Kings first round of coaching candidate interviews comes out
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
- Status
It’s a no brainer that Brown is the best candidate of the final 3 followed by Clifford.
Initially, I wanted a young up and coming coach (would have been happy with either Hardy or Ham) but the more I think about it, the more we were going to go after an experienced coach.
We are on the record that we are looking to make the play offs next season and the move to get Sabonis to pair with Fox pretty much confirms this. As a result, the team was likely going to go with somone who has had some previous success as a head coach and who has extensive experience as an assistant. Brown and Clifford fit this description. Jackson is the odd one out for me here.
My only concern here is that Brown may actually turn down the job as he has the option of being picky. I have no doubt he would have improved since his last stint as a HC with the Lakers. He is very much about structure, discipline, preparation and reportedly has OCD tendencies. IMHO, that is EXACTLY what this team needs and Fox has said many times that the team needs structure.
Is it such a coincidence that the best season this team had in recent times was with coach Joerger who was very much about structure, discipline, rules. This team needs that type of coach who will call plays, set schemes etc. We tried giving players freedom to do their own thing, make thier own reads… a bit like we did under Adelman. The problem with that approach was that we did not have a high basketball IQ players to make that work. Let’s be real, how would Buddy go in a Princeton offense?
While Sabonis is a high basketball IQ guy, the rest of the roster is not really. They need structure both offensively and defensively, set plays, discipline, clear instructions and I think someone like Brown would do a pretty good job.
My main concern is, would he take to job? I am not comvinced yet. It’s arguably the least desireable head coaching job im the NBA.
Initially, I wanted a young up and coming coach (would have been happy with either Hardy or Ham) but the more I think about it, the more we were going to go after an experienced coach.
We are on the record that we are looking to make the play offs next season and the move to get Sabonis to pair with Fox pretty much confirms this. As a result, the team was likely going to go with somone who has had some previous success as a head coach and who has extensive experience as an assistant. Brown and Clifford fit this description. Jackson is the odd one out for me here.
My only concern here is that Brown may actually turn down the job as he has the option of being picky. I have no doubt he would have improved since his last stint as a HC with the Lakers. He is very much about structure, discipline, preparation and reportedly has OCD tendencies. IMHO, that is EXACTLY what this team needs and Fox has said many times that the team needs structure.
Is it such a coincidence that the best season this team had in recent times was with coach Joerger who was very much about structure, discipline, rules. This team needs that type of coach who will call plays, set schemes etc. We tried giving players freedom to do their own thing, make thier own reads… a bit like we did under Adelman. The problem with that approach was that we did not have a high basketball IQ players to make that work. Let’s be real, how would Buddy go in a Princeton offense?
While Sabonis is a high basketball IQ guy, the rest of the roster is not really. They need structure both offensively and defensively, set plays, discipline, clear instructions and I think someone like Brown would do a pretty good job.
My main concern is, would he take to job? I am not comvinced yet. It’s arguably the least desireable head coaching job im the NBA.
I agree with all of this. While we all wish we'd hire a young assistant who could become the next Popovich or Brad Stevens, McNair is looking for a turnaround next season. I am disappointed that it won't be Ham, or Hardy, or Lee, but I think the Kings are looking for more of a sure improvement, possibly at the expense of sustained, long term success.
That said, I was thinking about two other aspects. One is that McNair thinking short term may not be the worst thing in the world. Hopefully he keeps improving the roster and you get an experienced coach who helps the team finally break the playoff drought. Maybe the team doesn't get out of the first round for a few seasons and then you make another coaching move to "take the team to the next level". This coaching search isn't necessarily the one that gets the Kings to be contenders. it just has to be part of them actually winning more games than they lose right now.
Secondly, I also wonder if this list of finalists is largely about who was willing to take the job. It may well be the case that McNair WAS interested in Ham, Hardy, and/or Lee, but they are really wary of Sacramento being their first coaching job. That's understandable. Right now they are hot names, but becoming a head coach for a small market franchise with decades of dysfunction could hamper their future opportunities if it goes poorly. The flipside is that if they made the Kings a winner it would be a major accomplishment for them, but the risk probably outweighs the reward, not to mention the lower visibility of the Kings job.
Brown, Clifford, and Jackson are already known commodities, for better or worse. I don't think perception of any of them changes much if they take the Sacramento job. And they also know well that there just aren't that many head coaching opportunities. I think that makes them more likely to take the job. Which could be a part of why they are the finalists.
