问题1：运转速度
柯林斯或许是在过去四分之一世纪战术攻防运转最慢的教练。和他比起来，杰夫-范甘迪简直像极了保罗-威斯特海德（译者注：Run&Gun的发起者和代表人物）。
1986-87和87-88赛季他执教的公牛队是全联盟最慢的球队，而当时的乔丹正处于他运动能力的巅峰。88-89赛季当皮蓬成为先发球员后，柯林斯治下的公牛则是全联盟第三慢的球队。
在底特律他拥有年轻的格兰特-希尔，活塞攻防转换全联盟第二慢；在华盛顿的2年里奇才队速度也变成了联盟的第26和第27名。
所以对于公牛队的第一个问题就出现了。尽管公牛队最近几个赛季一直主打防守篮球，但他们的速度并不慢。在过去的4个赛季里攻防速率方面公牛分别是11，6，5，11，这并不妨碍他们成为联盟防守效率最好的球队之一。
公牛下赛季应该会打得更快。冒昧的猜测一下：公牛队应该会选择德里克-罗斯作为状元，新赛季他们可以更多的跑动。这是他们的优势：一支身材普遍不高，可以打快球，同时他们缺乏可以在低位制造威胁的球员，每次进攻都应该尽量打快。但是问题就是柯林斯似乎不吃这一套。
很明显如果公牛选择了迈克尔-比斯利，这个问题会被淡化些，然而必须要说的是一个战术运行缓慢的教练必然需要大量与其合拍的球员。除非约翰-帕克森在夏天对球队大换血，否则对于公牛来说这个问题就足够大了。
问题2：不信任年轻球员
柯林斯喜欢约定俗成，极快敲定基调，之后波澜不惊。
最近几十年很少能找出比柯林斯还不信任年轻球员的主教练了。非典型的夸梅-布朗只是其中缩影而已，他对没有极强即战力的年轻球员向来都没有什么好感。
近年来柯林斯这个问题更是愈演愈烈，在华盛顿倒霉的不止是一个布朗：22岁的鲍比-西蒙斯在板凳末端一坐就是两年，32的巴伦-拉塞尔却要在场上拼死拼
活；25岁的卡迪纳尔没事可做，39岁的老家伙奥克利却有大把的上场时间；22岁的海伍德一样要坐着，因为32岁的波培-琼斯更得宠。好了，你该有印象了
吧。
尽管在底特律和芝加哥这个问题并不像在华盛顿那么明显，柯林斯不喜欢新人的毛病也从来没改：在底特律新人阿龙-麦基和拉特利夫是1996-97赛季最有效
率的球员但大多数时间他们只能在老兵身后坐板凳，“垃圾狗”威廉姆斯更惨些---几乎没打；在芝加哥23岁的新秀威尔-普度在88-89赛季总共打了
190分钟，另外一位倒霉蛋杰克-海利比他多打了99分钟。真不知道柯林斯是让他们打球还是到现场轮毛巾。
如果你看过公牛队的名单就会知道这是个严重问题。无论罗斯还是比斯利出场是没问题的，但其他球员呢？诺阿和托马斯需要不断通过比赛去改良自己，然而一个错
误就可能让他们失去柯林斯的信任进而被打入冷宫，这种情况下柯林斯宁可去相信那些夏天用底薪签来的老头子。同样的问题索夫罗萨和格雷也要面对。
一支年轻球队却雇用了一个“少壮杀手”当教练，实在让人担忧。
问题3：性格缺陷
问题1和2诚然可虑，第三个问题则更可能成为致命伤。
斯科特-斯基尔斯是个讲究细节到近乎苛刻的教头，他治下的公牛每分钟都力求拼劲十足。这一风格在短期效果明显，然而过去赛季伊始他的队员就对他离心离德并不断抱怨他的苛刻。很明显，战绩表明了后果。
雇佣柯林斯，公牛队等于找了另一个斯基尔斯，二者同样暴躁刻板。
柯林斯一旦确立某些事情三年任期恐怕都不会变。球员们需要一个打快球的教练，管理层却招来了又一个和斯基尔斯别无二致的，球员们会不会很快逼宫唱反调？那可真要生死时速了。
柯林斯或许在第一个赛季会带领球队取得战绩上的进步，因为他们拥有如此多的天才球员，常规赛输掉49场已经够糟了，他们不会想再来一次。但是想要成功，让球队的气氛变得轻松，提高球队攻防速度，和年轻球员打好关系是他必须要走的三步。
再次声明，并不是说柯林斯不是好教练，但就其个人优缺点来讲，他并不适合公牛队。如果他不打算改变自己老一套的话，那么大家就该考虑考虑他的继任者是谁了。
原文
Problem No. 1: Pace
Collins might be the most extreme slow-pace coach in the past
quarter century. I'm amazed nobody has brought this up yet -- the
guy makes Jeff Van Gundy look like Paul Westhead.
