DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

Coach DLeo (No "i" Needed?)

"The name on the list I like the most is Jeff Van Gundy."

I quit Insider so I can't see the list, but I'm sure he's the most prestigious name on it - that said, is he a good idea? Do we want a slow-it-down defensive coach? What about Eddie Jordan? Yeah, he got fired from the Wizards, but they had one defensive player and an inefficient loon at the helm of their offense, don't see how he could've made them much better.

I'm leaning toward a defensive coach. This team has the athletes to be a superior defensive team, they don't have the shooter to be a superior offensive team. Getting a guy in here who can maximize their strength seems like a better move to me than bringing in an offensive-minded coach who will try to improve their weaknesses.

Tray reply to Brian on Apr 3 at 15:12

Let's concede that point, but shouldn't it be an up-tempo swarming/pressure defensive coach, not a slow the game down halfcourt defensive coach?

Here are the 10 they listed, by the way:

Lenny Wilkins
Flip Saunders
Del Harris
Doug Collins
Mo Cheeks
Eddie Jordan
Phil Weber (D'Antoni assistant)
Ettore Messina (CSKA Moscow's coach)

Thibideau is a name I've seen mentioned in the comments here a bunch of times.

Essentially, isn't any defensive coach going to really slow the pace down?

It's hard to determine how much of the impact and change in the sixers play was DiLeo - consistently slow starts - not having to worry about Brand and thus being more comfortable - or whatever.

I know a lot of people question his play calling and rotations.

My big concern is that the draft/scouting was (is still?) a strength of the sixers the past few years, getting what could be considered 'steals' in Young, Speights and even back to kyle korver (yes they got him the same year as willie green but i'm not calling him a steal) - and before this season lou williams seemed to have been a solid pick as well. My understanding is that DiLeo was THE GUY who was responsible for these things, and aside from a seeming fear of drafting guys not attending US colleges, I worry about that, and this year will be telling in terms of the importance of DiLeo

I mean stories go back to the 'hughes' draft where dileo wanted some guy named nowitzki (or paul pierce, i forget which one) over Hughes but Larry Brown 'knew better' so the sixers drafted the highly athletic 'guard' from Memphis and tried to make him a point guard

How would it have turned out , better or worse, if the sixers had ignored the megalomaniac and listened to DiLeo (or even King, i'm pretty sure one wanted nowitzki one wanted pierce and brown wanted hughes)?

It may not be a choice for the Sixers of having him as coach or having him as assistant GM. It may be a choice between having him as coach or not having him in the organization at all.

Chris reply to Brian on Apr 3 at 17:37

I'd prefer DiLeo in a scouting role as he's been the one suggesting our recent picks (which have been outstanding values for where we've picked).

For a coach, I'd prefer Thibideau as I figure with the athletes on this team they should be one of the top defensive teams in the league. Look at their losses lately. It is because they are letting some teams shoot 50%+. That should be inexcusable for a team this athletic. Most of those losses you'll see the other team get some ball movement and get wide open shots (often from 3). So, how can people as athletic Iggy, Thad, Speights, Sammy and Lou keep 'losing their man'? So, I figure someone like Thibideau would be able to teach them some fundamentals.

john reply to Chris on Apr 3 at 17:39

I hear Thibodeau's name bandied about a lot - but what head coaching experience does he have - on any level?

Maybe he took over for DiLeo as the West German Women's coach 20 years ago.

Ugh, I shouldn't have written this point. This is a discussion for a much later date. If DiLeo takes them into the second round and they push Cleveland to 7 games we're all going to feel differently about him.

Chris reply to john on Apr 3 at 17:45

He doesn't have any.

He's sort of an NBA version of Jim Johnson, def. coordinator for the Eagles who has been around forever (except a lot younger). But that doesn't mean he wouldn't be a good head coach. In my mind, I'd rather give someone 'new' and promising a chance than continuously recycling failures (which seems to be the standard operating procedure).

My host is pissing me off these days.

The man knows what his players can do, and he puts them in positions to do them well. I know you're big on rotations, and they've become infinitely better and more consistent since DiLeo's taken over. Guys that work well together are, well, TOGETHER on the court at the same time.

I see no reason why we should change coaches next season.

The counter argument is that there are coaches out there who could, theoretically, install a more efficient defense and/or a more efficient offense. I'm not sure how strong DiLeo is on the X's and O's.

I wonder if basketball coaches get over credited (and blamed) as much as baseball managers - be curios to see if that ever gets looked at.

The sixers started slow last year and then turn it on near the end of the season and finished 1 game below 500 (i call it one some call it two) - they didn't exactly turn the world on first this year with vast improvement in overall performance.

If DiLeo said 'make me coach or i'm gone' - i think he'd be insane - cause I doubt anyone else would name him a head coach plus it's a slap in the face to the organization that hired him 19 years ago - give him a raise, a new title, and remind him that he can do the most good for the organization by returning to his very important job that he was one in the best of the game at.

But seriusly - I don't want him as the head coach next year and no i don't know who i want but the old retreads names being floated over and over get tiresome.

And after listening to van gundy do abc games this year - i'm starting to think his ego comes close to rivaling the rats.

