Jack’s Blog

Fan is short for fanatic.  It’s just that a fanatic gets fanatical about his or her team when the team is down as well as when it’s winning.  And that fanaticism can take on the form of sarcasm, negativity and disgust if losing persists - even if injuries turn a slim chance into a nonexistent one.  In the case of the Los Angeles Lakers, their fans should have their “fan licenses” revoked after the way they acted toward their team - or what was left of it - the past few games.

If any Lakers fan is asked to name the greatest player in the NBA, every last one of them will (still) yell, “Kobe!“  So, when your team loses its best player - who happens to be the best player in the NBA (according to you) - wouldn’t you think it would be normal (even for fanatics) - to tone down their expectations?  At least a little?  One of them was heard (on the air in Fresno) answering that question by exclaiming, “Maybe, but this is the Lakers.“  Meaning what?  That there’s a proclamation issued that your team is bequeathed wins?

First of all, before they lost Bryant, the Lakers were a seven seed matched up against the two seed.  The two seed that just happened to be the San Antonio Spurs, a team that’s used to post season pressure, having won its share of championships in the past, and a team that has a coach in Gregg Popovich who many think is the best in the business.  In addition to having the great Kobe MIA for the remainder of the year, Los Angeles had Steve Nash as its point guard.  He would have been the perfect lead guard had he not gotten hurt.  Some fans felt that it was a mistake to obtain Nash because it was inevitable he was going to get hurt - with his age and history of injuries.  Nevertheless, these fans still expected Nash to lead the team to a World Championship.  But, alas, Nash got hurt and wasn’t available last night.

Steve Blake is, ideally, the back up to Nash, so with Nash out, Lakers fans felt he was certainly capable to lead the team.  Then, he pulled his hamstring - and now he’s out indefinitely.  Jodie Meeks, a nice complementary player was next, but he sprained his ankle and is headed for an MRI.  Is there someone out there with a Los Angeles Lakers voodoo doll?  I guarantee if there was such a thing, they’d sell out in a hurry.

Still and all, Laker fans went into Game 3 with hope that, maybe the home crowd could pull them through.  Of course, if that were to happen, it would have to wait until at least midway through the second quarter because that’s when it’s fashionable to show up in LA.  You know, like, with the traffic and all.

When the game began, the Lakers got a few points from their big guys - Pau Gasol and Dwight Howard.  The fans, which include their announcers, actually thought, even though the game is 48 minutes, that they’d have a shot.  “Get it inside!” they yelled, because it is somewhat unrealistic to depend on a second year player and a guy just called up from the D-League to knock down enough shots to win.  And, because that’s what Kobe tweeted.  As if the Spurs didn’t consider it would be a good idea for the Lakers to try to score that way and had not game planned for it.

That’s when the cynicism begins.  All because the fan’s team is losing.  And they don’t want to be a loser.  A number of them are losers in what they do.  The Lakers give them meaning - and they think - respect.  Hey, they don’t need any more help being a loser.  While fanatic has the word “fan” in it, so does infantile.  Winston Churchill said a long time ago:

“A fanatic is someone who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”

Headed up to the Bay Area this weekend as Cal State Monterey Bay opens league play.  Younger son Alex is currently the team’s scoring leader at 17 ppg.  He gets his first collegiate start tonight.  The blog will resume on Tuesday.

The San Antonio Spurs were on a six-game road trip, having won the first five games when Spurs’ head coach Gregg Popovich decided to rest his Big Three - Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker (plus Danny Green).  He sent them home to rest because they had a big game coming up tomorrow (Sat) with Memphis and he wanted them at their best.

“Pop” is the longest tenured NBA head coach with the same team and is one of only five coaches who have won at least four championships.  No one doubts his ability to put a quality team on the court and give them every possible chance of winning.  Be it strategy, motivation, in-game and halftime adjustments or late game situations, he understands his job as well or better than anyone.

And therein lies the point of contention between his actions - which he sees as doing his job in the best possible way, i.e. win games and have a rested team free of injuries (if anyone can figure that out) come playoff time.  Even his title of President of Spurs Basketball connotes that his ultimate job each and every year he’s in charge is to win it all.  So what’s the problem?

David Stern is commissioner of the NBA and, as such, has no affiliation with any particular club.  His job is to build the NBA brand.  That’s why there are regular season games in Europe.  That’s why there’s so much individualization (even though, technically, it’s a team game), i.e. endorsements and commercials being encouraged.  It’s a league of stars - so put your stars front and center.  That’s why the NBA picks up the tab for the WNBA - even though that’s a losing venture year after year after year.  Stern realizes the WNBA losses are (relatively) insignificant compared to having the image of (financially) promoting women’s basketball.  Since women make up half of the population, why not cater to them too?  (Or at least don’t upset them).

That’s exactly the point.  David Stern is a servant to the public.  He needs giant corporations to buy luxury boxes and huge blocks of tickets.  He needs television and its _illions (fill in the first letter or two) of dollars - which they can give because the demand to see games is so high because of its superstars.  He needs the family of however many to take in a game.  He needs fans purchasing NBA souvenirs, memorabilia and gear (which mainly happens to be that of the superstars).

The argument I’ve heard why Pop was wrong is because of the young kid who whose dad saved up so they could go to one game - to see the boy’s idol.  Sounds nice and that’s true - in fairy tales.  What about the guy who’s head of a multi-_illion dollar company, who’s trying to seal a deal with another guy who owns a multi-_illion dollar company, and knows the guy has a man crush on whomever (Duncan, Ginobili, Parker) and says, “C’mon, let’s go to the Heat-Spurs game.  I’ve got a couple court-side seats.  We’ll check out these guys up close.”  That is what Stern dreads.  All of it is what Stern dreads.

It’s “Stern needs to keep the game as pure as the driven snow” vs. “Popovich needs to figure out the best way to win it all.”  Harken back to the days of yore when guys flew commercially - or went by train - and for a lot less dough.  The NBA Players Association has a strong union.  Players are making enough money that 90% of them ought to be able to retire comfortably if they had a morsel of decent financial advice.  They must stay at luxury hotels.  There have been stories about guys bitching because they had to stay at a Marriott - of all godforsaken places - when they first went to Oklahoma City.  Per diem is $125 even though some meals are catered. e.g. on the (private) plane.  It is written in the collective bargaining agreement that, during the season, players must have so many days off.  This is, obviously, an injury-prevention measure and a wise one.

What Pop did was not against the rules.  At the very least, though, he should have had communication with Stern prior to making the move.  Nearly ten years ago, I heard an educator, Dr. Bertice Berry, say something that I think applies here - because in the end, it’s the consumer who’s paying for the way for the NBA:

“There’s a big difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do.”

Which finals coach has the make up of a champion?  Neither Rick Carlisle nor Erik Spoelstra has been to the mountaintop of coaching.  How can they be evaluated then?  The following is a blog from last June.  Does it shed light on which guy will be hoisting the Larry O’Brien trophy?  Decide for yourself.

Much has been made of the fact that in the last 20 years, only six coaches have claimed the NBA championship (neither of this year’s contestants are a member of that group).  So what ingredients go into making a championship basketball coach on the professional level?

Great player?  Doubtful (Carlisle was the better player but neither would be considered great).  There have been many more great players who’ve tried their hand at coaching and haven’t won than those who have. Of the six latest NBA championship coaches, Rudy Tomjanovich would probably rank as the best player, with Gregg Popovich being at the bottom of the list skill-wise (Doc Rivers, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson and Larry Brown are the others who’ve won titles in the NBA since 1990).  Moot point this year.

As far as coaching in the college ranks prior to taking on an NBA job, only Pop and Brown had done so, Larry having a great deal more success (winning an NCAA title with Kansas) than Pop (who struggled mightily at Pomona-Pitzer).  If I’m not mistaken, of all the coaches who’ve ever won an NBA championship, only Chuck Daly, Jack Ramsey, Dick Motta, Paul Westhead and Bill Fitch were collegiate head coaches before going on to win an NBA title.  Once again, non-factor.

In fact, there doesn’t seem to be any blueprint for NBA coaching success other than the obvious: having a whole lotta talent (advantage Spoelstra).  But even with that, a championship isn’t guaranteed.  Within the past two decades, communication has become of vital importance in leading any type of organization.  The authoritative mentality, e.g. “He treats us all the same - like dogs” used so successfully by Vince Lombardi would meet with resistance (probably to a man) now, unlike in the heyday of the Packers.  Neither fits the bill.

The one common denominator each of those championship coaches had was a very focused leader on the floor, one who commanded the respect of his teammates.  At the risk of upsetting some, let’s say these leaders are named Dirk Nowitzki and Dwyane Wade.  Of course they all possessed overwhelming talent, but beyond that, each superstar had his own style of leading, some more vocal than others, but each displaying one common theme - leading by example (put each in that category).  From MJ to Hakeem to David Robinson and Tim Duncan to Kobe and Shaq (granted, it was difficult to follow Shaq’s example - he, among all of these guys, could truly be categorized as unique) to Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton to KG, they were comfortable in their roles as the go-to guy and were, for the most part, players who set good examples.

So, to make one of the greatest understatements of all-time, it seems like the coach isn’t nearly as valuable as the best player (much more apparent this year).  As long as that player doesn’t flaunt his power. In all, acceptance of leadership is what’s necessary for a championship club (and this year - THAT could be the key) and in the words of Nathaniel Branden:

“Accepting does not necessarily mean ‘liking,’ ‘enjoying,’ or ‘condoning.’ I can accept what is - and be determined to evolve from there.”

The San Antonio Spurs have been playing the best basketball in the NBA.  At the start of the season most prognosticators wrote off the Spurs as “too old.”  True, their “Big Three” of Tony Parker, Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobli have been together for about nine years, but under the guidance of Gregg Popovich, monitoring their minutes (even at the risk of losing a game), San Antonio has been playing as well as any club in the league.

Duncan was interviewed by a reporter about their latest victory.  After a minute or so, the scribe wanted to know if Duncan thought this team bore any resemblance to their championship teams.  Tim answered that they were playing well so far, and that staying injury-free, to this point, was a contributing factor.  Naturally, the reporter pushed further (most believe their job is to take every interview to the limit), asking The Big Fundamental whether could they win it all.  Duncan,  ever the consummate pro and seasoned veteran, simply said that it was too early to make any predictions and that they’d just have to let the season play out.  After all, the season is not even halfway over.

Listening to this interview I could only think of the line:

“The only exercise some people get is jumping to conclusions.”

When people are faced with major decisions in life, one strategy that’s suggested is to take a piece of paper and write down two columns.  One of the columns is the positive side, the other the negative.

Although I spent 30 years in college basketball and got to know Tom Izzo pretty well, I am not privy to whether he used this method or not.  If he did, however, I am sure he made the right call in turning down the offer to coach the Cavs.  My only wonder is why it took him so long to decide.

In the positive column, that one being to take the job, there would be, of course, the money - reportedly $6 million/year for five years (forgive me for intruding for just a moment, but he makes $3 mil now - so how much more would his and his family’s life style improve - even with his salary doubling)?  Therefore, the only other positive I can think of would be: “If when I get fired, they owe me a whole bunch of dough.”  Imagine getting canned after year two and him coming home and saying, “Lupe, I’ve got good news and bad news.  The bad news is I got fired” (because getting fired is usually considered bad news).  “The good news is I have the next three years off and we have $18 million to spend” (which kinda takes the edge off of the bad news, don’t ya think)?   

Seriously, other than a new challenge (as if trying to win a national championship in college basketball isn’t enough of a challenge), what other possible positive could there be?  Winning an NBA title?  Even if LeBron told Izzo that not only was he going to stay in Cleveland, but his boys promised to join him (and I’m not using those words to describe the high school buddies he claims as dependents every April 15th), there still might not be sufficient reason to start planning the parade.

When moving is entered into the equation, no offense to the Rock ‘N Roll Hall of Fame and now, Betty White, but changing your address from East Lansing to Cleveland (or even Shaker Heights) isn’t considered that much of an upgrade.  Especially when you’re a legend in the former.  Sure it’s Magic’s hometown, but he doesn’t walk down those streets much anymore, so as far as “owning” a town, that one is definitely Izzo’s.

As far as “enjoying the job,” why would the NBA’s Eastern Conference grind be more fun than the Big Ten - independent of how many teams they put in it?  Certainly, the addition of Nebraska isn’t so frightening he’d consider packing his bags.  Tom is a self-described grunt and, to date, no one’s ever pinned that label on LeBron James so a marriage of Beauty and the Beast (as far as innate ability goes), might not have a fairy tale ending.  And remember, Tom, which of you is the native son.

When I first heard the Cavs were offering the job to Izzo, my first thought was, “I wonder how those guys will react the first time Tom tells them to put on the shoulder pads for a rebounding drill?”  He’d better have some serious front office backing or what could ensue would make what the French soccer team just did look like a group of guys heading for the john. 

