Peja To Step Down

#3
I really have no idea if Peja was good at his job or not. Or whether he was fired or choose to step down. Maybe we'll learn the truth. Maybe we won't.
But I hope the next GM is a solid choice, and that they are given every chance to succeed, including choosing their coach, assembling their players, and surrounding themselves with competent front office personnel.
 
Last edited:
#4
I really have no idea if Peja was good at his job or not. Or whether he was fired or choose to step down. Maybe we'll learn the truth. Maybe we won't.
But I hope the next GM is a solid choice, and that they are given every chance to succeed, including choosing their coach, assembling their players, and surrounding themselves with competent front office personnel.
I really have no idea if Peja was good at his job or not. Or whether he was fired or choose to step down. Maybe we'll learn the truth. Maybe we won't.
But I hope the next GM is a solid choice, and that they are given every chance to succeed, including choosing their coach, assembling their players, and surrounding themselves with competent front office personnel.
You edited before I replied and addressed the question I had. They framed Vlade leaving as stepping down, he was fired. Peja, who knows, but I suspect the same. Cleaning house.
 

Capt. Factorial

This Is Why We Can't Have Nice Things
Staff member
#5
Thread title changed to accurately reflect content of story.

And now updated again with update to story.
 
Last edited:
#8
You edited before I replied and addressed the question I had. They framed Vlade leaving as stepping down, he was fired. Peja, who knows, but I suspect the same. Cleaning house.
In terms of employment law, you're most likely wrong. But I agree that "stepping down" is pure spin. In fact, it smells like Matina.
 
#9
In terms of employment law, you're most likely wrong. But I agree that "stepping down" is pure spin. In fact, it smells like Matina.
Possibly true in being wrong. But it may be just how we are using the terminology. It sounded like they "wanted" to reassign his duties contrary to their agreement. He balked so he is gone AND getting paid. To me it's more that he refused to step down.... there may be a more appropriate term than fired but not sure what it would be.
 

bajaden

Hall of Famer
#13
You edited before I replied and addressed the question I had. They framed Vlade leaving as stepping down, he was fired. Peja, who knows, but I suspect the same. Cleaning house.
It was clearly stated in Sam Amick's collumn that Vivic wanted Vlade to take a lesser role under Dumars and Vlade refused and stepped down. Do you get some thrill out of believing he was fired? As for Peja, it't no surprise that he would step down with Vlade gone.
 
#14
It was clearly stated in Sam Amick's collumn that Vivic wanted Vlade to take a lesser role under Dumars and Vlade refused and stepped down. Do you get some thrill out of believing he was fired? As for Peja, it't no surprise that he would step down with Vlade gone.
And in the end Vivek is just costing himself money while making roster decisions very difficult if you keep the same guy in the coaching seat that determines how the team ACTUALLY FREAKING PLAYS. Vlade didn't use Buddy at backup PG. Vlade didn't put Cory Joseph at starting SG. Holy ****. Do these people have brain worms? If they keep Luke we are hinging all our hopes on the possibility that Vlade was directing play style and rotations from his office and not just allowing it to happen.
 
#15
It was clearly stated in Sam Amick's collumn that Vivic wanted Vlade to take a lesser role under Dumars and Vlade refused and stepped down. Do you get some thrill out of believing he was fired? As for Peja, it't no surprise that he would step down with Vlade gone.
Why would I get a thrill thinking he was fired? I have supported Vlade. I don't trust and have very little confidence in Vivek.

With Peja, I hope he worked it out so he got paid also.
 
#16
And in the end Vivek is just costing himself money while making roster decisions very difficult if you keep the same guy in the coaching seat that determines how the team ACTUALLY FREAKING PLAYS. Vlade didn't use Buddy at backup PG. Vlade didn't put Cory Joseph at starting SG. Holy ****. Do these people have brain worms? If they keep Luke we are hinging all our hopes on the possibility that Vlade was directing play style and rotations from his office and not just allowing it to happen.
Luke is not staying long term. The team needs to name a new GM first. With this COVID thing, the timing on draft picks and free agents is messed up. It will be hard to bring in any new players when you don't have a coach, let alone a GM when so many other things are up in the air as it is. In the interim, the Kings have to at least appear to have some semblance of stability.
 