If you're looking for a good coach without an ego you're going to be looking for a long, long time.

john reply to Brian on Apr 3 at 16:35

I think there's degree of ego and I think Larry Brown is as close to narcissistic megalomania as you'll ever see running an NBA team (and franchise if he gets his way)

I'd also prefer a more 'flexible' type of coach, from what I have seen of Van Gundy he's a very one note defensive oriented coach slow down offense - that's a bad kind of guy to bring into this franchise because it would take away a huge strength i believe.

How come nba teams don't go with an 'offensive' and 'defensive' coordinator?

Dunno. I guess because if you have one guy in charge of the offense and one guy in charge of the defense the only thing the head coach is doing is subs.

john reply to Brian on Apr 3 at 16:58

Sounds like an experiment for marc cuban - co head coaches - course you'd need the right egos - kind of thing you might want to try if you ahve your own NBDL team to play with.

In the NFL you got offensive and defensive coordinators and head coaches still calling plays - i just think that, for instance jeff van gundy, great defensive coach probably but his offensive mind set wouldn't work with the sixers.

I actually think a bigger hang up is not the head coach but the 'players' - in the NFL you got very few 'two way' guys any more - so while you run practice - the OC works with his guy snad the DC works with his guys - probably more difficult to implement when the guys are basketball players - though when you have a roster like the sixers that needs defensive improvement but really doesn't need to play 'slow down' basketball it's worth looking into - or at least having a head coach who is flexible based on his roster

There's a misconception we need to clear up here. The are a slow team, according to pace (19th out of 30 teams).

They force teams to take longer to get into their offense with pressure. They grab offensive rebounds. And when they can't get out on the run, they use a large portion of the shot clock more often than not. Yes, they run when the opportunity presents itself, but overall, they slow the pace of games down.

Usually they can't find a good shot in the halfcourt if they run offense for 20 seconds. If they consciously tried to get shots up in 12, they'd be less effective than they are right now. A slow pace suits this team.

I was at first very, very supportive of Tony D. Recently not as much so, BUT, I do not know if it is worth the risk of trying a new coach w/ our chemisty as it is right now. Tony D knows our players and the players seem to like playing for him. Don't hear and rumblings and definitely think his ego is alot less than the coaches on the list you provided. So, given that, I would say atleast 1 full year. I would not necessarily say more than that and Mo would be off the books then also! Perfect!

Brian - wasn't talking pace per say - I was just thinking along the lines of the fact that they are better in 'transition' (off rebounds and turnovers) then in a half court set where van gundy seems obsessed with the half court game more than most coaches

BUT, I do not know if it is worth the risk of trying a new coach w/ our chemisty as it is right now.

I'm calling balderdash on such a statement for two reasons

A. Everyone thought Cheeks had great rapport and locker room hoity toity as well
B. Um - the 'chemistry' as you want to refer to it is GOING to be upset next year, there's this guy who missed most of the season that is going to be vital if this team is going to ever seriously contend for a title.

In my opinion the bolded statement is one of those 'too much credit' for the coach statements - most nba teams seem to have a find 'chemistry' - not a lot of reports of locker room discord reverberating through the NBA - there also seems to be a relationship to winning and team chemistry.

And by the way - let's not forget that Sammy Dalembert felt it necessary to whine publicly more than once this season - under Tony DiLeo

I don't care if the sixers are paying mo cheeks and jim o'brien next year - that's also a poor basketball reason to keep Dileo in place - in fact i still think the primary reason they named him coach was that he was already under salary and i don't know if he got a pay bump to go with his promotion

Hire the best coach for the job but don't hand it to DiLeo because he's done a mediocre job in my opinion getting a team to play exactly how they were supposed to - his 'success' is more of an indictment of Cheeks as a coach (if anything at all) unable to get the most out of his teams be it in Philadelphia or Portland

I'm not saying keeping him is necessarily the right move. I'm just saying he's done pretty well in the win/loss column considering the circumstances. And I don't think anyone would've pegged this team to win 48 wins w/out Brand and that's the pace they've played under DiLeo.

You can give him credit or not. There's a lot to be said for giving coaches little credit. Phil Jackson wasn't exactly a coaching genius when he didn't have Jordan or Kobe and Shaq, or Kobe and Pau and Odom etc.

If the question is whether DiLeo has earned a chance to coach this team next season, then I think the answer has to be yes. That's entirely different from asking whether he's the best guy to coach the team going forward.

Alvin reply to Brian on Apr 3 at 23:16

That last line totally made sense. I hope I don't jinx it though seeing what happened to Mo.

If we can't get van Gundy, Lenny or Eddie Jordan then I'm okay with standing pat. Especially since we're hopeful that Elton Brand can stay healthy through an entire season, which I predict will have a massive impact on our defense.

I'm prepared to give this guy a half season (with a full-strength roster) at least to show he can coach this bunch.

I agree with you, Brian, 100%.

The only major criticism I have is Thad not starting at the 3. Next year, there isn't a decision to make with the starting lineup. PG, Iguodala, Young, Brand, Dalembert.

I would've liked to have seen it, but it was never a no-brainer for DiLeo. He inherited the garbage lineup from Mo (Sammy, Brand, Iggy, Green, Miller with Thad coming off the bench). Then Brand went down right away, so he just inserted Thad back in the lineup at the 4. I would've gone w/ Speights at the four at some point, but you can't really crucify the guy for that.

Mike reply to Joe on Apr 4 at 3:58

as far as the starting lineup goes, i'm sure that's as much stefanski's decision as it is dileo's. pretty sure they've been partners in this together since mo was fired.

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment