Should we replace Coach Lucas with a true "big man coach"?

[SodaPopinski]

As much as I will always respect Luc', I don't really see him as offering much from a coaching standpoint. If you watch the Blazers sideline during games, he seems distant, and that especially seems to be the case during timeouts, when he frequently meanders around the outside of the huddle, not seeming to offer much.

Now, I certainly don't attend practices or get to see what he offers to Nate and the other coaches, but I thought it was fairly telling last week when I heard Dean Demopoulos on 95.5 The Game, and he was talking about the staff. He went on to praise each coach extensively, including the new guy we got from Dallas, but when he got to Maurice Lucas, he more or less said "And what can you say about Luc'? He's a legend in this town." And that was it. No talk of specific things he's doing to help the players or the other coaches. It was a pretty stark contrast to the praise the other coaches received from DD.

Lucas was hired back during the time when PatterNash was running the show, and at the time it seemed like a fairly transparent attempt to bring in a guy from one of the "glory eras." I was OK with it at the time. But even then it seemed more like a move to appease the fans (since Lucas is one of the most popular Blazers of all-time) than a move that made sense from a coaching standpoint.

But now that our success hangs pretty heavily on how well two of our post players do (Aldridge and Oden), shouldn't we bring in a guy who can specifically work with the big men? On their post moves? The Lakers have Kareem helping out Bynum. The Magic have Patrick Ewing working with Dwight Howard.

I think Lucas has been tasked with this job, but I'm not sure if he's sufficient enough when you think of the star-power we have at the 4 and 5. If we want to maximize the talent of these two, shouldn't we consider someone who has had significant success at the position? I'm not sure who that guy is, but I don't think it's Luc'.

-Pop

 

[GrandpaBlaze]

But now that our success hangs pretty heavily on how well two of our post players do (Aldridge and Oden), shouldn't we bring in a guy who can specifically work with the big men? On their post moves? The Lakers have Kareem helping out Bynum. The Magic have Patrick Ewing working with Dwight Howard.

Sabas!

Gramps...

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

I don't see what the diff between Lucas and a guy like Kareem or Ewing is from a pure coaching standpoint. Kareem was a huge failure as a coach and people didn't like him really.....Ewing....i mean how much of Dwight's ability can be traced directly to him?

I just don't see the correlation of success between the big centers you mentioned as a direct result of the skills of either Bynum or Howard. It very well could have been natural talent/progression/playing time.

 

[Masbee]

David Robinson

 

[andalusian]

Sabas!

Gramps...

Are we ready to expose this group of clean-shaven kids to his wife?

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2000/12/04/sabonis001204.html

 

[anonymous gambler]

I wouldn't mind bringing in that Shaq fellow to coach our bigs...maybe he could even back up the local PD?

 

[andalusian]

I wouldn't mind bringing in that Shaq fellow to coach our bigs...maybe he could even back up the local PD?

While I am not a fan of the musical masterpiece (tell me how my *** tastes) - He can certainly teach Greg how to sing, or at least, carry a tune.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Hell, I say bring Chris Dudley into the Blazers organization. Good, high IQ bball player even with the limited offensive skills. Lots of other things than just putting the ball in the hole.

 

[BlazerFanForLife]

David Robinson may actually be an option, KP does have ties with the Spurs organisation but if i remember correctly the admiral is currently enjoying retirement and probably wouldnt want to move. The only thing i see a big man coach as is someone big whos a coach who can push around our big men, so as long as Mo is big enough to push Oden around i think thats basically all they need. (used in one on one coaching drills and the such)

 

[Nikolokolus]

Frankly I don't think former "superstar" players make very good coaches, it's usually far more effective to have players that made their living off of hard work and technique versus all of that god-given talent, So in this respect I have a feeling Dudley would probably be a very effective big-man coach.

As for coach Luke's ability to coach and his value as a teacher I can only assume that he does more behind the scenes and in practice, otherwise it seems unlikely that KP and Nate would retain him.

 

[THE HCP]

I think Luke is great. He's in their banging against the guys teaching them some toughness.

 

[BlazerWookee]

That's absurd. You're basically saying that Luke has nothing to offer because he's not tall enough.

 

[dreamcloud]

Isn't he in the damn hospital right now?! Nice way to talk about him right now

And also, who taught Hakeem, Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Kareem, etc. how to be legendary big men? Yeah I highly doubt they had some legend teach them their style.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Lucas is great. PatterNash may have hired the guy but if Nate didn't want him he wouldn't be there. That said I do think that Nate should add an additional big man coach. Lucas did just have surgery and an additional coach couldn't hurt.

Who?

First thought is Kermit Washington. He's very knowledgeable. He's been running the Pete Newell's Big Man Camp for years.

