Coaching change would be good

[thenbakings]

I think it is a good thing that the Kings are at least looking into a new coach. Adelman has already gotten us as far as he can. The same problems that he was having this year such as rotation and playing time are the same problems he has had since he got there. Yes, this year we had new additions late and injuries but even in the last few years it has always been a question of who he would play and he wasn't sure what rotation he wanted to go with. He has done a good job overall but I don't think he can get this team to a championship. With the addition of new players I think now would be the perfect time to get a new coach and start some new team chemistry. Adelman doesn't seem to have the passion to get this team to play defense and we need somebody that will.

 

[Kingsgurl]

As someone who has lived through the Dick Motta days, just let me say "Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it"


I'm not against a coaching change, per se. I've enjoyed the style of ball employed by Adelman and think he has done a terrific job (weird rotations aside) especially with the injuries he has had to deal with. I will miss the system, but then again, we currently don't have quite the right mix for that system to be at it's most effective anyway.

 

[quick dog]

I don't see any compelling evidence which demonstrates that Adelman is responsible for the Kings' modest success (by recent standards) this year. You all know the reasons, yada, yada, yada. The Kings have a great coach, no change is needed.

 

[Bibby_Is_Clutch]

You have some good points but I dont think its the lack of passion he has towards defense its just not the style he teaches. If he taught better D then we would be a better team (possibly) but he is the kind of coach that is teaching his team to outscore the other team and not worry about how many points they score as long as you outscore them. But our team is now not as offensive as it once was. The passing is down because we no longer have two of the best passing big men in the NBA and our players just getting older. I think Adelman can keep this team a contender and Geoff can get some more pieces together to develope this team into a championship contender again but I think we may need to take the opportunity of hiring Jackson if the option arrises. His resume speaks for itself.

 

[DocHolliday]

Adelman is a great OFFENSIVE coach. He does not work much with defense. Also, he has the label as a *Players Coach*. Which means he doesn't get on you as much. He try's to work with you on a friend level, while still giving direction.

Now this sounds all warm and fuzzy. But, there is a reason players on this team get away without playing defense. The coach. Plain and simple. Ther are other more aggressive coaches in the league that get more out of their players in a defenseive and listening sense. Phil Jackson, Rick Carlisle, George Karl, Popovich. Why?? They aren't afraid to say HEY GET YOUR **** TOGETHER OR GET OFF THE COURT. They have the attention of their players.

-Mike Bibby isn't a great defensive player, because it's been ok for him not to. He obviously finds no reason to improve, yet he'll come in late if he's shooting poorly to workon his jumpshot hmmmm.

Brad Miller needs to hit the gym harder and lift heavier weights so he can gain some mass. His end of season comment was he'll be working out in the offseason. On the Grants show he said he'll be working out in his barn in indiana, although he has never believe in lifting heavy weights he'll increase the reps. As a guy who's been working out since he was 15 and is now almost 28 that's complete and utter BULL****. Eat big, work out big. He's WEAK. It would also increase the lift in his legs

Peja. He is the ONLY one that on his own accord after 7 years is FINALLY trying to work on his defense.


The players that have been there the longest, Mike, Brad, Peja, Bobby, they don't really listen to Rick anymore and you can see it. Like Phil Jackson said after so many years with a team there's nothing else I could say to them to motivate them. They had heard it all before. Rick has lost control of the team. Oh but what about the new guys you say, well your core veterans are your leaders. Monkey see, monkey do. Kenny and Brian tried for a while, and even they slacked off.

Sometimes you need change for the sake of change. Go get Phile, or Doug Collins or someone.

 

[Bricklayer]

Now this sounds all warm and fuzzy. But, there is a reason players on this team get away without playing defense. The coach. Plain and simple. Ther are other more aggressive coaches in the league that get more out of their players in a defenseive and listening sense. Phil Jackson, Rick Carlisle, George Karl, Popovich. Why?? They aren't afraid to say HEY GET YOUR **** TOGETHER OR GET OFF THE COURT. They have the attention of their players.

And there are also a far GREATER number of coaches of that ilk who lose their teams, the locker room erupts in revolt, they are canned, and the franchise is set back sometimes for years.

