This is not an opinion piece, but instead a short history paper, probably something Dani could give to a teacher and receive a solid “B” for. Byron Scott has coached the Cavaliers for nearly two-hundred games, but I never thought much about his pre-Cleveland days. Hired at the time of “the decision”, the move hardly registered compared to the earthquake surrounding it. Overseeing a franchise deconstruction and rebuilding, his current record sits at a pitiful 47 wins and 134 losses. As anticipated, it has been ugly, but concerns about the franchise’s direction percolate as the team ventures through the season at 17-win pace…worse than even the initial, horrid, post-Lebron season.
Let’s take a look at Coach Scott’s past and see what can be learned.
New Jersey Nets – October 2000 through January 2004
Immediately following his playing career, Byron Scott began coaching as an assistant with the Webber / Divac / Stojakovic Sacramento Kings teams. Two seasons as a deputy were parlayed into his first head coaching gig; an opportunity to play-call for a Stephon Marbury-lead New Jersey Nets team. His first year, 2000 – 2001, featured a depressing roster and only 26 wins. Brighter times were on the horizon though, as the following campaign saw a doubling of the win total, aided by: Keith Van Horn and Kerry Kittles combined to play 163 games after totaling 49 the prior season; reigning rookie-of-the-year Kenyon Martin improved to lead the team in points and blocks; first-year wing Richard Jefferson contributed immediately; and the Big Deal, the Nets traded Stephon Marbury for Jason Kidd.
At the time, Marbury represented an exciting, up-trending player; 23 years old and recently a third-team All-NBA member. Jason Kidd was the NBA’s best point-guard though, coming off back-to-back-to-back first-team All-NBA and All-Defense selections, and at age 28, working in his prime. The 2001 – 2002 Nets rode the NBA’s best defense and Kidd’s MVP runner-up status to the East’s #1 seed, before barreling into an NBA Finals matchup against the Los Angeles Lakers. Kidd averaged a triple-double in the Eastern Conference Finals. Unfortunately in those days, the NBA championship traveled through the Lakers / Spurs / Kings western conference championship. New Jersey led for 59 seconds combined in games one & two, before losing two heart-breakers at home, allowing LA to complete the sweep. This series featured Shaq at his pinnacle, tallying a monstrous 36 & 12. Along with their elite defense that season, the Nets played at the League’s 8th fastest pace and posted the 17th-best offensive rating.
The 2002 – 2003 Nets, still fronted by Kidd, Martin, Jefferson, and Kittles, returned to the NBA Finals with a 10-game playoff win streak. Kidd’s seasonal per-game averages of 19 points, league-leading 9 assists, 6 rebounds, and 2 steals gained him all-NBA status again, albeit with a decline to the second-team. The team again ran a fast-paced, but relatively inefficient offense (ranked 18th) that was buoyed by NBA-best defense. In the Finals, the Nets appeared poised to force game-seven, holding a nine point lead with nine minutes remaining in game six. Alas, like clockwork, San Antonio unleashed a furious 19 point run to close the series. Tim Duncan received MVP honors, averaging over 24 points, 17 rebounds, 5 assists and 5 blocks. The lesson, as always; when you play a top-ten all-time player in vintage form, it is hard to win.
Despite the back-to-back Finals runs, the next season served as Coach Scott’s last in New Jersey. Although their top-five minutes earners from the previous season remained intact and generally healthy, after 42 games, the Nets treaded near a five-hundred record. The New York Post reported that Jason Kidd wanted Coach Scott gone, but all parties denied this. Somewhat amazingly, the Nets won their next thirteen games after switching coaches, providing Lawrence Frank with a spot in the record books.
Based on his two-year run of success in New Jersey, Coach Scott was immediately hired as the coach of the ambitious New Orleans Hornets.
New Orleans Hornets – October 2004 to November 2009
Actually, I have written about this team previously at Cavs:the Blog. The 2003 – 2004 New Orleans Hornets were a middling team, built around a young All-Star duo of Jamaal Magloire and Baron Davis. They aspired to loftier goals, fired Tim Floyd, and hired Coach Scott as a “proven winner”. Of course, they then watched Jamal Mashburn retire, Jamaal Magloire battle injuries, and Davis basically undermine the whole team. Coach Scott guided a shell of a roster through an 18-win season, as Davis and eventually Magloire were traded. The playing time leaders were PJ Brown, Dan Dickau, Lee Nailon, and teenaged JR Smith; the team’s offensive rating was NBA-worst and the defense was not much better.
