Minnesota Sports Forum

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Ultimately I agree that the vast majority of credit for a player becoming a star rests with the player. No doubt.

But I do think Thibs was a match made in heaven for Butler and in that particular case his style and philosophy was of benefit to Jimmy. I'm not sure Jimmy is the same player he is now without Thibs in those early years.

Kawhi came into the San Antonio organization which was at the peak of its powers, surrounded by the likes of Pop, RC Buford, Parker, Duncan, and Manu. That had to have helped him. I wonder if KAT had been drafted by San Antonio at that time would he be a completely different player on defense? Perhaps so.

It's hard to point to any one thing with Giannis, but Milwaukee has built a system that has worked really well for him (at least in the regular season).

Again... Jason Kidd was Giannis' first coach.

Wiggins went through 4 coaches. Is it just bad luck none of them got to him?

It's very easy to point to superstars being superstars with a wide range of coaches. It's a lot of conjecture to point to one particular coach having a ton to do with it... and probably merely coincidental.

Let me state this one more time: *****I AGREE THAT THE PLAYER DESERVES THE VAST MAJORITY OF CREDIT FOR THEIR OWN DEVELOPMENT INTO A STAR.****** :)

But I disagree that early NBA experiences in terms of the coaching, team mates, and organizational culture have zero to only very minimal impact. I do think those things help determine the trajectory of a Butler or Kawhi in a material way. It's not a 50% or 40% or 30% variable, but it's more than 0% and probably more than 10%.

My example is KAT. I think KAT becomes a two-way stud if he had entered the league with either Miami or San Antonio.

Prodigies like LeBron are the exception.

But Towns was coached by Thibodeau... who coached Butler into a star.

--- Yes, I'm being slightly facetious with you. Apologies... But I'm trying to make a point. It's fine if you want to give coaches some credit, but it's so coincidental. And there are so many variables. "But it was a bad fit. Bad timing. Bad teammates. Bad season. Et al."

Maybe we look at it this way...

What superstars seemingly came out of nowhere with their 2nd or 3rd coach?

Camden wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Ultimately I agree that the vast majority of credit for a player becoming a star rests with the player. No doubt.

But I do think Thibs was a match made in heaven for Butler and in that particular case his style and philosophy was of benefit to Jimmy. I'm not sure Jimmy is the same player he is now without Thibs in those early years.

Kawhi came into the San Antonio organization which was at the peak of its powers, surrounded by the likes of Pop, RC Buford, Parker, Duncan, and Manu. That had to have helped him. I wonder if KAT had been drafted by San Antonio at that time would he be a completely different player on defense? Perhaps so.

It's hard to point to any one thing with Giannis, but Milwaukee has built a system that has worked really well for him (at least in the regular season).

Again... Jason Kidd was Giannis' first coach.

Wiggins went through 4 coaches. Is it just bad luck none of them got to him?

It's very easy to point to superstars being superstars with a wide range of coaches. It's a lot of conjecture to point to one particular coach having a ton to do with it... and probably merely coincidental.

Let me state this one more time: *****I AGREE THAT THE PLAYER DESERVES THE VAST MAJORITY OF CREDIT FOR THEIR OWN DEVELOPMENT INTO A STAR.****** :)

But I disagree that early NBA experiences in terms of the coaching, team mates, and organizational culture have zero to only very minimal impact. I do think those things help determine the trajectory of a Butler or Kawhi in a material way. It's not a 50% or 40% or 30% variable, but it's more than 0% and probably more than 10%.

My example is KAT. I think KAT becomes a two-way stud if he had entered the league with either Miami or San Antonio.

Prodigies like LeBron are the exception.

But Towns was coached by Thibodeau... who coached Butler into a star.

--- Yes, I'm being slightly facetious with you. Apologies... But I'm trying to make a point. It's fine if you want to give coaches some credit, but it's so coincidental. And there are so many variables. "But it was a bad fit. Bad timing. Bad teammates. Bad season. Et al."

Maybe we look at it this way...

What superstars seemingly came out of nowhere with their 2nd or 3rd coach?

Victor Oladipo came to mind. D'Angelo Russell is another. Kyle Lowry. James Harden, technically. There are probably better examples out there, but I still think coaching and situation matters to player development. Obviously, it's on that individual player to absorb the coaching/training and utilize it on the court, but there's some sort of blend that is needed.

Q12543 wrote:Wiggins is a bad example IMO since I think he's so far off on the "self-made" side of the equation that no amount of coaching or organizational culture could coax him into becoming a superstar. While he had an ideal physical profile, his skills were (and still are to some degree) lacking in shooting touch and ball handling. Then there was the ever-present motor issue.....

That's why I use the KAT "what if" scenario. He came into the league with some immediate high-level skills. I am convinced he'd be a better defender if he was drafted and spent his early years in the San Antonio or Miami culture.

Camden wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Ultimately I agree that the vast majority of credit for a player becoming a star rests with the player. No doubt.

