As the off season begins, comes the brutal reality of coaching. Even more-so, suddenly everybody develops an opinion of what a good or bad coach is.
One thing is for sure, when Brad Stevens hired Joe Mazzulla - they knew exactly what they were looking for to fit for their organisation. They didn't get capsized by a certain name, accent, background or stature - but had a set of criteria and understood in his case growing into the job would be part of it.
There was a level of patience and support from above, it appeared that allowed him to become sturdy in his coaching philosophy.
The results worked out fairly quickly, but even if they didn't - you had confidence in the Celtics that they were not jumping at shadows and hitting the panic button. They knew what they were evaluating, more than just the W's or the L's. It's no secret that Boston, Miami & San Antonio have had a certain level of continuity that provides stability and an opportunity for growth for players and staff.
Well, what exactly comes into evaluating what a good coach is?
What the public eye sees:
Roster
Results
What sits behind all of that within a club:
Style of Play
Basketball Program
Game Management
Player Development
Performance Staff
Medical
Communication - Player & Staff Management
Investment in Brand
Investment in Community
Aligned Strategic Messaging in Media
Player Welfare
Vision
Role Clarity & Accountability
Recruiting & Player Evaluation
Culture - Leadership & Standards
Integration of Analytics
Alignment with General Manager & CEO
Family of Players
The best clubs in the world, have their finger on the pulse with how they evaluate coaching and can get a 360 degree view of that through how they operate. If they know what they are looking for. Results matter, but it's a very narrow view of what coaching is when only 1 team wins a championship every year.
The best clubs know who they are and even more importantly, who they're not.
Comments