Measure Mazulla?s future success

[mobilija]

Player development:
 As a measuring stick, this is an example that is hard to quantify and as VG points out will look different and mean different things to different people. Is a player getting better just due to player talent or help from coaches? Surely it?s both but the lower the perceived ceiling of that player and the more they achieve, it?s logical to assume coaching plays a significant role. It?s at least an example of non-negative coaching, ie the coach was not a detriment. This should also be measurable by seeing development players on the court, the coaches attempting to get the players experience.

Playing hard:
Again, hard to quantify and directly attribute to coaching as it?s the players performance being evaluated. But again, positive player attitude and effort doesn?t happen from bad/negative coaching. I think we can assume a correlation. However, effort can be perceived differently from a fan perspective and bias.

In game management:
This is direct coaching and certainly an area that Mazulla needs to improve on. Being flexible with strategies when something is not working. Easy to see when this isn?t happening, easy to ignore and credit the players when it does happen.

Wins/Losses:
Though it is arbitrary to assign overall record to coach success, I think if a person assumes a range of record for the team based on talent and the team out performs that range then either A) your evaluation was off or B) they were coached up. Most here could agree that if the team wildly outperforms expectations, say they win 50 games, good coaching is responsible.

[aefgogreen]

Wins are hard to use as criteria this year.  If he wins a playoff series, I'll see it as overachieving. If they don't make the playoffs, I'll see it as underachieving. If they make the playoffs (or play-in) and lose in the first round, I'll say he met expeactations.

[Roy H.]

In terms of player development...  if guys like Walsh, Scheierman, Hugo, etc., *don't* develop, do we hold that against Joe?

I think that most of the guys on the team with NBA-level skills have developed under Joe.  We've seen big strides from Pritchard, Hauser, Queta, and even Kornet. 

I think I'm willing to give Joe the benefit of the doubt.  I don't think I'll blame him if the fringe players don't improve.  That said, I reserve the right to call for his head if he doesn't force feed minutes to some of the kids if we're below .500 around the All-Star break.

[ozgod]

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.

There's more to it than that...that's assuming your players can shoot 3s at a decent clip, and that their defenders think they can make them too, so they are forced to defend them. if most of your players are shooting 20-25% from 3, then the average value of a 3 point shot drops. It's why Kornet never took a 3 since Mazzulla became coach. I don't think he has the personnel this season to take a record number of 3s because defenders will be able to cheat when defending players like Queta, Gonzalez, Walsh, Minott or Tillman.

I agree with NG - the first thing will be to see if he can adjust his approach with a different set of players, with different strengths. That was something Brad was always good at, being able to maximize teams with mid-level talent. We'll see if Joe can come up with a gameplan that plays to his team's strengths.

Also Joe will also have to take on a more authoritarian role this season from a leadership point of view, the previous couple, he had a lot of vets to lean on, the Jays, Al, Jrue, KP, all he had to do was be the guide and make sure they were all pulling in the same direction. Everyone knew the goal was a championship, he just had to make sure they stayed on track. Now he has to choose a direction for many of these young guys, especially with JT off the court for pretty much the whole year.

The risk is that Jaylen feels he has to do too much leading and he does something like what Cryrie did in 2018 and 2019, trying to impose his will on young guys who have different priorities in the league than him right now. Some of these young guys will be thinking of their own personal goals, trying to stay in the league, showcase themselves for contract extensions, while JB will be wanting to show he can be an alpha. That's a recipe for players all pulling in different directions, with different goals.