On Three Requests I’m Looking For From A New Sixers Coach

How do you evaluate an NBA coach? The NBA media sphere evaluates coach performance using mostly subjective measures— perceived effort levels of the team versus the league standard, under- or overperformance of the team versus expected preseason record, rotation decisions versus what you yourself would do, attentiveness of players in huddles, and whether or not the star players stare daggers through the hearts of their coach even in victory (hi, Jim Boylen). It’s very imprecise, which makes sense since we only see the results of their jobs 7–10 hours per week during the season. It’s exactly why I’m not going to get too aggressive in evaluating a coaching prospect, because there’s a lot that goes into the position and only so much of it is both visible and measurable. I have preferences — and the title implies that I have measurements for that — but I’m willing to give most coaches a chance.

Put more specifically, I’ll give a coach a chance unless there is a clear disqualifying factor preventing me from doing so. One example of an ex-coach with a disqualifying factor is Mark Jackson, who coached a healthy Steph Curry and Klay Thompson to an average offense through a lack of caring or knowledge of how shooting works. A good coach would simply not do that.

This summer may feature the most accomplished coaching free agent list ever, based on the number of candidates with championship bonafides and varied experiences. Nate McMillan, Doc Rivers, Tyronn Lue, and Mike D’Antoni should be NBA coaches next season if they choose to be. Let’s call them the Prime Candidates, since I’ll be referring to this group a lot later down the page. Because they’re been around the block a few times, their former teams have records of both tangible team-wide behavior and less tangible behaviors. Fringe Candidates like retread options Alvin Gentry and Dave Joerger bring warts but also clear positives. New blood out there is more of a mystery box; I prefer a veteran coach, as there’s plenty of good, available names, but let’s consider anyone in that boat a Fringe Candidate.

Also available this summer is Brett Brown, who was chronically undervalued in Philly. His time had come, but his positivity was more than necessary during the three Process years, and his culture-setting and ability to handle chaos was never appreciated enough. He should coach somewhere down the line. That said, his weaknesses were clear by the end — his inflexibility with his ideals and inability to get the overbloated roster to play together and at their best at any time chief among them. My three ideals are in line with shoring up areas where Brown appeared deficient, and assume that otherwise the Sixers remain strong in the areas where they are strong (which is chiefly social media and passive-aggressiveness, shit, uh being good and talented and very tall).

1.) Hold key players accountable

Since the beginning of Brett Brown’s tenure in Philadelphia, he’s been accused of coddling top prospects and then, eventually, superstars. I doubt that’s untrue. All teams bend over backwards for superstars; the best players earn that by virtue of their skillsets and salaries. Being good has its perks. But it shouldn’t mean that a coach shouldn’t, like, intensely coach, critique, and possibly even bench a star player if the situation calls for it. You don’t need the racist Bobby Knight-ish coach that the Bulls were attempting to recreate last year. You need someone who simultaneously respect and earn respect from stars and actually coach and help them.

Assuming the Sixers remain married to their Simmons-Embiid core, the new coach will face the same challenges the old one did. Chief among them will be ensuring Joel Embiid understands the critical nature of this upcoming season and maintains his conditioning during the season. The coach should respect Ben Simmons’s game while also challenging him to score. The coach should tell Al Horford, god-forbid that he’s still here, that he’ll need to accept a lesser role while simultaneously making him feel more involved in the offense.

All of the Prime Candidates above have coached stars who have had career seasons. All have coached veteran teams with expectations. None have every conquered a problem with as much upside as an Embiid-Simmons duo. I’m sure some assistants have a solid record in this regard as well. At the same time, Alvin Gentry coddled Zion Williamson who has similar health concerns to Embiid and his conditioning was a question for all of 2019–20.

2.) Coaxing consistent defensive effort out of an inconsistent team

Opinion time: I don’t think the inherent offensive limitations of a Simmons-Embiid tandem will ever become not-inherent. I have no faith that Simmons will ever develop a jumper strong enough to alter the dimensions of a defense. They will be in each other’s way as long as they’re teammates.

Second opinion time: That won’t matter if the Sixers unlock the team’s defensive potential. An engaged and in-shape Embiid can adequately play any style of defense effectively and would be the most impactful defender in the NBA. Ben Simmons is one of the best perimeter defenders in the league already and should still get better. Together, they have the intelligence, athleticism, and size to guard anyone better than any other NBA team, and I don’t think it’s close.

Third opinion time: it’s an indictment of the team that the defense ranked 15th in the NBA in 2018–19 and 8th in 2019–20. Brett Brown’s philosophies on defense remained the same over time — that having Embiid guard the paint and all wings selling out to prevent threes could create what’s close to an optimal defensive shot chart. Their results never achieved optimality. Too often, the Sixers would live with being beat one-on-one by increasingly skilled guards. They’d foul excessively. They couldn’t execute at the same level without Embiid on the floor. These themes persisted because the philosophy never changed; these philosophies were also used during the 10-win Process season. I even wrote about them. Playing perfect instead of playing percentages is tiring, and the Sixers never maintained peak defensive effort.