2nd choice would be Buck Williams.

 

[noknobs]

Woah, woah, woah! Where did this come from? Lucas is the man.

Just because you may not see him do a lot during timeouts doesn't mean anything. For example, when I watched the U.S. Olympic team, Nate never seemed to be that involved on the bench or in timeouts either, but I'm sure he was involved in other ways.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

There is nothing wrong with Coach Lucas. You probably don't really know what he does exactly, is this all based on assumption off of a radio interview?

Hell, there was a Lakers blog from last year talking about "prying" Coach Lucas away to instill hard nosed play and toughness to their frontcourt.

Viva La Lucas!!

 

[BenDavis503x]

I support Lucas.

 

[alex42083]

I don't have any problems with Lucas either. We have no basis with this, and it's quite ridiculous.
Trying to find something wrong when there is nothing concrete to base it on -- it's the very thing everyone complains about when Canzano opens his mouth or writes something.

 

[Tallbottom]

I think Luke is great. He's in their banging against the guys teaching them some toughness.

Exactly! I think he gives our bigs a way to learn that toughness. He's fine.

 

[Minstrel]

As much as I will always respect Luc', I don't really see him as offering much from a coaching standpoint. If you watch the Blazers sideline during games, he seems distant, and that especially seems to be the case during timeouts, when he frequently meanders around the outside of the huddle, not seeming to offer much.

What else would he do during games? What role would a positional coach have during games? Active coaching is not done during games. Judging a positional coach from what he does during games seems almost as pointless as judging a GM from what he does during the game.

A "big man coach" should be doing his job during practice. As you admit, you (and none of us) have any real idea of what value Lucas has during practice. So, I really don't see how we can evaluate this.

 

[SodaPopinski]

I guess I should have expected this sort of response. A lot of fans have an emotial attachment to the guy from his days in a Blazers' uni.

I guess I would like to hear more about what specific strengths he brings to the staff. I've heard and read numerous praises of Demopoulos, Prunty, Canales, and Williams ... even Bayno when he was here. Don't you think we'd see or hear at least ONE story about Luc's presence on the staff? Seems to me that would be a great feature piece, seeing as how he's the only former Blazer on the staff. Although you would have to present some evidence that he's adding something - toughening up Oden and Aldridge, or helping them work on their post moves, etc.

I have nothing against Lucas. I just want to see us maximize our big men, since that seems to be the key to us winning championships in the near future.

-Pop

 

[Minstrel]

I guess I should have expected this sort of response. A lot of fans have an emotial attachment to the guy from his days in a Blazers' uni.

Not me. I wasn't a Blazers fan until 2000, not having grown up in Portland. I have no emotional connection to Lucas whatsoever. I simply don't see that you've provided any evidence that Lucas is a poor/unnecessary coach. In the absence of that, the default to me is that McMillan and Pritchard continue to employ him because they believe he has value to the team.

 

[SodaPopinski]

I simply don't see that you've provided any evidence that Lucas is a poor/unnecessary coach.

I'll grant you my evidence isn't very compelling. It's merely the fact that no evidence he's a good/necessary coach exists either, despite the fact that evidence exists for each of his colleagues on the staff.

In the absence of that, the default to me is that McMillan and Pritchard continue to employ him because they believe he has value to the team.

I don't necessarily agree with this. Very rarely do you see an assistant get fired unless the head coach gets canned. Coaches are very loyal to each other. The fact they haven't replaced him doesn't necessarily mean he's considered irreplacable.

-Pop

 

[Minstrel]

It's merely the fact that no evidence he's a good/necessary coach exists either

I would say that his continued employment is "evidence" (not proof).

I don't necessarily agree with this. Very rarely do you see an assistant get fired unless the head coach gets canned. Coaches are very loyal to each other. The fact they haven't replaced him doesn't necessarily mean he's considered irreplacable.

"Irreplaceable" is a very different standard. No one on the Blazers except perhaps Oden is irreplacable. The question is whether Lucas has value / is a good coach, which I don't think we have the information to evaluate. And perhaps assistants aren't fired by the GM unless the head coach is fired...that still doesn't explain why McMillan employed him and continues to.

 

[mook]

I'll grant you my evidence isn't very compelling. It's merely the fact that no evidence he's a good/necessary coach exists either, despite the fact that evidence exists for each of his colleagues on the staff.

Ratliff, Magloire, Przybilla, Randolph, Aldridge, Frye and Oden all seemed to play to their current capabilitiy. (You could argue about Ratliff, I suppose. But the guy just seemed to give up. How do you coach around that?) None of those players have done better after leaving this team.

Not conclusive evidence, I'll concede. But probably the best evidence I can see from our limited perspective on either side of the argument.