Fire Christie

GWD said:
Assistant coaches are indeed a key to a successful on-floor product. After a losing streak of the current magnitude, one wonders what all of these "helpers" are telling Coach Christie. Is Christie ignoring their sage advice and plowing forward with his own vision? If so, (short of firing Christie) the front office should consider replacing them all with people that Christie would listen to. If not, then the front office should consider replacing them all with competent assistants. In either circumstance, the remedy is the same.

Why would assistant coaches accept the status quo that results in continual losses? For that matter, why would a "win at all costs" coach seem willing to continue down the established path that does not produce the desired results? Perplexing.

A stubborn, refusal to change and adapt was a partial cause for Mike Brown's departure. Now, Christie is showing some of those traits as well, assuming he is making all game decisions. There were slight changes to playing times after the trade deadline but the bottom line is that the offensive and defensive systems are flawed. There must be assistant coaches that have enlightened suggestions. Will such suggestions be accepted, tolerated, and implemented by the Kings's organization is the apparent challenge?
Click to expand...

The reason it doesn't make sense, is because it's not likely at all. This season became about managing contracts until the trade dead-line early on, while getting in position for a high pick in a strong draft. Post dead-line, they are obviously full on tanking, while finally allowing their younger players to experience consistent playing time
 
fansinceday1 said:
Didn’t everyone here already know that Christie wasn’t the best coach available? He’s nothing but the placeholder. There would be no point in firing him this season. He might even be here through next season because next season will probably be a rerun of this season. Get through next season and then fire Christie.
Click to expand...
I sure hope not. Tanking player confidence and promoting bad basketball is not going to help us build towards anything positive 2 years from now either.

We never quite gained a new identity after signing DDR. It was at odds with everything we wanted to do as a team on offense and other guys started playing worse. Guys struggled to get in a rhythm with the new slow, iso ball style.

We need a coach that knows how to run an offense that will suit our young guys and build their confidence on that end.
 
fansinceday1 said:
Didn’t everyone here already know that Christie wasn’t the best coach available? He’s nothing but the placeholder. There would be no point in firing him this season. He might even be here through next season because next season will probably be a rerun of this season. Get through next season and then fire Christie.
Click to expand...

Keep him through this season for sure, it's already lost and we want that high pick.

But if we do land a prospect with star potential, the franchise needs to start thinking about laying a foundation of a winning culture here. Otherwise you're just going to turn all these youngsters into a group of Zachs.
 
Once the new draft pick lands here, Doug is about the last coach who should be running this team. He has been awful in regards to young players. Plus, couldn’t tell you what his offense is. They should think about laying the foundation next year with the coach who will be here long term.
 
I was originally thinking we could have Doug lead the tank for a few years and give him a chance when the team is supposed to take a “step up” and be competitive to see if he can lead them when they’re finally good.

But this season has me thinking he might need to be let go after his contract expires next year. I mean, there’s no offensive system at all. And while that is beneficial for the tank, I think it is hindering the development of the young guys and makes it harder for them to highlight their strengths.
 
Bosnian Diehard said:
I was originally thinking we could have Doug lead the tank for a few years and give him a chance when the team is supposed to take a “step up” and be competitive to see if he can lead them when they’re finally good.

But this season has me thinking he might need to be let go after his contract expires next year. I mean, there’s no offensive system at all. And while that is beneficial for the tank, I think it is hindering the development of the young guys and makes it harder for them to highlight their strengths.
Click to expand...

What we don’t know is if it’s by design and at the behest of the front office or not.

That’d make a big difference in properly evaluating DC, wouldn’t it?

Only those behind the scenes know.
 
If the young players like and respect Doug and this isn't all by design you bring in some assistants who can fill the weak spots. Brown had the largest assistant pool in Sac history I believe. And that is similar to most teams these days. It looks like the budget may be slightly decreased this year but if we bring in a top 5 pick we better increase spending on developmental guys and an offensive minded assistant coach.
 
sactowndog said:
Given the improvement we have seen with the young bigs and some improvement with Clifford I’m okay with what we have been doing. It’s not like these guys are lottery picks we are playing.

We should be getting crushed.
Click to expand...

it's true that our rooks are not lottery picks (although Devin Carter, now in his sophomore season was), but the feeling here seems to be that A) they were good picks and B) none show signs of "failing"

then there is the other way to look at it

i just glanced at the rising stars games, but i believe the four teams were seven or eight players each, with one being composed of G-League players.

either way, that means that more than 20 first/second year nba players were selected for that game.


but many of the playoff teams are composed of "veterans" and it would be difficult (on some teams) for first/second year players to get enough on-court time to establish oneself as a "rising star" (even as a "rotation player").

yet the kings youngsters are and have been playing important roles on the team - more so, since all can see that the "vets" will soon be gone and the young players WILL be a part of the team's "future"

i watched some of the rising stars intros and the first three players were all with the washington wizards.

alex sarr i get - he was selected number one in his draft - i don't think i could name the other two.

how are these selections to the "rising stars" game(s) MADE?

is there a "minutes played" criteria? some sort of "stats" that one must have?

at the least, dylan cardwell should have been there (do "two-way" players count as G-Leaguers or nba players?)

you could certainly make cases for nique and max - or ONE of those three (carter hadn't played enough until recently).

was this a case of the league disrespecting sacramento?

or do we have an inflated hope that two or three of these players might be important to the kings' future?

if you go by the "rising stars" selections, all four are just temporary placeholders for the yet to be drafted future kings.

so, what say you? - do we just overvalue our own young players because we know more about them than young players on other teams?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top