Jimmy the snitch,
The following isn't an original idea of mine, but it's something I agree with and will help you understand what others are seeing in the current coaching situation.
There are 3 different types of coaches. The authoritarian, the relaxed submissive coach and the co-operative coach. The dictator will want everything done his way, all the time, without fail. Consequences for not playing a pick and roll in the right manner could mean a lack of minutes plus a loss of confidence, a missed shot in transition with no one to rebound will result in a time-out and a shouting match. Young players can learn a lot about playing hard and the right way with these types of coaches, but can go on very long confidence slumps. Mike Dunlop, Brendan Joyce and similar coaches loosely fit this mould. The submissive coach will let things go unchecked. Shots in transition early that miss will result in no consequences unless the team has a 1-5 win loss record and a public scapegoat is needed. When players are finally shown tape of how lazy they are around on ball screens, they won't need to make adjustments as they know the submissive coach will still give them time anyway and not say much in practice. Young players quickly lose respect and confidence in this type of coach. The co-operative coach is in the middle ground. He has the respect of the players and doesn't feel the need to punish players too much to improve their game, while the players get confidence from the coach as they know he/she is working hard to improve their game.
Phil is a submissive coach. He followed on from an era where Mike Dunlap left a good nucleus of well drilled talent reaching their peak. Brett Maher, John Rillie, Martin Cattalini and co was taught how to play the game at the highest level by Dunlap. Kevin Brooks and Darnell Mee were bought in not long after they were involved in the greatest NBA playoff upset of all time. Rupert Sapwell and Scott Ninnis both learnt their trade under Brian G at the Magic. The team was full of veterans at their peak and there was no need for Phil to call time-outs to work out how to beat a trap with less than ten seconds on the clock as teams rarely came within ten points of the 36ers. Darnell Mee didn't need to be shown how to defend a pick and roll, as he takes pride every time he hits the court and Paul Rees already had it drilled into him to show and recover. Phil was exactly the right type of coach for the right type of players at the time because this team didn't need to be over-coached. Plus Dave Claxton had Leon Trimingham and Jeff Brown to start the season with at short notice; if he had a proper pre-season plus Darnell Mee and Kevin Brooks I'm sure he would have done better than 7th.
But then as time went on Phil was expected to start developing some players, while also working with players who didn't have as complete games as the players he coached previously. Oscar, Jacob and Illman were signed to the team. Did he ever do individual sessions with these players? Did he delegate to other coaches to do individuals? Did he run thru training tape and try to work on what they needed to take their game to the next level? Why not ask some of the guys themselves, I'm sure you will get a clear answer.
And this is where the problem for the club's future comes in. See when Oscar and Jacob signed Phil was coming off some very good years with veterans and had no public complaints against him. Now every junior who even thinks of signing with Adelaide hears the stories of how Adelaide trainings are nothing more than scrimmages, about how Phil will play you out of position. How he won't hold his favourite players accountable to defensive errors or lack of effort while they get dragged for a missed shot. How one day you can wake up after getting a DNP with no warning and see Phil indicating in the paper that the team's recent bad form may have something to do with you instead of his lack of coaching. Damn half these players will be lucky to get a call from Phil himself to ask them to come to play, or if they do, the only guarantee will be a spot in the 13 with a salary lower than the league minimum for a player in the ten! I can bet money that no way will Jacob Holmes, Oscar Forman, Joe Ingles, and Brad Newley etc will come back while Phil is in town, and will also bet good money on Brad Hill walking as well. Can people also get the idea out of their head that Darnell Mee wants to finish his career in Adelaide, because I can guarantee it will never happen while Phil is in town. Players aren't signing elsewhere due to money, they are signing elsewhere as they don't want to play for Phil.
From 2002 something else happened. Brian moved to Sydney and gained the perimeter one on one players he lacked in the past. He learnt from his mistakes and realised the hold on to the ball to reduce turnovers and pound it in the post game wasn't working in this league as his teams were getting the court spread on him defensively, with 1 on 1 players forcing umpires to call fouls. The court will open up and teams were simply out-scoring him. Credit to Brian, instead of calling his critics ignorant, he admitted to his fallibilities as a coach and went about improving himself. Meanwhile the rest of the league copied suit and team scoring averages went up a fair bit (the highest ppg in the league in 1998 was 99ppg; league average was in the low 90s). Now all teams can score 110 points on any given night, where as during the 36ers championship years it was only Adelaide who were really any chance to do so. Phil has failed to recognise this change in the league, and is still coaching like it is 1998.
So in response to the thought that Smyth could be sacked and no one else better picked up I suggest that Smyth is the worst type of coach for the 36ers current position anyway. A co-operative coach or an authoritarian, or anyone who puts in any damn effort would be good in order to build the program up from scratch again. There are plenty of options around in the likes of Richard Hill, Scott Ninnis, Dave Ingham, etc. Andy Simons maybe?
