 |
|
To revisit a point from below
Posted on: March 21, 2025 at 12:01:07 CT
FIJItiger MU
Posts:
146976
Member For:
22.28 yrs
Level:
Moderator
M.O.B. Votes:
2
Regarding coaching philosophy and strategy during the Gates era to date
Year 1
We used a very tight rotation and pretty much started the same lineup every game and certainly the same crunch time lineup. Only real change being the bizarre development of Diarra going from basically not playing at all the first half of season to being a crucial player in second half, and the ongoing disappearance of Mosley. Used timeouts constantly and micromanaged games. Scored on almost every dead ball situation via very detailed designed and executed dead ball plays but had very little structure otherwise and would go long periods without scoring unless transition opportunities, dead ball situations, or Kobe creating individuallly. Heavy value put on glue guys like Gomillion. Pretty much maximized the potential win total and obviously a sum greater than its parts
Year 2
Huge increase in roster size and wildly fluctuating rotations. Hands off approach to coaching with very little timeout usage or focus on dead ball situations, and just a very low priority on winning actual games overall. Almost every game had the same 2nd half collapse at roughly the same point. Strange over reliance on favorable guys like Mabor. No consideration to who was playing well or the contribution of younger guys, when it came crunch time the older players were re-inserted and took all the big shots regardless of what had played out up to that point. Total disaster of a season
Year 3
Repeat of having way too many players and impossible to manage rotations. Definitely a desire to outscore opponents and a willingness to sacrifice defense and rebounding for offensive firepower. Timeouts play little tactical role. Established players sent to bench for long stretches trying to find the hot hand and immediate combinations that work. Game to game wild fluctuations in terms of individual contributions and overall strategy. Sum considerably less than its parts.
I don’t know which of those 3 are the real Gates, or if a 4th different option will appear next year. I think he is still figuring some things out and learning in real time. My opinion is year 1 was a very well coached team, that was my preference. So if he is evolving and learning at least from afar he seems headed in the wrong direction in my opinion
Year 1
We used a very tight rotation and pretty much started the same lineup every game and certainly the same crunch time lineup. Only real change being the bizarre development of Diarra going from basically not playing at all the first half of season to being a crucial player in second half, and the ongoing disappearance of Mosley. Used timeouts constantly and micromanaged games. Scored on almost every dead ball situation via very detailed designed and executed dead ball plays but had very little structure otherwise and would go long periods without scoring unless transition opportunities, dead ball situations, or Kobe creating individuallly. Heavy value put on glue guys like Gomillion. Pretty much maximized the potential win total and obviously a sum greater than its parts
Year 2
Huge increase in roster size and wildly fluctuating rotations. Hands off approach to coaching with very little timeout usage or focus on dead ball situations, and just a very low priority on winning actual games overall. Almost every game had the same 2nd half collapse at roughly the same point. Strange over reliance on favorable guys like Mabor. No consideration to who was playing well or the contribution of younger guys, when it came crunch time the older players were re-inserted and took all the big shots regardless of what had played out up to that point. Total disaster of a season
Year 3
Repeat of having way too many players and impossible to manage rotations. Definitely a desire to outscore opponents and a willingness to sacrifice defense and rebounding for offensive firepower. Timeouts play little tactical role. Established players sent to bench for long stretches trying to find the hot hand and immediate combinations that work. Game to game wild fluctuations in terms of individual contributions and overall strategy. Sum considerably less than its parts.
I don’t know which of those 3 are the real Gates, or if a 4th different option will appear next year. I think he is still figuring some things out and learning in real time. My opinion is year 1 was a very well coached team, that was my preference. So if he is evolving and learning at least from afar he seems headed in the wrong direction in my opinion
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
To revisit a point from below - FIJItiger MU - 3/21 12:01:07