Then, with the fourth pick in the 2005 draft, New Orleans chose Chris Paul, who exploded onto the NBA scene by winning all six rookie-of-the-month awards and posting the highest first-year PER of the 2000s. David West saw his minutes increase almost five-fold, and his Win Shares rise from 0.2 to 7.4 from 2004 – 2005 to 2005 – 2006. Armed with a dynamic young point guard, the team won twenty more games than the previous season. In a trend for Scott-coached teams, their offensive rating ranked 26th in the NBA.
2006 – 2007 saw only marginal improvements, as West missed 30 games and Paul sat for nineteen. Two important developments occurred though, as New Orleans turned JR Smith and PJ Brown into Tyson Chandler, and received Peja Stojakovic through a Pacers salary dump. Peja missed the final 69 games of this season with a back injury, as the Hornet offense again struggled to a 23rd ranking. The addition of Chandler helped bolster the defense into the league’s top-half.
The next season featured both Coach Scott and Chris Paul’s signature seasons with the Hornets. Paul lead the league in assists, steals, and win shares, while finishing second in PER. Voters placed him second in MVP voting, despite statistical dominance and team success. As the squad improved to 56 wins, outlasting San Antonio for the Southwest Division crown, Coach Scott received NBA Coach-of-the-Year. The seventeen win improvement, in the organization’s first year returning to the Big Easy after Hurricane Katrina, warranted the honors. He coached the Western All-Star team, featuring Paul and West, as the event was located in New Orleans. The Hornets performed as the NBA’s fifth-best offense and seventh-best defense that season, as Peja nailed 44% of his threes, West averaged 21 & 9, and Chandler flashed the first total assemblage of his potential.
The magical season eventually ended though. Despite Chris Paul’s spectacular efforts (PER of 30.7) and possessing home-court advantage, the Hornets lost a crushing seven-game series to San Antonio. Game Seven, at New Orleans, saw the Hornets fall behind by fifteen at the end of the third quarter, before cutting the deficit to three with a minute to go. Tony Parker and Manu Ginobli scored eight points during those sixty-seconds to close out the game.
2008 – 2009 witnessed a step backward for the team, as Stojakovic missed 20 games and Chandler nearly twice as many. Chris Paul and David West played as All-Pro and All-Star again, respectively, and the team provided the League’s 12th best offense and 9th best defense. Trouble loomed though, as cumbersome contracts for overpaid thirty-somethings began to burden the team’s flexibility. They paid $24 million for 4700 minutes of an 11.5 PER from wings Stojakovic, Morris Peterson and James Posey. In five playoff games, including losses by 15, 21, 29 and 58(!), this group offered up 300+ minutes of 10.3 PER. Even worse, they still owed the trio $62 million.
As Paul’s extension kicked in for 2009 – 2010, the luxury tax beckoned. Due to his injuries, but also his $1.3 million higher salary, Tyson Chandler was packaged for Emeka Okafor, who despite the lower annual salary was owed 5 years and $60 million. This transition dealt a serious blow to Paul, whose best friend on the team vanished. Nine games into the next season, Coach Scott received the axe from the Hornets, due to a start including five double-digit losses. Chris Paul was again notably upset, and rumors existed that Scott’s $5 million salary served as a reason for his departure. David West followed the company line, saying “Amongst the team I think there was a sense [that] a few guys weren’t trusting what we had in terms of our system and our ability to know what we were going to get every single night from our system.” Following the 2010 campaign, the Hornets traded a top-ten draft pick to Oklahoma City so that the Thunder would take Morris Peterson off their hands. Next to go, after the 2010 – 2011 season, was Chris Paul.
Summary
In 13 seasons of NBA coaching, Scott has lead two squads to 50+ wins, and five to winning records. His time with New Jersey ascended and declined as rapidly as possible, spurred by the acquisition of the game’s best point guard, and possibly undone by the dissatisfaction of that same player. His tenure in New Orleans, like Chris Paul’s, never stood a chance, flumoxed by tragic Hurricane Katrina and also poor drafting & salary cap management.
Scott’s resume gnaws at me. Basketball-reference.com includes a “Coach Register” of 298 NBA generals. Somewhat surprisingly, Byron ranks 31st for most games coached. Of the thirty coaches above him, only two possess lower career winning percentages. Looking through the entire list, it is apparent that very few coaches last 180 games during a stretch when their team succeeds at the 47-win rate of the current Cavs. Here is a comprehensive(-ish) list of the coaches that lasted 180 games with one team, with 55 wins or less.
- Tim Floyd was the first Bulls coach after Jordan, who won only 36 of Floyd’s first 180 games. He was fired 59 games later.
- Ron Rothstein lead the expansion Miami Heat to 38 wins in their first 180 games. He was fired 66 games later.
- Bill Fitch guided the expansion Cleveland Cavaliers to 42 wins in their first 180 games. He coached nine seasons with the team, including a 49-win season that culminated in an Eastern Conference Finals exit.
- Mike Woodson prodded the Atlanta Hawks to 46 wins in his first 180 games. He went on to coach six seasons with the team, reaching the second round of the playoffs twice. The Hawks were swept both times.
- Bernie Bickerstaff kicked off the expansion Charlotte Bobcats existence with 48 wins in 180 games. He was fired 66 games later.
- Flip Saunders managed the Washington Wizards to 51 wins in 180 games. He was fired following game 181.
- Don Chaney piloted the Los Angeles Clippers to 53 wins in 180 games. He lasted through game 185.
- Matt Guokas kick-started the expansion Orlando Magic to 55 wins in 180 games. He was fired 148 games later, following a 41 – 41 season.
So, Cleveland has ventured into territory where eight franchises have gone before. Most were either expansion squads, teams that recently parted ways with an all-time great, or dysfunctional units riddled by locker-room gun play. The best any of the previous coaches reversed course was into a 49 win season.
Coach Scott’s accomplishments include:
- Two NBA Finals appearances
- Constructed two #1 ranked NBA defenses.
- The 16th best playoff winning percentage in NBA history
- One NBA Coach-of-the Year award
- Coached the 41st most regular-season and 39th most playoff wins in NBA history. His next win will be number 400.
His black-marks include:
- In thirteen seasons, orchestrated one top-ten NBA offense, and seven bottom-seven offenses.
- Immediately after being dismissed from his first job, the team won thirteen straight games.
- Coached the largest defeat in NBA playoff history
- Coached the longest losing streak in NBA history
- Of 195 NBA coaches with 100 or more games, posted the 112th best regular-season winning percentage.
Coach Scott’s primary successes are associated with dominance from one of the NBA’s top-ten all-time point guards in a signature season. As quickly as the good times rose, the teams descended. How much of the credit is Scott’s and how much belongs to these transcendent talents? Why have over half of his teams been miserable on offense? What precipitated his involvement in those epic fails?
I don’t know the answers; this is just a small research project.
I think NBA coaches more than any other coach in any other sport are the hardest to evaluate. Baseball is easy – the HC is never blamed for poor player performance. Only if he yanked someone too soon or made a bad call to the pen or should have pitched the ace on 3 days rest or not.
Football is all about schemes and coverages and playcalling and clock management.
College is often based on recruiting and graduation rates.
In the NBA – what really makes a good coach? I think reputation and “identity” is a big deal as those are the characteristics that can mold player talents. Scott’s got a reputation from his playing days and his playoff successes. No idea what his identity is, though. This research paper, as great as it is, doesn’t really give any insight either. That probably means he doesn’t really have one.
At the end of the day – this is a bottom line league. No different than Norman Dale being voted out after a few losses. Of course that story ended differently because Jimmy was the star and the star had the coach’s back. I suspect a similar thing guides Scott’s fate. If Kyrie and crew believe that their coach has them on the right track, that might not matter THAT much, but you can be sure that if they DON’T believe in their coach – he will be canned. I wish Scott would adopt Norman Dale’s 4 pass policy. I also wish he’d sit Kyrie or Dion or whomever the next player is to jack up a ill-advised hero-ball shot out of a timeout after he explicit draws something else up. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITGwzan_0FY
I can’t really judge a guy leading a team that is simply not concerned with winning. We haven’t even tried to construct a real roster yet. Not Scott’s fault, IMO. There is a reason most coaches with good resumes don’t sign on for the ground floor of a rebuild, with the notable exception of Larry Brown. Im sure Scott took the job expecting he’d have Bron Bron.
Also, Larry Frank is not good. I attribute the 13 straight wins to the fruits of a player revolt, not Scott coaching deficiencies.
All that said, Im really not very impressed with Scotts vanilla version of the Princeton, nor his tendacy to bury guys on the bench…but I still think hes a lot better than the Flip Saunders’ of the world.
The lack of an offense bothers me. Perhaps it is because he doesn’t think the kids are ready for it, but I can’t see why there are so few screens and so much standing around. I don’t think they should fire Scott this year and don’t think they will. Each situation is different and I don’t think any coach would have them playoff bound this year with this roster and the injuries.
The bench was the most obvious reason I didn’t think they’d contend, but I don’t blame Grant for wanting flexibility next summer. The problem New Orleans had is a perfect reason that Grant’s plan isn’t the worst situation possible. Giving stupid contracts to average talent kills you in the NBA. Different ownership situation, but flexibility does matter especially when a product isn’t finished. I like the three drafts with two first rounders each year and then evaluate what else is out there with the cap room and other draft picks via trade. There will be more trades coming. Since Lebron left there have been a couple a season. The check your prostate with an ice cold gardening trowel luxury tax is kicking in. There will be plenty of moves for the Cavs to make next season. I look at next years draft as the best available player. If that’s a PF like Anthony Bennet or a SG like Ben McLemore so be it. They can fill out the rest of the roster via trade and that might be by trading some of our young non-Kyrie guys.
T: wouldn’t a player revolt have happened because they disliked Scott and were showing it by the wins? Wouldn’t the coach be the first person to bring a culture of winning?
I guess my problem with coach scott is his seeming inability to choose a lineup or identity. Part of this is injuries and lack of depth, but why can’t we try playing casspi, Miles and Gee during a game, rather than either/or. At the 2-3 there are 94 minutes available. if 30 go to dion we are at 64. cant each player be given 20-25 a night, with boobie taking the backup minutes at “point guard” even though someone else could handle the ball? I guess what I am saying is that there doesnt seem to be a direction on offense. what are the lineups trying to accomplish? These are definite coaching choices that Scott can be critiqued on. The cav’s could definitely win more games than they are right now, why arent they?
There are more questions than answers in this piece. Just don’t get it. He has an impressive resume but he doesn’t seem to be THAT coach here in Cleveland.
Please, Kevin- I’m straight B+’s, all the way.
As for personnel changes, the Cavs have started to frustrate me so much that I’d be fine with a sever shake-up. Trade Andy for someone, trade someone for Demarcus Cousins, can Byron Scott. Is Chip Kelly available? What about Andy Reid?
I have no doubt that Chip Kelly could run a better offense for the Cavs. I can’t stop watching the Banner/Haslem press conference. Banner just radiates evil. He’s like a real life Gargamel. Watch it. Don’t look at Haslem at all. Just watch Banner snarl and scowl at the the reporters.
Anyone ever notice how Phil Jackson always signs onto a team when they get a really great player? How hilarious would it be if Cleveland got him and LA didn’t? Just a pipe dream I know but it would be freaking hilarious.
I liked this study very much. There is something that I would like to add to this. You certainly remember Pat Riley. Byron Scott is very much influenced by him. He believes in Riley’s hard discipline. However, he doesn’t seem to understand that his star PG is nothing like the one he played with (Magic) or the ones he coached in the past (Kidd and CP3). He should build the Cavs like in a model of the MJ Bulls, Kobe Lakers or Iverson Sixers. The Cavs are not geared to those models and, consequently, the players do not seem to understand what they are supposed to do. There are elements in the present Cavs that could be used in the MJ Bulls model. However, Scott has to first figure out where he likes to go with the roster. Maybe more accurately, what this roster is unable to do.
Tom Pestak,
Regarding Scott’s “identity” as a coach, it is definitely not as an offensive coach. I also think the “molder of young point guards” theme is questionable. Kidd was already the game’s best. Chris Paul stepped on the court from day one and was really fricking good; pretty much the same story for Kyrie, and he only had 2 weeks of training camp.
T and Cory Hughey,
Regarding the team being “not concerned with winning” or not “playoff bound”, my biggest issue is that the team is on 17-win pace. Hopefully we can all agree there is a significant difference between playoff contending and 17 wins. 17 wins basically says to me that the young guys are flailing through an important developmental year; that they aren’t learning good NBA systems and fundamental ideas. Taking a young roster and leading it to miserable results is just “meh”. January – April 2013 should look appreciably better than November – December 2012. To me, if the wins don’t start coming to some extent in the second half of this season, then something needs shaken up.
