↓ Login/Logout ↓
Schedule/Results
↓ Roster ↓
Salaries
↓ Archives ↓
↓ About ↓

Roy Rogers leaves Pistons for Suns

Sam Amick of USA TODAY:

Former Pistons assistant Roy Rogers is joining new Phoenix coach Jeff Hornacek. Rogers was an option for Kings too, but is signing with Suns

Maurice Cheeks definitely deserves an opportunity to hire his own staff, but I had hoped he would have wanted to keep Rogers, who had another year remaining on his contract.

The circumstantial evidence indicated Rogers did a really good job as the Pistons’ big-man coach under Lawrence Frank. Andre Drummond played better as a rookie than anyone could have expected. Greg Monroe showed a more well-rounded game. Jason Maxiell had his best season in years, and Viacheslav Kravtsov improved from a player who seemed in over his head earl in the season.

Rogers is rising the coaching ranks, and considering the Pistons interviewed assistants like J.B. Bickerstaff and Darrell Walker, I was surprised Rogers didn’t get a look (unless he did, and it was never reported publically). If he continues on this trajectory, he’ll eventually get his chance as a head coach.

21 Comments

  • Jun 11, 20135:23 pm
    by I HATE FRANK

    Reply

    given Roy Rogers a little too much credit, best believe if he real did help Drummond, and Greg develop he’d still be on staff. Also Maxiell is a friggin 8 year player during a contract year, its just what they do

    • Jun 11, 20137:12 pm
      by Ryan

      Reply

      Kinda surprising – I actually don’t mind (and mostly agree with) Dan’s recent negativity, but did he lob credit on Rogers for his work with big men and question Cheeks’ work developing guards? Or did I miss something?

      • Jun 11, 20137:47 pm
        by RyanK

        Reply

        Yeah, kind of ironic how he totally discredited himself with this post…he does that with a lot of posts, but this one right after his rant about Cheeks makes it clear for everyone.

      • Jun 11, 20138:08 pm
        by Huddy

        Reply

        Wow…..Russell Westbrook hones his athletic ability whether Cheeks was at OKC or not and Drummond (a similar talent with raw athleticism) was better than anyone could have expected because of Rodgers?  Is there any more evidence for him than Cheeks?

        • Jun 12, 201312:15 am
          by oats

          Reply

          Westbrook was already the rookie of the year before Cheeks came in. He clearly was ready. Drummond looked much less ready to go right away. He stunk at UConn, and he consistently got outplayed in the summer league too. Heck, most of the reports on training camp had Kravstov ahead of him on the depth chart. There is more of an argument that Drummond was coached up than there is that Westbrook was. I wouldn’t give Rogers the credit, but I would say the argument for Drummond getting coached up is slightly stronger than the one for Westbrook.
           
          I personally think Drummond’s success had more to do with the work Arnie Kander and whoever he worked with over the summer did for him. He looked quicker than his combine numbers suggested, and he definitely looked stronger in the regular season than he did in summer league. I think he was naturally athletic in college, but now he’s done some work on honing that athletic ability.

          • Jun 12, 201311:15 am
            by Huddy

            I was more talking about the types of spin the two coaches were receiving.  a “slightly stronger” argument and you think Kander deserves more credit anyway…not much of a disagreement. 

      • Jun 12, 20139:13 am
        by Dan Feldman

        Reply

        I never said Rogers was a good coach, just that the circumstantial evidence pointed in his favor.

        The threshold for the evidence of positives necessary to hire an assistant coach is and should be lower than the threshold for a head coach.

        • Jun 12, 201311:12 am
          by Huddy

          Reply

          That’s fair, but it seems like circumstantial evidence puts Rodgers in a positive light to the point where you think he should have gotten a look like other Assistants did (I know that didn’t mean you think he would have been the best candidate) and circumstantial evidence about Cheek’s player development ability is turned into an article about correlation and causation and how good things that happened during Cheek’s Assistant Coaching are probably not his responsibility.  They are both based on pure speculation, Rodgers gets a positive spin and Cheeks doesn’t.
          Not much positive to write about right now though so its all good.

          • Jun 12, 20135:11 pm
            by Dan Feldman

            I was fine with Cheeks being a candidate. He was definitely worthy of further examination.

            Obviously, Cheeks and Rogers were dealt different hands, and Rogers’ better lends itself to proving himself. He worked with multiple players who hadn’t shown as much before his arrival as Westbrook had.

          • Jun 13, 20132:36 pm
            by Huddy

            IMO His overall record and these articles you’ve been posting are obvious pieces of public info that should be used to decide if an interview or further examination is warranted.  The further examination should be the interviews, his description of his vision for the team, his explanation for concerns about his record, etc.  In that respect I think if he was worthy of the further examination step then the reasons for Joe/Gores choosing him are things behind closed doors that only they discussed with him.  If all of the first level evidence points to him not being a realistic candidate then I can see where a load of negativity is in order, if he was a reasonable candidate I feel like the next half of the process is all based on faith in Joe/Gores anyway and we will have to see what he does next season.  Other guys like Shaw et al. pass the first  test easier for their own reasons (Shaw because of no positive or negative HC record and working with good organizations) but in the end the focus and vision for the team etc. are things no one can predict regardless of how much they research guys (especially assistant coaches and players with no HC experience).

  • Jun 11, 20135:41 pm
    by Reaction

    Reply

    They should try to get Patrick Ewing to coach the big men. He was really successful with most of the big men he has worked with.

    • Jun 11, 20135:48 pm
      by Reaction

      Reply

      Sorry just noticed he was hired by the “Bobcats” as a assistant

  • Jun 11, 20136:36 pm
    by acr

    Reply

    Moses Malone was Cheeks’ “big man coach” in Philly, wouldn’t mind having him work with Drummond.

    • Jun 11, 20137:13 pm
      by Ryan

      Reply

      Definitely. That could be interesting. Apparently Aaron McKie is potentially in the mix too, not that that means much.

  • Jun 11, 20137:23 pm
    by sebastian

    Reply

    A staff of Rick Mahorn, Aaron McKee, and Lindsey Hunter would do the trick.

    • Jun 11, 20137:35 pm
      by The Rake

      Reply

      Interesting. I kinda like some of those names. Outside the box, I thought that maybe Big Ben expressed interest in coaching. He’d be a nice hire to get on staff if so, just to work on toughness, big men and defense. As long as he’s not the top offensive assistant, he’d be a nice pickup.

      On different note, I hear Kidd wants Frank to be his top assistant if he gets Nets gig.  

      • Jun 11, 20139:38 pm
        by Vic

        Reply

        That’d be full circle… Frank was already Kidd’s top assistant when Kidd was point guard/ coach for the Nets before

  • Jun 11, 20138:18 pm
    by jinzzy

    Reply

    hire sheed lol
     

  • Jun 11, 20138:45 pm
    by gmehl

    Reply

    Hopefully Rogers can take CV with him

  • Jun 12, 201312:42 am
    by ryan

    Reply

    Nice thought. gmehl.

    I’d love to see Aaron McKie on the staff here.
     

  • Jun 12, 20135:50 am
    by Simon

    Reply

    Perfect opportunity to get Bill Laimbeer as bigman coach. Might be a nice way for Joe D to appease some fans too. 

  • Leave a Reply

    Your Ad Here