George Karl on why Seth plays

[Livinthedream]

I tend to be of the opinion that a professional basketball player can be a positive contributor to an NBA team without being aggressive; it just takes a more rigidly defined role than what McLemore currently has. My opinion is that McLemore, humorously enough, is part of the ridiculously small percentage of basketball players who would be best served by playing under a micromanaging-type coach. And hey, even great coaches aren't great for everybody. Rick Adelman was a great coach for Webber, Divac, Christie, Stojakovic, Pollard, Bibby, even Jackson. For Gerald Wallace? Not so much.

I would disagree in this regard only. Ben would benefit from one coach, system and role for any consistent period of time. Doesn't matter the system. However, a coach who doesn't want to allow a player time to develop is an issue. I understood the Gerald Wallace decision, as that team was in different situation. I think people may resent Ben because they want to be in the situation where we're a contending team, or maybe even think we are, but in reality, we're not. With or without him.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I feel like you're in danger of trying to create a false equivalence, though. There's a whole lot of excluded middle between "championship contender" and "rebuild." In that regard, I think that many (not all) of McLemore's critics have valid complaints about his rate of progress.

You appear to be making the argument that, unless you're a legit championship contender, then the coach should take the time to develop all of the players on the roster, and my rebuttal to that would be, "Ehhh..." We have way too many veterans with playoff experience on the team to believe that we're still in "teaching" or "building" mode. We've been built. The questions of whether we've been built properly, or whether we're being utilized correctly are, in fact, separate conversations. But we're past the point of trying to "put it all together." It's been put together; we have a goal, the goal is attainable. We are officially in "win now" mode. "Win now" doesn't just mean championship or bust, that's the folly of Sam Hinkie and his "process." For a team that's been at the bottom as long as we have, earning the eighth seed would qualify as "win now."

That's where we're at. And the most obvious chink in the armor is at shooting guard. That's the source of many people's frustration with McLemore. You seem to be coming at this from the point of view that you think we're still in the latter stages of a rebuild and, yeah, if we make the playoffs, that would be gravy, but don't lose sight of developing personnel. Only, the rebuild is over already. We're not in developing players mode; the eighth seed isn't icing on the cake for us, at this point, it's the whole cake.

 

[bajaden]

I tend to be of the opinion that a professional basketball player can be a positive contributor to an NBA team without being aggressive; it just takes a more rigidly defined role than what McLemore currently has. My opinion is that McLemore, humorously enough, is part of the ridiculously small percentage of basketball players who would be best served by playing under a micromanaging-type coach. And hey, even great coaches aren't great for everybody. Rick Adelman was a great coach for Webber, Divac, Christie, Stojakovic, Pollard, Bibby, even Jackson. For Gerald Wallace? Not so much.

Well he might have been a great coach for Wallace if he had decided to make him a part of the rotation. Adelman, like Karl, and to be honest, most NBA coaches, like experienced players. Adelman, like Karl, gave his players a lot of freedom to make in time decisions on the court. You can see where that doesn't work as well with inexperienced players. Which is why Adelman didn't play Wallace much. As I said, I think being thrown into the fray so early in his career wasn't the best thing for McLemore, but, if there is an upside, it's that he got a lot of experience in a short period of time. As for being aggressive or not, once again it comes down to your or my definition of aggressive. Let me phrase it another way. When a coach says a player isn't aggressive enough, it usually means he thinks the player is being too passive on the court. Bill Self called McLemore passive more than once. Ben too often becomes a spectator.

Now I do think he's improved in that area, but it seems to come and go. Coaches love consistency. They want to know what to expect from every player that's in the rotation on a nightly basis. An inconsistent player gives coaches grey hair and ulcers. Karl pretty much knows what he's going to get from Cousins every game. Same can be said this year for Casspi. Unfortunately not so for Ben. Hey, nothing would make me happier than to see Ben become a solid player. But at the end of the day, or his career, he's ultimately responsible for the results. Yes, a different environment might be better for him, but that could be said for a lot of players. His success is his responsibility, not Karl's or Vlade's, though they have an investment in him. If he thinks he'd be a better fit somewhere else, then ask to be traded. Sometimes you need a fresh start to break out of the mold.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I don't think that Wallace's inexperience had anything to do with it; inexperience didn't factor into Adelman's decision to play young guys, when he was coaching teams that were not expected to compete. It was the urgency of that team which was the mitigating factor in Adelman's decision not to play Wallace. And I believe that the same holds true with McLemore right now. McLemore needs to be taught; Karl doesn't have time to teach him.

 

[VF21]

I don't think that Wallace's inexperience had anything to do with it; inexperience didn't factor into Adelman's decision to play young guys, when he was coaching teams that were not expected to compete. It was the urgency of that team which was the mitigating factor in Adelman's decision not to play Wallace. And I believe that the same holds true with McLemore right now. McLemore needs to be taught; Karl doesn't have time to teach him.

As I've repeated for the past umpteen years, it was also Wallace's work ethic that kept him on the bench. It wasn't until he went to Charlotte that he changed his attitude. It was then Gerald realized that all the natural talent in the world wouldn't mean a thing if he never got onto the court because he wouldn't work on additional parts of his game.

 

[Livinthedream]

I feel like you're in danger of trying to create a false equivalence, though. There's a whole lot of excluded middle between "championship contender" and "rebuild." In that regard, I think that many (not all) of McLemore's critics have valid complaints about his rate of progress.

You appear to be making the argument that, unless you're a legit championship contender, then the coach should take the time to develop all of the players on the roster, and my rebuttal to that would be, "Ehhh..." We have way too many veterans with playoff experience on the team to believe that we're still in "teaching" or "building" mode. We've been built. The questions of whether we've been built properly, or whether we're being utilized correctly are, in fact, separate conversations. But we're past the point of trying to "put it all together." It's been put together; we have a goal, the goal is attainable. We are officially in "win now" mode. "Win now" doesn't just mean championship or bust, that's the folly of Sam Hinkie and his "process." For a team that's been at the bottom as long as we have, earning the eighth seed would qualify as "win now."

That's where we're at. And the most obvious chink in the armor is at shooting guard. That's the source of many people's frustration with McLemore. You seem to be coming at this from the point of view that you think we're still in the latter stages of a rebuild and, yeah, if we make the playoffs, that would be gravy, but don't lose sight of developing personnel. Only, the rebuild is over already. We're not in developing players mode; the eighth seed isn't icing on the cake for us, at this point, it's the whole cake.

I think that we're rebuilt and that we're just not very good. The 8th seed doesn't do much for me personally as a fan if that's the win now that we're looking at. It will be good for Cousins, but the franchise is headed for mediocrity.

I also take into account the turnover of roster, coaches and ownership as a factor as much as I do for Cousins. It has stunted the growth for both of them in different ways. So I don't share the frustration with Cousins or Mclemore that other fans do. I get it, but don't share it. It helps that I don't have a do or die feeling about making the playoffs and never have. My preference is to build a team, rather than throw one together. I like what the Celtics are doing, personally. Not a great team, but they're in position to make a jump with the right trade or two. We're not in that position at all because we've drafted poorly, used up all of our assets and backed ourselves into do or die territory in the minds of the ownership.

It's clear we're not developing players. Which is why I don't necessarily get angry at a player who needs time to make mistakes and learn his game, and it's not being given to him. I have a hard time faulting him for that and calling him a bust, or weak or dumb, or whatever people may label him. I also don't fault him for being the starting SG on a team, when the team can't find one person to outplay him in 3 years and relegate him to a reserve guy. If the Kings can trade him for a better SG, or find a better one, then do it now. If they can't, it's a team created problem, not player, and they better do everything in their power to get the SG they do have ready to make an impact in the playoffs.

