Fire Joe! ... or critique Joe ... or defend Joe... or worry about Joe's coaching

[Kernewek]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

[Goldstar88]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

Ime was terrible at ATO’s. It amazes me how quickly people forget. He was also very slow to make adjustments and ran the starters into the ground during the postseason, especially Horford. People try to make it seem like Udoka was so much better than Joe, but the truth is he wasn’t.

[ozgod]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

Ime was terrible at ATO’s. It amazes me how quickly people forget. He was also very slow to make adjustments and ran the starters into the ground during the postseason, especially Horford. People try to make it seem like Udoka was so much better than Joe, but the truth is he wasn’t.

The past always looks a lot better when the present isn’t going so well…that’s how it is in life 

[BudweiserCeltic]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Not putting too much weight for the lack of using time outs as an evaluation of a coach doesn't mean someone is "Pro-Joe" or a sign of inexperience. Time management is an issue, like we so in those final minutes vs Philadelphia, but the whole aspect of using time outs for momentum aspects is overblown.

[liam]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

Ime was terrible at ATO’s. It amazes me how quickly people forget. He was also very slow to make adjustments and ran the starters into the ground during the postseason, especially Horford. People try to make it seem like Udoka was so much better than Joe, but the truth is he wasn’t.

I agree.

[Roy H.]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Not putting too much weight for the lack of using time outs as an evaluation of a coach doesn't mean someone is "Pro-Joe" or a sign of inexperience. Time management is an issue, like we so in those final minutes vs Philadelphia, but the whole aspect of using time outs for momentum aspects is overblown.

Yeah, but even if you disregard timeout usage -- which most think is a weakness -- what aspects of coaching is Joe above-average at?  Any?

[Neurotic Guy]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Not putting too much weight for the lack of using time outs as an evaluation of a coach doesn't mean someone is "Pro-Joe" or a sign of inexperience. Time management is an issue, like we so in those final minutes vs Philadelphia, but the whole aspect of using time outs for momentum aspects is overblown.

Yeah, but even if you disregard timeout usage -- which most think is a weakness -- what aspects of coaching is Joe above-average at?  Any?

I don’t think anything observable looks above average. However, a large part of what coaches do isn’t in the public eye.  I’d suggest that it seems game planning/adjusting isn’t a strength - and I’m not a fan of over reliance on the 3… but it’s possible that Joe did well to keep the players together (despite the fallout rumors post G3), and he kept MB and Rob pretty healthy and ready for post-season. It could be that another coach would have struggled more with post-ime fallout.  Idk - I think he turned out to be a bad choice, but I do think there are unseens and unknowns that might mitigate what we see as a bad (or not ready) coach.   And… Cs are still alive and in the ECF (might need an edit tomorrow).

[Goldstar88]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Not putting too much weight for the lack of using time outs as an evaluation of a coach doesn't mean someone is "Pro-Joe" or a sign of inexperience. Time management is an issue, like we so in those final minutes vs Philadelphia, but the whole aspect of using time outs for momentum aspects is overblown.

Yeah, but even if you disregard timeout usage -- which most think is a weakness -- what aspects of coaching is Joe above-average at?  Any?

I think he’s an above average coach when it comes to the offense. Team went from being the 12th best offense in the league last season to the 4th best this year. Defense slipped from #1 to #5, which is still very respectable. So a top 5 offense, top 5 defense.. 57 wins, 2nd best record in the league this season. Last year the C’s were in a 3 way tie with the Bucks and 76ers for the 6th best record at 51-31.

[Roy H.]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Not putting too much weight for the lack of using time outs as an evaluation of a coach doesn't mean someone is "Pro-Joe" or a sign of inexperience. Time management is an issue, like we so in those final minutes vs Philadelphia, but the whole aspect of using time outs for momentum aspects is overblown.

Yeah, but even if you disregard timeout usage -- which most think is a weakness -- what aspects of coaching is Joe above-average at?  Any?

