The Mind of Tyrone Corbin

Here's a great post from a Jazz fan on how Corbins history as a player may effect his decision making...

Quote :

Al Jefferson. Paul Millsap. Raja Bell. Josh Howard. Randy Foye.

What do these guys have in common?

The number one answer would probably be that each of these players got to where they are through hard work and determination, rather than natural, God-given athletic ability.

In terms of the Jazz, the number one thing they probably have in common is that they were/have been shown favor by Tyrone Corbin over inexperienced, younger guys who arguably do possess natural, God-given athletic ability.

As a coach who was a former journeyman player, you have to wonder how Corbin’s experiences as a player are influencing his coaching decisions today.

....

http://jazzfanatical.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/what-is-my-motivation-the-tyrone-corbin-edition/

The article goes on to list Corbins palyer bio and gives some great quotes from Corbin and Matt Harpring that drive home the point. Definitely worth reading the whole thing if you wonder sometimes where Cobin is coming from.

It makes sense, but he isn't the only coach on the team. You know his assistants are helping him make these decisions. I'm not impressed with Ty's ability to coach so far, but I do see some improvement. Also he isn't a coach with a secure job. He is going to do whatever it takes to win as many games as possible, to keep his job. He makes bad decisions at times, but I don't really think it is because of some grudge he is holding. I think it's just more inexperience.

Romoholic wrote:

It makes sense, but he isn't the only coach on the team. You know his assistants are helping him make these decisions. I'm not impressed with Ty's ability to coach so far, but I do see some improvement. Also he isn't a coach with a secure job. He is going to do whatever it takes to win as many games as possible, to keep his job. He makes bad decisions at times, but I don't really think it is because of some grudge he is holding. I think it's just more inexperience.

One would think that development of the younger talent for the future is just as relevant as making the playoffs from the FO perspective. Corbin definitely is not creative and doesn't seem to have much game feel - witness the Wiz game. While granted it was against the second line-up, Kanter had it going on in the first half, got jerked early and didn't see the floor for the rest of the night. Very typical pattern Corbin has with Kanter. Doesn't matter how poorly the starters are playing, he will ride them anyway. Every 15 games or so we will see him use an "unsusual" line-up to finish a game that has a bench player playing significant minutes in the crunch because that player had it going on, either on D or O. But not nearly enough. I'm with you, Corbin has not won me over, I think he is a pretty average coach, maybe below average. Yes, the Jazz had a brutal road schedule (and they suck on the road, something a coach should have some influence on), but just now they are finally playing the quality of ball we knew they could based simply on the talent on the team, and I'm not sure a bit it has to do with coaching but rather the players.

MTJazz wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

It makes sense, but he isn't the only coach on the team. You know his assistants are helping him make these decisions. I'm not impressed with Ty's ability to coach so far, but I do see some improvement. Also he isn't a coach with a secure job. He is going to do whatever it takes to win as many games as possible, to keep his job. He makes bad decisions at times, but I don't really think it is because of some grudge he is holding. I think it's just more inexperience.

One would think that development of the younger talent for the future is just as relevant as making the playoffs from the FO perspective. Corbin definitely is not creative and doesn't seem to have much game feel - witness the Wiz game. While granted it was against the second line-up, Kanter had it going on in the first half, got jerked early and didn't see the floor for the rest of the night. Very typical pattern Corbin has with Kanter. Doesn't matter how poorly the starters are playing, he will ride them anyway. Every 15 games or so we will see him use an "unsusual" line-up to finish a game that has a bench player playing significant minutes in the crunch because that player had it going on, either on D or O. But not nearly enough. I'm with you, Corbin has not won me over, I think he is a pretty average coach, maybe below average. Yes, the Jazz had a brutal road schedule (and they suck on the road, something a coach should have some influence on), but just now they are finally playing the quality of ball we knew they could based simply on the talent on the team, and I'm not sure a bit it has to do with coaching but rather the players.

Last night is kind of a poor example to the point you were trying to make. It doesn't really matter how he played in the first half, as a unit the starters handed the "Core 4" a 17 point lead at the end of the third quarter, which they proceeded to blow in just over 3 minutes, and the bleeding didn't stop until Kanter was yanked along with Burks and Watson.

