↓ Login/Logout ↓
↓ Roster ↓
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Pistons contact Brian Shaw for interview

Tom Leyden of ABC 7:

Indiana Pacers associate head coach Brian Shaw has been contacted by the Detroit Pistons to interview for the team’s head coaching job, according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

The Phil Jackson influence appears to be showing. Shaw was Jackson’s heir apparent with the Lakers before Los Angeles hired Mike Brown instead.

Without the Lakers’ head job, Shaw become Indiana’s associate head coach, and he’s remained an in-demand candidate around the league. I don’t know how responsible Shaw is for the Pacers’ defense, but their schemes are excellent, and I’d love for the Pistons to hire someone heavily involved in designing and implementing those.

To be clear, Leyden is reporting only that the Pistons asked Shaw about interviewing. Despite how this report has been portrayed elsewhere, Leyden did not report Shaw agreed to interview. The Pacers are still alive in the playoffs, likely through the conference finals. Indiana wouldn’t let Shaw interview with the Nets until its playoff run ended, and the same will likely be true with the Pistons.


  • May 15, 20131:32 am
    by Blocks by Dre (Burke for the win!!)


    If he agrees to an interview, he’s my new favorite to win that gig

  • May 15, 20132:15 am
    by tiko


    he can be the right hire.. let him grow with this young squad

  • May 15, 20132:25 am
    by Vince


    Shaw, Budenholzer, Sampson, McMillan and Obradovic are my top 5. I’m very happy that 4/5 have been interviewed. Phil Jackson or not, I’m liking the coaching search so far.

    • May 15, 20136:07 pm
      by Mickey


      Did you intentionally leave Kurt Rambis off the list or he is not one of the prospective coaches you like!

      • May 16, 20131:11 am
        by Vince


        I’m not very high on Kurt, he’s outside of my top 10. 

  • May 15, 20134:55 am
    by Nick


    I hear Brian Shaw runs the triangle off. Do we have the players to run it?

    • May 15, 20135:33 am
      by gmehl


      Where did you hear this? Yes he was an assistant for Jackson where the triangle was run but by no means is it said a done that when Shaw becomes a head coach he will run it. I am not sure but i’m assuming Indiana don’t run the triangle where he is an assistant now.

  • May 15, 20135:01 am
    by Grizz


    Shaw seems a solid choice .. the experience as head coach is not there but the experience in working with highly successful teams is there .. that is a big factor to make your decision upon .. Far better choice than any of the last 3 head coaches ..

  • May 15, 20139:01 am


    Shaw makes the most since, he’s not a recycled coach, he been under winning coaches and winning systems in recent years, he’s former player, he has been a started, 6th man and rotation guy. He has been talked about for Head-Coaching jobs for awhile…

    I like Shaw..my top choice 

    • May 15, 20139:32 am
      by Chris N


      “Shaw makes the most since, he’s not a recycled coach”

      Not sure I understand this rationale?  By recycled coach, do you mean a coach that has had head coaching experience elsewhere in the league?  If that’s the case, why would someone that has less experience (or no experience) as a head coach necessarily be a better candidate than someone who has?

      In looking at the list of coaches that have won a championship in the last 30 years, many have been “recycled”.  Both Larry Brown and Phil Jackson were “recycled coaches.” that went on to win championships (as were Chuck Daly, Doc Rivers, Pat Riley, Rick Carslisle, & K.C. Jones).

      Shaw might be the best choice overall, but if he is, I think it would be because of his talent, not the lack of a “recycled coach” moniker.

      • May 15, 201310:13 am
        by MIKEYDE248


        I think what he’s saying is that almost all the coaches with head coaching experience don’t look that enticing, so looking into the top assistances might be a better option.

      • May 15, 20132:44 pm
        by I HATE FRANK


        @Mickey …. Exactly

        “”Both Larry Brown and Phil Jackson were “recycled coaches.” that went on to win championships (as were Chuck Daly, Doc Rivers, Pat Riley, Rick Carslisle, & K.C. Jones)”"

        Are any of those guys interviewing for the Pistons coaching Job?

