InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
You're speculating here, but it's not unreasonable speculation.Lakers_slapper said:
But it's a bit off topic, given that Ostertag--even with arguably similar work ethic--got the minutes, and Fes didn't, and my contention is that KK or KF or both could've gotten more minutes without sacrificing wins--especially when the existing roation was sucking.
And you'd be hard-pressed to prove that Sloan gave the same level of coaching to Fesenko as he did to Ostertag--at least in terms of on-court minutes--a huge discrepancy between the two.
This is a reasonable statement, but Sloan made no effort to develop a center in the Boozakur era, even though a backup C has been shown repeatedly to be a crucial component to a title contender:
1. Trio of Gasol-Bynum-Odom at the 4/5 for the Lakers. (With Kobe, though, they still won, even with Bynum's injury).
2. Trio of Garnett-Perkins-(Wallace/Davis) at the 4/5 for the Celtics.
3. Nowitzki-Chandler-Haywood at the 4/5 for the Mavericks.
Much of the time, the defense of Okur, Boozer, and even Jefferson was as if they had "no one else" in the game playing center.
Did Sloan "develop" them? Do elaborate.
But Ostertag was given minutes, and Fesenko wasn't. Exactly my point.
I credit the majority of Millsap's success to Millsap. Of course if Fes or 'Tag were self-motivated, the task of development would have been easy, but the ability to develop or improve players with weaknesses is one of many things that can separate an overrated coach (the recent Sloan, for starters) from an excellent coach (Carlisle, Popovich, Thibodeau).
You still haven't addressed the issue of the massive minute differential between Tag and Fes/Koufous (except by weakly pointing out that alternatives were few in the 'Tag era--although neither Boozer nor Okur nor Jefferson was a solution at the 5 spot, especially defensively, either, and often their relatively prolific scoring did not compensate for their piss-poor defense (much more likely minimized if defense had been enforced like you'd expect Sloan to do), thus implying that the true center alternatives were at least as abundant in the Fes/Koko era than during the Tag years).
Lulz. You're still comparing apples (motivated players such as Millsap or Malone who would've likely been successful under most any coach) vs. oranges (unmotivated players such as Ostertag (who benefitted from what was possibly a more active coaching role for Sloan) and Fesenko (who was repeatedly not rewarded with additional playing time--not even to the minimum 10 MPG that I argue to be necessary for legitimate development--even when he did well, thus further implying that the Sloan coaching staff in the last few years put forth less effort in player development of bigs, at minimum when it comes to finding them the essential playing time to develop, which could've been done without sacrificing losses, especially over the course of a year).
Off-court smarts does not equate to on-court prowess. Usually helps, but the correlation is weak. Example 1: Jarron Collins, who was an intelligent locker room influence but so-so on the hardwood. Example 2: Karl Malone, who is comparable in this sense because he was no Einstein off the court but still developed into a top PF in NBA history.
Example 3: Allen "do you know who I am?" Iverson.
This statement is not relevant to my claim, sweet cheeks; I was referring to the coaching staff sending a message to the players. But maybe your bold-font rant is consistent with the obliviousness or willful ignorance that the coaching staff had toward the defense of the regular 4/5 rotation in recent years.
Last edited:
