Shots fired (post-Nets)
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
you mean like hiring a head coach before a gm? because that's the sin we should actually be talking about here. this franchise did it twice in less than two years!! and here's the rub: in the offseason, vlade divac simply did not construct a "george karl team." and george karl seems incapable of coaching anything other than a "george karl team" at this late stage of his career. as an organization, you can't constantly have your gm and head coach at cross-purposes. occasional tension and disagreement can be healthy/productive, but you're not gonna get very far in the nba when that tension and disagreement is the result of a gm not having majority control of the head coaching hire...
if karl was 10 years younger, you could consider re-shaping the roster to better suit his basketball philosophy, but how much does karl even have left in the tank? another season or two? in some post-game interviews, it sounds as if he'll barely make it through the rest of this season. so what do you do? it's a bad fit, and it's not just kingsfans.com that thinks so. better to move on from this failed experiment and let vlade hire the guy he wants. at that point, there are no more excuses. until then, though, you've got a gm who has begun to build a team to suit his vision and a head coach intent on executing a particular kind of game plan despite it's poor alignment with the gm's vision...
if karl was 10 years younger, you could consider re-shaping the roster to better suit his basketball philosophy, but how much does karl even have left in the tank? another season or two? in some post-game interviews, it sounds as if he'll barely make it through the rest of this season. so what do you do? it's a bad fit, and it's not just kingsfans.com that thinks so. better to move on from this failed experiment and let vlade hire the guy he wants. at that point, there are no more excuses. until then, though, you've got a gm who has begun to build a team to suit his vision and a head coach intent on executing a particular kind of game plan despite it's poor alignment with the gm's vision...
it is a bit interesting, but it doesn't amount to much, does it? what control can the minority owners exert? what can they do except protest behind closed doors? i don't think anybody within the kings organization (or anybody watching this trainwreck from the outside, for that matter) is 100% sold an owner who has made nearly every rookie mistake in the book. vivek's decision-making as an owner has been nothing short of erratic, and often defies explanation. i mean, it wasn't even clear what vlade was hired to do initially. and hell, it may not even have been clear to vivek that vlade divac was going to be his new gm until chris mullin skipped town and pete d'alessandro was officially shown the door...
now, i'm not necessarily displeased with the divac hire, but it was without a doubt one of the strangest hiring "processes" i've ever witnessed, particularly given the fact that vlade's authority was undercut from the start by the preceding hire of future hall-of-famer and known stubborn-as-an-ox george karl (who, by the way, may not even have ultimately been a d'alessandro hire, given reports that he preferred to conduct a thorough coaching search in the offseason). in the immortal words of john mcclane: "add it all up, and you don't know what the f*** it means," but the kings are stuck with this owner, so we just have to hope that there is a sincerity in vivek's decision to give vlade full control of basketball operations...
now, i'm not necessarily displeased with the divac hire, but it was without a doubt one of the strangest hiring "processes" i've ever witnessed, particularly given the fact that vlade's authority was undercut from the start by the preceding hire of future hall-of-famer and known stubborn-as-an-ox george karl (who, by the way, may not even have ultimately been a d'alessandro hire, given reports that he preferred to conduct a thorough coaching search in the offseason). in the immortal words of john mcclane: "add it all up, and you don't know what the f*** it means," but the kings are stuck with this owner, so we just have to hope that there is a sincerity in vivek's decision to give vlade full control of basketball operations...
ESPN coaching sources say Nancy Lieberman "unlikely" to be named interim coach if George Karl indeed let go. One option: Corliss Williamson
24 retweets11 likes
Which, knowing Vivek, means she's probably the choice.
Last edited:
Yeah, that's why I phrased it more as Woj taking a shot at Vivek than reporting anything.
As for minority owner power, who knows? I don't know how much % Vivek actually retains (and remember, his majority share could actually be part of a package itself), or if there are any sort of grievance/overthrow options within their ownership structure.
But yes, the "process" has been bizarre at almost every stage of the Vivek era.
As for minority owner power, who knows? I don't know how much % Vivek actually retains (and remember, his majority share could actually be part of a package itself), or if there are any sort of grievance/overthrow options within their ownership structure.
But yes, the "process" has been bizarre at almost every stage of the Vivek era.
Sure, fire Karl. It just wouldn't be a Kings' season without firing the coach at mid-season.
Who is going to be the next Kenny Natt? The next Tyrone Corbin? Corliss, if it's you man, I feel for you. You're going to be the guy who darned near every game has tell the media why the team isn't play well. And please, please, PLEASE don't think about putting Nancy in that position. That would be horrible for her career going forward. If Vlade fires Karl, he owns it, and he's going to be perceived as just another Sacramento Kings GM who has no idea what he is doing.
Who is going to be the next Kenny Natt? The next Tyrone Corbin? Corliss, if it's you man, I feel for you. You're going to be the guy who darned near every game has tell the media why the team isn't play well. And please, please, PLEASE don't think about putting Nancy in that position. That would be horrible for her career going forward. If Vlade fires Karl, he owns it, and he's going to be perceived as just another Sacramento Kings GM who has no idea what he is doing.wow, that's something. i've been casually familiar with karl's past work as a head coach. by that i mean i know the highlights (and lowlights). but that quote about his time with nuggets is eerie in its parallel of his brief tenure thus far with the kings. in denver, of course, he had a roster much better suited to his sensibilities. in sacramento, he's had no such luck, nor does he have the kind of influence to shape the roster that he's had in previous head coaching gigs. and i think the kings' 21-29 record is reflective of that lack of congruence. this roster doesn't fit his sensibility, and at his age, with his health issues, he seems wholly disinterested in making the adjustments necessary to help push this team closer to its goal of making the playoffs. whatever you think of this team's ceiling, they're absolutely underachieving, and while i've taken the more conservative position in the past that it's probably best to just let the rest of the season play out with karl at the helm, if the locker room is turning on him in the way it appears to be, it may be best to just cut him loose now...
This was never the right coach. Not remotely the right coach. Casual fans wanted him because it was a name they knew. Vivek wanted him for few better reasons. But his hiring was not a basketball hiring. Not any sort of knowledgible strategic matching of a coach to personnel. At very best a dim matching of coach to half thought out owner fantasy.
Now as the season was rolling along I have argued patience on the theory that if some level of results come you are better off staying the course, and as long as Cuz and Rondo support the coach the last thing you do is fire another one out form under them. I shot Vivek an tweet after things fell apart last year to the point of "where the hell was your people sense?" Firing a coach midseason that players like and are responding to is showing none, even if you personally don't like the style.
But knock either pillar away -- some level of achievement, and/or main player support, and the underlying fact is Karl was NEVER a good hire. Never a good fit. He was just a name.
This season isn't quite over yet for us. Its on life support after this most recent collapse, but not quite done. If we're off the honeymoon, then you have a duty to move on and try to save it. You have the best center in the game, and a whole team full of guys who have made the playoffs again and again in their careers. They are flat underachieving as a team, and the defensive issues are ridiculous.
Now as the season was rolling along I have argued patience on the theory that if some level of results come you are better off staying the course, and as long as Cuz and Rondo support the coach the last thing you do is fire another one out form under them. I shot Vivek an tweet after things fell apart last year to the point of "where the hell was your people sense?" Firing a coach midseason that players like and are responding to is showing none, even if you personally don't like the style.
But knock either pillar away -- some level of achievement, and/or main player support, and the underlying fact is Karl was NEVER a good hire. Never a good fit. He was just a name.
This season isn't quite over yet for us. Its on life support after this most recent collapse, but not quite done. If we're off the honeymoon, then you have a duty to move on and try to save it. You have the best center in the game, and a whole team full of guys who have made the playoffs again and again in their careers. They are flat underachieving as a team, and the defensive issues are ridiculous.
Sure, fire Karl. It just wouldn't be a Kings' season without firing the coach at mid-season. Who is going to be the next Kenny Natt? The next Tyrone Corbin? Corliss, if it's you man, I feel for you. You're going to be the guy who darned near every game has tell the media why the team isn't play well. And please, please, PLEASE don't think about putting Nancy in that position. That would be horrible for her career going forward. If Vlade fires Karl, he owns it, and he's going to be perceived as just another Sacramento Kings GM who has no idea what he is doing.
Who is going to be the next Kenny Natt? The next Tyrone Corbin? Corliss, if it's you man, I feel for you. You're going to be the guy who darned near every game has tell the media why the team isn't play well. And please, please, PLEASE don't think about putting Nancy in that position. That would be horrible for her career going forward. If Vlade fires Karl, he owns it, and he's going to be perceived as just another Sacramento Kings GM who has no idea what he is doing.
but i don't think vlade will be perceived as another kings gm who doesn't know what he's doing if he fires george karl. it's plain as day that karl is a bad fit here. plenty of writers were saying so after the hire, and many are saying so now. when karl is inevitably let go, i think vlade will be perceived as a first-time gm who had no control over the head coach that was hired mere months before his own hiring. now, vlade absolutely will be held accountable for his first head coaching hire, and any success or failure that the kings achieve thereafter.
Unless Corliss has a side to his personality that I haven't seen yet he is not the right guy.
I don't perceive him as a high IQ guy (not saying he's dumb) or having a strong enough (forceful) personality.
Big Nasty is a Big Softy off the court. He's a nice guy and a nice guy is not what we need in a new coach.
We need a coach to tell it like it is no B.S. hold guys accountable stand-up to your best players and tell em what they maybe don't want to hear!!
And also it would not hurt to have fresh ideas and obsessive over preparation and be innovative and this takes high IQ.
So a leader which is a combination of high IQ and leadership and not someone you have to like but respect . (This describes Thibs by the way)
I don't see leaderships skills or high IQ in Corliss. I actually see these qualities more in Nancy Lieberman.
I don't perceive him as a high IQ guy (not saying he's dumb) or having a strong enough (forceful) personality.
Big Nasty is a Big Softy off the court. He's a nice guy and a nice guy is not what we need in a new coach.
We need a coach to tell it like it is no B.S. hold guys accountable stand-up to your best players and tell em what they maybe don't want to hear!!