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#17
Luke next, then at least it's a clean sweep. Until then you're just moving around deck chairs.
I never jumped on the Walton bandwagon and thought that the abriviated hiring process was inherently flawed from the start. I even thought that the Kings might due well to cancel the contract when the sexual assault allegations came out just so they coul look at other options. But at this point the guy has had one shortened season and seems to have good player report, so unless some coaching genius and slam dunk is waiting in the wings you have to give Walton a legitimate chance to show what he can or can not do. If he blows it then let Joe pick up the phone and call in one of his guys.
 
#18
I never jumped on the Walton bandwagon and thought that the abriviated hiring process was inherently flawed from the start. I even thought that the Kings might due well to cancel the contract when the sexual assault allegations came out just so they coul look at other options. But at this point the guy has had one shortened season and seems to have good player report, so unless some coaching genius and slam dunk is waiting in the wings you have to give Walton a legitimate chance to show what he can or can not do. If he blows it then let Joe pick up the phone and call in one of his guys.
Seeing that this team has gone through like 10 coaches in 16 years, a little coaching stability might actually help this team grow together.

Afterall, Mike Malone didn't see any improvement until his 2nd year with the Kings and Dave Joeger didn't see any improvement until year 3 with this team, giving Walton one more year to prove he can coach would be acceptable to me.

I'm open to giving Walton another year, then if he flops, the new GM can hire his own coach. Sometimes it takes a year for players to get comfortable in a system and start showing improvement.
 
#19
Seeing that this team has gone through like 10 coaches in 16 years, a little coaching stability might actually help this team grow together.

Afterall, Mike Malone didn't see any improvement until his 2nd year with the Kings and Dave Joeger didn't see any improvement until year 3 with this team, giving Walton one more year to prove he can coach would be acceptable to me.

I'm open to giving Walton another year, then if he flops, the new GM can hire his own coach. Sometimes it takes a year for players to get comfortable in a system and start showing improvement.
Except Walton's system relies too much on player ISO and freelancing once the first option breaks down IMO. Notice how few open three's the Kings take?
 
#20
I never jumped on the Walton bandwagon and thought that the abriviated hiring process was inherently flawed from the start. I even thought that the Kings might due well to cancel the contract when the sexual assault allegations came out just so they coul look at other options. But at this point the guy has had one shortened season and seems to have good player report, so unless some coaching genius and slam dunk is waiting in the wings you have to give Walton a legitimate chance to show what he can or can not do. If he blows it then let Joe pick up the phone and call in one of his guys.
Again, this bubble showing was basically like year 2. That's what many thought it would feel like and it was. Even if they file it under the same calendar season it's something else entirely. Unfair for Walton? Maybe. But this bubble showing was bad. Really bad. He's deep in the process of losing his team if he hasn't lost it completely yet. You can see it, we've seen it before, we know what it looks like. Fox even kind of threw him under the bus already with one of his post game interviews. Buddy has made his opinion clear as he's fresh on his new long term contract. This would be playing out the Vlade/Karl situation all over again. New GM's have to pick their guy if you're clearing out everything else when that coach was specifically chosen by your predecessor. Otherwise you are literally just wasting time or hoping that you happen to come across the rare circumstance where it all comes together. Last go around when "giving time" it not only cost the Kings that coach, but the player you thought you were sparing because things became that toxic. Vivek has to learn from his mistakes otherwise he'll just keep making them and winning anything will always hinge on the pure luck that all the pieces of the puzzle happen to lock together to form a picture. Not good enough.
 
Last edited:

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#21
Some of you really need to be very careful what you wish for. This "off with their heads" mentality is not helpful for the players and reeks of total inadequacy on the part of the team ownership. I gave Vivek every benefit of the doubt and then some...but does anyone really think the next GM, coach etc. will do any better? I can't believe I'm actually looking back on the good Maloof years as the best times of the Sacramento franchise....with no reason for optimism on the horizon.
 
