C
CoJ2
Guest
I hope its not just a PR move by Chot
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
I hope its not just a PR move by Chot
N
neo2
Guest
I hope its not just a PR move by Chot
in 2014, he tapped 2 or 3 foreign consultants to help him in specific games (tab included).
he loves d hype. but he's not shy to look for help from others.
R
Rds2
Guest
I hope its not just a PR move by Chot
Actually it feels like hype to me. This is what I dont like about Chot. Sometimes you dont know if your talking to a coach or a marketing person. I prefer he minimizes his marketing tendencies when his role is a coach.
U
unstopaball122
Guest
Who was the coach of the most successful Gilas version? Who brought us back to the World Cup? In fairness...
Chot is the most accomplished, while tab is the most impressive.
Chot had the benefit of full training camps, homecourt advantage and the Philippines taken lightly in the 2014 World Cup + nba shape Blatche.
Tab had aging players, role players and a cba version of blatche and led the team to a 2nd place finish in the fiba Asia games. He coached gilas to competitive games vs France and NZ. For this last program, he led gilas college players to almost win against Serbia, which featured 2 nba players.
Both did a good job, it just sucks that continuity is never achieved with politics and vested interest in the way
D
deku_midoriya2
Guest
in 2014, he tapped 2 or 3 foreign consultants to help him in specific games (tab included).
he loves d hype. but he's not shy to look for help from others.
Getting consultants actually covers for his deficiencies. The marketing guys always need technical guys in the background. Chot knows he cannot bullsh*t his way to winning high-level FIBA games.
N
neo2
Guest
Getting consultants actually covers for his deficiencies. The marketing guys always need technical guys in the background. Chot knows he cannot bullsh*t his way to winning high-level FIBA games.
and that's ok. unlike yeng.
it would really have been better if sbp just announced chot as d interim coach for this window. if he fares well (2-2 would have been a win already), then he can be named as d full-time coach and program director. maybe they offered it to him that way but only accepted the task if its not for an interim basis.
regardless, after this current pba conference, he should step down as tnt coach to work full-time with gilas.
D
deku_midoriya2
Guest
Chot is the most accomplished, while tab is the most impressive.
Chot had the benefit of full training camps, homecourt advantage and the Philippines taken lightly in the 2014 World Cup + nba shape Blatche.
Tab had aging players, role players and a cba version of blatche and led the team to a 2nd place finish in the fiba Asia games. He coached gilas to competitive games vs France and NZ. For this last program, he led gilas college players to almost win against Serbia, which featured 2 nba players.
Both did a good job, it just sucks that continuity is never achieved with politics and vested interest in the way
Tab did have aging players, but 2015 saw castro at his peak and romeo and abueva in their primes. He had norwood, ranidel and ping with high level international experiences already. Blatche was still unstoppable in Asia and more than covered for the aging taulava and thoss. Hontiveros was past his prime but still considered our best shooter available. I don't think it was a weak team but it was vulnerable and had the benefit of luck by not facing Korea and China early.
2016 OQT team was actually better on paper compared to 2014 Gilas and it was expected to play well at home.
Serbia in the OQT was the weakest team they have sent in the recent years. Why be selective? We got blown out by DR and lost thrice in Jordan
U
unstopaball122
Guest
Tab did have aging players, but 2015 saw castro at his peak and romeo and abueva in their primes. He had norwood, ranidel and ping with high level international experiences already. Blatche was still unstoppable in Asia and more than covered for the aging taulava and thoss. Hontiveros was past his prime but still considered our best shooter available. I don't think it was a weak team but it was vulnerable and had the benefit of luck by not facing Korea and China early.
2016 OQT team was actually better on paper compared to 2014 Gilas and it was expected to play well at home.
Serbia in the OQT was the weakest team they have sent in the recent years. Why be selective? We got blown out by DR and lost thrice in Jordan
We sent a college selection to play Serbia hahaha and players that haven’t even yet play in the uaap to play against the Serbia team that were composed of euroleague players and players with nba experience.
I
IPC2
Guest
Hmm..
1 Got to think long term program perspective.. churning out
players.. If the SBP is not doing that. Then what program are we talking about? Putting together a collection of players is NOT a program!
