Tag: Coach of the year

Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, DeJuan Blair, Gregg Popovich

Gregg Popovich named NBA Coach of the Year


The announcement came Tuesday afternoon with a press conference to follow where Gregg Popovich will be uncomfortable answering media questions.

Spurs headman Gregg Popovich has been named NBA Coach of the Year. Mike Monroe of the Express-News was first with the report but the league has now confirmed it.

And it’s a good call. When the Spurs were winning titles last decade they were a great defensive team that had enough offense to beat you, but as his core aged the role players shifted that formula no longer worked. So in the past couple years Popovich has helped the Spurs evolve into an offensive powerhouse — they play at a faster tempo, they move the ball and guys work off the ball, the steps are taken to get guys the ball where they can succeed (Tim Ducan where he can drive or go to the bank, Matt Bonner spacing the floor, Tony Parker off picks and getting to make decisions). Popovich has been a master at putting guys in places where they can succeed and he has been at his peak with that the past couple years.

There were other guys who had great years. Second place in the voting went to the Bulls’ Tom Thibodeau, who did a better job this season than last when he won the award — he was without Derrick Rose much of the year, not to mention Rip Hamilton and he got role players to win the East. Frank Vogel got as much out of the Pacers roster as could be expected and he came in third. Lionel Hollins of Memphis finished fourth and Doc Rivers of the Celtics fifth in the voting.

You can’t really be unhappy with Popovich as the call. He earned it this year, he has earned a bunch more as a lifetime achievement award. This is a good call.

Bulls Tom Thibodeau named Coach of the Year

Tom Thibodeau

UPDATE 5:02 pm: It’s official, Tom Thibodeau is your Coach of the Year. He will be honored before the Bulls game Monday night.

As we said, this is well deserved. The Bulls had a roster with eight new players yet melded into a defensive power that finished with the best recoed in the NBA.

Philadelphia’s Doug Collins was second in the voting, San Antonio’s Gregg Popovich was third and Denver’s George Karl was fourth.


11:52 am: The Chicago Bulls are having a press conference at 3:30 (eastern) today for a “major announcement.”

That means either Derrick Rose is going to be named MVP or Tom Thibodeau is going to be named Coach of the Year.

Looks like it is Thibodeau’s turn, according to K.C. Johnson of the Chicago Tribune, who tweeted this.

Tom Thibodeau has won NBA Coach of the Year, the Tribune has confirmed.

It is possible Rose winning will be announced at the same time.

This is well deserved. The Bulls got 21 games better season over season, and improved to be the best defensive team in the NBA. Rose also credits the growth in his game to the pushing by Thibodeau.

Thibodeau will accept the award, if they can pry him out of the film room for a couple of minutes.

Gregg Popovich has Rick Adelman’s support for COY

San Antonio Spurs v Golden State Warriors

Coach of the Year may come down to whether you’re old school or new school this year.

The expected favorite for the award is Chicago coach Tom Thibodeau, who has brought Chicago around to what may be the best win-total improvement, seed improvement, and clearly defensive improvement in the league this year, in only his first season with the Bulls. Thibodeau has helped Derrick Rose reach an MVP level (mostly bey admittedly staying out of the way and letting Rose do his thing), and made a defensive juggernaut out of a team featuring Carlos Boozer, Luol Deng, Kyle Korver, and Keith Bogans.

But his biggest competitor has the best advantage he can have. A superior record. Coach Gregg Popovich of the San Antonio Spurs is gaining more and more traction for his performance in leading the Spurs to a ridiculous 54-12 record. You can count Rockets coach Rick Adelman among those who think Pop’s done the job this year.

“I think Pop’s just done a great job this year,” Adelman said. “To me, the record they have, he’s the Coach of the Year, the way he’s put these guys together and the type of season they’ve had.

via Rockets notes: Adelmans COY vote goes to Popovich | NBA Basketball | Chron.com – Houston Chronicle.

The award may end up coming down to whether Thibodeau’s Bulls manage to hold onto the top spot in the East which they now share a piece of after Saturday’s win over the Jazz. If they secure the top spot in the East after being an 8th seed speed bump last year, with a group of new pieces, that may be enough to win. But if the Spurs keep pace, voting against Popovich will be extremely difficult.

Thibodeau does have one other advantage. He’s coaching a team with significant roster changes, featuring three new starters from last season, guys who are playing together for the first time. Much of the bench unit has changed as well with Korver, Ronnie Brewer, and Omer Asik. Getting new guys to play this well together is extremely tough.

Just ask Erik Spoelstra.


Thunder pick up 2011-2012 option on Scott Brooks

Leave a comment

Coach of the Year winner Scott Brooks was already slated to be the coach of the Thunder for the foreseeable future, but Sam Presti made it official by picking up Brook’s contract through the 2011-2012 season.

Not exactly shocking news. The Thunder were incredibly successful this season, particularly relative to their dismal 23-59 in ’08-’09. Brooks may not be as pivotal to that success as, say, Kevin Durant, but it’s his system that turned a team of mostly young players into a defensive force. Oklahoma City was had a top-10 defense this season and the 2nd best defense in the Western Conference. That’s worth noting for any team, much less one boasting so many players in their first few years in the league.

