Raptors Offseason 2022

[Joey]

This is beyond hilarious and stupid.
Hold on second, u can't have a relationship.
Wtf...listen if he crossed the line and she said no, than I can understand, but it was consensual relationship.

It came out that it maybe became non-consensual when he made some unwanted comments to the woman. I assume in the work place.

Either way, when dealing with power structures in organizations, the risks are not worth the reward of not nipping this in the bud right away, and putting a stop to it.

[TrueTorontoFan]

Yup.. Casey never got to work with a ferrari. Still did a pretty decent job though given what he had to work with.

he both never got the best version of that roster construction but also made bad decisions its not like both can't be true

[Joey]

This interview got me actually liking Simmons ... unpopular opinion I know. But also makes me hate the 76ers more, which is a popular opinion. Lol

[Joey]

he both never got the best version of that roster construction but also made bad decisions its not like both can't be true

Ya with Casey it was always the lack of adjustments, or completely bowing to the adjustments the other wanted him to make.

[TrueTorontoFan]

I think the maximizing talent stuff is over played. You can't really prove it.. your just coming up with random numbers.

And bringing in shooters for Lebron is also talent.. that's on the GM and front office... not the coach. If a coach doesn't have the right tools he'll fail. If he does, he'll succeed. That's how simple the equation is.

Vogel won a championship but he had the right tools.. and old team with super stars that didn't have to travel much because of the bubble situation. So he had a healthy team. Once his team started getting hurt, he struggled. It got harder when he lost some of his talented pieces like Caruso.

Walton lead his team to a 24-0 start while Kerr was having surgery. He goes on to Sacramento with inferior players and struggles.

Casey lost to the Cavs because the Cavs had better talent (ie, Lebron). If Casey had Kawhi that season, I think he would have been in the finals instead.

Doc fricken Rivers has a championship ring.. you know why? He had a pretty good roster full of stars.

which is why I mentioned GM is for roster management. outlined that clearly.


This is the direct quote

gotta give credit to line ups and roster construction (gm+coaching).

My point is you are taking a very hardlined stance and then if anyone is disagreeing or saying yes there are other confounding factors you are extremely dismissive without having any real support for your position yet at the same time you are quick to use a similar lack of support although I think there is more support for coaching adding some form of impact .... to dismiss the alternative point of view. Again no one is saying coaching is the most important or matters more than other factors let me be clear in my personal position. Coaching matters ... to an extent where yes it can effect a teams ability to make it to the finals and win the finals.. UNLESS a team is so much more talented than the other teams like that team needs to be head and shoulders above the field. Like think the 2nd and 1st year of Durant on the warriors...

The league is trending towards parity more and more each passing year. I do not think the Celtics are head and shoulders above the field and in general yes there is a such thing as a bad coach. a bad coach can disrupt the locker room and ruin player relationships.. has trouble motivating players. Yes having a good GM who backs the coach and having a good organization helps tremendously but not every organization is run like the one you cheer for. The raptors are not the norm in terms of organizational structure... look at teh knicks for example. Substitutions are important.... x's and o's and execution is important. Putting reps in for those things is important... scouting (which is part of coaching) is important.


Thad Young mentioned it when he first got here. A mediocre coach who is some what bad vs a mediocre coach who is some what good .. yeah probably not much difference... but a very GOOD coach is able to again squeeze the last little bit of development, or success out of there players. Players don't optimize themselves. Want to look at bad coaching.. look at the brooklyn nets and how they continually trashed there organization all year last year and even in summer league with kyrie saying we dont need a coach... book it right now and revisit this later.. They will not win with that attitude.


Without coaching players don't always work on the thigns that will make them better. I mean look at Lowry and how he has credited coaches with getting the most out of him...


KD's high school coach who told him .. yeah you aren't a big man... you need to watch t-mac film.. those are early instances but a good example of how coaching can impact players on court performance and development and impact winning. On top of that yes x's and o's and execution does matter. Not every single team works with a read and react offence .... if you don't think coaching matters... I will tell you this I don't think many coaches beyond Chris Finch will have a good shot at making Minny work with their wonky roster construction with two flawed big men flawed in the exact opposite way (KAT and Gobert).


Coaching matters on the court and off. One of the most important parts of the coach though IS the ability to manage relationships and egos. Players help coaches but also coaches help players.

You saying its overplayed without acknowledging that no one put a specific percentage but everyone is saying it impacts it. Things can exist without being mutually exclusive ...