I think he’s an above average coach when it comes to the offense. Team went from being the 12th best offense in the league last season to the 4th best this year. Defense slipped from #1 to #5, which is still very respectable. So a top 5 offense, top 5 defense.. 57 wins, 2nd best record in the league this season. Last year the C’s were in a 3 way tie with the Bucks and 76ers for the 6th best record at 51-31.

Our offense actually regressed from where it was between January 2022 until the end of last season. 

[gouki88]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

Ime was terrible at ATO’s. It amazes me how quickly people forget. He was also very slow to make adjustments and ran the starters into the ground during the postseason, especially Horford. People try to make it seem like Udoka was so much better than Joe, but the truth is he wasn’t.

Except for the fact that he was much better, sure. As hard as people try to make Udoka "seem" like he was better (due to the fact of his significant coaching superiority), you sure try as hard to match it with weird lambasting of anyone who dares criticise Joe.

[Goldstar88]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

Ime was terrible at ATO’s. It amazes me how quickly people forget. He was also very slow to make adjustments and ran the starters into the ground during the postseason, especially Horford. People try to make it seem like Udoka was so much better than Joe, but the truth is he wasn’t.

Except for the fact that he was much better, sure. As hard as people try to make Udoka "seem" like he was better (due to the fact of his significant coaching superiority), you sure try as hard to match it with weird lambasting of anyone who dares criticise Joe.

He really wasn’t better, though. So… People like to say that the team is winning in spite of Joe. Well that definitely was the case with Udoka last year. Luck ran out in the Finals, though. I know it’s not a pleasant thing to remember. I think Joe has done a good, not great job this year. just trying to be fair, which apparently is more than you’re capable of.   

[Roy H.]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

Ime was terrible at ATO’s. It amazes me how quickly people forget. He was also very slow to make adjustments and ran the starters into the ground during the postseason, especially Horford. People try to make it seem like Udoka was so much better than Joe, but the truth is he wasn’t.

Except for the fact that he was much better, sure. As hard as people try to make Udoka "seem" like he was better (due to the fact of his significant coaching superiority), you sure try as hard to match it with weird lambasting of anyone who dares criticise Joe.

He really wasn’t better, though. So… People like to say that the team is winning in spite of Joe.   Well that definitely was the case with Udoka last year. Luck ran out in the Finals, though. I know it’s not a pleasant thing to remember. I think Joe has done a good, not great job this year. just trying to be fair, which apparently is more than you’re capable of.

Yeah.  Taking over a .500 team, turning them into a dominant team for 5 months (#1 defense, #1 Net Rtg, top-2 offense) was "luck".

[Goldstar88]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

Ime was terrible at ATO’s. It amazes me how quickly people forget. He was also very slow to make adjustments and ran the starters into the ground during the postseason, especially Horford. People try to make it seem like Udoka was so much better than Joe, but the truth is he wasn’t.

Except for the fact that he was much better, sure. As hard as people try to make Udoka "seem" like he was better (due to the fact of his significant coaching superiority), you sure try as hard to match it with weird lambasting of anyone who dares criticise Joe.

He really wasn’t better, though. So… People like to say that the team is winning in spite of Joe.   Well that definitely was the case with Udoka last year. Luck ran out in the Finals, though. I know it’s not a pleasant thing to remember. I think Joe has done a good, not great job this year. just trying to be fair, which apparently is more than you’re capable of.

Yeah.  Taking over a .500 team, turning them into a dominant team for 5 months (#1 defense, #1 Net Rtg, top-2 offense) was "luck".

A .500 team that was regularly making it to the ECF. Sure, they tuned Brad out his last year, but let’s not make it sound like Udoka didn’t take over a very talented team.

[gouki88]

Spo is losing the series for Miami cause he's been terrible with his timeouts. He should be fired.

If something doesn't work 100% of the time, it's never worth trying, right?

Also, is Spo's rotation a mess?  Is his team sleepwalking during crucial games?  Blowing big leads because they're playing lazy?  Refusing to make adjustments?  Deemphasizing his team's strengths?

It cracks me up that Joe's defenders never seem to point out anything he has done well this season or in the playoffs. Instead, they just criticize the critics.  There's no affirmative argument that people have come up with to suggest that he is a good coach, where is the right coach for a contender.

