George Karl - Once and always great? (split)

[Im Still Ballin]

I explained why in response to the thread. Everybody here gets it. We know your position on things probably better than you do yourself. Your "prediction" thread was nothing more than a different way of phrasing what you've been saying in numerous other threads. Also there is at least one other thread ALREADY IN EXISTENCE that asks how people envision the 2016-17 Kings, which seems to already cover what you asked.

And please, let's try and NOT derail this thread (which in and of itself came to be because you derailed a different thread) just so you can argue the same points.

It's an open ended thread which ANYONE can post in. You are the worst forum moderator of all time. This thread is about George Karl. That was a prediction thread. Open ended. Could be about anything, and that doesn't have to include George Karl. There is a clear distinction. Jesus christ you are a baby.

 

[VF21]

It's an open ended thread which ANYONE can post in. You are the worst forum moderator of all time. This thread is about George Karl. That was a prediction thread. Open ended. Could be about anything, and that doesn't have to include George Karl. There is a clear distinction. Jesus christ you are a baby.

Actually "this thread" was originally about a poll. You single-handedly derailed it and turned it into a discussion of George Karl, which is why I split out TWO PAGES of comments into this thread.

 

[Im Still Ballin]

Am I allowed to make any threads? Hahahah jesus christ this is the worst run forum in the NBA internet-sphere.

 

[Im Still Ballin]

Actually "this thread" was originally about a poll. You single-handedly derailed it and turned it into a discussion of George Karl, which is why I split out TWO PAGES of comments into this thread.

Yeah, because the poll was about George Karl numnuts. Holy crap you just don't get it. What point is a poll if you can't discuss said poll in detail? I make a post about said poll, someone responds, I respond back. It's called discussion. Jesus christ. Would you rather this place dead and everyone agreeing with what you want them to say?

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Am I allowed to make any threads? Hahahah jesus christ this is the worst run forum in the NBA internet-sphere.

If you truly believe that, then why come here? Wait -- don't answer -- we already know why.

Let's take a different approach. How about you explain in detail what George Karl has done the past 13 months to backup your claim that he's still a good head coach. Don't point to 20 years ago or other seasons in which all he could muster was a 1st round and out. Cite examples from the last 30 games of last season and the entirety of this current season that support your premise.

I can promise that most here won't hold their breath. I know I won't. But, please, give it a try.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Yeah, because the poll was about George Karl numnuts. Holy poopoo you just don't get it. What point is a poll if you can't discuss said poll in detail? I make a post about said poll, someone responds, I respond back. It's called discussion. Jesus christ. Would you rather this place dead and everyone agreeing with what you want them to say?

The unraveling has begun. Name calling and getting emotional. That's certainly not going to help your case.

VF21 -- go easy, you've got this guy in tears already. Ease up!

 

[Im Still Ballin]

If you truly believe that, then why come here? Wait -- don't answer -- we already know why.

Let's take a different approach. How about you explain in detail what George Karl has done the past 13 months to backup your claim that he's still a good head coach. Don't point to 20 years ago or other seasons in which all he could muster was a 1st round and out. Cite examples from the last 30 games of last season and the entirety of this current season that support your premise.

I can promise that most here won't hold their breath. I know I won't. But, please, give it a try.

I have never said he has done a good job. I said I would understand his firing, but I don't think we should. Because I believe in people who have the resume to back it up. You give a guy of his caliber a chance. Bottom line. And the whole coaching issue is subordinate to the Demarcus Cousins issue. I've got 6 years of ball to back up this issue. Pretty stats don't cut it.

Bottom line: You give the Hall of fame coach a 2nd chance.

 

[Im Still Ballin]

The unraveling has begun. Name calling and getting emotional. That's certainly not going to help your case.

VF21 -- go easy, you've got this guy in tears already. Ease up!

I'm honestly wondering

What type of threads can I actually make? If any at all? Is there even a rules post on here? Someone please direct me to this.

 

[whozit]

I have never said he has done a good job. I said I would understand his firing, but I don't think we should. Because I believe in people who have the resume to back it up. You give a guy of his caliber a chance. Bottom line. And the whole coaching issue is subordinate to the Demarcus Cousins issue. I've got 6 years of ball to back up this issue. Pretty stats don't cut it.

Bottom line: You give the Hall of fame coach a 2nd chance.

He was fired after getting Coach of the Year. Nobody that we know came calling. And the way he begged for this job, I doubt anyone did. This was his "second chance." He failed and the team likewise failed.

 

[Glenn]

I have never said he has done a good job. I said I would understand his firing, but I don't think we should. Because I believe in people who have the resume to back it up. You give a guy of his caliber a chance. Bottom line. And the whole coaching issue is subordinate to the Demarcus Cousins issue. I've got 6 years of ball to back up this issue. Pretty stats don't cut it.

Bottom line: You give the Hall of fame coach a 2nd chance.

I understand totally. However, when a guy has lost his energy and has to turn over some of his responsibilities to his assistants, I think he is done. Am I the only one bugged by the fact his assistants have such a big roll. I think he actually said he didn't have the energy and needed to delegate.

 

[Im Still Ballin]

He was fired after getting Coach of the Year. Nobody that we know came calling. And the way he begged for this job, I doubt anyone did. This was his "second chance." He failed and the team likewise failed.

Well considering they've been in the lottery ever since, I think they made the wrong decision.

 

[whozit]

Well considering they've been in the lottery ever since, I think they made the wrong decision.

On that one point, you may be right. The rest not so much.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Because I believe in people who have the resume to back it up. You give a guy of his caliber a chance. Bottom line.

It's nice that you subscribe to this train of thought. You have that right. But it's far from a foolproof ideal. And it's far from black and white in how it's applied, no?

For example, would you have more belief in a a player such as Blake Griffin or Karl Anthony-Towns, who doesn't yet have the same resume?

Furthermore, can't you concede that there comes a point and time when a player, coach or GM with an extensive resume isn't able to perform at that same level anymore? For example, Don Shula is considered an all-time great football coach. He has more wins than any other HC in history. But in the late 80's and 90's, he didn't get it done. In fact, as the the years went by, his ability to accomplish what he had done for many years previously declined. I followed that team. I'm well aware of how it went down. There are many factors that contributed to it. Age, the way the game changed, different era of players, etc. In 1995, somebody could have made the same argument for Shula that you are making for Karl now. They would have been wrong. And Shula knew it himself, which is why he stepped aside and retired. But Shula never had the same ego Karl has.

I've got 6 years of ball to back up this issue. Pretty stats don't cut it.

Please present your "6 years of ball" so we can all see whether it supports your case or not. To me, it sounds as if your argument is "I just know because I know, so trust me". That's not gonna cut it. If you have irrefutable evidence, please present it.

 

[Glenn]

I think my son has 6 years of ball also.

 

[Bricklayer]

The thing is that this is not George Karl coaching us.

This happens to every old ball coach that hangs on too long, no matter who it is. And it doesn't mean it was 100% predictable that George had reached that point before he was hired. But it means that all the signs are there now. No matter how great they were in their primes, almost every great coach who has hung on too long eventually goes out a loser.

How they ended their careers:

Lenny Wilkens -- 1332 Wins
Age 65 24-58 Playoffs?: No
Age 66 23-19 Playoffs?: Yes (swept 0-4)
Age 67 17-22 Playoffs?: No

Larry Brown -- 1327 wins
Age 65 23-59 Playoffs?: No
Age 68 35-47 Playoffs?: No
Age 69 44-38 Playoffs?: Yes (swept 0-4)
Age 70 9-19 Playoffs?: No

Dick Motta -- 935 wins
Age 58 16-38 Playoffs?: No
Age 59 25-57 Playoffs?: No
Age 60 7-18 Playoffs?: No
Age 63 36-46 Playoffs?: No
Age 64 26-56 Playoffs?:No
Age 65 17-52 Playoffs?: No

