Voisin: Brown Interested in Kings Job (merged)
- Thread starter Rockmeister
- Start date
Thank you. And thanks to Jerryaki, too.
I think it's interesting that people who actually were immersed in the drama in New York City up close and personal are adamantly against bringing Brown to the Kings. I think you two have a much better hand on the pulse of what was happening... and I think you've both done an excellent job of trying to impart it to the rest of us.
It's a shame that some have to try and reduce everything to fodder for their sarcasm.
I think it's interesting that people who actually were immersed in the drama in New York City up close and personal are adamantly against bringing Brown to the Kings. I think you two have a much better hand on the pulse of what was happening... and I think you've both done an excellent job of trying to impart it to the rest of us.
It's a shame that some have to try and reduce everything to fodder for their sarcasm.
So you live in New York and you're trying to convince me that a much much much smaller city is going to have the same media exposure? Wow. I'll admit I never thought I'd hear that one. Does media coverage reach everywhere? Of course. But it is hardly the same.
If Artest was a Knick after he was a Pacer he would've gotten 10 times the media attention. Every little thing he did would've gotten blown way out of proportion. The domestic violence incident would've been absolutely huge.
Without getting too off subject, look at what the New York media has done with A-Rod. Nuff said.
If Artest was a Knick after he was a Pacer he would've gotten 10 times the media attention. Every little thing he did would've gotten blown way out of proportion. The domestic violence incident would've been absolutely huge.
Without getting too off subject, look at what the New York media has done with A-Rod. Nuff said.
here is a piece written by a a PHILLY writer last year (even thought he ruined that franchise)
I know the Kings just hired Eric “Musclehead” as their coach before this season began, but I am going on record right now to say that Mussleman won’t be in Sacramento long. Besides, Ron Artest and the rest of the Kings’ veteran players who want to win in the worst way would embrace Brown’s defensive philosophies.
I can just see it now, Sacramento 86 – every western conference opponent they face – 80. The Maloof brothers can certainly afford Brown and once again, the defensive mentalities of Brown and Artest would mesh perfectly together.
All we are saying is he deserves an interview ppl.
I do have a feeling this is all for nothing as i would think something would have happened by now. Draft is nex week
I know the Kings just hired Eric “Musclehead” as their coach before this season began, but I am going on record right now to say that Mussleman won’t be in Sacramento long. Besides, Ron Artest and the rest of the Kings’ veteran players who want to win in the worst way would embrace Brown’s defensive philosophies.
I can just see it now, Sacramento 86 – every western conference opponent they face – 80. The Maloof brothers can certainly afford Brown and once again, the defensive mentalities of Brown and Artest would mesh perfectly together.
All we are saying is he deserves an interview ppl.
I do have a feeling this is all for nothing as i would think something would have happened by now. Draft is nex week
You misunderstand me. All I'm saying, and have been saying is that the media coverage for person X in New York, is way, way bigger than the same person X for the same reason in just about any other city, Sacramento being one of them.
Is Ron Artest big news? Yes. Was his domestic violence incident covered by the New York media? Yes. Would the media coverage have been 10 fold if Artest was a Knick when it happened? You bet.
Does the media everywhere take big stories and run with them? For sure. But does the New York media take it futher than any other city? Absolutely. Does the New York media take some stories further than they should ever go? Almost weekly. The New York media is drama. Maybe you are oblivious to it because you live there.
Whether or not we agree or disagree about the New York media, I think it is time now to let it go.
Is Ron Artest big news? Yes. Was his domestic violence incident covered by the New York media? Yes. Would the media coverage have been 10 fold if Artest was a Knick when it happened? You bet.
Does the media everywhere take big stories and run with them? For sure. But does the New York media take it futher than any other city? Absolutely. Does the New York media take some stories further than they should ever go? Almost weekly. The New York media is drama. Maybe you are oblivious to it because you live there.
Whether or not we agree or disagree about the New York media, I think it is time now to let it go.
The whining I'm very familiar with. That's a given with Brown. But it seems to me that if Geoff and the Maloofs know his schtick, then it's pretty easy to counter it. I see Brown's dramatic actions as a small price to pay to get one of the best coaches in the game, especially if it's understood it's a short-term gig, especially if his understudy is sitting there on the bench, a moment's notice away from taking the head coaching position. I think there has to be an understanding though, with Brown, Petrie, the Maloofs, and the future-future coach on where Petrie wants to take this franchise over the next couple of years. That means Petrie tosses the mute oracle from on high personna and gives clarity to Brown and the rest of the org on if he's going to go young, or do the retread vets option, or whatever. And if it were me, I'd let the press know what the vision is as well. EVERYBODY is clear then on what the deal is.
