Ignore the billboard. Hire the right coach for the right reasons.

[tazzmaniac]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

What makes Lawson very highly qualified?

One year as a low level assistant?  Or three games as Duke’s head coach?

Those renting the billboard care about the presence of a vagina more so than qualifications.  Hammon is extremely qualified.  Lawson is an agenda-driven nonsense candidate.

What makes her highly qualified is her experience but also a whole lot of stuff that are in the answers to the questions I asked.

This franchise already hired her as a coach. They know all the answers to my questions. By giving her an interview, it shows me Stevens feels her very highly qualified to do the job, even if some bloggers on an internet site, that have to resort crude mentions about her body parts to make a point, that know nothing about her total capabilities, don't see it that way.

Being an NBA head coach is the pinnacle of basketball coaching.  Very few coaches reach that level.  I really like Lawson but she is in no way highly qualified to be an NBA head coach.  Objectively she'd should be considered barely qualified.  If you consider Lawson highly qualified, there would be thousands of other people that should be considered highly qualified. 

[liam]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

What makes Lawson very highly qualified?

One year as a low level assistant?  Or three games as Duke’s head coach?

Those renting the billboard care about the presence of a vagina more so than qualifications.  Hammon is extremely qualified.  Lawson is an agenda-driven nonsense candidate.

What makes her highly qualified is her experience but also a whole lot of stuff that are in the answers to the questions I asked.

This franchise already hired her as a coach. They know all the answers to my questions. By giving her an interview, it shows me Stevens feels her very highly qualified to do the job, even if some bloggers on an internet site, that have to resort crude mentions about her body parts to make a point, that know nothing about her total capabilities, don't see it that way.

Being an NBA head coach is the pinnacle of basketball coaching.  Very few coaches reach that level.  I really like Lawson but she is in no way highly qualified to be an NBA head coach.  Objectively she'd should be considered barely qualified.  If you consider Lawson highly qualified, there would be thousands of other people that should be considered highly qualified.

I'm watching Steve Nash coaching right now.

[Ogaju]

Very surprising how threatened some seem to be by a billboard...

do you know how difficult it is to make Billboard’s top 100....oh wait.

[BruceBanner18]

If winning the most games in the NBA is the #1 goal - why risk hiring a woman?  Zero track record.  I see way a bunch of potential downside and no objective benefit (other than meaningless favorable media treatment).  People pretending that males and females are same is irrational.

What key differences do you see?  Is there a difference between gambling on Brad Stevens versus gambling on Dawn Staley?

For me the answer would be yes there is a difference - the stage and make up of the roster. I tend to group head coaches into 2 groups, X's and O's coaches and personality managers. All coaches need to be proficient in both but tend to have a strength in one it the other. X's and O's coaches are typically good developmentally and getting the most out of rosters short of top end talent. Personality managers thrive with top end talent, managing egos and motivating millionaires/entitled athletes.


That said, when Stevens took over it was post championship run, draft picks, young players so an x o coach made sense. And Doc, a personality manager, stepping away to go LA to manage stars made sense too. Stevens seemed to lose his way a bit with the big egos/personality/expectations of Kyrie, Horford and Hayward.

With those recent issues and it not being clear if maybe Brown and Tatum are the ones with personalities that need to be managed/motivated (Ubuntu?), it seems like a good time for a personality manager coach. Those coach types are typically ex players with big personalities.

[Moranis]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

What makes Lawson very highly qualified?

One year as a low level assistant?  Or three games as Duke’s head coach?

Those renting the billboard care about the presence of a vagina more so than qualifications.  Hammon is extremely qualified.  Lawson is an agenda-driven nonsense candidate.

What makes her highly qualified is her experience but also a whole lot of stuff that are in the answers to the questions I asked.

This franchise already hired her as a coach. They know all the answers to my questions. By giving her an interview, it shows me Stevens feels her very highly qualified to do the job, even if some bloggers on an internet site, that have to resort crude mentions about her body parts to make a point, that know nothing about her total capabilities, don't see it that way.

Being an NBA head coach is the pinnacle of basketball coaching.  Very few coaches reach that level.  I really like Lawson but she is in no way highly qualified to be an NBA head coach.  Objectively she'd should be considered barely qualified.  If you consider Lawson highly qualified, there would be thousands of other people that should be considered highly qualified.

I'm watching Steve Nash coaching right now.

He has been pretty bad.  A lot of his decisions, both in game and overall, have been terrible.  And I still keep coming back to the decision to play Durant against Minnesota and then rest him the next day against Philadelphia (and I called it out on here at the time).  They lost to Philly, lost the tiebreaker, and ended up as the 2 seed where they are playing Milwaukee instead of Atlanta.  They can beat Atlanta without Irving and a banged up Harden, they seemingly can't beat Milwaukee in that scenario (and I believe they would have lost anyway because they can't defend Giannis).  The Nets seasons is filled with weird moves like that one, that cost them games, cost them points, etc. 

[tazzmaniac]

So I don't get the problems that some have over this billboard. The people who bought the billboard want one of two highly qualified people to get the job. Are those two candidates women? Yes. But are they experienced, accomplished and highly qualified for the job? Yes.

So who cares who the buyers of the billboard are routing for to be the next head coach of the Celtics?

Nowhere in that billboard are they saying to hire a lesser candidate? The billboard doesn't advocate to hire one of the ladies over a more qualified male. It is simply cheering on the Celtics to hire one of two excellent candidates, two amongst many, who happen to be women.

I happen to love Becky Hammond as the next head coach. Her coaching philosophy and system most likely will be extremely similar to those of Pops, and that, to me, would be a good fit with the current players on the Celtics.

If I had the money to put a billboard in Stevens face as to who to hire, it would probably be to push Hammond, too. And I would probably mention it would be a historic pick. Nothing wrong with stating that fact

Is Kara Lawson highly qualified? If the Celtics picked her it would be because they had inside knowledge that people who advocate for her (everyone else) do not know. Therefore, those people would be pushing an under-qualified candidate...because of her gender.

I'd be onboard because, again, it means the Celtics knew she could handle the job. They know her really well now. But even if a team like Orlando hired her, it would be strange. Not that it would or wouldn't work out. But the resume isn't there for Lawson. Wasn't she even focused on player development more than anything? That's like a team hiring Evan Turner right now.

Hammon would make much more sense.

Yes, Lawson is highly qualified. Is she as experienced as some? Probably not but neither are some of the other names being mentioned. That doesn't mean they aren't highly qualified. I mean, doesn't Lawson have about the same level of experience as Chauncey Billups, who so many are routing to become the next coach?

I don’t think it’s debatable between Billups and Lawson which one knows the nba game and nba life more intimately.

But is Chauncey a good manager of time? Is he a good teacher? Is he able to develop talent? Does he have a system? Does he have a good eye for talent? Does he connect with modern day youth?

I have no idea what the answer to these questions are. No one on this site does. We also don't know if Lawson does. But I think the answers to these questions are more important than whether Chauncey's NBA experience is better than Lawson's WNBA experience or if Chauncey's coaching experience is more or less than Lawson's. Only an interview we won't be privy to will have those answers.

This is devolving from the main point. The buyers of that billboard were cheering on Stevens to hire one of two very qualified candidates and were not advocating to hire them over more qualified people. Both are highly qualified. So are every other person Stevens will interview and so are a bunch of people that won't be considered or given an interview.

I simply don't see a problem with cheering on Stevens to select one of two very qualified candidates for the job and being happy because that decision would be historic.

What makes Lawson very highly qualified?

One year as a low level assistant?  Or three games as Duke’s head coach?

Those renting the billboard care about the presence of a vagina more so than qualifications.  Hammon is extremely qualified.  Lawson is an agenda-driven nonsense candidate.

What makes her highly qualified is her experience but also a whole lot of stuff that are in the answers to the questions I asked.

This franchise already hired her as a coach. They know all the answers to my questions. By giving her an interview, it shows me Stevens feels her very highly qualified to do the job, even if some bloggers on an internet site, that have to resort crude mentions about her body parts to make a point, that know nothing about her total capabilities, don't see it that way.

Being an NBA head coach is the pinnacle of basketball coaching.  Very few coaches reach that level.  I really like Lawson but she is in no way highly qualified to be an NBA head coach.  Objectively she'd should be considered barely qualified.  If you consider Lawson highly qualified, there would be thousands of other people that should be considered highly qualified.

I'm watching Steve Nash coaching right now.

I'd call Nash barely qualified too.  You can certainly choose to hire a barely qualified person but don't try to game it by saying that they are highly qualified.  Nash being a well respected former NBA PG would put him higher in my books than Lawson.  Especially for a team like the Nets where the main job is managing superstar egos. 

[ozgod]

I'm surprised this was even brought up as a thread. I'm sure we all know the desires of a someone booking a billboard for advertising space ranks pretty low on Brad Stevens' criteria for hiring a new coach, to be honest. Given his own job and credibility will hinge upon the performance of whoever he hires, he will want to pick the best candidate possible, whether that's a man or a woman, black or otherwise, or former NBA player or not. Brad hired Kara to do a job, so his bona fides should not be in question. It's entirely possible Becky and Kara end up being the best candidates possible, particularly Becky, but if they are, a billboard won't be a factor in his decision. It will be because he decided that they were the best person and if that's the case we should all support his decision and not blame it on some billboard. I'm actually amazed if anyone thinks otherwise, irrespective of their political views.

[mr. dee]

It wouldn't surprise me if someone push for the likes of Jason Collins as the first black LGBTQ headcoach in the NBA.