That said, I was thinking about two other aspects. One is that McNair thinking short term may not be the worst thing in the world. Hopefully he keeps improving the roster and you get an experienced coach who helps the team finally break the playoff drought. Maybe the team doesn't get out of the first round for a few seasons and then you make another coaching move to "take the team to the next level". This coaching search isn't necessarily the one that gets the Kings to be contenders. it just has to be part of them actually winning more games than they lose right now.
Secondly, I also wonder if this list of finalists is largely about who was willing to take the job. It may well be the case that McNair WAS interested in Ham, Hardy, and/or Lee, but they are really wary of Sacramento being their first coaching job. That's understandable. Right now they are hot names, but becoming a head coach for a small market franchise with decades of dysfunction could hamper their future opportunities if it goes poorly. The flipside is that if they made the Kings a winner it would be a major accomplishment for them, but the risk probably outweighs the reward, not to mention the lower visibility of the Kings job.
Brown, Clifford, and Jackson are already known commodities, for better or worse. I don't think perception of any of them changes much if they take the Sacramento job. And they also know well that there just aren't that many head coaching opportunities. I think that makes them more likely to take the job. Which could be a part of why they are the finalists.
Last edited:
If we're talking about a sure short term improvement, then I think Clifford is the only guy that fits that bill. He improved the Bobcats and Magic immediately but he also kind of peaked out in those initial years as well. I don't see anything on the other guy's resumes that say they would improve the Kings immediately. Not saying they can or can't for certain but the evidence is pretty scarce when multiple factors are taken into context.
Although I dont share Jackson’s views on some hot topics (at least his past comments) it would be hypocritical of me to eliminate him on that alone while still wanting a Prime Iggy (who shares his views) to sign with the Kings back in the day.
I do worry about drama with the front office which we have had entirely too much of already. I also wonder if he has adjusted his old school philosophy over the years as far as play style.
I do worry about drama with the front office which we have had entirely too much of already. I also wonder if he has adjusted his old school philosophy over the years as far as play style.
This sounds so bad to me that as a fan it makes me furious.
Short term thinking is literally the worst thing a franchise like us can do. The actual point shouldnt be to get a couple of first round exits and then be forced to start all over again. The point should be and should have always been building a sustainable long term contender with the ability to go all in if there is an actuall chance of winning the finals.
Since the Vlade hire we havent done basically anything for the long term. Everything has been for the short term. Even after trading Cousins when it was a perfect oppirtunity to spend couple of years doing only long term moves, no. Everything was short term. This is the result. A bad team without a top 5 pick pre lottery and zero additional assets. Short term moves have been killing this franchise. If this is forced by the owner, I'm furious that the league hasnt stepped in. That would be outrageous mismanagement and the league has intervened for less.
Short term thinking is literally the worst thing a franchise like us can do. The actual point shouldnt be to get a couple of first round exits and then be forced to start all over again. The point should be and should have always been building a sustainable long term contender with the ability to go all in if there is an actuall chance of winning the finals.
Since the Vlade hire we havent done basically anything for the long term. Everything has been for the short term. Even after trading Cousins when it was a perfect oppirtunity to spend couple of years doing only long term moves, no. Everything was short term. This is the result. A bad team without a top 5 pick pre lottery and zero additional assets. Short term moves have been killing this franchise. If this is forced by the owner, I'm furious that the league hasnt stepped in. That would be outrageous mismanagement and the league has intervened for less.
I get it but they both violate my personal ethics. Now if he is forcing something on the players which according to Iggy he wasn’t, that’s a different story. It would be nice to know if he has updated any of his views in the last 15 years which a lot of people have. I do worry about him not getting along with staff however.
As long as you aren't mortgaging your future (trading away FRPs, getting into salary cap hell) then I think actually working for some short term success is a good thing. Just making the playoffs, having a winning season, changing the culture of constant losing, is a good first step. McNair is likely taking a short term approach because his job may hang in the balance. But if he succeeds, then at least there IS something to build off. I know we all hope the Kings tank and wind up with a generational talent like LeBron or Giannis, but I don't see that player in this draft and at some point you just have to stop losing.
Make the playoffs and build from there.
Make the playoffs and build from there.
First of all we would be so much better off if we made moves for the long term five years ago. I dont see many reasons why this next five year span would be different when we look back after next five years. Mcnair making short term moves because of the ownership is literally the thing that the league should have already intervened with Vlade. The gm should never make win now moves unless the team is either already in a championship window or one move away from it. The Kings are closer to a two years away from being two years away type of team than a championship team.
I dont know what one or two first round exits brings here if it amounts to paying huge money to aging Barnes, max money to Fox and Sabonis and lots of money to other win now vets. At least if you compare that situation to where this team would achieve playoffs organically with cap space and additional future assets. Our current "win now" scenario is an extremely low ceiling team unless we get extremely lucky in this years draft and of cource we didnt do much to get the best possible odds to achieve that.
Win now moves has been incredibly bad for this franchise in the past and most likely they wont amount to much in the future either. As long as there is this speculated win now mandate by the owner, the league should step in. There is a reason why there is this shamefully long period where we have been the absolute worst franchise in the whole league. The reason hasnt been making long term moves. Making win now moves toi early has been a huge part of that
I dont know what one or two first round exits brings here if it amounts to paying huge money to aging Barnes, max money to Fox and Sabonis and lots of money to other win now vets. At least if you compare that situation to where this team would achieve playoffs organically with cap space and additional future assets. Our current "win now" scenario is an extremely low ceiling team unless we get extremely lucky in this years draft and of cource we didnt do much to get the best possible odds to achieve that.
Win now moves has been incredibly bad for this franchise in the past and most likely they wont amount to much in the future either. As long as there is this speculated win now mandate by the owner, the league should step in. There is a reason why there is this shamefully long period where we have been the absolute worst franchise in the whole league. The reason hasnt been making long term moves. Making win now moves toi early has been a huge part of that
I agree. In many ways I think we get caught up in doing a franchise building exercise the "right way". Take the long term view. Tank for a number of years. Assemble as much young talent as possible that can grow together. Hire a coach that can be here for 15 years and build toward a championship. I think people forget how much luck that strategy still requires, while at the same time tacking YEARS onto our current playoff drought. I really think we need to break the general culture of losing first, even if that means we aren't quite as "smart" with our long term vision. There's a reason why certain organizations are thought of as "systems" that continue to churn out winners and its often not because they tear it all down every few years to "reset".
There's also the problem of the lottery being a totally unreliable way to build a team. Guys like Lebron or Giannis come around every 10 years, maybe. That's a lot of being terrible waiting for lightning to strike. It's great if it happens but you can't plan around it.
I also think you're right about young coaches looking for opportunities elsewhere (in your previous post). The Lakers are a mess long-term but it's still the Lakers and they have Lebron and AD for a little while longer. Charlotte has LaMelo and seems like a team on the rise considering they had a winning record this season. I don't know that anyone would have removed themselves from consideration completely -- it is an NBA head coaching job after all -- but I don't think we're anyone's first choice and Monte may not want to wait to be someone's third choice which narrows the pool of potential candidates.
I also think you're right about young coaches looking for opportunities elsewhere (in your previous post). The Lakers are a mess long-term but it's still the Lakers and they have Lebron and AD for a little while longer. Charlotte has LaMelo and seems like a team on the rise considering they had a winning record this season. I don't know that anyone would have removed themselves from consideration completely -- it is an NBA head coaching job after all -- but I don't think we're anyone's first choice and Monte may not want to wait to be someone's third choice which narrows the pool of potential candidates.
And guys like Giannis and Kawhi didn’t even go in the lottery but rather ended up going 15th in relatively weak drafts to playoff teams anyways.
Kings have a bunch of money coming off the books in a season and Sabonis’s contract up in two years. There’s no real long term consequences to hiring a vet coach.
Kings have a bunch of money coming off the books in a season and Sabonis’s contract up in two years. There’s no real long term consequences to hiring a vet coach.
Last edited:
this point of view has been beaten to death on this forum.
Monte’s win now move is trading a good young player on a rookie contract for a better player that is 25. That is a weird criticism if you ask me. Trading Ty for CJ McCollum would have fit that narrative better.
You could make the argument we should have tanked in previous years but the idea we were going to somehow lose more games than the six ahead of us this year is ridiculous.
If we as fans of the Sacramento Kings have a championship or bust mentality we might as well switch teams. Even a franchise level talent doesn’t guarantee it and there are a long list of teams and players that don’t get one.
If we make the playoffs next year it will be hella fun and we will likely have cap room to make a big splash if we are an ascending team.
Monte’s win now move is trading a good young player on a rookie contract for a better player that is 25. That is a weird criticism if you ask me. Trading Ty for CJ McCollum would have fit that narrative better.
You could make the argument we should have tanked in previous years but the idea we were going to somehow lose more games than the six ahead of us this year is ridiculous.
If we as fans of the Sacramento Kings have a championship or bust mentality we might as well switch teams. Even a franchise level talent doesn’t guarantee it and there are a long list of teams and players that don’t get one.
If we make the playoffs next year it will be hella fun and we will likely have cap room to make a big splash if we are an ascending team.
- Status