 

[Sac.Kings]

I tend to be of the opinion that a professional basketball player can be a positive contributor to an NBA team without being aggressive; it just takes a more rigidly defined role than what McLemore currently has. My opinion is that McLemore, humorously enough, is part of the ridiculously small percentage of basketball players who would be best served by playing under a micromanaging-type coach. And hey, even great coaches aren't great for everybody. Rick Adelman was a great coach for Webber, Divac, Christie, Stojakovic, Pollard, Bibby, even Jackson. For Gerald Wallace? Not so much.

What exactly is his role then? Are you suggesting that 1. Hitting the open shot and 2. Play solid defense are not well defined roles? We literally cannot make it simpler for Ben. All we ask him to do are those two things above-- he doesn't have to dribble the ball a significant amount of time, he doesn't initiate the offense at all, and we don't ask him to create for others. Some nights I think there is a glimmer of hope, and others I wonder if he even has a future in the NBA. Ben Mclemore has had seasons to prove his worth and to figure things out, but he really hasn't. He's improved, but it's nothing to write home about. I would be willing to include him in almost any trade scenario, but that's for a different thread. I always like to bring everything back to a "reality" level. Would any regular working person be allowed years and years to prove they can do something well? I would think the answer to that question would be no at least 99% of the time.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

What exactly is his role then? Are you suggesting that 1. Hitting the open shot and 2. Play solid defense are not well defined roles?

Not when his minutes are not consistent, no. Not when he gets jerked around, even when he does play well.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I think that we're rebuilt and that we're just not very good. The 8th seed doesn't do much for me personally as a fan if that's the win now that we're looking at. It will be good for Cousins, but the franchise is headed for mediocrity.

If you're a fan of a team that's missed the playoffs for a decade straight, any playoff seed should "do something for you." I'm not here for that "be ****ty until you can be great" life. Yeah, the team has been built poorly, and we have handicapped ourselves by getting rid of all our picks. Which is exactly why the eighth seed is important. We've left ourselves with only one avenue to improve: free agency. And the only way to get quality free agents to come here is to show that we've got the foundation of a playoff team already in place.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

As I've repeated for the past umpteen years, it was also Wallace's work ethic that kept him on the bench. It wasn't until he went to Charlotte that he changed his attitude. It was then Gerald realized that all the natural talent in the world wouldn't mean a thing if he never got onto the court because he wouldn't work on additional parts of his game.

You've been very consistent about espousing this point of view, over the years. And I have been very consistent about saying that I don't believe a word of it. IMO, it's a revisionist way of restructuring historical events to fit a narrative. You're never going to sell me on this "change of attitude" business.

 

[Sac.Kings]

Not when his minutes are not consistent, no. Not when he gets jerked around, even when he does play well.

That's what happens when you aren't good enough, you don't get enough minutes. In order for the narrative to change, Ben has to force Karl's hand. This isn't a playground with cute little puppies everywhere. You have to earn your stripes and if you feel like you are owed more playing time, then prove it. Someone mentioned above (Bajaden?) that Ben falls into a different category because he works at his craft. Well, I'll throw a wrench in that. What if he is putting in work that doesn't translate to success for him? I have a cousin who studied for days on end to become a nurse, but didn't make it. He put in a ton of effort, but it was fruitless because he never opened the textbooks (true story). He just studied the packets and recorded the lectures. What if Ben never opened the textbook?

 

[VF21]

You've been very consistent about espousing this point of view, over the years. And I have been very consistent about saying that I don't believe a word of it. IMO, it's a revisionist way of restructuring historical events to fit a narrative. You're never going to sell me on this "change of attitude" business.

Let's just say I completely believe the people I heard it from, primarily when Wallace became the official player being exposed to the expansion draft. I don't see how you can possibly accuse me of being "revisionist" when I've said the same thing the whole time, but I no longer let it bother me.

 

[Livinthedream]

We've left ourselves with only one avenue to improve: free agency. And the only way to get quality free agents to come here is to show that we've got the foundation of a playoff team already in place.

This is the part the plan that I didn't agree with. So we're locked into it and I'm not over that fact yet. Probably won't be until I see where we go after this season is over.