Anyway I am out for a few hours

[planetmars]

A lot of time it's the vets that are the problem. They don't want to listen to a young and inexperienced coach that are telling them something they don't like, they want and need a guy they respect. Udoka came into that job with a lot of respect on his name. Can you imagine what it's going to be like when this new guy is trying to tell Marcus Smart to get his sh!t together? LOL

Anyways there's just a lot of ways the coaching change can impact the team this season.

Tye Lue won in Cleveland. He's pretty young too. Spoelstra was pretty young when he won with Lebron and Wade.

Boston still has Stevens there.. and all their assistants from last year. They'll be fine.

[planetmars]

he both never got the best version of that roster construction but also made bad decisions its not like both can't be true

Nurse made bad decisions as well. But because he had good talent it didn't matter in the end.

[DanH]

Nurse made bad decisions as well. But because he had good talent it didn't matter in the end.

Fewer bad decisions, less impactful bad decisions, more good decisions, more impactful good decisions. No coach change is going from all bad decisions to all good ones, but Nurse was definitely a significant coaching upgrade based on those four decision impacts. Particularly in the playoffs. Casey was a very good regular season win-churn coach. But terrible at using the regular season to prepare his team for the playoffs and it bit us every year.

[Kagemusha]

This interview got me actually liking Simmons ... unpopular opinion I know. But also makes me hate the 76ers more, which is a popular opinion. Lol

76ers is sh!t, but Ben is a diva.

[planetmars]

which is why I mentioned GM is for roster management. outlined that clearly.


This is the direct quote

I don't understand why you are bringing in management into this discussion. We're talking about coaching. Boston isn't changing their GM. They are changing their coach. So I guess I agree that management makes a difference. It's kind of like saying super stars make a difference. I know this and was agreeing. But it's moot to this discussion.

My point is you are taking a very hardlined stance and then if anyone is disagreeing or saying yes there are other confounding factors you are extremely dismissive without having any real support for your position yet at the same time you are quick to use a similar lack of support although I think there is more support for coaching adding some form of impact .... to dismiss the alternative point of view. Again no one is saying coaching is the most important or matters more than other factors let me be clear in my personal position. Coaching matters ... to an extent where yes it can effect a teams ability to make it to the finals and win the finals.. UNLESS a team is so much more talented than the other teams like that team needs to be head and shoulders above the field. Like think the 2nd and 1st year of Durant on the warriors...

It's a discussion. Nobody has proven to me why coaching really matters. So I come back with my own comments. It's not a hard stance so much as nobody is giving me anything tangible that sways my perspective. If you can show me examples of a team that hired a new coach that made an immediate difference I might be convinced otherwise. I can cite several examples of young coach's that won without much experience. Pat Riley is a good example of that from back in the day in LA. He had no experience in coaching at all other than being an ex-player. And was doing the colour commentary as well as a broadcaster. He got thrown in because the previous coach got hurt and the new coach needed help. The previous coach was still doing a fine job though. But yeah they also had Magic and Kareem.

So give me examples of a coach that was brought in that made a huge difference with the same personnel they had the year before. I might debate it depending on the example you provide. But that's my prerogative on a message board no?

The league is trending towards parity more and more each passing year. I do not think the Celtics are head and shoulders above the field and in general yes there is a such thing as a bad coach. a bad coach can disrupt the locker room and ruin player relationships.. has trouble motivating players. Yes having a good GM who backs the coach and having a good organization helps tremendously but not every organization is run like the one you cheer for. The raptors are not the norm in terms of organizational structure... look at teh knicks for example. Substitutions are important.... x's and o's and execution is important. Putting reps in for those things is important... scouting (which is part of coaching) is important.

Is Thibs a good coach or a bad coach? My answer is it doesn't matter because the Knicks roster is flawed. And it's flawed because they have poor management. Management and coaching are not the same. You need great management in the NBA. But a "bad" coach with great management can succeed. The term "bad" and "good" is subjective anyway. At the end of the day it comes down to winning. But winning only happens with talent in the NBA. Is Phil Jackson a good coach? What if he didn't have MJ or Kobe or Shaq? Pops is a great coach right? Well he was great until Duncan and Ginobili retired, because he couldn't get a DeMar lead team into the playoffs.

This isn't high school or college. It's the NBA. Everyone is a professional. Sure nobody likes a guy that's going to be unsupportive. But a talented, mature adult who is being paid good money to do a job will still work hard despite who their coach is. And if they won't/can't.. maybe the problem is with the player.

Thad Young mentioned it when he first got here. A mediocre coach who is some what bad vs a mediocre coach who is some what good .. yeah probably not much difference... but a very GOOD coach is able to again squeeze the last little bit of development, or success out of there players. Players don't optimize themselves. Want to look at bad coaching.. look at the brooklyn nets and how they continually trashed there organization all year last year and even in summer league with kyrie saying we dont need a coach... book it right now and revisit this later.. They will not win with that attitude.

