So, people on here are constantly bemoaning the fact that the Blazers don't have a "big man coach" since Kim Hughes was fired. Here's an article from 2012 on varying opinions around the league about the value of hiring a big man as big man coach. I don't know if things have changed, but it sounds to me like it's not viewed as an especially essential thing for a team to have. http://www.nba.com/2012/news/features/steve_aschburner/10/11/nba-big-man-coaches-becoming-a-rarity/
It's not that we want a BIG big man coach, it's that we want A big man coach. Someone to teach our bigs the intricacies of their position. If Spud Webb was an effective big man coach I'd be fine hiring him - we just need SOMEBODY WHO UNDERSTANDS THE POSITION, regardless of their height.
I always find it funny how people think that an ex big man player is the best option for a coach for the bigs. I remember when Bill Bano was with McMillan and worked with the bigs and Aldridge gave him lots of praise in helping him. The best players aren't necessarily the best coaches. Pete Newell who started as a coach at U of San Francisco and after retiring from coaching then ran a camp to help develop players and known for his big man camp and he never played in the NBA
I believe I asked you once or maybe it was someone else, how do you know we don;t have a coach that coaches the bigs? Do you think the bigs just sit around during practice?
It's obvious the Blazers are moving past the "we need a big man coach" league philosophy. They would have replaced Hughes years ago (esp with Nurk on the team) if they had thought otherwise. My guess is they rotate coaches with players at different times to practice different facets of the game. I mean, isn't that what the Spurs do. Seems to work pretty well for them.
