Measure Mazulla?s future success

[mobilija]

There is always lots of complaining about a teams coach. Some is warranted criticism and some is just a place to put fan anger after a loss.

For this years Celtics team, there is a fair amount of fan divide on what a successful season will look like?tanking, developing players, etc.

But what would a successful season for Mazulla and the coaching staff look like to you?

[Vermont Green]

To me, it is not necessarily a number of wins.  It is about the team buying in a playing hard. It is qualitative. You just have to know it when you see it.  Which means different people will see the same thing and have different conclusions. 

[Neurotic Guy]

I think a successful season for Mazulla would be to show the capacity to adjust his offense to the talent he has. If this team is leading the league in threes attempted not only will it be a losing strategy it will show that Joe can?t adjust. 

[SparzWizard]

I think a successful season for Mazulla would be to show the capacity to adjust his offense to the talent he has. If this team is leading the league in threes attempted not only will it be a losing strategy it will show that Joe can?t adjust.

Unfortunately, his philosophy is taking the 3 is an a lot better shot than taking 2s.

[mobilija]

To me, it is not necessarily a number of wins.  It is about the team buying in a playing hard. It is qualitative. You just have to know it when you see it.  Which means different people will see the same thing and have different conclusions.

It sounds like in training camp so far, the team is bought in and playing hard. Pritchard is quoted as saying it?s been ?a war?. Tillman has said that your ?head needs to be on swivel? they are playing so fast and hard. The new additions of Graza and Minot said they want to play for Joe like they?ve never played for a coach before and that they?d ?run through a brick wall? for Joe.

We will see how that translates to the regular season and especially when they hit some bumps in the road and endure a loosing streak.

[mobilija]

I think a successful season for Mazulla would be to show the capacity to adjust his offense to the talent he has. If this team is leading the league in threes attempted not only will it be a losing strategy it will show that Joe can?t adjust.

In training camp they?ve adjusted their style of play to mirror that of the faster more aggressive teams in the league. Getting up into people?s space with more physical defense, pushing the pace on offense and flowing into sets/actions more quickly with lots of people touching the ball. This sounds like an adjustment to get the younger, hungrier and newer guys more involved. I suspect they will still take a large number of 3s because they have good shooters on the team but there will be less standing around the 3 point line. At least that?s the indication so far.

Again, we?ll see if A) that?s a winning strategy and B) if they stick to it.

[Goldstar88]

I think a successful season for Mazulla would be to show the capacity to adjust his offense to the talent he has. If this team is leading the league in threes attempted not only will it be a losing strategy it will show that Joe can?t adjust.

Unfortunately, his philosophy is taking the 3 is an a lot better shot than taking 2s.

You guys do realize that this is how Brad wants the team to play, right. A big reason he brought back Horford and then traded for KP is that they can stretch the floor. How many players on the C?s right now can?t shoot from deep? I mean, they have Queta practicing 3?s.

[Neurotic Guy]

I think a successful season for Mazulla would be to show the capacity to adjust his offense to the talent he has. If this team is leading the league in threes attempted not only will it be a losing strategy it will show that Joe can?t adjust.

Unfortunately, his philosophy is taking the 3 is an a lot better shot than taking 2s.

You guys do realize that this is how Brad wants the team to play, right. A big reason he brought back Horford and then traded for KP is that they can stretch the floor. How many players on the C?s right now can?t shoot from deep? I mean, they have Queta practicing 3?s.

Yes. So my point was, how does Joe adjust?  Two years ago we lost a low percentage chucker in Smart and added KP and Jrue. In Sam, Jrue, PP, DW, and Al we had guys who were shooting high % from 3. Last year % fell off and this year there?s no Al no Jrue and no KP.  They are not built to win by the three despite what Brad might want.  So the question was about measuring Joes success this year.  If he continues to run a 3 centric offense without adjustments and without emphasis on defense I think he will show himself to be a one trick coach who needs historic level shooters to win.

[SHAQATTACK]

Brad will see to it we get a decent draft pick. Joe is driving the bus straight down the road , being Celtics first .

[Roy H.]

It's hard to say in advance, because I want to be fair. 

If our front court looks competent at all, that would be a success.  I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that the big rotation is one of the worst in team history.  M.L. Carr didn't have to coach with bigs this bad.  And worse, it's the first time Joe will be coaching without a stretch-5; often he's had two.

If Simons plays defense, that's a success.

If Scheierman looks like a rotation player, that's a success.

If he keeps the chemistry together all season long and the team plays hard, that's a success.

I'd love to see growth in some of his coaching weaknesses, such as being better at making in-game adjustments and stopping long runs from the other team.  But, if the bigs are as bad as I'm worried about, I don't think there's going to be a lot that Joe can do.

Oh...  and if we're below .500 in February, it would be a success to cut the minutes of our best players in order to develop some of the fringe rotation players.  Don't stubbornly win games; get the draft pick.

[slamtheking]

It's hard to say in advance, because I want to be fair. 

If our front court looks competent at all, that would be a success.  I don't think I'm exaggerating when I say that the big rotation is one of the worst in team history.  M.L. Carr didn't have to coach with bigs this bad.  And worse, it's the first time Joe will be coaching without a stretch-5; often he's had two.

If Simons plays defense, that's a success.

If Scheierman looks like a rotation player, that's a success.

If he keeps the chemistry together all season long and the team plays hard, that's a success.

I'd love to see growth in some of his coaching weaknesses, such as being better at making in-game adjustments and stopping long runs from the other team.  But, if the bigs are as bad as I'm worried about, I don't think there's going to be a lot that Joe can do.

