The "can Steve Lavin coach?" question

by picodulce on Jan 7, 2011 5:00 AM EST in St. John's Red Storm men's basketball

NEW YORK NY - DECEMBER 20: Head coach Steve Lavin of the St. John's Red Storm coaches against the Davidson Wildcats during the Madison Square Garden Holiday Festival at Madison Square Garden on December 20 2010 in New York City. (Photo by Chris Chambers/Getty Images)

This week's Sports Illustrated includes a feature on Steve Lavin, which is great exposure for the program and the coach, as the Red Storm try to crack the top half of the Big East and the top-25 with the platoon of seniors.

With great exposure, come big questions. And in Steve Lavin's case, the question is about that sticky narrative following him - the idea, held to be certain by certain people, he's a bad coach. The question is alive and well, and those questions will be echoed closer to that scheduled contest in Pauley Pavilion against UCLA. Author George Dohrmann's digs into the Lavin prose, sounding almost annoyed at the way the coach weaves through language, searching for a conclusive answer.

Can he coach?

Can this question really be answered? And does it matter?

Somewhere early in his career, Steve Lavin received a scarlet letter as an inept coach, despite what looked like decent success. He was young when he was handed the wheel of the Bruins program, and it showed at times. His teams were inconsistent despite their NBA-level talent. When they were on, it looked like a freelance offense. They lost to less renowned programs and were a wilder card than they might have liked in the Pac-10 race.

Once a fanbase believes a coach isn't a good coach, they criticize with extra vehemence. Nothing the coach can do is right until the "bum" is gone. The Sports Illustrated piece visits with Coach Lavin in Los Angeles, as he goes to dinner with assistant coach (and former UCLA player) Rico Hines and former star player Baron Davis. Dohrmann recounts the path Lavin has taken to the St. John's job, the years in broadcasting, touching often on the coaches' gift for gab/ metaphor.

And then, that pervasive question. Can he coach?

Probably. Possibly. We may never know; coaching is always more than the ability of one head man to win games. Coaching is the ability to build a staff. The ability to recruit the right players, not just the ones that sound exciting on recruiting websites. The ability to manage personalities. The ability to train and educate.

All of these aspects of leadership have been on display, and the early returns have been positive. But half of a season isn't conclusive; these questions will dog Lavin for his whole career. Some will say that he's nothing without his current assistants. Some will point out some unexpected loss and say "see, a terrible coach!" And if he never gets that right mix of players, maybe some circles will always view him as a terrible coach, unworthy of a spot in UCLA - or college basketball - history.

That's the way it is. We know why those questions are asked; I touched on Lavin's negatives and took a long look at his UCLA teams, and came out realizing that there are certainly flaws, but the man did something right if his "failures" repeatedly get him wins in the NCAA Tournament. If Lavin can "fail" the way he did at UCLA while he coaches games in Carnesecca and Madison Square Garden... somehow, I think Red Storm fans will defend his coaching.

Tweet Comment 3 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I remember one of the complaints during the last year’s Lavin’s tenure at UCLA was his offenses were too boring. UCLA fans though complain about every coach not named “Wooden.”

Defender of the Universe

by KD1 on Jan 7, 2011 11:35 AM EST reply actions

COACH Steve Lavin

Steve Lavin’s record speaks for itself, regardless of the naysayers at UCLA who have tried to take him down. They from UCLA with the unbelievable sense of entitlement often have nothing more to criticize than his hair. They blame him for bringing their “storied program” down after he made the Sweet Sixteen for 5 years in a row and had ONE losing season. How many other coaches have duplicated this, one, maybe? Pompous asses, they are. They’re the ones who have maligned and slandered him. They’re the ones who have tried to make this BS about him stick. There is nothing that the UCLA crowd has said about Lavin that couldn’t be said about any other coach at one time or another, except that most of the other coaches don’t have the outstanding record that Lavin has. So, now, Steve Lavin comes on the scene again and has to prove himself because of the pukes at UCLA? Not to the discerning college basketball fan, he doesn’t. What about Howland? I suppose he can’t coach, either. Look at UCLA basketball this year. Isn’t the same scenario that is attributed to Lavin during his days there applicable to Ben Howland this year? Hasn’t he, too, lost games he should have won? Will they soon say, if they haven’t already, that he hasn’t upheld the UCLA legacy? If you look at the crap that some of them have written about Lavin on their blogs, I’m sure that it would make the great John Wooden turn over in his grave. So, Steve Lavin comes on the scene again and in a very short time recruits one the top five classes in the country for next year. He takes a team that hadn’t won three Big East games in a row for over ten years, and he makes them believe in themselves. He builds a top notch staff and he excites the entire New York metro area. He raises over $2 million for St John’s basketball. And he gets a ton of press for the Johnnies. It’s true what KD1 said: "UCLA fans… complain about every coach not named "Wooden."

UCLA people, get real. You’re no longer at the top. Your actions are despicable. You have a distorted sense of yourself. Your time is long gone. Get over it and get outta town!

by Walk to School on Jan 7, 2011 11:48 AM EST reply actions 1 recs