Christie’s Kings
- Thread starter Tetsujin
- Start date
To me it seems obvious. Fewer things in this league are a better measure of the will to win and play for each other than gritting it out when the going gets tough.
Couple of those under Christie involved very impressive comebacks too. The team's heart has been revived. Brown had killed it.
And before you go all Chuckster on me and say "the players should take responsibility!!!"... Just as much as a coach can motivate and moralize a team, a coach can demotivate and demoralize a team. Holding personal vendettas against players is a great way to create a culture of demoralization. Brown obviously did that with at least Keon, one of the best rising young guards literally in the Association. And probably Sasha last year too.
The players quit on Coach Brown to give the owners and excuse for firing him. That's how much they disliked playing for him.
Couple of those under Christie involved very impressive comebacks too. The team's heart has been revived. Brown had killed it.
And before you go all Chuckster on me and say "the players should take responsibility!!!"... Just as much as a coach can motivate and moralize a team, a coach can demotivate and demoralize a team. Holding personal vendettas against players is a great way to create a culture of demoralization. Brown obviously did that with at least Keon, one of the best rising young guards literally in the Association. And probably Sasha last year too.
The players quit on Coach Brown to give the owners and excuse for firing him. That's how much they disliked playing for him.
Yeah, that is the one thing that seems to get reported, but I think there must be more driving the big change in play.
The players didn't seem to enjoy playing the game together under Brown for some reason. It seemed labored, really. Whether it was Brown's practices, they didn't trust his play calling / rotations or they just no longer bought in to what he was selling, he clearly lost the locker room.
What Doug brought in was a sense of energy and creating a "family" on this team and the team has bought in big time. That is the reason I would prefer they keep the core 7 that are playing big minutes intact (Fox, Domas, DDR, Keegan, Monk, Keon and Carter) past the deadline and see what kind of run they can put together. Add some depth at the deadline, but don't disrupt the chemistry. No need to make a big splash or rash changes right now, let it simmer and see what we have cooking.
The players didn't seem to enjoy playing the game together under Brown for some reason. It seemed labored, really. Whether it was Brown's practices, they didn't trust his play calling / rotations or they just no longer bought in to what he was selling, he clearly lost the locker room.
What Doug brought in was a sense of energy and creating a "family" on this team and the team has bought in big time. That is the reason I would prefer they keep the core 7 that are playing big minutes intact (Fox, Domas, DDR, Keegan, Monk, Keon and Carter) past the deadline and see what kind of run they can put together. Add some depth at the deadline, but don't disrupt the chemistry. No need to make a big splash or rash changes right now, let it simmer and see what we have cooking.
I'm past the point in my life of taking a fundamental stand that players should put out effort every night no matter what because of their paycheck. That line of thinking (which is understandable), is so 1990's. We are beyond that as a society in a number of ways. The players are who they are, and are paid sums of money that are unthinkable to any of us (I assume...) We might not like it, but the thought that they should be grateful for what they have and should put it all on the line every night to prove it is just not realistic. Better to not cry about it, and instead find a coach that can find other ways to motivate and get the most out of a team.
I have to believe there's an X's and O's component here too. I always got the feeling that Brown was installing more and more concepts each season. At least to me it seemed like he was calling out more plays this season than in the original Beam Team season. That can be a bit constraining offensively if you aren't as free to read and react, at least initially.
Also, whatever the defense concepts were this season were clearly not working. I can't imagine Brown WANTED the team to give up so many open threes to protect the painted area, but either way, that was the end result and it meant a big disparity in made 3's most nights.
Also, whatever the defense concepts were this season were clearly not working. I can't imagine Brown WANTED the team to give up so many open threes to protect the painted area, but either way, that was the end result and it meant a big disparity in made 3's most nights.
The 3's thing made no sense. Every single game it was a 5+ 3PM disparity. We've closed the gap a bit, but pretty much under Brown, we spotted the other team 15 points on 3's, every single game.
Probably didn't help Brown kept saying "We tell the guys to get out and defend the 3 and they're not doing it" or something to that extent. So what was it? Players ignoring orders, or following the defensive game-plan and allowing open 3 after open 3?
Probably didn't help Brown kept saying "We tell the guys to get out and defend the 3 and they're not doing it" or something to that extent. So what was it? Players ignoring orders, or following the defensive game-plan and allowing open 3 after open 3?
Yeah the concept was the help defender *always* tagged the driver and then got out on the shooter. Problem was there was always way too much space and that kick-out was always way to easy to find. I remember one play where Keegan instinctually went out to the corner shooter, stopped himself to help on the drive and then was late on the contest. Was just a maddening game-plan
I'm certainly not blaming all of Keegan's regression on Mike Brown, but he's always been a player who "thinks" the game and wants to know exactly what he's supposed to do in all situations. Putting too much on his plate was likely to end in some mistakes.
It reminds me of what Urban Meyer said about Alex Smith before the Niners took him #1. That essentially Smith was "non-functional" until he fully understood the playbook inside and out. And then he would excel.
It reminds me of what Urban Meyer said about Alex Smith before the Niners took him #1. That essentially Smith was "non-functional" until he fully understood the playbook inside and out. And then he would excel.
10-2 is mighty impressive.
I'm curious what the masses here think. How large does the sample size have to get for the "Brown wasn't the problem" crowd to finally get hit over the head with a sledgehammer?
I mean, for even those like Charles Barkley, who like to blame the players regardless, how long will it take?
While I acknowledge the players also share some of the blame, if one coach can get them to play much better, harder than another -- how is that not coaching? The reason Phil Jackson was considered such a great coach was his supposed ability to manage different personalities. In LA, he was able to manage Kobe/Shaq (and the supporting cast) in ways that his predecessors were not (until it finally fell apart). There are many other similar examples over the decades that could also be cited.
Most of what coaching in the NBA is all about is finding ways to manage the different personalities and get the core to buy into a team goal. Sure, x' and o's, rotations, and development also factor in to the coaching equation -- but in this day and age, that's what the assistant coaches are more responsible for. The head guy shoulders the burden of getting the players to balance their egos with team goals.
So, with that in mind, Christie is somehow getting through to these guys in a way Brown did not. IMO, the best evidence of this is the more consistent defensive effort and passion shown out on the floor. And even in a game like last night, the team didn't mail it in at half after being down 17 (and with a game to play the next night).
This upcoming stretch of, say, 23 games through March 14th is super daunting to say the least. And should tell the tale.
It is really like a 23 game road trip before finally coming home for an actual extended 7 game home stand.
Why do I say that? Well, of the next 23 games, the KINGS only have ONE instance of returning home to play more than one home game. So in terms of travel, it really is like a long extended road trip. They will be traveling for each and every game except for the back-to-back home games that begin AFTER the all-star break.
If this team comes out of this stretch with a winning record, on top of the 10-2 they've already produced --- won't it be time for the coaching naysayers to "tap out"?
I'm curious what the masses here think. How large does the sample size have to get for the "Brown wasn't the problem" crowd to finally get hit over the head with a sledgehammer?
I mean, for even those like Charles Barkley, who like to blame the players regardless, how long will it take?
While I acknowledge the players also share some of the blame, if one coach can get them to play much better, harder than another -- how is that not coaching? The reason Phil Jackson was considered such a great coach was his supposed ability to manage different personalities. In LA, he was able to manage Kobe/Shaq (and the supporting cast) in ways that his predecessors were not (until it finally fell apart). There are many other similar examples over the decades that could also be cited.
Most of what coaching in the NBA is all about is finding ways to manage the different personalities and get the core to buy into a team goal. Sure, x' and o's, rotations, and development also factor in to the coaching equation -- but in this day and age, that's what the assistant coaches are more responsible for. The head guy shoulders the burden of getting the players to balance their egos with team goals.
So, with that in mind, Christie is somehow getting through to these guys in a way Brown did not. IMO, the best evidence of this is the more consistent defensive effort and passion shown out on the floor. And even in a game like last night, the team didn't mail it in at half after being down 17 (and with a game to play the next night).
This upcoming stretch of, say, 23 games through March 14th is super daunting to say the least. And should tell the tale.
It is really like a 23 game road trip before finally coming home for an actual extended 7 game home stand.
Why do I say that? Well, of the next 23 games, the KINGS only have ONE instance of returning home to play more than one home game. So in terms of travel, it really is like a long extended road trip. They will be traveling for each and every game except for the back-to-back home games that begin AFTER the all-star break.
If this team comes out of this stretch with a winning record, on top of the 10-2 they've already produced --- won't it be time for the coaching naysayers to "tap out"?
I'm not sure about practice, but Christie at some point has to start dwindling those starters minutes down too because he's actually riding all the starters even more than Brown was. Since DC took over the Kings have dropped to 29th in bench minutes. The bench is only averaging around 12 mpg which is nutty. And he's still spreading those few minutes around 4 guys at times which is going to work against him at some point.
I think this is a tough part of taking over the HC job mid-season. Of course Christie is there every day and has been there every day, but I imagine having to build your rotations how you want is significantly more challenging when you don't get a preseason, a training camp to see how some lineups looks together. Doesn't help Huerter is struggling as much as he has all year, and your other rotation piece is a rookie who joined the team after 9 months off from basketball. Alex Len certainly isn't an answer for a consistent rotation spot
Maybe it's time to tap Colby/IJ/IC? Give them a shot to take over a 10-12 MPG role?
Maybe it's time to tap Colby/IJ/IC? Give them a shot to take over a 10-12 MPG role?
I agree, but most of our bench is horrible (and really, it shouldn't be as bad as it has been) so I can understand him riding the starters more. Huerter, Keon, and Trey looks solid on paper, but Huerter is essentially unplayable right now and Trey has been inconsistent. We are sorely lacking a better back-up big man, so Sabonis is doing a ton of heavy lifting lately too.
It's tough to say what's horrible though. In glancing at the 5 man lineups, when Keon and Carter are in the lineups that play the most you have BY FAR the best defensive net ratings of all their consistent rotations. With any team if you can have 3 legit rotation pieces off your bech you should be good.
Carter is still a relatively new addition to the lineup though, so it's not like we have weeks and weeks of data to confirm that, though I have no doubt he will pan out (especially as he gets his legs under him). I think our issue is size. Our starting line up isn't very big to begin with and when 2/3 main guns off the bench are smaller guards, it puts us in a tough spot matchup wise.
I still think we need a better partner for Sabonis and slide Murray to a 3 spot (yes I know that positions don't really matter anymore). This will allow us to have better balance from the bench, reduce the workload for Sabonis, and increase in size/length overall. The second option would be to offload some dead weight off the bench and get a better backup big man.
I still think we need a better partner for Sabonis and slide Murray to a 3 spot (yes I know that positions don't really matter anymore). This will allow us to have better balance from the bench, reduce the workload for Sabonis, and increase in size/length overall. The second option would be to offload some dead weight off the bench and get a better backup big man.