I agree. I liked the Dallas situation. They knew who the next coach was going to be well before Don Nelson left. Avery Johnson was chosen to be the next coach so he was assistant under him. I thought that was cool. I would love for Scott Brooks or Terry Porter, maybe even Shaw to be the top asstant to Brown for 2 years then take over. It would be a good situation for all parties.
Oh come on. It's who he is? Watching from afar, everything that happened in New York last year was a nightmare, I agree with that. The coach was undermining the GM, the GM was undermining the coach, the players were complaining to the media and Larry Brown was complaining right back. That's not a good situation. On the other hand, how much do any of us really know about this? Watching up close how every Ron Artest "situation" is consistnetly blown way out of proportion, I remain skeptical as to how much of the media circus is the result of Larry Brown's power-hungry, ego-driven rampage and how much of it is just a big show. How can you honestly claim to know "who he is" on the basis of the media coverage? It's just as likely, from my standpoint, that you've bought into a heap of lies. You don't know that the situation you described would come true if Larry Brown were to become the Kings' coach, you're only guessing. And some of us are guessing it would turn out differently.
Looking at some of the specifics -- Larry Brown didn't trade draft picks, that happened before he got there. He may have pushed for the Steve Francis trade, but that's ultimately going to be the GM's responsibility. And again, we don't really know, as outsiders, what's happening over there. The players didn't rebel against him in Detroit, he was a distraction at first because he was in and out of the hospital so they never knew when he was going to be there. During the playoffs when he was reportedly leaving for New York, he never once commented on it. That was all speculation and the players repeatedly said it wasn't distracting them, but I bet it was -- I bet getting asked about your coach leaving after every single playoff game was a distraction, but can you really blame Larry Brown for that?
Here's what I saw. Larry Brown took two of the least talented teams into the finals in two different cities -- a Sixers team with Allen Iverson and a bunch of has beens and scrubs and then a balanced Pistons team whose star player can't even score 10 points per game. Then he went to a situation in New York where he was expected to be the savior and turn things around, but as soon as he started ruffling some feathers and asking them to play his way the team quit on him. Then their GM supported the players he traded for instead of supporting his coach (because admitting he made some stupid moves might cost him his job) so then the players really tuned Larry Brown out and so he quit on the team. I don't know if that's exactly what happened, but it seems equally as likely to me as your scenario.
And lastly, there's several important differences between the situation in New York and the situation in Sacramento. First of all, we have Geoff Petrie and they have Isiah Thomas. However much of an egomaniac you imagine Larry Brown to be, you have to admit Isiah Thomas is worse. Larry Brown seems to have more respect for Geoff already than he's ever had for Isiah Thomas. Secondly, we're not entering a re-build situation with 120 million worth of unmovable long term contracts and traded draft picks. That's an impossible situation. He had to win right away because Isiah had already traded their draft pick -- and yet he had a roster composed entirely of rookies and aging past-their-prime veterans who were never any good anyway and one superstar self-promclaimed "best PG in the NBA" who'd never led any team to a winning record (who had a chance to play with KG for a championship in Minnesota but wanted out because he wouldn't get to be the #1 star there). So not only do we have a decent GM, but our roster is in pretty good shape (at least compared to the unimaginably bad roster mismanagement in New York). And Larry Brown is not going to be expected to save the franchise like he was in New York. There's far less pressure. Given how different the situations are, isn't it reasonable to expect a different outcome than what happened in New York?
(As a sidenote, I don't think Coach K and Mike D'Antoni did any better with the Olympic squad last year. Did you watch any of those games? It was just a bunch of selfish superstars who didn't know how to play team ball all over again. I don't think the coaching matters much in that situation. That's the real problem. You might as well be yelling at a brick wall. Carmelo, Wade, and Lebron in your starting lineup? How about a three point shooter? How about a guy to set screens? It's obvious why those teams continue to fail.)
Looking at some of the specifics -- Larry Brown didn't trade draft picks, that happened before he got there. He may have pushed for the Steve Francis trade, but that's ultimately going to be the GM's responsibility. And again, we don't really know, as outsiders, what's happening over there. The players didn't rebel against him in Detroit, he was a distraction at first because he was in and out of the hospital so they never knew when he was going to be there. During the playoffs when he was reportedly leaving for New York, he never once commented on it. That was all speculation and the players repeatedly said it wasn't distracting them, but I bet it was -- I bet getting asked about your coach leaving after every single playoff game was a distraction, but can you really blame Larry Brown for that?
Here's what I saw. Larry Brown took two of the least talented teams into the finals in two different cities -- a Sixers team with Allen Iverson and a bunch of has beens and scrubs and then a balanced Pistons team whose star player can't even score 10 points per game. Then he went to a situation in New York where he was expected to be the savior and turn things around, but as soon as he started ruffling some feathers and asking them to play his way the team quit on him. Then their GM supported the players he traded for instead of supporting his coach (because admitting he made some stupid moves might cost him his job) so then the players really tuned Larry Brown out and so he quit on the team. I don't know if that's exactly what happened, but it seems equally as likely to me as your scenario.
And lastly, there's several important differences between the situation in New York and the situation in Sacramento. First of all, we have Geoff Petrie and they have Isiah Thomas. However much of an egomaniac you imagine Larry Brown to be, you have to admit Isiah Thomas is worse. Larry Brown seems to have more respect for Geoff already than he's ever had for Isiah Thomas. Secondly, we're not entering a re-build situation with 120 million worth of unmovable long term contracts and traded draft picks. That's an impossible situation. He had to win right away because Isiah had already traded their draft pick -- and yet he had a roster composed entirely of rookies and aging past-their-prime veterans who were never any good anyway and one superstar self-promclaimed "best PG in the NBA" who'd never led any team to a winning record (who had a chance to play with KG for a championship in Minnesota but wanted out because he wouldn't get to be the #1 star there). So not only do we have a decent GM, but our roster is in pretty good shape (at least compared to the unimaginably bad roster mismanagement in New York). And Larry Brown is not going to be expected to save the franchise like he was in New York. There's far less pressure. Given how different the situations are, isn't it reasonable to expect a different outcome than what happened in New York?
(As a sidenote, I don't think Coach K and Mike D'Antoni did any better with the Olympic squad last year. Did you watch any of those games? It was just a bunch of selfish superstars who didn't know how to play team ball all over again. I don't think the coaching matters much in that situation. That's the real problem. You might as well be yelling at a brick wall. Carmelo, Wade, and Lebron in your starting lineup? How about a three point shooter? How about a guy to set screens? It's obvious why those teams continue to fail.)
Last edited:
You know who/what hiring Larry Brown at this point feels like?
Dick Motta.
And before people wihtout any knoweldge of the histroy start screeching, dick Motta was an extremely accomplished coach at the time the Kings got him. Had won the same number of NBA titles as Brown. Had just come off a stint building Dallas from expansionism all the way to the WCF.
He was also old, burnt out, buring bridges, arrogant and crotchety. His time had past, and he was not worth the trouble anymore. And it was pretty obvioius because all those achievements aside, there was no rush for his services. This is Larry Brown today. He was a selfish vagabond in his prime. Now he's just an old slime trying to slither his way back in one more time. Wanting him is somewhere halfway between being the woman who sees the serial adulterer and convinces herself that she will be the oen to change him, and the woman with no self respect who just takes him back again and again while burying her head in thr sand.
Hrdbold, not going to go every point, just some notes:
1) that terrible roster in New York won exactly one fewer game the year before Brown arrived than our wonderful roster in Sacto did last year. Turly a shockingly different position.
2) Brown openly flirted with the GM job in Cleveland in the midst of Detroit's playoffs, to the degree that as I recall Detroit ownership had to call him on the carpet and tell him to knock that **** off. I can only imagine the joy joy feelings that sort of activity would have inspired if Rick had started politicking for another job, in division mind you, during our 01-02 or 02-03 runs.
3) Brown's record in Philly is overrated to say the least. He took a grand total of one team to the Finals in 6 years, and was a boring irrelevancy most of the rest of the time. It was the only time they ever even won 50 games. And all this ith Iverson right through his prime years. Nor was that accidental, he had a dimwit yesman installed as GM there to runner stamp Brown's more than dubious twitchings. The reason those teams were not talented was precisely Larry Brown. Scrubs don't fight back when you slime them.
4) Brown openly clashed with and attempted to undermine Joe Dumars too. Must have been Joe's big ego. Then of course finding out much to his shock and dismay that Joe's classy Pistons lifer act was held in higher regard than his own carpetbagging and whining, he quit on them. But not really quit you see, because he needed to drag it out to make them "fire" him so he could collect all his illgotten money. Until of course the New York golden parachute opened up so he could steal even more.
5) You may or may not have noticed it, but in the pathetic East that Pistons squad has made something like 5 or 6 straight ECF appearances. He may have been a good coach, but taking an annual ECF participant and getting them 1 more series is hardly miraculous.
Dick Motta.
And before people wihtout any knoweldge of the histroy start screeching, dick Motta was an extremely accomplished coach at the time the Kings got him. Had won the same number of NBA titles as Brown. Had just come off a stint building Dallas from expansionism all the way to the WCF.
He was also old, burnt out, buring bridges, arrogant and crotchety. His time had past, and he was not worth the trouble anymore. And it was pretty obvioius because all those achievements aside, there was no rush for his services. This is Larry Brown today. He was a selfish vagabond in his prime. Now he's just an old slime trying to slither his way back in one more time. Wanting him is somewhere halfway between being the woman who sees the serial adulterer and convinces herself that she will be the oen to change him, and the woman with no self respect who just takes him back again and again while burying her head in thr sand.
Hrdbold, not going to go every point, just some notes:
1) that terrible roster in New York won exactly one fewer game the year before Brown arrived than our wonderful roster in Sacto did last year. Turly a shockingly different position.
2) Brown openly flirted with the GM job in Cleveland in the midst of Detroit's playoffs, to the degree that as I recall Detroit ownership had to call him on the carpet and tell him to knock that **** off. I can only imagine the joy joy feelings that sort of activity would have inspired if Rick had started politicking for another job, in division mind you, during our 01-02 or 02-03 runs.
3) Brown's record in Philly is overrated to say the least. He took a grand total of one team to the Finals in 6 years, and was a boring irrelevancy most of the rest of the time. It was the only time they ever even won 50 games. And all this ith Iverson right through his prime years. Nor was that accidental, he had a dimwit yesman installed as GM there to runner stamp Brown's more than dubious twitchings. The reason those teams were not talented was precisely Larry Brown. Scrubs don't fight back when you slime them.
4) Brown openly clashed with and attempted to undermine Joe Dumars too. Must have been Joe's big ego. Then of course finding out much to his shock and dismay that Joe's classy Pistons lifer act was held in higher regard than his own carpetbagging and whining, he quit on them. But not really quit you see, because he needed to drag it out to make them "fire" him so he could collect all his illgotten money. Until of course the New York golden parachute opened up so he could steal even more.
5) You may or may not have noticed it, but in the pathetic East that Pistons squad has made something like 5 or 6 straight ECF appearances. He may have been a good coach, but taking an annual ECF participant and getting them 1 more series is hardly miraculous.
Last edited:
I'd say that's one way Brown is NOT like Motta. Motta's hiring was seen as a major coup, and was expected to bring instant success in Sacramento. His attitude, and demeanor with players (or lack thereof), were completely overlooked, and a key to his undoing here.
Brown is coming off of a horrific, unbelievably poor career blemish in NY, and has been humbled a bit by what he had done there. Motta's humbling had never occurred before he arrived in Sac, and it showed.
Brown is coming off of a horrific, unbelievably poor career blemish in NY, and has been humbled a bit by what he had done there. Motta's humbling had never occurred before he arrived in Sac, and it showed.
Maybe so.
But lets remember they are humans too. They make bad decisions all the time. And many fans have been upset with Geoff in general for years now. He gets a free pass on Muss, because it wasn't his decision. But how much longer are the fans willing to put up with Petrie making bad signings? How much longer until the Maloofs give up on him? How many more times are we going to stand by while he drafts away from our needs and tries to put together the only all 6'7" team in the history of basketball?
My guess is that he is only going to be around a couple more years unless if he makes some real headway in our rebuild process.