People always talk about the 2 or 3 good examples of guys who ride you, and conveniently ignore the overwhelming number of guys who ride you who don't get it right and manage to detroy their teams and their careers simultaneously.

You say there is a reason our guys play bad defense, and its Rick? I say there's a reason ouor guys have been the most unselfish team in the league and had great chemistry year after year, and it is also Rick (I also by the way will one more time point out the gnerally crappy defensive personnel on our team -- never have played any defense, never will for ANYbody).

 

[LPKingsFan]

You say there is a reason our guys play bad defense, and its Rick? I say there's a reason ouor guys have been the most unselfish team in the league and had great chemistry year after year, and it is also Rick (I also by the way will one more time point out the gnerally crappy defensive personnel on our team -- never have played any defense, never will for ANYbody).

And thus we find ourselves contemplating the blasphemous, that Petrie is not god, and is fact a mere mortal with a penchant for soft shooters that can pass.

 

[quick dog]

And thus we find ourselves contemplating the blasphemous, that Petrie is not god, and is fact a mere mortal with a penchant for soft shooters that can pass.

You beat me to it.

 

[Gargamel]

I don't see any compelling evidence which demonstrates that Adelman is responsible for the Kings' modest success (by recent standards) this year. You all know the reasons, yada, yada, yada. The Kings have a great coach, no change is needed.

I think there comes a time when every coach loses the motivation and ears of his players. Either that, or a front office wants to go in a new direction. Jacko and Riley had, what, 13 of the last 23 titles and even they got served for those reasons by the teams for which they won those rings.

Adelman hasn't seemed to lose the motivation of his players yet -- at least, you'd expect to hear rumblings about it by now if he had. By virtue of coaching in Sacramento, I think Adelman is relatively safe. He's the best coach in their history by default (there's no need to even mention that he's made it to the WCFs 4x and the Finals 2x). It'd be tough to get a Larry Brown or Phil Jackson to live in Sacto for most of the year. And unless Petrie is dying for Saunders or Mussleman, Adelman stays put. Jackson I can see him having enough interest in to push Adelman out. I can't see him doing that for anyone else. Likewise, I doubt Petrie is waiting with baited breath to replace Adelman with T.R. Dunn or Elston Turner.

 

[PixelPusher]

I think there comes a time when every coach loses the motivation and ears of his players. Either that, or a front office wants to go in a new direction. Jacko and Riley had, what, 13 of the last 23 titles and even they got served for those reasons by the teams for which they won those rings.

Adelman hasn't seemed to lose the motivation of his players yet -- at least, you'd expect to hear rumblings about it by now if he had. By virtue of coaching in Sacramento, I think Adelman is relatively safe. He's the best coach in their history by default (there's no need to even mention that he's made it to the WCFs 4x and the Finals 2x). It'd be tough to get a Larry Brown or Phil Jackson to live in Sacto for most of the year. And unless Petrie is dying for Saunders or Mussleman, Adelman stays put. Jackson I can see him having enough interest in to push Adelman out. I can't see him doing that for anyone else. Likewise, I doubt Petrie is waiting with baited breath to replace Adelman with T.R. Dunn or Elston Turner.

as far as I can tell, there are only 3 players on this roster that have been under Adelman for more than 2 years: Bibby, Bobby and Peja. Has anyone seen indications that any of these 3 players have tuned out the coach?

 

[striker]

If the Kings struggle next year, certainly a possibility, I wouldn't be surprised if Adelman doesn't survive.

 

[VF21]

Sooner or later Adelman will move on. The team will decide to go in a different direction, or whatever.

I have no problem with that. But I do have a problem with the need of some to pile stuff on him like he's inept, ineffective, etc. He's a very good, competent coach who has been at the head of our team for the most exciting times of our lives. I'm not quite convinced anyone else could have done any better and I sure as hell believe there are a lot who could have done a lot worse.

Eventually a coaching change will occur, for good or bad. And if we're lucky, the new coach will be able to get performances out of his team approaching what Adelman has been able to do these past years.

 

[Kingsgurl]

And if we're lucky, the new coach will be able to get performances out of his team approaching what Adelman has been able to do these past years.