[gift]

It wouldn't surprise me if someone push for the likes of Jason Collins as the first black LGBTQ headcoach in the NBA.

No other coach would set better screens.

[Kuberski33]

Then we have this tweet yesterday from Jaylen

https://sports.yahoo.com/boston-jaylen-brown-tweets-head-234449442.html

Good luck to Brad and Wyc handling this situation.  It has become hugely important for the future direction of this team and the pressure is coming from all sides.  Get it wrong and the whole house of cards could come tumbling down.

[wiley]

People are allowed to be excited about the idea of a woman getting a head coaching job.  I am sure Brad will hire the best person for the job, in his estimation.

If you're griping about people being excited by the idea of the Celts hiring a woman to be head coach, that only says unflattering things about you.

I can't verify their feelings obviously, but if I were Hammond or Lawson I would be bummed about this billboard.  Bummed because I would want to be hired purely on my merit, and bummed because I would have an uneasy sense that this billboard hurts my chances to be hired, rather than elevates my chances.

yes it's okay to be excited by the idea of hiring a woman, but it's also ok to dislike billboards in general.  Probably good intention by the makers of the billboard, but in my opinion, not a lot of wisdom.

[nickagneta]

People are allowed to be excited about the idea of a woman getting a head coaching job.  I am sure Brad will hire the best person for the job, in his estimation.

If you're griping about people being excited by the idea of the Celts hiring a woman to be head coach, that only says unflattering things about you.

I can't verify their feelings obviously, but if I were Harmon or Lawson I would be bummed about this billboard.  Bummed because I would want to be hired purely on my merit, and bummed because I would have an uneasy sense that this billboard hurts my chances to be hired, rather than elevates my chances.

yes it's okay to be excited by the idea of hiring a woman, but it's also ok to dislike billboards in general.  Probably good intention by the makers of the billboard, but in my opinion, not a lot of wisdom.

Do you really believe this billboard is going to have any bearing whatsoever on Stevens decision as to who will be the next Celtics coach?

[wiley]

People are allowed to be excited about the idea of a woman getting a head coaching job.  I am sure Brad will hire the best person for the job, in his estimation.

If you're griping about people being excited by the idea of the Celts hiring a woman to be head coach, that only says unflattering things about you.

I can't verify their feelings obviously, but if I were Harmon or Lawson I would be bummed about this billboard.  Bummed because I would want to be hired purely on my merit, and bummed because I would have an uneasy sense that this billboard hurts my chances to be hired, rather than elevates my chances.

yes it's okay to be excited by the idea of hiring a woman, but it's also ok to dislike billboards in general.  Probably good intention by the makers of the billboard, but in my opinion, not a lot of wisdom.

Do you really believe this billboard is going to have any bearing whatsoever on Stevens decision as to who will be the next Celtics coach?

Knowing Stevens and his discipline, likely not.  I still think if I were Hammond or Lawson I would prefer it not exist.  If I were either of those two I would feel lumped with the other for a non basketball reason. (again, speculating...I don't know their feelings).

[Donoghus]

Can we at least get her name right? Its Hammon.  Not Harmon or Hammond or Hammons.  It's Hammon.

[Ogaju]

People are allowed to be excited about the idea of a woman getting a head coaching job.  I am sure Brad will hire the best person for the job, in his estimation.

If you're griping about people being excited by the idea of the Celts hiring a woman to be head coach, that only says unflattering things about you.

I can't verify their feelings obviously, but if I were Harmon or Lawson I would be bummed about this billboard.  Bummed because I would want to be hired purely on my merit, and bummed because I would have an uneasy sense that this billboard hurts my chances to be hired, rather than elevates my chances.

yes it's okay to be excited by the idea of hiring a woman, but it's also ok to dislike billboards in general.  Probably good intention by the makers of the billboard, but in my opinion, not a lot of wisdom.

Do you really believe this billboard is going to have any bearing whatsoever on Stevens decision as to who will be the next Celtics coach?

Knowing Stevens and his discipline, likely not.  I still think if I were Hammond or Lawson I would prefer it not exist.  If I were either of those two I would feel lumped with the other for a non basketball reason. (again, speculating...I don't know their feelings).

I agree with Wiley on this because the billboard does more disservice to the candidates you are trying to promote than it helps. It reduces them to an affirmative hire based on gender. It also puts the two on par just because of gender without objective evidence. Hammon has more NBA stewardship than Lawson why is she being categorized with Lawson if not because of gender?

Becky Hammon is my favorite for the job outside Juwan Howard, she should not be reduced to being a gender choice.

Biden made the same mistake when he announced his VP would be a woman, then reduced it to black woman. This undermined the eventual choice as not the best candidate but the best woman. All you have to say in this situations is that you will hire the best candidate for the job. There is no need to undermine your eventual choice. Those that promote affirmative hiring marginalize and hurt their candidates.