Can we just fire Adelman now instead of waiting until the end of the season???

[RoyalDiva]

you nailed on the head precisely what VF21 was saying.

 

[peja16]

You're just looking for an easy answer as usual.

you nailed on the head precisely what VF21 was saying.

I need my own psychic hotline.

 

[VF21]

All 3 of you misinterpreted me and are looking too much into a simple statement.

People are not moaning that how the team is playing after 3 games. People moan that Adelman's teams make the same mistakes year after year, and melt down under pressure all the time. There is no human being on the planet who can say PJ's teams are not tougher and more poised than Adelman's teams.

Few teams have the talent and chances we have had these past few years, and we blew it every single time. Unless you give the next coach the exact same circumstances, there would be no moaning about "constant failures", at least for another 5 years of meltdowns.

If we got a coach, and won a title based on clutch postseason play, there would be no "whining" as you put it. You're just looking for an easy answer as usual.

And you, as usual, are blaming the coach for the TEAM'S failures.

Rick Adelman may be the unluckiest coach in the history of the game, but that doesn't make him an inept coach. Our teams have done spectacularly well considering some of the things they've overcome.

"We blew it every single time." That speaks volumes because you used "we"...as in plural. Yes, we (the team) blew it. They showed themselves capable of winning and yet managed to snatch defeat into their hands at the last moment.

Horry's shot wasn't Adelman's fault. Webber's last-second three going virtually all the way through the net and then bouncing out wasn't Adelman's fault. The plethora of unbelievable injuries at the most critical junctures weren't Adelman's fault.

Sometimes, <expletive> happens. In the short time the Kings have been in Sacramento, it seems they've drawn more than their share of bad luck.

Blame it on the Coach? Sure, if you like. But that COACH has taken this team to the playoffs every single year he's been here. That's an accomplishment in and of itself. We've gone deep into the playoffs, even when the pundits thought we'd never make it out of the first round. That's another pretty significant accomplishment.

Granted, if the team manages to stay somewhat healthy this year and they still don't get the title - or at least to the WCF - I'm sure there will be changes. That's just the nature of the beast.

If we got a coach, and won a title based on clutch postseason play...

What will you say IF we get a different coach and still don't win but Adelman goes to another team and DOES win?

 

[RoyalDiva]

All 3 of you misinterpreted me and are looking too much into a simple statement.

People are not moaning that how the team is playing after 3 games. People moan that Adelman's teams make the same mistakes year after year, and melt down under pressure all the time. There is no human being on the planet who can say PJ's teams are not tougher and more poised than Adelman's teams.

Few teams have the talent and chances we have had these past few years, and we blew it every single time. Unless you give the next coach the exact same circumstances, there would be no moaning about "constant failures", at least for another 5 years of meltdowns.

Based on your logic, the same could be said about the other 28 NBA teams-(including those coached by PJ). Boy, then the NBA sure is full of lousy coaches.

 

[cogito ergo sum]

anybody that thinks coaches are most at fault for losing games is irrational. in my opinion, coaches are important. but they aren't the key in acquiring championship tropies and winning games. the determination of such successes lie within the players being coached. coaches give strategies. most times, they preach to players about their roles in playbooks. it's all about the effort the players give. it's funny that when players mis execute their plays, all the blame goes on their coaches. it's not a coach's job to be popular with the fans or with their players even. in my opinion, some players that don't get along with their coaches don't have good sportsmanship. professionalism and respect between coaches and players make great teams past and present regardless their statistics!

 

[Superman]

Perhaps it is time for a coaching change in Sacramento. If the Kings management are seriously contemplating it though, they better have a committed replacement with a proven track record of winning in the NBA.

And who would that be?

This is the question that it always comes back to for me. You don't fire a coach with the winning and playoff experience that Rick Adelman has if you don't have a better coach waiting for your phone call. Who else is available? People want a taskmaster like Jerry Sloan or Gregg Popovich because they've either shown the ability to win or because their teams overacheive. Neither of them are available, and they have both had the luxury of coaching top five players during their primes. I mean, we could coax 103-year-old Chuck Daly out of retirement, but the decade and a half removed coach thing doesn't work that often in professional sports; ask Joe Gibbs and the Washington Redskins. Unless he can do the Hubie Brown thing (giving a young team without an idea of what winning is like an identity by instilling some basketball values in the team leaders; doesn't exactly apply to our team), it's not a good idea.

And perhaps we missed the Larry Brown boat last season, since Joe Dumars had the foresight to fire his two years in coach who won Coach of the Year in his first year and took his team to two second round playoff fights. He replaced him with Larry Brown, and we all said "what the hell?" Because Rick Carlisle had done a fine and dandy job in Detroit, and Larry Brown wasn't exactly a proven winner. But it paid off for the Pistons, and plenty of Kings fans said: "that could have been us." But we don't have the two-time reigning defensive player of the year that fits in perfectly to Larry Brown's scheme.

Besides, that's all water under the bridge. Right now, if we were to fire Rick Adelman because he hasn't shown the ability to win the big one (which is what it would all boil down to; he's had us in the playoffs every year for six years, and we have been [snaps fingers] this close to winning a championship), who would we replace him with?

I can't even believe that we're seriously having this discussion just three games into the season. It has to be some kind of Kingsfans.com record.

 

[peja16]

Based on your logic, the same could be said about the other 28 NBA teams-(including those coached by PJ). Boy, then the NBA sure is full of lousy coaches.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. 28 other coaches in the league have had great talent and numerous chances over the past few years to win, but have failed. That's EXACTLY what I meant. And don't I look dumb.

Posting a single vague, common-sense, or "not this again" sentence per discussion isn't fooling anybody into thinking you know what you're talking about.

VF21,

That's a fair interpretation. The problem is there is never a clear answer - a win can be defined by the layer or coach, as can a loss. Using the "Adelman can't hit free throws" argument, there is never any measure of greatness. You can say that Phil Jackson and Rick Adelman are equally good, but the Lakers hit their free throws when we didn't.

My point is, you can say '**** happens' at any instance. How can you separate coaching ability in this case?

What will you say IF we get a different coach and still don't win but Adelman goes to another team and DOES win?

Well, that falls into what I said above. If we hired a coach and didn't win again, I could say it was the the players fault we lose and the players' accomplishment Adelman won the title, and you say the opposite. Just like people say PJ didn't win, Mike & Shaq won. There's no real answer I can give.