miller31time wrote:We don't need a "passable" defensive coach. We need a defensive guru.
That should be priority #1, with everything else (including ability to foster team chemistry, and offensive implementation) becoming secondary.
Just to take the other side of that argument, how is that going to affect his use of the current roster? Defensive coaches generally prefer defensive players, which we don't have a lot of. Now I'm not saying that EJ should have been given a pass because we lack great defensive talent. But I am saying that asking this team to be Boston or Cleveland defensively may be setting yourself up for disappointment - again, unless you're planning on a serious roster makeover.
I have no doubt that this team can be average defensively. With a healthy Haywood, an improved McGuire, and shot blocking bigs on the bench this team has no excuse not to be in at least the 14-16 range defensively. AT LEAST. Can they go higher? Maybe, but not to the top 5 IMO, which is the whole reason why you would hire a defensive guru.
My point is that getting a purely defensive guy without blowing up the roster isn't going to be as rosy as you might think. (You might even start hating him when he forces trades for guys like Reggie Evans and Trenton Hassell because of their defense/rebounding.) But getting a guy who can keep everybody interested offensively, deploy sensible rotations, and motivate the troops - while still keeping us in the middle of the pack defensively - may be a little more realistic. At least in the short run.
Let's see this team be average on defense for a couple years in a row. Then we can talk about turning them into the Bad Boys circa 1990.