Oh...  and if we're below .500 in February, it would be a success to cut the minutes of our best players in order to develop some of the fringe rotation players.  Don't stubbornly win games; get the draft pick.

I think this would all represent a fair level of expectations to measure his success.

[Vermont Green]

I know my point of you will know it (good or bad coaching) when you see it, is not real definitive.  But taking a couple of examples, if Simons does not play good or improved defense, is that a negative reflection on Mazzulla's coaching?  How about if Scheierman does not develop/improve?

I remember that Doc Rivers made a name for himself as a coach in ORL when he got some pretty mediocre teams to play hard and play well.  Then he got a title with the Pierce-Garnett-Allen big 3.  Doc had trouble replicating that coaching success (if you consider these examples as coaching success).  But does that mean he was never a good coach?  That he was a good coach but lost his edge or something?

This is not a season where it is going to be easy to judge Mazzulla's coaching.  The success of the team (relative to expectation) and/or individual players may have nothing to do with Mazzulla.  I think what you want to judge about this season is what does it mean regarding the development of Mazzulla as a coach.  And even that will be hard to quantify.  But I think we will know it when we see it (or don't see it).

[slamtheking]

I know my point of you will know it (good or bad coaching) when you see it, is not real definitive.  But taking a couple of examples, if Simons does not play good or improved defense, is that a negative reflection on Mazzulla's coaching?  How about if Scheierman does not develop/improve?

I remember that Doc Rivers made a name for himself as a coach in ORL when he got some pretty mediocre teams to play hard and play well.  Then he got a title with the Pierce-Garnett-Allen big 3.  Doc had trouble replicating that coaching success (if you consider these examples as coaching success).  But does that mean he was never a good coach?  That he was a good coach but lost his edge or something?

This is not a season where it is going to be easy to judge Mazzulla's coaching.  The success of the team (relative to expectation) and/or individual players may have nothing to do with Mazzulla.  I think what you want to judge about this season is what does it mean regarding the development of Mazzulla as a coach.  And even that will be hard to quantify.  But I think we will know it when we see it (or don't see it).

I'm not sure that it would be that difficult.  basically it's evaluating the team's effort, improvement in players needing to develop and a cohesive coaching plan that maximizes the skills of the roster he has rather than trying to force players into his pre-conceived notion that a barrage of 3's is the only path to winning.

[Vermont Green]

I know my point of you will know it (good or bad coaching) when you see it, is not real definitive.  But taking a couple of examples, if Simons does not play good or improved defense, is that a negative reflection on Mazzulla's coaching?  How about if Scheierman does not develop/improve?

I remember that Doc Rivers made a name for himself as a coach in ORL when he got some pretty mediocre teams to play hard and play well.  Then he got a title with the Pierce-Garnett-Allen big 3.  Doc had trouble replicating that coaching success (if you consider these examples as coaching success).  But does that mean he was never a good coach?  That he was a good coach but lost his edge or something?

This is not a season where it is going to be easy to judge Mazzulla's coaching.  The success of the team (relative to expectation) and/or individual players may have nothing to do with Mazzulla.  I think what you want to judge about this season is what does it mean regarding the development of Mazzulla as a coach.  And even that will be hard to quantify.  But I think we will know it when we see it (or don't see it).

I'm not sure that it would be that difficult.  basically it's evaluating the team's effort, improvement in players needing to develop and a cohesive coaching plan that maximizes the skills of the roster he has rather than trying to force players into his pre-conceived notion that a barrage of 3's is the only path to winning.

I think that is my point.  They might win 40 games and if in your opinion, he maximized the skills of the roster, you will say he did a good job.  Someone else may be nothing but critical.  But you can't say today that if he doesn't win more than 40 games, than it is a bad coaching season.  Or say they still lead the league in 3PA , win 40 games, you may say he is being stubborn and not coaching to the strengths of the team.

[slamtheking]

I know my point of you will know it (good or bad coaching) when you see it, is not real definitive.  But taking a couple of examples, if Simons does not play good or improved defense, is that a negative reflection on Mazzulla's coaching?  How about if Scheierman does not develop/improve?

I remember that Doc Rivers made a name for himself as a coach in ORL when he got some pretty mediocre teams to play hard and play well.  Then he got a title with the Pierce-Garnett-Allen big 3.  Doc had trouble replicating that coaching success (if you consider these examples as coaching success).  But does that mean he was never a good coach?  That he was a good coach but lost his edge or something?

This is not a season where it is going to be easy to judge Mazzulla's coaching.  The success of the team (relative to expectation) and/or individual players may have nothing to do with Mazzulla.  I think what you want to judge about this season is what does it mean regarding the development of Mazzulla as a coach.  And even that will be hard to quantify.  But I think we will know it when we see it (or don't see it).

I'm not sure that it would be that difficult.  basically it's evaluating the team's effort, improvement in players needing to develop and a cohesive coaching plan that maximizes the skills of the roster he has rather than trying to force players into his pre-conceived notion that a barrage of 3's is the only path to winning.

I think that is my point.  They might win 40 games and if in your opinion, he maximized the skills of the roster, you will say he did a good job.  Someone else may be nothing but critical.  But you can't say today that if he doesn't win more than 40 games, than it is a bad coaching season.  Or say they still lead the league in 3PA , win 40 games, you may say he is being stubborn and not coaching to the strengths of the team.

I think pinning the idea of him being successful to a specific number of wins is the wrong way to go so I think we're on the same page in that regard.