Adelman skeptical of Jackson talk

quick dog · May 7, 2005

Excuse me for sounding too much like She Who Must Be Obeyed Around Here, but I am really sick of people bad-mouthing Peja and the other guys. We didn't win the NBA title. Boo, hoo, hoo. I am not as bummed as last year, or the year before, or the year before that. This year was fun, and next year will be fun. Peja and the guys are trying hard to improve and win. They aint perfect. I think I'll kill myself.

VF21 · May 7, 2005

Um, what? That seems a little harsh, qd... and somewhat off topic, to be totally honest.

Oddly enough, people are actually working through a lot of mixed feelings about Peja, about Coach Adelman, about the future of the franchise, etc. I don't see it as "bad-mouthing" for the most part.

Why all the anger?

VF21 · May 7, 2005

AleksandarN said:

He's talented. No-one in their right mind would deny that. If he's found it within himself to push himself harder, to be "all that he can be," then more power to him!!!

NAPRED KRALJEVI!!!

kennadog · May 7, 2005

Bricklayer said:

Thank you for making the eloquent argument I never could. I believe among active coaches, two have NBA championship rings, Brown and Pop. The other 28 must be failures. And Larry Brown was a failed NBA coach until last year.

I just have not been able to understand the "fans" that think we should have won a championship and its Adelman's fault we haven't. Do I wish we had one it in 2002 or 2003? With all my heart. If people are only going to be happy with a championship, they are going to be disappointed a whole lot more years than not.
I think we are fortunate to have owners like the Maloofs, a GM like Petrie and a coach like Adelman. I'm rooting for them to put together a good, competitive team again. Adelman could turn into a brilliant coach in one season.

Fillmoe · May 7, 2005

Bricklayer said:

That's just dumb. Sorry. But it is.

If Phil Jackson took over the Clippers next year and failed to win it all is he "a failure" for not winning the championship? Hardly.

Winning a championship is an absolutely meaningless standard by which to judge a coach UNLESS you factor in SHOULD he have won a championship? And there I want to hear your argument. Actually its not necessary. I know all of the ridiculous Kings fans claims at this point. But the reality is we have '00-'01 when we first got good and there was no realistic chance. We have '01-'02 where Peja blows out his ankle and we still manage to take the Lakers to a Game 7 OT despite being picked to get swept by many observers. '02-'03 where Webber destroys his knee, and nobody has EVER won a title without their #1 guy, everyone's favorite delusion '03-'04 where we were racing along playing no defense but scoring a lot and hoping Webb could return at close to his old form to give us the interior presence we needed, then lost Bobby, mostly lost Brad, and found out Webb would never be what he was, and of course this year when the team was torn apart midseason and there was simply no shot at all.

By anyone not a Kings fan (and thus a bit more objective about the team) we were susposed to win the title one year, and one year only, and that was '02-'03. And that was taken from us emphatically by injuries. NO coach, and this has been said before -- NO coach wins titles with his main guns sitting in street clothes. When Duncan got hurt in '00 Pop's Spurs got bounced early. When Mailman got hurt last year, Phil's lakers go down. When MJ sat out a year, Phil's Lakers get bounced in Rnd 2. When MJ returned ala Webber the next year, Phil's Lakers get bounced. When Magic & Scott went down in the Finals vs. Detroit, Riley didn't magically make them champs. If Duncan was not/is not truly healthy this year, pop will be bounced again. If Ben Wallace gets hurt tommorow, the Pistons are done. Rick Adelman has never failed to win this team a title it should have won. Indeed we've never even lost a playoff series we should have won. The only one we ever lost where we were favored was the Dallas series in '02-'03, and we weren't favored anymore after losing our star.

Phil Jackson has never won a title without not one, but TWO HOFs on the team. Larry Brown took 30 years to finally win a title. Did he magically get smarter? or did he finally have the team to do it with. Jerry Sloan has never won a title, WITH two HOFs.

Repeat after me peoples: NO COACH WINS TITLES WITH INJURIES TO HIS MAIN GUYS. No coach. Not Rick. Not Pop. Not PJ. Not Riley. Always looking for a scapegoat for our disappointment.

Phil Jackson taking over the Clippers and having a bad season does not make him a failure, because its only one season. He hasnt had enough time to prove himself, on the other hand Rick has had 8 years..... i used to make excuses for Adelman myself but than I hit reality and just realized hes not a defensive orientated coach... Which could have really helped us in 01-02 when Kobe and Shaq would have their way with us....

side note: did you say Mailman going down last year was the reason the Lakers lost to to Detroit?

Gargamel · May 7, 2005

Bricklayer said:

What years are you talking about?

Gargamel · May 7, 2005

Fillmoe said:

Apparently he did and yes, it was the major cause of their loss. For some reason, they didn't hold Rasheed Wallace nearly as well with Stanislav Medvedenko and Luke Walton at PF.

VF21 · May 7, 2005

Fillmoe said:

Oh, God. I wish people would simply admit the cold, brutal truth - the Sacramento Kings DID NOT lose game 7 because of a lack of defense. They lost because, as a group, they choked and forgot how to shoot free throws. We had the game in hand several times. If we had hit from the line, we would have gone to the Big Show. We didn't.

It wasn't about stopping Kobe and Shaq, which no one could do completely. It was about making the most of those FREE THROWS - and we didn't.

If you're trying to say our team should have blown out the Lakers in 2002, you're simply being naive.

It was a fantastic year. We almost won it. And the coach that got us there was Rick Adelman.

Bricklayer · May 7, 2005

Gargamel said:

Close enough.

kennadog · May 7, 2005

VF21 said:

Amen!! And the following year the Kings were arguably the best defensive team in the NBA. Adelman was coach that year. Did he just become a good defensive coach that year? No. He just had better defensive players to coach. I think Adelman is very, very good at using whatever coaching strategy will play to the strengths of the players he's given. And I still think he did an exceptional job under the circumstances this season. At no point this season did I think this team was likely to go all the way. I just cheer them and live in hope.

thesanityannex · May 7, 2005

kenna nailed this one on the head. adelman is an exceptional coach who just hasnt been "lucky" enough to win a title. hes had chances, but only one team wins. im just glad we can watch a "playoff bound" team every year. props to you adelman.

Gargamel · May 7, 2005

Bricklayer said:

Heh.

KA_2 · May 7, 2005

The only two places Jackson ever seriously considered were New York and LA (New York being his former team as a player, LA for obvious reasons). And Jackson just rejected NY.

If I had to put down $1000, I'd bet Jackson is announced as the Lakers next head coach (and soon). Unless he retires for good from basketball, which is certainly possible.

VF21 · May 7, 2005

I've been predicting the announcement of his return to LA for at least a week. You really need to check in more often, KA_2.

And, for the record? I'll be glad when he's back where he belongs. It's so much easier to hate you guys with PJ at the reins - and I've missed hating you terribly!

KA_2 · May 7, 2005

VF21 said:

Maybe there's still some hope in reviving the Kings-Lakers rivalry? That would be fun!

VF21 · May 7, 2005

I hope so.

The Kings-Sonics rivalry wasn't much to talk about. I mean, Jerome James parading around with a trash bag as a cape? Geez...

uolj · May 7, 2005

Do any Jackson followers know of a playoff series his team has won where they were not favored or expected to win?

chelle · May 8, 2005

I must admit, I have TERRIBLY missed having a reason to hate the Lakers! Also, I usually do not like to single out 1 player as an object of my dislike, but I really, really, REALLY hope that sombody on the Spurs is able to put a hurtin' on "Trash Bag" in a way we were not able. Of course, I do not mean for him to be physically hurt, but a good bruise to his pride would be nice.

slugking50 · May 8, 2005

Funny, I didn't know there wasnt a thousand reasons to hate the Evil Empire. I always found it so easy to hate them with a passion myself.... Go figure.

Gargamel · May 8, 2005

uolj said:

Depends on your opinion of who was favored. Consensus was split on LA/Port in the 2000 WCFs and LA/SA in the 2001 WCFs. The LA Times on the eve of Gm1 of the Blazers series titled the preview "Too Deep vs. Two Deep". They had the Blazers winning the title. The 2001 Spurs WCFs was the first matchup between the two because Phx beat SA in 2000. Therefore, it was tough to gauge and a lot of people gave SA at least equal odds. Then they got mudholes stomped into them.

I think the Bulls won almost every series they were expected to under Phil, with the exception of the 1995 Semis vs Orlando (that was just due to the hype surrounding MJ's return). They probably would've won the 1994 Knicks series (where they were clear underdogs) if not for a crippling wrist foul Pippen got on Hubert Davis after the ball was out of his hands. That was Gm3/4. BS call, Knicks squoze by.

loopymitch · May 8, 2005

chelle said:

There's still reasons like Kobe and the fans (not all of them, Garg and hoops before you blast me). As long as the sky's blue there will be reasons. It's just that this year not only are they not the best team in Cali, they're not even the best in LA. A fact that makes this season even better

Gargamel · May 8, 2005

loopymitch said:

Never I hope. We cool, loopy.

Elektrik · May 8, 2005

Bricklayer said:

That's just dumb. Sorry. But it is.

If Phil Jackson took over the Clippers next year and failed to win it all is he "a failure" for not winning the championship? Hardly.

Winning a championship is an absolutely meaningless standard by which to judge a coach UNLESS you factor in SHOULD he have won a championship? And there I want to hear your argument. Actually its not necessary. I know all of the ridiculous Kings fans claims at this point. But the reality is we have '00-'01 when we first got good and there was no realistic chance. We have '01-'02 where Peja blows out his ankle and we still manage to take the Lakers to a Game 7 OT despite being picked to get swept by many observers. '02-'03 where Webber destroys his knee, and nobody has EVER won a title without their #1 guy, everyone's favorite delusion '03-'04 where we were racing along playing no defense but scoring a lot and hoping Webb could return at close to his old form to give us the interior presence we needed, then lost Bobby, mostly lost Brad, and found out Webb would never be what he was, and of course this year when the team was torn apart midseason and there was simply no shot at all.

By anyone not a Kings fan (and thus a bit more objective about the team) we were susposed to win the title one year, and one year only, and that was '02-'03. And that was taken from us emphatically by injuries. NO coach, and this has been said before -- NO coach wins titles with his main guns sitting in street clothes. When Duncan got hurt in '00 Pop's Spurs got bounced early. When Mailman got hurt last year, Phil's lakers go down. When MJ sat out a year, Phil's Lakers get bounced in Rnd 2. When MJ returned ala Webber the next year, Phil's Lakers get bounced. When Magic & Scott went down in the Finals vs. Detroit, Riley didn't magically make them champs. If Duncan was not/is not truly healthy this year, pop will be bounced again. If Ben Wallace gets hurt tommorow, the Pistons are done. Rick Adelman has never failed to win this team a title it should have won. Indeed we've never even lost a playoff series we should have won. The only one we ever lost where we were favored was the Dallas series in '02-'03, and we weren't favored anymore after losing our star.

Phil Jackson has never won a title without not one, but TWO HOFs on the team. Larry Brown took 30 years to finally win a title. Did he magically get smarter? or did he finally have the team to do it with. Jerry Sloan has never won a title, WITH two HOFs.

Repeat after me peoples: NO COACH WINS TITLES WITH INJURIES TO HIS MAIN GUYS. No coach. Not Rick. Not Pop. Not PJ. Not Riley. Always looking for a scapegoat for our disappointment.

This has to be the best analysis I have ever read and am 100% in agreement with it. Nice!

uolj · May 8, 2005

The reason I asked about whether Jackson's teams have won when they weren't favored was because that would be one of the traits I would look for from an Adelman replacement. However, the series that Gargamel mentioned sound an awful lot like the two Mavs series that the Kings won 4-1. The Kings weren't clear favorites in either one, but still won easily. Also, I don't know enough about Adelman's history with Portland to know if he had any upset success there.

Based on his tenure with the Kings, I'd say that is the one thing he failed to do. He "failed" to elevate his team to an upset series win. That is what a great coach can do. I won't knock him for that "failure", but I would definitely consider replacing him with somebody with that ability. I don't think Jackson has shown it any more than Adelman has.

Gargamel · May 9, 2005

uolj said:

In retrospect, I would confidently say that the 2000 Blazers were the better team, but started choking to death from an infamous Leap Year loss to LA all the way to the playoffs. In the WCFs, they just basically didn't show up in Gm1 and Wallace was ejected for staring at a Garretson. Gm3 they lost in the final secs. From Gm4-6 until the 4th quarter of Gm7, they made easy work of LA. If they were smarter and Sheed was more stabile, they win that series. That was Shaq's worst series in LA because they had a 300-lbr on him and were allowed to use a modified zone to deny Shaq the inlet on the first try.

Porty under Adelman did choke to LA in the 1991 WCFs. They were a 63-win team primed to go to the Finals, beat LA twice at the Forum that year. In Gm1 at home, the Blazers blew a 13-pt lead in the 4th Qtr and got kicked around in Gms3/4 at the Forum. At the end of Gm6 (the closeout game), Porty was down 1 in the final 30 secs with a chance to go up by 1 on a fast break. Kersey threw it to a wide-open Cliffy under the rim and he dropped it out of bounds. Cliffy is so old now that he's managed to outlive that infamy. Lakers won series by 1 pt when Magic rolled the ball down court to bleed the clock out. Not a nice way to get eliminated. Adelman probably brought a fair deal of hatred for LA with him to Sac from his days in Porty.

In 1990, Adelman's Blazers went to the Finals and were 1-0 on Detroit before getting swept. Detroit previously hadn't won in Portland since 1974, but swept the Blazers in Portland 3-0. No one was under the illusion that the Blazers really had a shot, however. Before the Finals, Porty had a tight 7-gm series with SA just to get to the WCFs. SA's Rod Strickland threw a behind-the-head pass out of bounds in the waning seconds of Gm7 that blew it for SA. Then Portland beat Phx in the WCFs in 6 games. Phx was the team that just eliminated the 63-win Lakers 4-1. That year was most likely Adelman's best coaching job.

Adelman skeptical of Jackson talk

Starter

Super Moderator Emeritus

Super Moderator Emeritus

Dog On It!

Fillmoe

Guest

Starter

Starter

Super Moderator Emeritus

Don't Make Me Use The Bat

Dog On It!

thesanityannex

Guest

Starter

Bench

Super Moderator Emeritus

Bench

Super Moderator Emeritus

Starter

Starter

All-Star

Starter

All-Star

Starter

Bench

Starter

Starter