But I do think Thibs was a match made in heaven for Butler and in that particular case his style and philosophy was of benefit to Jimmy. I'm not sure Jimmy is the same player he is now without Thibs in those early years.

Kawhi came into the San Antonio organization which was at the peak of its powers, surrounded by the likes of Pop, RC Buford, Parker, Duncan, and Manu. That had to have helped him. I wonder if KAT had been drafted by San Antonio at that time would he be a completely different player on defense? Perhaps so.

It's hard to point to any one thing with Giannis, but Milwaukee has built a system that has worked really well for him (at least in the regular season).

Again... Jason Kidd was Giannis' first coach.

Wiggins went through 4 coaches. Is it just bad luck none of them got to him?

It's very easy to point to superstars being superstars with a wide range of coaches. It's a lot of conjecture to point to one particular coach having a ton to do with it... and probably merely coincidental.

Let me state this one more time: *****I AGREE THAT THE PLAYER DESERVES THE VAST MAJORITY OF CREDIT FOR THEIR OWN DEVELOPMENT INTO A STAR.****** :)

But I disagree that early NBA experiences in terms of the coaching, team mates, and organizational culture have zero to only very minimal impact. I do think those things help determine the trajectory of a Butler or Kawhi in a material way. It's not a 50% or 40% or 30% variable, but it's more than 0% and probably more than 10%.

My example is KAT. I think KAT becomes a two-way stud if he had entered the league with either Miami or San Antonio.

Prodigies like LeBron are the exception.

But Towns was coached by Thibodeau... who coached Butler into a star.

--- Yes, I'm being slightly facetious with you. Apologies... But I'm trying to make a point. It's fine if you want to give coaches some credit, but it's so coincidental. And there are so many variables. "But it was a bad fit. Bad timing. Bad teammates. Bad season. Et al."

Maybe we look at it this way...

What superstars seemingly came out of nowhere with their 2nd or 3rd coach?

Victor Oladipo came to mind. D'Angelo Russell is another. Kyle Lowry. James Harden, technically. There are probably better examples out there, but I still think coaching and situation matters to player development. Obviously, it's on that individual player to absorb the coaching/training and utilize it on the court, but there's some sort of blend that is needed.

lipoli390 wrote:

Camden wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Ultimately I agree that the vast majority of credit for a player becoming a star rests with the player. No doubt.

But I do think Thibs was a match made in heaven for Butler and in that particular case his style and philosophy was of benefit to Jimmy. I'm not sure Jimmy is the same player he is now without Thibs in those early years.

Kawhi came into the San Antonio organization which was at the peak of its powers, surrounded by the likes of Pop, RC Buford, Parker, Duncan, and Manu. That had to have helped him. I wonder if KAT had been drafted by San Antonio at that time would he be a completely different player on defense? Perhaps so.

It's hard to point to any one thing with Giannis, but Milwaukee has built a system that has worked really well for him (at least in the regular season).

Again... Jason Kidd was Giannis' first coach.

Wiggins went through 4 coaches. Is it just bad luck none of them got to him?

It's very easy to point to superstars being superstars with a wide range of coaches. It's a lot of conjecture to point to one particular coach having a ton to do with it... and probably merely coincidental.

Let me state this one more time: *****I AGREE THAT THE PLAYER DESERVES THE VAST MAJORITY OF CREDIT FOR THEIR OWN DEVELOPMENT INTO A STAR.****** :)

But I disagree that early NBA experiences in terms of the coaching, team mates, and organizational culture have zero to only very minimal impact. I do think those things help determine the trajectory of a Butler or Kawhi in a material way. It's not a 50% or 40% or 30% variable, but it's more than 0% and probably more than 10%.

My example is KAT. I think KAT becomes a two-way stud if he had entered the league with either Miami or San Antonio.

Prodigies like LeBron are the exception.

But Towns was coached by Thibodeau... who coached Butler into a star.

--- Yes, I'm being slightly facetious with you. Apologies... But I'm trying to make a point. It's fine if you want to give coaches some credit, but it's so coincidental. And there are so many variables. "But it was a bad fit. Bad timing. Bad teammates. Bad season. Et al."

Maybe we look at it this way...

What superstars seemingly came out of nowhere with their 2nd or 3rd coach?

Victor Oladipo came to mind. D'Angelo Russell is another. Kyle Lowry. James Harden, technically. There are probably better examples out there, but I still think coaching and situation matters to player development. Obviously, it's on that individual player to absorb the coaching/training and utilize it on the court, but there's some sort of blend that is needed.

I think the individual success of a player is 80% dependent on the player, 15% dependent on the situation/opportunity and 5% dependent on the head coach. However, TEAM success still has a lot to do with the head coach

PorkChop wrote:Is Butler considered a superstar on this board? Honest question.

khans2k5 wrote:

PorkChop wrote:Is Butler considered a superstar on this board? Honest question.

If you look at the impact he made in MN, Philly and now Miami after what he did in Chicago I think he would have to be considered a superstar. He's more of a support star than most of the top guys, but I think you take Jimmy over PG13 any day of the week now.