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

[green_bballers13]

This thread has become a bit of a joke.  28-7, .800 winning percentage.

You don't like the title of the thread. There are plenty of people defending Joe.

I think 60% of the comments in this thread are sarcastic drivebys, or people complaining about the thread existing.  Another 35% are from last year's playoffs, when even the players and Wyc were pretty upset with Joe.

But, I modified the title so that people can stop being so triggered.

Thank you for being willing to change. It was a pretty dumb title and this is more appropriate.

[jpotter33]

Since nobody else has said it yet - another poor end-game decision by Joe to not call the timeout there. That JB shot was poor, in tons of traffic, too early, and the same kind of awful shot we have Tatum take in those situations when we don’t run a play. He was lucky/bailed out by the foul call that ended up being questionably overturned.

Not sure how you trust this guy when the games matter when he consistently doesn’t learn from these mistakes. The Pacers are hardly a defensive juggernaut, so you absolutely take the dang timeout there and get a better look at the basket than that, especially given our history of futility in those situations.

[SparzWizard]

Since nobody else has said it yet - another poor end-game decision by Joe to not call the timeout there. That JB shot was poor, in tons of traffic, too early, and the same kind of awful shot we have Tatum take in those situations when we don’t run a play. He was lucky/bailed out by the foul call that ended up being questionably overturned.

Not sure how you trust this guy when the games matter when he consistently doesn’t learn from these mistakes. The Pacers are hardly a defensive juggernaut, so you absolutely take the dang timeout there and get a better look at the basket than that, especially given our history of futility in those situations.

Same old mistakes. And that 3rd quarter showing, what happened. Lack of preparation.

[Who]

Since nobody else has said it yet - another poor end-game decision by Joe to not call the timeout there. That JB shot was poor, in tons of traffic, too early, and the same kind of awful shot we have Tatum take in those situations when we don’t run a play. He was lucky/bailed out by the foul call that ended up being questionably overturned.

Not sure how you trust this guy when the games matter when he consistently doesn’t learn from these mistakes. The Pacers are hardly a defensive juggernaut, so you absolutely take the dang timeout there and get a better look at the basket than that, especially given our history of futility in those situations.

I mentioned it in one of the previous game threads ... I was listening to the podcast Mazzula did with JJ Redick before the start of the season and was kinda shocked at how he thought about end of game situations. How he approached them. He said what you want in an end of game situation is the ball in the hands of your best player and them taking the shot.

He was talking also about why he didn't call timeouts in those situations and it was basically well we have the ball in our best guys hands and this is what we want so why would we call a timeout.

There was no difference in terms of shot quality, in terms of location of where your best guy gets the ball, makes his move or takes his shot. You just want the ball in your best guys hands and you will live or die with what he does.

That is all you want down the stretch. Your best guy with the ball making the play. So long as you get that, it is a good possession to end the game.

It seemed like such a ridiculous thing to say and maybe he just didn't clarify his thoughts well on the podcast ... but watching all these games this season and seeing the same thing over and over, I have to take those words as an accurate description of what he believes a good end of game situation is. Best player, ball, let him win or lose the game. Nothing more, nothing less. Best player, ball. Make or break.

[Indocelts]

Since nobody else has said it yet - another poor end-game decision by Joe to not call the timeout there. That JB shot was poor, in tons of traffic, too early, and the same kind of awful shot we have Tatum take in those situations when we don’t run a play. He was lucky/bailed out by the foul call that ended up being questionably overturned.

Not sure how you trust this guy when the games matter when he consistently doesn’t learn from these mistakes. The Pacers are hardly a defensive juggernaut, so you absolutely take the dang timeout there and get a better look at the basket than that, especially given our history of futility in those situations.

I mentioned it in one of the previous game threads ... I was listening to the podcast Mazzula did with JJ Redick before the start of the season and was kinda shocked at how he thought about end of game situations. How he approached them. He said what you want in an end of game situation is the ball in the hands of your best player and them taking the shot.

He was talking also about why he didn't call timeouts in those situations and it was basically well we have the ball in our best guys hands and this is what we want so why would we call a timeout.

There was no difference in terms of shot quality, in terms of location of where your best guy gets the ball, makes his move or takes his shot. You just want the ball in your best guys hands and you will live or die with what he does.

That is all you want down the stretch. Your best guy with the ball making the play. So long as you get that, it is a good possession to end the game.

It seemed like such a ridiculous thing to say and maybe he just didn't clarify his thoughts well on the podcast ... but watching all these games this season and seeing the same thing over and over, I have to take those words as an accurate description of what he believes a good end of game situation is. Best player, ball, let him win or lose the game. Nothing more, nothing less. Best player, ball. Make or break.

Always "break" this season. Sigh...

[Goldstar88]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

[ozgod]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

So Joe's still getting fired on Tuesday morning for his ineptitude?

[Goldstar88]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

So Joe's still getting fired on Tuesday morning for his ineptitude?

Indubitably 

[Yuckabuck33]

Joe has completely won me over with this post game response! I've been converted and I'm now a believer!

https://twitter.com/NoaDalzellNBA/status/1744551076018245832/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1744551076018245832&currentTweetUser=NoaDalzellNBA&currentTweet=1744551076018245832&currentTweetUser=NoaDalzellNBA

[Kernewek]

That link doesn't work for me

Since nobody else has said it yet - another poor end-game decision by Joe to not call the timeout there. That JB shot was poor, in tons of traffic, too early, and the same kind of awful shot we have Tatum take in those situations when we don’t run a play. He was lucky/bailed out by the foul call that ended up being questionably overturned.