Don Nelson -- 1335 Wins
Age 68 29-53 Playoffs?: No
Age 69 26-56 Playoffs?: No

Rick Adelman -- 1042 Wins
Age 65 26-40 Playoffs?: No
Age 66 31-51 Playoffs?: No
Age 67 40-42 Playoffs?: No

George Karl -- 1167 Wins
Age 62 11-19 Playoffs?: No
Age 63 25-40 Playoffs?: No


etc. Age happens. To all of us. Except me. I plan on being immortal.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

He was fired after getting Coach of the Year. Nobody that we know came calling. And the way he begged for this job, I doubt anyone did. This was his "second chance." He failed and the team likewise failed.

And this is being conveniently overlooked and ignored. It's not like there aren't always numerous teams in need of a good coach year over year.

Well considering they've been in the lottery ever since, I think they made the wrong decision.

If or when Mike Malone helps develop a team that makes it past the 1st round of the playoffs, he will have already matched what Karl accomplished there in 9 seasons and what he typically accomplished throughout his career. And if that does happen, it will be proven that isn't wasn't a bad decision.

FWIW, Karl's teams lost in the 1st round 8 out of 9 seasons in Denver and 3 of 4 playoff appearances in Milwaukee.

 

[Dbeltz24]

The thing is that this is not George Karl coaching us.

This happens to every old ball coach that hangs on too long, no matter who it is. And it doesn't mean it was 100% predictable that George had reached that point before he was hired. But it means that all the signs are there now. No matter how great they were in their primes, almost every great coach who has hung on too long eventually goes out a loser.

How they ended their careers:

Lenny Wilkens -- 1332 Wins
Age 65 24-58 Playoffs?: No
Age 66 23-19 Playoffs?: Yes (swept 0-4)
Age 67 17-22 Playoffs?: No

Larry Brown -- 1327 wins
Age 65 23-59 Playoffs?: No
Age 68 35-47 Playoffs?: No
Age 69 44-38 Playoffs?: Yes (swept 0-4)
Age 70 9-19 Playoffs?: No

Dick Motta -- 935 wins
Age 58 16-38 Playoffs?: No
Age 59 25-57 Playoffs?: No
Age 60 7-18 Playoffs?: No
Age 63 36-46 Playoffs?: No
Age 64 26-56 Playoffs?:No
Age 65 17-52 Playoffs?: No

Don Nelson -- 1335 Wins
Age 68 29-53 Playoffs?: No
Age 69 26-56 Playoffs?: No

Rick Adelman -- 1042 Wins
Age 65 26-40 Playoffs?: No
Age 66 31-51 Playoffs?: No
Age 67 40-42 Playoffs?: No

George Karl -- 1167 Wins
Age 62 11-19 Playoffs?: No
Age 63 25-40 Playoffs?: No


etc. Age happens. To all of us. Except me. I plan on being immortal.

Come on don't present him with stats and examples. That logic doesn't make sense. He won COTY a couple years ago, Karl is like Pop

 

[twslam07]

I have never said he has done a good job. I said I would understand his firing, but I don't think we should. Because I believe in people who have the resume to back it up. You give a guy of his caliber a chance. Bottom line. And the whole coaching issue is subordinate to the Demarcus Cousins issue. I've got 6 years of ball to back up this issue. Pretty stats don't cut it.

Bottom line: You give the Hall of fame coach a 2nd chance.

With that logic you'd rather have George Karl vs. Ben Simmons considering Simmons doesn't have the NBA resume to 'back it up'.

But do you know what I find most interesting about this argument is how easily it can be applied to the workplace to make this argument of yours look flat out ridiculous. Let's begin...

What are resumes good for in the workplace? They are good for landing a job. If you have a good resume, you will get a good job. If you have a poor resume, most likely not. Karl had a good resume and was rewarded with a head coaching job for the Kings.

But what happens when the person you hired with a good resume doesn't live up to expectations? Doesn't live up to the potential their resume communicated? You get an upset employer and that hired employee is likely let go. That's exactly what is happening here with Karl. He's done an absolutely terrible job coaching this team. His performance did not live up to his resume (not even close enough to say "let's give him a little more time to see if he can figure it out.")