For this I pray.

 

[DocHolliday]

And there are also a far GREATER number of coaches of that ilk who lose their teams, the locker room erupts in revolt, they are canned, and the franchise is set back sometimes for years.

People always talk about the 2 or 3 good examples of guys who ride you, and conveniently ignore the overwhelming number of guys who ride you who don't get it right and manage to detroy their teams and their careers simultaneously.

You say there is a reason our guys play bad defense, and its Rick? I say there's a reason ouor guys have been the most unselfish team in the league and had great chemistry year after year, and it is also Rick (I also by the way will one more time point out the gnerally crappy defensive personnel on our team -- never have played any defense, never will for ANYbody).

I'm sorry, but BULL ****!!! Unless you are physically incapable to move you can play defense. There is no reason why a guy, if coached properly, can't play defense. Guys don't play defense, because they haven't had a coach to kick the **** out of them, and because they've always got away without doing it.

I agree Rick is the reason for our offensive success and SOMETIMES unselfish play, when we decide to move the ball. You can not deny the fact though that he is also the reason for our defensive insufficiencies. So, in response to your question. YES, Rick is the reason we play extremly ****ty defense.

And for the guys who are very aggressive towards their players, lose their players and get canned. That's called a ****ty coach! We are talking about good coaches here. If you want to talk about poor coaches we can do that.

 

[Pollardo!]

Well, ****, ****tity, ****, ****, ****!

I think that Doc still raises an interesting point- About anyone that can move, can play defense. While this may be true in part, it's like saying that anyone with hands can paint... But for every Van Gogh, there are 10,000 Thomas Kinkades.

I would love to see a more defense-oriented system in place as well, but at the same time, I also agree with Brick, in that some players are just naturally more equipped to play defense than others (Be it mentally, physically, or instinctually). A coaching change is usually a last and desperate resort, and I don't know that with our current personnel, we'd be that much better off with a new General.

 

[slugking50]

Well, ****, ****tity, ****, ****, ****!

I think that Doc still raises an interesting point- About anyone that can move, can play defense. While this may be true in part, it's like saying that anyone with hands can paint... But for every Van Gogh, there are 10,000 Thomas Kinkades.

I would love to see a more defense-oriented system in place as well, but at the same time, I also agree with Brick, in that some players are just naturally more equipped to play defense than others (Be it mentally, physically, or instinctually). A coaching change is usually a last and desperate resort, and I don't know that with our current personnel, we'd be that much better off with a new General.

Mike wont ever be a great defender. He cant sustain good defense. It wears him out because he definately doesnt have a gift for moving side to side. He'd be dead on the offensive end for us.

Defense is about skill just as much as offense is. You cant teach many of the gifts that the best defenders in the league have just as you cant teach the shooting and passing skill our team has been known for in the past. You need a blend of both of offense and defense to be sucessful. We havent had that or what looks like it for 3 years. When he had a great defensive team. We didnt show it too much. Only when needed but it was still there.

 

[TonyFiat]

Everyone who watches the Kings knows Rick doesn't care about defense. The only guy on the roster who consistently played any D was Ostertag, and he never got off the bench. The real problem here is the fact that he holds nobody accountable for their subpar play, offensively or defensively. No matter how crappy someone is playing, he won't take them out and make an example of them. This leads to compalcency among the players, which leads to half-assed effort. To illustrate, quick shooting, one-on-one play, and soft defense are all signs of half-assed effort. The starters flat out quit in the 3rd quarter of Game 2 against the Sonics, and Rick waited until near the end of the quarter to yank them. The Kings need a new coach who will motivate the players to do something other than take the path of least resistance. This is such a veteran team that almost anyone who will demand effort will get these guys to put out. Remember what Lawrence Frank did for a team that had tuned out its coach? Phil Jackson would be great, but a guy like Musselman who would actually get in someone's face when they jog back on D would be just as good.