Not sure how you trust this guy when the games matter when he consistently doesn’t learn from these mistakes. The Pacers are hardly a defensive juggernaut, so you absolutely take the dang timeout there and get a better look at the basket than that, especially given our history of futility in those situations.

I mentioned it in one of the previous game threads ... I was listening to the podcast Mazzula did with JJ Redick before the start of the season and was kinda shocked at how he thought about end of game situations. How he approached them. He said what you want in an end of game situation is the ball in the hands of your best player and them taking the shot.

He was talking also about why he didn't call timeouts in those situations and it was basically well we have the ball in our best guys hands and this is what we want so why would we call a timeout.

There was no difference in terms of shot quality, in terms of location of where your best guy gets the ball, makes his move or takes his shot. You just want the ball in your best guys hands and you will live or die with what he does.

That is all you want down the stretch. Your best guy with the ball making the play. So long as you get that, it is a good possession to end the game.

It seemed like such a ridiculous thing to say and maybe he just didn't clarify his thoughts well on the podcast ... but watching all these games this season and seeing the same thing over and over, I have to take those words as an accurate description of what he believes a good end of game situation is. Best player, ball, let him win or lose the game. Nothing more, nothing less. Best player, ball. Make or break.

I don't know - to me it feels like a pretty sports-standard stock non-answer.

Obviously no one is happy with the play (or surprised by it), but it was a two-point loss where we shot 60% at the line - and where there should have been a shooting foul on that last shot, so I can't get too bothered.

I do wonder, though - do we have more faith in the quality of the ATO play that would get drawn up with a timeout, or the ability of our best guys to generate points within the flow of a possession?

[SHAQATTACK]

Joe is about sorry ending games as Brad was great calling timeout plays .  He needs more brain power or help and experience being a head coach.

[jpotter33]

That link doesn't work for me

Since nobody else has said it yet - another poor end-game decision by Joe to not call the timeout there. That JB shot was poor, in tons of traffic, too early, and the same kind of awful shot we have Tatum take in those situations when we don’t run a play. He was lucky/bailed out by the foul call that ended up being questionably overturned.

Not sure how you trust this guy when the games matter when he consistently doesn’t learn from these mistakes. The Pacers are hardly a defensive juggernaut, so you absolutely take the dang timeout there and get a better look at the basket than that, especially given our history of futility in those situations.

I mentioned it in one of the previous game threads ... I was listening to the podcast Mazzula did with JJ Redick before the start of the season and was kinda shocked at how he thought about end of game situations. How he approached them. He said what you want in an end of game situation is the ball in the hands of your best player and them taking the shot.

He was talking also about why he didn't call timeouts in those situations and it was basically well we have the ball in our best guys hands and this is what we want so why would we call a timeout.

There was no difference in terms of shot quality, in terms of location of where your best guy gets the ball, makes his move or takes his shot. You just want the ball in your best guys hands and you will live or die with what he does.

That is all you want down the stretch. Your best guy with the ball making the play. So long as you get that, it is a good possession to end the game.

It seemed like such a ridiculous thing to say and maybe he just didn't clarify his thoughts well on the podcast ... but watching all these games this season and seeing the same thing over and over, I have to take those words as an accurate description of what he believes a good end of game situation is. Best player, ball, let him win or lose the game. Nothing more, nothing less. Best player, ball. Make or break.

I don't know - to me it feels like a pretty sports-standard stock non-answer.

Obviously no one is happy with the play (or surprised by it), but it was a two-point loss where we shot 60% at the line - and where there should have been a shooting foul on that last shot, so I can't get too bothered.

I do wonder, though - do we have more faith in the quality of the ATO play that would get drawn up with a timeout, or the ability of our best guys to generate points within the flow of a possession?

To his credit, Joe has actually been decent at drawing up some ATOs in these situations - highlighted by the Tatum game-winner in Philly. So I absolutely trust the ATO philosophy in that situation, ESPECIALLY against a poor defensive team and with no obvious mismatch out there that we were aiming to exploit.

[jpotter33]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

This is where the Joe apologism is so irrational and frustrating.

All of that can be true - we missed free throws and played lackadaisical defense in the third - but that still doesn’t absolve him of his mistake or release his contribution to this loss. Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

[Goldstar88]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

This is where the Joe apologism is so irrational and frustrating.

All of that can be true - we missed free throws and played lackadaisical defense in the third - but that still doesn’t absolve him of his mistake or release his contribution to this loss. Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is where your constant complaining and scapegoating of the coach is frustrating. You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.

Jared Weiss: Buddy Hield wouldn’t share what he told Joe Mazzulla, but said that he made some contact with Jaylen Brown yet the officials and replay center made the decision.  – via Twitter JaredWeissNBA

[jpotter33]

If only Joe had reminded the players to make their free throws and play defense. What a shame…

This is where the Joe apologism is so irrational and frustrating.

All of that can be true - we missed free throws and played lackadaisical defense in the third - but that still doesn’t absolve him of his mistake or release his contribution to this loss. Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is where your constant complaining and scapegoating of the coach is frustrating. You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.

Jared Weiss: Buddy Hield wouldn’t share what he told Joe Mazzulla, but said that he made some contact with Jaylen Brown yet the officials and replay center made the decision.  – via Twitter JaredWeissNBA

“You trying to put every loss on Joe is just laughable.”

It helps to actually read the posts that you’re responding to, Goldy.

Nobody said he was the only or even primary reason for this loss, but he absolutely played a role and screwed up in this situation, which highlights why many people don’t trust him in the playoffs and end-game situations when he’s just not shown any growth or improvement and continues to dogmatically hold on to a futile philosophy.

This is textbook apologism on a very reasonable and measured critique of Joe, and why your kind of radical position on Joe is unserious.