Due Diligence: Will the Kings Research Paul Westphal's Recent Failures?
I don't mean to damn a man before he gets a chance to work some flavor of magic in this lost town, but we have already heard from two highly reputable fans who witnessed the last two Paul Westphal implosions.
Seattle native and Basketball Prospectus analyst Kevin Pelton told us what Westphal did to break up the Sonics by the turn of the millenium: he jerked around his loyal vets to give an out-of-shape Billy Owens a starting job and mismanaged his stars. Clips Nation blogger Steve Perrin, a Pepperdine alum, told us how Westphal ran that university's program into the ground, not with recruiting violations or bad recruiting, but by underachieving on the court with decent talent.
Has management done any background? Because me, if I see a Seattle team that regressed heavily in the switch from George Karl to Westphal, I'm talking to as many people close to the situation as I can. Me, if I see that shrinking win total for Pepperdine over the course of Westphal's tenure, I'm calling up the coach's players, assistants. I'm calling up boosters, alumni. If I'm forking over $3 million plus, I'm doing my due diligence.
I have no idea if the Kings have done or will do their due diligence. But we do know that when the team hired Eric Musselman three years ago, they didn't fully check into his past. Sure, the owners and Petrie called the coaches Muss had been an assistant under, the GMs who employed him as a No. 2 on the staff.
But the only team of which Musselman had been a head coach? Nope. Monte Poole of the Oakland Tribune:
Gavin Maloof, asked if he contacted the Warriors, related a story.
"I tried calling the Warriors ... well maybe I should say that," he said. "But I couldn't get past the message machine. So we made an attempt to call. I think I left a message. I think. But I was talking to a machine, so I think I left a message for Chris to call.
"But I didn't hear anything."
I hear the volume being turned up on this regional rivalry.
Gavin insisted he attempted to reach the Warriors, that he wanted to hear what they had to say. Failing to make contact, however, had zero effect on his decision to endorse Musselman.
Gavin did reach somebody in Oakland. He spoke with Raiders senior executive Mike Lombardi, who provided a glowing recommendation.
So it was left to Petrie to get the goods. He's the basketball guy. Maybe he could get some specifics on what happened to Muss in Oakland. He could grill executive vice president Chris Mullin, or general manager Rod Higgins or team president Bobby Rowell.
No, yes and no. Petrie did make contact with Higgins.
"I talked to Rod more about Mario [Elie], actually," Petrie said.
So let's get this straight. Kings ownership never contacted the Warriors regarding Musselman, but they know where the Raiders stand. The team president contacted the Warriors, but mostly to discuss someone the Kings weren't going to hire.
Does this concern you as a Kings fan? When you're making this sort of committment, trying isn't good enough. Maybe the Warriors wouldn't have been honest. Maybe Muss was a saint in Oakland, only to turn into the drunk-driving, abrasive hologram we know in Sacramento. But it would have been nice to have an idea of what the team was getting into before the hire.
Calling the Westphal fans, that's easy. Kevin Johnson, Tom Chambers, Charles Barkley, Jerry Colangelo -- of course they'll be thumbs up on the guy. Lon Kruger, Jerry West, Mike Fratello -- of course they'd be high on Muss. But you have got to look at the other side of that sandwich before taking a bite. There's probably a reason 29 other dudes left it on the table.
The idea of another "grand experiment" frightens the front office, and I don't bemoan that. The Reggie Theus caper -- letting a minimally experienced mid-major coach take over ... without hiring a lead assistant with head coaching experience or any coach with defensive chops -- did a lot of damage to the psyche of management, no doubt. That's fine.
I'm not cool with "grand experiments" either. (Remember the spittle that covered this blog when Rick Pitino emerged?) But I'm equally not cool with cheap damage-control hires. I'm not cool with using all the available power of being the only franchise with a vacancy to ... hire someone no other team would seriously consider at this point. Every top assistant or out-of-work coach in the nation will interview with you. Meet with them! Pick their brains! Consider them seriously. Be bold if the potential benefit is right. No one ever gets elite without a few risks. Omelettes and eggs and all that.
(One more question: what the Hades happened to Brian Shaw? The team was about to hire him two years ago. He's still on the Lakers bench, right next to Kurt Rambis [whom should interview today]. How do you go from Choice 1B to Choice Zero in two years without a corpse in your trunk or a very public meltdown? Has Shaw's agent told the team he's no longer interested? This seems unlikely, considering Byron Scott could very well be available next summer should Phil Jackson decide to step down after one more season.)
0 recs |
28 comments
|
Comments
If there's any question ...
… as to how the rest of the league sees this, I present David Aldridge from last night:
Lakers assistant Kurt Rambis has the inside track to the Kings’ vacant job. Rambis will interview a second time for the job, probably on Monday, now that L.A. has secured a berth in The Finals. Former Suns coach Paul Westphal is the only other contender at the moment now that Eddie Jordan has taken the Philadelphia job.
Aldridge isn’t reporting it based on rumor. It’s based on common sense: if your two candidates (excepting Thibodeau, for some reason) are Rambis and Westphal, you’re hiring Rambis. Westphal is not an option for most sane people around the league.
by Ziller on May 31, 2009 6:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I hope you're right
But Rambis doesn’t fit Petrie’s “criteria” for a new coach. Which is fine with me, I just hope Petrie has the ’nads to back off that pledge. Rambis is light years ahead of Westphal IMO.
by otis29 on May 31, 2009 7:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The hope would be
that Rambis’ (or Thib’s) years and years of assistant work would “shoe horn” into the parameters that Petrie had laid out.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on May 31, 2009 7:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And maybe it's this -
“We hired a former L*ker instead of Eddie Jordan?” – That sucks.
But…
“We hired Kurt Rambis instead of Paul Westphal?” – Thank God!
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on May 31, 2009 7:24 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Good point here.
There can be just as much posturing in the process of hiring a coach as the draft.
I remember a 2006 Bee article that claimed Whisenant was to be the next Kings coach. I just hope Petrie gets his caboose in gear and gets this head coach thing knocked out.
Teh Dego Dagger
by BPaoliano on May 31, 2009 10:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good point
Added bonus: taking a valued assistant away from LA
Never forget: I am a complete idiot
by Exhibit G on Jun 1, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Lalalalala
I’m just going to go on with life pretending I never read this. Ignorance is bliss.
Victory is tasty.
by iashwash on May 31, 2009 8:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
What has emerged from the normally ok, but now too quiet manner on how this is being handled
is that money is a bigger factor than previously admitted.
The worst PR possible:
We suck, we have litte talent, we don’t have a secure arena deal, we bailed out every contract dollar we could, we are using a slimmed down version of our previous staff and, oh, by the way, we can’t afford much for a Head Coach.
I know that is a melodramatic reaction, but I fear not an inaccurate one
by betweentheeyes on May 31, 2009 9:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Is Westphal just not...
sexy enough for you?
by passionforPERPS on May 31, 2009 10:01 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
A few notes from the Devil's advocate
Do you really believe that the Kings front office has not done or will not do everything possible to talk to the people with the most relevant perspectives on Paul Westphal’s most recent head-coaching experience? Do you really believe that, or do you just mention it because you have an axe to grind? If you really do believe it, then it’s hard to imagine how you can remain a Petrie supporter.
Isn’t it unfair to dismiss Theus’s experience as head coach of a mid major, but count Westphal’s against him (even though he only had one bad season and maintained an overall +.500 record)?
How can you claim to know that Westphal is “someone no other team would seriously consider at this point”? Oh – because no other team has a coaching vacancy and he’s too old to hit the three consistently.
I think your assessment of David Aldridge’s statement on the situation is a pretty big reach. I don’t read it as a vote of no confidence in Westphal. I read it as lazy journalism. That blurb was posted the same day that Amick reported the handshake deal with Westphal. Obviously he put no time or “common sense” into it, and simply repeated what he read in the last paragraph of this article. (The article is written by Phil Jasner, who writes for the Philadelphia Daily News. Aldridge wrote for the Philadelphia Inquirer from 2004-2008. The Inquirer and the Daily News share an office and a parent company, The McClatchy Company).
Personally, I trust Geoff Petrie’s opinion regarding who should be the next coach of this team more than anyone else’s. We’re the only opening, so he has the leisure of taking his pick among the contenders and having time to vet their qualifications. And if you think he is being hindered by the Maloofs obstinance (despite their constant public claims to the contrary), then he should stand up for himself and this team, forcing them to agree to what he knows is best or set him free. Lord knows he’d have no trouble finding a new job if it came to that. I think that Petrie has every opportunity to recruit the head coach that he wants (and who wants us). If he wants Paul Westphal, I want Paul Westphal.
by furious.d on May 31, 2009 10:38 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Bold
I like it. I’m suprised by this sudden surge of Petrie cynicism (not the Maloofs). Actually, I’m more surprised that these reports run quite contrary to what I’ve come to expect from Petrie. Unless the Maloofs have not given him full control, or Petrie has gone off his rocker, then I have a hard time buying into this.
Bé foréwarnéd: I am a mémbér of StR Groupthink méntality.
by CAB on May 31, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who loves anagrams?
Gavin Maloof, asked if he contacted the Warriors, related a story.
“I tried calling the Warriors … well maybe I should say that,” he said. “But I couldn’t get past the message machine.”
MALOOF = AM FOOL
Every player in the league has the Maloofs’ cell numbers on speed dial, and they can’t get through to Golden State Warriors, Inc? Jesus….
And the icing on the cake is, “Hey, Golden State is closed for pest spraying or something. Anyone around from the Raiders? Because there is an organization that’s really kicking ass, circa 1975.”
The only saving grace is that at least they didn’t speak to Al Davis.
Rocks are free, and slingshots easily stolen.
by andy sims on May 31, 2009 11:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
They should've contacted Al Davis
David would’ve been confused and thought Musselman was someone that worked for the Raiders and probably would’ve given Gavin a glowing review of the man at which point the the Maloofs and Petrie would have moved onto the next coaching candidate. Even they know better than to listen to anything Al Davis says.
www.mancancook.net
by vfettke on May 31, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My list for who I want as the new Kings coach
1. Thib
2. Rambis
3. A Turkey sandwich
4. My wife
5. Westphal
Booyah!
by what_the_crap on May 31, 2009 11:20 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Where's Ettore Messina?!?!?!?!?!?
Father of the "Natt this!" movement.
by Aykis16 on Jun 1, 2009 2:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably #6
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 Jun 1, 2009 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My List
1. Messina
2. Rambis or Thibodeu
3. Unknown darkhorse candidate (JVG, Avery, etc)
4. Westphal
Never forget: I am a complete idiot
by Exhibit G on Jun 1, 2009 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd put Avery above Westphal and below darkhorse.
And Fratello I’d put below Westphal.
Father of the "Natt this!" movement.
by Aykis16 on Jun 1, 2009 3:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
2 thoughts - well, 1 thought and 1 question
Thought: a handshake agreement on salary really only means that Petrie/Maloofs told Westphal what kind of salary they would be offering if they offered him the job and he agreed to said salary if he were offered the job. We might be reading too much into this.
Question: What does Rambis bring to the table? I ask this because I truly don’t know and am really curious. As of now the only reason I’m behind a Rambis hire is because it means we’re not hiring Westphal.
www.mancancook.net
by vfettke on May 31, 2009 11:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Rambis brings defense to the table.
Father of the "Natt this!" movement.
by Aykis16 on Jun 1, 2009 2:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
uh oh
If the coaching search turns into another failure, and/or we don’t end up with the best possible player at # 4, sadly this will be the year that fans begin to turn on Petrie.
by henryclemente on May 31, 2009 12:02 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't have a strong opinion on him, but I think you can see both sides.
On a positive note, he comes with a coaching record of over .620 having coached 3 and a half seasons in Phoenix and a little over 2 seasons in Seattle. As is well known, he reached the finals once, and has a .550 winning percentage in the playoffs. That is pretty good, not too many head coaches can claim this.
This is quite some time ago, but more recently he was an assistant under Avery Johnson for the Mavs, and that team achieve a phenomenal 67–15 in the regular season albeit the bitter loss in the first round. Then he became vice president of basketball operations for them. I would assume Cuban and Donnie Nelson would recommend him when the Maloffs ask.
He might not be a coaching All-Star and maybe the Kings can attract a better candidate in Rambis for the money they seem willing to pay, but I don’t see how he would be a really bad choice.
by Norsktroll on May 31, 2009 3:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
not a bad choice, just a confusing one
it seems like a choice of one (with Eddie Jordan gone) with a big financial motive.
by betweentheeyes on Jun 1, 2009 12:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If money is such a factor,
Wouldn’t we be better off taking a chance on a Assistant who may turn out to be great as oppossed to a Previous Head Coach who can’t find a job?
by nothingbutnet on Jun 1, 2009 1:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Because they think he's a better coach?
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 Jun 1, 2009 8:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I dont know about that…I would say Thibodeau is clearly the better assistant coach (see last years finals, 2 past years with the celtics, and his history with jeff van gundy)
Obviously, theres alot of doubts to whether or not he can be a good head coach, for whatever reason…
by ohc on Jun 2, 2009 5:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 






