 

[D-Mass]

Everyone who watches the Kings knows Rick doesn't care about defense. The only guy on the roster who consistently played any D was Ostertag, and he never got off the bench. The real problem here is the fact that he holds nobody accountable for their subpar play, offensively or defensively. No matter how crappy someone is playing, he won't take them out and make an example of them. This leads to compalcency among the players, which leads to half-assed effort. To illustrate, quick shooting, one-on-one play, and soft defense are all signs of half-assed effort. The starters flat out quit in the 3rd quarter of Game 2 against the Sonics, and Rick waited until near the end of the quarter to yank them. The Kings need a new coach who will motivate the players to do something other than take the path of least resistance. This is such a veteran team that almost anyone who will demand effort will get these guys to put out. Remember what Lawrence Frank did for a team that had tuned out its coach? Phil Jackson would be great, but a guy like Musselman who would actually get in someone's face when they jog back on D would be just as good.

Word...you're so right...it's about accountability for defense, and right now they have NONE.

 

[VF21]

Everyone who watches the Kings knows Rick doesn't care about defense. The only guy on the roster who consistently played any D was Ostertag, and he never got off the bench. The real problem here is the fact that he holds nobody accountable for their subpar play, offensively or defensively. No matter how crappy someone is playing, he won't take them out and make an example of them. This leads to compalcency among the players, which leads to half-assed effort. To illustrate, quick shooting, one-on-one play, and soft defense are all signs of half-assed effort. The starters flat out quit in the 3rd quarter of Game 2 against the Sonics, and Rick waited until near the end of the quarter to yank them. The Kings need a new coach who will motivate the players to do something other than take the path of least resistance. This is such a veteran team that almost anyone who will demand effort will get these guys to put out. Remember what Lawrence Frank did for a team that had tuned out its coach? Phil Jackson would be great, but a guy like Musselman who would actually get in someone's face when they jog back on D would be just as good.

I watch the Kings and I DO NOT agree that Adelman doesn't care about defense. I'm still amused that people who are going to post minority opinions consistently feel the need to preface those statements with an "everybody knows" or "I'm sure we'll all agree..." etc.

What you're arguing isn't whether or not Adelman cares about defense. What you're actually trying to prove is the only way to get defense out of players is to "make an example out of them." That's one way of coaching but it certainly isn't the only way.

Adelman's style of coaching has remained constant. What has changed are the tools he's had available. If you think Musselman is a better coach than Rick Adelman, this whole discussion is going to go nowhere in the express lane.

 

[TonyFiat]

I watch the Kings and I DO NOT agree that Adelman doesn't care about defense. I'm still amused that people who are going to post minority opinions consistently feel the need to preface those statements with an "everybody knows" or "I'm sure we'll all agree..." etc.

You must listen to all of the postgame press conferences where Rick says, "Well, we talk about how they should play defense, they just never do it" and believe the guy hammers the point home every chance he gets. If he really cared, he would yank Bibby occasionally for not even trying to stay in front of his man. Seriously, it took until Game 1 against Seattle before Mike even got into a defensive stance this season, yet Rick never once sat him down for not giving a crap on D. The same can be said for the big men who rarely, if ever, aggressively stepped in to stop whoever blew right by Bibby or Mobley. I take that back, Skinner was aggressive and a force on D when he first came over, but once he hurt his thumbs and was able to give absolutely nothing on offense, Rick planted him next to Ostertag on the end of the bench.

 

[uolj]

Everyone who watches the Kings knows Rick doesn't care about defense. The only guy on the roster who consistently played any D was Ostertag, and he never got off the bench. The real problem here is the fact that he holds nobody accountable for their subpar play, offensively or defensively. No matter how crappy someone is playing, he won't take them out and make an example of them. This leads to compalcency among the players, which leads to half-assed effort. To illustrate, quick shooting, one-on-one play, and soft defense are all signs of half-assed effort. The starters flat out quit in the 3rd quarter of Game 2 against the Sonics, and Rick waited until near the end of the quarter to yank them. The Kings need a new coach who will motivate the players to do something other than take the path of least resistance. This is such a veteran team that almost anyone who will demand effort will get these guys to put out. Remember what Lawrence Frank did for a team that had tuned out its coach? Phil Jackson would be great, but a guy like Musselman who would actually get in someone's face when they jog back on D would be just as good.