And giving Corbin all of the credit for failure and then not give him credit for the "quality of ball" they are currently playing seems kind of dumb doesn't it? Especially with what "quality of play" means to a Jazz fan. Either he taught them how to play together, put them in a position to succeed, and work within the system or he didn't.

I have my own beefs with Corbins coaching, but I can't deny that he does some really good things (trying different lineups, moving Hayward to the bench, picking up the pace and encouraging more ball movement, improving the defensive rotations and rebounding) along with the things that drive me crazy (his rotations, playing ineffective veterans).

TheMagnus wrote:

MTJazz wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

It makes sense, but he isn't the only coach on the team. You know his assistants are helping him make these decisions. I'm not impressed with Ty's ability to coach so far, but I do see some improvement. Also he isn't a coach with a secure job. He is going to do whatever it takes to win as many games as possible, to keep his job. He makes bad decisions at times, but I don't really think it is because of some grudge he is holding. I think it's just more inexperience.

One would think that development of the younger talent for the future is just as relevant as making the playoffs from the FO perspective. Corbin definitely is not creative and doesn't seem to have much game feel - witness the Wiz game. While granted it was against the second line-up, Kanter had it going on in the first half, got jerked early and didn't see the floor for the rest of the night. Very typical pattern Corbin has with Kanter. Doesn't matter how poorly the starters are playing, he will ride them anyway. Every 15 games or so we will see him use an "unsusual" line-up to finish a game that has a bench player playing significant minutes in the crunch because that player had it going on, either on D or O. But not nearly enough. I'm with you, Corbin has not won me over, I think he is a pretty average coach, maybe below average. Yes, the Jazz had a brutal road schedule (and they suck on the road, something a coach should have some influence on), but just now they are finally playing the quality of ball we knew they could based simply on the talent on the team, and I'm not sure a bit it has to do with coaching but rather the players.

Last night is kind of a poor example to the point you were trying to make. It doesn't really matter how he played in the first half, as a unit the starters handed the "Core 4" a 17 point lead at the end of the third quarter, which they proceeded to blow in just over 3 minutes, and the bleeding didn't stop until Kanter was yanked along with Burks and Watson.

And giving Corbin all of the credit for failure and then not give him credit for the "quality of ball" they are currently playing seems kind of dumb doesn't it? Especially with what "quality of play" means to a Jazz fan. Either he taught them how to play together, put them in a position to succeed, and work within the system or he didn't.

I have my own beefs with Corbins coaching, but I can't deny that he does some really good things (trying different lineups, moving Hayward to the bench, picking up the pace and encouraging more ball movement, improving the defensive rotations and rebounding) along with the things that drive me crazy (his rotations, playing ineffective veterans).

You know, one of these days I might say something that you actually agree with, and I'm guessing it might be July 20014 if my crystal ball is accurate. Anyway, I didn't see anything besides Kanter hitting all his shots and grabbing rebounds at a high rate - my bad. Burks and Watson were not playing that great but there was nothing wrong with Kanter's game. My point with Corbin is he is an average at best coach. Sure, Hayward off the bench appears to be a good move, (though how do we know he wouldn't be an even better starter now, and perhaps Marvin off the bench would work for Marvin's game)? But "ball movement" and "picking up the pace"? That there is Basketball 101. Now, if he did something to stop the bleeding when the Jazz start blowing big leads, like mixing up the rotations, changing D- or O-schemes, drawing up killer plays after calling timeouts, actually calling timeouts to stop the other team's momentum - well, that would be nice.

MTJazz wrote:

You know, one of these days I might say something that you actually agree with, and I'm guessing it might be July 20014 if my crystal ball is accurate. Anyway, I didn't see anything besides Kanter hitting all his shots and grabbing rebounds at a high rate - my bad. Burks and Watson were not playing that great but there was nothing wrong with Kanter's game. My point with Corbin is he is an average at best coach. Sure, Hayward off the bench appears to be a good move, (though how do we know he wouldn't be an even better starter now, and perhaps Marvin off the bench would work for Marvin's game)? But "ball movement" and "picking up the pace"? That there is Basketball 101. Now, if he did something to stop the bleeding when the Jazz start blowing big leads, like mixing up the rotations, changing D- or O-schemes, drawing up killer plays after calling timeouts, actually calling timeouts to stop the other team's momentum - well, that would be nice.

