Fire Gentry!

[dude12]

"You're in danger of becoming the next Tyrone Corbin." So says James Ham about Gentry after he watches Hield's gawdawful play without Gentry taking him out of the game. Ham thinks Hield should sit a minimum of five games for his stupid play in the Lakers game, both on offense and defense.

I listened to that whole piece and Ham is an idiot.

 

[SacTownKid]

Luke really was a big part of the problem.

Gentry, I am not a fan of, but I think honestly I'd be surprised if he wants the job long term. Poor guy just went out and apologized to everyone after only a week on the gig and a bunch of players that clearly haven't responded to having their idiot coach sacked.

This really marks a low point of the post Adelman era for me.

Luke was a long time loser according to history and guess what, so is Gentry. As ANY coach is going to be with a disconnect between front office and bench, and personnel and fit/talent. For those not connecting the dots, players and teams that can either fit into an era seamlessly or blast a hole right through it (superteams baby!) win, coaches don't. But oh boy can they F things up if they use personnel wrong. Not only do you not win, you also sap value out of those players immediately. Heck, look at Fox under Walton. The difference between Walton and Gentry being that an interim guy taking over for someone who would have to pretty much upend all levels of history to stick longterm is still an upgrade. Until that shock fades of course, which it may already have, because it's likely not a long term thing either. It simply is what it is. Usually it's best for teams to go with an unknown, upside guy in this scenario rather than a re-tread considering 46% guy is digging out of a hole already. Somebody new is just happy to be there, may have new concepts, and could be seen as an outsider. Oh well, that's on Monte now along with other things, we'll see if it lumps more negatives onto what will be another short career arc as a GM or be the turning point.

 

[SacTownKid]

I listened to that whole piece and Ham is an idiot.

I mean, goodness gracious though, it's a safe bet that Genrty becoming the next Tyrone Corbin is the safest move forward regardless. Again, what the heck are the dynamics of success for Gentry here? Winning 41 games? 40? 30? Monte is a fool for not giving himself a fresh start this last summer. His lack of aggression has put this franchises back against the wall with less time to correct it.

 

[Warhawk]

Yes. Walton had to go. For a myriad of reasons, he had to go. Poor planning, poor development, in-game decisions, etc.

That said,

I don't know why people thought a light switch would just flip. It takes time to implement change. That is why this move should have been made over the summer. But it wasn't. You can get guys playing harder, and you can change up rotations, but if the system is fundamentally flawed, which we know to be true, it's not going to fix itself overnight. The coach in me says that I wouldn't expect anything dramatically different until after the break, or during an extended homestand.

Having Gentry slide in at this time creates an additional problem, as he probably also knows he's just a placeholder until the end of the year. Again, with an off-season to make wholesale changes, he could have done a more thorough change. I think he would have been more successful in this scenario. A new coach coming in from the outside would be more inclined to scrap pretty much everything that wasn't working, given the understanding that if you bring in a new guy, that means he's the man for beyond just the end of this season.

The best you can hope for here is some player development and minor tweaks, unfortunately.

Agreed. I think I read that Gentry hasn't even had more than maybe 1 or 2 full practices (at most) with their game and travel schedule since Walton was canned. Not excusing the last couple games by any means, but he's going to need some time to make some substantiative changes.

 

[Kingster]

I honestly don't know! You tell me! Tell me how any coach can win with this team when he has no idea what he's going to get out of any player on the team other than maybe Holmes and possibly Barnes. Will the real Fox please show up. Ditto Haliburton! I won't even touch Buddy other than to say that he needs to be gone off the team. He is a horrible defender, and he makes absolutely bone headed plays game after game. After turning the ball over with the Kings down five, he then fouls Westbrook putting him on the line. And then with the game seemingly going south, he launches a three from downtown Stockton with around 20 seconds left on the shot clock. Inexcusable!

At that point, the whole team seemed to go into that, here we go again mode and they just threw in the towel. In a span of around 8 or 9 minutes we went from being up 15 to the game was over. I'm not a fan of Westbrook, but I'll give him this. There is no quit in him. He never stops believing he can win. I think he puts up empty stats at times, but I'll never question his desire to win. I'm not upset that the Kings lost the game, I'm upset at how they lost the game.

I don't know either! He's giving new meaning to the word, chimerical. Maybe we should just call him, Chimera, instead of Fox, from now on. Maybe it is passive-aggressiveness toward the coaching staff? Maybe he doesn't like sharing the ball with Tyrese? Maybe the pressure is too much for him to be a leader? All I know is that we aren't getting nearly what we should from Fox so far this season. Not even close.

 

[bajaden]

I don't know either! He's giving new meaning to the word, chimerical. Maybe we should just call him, Chimera, instead of Fox, from now on. Maybe it is passive-aggressiveness toward the coaching staff? Maybe he doesn't like sharing the ball with Tyrese? Maybe the pressure is too much for him to be a leader? All I know is that we aren't getting nearly what we should from Fox so far this season. Not even close.

In no way am I going to use this as an excuse for Fox, but I do think he's feeling the pressure of the huge contract he signed and the expectations that came with that. He's been called the leader of the team, or as Walton referred to him, the head of the snake. I do think he's still adjusting to playing with Haliburton, but I don't think that's an impossible situation. When this team actually plays as a team, they're capable of beating anyone on any given night. But when they go away from that and the ball movement stops, the three pt chucking in isolation begins. The Kings were 0 for 11 from three in the 2nd half. Holmes was 9 for 9 in the first half, and hardly touched the ball in the 2nd half. Why???

The Lakers went on a 40 to 8 run in the 2nd half. Someone please explain how that's possible.. The only way that happens is if you throw in the towel. Believe it or not, I re-watched this game. I wanted to see why things went south so quickly. The answer is that they simply went away from what they were doing in the 1st half. As to why, I have no idea. But if they don't get it by now, I suspect they never will.

 

[Entity]

I had a thought. Maybe we just don’t have good players. Nobody on this team would even be the #2 guy on a playoff team.

 

[EIM86]

I listened to that whole piece and Ham is an idiot.

Ham has all the insider info lol

 

[EIM86]

I had a thought. Maybe we just don’t have good players. Nobody on this team would even be the #2 guy on a playoff team.

uh what are you talking about. Metu would be a #2 on most teams