A Bee writer gets it!

[VF21]

There's an article in today's Bee that was a refreshing change...

Leading Off: Kings players beware - front office will back Malone
By Victor Contreras

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/11/5899655/leading-off-kings-players-beware.html#storylink=cpy

Among other things, it says:

Malone will change the team's lineup this week, with the backing of the front office, sending a message throughout the locker room.

Either you play the way the coach wants you to play, or you don't play at all.

Refreshing change, both from the Bee and from TPTB at the Kings. Support your coach. What a concept.

 

[jalfa]

in fairness, Malone is the first coach in a long time that seems worthy of being supported. but yeah, very refreshing to see the whole organisation being on the same page, involved and actually interested in improving the product on the floor.

 

[swisshh]

The point that ownership backs Malone is true, but the assessment of the previous coaches and their situation is way off.

Just to run down the head scratchers:

Reggie Theus - Writer says he couldn't turn tide and team didn't play for him. Theus actually got the team to outperform expectations in his first year, but didn't make a leap in his second year. The team didn't quit on him like we've seen with Westphal and Smart. He just had an ego clash with ownership and others.

Kenny Natt - "Never was given a chance. " WHY WOULD YOU GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE JESUS

Westphal - Tried to instill discipline and accountability but didn't have support of ownership. Westphal actually sidestepped ownership and hung players out to dry without involving his front office. It wasn't just Cousins that he clashed with, but the vets like Landry and Dalembert. If a guy like Malone has issue with a player, he's smart enough to know that he must talk about it with his staff and that the front office will care what he does. Westphal just picked on players while leaving other players to do what they want. He didn't develop Tyreke's game and just let him do whatever the hell he wanted on the court. He'd then immediately bench other players for doing the same. He was just plain old bad and out of touch.

Smart - I can't really tear apart his assessment here because Smart was a multitude of issues.

So while I agree with the idea that Malone is backed by ownership, I do that for my own reasons. This article's assessment of each coach is so bizarre that I question the entire piece.

 

[KingMilz]

I like what I have seen from Malone thus far and I'm glad he's prepared to make changes after giving some of the vets a chance to prove themselves, if he keep's this up he's got my support.

 

[Kingstime]

The point that ownership backs Malone is true, but the assessment of the previous coaches and their situation is way off.

Just to run down the head scratchers:

Reggie Theus - Writer says he couldn't turn tide and team didn't play for him. Theus actually got the team to outperform expectations in his first year, but didn't make a leap in his second year. The team didn't quit on him like we've seen with Westphal and Smart. He just had an ego clash with ownership and others.

Kenny Natt - "Never was given a chance. " WHY WOULD YOU GIVE HIM ANOTHER CHANCE JESUS

Westphal - Tried to instill discipline and accountability but didn't have support of ownership. Westphal actually sidestepped ownership and hung players out to dry without involving his front office. It wasn't just Cousins that he clashed with, but the vets like Landry and Dalembert. If a guy like Malone has issue with a player, he's smart enough to know that he must talk about it with his staff and that the front office will care what he does. Westphal just picked on players while leaving other players to do what they want. He didn't develop Tyreke's game and just let him do whatever the hell he wanted on the court. He'd then immediately bench other players for doing the same. He was just plain old bad and out of touch.

Smart - I can't really tear apart his assessment here because Smart was a multitude of issues.

So while I agree with the idea that Malone is backed by ownership, I do that for my own reasons. This article's assessment of each coach is so bizarre that I question the entire piece.

Crazy how many bad coaches have been here since Adelman..

Sounding like Thornton is def donezo in the starting lineup, cant wait for the next game

 

[mac]

Out of the bunch I actually think Westphal did a pretty decent job overall. Not perfect, but not as bad as some make it out to be. He had a far more immature Cousins to deal with and a lockout is never good for any team, especially a young one. I don't think he lost the team at all - it was only that conflict with Cousins that got him fired after a 2-5 start. We're sitting at 1-5 now after a full training camp by the way... He definitely had his issues in handling players, from Spencer Hawes to Cousins and such, but in terms of what we were getting on the court it wasn't that bad. Thinks were really looking up at the end of Cuz' rookie season. Then we brought back Salmons, the harbinger of suckitude.

But back to the topic at hand - I'm glad that Malone has the backing of the organization, because he is the first competent coach we've had a in a while. Well ... the results don't show it but I'm more than willing to give him 2 seasons to turn us around. Every single coach talks a good game, preaches defense and such, but it's the little things that give you an idea of whether the coach really walks the talk. Thus far I think Coach Malone is ready to do whatever it takes to build a successful, sustainable culture in the Kings.