What makes a good coach in your mind?

[jacobdrj]

There is the ongoing and never ending debate about who is and who is not a good/great coach. Some define being a good coach by how many games he wins. Others by how many championships. Some look at the individual games and see how a coach makes adjustments during a game. Yet some people look from game to game to see what adjustments are made. Is it a coach's ability to manage the egos of his players? Is it the ability to maximize his talent? Perhaps it has something to do with how much the players like him. Some point out how humble or arrogant the coach is. Some look at how emotional he gets.

I am sure most of you know by now, over time, I have come to have distinct groups of coaches that I either hate, like, or love. It lead me to try and figure out why, now that one of the coach's I hate, and another I love, are now dunking it out in the eastern semis.

Is there really that much of a difference?

I have found that, for me at least, what determines a good coach is much more his ability to deal with the flow of a game as it happens. His ability to, on the spot, make an adjustment during a timeout or even just yelling something out while the play is unfolding that gives some insight to the players on how to deal with their opponents. There are some coaches who excel at tactics like these. I like those coaches. But a coach who has a mastery of both the in-game tactics AND has a grasp of pre-game strategy finds their way atop my list of great coaches.

I think the reason I like these coaches is because I relate more to these people. I am more of a reactionary person.

I have a hard time grading coaches that have little experience. Some people (and I don't know how) look at a coach on a miserable team and judge him (for better or for worse), when it is obvious there is no talent on his squad.

Some look at an interim coach and immediately pass judgment because of W's and L's, when it is not their team to begin with. Luck could simply have been the issue.

Usually I don't pay attention to allegations about how players like a particular coach. I can never tell when they are true, and I certainly don't think that liking someone makes them good at coaching. For example, I don't think everyone on the Lakers liked each other or their coach, but they managed to win, perhaps, to spite each other. Just a hypothesis.

So what determines a good coach in your mind?

 

[El Duque]

One that knows the game, and knows personnel. One that knows fundamentals and how to enforce them in practice. One who knows that once the game begins, he has some important duties, but that ultimately the less he intervenes the better off his team will be. One who realizes this is a players' league in every sense of the term.