web analytics
<

Brand Name Coaching

Photo by thisisbossi on Flickr

“The average NBA player would rather be coached by some guy that he’s seen on TV rather than a guy who has been a no-name assistant for 20 years. The head coach doesn’t need to be a star X’s and O’s guy himself.”

Via Moderately Cerebral Bias: “Mark Jackson and the Value of a Name”

Interesting theory posited by MCB. Sure we can receive assurances from Local Grocer Jim that Crispy Hexagons have all the vitamins, nutrients and taste of Kellogg’s Crispix. But we’ve seen Crispix on TV (well, we used to. Crispix is pretty much dead and gone, but bear with me). That brand name, that BIG NAME, appended to Kellogg’s gives the cereal authority and credence. Without previous coaching experience, ESPN’s Mark Jackson scored a coaching gig thanks, in part, to this idea. One has to wonder whether a coach with no coaching experience will succeed. Seems dicey, but there is hope.

If the BIG NAME head coach styles himself as more of a general manager of the bench (players, trainers and assistant coaches), then I think the situation can go quite well. Think of Larry Bird as coach of the Pacers leading them to two Eastern Conference Finals and the NBA Finals. The BIG NAME effect will only last so long, though, before results dictate players’ respect. To get those results in the face of lack of experience, talented assistants to manage the Xs and Os heavy lifting is necessary. Remember, Bird worked so well in Indiana because he had Rick Carlisle as an assistant. Despite Carlisle’s contributions and Bird’s lauds, the Pacers went BIG NAME again with Isiah Thomas instead of promoting Carlisle when Bird retired as coach. That went quite not so well. Not horribly, but the Pacers stymied until, given a second chance, the organization hired Carlisle as head coach.

Now, I’m not a fancy Southern lawyer or extremely knowledgeable about the Warriors coaching staff to sway y’all good folk one way or the other, but as the season (hopefully) unfolds it’d be wise to keep a watchful eye on Jackson’s development as coach in Golden State. Will he stick by his “Mama There Goes That Man” guns? Or will a deeper level of basketball theory and management develop? Will his beauty be only skin deep? Or will the catchphrases be merely an ostentatious veneer to a substantive core?

For the sake of Bay Area hoops fans and television broadcasts everywhere, I hope Jackson works out.

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Thanks for the link, Curtis. I think the other thing I find strange is, this effect doesn't seem to work in baseball or football. There's a much smaller bias towards hiring old stars.

The best part about Mark Jackson becoming the head coach of the Warriors is that I gain the pleasure of listening to someone else as a color man for ESPN. He is the worst. I don't understand why if Golden State wanted big name, then why not go with JVG? Higher upside and less risk of failing.

Same thing with the GM - a name gets hired there to cause a stir, but isn't a 'name' as a GM much more harmful than a name as a coach? I also wonder what gives an assistant the chops to be a head coach to begin with. Thibodeau got known as a defensive guru...maybe that's what has to happen

The big name coach theory is not only linked to players. In most situations the tactition vs big name coach debate is brought on by not only a lack of team success, but a lack of fan support. While the tactition may increase the teams Ws the average person doesn't generally support a team until after the winning begins (usually a season after). A big name can excite the less knowledgeable fan and put a few more people in the seats immediately.