His Bulls were the league's slowest-paced team in 1986-87 and
1987-88, even with Michael Jordan at the peak of his athleticism.
Scottie Pippen became a starter in 1988-89, yet Collins had the
Bulls playing at the third-slowest pace in the NBA.
His Pistons, with a young Grant Hill, were the league's
second-slowest team in both seasons Collins coached in Detroit. And
his Wizards were 26th and 27th out of 29 teams in his two years at
the helm in Washington.
So there's problem No. 1. The Bulls, though a defense-minded team
in recent seasons, played fast. The past four seasons, Chicago has
ranked 11th, sixth, fifth and 11th in pace, even while ranking
among the league's top clubs in defensive efficiency.
The Bulls probably ought to play even faster next season. Presuming
the Bulls take Derrick Rose with the first overall pick, they'll
want to run more than ever. This would be to their advantage -- as
a small, fast team without a go-to post player, Chicago should look
to run at every opportunity. But it's an open question whether
Collins can lighten up enough to coach this way.
Obviously, if the Bulls take Michael Beasley, this is a lesser
concern, but even so, the fact remains that Chicago would have a
down-tempo coach with a mostly up-tempo roster. Unless John Paxson
is planning to nuke the roster this summer, this looms as a major
issue.
Problem No. 2: Youth
Collins' history is that he gets an immediate jump from his team --
then things level off in subsequent seasons.
There's a reason for that. Few coaches in recent history have
trusted young players less than Collins has. Obviously, there's the
infamous Kwame Brown saga, but his obvious discomfort with any
young player who isn't an immediate star goes well beyond
that.
Collins was particularly over the top in this respect in his most
recent tenure, in Washington, and not just with Brown. While
22-year-old Bobby Simmons sat at the end of the bench for two
years, 32-year-old Bryon Russell played and was horribly
ineffective. While 25-year-old Brian Cardinal sat, 39-year-old
Charles Oakley got plenty of time to prove how washed up he was.
While 22-year-old Brendan Haywood sat, 32-year-old Popeye Jones
played. You get the picture.
Although Detroit and Chicago weren't exactly awash in young talent
with Collins as coach, he didn't get much out of the young 'uns
there, either. In Detroit, rookies Aaron McKie and Theo Ratliff
were two of his most effective players in 1996-97, but they came
off the bench behind the veterans; a third productive rookie,
Jerome Williams, hardly played at all. In Chicago, he played
23-year-old rookie Will Perdue 190 minutes in 1988-89 … or 99
minutes fewer than he played future towel-waver Jack Haley.
Obviously, if you look at Chicago's current roster, this portends a
serious problem. Rose or Beasley will play no matter what,
presumably, but what of younger players with less impressive
pedigrees? Joakim Noah and Tyrus Thomas need to get experience and
play though their mistakes, but one worries Collins will pull the
plug on them after the first miscue and put in whatever decrepit
32-year-old veteran the Bulls sign for the minimum this summer.
Ditto for Thabo Sefolosha and Aaron Gray.
In short, for a young team to hire a coach so suspicious of youth
is a head-scratcher.
Problem No. 3: Temperament
Problems 1 and 2 are concerns, but this last problem is potentially
the biggest hurdle.
For three-and-a-half seasons, the Bulls played for Scott Skiles --
a detail-oriented stickler who rode his players hard every minute.
This had impressive short-term effects, but by the start of last
season, his players had tuned him out and seemed to be bothered by
his demanding approach. The results showed in the team's
record.
By hiring Collins, the Bulls are effectively bringing in another
Skiles, in terms of temperament.
At each of his previous three stops, Collins' constant harping wore
out his players within three years. If he lost them that fast when
he replaced players' coaches, how fast will the Bulls' players tune
him out when he comes in as Skiles the Sequel? My guess is "with
breathtaking speed."
One has to presume Collins will get his one-year jump in the win
column, simply because the Bulls are too talented to lose 49 games
again. But for him to succeed, he'll need to be a much more
laid-back, up-tempo, youth-friendly coach than he ever was in his
past three stops.
Again, the problem isn't that Collins is a "bad" coach. It's that
his strengths and weaknesses are a bad fit.
And if he doesn't change his stripes, we'll find ourselves
contemplating Chicago's next coaching hire before you know
it.
原文链接
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=Collins-080529
5月29日更新
原文作者John Hollinger