#23
Except Walton's system relies too much on player ISO and freelancing once the first option breaks down IMO. Notice how few open three's the Kings take?
Walton runs a read and react offense. He expects his players to read what the defense is giving them and setup the plays accordingly.

Which works well for veteran teams or a team with a high basketball IQ. That is why the team started clicking when he started the 5 highest BBIQ players right before the lockdown. Fox, Bogdan, Giles, Bjeli and Barnes. Which is why Buddy came off the bench. Why he went away from Giles in the bubble may be why the Kings flounder their chance at the playoffs and cost Vlade his job.

The role of the GM would be to give the coach the players they need to run their system. The problem being that Bagley will probably need to really increase his BBIQ, since he will likely start, for the Kings to be successful next year in Walton's system.

BTW, if Walton retains his job, I would really be in the new GM ear to bring back Bogdan and Giles. They fit his system for high BBIQ players he will need to succeed.
 
#24
Walton runs a read and react offense. He expects his players to read what the defense is giving them and setup the plays accordingly.

Which works well for veteran teams or a team with a high basketball IQ. That is why the team started clicking when he started the 5 highest BBIQ players right before the lockdown. Fox, Bogdan, Giles, Bjeli and Barnes. Which is why Buddy came off the bench. Why he went away from Giles in the bubble may be why the Kings flounder their chance at the playoffs and cost Vlade his job.

The role of the GM would be to give the coach the players they need to run their system. The problem being that Bagley will probably need to really increase his BBIQ, since he will likely start, for the Kings to be successful next year in Walton's system.

BTW, if Walton retains his job, I would really be in the new GM ear to bring back Bogdan and Giles. They fit his system for high BBIQ players he will need to succeed.
That's the wrong question to be asking about long term success though. You should look at the players you DO have, guys you just signed to big contracts, guys you drafted #2 - and based on that say what system is going to put them in the best situation? A bad coach is one who insists on his methods despite it not being good for the personnel. An even worse one is one who does that when he hasnt proved anything at all. If Pop doesn't expect DeRozan to run to corners to shoot 3s, why does Luke Walton expect the players to fit his (broken) system?

And no, not starting Harry Giles is not the reason this team is bad/will remain bad. Harry Giles is a decent player, hardly proven at this point.

This idea of "high IQ" is so intangible. You talk about Bogi as one of our higher IQ guys but truth is depending on the game you could call Bogi high IQ or dumb as rocks with the decisions he makes. You know what helps a guy look like he's "high IQ"? Putting him in clearly defined roles that play to his strengths. You watch other teams and their random scrubs look fine - it's not that theyre so magically higher bball IQ than ours; they just have defined roles to be shooters, make simple drives etc while playmaking is left to the actual playmakers.
 
Last edited:
#25
That's the wrong question to be asking about long term success though. You should look at the players you DO have, guys you just signed to big contracts, guys you drafted #2 - and based on that say what system is going to put them in the best situation? A bad coach is one who insists on his methods despite it not being good for the personnel. An even worse one is one who does that when he hasnt proved anything at all. If Pop doesn't expect DeRozan to run to corners to shoot 3s, why does Luke Walton expect the players to fit his (broken) system?

And no, not starting Harry Giles is not the reason this team is bad/will remain bad. Harry Giles is a decent player, hardly proven at this point.

This idea of "high IQ" is so intangible. You talk about Bogi as one of our higher IQ guys but truth is depending on the game you could call Bogi high IQ or dumb as rocks with the decisions he makes. You know what helps a guy look like he's "high IQ"? Putting him in clearly defined roles that play to his strengths. You watch other teams and their random scrubs look fine - it's not that theyre so magically higher bball IQ than ours; they just have defined roles to be shooters, make simple drives etc while playmaking is left to the actual playmakers.
Well, Luke’s broken system is the same one they run at GSW and they seem to have won multiple championships running that system.