Not every coach in my Prime Candidate pool has shown they can consistently coax defense effort out of a team which is good enough to win 50 games without it. Of the PCs, Mike D’Antoni never cared for defense, and his switch-heavy tendencies probably wouldn’t work here. Doc Rivers could get a mediocre team to play hard, but unless he’s coaching on-court maniac Kevin Garnett, his more talented teams zoned out during the regular season. Ty Lue got enough out of the Cavaliers during his first season, where he won a championship with LeBron, but his other two teams took defense as seriously as anti-science folk treat coronavirus. Only Nate McMillan can really say he’s coached consistent effort out of his defenses, but he’s also never had a team in true contention.

There’s a thought that defensive buy-in across the roster is carried by the team’s stars and their teammates’ respect for them. If so, that makes trait 1 even more important. I don’t think it’s out of the question that any coach I named could help build the Sixers defensive monster that was promised, but at the same time, it probably is the most important for the team’s title hopes. Gulp!

3.) Further modernizing shot selection for the star players

Let’s break this down into three categories, one for each star player that needs to be unlocked offensively, that I think is somewhat independent from each star’s flaws (which I suppose will remain unchanged).

Ben Simmons: aside from improvements in his shot form, the easiest thing to upgrade is the number of planned shot attempts, regardless of location. In 2020, your lead ball-handler cannot be a scoring afterthought in planned sets. Odds are that he’ll remain the best ball-handler for next year’s Run It Back A Year In Arrears campaign. Rarely if ever was Ben Simmons the designated scoring threat for the Sixers under Brett Brown. Running more offense for Simmons — including while he’s sharing the court with Embiid — seems like the easiest way for a coach to unlock more offensive potential. How is another story… which is one of many reasons why I’m not an NBA coach. I don’t have a great answer for this. But Rivers and D’Antoni are known for offensive ingenuity.

Joel Embiid: I don’t think Joel Embiid is a particularly good screening big, ast least in a traditional pick-and-roll/pop situation. He’s uncoordinated while airborne, plodding as a roller, and hasn’t proved to be efficient enough or shoot quickly and decisively enough on threes to warrant a heavy pick-and-pop attack. The problem is that Embiid knows he’s a below-average shooter and pump-fakes his way into oblivion (turnovers leading to a fast break). I’d like a coach that would inch him away from face-up drives and insist on him shooting those threes. They’re more efficient than most midrange offense — and it should offer a defensive benefit given Embiid would be naturally closer to the defensive end of the court off a miss.

Some teams really insist on having bigs space the floor at the top of the key. Milwaukee has built a legendary regular season defense on the power of this. Indiana under Nate McMillan actually figured this out with Myles Turner as well. It comes at the sacrifice of offensive rebounding for your largest player; could Ty Lue live with that? I’d like to think he’s pragmatic enough to do so.

Tobias Harris: there’s a misconception that Harris is an elite midrange shooter. His numbers in 2019–20 don’t necessarily reflect that. Per basketball-reference, they look like this:

(note that these percentages shouldn’t be considered gospel)

Taking the above numbers from 10–22 feet, at about a 42.5% clip and 0.85 points per shot, he is awfully average at shots outside the paint. His 3–10 shot accuracy is quite good; if only he had the athleticism to turn some of those into rim shots. His overall TS% is below the league’s average — 55.6% versus a league average of 56.3% for 2019–20.

Simply put, he needs to be more efficient, and the easiest way to do it as a coach would be to insist on his shot selection. A coach can coax him into that by clamping down on his midrange rampage — he shouldn’t have nearly as many midrange attempts as three point attempts — and insist on his three point shot. It’s a point in Mike D’Antoni’s favor again, with his history of unleashing previously shy three point scorers and turning them into gunners. Ty Lue insisted on a spread attack in Cleveland, gamely noting that a LeBron-based team could likely outscore anyone if it had enough perimeter shooting. Doc Rivers literally coached Harris during his career’s most successful offensive stretch, buoyed by increased three point volume and accuracy. Nate McMillan, on the other hand, has a history of poor shot selection as a coach, and a lack of pace to match it.

The lack of foul drawing is a harder puzzle to solve. Maybe Doc Rivers can complain to officials on his behalf? He’s quite good at that, but it wasn’t evident in LA.

The one thing with the Prime Candidates is that they’re all quite good coaches per my and popular opinion, but they’re all available for one reason or another. Perfection isn’t the goal, but I can’t confidently say more than 3 or 4 coaches currently employed would figure this situation out. If I didn’t believe so much in the talent base of the Sixers’ stars, I’d probably opt for the new coach mystery box. But I still, maybe against better judgment, believe in the talent. If the talent is there, I think the proven coaches with known strengths could push the Sixers over the top. I think specifically Lue or Rivers would be the best option. But really, @ Sixers Organization and whoever is running shit: just don’t hire a coach with a disqualifying factor like Jackson or Jason Kidd. The Sixers have taken so much joy away from me already this year — at least give me a reason to hope for better next year.