I agree that Corbin is an average coach, so we've got that going for us, right? I also agree that stuff is basketball 101, but it is remarkable as you watch games around the NBA how many teams struggle with those simple concepts. There's a reason watching the NBA is often intolerable for a longtime Jazz fan, playing basketball the RIGHT way often seems like a dying art.

I just wish that you guys were the coaching staff of the Utah Jazz, since it seems like you have all the answers that Ty Corbin and his assistance obviously don't have.

thejazzkickazz wrote:

I just wish that you guys were the coaching staff of the Utah Jazz, since it seems like you have all the answers that Ty Corbin and his assistance obviously don't have.

Ya, it's easy to play armchair coach, but I look at it the same way I look at any other product that I invest my time and money in.

I don't know how to build a car (or a sofa, or a refrigerator, etc.), but I know how to use one, I know how to tell a good one from a bad one, and I can even fix them sometimes, so I can tell you which ones I think are crap and which ones I like and I can tell you why I feel that way.

That's really all this is, and I think it is totally fair to judge coaches and players in this way, even if our judgments are often completely irrational.



....



This post actaully made me ask myself "If the Jazz were a car company, relative to the rest of the NBA, what car company would they be?"

The answer was obvious, Utah is the Toyota of the NBA. Fairly bland and traditional in their style, never the best at anything and never the worst, always comfortable and dependable...

MTJazz wrote:

TheMagnus wrote:

MTJazz wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

It makes sense, but he isn't the only coach on the team. You know his assistants are helping him make these decisions. I'm not impressed with Ty's ability to coach so far, but I do see some improvement. Also he isn't a coach with a secure job. He is going to do whatever it takes to win as many games as possible, to keep his job. He makes bad decisions at times, but I don't really think it is because of some grudge he is holding. I think it's just more inexperience.

One would think that development of the younger talent for the future is just as relevant as making the playoffs from the FO perspective. Corbin definitely is not creative and doesn't seem to have much game feel - witness the Wiz game. While granted it was against the second line-up, Kanter had it going on in the first half, got jerked early and didn't see the floor for the rest of the night. Very typical pattern Corbin has with Kanter. Doesn't matter how poorly the starters are playing, he will ride them anyway. Every 15 games or so we will see him use an "unsusual" line-up to finish a game that has a bench player playing significant minutes in the crunch because that player had it going on, either on D or O. But not nearly enough. I'm with you, Corbin has not won me over, I think he is a pretty average coach, maybe below average. Yes, the Jazz had a brutal road schedule (and they suck on the road, something a coach should have some influence on), but just now they are finally playing the quality of ball we knew they could based simply on the talent on the team, and I'm not sure a bit it has to do with coaching but rather the players.

Last night is kind of a poor example to the point you were trying to make. It doesn't really matter how he played in the first half, as a unit the starters handed the "Core 4" a 17 point lead at the end of the third quarter, which they proceeded to blow in just over 3 minutes, and the bleeding didn't stop until Kanter was yanked along with Burks and Watson.

And giving Corbin all of the credit for failure and then not give him credit for the "quality of ball" they are currently playing seems kind of dumb doesn't it? Especially with what "quality of play" means to a Jazz fan. Either he taught them how to play together, put them in a position to succeed, and work within the system or he didn't.

I have my own beefs with Corbins coaching, but I can't deny that he does some really good things (trying different lineups, moving Hayward to the bench, picking up the pace and encouraging more ball movement, improving the defensive rotations and rebounding) along with the things that drive me crazy (his rotations, playing ineffective veterans).

You know, one of these days I might say something that you actually agree with, and I'm guessing it might be July 20014 if my crystal ball is accurate. Anyway, I didn't see anything besides Kanter hitting all his shots and grabbing rebounds at a high rate - my bad. Burks and Watson were not playing that great but there was nothing wrong with Kanter's game. My point with Corbin is he is an average at best coach. Sure, Hayward off the bench appears to be a good move, (though how do we know he wouldn't be an even better starter now, and perhaps Marvin off the bench would work for Marvin's game)? But "ball movement" and "picking up the pace"? That there is Basketball 101. Now, if he did something to stop the bleeding when the Jazz start blowing big leads, like mixing up the rotations, changing D- or O-schemes, drawing up killer plays after calling timeouts, actually calling timeouts to stop the other team's momentum - well, that would be nice.

