Who's the New coach!

[Goldstar88]

I really hope we get Becky, and with that, something to prove.

I don’t mean to be sexist but would the players really respect a female coach? Thoughts?

I think it would be a terrible idea. If the C’s were In a full rebuild, sure, roll the dice. But they are not. Please, No rookie NBA coaches. This team needs someone that is experienced and can hit the ground running.

[GreenlyGreeny]

Thanks, Liam!

Rondo

I'm sure he won't be the one, but, he's extremely intelligent, has run the floor from the point against top NBA teams for years and is prickly.....a sour puss....difficult, but he's been on NBA teams for a long time and if he was that "bad"?

Stevens has been an excellent coach and I think Rondo would be also.

Please don't bring in one of the guys who gets fired in 3 or 4 years. The Celtics have enough good players and brains to get us back to the finals.

God, I wonder who Red would want.

They were talking to John Havlicek many years ago and they asked him about how Red ran the team during big games.

(I won't remember it right, but this is what he said)

Havlicek..."so we're down to the Lakers by 5 points in Game six. It's early 4th quarter, Red calls time and we huddle...there's Tommy, Don Nelson, KC, Sam, Russell and the rest of the guys...Red says..."Ok, what do you want to do?" His plan was to make us come up with one...all those guys start to put together how we're gonna attack them and Red puffs on his cigar, didn't say a word...we beat them. Look at who was on that team. Look at all those NBA head coaches."

Rondo as a player-coach who starts the first few minutes, with Kemba coming off the bench and Rondo changing into a suit at halftime, would be a riot.

[Kuberski33]

Brad talked a lot during the press conference about the relationship between the head of ops and the coach - how they need to get along and be on the same page. That to me was insightful. Meaning I don't think it will be Cassel/Chauncey etc.  Also hiring someone off the current staff means they're good with more of the same, which is what they'd likely get. I think that would be a huge mistake.

Have a feeling this will be someone whose name hasn't been mentioned yet.  And I doubt that it's someone old.

[hwangjini_1]

having hammon serve as the next celtic coach would be interesting. she is supposed to be a very very good basketball mind.

and she has the respect of pau gasol.

One of basketball's most prolific scorers, Pau Gasol wrote an open letter about female coaches with as emphasis on Becky; he said, "I’ve played with some of the best players of this generation … and I’ve played under two of the sharpest minds in the history of sports, in Phil Jackson and Gregg Popovich. And I’m telling you: Becky Hammon can coach. I’m not saying she can coach pretty well. I’m not saying she can coach enough to get by. I’m not saying she can coach almost at the level of the NBA’s male coaches. I’m saying: Becky Hammon can coach NBA basketball. Period."

[Kiorrik]

Popovich, Coach K or Tony Bennett. If one of the first two, we’re back to Stevens in 1-3 years. Bennett and Stevens would be a match made in heaven; music to my ears.

Hammon would add to Celtics lore and add a lot of female fans… if it worked…

"If it worked" fits for every single choice.

But I'd love to give it a shot regardless of outcome. Not every "first" will work out perfectly. Not every first has to, either.

aaaaaannnd that’s where you lose me. i’m completely disinterested in the C’s making a social justice statement “regardless of outcome.” what i am interested in is another banner (or three). if hammon is the best candidate to make this happen, hire her. i care not about her gender.

unless i misread your post, you clearly have a very different agenda for this team. if the C’s see it your way, i’m going to find it very difficult to support the franchise going forward.

Maybe you're misreading, maybe I'm failing to explain it properly

I consider the odds of it succeeding a totally separate issue from gender. Unrelated, to me.

I think 7 years under Pop as a head coach, and being the go-to when Pop gets tossed from a game to take over coaching, is as much respect anyone could ever get. Anyone.

When I'm saying "whether it's successful or not" I don't deem it more likely to fail than any other coach.

It's more that WHEN it fails, it can be a bad look since it's the first time a woman would coach an NBA team, and that could backfire for the purpose of equality. That, to me, is the risk. IF it fails, it'll set back more than just the Celtics.

Does that make sense?

[GreenlyGreeny]

Popovich, Coach K or Tony Bennett. If one of the first two, we’re back to Stevens in 1-3 years. Bennett and Stevens would be a match made in heaven; music to my ears.

Hammon would add to Celtics lore and add a lot of female fans… if it worked…

"If it worked" fits for every single choice.

But I'd love to give it a shot regardless of outcome. Not every "first" will work out perfectly. Not every first has to, either.

aaaaaannnd that’s where you lose me. i’m completely disinterested in the C’s making a social justice statement “regardless of outcome.” what i am interested in is another banner (or three). if hammon is the best candidate to make this happen, hire her. i care not about her gender.

unless i misread your post, you clearly have a very different agenda for this team. if the C’s see it your way, i’m going to find it very difficult to support the franchise going forward.

Maybe you're misreading, maybe I'm failing to explain it properly

I consider the odds of it succeeding a totally separate issue from gender. Unrelated, to me.

I think 7 years under Pop as a head coach, and being the go-to when Pop gets tossed from a game to take over coaching, is as much respect anyone could ever get. Anyone.

When I'm saying "whether it's successful or not" I don't deem it more likely to fail than any other coach.

It's more that WHEN it fails, it can be a bad look since it's the first time a woman would coach an NBA team, and that could backfire for the purpose of equality. That, to me, is the risk. IF it fails, it'll set back more than just the Celtics.

Does that make sense?

No doubt it is high-risk/high-reward: If we won banner 18 with the first female head coach of any professional sports franchise in history, we’d be bigger than ever and probably become the most popular sports franchise among all four sports. Our status in history as the greatest basketball club of all-time cemented forever, and beloved by females far and wide.

The high-risk is it does not work because the players do not respect a woman. That’s ugly and could destroy the franchise…

[Kiorrik]

Popovich, Coach K or Tony Bennett. If one of the first two, we’re back to Stevens in 1-3 years. Bennett and Stevens would be a match made in heaven; music to my ears.

Hammon would add to Celtics lore and add a lot of female fans… if it worked…

"If it worked" fits for every single choice.

But I'd love to give it a shot regardless of outcome. Not every "first" will work out perfectly. Not every first has to, either.

aaaaaannnd that’s where you lose me. i’m completely disinterested in the C’s making a social justice statement “regardless of outcome.” what i am interested in is another banner (or three). if hammon is the best candidate to make this happen, hire her. i care not about her gender.

unless i misread your post, you clearly have a very different agenda for this team. if the C’s see it your way, i’m going to find it very difficult to support the franchise going forward.

Maybe you're misreading, maybe I'm failing to explain it properly

I consider the odds of it succeeding a totally separate issue from gender. Unrelated, to me.

I think 7 years under Pop as a head coach, and being the go-to when Pop gets tossed from a game to take over coaching, is as much respect anyone could ever get. Anyone.

When I'm saying "whether it's successful or not" I don't deem it more likely to fail than any other coach.

It's more that WHEN it fails, it can be a bad look since it's the first time a woman would coach an NBA team, and that could backfire for the purpose of equality. That, to me, is the risk. IF it fails, it'll set back more than just the Celtics.

Does that make sense?

No doubt it is high-risk/high-reward: If we won banner 18 with the first female head coach of any professional sports franchise in history, we’d be bigger than ever and probably become the most popular sports franchise among all four sports. Our status in history as the greatest basketball club of all-time cemented forever, and beloved by females far and wide.

The high-risk is it does not work because the players do not respect a woman. That’s ugly and could destroy the franchise…

Yup. However, I don't think that'll be a problem with this team.

I very much doubt, with the way this team has been outspoken about discrimination, they'd have trouble taking the lead from anyone that coached under Pop.

[GreenlyGreeny]

Unless Pops, Coach K or Tony Bennett are available, I do think Hammon is the best person for the job. The potential reward is worth the risk.

[Kuberski33]

Regarding Hammon or Lawson, making a 'PC' hire at any level of sports is usually a recipe for disaster. 

If you pick either you do it because you feel they're the best candidate and will get this team over the hump. Because if you're Brad and you do this and it's the wrong hire - you have to fire them.  And you have to be ready to do that and put up with the grief you're going to get from the national media and those outside basketball. 

So do you go that route? If it's Lawson and your two star players sign off on her, you might - assuming that she'll even leave Duke who she committed to only about a year ago.  That job likely is a lot more secure than the one she'd be taking.

[GreenlyGreeny]

Regarding Hammon or Lawson, making a 'PC' hire at any level of sports is usually a recipe for disaster. 

If you pick either you do it because you feel they're the best candidate and will get this team over the hump. Because if you're Brad and you do this and it's the wrong hire - you have to fire them.  And you have to be ready to do that and put up with the grief you're going to get from the national media and those outside basketball. 

So do you go that route? If it's Lawson and your two star players sign off on her, you might - assuming that she'll even leave Duke who she committed to only about a year ago.  That job likely is a lot more secure than the one she'd be taking.

Hammon is Pops’ prodigy, so far from a PR move alone. Easy to see the best available coach being Popovich’s number one. I think if rumors flied that we were going to take Hammon, Pops might “retire” to ensure Hammon takes over the Spurs instead. That puts Pops on the market…all Stevens would need to do is agree to be Coach/GM the next couple months and then Pops comes out of retirement wanting to join the club he watched win all those championships when he was a kid.

In other words, we go for Pops’ prodigy, I think we either end up with Pops’ prodigy or Pops himself…

[Kiorrik]

Regarding Hammon or Lawson, making a 'PC' hire at any level of sports is usually a recipe for disaster. 

If you pick either you do it because you feel they're the best candidate and will get this team over the hump. Because if you're Brad and you do this and it's the wrong hire - you have to fire them.  And you have to be ready to do that and put up with the grief you're going to get from the national media and those outside basketball. 

So do you go that route? If it's Lawson and your two star players sign off on her, you might - assuming that she'll even leave Duke who she committed to only about a year ago.  That job likely is a lot more secure than the one she'd be taking.

Hammon is Pops’ prodigy, so far from a PR move alone. Easy to see the best available coach being Popovich’s number one.

I put Pop in my top 3 coaches ever. Definitely my personal favourite.

I'm saying that because it shows I'm heckin' biased here; but that's how I judge Hammon as well

If Pop thinks you're that good, I want you on my side.

[tenn_smoothie]

Jeff Van Gundy. You want a tough team? His Knicks were one of the toughest in a historically tough era of NBA basketball. Those Knicks-Heat battles were brutal.

I love his basketball sensibilities. If he still has the fire in his belly, he would be great for this team.

[jpotter33]

Regarding Hammon or Lawson, making a 'PC' hire at any level of sports is usually a recipe for disaster. 

If you pick either you do it because you feel they're the best candidate and will get this team over the hump. Because if you're Brad and you do this and it's the wrong hire - you have to fire them.  And you have to be ready to do that and put up with the grief you're going to get from the national media and those outside basketball. 

So do you go that route? If it's Lawson and your two star players sign off on her, you might - assuming that she'll even leave Duke who she committed to only about a year ago.  That job likely is a lot more secure than the one she'd be taking.

Hammon is Pops’ prodigy, so far from a PR move alone. Easy to see the best available coach being Popovich’s number one. I think if rumors flied that we were going to take Hammon, Pops might “retire” to ensure Hammon takes over the Spurs instead. That puts Pops on the market…all Stevens would need to do is agree to be Coach/GM the next couple months and then Pops comes out of retirement wanting to join the club he watched win all those championships when he was a kid.

In other words, we go for Pops’ prodigy, I think we either end up with Pops’ prodigy or Pops himself…

Becky seems tough.

[Kiorrik]

Jeff Van Gundy. You want a tough team? His Knicks were one of the toughest in a historically tough era of NBA basketball. Those Knicks-Heat battles were brutal.

I love his basketball sensibilities. If he still has the fire in his belly, he would be great for this team.

The Gundies sure are up there with the most firey fellers.

I could be on board with this hire too. If even just to see/hear him rage occasionally.

[Mahk E Mahk]

Popovich, Coach K or Tony Bennett. If one of the first two, we’re back to Stevens in 1-3 years. Bennett and Stevens would be a match made in heaven; music to my ears.

Hammon would add to Celtics lore and add a lot of female fans… if it worked…

"If it worked" fits for every single choice.

But I'd love to give it a shot regardless of outcome. Not every "first" will work out perfectly. Not every first has to, either.

aaaaaannnd that’s where you lose me. i’m completely disinterested in the C’s making a social justice statement “regardless of outcome.” what i am interested in is another banner (or three). if hammon is the best candidate to make this happen, hire her. i care not about her gender.

unless i misread your post, you clearly have a very different agenda for this team. if the C’s see it your way, i’m going to find it very difficult to support the franchise going forward.

Maybe you're misreading, maybe I'm failing to explain it properly

I consider the odds of it succeeding a totally separate issue from gender. Unrelated, to me.

I think 7 years under Pop as a head coach, and being the go-to when Pop gets tossed from a game to take over coaching, is as much respect anyone could ever get. Anyone.

When I'm saying "whether it's successful or not" I don't deem it more likely to fail than any other coach.

It's more that WHEN it fails, it can be a bad look since it's the first time a woman would coach an NBA team, and that could backfire for the purpose of equality. That, to me, is the risk. IF it fails, it'll set back more than just the Celtics.

Does that make sense?

yes, thanks for the clarification.

if true equality is the goal, then equality of consequence for failure has to be preserved, social justice be [dang]ed. otherwise, it’s not equality but preferential treatment, which would be a curse to the truly deserving coaches, regardless of gender.