You have to find that Thad quote for me. Was he talking about coaching or the system / management? There is more than one coach on an NBA team though. Most head coach's don't have time to sit down with a player and go over habits and things. As for Brooklyn.. again Steve Nash likely would have won a chip or at least get to the finals if KD's foot wasn't on the line against the Bucks. They had a mess of a season last year because of Covid and injuries. He didn't have all the right tools to work with.

Without coaching players don't always work on the thigns that will make them better. I mean look at Lowry and how he has credited coaches with getting the most out of him...


KD's high school coach who told him .. yeah you aren't a big man... you need to watch t-mac film.. those are early instances but a good example of how coaching can impact players on court performance and development and impact winning. On top of that yes x's and o's and execution does matter. Not every single team works with a read and react offence .... if you don't think coaching matters... I will tell you this I don't think many coaches beyond Chris Finch will have a good shot at making Minny work with their wonky roster construction with two flawed big men flawed in the exact opposite way (KAT and Gobert).

Lowry was known as a coach killer. It wasn't Casey that helped him.. it was Masai (GM) and Billups (ex player) that did. Back in Houston he preferred Adelman over McHale, likely because Adelman gave him playing time. But that's again on the player for not being mature.

Why are you bringing up a high school coach? We're talking about NBA coach's. Again you are implying no other coach would get the most out of KAT and Gobert.. but you can't back that up with anything tangible because no other coach will get that chance, unless Finch gets fired. That's just your hunch.. which isn't going to help sway me here.

Coaching matters on the court and off. One of the most important parts of the coach though IS the ability to manage relationships and egos. Players help coaches but also coaches help players.

You saying its overplayed without acknowledging that no one put a specific percentage but everyone is saying it impacts it. Things can exist without being mutually exclusive ...

I mean at the end of the day you are hanging out with your players for 4-5 months out of the year. You need to get along. That's part of human nature. It doesn't mean you have to be good at coaching. Just have good repour with your players. That's like having teammates that like each other and shipping one out that can't get along. You can still be a player friendly coach and still be "bad" (whatever that really means) at the job.. I guess you have to then define what "bad" means. If the players suck at their job it won't matter how "bad" or "good" he is.


This all started with the Celtics new coach.. so let's go back there. He's been with the team since 2019. So how's that a bad thing? I'm sure he knows his guys and will get along with them.



Anyway.. let's see how the Celtics do. If they do well then I'll continue to believe that coach's don't really matter. If they struggle all year, well then I'll be wrong, and will change my tune on this matter.

[planetmars]

Fewer bad decisions, less impactful bad decisions, more good decisions, more impactful good decisions. No coach change is going from all bad decisions to all good ones, but Nurse was definitely a significant coaching upgrade based on those four decision impacts. Particularly in the playoffs. Casey was a very good regular season win-churn coach. But terrible at using the regular season to prepare his team for the playoffs and it bit us every year.

You can't prove though that Casey wouldn't have won with Kawhi and Marc. It'll just be supposition based on bias. Maybe he would have prepared differently if he had a super star at his disposal instead of a seriously flawed player in DeMar.

[TrueTorontoFan]

I don't understand why you are bringing in management into this discussion. We're talking about coaching. Boston isn't changing their GM. They are changing their coach. So I guess I agree that management makes a difference. It's kind of like saying super stars make a difference. I know this and was agreeing. But it's moot to this discussion.




It's a discussion. Nobody has proven to me why coaching really matters. So I come back with my own comments. It's not a hard stance so much as nobody is giving me anything tangible that sways my perspective. If you can show me examples of a team that hired a new coach that made an immediate difference I might be convinced otherwise. I can cite several examples of young coach's that won without much experience. Pat Riley is a good example of that from back in the day in LA. He had no experience in coaching at all other than being an ex-player. And was doing the colour commentary as well as a broadcaster. He got thrown in because the previous coach got hurt and the new coach needed help. The previous coach was still doing a fine job though. But yeah they also had Magic and Kareem.

So give me examples of a coach that was brought in that made a huge difference with the same personnel they had the year before. I might debate it depending on the example you provide. But that's my prerogative on a message board no?