I think thats one of the biggest problems I have with him, that go along with not liking his rotations: he watches as leads not only dwindle, but they evaporate. And THEN, he decides to make a change. The guy never seems to stop the bleeding, and it always seems to coincide with right after he goes AWAY from what was working well.

Mutangclan wrote:

MTJazz wrote:

TheMagnus wrote:

MTJazz wrote:

Romoholic wrote:

It makes sense, but he isn't the only coach on the team. You know his assistants are helping him make these decisions. I'm not impressed with Ty's ability to coach so far, but I do see some improvement. Also he isn't a coach with a secure job. He is going to do whatever it takes to win as many games as possible, to keep his job. He makes bad decisions at times, but I don't really think it is because of some grudge he is holding. I think it's just more inexperience.

One would think that development of the younger talent for the future is just as relevant as making the playoffs from the FO perspective. Corbin definitely is not creative and doesn't seem to have much game feel - witness the Wiz game. While granted it was against the second line-up, Kanter had it going on in the first half, got jerked early and didn't see the floor for the rest of the night. Very typical pattern Corbin has with Kanter. Doesn't matter how poorly the starters are playing, he will ride them anyway. Every 15 games or so we will see him use an "unsusual" line-up to finish a game that has a bench player playing significant minutes in the crunch because that player had it going on, either on D or O. But not nearly enough. I'm with you, Corbin has not won me over, I think he is a pretty average coach, maybe below average. Yes, the Jazz had a brutal road schedule (and they suck on the road, something a coach should have some influence on), but just now they are finally playing the quality of ball we knew they could based simply on the talent on the team, and I'm not sure a bit it has to do with coaching but rather the players.

Last night is kind of a poor example to the point you were trying to make. It doesn't really matter how he played in the first half, as a unit the starters handed the "Core 4" a 17 point lead at the end of the third quarter, which they proceeded to blow in just over 3 minutes, and the bleeding didn't stop until Kanter was yanked along with Burks and Watson.

And giving Corbin all of the credit for failure and then not give him credit for the "quality of ball" they are currently playing seems kind of dumb doesn't it? Especially with what "quality of play" means to a Jazz fan. Either he taught them how to play together, put them in a position to succeed, and work within the system or he didn't.

I have my own beefs with Corbins coaching, but I can't deny that he does some really good things (trying different lineups, moving Hayward to the bench, picking up the pace and encouraging more ball movement, improving the defensive rotations and rebounding) along with the things that drive me crazy (his rotations, playing ineffective veterans).

You know, one of these days I might say something that you actually agree with, and I'm guessing it might be July 20014 if my crystal ball is accurate. Anyway, I didn't see anything besides Kanter hitting all his shots and grabbing rebounds at a high rate - my bad. Burks and Watson were not playing that great but there was nothing wrong with Kanter's game. My point with Corbin is he is an average at best coach. Sure, Hayward off the bench appears to be a good move, (though how do we know he wouldn't be an even better starter now, and perhaps Marvin off the bench would work for Marvin's game)? But "ball movement" and "picking up the pace"? That there is Basketball 101. Now, if he did something to stop the bleeding when the Jazz start blowing big leads, like mixing up the rotations, changing D- or O-schemes, drawing up killer plays after calling timeouts, actually calling timeouts to stop the other team's momentum - well, that would be nice.

I think thats one of the biggest problems I have with him, that go along with not liking his rotations: he watches as leads not only dwindle, but they evaporate. And THEN, he decides to make a change. The guy never seems to stop the bleeding, and it always seems to coincide with right after he goes AWAY from what was working well.

Great thread. Looking at Ty as our coach and a former Jazz player is a perfect way for us to look at it. We have Jerry Sloan as an example of a coach who could win the game before it even started by coaching his team in practice as to what they should do in any given situation. Now, we have Ty, who wants to do what Sloan did, but, is constantly faced with situations where HE needs to be making the decisions, rather than leaving it up to his well-coached players. In almost every situation back in the Sloan era, the best decision was to not call a time out and let the well-coached players out-play the opponent. Sloan (and Johnson) had the Jazz prepared, and didn't need to risk taking a time-out (which would give the other team's coach time to make a move). Ty doesn't have the Jazz running on automatic nearly to the degree Sloan had his teams running. And, when it comes to game-time coaching, Ty is sometimes getting out-coached.

