Article: Theus was a Maloofs Hire
- Thread starter Bricklayer
- Start date
like it or not reggie is going to be our head coach, i think petrie had say in this and it was probably a 50/50 decision even though i beginning 2 think the problem with our franchise is not the players not the gm but our owners, plz maloofs if you're reading this stay out of petries way, if you don't like the decision he makes you try to be a gm for a year and see how you like it, just stick to the casino chips and eating burgers leave the rest to GP
I don't disagree with everything you say, but a few things I'd point out:
-Shaw was indeed a role player. And role players tend to make up most of the NBA coaching spectrum, such as guys like Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, George Karl, Jerry Sloan, Mike Dunleavy, Don Nelson, Avery Johnson, Nate McMillan, Rick Carlisle, .....I could go on and on. Those guys were role players. Hustle guys. Not all-stars who jacked up shots and put up gaudy stats.
Role players on winning teams tend to make better coaches than guys who put up big numbers on losing teams (like Reggie). That's just been the case.
-Magic Johnson and Bill Russell were far more accomplished than Reggie as a player, yet had a hard time getting the respect and attention of this generation's players. Those are two of the 10 (possibly 5) greatest players of all time and have 16 championships between them. Obviously, whatever it is that commands respect from players doesn't neccessarily come from what that coach previously accomplished as an NBA player.
Michael Jordan played for the Wiz for two years as a player/mentor to the young guys. He was the greatest of all time. You figure he'd command respect from the young guys and get them to respond, yet what happened? The players on those teams hated him and Kwame Brown got mentally destroyed.
-Of course Musselman wasn't Petrie's #1 choice. His #1 choice was to keep Adelman. He suggested Musselman to save the Maloofs the utter embrassment of hiring Whisenant and having to fire him 20 games into the season (and it would have been a huge embarassment).
-Shaw was indeed a role player. And role players tend to make up most of the NBA coaching spectrum, such as guys like Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, George Karl, Jerry Sloan, Mike Dunleavy, Don Nelson, Avery Johnson, Nate McMillan, Rick Carlisle, .....I could go on and on. Those guys were role players. Hustle guys. Not all-stars who jacked up shots and put up gaudy stats.
Role players on winning teams tend to make better coaches than guys who put up big numbers on losing teams (like Reggie). That's just been the case.
-Magic Johnson and Bill Russell were far more accomplished than Reggie as a player, yet had a hard time getting the respect and attention of this generation's players. Those are two of the 10 (possibly 5) greatest players of all time and have 16 championships between them. Obviously, whatever it is that commands respect from players doesn't neccessarily come from what that coach previously accomplished as an NBA player.
Michael Jordan played for the Wiz for two years as a player/mentor to the young guys. He was the greatest of all time. You figure he'd command respect from the young guys and get them to respond, yet what happened? The players on those teams hated him and Kwame Brown got mentally destroyed.
-Of course Musselman wasn't Petrie's #1 choice. His #1 choice was to keep Adelman. He suggested Musselman to save the Maloofs the utter embrassment of hiring Whisenant and having to fire him 20 games into the season (and it would have been a huge embarassment).
Last edited:
S
Well Russell did win a ring as a coach did he not? as a player/coach?
Magic well is just magic. I never thought he was that smart of a player. I think it was just so natural for him and he was so gifted, talented, skilled and Huge 6'9 Point guard ! also he was more a player leader than a coaching leader.
it actualy doesnt matter how good of a player they were as long as they played on the NBA level. thats the main point. and if your a good coach and just happend to be a all-star and in the record books it cant hurt.
my point about shaw goes back to something someone else had said about shaw winning rings. it was luck. being at the right place at the right time for him. I also mentioned that being with Shaq and Kobe doesnt mean that he experenced awesome coaching. I think Phil is overrated same wit Pop.
Magic well is just magic. I never thought he was that smart of a player. I think it was just so natural for him and he was so gifted, talented, skilled and Huge 6'9 Point guard ! also he was more a player leader than a coaching leader.
it actualy doesnt matter how good of a player they were as long as they played on the NBA level. thats the main point. and if your a good coach and just happend to be a all-star and in the record books it cant hurt.
my point about shaw goes back to something someone else had said about shaw winning rings. it was luck. being at the right place at the right time for him. I also mentioned that being with Shaq and Kobe doesnt mean that he experenced awesome coaching. I think Phil is overrated same wit Pop.
Reggie Theus is our new coach--period. We will never know how he was selected; all articles read can be interpreted many different ways. We all know who supports the coach, owners and team and who just can't move forward. Really--the whole Petrie/Maloof thing is getting really boring. How many ways can you say the same thing? Annie.
A guy with his passing ability had to have had an extremely high basketball IQ. The worst thing you could say about him was that he was the smartest or second smartest (behind Bird) 6'9" player to every play the game. As for Russell, he could still win as a player/coach because he could still play like Bill Russell out on the court. Once he lost that ability to play, he just wasn't quite the same coach.
Then don't bother bringing up Reggie as an all-star and Shaw as a scrub, since they both played in the NBA.
Should be noted that MJ/Pippen and Shaq/Kobe never won a thing before Phill was named head coach. Maybe Phill is only good at coaching superstars with big egos. Well if that's the case, then he's better at that than anyone else, and that counts for something.
But Jackson has nothing to do with Shaw. The only thing I'd note about Shaw is that he's had a lot of experience in the league as a player/assistant coach and he was Petrie's initial choice. He was a smart player. And, like a lot of role players, he spent a lot of time sitting on the bench watching and observing games and observing his own coach. I think that's a big reason role players tend to be better coaches. They have more experience from the bench because they sat there a lot more than the superstar.
Then don't bother bringing up Reggie as an all-star and Shaw as a scrub, since they both played in the NBA.
Should be noted that MJ/Pippen and Shaq/Kobe never won a thing before Phill was named head coach. Maybe Phill is only good at coaching superstars with big egos. Well if that's the case, then he's better at that than anyone else, and that counts for something.
But Jackson has nothing to do with Shaw. The only thing I'd note about Shaw is that he's had a lot of experience in the league as a player/assistant coach and he was Petrie's initial choice. He was a smart player. And, like a lot of role players, he spent a lot of time sitting on the bench watching and observing games and observing his own coach. I think that's a big reason role players tend to be better coaches. They have more experience from the bench because they sat there a lot more than the superstar.
This whole debate over experience seems silly. Debating about whether role players are more likely to become good coaches.
Look it all depends on the person. Some guys have it and some dont, end of story.
Take Rudy Tomjanovich. The guy never sat on the bench in his life and all of a sudden the Rockets hire him to run their team and two years later they win the championship. He had zero experience as a coach on any level
You guys are micro-analyzing this way too much.
Look it all depends on the person. Some guys have it and some dont, end of story.
Take Rudy Tomjanovich. The guy never sat on the bench in his life and all of a sudden the Rockets hire him to run their team and two years later they win the championship. He had zero experience as a coach on any level
You guys are micro-analyzing this way too much.
Whatever happened to the Geoff Petrie that was going to up and quit on the spot with the previous ownership (cant remember his name) over some issues of principle. I guess Geoff is just aboard for the ride and a paycheck nowadays. Hence, the situation we are now in. I guess Geoff just wants to spend the rest of his days growing Zinfandel down in Clarksburg.
You're right! He is our coach period. And we'll deal with it and give him the benefit of the doubt. But the whole Petrie/Maloof thing as you put it is not yet boring to some of us. Many of us smell a rat. Maybe we're wrong...Maybe not. Let it play itself out till we are satisfied one way or the other. There is a lot of solid points on both sides. If you're bored with it, don't bother with it.
Personally I think WAY too much is being made of the decision on the Coach
Guy. Maloofs finaly realiszed it was rebuild time so ANY young couach used to working with young players developing tallent would do for the time being, so why not get a guy with PR cred as well?
Of course I will give Coach Guy* a break and let him do his thing this season regardless of who's deceision it was to hire him. All I care about is what he does with the young tallent and how he manages what ever passes for a team this season.
* In Viet Nam US troop causalties were heavest among new recruits leading to a phenomonon where troops would wait untill a guiy had been incountry for 3 months before calling him by name. I'll learn Coach Guy's name in his second season.
Guy. Maloofs finaly realiszed it was rebuild time so ANY young couach used to working with young players developing tallent would do for the time being, so why not get a guy with PR cred as well?
Of course I will give Coach Guy* a break and let him do his thing this season regardless of who's deceision it was to hire him. All I care about is what he does with the young tallent and how he manages what ever passes for a team this season.
* In Viet Nam US troop causalties were heavest among new recruits leading to a phenomonon where troops would wait untill a guiy had been incountry for 3 months before calling him by name. I'll learn Coach Guy's name in his second season.
yeah this whole maloof/petrie thing has been shot down a trillion times somebody end this thread. reggie thesus is our coach, and for the time being i'll give him the benefit of the doubt and if he does a horrible job give him some time and if he doesn't improve or team at all then we could start pointing fingers.
Last edited:
Since we are unlikely to ever know the facts about what went on, what in the world would constitute satisfaction "one way or the other?" 
In a situation where there's very little known fact, but plenty of gossip, speculation, innuendo and assumption, I can't see any "resolution" that will bring satisfaction. So the speculative, fact-lacking arguments just keep going in the same old circles.
In a situation where there's very little known fact, but plenty of gossip, speculation, innuendo and assumption, I can't see any "resolution" that will bring satisfaction. So the speculative, fact-lacking arguments just keep going in the same old circles.
I also remember that. Don't recall the exact words, but think Petrie mentioned something like "there is no decision on which he and the owners have not agreed on 100%". At that time though, I think he was referring to letting Rick go, instead of the decision to hire Muss.
This does not mean that it was his decision. Letting Rick go was quite certainly the owners' decision, something Geoff agreed/accepted. Similarly, trading for Ron, hiring Muss/Reggie might have been the Maloofs' decisions or done at their prompting, but ultimately Geoff agreed with them.
I am not defending him. Even if he didn't agree with the decisions, as GM, he is ultimately responsible, and deserves flak for the bad decisions, as much as he desrves praise for the good ones. I do believe though, that sometimes, it is okay to lose the battle in an effort to win the war. Even if he was leaning towards Shaw, it was better to agree with the owners about Reggie, if the difference wasn't much, rather than make it an issue, and lose future bargaining position with them.
My bigger concern is, will Reggie hire prevent trades? At least publicly, Reggie talks about getting Ron and Bibby on board, and how, getting equal value for them will not be possible. While true, this displays a win-now mentality, which is good/required of a coach. The owners and GM however, need to think long term. Right now, we can only hope they have a plan they agree on.
This does not mean that it was his decision. Letting Rick go was quite certainly the owners' decision, something Geoff agreed/accepted. Similarly, trading for Ron, hiring Muss/Reggie might have been the Maloofs' decisions or done at their prompting, but ultimately Geoff agreed with them.
I am not defending him. Even if he didn't agree with the decisions, as GM, he is ultimately responsible, and deserves flak for the bad decisions, as much as he desrves praise for the good ones. I do believe though, that sometimes, it is okay to lose the battle in an effort to win the war. Even if he was leaning towards Shaw, it was better to agree with the owners about Reggie, if the difference wasn't much, rather than make it an issue, and lose future bargaining position with them.
My bigger concern is, will Reggie hire prevent trades? At least publicly, Reggie talks about getting Ron and Bibby on board, and how, getting equal value for them will not be possible. While true, this displays a win-now mentality, which is good/required of a coach. The owners and GM however, need to think long term. Right now, we can only hope they have a plan they agree on.
Think the issue is not if Reggie shall turn out to be a good choice. Hopefully, he shall be great. The concern is that should the owners rely on their GM, or their buddies in Nevada to make basketball related decisions. If this story is true, then in this aspect, their approach is not correct, even if their decision turns out to be.
Or they are trying to drive up their value a little bit by saying that the down year was the coach's, not the player's, fault and we can still use these guys effectively. We are not desperate, so it you want them - pony up.
Also, as I mentioned previously (another thread?), they are on the team right now. They are the players we need to prepare with. If you publicly call a guy out as being trade fodder or dump on them, how do you think they feel? Whether they get traded or not, keep the guys feeling happy and wanted. No reason not to at this point.
Also, as I mentioned previously (another thread?), they are on the team right now. They are the players we need to prepare with. If you publicly call a guy out as being trade fodder or dump on them, how do you think they feel? Whether they get traded or not, keep the guys feeling happy and wanted. No reason not to at this point.
Or they are trying to drive up their value a little bit by saying that the down year was the coach's, not the player's, fault and we can still use these guys effectively. We are not desperate, so it you want them - pony up.
Also, as I mentioned previously (another thread?), they are on the team right now. They are the players we need to prepare with. If you publicly call a guy out as being trade fodder or dump on them, how do you think they feel? Whether they get traded or not, keep the guys feeling happy and wanted. No reason not to at this point.
Also, as I mentioned previously (another thread?), they are on the team right now. They are the players we need to prepare with. If you publicly call a guy out as being trade fodder or dump on them, how do you think they feel? Whether they get traded or not, keep the guys feeling happy and wanted. No reason not to at this point.