Considering the deliberate misrepresentation (or earnest lack of reading comprehension) on display in the post you replied to, there’s not much point is there?

I think there is a point. If somebody thinks the guy is a good coach, point out why. Show some things that he has done well this year.  Maybe some actual discourse will educate open-minded fans.

I feel like the "Pro-Joe" squad mostly uses sarcasm and strawman arguments.

Perhaps if we want to evaluate the use of strawman arguments I think painting posters who are asking for more meaningful critiques as posters who think he's a good coach is a pretty good place to start.

That's what I'm supposed to glean from the sarcastic quip?  That after a 60 page thread pointing out a number of flaws -- failure to make adjustments, poor rotations, having his reserves unprepared, poor ATOs, a focus on outside shooting over shots closer to the basket, a de-emphasis on defense, a team that frequently seems unprepared and to lack focus and/or motivation, immature interactions with the media, a shouting match with the owner of the team, and yes, poor timeout usage -- there haven't been meaningful critiques?

It's not sarcastic. Look at the comment chain that started this conversation off: we had a good discussion about timeouts for example that was, essentially, dropped and never referenced again after some requested evidence was provided - only to come up as an actual bit of snark from a poster who's main contribution to the thread as of late has been the incredibly nuanced usage of a clown emoji. If that's the result of the actual discourse, it's very discouraging - likewise with the discussion on some of the defensive changes we've seen over the season.

Happy to try again with ATO plays, it's just exhausting. So, my 2c on ATOs:

I'm fairly certain no one thinks Mazzulla is a particularly impressive ATO coach, but since a lot of this thread is, shall we say, based on emotional responses to subjective interpretation, let's consider that last year our ATO strategy often went something like this:

Down one point with 20 seconds left, Ime calls a time out to draw up a play.

The play: Tatum takes the Ball dribbles iso for 15 seconds, then shoots a long three and misses

When the team is playing badly, I don't think anyone can really see a meaningful change year on year from that story. Except maybe Mazzulla doesn't call a time out first. 

What is weird is that Boston was actually one of the most successful ATO teams in the first half of the season... with the same head coach: https://twitter.com/NBA_University/status/1609937012781350913?lang=en

Miami, you'll see from that tweet, was one of the bottom teams in the league on points after timeouts - which is where a great coach like Spolestra should excel, per this thread.

But this discussion was started in May, after the wheels had come off because the players were underperforming, and that bit of info is from January - when the team was playing well. So, a few options here:

• Damon Stoudimire was the guy doing the X's and O's after the timeouts, and once he left that hole wasn't filled as none of the remaining coaches stepped up afterwards
• Teams started gameplanning for Boston's basic ATO playcalling more and Boston didn't adjust
• The monkey's paw that Mazza used to get Ime out of the way is finally coming to collect it's due

But I'm not sure which is most likely because I really haven't had the time or the resource to dive into what changed about their ATO performance specifically after January.

Ime was terrible at ATO’s. It amazes me how quickly people forget. He was also very slow to make adjustments and ran the starters into the ground during the postseason, especially Horford. People try to make it seem like Udoka was so much better than Joe, but the truth is he wasn’t.

Except for the fact that he was much better, sure. As hard as people try to make Udoka "seem" like he was better (due to the fact of his significant coaching superiority), you sure try as hard to match it with weird lambasting of anyone who dares criticise Joe.

He really wasn’t better, though. So… People like to say that the team is winning in spite of Joe. Well that definitely was the case with Udoka last year. Luck ran out in the Finals, though. I know it’s not a pleasant thing to remember. I think Joe has done a good, not great job this year. just trying to be fair, which apparently is more than you’re capable of.

Your refusal to admit it doesn't actually make it fact. I know you clearly think very highly of your opinion, but you haven't actually backed it up with anything yet.

You call it fair, whereas to myself and many others it is incredible generosity. I do not think he has done a good job.

[SHAQATTACK]

Joe ….we is watching ya !