Joerger Status. (He’s Fired)

I usually ignore your vague "one comment fits all" posts but I'm calling this out. The biggest Lakers forum on the Internet has a thread dedicated to Luke Walton. The majority of posters LIKED him and are not real happy with current Lakers decisions.

But I know - you're gonna quote realGM.
Lakersground? It has been positive, but I think the General mood is wishing him well/but no longer wanting him coaching there, right? How many on that thread actively want him coaching there now?
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
Lakersground? It has been positive, but I think the General mood is wishing him well/but no longer wanting him coaching there, right? How many on that thread actively want him coaching there now?
I'm supposed to prove your point for you? Sorry, it doesn't work that way (especially when you're wrong). As usual, you're backtracking when your sweepingly vague comment is challenged.
 
Last edited:

Warhawk

The cake is a lie.
Staff member
I never go to another team's message boards (maybe once every couple years), but decided to check out LakersGround to see what was being said about Luke on my own. In the Luke thread the majority of the posters seem to be happy he's gone, repeatedly calling him Puke, and listed all kinds of issues including: bad rotations/players playing out of their natural positions, no shooting coach, awful plays out of timeout, no offense scheme, frat buddy assistants, no mastery of the Xs and Os and nobody on his staff to help. General consensus is that he's a below average coach.

Heck, some of the folks over there are thinking DJ is the best coach available for the Lakers to hire!

So, again, what am I missing here? What's the big rush to hire him? I hope and pray he's good great since he is ours now (and DJ was a good coach), but I'd like to see what others are looking at that I am missing...

I'm not against Luke as a coach. But I also don't see why we didn't do a coaching search or interview others. I would have liked to see Becky Hammon interviewed. Messina too. Both are likely to be good coaches based on what little I have heard/seen. If nothing else, pick the brains of the proteges of the best coach in recent memory BEFORE you hire someone. Is there something you are missing internally as far as evaluating holes in the roster? Are there areas of the game that the team needs to work on you haven't considered yet? Whatever! Information like this can be gleaned from interviews and can be incredibly helpful in the overall hiring process in making sure you got the right guy/gal.

Maybe we did get the right person. I just feel like we jumped at a shining bauble (squirrel!), and I'm not sure why people think it's so shiny to begin with....
 
I never go to another team's message boards (maybe once every couple years), but decided to check out LakersGround to see what was being said about Luke on my own. In the Luke thread the majority of the posters seem to be happy he's gone, repeatedly calling him Puke, and listed all kinds of issues including: bad rotations/players playing out of their natural positions, no shooting coach, awful plays out of timeout, no offense scheme, frat buddy assistants, no mastery of the Xs and Os and nobody on his staff to help. General consensus is that he's a below average coach.

Heck, some of the folks over there are thinking DJ is the best coach available for the Lakers to hire!

So, again, what am I missing here? What's the big rush to hire him? I hope and pray he's good great since he is ours now (and DJ was a good coach), but I'd like to see what others are looking at that I am missing...

I'm not against Luke as a coach. But I also don't see why we didn't do a coaching search or interview others. I would have liked to see Becky Hammon interviewed. Messina too. Both are likely to be good coaches based on what little I have heard/seen. If nothing else, pick the brains of the proteges of the best coach in recent memory BEFORE you hire someone. Is there something you are missing internally as far as evaluating holes in the roster? Are there areas of the game that the team needs to work on you haven't considered yet? Whatever! Information like this can be gleaned from interviews and can be incredibly helpful in the overall hiring process in making sure you got the right guy/gal.

Maybe we did get the right person. I just feel like we jumped at a shining bauble (squirrel!), and I'm not sure why people think it's so shiny to begin with....
Walton is who Vlade wanted 3 years ago, before he hired Joeger. I'm sure Vlade has been assessing Luke from afar ever since.

Joeger was a good coach, he helped this team develop an identity that worked for them this year. This identity of pace, I think, was always Vlade's vision. He designed this team and it's players together and built it to run. The first two years of Joeger's tenure was all grit and grind. Even the 2017-18 season was built around ZBo offense, which I'm sure Vlade signed as a favor for Joeger.

Vlade's vision to bring the Kings into championship contention centered around Fox, Buddy, Bagley and Giles. Vlade felt the Bagley and Giles should had played a bigger role this past year and Bagley should had started. Joeger didn't feel that way, because he didn't start Bagley all year (except for a few games). Whether Joeger's refusal to start Bagley was due to him feeling Bagley was not ready or if it was personal, I think Vlade may have felt it was the latter.

If Vlade felt that Joeger may not manage his team the way he envisioned, Vlade took the steps to ensure the Kings coach matched his vision for the team. I'm sure he spoke with Walton about his vision of how he would play the Kings roster and the way that Walton plays with pace, I'm sure his vision is aligned with Vlade. Walton also comes in with no possible personal agenda against the Kings prized big man, Bagley.

For the Kings to grow and for the players to be happy and want to re-sign with the Kings when the time comes, Vlade couldn't risk alienating some of his core players going forward. He decided to drop the hammer now, when his #1 candidate to be the Kings coach all along was available. Why screw around for show, you might lose Walton to another team.
 
I never go to another team's message boards (maybe once every couple years), but decided to check out LakersGround to see what was being said about Luke on my own. In the Luke thread the majority of the posters seem to be happy he's gone, repeatedly calling him Puke, and listed all kinds of issues including: bad rotations/players playing out of their natural positions, no shooting coach, awful plays out of timeout, no offense scheme, frat buddy assistants, no mastery of the Xs and Os and nobody on his staff to help. General consensus is that he's a below average coach.

Heck, some of the folks over there are thinking DJ is the best coach available for the Lakers to hire!

So, again, what am I missing here? What's the big rush to hire him? I hope and pray he's good great since he is ours now (and DJ was a good coach), but I'd like to see what others are looking at that I am missing...

I'm not against Luke as a coach. But I also don't see why we didn't do a coaching search or interview others. I would have liked to see Becky Hammon interviewed. Messina too. Both are likely to be good coaches based on what little I have heard/seen. If nothing else, pick the brains of the proteges of the best coach in recent memory BEFORE you hire someone. Is there something you are missing internally as far as evaluating holes in the roster? Are there areas of the game that the team needs to work on you haven't considered yet? Whatever! Information like this can be gleaned from interviews and can be incredibly helpful in the overall hiring process in making sure you got the right guy/gal.

Maybe we did get the right person. I just feel like we jumped at a shining bauble (squirrel!), and I'm not sure why people think it's so shiny to begin with....
I feel the same exact way that you do about this. I am just perplexed as to why everyone views Luke the way they do, even the so called experts. He really hasn’t been that great. He’s a players coach? Great, but he’s not here to be their friend that’s not how that works. Eh what do I know anyway, like everyone else all I can do is sit back and hope that this somehow works out in our favor.
 
Walton is who Vlade wanted 3 years ago, before he hired Joeger. I'm sure Vlade has been assessing Luke from afar ever since.

Joeger was a good coach, he helped this team develop an identity that worked for them this year. This identity of pace, I think, was always Vlade's vision. He designed this team and it's players together and built it to run. The first two years of Joeger's tenure was all grit and grind. Even the 2017-18 season was built around ZBo offense, which I'm sure Vlade signed as a favor for Joeger.

Vlade's vision to bring the Kings into championship contention centered around Fox, Buddy, Bagley and Giles. Vlade felt the Bagley and Giles should had played a bigger role this past year and Bagley should had started. Joeger didn't feel that way, because he didn't start Bagley all year (except for a few games). Whether Joeger's refusal to start Bagley was due to him feeling Bagley was not ready or if it was personal, I think Vlade may have felt it was the latter.

If Vlade felt that Joeger may not manage his team the way he envisioned, Vlade took the steps to ensure the Kings coach matched his vision for the team. I'm sure he spoke with Walton about his vision of how he would play the Kings roster and the way that Walton plays with pace, I'm sure his vision is aligned with Vlade. Walton also comes in with no possible personal agenda against the Kings prized big man, Bagley.

For the Kings to grow and for the players to be happy and want to re-sign with the Kings when the time comes, Vlade couldn't risk alienating some of his core players going forward. He decided to drop the hammer now, when his #1 candidate to be the Kings coach all along was available. Why screw around for show, you might lose Walton to another team.
Dave made very clear on why he did not start Bagley during his exit interview on the radio and it’s what I was saying all year. You have to make kids work for something. He said it best, Bagley earned every single second of playing time and nothing was given to him. He earned the respect of his peers and teammates this way. I completely understand this approach.

I have kids and that is exactly what I do with them. You want something? Well you have to do something in return to get what you want. They won’t like it one bit, but then they will go the rest of their lives understanding that in order to get something, you have to work for it. I’m not there to be my kids best friend 100 percent of the time. I’m there to teach them and that is all Joerger was doing. It’s just that younger kids these days can’t take the heat. Too accustomed to getting everything they want without effort.
 
Dave made very clear on why he did not start Bagley during his exit interview on the radio and it’s what I was saying all year. You have to make kids work for something. He said it best, Bagley earned every single second of playing time and nothing was given to him. He earned the respect of his peers and teammates this way. I completely understand this approach.

I have kids and that is exactly what I do with them. You want something? Well you have to do something in return to get what you want. They won’t like it one bit, but then they will go the rest of their lives understanding that in order to get something, you have to work for it. I’m not there to be my kids best friend 100 percent of the time. I’m there to teach them and that is all Joerger was doing. It’s just that younger kids these days can’t take the heat. Too accustomed to getting everything they want without effort.
Yes, Bagley had to earn everything, which was good.

But, I also think Bagley showed he was the best big man on the team, on the court every game. He always gave 100% effort when he was on the court. He showed he was the best interior scorer, the best rebounder, the best shot blocker and at least a decent 3 point shooter.

What else did he need to do to earn a starting spot in the line-up? Even after the Kings were eliminated from the playoffs, still Joeger refused to start Bagley. I think that Bagley may had felt it was personal, either against his dad or Williams and I'm sure Vlade probably had the same concerns.
 
Yes, Bagley had to earn everything, which was good.

But, I also think Bagley showed he was the best big man on the team, on the court every game. He always gave 100% effort when he was on the court. He showed he was the best interior scorer, the best rebounder, the best shot blocker and at least a decent 3 point shooter.

What else did he need to do to earn a starting spot in the line-up? Even after the Kings were eliminated from the playoffs, still Joeger refused to start Bagley. I think that Bagley may had felt it was personal, either against his dad or Williams and I'm sure Vlade probably had the same concerns.
You also have to consider the fact that WCS is a free agent this year and could potentially be used in a sign and trade. If you demoted him to a bench player the Kings would lose value there. Perhaps it wasn’t just Joerger that was responsible for this. I’m not saying it was right as I preferred Bagley to start but in the real world it’s not that simple.
 
You also have to consider the fact that WCS is a free agent this year and could potentially be used in a sign and trade. If you demoted him to a bench player the Kings would lose value there. Perhaps it wasn’t just Joerger that was responsible for this. I’m not saying it was right as I preferred Bagley to start but in the real world it’s not that simple.
I dont think under the new CBA teams S&T RFA's anymore.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
I dont think under the new CBA teams S&T RFA's anymore.
As long as an RFA hasn't signed another team's offer sheet, he can be signed-and-traded. He can be presented with an offer sheet, that's fine, but once he signs the offer sheet it's a binding contract and the only question is which team he'll be playing for.
 
I never go to another team's message boards (maybe once every couple years), but decided to check out LakersGround to see what was being said about Luke on my own. In the Luke thread the majority of the posters seem to be happy he's gone, repeatedly calling him Puke, and listed all kinds of issues including: bad rotations/players playing out of their natural positions, no shooting coach, awful plays out of timeout, no offense scheme, frat buddy assistants, no mastery of the Xs and Os and nobody on his staff to help. General consensus is that he's a below average coach.

Heck, some of the folks over there are thinking DJ is the best coach available for the Lakers to hire!

So, again, what am I missing here? What's the big rush to hire him? I hope and pray he's good great since he is ours now (and DJ was a good coach), but I'd like to see what others are looking at that I am missing...

I'm not against Luke as a coach. But I also don't see why we didn't do a coaching search or interview others. I would have liked to see Becky Hammon interviewed. Messina too. Both are likely to be good coaches based on what little I have heard/seen. If nothing else, pick the brains of the proteges of the best coach in recent memory BEFORE you hire someone. Is there something you are missing internally as far as evaluating holes in the roster? Are there areas of the game that the team needs to work on you haven't considered yet? Whatever! Information like this can be gleaned from interviews and can be incredibly helpful in the overall hiring process in making sure you got the right guy/gal.

Maybe we did get the right person. I just feel like we jumped at a shining bauble (squirrel!), and I'm not sure why people think it's so shiny to begin with....
Just because you’re now interested in their opinions doesn’t mean Laker fans have all of a sudden grown a brain. They are still the same clueless, obnoxious, low IQ fan base they have always been. I would take any opinion on that site with a massive grain of salt.
 

Warhawk

The cake is a lie.
Staff member
Just because you’re now interested in their opinions doesn’t mean Laker fans have all of a sudden grown a brain. They are still the same clueless, obnoxious, low IQ fan base they have always been. I would take any opinion on that site with a massive grain of salt.
Agreed, but we have clueless, obnoxious, low IQ fans here too. It seemed pretty unanimous.
 
Dave made very clear on why he did not start Bagley during his exit interview on the radio and it’s what I was saying all year. You have to make kids work for something. He said it best, Bagley earned every single second of playing time and nothing was given to him. He earned the respect of his peers and teammates this way. I completely understand this approach.

I have kids and that is exactly what I do with them. You want something? Well you have to do something in return to get what you want. They won’t like it one bit, but then they will go the rest of their lives understanding that in order to get something, you have to work for it. I’m not there to be my kids best friend 100 percent of the time. I’m there to teach them and that is all Joerger was doing. It’s just that younger kids these days can’t take the heat. Too accustomed to getting everything they want without effort.
The problem is that approach only works when you're willing to sacrifice a year for the sole purpose of very strict development. It works both ways - sometimes guys just need an opportunity to prove themselves, rather than the other way around. Bagley, Buddy (even last year), Giles all proved (at least beyond a halfway point of not proving and completely proving) that they made the team better and should have gotten more minutes/starts. Yet for all the talk of earning Joerger continued to keep tighter leashes on them than he did with some of the other players who weren't even contributing as much.
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
Dave made very clear on why he did not start Bagley during his exit interview on the radio and it’s what I was saying all year. You have to make kids work for something. He said it best, Bagley earned every single second of playing time and nothing was given to him. He earned the respect of his peers and teammates this way. I completely understand this approach.

I have kids and that is exactly what I do with them. You want something? Well you have to do something in return to get what you want. They won’t like it one bit, but then they will go the rest of their lives understanding that in order to get something, you have to work for it. I’m not there to be my kids best friend 100 percent of the time. I’m there to teach them and that is all Joerger was doing. It’s just that younger kids these days can’t take the heat. Too accustomed to getting everything they want without effort.
He literally earned that starting spot by like the second week of the season as he started outproducing anyone on the team not named De'Aaron or Buddy.

Making someone work for something is great but making them work for something, have them clearly meet all the benchmarks you set up for them to receive the reward, and then promptly not rewarding them is not.
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
The problem is that approach only works when you're willing to sacrifice a year for the sole purpose of very strict development. It works both ways - sometimes guys just need an opportunity to prove themselves, rather than the other way around. Bagley, Buddy (even last year), Giles all proved (at least beyond a halfway point of not proving and completely proving) that they made the team better and should have gotten more minutes/starts. Yet for all the talk of earning Joerger continued to keep tighter leashes on them than he did with some of the other players who weren't even contributing as much.
This. Joerger's blind refusal to player Harry or Bagley more than 25 minutes a night while also allowing Bogdan to do whatever the hell he wanted despite him sucking for most of the back half of the year doesn't exactly bely the whole "make 'em work" philosophy.
 
I never go to another team's message boards (maybe once every couple years), but decided to check out LakersGround to see what was being said about Luke on my own. In the Luke thread the majority of the posters seem to be happy he's gone, repeatedly calling him Puke, and listed all kinds of issues including: bad rotations/players playing out of their natural positions, no shooting coach, awful plays out of timeout, no offense scheme, frat buddy assistants, no mastery of the Xs and Os and nobody on his staff to help. General consensus is that he's a below average coach.

Heck, some of the folks over there are thinking DJ is the best coach available for the Lakers to hire!

So, again, what am I missing here? What's the big rush to hire him? I hope and pray he's good great since he is ours now (and DJ was a good coach), but I'd like to see what others are looking at that I am missing...

I'm not against Luke as a coach. But I also don't see why we didn't do a coaching search or interview others. I would have liked to see Becky Hammon interviewed. Messina too. Both are likely to be good coaches based on what little I have heard/seen. If nothing else, pick the brains of the proteges of the best coach in recent memory BEFORE you hire someone. Is there something you are missing internally as far as evaluating holes in the roster? Are there areas of the game that the team needs to work on you haven't considered yet? Whatever! Information like this can be gleaned from interviews and can be incredibly helpful in the overall hiring process in making sure you got the right guy/gal.

Maybe we did get the right person. I just feel like we jumped at a shining bauble (squirrel!), and I'm not sure why people think it's so shiny to begin with....
There was no rush. It was planned, maybe for a quite a while. Planning isn't rushing.
 