Ty hasn't been given the extremely solid players like Stockton and Malone. He has, however, been given a much deeper bench than the Jazz have ever had. Ty needs to learn how to use player management better, or admit he can't help the Jazz win it all. Frankly, Ty is in a hole that no NBA coach could dig himself out of-- out-matched talent-wise, and, a team strategy relying on all players out-performing their opponents.

I have been thinking about this thread, and the overall sentiments of Jazz fans who are becoming somewhat impatient by Ty Corbin's management of the team. I will admit that I share some of the frustrations that some of you have aired out on this chatboard. I would like to see players like Enes Kanter and DeMarre Carroll get more minutes. I love the hustle and determination of the two guys, and I also see them as having more upside than the players they are backing up.

However, I also want to give Ty Corbin a fair shake. Does Ty Corbin also have upside, as do EK and DC? I'd like to think that that is at least possible. Look at Ty's situation. He is thrust into a role of heavy leadership very unexepectedly two seasons ago, mid-season, and without his all-star point guard. Essentially, a shit sandwich is dropped in his lap and he's asked to take a bite. His best remaining players are Al Jefferson, a guy who is new to the team, and Paul Millsap, an overachieving 2nd round draft pick. The rest of the team are essentially rookies, journeymen, wash-ups or never-has-beens. Then, he gets a strike-shortened second season with a bunch of rookies/2nd years who don't get the benefit of summer league ball or pre-season. So, in essence, before this season he had coached what amounts to not even one continuous full season. THIS season is his first FULL season in the league, and he's only halfway through that. Personally, I don't think he's been provided a normal chance to show what he has got.

Let's analyze the issue of his player usage. A lot of us would love to see more of Enes Kanter over Al Jefferson (since he primarily backs up Al). First, Ty has to balance minutes between Enes and Derrick Favors. If he plays more of one, he's most likely going to be playing less of the other. If Enes were getting Derrick's minutes, and Derrick Enes's, we'd all be bitching that Derrick isn't getting enough playing time. Second, Ty has to think about what player to go to in crunchtime. Do you go with the guy who has been in the league for years, has averaged double figures in points and rebounds, knows the ins and outs of the game, understands how to handle the pressure in the last few minutes (AJ), or does he go with the young 2nd year player who has a great deal of potential, but who shows a lot of inconsistency, has never averaged in double figures, and is an unknown commodity in pressure situations? We'd all like to think that we would just throw Enes in there and let him take his lumps, but Ty has to think about winning and keeping his job. He's going to stick with AJ.

Same think with Foye. Do you guys really think Ty is not aware of Foye's defensive issues? I highly doubt that Ty is that naive or stupid. And he's got a whole bunch of basketball experts on his coaching staff who will tell him if he can't see it. The fact is that, once again, Foye has things to offer that his potential back-up, Alex Burks, does not. Foye has averaged double figures for an entire season, is a consistently reliable outside shooter and is an old veteran who knows the tricks and secrets of the trade. Burks, on the other hand, is a complete wild card. He's inconsistent, has not averaged in double figures in points (and, yes, I understand that he has not averaged in double figures because of a lack of playing time), has a young man's cockiness and mentality, which leads to irrational decision making at times, and is not the most reliable outside shooter. Honestly, if you were looking to keep your job as one of 30 NBA coaches in the world, would you take the risk of playing Alex Burks in crunchtime? It's easy to say yes while riding your coaching armchair, but try doing it in real life. Foye is being paid millions a year to play starters/sixth man minutes...it appears that Jazz brass want to see him played and not riding the pines.

As for DeMarre over, say, Marvin Williams, the same logic applies. Despite the amazing performances DeMarre has provided for us this season, he's still a journeyman who was originally signed by the Jazz to serve as 12th man. He's making pennies compared to Marvin Williams. Again, Jazz management, by their financial actions, are expecting Marvin to play and succeed. Ty's thought process therefore must be to play Marvin as much as is allowable.

Again, I think all Jazz fans can relate to the fact that it is frustrating to see players like Marvin Williams, who seems to be a chronic underachiever, get minutes over DeMarre Carroll, who is a classic overachiever. I think fans can also generally relate to a sense of frustration an unathletic Foye being played over an electric, exciting Alex Burks. But, unless Jazz management decides to take the plunge and get rid of those veteran players, forcing Ty to play the young guns, it ain't going to happen. And I, for one, don't blame Ty for that. He's playing the cards he's dealt that, in his mind, are the safest and most reliable. He's just not the big risk taker that some of you are hoping he will be. Would it be exciting if he were willing to take the risk? Yes. Is the potential for disaster greater by taking said risks? Yes, again. Therefore, we'd better get used to seeing Foye and Marvin in the starting line-up, because that's where they are staying for the rest of the season.

By the way, just as an addendum, speaking of personnel. I personally believe that the Jazz are still a very limited team. The starting line-up is average by NBA standards, while the bench is above average. That being said, regardless of who you stick in there during crunchtime minutes, the Jazz are only an average team in the 4th quarter. That means, probably about half of the teams in the league can field a better (or at least comparable) five players down the stretch than the Jazz. That's what Ty has to work with.

Solid points about Corbin's up-side. I like that way of describing it.

I've said it before, but I've never really had a problem with Corbin playing the Vets over the young guys, as long as the vets are actually worth playing. Especially in the case of Kanter and Burks, playing those two guys right now is simply not in the best interest of the team, right now. They are the least effective options at their respective positions, so getting them minutes to increase their experience is nice but with the Jazz fighting for playoff position it should be a little ways down Corbin's priority list. My beefs have always been about not playing young guys that really are getting it done, and playing vets that really aren't. This season it is Carroll and Watson that have frustrated me, Carroll getting too little run, Watson getting too much. Carroll especially though, overall he's the second best wing on this team behind Hayward, but he's been losing minutes to Burks and never gets more minutes than Foye or Williams no matter how well he is playing. I'm not saying he should always play more, or that Foye and Williams shouldn't be playing over him, but the way he has been yanked around this season is bordering on criminal when you consider how consistently good he has been.

I hate the argument that we hear sometimes that because the Jazz aren't a contender they should be playing for the future, and I love that the Jazz have always been about doing the best with what they have in the present rather than just playing for some future that may or may not come. I'm excited to see if this team can get it together and at least make a solid showing in the playoffs this year.

Doesn't read quite a flowery now, but article on Corbin. Some good and bad points, but interesting.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/jazz/55713801-87/jazz-corbin-coach-season.html.csp

thejazzkickazz wrote:

I just wish that you guys were the coaching staff of the Utah Jazz, since it seems like you have all the answers that Ty Corbin and his assistance obviously don't have.

If we had any good refs we would be killing it!

TheMagnus wrote:

MTJazz wrote:

You know, one of these days I might say something that you actually agree with, and I'm guessing it might be July 20014 if my crystal ball is accurate. Anyway, I didn't see anything besides Kanter hitting all his shots and grabbing rebounds at a high rate - my bad. Burks and Watson were not playing that great but there was nothing wrong with Kanter's game. My point with Corbin is he is an average at best coach. Sure, Hayward off the bench appears to be a good move, (though how do we know he wouldn't be an even better starter now, and perhaps Marvin off the bench would work for Marvin's game)? But "ball movement" and "picking up the pace"? That there is Basketball 101. Now, if he did something to stop the bleeding when the Jazz start blowing big leads, like mixing up the rotations, changing D- or O-schemes, drawing up killer plays after calling timeouts, actually calling timeouts to stop the other team's momentum - well, that would be nice.

I agree that Corbin is an average coach, so we've got that going for us, right? I also agree that stuff is basketball 101, but it is remarkable as you watch games around the NBA how many teams struggle with those simple concepts. There's a reason watching the NBA is often intolerable for a longtime Jazz fan, playing basketball the RIGHT way often seems like a dying art.

It can be really hard on fans building a model like Memphis has the last few seasons.

Teams take time to mesh, especially with young players that Coach must bring along. Corbin has expressed his concern for bringing along Hayward in particular, and for that I am greatful.

I realize it's hard for fans to take away anything positive from the last two middlin' seasons, but I still see signs worthy of respect. After all, I don't practice these young kids ever single day and I don't understand why they can't turn those rare to more frequent flashes into continual All Star worthy performances.

Introducing the next coach of the Utah Jazz ......... Earl "Magic" Watson ???

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/jazz/55724143-87/watson-coach-says-basketball.html.csp