However, I do find it a bit odd that the Sacramento Kings were criticized by many when they picked up coach Paul Westphal’s third-year option (guaranteeing his salary for 2011-2012 as well) almost a month ago, and yet there seems to be no such criticism when it comes to the Thunder’s treatment of Brooks. Brooks is more deserving of the guaranteed money and did a better job this year in OKC than Westphal did in Sacramento, but considering that the crux of that argument — as I understood it — concerned the timing of the “extension” more than anything else, isn’t Brooks more or less in the same boat?

The Kings lack the stability of the Thunder, but given how fast a good situation can go south in this league and especially how quickly a Coach of the Year winner can bite the dust (most of the winners of the award in this decade have only lasted some two seasons with their respective teams after winning, with the notable exceptions being San Antonio’s Gregg Popovich and Cleveland’s Mike Brown), I don’t see Brooks as decidedly different. Maybe a slightly better coach but not without his own faults.

Brooks was terrific this season, but premature timing is premature timing, right?. If it was wrong with Westphal, then it’s still wrong with Brooks. When the Kings exercised Westphal’s option, the timing did seem a bit curious, yet when the circumstances are just a bit different, a move like this one seems to be a natural part of establishing a winning culture.

In reality, Westphal and Brooks are likely much closer in terms of coaching aptitude than the Kings and Thunder were in terms of performance. It’s hard to determine the precise impact of each given their respective rosters, but there’s no question that the Thunder’s season to remember will color opinions of this move favorably by the public and the media. That’s fine given OKC’s success this year, but at on a theoretical basis, this move is no different than the Kings picking up Westphal’s third-year option. They had time and could’ve waited but didn’t, and have guaranteed Brooks’ third year salary when they didn’t need to just yet.

A month ago, I said that the Kings acted strangely with regard to guaranteeing Westphal’s 2011-2012 salary. I was wrong. Stability really is important, and if the Kings want to even sniff the success of the Thunder while their core is still young, they could learn a lot from Presti’s model. It’s more than a “Well, if the Thunder did it, it must be alright” argument, though. This is a case where the possible negatives (a pretty modest 2010-2011 coaching salary) don’t even come close to matching the potential positives (removing doubt, giving a coach the freedom to operate, team stability), and both teams made the right call.

Paul Westphal’s Kings may not have taken the Lakers to six games, but if Sacramento wants to establish something real, this is the way to do it. The NBA will always be more about the players than the coaches, which makes sense. That said, coaches still hold great symbolic value in this league, and in the case of the Thunder and the Kings, it’s more about each franchise committing to a system and an idea than it is about committing to a head coach.

Media members need not be protected, accountability in award voting is a must

Leave a comment

As in most things related to the NBA, the ultimate goal should be transparency. Transparency in the officiating, especially in a post-Donaghy era. Transparency from the league office in how they deal with specific rulings, punishments, and edicts. Transparency from coaches and general managers, who optimally wouldn’t pretend to be vying for a playoff spot if it was well out of reach, and who are well capable of imparting knowledge if they abandon the convenient cliché.

It’s about damn time the same applies to the media as well.

Media members write all kinds of things about the NBA on the daily basis, and their work is available for public scrutiny. If facts aren’t checked, if stories are unfair, or if something is misrepresented, the writer will hear about it. That’s how the wonderful world of feedback works, and that ability to respond not only makes for better writing, but a better understanding from consumers concerning what an NBA scribe hopes to accomplish. It is, in a word, good.

So why then does it make sense that on the occasion that such scribes have the ability to significantly impact NBA lore — in award voting — they’re completely removed from the results in a way that makes them completely unaccountable? They’re not revealing their party preferences or voting on controversial legislation, but casting a ballot for MVP or Defensive Player of the Year; the sanctity and security of the democratic process should be far removed from this particular arena, because well, it’s not democratic. Certain writers are privileged with a vote, and those with a vote should be able to defend their selections.

Choosing an MVP or Rookie of the Year may be a matter of opinion, but that doesn’t mean there are not wrong answers. There are also interesting answers, worthy of further explanation and clarification. There are toss-ups that fans would want to hear about, there are snubs that they would want explained, and there are surprise vote-getters that may even earn voters a pat on the back.

Howard Beck of the New York Times has been throwing this idea around ever since David Lee stumbled into a Defensive Player of the Year vote, and collected his thoughts in a post for the NYT Off the Dribble blog:

Removing anonymity from the process could have some drawbacks. Beat writers, who see the same team every day, may feel pressure to vote for the players they cover if they know the results will become public. Voting for a rival could conceivably cause tension with the home team’s star player or coach, or the media-relations staff.

But these concerns do not seem to have adversely affected the balloting in baseball or the N.F.L. And many N.B.A. writers already make their choices and rationale public, in blogs and in newspaper columns. No one seems overly worried about potential backlash from teams or fans.

Transparency creates more accountability because voters have to be prepared to explain their choices publicly. That is a routine part of baseball’s award process, and it helps promote discussion of the results, which benefits the game.

Beck could be correct in how beat writers could be swayed, but isn’t that what journalistic integrity is all about? These writers are supposed to be trusted to write what’s actually going on in the games and in the locker room rather than rosy pieces loaded with team-sponsored propaganda, so why can’t we trust them to do the same with the awards voting?

If someone is voting for an award with actual implications, they should be prepared to defend their choices. They should be able to tell us why there are three better defenders than Dwight Howard, how Ben Wallace or Ersan Ilyasova could possibly be the Most Improved Player, or why Jonny Flynn deserves a second-place vote for Rookie of the Year. That’s the responsibility that should come with the privilege of voting, and it’s honestly a wonder to me that secret balloting has lasted this long.