Now it's your turn to say that it's Cousins fault, but I'd like to make another office reference to show you how illogical this is once again. Let's say Cousins is the stockbroker from Limitless (a very talented broker who is the best in his organization by a mile). Let's call this guy Paul. If Paul's superior/manager was constantly getting into arguments or mismanaging the team around him (using secretaries & mail men as his support staff), the entire organization is not going to live up to its potential. Now does Paul act out every now and then? Sure, but he's the bread maker for the company so you put up with it. As his manager, you need to make sure you give him everything he can to succeed and handle his temperament. Sure you can fire Paul and replace him with your average stock broker and not have to worry about making large or small amounts of money (you'll always be average), but if you know how to utilize and handle Paul, you have the potential to make your organization the wealthiest one in its industry.

Karl has failed to not only manage the Cousins relationship but also the talent around him. After a 1.5 year trial period with the Kings, we have seen enough to know how this engagement will work out. He has to go, and anyone who thinks otherwise would be in for a rude awakening if he remained the head coach.

 

[KingMilz]

Malone's team has a better record than Karl's. With arguably less. If he hasn't proven himself as a winning coach, what does that make Karl currently? A loser? Or maybe simply a coach whose better days are behind him.

George Karl had proven himself a winning coach. Past tense! Time takes its toll on all of us. Past and present are two different things.

Damian Lillard amongst many other players have lead teams to better records than Cousins while having less talent than the current Kings roster yet w/l's only seem to apply when it's not talking about Cousins.....

 

[Kingston Jamaica]

I think George Karl is a great coach, one of the greatest. However, his tenure with the Kings has been a bad period for the Kings and he has to take a lot of that responsibility. If George Karl had five Casspis in his starting lineup, he would probably had made it to the playoffs, because they would execute his every idea the best way they can and with a lot of enthusiasm. Not brilliant or great executions, but true to the designer.

This Kings team is nothing like that. First of all, the team is build around one dominant player (DMC) and the game has to streamlined to fit his optimal use. Similarly, one of Karl's weak sides has always been playing rookies. He doesn't fancy that. However, the Kings are notorious to miss on all of their draft picks. The team needed badly a coach who could first of all incorporate McLemore and Cauley-Stein in to the rotation as well as possible, but if possible, also as fast as possible. What I'm trying to say is that the Kings need a coach who can get the best out of every player on the roster. Not a coach who has a game vision of how the game should be played regardless of the pieces he has on his roster. And, finally, I have to say this: I would prefer that the Kings were the strongest defensive team in the league, not the strongest offensive team. That is probably my biggest concern of George Karl's vision.

 

[Chubbs]

It's about making logical and smart decisions for this franchise. There is clearly an ego friction going on with this team. I know this is exactly what the organization is thinking hence why they haven't fired Karl yet. One year? Is that all you give a coach with a resume like that? One year? You people would have fired Greg Pop in his first season.

News flash: They never get a coach that works for them, because the coach is never the main problem. The problem is 6 foot 11 in shoes and weighs 280 pounds.

It's his second season, and year 2 of his 4 year deal.

If you can't even get the most basic facts correct...

They were also on coach 4 in 4 years the day Demarcus arrived. Were those coaches being fired Cousin's fault too?

 

[Kings_on_the_RiSE]

It's his second season, and year 2 of his 4 year deal.

If you can't even get the most basic facts correct...

They were also on coach 4 in 4 years the day Demarcus arrived. Were those coaches being fired Cousin's fault too?

If the 4 coaches thing is true, why in the hell does Grant Napear blame Cousins so much? Clearly, we were having issues prior to his arrival.

SOMEBODY CALL NAPEAR DURING HIS SHOW, AND TELL HIM THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sick of him picking on Cuz all the time.

 

[Chubbs]

If the 4 coaches thing is true, why in the hell does Grant Napear blame Cousins so much? Clearly, we were having issues prior to his arrival.