But lets remember they are humans too. They make bad decisions all the time. And many fans have been upset with Geoff in general for years now. He gets a free pass on Muss, because it wasn't his decision. But how much longer are the fans willing to put up with Petrie making bad signings? How much longer until the Maloofs give up on him? How many more times are we going to stand by while he drafts away from our needs and tries to put together the only all 6'7" team in the history of basketball?
My guess is that he is only going to be around a couple more years unless if he makes some real headway in our rebuild process.
1. Last year we had an incompetant coach. Bibby shot like 30%. Artest tried to run the team. Miller had injuries. And we can thank Geoff for the rest of the veterans. If we didn't get extremely lukcy that Kevin Martin became a great player as a #26 pick, then we would be even further in the hole.
We are coming off of our glory years. New York had 4 seasons under .500 before Larry came in.
Not to mention the pressures of New York vs. Sacramento.
I wouldn't call it shockingly, but they are different situations.
2. & 4. So if Larry was having problems with Dumars, then wasn't it wise of him to look for a new job? Job security ain't what it used to be.
3. We don't want Larry Brown the GM, we want Larry Brown the coach.
5. Yeah. The team that Larry Brown developed, a bunch of nobodys until he made them a TEAM. And they were able to prosper after his departure, but BECAUSE of him. Flip Saunders inherited a perennial championship contender, and completely squandered opportunity after opportunity.
We are coming off of our glory years. New York had 4 seasons under .500 before Larry came in.
Not to mention the pressures of New York vs. Sacramento.
I wouldn't call it shockingly, but they are different situations.
2. & 4. So if Larry was having problems with Dumars, then wasn't it wise of him to look for a new job? Job security ain't what it used to be.
3. We don't want Larry Brown the GM, we want Larry Brown the coach.
5. Yeah. The team that Larry Brown developed, a bunch of nobodys until he made them a TEAM. And they were able to prosper after his departure, but BECAUSE of him. Flip Saunders inherited a perennial championship contender, and completely squandered opportunity after opportunity.
Larry Brown did NOT develop the Detroit Pistons. Rick Carlisle did. In fact Larry Brown's win% was nearly identical to Carlisle's before the true turning point -- Dumars brilliant steal of Sheed midseason. After that move is when they went on their tear. Brown walked into a situation where not only had his team been in the ECF the year before his arrival, but they suddenly traded for an All Star caliber PF midseason without having to give anything up.
That's a largely irrelevant point however. Larry Brown has long been considerably overrated, but he was still a good coach. On the court. Off the court he's always been a whiny undependable *** in it solely for himself. But once he got old, lazy, greedy, incredibly full of himself, and developed the world's preeminent persecution complex, its no longer remotely worth it.
P.S. Larry Brown the coach doesn't come without Larry Brown the GM, whereas if he doesn't get his way he will try to undermine your GM, whine and imnply endlessly to the press, cozy up the owners, and as the old *** has been increasingly ignored he's now come upon a new streategy when he doesn't get his way: throw a tantrum, scuttle the team. Then whine, complain, play the victim. He's a dangerously slimy and political animal.
That's a largely irrelevant point however. Larry Brown has long been considerably overrated, but he was still a good coach. On the court. Off the court he's always been a whiny undependable *** in it solely for himself. But once he got old, lazy, greedy, incredibly full of himself, and developed the world's preeminent persecution complex, its no longer remotely worth it.
P.S. Larry Brown the coach doesn't come without Larry Brown the GM, whereas if he doesn't get his way he will try to undermine your GM, whine and imnply endlessly to the press, cozy up the owners, and as the old *** has been increasingly ignored he's now come upon a new streategy when he doesn't get his way: throw a tantrum, scuttle the team. Then whine, complain, play the victim. He's a dangerously slimy and political animal.
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm not old enough to remember Motta. When I first started watching the Kings our coach was Gary St. Jean. It does sound familiar, but again -- the players are different, the coach is different, the situation is different. Even if there are eerie similarities, it's still just intuition right? Educated intuition, sure. It does sound like you have more reason to be skeptical than I do, not having witnessed that myself.
In response:
(1)You're right the records are similar, but there's a whole lot more going on than just win totals. The Kings are looking to do more than just improve their win total, they're looking to actually compete for a championship. Why else do you fire Rick Adelman? If we wanted just to be in the playoffs every year, you keep him around. I think they're shooting higher than that. They (the Maloofs) didn't think he was the right coach to take them all the way. Larry Brown is like the anti-Adelman. He's a disciplinarian where Rick was a player's coach. He's defense-first whereas Rick was offense. It may be okay to win less games next year if we're developing players and putting together a squad that can be competitive. There's less pressure to win now, which I think makes the situation a lot different.
(2)I don't remember much about that, but probably you're right. And there would certainly be a risk that Larry Brown is more interested in using our team to restore his reputation (before moving on to bigger and better things) than in actually building a winning team in Sacramento. I think that would be the job of Petrie and the Maloofs to be very clear up front what their expectations are. I'm not 100% in favor of signing him right away, I just think he should be interviewed. And even then, you'd have to know upfront he's just a one or two year rental to buy time while hopefully better, younger coaching candidates come on the market. If he can contribute something positive to the organization in one or two years, it would still be worth it I think. Every other candidate carries the risk of being Musselman part 2.
(3)I don't agree here. Plenty of coaches don't make it to the Finals in 6 years, it's an accomplishment just to get there. Avery Johnson blew it in the first round this year, does that automatically make him irrelevant? Looking at the numbers, in 6 years Larry Brown took a losing team (Iverson played there a season already so it wasn't just him) and got them to the playoffs in two years. After that they competed in the next 4 playoffs, making it to the Finals once, before Larry Brown left. They've won 1 playoff game since. And that roster is one of the weakest rosters to make it to the Finals before this years' Cavs. Iverson was the only legitimate star on any of those teams. Even in a weak Eastern conference, that's got to be considered overachieving.
(4)Well, that's news to me. I do get the sense that Larry Brown wants to be more than just a coach, he wants personnel control too. But then hasn't he already said that wouldn't be the case here? I guess it's just a matter of whether or not you believe him. You have your reasons not to, which I respect. They're sufficiently backed up. But, given the circumstances, I'd be willing to give him a try regardless -- for more or less the same reason I was in favor of trading for Iverson (which I now think we would have regretted) -- I just want this team to be relevant again, in some capacity. Perhaps we'll get our coach and re-build the right way and in a couple years all will be dandy, but right now looking out of "the abyss" of apparent indecisivness coming from the front office, I'd be happy with any bold move. Show us a pulse you know?
(5)That's true, Larry Brown did inherit a very good team in Detroit. But the year before he came they got swept by the Nets in the E.C.F. The Nets weren't exactly a colossus of talent themselves. He was hired to get them over the hump, which he did. Granted that had a lot to do with the Rasheed Wallace trade and the Lakers' implosion (and also Indiana's nosedive from relevance). Probably not a one-man effort in that regard and more overrated than the job he did in Philly. What I liked about the Pistons under Larry Brown is that you knew how they were going to win every night, everybody did, and they'd still beat you. That's what the Suns and the Spurs have right now. Under Flip Saunders they've cranked up the offense and won a lot of regular season games, but choked in key playoff games at the end when they couldn't decide who or what to go to. It does look like Larry Brown was a difference maker in Detroit. Three coaches have tried to take that group to the Finals and only one succeded. That's something.
Not a lot of coaches take two different teams to the Finals within 5 years. That's got to be some kind of record. And also a record of his oft-cited "nomadic" ways. Either you think Larry Brown is extremely lucky, or he's a pretty good coach. Even being a "pretty good coach" puts him well ahead of his competition doesn't it?
In response:
(1)You're right the records are similar, but there's a whole lot more going on than just win totals. The Kings are looking to do more than just improve their win total, they're looking to actually compete for a championship. Why else do you fire Rick Adelman? If we wanted just to be in the playoffs every year, you keep him around. I think they're shooting higher than that. They (the Maloofs) didn't think he was the right coach to take them all the way. Larry Brown is like the anti-Adelman. He's a disciplinarian where Rick was a player's coach. He's defense-first whereas Rick was offense. It may be okay to win less games next year if we're developing players and putting together a squad that can be competitive. There's less pressure to win now, which I think makes the situation a lot different.
(2)I don't remember much about that, but probably you're right. And there would certainly be a risk that Larry Brown is more interested in using our team to restore his reputation (before moving on to bigger and better things) than in actually building a winning team in Sacramento. I think that would be the job of Petrie and the Maloofs to be very clear up front what their expectations are. I'm not 100% in favor of signing him right away, I just think he should be interviewed. And even then, you'd have to know upfront he's just a one or two year rental to buy time while hopefully better, younger coaching candidates come on the market. If he can contribute something positive to the organization in one or two years, it would still be worth it I think. Every other candidate carries the risk of being Musselman part 2.
(3)I don't agree here. Plenty of coaches don't make it to the Finals in 6 years, it's an accomplishment just to get there. Avery Johnson blew it in the first round this year, does that automatically make him irrelevant? Looking at the numbers, in 6 years Larry Brown took a losing team (Iverson played there a season already so it wasn't just him) and got them to the playoffs in two years. After that they competed in the next 4 playoffs, making it to the Finals once, before Larry Brown left. They've won 1 playoff game since. And that roster is one of the weakest rosters to make it to the Finals before this years' Cavs. Iverson was the only legitimate star on any of those teams. Even in a weak Eastern conference, that's got to be considered overachieving.
(4)Well, that's news to me. I do get the sense that Larry Brown wants to be more than just a coach, he wants personnel control too. But then hasn't he already said that wouldn't be the case here? I guess it's just a matter of whether or not you believe him. You have your reasons not to, which I respect. They're sufficiently backed up. But, given the circumstances, I'd be willing to give him a try regardless -- for more or less the same reason I was in favor of trading for Iverson (which I now think we would have regretted) -- I just want this team to be relevant again, in some capacity. Perhaps we'll get our coach and re-build the right way and in a couple years all will be dandy, but right now looking out of "the abyss" of apparent indecisivness coming from the front office, I'd be happy with any bold move. Show us a pulse you know?
(5)That's true, Larry Brown did inherit a very good team in Detroit. But the year before he came they got swept by the Nets in the E.C.F. The Nets weren't exactly a colossus of talent themselves. He was hired to get them over the hump, which he did. Granted that had a lot to do with the Rasheed Wallace trade and the Lakers' implosion (and also Indiana's nosedive from relevance). Probably not a one-man effort in that regard and more overrated than the job he did in Philly. What I liked about the Pistons under Larry Brown is that you knew how they were going to win every night, everybody did, and they'd still beat you. That's what the Suns and the Spurs have right now. Under Flip Saunders they've cranked up the offense and won a lot of regular season games, but choked in key playoff games at the end when they couldn't decide who or what to go to. It does look like Larry Brown was a difference maker in Detroit. Three coaches have tried to take that group to the Finals and only one succeded. That's something.
Not a lot of coaches take two different teams to the Finals within 5 years. That's got to be some kind of record. And also a record of his oft-cited "nomadic" ways. Either you think Larry Brown is extremely lucky, or he's a pretty good coach. Even being a "pretty good coach" puts him well ahead of his competition doesn't it?
Please...no Larry Brown. There's a reason other teams hiring coaches this year have not even bothered interviewing Larry Brown, folks. Or do you really think those other teams are all just stupid blind and it's our incredible luck that he's still available? Give me a break.
AV may have contacted Larry Brown, but my guess is someone passed a hint along to AV that Larry Brown was interested. How could she pass on that juicy little tidbit? Yep, they don't call you, then lobby them through the press.
AV may have contacted Larry Brown, but my guess is someone passed a hint along to AV that Larry Brown was interested. How could she pass on that juicy little tidbit? Yep, they don't call you, then lobby them through the press.
Please...no Larry Brown. There's a reason other teams hiring coaches this year have not even bothered interviewing Larry Brown, folks. Or do you really think those other teams are all just stupid blind and it's our incredible luck that he's still available? Give me a break.
AV may have contacted Larry Brown, but my guess is someone passed a hint along to AV that Larry Brown was interested. How could she pass on that juicy little tidbit? Yep, they don't call you, then lobby them through the press.
AV may have contacted Larry Brown, but my guess is someone passed a hint along to AV that Larry Brown was interested. How could she pass on that juicy little tidbit? Yep, they don't call you, then lobby them through the press.
OK, interviewed by one team. Let's see, Memphis and Charlotte both hired NBA coaching assistants, with no NBA head coach experience, instead of Brown. Hmmmmm......
Do you do everything based on what other people do? Are you more re-active than active?
Yeah, hmmm, Charlotte and Memphis didn't hire him so he must be worthless. Last time I checked, we aren't Charlotte or Memphis. But if we want to be we can just hire an assistant for our head coaching position...hmmm.