Search for a shepherd to lead a flock of sharks.
I wanted to weigh in on the Coaching Search. Most of the options that we pine for have been talked about ad-nauseum. I wanted to go over each coach as an individual (team strategy, balancing player personalities, development) and what the stats say about them (with regards to W’s L’s, and the playoffs). This is not an exhaustive list just more of an off the top list (with regards to which candidates I know of, granted I do not have an complete and comprehensive list of assistant coaches nor am I privy to who The Maloof’s Petrie, Levien, and the Kings have their respective eyes on with regards to assistant coaches, nor do I care to look at the College, or Euro coaches at this time, mostly a list of “re-tread” coaches and a few Assistants who have interviewed for head coaching positions over the last few years or who we have had an eye on)
Let me jump into the coaches.
I’ll start with those who have been Head-Coaches at the NBA level, they fall in no particular order:
Avery Johnson: The Lil’ General reminds me a bit of Scott Skiles, gritty/hard nosed player, who played for several different systems, and takes his coaching style from the Pop’ Handbook. Took an underachieving but still talented Mavericks team with no nose for Defense at all (although what team does have a nose for defense under Nellie?) and turned them into a solid defensive unit based mostly on grit, and a pretty good help-zone-hybrid… tight rotations are generally key. Not to mention the Dampier/Diop provided a two headed monster of one-one D and shot blocking… while providing decent rebounding in the middle as well. He also had the ball hawking Devin Harris to provide defense at the point. Combine that with Josh Howard and his decent D… and Nowitzki’s nose for the ball while rebounding and you have yourself a team that is finals bound. Which is exactly what happened. They would have one if not for a certain player named Dwayne Wade, who destroyed the Mavs D (this is what happens when you do not have a player capable of “lockdown” defense who can at least drape themselves all over the opponent’s best player and make life a bit more difficult for him). We all know what happened the year after, a history-making loss to the Warriors in the round one of the playoffs.
The reason I mention that Avery reminds me of Skiles is, again they were both tough-nosed players and seem like the kind of coach that would wear on a group of players much like he did with the Mavs and much like Skiles did in Chicago. (although the Bucks have played MUCH better D this year… even though they have to sieves at PG in Ridnour and Sessions and their starting center has been gone most of the year, gritty. Also, remember these are the same Bucks which were the worst team in the league last year in defense). This is not to say that Avery could get the same results with our roster that he did with the Mavs having a MVP caliber player on your roster sure does mask a lot of deficiencies through in Jason Terry, Devin Harris, and Josh Howard and it is easy to see why the Mavericks were a Championship caliber team under Avery. I do not think that Avery is all that good a fit for our team, I like him as a coach, and liked him as a player but something in my gut says that he would be a temporary fix a 2-3 year coach to come in and instill a bit of edge and then be gone (due again to the “grind”).
Here are his Coaching Numbers:
Games Coached: 264
Games Won: 194
Games Lost: 70
Win %: 73.5
Playoff Games Coached: 47
Playoff Games Won: 23
Playoff Games Lost: 24
Win %:48.9
Eddie Jordan: Our hope, our future, the Princeton offense, class, style, former player. All of these describe Eddie Jordan (or at least for some of the fans around here). Jordan was a player, retired, became and assistant coach, then was promoted to a head coach position. He was the second longest tenured coach in the League (behind only Jerry Sloan) until he was fired from the Wizards (baaaaad mistake IMO) but their loss our potential gain. We are highly familiar with EJ’s offense (as we ran it/run it currently). He is a student of the Princeton offense and Petrie has a soft spot for the offense (and from what I hear EJ as well). Defensively is where the red-flags start to pop-up for me.
He said that his Wizards teams stressed D in practice consistently. But someone explain how a team with Gilbert Arenas (pre-injury), Brendan Haywood/Etan Thomas (two bruising centers who rebound well and play decent one-one D and block a fair amount of shots), Larry Hughes then later Caron Butler (both who are praised for Decent one-one D and Hughes led the league in steals under Jordan) can be so porous on the defensive side of the ball. Yes Arenas/Hughes/Butler take a few to many risks. True Deshawn Stevenson is not a Lockdown defender (despite his delusions of such action). But it seems to me that having two decent defensive minded centers would help (I know that the injury bug bit both of them but still) the wizards were consistently ranked from middle to low end of the league under Jordan.
Personally I like EJ and would not mind if he were the next head coach of the Kings, I think he did a fair job in helping Haywood break out, in turning Arenas (pre-injury) into a franchise type talent, and in getting the most out of his veteran players, he tried to teach the young players on his roster how to flow in his offensive system, and if they caught on they were rewarded, if not glued to the bench. The good thing about bringing Coachie in now (if we really want or truly do get EJ) is that our rookies and younger players will be familiar with the Princeton O already, so the learning curve will not be as extreme. The benefit of having Petrie as our GM is that he prizes a high basketball IQ and tends to draft players who will fit into his system and vision. The Coach is important because he will effectively enable Petrie’s vision to be realized on the court, EJ is a coach who can do this.