I would like to see Adelman stress defense more than it appears he does. However, could you explain how your reasoning applies to the same Adelman a couple years ago whose team led the league in FG% defense? I don't understand how he could not care about defense and not hold his guys accountable, when it certainly appears he did just two years ago, or in last year's playoffs?

And what did Frank do for the Nets? They went on a 15 game winning streak, then closed the season 12-15 and lost in the second round after making it to the finals the two years before. I know Kidd was injured, but I'd rather have a consistent winner than a new coach who can motivated his guys for 15 games before falling back into mediocrity.

 

[D-Mass]

I watch the Kings and I DO NOT agree that Adelman doesn't care about defense. I'm still amused that people who are going to post minority opinions consistently feel the need to preface those statements with an "everybody knows" or "I'm sure we'll all agree..." etc.

What you're arguing isn't whether or not Adelman cares about defense. What you're actually trying to prove is the only way to get defense out of players is to "make an example out of them." That's one way of coaching but it certainly isn't the only way.

Adelman's style of coaching has remained constant. What has changed are the tools he's had available. If you think Musselman is a better coach than Rick Adelman, this whole discussion is going to go nowhere in the express lane.

Come on...this might be a "minority opinion" in the technical sense, but you make it sound like there is this tiny bunch of people with this wacky, extreme view that some of the blame should be squarely placed on the coaching staff. Unless, of course, all of my friends and relatives who are Kings fans are crazy...

As a former high school basketball coach, I know that there are many coaching styles, and personally, I'm not the in-your-face sort of coach either. BUT, there is never an excuse for poor TEAM defense, and if you know you have poor team defense, it is your job as a coach to DEAL WITH IT and IMPROVE IT to the best of your ability. And even as a "player's coach", I would never hesitate to yank a player who's not playing good defense, even if just for a few seconds. Sometimes that's all you need to send a message. Adelman rarely, if ever, does that. I don't really want the guy gone...I don't think there's anything better out there. But it would just be refreshing to see some more effective coaching, no matter what the "style" it comes out in.

 

[VF21]

I'm sorry but I think you're reading more into my post than I meant...either that, or I misspoke.

First, I was speaking in general when I said that people posting minority opinions lately seem to favor prefacing them with something like "everybody knows" or "I'm sure we'll all agree"... In this case, the poster made the "everybody who watches the Kings feels" comment and I, who watch the Kings, didn't feel what he was claiming.

I don't deny that SOME of the blame should be placed on the coaching staff. What I'm objecting to is the apparent opinion by some that ALL the blame is Adelman's. While you talk about yanking someone who isn't playing good defense, that's simply not something you start doing 82+ games into the season, especially with a team that is already walking on egg-shells.

Granted, Adelman could find more obvious ways to send messages. But, IMHO, he needs to do it at the start of the season - not at the end.

 

[D-Mass]

I'm sorry but I think you're reading more into my post than I meant...either that, or I misspoke.

First, I was speaking in general when I said that people posting minority opinions lately seem to favor prefacing them with something like "everybody knows" or "I'm sure we'll all agree"... In this case, the poster made the "everybody who watches the Kings feels" comment and I, who watch the Kings, didn't feel what he was claiming.

I don't deny that SOME of the blame should be placed on the coaching staff. What I'm objecting to is the apparent opinion by some that ALL the blame is Adelman's. While you talk about yanking someone who isn't playing good defense, that's simply not something you start doing 82+ games into the season, especially with a team that is already walking on egg-shells.

Granted, Adelman could find more obvious ways to send messages. But, IMHO, he needs to do it at the start of the season - not at the end.

Great clarifications...we can definitely agree on your last point. Consistency from the very beginning of the season is essential.

 

[gman23]

Coaches try to the best with what they have to work with what needs to hapeen is below.

Great players have 95% self-motivation. The Kings don't have great players, so they need 95% percent of motivation from another source. How about you have a job to do and take some damm pride and stop blaming all the coaches. This goes for all over-paid sport players that need outside motivation. Here's some self-motivation...for every techincal foul(i.e running your damm mouths), missed free throw, bad pass, not playing defense,etc.. money is subtracted form your salary. Now that's MOTIVATION.