Outside the Lines With Eddie Jordan

by Ziller on May 11, 2009 5:45 AM PDT in Commentary Comment 45 comments

There has been some great debate on Eddie Jordan of late. Some have acceptable concerns about his defensive dedication and chops, while others believe he's the best option for this team. I think all of us have a touch of both opinions in our minds.

Something Sam Amick mentioned in his Sunday thinkpiece on the prospects of Jordan stands out to me, though -- something that usurps the boundaries of how we'd traditionally judge a coach (win and losses, player development).

Petrie ... may be forcing his way back into his comfort zone after years of professional discomfort. Not since longtime friend and former teammate Rick Adelman held the position has a Kings coach been so in sync with the team's basketball president. ... There is the shared hoops vision, as Jordan – who followed his Kings tenure by spending four seasons as New Jersey's lead assistant and five-plus seasons as Washington's head coach before his firing early this season – runs the very Princeton offense created by Petrie's mentor, former Princeton coach and Kings consultant Pete Carril.

I mean, this seems pretty basic. But it's important, right? Isn't it a better work environment if you're working in concert with your boss, with the same goals and ideas?

Never badmouth synergy.*

0 recs | Comment 45 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

In addition

since Petrie drafts the players they should be the type to succeed in the Princeton offense. Eddie Jordan running the Princeton just means an easy fit.

by mayfieldcol on May 11, 2009 6:56 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

I’ve often wondered what might have become of Douby’s career if Adelman had still been around. Probably doesn’t turn him into an All-Star, but I imagine he’d have had a bit mroe success.

Never forget: I am a complete idiot

by Exhibit G on May 11, 2009 7:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Is it at all possible

That Petrie should’ve adapted his personnel picks to more effectively synergize with the systems that the post-Adelman coaches were trying to install?

If you’re willing to speculate about whether Douby would’ve been more successful under Adelman, don’t you have to afford Muss, Theus, and Natt the same luxury? Don’t you have to ask whether our non-Princeton coaches would’ve been more successful if Petrie had drafted a non-Princeton guard like Rajon Rondo (questionable shooter, defensive-minded) instead of QD?

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 8:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

To all of your questions: no

simply put, none of our post-Adelman coaches have had anything remotely resembling a “system”

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on May 11, 2009 8:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think they've all been knuckleheads too

But I still wonder if some of Petrie’s Princeton-centric personnel choices didn’t sabatoge the non-Princeton teams to a certain degree.

I’m an ardent Petrie supporter. I think he’s the best thing this franchise has going for it (aside from StR, of course). But I worry that the narrowness of his vision limits his ability, if he thinks that the Princeton Offense is the only way to field a quality club in Sacramento.

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Knowing Adelman's rotations

Douby never would have gotten off the bench.

Frank Army

by BPaoliano on May 11, 2009 9:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nothing beats synergy?

That’s all good and well…

But coffee is for closers.

Is Mr. Jordan a closer? I’m pretty sure his watch costs more than my car…

Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.

by andy sims on May 11, 2009 7:11 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Great f-ing movie

Question: What kind of bear is best?

by otis29 on May 11, 2009 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I must watch it again

The first time I watched I thought it was boring, slow & stupid.

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 12, 2009 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Certainly

A GM and coach should be working toward the same goals with the same ideas.

Unfortunately the synergy of shared vision doesn’t guarantee that the ideas agreed upon to achieve the goals are valid, or that the agents involved are capable of effecting them.

And we’re back at square one. Can an Eddie Jordan coaching staff working in concert with Geoff Petrie’s personnel directorship craft a team that plays quality defense?

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 7:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Could Avery Johnson?

Could Jeff Van Gundy? Could Thom Thibodeau? Could Gregg Popovich? Could Rick Adelman? Could Phil Jackson? Could God?

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 7:46 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

If none of those people (or dieties) can do it

Then obviously the problem is with Petrie, not the coach.

If it is possible to build a good defensive team working with GP (I know it is, having seen it done), then let’s find the person who is most capable of making it happen. Personally, I don’t think it’s Eddie Jordan. But you (and Petrie) are free to disagree.

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 8:01 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It seems clear cut that Eddie Jordan is the man for the job

If that is the case, I don’t understand why he has been signed sealed and delivered. Is it “due diligence” in the manner of waiting until the playoffs are done so all possible candidates are available or is it Eddie Jordan holding off until he is able to see what positions are available?

If it is a candidancy of one, why hasn’t he been inaugurated?

by betweentheeyes on May 11, 2009 8:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've said this before

But maybe they’re waiting until after 5/19 to see if the hypothetical #1 pick brings any better candidates out of the woodwork, or gives them some bargaining power with the guys who’ve already been identified.

It’s hard to imagine any of the coaches that are still alive not being with their teams next year.

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It might also be that candidates aren't in a rush because of that too

look what happened last year to Mike D’Antoni. He chooses New York and the money over Chicago and a good young team. Had he known the Bulls would be landing Derrick Rose don’t you think he’d have gone to Chicago? He’d have a team of guys that would be perfect for his system. It might be things like that that give both candidates, and teams, some patience.

www.mancancook.net

by vfettke on May 11, 2009 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not to mention the economy

Coaches that have jobs don’t want to leave them unless they’re absolutely sure they’re in line for a better one (i.e. not one that involves co-hosting a show with Rick Kamla on NBAtv). Teams don’t want to fire coaches on thin ice, then have to pay for the services of two head coaches.

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 9:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Beating the dead horse here

But other than the fact that he coaches the Princeton Offense, please someone tell me why this is a “clear cut” decision? Shoot, I’ll bet 75% of the coaches out there would be willing to run some version of the Princeton. 90% even. We are anointing the savior label to a guy with a losing regular season record. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying he won’t be an improvement over our last 2 1/2 coaches. But please don’t call this decision a no-brainer. There are as many reasons not to hire EJ as there are to make the move. I want to know who else might be available before I start worshipping at the EJ shrine.

"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke

by SavageBeast on May 11, 2009 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

you can lead a dead horse to water...

Eddie Jordan is the clear cut choice as he fits the pre-prescribed label given by Mr. Petrie and the other candidates are irregular fits. Those choices are Avery Johnson, Jeff Van Gundy, Mike Fratello, not Byron Scott nor Lawrence Frank. If the choices also include Del Harris, Bernie Bickerstaff, Paul Silas, Paul Westphal then you have a point, they can work a version of the Princeton.

Which of those choices – or whomever I have not listed – are you in favor of, and why?

by betweentheeyes on May 11, 2009 9:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But then you'll just have infected water

Are we talking about the head coach with a successful track record label? Because I didn’t see anything in his quote about must have run the Princeton with his last team. I would start the narrowing with candidates who have either coached at a .500 rate or better, or who have dramatically improved a sub .500 team.

I don’t know if you remember back when Adelman was asked about a particular defensive scheme and he said something like, “I know 100 different defensive schemes but you have to work with what you have.” A good coach isn’t limited to just one offense or one defense. They coach what will work best for their players. Think Adelman didn’t change his scheme when Yao went down? Think a good coach won’t change his play book depending on who we pick in the first round?

I know a lot of you hate Avery, or think he wouldn’t fit here. I am not tied to Avery, But my point is, you assume that a coach can only run the offense he ran with his last team. Why? It’s not like the Princeton—or the triangle or any other offense—is some secret 11 herbs and spices. Most successful NBA coaches understand the Princeton better than anyone on this board. It’s not magic.

Judge a coach based on how well they created team unity, if they improved offense/defense, how well they brought up younger players, and yes, their wins and losses.

That’s the argument I’d like to see for EJ. Hell, if the main thing he has going for him is that he can only run one offense, is that really a good thing?

As far as who the choices include, we should have our pick at this point. Like I said back when we first realized Natt was going, this should be a buyers market. We are the only choice in town at the moment, there are only 30 of these jobs in the world, and the economy sucks. We are in the drivers seat, so let’s pick the best candidate available.

"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke

by SavageBeast on May 11, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

If Avery Johnson is the next head coach of the Kings

I’m not forgiving Geoff Petrie or the Maloof’s or anybody. I might even quit being a Kings fan altogether. (And I came close several times before.) No thank you.

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In counterpoint to my above statement

I am completely diametrically opposed to anything remotely involving Avery Johnson. A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G.

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know that Pookey

But I expect better of you. I am not arguing for a person, I am arguing for a strategy. I am a big Pookey fan, but your head coach strategy (at least based on what I’ve read) seems to be hire an assistant or Euro coach because there is less to judge them on. Give me some meat and potatoes here. Forget Avery, tell me how to pick the next coach.

"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke

by SavageBeast on May 11, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'll write up why I hate AJ

on EC Inc. The reasons may surprise you, but I’m not against a head coach with a winning record or one who preaches defense. I’m not even a full believer that the Kings should run the Princeton as their next offensive system (although that could work).

I am diametrically opposed to Avery Johnson. Period. End of story. I’ve come close to quitting several times. I can’t take AJ. He won’t work for this team, and he never will. He doesn’t have the mentality for it. Simple as that. Time to go to class.

Oh & SB, I’ve written about this topic at least 15 times in the last month. Just not here.

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Do I look like a groupie?

Now I have to hunt you down on your other sites. Sorry, not until you read my fantasy series. But on a serious note, it’s easy to attack a coach. I say why I dislike EJ. You say why you hate Avery. Whatever. I don’t really care why.

What I’d like to see from someone smarter than I am, is a measurement we can use to judge a potential head coach. We have all kinds of data for players, but based on other succesful head coaches, what can we learn?

The only reason I keep pointing to Avery is because the measurent of w/l before he came and after he left would support that he is/was a good coach. At least a winning coach. The same with Flip, who I lusted after. I’m not tied to the person, but the philosophy. Assuming we are picking from the previous head coach pool (which is what GP said) what defines a previous head coach as successful?

"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke

by SavageBeast on May 11, 2009 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I changed my mind SB

I don’t want to inundate my blog with points directed mostly towards you.

Avery Johnson has a nice W/L record. I already know that. But, so do you and most Kings fans. It’s what’s beyond that that concerns me.

Development of young players. Umm, what development of young players? Devin Harris slowly developed in Dallas under AJ, and not only that, they ended up trading Jason Kidd in part because of that.

The Miami/Golden State series stick out to a lot of fans on where his coaching didn’t work well. Golden State is obvious. You got the better team. And he adjusted TO NELLIE. Dumb, dumb, and dumb.

I won’t bother why only a moron would double time Shaq at the end of his career and not double Wade. There’s too much common sense in that tact.

The series where Dallas should have kicked the crap out of an inferior team was Phoenix. Yet, it went 6 games. I didn’t really watch those games so I don’t remember it. Still, that Phoenix team had been taken to the limit TWICE in 2 rounds, and it still took 6 games for Dallas to knock them out.

What I want is simple. Very simple. I want a coach who is more than a stop gap, and can grow with this roster. I fear that is not EJ. He is a stopgap or something like that.

The reason I want a coach who doesn’t have a proven track record is because of the “Mike Brown” rule. It’s true that having LeBron makes a difference, but so has Mike Brown. (I swear this isn’t Marc Stein talking either.)

Last but not least, I don’t like coaches who played for the San Antonio Spurs as a player, worked for the Mavericks as an assistant coach under Don Nelson, got fired for a coach who was known as a stick in the mud every other stop he was at (yet the team has sped up with similar results despite a worse roster). Avery Johnson’s W/L record were a function largely because of the talent of his teams, and the fact they brought in talent to play “his” way.

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wholeheartedly agree, SB

Give me the person with the best combination of basketball knowledge and personal management skills. If that person sees the roster, meets the players, and decides to run a version of the Princeton O – great! We’ve got the guy who invented it on the sideline to fill in the gaps in his expertise.

If GP absolutely wants a coach to run the Kings version of the Princeton Offense, then he should hire himself and really save the Kings some coin. It’s ironic to me that so many people around here are dogmatic about picking the “best player available” but we don’t use the same standard to advocate for a coach.

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 10:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good post

The Media is moving too quickly to jump on the Jordan bandwagon. Coaching in the NBA is a luxury, Sac has the only vacancy (currently), patience is a virtue, lets see what other names are thrown into the mix before settling.

And for every reason people give for not hiring Avery Johnson, I’ll give you one for Eddie Jordan…

Member of play JT and Donte Greene 40 mins a game club.

by Sac King on May 11, 2009 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Princeton is no panacea

yes, it will be nice to have a system, an identity again. It will likely help win some more games, push this team back from the cellar to mediocrity.

But will it contend? That all still depends on whether we find a legit star or not. And if we’re limiting our star prospects to those who fit in the system, then our odds get even worse. Fit the system to the players you have, not the other way around.

by LPKingsFan on May 11, 2009 8:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The Princeton can be tailored to the players you have

The Kings did not run a full scale Princeton under Adelman.

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Did Adelman run the Princeton when he got to Houston?

If the Princeton was so vital to the success of the Adelman era and the Kings Golden Years, how come he isn’t running it now? Personel, that’s why! Do the Kings have the type of shooters that can catch & shoot in motion? Certainly not the bigs. Cisco needs to have his feet set to be reliable. I can’t see Noc running around cutting off of screens. Maybe Martin, although his ball handling needs some work. Beno may be the best suited for the Princeton.

Is EJ even the best coach for running the Princeton? Coachie knows the Princeton and probably every other offense ever devised in the history of basketball. In a resent interview Coachie acknowledged the John Thompson III, is probably the best coach at running the Princeton. And, especially incorporating the Bigs into the offense.

furious.d makes a great point

Give me the person with the best combination of basketball knowledge and personal management skills. If that person sees the roster, meets the players, and decides to run a version of the Princeton O – great!

I agree with SB

there are only 30 of these jobs in the world, and the economy sucks. We are in the drivers seat, so let’s pick the best candidate available

Hire a Head Coach based on how he can develop & work with the players, not because he thinks like the GM. GP isn’t perfect. He’s made mistakes. Let’s hope EJ isn’t another of them.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on May 11, 2009 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I haven't seen Doug Collins name come up for coach yet.