A look at his numbers:
Games Coached: 518
Games Won: 230
Games Lost: 288
Win %: 44.4
Playoff Games Coached: 26
Playoff Games Won: 8
Playoff Games Lost: 18
Win %: 30.8
Flip Saunders: What can be said about Flip Saunders, in my opinion he is one of the most overrated coaches to ever sit on the bench. True his offensive schemes maximize the talents of the players, and true his defensive schemes are creative, but Flip does not seem like the kind of guy to eventually get us to the mountaintop. He may be a coach to pull us from the valley of despair though and that in and of itself is worthy of consideration. With the T-Wolves and KG he was only able to get out of the first round of the playoff once. Which was a loss in the WCF to the Lakers (who eventually lost out to the Pistons in the finals). I see Flip ending up in Washington for some reason, he just seems like the right guy. Veteran players looking for a veteran coach? CHECK. (Arenas/Butler/Jamison/Haywood/Stevenson/Songaila) Young guys who need to learn? (Remember the Detroit Zoo-Crew?) CHECK. (Mcguire/Blatche/Young). I think the wizards are a team that next season will be relatively potent given the right coach and a high draft pick which could be used in a number of ways (trade for proven vet’s etc.) and given Flip’s success with veteran players (think Cassell/Sprewell/KG). Flip would also be a good fit for the Kings (particularly if we add Griffin this off-season) and with his track record of helping talented PF’s develop (see KG again) I think hiring Flip would not be that bad of a choice. It all just depends on Flip. And honestly I do not see him coming to a rebuild situation.
Numbers:
Games Coached: 983
Games Won: 587
Games Lost: 396
Win %: 59.7
Playoff Games Coached: 98
Playoff Games Won: 47
Playoff Games Lost: 51
Win %: 48
Jeff Van Gundy: JVG. What to say about JVG. One of the better Defensive coaches the NBA has ever seen. Worked his way up as an assistant coach sat under a number of coaches as an assistant (Pat Riley and Don Nelson come to mind). Solid all around coach… loves the Grind-it-out 78-80ppg type of basketball that has won San Antonio (and last year the Celtics… and before that the Pistons) so many championships. My problem with Van-Gundy is two fold. One what type of offense do you run? Because all I have ever seen is throw the ball into the post double team, crap, throw the ball to the perimeter hock up a 3pt shot repeat. Can be effective (see San Antonio, Spurs) if you have the right players to implement. My other problem with Van Gundy is can he develop a roster? He did a pretty good job with Yao bringing him to Star level, but it was not enough to get the Rockets out of the 1st round. Even with McGrady in his prime at the time.
By the Numbers:
Games Coached: 748
Games Won: 430
Games Lost: 318
Win %: 57.5
Playoff Games Coached: 88
Playoff Games Won: 44
Playoff Games Lost: 44
Win %: 50
Maurice Cheeks: Mo Cheeks, what to say about Mo Cheeks the player? Great. Fantastic. Tremendous defensive ability. (one of the best defensive PG’s who ever played) One title, numerous all-star games played, and several time all-defense team nominee. Mo would be much like our former player turned coach, Reggie Theus. He seems to have an aptitude for getting the most effort out of his players, while he may not know his X’s and O’s (at least that is probably the biggest nock on Mo as a coach) I will say that it looked like he lost the locker-room this year in Philly, and that as undisciplined as the Trailblazers were it took a total overhaul to get them to respectability. (starting with the coach and moving through the rest of the franchise). I think the players would respect Mo and his previous accomplishments as a player, and they would (I hope) leave it on the court every night and compete every night under him. However, they would not be anything much more than what they are now a bottom dweller in the NBA. He inherited a team in Portland (that while troubled) was still very talented and wasted it on a few first round playoff exists. Although, he did help Zach Randolph to become a 20-10 guy… and that is saying something. He also helped Iggy/LouisWilliams/T. Young in Philly to play to their strengths and that is half the battle in the NBA.
Numbers:
Games Coached: 570
Games Won: 284
Games Lost: 286
Win %: 49.8
Playoff Games Coached: 16
Playoff Games Won: 5
Playoff Games Lost: 11
Win %: 31.3
Mark Iavaroni: I was going to touch on Iavaroni, but the rumor is that he will end up on the bench in Toronto as an “offensive coordinator” which really is what he should be doing. He and D’Antoni are a bit part of the SSL offense which of course made PHX so potent.
Numbers:
Games Coached: 123
Games Won: 33
Games Lost: 80
Win %: 26.8
Playoff Games Coached: 0
Playoff Games Won: 0
Playoff Games Lost: 0
Win %: 0
Sam Mitchell: Smitch might be a good fit, for our franchise, although my gut says he will take one with a bit more promise and more of a veteran presence than what we have here in Sacramento. Mitchell helped guide the Raptors to the playoffs and helped turn TJ Ford into a very solid point as well as allowing Bosh, Moon, and Calderon flourish. He was the wrong coach to fire at the wrong time, but how else was Colangelo going to get “his guy” in. Honestly I was surprised the Colangelo did not fire Mitchell after last season and drop Toronto into the D’antoni sweepstakes. Mitchell is another former player and former assistant coach (notice a theme?). Who was able to get his team to at least play decent defense and helped guide a very young a very raw squad to the playoffs. He helped turn Chris Bosh into a monster as well. My big beef with Mitchell is two fold. His rotations were puzzling (well in the playoffs when he put Bargnani in last year who had been the third big off the bench all season) into the starting lineup and moved moon to the bench. A bit puzzling to me. But again a coach who can get the most out of his veterans and will garner the respect of the players. His offensive schemes were a bit primitive (what with the perimeter rules the way they are what offense isn’t either primarily pick & roll, Drive & Dish, or iso?) I do not particularly want Smitch on the bench for us because I am afraid that he will hinder the growth of the youth that we have here.
Numbers:
Games Coached: 345
Games Won: 156
Games Lost: 189
Win %: 45.2
Playoff Games Coached: 11
Playoff Games Won: 3
Playoff Games Lost: 8
Win %: 27.3
P.J. Carlesimo: P.J. is a guy who would be best served as an assistant or defensive coordinator IMO a good mind, not so good at motivating and implementation. I bet he finds his way back into San Antonio before it is all said and done, because it was Pop who lobbied hard for P.J. to get the job of coaching Kevin Durant. Which he squandered largely by playing Durant at the 2 guard spot.
Numbers:
Games Coached: 500
Games Won: 204
Games Lost: 296
Win %: 40.8
Playoff Games Coached: 12
Playoff Games Won: 3
Playoff Games Lost: 9
Win %: 25
Mike Fratello: We discussed Fratello a lot the last couple weeks here at STR but honestly, his track record is fairly solid. If we could get him to buy into the Princeton offense, and let him instill his defensive presence and his take-care-of-the-ball strategy (which actually would be a result of his slow as snails offense perhaps) I think he might actually be a good idea. He helped turn a young Grizzlies team into a solid playoff team (they had the unfortunate situation of being in the same division as the Rockets, Mavs, and Spurs) and they still made it into the playoffs. He did the same thing with the Cavs, and Hawks (well actually the Cavs were a solid veteran team already) before that. He helped Jason Williams to tone it down and become one of the most efficient PG’s in the league. The team played hard-nosed D every night and competed like their careers depended on it… for a lot of those guys it did. Think Shane Battier, James Posey, Stromile Swift, Bonzi Wells… these guys all played for Fratello, and played pretty well.
The Numbers:
Games Coached: 1215
Games Won: 667
Games Lost: 548
Win %: 54.9
Playoff Games Coached: 62
Playoff Games Won: 20
Playoff Games Lost: 42
Win %: 32.3
Paul Silas: Silas is a bit combative in the media, and seemed to lose LBJ’s respect, which lead to the hire of Mike Brown in Cleveland. He also seemed to lose the New Orleans/Charlotte team as well (Baron Davis rings a bell here) But they did compete, and make a few surprise run’s in the systems. The last couple of years he has attempted to throw his name into the ring with the Sun’s job last year saying something to the effect of: “The Sun’s just need a system, that is what I would bring a system, on the offensive side of the ball and the defensive side of the ball”. I wonder what that system would be. And before Larry Brown was hired in Charlotte he said that it would be “His Dream Job”… although no reported interview were made. Which makes me wonder does he have a reputation around the league or something? He obviously wants to coach and has a decent track record so what is the red-flag with this guy? His teams in Charlotte/NO were always decent, and the Cavs played well under him but LBJ was just a pup… and Boozer betrayed them. (personally I think the problem Cleveland had with Boozer and his lack of respect for the organization is what caused LBJ to question the organization and the coach). But who knows. I’d be for Paul Silas on the bench for the Kings next season.
The Numbers:
Games Coached: 755
Games Won: 355
Games Lost: 400
Win %: 47
Playoff Games Coached: 29
Playoff Games Won: 13
Playoff Games Lost: 16
Win %: 44.8
Terry Porter: We interviewed him after Adleman but went in a different direction (i.e. Mussleman) I think Porter is a decent coach. He just ran into a problem in Phoenix, the team is built to get up and down the court (minus Shaq) And he tried and tried to get them to buy into his Half-Court Philosophy. And the two worlds just did not meet. I do believe that the Suns would be in the playoffs this year (as I would count them out over the Mavs at this point) if they had retained Porter, but his problems with Nash/Shaq/Amare got him canned. Shame really, my gut says he finds his way to the bench as a lead Assistant under a big-name coach (like Pop, or Flip or someone like that). He did take a Buck’s team that was only so-so to the playoffs and scare the Pistons in a game or two.
The Numbers:
Games Coached: 215
Games Won: 99
Games Lost: 116
Win %: 46
Playoff Games Coached: 5
Playoff Games Won: 1
Playoff Games Lost: 4
Win %: 20
A few Assistant Coaches that I remember or that have come up before:
Mario Elie: He has studied under Pop as a player, and won a championship under him. He also helped the rockets in the early 90’s to get to and win the Finals under another esteemed basketball mind Rudy Tomjanovich. He currently is on the Mavs bench under Rick Carlisle another solid basketball mind. I think he may be ready for a head coaching job, and he has interviewed with us before.
Tom Thibeadou: One of the best defensive minds in the NBA, his teams are always in the top 10 in Defense (well 15 out of 19 seasons). That is what I call defensively sound. He helped transform the Rockets defense from OK to Superb (that and a bit of roster tweaking and a dash of JVG) Another assistant coach that I would not mind seeing on the sidelines for the Kings and supposedly one of the frontrunners.
Elston Turner: An Adelman protégé, and a student of the Princeton offense, he would be (essentially) a cheaper version of Eddie Jordan. That is if we lose out on EJ.
Mike Budenholzer: One of the minds in arguably the best run franchise in the NBA. He knows the system that Pop runs (which will a bit on the boring side is awfully effective) and would probably try and turn Sacramento into a cheap-version of SA. The problem I see with this is that Petrie would want us to continue running the Princeton offense, and we do not really have the personnel to play the type of tight D that Pop’s system requires. We do how ever have the high-basketball iq type of guys and the team first type of guys that are required to play in both of these systems.
Finally, I would like to talk about our own Kenny Natt for a moment.
Kenny could be a good coach. And here is why. He is coaching like he is going to be here next year. By this I mean, giving Nocioni minutes while Greene is glued to the bench. He wants to gain the respect of the Vet’s instead of having them sit, because he does not want to have to start over next year. I do not buy into that fact that he will not bench a guy for bad D because he is a lame duck coach. What is the player (especially on our roster) going to do about it? I think if Natt really were as dedicated to the Sloan way (which by the way the Jazz D is rather suspect outside of AK-47) as he says he is it would not matter to him what position he was in, he would stick to his guns, and earn the respect of the rooks as well as the vets. I think that it would be great if we were to hire someone like EJ, if we were able to retain Natt as an assistant I think that would be a great setup I do not know if anyone would buy into that but I think you let Kenny focus on the discipline and defense of the game and let Jordan do all the motivating and offensive tinkering (with Coachie of course) and it might be a recipe for growth and respectability. Just a though.
Again this is not an exhaustive list… I was hoping to bring a bit of discussion to the board. So, please bring your own coaching ideas to the table.
Thanks for reading!
(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)
6 recs |
59 comments
|
Comments
I like the idea of...
bringing in the little general. Good job on the numbers
I think Avery lost a good team in Dallas
that worries me. Eating Dinner – more later
So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii
by lietothegirls on Apr 6, 2009 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions
One quick point
What can be said about Flip Saunders, in my opinion he is one of the most overrated coaches to ever sit on the bench.
The same was said about Adelman, and my guess is that a lot of folks here would love to have him still coaching the Kings.
If he maximizes the offensive talents of his players and has creative defensive sets (which is necessary given the lack of defensive talent on our squad), what’s not to like?
Coming to you live from the land of interim coaches.
by LeaguePassAddict on Apr 6, 2009 8:12 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs
I do like
Saunders… and i think my piece does not bare that out.
He is overrated though. Still a very solid coach and would be a start in the right direction.
Just not someone i see being a good longterm fit for us.
Again my gut is saying that Saunders goes to a team that looks more ready to compete for a playoff spot than we are.
Blessings.Love.Peace
by lifestyleforthesellout on Apr 6, 2009 11:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Raises hand on the Adelman point
But I don’t want Flip Saunders.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwing Sucka'z over since 1985.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Adelman
has the track record of getting his teams deeper into the playoffs than flip (a couple finals appearances). While Flip flamed out in the first round 7 times before he made it to the WCF. Then he was let go. In Detroit he did exactly what was asked of him… get the team deep in the playoffs, but he did not get the team to the Finals which was the goal yes?
I’m just saying… if you offer me Adelman or Flip everytime im going to choose Adelman.
Blessings.Love.Peace
by lifestyleforthesellout on Apr 8, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Avery Johnson – No, I felt I was taking crazy pills when Avery was getting all the credit in Dallas. Hadn’t anyone notice the major personnel changes!!!
Eddie Jordan – Yes, our young team likes to play offense.
Flip Saunders – No, could not win games with an absolute superstar in Kevin Garnett. Go back in the annuals of the NBA and find another coach who has done that?
Jeff Van Gundy – No, but his brother can give him directions to the Kinkos.
Maurice Cheeks – No, just never been impressed.
Mark Iavaroni – No, dumb enough to take Memphis job.
Sam Mitchell – No, Bill Simmons mocks us enough. Sam Mitchell comment every article.
P.J. Carlesimo – No, P.J (NBA) = Dennis Erickson (NFL)
Mike Fratello – Maybe, won’t win but will beat the immaturity out of the young guys. Would Maloofs get passed his Musselman stink?
Paul Silas – Maybe, but he is in that Jerry Reynolds, St. Jean mold of the likable loser.
Terry Porter – Nope, NBA players don’t like him.
Mario Elie – Maybe, good name and rep but haven’t we figured out if you can’t take Duncan with you than coaching under Pop doesn’t mean anything.
Tom Thibeadou – No, I’d be genius too on defense if I had two 7 foot shot blockers and a team of gamey defenders.
Elston Turner – Yes, but the Maloofs would have to admit they were wrong . . . ain’t ever gonna to happen.
Mike Budenholzer – No, see Mario Elle comment. Probably more on point with this guy.
Kenny Natt – No, has lost the team but deserves another shot later down the line in the NBA.
Ken Whiz – Yes, simply because it will take our players no effort breaking into his car to haze it with popcorn, dog food, etc. Leaves our guys more time to actually . . . well you know . . . practice.
by bignerd on Apr 7, 2009 1:08 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
The facination here for the Princeton O still astounds me
We’re the worst rebounding team in the NBA. And, the principal behind the Princeton is to have your center as far away from the basket, so as to draw the opponents center away from the basket. We’re one of the worst asst/turnover ratio teams in the league. And, the Princeton uses a lot of screening and cutting and passing, with the center or pf out high as the facilitator. Yet, half the people want to draft Rubio, which would be a total waste. And, finally, with the ball handling skills of our major players, I’m not sure we have players good enough to run the Princeton.
If we end up playing the Princeton O, it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world. I’m just confused why the ability to coach that perticular offense is considered a reason to hire a new coach. Certainly, there’s alot of exciting offenses run in the NBA that aren’t based on the Princeton. There are certainly more successful offenses too. So, to limit or prioritize the coaching selection based on the Princeton seems to me to be a poor decision.
Then there’s the Kings defense. Now, some here have thought that the players aren’t good man to man defensive players by nature. Natt seems to think it’s all about effort. Or, at least that what he says in public. I believe the defensive scheme is bad. Whatever the reason, until we can start to hold teams under 105ppg, it won’t make a difference what offense we run or how well we run it.
If the next coach cant teach some team defensive scheme, we’ll be talking about tanking at the end of next season too. An exciting offense is fun to watch, but in the end if it doesn’t result in a win, how’s that any different than this year. Any time the Kings have a chance to win at the end of the game, then the games exciting. Were a team of jump shooters with no interior offense and no one who can drive, penetrate and score at the rim, but people come away from a win just as happy as if we played the most sophisticated offense in basketball.
If you have to fixate on something, how about Defense.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Funny thing is
both Charlotte and Detroit hold teams under 95 points a game and both are under .500. Phoenix gives up just under 108 a game and they win 54.5% of their games and would be a 5 seed in the East.
It’s really about point differential, ie. scoring more than you give up. Phoenix is +1.9 and Charlotte and Detroit are -0.9 and -0.8 respectively.
We need to improve our defense yes, but we need to improve our offense too.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Apr 7, 2009 5:20 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd cuz I think that people are missing that point
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....
Style of play does effect scoring & defense
With a running offense like Phoenix you are going to give your opponents more chances to score than say the Spurs. And, if you have a poor defense, your going to give up more points. Yes
And your point:
We need to improve our defense yes, but we need to improve our offense too.
is right on as well.
But, I my experience when you make adjustments to get improvement, you do it in the area where the biggest improvement can be made. Example: If you wanted to look to improve offense, you could look to improved FT shooting or Offensive rebounding. FT shooting could be improved but we’re already one of the better FT shooting teams, so the overall effort to improve FT shooting won’t add that many additional points to our total score. Were as we are last in Offensive rebounding, so even a small increase in the total can lead to a large number of 2nd chance points.
Even if we are 25th in scoring effeciency as TZ stated in a prior thread, we are still worst at defense. So, if amount of improvement in defense & offense is the same, the defense will return a greater point differential.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
This team will never play good defense
If it doesn’t have a quality offense in tandem. You can’t make eggs out of chickenshit HT.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....
Does a quality offense aid a good defense, Certainly
Can the core 8 players on this team play better defense than they are playing right now?
I believe the answer is also, certainly. Changing from switching of every pick would help the defense. The bigs showing longer on the pick & rolls would help improve the defense. Better weak side help and staying on the 3pt shooter would help, too. None of those things require improved offense.
The Kings are currently 23rd in shooting percentage at 45%, but if they increase the effeciency by 4% they would be in 2nd place. 4% is equal to 4 ppg, but they’re out scored by 8ppg so they’d still lose even with the 2nd best scoring percentage. The Kings are currently tied with Wash for last in defensive scoring percentage at 48% which is 5% form being at 2nd best. So, in reality the Kings need to improve defensively more than offensively if they ever expect to win consistantly.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
That's your point of view
Which is fine, but I’m not going to argue anything either way. What I will say is that this team’s defense picks up when their offense does. In other words, this team is driven by emotion. A coach that might recognize that might find that working on defense will also accompany an improved offense.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....
Come on
We’re 4% from 2nd on offense and 5% from 2nd on defense and that’s a proof for focusing on improving the defense not the offense?
We need improvement everywhere. Saying we need to focus only on D or only on O is wrong.
As with anything your biggest improvements per effort put in come at the lower skill levels. So, it is easier to improve initially and gets harder as you get closer to your potential. I propose that it would be much easier to improve 5 steps(whatever measuring stick you want a step to be) on offense and 5 steps on defense than to improve 10 steps on either offense or defense.
I say we fixate on finding a coach that can help the team improve in both areas.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Apr 7, 2009 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm in total agreement
If you go back to the 1st post, I had no problem with the Kings improving the offense or playing the Princeton. I only suggested that people were more willing to choose a coach based on his history of running the Princeton O (EJ). Rather than his ability to teach a group of young players how to play defense together.
And, since I brought up the fact that the need for improvement on both offense & defense, I have no problem with your statement.
I say we fixate on finding a coach that can help the team improve in both areas.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Cool
I must have misinterpreted some of your intention in arguing for defense. Sorry about that.
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Apr 8, 2009 5:55 AM PDT up reply actions
I doubt it
He was saying that the greater need to fix was defense.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....
I'll argue for defense . . . . .
So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii
by lietothegirls on Apr 8, 2009 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions
No kidding
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwing Sucka'z over since 1985.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I don't think the next coach's primary job is going to be to male a strong defensive team
but to make us much better on offense and better on d. If he improves our offensive the d will come along. Remember, rebuilding is a process that is going to take some time.
Thinking about the new coach gives me a headache. The only coaches I could definitely take off the list is p.J Carlisimo and Fratello and a few more easy choices along those lines but after that it gets hard.
"We are in the business of kicking butt and business is very, very good." - Charles Barkley
Your supposition that a Princeton offense is a bad offensive rebounding one by definition is just silly.
No pro offense plays with two players down low all the time. The reason is, its moronic. Why would you play two players close to the basket, allowing for ridiculously easy double-teams and terrible passing angles between the bigs? The Princeton offense does allow for a lot of high-low posting. Many pro offenses have one guy posting and the other big is roaming around the floor setting screens. I won’t take it as a given that a high-low offense like the Princeton is automatically worse for offensive rebounding compared to an offense with one post guy and one screen setter.
People are concerned about the Princeton offense because clearly its the style of basketball the GM prefers.
Also, your perception we’re a team of jump shooters is hilarious in contrast to Lttg’s assertion we have all drivers. The truth is, we don’t have enough talent. We have one player that deserves 30+ minutes a night at this moment on a good team, K-Mart. Everyone else should be a role player right now, but they play big minutes so they do stupid things.
The ultimate victory in competition is derived from the inner satisfaction of knowing that you have done your best and that you have gotten the most out of what you had to give…Howard Cosell
Your observations on the pro offense are well made
As stated I’m not against the Princeton, but more conficted by the fact that people place a higher importance on it than defense. Just as I was conficted about the need for a true playmaking PG in an offense controlled by a high post center. As far as the offensive rebounding goes, I was more concerned about having our best rebounder which I believe is Spencer, playing in the high post.
As far as,
People are concerned about the Princeton offense because clearly its the style of basketball the GM prefers.
I thought the conversation was about who we wanted to have for our next coach. And, not who we thought GP wanted for coach.
And, with all due respect to LTTG, I’ll stick by my jump shooting team assessment. Without doing a lot of individual analysis, based on our points in the paint totals, I can reliably say that even if we do have a lot of drivers, we most certainly don’t have many finishers.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
That's actually one of the problems with this team
It shoots way too many jump shots, and in fact, will trade deep jump shots over layups consistently.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....
Correction!!!!
They all feel the need to dribble – and THEN take a Jumpshot.
They are usually not dribbling into the nearest clear spot open either…..
So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii
by lietothegirls on Apr 7, 2009 8:59 PM PDT up reply actions
We have neither anyone who (yet anyway) plays hard right at the rim
OR anyone who’s first instinct is to ‘catch and shoot’ without the need to make a dribble-move before essentially taking a jumpshot [Salmons did usually go all the way to the rim – but they all dribble first, shoot next, pass third]
(sigh)
Sorry if I haven’t been clear on that.
So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii
by lietothegirls on Apr 8, 2009 12:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Clear enough
Even the best spot up shooter questions his ability to make the shot sometime. Noc, McCants, Cisco, & Donte will take that corner 3 if their open most of the time. But, as with Donte, sometime the jumper isn’t the best choice if there’s a path to the rim. Cisco,McCants & Noc can finish, and I’d like to see Donte try to finish at the rim more often.
But, their not good enough to beat a man in front of them off the dribble like Salmon’s could. Martin can if he doesn’t get called for traveling, but his weak ballhandling skills leads to too many turnovers. To me the difference between a spot up shooter and a dribbling penetrator is can you put the ball on the floor and beat your man off the dribble. And, the only player that fits that criteria, is Martin.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Donte' has proven nothing this year
He’s gotten marginally better – very marginally.
Yes, he should be one of those big guys who can go all the way to the rim and finish. Thats the whole point of being a big 3 /sm 4.
The point is not – as Donte’ seems to think, – to jackup jumpers from the perimeter.
So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii
by lietothegirls on Apr 8, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Did you realistically expect Donte to achieve the type of success you're talking about?
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwing Sucka'z over since 1985.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Not in
his first year. Granted we are in a hopeless situation, and he has not been able to play any minutes at all… being buried on the bench most of the year. The best way to improve is to play.
Blessings.Love.Peace
by lifestyleforthesellout on Apr 8, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions
50 games, 12.7 minutes per game
Donté has played the equivalent of fewer than 17 NBA games using a 36 minute per game ratio. And he has done this under two coaches, at the age of 20/21.
It’s fair to be uninspired by his overall performance, but it’s a damn small and young sample size from which to attempt to draw conclusions as to what kind of player he might become.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Apr 8, 2009 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I hate it when you bring about rational arguments
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Isn't that about the same amount of PT that Hawes had the 1st year?
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
Spencer got about 300 more minutes
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
We still have 5 more games
60 minutes a game for Donté!!
Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott
by Kfan in Korea on Apr 8, 2009 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Here
Read Donte’s b-ref link, and Spencer’s b-ref link.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
I'm not sure where in my remarks I judged what kind of player
he may become.
But I’m not wild about where his head seems to be on the issue. A 6’10 jumpshooter – we don’t need, unless thats just a piece of his game.
So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect
and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii
by lietothegirls on Apr 8, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Nor did I say you did
Read what I, me, myself and I wrote again. Then tell me that’s what I said. Stop implying that I said something I didn’t. I’m tired of your double edge sword hollow end crap you pull when you don’t like that others disagree with you too. Knock it off lttg.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Be careful
using winning percentage to judge coaches, because we all know coaches aren’t dealt the same hand in terms of talent to work with.
The question is, how did the coach do compared to the talent they had? Of course this leads to all kinds of subjectivity, but I would say that’s still preferable to using straight winning percentage.
For example, I think Mike Fratello did a very good job with the Grizzlies, well ahead of my expectations.
On the other side, I think Avery Johnson was historically bad as head coach of the Mavericks. In fact, I think Kenny Natt has done a better job with the Kings than Avery did with that team. Avery destroyed that Mavericks team, when all he had to do was keep them on the same road they were already on.
The ultimate victory in competition is derived from the inner satisfaction of knowing that you have done your best and that you have gotten the most out of what you had to give…Howard Cosell
I know all of that.
You cannot base everything off the numbers, that is why i tried to include a bit of observation, and things like that. We all basically know who those coaches have coached in their respective careers. All coaches will suffer at times with good talent, and all coaches will do well with OK talent at some point (basically get them to overachieve).
Winning does say a lot about a coach though. Good coaches will maximize the talents of the team and they will WIN.
Blessings.Love.Peace
by lifestyleforthesellout on Apr 7, 2009 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
Welcome to the land of Recommended fanposts
this write-up deserves it.
"Greed is the inventor of injustice as well as the current enforcer." - Julian Casablancas
Sam Mitchell is
an absolute bum. In my opinion, he was the second worst NBA head coach in the league (hats off to you, Carlesimo!), he can’t make in-game adjustments at all, and he was stunting Andrea Bargnani’s growth and development (I always thought he was a good scorer, his performance under Triano just proves it). He should not be a head coach anytime soon.
I wouldn’t mind Flip Saunders, Eddie Jordan, or JVG at all.. Saunders is very creative and his offense will just get better with Pete Carill. He is a bit overrated though, and like it’s been said he’ll probably go to the Wizards who are in a better position to compete then we are.
Eddie Jordan is a favorite to return as a coach, and for good reason: he loves the Princeton offense, and so does Geoff Petrie, so there’ll be no problem offensively. However, I’m worried that Jordan won’t be able to teach the Kings how to play good defense, and if we do hire Jordan will we be able to grab a solid defensive coordinator to teach the team?
Van Gundy can and likely will make our defense better, but he’s known for an offense that’s dreadful to watch. If he’s willing to cooperate with the aforementioned Carill, the half-court offense wouldn’t have to be as stagnant as his other teams have been, because Princeton fundamentals are first and foremost to use your energy defensively and then use organization to make smart and efficient passes in the half-court.
Overall, I think having a defensive-minded head coach might be better for the team. If Petrie hires an offensive coach, the organization probably can’t afford a good defensive coordinator and issues on defense will still linger. However, Coachie is going to be here for little while longer, and if a defensive head coach can work with Coachie on offense, Sacramento just might be able to have their cake and eat a little bit of it too.
"Greed is the inventor of injustice as well as the current enforcer." - Julian Casablancas
Also factor in
that if we pick up a real point guard in the draft or free agency like Rubio our offense will be better than Udrih/B Jax running it regardless.
"Greed is the inventor of injustice as well as the current enforcer." - Julian Casablancas
If you thought Mitchell was stifling
I can’t imagine why you think so highly of JVG sub.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwing Sucka'z over since 1985.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Even though JVG is really annoying
I see him as a coach who could a team deep into the playoffs. As it was said by lifestyleforthesellout, JeffVG is one of the better defensive coaches the NBA has seen, while Sam Mitchell is just simple in his ways. His offensive and defensive schemes are easy to understand because of their simplicity, but he cannot go further than that, which leads to the lack of in-game adjustments.
I really believe that it will be harder for Sacramento to find a good defensive coordinator on the sidelines than an offensive coordinator, so going for a defense-oriented coach makes some sense to me, and one option on that end is JVG.
"Greed is the inventor of injustice as well as the current enforcer." - Julian Casablancas
New question to add:
Should the coach be hired before the draft? I think it is a definite yes, but do you agree? Post lottery maybe but predraft.
Definately Pre-Draft
We need to know what direction we are going in. PERIOD. The first pick will be the BPA regardless but the later picks (Houston’s and the 2nd Rounder) Will be based off of system I would think, and it would be nice to have a coach in place so we know what kind of system we will be runinng.
Blessings.Love.Peace
by lifestyleforthesellout on Apr 8, 2009 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions
I would think so
And the possibility of having a Blake Griffin or a Ricky Rubio added to Speed, JT and Spencer wouldn’t be a bad carrot for a quality coach. So I agree, post-lottery but pre-draft.
I think the next coach should be here when the team decides they're going to answer the question
But, personally, I hope it’s before the lottery.
Evil Cowtown Inc: Screwin' Suckaz over since Nineteen Eighty-Five.....
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
NO
Well, it’s kind of a double edge sword. If we end up with on the top 2 picks than the franchise will have it’s choice of coaches and can match the coach perfectly to the personnel.
If we get the 4th pick and it doesn’t look like a great talent will be their than less coaches will be interested, but again we will know the personnel and can match it to the coaching choices.
New coach should have been here when they fired Theus. But, April 20th will do.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
by HighTops on Apr 8, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Natt's option expires on May 1st
so I think it follows that the new coach will be hired prior to the draft.
Another Question
Lets say we lose the lottery. Right now it appears the team will at least have the 4th pick. I’m 90% sure the Kings would be willing to part with anyone on their roster to get into the top 2 (yes, I’m specifically saying they would be thrilled to trade you Kevin Martin).
Anyone have thoughts on this scenario and what wouldn’t you trade with the 4th pick to get into the top 2?
Assuming Rubio declares
I would be willing to give up the #4 and any one players and probably the Rockets pick to get top 2.
No, but there are very few senarios that would work anyways
The team with the #2 pick would have to not need a PG or want Thabeet. With the probable draft order being Griffin, Rubio,Thabeet & Hardin, the #2 pick would have to want Hardin. And, any talent we’d be willing to give up to get Rubio, probably wouldn’t convince a team that wanted Rubio or Thabeet to pass them on to us.
"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom
no way
there’s no way the Kings give up Martin and the #4 for the #2 pick. I wouldn’t give up Martin, Hawes or JT + our #1 for the #2 pick.
No way in hell.
The ultimate victory in competition is derived from the inner satisfaction of knowing that you have done your best and that you have gotten the most out of what you had to give…Howard Cosell
Agreed.
No way we trade any of our starting five (except Beno) or Garcia. However, if a top-2 team wants to jump on the 2010 FA bandwagon, we do have a Sweet Expring for next year (woof!).

by 



















