Kenny Natt the next Scotty Brooks... OMG! sacbee!

S

sactownfan

Guest
#1
Sam Amick has officially no more credit after this last article.

http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/sports/kings/archives/018707.html

Kenny Natt status report: Could he be next Scotty Brooks?
Kings Plus material: Midseason report card (with Jerry Reynolds lead-in), Week ahead (with weekly Fire and Ice feature)

Today's Game Notes

***

Could Kenny Natt become the next Scotty Brooks?

Absolutely.

While both are technically considered interim coaches for their respective teams (Kings and Oklahoma City, of course), the Oklahoman is reporting that Brooks' bosses are leaning toward keeping him beyond this season. After starting 3-29, the Thunder had won five of their last eight games before falling to Miami on Sunday. Yet as is the case here in town as well, it's not just about the record when it comes to these types of situations.

It's about the relationship between the coach's bench and the front office, about having a shared vision and solid communication that creates an environment in which the talent on hand is used to its maximum potential. And just as Thunder GM Sam Presti has praised Brooks in this department, I continue to hear nothing about good things about Natt in that area as well. From his personality to his approach and general philosophy, he has a good approval rating going.

That's not to say it's a done deal that he'll stick around. Not even close. There are 41 games left and the Kings haven't experienced even a mini-turnaround like lowly teams like the Thunder and Minnesota. Winning at an increased pace - however small - is a public relations necessity as far as Natt is concerned. It's hard to sell an already-furious fanbase on a relative unknown for a new coach when they haven't seen a change in the outcomes since he's been here. What's more, Natt has called for some puzzling matchups in a number of games and had a few hiccups in late-game situations.

But if Natt can finish the season with his good name in tact, he'll be ahead of the game on his own merits and because of the context around him. Remember the part about the Kings still paying two other coaches at the moment? That's no small thing in these economic times, as the Maloofs are among the masses taking a hit and they may not be eager to pay a bigger name coach $5 million a year (around the going rate). If the rebuilding had led to a roster that looked playoff ready by next season or even the season thereafter, then it's more of a possibility. But right now, they're taking this into consideration...

Eric Musselman: We knew his payoff was $5 million, but the way it was structured in his contract spread the amount out over four years ($1.25 million per year) with the hopes that he would get a new job and thereby lose out on most of the dough. So far, though, Musselman remains an inactive coach and active blogger/writer.

Reggie Theus: Theus' deal was for three years and approximately $6 million, with the final year a team option. So really, it's something close to a two-year, $4 million deal in which he was let go 24 games in. Lump sum owed Theus after he was gone: $1.36 million.

For the time being, this is all feel and speculation on my part based on what's being said around the team. There'
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#2
I continue to hear nothing about good things about Natt in that area as well. From his personality to his approach and general philosophy, he has a good approval rating going.
This is the key statement in this...thing.

If Sam wants him back...well Sam is an idiot. If Geoff wants him back, well Geoff is an idiot. And Sam's blatherings about money owed the old coaches is irrelevant, because both those contracts should expire at the end of this year (barring some oddity in the Muss contract).

But the scary statements in Sam's repeated attempts to pump up Natt have continued to be his assertions that nameless somebodies in the front office like him. Then it all depends on who Amick's sources are. How many fans of benching your kids, no defense, whacked rotations, and lousy end game strategy can there be? But hey, at least we have that all critical arrive on time for the team bus category covered.

At this point I am rapidly headed toward my normal late season stance these last few seasons -- I think we may need to lose, and lose miserably, to wake up the morons who populate our front office and accelerate things.
 
Last edited:
#3
Either this is management trying to put a good spin on a bad situation or they're just idiots. It's one or the other. Natt isn't playing the kids, the result on the court is terrible, he's lost a point guard we have signed for another 4 years, the defense is still awful, and he almost blew the win against Golden State by going small.

Other than that he's doing great.

EDIT: Um, jinx?
 
#4
Call this the epitome of much ado about nothing. So Amick says the front office has praised the coach's communication and personality. This essentially means zero.

What do you want to front office to say? "We have zero faith in our coach, we don't like his play calling or personality and there's zero chance he is returning so every player would be best off tuning him out and quiting on the season completley."

If we win some games, Natt may get a cursory look, but we have some good young pieces and my guess is the organization will want a long term solution to coach.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#6
SamAmick said:
...I continue to hear nothing about good things about Natt in that area as well....
Um, I think he meant to say: "I continue to hear nothing BUT good things..."

Hey Sam? Proofreading is fundamental...
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#7
Call this the epitome of much ado about nothing. So Amick says the front office has praised the coach's communication and personality. This essentially means zero.

What do you want to front office to say? "We have zero faith in our coach, we don't like his play calling or personality and there's zero chance he is returning so every player would be best off tuning him out and quiting on the season completley."

If we win some games, Natt may get a cursory look, but we have some good young pieces and my guess is the organization will want a long term solution to coach.
I would brush it off more easily if it was some sort of standard official statement of support from the organization, which obviously would be all for show, rather than an ear to the ground report from a semi-insider.
 
Last edited:

Kingster

Hall of Famer
#9
Obviously, obviously, obviously & obviously

I hope they're just saying that for the players' consumption. It may reinforce his authority. That said, it's certainly not the way I'd go about determining the next head coach of the Kings. My bias is to have a coach that is not only a good leader, a straight-shooter, but also someone very, very bright. And my bias is that individuals who aren't very articulate are not very, very bright. I realize that my bias isn't always right, but I have the bias nonetheless. And Natt just doesn't exactly fit my image of the ideal coach for the Kings. Obviously.
 
#13
Haha, actually, from what we've seen of Natt's coaching, maybe that's actually what Sam meant. Makes more sense to me :D
That takes me back to an article written about Van Halen during the first gulf war. The writer described Alex Van Halen as "drumming with SCUD-like accuracy."

I didn't know what to make of it. SCUD missiles were notorious for their inaccuracy. Was the writer an idiot and using "SCUD" in his article because they were in the news, since Iraq was lobbing them all over, or did the writer really think Alex sucked and was slipping this in on an otherwise positive article (think it might have even been an interview piece)?