Justin Yafanaro,
I agree; it seems to be a red flag that each of Scott’s teams appear to have quit on him at various times. The immediate switch-flip upon his exit in New Jersey is one example. The gross run of double-digit losses near his end in New Orleans is another (including getting doubled-up in a playoff game). The 26 game losing streak in Cleveland being the most recent.
Dani,
I am sure you would have submitted a better research paper than me; certainly a B+ or A-. I think that my project nets a “B” from a high school english teacher.
The value of being able to take on salary triples next season as the new luxury tax kicks in. The cavs are in great position for trades over the next 2 years.
The problem with being “not concerned with winning” is that players have defined contracts. And if they are good players, something has to make them want to stay. LBJ, Wade, Durant, etc all had playoff clubs by year 3. The Cavs have 2 more seasons to show KI they can produce an exciting contender. Let’s hope Grant is up to the task. I’m not sure Scott is at this point.
I view Byron Scott’s main role in the short-run as a mentor to the young guys. I think he is perfect for that role. As a former player, he commands their respect. It is clear Kyrie connects well with him. It also seems clear that TT, Dion, and Zeller do.
If we keep losing games we should win once we actually have a better team, then I think criticism of Scott makes sense. Until then, as long as the players respect him, he is doing his job.
WITMI -
So are like 5 or 6 other NBA teams. If 1/6 of the league is in a position to take on salary, how is that a pure advantage to us?
Eh
Scott seems like an OK coach who has the respect of his players. If Kyrie, Dion, Thompson continue to develop like they have then he’s doing a good job. Win totals for the 2011-2013 Cavs are pretty meaningless. Development is the key and so far things seem to be doing just fine.
Next year is the key for Scott. If they stagnate next year he’ll be gone and be replaced by someone different.
Mallory, pure advantage is your words not WimI’s, he/she said cavs will be in great position. Not all 5 or 6 of those teams as you say have ownership that’s willing to burn millions on a bad contract for the chance to come out on top. Realistically the Cavs might be competing with one or two teams to pull off a major trade, and they are collecting a lot of young talent to sweeten the pot if the right deal comes along.
Um, history paper gets off to a bad start… “Hired in the aftershocks of “the decision”….”
Facts wrong in opening paragraph – automatic F! Though I agree with everything else…
W C,
That’s funny. Initially I wrote it the other way, but swear that during my fact-checking, I found a link saying otherwise, so I revised the piece. I thought, “I must have remembered wrong.”
Well now I made new minor edits to correct.
Good Point Cols. As far as Scott’s developing players, the only players I’ve seen improve under his watch are Andy and TT. Kyrie really hasn’t improved in any discernible way from last year, which honestly does worry me. He’s still playing great and like an all-star on offense, but he still is a sieve on defense and he turns it over too much, and nothing really has improved outside of his minutes/gm and maybe 1 more fga/36min and getting another free throw a game (but that probably is because he’s not a rookie anymore and thusly gets more calls more so than any improvement in play).
Dion has regressed from a hot start, Zeller is still an unknown, and Miles has hugely improved as the season has gone on, but not really doing any better than his career averages. He’s just not in the worst funk of his career anymore.
Eh, I don’t like Scott, but don’t really know what our other options are. We could do worse, but I’m sure there are at least 15 other coaches I’d rather have… but they are already employed. Everyone seems fine with letting him lose while we are young, which I get. We’re rebuilding, we don’t need to jeapordize the future by playing guys too many minutes, or relying too much on guys who aren’t part of the future, to eke out a few wins and hurt our lottery chances. But he seems to be doing those things and still losing. We’re overplaying Dion and not correcting his propensity to jack up terrible shots. Byron’s not disciplining Kyrie for terrible defense because we *need* him out there to carry our offense, holding Irving to zero accountability. We play Andy 38 minutes a night during back to backs when we risk injury to him, and he’s supposedly one of the guys who might not be part of the “Core” going forward. Our offense doesn’t run any plays but just has Kyrie pull the old lebron dribble from 30 feet out and run down the clock ISO play that is pretty much the worst play in all of basketball, if you can call it a play. We’re not learning or even attempting off-ball screens, our defense doesn’t try or rotate well. When we come out of a timeout it looks like Byron doesn’t even call a play. And when a mistake is made Byron doesn’t so much as flinch, much less talk to the player about what they did wrong and what to correct.
These guys are young and malleable, if you think when we get a good roster that Byron will act appropriately, thats fine, but there will still be lasting effects and bad habits built that won’t be easy to fix.
Brian -
I’ll concede the owner point, but I think we overrate how much we have to trade. There are a lot of teams with big expiring contracts that have much more proven assets. We all like TT fine now, but I doubt, for example, we could land Cousins by trading him + a late 1st + some of our roster filler. Our two greatest assets right now are our own 1st rounder and Andy.
I’m all for trading that first rounder, and even Andy in the right situation, but nearly everyone is against the former, and not too many people are on board with the latter.
The thing about having assets is you have to be willing to part with them. Otherwise they’re just players/picks sitting on your roster.
I look at a coach’s greatest accomplishments to determine their quality. Tenure and winning percentage won’t define a coach the way winning a Conference Championship does — Byron Scott could have 10 seasons in Cleveland like these past few and would still be vindicated by winning a title. Plus, you have to recognize it takes longer to “coach up” a team with less talent. Previously, Scott inherited two mediocre teams over a middling span of time (4ish seasons) and had moderate success, with two Finals appearances on the Nets and a magical 07-08 Hornets team. His first Cavs team was much worse than those Nets or Hornets, and midway through his 3rd season in Cleveland we are wondering where we are on the Byron Scott Curve of Success…
I know I don’t buy the argument that a coach just inherits good players and has success; the player/coach relationship is a symbiotic one, especially in a sport where the head coach is so involved with players’ personal training and development. I don’t think it’s just coincidence that all the success Scott has enjoyed has been while coaching, literally, the three best point guards to play throughout the past two NBA eras (minus Nash). Also, you always see some phenomenon when these teams get a new head coach and play out-of-their-minds good for a brief stretch, but Scott did well over sustained periods, and I would argue he had an unwarranted dismissal from the Hornets.
What we DO know is that Scott is great at developing PGs, getting guys to play D (ummm Cavs?) and has been on the big stage as both player and coach. What other viable coaching options have a more impressive resume? I would rather have Scott coaching the Cavs instead of Coach X, if only for the sake of continuity. For all the tools we’ve given Scott to build with, I would hate to see another coach come in and try to build a table out of the chair that Scott has already started. I guess that I’m still optimistic with Scott and will give another year or so to see what he’s getting out this team, because certain players and even the Cavs front office deserve some finger pointing when you’re 7-26
Nice piece, Kevin. I had forgotten how badly George Shin and Jeff Bower mismanaged the Hornets roster. The Tyson Chandler trade was the beginning of the undoing, and the horrific overpaying of Morris Peterson, James Posey, and a host of others, doomed them. I actually was a big proponent of trying to take a bunch of horrible contracts off of New Orleans with Mo Williams and Shaq’s contract in order to get Chris Paul in 2009, but Danny Ferry insisted on riding out the ancient Shaq. But this article is about Scott. I think that NBA coaching staffs vastly underrate the value of good assistents. Paul Pressey and Jamahl Mosely are supposedly the top assistants, and I know Mosely handles the defense. I don’t think either of the guys has a super strong pedigree. Pressey’s been following Scott around quite a bit, but does have some successes on his record.
To me the problem with Byron is the little things: almost no in game adjustments, terrible execution out of timeouts, bad closing out of quarters (they don’t even seem to have a philosophy on this), inscrutable rotations, lack of passion… It’s hard to pin it on any one thing, especially with the teams glaring lack of veterans. I don’t know. I am not a fan of firing anyone in season, but I see the team regressing. However, it’s pretty obvious they’re tanking. Argh. I just don’t know.
I posted this yesterday about my thoughts on B Scott. http://clevelandsportschronicles.blogspot.com/2013/01/cavs-perceived-coaching-woes.html
Basically, I think there is more to what is going on in the games for him and the rest of the FO.
@(other)Nate, When in doubt, I refer to “Nate’s law,” a rephrasing of the ideas behind Hanlon’s razor: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor “Never ascribe to malevolence, that which can be ascribed to incompetence.”
Mallory, because there will be more than 5-6 teams selling. My point was more to recognize how the value of cap space goes up this summer.
Kevin I am 97% sure I know exactly what article you are referring to on the timeline of when Byron got hired. I think this just means we follow the Cavs too closely, or something.
Anyways, this was pretty informative for me. Chris Paul did have a little bit of an underwhelming year at Wake Forest, so the fact that he got the NBA game so quickly has to at least have something to do with Scott making it easier for him. And I always thought of him as an offensive coach, and hadn’t remembered how good the Nets were defensively. So thank you.
I sort of share the bemusement with Tom over the unique role basketball coaches have, and how difficult they are to really judge. The NBA is uniquely crazy, what with the overall dearth of starpower, the importance of starpower to winning, and the effect that starpower ends up having on a coach. In short, the coach must both demand defense and be a stars best friend, or at least make the star’s ego feel valued both on a human level and in the system. Its a weird mix.
Basically, I think the young players are developing, slowly but surely. Maybe I am wrong about that, but I dunno. And it is hard to get on him about rotations and stuff when the options are D-Leaguers or rookies or retreads.
WitMi -
I think it’s tough to predict exactly how this summer will play out. I’ve heard a lot of people on here clamoring about how we’re primed to be the big players due to our cap space, etc., but I’ve seen little indication that’s the case elsewhere. The point is putting your eggs JUST into this summer’s basket is dangerous – it’s possible the trades we all expect to be there may not be.
David,
Chris Paul was not underwhelming at wake forest. He averaged 15 points , 5 rebounds, 6.6 assists and 2.4 steals as a sophomore in the ACC. He shot 45 / 47 / 83. His offensive rating and usage were 123 and 23 and he turned 20 right before the draft. That is a prospect worth salivating over.
My problem with Scott’s status is, “when is the time to be concerned?” If they are really bad again next year, then it is 100% full-on panic button time. That is NOT the time to be concerned. If they improve marginally next year, what if a different coach could have turned 35 wins into 40…or eventually 49 wins into 55?
Now is the easiest time to make a hard decision like this.
@Mallory
Curious as to what you think the asking price for Cousins is. I honestly have no idea. Do you really think the Kings wouldn’t be enticed by a 1st round pick + expiring contract + Zeller (or TT) in exchange for Cousins and dumping salary? Don’t know what they’ll be asking, but with the frustrations he’s cause there, that doesn’t sound like a bad haul.
Also I don’t know where I fall on Cousins btw… It’s one of those moves where if another teams takes him and they go on to do great things I’ll want to jump off a cliff. But this being Cleveland, we’ll trade for him, it destroys all remaining team chemistry, Kyrie leaves in free agency, Isiah Thomas gets hired, and somehow Samardo Samuels becomes our best player…yes I’ve been rooting for Cleveland teams way too long.
you always educate me. I just remember hearing he was a certain 1 and done guy, and ended up coming back and Wake didn’t win a national title. I didn’t follow sports as smart, and was a little more susceptible to narratives
My biggest concern right now is how Scott is coaching the guards. We’ve seen plenty of bad shot selection from Dion Waiters so far this year and, what is more worrying, Kyrie’s shot selection has become much worse. He’s shooting less at the rim, finishing more poorly, and take way more long twos and threes. I see him taking many more early shot clock “heat check” type shots now. Scott was hailed as a mentor who could develop young playmaking guards but he has shown no ability so far to improve the decision making of Kyrie and Dion. If anything, they look like they are allowed to do whatever they like out there and the results have been pretty mixed. Unless we see the shot selection and decision making improving from these guys along with the so far abysmal defense I don’t see much reason to keep Byron Scott around. Those are the things he was supposed to improve when he came in and I’m not seeing it so far.
Tristan makes BOTH free throws at the end plus a 12-footer by Kyrie to finish it.
TT was 8 of 10? 13 boards?
CJ 18 pts as starter and Dion 3/6 off bench (& 2 blocks)
p.s. Is Casspi hurt? Badly?
Loving that Clippers are beating the shit out of the Lakers but I’m seriously starting to fear that the Lakers won’t make the playoffs.
Having that 17th pick instead of the 28th pick would be a great asset. Grant has been a hustler in all of his trades. Looking forward to the next one.
Kyle nailed it. The shot selection of the guards is horrifying. Why hasn’t Scott corrected this? He should be calling plays/forcing Waiters to go to the rim, and yanking him every time he shoots a contested 20 footer early in the shot clock. NOW is the time to work on these habits, when wins don’t matter as much.
Agreed with Kyle. I won’t elaborate much, but you’re dead on