Is Thibs a good coach or a bad coach? My answer is it doesn't matter because the Knicks roster is flawed. And it's flawed because they have poor management. Management and coaching are not the same. You need great management in the NBA. But a "bad" coach with great management can succeed. The term "bad" and "good" is subjective anyway. At the end of the day it comes down to winning. But winning only happens with talent in the NBA. Is Phil Jackson a good coach? What if he didn't have MJ or Kobe or Shaq? Pops is a great coach right? Well he was great until Duncan and Ginobili retired, because he couldn't get a DeMar lead team into the playoffs.

This isn't high school or college. It's the NBA. Everyone is a professional. Sure nobody likes a guy that's going to be unsupportive. But a talented, mature adult who is being paid good money to do a job will still work hard despite who their coach is. And if they won't/can't.. maybe the problem is with the player.




You have to find that Thad quote for me. Was he talking about coaching or the system / management? There is more than one coach on an NBA team though. Most head coach's don't have time to sit down with a player and go over habits and things. As for Brooklyn.. again Steve Nash likely would have won a chip or at least get to the finals if KD's foot wasn't on the line against the Bucks. They had a mess of a season last year because of Covid and injuries. He didn't have all the right tools to work with.




Lowry was known as a coach killer. It wasn't Casey that helped him.. it was Masai (GM) and Billups (ex player) that did. Back in Houston he preferred Adelman over McHale, likely because Adelman gave him playing time. But that's again on the player for not being mature.

Why are you bringing up a high school coach? We're talking about NBA coach's. Again you are implying no other coach would get the most out of KAT and Gobert.. but you can't back that up with anything tangible because no other coach will get that chance, unless Finch gets fired. That's just your hunch.. which isn't going to help sway me here.





I mean at the end of the day you are hanging out with your players for 4-5 months out of the year. You need to get along. That's part of human nature. It doesn't mean you have to be good at coaching. Just have good repour with your players. That's like having teammates that like each other and shipping one out that can't get along. You can still be a player friendly coach and still be "bad" (whatever that really means) at the job.. I guess you have to then define what "bad" means. If the players suck at their job it won't matter how "bad" or "good" he is.


This all started with the Celtics new coach.. so let's go back there. He's been with the team since 2019. So how's that a bad thing? I'm sure he knows his guys and will get along with them.



Anyway.. let's see how the Celtics do. If they do well then I'll continue to believe that coach's don't really matter. If they struggle all year, well then I'll be wrong, and will change my tune on this matter.

define well?

[TrueTorontoFan]

Nurse made bad decisions as well. But because he had good talent it didn't matter in the end.

this is my point.. no one said nurse was perfect so using this as an example is such a strawman from the central argument.

[planetmars]

define well?

You'll have to give me some context here.. what did I write specifically in my replies to you to make you ask this question?

[planetmars]

this is my point.. no one said nurse was perfect so using this as an example is such a strawman from the central argument.

I know nobody is perfect. I'm not implying that. Maybe I don't understand your central argument. Mine is that all NBA caliber coach's are good enough to win it all if they have the right personnel. Even a so called "bad" coach. And as such coaching doesn't really matter. I mean if we're talking about helping a bad team get slightly better over staying worse sure.. but I don't think we are, are we? That to me is like irrelevant since most of those coach's get fired once the team starts getting good enough to contend.

I think many Raptor fans believe that Casey was a bad coach. Correct me if I'm wrong. But I think Casey could have won a championship in 2019. I know that team was better than any team Casey ever had (I don't think that's questionable). There is no way to prove this and I know that's not fair. But I have no way to prove this either other than try through my arguments. I just see Casey riding Kawhi and Kyle in the playoffs like he rode DeMar and Kyle. I know that he had more weapons like Gasol and Green and a blossoming Pascal and Fred. And he had OG, Serge and Norm off the bench. He didn't have guys like Miles or Bebe anymore. He didn't have to worry about Kawhi turning into a shell of himself like DeMar did. And I think he was a good enough coach to game plan in the playoffs. People use those Cavs games, but Lebron was different. It was the players on the Raptors that crumbled under Lebron's shadow. Nurse didn't have to face a prime Lebron in the playoffs.

Brett Brown almost beat Nurse's team. He's also considered a bad coach among a lot of fans. But that series was pretty close (essentially came down to a buzzer beater in that 7th game - I know O/T was next, but that could swing either way). Rivers just beat Nurse this year.. and again Rivers isn't considered a good coach either (again correct me if I'm wrong).

Taking it back to the original point which was the new Boston coach - sorry I don't remember his name. But I suspect he'll be as good as Udoka was. And by good I mean he'll help Boston win games. That's my theory going into this season. I'll be proven right or wrong pretty easily here. Hopefully the star players in Boston will be healthy as that's a variable Udoka didn't really have to worry about too much last season.