Plus, Tom’s an emotional guy.  Sure, there are a lot of hugs when the Spartans cut down the nets after winning a regional, but prior to those embraces is a good deal of “in your face” (constructive) criticism.  Reflect on the recent NBA playoffs (I’d say the regular season, but I wanted more than two readers to be able to participate in the reflection).  Stan Van Gundy might be a screamer (but his tirades more to the team than directly at a specific player) and while Gregg Popvich did call his guys “dogs,” that was after a loss (and was said to the media).  How many NBA head coaches get right up in the players’ mugs and chew them out?  Naturally, I’m talking about serious rotation guys, not the ones who, if they chirped back, the coach could have released the following day.  And don’t start with Phil yelling at Kobe as he comes off the floor.  That’s more to show the rest of the guys what they all know - that he realizes Kobe is trying to do too much.  You’ll also notice when Phil’s barking at him, he’s never so close that he violates Kobe’s space.  Add to that scenario that Kobe’s come out publicly stating total support for his coach.  In LeBron’s case, John Calipari as coach would be more like Kobe-Phil, and the jury’s out on how that relationship would survive in the NBA.  

Tom Izzo and the Cleveland Cavaliers (or any team in the NBA) is as wrong a match as Tom and Michigan State is the perfect one.  Besides - and I know I’ve used this Jim Valvano quote before - but I also know this would be V’s advice to Tom just as it was to all those successful coaches who flirted with leaving a place they’d built and loved:

“Don’t mess with happy.”

Much has been made of the fact that in the last 20 years, only six coaches have claimed the NBA championship.  So what ingredients go into making a championship basketball coach on the professional level?

Great player?  Doubtful.  There have been many more great players who’ve tried their hand at coaching and haven’t won than those who have.  Of the six latest NBA championship coaches, Rudy Tomjanovich would probably rank as the best player, with Gregg Popovich being at the bottom of the list skill-wise (Doc Rivers, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson and Larry Brown are the others who’ve won titles in the NBA since 1990).

As far as coaching in the college ranks prior to taking on an NBA job, only Pop and Brown had done so, Larry having a great deal more success (winning an NCAA title with Kansas) than Pop (who struggled mightily at Pomona-Pitzer).  If I’m not mistaken, of all the coaches who’ve ever won an NBA championship, only Chuck Daly, Jack Ramsey, Dick Motta, Paul Westhead and Bill Fitch were collegiate head coaches before going on to win an NBA title. 

In fact, there doesn’t seem to be any blueprint for NBA coaching success other than the obvious: having a whole lotta talent.  And even with that, a championship isn’t guaranteed.  Within the past two decades, communication has become of vital importance in leading any type of organization.  The authoritative mentality, e.g. “He treats us all the same - like dogs” used so successfully by Vince Lombardi would meet with resistance (probably to a man) now, unlike in the heyday of the Packers.

The one common denominator each of those championship coaches had was a very focused leader on the floor, one who commanded the respect of his teammates.  Of course they all possessed overwhelming talent, but beyond that, each superstar had his own style of leading, some more vocal than others, but each displaying one common theme - leading by example.  From MJ to Hakeem to David Robinson and Tim Duncan to Kobe and Shaq (granted, it was difficult to follow Shaq’s example - he, among all of these guys, could truly be categorized as unique) to Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton to D Wade to KG, they were comfortable in their roles as the go-to guy and were, for the most part, players who set good examples.

So, to make one of the greatest understatements of all-time, it seems like the coach isn’t nearly as valuable as the best player.  As long as that player doesn’t flaunt the obvious.  In all, acceptance of leadership is what’s necessary for a championship club and in the words of Nathaniel Branden:

“Accepting does not necessarily mean ‘liking,’ ‘enjoying,’ or ‘condoning.’  I can accept what is - and be determined to evolve from there.” �

Larry Brown has made the statement that he doesn’t know whether his Charlotte Bobcats can actually beat the Orlando Magic.  Many in the field of psychology would be appalled if they heard the leader of a group say something that would plant a seed of doubt in his team.  Being the underdog in the series, you’d think the coach would try to bolster the confidence of his club.

Why, then, would Brown make a comment like that?  My guess is that what Larry Brown said is exactly what he believes - and he’s been around long enough and has had so much success that he feels it would be foolish to try to play mind games or use some other psychological ploy.  As Charles Barkley (another who’s been known to speak frankly) pointed out, if Charlotte is to win (a game), the Bobcats need someone to have an other-worldly experience in terms of point production, because the Magic, who had five players in double figures in their game two victory, simply have too much firepower for Charlotte.

In the first two games, Dwight Howard, aka Superman, had subpar production, mainly due to foul trouble, yet the Bobcats never even posed a threat.  In game two, they scored a mere 30 points in the first half.  Their defense, or rather their half-court offensive philosophy of walking the ball up the floor on each possession, limited Orlando to only 41 points themselves.    

Gregg Popovich called his team out after their game one defeat in Dallas.  He said the Spurs played “like dogs.”  Whoa!  Psychology majors are in for a real challenge trying to analyze these two veteran coaches.  None of the players for San Antonio, though, when questioned, took exception with their coach’s comments.  And wouldn’t you know it, the Spurs came out in the second game and played like gangbusters, jumping to a 9-0 start and never looking back, leading by as much as twenty points.

The game did get close, however, when the Mavs cut the lead to five in the fourth quarter but eight straight points by ageless Tim Duncan squashed any hopes the hometown club had on sweeping the opening two games.  Not surprisingly, Duncan made no mention of his desire to prove to Pop he wasn’t a dog in the post-game press conference.

Both Larry Brown and Gregg Popovich have grabbed the brass ring - on more than one occasion - Brown claiming an NCAA national championship (Kansas) and a World Championship (Detroit) and Pop winning multiple titles with the Spurs.  Then why did Pop’s psychology work better than Larry’s?  I’ve done a great many of these blogs in which I’ve stated Jerry Tarkanian’s philosophy of coaching (click on the “Jerry Tarkanian” category and you’ll be sure to find it mentioned on numerous occasions).  “Talent” is always Tark’s reply.   

There’s an old saying that sums up why Charlotte couldn’t do to Orlando in game two what San Antonio did to Dallas (even though each is a #7 seed playing a #2).  Substituting for the chicken products that Charles Barkley - The Round Mound of Rebound - or, as he might now be referred to following Tuesday night’s TNT broadcast, the Prince of Profanity - would use in the old adage, the message is:

“You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.”

Herm Edwards of the NFL’s Kansas City Chiefs just got fired, becoming the most recent professional head coach to lose his job.  It was about time for a coach to be fired.  After all, it was a entire day since Mark Iavaroni was pink slipped by the Memphis Grizzlies of the NBA.

People think the reason for firing a coach is he did a poor job and lost too many games. And they’re correct -partially.  However, there are other factors that come into play.  The reason it can’t just be losing is that many of the teams that just fired their coaches wouldn’t have won if Vince Lombardi or Red Auerbach, in their heydays, were coaching them.  Plain and simple, they were bad teams whose rosters were filled with bad players, players, for the most part, selected in the draft, free agency or through trades by the general manager.  Firing the coach “buys time” for the GM, shifting the blame to the head coach - and blame is what the fans, i.e. buying public, is most interested in.  “Oh, he was the culprit?  You know, I always thought so.  Off with his head.  Boy, now I can’t wait until next year.”

Another reason for the coach being fired, in several cases, is that his lack of success can be pinned on someone else - the owner, who simply made a poor management decision, by hiring the guy in the first place!  Every year, there are certain hires that raise the eyebrows of those “in the know,” i.e. the guys who have been around the game seemingly forever (mainly former coaches and, in some cases, media members) and can give a laundry list of reasons why the new man was the wrong man.  In all my years, I’ve yet to see these wise old vets wrong. 

Next up on the “reasons coaches get fired list” is the coach couldn’t get along with the players, or at least the players who had the owner’s (and possibly GM’s) ear.  The tag “franchise player” doesn’t refer only to playing skills.  This isn’t a new concept (unless you consider what Magic Johnson did to Paul Westhead as recent).

Another factoid, albeit one less frequent - a proven winner becomes available, i.e. the GM or owner hears from, say, Bill Cowher’s agent that his client is worried that his jaw is unclenching which can only mean he’d better get back into coaching and is there any truth to the rumor your coach’s contract won’t be renewed?  There is now.

Let’s talk reality and nothing talks reality better than numbers.  The number of NFL games in a year is 256, i.e. 16 (the number of games played by each team) times 16 (32 NFL teams with two teams playing in each game).  The overall record each year in the NFL is 128 wins and 128 losses.  Note: There was one tie this past year, so call the record 127-127-2.  So … when the Tennessee Titans went 13-3, somebody had to absorb those 10 losses to even out the slate.  Same goes for every other team posting a winning record.

In the NBA the numbers are 82 games played by 30 teams or an overall record of 615-615.  Currently, the Lakers, Celtics, Magic and Cavs are a combined 102 games over .500 and the season just passed the halfway point!  Can you start to understand now why seven of the 30 NBA head coaches have been fired already?  With rumors of possible changes in Detroit, Phoenix, New Jersey and, naturally, the Clippers?     

Former head man for the Houston Rockets and New York Knicks, Jeff Van Gundy, a very cerebral commentator, coach, individual (and being smart in one area does not necessarily mean you automatically qualify in the others) evaluated the current situation of the NBA coach’s life expectancy.  “Unless your name is Phil Jackson, Gregg Popovich, Jerry Sloan or Doc Rivers, if you lose three games in a row, you’re instantly on the hot seat.”  And, until last season, Doc’s seat was mighty warm.

If changing coaches can increase a team’s value, consider it done. Your fans will not put up with excessive losses.  Season-ticket renewals aren’t so easy in today’s economy. 

Yet, while fans must be placated, the people directly involved don’t want to come off as heartless.  Fishing reels aren’t spun as much as press conferences after a coach is let go.  Listen to a portion of the press conference when Tampa Bay fired Jon Gruden (who, although he was the coach when the Bucs won a Super Bowl, it was just too long ago).  “These decisions are never easy. This is the toughest decision you can make for an NFL franchise.  Jon (is a) consummate professional.  (He’s) poured (his) heart and soul into this franchise,” Buccaneers co-chairman Joel Glazer said. “It’s really been an honor to work with (him).”  Or this from the most recently deposed coach: “This was not an easy decision,” the KC’s boss, Clark Hunt, said. “Herm is an outstanding football coach and a man of integrity.”  Other terms of endearment are lines like: “____ is a great human being and we wish him the best in his future endeavors.  We just decided we needed to go in a different direction” (why didn’t they just give this wonderful humanitarian a compass)?  Or the ever popular, “We felt like we needed a different voice.”  Perfect, hire a ventriloquist - or, better yet, Rich Little.  Who has more voices than Rich?  Anytime a different voice is needed, bingo.  Talk about job security.

One item that’s never mentioned is the nice parting gift the outgoing coach receives.  Even if he only has one year left on his contract, like Herm Edwards, it’s usually for what his is - the last year of a 4-year, $12 million deal.  Herm ought to be able to make ends meet for a while - as long as he doesn’t run into a Bernie Madoff protege.

One thing I’ve never understood is coaching is one job where there are an overabundance of applicants (and with the law of averages being what it is, many of them must be highly capable), all of whom like money, but most of whom (the highly competent ones included) would take the position for a fraction of what teams are currently paying.  Sure, no one’s going to get a Bill Cowher at a bargain price, but it doesn’t seem like Mike Tomlin’s doing such a bad job in his absence (at about half the price).  I have no knowledge of this, but I’m pretty certain he would have taken the job for less (than the 4-year, $10 million he’s making).  He obviously (now) was the perfect fit and I’d be willing to bet he knew that - and only needed the opportunity.  Should the Steelers win the whole enchilada, he’ll be in for a new deal and a (BIG) raise.

My strong feeling is that coaches and players (although the union would be up in arms should it even be suggested) ought to be paid based on only two elements: wins and paid attendance.  No other stats will do because players will find ways to pad them (remember Dennis Rodman missing easy shots so he could get another rebound before he scored or the stories of him stealing rebounds from teammates just to up his total number of boards)?

Teams shouldn’t fear the untested coach.  Just make sure the proper research on him is done.  What he lacks in experience, he’ll more than make up for in enthusiasm, work ethic and energy.  “But the players won’t respect a guy who’s not making a ton of money,” the skeptics will cry.  Do you really think there’s a whole lot of respect right now?  Especially on these teams who are making coaching changes?  As former Princeton coach Pete Carril used to say everytime he’d hear the players complaining their coach’s firing was unjustified, that it was them on the floor and that they loved the guy, “If they really felt that way, they should have been playing harder for him during the season.”

It might be a giant risk, but what you’re doing now ain’t working, so as the saying goes:

“Don’t have your goal: to get to death safely.”  