I've had conversations with Petrie as well, and the major difference between the two, is that although neither really told you anything you didn't already know, you always walked away from Petrie thinking that he had. Petrie never made you feel like you talking to a politician. As a matter of fact, Petrie had the habit of saying very little, so when he did say something, it felt like it was important.
Official PDA live radio thread
- Thread starter PurpleHaze
- Start date
Some of it was on-court philosophy, both offensive and defensive. He's pretty adamant that defense is a crucial part of the equation. He doesn't want to go "Paul Westhead" and he even thinks that Corbin is pushing the pace too much right now, though he doesn't want to micromanage him down. The numbers I believe were that under Corbin we're 4th in pace and he thinks that somewhere around 9th/10th would be better for the team. But thinking like this gives me a strong impression that they've got a real plan about what they want to do (and no, he's not sharing that, unsurprisingly). Unlike the common perception, it's not about "LEt'S GeT DUnnnkZ LOL!" like he's getting crucified for here. He believes there's a need for the team to take more three-point shots, and while the smash-mouthers around here will poo-poo that, I agree that the numbers say yes. There's a reason that the number of threes leaguewide taken has increased basically every year since they were introduced, and it's not because everybody in the NBA is dumb. Threes are simply more efficient shots, corner threes even moreso.
Without giving specifics, it seems quite obvious that Malone was gone. His offensive deficiencies didn't fit in with the franchise's direction. It sounds as if the only reason he wasn't fired in the offseason (which basically everybody agrees would be preferable) is because he lost Brendan before the season started and they wanted to give him a chance to develop his offense in a year where he actually had a lead assistant. He didn't improve, and they moved on. And for those who think that PDA is on thin ice for that decision, it sounded pretty clear that this decision was concurred with by ownership. You don't just fire a head coach, much less a head coach originally hired by the owner, without the owner's blessing. Buzz Oates was there as well, if he wasn't pointed out during the interview, and he is basically 100% behind Pete right now - he says the plan (and no, he's not elaborating) is a solid one.
It's things like that.
I find PDA to be sincere. I know a lot of people don't. But they weren't in the room. Maybe I'm naive, but I generally find myself a good judge of character. Yes, PDA spun and avoided a lot on the air, he told us ahead of time he was going to do that. There are things he can't say on the air, and I'm sure it's a tough job to walk that fine line he had to walk.
I don't know, I just don't think that there was much to be gained from the whole process in general - I doubt many people were open to having their minds changed, and the format was one in which he couldn't be perfectly open anyway. But I believe he's quite sincere in wanting to do what's best for this team, and I have more faith in his ability than most here.
Without giving specifics, it seems quite obvious that Malone was gone. His offensive deficiencies didn't fit in with the franchise's direction. It sounds as if the only reason he wasn't fired in the offseason (which basically everybody agrees would be preferable) is because he lost Brendan before the season started and they wanted to give him a chance to develop his offense in a year where he actually had a lead assistant. He didn't improve, and they moved on. And for those who think that PDA is on thin ice for that decision, it sounded pretty clear that this decision was concurred with by ownership. You don't just fire a head coach, much less a head coach originally hired by the owner, without the owner's blessing. Buzz Oates was there as well, if he wasn't pointed out during the interview, and he is basically 100% behind Pete right now - he says the plan (and no, he's not elaborating) is a solid one.
It's things like that.
I find PDA to be sincere. I know a lot of people don't. But they weren't in the room. Maybe I'm naive, but I generally find myself a good judge of character. Yes, PDA spun and avoided a lot on the air, he told us ahead of time he was going to do that. There are things he can't say on the air, and I'm sure it's a tough job to walk that fine line he had to walk.
I don't know, I just don't think that there was much to be gained from the whole process in general - I doubt many people were open to having their minds changed, and the format was one in which he couldn't be perfectly open anyway. But I believe he's quite sincere in wanting to do what's best for this team, and I have more faith in his ability than most here.
I have a very hard time believing that Vivek wants to tank and is hoping for the worst record possible for the rest of the season. I'm more on the side that believes that if the Kings continue to lose at an alarming rate that PDA will be fired, either mid-season or at season end. Just my speculation, but if the Kings lose at a .300 rate or lower for the rest of the season, my money is on PDA being a very short-lived weasil.
I've read enough of the thread that I won't listen to the podcast...but what PDA and maybe others in the FO seemingly don't understand is that data points and analytics are NOT great than the bond that a team (players AND coaches) has when they believe in themselves and their coach and what they doing. PDA has no concept of this. I've coached varsity baseball for 17 years and I understand this. My best teams have rarely been the teams with the most talent, although that certainly helps, but it's the teams that understand that they need to hold each other accountable and we strive together be a use they believe in the common goal. When your team can put the teams goals ahead of the individuals goals, great things can happen. This was Malones greatest accomplishment this year...not the X's and O's but he created an identity and a team concept tank the players believed in it. The execution in games at times was wanting as our roster still has holes but.....give me some talent and that team bond and I'll take my chances.
PDA does not get that part. He destroyed that bond between the players and the coaches and I have no problems with Ty Corbin but he has about zero chance to make it work this year. But that comment by PDA about STH's being upset and he thinks "over a coach?" He doesn't get that part at all. Geoff Petrie played and he had that part and he put together a great TEAM once because he gave Adelman the pieces that Adelman needed. Adelman was great at bringing the team/ together.
I just have and feeling that we will have to suffer through the FO and owners learning curve.
PDA does not get that part. He destroyed that bond between the players and the coaches and I have no problems with Ty Corbin but he has about zero chance to make it work this year. But that comment by PDA about STH's being upset and he thinks "over a coach?" He doesn't get that part at all. Geoff Petrie played and he had that part and he put together a great TEAM once because he gave Adelman the pieces that Adelman needed. Adelman was great at bringing the team/ together.
I just have and feeling that we will have to suffer through the FO and owners learning curve.
I absolutely disagree with the bolded statement.
There are some reasons why early hot streaks might not be sustainable: a hot shooting start with guys well above their career averages, a creampuff schedule, a dramatic shift in style that catches teams offguard temporarily, catching lots of teams with injuries etc.
None of that happened with the Kings. They had the 2nd most difficult schedule in the league and with 9 of those first 15 on the road, were winning with defense, rebounding and attacking the basket, and in every way I can think of building a sustainable model of a hard nosed team with room to grow. They beat the Trailblazers, the Clippers, Denver (twice), the Spurs, the Bulls, and the Pelicans, not to mention the T'Wolves. And as for "horrific" losses, the Kings' worst loss before Boogie went out was actually that first one to Golden State. Yeah, giving up huge leads to Dallas and Memphis before ultimately losing were both gut punches. But they jumped all over the 4th and 5th best team (by record) in the whole league and were pummeling them on their home floor. Did anybody thing before the season started that the Kings were going to go on the road and beat the Grizzlies and the Mavericks? The Kings had to learn to sustain leads, but even those awful losses showed me that they were close to hanging with anyone.
Before Cousins went out with viral meningitis I legitimately believed that the Kings could win every night. Now I expect them to lose. That's not building for the future. That's throwing away a promising season to chase something that may or may not pan out to ever be as good as what we watched those first 15 games.
The problem I have with D'Alessandro talking about building for the future, and pace, and style and being great at offense and defense, and thinking outside the box, and their analytics and his experience and so on and so on is that it's just talk. Mike Malone was delivering. He had a team that battled every night and surprised the league. Pete D'Alessandro might be the only one who thinks the early winning wasn't sustainable. Popovich thought Malone was doing a great job. So did Kerr, and Byron Scott. So did Stu Jackson. I invite everyone to go back and read the numerous articles from the early part of the season asking if the Kings were for real. The conclusion in every case I saw was yes. Same thing with TNT and NBA.com. No one saw smoke and mirrors except Pete apparently.
I hope Pete is busy at the deadline because I'm tired of the talk. He fired a coach that was delivering a Kings team I was proud of and now the narrative has gone from the Kings being an early surprise team to "same old Kings" or "can always count on the Kings to screw up" or any number of punchlines I've heard over the last three weeks. That's on the GM that said our early success wasn't sustainable and that he wants to build a real contender and that wins and losses don't matter and that it's about what kind of team we want to be. And that's definitely also on the owner that said by firing Malone and bringing in Corbin we'd win even more games and make the playoffs.
Your move Pete and Vivek.
There are some reasons why early hot streaks might not be sustainable: a hot shooting start with guys well above their career averages, a creampuff schedule, a dramatic shift in style that catches teams offguard temporarily, catching lots of teams with injuries etc.
None of that happened with the Kings. They had the 2nd most difficult schedule in the league and with 9 of those first 15 on the road, were winning with defense, rebounding and attacking the basket, and in every way I can think of building a sustainable model of a hard nosed team with room to grow. They beat the Trailblazers, the Clippers, Denver (twice), the Spurs, the Bulls, and the Pelicans, not to mention the T'Wolves. And as for "horrific" losses, the Kings' worst loss before Boogie went out was actually that first one to Golden State. Yeah, giving up huge leads to Dallas and Memphis before ultimately losing were both gut punches. But they jumped all over the 4th and 5th best team (by record) in the whole league and were pummeling them on their home floor. Did anybody thing before the season started that the Kings were going to go on the road and beat the Grizzlies and the Mavericks? The Kings had to learn to sustain leads, but even those awful losses showed me that they were close to hanging with anyone.
Before Cousins went out with viral meningitis I legitimately believed that the Kings could win every night. Now I expect them to lose. That's not building for the future. That's throwing away a promising season to chase something that may or may not pan out to ever be as good as what we watched those first 15 games.
The problem I have with D'Alessandro talking about building for the future, and pace, and style and being great at offense and defense, and thinking outside the box, and their analytics and his experience and so on and so on is that it's just talk. Mike Malone was delivering. He had a team that battled every night and surprised the league. Pete D'Alessandro might be the only one who thinks the early winning wasn't sustainable. Popovich thought Malone was doing a great job. So did Kerr, and Byron Scott. So did Stu Jackson. I invite everyone to go back and read the numerous articles from the early part of the season asking if the Kings were for real. The conclusion in every case I saw was yes. Same thing with TNT and NBA.com. No one saw smoke and mirrors except Pete apparently.
I hope Pete is busy at the deadline because I'm tired of the talk. He fired a coach that was delivering a Kings team I was proud of and now the narrative has gone from the Kings being an early surprise team to "same old Kings" or "can always count on the Kings to screw up" or any number of punchlines I've heard over the last three weeks. That's on the GM that said our early success wasn't sustainable and that he wants to build a real contender and that wins and losses don't matter and that it's about what kind of team we want to be. And that's definitely also on the owner that said by firing Malone and bringing in Corbin we'd win even more games and make the playoffs.
Your move Pete and Vivek.
Last edited:
I'm probably closer to this viewpoint than most here as well. But then I keep coming back to thinking this was just a bad move, whether there are sincere plans or not.
The bleacher report article in another thread talked about the team making a lot of high-risk moves and this is clearly one of them. High risk moves are great when there isn't much to lose, but after the start this team had and the excitement it was building, suddenly they did have a lot to lose. For this to work out they have to hope that their long-term vision plays out nearly perfectly, because in this case there was real damage done.
P.S. Big thanks to you and funkykingston for taking the time and representing the site.
The bleacher report article in another thread talked about the team making a lot of high-risk moves and this is clearly one of them. High risk moves are great when there isn't much to lose, but after the start this team had and the excitement it was building, suddenly they did have a lot to lose. For this to work out they have to hope that their long-term vision plays out nearly perfectly, because in this case there was real damage done.
P.S. Big thanks to you and funkykingston for taking the time and representing the site.
Napier trying to pump up the fans. Things will get better. He doesn't know why it will get better specifically, but he believes in the IQ of Vivek. His IQ will make things get better quicker than later. Now you're going to watch how this organization gets back up. He's talking about a two to four week period that is bad. (Does he know something we don't about what's going to happen in the next couple of weeks?) He doesn't know how the problems will be fixed, but he feels confident they will get fixed. Thinks we will look back on this era as, "How awful was that?" He say, "It is going to happen." Says, just for the record, he didn't listen to the PDA interview because he got in late last night.
My two cents: If Vivek wants to make the situation better, PDA needs to go; he's lost all credibility with the fans. You don't inspire trust if you can't be credible.
My two cents: If Vivek wants to make the situation better, PDA needs to go; he's lost all credibility with the fans. You don't inspire trust if you can't be credible.
Yep. I felt shined on today. I never felt that way with Petrie. And while Geoff has some terrible moves (especially towards the end of his tenure) I could always at least see the logic even if I didn't agree. He was trying to build a winning team the way he knew how. I honestly (1) don't know if Pete knows how to build a winning team and (2) am not even sure that's his top priority.
Yep, Grant is walking back last week. Grant "hasn't listened to PDA's appearance on KHTK this morning." His take is things are bad, but they can only get better and they will get better. At least we have a team. These guys are smart, they will figure it out. I don't know when, but they will figure it out.
He's not shilling like the Maloof days or being aggressive about it. Sounds resigned and flat.
He's not shilling like the Maloof days or being aggressive about it. Sounds resigned and flat.
While I don't agree with certain aspects pertaining to his vision, I think he deserves a chance, but that chance should extend no further than the chance Malone was given. Pete is either super over confident and will end up looking like a genius or he's crazy. I truly hope it's the former instead of the latter. I can respect his cajones if he isn't being fueled by an altered mental state. I'm deciding to chill and give him until the deadline to do what he does and that's hopefully put this team in a better position moving forward. If it's obvious this roster needs some tinkering by the deadline, in any and ALL respects, and he sits on it, then I'll bring the pitchforks.
From Stu Jackson:
.@DetroitPistons waive Smith=addition by subtraction @SacramentoKings fire Malone=subtraction by subtraction Chemistry is a formula
and
Under Mike Malone, the @SacramentoKings had an identity, promise and competed Now they are back to being the Kings. Hard way to learn lesson
.@DetroitPistons waive Smith=addition by subtraction @SacramentoKings fire Malone=subtraction by subtraction Chemistry is a formula
and
Under Mike Malone, the @SacramentoKings had an identity, promise and competed Now they are back to being the Kings. Hard way to learn lesson
I can't comprehend how Grant doesn't listen to the PDA interview before his show starts. Not even when he got to work before the show? I think Grant's show prep is bad and he's tired of the Kings right now ... but really? Didn't think it would come up today, willful blindness, or just lying so you don't have to comment.
Reviewed twitter and "social media" to gauge reaction, but couldn't get to the interview? Ok then Peaches.
Reviewed twitter and "social media" to gauge reaction, but couldn't get to the interview? Ok then Peaches.
Something I haven't yet seen mentioned in regards to the interview.
PDA basically said (though he didn't actually say it, but only implied it) that both Cousins and Rudy knew that Malone was going to be fired.
I think he followed up by basically saying, "I'm not a complete idiot, of course I kept them both in the loop. I just didn't give them an exact date."
So my question is: Do you think this is true?
Do you believe that both Cousins and Rudy were on-board with Malone getting fired in the middle of the season so that they could make Ty Corbin the interim coach for the rest of the year?
And if they were both on board...then why do they seem so angry and despondent about the whole situation?
PDA basically said (though he didn't actually say it, but only implied it) that both Cousins and Rudy knew that Malone was going to be fired.
I think he followed up by basically saying, "I'm not a complete idiot, of course I kept them both in the loop. I just didn't give them an exact date."
So my question is: Do you think this is true?
Do you believe that both Cousins and Rudy were on-board with Malone getting fired in the middle of the season so that they could make Ty Corbin the interim coach for the rest of the year?
And if they were both on board...then why do they seem so angry and despondent about the whole situation?
Grant sounds deflated and I don't blame him. He's not aggressively loyal to this regime like he was the Maloofs. I think his tone and deflated way of speaking now tells you he is disgusted as the rest of us........but what can he really do?
If he comes on air and blasts Vivek and PDA he runs risk of getting fired. Being an NBA play-by-play announcer is a pretty nice job. Grant has a family so I don't blame him for wanting to keep his job.
If he comes on air and blasts Vivek and PDA he runs risk of getting fired. Being an NBA play-by-play announcer is a pretty nice job. Grant has a family so I don't blame him for wanting to keep his job.
"In the loop" does not equal "on board". Seems more likely that they knew that management wanted more or something different from Malone and that his job was in jeopardy, but they didn't expect it to happen that quickly or after that start. Or maybe they knew it could happen when it did but just weren't happy about it despite being in the loop.
I agree with this. He's done a good job so far of re-shuffling the roster. The parts we have now at least fit together. The problem started when he thought the team was under-performing with Malone on the sideline and it turns out they were actually over-performing. That whole "let's wait and see what we've got" idea we heard at the beginning of the season went the exact opposite way that we all expected it to. What Pete should have done is see how badly we needed a backup center and a competent third guard and put all his effort into finding solutions for those problems. There are a lot of bigs who could have helped us. Has anyone else seen what Hassan Whiteside is doing in Miami for instance? We couldn't have used that guy?
Blaming Malone probably felt pretty good at the time -- this is my roster, why aren't you using these players how I would use them? -- but it hasn't fixed anything that needed fixing. And it created a whole slew of new problems, not the least of which is our franchise player getting frustrated enough to throw a tantrum on the court and get himself ejected. We have the same huge holes in the rotation now that we had before, the difference being that the players are now demoralized and trying to adjust to changes in the offensive system mid-season.
In other words, Pete does get points for his roster management -- he's increased the talent level of the team from about 3 or 4 to 6. It's a good start. But he gets no points for his ability to manage personalities. We'll see if the situation self-corrects in time, but from these past few weeks it appears we actually had a rather volatile team-chemistry mix that Coach Malone was masking and now that's gone it's heading toward nuclear meltdown status in a hurry.
Blaming Malone probably felt pretty good at the time -- this is my roster, why aren't you using these players how I would use them? -- but it hasn't fixed anything that needed fixing. And it created a whole slew of new problems, not the least of which is our franchise player getting frustrated enough to throw a tantrum on the court and get himself ejected. We have the same huge holes in the rotation now that we had before, the difference being that the players are now demoralized and trying to adjust to changes in the offensive system mid-season.
In other words, Pete does get points for his roster management -- he's increased the talent level of the team from about 3 or 4 to 6. It's a good start. But he gets no points for his ability to manage personalities. We'll see if the situation self-corrects in time, but from these past few weeks it appears we actually had a rather volatile team-chemistry mix that Coach Malone was masking and now that's gone it's heading toward nuclear meltdown status in a hurry.
I do not ignore your points. I agree with them actually and would be some of the reasons I would have kept Malone. But again, Malone was not "the end all, be all" coach - he was just decent. I think this FO is looking for an "end all, be all coach" or at least a coach that can make a bigger difference than Malone. Again, it is not the move I would make, but not settling for a decent coach at least has some merit to it and firing the decent coach is probably not a franchise ending catastrophe.
Grant wanted a statement about what the plan was and for someone to come forth and show this is all heading somewhere. PDA's interview revealed that there really isn't a plan or adjustment occuring. That they're letting Corbin be a lame duck coach and not assuring anything past that.
So once Grant hears the interview, he will either be mad or do the Grant Napear thing of resigning himself to a paycheck for spinning the eternal gloom.
So once Grant hears the interview, he will either be mad or do the Grant Napear thing of resigning himself to a paycheck for spinning the eternal gloom.
I have pondered the possibility that more knew about it than you might think. In fact I have pondered the possibility that Pete ****ing D' helped CREATE the excuse to fire Malone.
So consider.
1) we're winning
2) Cuz gets sick
3) Corbin suddenly disappears from the sideline with an achilles injury. You assume legit, but timing?
4) Omri suddenly disappears from rotation mysteriously, then mystery injury. Timing?
5) Landry suddenly loses his minutes and looks upset when he is on the floor, after a good November. What happened?
6) The team suddenly looks depressed out there. Could be losses mounting, but you could feel the drab. Who knew. Rudy?
7) Cuz appears at games, does not look happy. He's sick, could be it. Or did he know his coach was in trouble?
8) After the Detroit loss Malone gives a strange postgame interview, now properly viewed as him saying goodbye. He almost had to know himself by that point.
When you look at all the sudden bad cess that cropped up around the early season cinderella team of the entire league, I am not at all sure that it might not have been created behind the scenes by a scheming little weasel that I am about half a step from openly campaigning against. A slow rolling rumored and whispered backstab within team circles, sapping the team's spirit, disappearing personnel, and then finally the axe. I don't know this, but I think its a real possibility. And it seems like every time I imagine something stupid or ugly about the Kings anymore it turns out to be true.
So consider.
1) we're winning
2) Cuz gets sick
3) Corbin suddenly disappears from the sideline with an achilles injury. You assume legit, but timing?
4) Omri suddenly disappears from rotation mysteriously, then mystery injury. Timing?
5) Landry suddenly loses his minutes and looks upset when he is on the floor, after a good November. What happened?
6) The team suddenly looks depressed out there. Could be losses mounting, but you could feel the drab. Who knew. Rudy?
7) Cuz appears at games, does not look happy. He's sick, could be it. Or did he know his coach was in trouble?
8) After the Detroit loss Malone gives a strange postgame interview, now properly viewed as him saying goodbye. He almost had to know himself by that point.
When you look at all the sudden bad cess that cropped up around the early season cinderella team of the entire league, I am not at all sure that it might not have been created behind the scenes by a scheming little weasel that I am about half a step from openly campaigning against. A slow rolling rumored and whispered backstab within team circles, sapping the team's spirit, disappearing personnel, and then finally the axe. I don't know this, but I think its a real possibility. And it seems like every time I imagine something stupid or ugly about the Kings anymore it turns out to be true.