And also it would not hurt to have fresh ideas and obsessive over preparation and be innovative and this takes high IQ.
So a leader which is a combination of high IQ and leadership and not someone you have to like but respect . (This describes Thibs by the way)
I don't see leaderships skills or high IQ in Corliss. I actually see these qualities more in Nancy Lieberman.
no.
Not realistic. Has shown absolutely no desire in that direction. If its an interim, Nasty is fine. He has the respect of Cuz at least, and I expect all the guys really. Always a glue leader type in his playing days. Won a ring.
I obviously would love to see a major coach brought right in, but whoever it is, not Vlade.
Not realistic. Has shown absolutely no desire in that direction. If its an interim, Nasty is fine. He has the respect of Cuz at least, and I expect all the guys really. Always a glue leader type in his playing days. Won a ring.
I obviously would love to see a major coach brought right in, but whoever it is, not Vlade.
i may be wrong, but i don't think anybody is advocating for corliss williamson to take over as the kings' long-term solution at head coach. i think most see him as the obvious choice for the "interim" tag, because he's a former player who's logged some time as an assistant and seems to get along well with the players. tom thibodeau would then be an obvious candidate for the full-time gig in the offseason, because there is little chance of any respectable head coach wanting to take over this mess mid-season. george karl begged his way into the job, but i can't imagine thibs or any other coach would be in any rush, particularly since they would need at least one full offseason to start introducing some sound defensive principles...
I'm okay with a coaching change I guess, but will not get my hopes up for the next victim - I mean coach.
One question I do have though: if Karl and Cuz are such a bad match, how is Cuz having such a big season and how was he maybe the best player on the planet just last month? Is that all in spite of Karl?
One question I do have though: if Karl and Cuz are such a bad match, how is Cuz having such a big season and how was he maybe the best player on the planet just last month? Is that all in spite of Karl?
1 or 2 wins better probably because of morale reasons. Game plan would give around slightly results because he'd probably play Ben or Marco more for size on defense, but getting better everyday since he's a young coach and not stuck in his ways
Remember when we used to complain about Mike Malone's timeouts? Denver fans are really liking his timeouts now, when he calls it, so he's an improving coach, good for him
Remember when we used to complain about Mike Malone's timeouts? Denver fans are really liking his timeouts now, when he calls it, so he's an improving coach, good for him
it may very well be. sometimes talent is just talent, and it will find expression regardless of coach or circumstance. beyond that, we can recall that cousins and rondo approached george karl about the team's offensive play style several weeks into the season. after that "meeting of the minds," we started to see rondo exercise greater control of the kings' offense, and we started to see a greater emphasis on cousins' play in the post. that's about as "in spite of karl" as it can get. of course, it wouldn't be fair to cut karl completely out of the equation with respect to cuz's monster season. his newly-discovered three-point shooting skill is surely due in part to karl's influence. we can argue all day about how much time cuz should be spending on the perimeter, but he's added a legitimate weapon to his game in an era when nba bigs are rangier than ever...
I was adamantly opposed to Karl before it happened because (1) the players did not want him (per reports) (2) too old which would create generation gap and barrier to communication (3) history of being stubborn and bull-headed and would clash with Boogie.
When the hire was made Karl impressed me as someone who had mellowed (until the "snake in the grass" drama). He seemed a kinder and gentler George. His ego was not as large as I feared 0r so it seemed. The health issues and time away from NBA had given him new perspective and he would be more of a unifier instead of divider.
But after the novelty of "future HOF coach" has worn off he has devolved into a cranky curmudgeon who pontificates reflectively before and after games without any real ability to reach his team. Karl is not a bad coach. But the fire in the belly is a flicker and his team reflects that lack of vitality and vigor and passion especially on defense.
I have actually defended a lot of his coaching decisions with exception (1) to play Marco over Seth and (2) lack of minutes for Willie (until lately) and (3) too fast of pace early on in the season that his team was not ready to play.
There's been a lot unfair blame heaped on Karl by fans but I will leave that defense for another time. Regardless, he is a cooked goose because once media reports surface of his imminent demise players stop listening. It happened in Phoenix with Hornacek whose job was in jeopardy about a month before he was eventually canned.
When the hire was made Karl impressed me as someone who had mellowed (until the "snake in the grass" drama). He seemed a kinder and gentler George. His ego was not as large as I feared 0r so it seemed. The health issues and time away from NBA had given him new perspective and he would be more of a unifier instead of divider.
But after the novelty of "future HOF coach" has worn off he has devolved into a cranky curmudgeon who pontificates reflectively before and after games without any real ability to reach his team. Karl is not a bad coach. But the fire in the belly is a flicker and his team reflects that lack of vitality and vigor and passion especially on defense.
I have actually defended a lot of his coaching decisions with exception (1) to play Marco over Seth and (2) lack of minutes for Willie (until lately) and (3) too fast of pace early on in the season that his team was not ready to play.
There's been a lot unfair blame heaped on Karl by fans but I will leave that defense for another time. Regardless, he is a cooked goose because once media reports surface of his imminent demise players stop listening. It happened in Phoenix with Hornacek whose job was in jeopardy about a month before he was eventually canned.