2. Isn't it an advantage to have players playing overseas to further develop them ?
3 aren't Dwight and Jaun available. While.SMB players aren't?
4 People say a full time national team is not sustainable. Which is correct. So what's wrong with them earning a living playing overseas and getting reps exposure. Isn't like we have games.in the Philippines for them to play in.
Should basketball Australia now fault national team players for playing overseas in the NBA? Isn't that an advantage?
Systemic change of basketball eco system of doing things is required to improve.. I guess some would rather keep status quo and have same outcomes.
1. Agreed. We should be working to churn out players for the Gilas program and expose as many high upside youngsters as possible.
2. Yeah, they'd expand their playing positions and develop their games against taller imports.
R
Rds2
Guest
Tab did have aging players, but 2015 saw castro at his peak and romeo and abueva in their primes. He had norwood, ranidel and ping with high level international experiences already. Blatche was still unstoppable in Asia and more than covered for the aging taulava and thoss. Hontiveros was past his prime but still considered our best shooter available. I don't think it was a weak team but it was vulnerable and had the benefit of luck by not facing Korea and China early.
2016 OQT team was actually better on paper compared to 2014 Gilas and it was expected to play well at home.
Serbia in the OQT was the weakest team they have sent in the recent years. Why be selective? We got blown out by DR and lost thrice in Jordan
We beat Korea 2x with an all amateur team. Almost defeated Serbia with practically the same team. We kept it close with DR. Yes eventually got blown out. But again this is using the amateur developmental team. And it was without Dwight? We lost 3x in Jordan. But one of that was without our naturalized player. And we were actually competing even if Balti was our best rim protector. And the other losses we competed. And you could say those were the games Kai could have helped.
That 2015 team featured past prime Hontiveros, Taulava and Thoss. They were so shallow they had to play Intal. Blatche played. But come on. Hontiveros and Thoss were barely contributing for Alaska at that point. Are you really going to compare that with the 2014 WC lineup?
We kept it close against France. And the day after we kept it close against NZ. He was able make JF play lean. And would have probably improved defensively had Tab not been kicked out.
He was able to make a role player like Dwight into a game changer. A center like Balti into an SF. He was able to solve Korea by developing players who can play tall fast ball.
I dont know what else Tab needs to do for you to give him credit
C
CoJ2
Guest
Moves to make Clarkson a local: https://tiebreakertimes.com.ph/tbt/...make-jordan-clarkson-a-local-for-gilas/230999
Hmm, I dunno what to think of this. He fits in Chot's 3-guard system for sure. Would be a huge get if ever, kahit napaka-unlikely. Adds more talent to the team.
I lost count already as to how many times this news has come out in the past. I hope this time it comes into fruition. Clarkson is a player that has seen all kinds of defense and defenders and scores against each one of them. Definitely would elevate Gilas a notch or two if complemented with the right pieces.
tumanda nalang si clarskon yet we still havent resolved this issue, hopefully FIBA finally considers him a local
U
unstopaball122
Guest
Getting consultants actually covers for his deficiencies. The marketing guys always need technical guys in the background. Chot knows he cannot bullsh*t his way to winning high-level FIBA games.
Agreed and he relies on them to help on defensive coverages. In fsirnesd to chot, he was a much mature and defensive minded coach last conference vs previous stints. He has grown as a coach
I
IPC2
Guest
Interesting take: https://twitter.com/DwigtSchruute/status/1490248471592329222?t=QncYJSkMpzX9pAiOCf3Ifg&s=19
What this guy's saying is that we would be in a better position in Asia had SMC been heading SBP.
What this guy's saying is that we would be in a better position in Asia had SMC been heading SBP.
N
NOiNU2
Guest
Interesting take: https://twitter.com/DwigtSchruute/status/1490248471592329222?t=QncYJSkMpzX9pAiOCf3Ifg&s=19
What this guy's saying is that we would be in a better position in Asia had SMC been heading SBP.
Well, it’s hypothetical. With the success that SMC has in the PBA, we can never tell. We could only know for sure if Ramon Ang gets to inherit MVP’s post.
I
IPC2
Guest
Well, it’s hypothetical. With the success that SMC has in the PBA, we can never tell. We could only know for sure if Ramon Ang gets to inherit MVP’s post.
My question, though, is whether they can focus on player development the way Tab's Gilas did. Would the SMC group be willing to invest in expanding player skillsets, making them learn smaller positions, the way Tab did with Tamayo, Baltazar, Ildefonso, and Suerte?
C
CoJ2
Guest
My question, though, is whether they can focus on player development the way Tab's Gilas did. Would the SMC group be willing to invest in expanding player skillsets, making them learn smaller positions, the way Tab did with Tamayo, Baltazar, Ildefonso, and Suerte?
if danding is still alive no doubt he'll exhaust all efforts to develop young talents similar to the NCC model, but with Ramong Ang in charge, I think he wants results ASAP, again this is based on his track record in the PBA (reloading instead of rebuilding) Let see if they can use Letran as a breeding ground for the next gen gilas like what Ateneo (and Beda to some extent) for MVP
N
NOiNU2
Guest
My question, though, is whether they can focus on player development the way Tab's Gilas did. Would the SMC group be willing to invest in expanding player skillsets, making them learn smaller positions, the way Tab did with Tamayo, Baltazar, Ildefonso, and Suerte?
We can never tell what approach that results to winning will they take. But if there’s one thing they’re good at, it’s recruitment. If they could translate that into international level, maybe they could have brought in some marquee names that have slipped the MVPs net in the past. Baka yung mga “sayang”, nagawan ng paraan.
M
mathematicianrcg2
Guest
Honest Question about a National Team.
How many percentage will you credit(In Success) or blame(In failures) Players and Coaches ?
For the sake of argument, let's assume all of our best players are available in a big tournament.
Personally, I will go
Players: 65%
Coaches: 35%
Yes, I believe Players are still the one playing in the court. The outcomes will mostly rely in their talents and ON COURT decision making.
I gave Coaches 35% because ofc the x and o, game plan, timeouts, and rotation pattern.
But to be fair sometimes coaches are being underappreciated.
Usually when a team won (Most People say it is because Players are talented). And if a team lost or underachieve ( Most People will say because of the coach)
But I still believe Players are still the biggest factor in winning. Not saying coaching doesnt matter.
As I said, for me, it is:
Players: 65%, Coaches: 35%
How many percentage will you credit(In Success) or blame(In failures) Players and Coaches ?
For the sake of argument, let's assume all of our best players are available in a big tournament.
Personally, I will go
Players: 65%
Coaches: 35%
Yes, I believe Players are still the one playing in the court. The outcomes will mostly rely in their talents and ON COURT decision making.
I gave Coaches 35% because ofc the x and o, game plan, timeouts, and rotation pattern.
But to be fair sometimes coaches are being underappreciated.
Usually when a team won (Most People say it is because Players are talented). And if a team lost or underachieve ( Most People will say because of the coach)
But I still believe Players are still the biggest factor in winning. Not saying coaching doesnt matter.
As I said, for me, it is:
Players: 65%, Coaches: 35%
I
IPC2
Guest
We can never tell what approach that results to winning will they take. But if there’s one thing they’re good at, it’s recruitment. If they could translate that into international level, maybe they could have brought in some marquee names that have slipped the MVPs net in the past. Baka yung mga “sayang”, nagawan ng paraan.
You're right, though. They're good at recruiting players, and retaining them (for as long as they are in tiptop championship shape). Maybe they could have done more. Attract players, maybe foreign coaches like they did with Ron Jacobs (who started this foreign consultant movement).
Maybe they could focus on development with the right coach and program director.
I
interxavierxxx2
Guest
if danding is still alive no doubt he'll exhaust all efforts to develop young talents similar to the NCC model, but with Ramong Ang in charge, I think he wants results ASAP, again this is based on his track record in the PBA (reloading instead of rebuilding) Let see if they can use Letran as a breeding ground for the next gen gilas like what Ateneo (and Beda to some extent) for MVP
lol The SMC group is basically the Lakers of the Philippines. No to development. Yes to quick results.