SOMEBODY CALL NAPEAR DURING HIS SHOW, AND TELL HIM THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sick of him picking on Cuz all the time.

Cousins arrived in 2010. Years approximate as Theus/Natt overlap.

2006-Adelman
2007-Musselman
2008-Theus
2009-Natt
2010-Westphal

My bad. 5th coach in 5 years. Even worse. 4th coach since Adelman.

Cuz is in on 5th coach. JT had 7 coaches in his time here (theus, natt, westphal, smart, malone, corbin, karl). Must have been an even bigger coach killer, huh?

FYI, for those that care, of the last 5 coaches, Malone has the highest winning percentage. .368-367 over Karl.

Musselman and Theus also have higher winning percetanges than Karl. Neither had an all nba player or an all star.

Napear would hang up on you before you got a word out unfortunately. Anything that goes against his conclusions aren't allowed on the air.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sacramento_Kings_head_coaches

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Cousins arrived in 2010. Years approximate as Theus/Natt overlap.

2006-Adelman
2007-Musselman
2008-Theus
2009-Natt
2010-Westphal

My bad. 5th coach in 5 years. Even worse. 4th coach since Adelman.

I made this same point in another thread. Your comment about JT furthers the point.

People need to recognize that it's not the player, it's the organization. It's been in chaos for 10+ years and in ludicrous mode for the past 5.

The franchise went through all of the coaches above when they were in penny pinching mode prior to the failed relocation attempt. They've gone through most of the coaching changes since because the owner keeps making the mistake of hiring a coach before solidifying the front office and GM roles.

In short, the problem has been and continues to be "ownership". First it was the Maloofs and their $$ problems, now it's Vivek and his inability to realize that he can't run an NBA franchise as he did a tech company.

It's a simple as that.

 

[Kings_on_the_RiSE]

Cousins arrived in 2010. Years approximate as Theus/Natt overlap.

2006-Adelman
2007-Musselman
2008-Theus
2009-Natt
2010-Westphal

My bad. 5th coach in 5 years. Even worse. 4th coach since Adelman.

Cuz is in on 5th coach. JT had 7 coaches in his time here (theus, natt, westphal, smart, malone, corbin, karl). Must have been an even bigger coach killer, huh?

FYI, for those that care, of the last 5 coaches, Malone has the highest winning percentage. .368-367 over Karl.

Musselman and Theus also have higher winning percetanges than Karl. Neither had an all nba player or an all star.

Napear would hang up on you before you got a word out unfortunately. Anything that goes against his conclusions aren't allowed on the air.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sacramento_Kings_head_coaches

THANK YOU SO MUCH!!! Tune in to the Grant Napear Show.

If you don't mind, i'm going to make these points heard on his show. Pray for me.

 

[Livinthedream]

I made this same point in another thread. Your comment about JT furthers the point.

People need to recognize that it's not the player, it's the organization. It's been in chaos for 10+ years and in ludicrous mode for the past 5.

The franchise went through all of the coaches above when they were in penny pinching mode prior to the failed relocation attempt. They've gone through most of the coaching changes since because the owner keeps making the mistake of hiring a coach before solidifying the front office and GM roles.

In short, the problem has been and continues to be "ownership". First it was the Maloofs and their $$ problems, now it's Vivek and his inability to realize that he can't run an NBA franchise as he did a tech company.

It's a simple as that.

Yep. It's why I keep saying we don't truly know what type of team/talent we have until we give the players a stable and professional environment to play in.

 

[Kings_on_the_RiSE]

I'm on hold right now. I said my name is Mike. Look out for a caller named Mike. Lol

How long is the hold time? Anyone know? Never called before. 24 min and counting. But I don't care, I'll wait 2 hours. Gotta get my point across.

Lol i called but i was a little nervous. Hopefully i made my point. I love Vlade and Cuz. I hope my words didn't make them look like they suck ass.

 

[Section 101]

Just turned it on and said sam amick reported nancy has been exiled by karl for being close to vivek.