Yahoo: Kings mulling over ex-Monarchs coach

[jon e]

People forget with PJ that before he was a Spurs assistant, he just was NOT a very successful NBA coach. Choking incident aside, he never showed he could make a team anything more than mediocre in 6 years of coaching (his 6 year record 183-222). And of course the choking incident was just the tip of the iceberg as far as how much his players hated him. So yeah, he's Pop's assistant, and that's all well and good, but he has to be just about the WORST looking top assistant to a guy like Pop that oyu could find, because he failed, and he failed ugly, when he was a head coach. Phil Johnson, our first coach in Sacto has been Sloan's #1 for forever too. Doesn't mean I would be eager to see us run over and tap him as our next head guy either. Sometimes guys just make better behind the scnes guys than leads.

Think PJ may get another shot from somebody at some point, but if all you look at is "oohh Pop's assistant" when evaluating him, you are entirely missing the considerable risk factor there.

yea, his head coaching record stunk... before he was under pop winning championships. he has the most to offer. live learn move on... to sacramento

 

[Kingster]

If GP and the Maloofs/FO do the proper management practice of holding a reflective review concerning the Musselman hiring, tenure, firing debacle, of course Wiz's name will come up in those discussions. But I hope the heck it is only in the context of lessons learned. More than anything this summer, the selection of a new coach will say more about this franchise and where things are headed, IMO.

Excellent point. Will they ask: Where did we go wrong? What preparation, what questions could we have asked that we didn't, which would have led to a different result? Personally, I would like for them to challenge the candidates in the interviews. Such as -

Questions, such as,

1) How are you going to handle a player when they complain about their role?

2) How are you going to coach Ron Artest?

3) If a player refuses to play defense like he should, what are you going to do about it?

4) So what makes you so sure that you can coach this team?

Personally, if in response to #2, the prospective coach answers: I think I can coach Ron Artest....yada, yada, yada, I'd cross that coach off the list immediately. He's either too stupid, too desperate, or too much of a toady to be a good coach in my opinion. Now if, on the other hand, the coach answers something like, "I cannot work with Ron Artest. He's proven he's a cancer. He would undermine what I want to do on the court. At some point, if I coached him, I would have to suspend him, in order to retain control," then that would be a big check mark in his favor as far as I am concerned.

 

[VF21]

Now if, on the other hand, the coach answers something like, "I cannot work with Ron Artest. He's proven he's a cancer. He would undermine what I want to do on the court. At some point, if I coached him, I would have to suspend him, in order to retain control," then that would be a big check mark in his favor as far as I am concerned.

I, on the other hand, would scratch the candidate off my list for making the comment above. Especially if he's never worked with Artest. That kind of closed mind pre-judgment is much more destructive than anything Ron-Ron might do on the court. And if someone is admitting ahead of time they would have to "suspend him in order to retain control," then they clearly aren't the head coach I want for the Kings.

For what it's worth, I don't think your questions challenge the potential head coaches. They assume things are going to wrong and ask only how the candidates would try and stop the bleeding. I'd much rather ask a coach how he would prevent problems from occurring in the first place.

 

[fnordius]

I, on the other hand, would scratch the candidate off my list for making the comment above. Especially if he's never worked with Artest. That kind of closed mind pre-judgment is much more destructive than anything Ron-Ron might do on the court.

When Napoleon was meeting with officers who were candidates for promotions to general, he invited them to dinner.

Anyone who put salt or pepper on his food before he tasted it was crossed off the list.

 

[Sluggah]

well. now Rick Carlisle is available. any takers?

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

well. now Rick Carlisle is available. any takers?

nope, not me...wonder what Petrie thinks. I'm sure the Maloofs would like him, he seems to have a friendly personality...a'la Muss. At least he has experience, which Muss lacked.

 

[Padrino]

nope, not me...wonder what Petrie thinks. I'm sure the Maloofs would like him, he seems to have a friendly personality...a'la Muss. At least he has experience, which Muss lacked.

that's what sets him apart from the majority of the available candidates for the kings head coaching position. carlisle has a 281-211 regular season record. that's a .571 win percentage. he's not nearly as experienced as, say, rick adelman, who boasts a 751-481 regular season coaching record. that's a .601 win percentage, and over a much greater timeline.

i guess it depends on what petrie and the maloofs want from their head coach. for some reason, marc iavaroni is the big **** on the market right now. dunno why. he's got potential as a head coach, because he comes from a great system, but he hasn't done much to separate himself from the pack, in my opinion. muss had potential, too...but his inexperience bit him in the *** in the end, and i wonder if petrie and the maloofs might be looking for experience this time around (john whisenant rumors aside). i guess we'll just have to wait a few weeks to see what the short list looks like.

 

[VF21]

Since this is now becoming a discussion of Rick Carlisle and duplicating a new thread in the Personnel Moves section, I'm closing this thread...