I know he has ties to Philadelphia.

Is he a potential coach for the Kings? Just thought I would throw it out there…

by nothingbutnet on May 11, 2009 10:09 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I was just about to say the same thing

I have heard rumors of him making a return to coaching. This would be the best candidate available, if he decides to make a return. I still have a hard time believing Eddie Jordan gets another shot. There was a reason he was fired from the Kings in the first place. And as far as success goes the guy has done nothing with a ton of talent, barring last seasons injuries and a 1-10 start. Jamison, Butler and Arenas, you better get pass the first two rounds of playoffs.

Doug Collins is my pick.

Member of play JT and Donte Greene 40 mins a game club.

by Sac King on May 11, 2009 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think he was in negotiations with Chicago last year

and someone else a while back. The Bucks?

"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke

by SavageBeast on May 11, 2009 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I saw an article

where Collins and Jordan were listed as the best possible replacements in Philadelphia.

Time will tell.

I’m with Savage though. I think he would be the best coach for the Kings. He works well in the development of youngsters and has a solid record.

by nothingbutnet on May 11, 2009 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wondering out loud (erm, in print)

Had Jim Thomas not been adamant about firing Jordan, he would have been at the helm when Webber, Divac, etc. hit the Sacramento scene. I wonder what EJ’s legacy would be had he been given the opportunity to run that team?

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on May 11, 2009 11:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Good point,

I’m pretty sure his stay in Sac Town would have been much longer and more successful.

by nothingbutnet on May 11, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hard to speculate on that one

The 98-99 team certainly had a lot more talent than the 97-98 team that EJ coached, but it certainly wasn’t a foregone conclusion that they’d become contenders.

Webber was a can’t-miss talent who had missed with two teams in five seasons, and he didn’t want to play in Sacramento. Vlade was on the wrong side of thirty with a totally unproven team. J-Will was J-Will, a wildman PG with a hair trigger. And Peja shot 38% from the field that season.

It took a great coach in Adelman to mold that motley crew into a force to be reckoned with. It’s not proof that EJ wouldn’t have been able to do it himself, but the Kings were never a team of destiny. That team would’ve been a disaster with any old caretaker running the Princeton.

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs

+1

We tend to think about the great players GP brought in, but the biggest difference maker may have been the coach.

"Shut up and Coach!"
Vfettke

by SavageBeast on May 11, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm a big Adelman supporter,

So no arguments on his accomplishments. Houston’s last game is a testament to that.

I still don’t get why the Maloof’s fire a guy with eight consecutive playoff appearances. The fact we didn’t win a championship in my opinion was really not his fault. If Horry misses that shot, is Adelman still our coach?

With respect to E.J., my guess is he has success but probably not at the level Adelman had.

by nothingbutnet on May 11, 2009 12:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Seems reasonable given what he did in Washington

Improved a bad team, plateaued at the first round of the playoffs.

by furious.d on May 11, 2009 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Circumstances

The Maloof’s inquired about the availability of one Phil Jackson, and it pissed Adelman off. Adelman publicly stated that as his contract was up, it was going to be (at least in part) up to him as to whether he stayed or left. The Maloof’s did not like that and either (a) fired him or (b) did not extend his contract, depending on who is telling the story.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on May 11, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That statement's misleading a little

That inquiry happened in 2005, not in 2006. Adelman said PUBLICLY that he was willing to come back. Now whether that was on his exact terms or not, I do not know. I haven’t, and neither has anybody else I reckon, seen the full details of that.

I still think the Maloof’s fired him for 2 reasons that were/are stupid: 1) because he was not very fond of the media, and they wanted a coach more accessible to the media, and 2) because he didn’t “coach” defense

Adelman knew it. So did they. While I’m happy they’re mostly staying out of basketball affairs today, that doesn’t mean they did so in 2006.

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 1:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Adelman

did say that his coming back was at least in part his decision to make. He was not ’let go" until after he issued that statement. Perhaps that was just a coincidence. But it was an ill-timed statement for a guy that was already on melting ice with ownership.

And the Jackson saga is germane to this conversation, as it helped further sour the relationship between Adelman and the Maloof’s. Sorry, though. I can see where it could be a little confusing or misleading.

Bottom line, Adelman had a very long run here (at the time of his dismissal I believe that only Jerry Sloan had a longer tenure), and for a myriad of reasons it had run its course.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on May 11, 2009 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

All true

Wasnt arguing the points themselves. But the order in which they happened was a bit jumbled, and in this particular conversation, that’s important.

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.....

by pookeyguru on May 11, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs