Kenny Atkinson Is Not a Quick Fix For Cleveland Cavaliers' Issues

It seemed apparent that J.B. Bickerstaff needed to go, but will a coaching change really take the Cavaliers to the next level?

Atkinson Introductory Presser 2.jpg / Spencer German

The Cleveland Cavaliers have made two big moves this offseason: extending Donovan Mitchell, and replacing J.B. Bickerstaff with Kenny Atkinson at head coach.

Obviously, the Mitchell extension takes precedence. He is the Cavaliers' franchise player, and six months ago, the general consensus was that the All-Star guard would prefer to move on to a larger market. Mitchell ultimately bucked the narrative and signed a three-year, $150 million deal (with a player option for the third year) to remain in Cleveland.

But let's not understate the importance of firing Bickerstaff and bringing in Atkinson.

Mitchell himself was evidently not a huge fan of Bickerstaff, and when your best player doesn't think highly of the coach, the rest of the locker room tends to follow.

Atkinson has familiarity with some of Cleveland's key players, as he coached Jarrett Allen and Caris LeVert with the Brooklyn Nets. He is also likely to alter the Cavs' offensive style. Atkinson prefers to run a fast-paced, uptempo offense, which will represent a rather stark change from last season when the Cavaliers ranked 22nd in the NBA in pace.

But is Atkinson really going to solve Cleveland's problems?

Many times, a head coach gets fired because he is a scapegoat. The team underperforms? Blame the coach. Players don't get along? Blame the coach. Heck, injuries? Blame the coach.

Now, this isn't necessarily a defense of Bickerstaff. The Cavs players weren't responding well to his methods, and when that happens, yes; a change is required.

However, that does not mean that going from Bickerstaff to Atkinson will suddenly result in a haven for Mitchell and the rest of the squad.

Let's face it: the Cavaliers have a flawed roster. They don't have any big wings to defend the Jayson Tatums of the world (unless Jaylon Tyson fills that role). They lack genuinely elite shooting. Their floor spacing leaves much to be desired, especially up front.

On top of all that, Cleveland doesn't have the same top-level talent as the legitimate contenders. Mitchell is terrific, but beyond him, there are question marks, especially after the disappointing campaign Darius Garland just endured.

Good coaching can only take a team so far. The onus is really on the players to deliver.

We don't have to look any further than the Boston Celtics to see that. A year ago, many Celtics fans wanted to run Joe Mazzulla out of town. Today, he is the toast of Beantown.

This isn't to say that coaching doesn't matter at all. The players need to like their coach, and the coach does need to instill the proper motivation and belief into his guys. It didn't seem like Bickerstaff was succeeding on either of those fronts in Cleveland.

But just because Atkinson may end up having a better grip on the locker room and may be more appreciated by his players does not mean that the Cavs are suddenly going to vault themselves into serious contention.

A coach's scheme is only as effective as the players that are in it, so if Atkinson overhauls the offensive system, it doesn't ensure that success is guaranteed.

Could the Cavaliers stand to play at a quicker pace? Perhaps. You can imagine that all four of Mitchell, Garland, Allen and Evan Mobley would do well in a more frenetic style of play in which they can keep opposing defense on their heels.

But realistically speaking, a superior system can only achieve so much.

Take the Mike D'Antoni-era Phoenix Suns, for example. Was their "seven seconds or less" offense lethal? Yes. Did it result in a whole lot of playoff success? No, and they had Steve Nash running the show with pieces like Amar'e Stoudemire and Shawn Marion flanking him.

The Suns couldn't get by the San Antonio Spurs or the Los Angeles Lakers those years, and the Dallas Mavericks also ousted them once. It just wasn't a postseason-friendly scheme.

Then you look at the Golden State Warriors, who were able to employ a similar playstyle much more effectively. Why? Because they had one of the most stacked rosters in NBA history. Steve Kerr did a fine job implementing the system, but really, the lion's share of the credit rested on the shoulders of Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson and, later, Kevin Durant.

Talent wins championships. Good coaching is unquestionably a great aid, but it's elite players that win you hardware. Why do you think Gregg Popovich has been unable to win much of anything since Tim Duncan retired and Kawhi Leonard was traded? Popovich isn't a wizard. He can only work with what he has at his disposal.

Maybe Atkinson will be able to get the very best out of his players. Perhaps he will be able to help Mitchell and Co. achieve levels that they weren't capable of reaching under Bickerstaff.

However, it seems hard to imagine any coach in NBA history—whether that's Atkinson, Popovich, Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach—genuinely turning this Cavaliers team into a contender.

Cleveland has a solid foundation in place, but it needs more. Atkinson is a fine supplementary piece and a potential upgrade from Bickerstaff, but he isn't the answer.