There was no rush. It was planned, maybe for a quite a while. Planning isn't rushing.
I'm willing to give Walton a chance, just like anyone else, but thinking Vlade and Co want a "yes, sir" type of coach. With the 4-year extension, its Vlade's way or the highway. Walton is still young. I didn't like the firing although I wasn't peaches especially with stubborn rotations, but it was a good season comparatively,. Then there's the "missing the playoffs" justification which was perfunctory explanation. If Walton doesn't make the playoffs next year, is he fired by this precedent? What does Vlade want though?.....ALL ROADS TO THE FUTURE MUST LEAD TO BETTER DEFENSE for this club. If they're only looking at one side-of-equation it'll be doomed to start. Resigning Cauley-Stein for defensive purposes is a fairly big deal, but not overpaying him either, as he has not corrected his turdish FTs.
 
Here’s my opinion on what Vlade wants in a coach. Someone who shares his vision of where this team is going and how it’s going to get there.
Someone who has a good relationship with his players.
Again, my opinion, I don’t think Dave Joerger checked those 2 boxes.
If your coach has one year left on his contract and you have just signed a 4 year extension, AND your coach doesn’t check off those 2 very important things, why wouldn’t you fire him?
 
He literally earned that starting spot by like the second week of the season as he started outproducing anyone on the team not named De'Aaron or Buddy.

Making someone work for something is great but making them work for something, have them clearly meet all the benchmarks you set up for them to receive the reward, and then promptly not rewarding them is not.
Eh I was ok with it to be honest. At least for the most part. He made our bench incredible in the early part of the season and he was clearly a focal point on offense. He wouldn’t have been if he had started. I get why Dave did what he did. It wasn’t an insult as papa Bagley made it out to be, just a “earning your stripes” sort of thing.
 
Here is a synopsis of Jason Jones article about why Joeger was fired.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-dave-joerger-wanted-luka-172321728.html

Clearly, it looks like Joeger and Vlade were not on the same page as far as talent evaluation and player usage.

That would had become an even bigger issue going forward, had Vlade signed Joeger to an extension this summer. Rifts like that can only get worse, especially if the coach had the security of a long term contract.

It would also effect Vlade's ability to re-sign some of those players come contract extension time too.

I think this gives all parties involved a fresh start. Joeger can pursue the Minnesota job and Vlade gets his man in Luke Walton, whom this roster looks tailored made for.
 
Last edited:
Here is a synopsis of Jason Jones article about why Joeger was fired.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-dave-joerger-wanted-luka-172321728.html

Clearly, it looks like Joeger and Vlade were not on the same page as far as talent evaluation and player usage.

That would had become an even bigger issue going forward, had Vlade signed Joeger to an extension this summer. Rifts like that can only get worse, especially come contract extension time for the players.

I think this gives all parties involved a fresh start. Joeger can pursue the Minnesota job and Vlade gets his man in Luke Walton, whom this roster looks tailored made for.
If all that’s true, good riddance. I get wanting Doncic over Bagley. I get that. But after seeing what the kid is able to do, how could you not love him? And no faith in Giles? After the flashes he’s shown after barely playing any level of basketball in ~3 years and his teammates constantly gushing over him. Buddy gets publicly chewed out after a made 3, yet Bogs can do whatever the hell he wanted all season long with nary a word.

David just seems like a hardheaded SOB.
 
If all that’s true, good riddance. I get wanting Doncic over Bagley. I get that. But after seeing what the kid is able to do, how could you not love him? And no faith in Giles? After the flashes he’s shown after barely playing any level of basketball in ~3 years and his teammates constantly gushing over him. Buddy gets publicly chewed out after a made 3, yet Bogs can do whatever the hell he wanted all season long with nary a word.

David just seems like a hardheaded SOB.
Joeger wanting Doncic over Bagley probably also applies to the narrative that Joeger wasn't all about the pace offense that he was using this year.

Had the Kings drafted Doncic over Bagley, the Kings offense would have been a lot different. By drafting Bagley over Doncic, Vlade basically gave Joeger a recipe for success with the fast paced offense. Any other half court, grit and grind type offense wouldn't work with the roster. Doncic would had slowed the pace down on this team.

When Joeger was hired, we had DMC, so his grit and grind offense made sense and could have worked. Once DMC was traded, Vlade quickly turned the roster over to become a fast paced, run and gun offense. Even after DMC was traded, Joeger stuck with the grit and grind offense with ZBo last year.

Joeger did a good job adapting this year, but we can now see that this may not had been by choice, but by insistence from the FO.

With Walton, I don't see that issue with style of play. He has been all about the run and gun and his teams played pretty good defense too. I think we have a much better marriage of styles between Vlade vision and Walton coaching now.
 
Last edited: