poor quality, something in the water might be high on our list. Especially if something on the water loosely refers to the culture of management and hiring practices. There’s likely a lot of talent that would work for peanuts at KFAN, but for whatever reason, they stick to the lowest common denominator. And, their ratings suck, so they don’t have much to lose by hiring some smart young cookies.
by littleboxes on Jun 4, 2009 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
KFAN
I’ve got a friend that’s pretty connected over there. Their ratings are actually quite good for the format (Especially Danny B.) .
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 4, 2009 6:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And McDonalds has sold billions of hamburgers...
…..yet I’ll still order the Jucy Lucy when I want a special burger.
I like and listen to KFAN. I’m not arguing that they (or Barreiro) are all bad. I think the Common Man program is the best thing out there now that Mischke is gone from the airwaves. Barreiro has good guests and interesting topics. My argument is that there is an element of hackishness to a few of them (and former thems) when it comes to the Wolves and the substitution of personal opinion as barometer in place of any reasonable attempt at objectivity; which, granted, can’t be achieved, but it certainly deserves a more sporting shot from guys with that big of a mic.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 6:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should add...
….that there is, for me, a certain amount of relativity involved in liking to listen to KFAN. I cannot stand listening to, watching, or reading the news any more because of its manufactured nature (see News, Fox), its predictability, and its general unseriousness with serious issues. I don’t want to listen to our elected leaders talk about how we need to go to war with North Korea because they built a new missile and it supposedly threatens us all (it doesn’t). Stuff like that.
My problem with KFAN is when some of this media BS seeps into its airwaves. That’s where I’m coming from on this one.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
in other words
they have really, really low arbitron ratings. But sure, sports radio gets incredibly low ratings and KFAN does OK by those standards. That doesn’t mean they couldn’t do better or worse.
I don’t listen so I can’t comment on individual shows, but let’s just say writing a column for the local paper does not make one a good radio announcer or help one conduct a good radio show.
by littleboxes on Jun 4, 2009 7:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Biggity..
….I would agree with your last paragraph if it weren’t a situation where a guy was asked to come in and clean up. Kahn gets to decide the identity of the club and while it, I suppose, can be presented as a chicken and egg problem, I view it more as something where Kahn will decide the style of play and then fit the players and coach to this general decision. Once that system and coach are in place, then you start leaning on the coach for input. I don’t think it’s necessary for the first off-season with a club being remodeled with a new guy at the top.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's fair..
…and I didn’t know if this would be a topic that rises to the issue I’ve been wanting to talk about for a while: the piss-poor media coverage of the Wolves by certain segments of the local media population. I don’t think they will directly influence the decision makers, but I do think they do influence the fan base enough to make a difference in the grand scheme of things.
As for the coaching situation, I had planned a post on it in the next week or so. Here’s the Cliff Notes version: I always thought the Wolves missed their chance to make the big change at the firing of Wittman. That’s when the deal should have went down with McHale being completely separated from the franchise and an interim coach hired for the remainder of what was a lost season. I think this would have forced Taylor to move quicker and with a bit more of an eye for a wholesale change than what we saw. My hope is that this would have led to someone like Lindsey but the more I hear about how Moor is involved, that probably would have never been the case. In hindsight, and taking everything into consideration, I think they lucked out with Kahn and McHale. I would have done it differently if I were in charge but considering the owner, the son-in-law, the timing of the Wittman firing and McHale’s connection with the players and promise as a coach, I’m not sure they could do any better. The guy has a legit shot at being an above-average coach (i.e. ego manager) in the NBA. The problem is making sure that fans know there is a wall between McHale and the draft. Is that sort of thing possible? Will fans ever look at a bad selection and blame it on the coach still being there?
I do think that one concept that is being overblown here is that McHale has a choice. I don’t think it’s his choice at all. I think he wants the job but that Kahn isn’t ready to fill it yet. I believe Kahn when he says that he’s not at that point in the process yet. I think he has an idea of what will happen but he seems to be the guy who collects evidence before he acts on a hunch.
I do agree that the easy thing for fans would be for him to bow out. If he does, I hope he does so with the acknowledgment that it is because of his poor front office decisions and his realization that this connection is not something the franchise can get over at this point. He doesn’t need to say it in those words, but let’s admit that’s what a lot of us are thinking right now. A “clean break” is heard over and over about this subject.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 6:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
McHale/ Media
KFAN is generally unlistenable. The Columnists just basically recycle talk-radio talking points. So it’s fair to say I had a pretty good smile while reading this.
Few Points on McHale
1. It’s really hard to make conclusive conclusions on his coaching ability when Ryan Gomes leads the team in minutes. Another way to put this is the talent is probably not up to snuff when Jason Collins, and Kevin Ollie are being counted on for serious minutes.
2. I think hiring SMITCH would be a bad idea if everything Andrea Barganani said about his relationships with players in Toronto. At the very least Kevin McHale has this going for him.
3. I tend to agree with Britt and David Thorpe that he’s a fairly effective Coach. Thier was a lot to be said about several of the late season road efforts. Although Britt made the point at the same time the dynamics between Kahn/McHale could be so screwed up it might not work.
4. Who should Coach the team? I’ve already thrown out the name of Tyrone Corbin. I would tend to prefer a Coach that’s not a hardliner like Randy Wittman. While at the same time astutue enough to realize how this team is going to win games: Rebounding, and Inside-Out Game. I think it would be a mistake to bring in a Thibodeau or Van Gundy who want to turn this into a grind-it out defensive team. I realize this last statement will get me ripped.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 4, 2009 3:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I broadly agree
But I have some points to quibble with.
First, on point one I think McHale’s insistence on playing Gomes at the 5 while limiting Love’s minutes before Al’s injury speaks volumes about his ability to assess talent and his understanding of how basketball games are won. Ryan Gomes is a radically inferior player on both ends of the floor to Love. Doesn’t not realizing that call into question McHale’s ability?
Second, I don’t understand the Ty Corbin recommendation. I think our roster post draft could mirror Utah’s roster well so is it just that he’s the only viable assistant coach to make a head coach on their bench? I get a little weary sometimes that every recommendation for a coach for the Wolves seems to have a tie-in to the Wolves in his past.
by Ailuridae on Jun 4, 2009 5:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ty Corbin
Actually is considered a pretty good candidate in NBA Coaching Circles. The one thing that’s held him back is he is the 2nd assistant behind Phil Johnson. He works a lot with their big men (So I think this could be a plus here). Corbin also has no ties to Current Wolves Management as none of them were with the Organization when he was traded away in 1992. This is like saying we can’t hire Tom Thibodeau since he assisted Musselman twenty years ago.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 4, 2009 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's what I meant by only viable assistant
Phil Johnson, fairly or unfairly is likely perceived as too old.
Put me in the Corbin camp then. Not that he is necessarily the best coaching candidate but that he is qualified. Assuming Kahn would like to see that style of basketball played Corbin makes a ton of sense.
You mentioned Elston Turner elsewhere and I would be very interested in hiring someone off the Rockets staff whether it be Lurner, Dunn, Sikma or Adelman’s son. The did an excellent job with the defense this year and I think the Wolves roster fit very well with the Princeton offense especially Love and Miller. Additionally its enjoyable offensive basketball to watch.
by Ailuridae on Jun 4, 2009 6:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not as a head coach?
I think Kevin McHale’s value is in tutoring KLove and Big Al. So maybe they could keep him in house as a “big man” coach or something. As the man who’s drafted/acquired the current roster, I think he’ll show loyalty to them in terms of playing time, regardless of any new talent that Kahn brings in (that chemistry thing that Jose brought mentioned).
Overall I think it’s time for a new direction, but I wouldn’t mind McHale continuing to teach Love and Jefferson.
by C Tone on Jun 4, 2009 3:43 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
action
First, I enjoy the media analysis. It’s a bit easy to do, but John Stewart has a little show that uses some pretty easy set ups for some great comedy.
Second, perhaps I missed something, but I haven’t read the pitch that Kahn’s Evenings with McHale are solely intended as information gathering as to whether or not McHale should be included in a larger coaching search.
My main issue is if Kahn starts and ends his coaching search with McHale. I think this might actually happen and it might actually make sense. If you want to keep McHale can you actually conduct a process of 3-4 interviews and then decide on McHale? Short answer is yes, of course you can do that. Long answer is that McHale might decline to be part of that process and if you really want him as your coach then you don’t need the process anyway.
The dinners with McHale also hopefully include some discussion of the players on this team. McHale may be biased but after drafting them and coaching them he possesses valuable information about the team’s talent and needs. I advocate for dinners for this information sharing purpose alone. If Kahn is worth his salt he’ll use McHale for valuable information and will be able to sort out any BS.
Third, I think it’s reasonable to think that having a coach in place before the draft is a good thing. Now, that doesn’t mean that not having a coach is a complete disaster.
Fourth, I think Kahn should have dinner with other coaching candidates (unless he really does want to retain McHale). These interviews (at least some of them) should be conducted pre-draft and he should ask these candidates for the honest opinion about the Wolves roster. This will also provide him with valuable insight as to the talent on this team. It would clearly be helpful if these candidates were active assistant coaches (i.e., not Sam Mitchell). Again, if Kahn is worth his salt he’ll be able to separate the valuable information from the job seeking BS.
Bottom line: I don’t think Kahn has to rush. I do think he should conduct a coaching search and there’s no reason not to start it before the draft as the search itself can complement draft preparation. [Why not interview a Bulls assistant and ask him about Hinrich, there’s some pro-scouting.] The only reasonable argument for not starting a search now is that Kahn thinks he might want McHale and he knows McHale does not want to be part of a search, he wants yes or no.
I still worry that Kahn agreed to make McHale an offer as a condition of accepting the job and that he also agreed to keep the front office staff as a condition of the job. All this other stuff then is just a media snow job designed to make Glen Taylor not look like a compete a-hole. In other words, I’m open to the possibility that Glen Taylor and David Kahn are totally lying to the fans.
by littleboxes on Jun 4, 2009 3:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point on the evenings with McHale
I thought they were presented as get-to-know-you sessions. Sloppy presentation on my part.
I also agree with you that it is reasonable to have a coach in place. What I don’t agree with is that it is necessary so that they can know what type of system they want to run and draft around. That’s how this was presented by Doogie.
I agree with you that Kahn should take his time and interview other people. It has to, at the very least, look like a normal process. I worry about that last paragraph too.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 6:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Other names of interest
Dean Demopoulos- The lead assistant to Trailblazers and Elston Turner- Long-Time lead assistant to Rick Adelman.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 4, 2009 3:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Glen Taylor
needs to look between his legs and if he find something, anything he needs to have Kahn interview Demopoulos for the head coaching job. Why the hell not? And why not make Paul Allen hand out some more cash to keep his talent. Demopoulos could share his opinions about current wolves players, very helpful when figuring our your new team’s most striking weaknesses and better yet for understanding potential flaws in internal evaluation.
by littleboxes on Jun 4, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Kahn and McHale are compatible...
One of the things Kahn repeatedly said when hired was that our organization needed to outwork everyone else. He seems like a very driven guy…a guy that will eat, sleep, and crap Wolves Hoops for as long as he’s here…and a guy that will demand that from the people who work for him.
Does this sound like Kevin McHale to you? The guy that constantly bitches about NBA travel. The guy that disappears to his cabin for months at a time. The guy that has flat out said his job with the Wolves is NOT going to be his whole life.
I just don’t see these two getting to the altar together. And if they do, I predict a pretty quick and quiet divorce.
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
by mutleyil on Jun 4, 2009 4:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good test of Kahn's sincerity…
Kahn’s been saying all the right things but will he actually back them up with deeds? If Kahn ends up rehiring McHale then his words regarding hard work and dedication will mean nothing.
I’d like McHale back as big man’s coach; doesn’t go on the road, doesn’t have any input on personnel, and maybe get more out of Love and Big Al’s natural talent with improved technique.
It would be interesting to see who IS on Kahn’s list of coaches to interview. Wouldn’t that be fascinating!
by swheatle on Jun 4, 2009 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's too late to move quickly…
thanks to the laborious (smirk) GM search that apparently was not conducted in season. Ideally you would want to know who your coach is going in to the draft, but hey, this is Glenn Taylor’s team and he likes doing things his way.
Even if a coach was hired tomorrow, how much influence would he have on the draft? All the front office people have been (temporally) retained because they’re the only people who have been doing the scouting all year; without them the wolves would really be scrambling in developing a draft board. Of course these are the same clowns who have been running the draft the past few years, but they’re better than nothing? Right? Right?
by swheatle on Jun 4, 2009 4:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This has partially been stated previously, but the amount of preferential treatment given to McHale beyond collecting his assessment of the current roster will partially dictate how this move is viewed from a PR standpoint. If it were me and he didn’t want to be part of a larger search, then he should go. There are coaches available who’d do as good or better than him; it just depends on Kahn to make the best decision. To me, any action by Kahn that could be reasonably interpreted as preferential treatment to McHale would seriously damage his credibility.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 4, 2009 4:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I was kind of hoping you would give us some insight on “Is he the best available coach?”, “Did the players show solid progression under his tutelage?”, or “Does his style best fit the direction the club wants to go?” not just an OT against kfan. Maybe this thread needs a pt.2?
by revprodeji on Jun 4, 2009 5:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'll put up a post like that in the next week or so.
Part of the problem is that we don’t know a lot about which assistant coaches are good. It’s one thing to do a GM search where we can look at records and articles and whatnot, but that’s tougher with assistant coaches. I do think that McHale fits the club and that they would probably be hard pressed to find a better replacement for this particular situation. He would need to shape a few things up (stop bitching about the f’ing travel) but overall I think he would be a fantastic fit for the core of this roster.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 6:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree in the fact that the nba coach is more a spoiled personality manager than anything else. Let the assistants run practice. I just wish we had some resemblance of a priority on defense.
by revprodeji on Jun 4, 2009 7:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I've always viewed defense...
…as a matter of effort and maturity. This is where the biggest challenge to Big Al lies; it has to start with him. He’s the team leader and he needs to step it up on that end of the court. I should have put it in the post about him being a center, but even if he’s switched to the 4, he’s still going to get torched if he continues to play like he has on defense.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad we haven't settled on a coach yet
In the NBA it all starts with talent first and foremost. Let’s see what we’ve got after draft day, decide what kind of team we want to be, and then hire a coach. I would hate to bring in a coach and then have that coach’s personal philosophy influence the type of talent we should draft. We need to fit the coach to our talent, not the talent to the coach.
As it relates to McHale, he doesn’t appear to be wed to any particular style of play, which I like since he is probably willing to adapt to the talent he has at his disposal. Also, he seems to have a pretty good connection with young players. On the other hand, he brings the baggage of the past, and I can appreciate the view that we need a clean break. So I’m pretty much on the fence as it relates to his fate. But the fact that Kahn is handling his dealings with McHale in a thoughtful manner, without rushing to a decision, I’m totally fine with.
I moved away from the Twin Cities area 15 years ago and it’s amazing to me that the same old tired acts of Barreiro, Hartman, and Reusse are still hanging on. Yuck.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 4, 2009 6:20 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I agree with you completely.
The best coaches adjust their style to fit their talent and personnel. Get through the draft, then hire a coach that will be able to work with those players effectively.
by mnjayhawk on Jun 4, 2009 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very well put...
…and you put what I was trying to say into 3 paragraphs. I also agree with you about the local sports media personalities. I joined the military in 96 and the same guys giving opinions then were giving them when I got out in 03. The only call I ever made to a sports station was back in 93 to the Chad and Barreiro show. They were debating whether the Wolves should go with JR Rider or Cal Cheney and I called in to say that they should go with Allan Houston. I got back to Minnesota just in time to hear Barreiro talk about Ebi in the 03 draft. I turned the radio off before he got around to actually saying what he thought about the pick.
BTW: Reusse has his own radio show now.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 6:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was a credentialed by the Wolves
AND I blog (not related and I am in no way in with the local media).
anyway, while working games it was pretty obvious that McHale was often overmatched. Maybe nobody is asking the questions you are suggesting because they have all been answered with a bullet.
My take is that McHale is not head coach material. It was pretty clear that the assistants were the ones handling anything related to Xs and Os. I give him credit for throwing out half of a complicated playbook and just “letting the kids make plays.” But that only takes you so far. I have no doubt in my mind that were the Wolves to make the playoffs, McHale would be outcoached on every possession through 4 games.
Maybe he’d be good at developing players but I’m not convinced he has a strong trackrecord of that either. Garnett is certainly proof that he is, but there are few other solid examples.
We need a teacher in the head coach’s seat and I don’t believe McHale is the one.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you
by GopherNation on Jun 4, 2009 9:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
But isn't that the case...
…to a certain extent with many NBA coaches? That they are ego managers to a certain extent and the assistants handle the nuts and bolts of the operation? I can’t think of too many times during the year where McHale was torched on game management or the rule book. They had their issues but it wasn’t anything that couldn’t be overcome with a year or two on the job. I think at the college level he’d be exposed, but at the NBA level I think he has the potential to be a Phil Jackson-esque ego manager. I’m not saying he’ll win 9 (possibly 10) championships, but he seems to be the type of guy who can deal with big time personalities and that’s way more than 1/2 the battle for NBA coaches. I do agree that he needs lots of work to become an upper level coach. I just think he has more potential than most guys. I think they need teachers in the assistant spots, but at the head of the bench I think they need a guy that can deal with personalities and broad game management.
Also, I’m not arguing that he comes out ahead in any of those questions. I have a feeling that he’s good with this particular group of guys and the style of ball they should be playing but I think the question of whether or not he would be any good as a coach is largely ignored by the people calling for his head.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 9:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Phil Jackson. . .
. . . and Tex Winter was what came to mind as I read this. Phil didn’t develop the triangle, Tex did and Phil freely admits that. I can see the possibility of McHale being a Phil type guy. Watch Phil and see how often during the game he gets up and rants or raves or talks to the guys. Practice is where you teach, not the middle of a game. (although I did once install a new defense at half time)
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 5, 2009 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
SoDakHmr. . .
. . . goes into this in a little better detail at the bottom. Tip of the hat SoDak
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 5, 2009 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm talking about
assistants correcting him in the huddle because he doesn’t know the actual plays. Having talented assistants is a great thing but he just appears to be incapable of handling the X’s and O’s.
He’s good now with this group because there is no pressure and he was just letting the play and get used to this level. But when it comes to putting together a game plan, teaching it and executing it at this level I firmly believe he would be exposed as a lower-tier NBA coach. We would win games with talent alone, in spite of the coach. Phil Jackson knows exactly what he is doing and is a brilliant NBA coach.
what you say here can, and will, be used against you
by GopherNation on Jun 7, 2009 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The strategy part is the biggest issue...
And it makes me wonder whether McHale can become a good coach. On the flip side, the fact that the pre-Billups Nuggets didn’t have any out-of-bounds plays makes me wonder how much of the coach’s job is X’s and O’s (though they could’ve used more support in that area during the WCF). Wittman was supposed to be good in that area but obviously didn’t have a handle on the other aspects. I don’t have any data to back this up, but the Wolves did seem to be more organized when the game was on the line during Wittman’s tenure than they were under McHale. It was the other 46 minutes that were the problem.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 4, 2009 9:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Few More Thoughts
1. Part of what’s disappointing as far as KFAN goes is the lack of serious insight into the Wolves. Say what you will about Chad Hartman- he gave the best analysis of anyone in their weekday line-up by far. Henry Lake also had some fairly good takes on the NBA. My favorite was when Callers would call in proclaiming OJ Mayo “The Next Jordan” and he pointed out how OJ didn’t do much for him. Chad would also have Britt on some to breakdown the team which was great.
2. I wasn’t suggesting replacements as an endorsement of getting rid of McHale. I’m fine with keeping him. The major issue once Al went down was talent not coaching. This is evident by Ryan Gomes being the Team’s Iron Man. I think their’s very few coaches that could have made some line-ups that trot out work. Talent is what seperated Mike D’Antoni’s Coaching stints in Denver and Phoenix. It’s also what turned Vinny Del Negro’s season around once the Bulls got Salmons and Miller.
3. I think one thing that has to be stated with McHale as a Coach is “How much better would the strategy be designed with a training camp to implement it”. It’s unfair to make a lot of definitive judgements based on this on account of his 2 coaching stints.
4. The ability to get players to listen you is so huge as SNP has rightly pointed out. We don’t need Sam Mitchell to come in and cause a ruckus. We need a steady hand to guide the rebuilding.
5. The main issue is “Can Kahn and McHale work together?” I think you’ll be OK from Kevin’s end of the equation.
6. The last thing is the need for commitment. McHale can’t make this a Brett Favre saga every year. If he wants to Coach for the next 3 to 5- go for it. If he doesn’t- then leave.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 4, 2009 10:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed on Hartman and Lake...
..they are/were the station’s best b-ball guys. I do have to say that I like PA. He doesn’t make any bones about coming at things from the perspective of a fan and that is worth something. He gets a bit homerish for my tastes with the Vikes but the guy genuinely likes basketball and you can tell it and he doesn’t resort to the media-based posturing that Barreiro does.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 4, 2009 11:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Logical and well reasoned as always, Jose...
like you, I don’t have a problem with McHale staying on as coach. I think he should have a chance at a complete training camp and a full season with Big Al and Brewer healthy. But the Favre comparison is dead on – no more whining about the travel or the stress – either you want the job or you don’t.
As far as Phil Jackson and X’s and O’s, I believe that Tex Winter was the Triangle Offense guru. Phil’s greatest talent has always been ego management (Michael, Scottie, Toni, Rodman!!!, et al and Shaq/Kobi- OMG, that’s near impossible!). Dealing with the attitude of players is about 90% of a head coach’s job anymore. Of course, on the flip side, talent is a huge advantage…I notice Phil never took a chance on the Clippers or the Nets job!
by SoDakHmr on Jun 5, 2009 3:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For starters. . .
McHale needs to quite his pussy footing around the thing. How hard is it to say “Yes, I’m interested” or “No, don’t want the job.”? I’m sure some of us have that wife that can’t make up her mind about where she wants to go for supper, but doesn’t want to go wherever you want. That is how I feel about McHale.
I wouldn’t mind McHale as the coach. He seems to be capable of doing the job. I would just give him a drop dead date to let me know if he wants the job. If he doesn’t get back to me, I issue a press realease saying that McHale has not expressed any interest in the job and we will begin interviewing coaches after the draft.
I don’t really know if he is the best coach fo rthis team. I wouldn’t mind having him around as a “big man’s coach” to work with Love and any bigs we draft ( aside – please not Thabeet!!) and then he wouldn’t have to travel and Jefferson & Love would be happy as he is still with the team.
This may not be a popular viewpoint, but why don’t we bring in a young asst. coach and see what he can do with this team? I don’t have any names, but it seems like a good idea to me.
Disclaimer – I wrote this without reading any of the comments, so all of this may be well hased by the time I post. . . .
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 5, 2009 12:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