It may be you take your lumps now and once the players learn what to do and where to be on the floor, this system may lead to winning once the players learn it a higher level.

The Kings were really clicking the last month before the lockdown. If the season wasn’t shutdown, their momentum may had carried them into the playoffs.

Just running out of the gym like Joeger last season may be fun to watch, but hasn’t proven to be successful come the playoffs, when the game slows down.
 
#26
Well, Luke’s broken system is the same one they run at GSW and they seem to have won multiple championships running that system.

It may be you take your lumps now and once the players learn what to do and where to be on the floor, this system may lead to winning once the players learn it a higher level.

The Kings were really clicking the last month before the lockdown. If the season wasn’t shutdown, their momentum may had carried them into the playoffs.

Just running out of the gym like Joeger last season may be fun to watch, but hasn’t proven to be successful come the playoffs, when the game slows down.
Using GSW as an example of Waltons system working well is your proof of its success? OK so all the new Kings GM needs to do is duplicate Steph and Klay who may be two of the best shooters of all time. Not to mention that Durant guy who was around there for a while. Oh and they had a couple of world class defenders there, Klay, Green and Iguodala. That group of players GSW had would make most any coach look good IMO.
 
#27
Some of you really need to be very careful what you wish for. This "off with their heads" mentality is not helpful for the players and reeks of total inadequacy on the part of the team ownership. I gave Vivek every benefit of the doubt and then some...but does anyone really think the next GM, coach etc. will do any better? I can't believe I'm actually looking back on the good Maloof years as the best times of the Sacramento franchise....with no reason for optimism on the horizon.
Wanting the Kings to have to rebuild and start fresh is not something I wished for. The rebuild is needed as a result of poor decisions by the Kings management.

And yes I do hope the next GM, Coach and group of players do better. If I did not hope that what would be the point?
 
#28
And yet before COVID blew up the world, the Kings were looking pretty damn good under Walton's leadership.
What I saw was a team that played well when their shots went in. Unfortunately a lot of nights the quality of shots produced by the system they run was bad. Too many contested shots. As was evident in the first 5 games in the bubble the Kings are easy to scout and defend which leads to defenses not allowing the Kings good shots.
 
#29
Walton runs a read and react offense. He expects his players to read what the defense is giving them and setup the plays accordingly.

Which works well for veteran teams or a team with a high basketball IQ. That is why the team started clicking when he started the 5 highest BBIQ players right before the lockdown. Fox, Bogdan, Giles, Bjeli and Barnes. Which is why Buddy came off the bench. Why he went away from Giles in the bubble may be why the Kings flounder their chance at the playoffs and cost Vlade his job.

The role of the GM would be to give the coach the players they need to run their system. The problem being that Bagley will probably need to really increase his BBIQ, since he will likely start, for the Kings to be successful next year in Walton's system.

BTW, if Walton retains his job, I would really be in the new GM ear to bring back Bogdan and Giles. They fit his system for high BBIQ players he will need to succeed.
Walton had both Bogdan and Giles this season. They were both available in the bubble for those first five games. What I saw was a lot of the the other teams smothering defense. It was as if the other team knew what the Kings were going to do every trip down the floor.
 
#30
Well, Luke’s broken system is the same one they run at GSW and they seem to have won multiple championships running that system.

It may be you take your lumps now and once the players learn what to do and where to be on the floor, this system may lead to winning once the players learn it a higher level.

The Kings were really clicking the last month before the lockdown. If the season wasn’t shutdown, their momentum may had carried them into the playoffs.

Just running out of the gym like Joeger last season may be fun to watch, but hasn’t proven to be successful come the playoffs, when the game slows down.
Err if it's the same as GSWs system I couldn't tell. If it's really the same system then it just means Walton is an even worse coach than I thought. For one our PG can't shoot and somehow our 3 point shooting SG is initiating the offense which I've never seen Klay ever do. I don't recall the Lakers looking like GSW either. I don't even mean in results - I mean the actual looks they get. The Warriors have so much pass-screen-move action while we have.... Dribble dribble iso