        • May 15, 20136:25 pm
          by oats


          Doc Rivers resume before Boston was pretty damn shaky. He took over a so so team, got them to continue playing at roughly .500, then had them collapse due to an injury to Grant Hill and got canned with a 1-10 start. Compare that to say, Nate McMillan. McMillan has twice taken over bad teams and turned them around, and then either due to aging or injuries his teams started to slip up. I’d call that a pretty darn similar situation. So the answer would be, maybe one of these coaches is a Doc Rivers waiting to happen.
          Stan Van Gundy actually is pretty similar to Carlisle. He built Miami up, only to be replaced because they felt a legendary coach was the right guy to win a championship. That obviously is pretty similar to Carlisle in Detroit. In his next stop he fielded yet another contender but couldn’t quite get over the hump. That’s similar to Carlisle in Indy. Now he’s looking for his 3rd job. Are you really that certain Stan isn’t another Carlisle?
          I also don’t get why Shaw is someone’s favorite of the assistants. I like him fine, but I’m more interested in Budenholzer. Malone and Fizdale are also in that same range as far as I’m concerned, with Fizdale being more intriguing and Malone a little less so. I’d probably say Kelvin Sampson is pretty close behind those guys too. I’d be reasonably happy with any of these first time NBA head coaches, but I don’t get what separates Shaw from anyone on this list. Nor do I see a compelling reason to place any of these guys ahead of the coaches that have already proven they can get the most out of the talent on an NBA roster, and that would be the two guys I listed above.

          • May 16, 20133:21 pm
            by Shawn

            Since, I can’t upvote this I will just say nice insight.

          • May 17, 201311:35 am
            by Huddy

            Maybe the Doc Rivers example speaks to the talent level of teams being a bigger factor than coaching ability.  OKC is a good example, lots of people defend Brooks for being a good coach and not just having a talent roster, but he was pretty exposed after the loss of Westbrook.  Obviously losing a player of that caliber changes your teams ceiling for success, but if you watched the series it was obvious he did not react well or make adjustments on the fly the way a great coach would.

          • May 17, 20133:42 pm
            by tarsier

            If Brooks is at all responsible for his players’ development, I don’t care how mediocre he is at coaching, he’d be worth having just for that.

          • May 17, 201311:42 pm
            by G

            Uh, couple of things. First, Doc Rivers was a bad coach until Garnett & Allen joined the team. I mean he was bad in that he jerked his players’ minutes round, jerked guys in & out of the rotation (sound like anyone?) and didn’t run a particularly good system. After they got Garnett & Allen, it came together for Doc. He settled on a 10 man rotation (instead of 12), he came up with using the unbuntu-thing and ran a much better system. Having better players helped, but Doc kicked his game up. Joe D would’ve fired him before 2008 happened based on how he coached before, but he kicked his game up.

            Secondly, exactly how much credit are we giving Scottie Brooks for “developing” Durant and Westbrook? Durant was the #2 pick (and inarguably the best player) in a good draft (besides Oden, obviously), Westbrook was the 4th pick in an even better draft. He had REALLY talented players to work with… This is like someone doing a cast of Pieta and getting credit for being Michaelangelo.

  • May 15, 20139:15 am
    by Chris N


    “The Phil Jackson influence appears to be showing.”

    Perhaps.  Was it a foregone conclusion that management had no interest in talking with him before Jackson became involved?  I haven’t seen evidence one way or another.  Since Shaw wasn’t going to be available for interviews until after the Pacers finished their season anyways, its possible that Shaw may have been on the list of candidates that the Pistons were going to talk with all along. My point is that until more comes down the pike about this, its difficult to gauge just how influential Jackson is in the process.

    That said, glad to hear it. 

    • May 15, 201310:19 am
      by MIKEYDE248


      I agree, how does this have anything to do with Phil?  If the Pistons said that they contacted Popovich to be the next coach, would we all be praising Phil too?  They can say they contacted anyone, but until they interview him or at least hear that he will come in for an interview, who cares.

  • May 15, 201312:58 pm
    by The Rake


    I hope that he does indeed interview, though Pacers head Donnie Walsh said no assistant interviews til after playoffs, which still could be a few weeks. I would like for him to get a long look. It seems that players like him and particularly since we have such a young group, I like that thought. I look at Mark Jackson and think Shaw may be a reasonable comp. Still, I am sure that Detroit won’t be his first choice if Nets were seriously interested due to funds, closer to playoff contention, and our history of running through coaches. Ultimately, I do like that he is being considered and certainly one of the better names that has been mentioned in my eyes. 

    • May 15, 20131:59 pm
      by Chris N


      “Still, I am sure that Detroit won’t be his first choice if Nets were seriously interested due to funds, closer to playoff contention, and our history of running through coaches.”

      I’m hesitant to put any predictions on how a coach views Detroit.  Tom Gores has stated that he is ready to spend.  It may be hyperbole or it may be right on the money.  We won’t know until further along in the process, but if we take the statement at face value, money may not be as much of a factor as its been in past years.

      As for the Nets being closer to playoff contention, where they are now may not be where they wind up at the beginning of next season.  Ditto for the Pistons.  There’s a draft and free agency to work through and by default the Pistons roster will look much different than it does now.  Shaw might prefer the Nets of the Pistons, but I won’t put him in one column or the other until more info becomes available.

