What does it mean to be a great coach?

Did you know that for every Don Nelson victory an angel gets its wings? Or something like that. On Sunday, my Golden State Warriors defeated the Toronto Raptors, 113-112. More importantly, the win was number 1,332 for head coach Don Nelson, who is now tied for first place with Lenny Wilkins for most wins as an NBA head coach. Don’t worry, I won’t rant about how awesome the Warriors are, because, to be honest, they’re garbage this year (despite Stephen Curry). The milestone got me thinking about the difference between good coaches and great coaches.
I’ll be honest. I don’t know how to classify Nelson. He’s got a boatload of regular season wins under his belt, along with 1,060 losses, but he’s struggled in the postseason. He has never won a championship and he’s too often the coach of a bad team. So is he a good coach or a great coach?

Greatness is often associated with championships. The obvious argument is that individuals don’t achieve greatness until they’ve been king of the hill. But it’s much more complicated than that. Would you consider Doc Rivers a great coach, although he has only recently been successful in winning a championship after years of missing the playoffs or being knocked out in the first round? I don’t think I do. Winning championships is just one part of the equation, granted, a very important part. The rest varies from person to person, with some people putting more emphasis on total wins, while others put emphasis on winning with multiple teams. For me, the key word is consistency.

Great coaches are consistent. Year in and year out they put together contenders, even if that means changing a time-tested strategy that doesn’t work with a new roster. They play to the strengths of their players and, as such, are able to change and evolve with the times. Mike Shanahan is the first name that comes to mind, although there are many others. During his stint in Denver, he compiled a .615 winning percentage and two Super Bowl victories to go along with it. He did so by consistently putting together a solid running game with a variety of players. Yes, he didn’t do everything well­—defense, for example—but he did enough to put together contenders.

It may be hard to believe, but here at Columbia we have great coaches. As fellow columnist Kunal Gupta has written about on several occasions, our men’s tennis team is very good. In fact, it has been good for awhile now, especially during the reign of Bidyut Goswami. Every year I’ve been here, the men’s tennis team in particular has been a powerhouse, not only in the Ivy League, but on the national stage as well. The same is true of the fencing team, coached by George Kolombatovich, which consistently sends athletes around the globe to compete in world championships. Hell, Nicole Ross took the NCAA championship in women’s foil this year. What these two coaches have in common is consistency. The Lions are consistently good in these two sports, which is especially impressive considering that the two coaches have been here for 25 and 32 years respectively. Their greatness goes somewhat unnoticed because their sports are not mainstream, but it’s there.

So, if great coaches are consistent winners, with a championship or two thrown into the mix, than what is Don Nelson? Great coach with an impressive number of victories? Or is he someone who’s been around so long that he was bound to rack up a ton of wins? When it comes to consistency, he definitely hasn’t been consistent as of late. Ehh, I’m still not sure, but he’s a crazy old man, so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.