?
He was part of Chicago's normal rotation last season. Calling that "tanking time" seems rather disingenuous.
Is Quin really a good coach?
- Thread starter str8line
- Start date
He was part of Chicago's normal rotation last season. Calling that "tanking time" seems rather disingenuous.
He played 500 minutes when the season was already over for the Bulls. A 500 minutes sample size isn't much regardless of what part of the season it was anyways. The year before he played 1400 minutes. He was not NBA level during that season.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
2025 Prediction Contest Winner
My main issue with Quin is the same issues folks have with Coach Bud. He runs his system to get his shots and its based on math and rules etc. It is sound logic... but there is a limit to how far that rigid system will take you and you need to have counter attacks. The counter attacks have not been experimented with enough or just may not be there, so unless you get favorable matchups throughout the playoffs you will get smacked at some point.
The good news is I think we matchup well with a lot of the western conference teams, so I think we are setup well if we are healthy. If DM takes a solid step forward from last year we are in the convo as a contender... that step doesn't look to be there at the moment. There are some things coach could experiment with that might help insulate us from the bad matchups and there may be some useful players he is not using that would pay dividends later. Ultimately we need more wing talent but that upgrade is not obvious and will cost us something.
The good news is I think we matchup well with a lot of the western conference teams, so I think we are setup well if we are healthy. If DM takes a solid step forward from last year we are in the convo as a contender... that step doesn't look to be there at the moment. There are some things coach could experiment with that might help insulate us from the bad matchups and there may be some useful players he is not using that would pay dividends later. Ultimately we need more wing talent but that upgrade is not obvious and will cost us something.
How so? Are you his mother?
movedaball
Active Member
Time for a Mark Jackson to Steve Kerr transition then? He’s under contract til what 2024? Lol
Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
2025 Prediction Contest Winner
He could be traded in a second. Another team would give up something for him. I think we are selling him short. I have more questions about the front office than I do Quin.
Game6Conley
Well-Known Member
Yes he's a good coach. QS happens to be up against good coaches and very very good players and so mistakes are made. thats how it works.
homeytennis
Well-Known Member
He's got an MBA and a law degree. He is smrt. Smrter than everyone.
You're making up a lot of arbitrary rules here to stick to your point.
A 500 minute sample size is pretty big. And the season being "over" doesn't mean the stats are meaningless. Teams are still trying to beat the Bulls. If anything, his on/off metrics painting a favorable picture for him even with his team 'tanking' should be a point in his favor, not against.
500 minutes is objectively not a lot of minutes. If that’s how you use number, than what do you think of the 1400 minutes where he was awful?
Point is, he’s never played a season where he was a good regular rotation. He has only played one season where he was a regular rotation member, and in that year he (and his +\- metrics) was awful.
I think that was a year earlier, and that players, even older ones, improve as they gain more NBA experience. Look at Ingles.
Again, he was a regular rotation member last year, so this is false.
If your definition of regular rotation player is <500 minutes and you take what happens in that sample size to heart (especially +/- statistics), I have nothing for you.