      • May 15, 20136:30 pm
        by The Rake


        I figured somebody would pick apart the “I am sure” portion of that post. Change it to “I suspect”. Obviously we have to wait to see how it all plays out, my point was I like Shaw and drew a comparison to Mark Jax.

  • May 15, 20132:05 pm
    by joe


    If the Pistons hire Shaw, that mean’s Phil will most likely become Jerry West to Pistons, and a Pat Riley influence over Shaw. Let’s make it happen!

    • May 15, 20134:06 pm
      by mike


      yeah, thats what i want.  Not sure its certain that Phil stays if we hire Shaw, but it definitely gives us the best chance to keep him. So I say go for it.

      The Pistons could be the Warriors of the East, with Phil in the Jerry West role, Shaw in the Mark Jackson role, and Dre/Moose as the frontcourt version of Curry/Klay, and the draft Shabazz in the Barnes role.

      There’s a lot of similarities and West advising GS is working out great 

  • May 15, 20134:05 pm
    by L Boogie


    Look at Mark Jackson, who was a player, and analyst, never had a coaching job, but relates well to players, and look at what he’s done with that young team, they play defense, I never saw golden state play defense, and he was never an assistant coach, with all of that said, there needs to be more guys without eperience getting HC jobs, they do not have to yell and scream, but get guys to listen, motivate them, and I think Shaw and other assistant coaches need to be really given a chance. it would be nice to get an assistant coach from a winning team, to bring what he’s learned from there. I was just want someone to come in hear and HOLD THESE DIVAS ACCOUNTABLE like a Doc Rivers, Tom Thibedau, they preach DEFENSE and live by it, thats what we need, someone to toughen up these guys to make them play with passion and intensity, and FOCUS.

  • May 15, 20139:56 pm
    by Trent


    It’s obvious that our coach has to be a highly reputable coach. Shaw definitely is that. He is known throughout the league, well liked and has been successful in both playing and coaching.

    Our coach isn’t going to just coach but it is a key selling point when luring free-agents and getting rooks excited about the opportunity and keeping harmony as head of the locker room. We need a smart hire that can be used as a sell as much as a coach. Detroit is not a team or a market that FA’s automatically think of when they come out of contract so we need help to open players eyes to us. Andre, Moose and BK are a great start. Add a well-liked, reputable coach and all of a sudden DET becomes a little less freezing cold, dark winters and a little more light at the end of the tunnel. We are an organisation that is known for hard-work and success and I think LF helped us become less of a basket case through his level (sometimes stubborn) head. He wasnt the right coach that is clear but he stepped in to a divided locker room and had players that didnt care about the team which is not the case now. We were cohesive and there were no off-court issues.

    In summary what we need is another LF that is a better coach. A calm, calculated leader that can help us flourish using the tools we have.

    • May 16, 20139:18 am
      by tarsier


      Shaw isn’t luring in any FAs. Most teams have at least as respected a coach. Short of Phil Jackson, I don’t know if any head coach today would be a selling point.

      Don’t worry about magnetism. Just get a good coach. if he does a good job, the respect will follow. 

  • May 16, 20136:32 pm
    by by key decisions know


    Does anybody have information what Pops said about Mike B. going to Detroit when season is over? SA  TV News reporting. 

  • May 17, 20133:14 pm
    by Desolation Row


    Jerry Sloan’s not being hired by Milwaukee. I really hope the Pistons interview the guy.

  • May 17, 20136:59 pm
    by The Rake


    Collectively I wonder where we all are at. It seems across the map. Do we want a younger, unproven guy to “grow” with the young talent on the team, in hopes of the Pistons taking a nice step into the playoffs and the future? Or do we want a guy with some track record, the so-called recycled coaching candidates, that may be able to push these young guys (though potentially grate on them, be less patient..I don’t know, these are just thoughts) but this might be a guy who has already had some past success? 

    I think as fans (less important) but primarily as an organization, what does the front office want? Gores says win now…that may not be a “patient/young coach” type of motto. Still, our last three coaches have been two newbies  (Curry/Kuester) and one flame out but young (Frank). Our coach, like in Golden State, may become a significant portion of our identity, so the coach is critical. 

    I personally would be willing to take my time (2-3 years) on a young coach with no/little experience, versus a recycled guy (even a Sloan/SVG, for example). I like the idea of growing with the team and while I want to win, like anybody else, I have seen this team win 3 titles (have a reasonable chance at another 4 or so) and I am okay with enjoying some of the young guys grow up for another few years. It will be interesting to see if that is the approach the Pistons take (unlikely is my guess) or if the fans (us) are in similar accord. Thoughts?

  • Thanks a bunch for sharing this with all of us you actually recognise what you are talking approximately! Bookmarked. Kindly additionally talk over with my site =). We could have a link trade contract between us

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here