In an ironic life twist:
In the real world, for a lot of office jobs, there's a huge stigma if you're currently unemployed for more than 6+ months. Supposedly, a lot of HR people will automatically not consider your resume if they see you've been out of work for that long. If nobody has hired you yet, something must be wrong with you. Also a lesser, but similar stigma often exists if you try to go the management route but sit in one position too long without getting promoted.
I know these stigmas exist and absolutely hate it.
Now thinking about the next head coach. A lot of the names thrown out there, these guys have been assistants for 10+ years. And I find myself thinking something must be wrong with them if nobody has offered them a head coaching job yet.
Doc Rivers got a head coaching job right away and was COY in his first year.
Stevens went from college kid to assistant coach to D1 head coach to NBA coach by the time he was 36.
Guys like Ainge and Steve Kerr get GM and coaching jobs with out any experience and turn that into great stories of success.
These are the kinds of wunderkinds I want as the next Celtics coach.
I don't want Sam Cassell or Darvin Ham or any these guys that have been assistants for 10+ years. Something must be wrong with them if nobody has hired them yet. I want the guys that teams are fighting over who seemingly shoot to the top with no/minimal dues (don't worry, you don't have to point out how flawed this thinking is, I know guys who go this route often suck. Looking at you Jason Kidd, Mark Jackson, Steve Nash, Luke Walton, etc.)
Based on my faulty logic, Billups sounds like a good candidate (dude was being offered GM jobs right away, also seems like he'll have his choice of coaching offers). Kara Lawson, who very quickly went from player to analyst to NBA assistant to major D1 coach and now possibly NBA coach sounds even better!
I hate when HR and hiring managers treat people like this in the real world, now I find myself treating coaching candidates the same way. Go figure lol.
Yep, that is indeed faulty logic.
I don't know, there may very well be some truth to a lot of it. That isn't to say it would work in every scenario, but if someone is in the same job and keeps getting passed up for promotions, there is probably a reason and that reason is probably more times than not some form of competence.
I think a lot of the reason why people with less experience get jobs over those with more experience comes down to the inexperienced person showing they are innovative and have a firmer grip on the larger and future view of the situation. Those abilities make them shine in the eyes of people doing the hiring.
Competence definitely has something to do with it too, as you mention. Some of these long time assistants could be poor people managers or poor time managers or lacking in running a system or poor ability to teach/develop youth. They just may have maxed out their coaching abilities in a smaller position and just don't have that special "it" that it takes to be a head coach, so will never become a head coach.
I see the NBA (and a lot of team sports) as being down to backroom dealings -- a boy's club -- cronyism -- whatever you want to call it.
Having friendships (or contacts) in key decision making positions is often vital to getting picked for a job.
It should be about qualifications but there are little to no clear qualifications for head coaching jobs (in the NBA). There are attributes required but they are subjective rather than objective.
Outside of friendships / contacts, the next most vital part is how well you interview -- how charming or likeable you are, how you make someone feel, even how good looking you are has a surprising amount of influence on getting a job or not -- particularly when your job lacks qualifications & relies on subjective assessments rather than the opposite.
Topic: Ignore the billboard. Hire the right coach for the right reasons. (Read 20977 times)