The Bulls have hired Boston Celtics assistant coach Tom Thibodeau to serve as the new head coach of the Chicago Bulls. From working along side Greg Popovich in San Antonito to stints with Minnesota, New York, and Houston, Thibodeau is said to bring excellent defensive schemes and a diligent work-ethic. Pierce and Garnett have spoken highly of his workoholic tendencies, and it is undeniable that his defensive mindset has paid off for Boston. Moreover, he is said to be a great motivator and be effective on offense as well especially with big men. Jeff Van Gundy cannot praise the man enough and cites Yao Ming's 25 points, 11 rebounds season as proof of his ability to motivate post players and develop individual skill; as well as exalting his ability to incorporate team systems on the offensive end as well as the defensive end.
My gut reaction: Good hire. I believe these sources. Also, I always prefer a coach labeled as a defensive coach versus an offensive coach, and I always prefer a coach labeled as good with big men than good with guards. As cliche as it is, denfense wins championships and with post presence diminishing fast in the NBA, a coach who can fine tune guys like Noah and Gibson would be a perfect fit, whereas our main guard Derrick Rose has the skill-level more fit to improve with experience than hands on coaching.
The problem is that Thibodeau has never coached in the NBA. Is this going to pull in free agents? Is he going to be anything significantly better than VDN?
My theory is there are great coaches and than there's everyone else. Great coaches: Phil Jackson, Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Jerry Sloan, Rick Adelman. People who potentially could break in (even if much of the credit is due to their players): Doc Rivers, Stan Van Gundy, Nate McMillan, Scott Brooks. Finally, everyone else. Although I think for example Scott Skiles is a much better coach than say...Mike Brown... I still label almost every coach in the everyone else category. This is because only the few elite coaches actually take their coaching skill and cause significant impact on large-scale winning. Sure, Skiles can take the Bucks from a joke to a 6th seed, but only a few coaches build champions and dynasties (Phil and Pop have won 14 of 20 championships since 1991). My point exactly: great coaches, and everyone else (even Sloan and Adelman- though undoubtedly heralded as phenomenal might drop off this list if we want to be a frank as possible).
Thus, while we can't be sure on Thibodeau till we see what he does, hiring an Avery Johnson, Byron Scott, Lawrence Frank, Mo Cheeks, etc. would not have been a good call. Why? Because although we could rank those coaches and maybe one versus another would bring a difference of 5-7 wins for the team, none of them are great.
I'm not claiming Thibodeau is great, but we don't know... just as we didn't know with Phil.
What have I ever done to be considered great? This is an outrage.
ReplyDeleteI agree in the sense that the accolades aren't there with Rick and that those Sacramento King teams underperformed; however, they were going up against Shaq and Kobe. Just like Sloan could never get past Jordan and Pippen, sometimes you in the wrong place at the wrong time. Moreso, his work with Houston would lead me to believe he gets the most out of the least whereas a guy like Phil has always had the most to work with.
ReplyDelete